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

Re: Beloved Disciple passages in ms Pepys

Expand Messages
  • John N. Lupia
    Yuri, first you say there were no women doorkeepers, only burly men who acted as security guards, a notion supported by no Hellenistic scholar I know. I think
    Message 1 of 26 , Aug 12, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Yuri, first you say there were no women doorkeepers, only burly
      men who acted as security guards, a notion supported by no
      Hellenistic scholar I know. I think they would laugh. Moreover,
      you never even ask yourself why is there a Latin word janitrix?
      Nor do you pursue this venue which can certainly lead you to
      antique Latin authors who use the term. Then in this last
      posting you say a woman is appropriate as a doorkeeper for
      Job. This roller-coaster ride evidences a complete lack of
      cognizance about these issues and it only turns off scholars in
      the know.

      Then in order to summarily dismiss out of hand the evidence in
      Job you give an extremely imbalanced argument citing Bankole
      Davies-Browne, a PhD student from Sierre-Leone at St.
      Andrews, Scotland, who is studying under the American Dr.
      James R. Davila. You cite a URL which gives the impression
      that this is as much as you know on the subject (an internet
      university student) a view reinforced by the fact that you never
      mentioned M. R. James who was a staunch advocate of the view
      that Job was written in the 2nd or 3rd century. However, the most
      important scholar in the first half of the last century on Job was
      the Eli, C. C. Torrey who was the foremost authority on LXX
      apocrypha. Cf. Charles Cutler Torrey, The Apocryphal Literature.
      A Brief Introduction, (New Haven: Yale, 1945) 140-145.

      Moreover, it is rather audacious to discard Job saying it is a
      Christian work without having undertaken serious research and
      then go on to defend the Pepys Ms. a late medieval work! No
      biblical scholar I know would even give it a second thought.
      When Rev. Jack Kilgallen, SJ, the New Testament editor of
      Biblica and professor of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome
      gets out of the Loyal University Jesuit Community's Infirmiry in
      Chicago and returns to Rome slated September 30th I suggest
      you write to him and ask his opinion.

      http://www.bsw.org/index?l=71

      Don't be too disappointed as I know you will be since I can see
      you have devoted much time to this project.

      I for one think it is time to bring this thread to an end since you
      summarily dismiss any suggestion without serious erudition.


      Cordially,
      John

      John N. Lupia
      501 North Avenue B-1
      Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
      jlupia2@...
    • John N. Lupia
      To Yuri Kuchinsky: A further question regarding your posting at Johannine_Literature archive no. 1890 In your defense of Pepys Ms. 2498 where you discard the
      Message 2 of 26 , Aug 16, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        To Yuri Kuchinsky:

        A further question regarding your posting at
        Johannine_Literature archive no. 1890

        In your defense of Pepys Ms. 2498 where you discard the
        doorkeeper in Job saying it is a Christian writing, dating it to the
        3rd cent. AD, I am curious how you (and Mr. Davies-Brown for
        that matter) explain and account for the Targums of the Book of
        Job among the Dead Sea Scrolls:

        1 lQlO; 4QtgJob=4Q157, 11QtgJob=11Q10; 11QtgJob XXIV 6-7

        (cf. Ernst Kutsch, "Die Textgliederung im hebräischen Ijobbuch
        sowie in 4QTgJob und in 11QTgJob," BZ ns 27 No
        2(1983):221-228).


        Cordially in Christ,
        John

        John N. Lupia
        501 North Avenue B-1
        Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
        JLupia2@...
        <>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><>

        "during this important time, as the eve of the new millennium
        approaches . . . unity among all Christians of the various
        confessions will increase until they reach full communion." John
        Paul II, Tertio Millennio Adveniente, 16
      • Yuri Kuchinsky
        ... Dear John, Earlier you confused the Book of Job with the Testament of Job. Such confusion may also explain the above. Also (in regard to your previous
        Message 3 of 26 , Aug 16, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, John N. Lupia wrote:

          > In your defense of Pepys Ms. 2498 where you discard the
          > doorkeeper in Job saying it is a Christian writing, dating it to the
          > 3rd cent. AD, I am curious how you (and Mr. Davies-Brown for
          > that matter) explain and account for the Targums of the Book of
          > Job among the Dead Sea Scrolls:
          >
          > 1 lQlO; 4QtgJob=4Q157, 11QtgJob=11Q10; 11QtgJob XXIV 6-7
          >
          > (cf. Ernst Kutsch, "Die Textgliederung im hebräischen Ijobbuch
          > sowie in 4QTgJob und in 11QTgJob," BZ ns 27 No
          > 2(1983):221-228).

