[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #750
b-greek-digest Tuesday, 13 June 1995 Volume 01 : Number 750
In this issue:
Re: Who was short? (Lk 19:3)
Re: BG: transliteration schemes
Problems in the Christ Hymn (Phil 2:4-11)
The Christ Hymn
Re: The Christ Hymn
Re: #1(2) b-greek-digest V1 #749
Re: RE:Porneia (in Matt 19:9)
more on the alphabet
TEI workshop
Re: more on the alphabet
Re: Mark and Midrash
Re: more on the alphabet
Phil. 2 Again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nichael Lynn Cramer <nichael@sover.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 06:43:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Who was short? (Lk 19:3)
At 11:33 PM 12/06/95, Nichael Lynn Cramer wrote:
> [...]
My apology for sending to the entire list a reponse meant for Mr Ernest.
N
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 09:57:26 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: BG: transliteration schemes
Perhaps I ought to include the original posting, but I will assume that
the interested parties all got Bruce's message. I have only a couple
comments on Bruce's work, apart from the fact that it is beautifully laid
out!
(1) My own scheme is the second column in Bruce's chart; I just want to
note that I did not envision using the lower case at all, except to
indicate rough breathing, iota subscript, and digamma (which I hardly
think we'll ever seriously contemplate using on this list). I like using
the upper-case characters primarily because it sets off a transliterated
Greek text very clearly from the modern vernacular discussion, which is
almost always in English. I have tried to use this scheme consistently in
my own posts since our last discussion of transliteration schemes, and do
so in the lengthy note that I am about to post this morning. Bruce has
suggested modifications regarding the representation of Xi and Chi in
particular, to conform more to the Laser Greek standard; I prefer to use
J and X because it's closer to my own GreekKeys standard. However, I
don't believe that anyone using either of these two forms should have
been misunderstood by readers. Which brings me to my second point, one
raised at the time when I posted the alternatives earlier:
(2) There can be no thought of an attempt to enforce an "orthodoxy of
meta-orthography (or whatever else one wants to call a transliteration
scheme)" on our list. People have their own preferred methods and I would
not expect anyone to change them (as I don't want to change Xi and Chi).
A consensus on this matter would be theoretically achievable, but is it
that important? I don't really think so. I really think that the most
important thing is to be consistent in the scheme that one adopts; if
consistency is maintained in a post, I don't think those who know Greek
reasonably well should have any trouble figuring out what stands for what.
In sum, I say let's retain the freedom and flexibility of a pluralism
regarding "meta-orthography," just as we endeavor to retain an openness
to a pluralism of ideas and beliefs.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 10:10:32 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Problems in the Christ Hymn (Phil 2:4-11)
Perhaps not with the "fear and trembling" with which Paul urges believers=
=20
in Philippi to work out their own salvation, but nevertheless with=20
considerable trepidation, I want to propose some reflections on the=20
Christ Hymn in Philippians 2. Fundamentally, I am inclined toward the=20
view of a tiny minority (if anyone actually holds this view at all) that=20
the initial status of Jesus in the progression offered in the hymn is NOT=
=20
pre-existent Son of God but rather a Second Adam, the DEUTEROS ANQRWPOS=20
referred to in Romans 6 and 1 Cor 15--a human creature who sustains the=20
image of God that is in him by recognizing and acting out the proper=20
human role, that of a SERVANT, wherefore he is raised/exalted to the=20
status of KURIOS after his crucifixion and becomes the model of=20
AGE-TO-COME humanity. I did not invent this interpretation, nor do I know=
=20
who first suggested it, but I suspect I will find out very soon, once I=20
have loosed this message into the mails. I know that there is a mass of=20
literature on this, a major work being the _Carmen Christ_, the author of=
=20
which escapes me at the moment. What I really would like to see discussed=
=20
here is the problems I see with the use of the words MORFH and hARPAGMOS=20
in this passage. I certainly have no hinge of faith dependent on the=20
above interpretation of the text, but the text itself seems very=20
problematic to me, and I shall be grateful to the list for whatever=20
illumination its members may have to offer on my questions. That stated,=20
here goes:
Philippians 2:4b-11
5 TOUTO FRONEITE EN hUMIN hO KAI EN XRISTWi IHSOU, 6 hOS EN MORFHi
QEOU hUPARXWN OUX hARPAGMON hHGHSATO TO EINAI ISA QEWi, 7 ALLA hEAUTON
EKENWSEN MORFHN DOULOU LABWN, EN hOMOIWMATI ANQRWPWN GENOMENOS: KAI
SXHMATI hEUREQEIS ANQRWPOU 8 ETAPEINWSEN hEAUTON GENOMENOS hUPHKOOW
MEXRI QANATOU, QANATOU DE STAUROU.
5 Make this your shared intention [the intention amongst you], which
[intention] also [no verb: supply: "was", "you have" or the like] in
Christ Jesus, 6 who being in God's form (MORFHi) did not deem
pluckable (hARPAGMON) being on a par with God, 8 but emptied himself,
assuming the form (MORFHN) of a servant/slave, one born in the
likeness (hOMOIWMATI) of human beings; and when found in frame like a
human being, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to the point of
death, even death by crucifixion.
While Paul certainly wouldn't have cited this text if he had found
anything in it of which he disapproved, I think it's somewhat perilous
to rely too heavily upon this hymn for Paul's Christology--for two
reasons: (1) its style and language, except for perhaps the addition=20
of "even death on a cross" makes it seem likely that it is a Gentile
liturgical text that Paul cites, and in this context cites primarily
because of its emphasis on the Suffering Servant role of Jesus; (2)=20
The opening of this text is laden with very ambiguous language which
is usually interpreted in terms of Christ's heavenly pre-existence,
supposedly involving equality with God, although it doesn't really say
so. I really doubt whether Paul had a conception of Christ's heavenly
pre-existence. Moreover, I believe that the first part of the hymn can
be understood without reference to a heavenly pre-existence.
Nevertheless, I must admit that later parts of this text DO appear to
make more sense if one understands the first part in terms of
pre-existence, while parts of the first part don't make sense if one
DOES read them in terms of pre-existence.
The parts that are most problematic for my interpretation are verses
7b: particularly:
EN hOMOIWMATI ANQRWPWN GENOMENOS: KAI SXHMATI hEUREQEIS ANQRWPOU=20
(1) The word hOMOIWMA is troublesome because it suggests that the
appearance of Jesus as human is superficial, unreal, that the
"incarnate" state of Jesus was only an appearance: that is a gnostic
view, and it is hard to conceive of Paul acknowledging that the
humanity of Jesus was not real, but it is this that suggests that
maybe "being in God's form" in verse 6 really is a reference to
pre-existence after all.=20
(2) The phrase SXHMATI hEUREQEIS ANQRWPOU is troublesome because it
also suggests that the human state of Jesus was not real: "found like
a human being in shape/frame/outward appearance." So these are the
difficulties that (a) suggest that the Christ-hymn perhaps really does
begin with a declaration of Christ's pre-existence; unfortunately,
they also suggest that the human status of Jesus was less than
authentically human; and, from a soteriological viewpoint, it is hard
to see how a Christ-event without a fully human Christ can have any
saving value for humanity.
Now, to turn to my problems with reading the text in terms of
pre-existence and the interpretation of the Christ-hymn which I
personally find more persuasive:
To begin with, there are very difficult problems in the Greek text.
6 hOS EN MORFHi QEOU hUPARXWN ...
"who, being in [the] form of God ..."
What does MORFH QEOU mean? Some say it is the "essential nature of
being to whom MORFH belongs," and for this reason they assert that God
& Christ exist separately but in the same divine form: Christ's
essential nature in a pre-incarnate existence is the same as that of
God. But the problem is not solved by understanding morf=AE thus: why,
if MORFH means "essential nature" in 2:6, does it not mean the same
thing two verses later, when we read that Christ assumed the MORFH
DOULOU? Is there an "essential nature" of a slave?
... OUX hARPAGMON hHGHSATO TO EINAI ISA QEWi ...
"... did not consider being-equal-to-God a-thing-to-be-plucked, ...
What does the next clause mean? "he did not count equality w/ God a
thing to be plucked" The Greek literally says, "deemed not
being-on-a-par-with-God a-thing-to-be-plucked (hARPAGMON)." An
additional problem is that the word hARPAGMON is not found anywhere
else in extant Greek; clearly it derives from hARPAZW, "pluck," "grasp
in the hand." But if equality-with-God is something Jesus doesn't
deign to grasp, is it reasonable to suppose that it is something he
actually already has? =20
7 ALLA hEAUTON EKENWSEN MORFHN DOULOU LABWN,=20
" ... but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave/servant,...
Christ apparently initiated the important sequence by emptying
himself: of what? It is generally assumed that he emptied himself of
the form of God=CA, which is parallel to taking the form of a servant.=20
Did he in that case retain divinity? It is usually assumed that he did
retain it, even while assuming human status, servanthood. (the
Chalcedonian definition of Christ as "fully God, fully man" of 3
centuries later, is assumed to be already present in the text of a
Pauline letter!) Quite frankly, this seems problematic to me. The
problem is precisely with that word MORFH: if it really means "form
essential to a nature" then to say that Christ assumed the "essential
form" of a servant while retaining the "essential form" of God is
gobbledygook. But it is even worse, because it doesn't say morf=AF
=8Enyr=C5pou but MORFH DOULOU: I really don't think that the word MORFH=20
can mean "essential nature" in both places, and it may be that it
doesn't mean "essential nature" in either place.=20
8 ETAPEINWSEN hEAUTON GENOMENOS hUPHKOOW MEXRI QANATOU, QANATOU DE
STAUROU.=20
"... he humbled himself, having been obedient to the point of death,
death on a cross."
Isn't this problematic and paradoxical again? How can he become
"obedient to death"--i.e. how can he die, if he retains his divinity?
Is it consistent with the "essential nature" of divinity to die? On
the other hand, if the death is not a human death, how can it do
anything helpful to other human beings?
Paul uses the Gentile Christ-hymn primarily because it sets forth the
ethical model that is important to him at the outset of chapter
2--and if you're going to extrapolate from the Christ-hymn to Paul's
own Christology, the more important consideration is how Paul uses the
Christ-hymn. And the answer to that question is that he sees as most
characteristic of the model of Jesus the fact that he took the
self-renouncing role of an obedient servant of God, the role which
Jewish tradition and certainly Paul holds is the very pattern of
authentic human existence. That is, Paul introduces the "mind of
Christ" pattern to expound the model for the Philippians to follow as
they carry out the instructions which he offers in 2:1-4. Jesus shows
humanity what it means to be authentically human--and for this reason
God has exalted him.
An alternative interpretation of the Christ-hymn which seems to me
consistent with Pauline theology as it is found elsewhere in the
unquestioned letters of Paul (without a doctrine of pre-existence). In
this view, Jesus is de=E6terow =90nyrvpow; essentially human like all the
other descendants of Adam (=F5 pr=C7tow =90nyrvpow), he does not succumb, a=
s
did Adam, to the temptation to seize equality with God--to pluck
(=8Frp=8Bzein) it. The temptation that Adam succumbed to (Genesis 3-- "if
you eat of it, you will become like God=CA..."), Jesus resisted. Then
what does it mean to be in the form of God? I think it means what
Genesis 1 says: that man was created in the image of God. What Jesus
did was to resist the temptation to take advantage of the image of God
in himself to attempt to gain parity with God--the role of master--and
instead adopted the authentic human role of servant of
God--self-emptying, self-denying, self-sacrificing, obedient to the
point of execution; and it is as a consequence of that authentic human
role played out that God raised Jesus to the status of Lord and made
him the agent to exercise God's own authority over the created world.
This is an altogether different interpretation of this vexed Greek
text, but I believe it is consistent with the Greek text and avoids
the pitfalls, paradoxes and logical impossibilities of the
interpretation based upon the assumption of a heavenly pre-existence.
The opening of the hymn says nothing of pre-existence in heaven but
simply refers to "being in the form of God." According to Genesis 1,
all human beings are created in the "form of God."
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 95 11:47 CDT
Subject: The Christ Hymn
A consideration against Carl Conrad's reading of Phil. 2
is that the phrase "being found in human form" makes little
if any sense if it refers to one who has been only a human.
I.H. Marshall, Ben Witherington, and others have emphasized
this implication of the phrase. Consider Witherington,
*Jesus the Sage* (Fortress, 1994), p. 262: "Morphe suggests
the way in which a thing or person appears to one's senses.
