Talk:To the Hebrews - Revision history

Mjberkey: /* Authorship */

2007-07-30T12:57:23Z

‎Authorship

Joe Spencer: /* Authorship */

2007-07-30T04:27:49Z

‎Authorship

Mjberkey: Author of Hebrews?

2007-07-30T01:42:53Z

Author of Hebrews?

Mjberkey: /* Raymond Brown commentary */

2007-07-30T01:37:34Z

‎Raymond Brown commentary

RobertC: /* Raymond Brown commentary */ thanks

2006-02-28T03:24:50Z

‎Raymond Brown commentary: thanks

Nathan Oman: /* Raymond Brown commentary */

2006-02-27T17:51:58Z

‎Raymond Brown commentary

RobertC: NT commentary recommendations?

2006-02-25T04:59:46Z

NT commentary recommendations?

New page

==Raymond Brown commentary==
Nathan, I'm in the market for a good New Testament commentary--how strongly would you recommend Raymond Brown's book? Are there others you'd recommend? Anyone else have any recommendations? Thanks in advance. --[[User:RobertC|RobertC]] 04:59, 25 Feb 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:57, 30 July 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:There seems to be little to work with in any attempt to discover "the" author of Hebrews. At the same time, there seems to be little reason to be concerned with the identity of the author: the arguments and the spirit of the work seem to speak for themselves. It is, as Nate has written in the commentary, quite clear that Hebrews played an important role in Joseph Smith's thinking, and that is recommendation enough for me. --[[User:Joe Spencer\|Joe Spencer]] 06:27, 30 July 2007 (CEST)		:There seems to be little to work with in any attempt to discover "the" author of Hebrews. At the same time, there seems to be little reason to be concerned with the identity of the author: the arguments and the spirit of the work seem to speak for themselves. It is, as Nate has written in the commentary, quite clear that Hebrews played an important role in Joseph Smith's thinking, and that is recommendation enough for me. --[[User:Joe Spencer\|Joe Spencer]] 06:27, 30 July 2007 (CEST)
		+
		+	:: Joe, I agree. To quote one of the commentaries I checked out of the library on Hebrews, "The Spirit of God has seen fit to use numerous unnamed writers in giving us our Bible. Neither external nor internal evidence is sufficient to solve the problem of identifying the author of Hebrews. God spoke through him, however, and his message was designed to edify the Church of Jesus Christ." But, is there no hope of discovering the author, then? --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 14:57, 30 July 2007 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 30 July 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	==Authorship==		==Authorship==
	Do we have any idea who wrote this? I've heard several different names, but no evidence for any of them. At the end of the letter in my quad, it says "Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy", but it doesn't say that on the church website. --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 03:37, 30 July 2007 (CEST)		Do we have any idea who wrote this? I've heard several different names, but no evidence for any of them. At the end of the letter in my quad, it says "Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy", but it doesn't say that on the church website. --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 03:37, 30 July 2007 (CEST)
		+
		+	:There seems to be little to work with in any attempt to discover "the" author of Hebrews. At the same time, there seems to be little reason to be concerned with the identity of the author: the arguments and the spirit of the work seem to speak for themselves. It is, as Nate has written in the commentary, quite clear that Hebrews played an important role in Joseph Smith's thinking, and that is recommendation enough for me. --[[User:Joe Spencer\|Joe Spencer]] 06:27, 30 July 2007 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 30 July 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:Thanks for the recommendation—and for the new Latin phrase (''nihil obstat'' = official approval, literally "nothing hinders"). --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 03:24, 28 Feb 2006 (UTC)		:Thanks for the recommendation—and for the new Latin phrase (''nihil obstat'' = official approval, literally "nothing hinders"). --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 03:24, 28 Feb 2006 (UTC)

		+	==Authorship==
	Do we have any idea who wrote this? I've heard several different names, but no evidence for any of them. At the end of the letter in my quad, it says "Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy", but it doesn't say that on the church website. --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 03:37, 30 July 2007 (CEST)		Do we have any idea who wrote this? I've heard several different names, but no evidence for any of them. At the end of the letter in my quad, it says "Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy", but it doesn't say that on the church website. --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 03:37, 30 July 2007 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 30 July 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:

	:Thanks for the recommendation—and for the new Latin phrase (''nihil obstat'' = official approval, literally "nothing hinders"). --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 03:24, 28 Feb 2006 (UTC)		:Thanks for the recommendation—and for the new Latin phrase (''nihil obstat'' = official approval, literally "nothing hinders"). --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 03:24, 28 Feb 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	Do we have any idea who wrote this? I've heard several different names, but no evidence for any of them. At the end of the letter in my quad, it says "Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy", but it doesn't say that on the church website. --[[User:Mjberkey\|Mjberkey]] 03:37, 30 July 2007 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:24, 28 February 2006
Line 3:		Line 3:

	Robert, I am not such a great person for this. I like Raymond Brown, although his work is less of a commentary than a text book on New Testament studies. For a straight commentary, I went with the New Jerome Biblical Commentary. My understanding is that the first edition of this commentary was essentially the first English-language post-Vatican II Catholic commentary. It contains a nihil obstat from the Catholic Church. In other words, it is scholarlly and sophisticated, but also religiously sensitive in a Catholic sort of way. I really like it. --[[User:Nathan Oman\|Nathan Oman]] 17:51, 27 Feb 2006 (UTC)		Robert, I am not such a great person for this. I like Raymond Brown, although his work is less of a commentary than a text book on New Testament studies. For a straight commentary, I went with the New Jerome Biblical Commentary. My understanding is that the first edition of this commentary was essentially the first English-language post-Vatican II Catholic commentary. It contains a nihil obstat from the Catholic Church. In other words, it is scholarlly and sophisticated, but also religiously sensitive in a Catholic sort of way. I really like it. --[[User:Nathan Oman\|Nathan Oman]] 17:51, 27 Feb 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Thanks for the recommendation—and for the new Latin phrase (''nihil obstat'' = official approval, literally "nothing hinders"). --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 03:24, 28 Feb 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:51, 27 February 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Raymond Brown commentary==		==Raymond Brown commentary==
	Nathan, I'm in the market for a good New Testament commentary--how strongly would you recommend Raymond Brown's book? Are there others you'd recommend? Anyone else have any recommendations? Thanks in advance. --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 04:59, 25 Feb 2006 (UTC)		Nathan, I'm in the market for a good New Testament commentary--how strongly would you recommend Raymond Brown's book? Are there others you'd recommend? Anyone else have any recommendations? Thanks in advance. --[[User:RobertC\|RobertC]] 04:59, 25 Feb 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	Robert, I am not such a great person for this. I like Raymond Brown, although his work is less of a commentary than a text book on New Testament studies. For a straight commentary, I went with the New Jerome Biblical Commentary. My understanding is that the first edition of this commentary was essentially the first English-language post-Vatican II Catholic commentary. It contains a nihil obstat from the Catholic Church. In other words, it is scholarlly and sophisticated, but also religiously sensitive in a Catholic sort of way. I really like it. --[[User:Nathan Oman\|Nathan Oman]] 17:51, 27 Feb 2006 (UTC)