Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

John2 wrote:Ben wrote:

"Rather, the Elijah/Elisha cycle provided inspiration for a good deal of the early going in the synoptic gospels"

Elijah is also cited as an example in the Letter of James 5:17-18:

"Elijah was a human being, even as we are. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops."

Very true. And Paul alludes to Elijah both in Galatians and in Romans. I think that material was pretty popular in the early church.

And so does Paul in Rom. 11:2-5 (as I see you've also mentioned):

"Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: 'Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me'? And what was God’s answer to him? 'I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.' So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace."

I don't see where the Galatians reference is though.

Note also the reference in Rom. 11:3 to Israel killing the prophets, which is like 1 Thess. 2:15 ("who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets").

Kapyong wrote: My favourite parallelomaniacism would be from AcharyaS (RIP)
that Jesus the Son of God
is a Sun of God !




Kapyong

Which to me was idiotic, knowing the "son of god" was a known parallel to the Emperors divinity as "son of god" the proselytes were worshipping the week before.

John2 wrote:I don't see where the Galatians reference is though.

I should have specified, but I was writing hastily and from memory. The Galatians allusion is not as clear as the Romans reference, but what I was thinking of is Galatians 1.17 as compared with 1 Kings 19.15, as per N. T. Wright in his exposition of this verse: http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Paul_Arabia_Elijah.pdf. I find Wright to be pretty persuasive here, but obviously your mileage may vary.

Ben.

John2 wrote:Note also the reference in Rom. 11:3 to Israel killing the prophets, which is like 1 Thess. 2:15 ("who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets").

Interestingly, the Romans instance is attested as absent in Marcion, while the 1 Thessalonians one is attested as present.

Kapyong wrote:Gday all,

My favourite parallelomaniacism would be from AcharyaS (RIP)

• that Jesus the Son of God
  is a Sun of God !

Maybe not strictly a parallel, but certainly mania.

Are there parallels in anatolé? --Ανατολιος, ἀνατολή, ῆς, ἡ = sunrise; the east

• and it's derivations

Derived, in turn, from anatelló --ἀνατέλλω (a rising of light; to shine light on; to rise up)

neilgodfrey wrote:

MrMacSon wrote:'Parallelomania' seems to be used to disparage propositions that various Christian texts or practices are similar to texts or practices in non-Christian scenarios.

It has become a scholarly equivalent of a four letter word. It is used to insult, to dismiss, to ostracize, to avoid engagement.

I agree; that was what I was alluding to - it is a pejorative word Christian apologists have used & do use to dismiss any references to concept or texts that are similar to Christian ones.

to Ben,

Also, in this case, the parallels in view stand up under closer inspection, as well. I think one has to shut one's eyes pretty hard not to see them. They are pretty obvious.

Actually I agree with that. I wrote in my blog post http://historical-jesus.info/88.html
>> "Mark" had evidently read:
2 Ki 4:42-44 "A man came from Baal Shalishah, bringing the man of God twenty loaves of barley bread baked from the first ripe grain, along with some heads of new grain. "Give it to the people to eat," Elisha said. "How can I set this before a hundred men?" his servant asked. But Elisha answered, "Give it to the people to eat. For this is what the LORD says: `They will eat and have some left over.' "Then he set it before them, and they ate and had some left over, [no mention the left over were picked up by anyone. They are just proof the men had enough to eat] according to the word of the LORD." <<

On a previous posting on this thread (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2197&start=20#p48977), I wrote:
"I even acknowledge that "Mark" knew about the 2 Kings story (& probably other Elijah-multiplying-food stories) and used some of it."

However my main point has always been (from the same posting):
"For you, if you can find an OT story with some bits of similarity with one of the gospels, that means the gospel author based his story on one of the OT, and therefore nothing in it is likely true." Am I right to think that about you?

I added on the same posting:
"But also "Mark" wrote the disciples did not notice any miraculous feeding, just that they collected leftovers from a crowd eating outside. My overall conclusion (after a thorough analysis): the miraculous feeding did not happen but the collection of leftovers did."
I do not think you went that far. Am I correct?

Cordially, Bernard