Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Parable of the Sower (and Gth)

Expand Messages
  • mgrondin@tir.com
    ... I don t see any suggestion of this in Th9. It seems to me to be precisely on a par with the canonicals. Since the seeds sown on infertile ground yield
    Message 1 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      --- Rick Hubbard wrote:
      > What is distinctive in Thomas ... is that the seeds that do not
      > suffer the misfortunes that commonly befall other seeds provide
      > qualitatively (not quantitatively) superior yields.

      I don't see any suggestion of this in Th9. It seems to me to be
      precisely on a par with the canonicals. Since the seeds sown on
      infertile ground yield nothing at all, the yield of the seeds sown
      on fertile ground MUST be QUANTITATIVELY superior! (Note, however,
      as an item of curiosity, that the word 'seed' doesn't occur in this
      parable - neither in Thomas nor in the canonicals!)

      > In Thomas, there is no mention of numerically higher yield, only
      > that some of the "fruits" [KARPOS] are so large that it required
      > only 30 to fill a measure [SOTE], while it took 60 of the others
      > to fill a (presumably) similar container.

      The word 'KARPOS' does not occur, so the argument here must be based
      on the same phrase ('per SOTE') being used for both the 60 and the
      120 (not 30 and 60). I doubt, however, that the author(s) intended
      to imply that the 60 are individually SMALLER than the 120. To take
      a specific example, the apples of an orchard that yields 60 bushels
      of apples per acre are no larger than the apples of an orchard that
      yields 120 bushels of apples per acre.

      Mike
    • mgrondin@tir.com
      Whoops ... ... Mike
      Message 2 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Whoops ...

        > I doubt, however, that the author(s) intended
        > to imply that the 60 are individually SMALLER than the 120.

        ... should read:

        > I doubt, however, that the author(s) intended
        > to imply that the 60 are individually LARGER than the 120.

        Mike
      • David C. Hindley
        Mike, You said Note, however, as an item of curiosity, that the word seed doesn t occur in this parable - neither in Thomas nor in the canonicals!
        Message 3 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Mike,

          You said >>Note, however, as an item of curiosity, that the word
          'seed' doesn't occur in this
          parable - neither in Thomas nor in the canonicals!<<

          I am confused. Your interlinear translation has (6RO6) in Log. 9,
          which the lexicon defines as "a seed." SPOROS is the word used in
          Luke's version of the parable, and this word is equivalent to SPERMA
          or KOKKOS, is it not? (At least Louw-Nida classifies it so).

          Respectfully,

          Dave Hindley
          Cleveland, Ohio, USA
        • mgrondin@tir.com
          ... I always get into trouble when I say more than I need to, or when I try to show off without taking the trouble to recheck the claim. In the instant case,
          Message 4 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            --- David C. Hindley wrote:
            > Mike,
            >
            > You said >>Note, however, as an item of curiosity, that the word
            > 'seed' doesn't occur in this
            > parable - neither in Thomas nor in the canonicals!<<
            >
            > I am confused. Your interlinear translation has (6RO6) in Log. 9,
            > which the lexicon defines as "a seed." SPOROS is the word used in
            > Luke's version of the parable ...

            I always get into trouble when I say more than I need to, or when I
            try to "show off" without taking the trouble to recheck the claim.
            In the instant case, I was concentrating on the fact that the sower
            was said to "fill his hand", but "With what?" not specified. As I
            see now, however, it would not have been necessary to say what was
            in the sower's hand, since what else but seed could have been? Also,
            as you say, the word 'seed' does occur later on in the parable in
            the Lukan and Thomas versions. Having now committed at least three
            public gaffes so far today (including referring to Annette Merz as
            'Metz'), I believe that I've both satisfied my daily quota, and paid
            the appropriate penalty for pointing out someone else's mistakes.<g>

            Mike
          • John Lupia
            On Mon, 02 Jul 2001 20:27:03 -0000, crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com wrote: To Mike, I was concentrating on the fact that the sower ... Since I have already
            Message 5 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              On Mon, 02 Jul 2001 20:27:03 -0000, crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com wrote:

              To Mike,

              I was concentrating on the fact that the sower
              > was said to "fill his hand", but "With what?" not specified. As I
              > see now, however, it would not have been necessary to say what was
              > in the sower's hand, since what else but seed could have been?

              Since I have already demonstrated on Synoptic-L that GThom contained erotic
              twisted characterizations of canonical pericopae I would think what was in
              the hand is obvious.

