There has been much discussion here on Nazarenes. In my opinion it is important to consult not only the four canonical gospels, but other uses and cognates as well. Presuppositions can mislead; one example: in Migne PG 43.40, Ancoratus, as mentioned already, has a Greek version with two sigmas, yet the Latin col.39 has Nazareorum. (And recall that some early Christian meetings and meeting places were still called synagogues, evidently.)
In this Acts verse we read both the Naz- word [aside: anyone heard Lord Buckley's "here comes the Naz"?] and the Greek for heresy.
Both words have some evolution over time. For example, for some users, Naz- and variants, especially in Hebrew, Syriac, Mandaic, and Arabic, means Christians. (Though many Christians eventually dropped it, until a church founded in Los Angeles in 1895.) Though for Epiphanius, it meant his heresy number 29 (and compare his heresy 18, with sigma--possibly related, somewhat like his Essenes and Ossenes, though he apparently did not see that).
Heresy, as is rather well known, at some time added a negative sense, moving from merely a group, neutrally, a philosophical school or choice, to, in some uses, a disapproved choice. At, apparently, about the same time--related to polemic between Judaism and Christianity?--min, originally neutral, as in kinds of trees, took on a negative sense, like negative-heresy, minut.
So, the question here is about the Acts 24:5 usages. Is one or the other intended to be read as negative or not? Or are both intended to be negative or neither negative? Or negative or not from different character's different perspectives?
And, whatever your answer to the above, is any of that anachronistic, given the time elapse between the history setting and the penning of Acts?
In this Acts verse we read both the Naz- word [aside: anyone heard Lord Buckley's "here comes the Naz"?] and the Greek for heresy.
Both words have some evolution over time. For example, for some users, Naz- and variants, especially in Hebrew, Syriac, Mandaic, and Arabic, means Christians. (Though many Christians eventually dropped it, until a church founded in Los Angeles in 1895.) Though for Epiphanius, it meant his heresy number 29 (and compare his heresy 18, with sigma--possibly related, somewhat like his Essenes and Ossenes, though he apparently did not see that).
Heresy, as is rather well known, at some time added a negative sense, moving from merely a group, neutrally, a philosophical school or choice, to, in some uses, a disapproved choice. At, apparently, about the same time--related to polemic between Judaism and Christianity?--min, originally neutral, as in kinds of trees, took on a negative sense, like negative-heresy, minut.
So, the question here is about the Acts 24:5 usages. Is one or the other intended to be read as negative or not? Or are both intended to be negative or neither negative? Or negative or not from different character's different perspectives?
And, whatever your answer to the above, is any of that anachronistic, given the time elapse between the history setting and the penning of Acts?
Statistics: Posted by StephenGoranson — Fri Dec 06, 2024 5:28 am