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

[gthomas] Re: "Jesus Says"

Expand Messages
  • odell mcguire
    ... I haven t read Bethge, but on firsst reading of the Oxyrhynchus fragments I was struck by authors use of LEGEI instead of EIPON and wondered if the the
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Mark Goodacre wrote:

      > While we are on the topic of Bethge's edition of Thomas in the SQE 15th
      > edition, perhaps I may raise a question about one interesting element in it. In
      > almost all of the logia, PExE IC is translated not (as usual) "Jesus said" but
      > "Jesus says" (and "Jesus spricht" in the German). It gives the Gospel a really
      > interesting, less historicising feeling. On the first occasion that the translation is
      > used, there is a note:
      > 
      > "the verb can also be expressed in its past tense. When Logia appear without a
      > narrative framework, a translation in the present tense is preferable." (p. 519, n.
      > 4).
      >
      > Any comments?
      >
      > Mark
      >

      I haven't read Bethge, but on firsst reading of the Oxyrhynchus fragments I was struck by
      authors use of LEGEI instead of EIPON and wondered if the the Coptic could possibly be
      ambiguous. I hope the change sticks. After all, these are purported to be the words of
      >the living one<.

      By the way, I am now working with Huck/Greeven's retranslations which you put me onto, but
      haven't yet located a copy of Alland/Bethge's most recent edition. Could SQE 15 be the
      same thing?

      Odell, Lexington, VA
      omcguire@...


      ------------------------------------------------------------------------

      eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
      http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
    • Mark Goodacre
      While we are on the topic of Bethge s edition of Thomas in the SQE 15th edition, perhaps I may raise a question about one interesting element in it. In almost
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        While we are on the topic of Bethge's edition of Thomas in the SQE 15th
        edition, perhaps I may raise a question about one interesting element in it. In
        almost all of the logia, PExE IC is translated not (as usual) "Jesus said" but
        "Jesus says" (and "Jesus spricht" in the German). It gives the Gospel a really
        interesting, less historicising feeling. On the first occasion that the translation is
        used, there is a note:
        
        "the verb can also be expressed in its past tense. When Logia appear without a
        narrative framework, a translation in the present tense is preferable." (p. 519, n.
        4).

        Any comments?

        Mark


        --------------------------------------
        Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
        Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
        University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 6866
        Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom

        http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
        New Testament Web Resources
        Mark Without Q
        Aseneth Home Page

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
        http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
      • Mark Goodacre
        ... Yes -- that struck me too. I can t help thinking that it draws attention to a major distinction between the canonicals and Thomas, that they all blatantly
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          On 16 Jun 99, at 9:57, odell mcguire wrote:

          > I haven't read Bethge, but on firsst reading of the Oxyrhynchus fragments
          > I was struck by authors use of LEGEI instead of EIPON and wondered if the
          > the Coptic could possibly be ambiguous. I hope the change sticks. After
          > all, these are purported to be the words of >the living one<.

          Yes -- that struck me too. I can't help thinking that it draws attention to a major
          distinction between the canonicals and Thomas, that they all blatantly historicise,
          grounding everything in specific times and locations, whereas Thomas does this
          only marginally, e.g. the Salome dialogue. There are of course no concrete
          geographical locations in Thomas at all.
          >
          > By the way, I am now working with Huck/Greeven's retranslations which you
          > put me onto, but haven't yet located a copy of Alland/Bethge's most recent
          > edition. Could SQE 15 be the same thing?

          Yes; sorry. Bethge is the author of the appendix in the 15th edition of the
          Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum (ed. Kurt Aland). For at least a catalogue
          listing, see the URL in my earlier message. I am amazed that it is clearly so
          difficult to track down in the States.

          Mark
          --------------------------------------
          Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
          Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
          University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 6866
          Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom

          http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
          New Testament Web Resources
          Mark Without Q
          Aseneth Home Page

          ------------------------------------------------------------------------

          eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
          http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
        • Patterson, Steve
          Dear Thomas Folk: Re: the SQE 15 and the GTH that appears there... Jim Robinson and I consulted with the berlin group late in the process of producing their
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Thomas Folk:
            Re: the SQE 15 and the GTH that appears there...

            Jim Robinson and I consulted with the berlin group late in the process of
            producing their text and translation, primarily on issues involving the ET.
            On "Jesus says"... Yes, this decision has to do with the designation of the
            collection as coming from "the living Jesus." The historical interest of
            the document seems to be minimal. On the translation in general... The SQE
            15 had some rather gruesome translational problems in the ET (e.g. in GTh
            114 Peter is heard to say of Mary, "I will drag her to make her male"),
            which Jim and I, together finally with Hans-Martin Schenke, tried to clear
            up. The final product will appear in SQE 16. In the meantime, we have,
            together with Bethge, published this ET in a volume entitled The Fifth
            Gospel: The Gospel of Thomas Comes of Age (Trinity, 1998). It is available
            from Amazon.com. This might be easier than accessing a SQE 15, which in any
            event has a deficient ET.

