Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Christian M. M. Brady" <cbrady AT tulane.edu>]

On 1/30/01 11:26 AM, "Moshe Shulman" <mshulman AT ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> At 12:11 AM 1/30/01 -0600, Christian M. M. Brady wrote:
>> On 1/29/01 11:40 AM, "Moshe Shulman" <mshulman AT ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>> At 05:14 AM 1/29/01 -0500, Dan Wagner wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Jonathan D. safren [mailto:yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il]
>>>>>      If the verse is to be viewed in context, which is the
>>>>> only basis for
>>>>> philological - and not Christological - discussion,
>>>> .. except that you should recognize that Christology (Messiahism) is an
>>>> important component of Biblical Hebrew thought. They cannot be divorced.
>>>> Nevertheless, i will keep to philology for the remainder of this post.
>>> That is ONLY true for those who are evangelical Christians.
>> Not really, for lots of reasons, but I will offer only one: the expectation
>> of the messiah was not new to the followers of Jesus and most of the
>> passages interpreted by the NT authors as messianic either already had 
>> those
>> overtones in the Tanakh or were already understood in that vein before 
>> Jesus
>> was a glimmer in anyone's eye.
> 
> But this is irrelevant to the words in the text.

Not necessarily since the words *mean* something.

Cb
cbrady @ tulane.edu
-- 
"Why can't you make another word using all the letters in 'anagram'?"
- George Carlin