[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #745
b-greek-digest Friday, 9 June 1995 Volume 01 : Number 745
In this issue:
Greek Fonts
Re: Porneia
Intro to texts
Re: Porneia
Re: Intro to texts
How to UnSubscribe
Re: Porneia
Re: Intro to texts
Re: Intro to texts
More on Mark
Re: palaeography and p75
Re: How to UnSubscribe
Re: Resurrection appearances
Midrashim and Gospels
Reductio ad concubinum
Re: Porneia
Re: palaeography and p75
Re: Porneia
Re: Porneia
Off-line
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: George Chryssogelos <geo@prometheus.hol.gr>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 11:07:32 +0200 (GMT+0200)
Subject: Greek Fonts
I would like to know how many greek multi-accent (polytonic) fonts there
are available out there ... for MAC-IBM .
Also, if and how, could i have the font table of the following fonts:
KADMOS
ATTIKA
ATHENIAN
BOSPOROS
Thank you
George Chryssogelos
Athens - Greece
------------------------------
From: "Gregory Jordan (ENG)" <jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 08:44:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Porneia
To tie up a few loose threads in the thread, ...
On Thu, 8 Jun 1995, Larry W. Hurtado wrote:
> Also, please disagree with what I've stated, not what you wrongly
> impute to me. I have stated that "porneia" is used as the broader term,
> in various contexts connoting various sexual sins, including adultery,
> while "moicheia" seems to be used more restrictedly for "adultery"
> properly so called. In this sense, "porneia" seems to function much like
> the Hebrew "zenut", which likewise has a rather flexible range of
> connotations.
Larry, I understand you to be saying that porneia included adultery, but
that it also necessarily included other sexual sins. I think you mistook
the way I made my point. Is this correct? - that in the Matthew passage
you mean Matthew is referring to adultery *as well as* other sexual sins,
any other sexual sins? If that is the case, then my response stands: I
don't think the context supports any meaning further than simple
adultery. But I haven't read the article, only _your_ explanation, so I'll
suspend any further comment.
> = meaning for all practical purposes. I have already indicated how we
> can determine word-meanings: viz. by reading them in the context of the
> discourse-world of the texts in which they occur. Thus, we look for the
> sexual practices and mores reflected in the NT and then we can tell what
> they mean when they refer to "porneia", which is often used in the NT
> rhetorically for things in addition to/other than "prostitution"--e.g.,
> Rev 22:15.
I hate to use the much-abused term, but this sounds exactly like
eisegesis. You decide in advance what porneia will mean in the NT, and
when you look in the NT, voila, it means that. The OT and Jewish
traditional morality in NT times is certainly a relevant context, but I
would not use it to determine in advance what NT authors are arguing -
after all, they are Christian Jews, a strange animal of the time. My
assumption is that Paul is wrecking havoc with many practices and mores
of his world - kashrut, sabbath, circumcision, etc. Acts 15 (esp. 15:30)
shows the prohibition of porneia being introduced explicitly to
*simplify* and reduce the obligation of observing the OT law. I think it
is very unlikely that we are to read behind porneia the entirety of OT
sexual legislation. And I would not allow any considerations for
theology (Seventh Day Adventist or other) to dissuade me in objectively
historicizing this development.
> Greg, As you don't reply to my comments about Lev, I assume you
> now accept them. As to 1 Cor 5:1, I never stated Paul was "citing" Lev,
> only that the ref. to the sexual relationship as a man having "his
> father's wife" seems (to many exegetes in fact) to be wording influenced
> by Lev 18:8. Again, I respectfully request that you deal with arguments
> offered, and not erect straw-man ones. Thus, the presence or absence of
> porneia in Lev. 18 is *quite* beside the point, for example.
Your comments about Lev. are commonplaces, their relevance to 1 Cor. 5:1
is beyond my comprehension. "His father's wife", as simple a descriptive
phrase as it is, is not really in Lev. 18:8, which is "askhEmosunEn
gunaikos patros sou ouk apokalupseis: askhEmosunE patros sou estin." 1
Cor. 5:1 is "gunaika tina tou patros ekhein." The distinctive Levitical
phrases, askhEmosunEn akopolupsai, are missing, and the description of
incest 18:6 AnthrOpos anthrOpos pros panta oikeia sarkos autou ou
proseleusetai apokalupsai askhEmosunEn" has no resonance in 1 Cor. 5.
