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

[gthomas] Re: Q2 and Thomas

Expand Messages
  • Stevan Davies
    ... that word. That is the trouble with Thomas, isn t it? You think you ve got the major themes except that there are all of those other sayings that either
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 18, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      > From: Mike Grondin
      > This is not to say that all attempts at stratification are to be eschewed.
      > For example, ISTM that GTh 77a is a later addition to the main corpus -
      > mainly on the grounds that it doesn't seem to fit with the major themes in
      > the rest of the text. We might also suspect that #83 shows a Platonic
      > influence not evident elsewhere. But I would be very suspicious of any
      > attempt to separate huge chunks of text from each other, unless the grounds
      > were explicitly logical, without historical implications - and even then I
      > wouldn't call it 'stratification', because of the implications of
      that word.

      That is the trouble with Thomas, isn't it? You think you've got "the
      major themes" except that there are all of those other sayings that
      either have nothing to do with the major themes or actually have
      other themes entirely in mind. Interestingly, 77a is arguably the
      most anciently attested of all the Thomas sayings, fitting as it
      does with that host of pre-gospel "Jesus the Pantocrator" material,
      albeit first-person and not third-person.

      I was wondering whether the Q1/2 sayings material circulated
      as sayings attributed to "Jesus" and, if so, how is this known?

      Steve

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

      eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
      http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
    • Mark Goodacre
      I enjoyed reading those old Crosstalk messages. As a general comment, one thing that concerns me is that the casual reader could get the impression that Q and
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        I enjoyed reading those old Crosstalk messages. As a general
        comment, one thing that concerns me is that the casual reader could
        get the impression that Q and Thomas have a special relationship in
        terms of overlapping content. There are of course many parallels to
        (what we call) Q material in Thomas but there are parallels also to
        sayings material from Mark, M, L, Mark-Q overlap, prima facie
        MattR of Mark and prima facie LukeR of Mark. The areas of
        overlap are essentially between Thomas and synoptic sayings material
        in general: Thomas has no special relationship with Q material. If
        there is any preference, I would say that it is with (what we would
        call) M + Q, the same kind of preference paralleled in other early
        Christian documents like the epistle of James, but -- as I say -- there
        is plenty of Mk & some L too.

        I realise that this will be Noddy stuff to most on the list, but I think that
        it is nevertheless worth reiterating for those who might be seduced into
        thinking that there is a special relationship between Q and Thomas in
        terms of content. Whether there might be a special relationship in
        terms of genre is a story for another day.

        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
        The New Testament Gateway
        Mark Without Q
        Aseneth Home Page

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

        eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
        http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
      • Mike Grondin
        ... Could you specify some of this Jesus the Pantocrator material, Steve? Mike ... eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          >...77a is arguably the most anciently attested of all the Thomas
          >sayings, fitting as it does with that host of pre-gospel "Jesus
          >the Pantocrator" material, albeit first-person and not third-person.

          Could you specify some of this "Jesus the Pantocrator" material, Steve?

          Mike

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

          eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
          http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
        • Mike Grondin
          ... Damn! I thought only Paul Miller was listening! But seriously, I m afraid that I d become so concerned about the lack of traffic on the list lately that I
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            Bill Arnal:
            >Perhaps you should read the work you're criticizing Mike --
            >you'd thereby avoid making irrelevant points. I hate to
            >sound snotty about this, but I am SO sick of hearing these
            >same criticisms over and over again, when in fact they
            >don't touch the substance of the arguments for
            >stratification. The stuff is in print -- read it!

            Damn! I thought only Paul Miller was listening! But seriously, I'm afraid
            that I'd become so concerned about the lack of traffic on the list lately
            that I allowed my ignorance to take its head. There are indeed reasons for
            believing that "Q2" was a later addition to "Q1", and I apologize for
            saying otherwise. But I'm surprised at your suggestion that many others
            have made the same mistake. You mean I'm not the first to be aggressively
            ignorant about the stratification of Q?

            Mike

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

            eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
            http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
          • Stevan Davies
            ... No sooner said than done. GTh 77 Jesus said, It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am all things. From me did all things come
            Message 5 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              > >...77a is arguably the most anciently attested of all the Thomas
              > >sayings, fitting as it does with that host of pre-gospel "Jesus
              > >the Pantocrator" material, albeit first-person and not third-person.
              >
              > Could you specify some of this "Jesus the Pantocrator" material, Steve?
              >
              > Mike

              No sooner said than done.

              GTh 77
              Jesus said, "It is I who am the light which is above them
              all. It is I who am all things. From me did all things come forth, and
              unto me did all things extend.

              1 Cor 8:6
              yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came
              and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through
              whom all things came and through whom we live.

              Col 1:16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on
              earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
              authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

              Heb 1:2
              but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he
              appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

              John 1:3
              Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made
              that has been made.

              Steve

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

              eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
              http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
            • William Arnal
              ... Hurray! ... Yes indeed, which is why I get so cranky about it (and for which I, uh, uh, apologize). This sorta thing appears in PRINT with amazing
              Message 6 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                At 12:31 PM 7/19/99 -0400, Mike Grondin wrote:

                >Damn! I thought only Paul Miller was listening! But seriously, I'm afraid
                >that I'd become so concerned about the lack of traffic on the list lately
                >that I allowed my ignorance to take its head. There are indeed reasons for
                >believing that "Q2" was a later addition to "Q1", and I apologize for
                >saying otherwise.

                Hurray!

                >But I'm surprised at your suggestion that many others
                >have made the same mistake. You mean I'm not the first to be aggressively
                >ignorant about the stratification of Q?

                Yes indeed, which is why I get so cranky about it (and for which I, uh, uh,
                apologize). This sorta thing appears in PRINT with amazing regularity.
                Kloppenborg, in particular, is constantly being "refuted" on the grounds
                that "wisdom and apocalyptic are not incompatible" or that "the a priori
                assumption that Jesus [!!] cannot have been an apocalyptist is anachronistic
                and theologically motivated" etc. -- I fear that sheer repetition will turn
                all this irrelevant argumentation into FACT, so that no one will actually
                bother to read the quite different arguments on which the hypothesis is
                actually founded.

                Sorry to blow off on this -- the appropriate targets really are elsewhere.

                Bill
                __________________________________
                William Arnal wea1@...
                Religion/Classics check out my web page, at:
                New York University http://pages.nyu.edu/~wea1/


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

                eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gthomas
                http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
              • Stevan Davies
                ... Bill ... Bill Arnal has written a brief summary of Kloppenborg s case that he is too humble and self-effacing to mention. It s on the WWW off my Thomas
                Message 7 of 10 , Jul 19, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  >> You mean I'm not the first to be aggressively
                  > >ignorant about the stratification of Q?

                  Bill
                  > Yes indeed, which is why I get so cranky about it (and for which I, uh, uh,
                  > apologize). This sorta thing appears in PRINT with amazing regularity.
                  > Kloppenborg, in particular, is constantly being "refuted" on the grounds
                  > that "wisdom and apocalyptic are not incompatible" or that "the a priori
                  > assumption that Jesus [!!] cannot have been an apocalyptist is anachronistic
                  > and theologically motivated" etc. -- I fear that sheer repetition will turn
                  > all this irrelevant argumentation into FACT, so that no one will actually
                  > bother to read the quite different arguments on which the hypothesis is
                  > actually founded.

                  Bill Arnal has written a brief summary of Kloppenborg's case
                  that he is too humble and self-effacing to mention. It's on the WWW
                  off my Thomas homepage at
                  http://www.miseri.edu/users/davies/thomas/billklop.htm


                  Steve

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

                  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.