Posts by rick

17

Matthew 1:18-25..."the virgin birth"...(seeking exegetical help)

by rick_here in

i've been @ jwdf before, having been "referred" by an ex-jw i met at beliefnet.com.

this person said i'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff i am.

namely, the "historical-critical studies of the bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of christianity).

rick_here

Howdy Gumby-

Um, well, lemme see here....hmmmmm.....

How's about, "Were Joseph & Mary a in a 'sub-sect' of the Essenes?"
(Alex, in the proper question form-answer), LoL.

Thanx.

17

Matthew 1:18-25..."the virgin birth"...(seeking exegetical help)

by rick_here in

i've been @ jwdf before, having been "referred" by an ex-jw i met at beliefnet.com.

this person said i'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff i am.

namely, the "historical-critical studies of the bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of christianity).

rick_here

PS-

Other than the details outlined so far...I'm still interested in doing an online exegesis of the passage -- with y'all's help (that would be).

17

Matthew 1:18-25..."the virgin birth"...(seeking exegetical help)

by rick_here in

i've been @ jwdf before, having been "referred" by an ex-jw i met at beliefnet.com.

this person said i'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff i am.

namely, the "historical-critical studies of the bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of christianity).

rick_here

Greetings Narkissos-

Nope: en gastri ekhein (lit. "to have in belly/womb") is a fixed idiom for "be pregnant" (e.g. Herodotus III,32; and LXX Genesis 16,5).

LXX in the Greek is: εν γαστρι εχει. And the English translation of Herodotus is also open for interpretation, imo. (However, I can't access Herodotus right now @ Perseus). If I'm not mistaken, Herodotus has εχουσα εν γαστρι.

I'll concede that in the English idiom/translation "[to] be pregnant" (or) "to be with child" are considered acceptable. But I can't help but see a potential (if not probable?) bias here, based on traditional renderings of the phrase. If it were translated otherwise, it would threaten "orthodox doctrine."

One other thing that is often overlooked is that there are words in the Greek passage (in question) that have no other apearances in Greek literature. And what few there are; we have been dependent on English translations as they have come to us -- without question.

Matthew's Gospel, if indeed Matthew was a tax-collector and the author of this Gospel as traditionally known (which I accept, btw); tax-collectors of that era knew various forms of "short-hand (writing)" which was needed for their job descriptions and performance.

I've wondered if Matthew's Greek might reflect an "abbreviation tendency" and consider this as not only a possibility, but as a possible "key" to understanding his writing (in Greek). I don't want to belabor this point. But I would like to emphasize that centuries-old understandings, based on possible faulty "translations of the Greek" would be unreliable.

If you have further input for rebuttle, I welcome them (please)! As of now I'm unconvinced (agnostic) of traditionanl interpretations of the text. My only "debate" has to do with finding the true exegesis of this passage.

rick

\o/

17

Matthew 1:18-25..."the virgin birth"...(seeking exegetical help)

by rick_here in

i've been @ jwdf before, having been "referred" by an ex-jw i met at beliefnet.com.

this person said i'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff i am.

namely, the "historical-critical studies of the bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of christianity).

rick_here

PS-

I have other exegetical work (as tentative translations) of this passage, taking into account my "background studies." I think (and hope!) some of you may find this interesting.

Leolaia and Narkissos --- where are you???
(we've met before)....

\o/

17

Matthew 1:18-25..."the virgin birth"...(seeking exegetical help)

by rick_here in

i've been @ jwdf before, having been "referred" by an ex-jw i met at beliefnet.com.

this person said i'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff i am.

namely, the "historical-critical studies of the bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of christianity).

rick_here

Greetings-

I've been @ JWDF before, having been "referred" by an Ex-JW I met at Beliefnet.com. This person said I'd find some folks here who are interested in the stuff I am. Namely, the "historical-critical studies of the Bible" (not to be confused with theological liberalism, per se, which is a specific "movement" within the history of Christianity). In any event, I'm an ex-fundamentalist Christian and can't quite classify what version of a Christian I am right now...I just know I am one, LoL. (Be that as it may)...and Praise Jesus!

As a student-hobbyist of "the background of the Bible" I've been especially interested in The Intertestamental Period and/or the Jewish Apocalyptic Literature of that time-frame as it has relevance for the NT Era (and to the NT itself).

A prominent "sect" (as Josephus coined it) of this time were the Essenes. They are a subject unto themselves and scholars are coming up with more on them continuously; new books and articles are being released as I post.

But what does this have to do with Matt. 1:18-25? and "the virgin birth" of Jesus? (as it has been traditionally understood)? I CAN'T TELL...which is why I've started this thread!

I'll suffice it to say (in summary) that certain marriage customs of the Essenes -- and undeniable "links" (for lack of vocabulary) -- between the Essenes and the Early/earliest Christians are simply, "there." And not to mention the various divisions or "sects" within the Essenes themselves.

This must sound like Hogde-Podge. And I'd have to agree that it is in that we are only gaining more information/data on the Era of Jesus... However, I've been working on an exegesis of our passage in question and am at a kind of stand-still in that I'm only a beginner/self-taught in NT (koine) Greek.

