Hi Ken. I wasn't seeking to imply that there were other nomina sacra for the central or indeed other figures depicted by nomina sacra (the variations forf each of the nomina sacra are neither here nor there for the purposes of my point).I am not sure what you are claiming about ‘the central figure’. Are there examples from ancient Chistian or Christian adjacent (Jewish or, for want of a better term, Gnostic) literature of any of the common nomina sacra used in the manuscripts of the 27 documents collected in the canonical New Testament in which the nomen sacrum is clearly used to indicate a different word or name than is commonly taken to be by Christians (especially NT scholars, especially text critics)? I would be especially interested in any examples in which a nomen sacrum from a passage in one the NT documents or one of the patristic writers is taken in such a non-traditional way (or, if you prefer, a way that runs counter to the way modern scholars read it).There are indications that perceptions of 'the central figure' represented by nomina sacra [and perceptions of its key associates and their roles] changed from generation to generation over at least a few generations
- Which gospels?
- Which epistles?
- gospels and epistles produced when?
- gospels and epistles read when? and where?
What are the three best examples of this (if there are three good examples)?
Best,
Ken
Note that my point was about how
and also about howperceptions [about] 'the central figure'...changed from generation to generation over at least a few generations
I was thinking in terms ofperceptions of [his] key associates and their roles [changed]
- propositions that the canonical gospels as we know them were not 'firmed' into their current form until the mid 2nd century, and
- the proposition that the so-called apocryphal and/or 'gnostic' texts, such as the Gospel of Phillip, the Apocryphon/Secret Book of John, and/or the Gospel of Judas may have been written and 'firmed' at least at the same time
The battle in the early Church to distinguish between Christian truth and falsehood had many fields and many casualties. It was not just about the ‘correct’ exegesis and understanding of the Old and emerging New Testaments. It was also about the correct understanding of salvation, an approved Christology, [and other things] ... The diversity of voices about Jesus’ incarnation, the value of circumcision and the correct formula for baptism [were] heard in the Gospels and in Paul’s letters ..//.. during the second and later centuries, [various] Christian teachers claimed that their opinions and practices represented the Apostolic tradition ...
... I argue that we should be more aware of Christian-ites8 (a polyphony or, sometimes, cacophony of voices) during the first four centuries. Rather than trying to pinpoint a precise school, I argue that the diversity of material needs to be better acknowledged and explored.
8 See J. Carleton-Paget and J. Lieu (eds), ‘Introduction’, in Christianity in the Second Century, pp.1–21.
Ashwin-Siejkowski noted Anne Kreps' proposal that one of its central images the Gospel of Truth is
... of the crucified Jesus ...as a ‘book/scroll’[which] led readers to a new understanding of themselves as ‘living texts’ that can publicly display what is hidden in their inner life ...
14 Anne Kreps, ‘The Passion of the Book: The Gospel of Truth as Valentinian Scriptural Practice’, JECS, 24(3) (2016): pp.311–35.
Ashwin-Siejkowski explores the role of etymology in [the Gospel of Truth's] theology ...
Another recent Routledge book, A Social History of Christian Origins, by Simon J. Joseph
explores how the theme of the Jewish rejection of Jesus – embedded in Paul’s letters and the New Testament Gospels – represents the ethnic, social, cultural, and theological conflicts that facilitated the construction of Christian identity [and] facilitated the complex and multi-faceted representations of Jesus in the Gospels of the New Testament. This study systematically analyzes the theme of social rejection in the Jesus tradition by surveying its historical and chronological development. https://www.routledge.com/A-Social-Hist ... 1032288505
And of course there are other "multi-faceted representations of Jesus" outside the Gospels of the New Testament ...
And I had David Trobisch's latest book, On the Origin of Christian Scripture, in mind:
The New Testament claims to be a collection of writings from eight authors. The manuscript tradition and the first provenance narratives place its publication in the middle of the second century, when many other books on Jesus and his first followers were circulating. Competing publications on Jesus communicate knowledge secretly passed on from generation to generation, transcending time and geographical boundaries. Like the Canonical Edition of the New Testament, they use first-century voices to address second-century concerns, such as whether the Creator of the world was the Father of Jesus, the role of women in congregations, the culture of producing and distributing books, and the authority of Jewish Scripture for Christians. The shared meta-narrative is the story of a divine messenger sent to earth to deliver the promise of eternal life to those who believe his message ...
Historically, the New Testament was published...as an interpolated and enlarged revision of the Marcionite Edition ...
https://www.fortresspress.com/store/pro ... -Scripture
Statistics: Posted by MrMacSon — Fri Dec 29, 2023 1:57 am