[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #545
b-greek-digest Tuesday, 17 January 1995 Volume 01 : Number 545
In this issue:
Re: Which law(s)?
Re: Which law(s)?
Pastoral epistles inquiry
arsenokoitai
AN ALMAH OFFER
AN ALMAH OFFER
Re: arsenokoitai
Re: arsenokoitai
Re: arsenokoitai
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Last <D.Last@mmu.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 10:51:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Which law(s)?
Carl Conrad wrote:
> Thanks very much for your post in response to mine of last week; I had
> feared from the deafening silence that nobody wanted to talk about this
> very interesting passage. I like very much what you say about the Sermon
> on the Mount and I think it quite persuasive. One question: do you mean
> from what you say about the dawning Kingdom of Heaven that Mt's
> eschatology is largely "realized"?
My apologies for the slow response to this question - I've been away from
my PC for a few days. I'm glad that others have taken up this
discussion in the meantime. However, because my time is limited I'd like
to take up just Carl's question at the moment.
- ---
I think my answer would be "no". The passage seems to reflect a
interesting line of thought based on a balance of continuity and
discontinuity. And this tension leads me to an "already but not yet"
reading of the eschatology.
So, take the power of those eight declarations - the beatitudes -
at the start of the sermon. They are tremendous; it seems like
a golden age of peace and happiness is about to sweep into history.
And then bang: the ninth beatitude. Jesus warns his hearers that
those who follow him can expect insults and persecutions directed
against them. Just as it was for the prophets before, so it will
be for them. Yet the fact is still that they are blessed people; they
are part of the kingdom. But at the moment they rejoice not
in seen benefits but in unseen ones: rewards in heaven. Already
Jesus' hearers are blessed people but not yet have the full
kingdom benefits arrived for them (they are still praying "your kingdom
come").
Now this same tension seems to be in v17 onwards. The law and the
prophets still stand; this is not a time for their removal. Indeed the
law stands until heaven and earth disappear. Yet something very
important has changed. The law now reaches full potential because Jesus
comes "to fulfil". Then we get the passages discussing what "was said"
followed by "but I tell you".
I hope that answers your question Carl. I realise that many other
questions abound but then this thread has only just started ...
David Last
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 06:56:25 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Which law(s)?
On Mon, 16 Jan 1995, David Last wrote:
> Carl Conrad wrote:
> > Thanks very much for your post in response to mine of last week; I had
> > feared from the deafening silence that nobody wanted to talk about this
> > very interesting passage. I like very much what you say about the Sermon
> > on the Mount and I think it quite persuasive. One question: do you mean
> > from what you say about the dawning Kingdom of Heaven that Mt's
> > eschatology is largely "realized"?
>
> . . . [omitted introductory par.]
> I think my answer would be "no". The passage seems to reflect a
> interesting line of thought based on a balance of continuity and
> discontinuity. And this tension leads me to an "already but not yet"
> reading of the eschatology.
>
> So, take the power of those eight declarations - the beatitudes -
> at the start of the sermon. They are tremendous; it seems like
> a golden age of peace and happiness is about to sweep into history.
> And then bang: the ninth beatitude. Jesus warns his hearers that
> those who follow him can expect insults and persecutions directed
> against them. Just as it was for the prophets before, so it will
> be for them. Yet the fact is still that they are blessed people; they
> are part of the kingdom. But at the moment they rejoice not
> in seen benefits but in unseen ones: rewards in heaven. Already
> Jesus' hearers are blessed people but not yet have the full
> kingdom benefits arrived for them (they are still praying "your kingdom
> come").
>
> Now this same tension seems to be in v17 onwards. The law and the
> prophets still stand; this is not a time for their removal. Indeed the
> law stands until heaven and earth disappear. Yet something very
> important has changed. The law now reaches full potential because Jesus
> comes "to fulfil". Then we get the passages discussing what "was said"
> followed by "but I tell you".
>
> I hope that answers your question Carl. I realise that many other
> questions abound but then this thread has only just started ...
I am in accord with this reading of the eschatology of Mt 5 (I raised the
issue originally in response to your phrasing about this teaching
reflecting the "dawning of the Kingdom" (or a similar phrase). And I
think this is consistent with the eschatology of the gospel as a whole;
as I read Mt 24-25, the delay of the parousia is envisioned in the
parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins (and in general in these
chapters), and also in the Parables of the Kingdom in chap 13. Yet the
"already" element would appear to be involved in Mt's use of the term
"Kingdom of Heaven" to refer to the church community as an incipient
nucleus of the people of the age-to-come.
I might reply briefly to the short-lived thread that Ken Litwack
initiated in an inquiry that was apparently unclear or misunderstood. I
don't think this gospel is addressed directly and specifically at/to Jews
nor to Gentiles either AS SUCH, but rather to a church community which
understands itself as the "True Israel", the legitimate heir to the
descendants of Abraham, hearers and doers of the teachings of Rabbi
Jesus, keepers of the treasure of Old Israel as well as that of the New
(13:52). I don't mean by this to extend the discussion of Mt 5 into a
general discussion of Matthew, but simply to assume a stance toward that
question on which there was some exchange of views.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
------------------------------
From: Greg Doudna <gdoudna@ednet1.osl.or.gov>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 08:50:52 -0800
Subject: Pastoral epistles inquiry
Is there anyone on this list who can evaluate the argument
presented in 1921 by P.N. Harrison, _The Problem of the Pastoral
Epistles_? Harrison's thesis is that the pastorals as such are
linguistically different from and later than the rest of the
Pauline corpus, but (here's the intriguing part) five genuine
Pauline letters can be identified within the pastorals which all
are locatable within the known activities of Paul prior to 62,
and which _do_ agree in incidental linguistic markers with the
rest of the Pauline corpus. The five "genuine notes" per
Harrison are: Titus 3:12-15; 2 Tim 4:13-15, 20, 21a;
2 Tim 4:16-18a (?18b); 2 Tim 4:9-12, 22b; and finally a
"Farewell Letter" in the early part of 2 Timothy from Paul
to Timothy just before Paul's execution (c. 62).
Naively, Harrison's argument makes sense to me. Can anyone
provide some critical reaction or perhaps more recent
discussion?
Greg Doudna
Marylhurst College
West Linn, Oregon
- --
------------------------------
From: Donald Livingston <deljr@u.washington.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 10:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: arsenokoitai
Colleagues,
This last year I came across John Boswell's "Christianity, Social
Tolerance and Homosexuality" (1981) in the first appendix of
which the author argues that it is unlikely that 'arsenokoitai'
(1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10) during Paul's time meant generally
'homosexuals', but more likely meant something like 'male
prostitutes'. I wish to evaluate his line of reasoning and
would appreciate any input you have on the following questions:
1-- Are there any manuscripts from the first three centuries AD
where the meaning of 'arsenokoitai' is either clearly
indicated or reasonably clearly deducible?
2-- Are you aware of any appraisals of Boswell's argumentation?
Bibliographic references would be most helpful.
Allow me to specify that there are two things in which I am not
interested:
a-- I am not interested in a list discussion of homosexuality
per se, but only in issues relating to the question of how
we know what the word 'arsenokoitai' meant during Paul's
time.
b-- I am not interested in a simple root analysis of the word
itself.
I look forward to your thoughtful responses. DL.
------------------------------
From: William Brooks <wjbrooks@olympus.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 10:24:23 -0800
Subject: AN ALMAH OFFER
I have sent the chapter to those who have requested it. However, two of
those who requested it did not receive it because I think I wrote their
addresses down wrong. If you requested the information and did not receive
it and your address looks _something_ like this, please contact me so that I
can fet it right : )
pcepuch@diagl.iac.honeywell.com
oofjdolak@suvc.bsu.edu
Thanks,
William Brooks
wjbrooks@olympus.net
------------------------------
From: William Brooks <wjbrooks@olympus.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:13:33 -0800
Subject: AN ALMAH OFFER
Another address I had difficulty with was:
kb4mt@andrew.cmu.edu
Is this you? Please contact me.
William Brooks
wjbrooks@olympus.net
------------------------------
From: David Coomler <davidco@nethost.multnomah.lib.or.us>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:51:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: arsenokoitai
On Mon, 16 Jan 1995, Donald Livingston wrote:
>
> This last year I came across John Boswell's "Christianity, Social
> Tolerance and Homosexuality" (1981) in the first appendix of
> which the author argues that it is unlikely that 'arsenokoitai'
> (1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10) during Paul's time meant generally
> 'homosexuals', but more likely meant something like 'male
> prostitutes'. I wish to evaluate his line of reasoning and
> would appreciate any input you have on the following questions:
>
> 1-- Are there any manuscripts from the first three centuries AD
> where the meaning of 'arsenokoitai' is either clearly
> indicated or reasonably clearly deducible?
>
> 2-- Are you aware of any appraisals of Boswell's argumentation?
> Bibliographic references would be most helpful.
It will be interesting to see the responses you get (I hope). One
possible (but indefinite) point against Boswell's understanding is
that Paul may have been referring to the Greek of Leviticus
18:22, and that the term is derived thus:
"Kai meta arsenos ou koimEthEsE koitEn gunaikeian..."
(arseno) (koitai)
That is, however, only a possibility, and one should certainly build no
structure of understanding only upon that rather sandy foundation.
David
------------------------------
From: Heraclitos Christos Nickolaidis <heraclit@athena.compulink.forthnet.gr>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 23:49:33 +0200 (EET)
Subject: Re: arsenokoitai
David Coomler said:
>"Kai meta arsenos ou koimEthEsE koitEn gunaikeian..."
> (arseno) (koitai)
..and that's exactly the meaning. The man who only sleep in men
quarters (eg a kalogEros). It comes from Arren->Arsenikos and Koitwv.
********************************************************************
* * "antitetradia tis ekpaedeysis" *
* * Heraclitos Christos Nickolaidis *
* * Heraclit@Athena.compulink.forthnet.gr *
********************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 16:24:32 CST
Subject: Re: arsenokoitai
On Mon, 16 Jan 1995, Donald Livingston <deljr@u.washington.edu> asked,
among other things:
>1-- Are there any manuscripts from the first three centuries AD
> where the meaning of 'arsenokoitai' is either clearly
> indicated or reasonably clearly deducible?
Donald--
This is an interesting question. The word is not found in the LXX. It is not
discussed in TDNT (I was surprised that not even arshn is discussed there; I
guess there is nothing theological about males).
Arndt & Gingrich list five ancient references besides 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim.
1:10:
Bardesanes in Eusebius _Praeparatio Evangelica_ 6.10.25
_Anthologia Palatina_ 9.686.5 (ed. by F. Dubner 1864-72); also in LSJ and MM
_Catalogus Codicum Astrologorum Graecorum_ VIII 4 p. 196, 6; 8
Polycarp to the Philippians 5:3 (basically a quote from 1 Cor. 6:9 in a list of
sexual sins)
the verb form arsenokoitein is found in Sibylline Oracles 2.73 quoted by MM:
mh arsenodoitein, mh sukofantein, nhte foneuein
not to practice homosexuality, not to slander, and not to murder
I apologize if I have begged the question in the above translation but AG gives
the translation as "a male homosexual, pederast, sodomite" and LSJ as
"sodomite." I defer to the lexicographers who presumably have looked at the
sources until further evidence comes in. --Bruce
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #545
*****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu