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

textual criticism of thomas

Expand Messages
  • sarban
    I ve recently read Marcovich s essay The Text of the Gospel of Thomas . (Journal of Theological Studies 20; 1969, pps 53-74; reprinted in Studies in
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I've recently read Marcovich's essay "The Text of
      the Gospel of Thomas". (Journal of Theological
      Studies 20; 1969, pps 53-74; reprinted in Studies
      in Graeco-Roman Religion and Gnosticism).
      This analyses the textual differences between the
      Coptic text of Thomas, the Greek fragments of
      Thomas and the version used by the Naassenes.

      One particularly interesting part is the comparison
      of Thomas 3 in Greek and Coptic. Marcovich argues
      that the reading in Coptic "in the Sea" and the Greek
      reading "under the Earth" go back to an original
      Semitic, (Hebrew or Aramaic/Syriac), TEHOM, which
      can mean either Sea or Abyss (i.e. "under the Earth").
      Marcovich accepts that Coptic Thomas is translated
      from Greek but suggests that the Greek underlying
      Coptic Thomas, and the Greek of the existing
      fragments may be independent translations from a
      Semitic original.

      Andrew Criddle

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.