DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38 University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 1-1-2009 Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38 Kevin Lee Moore University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Moore, Kevin Lee, "Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38" (2009). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 445. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/445 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38 ______ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the University of Denver and the Iliff School of Theology Joint PhD Program University of Denver ______ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ______ by Kevin L. Moore June 2009 Advisor: Professor Gregory A. Robbins © Kevin L. Moore 2009 All Rights Reserved Author: Kevin L. Moore Title: Why Two Swords Were Enough: Israelite Tradition History Behind Luke 22:35-38 Advisor: Dr. Gregory A. Robbins Degree Date: June 2009 ABSTRACT Jesus’ charge in Luke 22:35-38 that his apostles should buy swords is one of the most enigmatic texts in the gospels. Although previous studies made use of a wide range of standard critical methods, none of these approaches satisfactorily revealed the pericope’s meaning. In a fresh re-examination of Luke’s sword-logion this project interweaves biblical and cultural intertextuality and asserts that the sword-logion is a Lukan literary foil that repudiates a well- known hagiographic tale. The provenance for this legendary saga (i.e., the “two-sword” traditum) was Gen 34 whose routine refraction in later Jewish writings led to its inclusion as part of the broader cultural milieu of the first century C.E. Based on that premise I argue that Luke 22:35-38 was Luke’s censure of a minor, but familiar HB tradition that informed and shaped the identity of Luke’s community. While this project employs an eclectic mix of standard historical critical methods, tradition and literary criticism serve as the two principal methodological strategies. Chapter two examines the provenance of the “two-sword” traditum and identifies four motifs: family identity and honor; vindication of an honored one; national identity and honor; and justified vengeance. Using the story’s main protagonists and these four motifs, the tradition’s reappearance and subsequent development in the HB is tracked. Chapter three traces the refraction of the “two-sword” traditum in extracanonical writings. Particular attention is given to the amplifications of the tradition as it is retold and rewritten in Jewish writings of the Second Temple Period. After establishing that Luke routinely made use of oblique allusions and that he and his community knew Israel’s scriptures and traditions, chapter four analyzes Luke 22:35-38 in light of that celebrated tradition. In the exegesis I argue that Luke exploits the “two-sword” traditum in order to exhort his community to reject a renowned HB tradition from their shared narrative universe. A survey of the gospel further corroborates that Luke attempts to persuade his readers to renounce the “two-sword” traditum and pursue peace instead of violence. Chapter five reviews the project and assesses its significance for future research. ii Acknowledgments I want to thank the members of my dissertation committee Dr. Richard Valantasis, Dr. Pamela M. Eisenbaum, and Dr. Gregory A. Robbins who offered many helpful suggestions and continued to support me throughout this project. I also want to thank Wolfgang Stahlberg who graciously read and corrected my German translations. Finally, my deepest appreciation is offered to Candace, my companion, dearest friend, and wife, for her constant encouragement during this lengthy endeavor. My love to you iii Contents Chapter 1: Introduction, Literature Survey, and Thesis ...................................................................1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Literature Survey ..........................................................................................................4 1.2.1 Preliminary Observations ............................................................................4 1.2.2 A Brief Overview of Previous Research ......................................................5 1.2.3 Theological Criticism: Hans Conzelmann ...................................................6 1.2.4 Literary Criticism: Paul S. Minear ............................................................. 14 1.2.5 Source and Redaction Criticism: G. W. H. Lampe and Joan F. Gormley ..18 1.2.6 Form Criticism: R. Heiligenthal, H.-W. Bartsch, and A. Vööbus ................28 1.2.7 Ideological Readings: Samuel G. F. Brandon and Robert M. Price ..........40 1.2.8 Traditio-Historical Criticism: H. A. J. Kruger ..............................................51 1.2.9 An Entertaining, Eclectic Assortment of Scholars .....................................56 1.2.10 Summary of Literature Survey ..................................................................59 1.2.11 Excursus: Didactic Readings ....................................................................60 1.3 Thesis and Methodology ............................................................................................ 