tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post3406249073044750569..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: Matthew and anti-Judaism 2Ken Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-6071149284520964622011-11-25T09:02:34.177-05:002011-11-25T09:02:34.177-05:00On Matt. 27:25, I don't have a position. It&#...On Matt. 27:25, I don't have a position. It's just a fun suggestion. Whoever suggested it does not mean to say that the people are begging for atonement. The suggestion would be an ironic double entendre. The people are saying, "Will take the blame for his death," but their words can ironically be interpreted in terms of exactly what Jesus' blood does--atone. The preposition <i>epi</i> can mean over us, although I'm not sure that's its prevalent sense with the accusative. So I'm not endorsing the interpretation, only saying it's intriguing and I can't immediately dismiss it out of hand without further investigation.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-36153294941645106702011-11-25T07:20:23.187-05:002011-11-25T07:20:23.187-05:00First, I think that antisemitic attitudes emerge i...First, I think that antisemitic attitudes emerge in the early Church because Jews were seen, rightly or wrongly, as often inciting Roman persecution of the Church.<br /><br />Ken writes: "Another interesting twist Donaldson mentions is the irony of Christ's blood being upon someone. Why yes, his blood is on us to save us from our sins (1:21)!"<br /><br />Nice Derridaian word play there, Ken, but I know of no place in Scripture where this specific phrase is used to describe the role of the blood of Christ in salvation. I would refer you to your own previous post concerning the normal use of language.FrGregACCAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00368463715994694203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-14698171504678934652011-11-25T01:06:06.673-05:002011-11-25T01:06:06.673-05:00I personally believe we have antisemitic attitudes...I personally believe we have antisemitic attitudes already in Christians of the second century (Ignatius, Justin Martyr...)Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-16168031127462326422011-11-24T17:16:38.349-05:002011-11-24T17:16:38.349-05:00Anti-Semitism or anti-Judaism in Scripture seems p...Anti-Semitism or anti-Judaism in Scripture seems problematic. I have read some interesing commentary on this topic by Tom Wright and Ben Witherington. When does anti-Semitism emerge in the ancient church?John C. Gardnernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-58049847906426459322011-11-24T15:09:11.527-05:002011-11-24T15:09:11.527-05:00Thank you, Ken, that's helpful.Thank you, Ken, that's helpful.daveynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-5625841250877166492011-11-24T05:38:53.113-05:002011-11-24T05:38:53.113-05:00... conversion to Judaism, that is.... conversion to Judaism, that is.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-45794877194376099302011-11-24T05:38:08.973-05:002011-11-24T05:38:08.973-05:00You are getting at some of the core issues of the ...You are getting at some of the core issues of the book. My sense is that the author of Matthew and his principal audience understand themselves as Jews and Israel as the people of God in a way that other nations are not. Sociologically, we should describe them as a Jewish sect, a sect within Judaism like the Dead Sea community. Their polemic against others is similar to the invective of the Essenes against the Sadducees and Pharisees. <br /><br />Gentiles can escape God's wrath. They can become Jesus-followers. But I'm not sure we can even say that they join Israel for Matthew. They can be saved like Israel. I don't think Matthew looks to their conversion. Part of the assumptions we have to re-examine is precisely that all Jews had the same view of the Gentiles. For some Alexandrian Jews, they might follow God just like a Jew might.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-34870645087751904152011-11-24T05:30:14.300-05:002011-11-24T05:30:14.300-05:00What Israel is under consideration? Ethnic Israel ...What Israel is under consideration? Ethnic Israel is always being castigated as unbelieving. So, suppose it is only believers in Israel that the Gentiles join. But in what sense do they join believers in Israel? Maybe it is on the same terms, faith in God. So, what has been joined? Perhaps it is both believers in Israel and Gentile believers who together, on the same terms, join Christ. So, there is maybe no precedence of Israel for Gentiles to join. Or only precedence in historical time, and only because God spoke to a particular people first, who then broadened the knowledge they had to Gentiles. So, if there is some other sense in which Israel has importance, precedence, what is it? (I am saying this against the background that as far as I can follow some commentators seem to think Israel has some kind of 'logical' precedence and importance other than the contingent historical/knowledge precedence I have identified.)daveynoreply@blogger.com