To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 25734
25733  |  25735
Subject: 
Re: Worthlessness
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:11:50 GMT
Viewed: 
1594 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Laswell wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
   A quick search via Google got me this page:

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/samaritan.htm

where it is claimed that the Samaritans adopted old testament beliefs in the first century BC. Depending on how far back the parable went, perhaps they were and perhaps they were not jewish. But in any case they were almost certainly not christian at the time that Jesus told the parable.

The issue was not that the Samaritan woman was or wasn’t a Jew. It was that she was not a Hebrew, and therefore a Gentile, and therefore supposedly racially inferior to all the people who crossed to the other side of the street. Besides, when that parable was told, noone was officially a “Christian”. Jesus and all of his apostles followed the Jewish faith, and for quite a long time after the crucifiction they termed themselves “Christian Jews”. It wasn’t until the leaders of the Jewish religion threatened them with something akin to excommunication if they didn’t renounce their belief in Jesus as the messiah that they fully separated into an independant religion. It’s been about ten years since I studied this, but, IIRC, that process took until sometime between 200-400AD to result in what we would recognize as Christianity.

Hey, thanks for clearing all that up.

Don merely asked whether they were believers or not, but all that extra background is great stuff.

I also learned something else interesting. You think the Samaritan was a woman... the King James version of the NT has the Samaritan as a man. I wonder if there’s a message in there somewhere, or if that’s just one of those translation idiosyncracies between versions that people always stumble over.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Worthlessness
 
(...) As far as I can tell, the Samaritan is conventionally credited as a man, but the earliest version I can remember hearing as a wee tot in Sunday School (yes, with feltboard images and everything) was a woman (which is probably why I always (...) (20 years ago, 16-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Worthlessness
 
(...) The issue was not that the Samaritan woman was or wasn't a Jew. It was that she was not a Hebrew, and therefore a Gentile, and therefore supposedly racially inferior to all the people who crossed to the other side of the street. Besides, when (...) (20 years ago, 16-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

44 Messages in This Thread:


















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR