Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:46 am

“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:49 am

I am more interested in the possibilities with ἴσος. So the genitive ΙΥ (ιυ) is supposed to be ίησοΰ or ί(η)σ(ο)ΰ. But the genitive masculine and neuter of ἴσος is ῐ̓́σου as well. One less 'missing letter' and according to our theory the genitive of the Hebrew 'ish' expressed in Greek as ΙΣ would also be Ισου. Does it make more sense to suppose that ΙΥ arose as a weird mystical way of expressing ίησοΰ or as I would suppose because Ισου might be read as the genitive form of ἴσος? You already know what I am leaning towards. The point is that this hasn't been considered as alternative explanation.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:56 am

I see over 500 instances of ἴσου in extant Greek MSS

Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, Line 627 (627) edition
ἀλλʼ ἐξ ἴσου δεῖ κἀμόν.

Aeschylus, Suppliant Maidens, Line 405 (405) edition
τί τῶνδ᾽ ἐξ ἴσου ῥεπομένων μεταλ-

Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, Line 563 (563) edition
σοφός γʼ ὁμοίως κἀξ ἴσου τιμώμενος.

Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus, Line 1374 (1374) edition
πεσεῖ μιανθεὶς χὼ σύναιμος ἐξ ἴσου.

Aeschylus, Suppliant Maidens, Line 405 (405) edition
τί τῶνδʼ ἐξ ἴσου ῥεπομένων μεταλ-

Sophocles, Antigone, Line 644 (644) edition
καὶ τὸν φίλον τιμῶσιν ἐξ ἴσου πατρί.

Euripides, Iphigenia in Aulis, Line 804 (804) edition
οὐκ ἐξ ἴσου γὰρ μένομεν Εὐρίπου πέλας.

Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, Line 61 (61) edition
οὐκ ἔστιν ὑμῶν ὅστις ἐξ ἴσου νοσεῖ.

Sophocles, Trachiniae, Line 485 (485) edition
κείνου τε καὶ σὴν ἐξ ἴσου κοινὴν χάριν

Sophocles, Trachiniae, Line 322 (322) edition
οὔ τἄρα τῷ γε πρόσθεν οὐδὲν ἐξ ἴσου

Sophocles, Antigone, Line 516 (516) edition
εἴ τοί σφε τιμᾷς ἐξ ἴσου τῷ δυσσεβεῖ.

Euripides, The Phoenician Women, Line 1402 (1402) edition
μέσον δʼ ἄκοντʼ ἔθραυσεν· ἐξ ἴσου δʼ Ἄρης

Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, Line 1019 (1019) edition
καὶ πῶς ὁ φύσας ἐξ ἴσου τῷ μηδενί;

Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus, Line 254 (254) edition
ἀλλʼ ἴσθι, τέκνον Οἰδίπου, σέ τʼ ἐξ ἴσου

Aristophanes, Frogs, Line 867 (867) edition
οὐκ ἐξ ἴσου γάρ ἐστιν ἁγὼν νῷν. τί δαί;

Hero of Alexandria, Geodaesia [Sp.], Chapter 1 Section 5 (1.5) edition
Ἐπίπεδος ἐπιφάνειά ἐστιν, ἥτις ἐξ ἴσου ταῖς ἐφʼ ἑαυτῆς εὐθείαις κεῖται.

Euclid, Elements, Book 1 Type Def Number 4 (1.Def.4) edition
εὐθεῖα γραμμή ἐστιν, ἥτις ἐξ ἴσου τοῖς ἐφʼ ἑαυτῆς σημείοις κεῖται.

Hero of Alexandria, Geodaesia [Sp.], Chapter 1 Section 3 (1.3) edition
Εὐθεῖα γραμμή ἐστιν, ἥτις ἐξ ἴσου τοῖς ἐφʼ ἑαυτῆς σημείοις κεῖται.