            -----Original Message-----
            From: odell mcguire [mailto:omcguire@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 4:58 AM
            To: M.S.Goodacre@...
            Cc: GThomas@egroups.com
            Subject: [gthomas] Re: "Jesus Says"




            Mark Goodacre wrote:

            > While we are on the topic of Bethge's edition of Thomas in the SQE 15th
            > edition, perhaps I may raise a question about one interesting element in
            it. In
            > almost all of the logia, PExE IC is translated not (as usual) "Jesus said"
            but
            > "Jesus says" (and "Jesus spricht" in the German). It gives the Gospel a
            really
            > interesting, less historicising feeling. On the first occasion that the
            translation is
            > used, there is a note:
            > 
            > "the verb can also be expressed in its past tense. When Logia appear
            without a
            > narrative framework, a translation in the present tense is preferable."
            (p. 519, n.
            > 4).
            >
            > Any comments?
            >
            > Mark
            >

            I haven't read Bethge, but on firsst reading of the Oxyrhynchus fragments I
            was struck by
            authors use of LEGEI instead of EIPON and wondered if the the Coptic could
            possibly be
            ambiguous. I hope the change sticks. After all, these are purported to be
            the words of
            >the living one<.

            By the way, I am now working with Huck/Greeven's retranslations which you
            put me onto, but
            haven't yet located a copy of Alland/Bethge's most recent edition. Could SQE
            15 be the
            same thing?

            Odell, Lexington, VA
            omcguire@...


            ------------------------------------------------------------------------

            eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
            http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications





            ------------------------------------------------------------------------

            eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
            http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
          • Andrew Bernhard
            Before reading too much into the Greek present tense, legei, one should consider the following; 1. The Greek fragments do use the past tense eipen in the
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              Before reading too much into the Greek present tense, legei, one should
              consider the following;

              1. The Greek fragments do use the past tense eipen in the prologue -
              "These are the hidden saying that the the living Jesus spoke (eipen)."

              2. It is not only Jesus who speaks (legei) in the present tense in the
              Greek fragments, but also his disciples. In saying 37 (POxy
              655.col.i.17), "His disciples say (legousin) to him..."

              3. The Coptic has the past tense - I'm no expert in Coptic but I can
              appeal to the authority of Fitzmeyer. See his comments on POxy 654.5
              for a discussion of this very issue.

              In short, I'm saying that I think the "legei" is the historical present
              and thus should probably be rendered into English as "Jesus said" to
              avoid leading people to unjustified interpretations. However, it should
              also be noted that the edition of the Greek Fragments of Thomas found in
              Kloppenborg, Meyer, Patterson, and Steinhauser's _Q-Thomas Reader_ has
              elected to translate Ihsous legei with "Jesus says."

              Best wishes,
              Andrew

              ------------------------------------------------------------------------

              eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
              http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
            • Andrew Bernhard
              Dear Professor Patterson, I have a question about the translation of the Gospel of Thomas in _The Fifth Gospel_. Why is the Coptic pege ( said ) translated as
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Professor Patterson,

                I have a question about the translation of the Gospel of Thomas in _The
                Fifth Gospel_. Why is the Coptic pege ("said") translated as the past
                tense "said" twice in saying 37, but translated as the present tense
                "says" elsewhere throughout the text (e.g. saying 38, 39, 40, etc.)?

                Thanks,
                Andrew Bernhard

                ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
              • Mike Grondin
                ... ... wherein #114 reads I will draw her in... (said by Jesus, not Peter). But why not simply I will lead her... ? Nothing gruesome about that. Of course,
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 16, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  Steve Patterson writes (or wrote):

                  > On the translation in general... The SQE
                  >15 had some rather gruesome translational problems in the ET (e.g. in GTh
                  >114 Peter is heard to say of Mary, "I will drag her to make her male"),
                  >which Jim and I, together finally with Hans-Martin Schenke, tried to clear
                  >up. The final product will appear in SQE 16. In the meantime, we have,
                  >together with Bethge, published this ET in a volume entitled The Fifth
                  >Gospel: The Gospel of Thomas Comes of Age (Trinity, 1998). ...

