Joseph Antley Posted October 31, 2009 Author Posted October 31, 2009 I see. That makes more sense. Do you have a reference?Best.cksNot off hand, although if you really want it, I could probably find it. I'm pretty confident that it's mentioned in Ehrman's Lost Christianities, but most of my library is a good 1,500 miles away.
cksalmon Posted October 31, 2009 Posted October 31, 2009 Not off hand, although if you really want it, I could probably find it. I'm pretty confident that it's mentioned in Ehrman's Lost Christianities, but most of my library is a good 1,500 miles away.Well, I'm certainly interested in the reference, but unless Ron is actually aware of and agrees with this purportedly-Ebionite interpretation of Matt. 5:17 (that, I assume, for it to be relevant here, calls into question the basic assumption that "law and prophets" does not refer only to Torah), it really doesn't matter much in this particular discussion. Also, I assume that, if Ron actually does agree with the Ebionite interpretation of this verse, he'll be able to provide the missing reference.Best.cks
Ron Beron Posted October 31, 2009 Posted October 31, 2009 How so?Also, what position do you mean, that Paul was Gamliel's disciple, that Gamaliel was grandson of Hillel or that Hillel was one of the greatest figures of what became mainstream Judaism?Sorry, I posted it a little late and I didn't back it up. I was referring to Paul being a disciple of Gamaliel. More to follow. I have a busy Saturday. Sorry.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.