63 1.3.1 Thesis and Scope of the Study .................................................................63 1.3.2 Theory Base and Methodological Approach .............................................70 1.4 Anticipating the Project: Chapter Outline ....................................................................80 Chapter 2: The Provenance of the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Hebrew Bible ............................84 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 84 2.2 The Canonical Source for the Tradition ......................................................................87 2.2.1 Preliminary Observations and a Brief Overview of the Story ....................87 2.2.2 The Canonical Provenance of the “Two-Sword” Traditum ........................ 90 2.2.3 Summary of the Canonical Provenance of “Two-Sword” Traditum ......... 134 2.3 The Transmission of the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Hebrew Bible .......................135 2.3.1 Preliminary Observations ........................................................................135 2.3.2 Hebrew Bible References to the “Two-Sword” Traditum ......................... 137 2.3.2.1 Survey of Generic References to Simeon and Levi in the Hebrew Bible ................................................................. 137 2.3.2.2 Explicit Reference to the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Hebrew Bible ................................................................. 139 2.3.2.3 Implicit References to the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Hebrew Bible ................................................................. 144 2.3.2.4 Summary of References to the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Hebrew Bible ................................................................. 160 2.4 Chapter Summary and Review .................................................................................161 2.5 Excursus: Did Shechem Rape Dinah? .....................................................................164 Chapter 3: The “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, and Other Jewish Writings of the Late Second Temple, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods ..............170 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 170 3.2 The Apocrypha .........................................................................................................173 3.2.1 Judith (Second to First Century B.C.E.) ..................................................173 3.2.2 4 Maccabees (Mid-First to Early Second Century B.C.E.) ......................178 3.2.3 Summary of the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Apocrypha ......................181 3.3 The Pseudepigrapha ................................................................................................182 3.3.1 Jubilees (Second Century C.E.) ............................................................. 182 3.3.2 Aramaic Levi (Third to Second Century B.C.E.?) ...................................187 3.3.3 Testament of Levi (Second Century B.C.E.) ...........................................189 iv 3.3.4 Theodotus (Second to First Century B.C.E.) ..........................................194 3.3.5 Joseph and Aseneth (First Century B.C.E. to Second Century C.E.) .....197 3.3.6 Summary of the “Two-Sword” Traditum in the Pseudepigrapha............ .201 3.4 Other Jewish Writings............................................................................................ ...202 3.4.1 Philo of Alexandria (First Century C.E.) ..................................................202 3.4.2 Pseudo-Philo (Late First to Early Second Century C.E.) ........................208 3.4.3 Josephus (First Century C.E.) ...............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Ted Kirnbauer Luke 22:54-71 8/27/17 Jesus' Betrayal and Arrest
    1 Ted Kirnbauer Luke 22:54-71 8/27/17 Jesus' betrayal and arrest was known and announced long before the events in the Garden of Gethsemane took place, so the arrest itself was anti-climactic. All four Gospels record the trial of Jesus. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus was first taken to Annas, the former High Priest, who still enjoyed dignity and power in the Jewish world (Jn. 18:13). Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the acting High Priest who filled that position from 18 AD to 36AD. Caiaphas was the one who first said clearly that it was a political necessity to murder Jesus (Jn. 11:49-50; 18:14). Peter denied Jesus at the house of Annas (Carson, Gospel of John, 582). The trial of Jesus was as follows: Early Friday morning (Nisan 15) while it was still dark First Jewish phase before Annas – Jn. 18:13-24 (This was more of an inquiry than a trial – no judgments were made) Second Jewish phase before the Sanhedrin – Matt. 26:57-68; Mk. 14:53-65; Lk. 22:54 Peter’s denials – Matt. 26:69-75; Mk. 14:66-72; Lk. 22:55-65; Jn. 18:25-27 Friday morning (Nisan 15) after the sun rose Third Jewish phase was a formal decision before the Sanhedrin – Matt. 27:1; Mk. 15:1a; Lk. 22:66-71 Remorse and suicide of Judas – Matt. 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19 First Roman phase before Pilate – Matt. 27:2, 11-14; Mk. 15:1b-5; Lk.
