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

Re: [John_Lit] HIS disciples vs THE disciples

Expand Messages
  • Stephen C. Carlson
    ... Jeffrey, according to Swanson, there are some Byzantine (S N Omega etc.) and later Alexandrian witnesses (Psi 33) that show the addition of AUTOU. It is
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      At 09:27 PM 8/8/02 -0500, Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:
      >Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
      >> John 4:31 In the mean while HIS DISCIPLES prayed him, saying, Master,
      >> eat.
      >
      >So far as I can see from the critical apparatus in NA 27, all witnesses
      >including the Byzantine ones (and D and the latin witnesses!) read hOI MAQHTOI
      >and not, as you claim, hOI MAQHTOI AUTOU. So have I missed something? Can you
      >point to a Byzantine witness that has hOI MAQHTOU AUTOU?

      Jeffrey, according to Swanson, there are some Byzantine (S N Omega etc.) and
      later Alexandrian witnesses (Psi 33) that show the addition of AUTOU. It is
      not the reading of the Textus Receptus, so it must have been added by the
      translators of the AV. This variant merely shows the well-known natural
      tendency of scribes to embellish the text by adding words like AUTOU after
      MAQHTOI. (See Metzger, TEXT, 3d ed., pp. 198-99). As the AV shows, it is
      also a tendency of translators, so the textual and versional evidence simply
      cannot support the weight Yuri puts on it.

      Yuri, why aren't you posting this textual minutia to the TC-list, where it
      would be more relevant (cf. list protocol no. 4)?

      Stephen Carlson
      --
      Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
      Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
      "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
    • Horace Jeffery Hodges
      ... More to the point, why are you posting it at all, Yuri? Your conclusions are premature, you have not clearly understood the textual information, and you
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Stephen C. Carlson wrote:

        > Yuri, why aren't you posting this textual minutia to
        > the TC-list, where it would be more relevant (cf.
        > list protocol no. 4)?

        More to the point, why are you posting it at all,
        Yuri? Your conclusions are premature, you have not
        clearly understood the textual information, and you
        are -- as Jeffrey Gibson has repeatedly pointed out --
        relying upon translations rather than primary sources.

        Although I have learned a good deal from the scholarly
        responses to your posts, I suspect that the critiques
        that you've had to undergo have been painfully
        embarassing.

        Since you seem to be learning on the job, why not --
        as Stephen Carlson suggests -- go to the TC-list and
        post there?

        But here's some advice: Don't post conclusions. Just
        ask for help. It looks as though you need it.

        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!?
        HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
        http://www.hotjobs.com
      • Mark House
        Greetings, Johannine lit listers! I m new to the list, which I heard about through B-Greek. My interest is primarily in the Johan. Epistles, which I will be
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Greetings, Johannine lit listers!

          I'm new to the list, which I heard about through B-Greek. My interest is
          primarily in the Johan. Epistles, which I will be teaching this Fall at
          Fuller Seminary in Pasadena, CA. I hope to be able both to generate new
          topics for discussion as well as to contribute to ongoing ones.

          I've noticed right off the bat that the list has far fewer posts than does
          B-Greek. I might have guessed this, since interest in NT Greek is bound to
          be broader than interest in one portion of the NT. However, I also would
          like to suggest that the tone of the list may have something to do with the
          degree of freedom subscribers feel to offer their questions and opinions.

          If you regular contributors will tolerate me saying so, walking into a new
          list is a lot like visiting someone's home or church for the first time. You
          notice things that those used to the environment no longer pay attention to.
          In this case, what I've noticed is the very strong tone of criticism that
          has been brought against Yuri for his suggestions regarding the tendencies
          of certain text-types. I agree with all of the critiques that have been
          brought. It is indeed premature to base judgments regarding Greek mss. on
          English translations of the text. The question at hand does indeed concern
          minutia. Perhaps the issue is indeed more appropriate to the TC list. Yuri
          might have done more homework on the issue before bringing it to the list.

          My grave disadvantage is that I don't know Yuri. For all I know, he may be
          driving you all crazy with the issues he wants to discuss and the manner in
          which he discusses them. But beginning, as I must, with no such
          presupposition, let me suggest that there are a few things that might be
          said in Yuri's defense.

