A Confusing Message of Salvation?

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

When I said "western" I didn't mean the modern term "western culture", rather I meant the difference between Roman/Greek and Semitic cultures

At the time of Jesus, Hellenism was the predominant culture. Cultures were pretty well syncretized at that time. But in the flow of human history, and conceiving the "thought life" it was pretty well Eastern. This describes the writers and their audience.

The distance between us and them is vast! I think one of the biggest struggles in interpretation is that many readers don't really realize just how vast it is.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Socialite

At the time of Jesus, Hellenism was the predominant culture. Cultures were pretty well syncretized at that time. But in the flow of human history, and conceiving the "thought life" it was pretty well Eastern. This describes the writers and their audience.

The distance between us and them is vast! I think one of the biggest struggles in interpretation is that many readers don't really realize just how vast it is.

You said "us and them"..and I said I was not using the word "Western" in the modern use of the term.

As I said before I was using it as the difference between Roman/Greek backgrounds and Semitic backgrounds. Western and Eastern.

Not all Jews were Hellenized. Arabia and other Semitic cultures were not Hellenized.

In any case I think your idea that "western culture" can only refer to modern cultures does not make sense. European states have always been considered "Western culture" regardless of the date.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_culture

Hellenism is the spread of Greek culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_civilization

And being specific here, what we are really referring to is Middle eastern culture not merely eastern culture

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You said "us and them"..and I said I was not using the word "Western" in the modern use of the term.

As I said before I was using it as the difference between Roman/Greek backgrounds and Semitic backgrounds. Western and Eastern.

Not all Jews were Hellenized. Arabia and other Semitic cultures were not Hellenized.

In any case I think your idea that "western culture" can only refer to modern cultures does not make sense. European states have always been considered "Western culture" regardless of the date.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_culture

Hellenism is the spread of Greek culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_civilization

And being specific here, what we are really referring to is Middle eastern culture not merely eastern culture

Prax, before I get into one of those "I didn't really say that" cat and mouse games, I'll just interact more with what I intend.

Western culture is used broadly and specifically. Scholars who discuss biblical audience would never suggest a Western influence in the biblical times (even NT Wright). As we call it today, The West really identified itself during the Enlightenment, Renaissance, and both pre and post-colonialism.

Some of these differences are highlighted in Ravi Zacharias' Jesus Among Other Gods. Western Christendom was shaped in the 3rd and 4th Century, really taking a cultural shape post-Constantine.

It is generally understood what one means when they refer to "East" and "West" differences. In actuality, "Eastern" would include, in a broad way, including:
Far Eastern, Indian, Middle East and Judiac religions.

When you say certain groups were not "hellenized" you miss the point that the majority of the Jesus Movement was shaped and influences by Hellenism. I'd again defer to NT Wright as more an expert, or someone who has examined this in much more detail than I. In particular, I'd recommend the book "Paul" by NT Wright.

Bottom line: the Western culture and world we know today is a polar opposite in many ways from the Eastern culture and world that was the setting for our 1st Century fathers.

This is emphasized repeatedly by students who are studying or taking classes on interpretation. It's the most obvious interpretive wall to get over.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Western culture is used broadly and specifically. Scholars who discuss biblical audience would never suggest a Western influence in the biblical times (even NT Wright). As we call it today, The West really identified itself during the Enlightenment, Renaissance, and both pre and post-colonialism.

According to the links I've already provided to substantiate my point, "Western" is not exclusive to modern times. The "West" was very much an influence. Hellenism was is the influence of Greek culture. You keep trying to peg this into a "Western culture today" and I keep pointing out by Western Im referring to influences from Greek and Roman culture.

And by Eastern I specified specifically Judean and Semitic society.

Some of these differences are highlighted in Ravi Zacharias' Jesus Among Other Gods. Western Christendom was shaped in the 3rd and 4th Century, really taking a cultural shape post-Constantine.

It seems like we are talking past each other. We are discussing the bible, when it was written, by who and to whom.

I pointed out it was written to those of both an eastern and western background. Not to a modern Western Civilization or culture

It is generally understood what one means when they refer to "East" and "West" differences. In actuality, "Eastern" would include, in a broad way, including:
Far Eastern, Indian, Middle East and Judiac religions.

I said the bible was written to those of Eastern and Western backgrounds. I later clarified Easter to refer to Judean and Semitic culture

When you say certain groups were not "hellenized" you miss the point that the majority of the Jesus Movement was shaped and influences by Hellenism. I'd again defer to NT Wright as more an expert, or someone who has examined this in much more detail than I. In particular, I'd recommend the book "Paul" by NT Wright.

So by "eastern" you mean the NT was only written to people of a greek culture?

You said :"Just the opposite, it was written with an Eastern mindset set about 0-100 AD, to an Eastern audience"

When I said I thought it was written by Hebrews to both Western and Eastern backgrounds you disagreed with me and brought up Hellenization. And here by "eastern" you seem to have in mind "Far Eastern, Indian, Middle East and Judiac religions."...So Im finding your line of reasoning a little confusing at this point

Bottom line: the Western culture and world we know today is a polar opposite in many ways from the Eastern culture and world that was the setting for our 1st Century fathers.

I don't even know why "the Western culture and world we know today" is something you keep bringing up since Im not talking about it and the issue is who wrote the bible and to whom

This is emphasized repeatedly by students who are studying or taking classes on interpretation. It's the most obvious interpretive wall to get over.

That the bible was written by Hellenists to Hellenists?

This is all just a little confusing and contradictory. Hellenism comes from the Greek culture. Greece is "Western"...Eastern according to you is :Far Eastern, Indian, Middle East and Judiac religions" but by Eastern I clarified what I was speaking of.

Western culture and civilization have been around for centuries. Hellenism is the influence of Greek culture and ideas. Greece is not "Eastern", again which according to you is "Far Eastern, Indian, Middle East and Judiac religions."