          Dear John,

          Earlier you confused the Book of Job with the Testament of Job. Such
          confusion may also explain the above. Also (in regard to your previous
          post) I don't think the fact that Davies-Browne is from Sierra-Leone
          should reflect negatively on what this scholar is saying.

          Regards,

          Yuri.

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

          It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than
          to put out on the troubled seas of thought -=O=- John K. Galbraith
        • John N. Lupia
          Yuri, my posting in the archive no. 1880 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/18 80 refers to the Book of Job as the reference cited.
          Message 4 of 26 , Aug 16, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Yuri, my posting in the archive no. 1880

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/18
            80

            refers to the Book of Job as the reference cited.

            Your posting archive 1890

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/18
            90

            Corrects me inappropriately saying that it "is more commonly
            known as the Testament of Job"

            Now you claim in archive 1896

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/18
            96

            "Earlier you confused the Book of Job with the Testament of Job.
            "

            So, Yuri, after being shown apodictly that you have no credibility
            in academic circles whatsoever you have the hutzpah try to
            inappropriately accuse me of bigotry because I mentioned Mr.
            Davies-Browne is from Sierre-Leone? In that same posting
            (archive no. 1880) I also mentined St. Andrews is in Scotland
            and that Dr. Davila is an American. Any critical reader can see
            that I in no way ever insinuated to discredit Mr. Davies-Browne
            because of his place of origin. I was merely showing that I knew
            exactly who you were referring to and where he was studying,
            and that I know Dr. Davila having corresponded with him on his
            former Qumran-List. So, now getting back to your claim that Job
            is c. 300 AD how do you explain the DDS texts in my posting
            archive no. 1885

            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/18
            95

            Cordially,
            John
          • RSBrenchley@aol.com
            ... The DSS texts are clearly closely related to canonical Job. The text you cited is not in the book; Job 2:7 (you cite 2,7, which doesn t look like a
            Message 5 of 26 , Aug 17, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              John Lupia writes:

              > So, now getting back to your claim that Job
              > is c. 300 AD how do you explain the DDS texts in my posting
              > archive no. 1885

              The DSS texts are clearly closely related to canonical Job. The text you
              cited is not in the book; Job 2:7 (you cite 2,7, which doesn't look like a
              canonical reference) says: 'So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD,
              and inflicted loathesome sores on Job from the sole of his foot to the crown
              of his head'. Nothing to do with female doorkeepers. I'm not familiar with
              the Testament of Job (is it online anywhere?) but for the moment I'll take
              Yuri's word for it. You're talking about different texts here.

              Regards,

              Robert Brenchley,
              Birmingham, UK.

              RSBrenchley@...
            • John N. Lupia
              Robert Brenchley wrote: The DSS texts are clearly closely related to canonical Job. The text you cited is not in the book; Job 2:7 (you cite 2,7, which doesn t
              Message 6 of 26 , Aug 17, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Robert Brenchley wrote:

                The DSS texts are clearly closely related to canonical Job. The
                text you
                cited is not in the book; Job 2:7 (you cite 2,7, which doesn't look
                like a
                canonical reference) says: 'So Satan went out from the presence
                of the LORD,
                and inflicted loathesome sores on Job from the sole of his foot
                to the crown
                of his head'. Nothing to do with female doorkeepers. I'm not
                familiar with
                the Testament of Job (is it online anywhere?) but for the moment
                I'll take
                Yuri's word for it. You're talking about different texts here.


                Robert, in the first place read: H. Heater, A Septuagint translation
                technique in the Book of Job (Catholic Biblical Quarterly
                Monograph Series, 11; Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of
                America Press, 1982); and Cecile Dogniez, Bibliographie de la
                Septante: (1970-1993) (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum,
                60; (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995); and Emanuel Tov, The Greek and
                Hebrew Bible : collected essays on the Septuagint (Leiden ;
                Boston : Brill, 1999. BS 410 .V452).

                Second, I cited Job 2,7b-10 which corresponds to "The
                Prologue" (E) as proposed by the versification suggested by P.
                W. Skehan, "Strophic Pattern in the Book of Job" CBQ 23
                (1961):125-142. The Prologue is not considered a later addition
                and the textual criticism of it reflects what Greenfield calls
                "Standard Literary Aramaic" (700-200 BC) (cf. J. C. Greenfield,
                "Aramaic and its Dialects," 34-36, in H. H. Paper, ed., Jewish
                Languages: Themes and Variations (Cambridge, MA: Assoc. for
                Jew. Stud., 1978):29-43).

                Third, you said "which doesn't look like a canonical reference" to
                a book you consider Apocryphal. Isn't this a contradiction of
                terms?

                Fourth, like Yuri you seem to think that the Book of Job and the
                Testament of Job are two different texts completely. This is
                false.

