Thu 30 Apr 2009
Reserve Reading – Greco-Roman Backgrounds of the NT
Posted by S.G.R. Webster under An Introduction to the New Testament
[24] Comments
-
Archived Entry
- Post Date :
- Thursday, Apr 30th, 2009 at 8:31 am
- Category :
- An Introduction to the New Testament
- Tags :
- Do More :
- You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
-
On page 3 of “Christianity and the gods”, why doesn’t Paul or Luke attempt to correct the statements about their idenity?
Were there anti-slavery groups during that time period or there slaves trying to escape their masters or was it just imeresed in their culture that there would be slaves and they would be obedient?
On “The Intersection Between Christianity and Politics” page I found it interesting that the actual intersection between Christianity and politics was the story of the Nativity. All to often I hear that this so called person did it and according to this paper that is not true. I never thought about that before and i find it very interesting.
on page 3 why doesn’t luke or paul attempt to correct the maltese when they call them gods
The parallel of Paul’s snakebite with the poem in the Palatine Anthology is very interesting. But why didn’t Luke or Paul tell the Maltese that Paul wasn’t a god? (“Christianity and the gods” pp.2-3)
On Page 3, “Christianity and the Gods” were you saying that neither Paul nor Luke corrected the people by telling them that Paul was not a god? It confused me.
On Christianity and the gods, I was put in awe of how awesome and I use that word with the full meaning put in place, because of how great our God is in comparison to the pagan idols of the people of the Maltese. They were super superstitious and any bad thing that happened to anyone was seen as a punishment from the gods. The fact that Paul was shipwrecked, and bitten by a snake, but was still unharmed demonstrates just how amazing our God is and how nothing compares the wonders of his hand. (Page 3)
On page 2 it talks about how slaves were often seen as the sexual property of their masters as well. My question is what about the Christian slaves? In Ephesians 6:5-9 Paul talks about slaves oberying their earthly masters, but he also says they should do this by doing the will of God. So what is the right thing for a Christian slave to do in this situation? Allow their earthly masters to abuse them sexually or risk losing their lives in order to do what would please the Lord?
on page 2 of christianity and the class structure
I thought it was interesting that it talked about the sexual abuse of slaves. Today this problem is so prevelant but i didn’t think about it being an issue back then. How would a Christian slave go about handling this issue since they had no control over thier masters? or did they not have a way of escaping the cylce?
Christianity & Class Structure
-Roman equestrian named Vedius Pollio used to throw his condemned slaves in a pond of deadly eels!? Wow! (pg. 2)
-If some slaves were seen as sexual property of their masters and this was “seen as commonplace in Graeco-Roman Literature” or as a normalitly, how then do the Christians that were slaves deal with this? What kind of posititon does this put them in? & what was the best way to respond/retaliate? (pg.2)
It says that Paul was against the idea of using oratorical tradition as a way of spreading the message to the Greco- Roman people, saying that it would hinder rather then assist them. Why was he against this method? Was it simply because the people thought the crucifixion was foolishness, and didn’t want to hear it? What would be a better method of teaching to them?
In “Christians, Literature and Rhetoric” it says that the Greco-Roman biographies purpose of the gospel is knowing the “exact truth about the things you have been taught” but then go on to say “that you MAY believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” if this is the exact truth and so many people are looking and searching for who or what to follow, wouldn’t people just automatically follow Christ. There wouldn’t really be a chance of “i hope that Jesus is the Christ” if the purpose was the EXACT truth about things.
The Paper intitled Christianity and Stoicism kind of oned my eyes to see that there are other views that are close to christianity, but that there are still differences. it just encouraged me to focus on have more then a belief but material to back it up.
I have 2 questions here:
1. It says in the Christianity & Stoicism section that Stoicism and Christianity are very similar, but I do not see that, Stoicism focuses upon reason and knowledge found in ones self while Christianity focuses on faith in and love for Christ and living a life of righteousness.
2. Seneca the Younger is referrred to and quoted multiple times as if he were an authoritative source, why is this? Was he a founder of Stoicism, or was he just a person who studied these things?
On pg. 2 of Christianity and the gods is a clear example of what you were talking about the other day in class, how they make it up as they go. When the snake attacks Paul and he just shakes it off, so the people just change their minds and say he was a god. I just thought that was ironic and interesting.
on page 3, it talks about Paul sending Onesimus “back to you.” was onesimus a former slave of Philemon? and paul refers to being Onesimus’ “father” b/c of his conversion to the faith. why wouldn’t he call him “brother” like he does his other fellow believers?
In the Christianity and the gods, Do you think it was a struggle for Paul to stay true to God when all the other gods were a big belief by other people?
(p. 3 “Christianity and the gods”) Why did Paul not correct the Maltese people when they began to think “that he was a god” (Acts 28:6)?
The third paragraph on “Christianity and the gods” confused me. Did people think the gods were helping or punishing Paul? Or does this even have to do with the gods preventing or helping Paul?
This is kind of what I asked you about in class – could the reason that Paul didn’t deny it when the people called him a god because they weren’t worshipping him?
i like how the new testament and the whole bible is not written in a void, but it is fermly located in the context of the greco roman world. and this fact can be sean not only in the things discused but also in the way they are descussed with the format of the letters and the NT itself.
I aslo was wondering about the fact that on page 3 of Christianity and the gods, why didn’t Paul correct the Maltese? I was also confused about what the profit would have been for furthering the Gospel since Paul did not deny it? More simply put, how’d it help?
p.#3 Christianity and the gods
How could the belief of the Maltese in Paul’s supposed deity “prepare the reader” for anything? Wouldn’t it be consistently wrong to perpetuate blasphemy?
On page 18 this quote stuck out huge to me, “So that the cross of Christ would not be made void.” I took the quote in a different way then it should be taken, but it got me thinking on how different religions view the cross and what it is a symbol of. Come view it as God is still ion the cross and others don’t. Even some are in disgust with it. That in its self is a hard thing to grasp when so much was shed on that cross. Its more than a tree…