- This is the first entry I have ever made for this discussion group, and at
the risk of being naive, I am going to ask, ---is it possible that the
statement, "I am your disciple was made by Salome to Jesus and not the other
way around. It appears to me to be a dialogue. First Salome speaks, then
Jesus speaks, then Salome speaks again. Maybe this is just too simple an
I do enjoy reading the discourse, but I am not a translator, just an
interpretter. Thanks Ray
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- --- Rpavenue@a... wrote:
> is it possible that the statement, "I am your disciple" was madeYes, this is the way it's usually interpreted. One of the reasons
> by Salome to Jesus and not the other way around? It appears to me
> to be a dialogue. First Salome speaks, then Jesus speaks, then
> Salome speaks again.
that George is investigating a more unorthodox way of reading it
is, I take it, that the expected phrase "Salome said to him" is
missing from the text. Some translators go so far as to insert
that phrase into the text, judging it to have been inadvertently
left out by the scribe. On the face of it, the choice of the
Coptic morpheme 'TEK', which was the masculine form of 'your'
(for a feminine noun such as 'disciple'), indicates that the
statement was addressed to a male, hence that, of the two, Salome
must have been the one saying it. George is trying to argue his
way out of that conclusion by showing that the 'TEK' should not
be taken at face value.
- --- In gthomas@y..., mgrondin@t... wrote:
> --- Rpavenue@a... wrote:Yes, that's part of it. But also, I think the usual way of reading
> > is it possible that the statement, "I am your disciple" was made
> > by Salome to Jesus and not the other way around? It appears to me
> > to be a dialogue. First Salome speaks, then Jesus speaks, then
> > Salome speaks again.
> Yes, this is the way it's usually interpreted. One of the reasons
> that George is investigating a more unorthodox way of reading it
> is, I take it, that the expected phrase "Salome said to him" is
> missing from the text.
this saying, what I would call the uninvited guest scenario, seems
awkward and a little odd.
In 61:2, we have Salome saying to Jesus, "Who are you, man, that you
have come up on my couch and eaten from my table as a stranger." I
think the emhasis should be placed on the word, "my," as in "why *my*
table." She's conveying wonder that he has chosen her company, rather
than expressing indignation that he has invaded her turf. I wonder
too if the phrase, "as a stranger" refers to him or does it refer to
herself. That sets up an opportunity for Jesus to convey to her and
demonstrate to her that she is his equal, at the most basic level.
Now, I admit that it's possible for the story to have her so blown
away by his resonse of 61:3, that she immediately declares herself a
disciple. But with the suspicious absence of the identification of
the speaker of this declaration as Salome, I think it more likely that
Jesus said it, as a demonstration of his willingness to immediately
shed his specialness in a dramatic way. He then explains in 61:5 why
such a joining in equality with others (presumable in thought and
deed)results in light, whereas division or separation brings darkness.
So, for what it's worth, I'm suggesting this alternative
All the best,
- Dear Mike,
Thanks for your reply. Believe I always welcome new insights and information
and if that dissuades me from my views I more than welcome it. Right now am
just about to depart for Italy for some lectures at Bologna so will not be
much on line if at all during the next two weeks, but I look forward to
continuing our discussion on my return.