                  ... wherein #114 reads "I will draw her in..." (said by Jesus, not Peter).
                  But why not simply "I will lead her..."? Nothing gruesome about that. Of
                  course, 'SOK' CAN mean 'draw' or 'pull in', as in #8. But it can also mean
                  'lead', as in #3 and #34 (leading a blind man). Why should #114 have been
                  so difficult, when there seems to have been no corresponding difficulty
                  with the same verb in #3 and #34?

                  Mike
                  ------------------------------------
                  The Coptic GThomas, saying-by-saying
                  http://www.geocities.com/athens/9068/sayings.htm

                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                  http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                • odell mcguire
                  ... Andrew, I agree with much of what you say and it needed saying. But I still think IH- LEGEI is better translated Jesus says
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 17, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Andrew Bernhard wrote:

                    > Before reading too much into the Greek present tense, legei, one should
                    > consider the following;
                    >
                    > 1. The Greek fragments do use the past tense eipen in the prologue -
                    > "These are the hidden saying that the the living Jesus spoke (eipen)."
                    >
                    > 2. It is not only Jesus who speaks (legei) in the present tense in the
                    > Greek fragments, but also his disciples. In saying 37 (POxy
                    > 655.col.i.17), "His disciples say (legousin) to him..."
                    >
                    > 3. The Coptic has the past tense - I'm no expert in Coptic but I can
                    > appeal to the authority of Fitzmeyer. See his comments on POxy 654.5
                    > for a discussion of this very issue.
                    >
                    > In short, I'm saying that I think the "legei" is the historical present
                    > and thus should probably be rendered into English as "Jesus said" to
                    > avoid leading people to unjustified interpretations. However, it should
                    > also be noted that the edition of the Greek Fragments of Thomas found in
                    > Kloppenborg, Meyer, Patterson, and Steinhauser's _Q-Thomas Reader_ has
                    > elected to translate Ihsous legei with "Jesus says."
                    >
                    > Best wishes,
                    > Andrew
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Andrew,

                    I agree with much of what you say and it needed saying. But I still think
                    IH- LEGEI is better translated >Jesus says< because the historical present
                    is frequently used in English with almost exactly the same weight as this
                    use in Greek. It rhetorically vivifies the speaker. Why should I or any
                    reader attach a different tense meaning to >Jesus says< than >Aristotle
                    says< or >Darwin says< or even >Groucho says<? --oops! But literalists
                    don't read Thomas anyway, I don't think. In short, I do think a switch to
                    the past from the historical present when translating Greek into English is
                    a little patronizing. I don't mean to imply that *any* Greek present should
                    be left to stand, but the historical present should.

                    Best, Odell, Lexington, VA
                    omcguire@...


                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                    http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                  • Mike Grondin
                    ... without a ... pexe- is the prenominal form of the infinitive, which is to say that it s attached to a noun, as in pexe-IS ( said-Jesus ). While
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jun 17, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >"the verb can also be expressed in its past tense. When Logia appear
                      without a
                      >narrative framework, a translation in the present tense is preferable."

                      'pexe-' <peje> is the prenominal form of the infinitive, which is to say
                      that it's attached to a noun, as in 'pexe-IS' ('said-Jesus'). While they
                      can be expressed in the present tense, verb-forms of this type are normally
                      expressed in the past tense. On the other hand, 'pexe-' is unusual within
                      its type, by virtue of the fact that the noun to which it's attached is a
                      subject, rather than an object (as is usual). So, for what it's worth, I
                      personally could accept either 'says' or 'said', though I think Bethge's
                      "preferable" is questionable.

                      Mike

                      The Coptic GThomas, saying-by-saying
                      http://www.geocities.com/athens/9068/sayings.htm

                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                      http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                    • Andrew Bernhard
                      Hi Odell, It seems we now both understand each other and just have a simple disagreement about how to translate the historical present. I m not convinced
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jun 17, 1999
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Odell,

                        It seems we now both understand each other and just have a simple
                        disagreement about how to translate the historical present. I'm not
                        convinced that we do usually use the historical present in the same
                        manner as the Greeks _in our writing_ (there is no doubt that we do in
                        our speech). The historical present is often corrected in translations
                        of the canonical gospels and I see no reason that it shouldn't be in
                        Thomas. I still think translating the historical present as a present
                        can lead to unjustified interpretations, but competant scholars have
                        seen it both ways. Bethge (althogh inconsistently) has seen fit to
                        correct the Coptic to "Jesus says," while Attridge has corrected the
                        Greek to "Jesus said"!