          1. Yuri's suggestion of grammatical (or even theological) bias on the part
          of manuscript copyists is nothing new. Indeed, I would think, human nature
          being what it is, that we should expect that copyists would have had their
          biases, and that these would have tended, at least unconsciously, to creep
          into their work. In this case, the suggestion, based as it was only on the
          English, may have proven to be false. But in itself the suggest was not
          preposterous and deserved a hearing. I noticed that some on the list first
          blasted Yuri, then went and checked the evidence. Shouldn't it at least be
          the other way around?

          2. With respect to the question of minutia, let me say as a long-time Greek
          teacher that I strongly encourage my students to pay attention to the
          details, since small things can sometimes lead to great insights. So Yuri
          should, in my view, be commended for scrutinizing the details of the text
          (while not losing sight of the bigger picture, of course).

          3. Certainly the TC list would be interested in this question, but it also
          concerns a possible grammatical/theological tendency in John, which should
          be the concern of this list. (Please correct me if my perception of the
          scope of the list's concerns is incorrect here.)

          4. Concerning the homework issue, shouldn't the list be just where one
          begins to do such homework? I know that part of my motivation for joining
          the list is so that I can bounce theories and questions off of others with
          like interests and expertise, before I bring them up with my students in
          class (or my peers in writing). As one of my mentors used to say: "Run it up
          the flagpole and see if it flies." To press the analogy, it is certainly
          embarrassing when the flag won't fly, and when it is shown to be full of
          holes. (I've been there, Yuri!) But in the interest of openness, shouldn't
          it be flown anyway, if only for the benefit of demonstrating its inadequacy?
          If we take out the big guns and blow the flag off of the pole, don't we also
          risk blowing away the flagpole itself? And if there is no flagpole, where
          will new ideas be flown?

          So while I too, without further research, find it hard to support Yuri's
          thesis regarding the use of the third person pronoun with "disciples" in
          GJn, I applaud him for raising the issue, and hope he won't be too
          embarrassed to post in the future. But then again, as I stated before, I
          really don't know Yuri, do I?

          Mark House
          Adjunct Assistant Professor of NT
          Fuller Theological Seminary

          > Stephen C. Carlson wrote to Yuri
          >
          > Although I have learned a good deal from the scholarly
          > responses to your posts, I suspect that the critiques
          > that you've had to undergo have been painfully
          > embarassing.
          >
          > Since you seem to be learning on the job, why not --
          > as Stephen Carlson suggests -- go to the TC-list and
          > post there?
        • Jeffrey B. Gibson
          ... I second (third?) Stephen s and Jeffery s motion and ask along with them why you have not posted your latest research on the T-C List? Given that your
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:

            > Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
            >
            > > Yuri, why aren't you posting this textual minutia to
            > > the TC-list, where it would be more relevant (cf.
            > > list protocol no. 4)?
            >
            > Since you seem to be learning on the job, why not --
            > as Stephen Carlson suggests -- go to the TC-list and
            > post there?
            >

            I second (third?) Stephen's and Jeffery's motion and ask along with them why
            you have not posted your latest "research" on the T-C List? Given that your
            argument is made on text critical grounds, that's where it really belongs.

            JG
            --
            Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
            1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
            Floor 1
            Chicago, Illinois 60626
            e-mail jgibson000@...
            jgibson000@...
          • Jack Kilmon
            ... From: Yuri Kuchinsky To: John Lit-L Cc: Loisy List Sent: Thursday,
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
              To: "John Lit-L" <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
              Cc: "Loisy List" <loisy@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 3:04 PM
              Subject: [John_Lit] HIS disciples vs THE disciples


              >
              > Dear friends,
              >
              > I've been recently examining which version of GJohn refers to the
              > disciples of Jesus as "the disciples", and which has "his disciples". So
              > I've compared the three texts, RSV (representing Alexandrian text), KJV
              > (representing Byzantine text), and the two ancient Old Syriac Aramaic
              > texts of GJohn.
              >
              > It sure seems like the use of the expression "his disciples" (tois
              > maqhtais autou), rather than of the more impersonal "the disciples" (where
              > autou is omitted), indicates, at least to some extent, a closer
              > relationship between Jesus and his disciples. And I found that both KJV
              > and the Old Syriac often feature "his disciples", rather than "the
              > disciples" -- against the Alexandrian text.
              >
              > Of course, in all versions of GJohn, "his disciples" is by far the
              > preferred reading (RSV uses it 32 times). So it seems like this was the
              > original format in which Jesus' disciples were referred to. But now, let's
              > consider these 17 cases where RSV uses "the disciples".
              >
              > In the following 7 Johannine passages, while RSV (Alexandrian text) has
              > THE DISCIPLES, KJV (Byzantine text) has HIS DISCIPLES. In each case except
              > one (John 11:12, which seems like a special case), the Old Syriac supports
              > KJV/Byzantine text.
              >
              > (The following are the KJV/Byzantine versions of these passages.)
              >
              > John 4:31 In the mean while HIS DISCIPLES prayed him, saying, Master,
              > eat.