However, morphe always signifies an outward form which
truly, accurately, and fully expresses the real being
which underlies it. Thus, when applied to Christ (in
v.6a) it must mean that he manifested a form that truly
represented the nature and very being of God. This is
why there is the further phrase, "the having equality to
God.".... Grammatically isa could be an adverb which
if translated as such would lead to an elliptical rendering
such as, "the being equally (something) to God."
Presumably the something is (indicated by) the phrase
en morphe theou from v.6a. Thus the expanded phrase
would mean, "the being equally in the form of God as
God is"." For further discussion of the hymn and
its interpretation by Hengel, Dunn, R.P. Martin (*Carmen
Christi*), and others, see Ben Witherington, *Paul's
Narrative Thought World* (Westminster, 1994), pp.
94-128. The latter gives references to some of
Larry Hurtado's publications on the hymn.--Paul Moser,
Loyola University of Chicago.
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 12:32:37 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: The Christ Hymn
On Tue, 13 Jun 1995, Paul Moser wrote:
> A consideration against Carl Conrad's reading of Phil. 2
> is that the phrase "being found in human form" makes little
> if any sense if it refers to one who has been only a human.
> I.H. Marshall, Ben Witherington, and others have emphasized
> this implication of the phrase. Consider Witherington,
> *Jesus the Sage* (Fortress, 1994), p. 262: "Morphe suggests
> the way in which a thing or person appears to one's senses.
> However, morphe always signifies an outward form which
> truly, accurately, and fully expresses the real being
> which underlies it. Thus, when applied to Christ (in
> v.6a) it must mean that he manifested a form that truly
> represented the nature and very being of God. This is
> why there is the further phrase, "the having equality to
> God.".... Grammatically isa could be an adverb which
> if translated as such would lead to an elliptical rendering
> such as, "the being equally (something) to God."
> Presumably the something is (indicated by) the phrase
> en morphe theou from v.6a. Thus the expanded phrase
> would mean, "the being equally in the form of God as
> God is"." For further discussion of the hymn and
> its interpretation by Hengel, Dunn, R.P. Martin (*Carmen
> Christi*), and others, see Ben Witherington, *Paul's
> Narrative Thought World* (Westminster, 1994), pp.
> 94-128. The latter gives references to some of
> Larry Hurtado's publications on the hymn.--Paul Moser,
> Loyola University of Chicago.
Thanks very much, Paul, and especially for the references. I was aware,
also, that a more propitious time to raise this issue might have been
while Larry Hurtado was not away. I do have, as I noted before, _Carmen
Christi_ (although I left off the essential genitive ending!). However,
the very text you cite above from Witherington discloses the problem I
have with MORFH: "... always signifies an outward form which truly,
accurately, and fully expresses the real being which underlies it ..."
If this is really so, then what in the world does MORFH DOULOU mean in
verse 7?
Moreover, however you understand TO EINAI ISA QEWi (and it is EINAI, not
EXEIN, which leaves me wondering how ISA should function adverbially), it
seems to me that hARPAGMON is hard to explain of an action of gaining or
achieving a status that supposedly one already has.
As I tried to indicate in my original text, it seems to me that
the language poses problems BOTH for my suggested view AND for the
traditional view. And ultimately, it's not which interpretation is better
favored by the Greek that I'm most concerned with here (I am fully ready
to accept the implication of whatever I can be shown to full satisfaction
is the correct MEANING of the Greek text), so much as the way the Greek
works in these crucial verses 6 and 7.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: DDDJ@aol.com
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 13:41:42 -0400
Subject: Re: #1(2) b-greek-digest V1 #749
Just thought I would mention that I am going off B-greek for the Summer. See
you in September.
Positive Dennis
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 12:51:22 CST
Subject: Re: RE:Porneia (in Matt 19:9)
On Mon, 12 Jun 1995, William Brooks wrote:
>(6) Jesus would contradict Himself within the same breath. In 19:6, the
>present imperative chorizeto (seperate) is used with the aorist suzeugnumi
>(to bind together). In effect, Jesus says, "What God has bound together in
>time past let no one separate in an ongoing manner." Jesus would not state
>that marriage in permanent and then state it may be broken.
William--
If my memory serves me right, A.T. Robertson made the claim that a negative
plus a present imperative usually meant quit doing something that is already
being done. This would make the passage mean, "Quit separating what God has
bound."
- --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: Vincent Broman <broman@np.nosc.mil>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 95 10:56:42 PDT
Subject: more on the alphabet
After reading here about transliteration of greek, I was looking at
the Unicode standard in the greek parts and wondered about the terms used.