Again, I think it is much more likely that Paul is condemning this
instance of incest, which is also a case of adultery, as a specially bad
form of adultery, porneia. He does not seem to take for granted that his
audience would be familiar with a more particular prohibition; he even
uses other broad terms with even less Mosaic resonance: to ergon touto
(2), touto (3), ton ponEron (13), etc. His argument (8) is to abstract
principles, not to a set of specific sexual laws from the OT invoked by
porneia.
And I do not see how Rev. 22:15 refers to something *more than* (even if
including) adultery/prostitution. But I feel soon we'll be hearing about
the Sexually Immoral Woman of Babylon in chapter 17.
Greg Jordan
jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu
------------------------------
From: Arlen.P.Walker@jci.com
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 1995 08:20 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Intro to texts
This has probably been asked before, so my apologies in advance for repeating
the question.
I've decided I need to know more about the history of the NT itself (yes, it's
partly due to the dating discussions that have been going on). I'm looking for a
good introduction to the NT texts (including the Peshitta): what they are, where
they're from, what's their history, how are they dated, what are their strong
and weak points. It's probably asking too much to find all that in one volume,
but I'll ask for it anyway. :{>} (Multiple-volume recommendations will also be
cheerfully accepted.)
Thanks, BTW, for all the good info that's been flowing on this list. Due
entirely to answers to previous questioners, I went out and picked up Mounce's
grammar and workbook. I'm not far into it (yet) but I've already decided I won't
regret parting with the funds.
Thanks in advance for your recommendations.
Have fun,
Arlen
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 124
Arlen.P.Walker@JCI.Com
- ----------------------------------------------
In God we trust; all others must provide data.
- ----------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: GAlanC@aol.com
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 09:50:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Porneia
Thanks to all who responded to the porneia thread. My understanding of the
term seems to be in line with what the majority of persons on this list
suggest.
My particular interest was in a proposition made by a few individuals on my
denominations list that since there was no explicit condemnation of sex
outside the bonds of marriage that pastor and others had no biblical basis
for instructing the youth to abstain form sexual relations outside of
marriage.
It seems that in a world which is lost and confused about life, the church,
in many aspects, had chosen to cave in to the cultural milieu instead of
being true to God and the Word.
Thanks again
Grace and Peace,
Alan Cassady
AOL - GAlanC@aol.com
Montgomery, AL
June 8, 1995
8:50 am
------------------------------
From: Larry Chouinard <fa78935@kcc.edu>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 10:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Intro to texts
Arlen,
I just recently received Arthur G. Patzia, The Making of the NT, from
InterVarsity Press. I have not had the time to go through it with any
detail, but on the surface it looks like a good intro into the origin,
collection, and canonicity of the text. You might check it out.
Hope this helps.
Larry Chouinard
Kentucky Christian College
On Fri, 9 Jun 1995 Arlen.P.Walker@jci.com wrote:
> This has probably been asked before, so my apologies in advance for repeating
> the question.
>
> I've decided I need to know more about the history of the NT itself (yes, it's
> partly due to the dating discussions that have been going on). I'm looking for a
> good introduction to the NT texts (including the Peshitta): what they are, where
> they're from, what's their history, how are they dated, what are their strong
> and weak points. It's probably asking too much to find all that in one volume,
> but I'll ask for it anyway. :{>} (Multiple-volume recommendations will also be
> cheerfully accepted.)
>
> Thanks, BTW, for all the good info that's been flowing on this list. Due
> entirely to answers to previous questioners, I went out and picked up Mounce's
> grammar and workbook. I'm not far into it (yet) but I've already decided I won't
> regret parting with the funds.
>
> Thanks in advance for your recommendations.
>
> Have fun,
> Arlen
> Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
> DNRC 124
>
> Arlen.P.Walker@JCI.Com
> ----------------------------------------------
> In God we trust; all others must provide data.
> ----------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------
From: Mike Adams <mikadams@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 07:12:51 -0700
Subject: How to UnSubscribe
For those who are interested, a repost from your welcome letter:
If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,
you can send mail to "Majordomo@virginia.EDU" with the following
command in the body of your email message:
unsubscribe b-greek (Plus your name and e-mail address)
Hope this helps.
Ellen
Wife of Mike
------------------------------
From: "Larry W. Hurtado" <hurtado@cc.umanitoba.ca>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 09:27:24 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Porneia
On Thu, 8 Jun 1995, Michael I Bushnell wrote:
>
> The NT
> doesn't describe much about sexual mores and practices at all, except
> for Paul's hesitancy about marriage, Paul's concern about prostitution
> (particularly with a non-Christian prostitute), and the like.