              I am going to use html format and the SGreek and SHebrew fonts and hope it is accepted. Just in case I will begin with the Greek transliteration:

              EN DE TW METACO HRWTWN AUTON hOI MAQHTAI LEGONTES RABBI FAGE

              En de tw metacu hrwtwn auton o(i maqhtai legontej rabbi fage
              SyrC )mxl }whm( lwk)nd hnm wwx ny(b }yd yhwdymlt
              SyrS )mxl }whm( lwk)nd whwdymlt wwh }y(bw

              Peshitta s(l }br hl }yrm)w yhwdymlt hnm wwh }y(b }ylh tnybw
              eat master to him and saying his disciples <from> him were beseeching these things in the midst


              The Syriac is talmyduhy HIS disciples and the Greek is an article that reflects HIS disciples by context. There is no difference.





              >
              > John 11:7 Then after that saith he to HIS DISCIPLES, Let us go into
              > Judaea again.

              Old Syriac is w)mr ltlmyduhy yhwdymltl rm)w which I do not see as any different than legousin autwi oi maqhtai. Both translate "Say HE to (his) disciples.

              I am going to snip the rest because all I see is the difference between Greek and Syriac orthography.


              Jack


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Jeffrey B. Gibson
              ... Actually, whatever the RSV and the KJV translations have, P66 and f13, among others have, hOI MAQHTAI AUTOU. And it is only SyS that has his disciples .
              Message 6 of 18 , Aug 9, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

                > Now, in the following 4 Johannine passages, both KJV and RSV have THE
                > DISCIPLES, while the Old Syriac has HIS DISCIPLES.
                >
                > John 13:22

                Actually, whatever the RSV and the KJV translations have, P66 and f13, among
                others have, hOI MAQHTAI AUTOU. And it is only SyS that has "his disciples".

                >
                > John 21:1

                AUTOU is attested in C3 D Psi 700 al it and in SyS and SyP but NOT SyC.

                > John 21:4

                There doesn't seem to be any indication that any Syriac MSS, Old or
                otherwise, has AUTOU here. What is your evidence -- besides what you find in
                an English translation of SyC and SyS -- that it does?

                > John 21:12

                There doesn't seem to be any indication that SyS and SyC have "his disciples"
                here. And it is interesting to note that SyP and SyH read what Siniaticus,
                Vaticanus D L W Theta Psi f1 f13 and other witnesses have, namely, TWN
                MAQHTWN.

                >
                > COMMENT: It's quite possible that the Old Syriac has preserved the more
                > original text in these 4 cases.

                Possible? Only if, as you do here, you not only distort the evidence you
                appeal to and ignore what is contradictory to your claims, but also beg the
                question about how the appearance of AUTOU in the SyS of Jn 13:22 and the SyS
                and SyP of Jn 21:1 can be explained. Indeed, given the contradictions between
                SyS and SyC, not to mention the Greek MSS evidence, it is much more likely
                that the "editor" -- better, translator--of SyS added "his" to his source text
                than that he preserved a text that always and originally read "his disciples".

                > And in the following 4 Johannine passages, all three of our texts -- KJV,
                > RSV, and the Old Syriac -- have THE DISCIPLES.
                >
                > John 20:10
                > John 20:18
                > John 20:19
                > John 20:20
                >
                > COMMENT: All four of these cases are concentrated in one long passage in
                > Chapter 20. AFAIK, these are the only cases where the Old Syriac GJohn
                > uses the expression "the disciples" at all.

                And as the evidence shows, you simply don't know enough. They are not the only
                instances in Old Syriac MSS in which the reputedly impersonal "the disciples"
                appear. Had you been working with the actual Syriac MSS instead of English
                translations of them, you would have seen this.

