Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: una lettura per Luca Logi

caldamente consigliata
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0062505858/peterkirby
 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyam_Maccoby
 
 
 
fe...@delenda.net
 
-- 
http://delendanet.blogspot.com
 

 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyam_Maccoby
 
 
aha, Ai miei tempi il bibliotecario era un altro. Qualcosa che non va,
febo?


Per fortuna non � quello che diceva che il cristianesimo era un virus 
culturale ideato per vendicarsi della distruzione del tempio e abbattere 
l'impero romano..
 
 
 
fe...@delenda.net
 
-- 
http://delendanet.blogspot.com
 

 Per fortuna non è quello che
 
che indecorosa svicolata, febo
C'e' qualcosa negli studi di Hyam Maccobi che non ti convince?


 
Reception of Maccoby's view
 
Reception of Maccoby's view of Paul among conservative scholarship has 
generally been negative.[6] John Gager of Princeton University reviewed 
The Mythmaker (1986) in the Jewish Quarterly Review (1988) describing 
part of Maccoby's thesis as "perverse misreading" and concluded "Thus I 
must conclude that Maccoby's book is not good history, not even history 
at all."[7] Skarsaune (2002), referencing Maccoby's work and the theory 
that Paul represents a Christianity totally different from that of the 
early community in Jerusalem, writes that "Acts provides no evidence to 
substantiate this theory."[8] James D. G. Dunn (2006) describes 
Maccoby's revival of Graetz' accusations that Paul was a Gentile as "a 
regrettable reversion to older polemics".[9] The continuity with Graetz 
is also noted by Langton (2009), who contrasts Maccoby's approach with 
adherents of a "building bridges" view, such as Isaac Mayer Wise, Joseph 
Krauskaupf, and Claude Montefiore, even if they shared some details of 
the polemic critique of Paul.[10]
 
 
6^ Steven T. Katz The Holocaust in Historical Context: The holocaust and 
mass death before the modern age 1994 "Maccoby's last work has been 
devastatingly reviewed, and quite properly so, by John Gager, "Maccoby's 
The Mythmaker," JQR 79.2-3 (Octoberï¿½January 1989), 248-250; to which 
Maccoby replied, "Paul and Circumcision: A Rejoinder," JQR
7^ pp248-250 ; p249 "Could Paul possibly have read The Mythmaker in 
proofs and written these lines in anticipation of Maccoby's perverse 
misreading? Of course, it is always possible to argue that words do not 
mean what they appear to say, but such a claim requires at least some 
form of argumentation. When arguments do appear in the book, they 
generally take the form of assertions" p250 "As such it is but the 
mirror image of traditional Christian apologetic treatments of Paul, 
couched in a polemic against the Pharisees. Both are unacceptable as 
good history. Thus I must conclude that Maccoby's book is not good 
history, not even history at all."
8^ ref Oskar Skarsaune In the shadow of the temple: Jewish influences on 
early Christianity "Some scholars speak of Paul as the second, or 
sometimes even the only, founder of Christianity. 3 They imply that Paul 
represents a Christianity totally different from that of the early 
community in Jerusalem. Paul is said to be a product of Hellenistic 
Judaism and Hellenistic Christianity, having minimal contact with the 
Aramaic-speaking community in Jerusalem and disregarding its theology 
and authority.4 | 4 A recent statement of this view is Hyam Maccoby, The 
Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity.| Acts provides no 
evidence to substantiate this theory"
9^ The Theology of Paul the Apostle p6 James D. G. Dunn - 2006 "In 
contrast, H. Maccoby's The Mythmaker; Paul and the Invention of 
Christianity (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson/New York: Harper and Row, 
1986) is a regrettable reversion to older polemics."
10^ Daniel R. Langton The Apostle Paul in the Jewish Imagination: A 
Study in Modern Jewish-Christian Relations (9780521517409) 2009 pp76-79
 
 
fe...@delenda.net
 
-- 
http://delendanet.blogspot.com
 

 Reception of Maccoby's view of Paul among conservative scholarship
 
e' incredbile come qualsiasi accenno a conservatori e reazionari ti
faccia bagnare nelle mutande.
Deve essere davvero brutto fondare la propria religiosa sul
(presupposto) errore di altri nel leggere i propri libri sacri.
 
 
 

 wrote:
 
attenzione: vomito di ubriaco con rimasugli teologici pretridentini.