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

Re: [GTh] Facsimiles Online!

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    ... From: mottrogere3 To: Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 1:51 PM Subject: Re: [GTh] Facsimiles Online! ...
    Message 1 of 42 , Apr 6, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "mottrogere3" <mottrogere3@...>
      To: <gthomas@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 1:51 PM
      Subject: Re: [GTh] Facsimiles Online!


      > Hi Mike,
      > Those are very nice improvements to your Gospel of Thomas online. I
      > am printing pdf's of the plates as needed for reference only.
      >
      > On page 51, there is a series of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then a title?
      > indicating that this is the Gospel of Thomas.
      >
      > Those 2 title? lines are followed by 6 lines which I do not find a
      > translation for. Granted there is a chunk of manuscript missing from
      > those 6 lines. Have you ever wrote about this? I am trying to
      > discern whether those last 6 lines belong to the inscription above or
      > something else that was tacked on to the main document by the Coptic
      > scribe.
      >
      > Any information is appreciated.
      >
      > Roger Mott
      > Waterloo, Iowa


      Roger. the standard at this period wasro place the title of a work atthe
      end. You will note the first page (p. 32) has the title of the book that
      preceded Thomas, the Apocalypse of John and the lines after the title of
      Thomas on Pg 51 are the beginning of the Gospelof Philip which si,ilarly has
      its title at the end ofthe work.

      Jack
    • Judy Redman
      Fair enough. I wasn t aware of the Metzer translation, which is mildly embarassing, given the area of my PhD. :-) Mind you, there is nothing about the title
      Message 42 of 42 , Apr 16, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Fair enough. I wasn't aware of the Metzer translation, which is mildly
        embarassing, given the area of my PhD. :-) Mind you, there is nothing about
        the title of the book or the publication details that would suggest that I
        might find an English translation of anything in it and I'm trying to avoid
        other people's English translations as much as possible until I've done my
        own, so I haven't gone looking.

        I would also respect Metzger's opinion, but it remains the opinion of one
        scholar (as does Turner's or Quispel's or anyone else's) and there are
        other, equally eminent scholars who disagree with him and have put their
        reasons in writing. I actually don't have a particularly firm position on
        this, but I would find it much more helpful to hear *why* particular
        scholars hold particular opinions - the name alone isn't convincing.

        Judy


        --
        Rev Judy Redman
        Uniting Church Chaplain
        University of New England
        Armidale 2351 Australia
        ph: +61 2 6773 3739
        fax: +61 2 6773 3749
        web: http://www.une.edu.au/chaplaincy/uniting/ and
        http://blog.une.edu.au/unitingchaplaincy/
        email: jredman@...


        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Johnson
        > Sent: Thursday, 17 April 2008 11:53 AM
        > To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [GTh] Facsimiles Online!
        >
        > Judy wrote:
        >
        > > Coptic is *crawling* with Greek loanwords.
        >
        > The double and triple names of Thomas are a special case. But
        > I'll return to that in a later message (hopefully soon).
        >
        > > Incidentally, can I suggest that "I once asked X"
        > > isn't a particularly convincing argument unless X has actually
        > > published on the particular issue?
        >
        > Feel free to suggest away. Personally speaking, I would respect Dr.
        > Metzger's opinion even if he hadn't published on this issue,
        > but I asked him specifically because he had published an
        > English translation of the Coptic Gospel According to Thomas
        > in Aland, Kurt (ed.) Synopsis quattuor
        > evangelium: locus parallelis evangeliorum apocryphon et
        > patrum adhibitis, Thirteen revised edition. (Stuttgart,
        > Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1985).
        >
        > There's also a website that quotes Dr. Metzger (from the
        > book, The Case For Christ, by Lee Strobel) as saying the following:
        >
        > "The Gospel of Thomas came to light in a fifth-century copy
        > in Coptic, which I've translated into English. It contains
        > 114 sayings attributed to Jesus but no narrative of what he
        > did, and seems to have been written in Greek in Syria in
        > about AD 140. In some cases I think this gospel correctly
        > reports what Jesus said, with slight modifications." (pp. 67-68)
        >
        > Regards,
        >
        > - Kevin Johnson
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Gospel of Thomas Homepage: http://home.epix.net/~miser17/Thomas.html
        > Interlinear translation:
        > http://www.geocities.com/mwgrondin/x_transl.htm
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.