                > These 4 exceptions to the rule
                > seem to show that the editors of the Old Syriac didn't just mechanically
                > use "his disciples" in every single case where the disciples of Jesus are
                > referred to.

                "Seem" is the operative word here. In any case, the "editors" use it more
                frequently than you assert.

                > This analysis probably has some significant implication for
                > the redactional history of GJohn, since it may indicate that this passage
                > was added to GJohn at a later date (or perhaps redacted at a later date).

                Hardly, since what it indicates is that you have little grasp of Greek syntax
                and how syntax, and not an appeal to redaction, explains why AUTOU does not
                appear in these verses.

                Please, Yuri. Spare us any more of your "exercises" in text criticism until
                you can actually read and cite from the primary source material.

                JG

                --
                Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
                1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
                Floor 1
                Chicago, Illinois 60626
                e-mail jgibson000@...
                jgibson000@...
              • indrasinha
                Dear Mark, Thank you for this. It is something that, as an observer rather a participant in this group I have often felt myself but lacked the courage to say.
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Mark,

                  Thank you for this. It is something that, as an observer rather a
                  participant in this group I have often felt myself but lacked the
                  courage to say. You have expressed with a great deal of grace
                  what I have been feeling.

                  I would be unhappy if Yuri stopped posting, because he seems
                  to have the most interesting ideas, and because his posts
                  provoke exhibitions of scholarship which I for one find extremely
                  valuable.

                  With all good wishes,

                  Indra

                  indra.sinha@...
                  indra.sinha@...





                  --- In johannine_literature@y..., "Mark House" <mark@t...> wrote:
                  > Greetings, Johannine lit listers!
                  >
                  > I'm new to the list, which I heard about through B-Greek. My
                  interest is
                  > primarily in the Johan. Epistles, which I will be teaching this
                  Fall at
                  > Fuller Seminary in Pasadena, CA. I hope to be able both to
                  generate new
                  > topics for discussion as well as to contribute to ongoing ones.
                  >
                  > I've noticed right off the bat that the list has far fewer posts than
                  does
                  > B-Greek. I might have guessed this, since interest in NT Greek
                  is bound to
                  > be broader than interest in one portion of the NT. However, I
                  also would
                  > like to suggest that the tone of the list may have something to
                  do with the
                  > degree of freedom subscribers feel to offer their questions and
                  opinions.
                  >
                  > If you regular contributors will tolerate me saying so, walking
                  into a new
                  > list is a lot like visiting someone's home or church for the first
                  time. You
                  > notice things that those used to the environment no longer pay
                  attention to.
                  > In this case, what I've noticed is the very strong tone of criticism
                  that
                  > has been brought against Yuri for his suggestions regarding
                  the tendencies
                  > of certain text-types.

                  > So while I too, without further research, find it hard to support
                  Yuri's
                  > thesis regarding the use of the third person pronoun with
                  "disciples" in
                  > GJn, I applaud him for raising the issue, and hope he won't be
                  too
                  > embarrassed to post in the future. But then again, as I stated
                  before, I
                  > really don't know Yuri, do I?
                  >
                  > Mark House
                  > Adjunct Assistant Professor of NT
                  > Fuller Theological Seminary
                • Wieland Willker
                  ... But there are other places for his posts. This is an academic list for scholars and laymen with the required knowledge. If you find the provoked
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Indra wrote:
                    > I would be unhappy if Yuri stopped posting, because he seems
                    > to have the most interesting ideas, and because his posts
                    > provoke exhibitions of scholarship which I for one find extremely
                    > valuable.

                    But there are other places for his posts.
                    This is an academic list for scholars and laymen with the required knowledge. If you find
                    the "provoked exhibitions of scholarship" valuable, ok, but it is not the job of scholars
                    to do this. You know, an idiot can ask more questions in half an hour than all scholars in
                    the world can answer.
                    Yuri has shown again and again that he has NOT the required knowledge. I have no time
                    anymore to refute his theories. But I don't find it acceptable to just ignore him, leaving
                    this as a forum for his fancies. The result will be that scholars will leave the list.
                    Everybody is allowed a weak moment, a crazy idea, from time to time. But not permanently.