                Fifth, when you say "I'm not familiar with the Testament of Job"
                how can you give a professional academic opinion that goes
                well beyond the text and has eruditely examined and reflected on
                the survey of all scholarship regarding Job? Hence, I gave the
                bibliographic references in Dogniez, and Tov for your
                convenience. To render an opinion without any reading
                whatsoever is hardly the material suitable for an academic
                discussion. To say "I'll take Yuri's word for it." in this regard not
                only deteriorates the academic discussion to the level of a chat
                room but evidences a very uncritical measure on your part.

                Sixth, following your line of logic only the few verses of P52 can
                said to be canonical as of c. 100-125 AD and the remainder of
                the text should/could be or must be later redactions, which some
                have claimed using this very line of reasoning. However, this is
                hardly a strong argument and it is overly cautious to the point of
                using the argument from silence (that is, a lack of physical or
                antique documentary evidence) as proof to justify a rather
                tenuous and weak position. This argument ignores the principle
                of text criticism that calls for critical examination of later texts
                since they may have been based on earlier exemplars and
                closer to the original than extant earlier ones that post date them.
                So, your summarily dismissing the "Prologue" of Job out of hand
                disregards critical lines of reasoning and the research that has
                ensued. I realize that postings to lists are sometimes made in
                haste off the cuff and my suspicion is this is true in your case.

                Cordially,
                John
              • RSBrenchley@aol.com
                ... To some extent, yes. I don t claim to be making any professional academic opinion, I merely checked the citation you gave, and found something rather
                Message 7 of 26 , Aug 18, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  John Lupia writes:

                  > So, your summarily dismissing the "Prologue" of Job out of hand
                  > disregards critical lines of reasoning and the research that has
                  > ensued. I realize that postings to lists are sometimes made in
                  > haste off the cuff and my suspicion is this is true in your case.
                  >
                  > Cordially,
                  > John

                  To some extent, yes. I don't claim to be making any professional academic
                  opinion, I merely checked the citation you gave, and found something rather
                  different. I'm not dismissing the prologue to Job, I'm trying to find the
                  female doorkeeper, and failing. Looking at the references you give, is this
                  from the LXX? That would clear the matter up, as you didn't specify, so I'd
                  assumed you referred to Hebrew Job; the LXX would require a trip to the
                  library.

                  <<Job 2, 7 The Evil One, having failed in this, went away and took
                  upon his shoulder an old, torn basket and went in and spoke to
                  the doorkeeper saying: "Tell Job : Give me bread from thine
                  hands that I may eat". 8 And when I heard this, I gave her burnt
                  bread to give it to him, and I made known to him : "Expect not to
                  eat of my bread, for it is forbidden to thee". 9 But the door-keeper,
                  being ashamed to hand him the burnt and ashy bread, as she
                  did not know that it was Satan, took of her own fine bread and
                  gave it to him. 10 But he took it and, knowing what occured, said
                  to the maiden : "Go hence, bad servant, and bring me the bread
                  that was given thee to hand to me". ">>

                  Regards,

                  Robert Brenchley,
                  Birmingham, UK.

                  RSBrenchley@...
                • John N. Lupia
                  Yuri, to settle the issue with closure and bring an end to this discussion (archive nos. 1866, 1873, 1880) of women doorkeepers which is a widely known
                  Message 8 of 26 , Aug 18, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yuri, to settle the issue with "closure" and bring an end to this
                    discussion (archive nos. 1866, 1873, 1880) of women
                    doorkeepers which is a widely known phenomenon among
                    biblical researchers for two centuries which any survey of the
                    literature will show and which is pellucidly evident in Exodus
                    38,8 I give the following:

                    cf. Adam Clarke's Commentary (Abingdon-Cokesbury, n.d.):1
                    "Exodus, Chapter 38" (6 paragraphs)

                    "Of the women-which assembled at the door] What the
                    employment of these women was at the door of the tabernacle,
                    is not easily known. Some think they assembled there for
                    purposes of devotion. Others, that they kept watch there during
                    the night; and this is the most probable opinion, for they appear
                    to have been in the same employment as those who assembled
                    at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation in the days of
                    Samuel, who were abused by the sons of the high priest Eli, 1
                    Sam. ii. 22.

                    Among the ancients women were generally employed in the
                    office of porters or doorkeepers. Such were employed about the
                    house of the high priest in our Lord's time; for a woman is
                    actually represented as keeping the door of the palace of the
                    high priest, John xviii. 17: Then saith the DAMSEL that KEPT THE
                    DOOR unto Peter; see also Matt. xxvi. 69. In 2 Sam. iv. 6, both the
                    Septuagint and Vulgate make a woman porter or doorkeeper to
                    Ishbosheth. Aristophanes mentions them in the same office,
                    and calls them shkiv, Sekis, which seems to signify a common
                    maid-servant. Aristoph, in Vespis, ver. 7lxviii. - Æoti thn quran
                    anewxen h shkiv laqra.

