From: Edgar M. Krentz (emkrentz@mcs.com)
Date: Wed Jul 24 1996 - 10:10:19 EDT
>What basic assumptions does this "B-Greek" list accept regarding the text
>itself?
>1. Is the Word of God to be considered Verbally Inspired?
>2. Who is to be considered the author of a given text?
>3. Who then is to be considered the intended receptor of a given text?
>4. What time period was a given text written in? Was it revised later?
>
>Or does each member of the B-Greek list have his/her own perspective on
>these questions? If so, to what extent does that influence our ability
>to discuss these texts in such a manner that real progress is made in
>understanding them?
>
>JGrams@juno.com
>Rev. Jeffery W. Grams - St. Paul's Lutheran Church and School - Fulda,
>Minnesota
Jeff, you will probably get many answers. Here is mine.
b-greek assumes that you know Greek and wish to discuss the language of the
Greek New Testament. Answers to the 4 questions above:
1. There is no required attitude to inspiration, verbal or otherwise.
Members of the list have many opinions on this. It is not good manners to
flame anyone on the list for a divergent opinion on this or any other
attitude toward Scripture.
2. There is not agreement about authorship of NT texts. In my opinion the
four gospels, Acts and Hebrews are all anonymous, Paul wrote Romans,
Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon. The
other Pauline letters were written by later paulinists. There is a chance
that Peter is in some sense the author of 1 Peter. A Johnthe Seer wrote
the Apocalypse, but he was not the ApostleThe rest of the NT documents.
3. The audience for any text has to be inferred from the text in relation
to the other questions of eisagogics.
4.No text in the NT dates itself. Therefore all dates are inferences made
by modern scholars. Some texts were clearly revised later, e.g. John 21 was
added to the gospel, the doxology to the book of Romans, etc. There are
also some interpolations.
Those are my opinions. But I respect the views of those who disagree
strongly with many of my answers to the above, just as I use the
commentaries written by scholars of widely divergent opinions on the above,
e.g. I highly resspect Luke Timothy Johnson, who was menioned recently by
someone on the list.
Finally, the list is not intended to become a forum for discussing the
theology of any NT writer, though at times one cannot avoid it. Nor is it
intended to debate historical issues, e.g. the historical Jesus question.
The language gives us more than enough to do.
Peace,
Edgar Krentz
Prof. of New Testament
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
Chicago, IL 50515
Tel.: 312-256-0752; Home: 312-947-8105
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:46 EDT