                    Yuri has put up his own list. All those who are interested in his theories can go there
                    and discuss everything there. Ok? Please....

                    Best wishes
                    Wieland
                    <><
                    ------------------------
                    Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                    mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
                    http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
                  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                    ... But Yuri is **not** suggesting that the changes he thinks are evident in the transmission of GJohn are due to random copyists bias. Baldly put, he thinks
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Mark House wrote:

                      >
                      > 1. Yuri's suggestion of grammatical (or even theological) bias on the part
                      > of manuscript copyists is nothing new. Indeed, I would think, human nature
                      > being what it is, that we should expect that copyists would have had their
                      > biases, and that these would have tended, at least unconsciously, to creep
                      > into their work. In this case, the suggestion, based as it was only on the
                      > English, may have proven to be false. But in itself the suggest was not
                      > preposterous and deserved a hearing. I noticed that some on the list first
                      > blasted Yuri, then went and checked the evidence. Shouldn't it at least be
                      > the other way around?
                      >

                      But Yuri is **not** suggesting that the changes he thinks are evident in the
                      transmission of GJohn are due to random copyists' bias. Baldly put, he thinks
                      that it is due to an actual conspiracy, directed by the Roman church, after 135
                      when according to him Gentiles had hijacked Jewish Christianity, the intention
                      of which was to make Jesus into something they knew he was not and to promote
                      universally a picture of Jesus who was anti semitic and a Gentile. See the
                      beginnings of his "research" on this at:

                      http://www.styx.org/yuku/pepys/w2ha.htm


                      > 2. With respect to the question of minutia, let me say as a long-time Greek
                      > teacher that I strongly encourage my students to pay attention to the
                      > details, since small things can sometimes lead to great insights. So Yuri
                      > should, in my view, be commended for scrutinizing the details of the text
                      > (while not losing sight of the bigger picture, of course).

                      But he **hasn't** scrutinized the details -- at least not of the Greek and
                      Syriac texts he claims to have scrutinized. I wonder if you'd praise your
                      students for looking only at the way certain English translations differed from
                      one another when you actually assigned them to look at the Greek and versional
                      text of John?

                      > 4. Concerning the homework issue, shouldn't the list be just where one
                      > begins to do such homework?

                      I think you miss the point here. Yuri claims to have already done his homework
                      and to have done it thoroughly. What he was taken to task for was that he lied
                      about this. He never consulted either the Greek or Syriac texts he claims to
                      have examined.

                      >
                      > So while I too, without further research, find it hard to support Yuri's
                      > thesis regarding the use of the third person pronoun with "disciples" in
                      > GJn, I applaud him for raising the issue, and hope he won't be too
                      > embarrassed to post in the future. But then again, as I stated before, I
                      > really don't know Yuri, do I?

                      No you don't. Should you wish to see who he is and how he really regards members
                      of the John List, see, for starters,

                      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/loisy/message/5889

                      or any of his postings at that site under the title of Six Big Fallacies of Nt
                      Studies

                      Yours,

                      Jeffrey Gibson

                      --
                      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
                      1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
                      Floor 1
                      Chicago, Illinois 60626
                      e-mail jgibson000@...
                      jgibson000@...
                    • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                      ... TC-list ... I was, primarily, trying to save Yuri further embarassment. I haven t generally been very openly critical of Yuri -- beyond occasionally
                      Message 10 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Mark House wrote:

                        > 4. Concerning the homework issue, shouldn't the list
                        > be just where one begins to do such homework? . . ..
                        > [I]t is certainly embarrassing when the flag won't
                        > fly, and when it is shown to be full of holes.

                        > > Stephen C. Carlson wrote to Yuri

                        Actually, I (Jeffery Hodges) wrote this:

                        > > Although I have learned a good deal from the
                        > > scholarly responses to your posts, I suspect that
                        > > the critiques that you've had to undergo have been
                        > > painfully embarassing.
                        > >
                        > > Since you seem to be learning on the job, why not
                        > > -- as Stephen Carlson suggests -- go to the
                        TC-list
                        > > and post there?

                        I was, primarily, trying to save Yuri further
                        embarassment. I haven't generally been very openly
                        critical of Yuri -- beyond occasionally suggesting
                        that he not use websites such as "A Christian
                        Thinktank" as an authority to back up his opinion on a
                        scholarly point.