Can anyone fill in the question mark parts, or correct these definitions?
ano teleia ?
aristeri keraia lower numeral sign, to the left
dasia rough breathing
dexia keraia upper numeral sign, to the right
dialytika diaeresis
digamma BETA=V, looks like long F, sounds like w, =vau.
koppa BETA=#3, numeral=90, sounds like qoph?
koronis ?
macron long vowel
oxia acute accent
perispomeni circumflex accent
prosgegrammeni iota adscript, maybe? whatever that is.
psili smooth breathing
sampi BETA=#5, numeral=900
stigma ? some archaic letter
tonos monotonic accent, looks acute
upsilon with hook variant graphic?
varia grave accent
vrachy breve or short vowel
yot ?
ypogegrammeni iota subscript
Vincent Broman, code 572 Bayside Email: broman@nosc.mil
Naval Command Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, RDT&E Div.
San Diego, CA 92152-6147, USA Phone: +1 619 553 1641
------------------------------
From: Eric Dahlin <hcf1dahl@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 95 11:04:11 PDT
Subject: TEI workshop
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ANNOUNCEMENT *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* REGISTRATION INFORMATION *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TEXT ENCODING FOR INFORMATION INTERCHANGE
A Tutorial Introduction to the Text Encoding Initiative
A workshop to be held at ACH/ALLC '95 in Santa Barbara
The organizers of ACH/ALLC '95 are pleased to announce a pre-conference
workshop on the Text Encoding Initiative Guidelines.
Title: Text Encoding for Information Interchange: A Tutorial
Introduction to the Text Encoding Initiative
Date: 10 July 1995, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Place: UCSB Microcomputer Laboratory
Instructors: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Lou Burnard, David Chesnutt
Registration fee: $50
This workshop will introduce the encoding scheme recommended by the Text
Encoding Initiative (TEI) in its Guidelines for Text Encoding and
Interchange. The main focus will be on introducing the tag set defined
in the Guidelines, but the context within which the TEI Guidelines were
developed and general problems of text markup will also be addressed.
Topics to be covered include:
1. General Principles of Text Markup: What is markup for?
Varieties of markup; effect of markup. What are electronic texts
for? Markup and interpretation. Markup as a means of enabling
intelligent retrieval.
2. Basics of SGML: What it is and isn't; the case for using it.
Basic SGML syntax for the document instance (tags, entity
references, comment declarations). Examination and explication of
simple examples.
3. Document Analysis: What document analysis is, and why it is an
essential part of any e-text project. Phases of document analysis.
Group document analysis of a sample text.
4. Basics of the TEI: origins and goals of the TEI, overall
organization of the TEI encoding scheme, basic structural notions
of the TEI DTD and the pizza model: the base, additional, and core
tag sets, and how they may be extended, modified, and documented;
group tagging of the sample document.
5. Hands-on Session: introduction to standard commercial or
public-domain SGML-aware editor.
6. Putting the TEI into Practice: types of software available for
SGML, how the adoption of TEI encoding affects the practical work
of an e-text project, and a review of where to go for further
information.
The Text Encoding Initiative
The Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) is an international cooperative
research effort, the goal of which is to define a set of generic
Guidelines for the representation of all kinds of textual materials in
electronic form, in such a way as to enable researchers in any
discipline to interchange texts and datasets in machine readable form,
independently of the software or hardware in use, and also independently
of the particular application for which such electronic resources are
used. The first full version of the TEI Guidelines was published in
May, 1994, after six years of development in Europe and the US. It
takes the form of a substantial reference manual, documenting a modular
and extensible SGML document type definition (DTD), which can be used to
describe electronic encodings of all kinds of texts, of all times and in
all languages. It is sometimes said that the Standard Generalized
Markup Language (SGML: ISO 8879) provides only the syntax for text
markup; the TEI aims to provide a semantics.
Computer-aided research now crosses many political, linguistics,
temporal, and disciplinary boundaries; the TEI Guidelines have been
designed to be applied to texts in any language, from any period, in
any genre, encoded for research of any kind. As far as possible, the
Guidelines eschew controversy; where consensus has not been
established, only very general recommendations are made. The object is
to help the researcher make his or her position explicit, not to
dictate what that position should be.
