Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

spin recently made three claims: 1) That Burkitt's "Syriac Forms of New Testament Proper Names" was largely ignored. That is plainly false. Yes, of course. Ignore the context. Forget the title of your thread. 2) That my Nazarenes article did not include mention of differing views. That is...

Folks can see just what I mean here. No response to substantive issues. Instead, he has chased up some citations of Burkitt without demonstrating their relevance to Burkitt's argument regarding a zeta in Greek for the Hebrew TSADE - which is why Burkitt was mentioned. The cursory nature of the list ...

One citation doesn't imply "numerous", but it does show "general silence". The Kittel reference ignored the point that Burkitt made, as you did. And this is you assuming that Ναζαρενος was a gentilic in ABD: "Thus questions on the formation of the gentilic remain." But ...

You don't know which Semitic source lies behind the Greek (in its various forms) and you can't show that - in its earliest usage - Ναζαρενος was a gentilic rather than an epithet (though you've assumed the former [ABD]). You might benefit from F.C. Burkitt's "Syriac Forms of New Testament Prope...

I favor the Farrer theory, that Luke used Matthew (as Farrer, Goulder, and Goodacre). Given that the Farrer theory proposes the Lucan writers had a copy of Mt, Ken, why would they have used Mk at all, when Mt had double the content and in better Greek? Would you propose something like, "well, ...

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; And this is such a glaring example of an interpolation! After Paul went on at the beginning of Galatians that there is only the gospel that he...

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 9:59 am "Etymology is no use to the discussion of the toponym, ...."
Wrong from the get-go.
I may return to this when I have time.

Please don't worry. You've only posited the most cursory responses.

There are spelling variants of the place name, yes? A place name can also have an etymological meaning or assumed (even if etymythological) association, yes? Etymology is no use to the discussion of the toponym, as neither of the terms reflect an underlying Hebrew source nun-tsade-resh as found in ...

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Sat Apr 20, 2024 11:28 am One place may have more than one spelling(s) in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

That seems to be not taking note of my third point, for once again you are putting forward an idea with no apparent probative value.

Also, the peripheral nature of the use the Nazareth goes unchecked.

Conjecture? Yes, the assertion that Jesus may have been "known in Nazareth and Capernaum at different times" is simple conjecture. And I'm dealing with texts, not presumptions of history. "Capernaum is earlier in the tradition than either, being in all three synoptics and Q." Le...