    [Show full text]
  • Luke Handout
    Luke Beginnings (1:1-4:13) 1. Luke 1:1-4, Introduction: Finding the One who seeks us • Luke 1:5-2:52 READING Jesus' ministry in Galilee (3:1-9:50) 2. Luke 3:1-20, The ministry of John the Baptizer 3. Luke 3:21-4:13, Jesus is tempted 4. Luke 4:14-30, Jesus rejected at Nazareth • Luke 4:31-37 READING 5. Luke 4:38-44, Jesus heals many people 6. Luke 5:1-11, Jesus calls the first disciples 7. Luke 5:12-26, Power to heal and forgive 8. Luke 5:27-32, Jesus calls a tax collector • Luke 5:33-39 READING 9. Luke 6:1-11, Who's in charge here? • Luke 6:12-16 READING 10. Luke 6:17-36, How can I do that? Part 1 11. Luke 6:37-49, How can I do that? Part 2 12. Luke 7:1-10, A centurion's faith • Luke 7:11-35 READING 13. Luke 7:36-50, An “uninvited guest” 14. Luke 8:1-15, The parable of the sower • Luke 8:16-25 READING 15. Luke 8:26-39, Jesus heals a demon-possessed man 16. Luke 8:40-56, A sick woman and a dead girl • Luke 9:1-17 READING 17. Luke 9:18, 46-50, Jesus, the One • Luke 9:37-45 READING The road to Jerusalem (9:51-19:44) 18. Luke 9:51-62, Counting the cost • Luke 10:1-42 READING 19. Luke 11:1-13, Prayer principles • Luke 11:14-32 READING 20.
    [Show full text]
  • The Civilization of War Edited by Alessandro Dal Lago and Salvatore Palidda Conflict, Security and the Reshaping of Society the Civilization of War
    Conflict, Security and the Reshaping of Society This book is an examination of the effect of contemporary wars (such as the ‘War on Terror’) on civil life at a global level. Contemporary literature on war is mainly devoted to recent changes in the theory and practice of warfare, particularly those in which terrorists or insurgents are involved (for example, the ‘revolution in military affairs’, ‘small wars’, and so on). On the other hand, today’s research on security is focused, among other themes, on the effects of the war on terrorism, and on civil liberties and social control. This volume connects these two fields of research, showing how ‘war’ and ‘security’ tend to exchange targets and forms of action as well as personnel (for instance, the spreading use of private contractors in wars and of military experts in the ‘struggle for security’) in modern society. This shows how, contrary to Clausewitz’s belief that war should be conceived of as a ‘continuation of politics by other means’, the opposite statement is also true: that politics, insofar as it concerns security, can be defined as the ‘continuation of war by other means’. This book will be of much interest to students of critical security studies, war and conflict studies, terrorism studies, sociology and international relations in general. Alessandro Dal Lago is Professor of Sociology of Culture and Communica- tion at the University of Genoa. Salvatore Palidda is Professor of Sociology in the Faculty of Education at the University of Genoa. Routledge studies in liberty and security Series editors: Didier Bigo, Elspeth Guild and R.B.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Owners, Kentucky Derby (1875-2017)
    OWNERS, KENTUCKY DERBY (1875-2017) Most Wins Owner Derby Span Sts. 1st 2nd 3rd Kentucky Derby Wins Calumet Farm 1935-2017 25 8 4 1 Whirlaway (1941), Pensive (’44), Citation (’48), Ponder (’49), Hill Gail (’52), Iron Liege (’57), Tim Tam (’58) & Forward Pass (’68) Col. E.R. Bradley 1920-1945 28 4 4 1 Behave Yourself (1921), Bubbling Over (’26), Burgoo King (’32) & Brokers Tip (’33) Belair Stud 1930-1955 8 3 1 0 Gallant Fox (1930), Omaha (’35) & Johnstown (’39) Bashford Manor Stable 1891-1912 11 2 2 1 Azra (1892) & Sir Huon (1906) Harry Payne Whitney 1915-1927 19 2 1 1 Regret (1915) & Whiskery (’27) Greentree Stable 1922-1981 19 2 2 1 Twenty Grand (1931) & Shut Out (’42) Mrs. John D. Hertz 1923-1943 3 2 0 0 Reigh Count (1928) & Count Fleet (’43) King Ranch 1941-1951 5 2 0 0 Assault (1946) & Middleground (’50) Darby Dan Farm 1963-1985 7 2 0 1 Chateaugay (1963) & Proud Clarion (’67) Meadow Stable 1950-1973 4 2 1 1 Riva Ridge (1972) & Secretariat (’73) Arthur B. Hancock III 1981-1999 6 2 2 0 Gato Del Sol (1982) & Sunday Silence (’89) William J. “Bill” Condren 1991-1995 4 2 0 0 Strike the Gold (1991) & Go for Gin (’94) Joseph M. “Joe” Cornacchia 1991-1996 3 2 0 0 Strike the Gold (1991) & Go for Gin (’94) Robert & Beverly Lewis 1995-2006 9 2 0 1 Silver Charm (1997) & Charismatic (’99) J. Paul Reddam 2003-2017 7 2 0 0 I’ll Have Another (2012) & Nyquist (’16) Most Starts Owner Derby Span Sts.