>
All I can say is that there is in fact a good deal more available in the
NT on the subject of sexual rights 'n wrongs than you imply--whether we
want to observe them still is another matter. But, as there are book
length treatments of sexual ethics in the NT, I do not find it necessary
to proceed further here.
Larry Hurtado, Religion, Univ. of Manitoba
------------------------------
From: "James D. Ernest" <ernest@mv.mv.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 10:30:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Intro to texts
I'm sure someone else will provide info on some basic works, including
the latest introduction of Metzger's The Text of the New Testament.
For the texts that were available at the time, B. F. Wescott and F. J. A.
Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek, is
still interesting; but if you're only going to look at one book, it
should be one of the newer ones. W & H, as I understand it, laid the
groundwork for all subsequent work to produce an eclectic text of the
NT, though some these days are more inclined than others to acknowledge
the debt.
If you like picture books (i.e., pictures of actual MS pages), don't
forget Bruce M. Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction
to Palaeography (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1981), which has plates
and descriptions for 45 MSS and chapters on the Greek alphabet,
pronunciation, ancient book-making, the transcribing of MSS, and
special features of biblical mss (nomina sacra, the Eusebian canons,
etc.)
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
James D. Ernest Joint Doctoral Program
Manchester, New Hampshire, USA Andover-Newton/Boston College
Internet: ernest@mv.mv.com Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
------------------------------
From: Nichael Lynn Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 11:13:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Intro to texts
At 8:20 AM 09/06/95, Arlen.P.Walker@jci.com wrote:
>This has probably been asked before, so my apologies in advance for repeati=
ng
>the question.
>
>I've decided I need to know more about the history of the NT itself (yes, i=
t's
>partly=7F=7F=7F due to the dating discussions that have been going on). I'm
>looking for a
>good introduction to the NT texts (including the Peshitta): what they are,
>where
>they're from, what's their history, how are they dated, what are their stro=
ng
>and weak points. It's probably asking too much to find all that in one volu=
me,
>but I'll ask for it anyway. :{>} (Multiple-volume recommendations will also=
be
>cheerfully accepted.)
Arlen
One very recent book that you might consider is _The Text of the NT in
Contemporary Research_. This book, edited by Bart Ehrman and Michael
Holmes, was published earlier this year as a _Festschrift_ in honor of
Bruce M Metzger's eightieth birthday. It is a collection of 22 essays, as
the subtitile says, "...on the _Status Quaestionis_". As such it supplies
a good survey of the current state of textual criticism.
(As a note, I'd like to say that personally I'm finding this book in all
respects wonderful. Each of the only two essays that I've had time to read
in detail so far --I'm in the middle of a major software release crunch--
Eldon Jay Epp's survey of the Papyrus data and Daniel B. Wallace's overview
and critique of the Majority Text theory, have each been worth the price of
the book.)
=46or that matter, now that Metzger's name has been mentioned, you might wis=
h
to consider three of his books that, taken together, provide very good
coverage of most of the issues that you raise above:
_The Text of the NT: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration (3rd ed)_
_The Canon of the NT: Its Origin, Development and Significance_
_The Early Versions of the NT: Their Origin, Transmission and Limitations_
All three are published by Oxford.
Hope this helps
Nichael -- Do not trust in these deceptive
nichael@sover.net words: "This is the
temple of the
Paradise Farm Lord, the temple of the Lord, the
Brattleboro VT temple of the Lord".
------------------------------
From: "Marmorstein, Art" <marmorsa@wolf.northern.edu>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 95 10:12:00 CDT
Subject: More on Mark
Carl rightly notes that most ancient literary works were intended for public
reading, and the classical examples he cites do show that an ancient audience
might have the patience for things like Matthew's genealogies. Even modern
audiences will put up with an occasional epic-length production of something
like Wagner's "Ring" cycle.
But audiences (whether ancient or modern) must have some special reason
before they will sit through a long performance. Yes, someone who is already
a Christian might sit through a reading of Matthew or Luke. But someone who
is merely curious about Christianity as one of many new religious cults needs
something more like Mark.
In what context was the Gospel of Mark read? Figure this out, and one may be
able to see also why Mark may have cut things like the Sermon on the Mount.