              Peace in Christ,
              John
              <><

              John N. Lupia
              501 North Avenue B-1
              Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
              JLupia2@...
              <>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><>
              "during this important time, as the eve of the new millennium approaches . .
              . unity among all Christians of the various confessions will increase until
              they reach full communion." John Paul II, Tertio Millennio Adveniente, 16





              _______________________________________________________
              Send a cool gift with your E-Card
              http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
            • Rick Hubbard
              ... I don t see any suggestion of this in Th9. It seems to me to be precisely on a par with the canonicals. Since the seeds sown on infertile ground yield
              Message 6 of 14 , Jul 2, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                --- Rick Hubbard wrote:
                > What is distinctive in Thomas ... is that the seeds that do not
                > suffer the misfortunes that commonly befall other seeds provide
                > qualitatively (not quantitatively) superior yields.

                --- Mike Grondin Wrote:
                I don't see any suggestion of this in Th9. It seems to me to be
                precisely on a par with the canonicals. Since the seeds sown on
                infertile ground yield nothing at all, the yield of the seeds
                sown
                on fertile ground MUST be QUANTITATIVELY superior! (Note,
                however,
                as an item of curiosity, that the word 'seed' doesn't occur in
                this
                parable - neither in Thomas nor in the canonicals!)

                You are right. Any number greater than "nothing" is numerically
                superior. But on the other hand, if 60 units of the crop output
                filled one measure but it took 120 units of output to fill a
                second measure, would not the size of the individual unit (fruit)
                be larger in the former case? From my own experience I know that
                I would prefer to harvest tomatoes that were so big I can only
                get 10 in a bucket instead of 20. If only 10 fit in the bucket,
                are they not larger than those of which I am able to load 20 to
                the bucket? Is bigger, better?

                > In Thomas, there is no mention of numerically higher yield,
                only
                > that some of the "fruits" [KARPOS] are so large that it
                required
                > only 30 to fill a measure [SOTE], while it took 60 of the
                others
                > to fill a (presumably) similar container.

                ---Mike wrote:
                The word 'KARPOS' does not occur,[snip]

                Maybe we are looking in different places. On page 34, line 12,
                second word, do we both read AF-ti-KARPOS? Since, (as you note),
                I confuse 30 with 60 and 60 with 120, I suppose anything is
                possible!

                Rick
              • mgrondin@tir.com
                As promised, this is a rewriting of my brilliant reply to Rick Hubbard originally sent to the list Tuesday night, and now lost to ... Yes. Sorry. I was having
                Message 7 of 14 , Jul 5, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  As promised, this is a rewriting of my brilliant reply to Rick
                  Hubbard originally sent to the list Tuesday night, and now lost to
                  posterity forever. <g> In response to my (erroneous) factual claim:

                  > The word 'KARPOS' does not occur [in Th9]

                  ... Rick rightfully, but gently, took me to task:
                  > Maybe we are looking in different places. On page 34, line 12,
                  > second word, do we both read AF-ti-KARPOS?

                  Yes. Sorry. I was having a bad-brain day and must have been looking
                  into the void. Hopefully, my interpretation wasn't as faulty as my
                  factual claims.

                  > [Rick]: ... if 60 units of the crop output
                  > filled one measure but it took 120 units of output to fill a
                  > second measure, would not the size of the individual unit (fruit)
                  > be larger in the former case?

                  Yes, of course, but this is a misunderstanding of 'per SOTE'. To
                  begin with, the Coptic noun 'SOTE' is related to the verb 'SITE',
                  which means 'to throw, cast, toss', etc. Indeed, 'SITE' is the very
                  verb used at the beginning of this saying, in the phrase which is
                  normally translated 'the sower', but which literally means 'he who
                  casts/throws/tosses' etc. 'SITE' is also used in the related saying
                  Th57, where the enemy of the man who has good seed comes in the
                  night and "tosses" (SITE) weeds among the good seed. So now then
                  when we come down to the conclusion of Th9, the 'per SOTE' has to
                  be taken as referring to the process of sowing. Whether 'per SOTE'
                  means 'per toss' (of the sower's hand) or 'per sowing' (of the
                  entire field - which would involve many "tosses") - I'm not sure,
                  but in any case it's not a reference to measuring the size of the
                  eventual fruit of this sowing. (I think now that 'per measure' is
                  a poor choice for translating 'per SOTE', precisely because of the
                  ambiguity to which your comments have drawn attention.)

                  Hope this is satisfactory,
                  Mike
                • Barlow, James C. DOC
                  Are you discussing crossan s misapprehension of Thomas and the Seed Secretly GRowing parable of Mark 4? In Crossan s Gospel of THomas he cites a Thomas
                  Message 8 of 14 , Jul 6, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Are you discussing crossan's misapprehension of Thomas and the "Seed
                    Secretly GRowing" parable of Mark 4? In Crossan's "Gospel of THomas" he
                    cites a Thomas parable or saying as the oridignal meaning of the "Seed"
                    parable in Mark with no justification whatsoever, but you do not know that
                    until you look up the parable yourself,and read it.
                    -jb

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: mgrondin@... [mailto:mgrondin@...]
                    Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:17 PM
                    To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [XTalk] Re: Parable of the Sower (and Gth)


                    As promised, this is a rewriting of my brilliant reply to Rick
                    Hubbard originally sent to the list Tuesday night, and now lost to
                    posterity forever. <g> In response to my (erroneous) factual claim:

                    > The word 'KARPOS' does not occur [in Th9]

                    ... Rick rightfully, but gently, took me to task:
                    > Maybe we are looking in different places. On page 34, line 12,
                    > second word, do we both read AF-ti-KARPOS?

                    Yes. Sorry. I was having a bad-brain day and must have been looking
                    into the void. Hopefully, my interpretation wasn't as faulty as my
                    factual claims.

                    > [Rick]: ... if 60 units of the crop output
                    > filled one measure but it took 120 units of output to fill a
                    > second measure, would not the size of the individual unit (fruit)
                    > be larger in the former case?

                    Yes, of course, but this is a misunderstanding of 'per SOTE'. To
                    begin with, the Coptic noun 'SOTE' is related to the verb 'SITE',
                    which means 'to throw, cast, toss', etc. Indeed, 'SITE' is the very
                    verb used at the beginning of this saying, in the phrase which is
                    normally translated 'the sower', but which literally means 'he who
                    casts/throws/tosses' etc. 'SITE' is also used in the related saying
                    Th57, where the enemy of the man who has good seed comes in the
                    night and "tosses" (SITE) weeds among the good seed. So now then
                    when we come down to the conclusion of Th9, the 'per SOTE' has to
                    be taken as referring to the process of sowing. Whether 'per SOTE'
                    means 'per toss' (of the sower's hand) or 'per sowing' (of the
                    entire field - which would involve many "tosses") - I'm not sure,
                    but in any case it's not a reference to measuring the size of the
                    eventual fruit of this sowing. (I think now that 'per measure' is
                    a poor choice for translating 'per SOTE', precisely because of the
                    ambiguity to which your comments have drawn attention.)

                    Hope this is satisfactory,
                    Mike



                    The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                    To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
                    crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    List managers may be contacted directly at:
                    crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com



                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • Rick Hubbard
                    To Jim Barlow: Since Mike Grondin has not yet replied to your remarks, let me offer this, merely because I am a party to the original conversation to which you
                    Message 9 of 14 , Jul 6, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      To Jim Barlow:

                      Since Mike Grondin has not yet replied to your remarks, let me
                      offer this, merely because I am a party to the original
                      conversation to which you respond:

                      No! We are NOT discussing John Crossan's analysis of Mk4:2-9. Nor
                      are we discussing Mk 4:2-9, itself. The subject of this
                      conversation relates to the Coptic rendering of SOTE in NHC II,2
                      34:12.

                      If you wish to direct your comments to that specific text, and to
                      the Coptic nuances underlying it, please feel free to do so.
                      Also, I submit that if there is reading to be done of this text,
                      it's apparent you are the one who has yet to do it. I'd suggest,
                      as well, that after you DO actually read the text under
                      discussion, and wish to comment further, you adhere to the
                      universally accepted conventions of style by capitalizing a
                      person's name (i.e., Crossan vs. crossan). Moreover, perhaps you
                      should investigate whether your e-mail program offers some kind
                      of spell-checking feature ("oridignal" being something less than
                      a standard spelling of "original").

                      With all the respect you post is due,

                      Rick Hubbard
                      Humble Maine Woodsman
                      [Post Script: Original Post}

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Barlow, James C. DOC [mailto:James.Barlow@...]
                      Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 10:40 AM
                      To: 'crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com'
                      Subject: RE: [XTalk] Re: Parable of the Sower (and Gth)


                      Are you discussing crossan's misapprehension of Thomas and the
                      "Seed
                      Secretly GRowing" parable of Mark 4? In Crossan's "Gospel of
                      THomas" he
                      cites a Thomas parable or saying as the oridignal meaning of the
                      "Seed"
                      parable in Mark with no justification whatsoever, but you do not
                      know that
                      until you look up the parable yourself,and read it.
                      -jb

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: mgrondin@... [mailto:mgrondin@...]
                      Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:17 PM
                      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [XTalk] Re: Parable of the Sower (and Gth)


                      As promised, this is a rewriting of my brilliant reply to Rick
                      Hubbard originally sent to the list Tuesday night, and now lost
                      to
                      posterity forever. <g> In response to my (erroneous) factual
                      claim:

                      > The word 'KARPOS' does not occur [in Th9]

                      ... Rick rightfully, but gently, took me to task:
                      > Maybe we are looking in different places. On page 34, line 12,
                      > second word, do we both read AF-ti-KARPOS?

                      Yes. Sorry. I was having a bad-brain day and must have been
                      looking
                      into the void. Hopefully, my interpretation wasn't as faulty as
                      my
                      factual claims.

                      > [Rick]: ... if 60 units of the crop output
                      > filled one measure but it took 120 units of output to fill a
                      > second measure, would not the size of the individual unit
                      (fruit)
                      > be larger in the former case?

                      Yes, of course, but this is a misunderstanding of 'per SOTE'. To
                      begin with, the Coptic noun 'SOTE' is related to the verb 'SITE',
                      which means 'to throw, cast, toss', etc. Indeed, 'SITE' is the
                      very
                      verb used at the beginning of this saying, in the phrase which is
                      normally translated 'the sower', but which literally means 'he
                      who
                      casts/throws/tosses' etc. 'SITE' is also used in the related
                      saying
                      Th57, where the enemy of the man who has good seed comes in the
                      night and "tosses" (SITE) weeds among the good seed. So now then
                      when we come down to the conclusion of Th9, the 'per SOTE' has to
                      be taken as referring to the process of sowing. Whether 'per
                      SOTE'
                      means 'per toss' (of the sower's hand) or 'per sowing' (of the
                      entire field - which would involve many "tosses") - I'm not sure,
                      but in any case it's not a reference to measuring the size of the
                      eventual fruit of this sowing. (I think now that 'per measure' is
                      a poor choice for translating 'per SOTE', precisely because of
                      the
                      ambiguity to which your comments have drawn attention.)

                      Hope this is satisfactory,
                      Mike



                      The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                      To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
                      crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to:
                      crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      List managers may be contacted directly at:
                      crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                      The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                      To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
                      crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to:
                      crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      List managers may be contacted directly at:
                      crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • Rick Hubbard
                      My sincere personal apology to Jim for my earlier remarks. For his satisfaction, and to his credit, I received more than one criticism off list about my
                      Message 10 of 14 , Jul 6, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        My sincere personal apology to Jim for my earlier remarks.

                        For his satisfaction, and to his credit, I received more than one
                        criticism "off list" about my response to his recent post.
                        Obviously he commands more respect than I accorded him.

                        I explained to one person who chastised me, that I was just
                        having a "bad hair" day, but after I've thought about it, maybe
                        it was because I had deer in my cornfield again, OR maybe it's
                        the heat (it was over 70 degrees today).

                        There's also the possibility that it is because I can't seem to
                        resolve the difference (if any) between the Platonic TO PAN and
                        the Colossian author's TA PANTA. Any assistance with that problem
                        I'm sure would soothe my "tetchy" soul.

                        Best Regards

                        Rick Hubbard
                        Humble Maine Woodsman
                      • mgrondin@tir.com
                        ... I m not familiar with the Crossan title you cite. I do know that there are some errors in appendix 2A of BOC. Is that what you re talking about? Mike
                        Message 11 of 14 , Jul 6, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- James Barlow wrote:
                          > Are you discussing crossan's misapprehension of Thomas and the
                          > "Seed Secretly GRowing" parable of Mark 4? In Crossan's "Gospel
                          > of THomas" he cites a Thomas parable or saying as the oridignal
                          > meaning of the "Seed" parable in Mark with no justification
                          > whatsoever, but you do not know that until you look up the parable
                          > yourself, and read it.

                          I'm not familiar with the Crossan title you cite. I do know that
                          there are some errors in appendix 2A of BOC. Is that what you're
                          talking about?

                          Mike
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.