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

Re: [John_Lit] "dokeo" and "pisteuo" (was: Beloved Disciple passages in ms Pepys

Expand Messages
  • Paul Schmehl
    ... From: Yuri Kuchinsky To: John Lit-L Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:04 PM Subject: [John_Lit]
    Message 1 of 16 , Aug 10, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
      To: "John Lit-L" <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:04 PM
      Subject: [John_Lit] "dokeo" and "pisteuo" (was: Beloved Disciple passages in
      ms Pepys
      >
      > Well, actually, I don't think this is relevant at all in the present
      > context. While indeed I hold that the earliest stratum of primitive
      > Christianity accepted a purely spiritual resurrection, at the same time, I
      > don't think that this incident with the Empty Tomb could have belonged to
      > the earliest gospel stratum. This is because, in general, I believe that
      > all Tomb Burial stories belong to a secondary stratum of gospel
      > composition.
      >
      This is an unusual viewpoint I've not heard or read before. Is it based on
      any primary evidence?

      Paul Schmehl pauls@...
      p.l.schmehl@...
      http://www.utdallas.edu/~pauls/
    • Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Oops ... I just noticed a typo in my post of yesterday. I wrote: The term pisteuo is used in John to mean belief in a strongly theologically pregnant sense.
      Message 2 of 16 , Aug 12, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Oops ... I just noticed a typo in my post of
        yesterday. I wrote:

        The term "pisteuo" is used in John to mean belief in a
        strongly theologically pregnant sense. The term
        "dokeo" is used to mean mere opinion and is often used
        to identify an opinion that is incorrect. Thus, the
        use of "dokeo" in the tomb scene would imply a
        theological point.

        That last line should read "pisteuo":

        Thus, the use of "pisteuo" in the tomb scene would
        imply a theological point.

        Sorry for the confusion.

        Jeffery Hodges

        =====
        Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
        Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
        447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
        Yangsandong 411
        South Korea

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
        http://im.yahoo.com/
      • Yuri Kuchinsky
        ... Jeffery, But the fact that Zacharias uses credidit goes contrary to your opinion. ... I don t see it this way. ... It seems that Zacharias thought that
        Message 3 of 16 , Aug 12, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:

          > Now if the Pepys document reflects the original Greek,
          > then one would expect the original Greek to have been
          > "dokeo". The Greek documents that we have read have
          > "pisteuo", so if your theory about the Pepys
          > document's primitiveness is correct, then we should
          > expect that the original Greek was changed from
          > "dokeo" to "pisteuo". This doesn't mean that your
          > argument cannot work, but it does add a complication.

          Jeffery,

          But the fact that Zacharias uses "credidit" goes contrary to your opinion.

          > You suggested that the explanation about the body's
          > having been taken was not a correction:
          >
          > > But perhaps this is not a correction, but merely an
          > > explanation that, in light of what the disciples
          > > knew at the time, they could not come to a
          > > different conclusion?
          >
          > It would nevertheless mean that their conclusion was
          > wrong and that Mary Magdalene was wrong

          I don't see it this way.

          > -- if you
          > grant that the Pepys document presupposed a bodily
          > resurrection.

          > You also state:
          >
          > > Yes, there's an important difference between "dokeo"
          > > and "pisteuo", but to suppose that Jn should have
          > > had "dokeo" there, if the expanded version supplied
          > > by both Pepys and Zacharias is to be accepted as
          > > valid, seems to me like trying to force the issue.
          > > After all, please keep in mind that this is what the
          > > Zacharias' version is,
          > >
          > > "vidit vacuum sepulcrum et credidit quod mulier
          > > dixerat, scilicet de monumento sublatum"
          > >
          > > "saw the empty sepulchre, and believed what the
          > > woman [Mary] said, that [Jesus' body] was taken away
          > > from the tomb"
          > >
          > > But "credidit" is equivalent to "pisteuo". So
          > > obviously, Zacharias didn't think that "credidit" is
          > > inappropriate in this passage.
          >
          > I'm not clear on your argument here.

          It seems that Zacharias thought that the word credidit/pisteuo was
          appropriate in the context in which it's used in the passage he quoted. I
          agree with Zacharias.

