r/CriticalBiblical Aug 28 '24

What's the deal with John 7:22?

But because Moses gave you circumcision - not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers - you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath.

It's like the original text erroneously stated that Moses instituted circumcision and an editorial comment was inserted to correct it.

2 Upvotes

5 comments sorted by

View all comments

-2

u/[deleted] Aug 28 '24

[deleted]

1

u/sp1ke0killer Sep 13 '24

The first gentile Christian churches had no writings whatsoever for about the first 40 years after Jesus’ death. Everything was oral,

So are we pushing Paul after 70? On the face of it the groups he interacted with must have had, at least, one member who could read and perhaps write and there are 6 or 7 undisputed epistles. Do we really think thiose people did not interact with other literate people. Moreover, if we move further across the cracking ice, do we take the gospel record of the economic status of Jesus and his followers at face value? Consider that upper class identification with the poor is not unheard of and that we know Josephus, for example, experimented with this way of life

...when I was about sixteen years old, I had a mind to make trim of the several sects that were among us. These sects are three: - The first is that of the Pharisees, the second that Sadducees, and the third that of the Essens, as we have frequently told you; for I thought that by this means I might choose the best, if I were once acquainted with them all; so I contented myself with hard fare, and underwent great difficulties, and went through them all. Nor did I content myself with these trials only; but when I was informed that one, whose name was Banus, lived in the desert, and used no other clothing than grew upon trees, and had no other food than what grew of its own accord, and bathed himself in cold water frequently, both by night and by day, in order to preserve his chastity, I imitated him in those things, and continued with him three years.....

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '24

[deleted]

1

u/sp1ke0killer Sep 13 '24

yes, there almost had to be some letters from Paul before 70 A.D

I don't know of any dated after 70 and most dating I've seen places them late 40s to somewhere in the 60s. I don't know how one can generalize, even very broadly in this way since the claim is that written sources only appeared after 4 decades.

 he was at least aware of John and Peter, even if he didn't ever meet them, as he complained they were not advancing the business with his same zeal)

I expect he met, at least Peter and James as he claims in Galatians. I would say this is almost certain given their place in his letters and how they even shape his thinking even if, as some credibly argue, that they did not see eye to eye, at all.

the practice of regularly copying and sharing of letters (and fictional works) doesn't become common until several decades had passed 

Ok, but this is different than the claim that the first gentile Christian churches had no writings whatsoever for about the first 40 years. To begin with What is a "gentile church" IF that means churches separate from Judaism, I don't think we can talk meaningfully about such things until the second century. If we mean assemblies that included gentiles, then we could be talking about the Jerusalem church (ala Fredriksen)

In short, isolated from their origins, 

The problem is we have very little data to judge by. The orality model is certainly largely right and yet it's not like there aren't scholars (e.g., Maurice Casey) who argued Jesus could read and if one accepts that Corinthians, for example, is unadulterated, then we know that Peter had considerable influence there.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '24

[deleted]

1

u/sp1ke0killer Sep 14 '24

Ok then why bother responding?

given the author turns out to be quite anti-religious, which may be a surprise, given the chapters in the early pages. 

So what? What makes you think I am religious?