Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Gospel of the Hebrews & Flight to Pella

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Gospel of the Hebrews & Flight to Pella

    Reading through P.H.R. Van Houwelingen's Fleeing Forward, which recounts some of the details of the first century church and the flight to Pella, mention is made of the Gospel of the Hebrews.

    Little remains of the gospel: some fragments, and citations by early church writers (Cyril, Jerome, Origen, Clement, Didymus the Blind.) Eusebius cites Papias cites Didymus cites an unnamed gospel (assumed to be the gospel of the Hebrews) found in Alexandria which recounts the story of the woman caught in adultery. Additional information included in that record: the woman was taken to a place designated for execution by stoning. John's account has a more detailed description of the proceedings.

    The gospel of the Hebrews wasn't included in the canon, but it does support the authenticity of the pericope despite being apparently not included in the original gospel of John. The gospel of the Hebrews apparently did not include a genealogy of Jesus. I'm not sure quite how that can be known, but it seems that the work wasn't much shorter that Matthew's gospel. If a modified copy of Matthew existed before the war, how much earlier the original?

    One of the more interesting claims in Van Houwelingen's treatise is the flight to Pella: the congregation took with them a copy of [(at least 1 of the three possible versions of)] the gospel of the Hebrews, a modified version of Matthew* when they left Jerusalem BEFORE** the Jewish war (66-73CE) with Rome. Checking will take some time, but on the basis of the apparent care that Van Houwelingen has taken throughout his treatise, it is safe to assume that there is evidence of a written gospel prior not only to the fall of Jerusalem, but to the war itself.


    [(** or is Matthew a modified version of the gospel of the Hebrews? ... more at Early Christian Writings)]
    [(** or no later than 67CE: between the repulsion of Rome's first attempt to take Jerusalem and the resumption of the siege.)]
    Last edited by tabibito; 05-24-2023, 04:56 AM.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

  • #2

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #3
      From the wiki article you linked to: "Distinctive features include a Christology characterized by the belief that the Holy Spirit is Jesus' Divine Mother"

      so, no. Just no.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        From the wiki article you linked to: "Distinctive features include a Christology characterized by the belief that the Holy Spirit is Jesus' Divine Mother"

        so, no. Just no.
        Yes - I'm checking into that. The problem with the interpretation that the Holy Spirit as a mother is stated in the same article - it may be the result of a misinterpretation on grammatical grounds, so no, it is not a deal breaker.
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • #5
          Origen's take on the passage in question:

          Origen Commentary on John 2.6.329 trans Philip Schaff
          This view is too firmly settled to be
          disturbed by a few words which may be adduced to the opposite effect. If any one should lend
          credence to the Gospel according to the Hebrews, where the Saviour Himself says, “My mother,
          the Holy Spirit took me just now by one of my hairs and carried me off to the great mount Tabor,”
          he will have to face the difficulty of explaining how the Holy Spirit can be the mother of Christ
          when it was itself brought into existence through the Word. But neither the passage nor this difficulty
          is hard to explain.For if he who does the will of the Father in heaven is Christ’s brother and
          sister and mother, and if the name of brother of Christ may be applied, not only to the race of men,
          but to beings of diviner rank than they, then there is nothing absurd in the Holy Spirit’s being His
          mother, every one being His mother who does the will of the Father in heaven.


          Origen is responding to a criticism of the idea that the Holy Spirit could be the mother of Christ when (so it was claimed) it was Christ who brought the Holy Spirit into existence.
          But there is still no citation of the actual text of the Gospel of the Hebrews that allows for a proper evaluation of what was actually recorded in original. If the original said (just for example) "She who engendered me" that would very readily be interpreted as "my mother," but the interpretation would be invalid.
          Last edited by tabibito; 05-24-2023, 08:41 AM.
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • #6
            Two thoughts:

            Matthew's Gospel frequently quotes from the Septuagint translation of the Bible rather than directly from the Hebrew text. (See https://www.scripturecatholic.com/se...new-testament/)

            Matthew also quotes heavily from Mark's Gospel, another document clearly written originally in Greek.
            When I Survey....

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Faber View Post
              Two thoughts:

              Matthew's Gospel frequently quotes from the Septuagint translation of the Bible rather than directly from the Hebrew text. (See https://www.scripturecatholic.com/se...new-testament/)
              I think it is safe to say that the New Testament writers did not use the MT. Whatever they used, it was either the LXX or something very like it.

              Matthew also quotes heavily from Mark's Gospel, another document clearly written originally in Greek.
              The immediate point of interest is the claim that the existence of a written gospel in Pella prior to the first Jewish war might be established. Links between that gospel and Matthew's are a secondary issue (today). It is, however, noteworthy that the early church, which had access to a wealth or material no longer extant, considered the gospel of Matthew to have been written in Hebrew. Modern scholarship, with almost none of that material available, considers the early church assessments to be wrong.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                Origen's take on the passage in question:

                Origen Commentary on John 2.6.329 trans Philip Schaff
                This view is too firmly settled to be
                disturbed by a few words which may be adduced to the opposite effect. If any one should lend
                credence to the Gospel according to the Hebrews, where the Saviour Himself says, “My mother,
                the Holy Spirit took me just now by one of my hairs and carried me off to the great mount Tabor,”
                he will have to face the difficulty of explaining how the Holy Spirit can be the mother of Christ
                when it was itself brought into existence through the Word. But neither the passage nor this difficulty
                is hard to explain.For if he who does the will of the Father in heaven is Christ’s brother and
                sister and mother, and if the name of brother of Christ may be applied, not only to the race of men,
                but to beings of diviner rank than they, then there is nothing absurd in the Holy Spirit’s being His
                mother, every one being His mother who does the will of the Father in heaven.


                Origen is responding to a criticism of the idea that the Holy Spirit could be the mother of Christ when (so it was claimed) it was Christ who brought the Holy Spirit into existence.
                But there is still no citation of the actual text of the Gospel of the Hebrews that allows for a proper evaluation of what was actually recorded in original. If the original said (just for example) "She who engendered me" that would very readily be interpreted as "my mother," but the interpretation would be invalid.
                Origen was a bit unorthodox himself. Especially if he thinks that Jesus created the Holy Spirit.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                  Origen was a bit unorthodox himself. Especially if he thinks that Jesus created the Holy Spirit.
                  And no, he didn't hold that opinion - it was an opinion that he was arguing against. Origen was unorthodox in a time when orthodoxy didn't exist, and some of his concepts do leave a lot to be desired.

                  On the basis of what is recorded here, which might be modified by other of Origen's writings, Origen considered that Wisdom preexisted Logos - but not that either created the other. (i.e. neither is a created being.)

                  In the same section, Origen says:
                  supposing we should
                  concede that the life which is the light of men was made through Him, since it said that the life
                  “was made” the light of men, what are we to say about wisdom, which is conceived as being prior
                  to the Word? That, therefore, which is about the Word (His relations or conditions) was not made
                  by the Word, and the result is that, with the exception of the notions under which Christ is presented,
                  all things were made through the Word of God, the Father making them in wisdom.“In wisdom
                  hast Thou made them all,” it says, not through, but in wisdom

                  1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                  .
                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                  Scripture before Tradition:
                  but that won't prevent others from
                  taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                  of the right to call yourself Christian.

                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                  Comment

                  Related Threads

                  Collapse

                  Topics Statistics Last Post
                  Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                  13 responses
                  41 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post whag
                  by whag
                   
                  Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                  21 responses
                  129 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                  Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                  78 responses
                  411 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post tabibito  
                  Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                  45 responses
                  303 views
                  1 like
                  Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                  Working...
                  X