Re: [John_Lit] architriklinos once more
- On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:
> Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:Yes, but the absence of evidence should also indicate certain
> > According to C. K. Barrett, _The Gospel According to St. John_, 1955, p.
> > 161, "[W]e lack Jewish evidence for any office corresponding to the title
> > architriklinos". And he further suggests that this may indicate a
> > Hellenistic origin for this story.
> So what? As you are fond of saying on NGs when people point out to you
> that there is a lack of evidence for many of the claims you make
> there, "absence of evidence should not necessarily be taken as
> evidence of absence".
probabilities, which should not be disregarded.
> In any event, as I know from personal contact with Barret himself (whoSo then how is Barrett's statement to be interpreted?
> is, by the way, a card carrying member of the Guild you find so
> corrupt and lazy and bigoted and biased, whose members you claim
> rarely these days ever engage in "rigorous and stringent critical
> analysis"), his statement that the story may have an Hellenistic
> origin is not to be taken as if he was saying it was composed, let
> alone edited, by a Gentile -- as you seem to want to do.
It's clear that the Diatessaronic versions, with their "master of the
house", rather than "architriklinos", preserve a story that fits a lot
more comfortably into the context of a rural Jewish household. And, of
course, there are also some other items in the Diatessaronic story that
indicate a closer connection with rural Galilee and with traditional
Judaism, rather than with the Hellenistic social milieu.
These considerations seem to point to our Diatessaronic witnesses
preserving a version of the miracle of Jesus that is earlier than what we
find in the canonical text.
PS. At this time, I'm consulting various commentaries on John, and writing
a brief essay looking into the theological motifs as intended by the
earliest author of this story. Should be done soon.
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
- --- In johannine_literature@y..., michael Hardin <michael1517@y...>
>Michael, I am more of a student than a scholar of the fourth
> For some time now I have been studying the usage of
> words with 'double meanings' in 4G. I am curious to
> know if others have also found the 'author's' use of
> words that have a double meaning to be of value . . . .
gospel. Nevertheless, even (maybe, especially) students have
opinions, too. It would indeed be an interesting and controversial
study to tabulate and classify the most obvious ones. The most
frequent reason I can see for the double (and sometimes more)
meanings is in support of the Johannine technique I call "dialogues
with dummies." The poor sap who is shown as questioning Jesus almost
always misunderstands what Jesus is telling him and, regarding words
with more than one possible meaning, only gets the infelicitous one
and is blind to what Jesus is actually saying. Jesus is then given
the opportunity to explain further for the benefit of the intended
audience. (The dummy is almost never shown as ever getting the
point.) I think this goes so far as to include instances in which
both meanings have to be in the listener/reader's mind in order to
have any hope of following Jesus. Perhaps the most obvious example
is John 3:3. Nicodemus interprets *gennhth anwthen* as meaning
only "born again." The usually excellent NAB makes the opposite
error, interpreting the words as meaning only "born from above." A
proper understanding, in my opinion, requires that Jesus be
understood as meaning both things. One must be reborn in the Spirit
in order to see the kingdom of God.
To say the same thing with different words, I think that the author
wants his or her audience to think and not to merely swallow dogma.
He is as much as saying that just as Jesus is more than appears on
the surface, Jesus' message is more profound than surface appearances
might lead one to believe.
Yours in Christ,