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

[John_Lit] Re: John's Greek

Expand Messages
  • Jim West
    ... Absolutely. We are in 100% agreement on this point. ... Ok- totally. jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page-
    Message 1 of 18 , Sep 18, 1999
      At 11:52 AM 9/18/99 -0500, you wrote:

      >Of course we've had this out before, Jim, in another forum, and we must
      >agree to disagree on some points (I'll grant that the extent to which the
      >Essenes were Hellenized may be questionable). I'd hope we agree that the
      >LOGOS conception is neither exclusively Greek nor exclusively Jewish in its
      >background.

      Absolutely. We are in 100% agreement on this point.

      >For my part, I think the Jewish background is pretty strong,
      >but I think nevertheless that the prologue of John's gospel is hardly
      >imaginable apart from the cross-fertilization of Greek and Jewish thinking.
      >I think the problem in the assertion above is in the word, "totally."

      Ok- totally.


      jim

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Jim West, ThD
      email- jwest@...
      web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
    • Thatcher, Tom
      Jim et. al., I apologize that my previous remarks on the possibly oral nature of FE s Greek were so cryptic. First, I have no desire to attach a specific name
      Message 2 of 18 , Sep 20, 1999
        Jim et. al.,

        I apologize that my previous remarks on the possibly oral nature of FE's
        Greek were so cryptic. First, I have no desire to attach a specific name to
        FE. Let me clarify by commenting specifically on the following exchange:

        ME:

        <<Many of the unusual features of Johannine style seem to result, in my
        view, from oral storytelling
        >techniques.>>

        JIM:

        <<What? So what??? At some point it was written down- in inelegant
        Greek.>>

        "So what" would be this. My impression from the string was that the Greek
        issue was somehow going to be brought into implications of FE's background
        and worldview--whether that worldview and background were "Hebrew" or
        "Greek."

        Literacy rates in the Roman Empire in the period of late Second Temple
        Judaim did not exceed 10%, and the number of people who could actually
        "write" anything down would be lower than that. Consequently, to refer to
        the classical authors as "elegant Greek" and then categoirze the other 90%
        of the population (or, truly, the other 99.999% of the population, if you
        want to use "the classical authors" as the baseline) seems to be a strained
        comparision. I am not certain, in other words, how acknowledging that
        John's Greek is "inelegant" (a very aesthetically biased term in the first
        place) when compared to Plato et. al. really provides relevant data for a
        discussion on authorship or FE's background, when at least 90% of the
        population of that period would have used the language in a similar way.

        I may, however, be missing your broader point.

        Respectfully,
        --tom thatcher

        "The Truth Will Set You Free"
        tom thatcher
        cbs&s
        (513) 244-8172
      • Kevin O'Brien
        I am a new member of the group (having just joined) and am very interested in contributing material to a topical current theme I have seen discussed in brief
        Message 3 of 18 , Sep 26, 1999
          I am a new member of the group (having just joined) and am very interested in contributing material to a topical current theme I have
          seen discussed in brief by Tom Thatcher and others in the group. The theme is John's Greek and how it has been communicated in the form
          we have today in the Gospel. To be brief in this opening communique: John 4:6 and John 13:25 in the use of hOUTWS puicture a lecturer --
          the B.D. relaying to those listening -- among whom was his son, the Evangelist and his principal notetaker his experiences with the
          Lord! It is highly significant that in hOUTWS we have a demonstrative adverb, to be translated as "like this", cewrtainly not the
          unintelligible translation, "just as he was". Here are two scenes in the same Gospel where first Jesus rested on the well of Jacob and
          secondly where the B.D. leaned back in a resting position on the Lord's breast. It is my contention that the B.D. demonstrated these two
          positions of rest in his own dining room at the Judaean Bethany and in the case of John 13:25 on the triclinium there where he showed
          how he did it!. I say the Evangelist was his son with many arguments in my published works -- one very important aspect of these claims
          solves the problem of the unified literary stylistics throughout the Gospel. The son in his formative years put into wrirting what his
          father the B.D. gave orally. Perhaps members of this group in their formative years under the parental roof absorbed the same idioms of
          speech, the same vocabulary and forms of vocal and literary expression as your parents. It certainly happened in my own case. Any takers
          on all this?

          Cheers
          Kevin O'Brien (Australia)




          .
          Thatcher, Tom wrote:

          > Jim et. al.,
          >
          > I apologize that my previous remarks on the possibly oral nature of FE's
          > Greek were so cryptic. First, I have no desire to attach a specific name to
          > FE. Let me clarify by commenting specifically on the following exchange:
          >
          > ME:
          >
          > <<Many of the unusual features of Johannine style seem to result, in my
          > view, from oral storytelling
          > >techniques.>>
          >
          > JIM:
          >
          > <<What? So what??? At some point it was written down- in inelegant
          > Greek.>>
          >
          > "So what" would be this. My impression from the string was that the Greek
          > issue was somehow going to be brought into implications of FE's background
          > and worldview--whether that worldview and background were "Hebrew" or
          > "Greek."
          >
          > Literacy rates in the Roman Empire in the period of late Second Temple
          > Judaim did not exceed 10%, and the number of people who could actually
          > "write" anything down would be lower than that. Consequently, to refer to
          > the classical authors as "elegant Greek" and then categoirze the other 90%
          > of the population (or, truly, the other 99.999% of the population, if you
          > want to use "the classical authors" as the baseline) seems to be a strained
          > comparision. I am not certain, in other words, how acknowledging that
          > John's Greek is "inelegant" (a very aesthetically biased term in the first
          > place) when compared to Plato et. al. really provides relevant data for a
          > discussion on authorship or FE's background, when at least 90% of the
          > population of that period would have used the language in a similar way.
          >
          > I may, however, be missing your broader point.
          >
          > Respectfully,
          > --tom thatcher
          >
          > "The Truth Will Set You Free"
          > tom thatcher
          > cbs&s
          > (513) 244-8172
          >
          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > Subscribe: send e-mail briefly describing your academic background & research interests to johannine_literature-subscribe@egroups.com
          > Unsubscribe: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@egroups.com
          > Contact list managers: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@egroups.com
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.