mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (11/06/84)
In article <1622@ucf-cs.UUCP> yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) writes: > I had thought most everyone knew what the texts were. I guess I hadn't > made it clear. The texts are the earliest extant manuscripts of the > N'tzarim writings: at present the codices sinaiticus and vaticanus, > Peshitta, > and the papyrii. The object is to use the same 'glasses' the authors > used when trying to understand them rather than rely on the traditional > non-Jewish 'glasses' which introduce a LOT of alien ideas which are > contradictory to the intents of the original Jews who wrote them. I see. We're supposed to slant the text according to Yirmiyahu's "Jewishness" theory rather than according to the traditional interpretation. Somehow I'm not suprised that you get a non-christian document when your interpretation philosophy outlaws any such ideas. Forgive me if I find this approach to be rather biased. Besides, the codexes cited and the papyri are all written in Greek; as such they hardly represent Hebrew originals-- unless, of course, you do a LOT of redaction. Protestant theologians have been aware for some time that the theological concepts need to be examined in the light of their traditional jewish meanings. This does not for one moment allow cutting out the resurrection, the ascension, the virgin birth, the miracles, or the claims to divinity. The phrase "Rose from the dead" is a statement of fact, not a statement of theology. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe