Timeline for answer to On the premise of an early Matthew, how does the intertextual relationship with Matthew 20:20–28 inform our understanding of 1 Timothy 2:1–15? by Dottard
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2024 at 5:59 | comment | added | Dottard | @DanMoore - I agree with these comments. However, I do not see how they impact anything hermeneutically. Whether Matthew was composed before the Pauline epistles or after makes no impact on what is said. | |
| Jun 15, 2024 at 3:02 | comment | added | Dan Moore | I contend that our interpretation of a passage, our hermeneutic, is substantively impacted by the assumptions which we impose on the text, based on our speculations concerning the chronological sequence in which the NT books were published. Accordingly, I contend that we need to take an open look at different sets of publishing assumptions to surface how these externally imposed assumptions are impacting our understanding of the text. | |
| Jun 15, 2024 at 2:55 | comment | added | Dan Moore | An enjoyable discussion. First, let me reiterate that I'm not using this correlation to demonstrate an early Matthew (I have established this to my own satisfaction elsewhere); rather, I am exploring what we can learn based on this premise, and I am eager to have others to help me flesh out this thought experiment. Secondly, I am not asserting that Paul is citing Matthew any more precisely than the Synoptic authors cite one another. Hence, for Paul to use a compound form of λύτρον, all (in the sense of many), and to elaborate on those in authority are sufficient to show intertextuality. | |
| Jun 14, 2024 at 23:19 | history | edited | Dottard | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 161 characters in body
|
| Jun 14, 2024 at 23:07 | history | answered | Dottard | CC BY-SA 4.0 |