Viewed as a standard, the TEI scheme attempts to occupy the middle
ground. It offers neither a single all-embracing encoding scheme,
solving all problems once for all, nor an unstructured collection of
tag sets. Rather it offers an extensible framework containing a common
core of features, a choice of frameworks or bases, and a wide variety
of optional additions for specific application areas. Somewhat
light-heartedly, we refer to this as the Chicago Pizza model (in which
the customer chooses a particular base -- say deep dish or whole crust
- -- and adds the toppings of his or her choice), by contrast with both
the Chinese menu or laissez-faire approach (which allows for any
combinations of dishes, even the ridiculous) and the set meal approach,
in which you must have the entire menu.
Materials and Presenters
All participants will be provided with a printed introductory summary
guide to the TEI scheme, and supporting materials on PC disks, including
full versions of the TEI DTDs, public domain SGML software and sample
TEI texts. Subject to availability, participants may be able to acquire
the CD-ROM of the TEI Guidelines at a discounted price.
The tutorial will be taught by three instructors: C. M.
Sperberg-McQueen (Computer Center, University of Illinois at Chicago),
Lou Burnard (Oxford University Computing Services), and David Chesnutt
(Dept. of History, University of South Carolina).
========================================================================
Registration Form
- -----------------
(please return before July 1, 1995)
TEI Tutorial
University of California, Santa Barbara
Monday, July 10, 1995
9 am to 4 pm
UCSB Microcomputer Laboratory
Fee $50
Registration for the TEI Tutorial will take place in the
lobby of Anacapa Hall on Monday, July 10, from 8 to 10 am.
Those staying on-campus at UCSB during ACH/ALLC '95 and
wishing to arrive early for the purpose of attending the
TEI Tutorial may check in after noon on Sunday and
stay an additional night for $29 double or $42 single,
no meals included. Meals may be purchased separately.
Name:
Affiliation:
Address:
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
Payment of Fees:
- ----------------
Payment in U.S. Dollars may be made by:
Personal Check
Money Order
Bank Check
[Checks must be drawn on a U.S. Bank and should be made
payable to U.C. Regents.]
Credit Card: VISA or MASTERCARD
International Wire Transfer (in U.S. Dollars) from
your bank to:
Bank of America
San Francisco Commercial Banking, Office (#1499)
555 California Street, 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Account #07805-00030
Regents of University of California
Santa Barbara. Reference: ACH/ALLC
[If using this latter method of payment; please add an
additional $10 to the total to cover the bank's fee for
this service.]
Payment (please check appropriate box):
___ Personal Check
___ Money Order
___ Bank check is enclosed
___ Wire Transfer [please enclosed a copy of the
wire transfer receipt with your registration]
Please charge to my credit card:
___ MasterCard
___ Visa
Credit Card #:
Expiration Date:
Signature:
Date:
Please complete and return this form with your remittance to:
TEI Tutorial, ACH/ALLC '95
c/o Campus Conference Services
University of California
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-6120
Phone: (805) 893-3072
Fax: (805) 893-7287
E-mail: hr03conf@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu
For questions regarding accommodations and registration,
please contact:
Sally Vito
Phone: (805) 893-3072
E-mail: hr03vito@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu
Please check applicable items below
- ------------------------------------
___ $50 fee for TEI Tutorial
___ $29 On-campus housing, double occupancy
___ $42 On-campus housing, single occupancy
___ Total
=================================================================
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 13:34:09 CST
Subject: Re: more on the alphabet
Vincent--
The stigma was a shorthand letter in ancient Greek that stood for a sigma plus
a tau. It looked like a final sigma with an extended top line (sort of like
s-). This is the only new word I have learned this week, so it's the only one
I will post about.
- --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: Timster132@aol.com
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 15:21:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Mark and Midrash
TO: b-greek@virginia.edu
kenneth@sybase.com said....
> First, I would ask how one distingushes between a text
>about Jesus whose author wanted to convey historical
>information AND show ways in which he/she felt Jesus' life
>fulfilled OT predictions and one which uses OT material to
>invent a story that may or not have historical elements in it?
Yes and Yes. Yes, the gospel writers felt Jesus' life "fulfilled"
OT scripture. "Fulfilled", not in the manner of the fortune-teller
predicting far off events, but fulfilled in the sense that the
gospel writers understood that the Scriptures contain the
Truth that is Eternal and timeless, and that they saw in Jesus
the embodiment of it all. He fulfilled, made complete (TELIOS)
what the OT writers perceived.