I'm seriously doubting that English Bibles (all of them) have the accurate translation of this passage (in several ways that I won't go into for now).

One particular phrase I'm having problems in translating is from Matt. 1:18:

εν γαστρι εχουσα which is normally rendered as "pregnant with child" in most Bibles. How do they come up with this? (I don't know?). The Greek words for "child" and "pregnant" just aren't in the text!

My (tentative) literal translation/paraphrase has this as: "in [her] womb, having ability coming out-of." Stated another way, this phrase meant that [Mary] "became able to have a child" -- she had her first menses or became menstrual (a woman).

I'll leave it here, for now -- thanx!
rick

\o/

9

The Book of Enoch

by VM44 in

the book of enoch has been mentioned here before.

i have some questions i would like to post here, and would very much like to read what people here have to say in answer to them.. .

3) did the book of enoch influence the writings of the new testement?.

rick_here

Greetings-

While I've been "lurking" JWDF ( and bookmarking various threads ) -- I haven't been posting for some time now.

I've ( finally ) just ordered:

"1 Enoch: 1 Enoch"
by George W.E. Nickelsburg

"Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism"
by Alan F. Segal

"One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism"
by Larry Hurtado

"Did God Have A Wife?: Archaeology And Folk Religion In Ancient Israel"
by William G. Dever

( and am about half-way through ):
"The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God"
by Margaret Barker

In any event, if I can get the "formatting right again" ( here @ JWDF ); I'm looking forward to posting & discussing things-related....

Till next time, then!

rick

\o/

22

Enoch - Transferred so as not to see death

by nowino in

wanted to know what anyone here thinks or has studied on enoch and him being "transferred so as not to see death" and whether or not anyone believes john the baptist might have been him reincarnated or sent back in.

also if he was the only one in the bible not to see death.

rick_here

Greetings folks (I haven't been "around" jwdf in a while).

This link would explain my view on:

Were Elijah and Enoch Raptured to Heaven?
By John L. Bray

Hope my formatting "works", LoL!

18

John Dominic Crossan

by kgfreeperson in

i've been listening to john dominic crossan on the radio and am fascinated.

what are your opinions of him as a biblical scholar?

.

rick_here

Narkissos-

I've been kinda busy and generally agree with your last post (seeing that you know your theology)! Sorry, so slow.

I don't really want to go into Christological differences among the theologians but would like to ask you one thing about Bultmann and Crossan: Would you say they are similar in their views on the resurrection of Jesus? From what I can recall (offhand) they are/were very much alike in this....

Just replying, for the most part.
(thanx, if you have time to reply, etc.)

18

John Dominic Crossan

by kgfreeperson in

i've been listening to john dominic crossan on the radio and am fascinated.

what are your opinions of him as a biblical scholar?

.

rick_here

Euphemism,

I think I know what you said (for me anywayz).
But could you plz repeat that again?

I can't guarantee I'll go with what you meant, thoh.
Know what I mean???
As long as it means something to somebody....
Ahhhh, nevermind!

It all depends, you know.
Right?
Do you?
Do I?
Huh?

yeah, that
;)

64

James 4:5 -- A Quote From a Lost Apocryphal Scripture

by Leolaia in

in defense of its fundamentalist approach to the bible and especially its belief that the bible is the word of god and inerrent, the wts frequently quotes from 2 timothy 3:16: "all scripture is inspired of god and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness".

we must've heard this scripture thousands of times as witnesses.

the words from eldad and modad quoted in hermas, vis.

rick_here

Narkissos, have I mentioned, "I'm pleased to meet you"? (Well, I am, though I do recall seeing some of your posts when I was here (@ jwdf) briefly earlier this year with a different user-name). I understand & agree with your last post (above), btw. I didn't offer any possibilites re: the etiology of the (James 4:5) quotation's source. We could probably say with some sense of accuracy that Genesis 6 might provide some kind of "paradigm" in relation to James 4:5; we're dealing with Jewish and/or Hebrew thought.

Leolaia:

It also might fit with the concept of demon possession as a source of vice and sin....

Right. Alternate translations of Ge 6:3; is it "My Spirit will not abide with man"? or "My Spirit will not contend with man"? Here we have two possible meanings or exegetical possibilites. "Spirit" here is ruach (Hebrew). Does this text merely say that the life-giving "breath" (ruach) is about to leave humanity? In other words, the world is about to be destroyed and no one will be "breathing" or alive any more? (of course, save Noah and his family). Or could this text be speaking about God's personal spirit (or Spirit?) The word that is alternately translated as either "abide with" or "contend with" (here indicative of judgments or of disagreements between God and ppl)...may show that God was simply done with (finished & personally frustrated by) humanity. These are intricate exegetical points that I'm still looking into!

Here's an article by Margaret Barker, author of: The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God. It somehow seems appropriate to this discussion.

The Book of Enoch and Cosmic Sin

Till next time....
;)

rick_here

Posts by rick_here