One thing is clear, and that is that Mark did omit some of the things he knew
Jesus taught. For instance, Mark introduces his account of the Parable of
the Sower (Mark 4) by saying explicitly that Jesus taught *many* things by
parables--but he gives only a few examples before saying "and with many such
parables spake He the word unto them, as they were able to hear it." Mark,
then, doesn't tell us everything he knows of Jesus.
But, again, in what context was Mark usually read? Prior to communion? As
part of the instruction of catechumens? To godfearers interested in hearing
the Gospel? Someone (Barclay?) has suggested that Mark is deliberately left
unfinished because, in public presentation, the ending was improvised and
adapted to different audiences. This seems to me a possibility worth
seriously considering.
In any case, I really would like to know what list members think is the
context of public readings of Mark. What preceded the reading of such a
work? What followed immediately after? Anyone have any ideas?
------------------------------
From: David Moore <dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 08:51:12 -0700
Subject: Re: palaeography and p75
Vincent Broman (broman@nosc.mil) quoted and wrote:
>
>perry.stepp@chrysalis.org asked:
>> Do these "idiosyncracies" continue throughout p75?
>
>All that you mentioned are common mis-spellings found in manuscripts,
>except possibly MARTURION for MARTURIAN, which is still not
astounding.
>They are so common that they are generally ignored by collators.
>Since that kind of misspelling is mostly caused by scribes who spell
by ear,
>they get more common in the middle ages when more Greek vowels
>get confounded.
>
Although Perry's observations include mainly common mis-spellings,
it is worthwhile to note each scribe's habits on these and other
matters. If, for instance, one comes across a variant in p75 that
depends on substitution of a single nu for the doubled letter, one can
know that the chances are good that it depends on a difference in
spelling rather than meaning.
Those interested in this matter might want to check out a couple of
articles by E. C. Colwell which are: "Method in Evaluating Scribal
Habits: A Study of P45,P66,P75," in _Studies in Methodology in Textual
Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 106-124, New Testament Tools and
Studies Series, ed. Bruce Metzger, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969); and
"Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Dorruption of the
Text," in _The Bible in Modern Scholarship_, pp. 370-389, ed. J. P.
Hyatt (New York: Abington, 1965). Maybe someone with access to an
ample reference library might be able to cite some more up-to-date
work.
David L. Moore Director of Education
Miami, FL, USA Southeastern Spanish District
Dvdmoore@ix.netcom.com of the Assemblies of God
------------------------------
From: "Paul J. Bodin" <pjbodin@sirius.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 95 09:05:01 EDT
Subject: Re: How to UnSubscribe
On Fri, 9 Jun 1995 07:12:51 -0700 Ellen, Wife of Mike wrote:
>If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,
>you can send mail to "Majordomo@virginia.EDU" with the following
>command in the body of your email message:
>
> unsubscribe b-greek (Plus your name and e-mail address)
Note also that the "(Plus your name and e-mail address)" is optional
*only* if your name and address (*and* sometimes your mail software) are
unchanged from the time you subscribed. If your address or mailer has
changed, even if your system administrator changed it without your
knowledge, you must send the unsubscribe command along with your
*former* name and address in order for it to succeed. This is the
source of most of the unsubscribe troubles on lists like ours,
particularly since system administrators love to tinker with mailing
addresses, aliases and such.
_______________________________________________________________________
Paul J. Bodin Internet: pjbodin@sirius.com
Seminary Pastor smail: 1333 66th Street
Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary Berkeley, CA 94702
------------------------------
From: INGBERMAN@cua.edu
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 1995 12:30:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Resurrection appearances
On Thu, 8 Jun 1995, David Moore wrote:
>
> His observation that, "*Resurrection appearances* (as
> distinguished . . . from other visions of the glorified Jesus)
> functioned *to accredit apostolic witnesses* as well as to validate
> Jesus' resurrection," is certainly correct. Nevertheless, since (as he
> implies) the set of resurrection witnesses is identical to the set of
> apostolic witnesses, it could be misleading to think that citation of
> resurrection appearances is always *equally* functioning both to affirm
> or define the resurrection *and* to accredit apostolic witness. One
> could not discuss the resurrection appearances of Christ at all without
> some reference (however oblique) to the apostle, or apostles, who
> witnessed them; so, perforce, mention of the resurrection appearances
> calls for mention of the apostles.
>
True. Otherwise the women would have to be considered apostles, yes?