                        I have, however, come to the conclusion that Yuri has
                        not done his homework for many of his posts. I wonder
                        why he continues to post them. And I was attempting to
                        offer him a dignified exit.

                        Jeffery Hodges

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

                        __________________________________________________
                        Do You Yahoo!?
                        HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
                        http://www.hotjobs.com
                      • Yuri Kuchinsky
                        Greetings, all, I think the critics are missing the big picture in all of this. Because the question about the Byzantine versions of these passages is only a
                        Message 11 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Greetings, all,

                          I think the critics are missing the big picture in all of this. Because
                          the question about the Byzantine versions of these passages is only a
                          subsidiary problem here. The main point, actually, is that the Old Syriac
                          has "his disciples" in 12 Johannine passages where RSV (based on the
                          Alexandrian text) reads "the disciples". In some of these 12 cases, also
                          the Byzantine text agrees with the Old Syriac/Western text, which
                          shouldn't be surprising in any way, as this is quite a common phenomenon.

                          Another very important point in all this is the fact that these Old Syriac
                          passages almost invariably agree with the Old Latin GJohn MSS. For
                          example, the 7 passages that I've quoted so far (i.e. John 4:31, 11:7,
                          11:8, 11:12, 11:54, 20:30, and 21:14) all have Old Latin support according
                          to Aland. So these are the same old Syro-Latin agreements that, in the
                          opinion of many big textual experts, indicate the earliest gospel text
                          that we possess. These Syro-Latin agreements should be dated to mid-second
                          century, which is a lot earlier than our earliest attestation for the
                          Alexandrian text.

                          So the priority of these Syro-Latin readings really lies on the surface of
                          things. And this should mean that the earliest text of GJohn was
                          indicating a closer relationship between Jesus and his disciples.

                          (More on the general subject of the Syro-Latin agreements can be found
                          here,

                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/message/2475 )

                          I thank very much the list members who have found that some of my ideas
                          may have merit.

                          All the best,

                          Yuri.

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

                          "One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea"
                          --Walter Bagehot (1826-1877)
                        • Yuri Kuchinsky
                          ... Jack, Thank you for posting these Old Syriac and the Peshitta versions of these verses. But I think the problem here is a bit more than how we choose to
                          Message 12 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Jack Kilmon wrote:

                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@...>
                            > To: "John Lit-L" <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
                            > Cc: "Loisy List" <loisy@yahoogroups.com>
                            > Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 3:04 PM
                            > Subject: [John_Lit] HIS disciples vs THE disciples

                            ...

                            > > (The following are the KJV/Byzantine versions of these passages.)
                            > >
                            > > John 4:31 In the mean while HIS DISCIPLES prayed him, saying, Master,
                            > > eat.
                            >
                            >
                            > I am going to use html format and the SGreek and SHebrew fonts and
                            > hope it is accepted. Just in case I will begin with the Greek
                            > transliteration:
                            >
                            > EN DE TW METACO HRWTWN AUTON hOI MAQHTAI LEGONTES RABBI FAGE
                            >
                            > En de tw metacu hrwtwn auton o(i maqhtai legontej rabbi fage
                            > SyrC )mxl }whm( lwk)nd hnm wwx ny(b }yd yhwdymlt
                            > SyrS )mxl }whm( lwk)nd whwdymlt wwh }y(bw
                            >
                            > Peshitta s(l }br hl }yrm)w yhwdymlt hnm wwh }y(b }ylh tnybw

                            > eat master to him and saying his disciples
                            > <from> him were beseeching these things in the midst
                            >
                            > The Syriac is talmyduhy HIS disciples and the Greek is an article that
                            > reflects HIS disciples by context. There is no difference.
                            >
                            > > John 11:7 Then after that saith he to HIS DISCIPLES, Let us go into
                            > > Judaea again.
                            >
                            > Old Syriac is w)mr ltlmyduhy yhwdymltl rm)w which I do not see as
                            > any different than legousin autwi oi maqhtai. Both translate "Say HE
                            > to (his) disciples.
                            >
                            > I am going to snip the rest because all I see is the difference
                            > between Greek and Syriac orthography.

                            Jack,

                            Thank you for posting these Old Syriac and the Peshitta versions of these
                            verses. But I think the problem here is a bit more than how we choose to
                            translate these passages at this time. Because we actually have the Old
                            Latin versions of these passages, and most of the time they happen to
                            agree with the Old Syriac text.