          > You seem to be accepting that "pisteuo" was the original term.

          Yes.

          > If so, then it would most likely have meant an important theological
          > belief on the part of the beloved disciple.

          But this is only a guess on your part.

          > To have 'believed' that the body had been
          > taken away would not fit the Johannine use of
          > "pisteuo". Thus, that 'explanation' does not seem
          > original to John's Gospel. On this point, at least, it
          > would seem that the Pepys (and Zacharias) document
          > reflects a later editing -- and misunderstanding -- of
          > John.

          If you think that the Pepys and Zacharias documents both reflect later
          editing, when do you think this was done? And also, in your view, was it
          done independently by both writers?

          Best,

          Yuri.

          Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

          Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
          it is time to reform -=O=- Mark Twain
        • Yuri Kuchinsky
          ... Paul, I take it that your question is in regard to the possible lateness of Tomb Burial stories. Lk 23:43 is often cited in this regard. There are also
          Message 4 of 16 , Aug 12, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Paul Schmehl wrote:

            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
            > To: "John Lit-L" <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:04 PM
            > Subject: [John_Lit] "dokeo" and "pisteuo" (was: Beloved Disciple passages in
            > ms Pepys
            > >
            > > Well, actually, I don't think this is relevant at all in the present
            > > context. While indeed I hold that the earliest stratum of primitive
            > > Christianity accepted a purely spiritual resurrection, at the same time, I
            > > don't think that this incident with the Empty Tomb could have belonged to
            > > the earliest gospel stratum. This is because, in general, I believe that
            > > all Tomb Burial stories belong to a secondary stratum of gospel
            > > composition.
            >
            > This is an unusual viewpoint I've not heard or read before. Is it
            > based on any primary evidence?

            Paul,

            I take it that your question is in regard to the possible lateness of Tomb
            Burial stories. Lk 23:43 is often cited in this regard. There are also
            passages in various extra-canonical writings indicating that Jesus did not
            have a Tomb Burial.

            Best,

            Yuri.

            Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

            Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
            it is time to reform -=O=- Mark Twain
          • Paul Schmehl
            ... From: Yuri Kuchinsky To: Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 5:43 PM Subject: Re: [John_Lit] dokeo
            Message 5 of 16 , Aug 12, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
              To: <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 5:43 PM
              Subject: Re: [John_Lit] "dokeo" and "pisteuo"


              >
              > On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Paul Schmehl wrote:
              >
              > >
              > > This is an unusual viewpoint I've not heard or read before. Is it
              > > based on any primary evidence?
              >
              > Paul,
              >
              > I take it that your question is in regard to the possible lateness of Tomb
              > Burial stories. Lk 23:43 is often cited in this regard. There are also
              > passages in various extra-canonical writings indicating that Jesus did not
              > have a Tomb Burial.
              >
              Ah! I would contend that that opinion is based on a misinterpretation of
              Luke 23:43. I'm not familiar with the extra-canonical writings that
              indicate this.

              Paul Schmehl pauls@...
              p.l.schmehl@...
              http://www.utdallas.edu/~pauls/
            • Horace Jeffery Hodges
              Yuri, Just some quick points and questions -- and a lot of snipping [my previous remarks will have double angles ( ), and yours will have single angles ( )].
              Message 6 of 16 , Aug 12, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Yuri,

                Just some quick points and questions -- and a lot of
                snipping [my previous remarks will have double angles
                (> >), and yours will have single angles (>)]. I
                wrote:

                > > It would nevertheless mean that their conclusion
                > > was wrong and that Mary Magdalene was wrong

                To which, you responded:

                > I don't see it this way.

                Why not? You agree that even the Pepys text
                presupposed the bodily resurrection. If Mary Magdalene
                thought that the body had been taken away, and if the
                beloved disciple also concluded this, then in the
                context of the Johannine presupposition of a bodily
                resurrection, this conclusion was wrong.

                > But the fact that Zacharias uses "credidit" goes
                > contrary to your opinion.

                You'll have to explain why. Perhaps this is your
                explanation:

                > It seems that Zacharias thought that the word
                > credidit/pisteuo was appropriate in the context in
                > which it's used in the passage he quoted. I agree
                > with Zacharias.