About historicity, as I have said previously, "the old narrative elements
are part of the gospel writer's way of interpreting and presenting his
witness to historical events". In that sense,
the OT elements are historical, at least as symbolic descriptions
of the Gospel writer's witness to the life of Jesus.
>He sems to suggest that ht presence of material reflecting OT >passages
suggests narrative midrash. I would ask, using
>my own experience, does the fact taht my wife and I often quote >lines from
Star Wars mean that we are doing a midrash on
>Geroge Lucas's material? Hardly
When OT references and allusions appear, they are being
interpreted by the gospel writer, aren't they? The simplest
definition of midrash is "interpretation, exegesis" based on
the meaning of the word in Hebrew which means "to look into,
to inquire of". It refers to "imaginary expostion or didactic
story" (BDB).
Concerning your quoting of Star Wars, it seems you and your
wife are needing to refer to certain quotes in order to communicate
a specific meaning found in knowing the context from where
the quotation came from. You're communicating more than
the words of the quote, you are communicating the known
context as well. You are weaving it into the immediate present's
context. You are indeed, in a broad and fundamental sense, midrashing.
>He seems determined NOT NOT to allow for the alternative
>that allows the Gospels to contain theologically shaded
>historical narrative with OT citations because their authors
>felt Jesus was the Messiah and read the OT in that light.
They aren't history, they are gospels. They are narratives. They
are midrash. To a large degree, they are historical, but they
aren't newspaper accounts.
Ken, its not so much a determination, as it is a conclusion that
if the gospels are of such a genre as narrative midrash, then they aren't
primarily a history text book.
>If it's narrative midrash as Tim suggests, then all bets are off,
>and it may just as easily be considered worthless for showing
>anything but the author's OT hermenetical skills.
I don't feel that way, but you obviously feel that this is a life and
death matter.
I do not take the extreme position that the gospels are purely
an exegetical exercize based soley on an author's imagination.
A poem about Jesus (such as Philp 2) may not be literal history, but it tells
us something about Jesus. Midrash works in a similar matter.
I believe they are based upon the author's witness to the Jesus of history.
His gospel story is a woven narrative with OT source elements which he
believes interprets the life of Jesus and new
elements from the life of Jesus.
>It sounds like a method without controls. Everyone's ideas
>about the extent of the midrash and its significance count
>equally.
Recognizing the gospels as narrative midrash is a relatively new
exploration, and there is some disagreement over parameters.
I have tried to argue for some.
Thanks to everyone for their comments. It has helped me iron
out few things as regards to this topic.
Peace,
Tim Staker
Timster132@aol.com
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 14:21:34 -0500 (GMT-0500)
Subject: Re: more on the alphabet
On Tue, 13 Jun 1995, Vincent Broman wrote:
> After reading here about transliteration of greek, I was looking at
> the Unicode standard in the greek parts and wondered about the terms used.
> Can anyone fill in the question mark parts, or correct these definitions?
I think the following are (more or less) accurate:
> ano teleia ? inverted period (the mark roughly equivalent
to our colon or semicolon
> koronis ? I'm pretty sure that this is the mark
over a vowel/diphthong in crasis; looks
just like a smooth breathing
> yot ? This is an iota with what looks like a rounded
circumflex just below the character: it is
used to indicate consonantal I (our Y)
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
------------------------------
From: Paul Moser <PMOSER@cpua.it.luc.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 95 14:43 CDT
Subject: Phil. 2 Again
Regarding "harpagmos" in the Christ hymn, Witherington
has a helpful reference to R.W. Hoover, "The Harpagmos
Enigma: A Philological Solution," *Harvard Theological
Review* 64 (1971), 95-119. According to Hoover,
"harpagmos" is part of an idiomatic phrase: "as something
to take advantage of". Cf. Rom. 15:3. His conclusion:
"In every instance which I have examined, this idiomatic
expression refers to something already present and at
one's disposal." I'm unclear, Carl, on your problem
with "morphe doulou"; the hymn has it that Christ really
did take the form of a self-sacrificing servant
(not a slave like Adam).--Paul Moser, Loyola University
of Chicago.
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #750
*****************************
** 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