Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: the_Watchman

Just to tweak: the ancient Christians *did* continue the Jewish method of proclaiming the Word in their Liturgies. By the 2nd century, there were moves to standardize which texts were worthy of inclusion into liturgies. So while it’s true that most early Christians probably never laid hands on a bible, it was central to early Christian worship.

On a tangent I hope you’ll find interesting:

As I noted before, The Gospel of St. John probably consists of several liturgical readings compiled together as John’s death approached. The existence of such proto-gospels before their canonical publication probably explains much of the relationship between their texts:

Church fathers (Irenaeus IIRC?) attest to a Hebrew version of St. Matthew as early as AD 50. And indeed, many textual analysts find that portion seem less natively Greek than others. What’s odd is that it’s the most Greek portions that parallel St. Mark perfectly. Why would Mark condense Matthew using only the most Greek portions? Answer: it happened the opposite way. Matthew added almost all of Mark’s writings to his own. But why? Because Mark wrote with the authority of St. Peter! (or at least his popularity). As Mark spread throughout the Roman world, Matthew aligned his local version to Mark’s. (Indeed, Mark would later script the liturgy.)

Likewise, St. Luke recognized the Hebrew nature of St. Matthew, and sensed that the very literal Greek audience would misunderstand the mythological style of Matthew, and become scandalized by it. So he wrote a very historical gospel: Whereas Matthew traced Jesus’ lineage through the Kings of Israel, Luke does so through the lowly origins of Jesus. Luke uses existing stories from Matthew, but also possibly from the Blessed Virgin Mary herself, and St. John, in addition to his own eye-witness.

[This is NOT to say Matthew is partly fictitious! He never actually wrote “... was the father of ...,” but simply “... begat ...” Nothing implies the immediacy of “was the father of.” Hence, Matthew was able to confirm the geneaology to the numerological expectations of the contemporary Hebrews.]


40 posted on 09/02/2014 12:15:38 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: dangus
"...Just to tweak: the ancient Christians *did* continue the Jewish method of proclaiming the Word in their Liturgies. By the 2nd century, there were moves to standardize which texts were worthy of inclusion into liturgies... "

Emphasis added by me.

This illustrates one of my points precisely. Some BODY, some PERSON made decisions to either INCLUDE or EXCLUDE earlier works. Some were "worthy". Some were not.

So, some PERSON decided which works were considered to be "Divinely Inspired", thereby influencing the direction of future interpretations.
42 posted on 09/02/2014 12:21:36 PM PDT by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson