10300Re: more on faith and knowledge
- Sep 27, 2004Hello pmcvflag
On 09/27/04, you wrote:
>>>> "While Thomas was undoubtedly written in Greek, and a small
> fragment of it actually exists in that language, what we have in
> Thomas is a Coptic translation of the Greek, and not the Greek
> source, so we really don't know what it said for sure in the
> original Greek. Just to clarify"<<<
> Right you are, Mike, I should have made my point a bit more clear.
> When I said "even in the Greek" I was making a destinction between
> the Coptic and the Oxyrhynchus fragments. My point being that while
> some people have argued that the original Greek version must somehow
> be closer to the beliefs presented in the generally accepted
> "Gospels" of the "Bible" (based on thier imagination of what an
> older Gospel has to look like), I do not see that notion supported
> in the 20 something surviving sayings.... on the contrary, I think
> they show that while the Coptic is not always a good word for word
> translation (some logions are better than others), it does a good
> job of preserving the meanings of the Greek. So, what we have in the
> Greek does not seem to imply that it would have placed a greater
> emphasis on faith than our Coptic version.
> That is the long version of my "even in the Greek" ;)
From what I know I would agree with you.
Mike Leavitt ac998@...
- << Previous post in topic