                    Homer, Odyss., y, ver. 225-229, mentions Actoris, Penelope's
                    maid, whose office it was to keep the door of her chamber:-
                    aktoriv - h nwin eiruto qurav pukinou qalamoio.

                    And Euripides, in Troad., ver. 197, brings in Hecuba,
                    complaining that she who was wont to sit upon a throne is now
                    reduced to the miserable necessity of becoming a doorkeeper or
                    a nurse, in order to get a morsel of bread. - h tan para proquroiv
                    fulakan katecousa, h paidwn qrepteira.

                    Sir John Chardin observes, that women are employed to keep
                    the gate of the palace of the Persian kings. Plautus, Curcul., act
                    1., scene 1, mentions an old woman, who was keeper of the
                    gate.

                    Anus hic solet cubitare, custos janitrix.

                    Many other examples might be produced. It is therefore very likely
                    that the persons mentioned here, and in 1 Sam. ii. 22, were the
                    women who guarded the tabernacle; and that they regularly
                    relieved each other, a troop or company regularly keeping watch:
                    and indeed this seems to be implied in the original, wabx
                    tsabeu, they came by troops; and these troops successively
                    consecrated their mirrors to the service of the tabernacle. See
                    Calmet on John xviii. 16. "

                    See also BAGD "PAIDISKH" 604 where the term is shown as
                    one known to "always" signify the female servant class
                    illustrated by citations.

                    Moreover, P59 and P66 both attest to the woman doorkeeper.
                    (cf. W. J. Elliott and David C. Parker, eds., The Gospel According
                    to St. John. The New Testament in Greek IV, Volume 1.
                    (American & British Committe IGNTP; Leiden, 1995): 377. See
                    also Comfort & Barret who date P66 (P. Bodmer II + Inv. Nr.
                    4274/4298) c. AD 150. (cf. Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett,
                    The Text of the Earliest Greek New Testament Manuscripts
                    (Tyndale, 2001):376.

                    The servant-girl motif is also cited in Luke 22,56 and Matthew
                    26,69 while Mark 14,66 calls them TWN PAIDISKWN TOU
                    ARCIEREWS "the maids of the high priest." the earliest
                    witnesses are the early fourth cent. uncials 01and 03, except
                    Luke which has its earliest in 0171 dated to the late 3rd cent. or
                    beginning of the fourth c. 300 (cf. Philip W. Comfort and David P.
                    Barrett, The Text of the Earliest Greek New Testament
                    Manuscripts (Tyndale, 2001):685)..

                    Cordially,
                    John

                    John N. Lupia
                    501 North Avenue B-1
                    Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
                  • Yuri Kuchinsky
                    On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, John N. Lupia wrote: ... I would like to bring it to the attention of the moderators of johannine_literature-l that such use of ad hominem
                    Message 9 of 26 , Aug 18, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, John N. Lupia wrote:

                      ...

                      > So, Yuri, after being shown apodictly that you have no credibility in
                      > academic circles whatsoever ...

                      I would like to bring it to the attention of the moderators of
                      johannine_literature-l that such use of ad hominem comments by Mr. John N.
                      Lupia violates the protocols of the list.

                      I do hope that basic rules of scholarly discourse will be followed by all
                      posters.

                      Respectfully,

                      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
                    • Yuri Kuchinsky
                      On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John N. Lupia wrote: ... John, please cite us any passage in the standard canonical Book of Job that has anything to do with any female
                      Message 10 of 26 , Aug 18, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John N. Lupia wrote:

                        ...

                        > Fourth, like Yuri you seem to think that the Book of Job and the
                        > Testament of Job are two different texts completely. This is
                        > false.

                        John, please cite us any passage in the standard canonical Book of Job
                        that has anything to do with any female doorkeepers. You have cited a
                        passage from an Apocryphal Testament of Job, which is not the same as the
                        canonical Book of Job. As most of us know, the Catholic canon had been
                        already fixed authoritatively quite a few centuries ago. Of course I
                        respect your views and all that, but to my mind the Council of Trent
                        (1556) has more authority on this matter.

                        Respectfully,

                        Yuri.

                        PS. And in reply to the query by Robert Brenchley, yes, indeed, the
                        Testament of Job is available online at the following address,

                        http://wesley.nnu.edu/noncanon/ot/pseudo/test-job.htm

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

                        The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
                        equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.