db95/27/therefore he (db) finds incomprehensible ~
RB's claim that
"EARLY CHRISTIANS SAID ABOUT JESUS
WHAT NO OTHER JEWS HAD WISHED TO SAY ABOUT THE MESSIAH
OR ANY OTHER FIGURE;
that he had been exalted by God to participate now in the cosmic sovereignty unique to the divine identity",
since RB himself had just demonstrated the significance of Enoch in this regard!?
To answer, as he does implicitly, [...], that
"THE PARABLES REPRESENT A PARALLEL RATHER THAN A SOURCE"
does not in any way impugn the authority of the Similitudes to render his claim false;
in fact, [...], it enhances it, since now we have at least two independent witnesses to this religious concept,
neither dependent on the other?!
Further,
it should be emphasized that accepting RB's premise, which seems compelling,
that there are not a series of semi-devine mediator figures within Second Temple Judaism to which Jesus could have been assimilated
forces us to recognize that Dani'el 7:13-14 already assumes that the Son of Man shares G d's divinity,
thus once again giving the lie to RB's claim to some absolute uniqueness to Christology in the Jesus version.
THE SIMILITUDES & THE GOSPELS REPRESENT TWO DEVELOPMENTS OUT OF THE DANIELIC TRADITION!
Of course, this does not preclude further religious creativity on the part of each of these traditions,
as we see from the Gospels' apparent powerful ad-dition of Psalm 110:1 to the mix {if RB is right}
& the continuation of the Enoch tradition in 3 Enoch
{if he is, as I suppose, wrong}!
"EARLY CHRISTIANS SAID ABOUT JESUS
WHAT NO OTHER JEWS HAD WISHED TO SAY ABOUT THE MESSIAH
OR ANY OTHER FIGURE;
that he had been exalted by God to participate now in the cosmic sovereignty unique to the divine identity",
since RB himself had just demonstrated the significance of Enoch in this regard!?
To answer, as he does implicitly, [...], that
"THE PARABLES REPRESENT A PARALLEL RATHER THAN A SOURCE"
does not in any way impugn the authority of the Similitudes to render his claim false;
in fact, [...], it enhances it, since now we have at least two independent witnesses to this religious concept,
neither dependent on the other?!
Further,
it should be emphasized that accepting RB's premise, which seems compelling,
that there are not a series of semi-devine mediator figures within Second Temple Judaism to which Jesus could have been assimilated
forces us to recognize that Dani'el 7:13-14 already assumes that the Son of Man shares G d's divinity,
thus once again giving the lie to RB's claim to some absolute uniqueness to Christology in the Jesus version.
THE SIMILITUDES & THE GOSPELS REPRESENT TWO DEVELOPMENTS OUT OF THE DANIELIC TRADITION!
Of course, this does not preclude further religious creativity on the part of each of these traditions,
as we see from the Gospels' apparent powerful ad-dition of Psalm 110:1 to the mix {if RB is right}
& the continuation of the Enoch tradition in 3 Enoch
{if he is, as I suppose, wrong}!
26 jan 2013 - bewerkt op 26 jan 2013
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 11 dec 2025 50250 ‘Wie dus die geboden onderhoudt & léért, zal
- O 10 dec 2025 50249 65 Wat kan een Beweging in de loop van haar
- O 10 dec 2025 50248 64 Bovendien werd het uitleveren van ‘n jood
- O 10 dec 2025 50247 Toen zijn apostelen werden vervolgd door een
- O 10 dec 2025 50246 63 Toen de farizeeën onder koningin Salome
- O 10 dec 2025 50245 Wie een studie heeft gemaakt van de schrift-
- O 09 dec 2025 50244 62 Zelfs als het niet mogelijk zou zijn om
- O 09 dec 2025 50243 Het zou dus helemaal niet verkeerd zijn om
- O 09 dec 2025 50242 Terwijl Yehosjoea zei: ‘Op de stoel
- O 09 dec 2025 50241 DIT ALLES doet ons denken
- O 09 dec 2025 5024061 YESJ zag de hypocrisie van deze farizeeën
- O 08 dec 2025 50239De Sadducese Koning sprak over de ‘Geverfden’
- O 08 dec 2025 50238 We kunnen de farizeeën niet met al de latere
- O 08 dec 2025 5023760 De farizeeën raakten betrokken bij de bur-
- O 08 dec 2025 5023659 In de tombe is ook ‘n tekening te zien van