Cactus Flower
Cactus Flower
https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&offerid=1494105.26
530043396452794&type=15&murl=https%3A%2F%2F2.zoppoz.workers.dev%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fwww.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2
Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F0043396452794
Cactus Flower
ISBN: 0043396452794
Category: Media > DVDs & Movies
File Fomat: PDF, EPUB, DOC...
File Details: 7.5 MB
Language: English
Website: alibris.com
Short description: Good in good packaging. Language: English. Run
time: 103 mins. Aspect ratio: 1.85: 1. Originally released: 1969. DVD
MOVIE POLISHED FOR YOUR VIEWING SATISFACTION withdrawn from the
library collection. You will receive a reliable DVD MOVIE!
DOWNLOAD: https://click.linksynergy.com/link?id=*C/UgjGtUZ8&
offerid=1494105.26530043396452794&type=15&murl=http%3A%2F%2F
www.alibris.com%2Fsearch%2Fbooks%2Fisbn%2F0043396452794
Cactus Flower
• Don’t miss the chance to explore our extensive collection of high-quality resources, books, and guides on
our website. Visit us regularly to stay updated with new titles and gain access to even more valuable
materials.
.
This book was produced in EPUB format by the Internet Archive.
*
The text on this page is estimated to be only 0.00%
accurate
I
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.56%
accurate
CONTENTS Acknowledgements ix Preface xi PART I: SAUL i
The Problem of Paul 3 2 The Standpoint of this Book 14 3 The
Pharisees 19 4 Was Jesus a Pharisee? 29 5 Why Was Jesus
Crucified? 45 6 Was Paul a Pharisee? 50 7 Alleged Rabbinical Style in
Paul’s Epistles 8 Paul and Stephen 72 PART II: PAUL 9 The Road to
Damascus 85 10 Damascus and After 100 n Paul and the Eucharist
no 12 The ‘Jerusalem Church’ 119 13 The Split 139 14 The Trial of
Paul 156 15 The Evidence of the Ebionites 172 16 The Mythmaker
184 Note on Method 206 Notes 212 Bibliography 222 Index 229
Index of Quotations 235
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should like to thank Dr Francis T.
Glasson, with whom I have discussed various issues relevant to this
book over a considerable period. His remarks were most thought-
provoking, even when I did not agree with them. I should like to
thank also Professor E. P. Sanders for his generous and stimulating
comments. I am also most grateful to Professor A. R. C. Leaney,
Professor P. R. Ackroyd, Canon J. W. Packer and Rabbi Jonathan
Sacks for their encouragement of the rabbinical aspects of my work.
Special thanks are due to Mr Jack Eisner for the generosity and
warmth of his support. I have been greatly heartened by the deep
understanding of the origins of the Jewish-Christian conflict shown
by Professor Roy Eckhart and Dr Robert Everett, and by their
courageous support. I am most grateful to Professor Yehuda Bauer
for his encouragement of my work, and to the International Centre
for the Study of Antisemitism, at the Hebrew University of
Jerusalem, for supporting its continuance with a grant. I should like
to thank also my colleagues and students at the Leo Baeck College
for their unfailing encouragement and companionship in scholarly
enquiry. The poet Samuel Menashe has been an indefatigable and
inspiring friend and adviser, and I am glad to express here my deep
gratitude to him. My chief thanks, however, must go to my dear
wife, Cynthia, whose keen criticism and advice has contributed to
every page of this book, and whose constant, loving support has
made its completion possible. H.M. IX
PREFACE As a Talmudic scholar, I have found that
knowledge of the Talmud and other rabbinical works has opened up
the meaning of many puzzling passages in the New Testament. In
my earlier book on Jesus, Revolution in Judaea, I showed how, in
the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus speaks and acts as a Pharisee, though
the Gospel editors have attempted to conceal this by representing
him as opposing Pharisaism even when his sayings were most in
accordance with Pharisee teaching. In the present book, I have used
the rabbinical evidence to establish an opposite contention: that
Paul, whom the New Testament wishes to portray as having been a
trained Pharisee, never was one. The consequences of this for the
understanding of early Christianity are immense. In addition to the
rabbinical writings, I have made great use of the ancient historians,
especially Josephus, Epiphanius and Eusebius. Their statements
must be weighed in relation to their particular interests and bias; but
when such bias has been identified and discounted, there remains a
residue of valuable information. Exactly the same applies to the New
Testament itself. Its information is often distorted by the bias of the
author or editor, but a knowledge of the nature of this bias makes
possible the emergence of the true shape of events. For an
explanation of my stance in relation to the various schools of New
Testament interpretation of modern times, the reader is referred to
the Note on Method, p. 206. In using the Epistles as evidence of
Paul’s life, views and ‘mythology’, I have confined myself to those
Epistles which are accepted by the great majority of New Testament
scholars as the genuine work of Paul. Disputed Epistles, such as
Colossians, however pertinent to my argument, have been ignored.
When quoting from the New Testament, I have usually used the
New English Bible version, but, from time to time, I have used the xi
PREFACE Authorized Version or the Revised Version, when I
thought them preferable in faithfulness to the original. While the
New English Bible is in general more intelligible to modern readers
than the older versions, its concern for modern English idiom
sometimes obscures important features of the original Greek; and its
readiness to paraphrase sometimes allows the translator’s
presuppositions to colour his translation. I have pointed out several
examples of this in the text. In considering the background of Paul, I
have returned to one of the earliest accounts of Paul in existence,
that given by the Ebionites, as reported by Epiphanius. This account
has been neglected by scholars for quite inadequate and tendentious
reasons. Robert Graves and Joshua Podro in The Nazarene Gospel
Restored did take the Ebionite account seriously; but, though they
made some cogent remarks about it, their treatment of the matter
was brief. I hope that the present book will do more to alter the
prevailing dismissive attitude towards the evidence of this fascinating
and important ancient community.
PART I SAUL