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

8247Re: [GTh] Re: Son of Man

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    Oct 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      > If GT started from, or was transmitted through the Syriac language, it
      > may not be very secure to build an argument on the article appearing
      > in a subsequent English translation!

      Thanks for the information, Steven. No, I wasn't arguing from an English
      translation. I never do. In Coptic, the letter 'p' attached to a masculine
      noun
      like 'rwme' ('man') represents the definite article 'the'. But if the noun
      isn't
      qualified by a who-phrase (as in, e.g., 'the man who came to dinner'),
      then the definite article functions as an untranslated capitalizer. Thus, in
      my
      note, whenever I used 'Man' instead of 'man', the capital 'M' indicated that
      the word in that context was 'p-rwme', and that it was unqualified.

      The difference between Coptic and Greek, which had the definite article,
      and the Syriac languages (also Latin, I think), which didn't, may account
      for some interesting twists of interpretation. It seems fairly clear,
      however,
      that what the GThom authors were trying to say was that anyone could
      become a "son/child of Man", which apparently for them meant an
      itinerant preacher/healer on the model of Jesus.

      Regards,
      Mike
    • Show all 26 messages in this topic