Eden story in Genesis
Interesting.
ha 'adam.
Not a name.
Androgynous?
Maybe both man and woman came from ha 'adam?
Maybe Ish was there with Shah when the Snake spoke?
http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/apr1988/v45-1-article3.htm
BTS
Redemption, Reductions
by Narkissos 48 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
mindmelda
I agree...nothing about Christian teaching derives from a single source or thought.
I'm Jungian in that I believe that all human thought develops naturally into becoming more than the sum of it's parts. Religion, faith, spirituality is one of the best examples of that.
I've read a little about the Hellenistic influences in Judaism, and of course, also in Christianity. Do you find Paul more Hellenistic than other NT writers?
I heard an interesting thought the other day that the allegory that Paul uses to the Galatians about Hagar and Sarah does not compare Jewish law to Christian faith, but rather, various avenues of thought within early Christian belief itself, that some of it was more bound to Judaism than others. Some of the accounts in Acts and Pauls own counsel to various congregations seem to bear that out also. The argument for the so called cohesiveness and purity of first century or "primitive" Christianity is challenged by that idea, and of course, that is what the WTS claims to be re-creating with their own beliefs, the purity of first century Christianity. (hah!)
But, if that never existed in the first place, if there were always various but converging (at least to some extent) ideas about Christ, resurrection, ransom and other doctrines, then they are pursuing a fallacy, are they not?
-
BurnTheShips
Do you find Paul more Hellenistic than other NT writers?
My vote goes with John. At least that is my impression. The Divine Logos and all that good stuff.
Thumbs up on Jung. What a guy!
BTS
-
Leolaia
They're all pretty Hellenistic in their own way. Bear in mind that "Hellenism" covers a wide range of philosophies and cultural constructs and Judea had been steeped in Greek influence for hundreds of years by then.
-
Narkissos
BTS: Interesting link. An important step (which the author doesn't mention, unless I missed it) in the history of Jewish misogyny and its interaction with the Eden narrative is the book of ben Sirach (which incidentally was first written in Hebrew, then translated into Greek); cf. 25:24 ("From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of- her we all die"); the treatment of "woman" in the whole book is absolutely fascinating.
mindmelda: as Leolaia said Hellenistic culture is everywhere, and it influences Judaism and early Christianity in many different and often opposite ways. For instance, both the Pharisaic notion of "soul" survival and the Sadducean conception of death as (apparently) total annihilation of the individual can be traced back to Greek philosophy (e.g. Platonic / Epicurean) and differ from the earlier Israelite view of death.
Paul certainly shows an influence of popular Greek philosophy (especially Stoic; the doxology formulae in "from him, through him, to him" etc. are quite typical). But the construction of his central "myth" (the Saviour coming from heaven under the appearance of flesh to deceive and defeat the worldly powers and save the elect by integrating them to his pneumatic "body") bears striking similarities with a number of "Saviours" in mystery cults as well as figures of the "Revealer" in Gnostic myths. This is not particularly Greek (although old Greek figures like Dionysos or Hermes can be affected by similar re-interpretive patterns at the time). It is really a trans-cultural phenomenon to which Hellenistic culture offers a general context and perhaps a sort of catalyst.
And it is certainly not all Paul's invention. The rhetoric in the Pauline epistles (and particularly the points of agreement it implies) suggests that similar views of the Saviour were held in what I termed "Hellenistic churches" (i.e. "early Christianity" on the fringe of diaspora Judaism) -- although we can only try to guess what Apollos or Cephas taught exactly.
And the relationship between this nebula in the diaspora and Palestinian Judaism is even more obscure. When we read the Acts we have a clear idea of a distinct Christian identity right from the beginning in Jerusalem; but suddenly we have "James" popping up from nowhere at the head of a Jerusalem church comprised of Pharisees and priests...
Every "identity" invents its origin once it has emerged, arranging tidbits of memory (or tradition) into a consistent, yet artificial, story of "the beginning".
-
Koiné
Hallo everyone,
Very interesting discussion you have .Altough the major question is not answered.
Not everyone has the time,ability,ambition to go as far as you do in your bible study.
Even so that criticism is not far.
So my question Concerning bible study is: Shall we keep it as simple as possible. Or is it our task to go as far that we just end with other questions,even doubts?
Will this be the platform for judgment? And what to do with the millions of christians,even the JW community who have no idea of the deeper things?
Is it their responsibility or of their leaders and teachers?
Greetings
-
-
Narkissos
Hello koiné
Shall we keep it as simple as possible. Or is it our task to go as far that we just end with other questions,even doubts?
Will this be the platform for judgment? And what to do with the millions of christians,even the JW community who have no idea of the deeper things?
Is it their responsibility or of their leaders and teachers?
I'm not sure what you mean, especially by the "we" I underlined. Are you talking from your personal standpoint as a believer or that of the teacher who tells others what to believe?
As I wrote in the opening post, the complexity of this topic is made of the addition (or juxtaposition) of very simple statements (for the most part). Why not let Bible readers interact with the texts and pick up what makes sense to them? Personally I'm all for it.
Now there are a lot of teachers and preachers (WT included) who are not satisfied with that and want to tell people "what to believe," equating their own message with "what the Bible teaches"... Comparing their "summary of Bible teaching" with the actual complexity of Bible teachings may be useful to at least a part of their audience I think.
-
Koiné
Hallo Narkissos,
I was raised JW and still carry some of their luggage,you know how it works.
The point is,that,since I went studying the scriptures on myself,included some hebrew and greek,I must conclude that more faith is needed than before.
Personal and deep study gives satisfaction as far as you are prepared to live with more and complexer questions.
Precisely that is faith,to leave some things unanswered now and to live the christian life.
Point is also,where starts personal and communal responsibility in our understanding of the scriptures.
Does God ask us we go that deep ,even to the point,that we begin to criticize his word or the writers he used ? or that we end as an agnostic?
The bible is full with stories of people who accepted the lord(and vice versa) on basis of a simple testimony. That is not any more possible now.
This is the enormous burden to carry by those people who instruct others what and why to believe.
The dragnet parable Jesus gave shows us that as long as judgment has not arrived we all make a chance to be sorted as good fish(or not) as long as we are found in the net.
Greetings
Greetings
Greetings
-
quietlyleaving
deleted because it was off topic