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of the 87Th MOUNTAIN INFANTRY in ITALY
    HISTORY of the 87th MOUNTAIN INFANTRY in ITALY George F. Earle Captain, 87th Mountain Infantry 1945 HISTORY of the 87th MOUNTAIN INFANTRY in ITALY 3 JANUARY 1945 — 14 AUGUST 1945 Digitized and edited by Barbara Imbrie, 2004 CONTENTS PREFACE: THE 87TH REGIMENT FROM DECEMBER 1941 TO JANUARY 1945....................i - iii INTRODUCTION TO ITALY .....................................................................................................................1 (4 Jan — 16 Feb) BELVEDERE OFFENSIVE.........................................................................................................................10 (16 Feb — 28 Feb) MARCH OFFENSIVE AND CONSOLIDATION ..................................................................................24 (3 Mar — 31 Mar) SPRING OFFENSIVE TO PO VALLEY...................................................................................................43 (1 Apr — 20 Apr) Preparation: 1 Apr—13 Apr 43 First day: 14 April 48 Second day: 15 April 61 Third day: 16 April 75 Fourth day: 17 April 86 Fifth day: 18 April 96 Sixth day: 19 April 99 Seventh day: 20 April 113 PO VALLEY TO LAKE GARDA ............................................................................................................120 (21 Apr — 2 May) Eighth day: 21 April 120 Ninth day: 22 April 130 Tenth day: 23 April 132 Eleventh and Twelfth days: 24-25 April 149 Thirteenth day: 26 April 150 Fourteenth day: 27 April 152 Fifteenth day: 28 April 155 Sixteenth day: 29 April 157 End of the Campaign: 30 April-2 May 161 OCCUPATION DUTY AND
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Media Guide NYRA.Com 1 FIRST RUNNING the First Running of the Belmont Stakes in 1867 at Jerome Park Took Place on a Thursday
    2018 Media Guide NYRA.com 1 FIRST RUNNING The first running of the Belmont Stakes in 1867 at Jerome Park took place on a Thursday. The race was 1 5/8 miles long and the conditions included “$200 each; half forfeit, and $1,500-added. The second to receive $300, and an English racing saddle, made by Merry, of St. James TABLE OF Street, London, to be presented by Mr. Duncan.” OLDEST TRIPLE CROWN EVENT CONTENTS The Belmont Stakes, first run in 1867, is the oldest of the Triple Crown events. It predates the Preakness Stakes (first run in 1873) by six years and the Kentucky Derby (first run in 1875) by eight. Aristides, the winner of the first Kentucky Derby, ran second in the 1875 Belmont behind winner Calvin. RECORDS AND TRADITIONS . 4 Preakness-Belmont Double . 9 FOURTH OLDEST IN NORTH AMERICA Oldest Triple Crown Race and Other Historical Events. 4 Belmont Stakes Tripped Up 19 Who Tried for Triple Crown . 9 The Belmont Stakes, first run in 1867, is one of the oldest stakes races in North America. The Phoenix Stakes at Keeneland was Lowest/Highest Purses . .4 How Kentucky Derby/Preakness Winners Ran in the Belmont. .10 first run in 1831, the Queens Plate in Canada had its inaugural in 1860, and the Travers started at Saratoga in 1864. However, the Belmont, Smallest Winning Margins . 5 RUNNERS . .11 which will be run for the 150th time in 2018, is third to the Phoenix (166th running in 2018) and Queen’s Plate (159th running in 2018) in Largest Winning Margins .