In peace,
Myosurus
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 95 12:58 CDT
Subject: Midrashim and Gospels
Tim Staker (aka Timster) suggested that midrash pervades
Mark's gospel. Craig Evans has commented plausibly on
the relation between midrashim and NT gospels in "Luke and
the Rewritten Bible: Aspects of Lukan Hagiography," in
J.H. Charlesworth & C.A. Evans, eds., *The Pseudepigrapha
and Early Biblical Interpretation* (Sheffield: JSOT,
1993), and in "Midrash," in *Dictionary of Jesus and
the Gospels*, eds. I.H. Marshall et al. (IVP, 1992),
pp. 544-48. See also the opening chapter in Evans and
James Sanders, *Luke and Scripture* (Fortress, 1993).
It is arguable (following B.D. Chilton and others) that
some parts of the NT gospels are midrashic and targumic,
but there's no evidence that they are pervasively so.
The burden of argument is surely upon the commentator
who thinks otherwise. The essays by Evans shed much
light on this topic.--Paul Moser, Loyola University
of Chicago.
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 95 14:04 CDT
Subject: Reductio ad concubinum
Note that 1Cor 9:15 explodes the Pauline concubine
hypothesis floated on this list. The antecedent of
"oudeni toutwn" is clearly the previous talk of the
various "rights" listed (so NRSV and NIV). Surely
Paul would have come across as a fool if, in reply
to vv. 5, 15, the Corinthians could have called
attention to an ever-present Pauline concubine.
There's nothing puzzling about v.5 once we note
that Paul is contrasting some obvious rights
exercised by certain other leaders but not by
himself. Perhaps I may venture a simple, if
unpopular, exegetical guideline: Offer no
exegesis that makes Paul out to be a complete
fool (especially when alternative exegesis is
perfectly sensible).--Paul Moser, Loyola University
of Chicago.
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carlson <ropes!scc@uu3.psi.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 95 22:31:23 EDT
Subject: Re: Porneia
Michael I Bushnell wrote:
> Can <porneia> include, say, sex between people engaged to be married?
What about Jn8:41, hHMEIS EK PORNEIAS OU GEGENNHMEQA ("we are not born
out of PORNEIAI"), with the inference they may have been referring to
the circumstances of the Virgin Birth?
I'm also trying to figure out why PORNEIA is a part of the resolution of
the Council of Jerusalem (Ac15:20 29 21:25) and what it refers to. One
theory is that since it is coupled with the prohibition of eating blood,
the terms of the resolution refer back to Noah's covenant which forbade
eating blood (cf. Gn9:4). Shortly afterwards, Noah cursed Canaan (v25)
for something connected to sex (v22). So, isn't possible that in this
context PORNEIA could refer to all the sexual practices of the Canaanites
for which the LORD cast them out of their land (see Lv18)?
Stephen Carlson
- --
Stephen Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, : ICL, Inc.
scc@reston.icl.com : and songs chant the words. : 11490 Commerce Park Dr.
(703) 648-3330 : Shujing 2:35 : Reston, VA 22091 USA
------------------------------
From: Jeff Kloha <kloha@sauron.multiverse.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 95 16:45:45 EDT
Subject: Re: palaeography and p75
On Thu, 08 Jun 95 14:29:35 Perry Stepp wrote:
[omit material]
>
>1.) Do these "idiosyncracies" continue throughout p75? I can't get
>to a good library for the next few days, or I'd look it up myself.
>
David Moore added:
> Those interested in this matter might want to check out a couple of
>articles by E. C. Colwell which are: "Method in Evaluating Scribal
>Habits: A Study of P45,P66,P75," in _Studies in Methodology in Textual
>Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 106-124, New Testament Tools and
>>"Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Dorruption of the
>Text," in _The Bible in Modern Scholarship_, pp. 370-389, ed. J. P.
>Hyatt (New York: Abington, 1965). Maybe someone with access to an
>ample reference library might be able to cite some more up-to-date
>work.
[omit material]
An excellent study of the major papyri (p45, p46, p47, p66, p72, p75)
is:
AUTHOR: Royse, James Ronald.
TITLE: Scribal habits in early Greek New Testament papyri /
YEAR: 1983 1981
PUB TYPE: Book
FORMAT: 2 v. (iv, 746 leaves)
NOTES: Thesis (Th.D.)--Graduate Theological Union, 1981.
Bibliography: leaves 725-746.
Photocopy. Ann Arbor : University Microfilms, 1983. 21 cm.
SUBJECT: Bible. -- N.T. -- Manuscripts. -- Greek.