                Assuming that Zacharias thought about this point and
                that you're correct about what he thought, why do you
                agree with him?

                > > You seem to be accepting that "pisteuo" was the
                > > original term.
                >
                > Yes.
                >
                > > If so, then it would most likely have meant an
                > > important theological belief on the part of the
                > > beloved disciple.
                >
                > But this is only a guess on your part.

                I wouldn't call it a "guess"; I'd call it a
                tentatively stated conclusion based upon the Johannine
                linguistic evidence as I see it. Since you have agreed
                that there is an important difference between the use
                of "pisteuo" and "dokeo" in John, you need to explain
                why this important distinction does not hold here.

                > If you think that the Pepys and Zacharias documents
                > both reflect later editing, when do you think this
                > was done? And also, in your view, was it done
                > independently by both writers?

                I don't know the answer to either question, but my
                ignorance on these two points is not relevant to the
                questions that I have raised about the use of
                "pisteuo" if the Pepys manuscript reflects the
                original version of John's Gospel.

                Best Regards,

                Jeffery Hodges

                =====
                Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                Yangsandong 411
                South Korea

                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
                http://im.yahoo.com/
              • Yuri Kuchinsky
                ... Because his conclusion was right in light of what he knew and saw. As to Mary Magdalene, it s not relevant in this case if she was right or wrong. ...
                Message 7 of 16 , Aug 16, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:

                  > > > It would nevertheless mean that their conclusion
                  > > > was wrong and that Mary Magdalene was wrong
                  >
                  > To which, you responded:
                  >
                  > > I don't see it this way.
                  >
                  > Why not?

                  Because his conclusion was right in light of what he knew and saw. As to
                  Mary Magdalene, it's not relevant in this case if she was right or wrong.

                  > > But the fact that Zacharias uses "credidit" goes
                  > > contrary to your opinion.
                  >
                  > You'll have to explain why. Perhaps this is your
                  > explanation:
                  >
                  > > It seems that Zacharias thought that the word
                  > > credidit/pisteuo was appropriate in the context in
                  > > which it's used in the passage he quoted. I agree
                  > > with Zacharias.
                  >
                  > Assuming that Zacharias thought about this point and
                  > that you're correct about what he thought, why do you
                  > agree with him?

                  Because he probably knew Latin better than I.

                  > > If you think that the Pepys and Zacharias documents
                  > > both reflect later editing, when do you think this
                  > > was done? And also, in your view, was it done
                  > > independently by both writers?
                  >
                  > I don't know the answer to either question

                  So then how do you know it was later editing if you don't know how and
                  when it was done?

                  Basically, Jeffery, you seem to be arguing that one word rather than
                  another is more appropriate in the context of a certain verse. But surely
                  this is a matter of opinion. I think we can agree to disagree about this,
                  and I'm willing to let you have the last word on this subject.

                  Best,

                  Yuri.

                  Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

                  The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
                  equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian
                • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                  Yuri, ... In the strictest sense of the term, I don t know because I haven t studied the issue. I was, primarily, raising questions that you would need to
                  Message 8 of 16 , Aug 16, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yuri,

                    You asked:

                    > So then how do you know it was later editing if you
                    > don't know how and when it was done?

                    In the strictest sense of the term, I don't know
                    because I haven't studied the issue. I was, primarily,
                    raising questions that you would need to investigate
                    and answer in order to tighten your arguments. This is
                    how I see the purpose of scholarly listserves such as
                    this one, and it's why I have tried to participate in
                    discussions whenever I felt that I had something to
                    say or a question to raise.

                    > Basically, Jeffery, you seem to be arguing that one
                    > word rather than another is more appropriate in the
                    > context of a certain verse.

                    That's correct.

                    > But surely this is a matter of opinion.

                    Some opinions are better grounded than others. I have
                    given my grounds, and those grounds would need to be
                    evaluated.

                    > I think we can agree to disagree about this, and I'm
                    > willing to let you have the last word on this
                    > subject.

                    I rarely have that honor.

                    Best Regards,

                    Jeffery Hodges

                    =====
                    Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                    Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                    447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                    Yangsandong 411
                    South Korea

                    __________________________________________________
                    Do You Yahoo!?
                    Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
                    http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.