    [Show full text]
  • The Triple Crown (1867-2020)
    The Triple Crown (1867-2020) Kentucky Derby Winner Preakness Stakes Winner Belmont Stakes Winner Horse of the Year Jockey Jockey Jockey Champion 3yo Trainer Trainer Trainer Year Owner Owner Owner 2020 Authentic (Sept. 5, 2020) f-Swiss Skydiver (Oct. 3, 2020) Tiz the Law (June 20, 2020) Authentic John Velazquez Robby Albarado Manny Franco Authentic Bob Baffert Kenny McPeek Barclay Tagg Spendthrift Farm, MyRaceHorse Stable, Madaket Stables & Starlight Racing Peter J. Callaghan Sackatoga Stable 2019 Country House War of Will Sir Winston Bricks and Mortar Flavien Prat Tyler Gaffalione Joel Rosario Maximum Security Bill Mott Mark Casse Mark Casse Mrs. J.V. Shields Jr., E.J.M. McFadden Jr. & LNJ Foxwoods Gary Barber Tracy Farmer 2018 Justify Justify Justify Justify Mike Smith Mike Smith Mike Smith Justify Bob Baffert Bob Baffert Bob Baffert WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC 2017 Always Dreaming Cloud Computing Tapwrit Gun Runner John Velazquez Javier Castellano Joel Ortiz West Coast Todd Pletcher Chad Brown Todd Pletcher MeB Racing, Brooklyn Boyz, Teresa Viola, St. Elias, Siena Farm & West Point Thoroughbreds Bridlewood Farm, Eclipse Thoroughbred Partners & Robert V. LaPenta Klaravich Stables Inc. & William H. Lawrence 2016 Nyquist Exaggerator Creator California Chrome Mario Gutierrez Kent Desormeaux Irad Ortiz Jr. Arrogate Doug
    [Show full text]
  • Honor and Shame in the Deuteronomic Covenant and the Deuteronomistic Presentation of the Davidic Covenant
    Honor and Shame in the Deuteronomic Covenant and the Deuteronomistic Presentation of the Davidic Covenant The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Jumper, James Nicholas. 2013. Honor and Shame in the Deuteronomic Covenant and the Deuteronomistic Presentation of the Davidic Covenant. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11124848 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Honor and Shame in the Deuteronomic Covenant and the Deuteronomistic Presentation of the Davidic Covenant A dissertation presented by James Nicholas Jumper to The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts April 2013 © 2013 James Nicholas Jumper All Rights Reserved. Dissertation Adviser: Jon D. Levenson James Nicholas Jumper Honor and Shame in the Deuteronomic Covenant and the Deuteronomistic Presentation of the Davidic Covenant Abstract The purpose of this dissertation is to identify the semantics of honor and shame in the Hebrew Bible and to demonstrate how these social values intersect with Israel’s fundamental social organizing principle, covenant. Though many scholars have claimed that honor and shame are pivotal values for biblical Israel and that covenant is fundamental to her conception of the divine-human relationship, no work attempting to explore the juncture of these two important social phenomena has appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • Did Jesus Forbid Ambition for Greatness in Luke 22:24–30? an Intercultural Reconsideration
    European Scientific Journal July 2014 edition vol.10, No.20 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 DID JESUS FORBID AMBITION FOR GREATNESS IN LUKE 22:24–30? AN INTERCULTURAL RECONSIDERATION Dr. George O. Folarin William Sunday Ojelade Department of Religious Studies, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria Abstract This is an Intercultural study of aspiration for greatness in Luke 22:24-30 first in the initial context of the first century Roman culture, and then in the contemporary Western Nigerian cultural context. The study looks at the common scholarly argument that the disciples were contending for superiority among themselves and that Jesus used this incident to correct their fight for power. After re-examining the text in the two cultural contexts, the study concludes that there is nothing condemnatory of aspiration for power in the text, but that the text challenges Jesus’ disciples to use the power inherent in it for and in his service. Keywords: Aspiration-ambition; greatness; power; servant; eschaton; and judgment. Introduction The issue of ambition or aspiration for greatness is contentious among Christians and the theological view of each Christian scholar is obviously reflected in his interpretation. Luke 22:24-30 has particularly been unfairly exploited by those who use the alleged condemnation of ambition for leadership by Jesus to subject their followers to perpetual followers and dependants. Expectedly therefore, many Christians remain at the level of followership. They rarely develop to become leaders since they are discouraged from aspiring to greatness. It is therefore common in Nigeria for leaders even in the church to pass down leadership baton in churches to relatives or close associates.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying the Significance of the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-52) to The
    Applying the Significance of the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-52) to the Socio- Political and Economic Situation of Nigeria Adesanya Ibiyinka Olusola and Ogunlusi Clement Temitope, Phd. ABSTRACT The Magnificat, otherwise known as Mary song, not only focused on God’s glorious mercy and deliverance but has been interpreted to speak of three of the revolutions of God namely moral, socio-political and economic revolution. The paper having singled out three themes, noted that Nigerians is in dire need of the words of the Magnificat . The paper observed that due to the level of selfishness, pride and injustice that characterize the actions of some individuals in the country, it became imperatives to highlight the importance of the Magnificat and apply same for overall welfare, security, progress and benefit of the nation and of its citizens. Hence for the purpose of clarity, the paper adopted descriptive and analytical forms to study and interpret the passage. The paper revealed that Mary’s song of divine victory over the powerful becomes a song of warning, instructions and hope. Therefore, the paper recommended that Nigerian leaders should borrow a leaf from the message of the Magnificat in order to have good governance that would be value- based and ensures that political, social and economic priorities are based on broad based consensus in society and that the voices of the poorest and the most vulnerable are heard in decision – making . INTRODUCTION Over the years, the Nigerian nation has been ravaged by severe political and economic crises which have retarded her developments in spite of its enormous natural and human resources.