Bible. -- N.T. -- Criticism, Textual.
Manuscripts, Greek (Papyri)
Paleography, Greek.
Royse analyzes all the singular readings of p45, p46, p47, p66, p72,
p75 to determine the scribes' tendencies in copying. Of the variants
you cite, Royse ignores all but John 1:7 as insignificant for
determining scribal tendencies. His interesting conclusion re p75 is
that the scribe was careful in making the copy, but not as careful as
some text critics claim, and no more careful than, e.g., the scribe of
p66, who is customarily regarded as sloppy.
Unfortunately, Royse' dissertation has not been published. It is
available from UMI (800) 521-0600. 4 years ago it cost around $35 to
get a hard copy, but it is worth it for this work of almost 750 pages.
Or there's always ILL. He did publish a few observations as: "Scribal
Habits in the Transmission of New Testament Texts," in _The Critical
Study of Sacred Texts_, ed. Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (Berkeley, CA:
Berkeley Religious Studies Series. Graduate Theological Union, 1979):
139-161, but of course without the detail.
Hope staring at those plate hasn't dried out your eyeballs!
///////+\\\\\\\
Jeff Kloha [] Lakewood, OH
kloha@po.multiverse.com [] KCICXC
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 95 13:53:51 PDT
Subject: Re: Porneia
Stephen Carlson wrote:
> Michael I Bushnell wrote:
> > Can <porneia> include, say, sex between people engaged to be married?
>
> What about Jn8:41, hHMEIS EK PORNEIAS OU GEGENNHMEQA ("we are not born
> out of PORNEIAI"), with the inference they may have been referring to
> the circumstances of the Virgin Birth?
>
> I'm also trying to figure out why PORNEIA is a part of the resolution of
> the Council of Jerusalem (Ac15:20 29 21:25) and what it refers to. One
> theory is that since it is coupled with the prohibition of eating blood,
> the terms of the resolution refer back to Noah's covenant which forbade
> eating blood (cf. Gn9:4). Shortly afterwards, Noah cursed Canaan (v25)
> for something connected to sex (v22). So, isn't possible that in this
> context PORNEIA could refer to all the sexual practices of the Canaanites
> for which the LORD cast them out of their land (see Lv18)?
>
> Stephen Carlson
>
I am under the impression that what the Council in Acts 15 forbids
aligns closely with what would go on in a pagan temple. I wouldn't
want to limit porneia's meaning on that basis. The idea that since a
word isn't explained in the NT, in terms of showing all that it might
refer to, it thus does not refer to those things and we can't look
elsewhere to know what that very common word means, to me seems
rather puzzling as a methodology. I also might point out that in 1 Tim.,
PAUL seems to suggest that only older widows should be taken care of,
since young widows are more likely to be unfaithful and become involved
in inappropriate sexual situations. Nothing in that context anywhere
suggests that it is with married men. So if this activity is not
covered by porneia, what word would it be covered by? The use of a word
does not tell you all that the author might mean by that word.
Ken Litwak
Emeryville, CA
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 1995 16:24:35 CST
Subject: Re: Porneia
On Fri, 9 Jun 1995, Gregory Jordan wrote about 1 Cor 5:
>Again, I think it is much more likely that Paul is condemning this
>instance of incest, which is also a case of adultery, as a specially bad
>form of adultery, porneia.
Greg--
You seem to be assuming that the man's father is still alive and married to
the woman. The text does not indicate this, or its converse either. Many
commentaries on this indicate that the father had most likely either divorced
the woman or had died, since the offender had (Greek _echein_ 'to have,' a
term usually used for marriage or concubinage) the woman. This is probably
not a case of polyandry. Either way, this would not be adultery, since she
would no longer be married to the father. But it would still be something not
practiced even among the Gentiles. As Gaius notes in his _Institutes_ (1.63):
"Again, I may not marry a woman who was previously my mother-in-law or
daughter-in-law or step-daughter or step-mother."
- --Bruce
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: "Larry W. Hurtado" <hurtado@cc.umanitoba.ca>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 17:24:13 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Off-line
I'm off to a weeklong commitment tomorrow, so I won't be able to respond
to any messages till after the 19th.
It looks like the only way to suspend mail on this list is to unsubscribe
and then re-subscribe. I'd hoped we had some sort of mail-supension
command. Maybe the list-owner could put this in the suggestion box.
Larry Hurtado, religion, Univ. of Manitoba
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #745
*****************************
** 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