                        Andrew

                        odell mcguire wrote:
                        >
                        > Andrew Bernhard wrote:
                        >
                        > > Before reading too much into the Greek present tense, legei, one should
                        > > consider the following;
                        > >
                        > > 1. The Greek fragments do use the past tense eipen in the prologue -
                        > > "These are the hidden saying that the the living Jesus spoke (eipen)."
                        > >
                        > > 2. It is not only Jesus who speaks (legei) in the present tense in the
                        > > Greek fragments, but also his disciples. In saying 37 (POxy
                        > > 655.col.i.17), "His disciples say (legousin) to him..."
                        > >
                        > > 3. The Coptic has the past tense - I'm no expert in Coptic but I can
                        > > appeal to the authority of Fitzmeyer. See his comments on POxy 654.5
                        > > for a discussion of this very issue.
                        > >
                        > > In short, I'm saying that I think the "legei" is the historical present
                        > > and thus should probably be rendered into English as "Jesus said" to
                        > > avoid leading people to unjustified interpretations. However, it should
                        > > also be noted that the edition of the Greek Fragments of Thomas found in
                        > > Kloppenborg, Meyer, Patterson, and Steinhauser's _Q-Thomas Reader_ has
                        > > elected to translate Ihsous legei with "Jesus says."
                        > >
                        > > Best wishes,
                        > > Andrew
                        > >
                        > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        >
                        > Andrew,
                        >
                        > I agree with much of what you say and it needed saying. But I still think
                        > IH- LEGEI is better translated >Jesus says< because the historical present
                        > is frequently used in English with almost exactly the same weight as this
                        > use in Greek. It rhetorically vivifies the speaker. Why should I or any
                        > reader attach a different tense meaning to >Jesus says< than >Aristotle
                        > says< or >Darwin says< or even >Groucho says<? --oops! But literalists
                        > don't read Thomas anyway, I don't think. In short, I do think a switch to
                        > the past from the historical present when translating Greek into English is
                        > a little patronizing. I don't mean to imply that *any* Greek present should
                        > be left to stand, but the historical present should.
                        >
                        > Best, Odell, Lexington, VA
                        > omcguire@...
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        >
                        > eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                        > http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications

                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                        http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                      • Patterson, Steve by way of Mike Grondin
                        Dear Thom-Folk: The Berlin group thought that the verb connoted drawing or pulling. I make it policy never to argue with their knowledge of the Coptic
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jun 22, 1999
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Thom-Folk:
                          The Berlin group thought that the verb connoted "drawing" or "pulling." I
                          make it policy never to argue with their knowledge of the Coptic language.
                          In this case, their problem was with the English language. I suggested
                          "draw her in" as the appropriate way to capture their sense of the word in
                          English.
                          Yours,
                          Steve P.

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Mike Grondin [mailto:mgrondin@...]
                          Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 8:09 PM
                          To: GThomas@egroups.com
                          Subject: [gthomas] Re: Dragging Mariam


                          Steve Patterson writes (or wrote):

                          > On the translation in general... The SQE
                          >15 had some rather gruesome translational problems in the ET (e.g. in GTh
                          >114 Peter is heard to say of Mary, "I will drag her to make her male"),
                          >which Jim and I, together finally with Hans-Martin Schenke, tried to clear
                          >up. The final product will appear in SQE 16. In the meantime, we have,
                          >together with Bethge, published this ET in a volume entitled The Fifth
                          >Gospel: The Gospel of Thomas Comes of Age (Trinity, 1998). ...

                          ... wherein #114 reads "I will draw her in..." (said by Jesus, not Peter).
                          But why not simply "I will lead her..."? Nothing gruesome about that. Of
                          course, 'SOK' CAN mean 'draw' or 'pull in', as in #8. But it can also mean
                          'lead', as in #3 and #34 (leading a blind man). Why should #114 have been
                          so difficult, when there seems to have been no corresponding difficulty
                          with the same verb in #3 and #34?

                          Mike-
                          The Coptic GThomas, saying-by-saying
                          http://www.geocities.com/athens/9068/sayings.htm




                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                          http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                        • Jim Gambrill
                          ... What was the German translation of the Coptic? Jim ... eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jul 1, 1999
                          • 0 Attachment
                            "Patterson, Steve (by way of Mike Grondin )" wrote:
                            >
                            > Dear Thom-Folk:
                            > The Berlin group thought that the verb connoted "drawing" or "pulling." I
                            > make it policy never to argue with their knowledge of the Coptic language.
                            > In this case, their problem was with the English language. I suggested
                            > "draw her in" as the appropriate way to capture their sense of the word in
                            > English.

                            What was the German translation of the
                            Coptic?

                            Jim

                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                            http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.