    [Show full text]
  • The Three Major Greek Keys That Unlock the Gospels
    part 2 The Three Major Greek Keys That Unlock the Gospels here are three Greek language keys that unlock the truth of the Gospels while Tsolving the apparent contradiction between John and the other Gospel writers as to whether the Last Supper was the Passover or not. There is no question that the English translations of Matthew, Mark, and Luke seem to state that the Last Supper was the Passover. But one must remember that the Gospels were not originally writ- ten in English but in Greek. When Jewish idioms and Passover laws are considered along with original Greek scriptures, it’s evident that the story told, after Rome dis- connected from these Jewish understandings, is inaccurate. These language keys will help us get back to the truth. The first key is the Greek subjunctive mood, which can imply doubt and un- certainty. The subjunctive mood is used every time Jesus refers to his actual eating of the Passover in the Greek language, but its use does not always carry over into the English translations of the Gospels. This seemingly small change has huge implica- tions for accurately determining whether the Last Supper was the Passover or not. The second key is the Greekdative of reference, which affects the meaning of Greek articles (a common article in English is “the”). In the English language, these Gospel accounts seem straightforward; yet in the original Greek language, the dative case brings additional shades of meaning. This is important because, as Greek scholar Daniel B. Wallace noted in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, one in seven words in the Greek scriptures is an article.
    [Show full text]
  • Orientalia Christiana Periodica
    YOLUMEN 57 FASCICULUS I 1991 ISSN 0030-5375 ORIENT ALI A CHRISTIANA PERIODICA COMMENTARII DE RE ORIENT ALI AETATIS CHRISTIANAE SACRA ET PROFANA EDITI CURA ET OPERE PONTIFICII INSTITUTI ORIENTALIUM STUDIORUM PONT. INSTITUTUM ORIENTALIUM STUDIORUM PIAZZA SANTA MARIA MAGGIORE, 7 ROMA 1991 SIGLA AASS Acta Sanctorum (Antverpiae et alibi 1643 ss.) AB Analecta Bollandiana ACO Eduardus Schwartz, Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum (Berolini 1914 ss.) AfO Archiv fur Orientforschung Assemani, BO Josephus Simonius Assemanus, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino- Vaticana (Roma 1719, 1721, 1725, 1728) (rep. Hildesheim 1975) AOC Archives de 1’Orient Chretien BHG FranIois Halkin, Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca (Bruxelles 19573) BHO Paul Peeters, Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis (Bruxelles 1910) BO Bibliotheca Orientalis Brightman Frank Edward Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, I: Eastern Liturgies (Oxford 1896) BSAC Bulletin de la Societe d’Archeologie Copte BV Bogoslovskij Vestnik Byzantion Byzantinische Zeitschrift CCG Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca (Tumhout 1971 ss.) CCL Corpus Christianorum, Series Lalina (Tumhout 1953 ss.) CerVed Cerkovnye Vedomosti Chr6t Christianskoe Clenie CICO Codex Iuris Canonici Orientalis (Citta del Vaticano 1957-1958) COD Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta (Bologna 19733) ConcR Concilium Florentinum. Documenta et Scriptores voll. I-XI (Roma 1940-1976) , CPG Mauritius Geerard, Clavis Patrum Graecorum (Tumhbut 1974 ss.) CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium (Louvain 1903 ss.) CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum
    [Show full text]