                            So the support for these Old Syriac passages in the Old Latin, and often
                            in the Greek Bezae as well, argues against the line that you've taken. In
                            other words, we cannot really explain these differences as merely some
                            sort of a grammatical peculiarity due to translation. Where all three of
                            these ancient traditions agree against the Alexandrian text, the
                            "difference between Greek and Syriac orthography" cannot really become a
                            big issue.

                            All the best,

                            Yuri.

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

                            I doubt, therefore I might be.
                          • Mark House
                            ... have no time anymore to refute his theories. But I don t find it acceptable to just ignore him, leaving this as a forum for his fancies. The result will be
                            Message 13 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Wieland Willker wrote:

                              >> Yuri has shown again and again that he has NOT the required knowledge. I
                              have no time
                              anymore to refute his theories. But I don't find it acceptable to just
                              ignore him, leaving
                              this as a forum for his fancies. The result will be that scholars will leave
                              the list.
                              Everybody is allowed a weak moment, a crazy idea, from time to time. But not
                              permanently.

                              >> Yuri has put up his own list. All those who are interested in his
                              theories can go there and discuss everything there. Ok? Please....<<

                              Then Jeffrey Gibson wrote:

                              > But Yuri is **not** suggesting that the changes he thinks are evident in
                              the
                              > transmission of GJohn are due to random copyists' bias. Baldly put, he
                              thinks
                              > that it is due to an actual conspiracy, directed by the Roman church,
                              after 135
                              > when according to him Gentiles had hijacked Jewish Christianity, the
                              intention
                              > of which was to make Jesus into something they knew he was not and to
                              promote
                              > universally a picture of Jesus who was anti semitic and a Gentile. See the
                              > beginnings of his "research" on this at:
                              >
                              > http://www.styx.org/yuku/pepys/w2ha.htm

                              Thanks, gentlemen, for clarifying the causes of your frustration with regard
                              to Yuri. Context is everything! Wieland's concern about losing scholarly
                              participation on the list seems as valid as the one I raised regarding loss
                              of participation because of the tone of the list. Scholastic freedom must be
                              balanced against what is perceived to be poor scholarship and even
                              deliberate deception.

                              What to do? If Yuri has indeed been publicly critical of the list perhaps he
                              should voluntarily end his participation. Otherwise, it may be time for hard
                              decisions on the part of the list moderator. In any event, I hope the
                              climate will be less inclement in the future, and I intend to contribute to
                              what I hope will be a more helpful direction, beginning with my next post.

                              Mark Aaron House
                              Adjunct Assistant Professor of NT
                              Fuller Theological Seminary
                            • Stephen C. Carlson
                              ... Thanks for joining the discussion. ... Unfortunately, a lot of us here have had a long, contentious relationship with Yuri, some as far back as five years,
                              Message 14 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                At 10:03 AM 8/9/02 -0700, Mark House wrote:
                                >I'm new to the list, which I heard about through B-Greek. My interest is
                                >primarily in the Johan. Epistles, which I will be teaching this Fall at
                                >Fuller Seminary in Pasadena, CA. I hope to be able both to generate new
                                >topics for discussion as well as to contribute to ongoing ones.

                                Thanks for joining the discussion.

                                >My grave disadvantage is that I don't know Yuri. For all I know, he may be
                                >driving you all crazy with the issues he wants to discuss and the manner in
                                >which he discusses them. But beginning, as I must, with no such
                                >presupposition, let me suggest that there are a few things that might be
                                >said in Yuri's defense.

                                Unfortunately, a lot of us here have had a long, contentious relationship
                                with Yuri, some as far back as five years, and these past confrontations
                                may have infected the tone of our responses. Thanks for showing how the
                                tone of recent messages is being perceived.

                                Let me just address one of your points that relates to a suggestion I
                                brought up.

                                >3. Certainly the TC list would be interested in this question, but it also
                                >concerns a possible grammatical/theological tendency in John, which should
                                >be the concern of this list. (Please correct me if my perception of the
                                >scope of the list's concerns is incorrect here.)

