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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 16 , Aug 12 8:04 AM
    • 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 2 of 16 , Aug 12 2:30 PM
      • 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 3 of 16 , Aug 12 3:43 PM
        • 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 4 of 16 , Aug 12 3:53 PM
          • 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 5 of 16 , Aug 12 5:14 PM
            • 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 6 of 16 , Aug 16 12:52 PM
              • 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 7 of 16 , Aug 16 4:34 PM
                • 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.