                                I brought up the suggestion that he first try his ideas on the TC-list
                                because there are a lot of textual details one must first get right
                                before one can address the theological tendencies of John. Since Yuri
                                admitted on 7/31 on the TC-list that he was "just a bare beginner in
                                the study of the Old Syriac", I thought that it would be more profitable
                                to hash out the textual details first on the TC-list, which has such
                                world-recognized experts as William Petersen who are fully conversant
                                in Syriac.

                                However, it turns out that my suggestion was in vain. As I am now
                                informed, Yuri was among the couple of people who were removed
                                last week from the TC-list for "egregious violations" of the list
                                protocols, which I believe included insulting Petersen's linguistic
                                abilities and other ad hominems.

                                Stephen Carlson
                                --
                                Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
                                Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
                                "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
                              • Thomas W Butler
                                On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 10:03:57 -0700 Mark House ... Mark, I m also relatively new to this list. I ve noticed that often the more
                                Message 15 of 18 , Aug 10, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 10:03:57 -0700 "Mark House" <mark@...>
                                  writes:
                                  > Greetings, Johannine lit listers!
                                  >
                                  > I'm new to the list ... (snip)
                                  >
                                  > 1. Yuri's suggestion of grammatical (or even theological) bias
                                  > on the part of manuscript copyists is nothing new. (snip).
                                  > But in itself the suggest was not preposterous and deserved
                                  > a hearing. I noticed that some on the list first blasted Yuri,
                                  > then went and checked the evidence. Shouldn't it at least
                                  > be the other way around?

                                  Mark,
                                  I'm also relatively new to this list. I've noticed that often the
                                  more seasoned scholars simply ignore posts that deal with
                                  points they consider unworthy of their time. Some (perhaps
                                  most) of us on the list are hoping that something we've noticed
                                  will be of interest to someone else on the list, and that another
                                  scholar will make time to dialog with us about it. I'm grateful
                                  to those who do this; I learn a lot from the exchanges. I also
                                  admire those with the courage to set forth their ideas. I see
                                  no reason for anyone to "blast" anyone else. I appreciate those
                                  who approach new or untried ideas as colleagues, offering
                                  scholarly comments in order to clarify, strengthen or refute an
                                  idea or observation.
                                  >
                                  > 2. With respect to the question of minutia, let me say as a
                                  > long-time Greek teacher that I strongly encourage my
                                  > students to pay attention to the details, since small things
                                  > can sometimes lead to great insights.

                                  Amen.
                                  >
                                  > 3. Certainly the TC list would be interested in this question,
                                  > but it also concerns a possible grammatical / theological
                                  > tendency in John, which should be the concern of this list.
                                  > (Please correct me if my perception of the scope of the list's
                                  > concerns is incorrect here.)

                                  Your perception is the same as mine.
                                  >
                                  > 4. Concerning the homework issue, shouldn't the list be just
                                  > where one begins to do such homework? I know that part
                                  > of my motivation for joining the list is so that I can bounce
                                  > theories and questions off of others with like interests and
                                  > expertise, before I bring them up with my students in class
                                  > (or my peers in writing). As one of my mentors used to say:
                                  > "Run it up the flagpole and see if it flies." To press the analogy,
                                  > it is certainly embarrassing when the flag won't fly, and when
                                  > it is shown to be full of holes. (I've been there, Yuri!) But in
                                  > the interest of openness, shouldn't it be flown anyway, if only
                                  > for the benefit of demonstrating its inadequacy? If we take
                                  > out the big guns and blow the flag off of the pole, don't we
                                  > also risk blowing away the flagpole itself? And if there is no
                                  > flagpole, where will new ideas be flown?

                                  I agree that this is the place for new ideas to be tested, but it
                                  seems to me that this is not where homework begins. I expect
                                  my work and the work of others to be the result of scholarship
                                  already done to the best of my ability before it is shared here.

                                  To use your analogy, I hope that we are not sending bolts of
                                  unmodified cloth up the flagpole. They would not be flags, and
                                  there would be no reason for anyone to salute. When we send
                                  out an idea, the work may be rough, but its significance should
                                  be visible enough for a discussion to ensue as to whether or not
                                  it should be saluted.

                                  When that discussion occurs, I would hope that we could
                                  discuss the idea (the flag), not who it was that sent it up.
                                  Scholarship should be visible and judged on its own merit.

                                  Yours in Christ's service,
                                  Tom Butler
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.