Euclid, Elements, Book 1 Type Def Number 7 (1.Def.7) edition
ἐπίπεδος ἐπιφάνειά ἐστιν, ἥτις ἐξ ἴσου ταῖς ἐφʼ ἑαυτῆς εὐθείαις κεῖται.

pseudo-Galen, De remediis parabilibus, Book 3 Chapter 272 (3.272) edition
[Οὐρητικὸν στραγγουριῶσιν.] Θύμου καὶ μαράθρου ἐξ ἴσου κόψας ἐν εὐκράτῳ θερμῷ δὸς πιεῖν.

pseudo-Galen, De remediis parabilibus, Book 3 Chapter 293 (3.293) edition
[Εἰς στραγγουρίαν.] Μαράθρου σπέρμα, δαφνίδων Θηβαϊκῶν ἐξ ἴσου κόψας σὺν εὐκράτῳ δίδου θερμόν.

Suda, Suidae lexicon, Book 2 Chapter E Section 2283 (2.E.2283) edition
2283 Ἐπιδαίϲιοϲ οἶκοϲ; ὁ ἐπίκοινοϲ καὶ οὐ μεριϲτόϲ. ὁ ἐξ ἴϲου Ecl. καταλειφθεὶϲ δύο τιϲίν.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 5 Book 7 Section 180 (5.7.180) edition
299. δῶρα δʼ ἄγʼ ἀλλήλοισι] ἵνα δοκῇ καὶ ἐξ ἴσου ἀπηλλάχθαι, καὶ ἐπαγόμενος τὴν φιλίαν Αἴαντος.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 3 Book 7 Section 139 (3.7.139) edition
299. δῶρα δʼ ἄγ᾿] ἵνα δοκῇ καὶ ἐξ ἴσου ἀπηλλάχθαι, καὶ ἐπαγό- μενος τὴν φιλίαν Αἴαντος.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 3 Book 7 Section 37 (3.7.37) edition
70. ἀμφοτέροισιν] πιθανῶς ἐξ ἴσου τὸν κίνδυνον ἀμφοτέροις κατέ- στησε, παρελὼν Ἑλλήνων τὴν τῶν θεῶν ἐπικουρίαν.

Polybius, Histories, Book 15 Chapter 14 Section 5 (15.14.5) edition
ἐπειδὴ δʼ ὑπερβάντες ἐξ ἴσου τοῖς ἁστάτοις ἐγένοντο, συνέβαλον αἱ φάλαγγες ἀλλήλαις μετὰ τῆς μεγίστης ὁρμῆς καὶ προθυμίας.

Philo Judaeus, Quod Omnis Probus Liber Sit, Chapter 126 (126) edition
τὸ λαμπρὸν πλεονεξίᾳ τύχης οὐκ ἀμαυρούμεναι, ὃ προτρέπει καὶ τοῖς τἀξίωμα ὑπερόγκοις ἐξ ἴσου διαφέρεσθαι, ἀλαζονείᾳ παρρησίαν ἀντιτάττον.

Suda, Suidae lexicon, Book 3 Chapter Ο255 Section 867 (3.Ο255.867) edition
867 0ὐκ ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου: οὐκ ἐξ ἴϲου. ἄλλα τέ τινα οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ EL ὁμοίου ποιεῖν ἐκελεύοντο.

Scholia in Sophoclem, Scholia in Sophoclem (scholia vetera), Book 6 Section 317 (6.317) edition
317 οἷον, κἀγὼ ἐξ ἴσου ἐλεῶ σε τοῖς ἀφιγμένοις ἐνταῦθα ὥσπερ οἱ ἄλλοι ξένοι, φησί, περὶ ὧν ἔλεγες.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 6 Book 15 Section 56 (6.15.56) edition
79. βῆ δὲ κατʼ Ἰδαίων] Ζηνόδοτος “βῆ δ᾿ ἐξ Ἰδαίωνʼ ἀπὸ ἴσου γὰρ ἐπὶ τὸ ἴσον ἡ δίοδος. B=

Polybius, Histories, Book 34 Chapter 12 Section 5 (34.12.5) edition
συμβαίνει δʼ ἀπὸ ἴσου διαστήματος συμπίπτειν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν ὁδὸν τούς τʼ ἐκ τῆς Ἀπολλωνίας ὁρμηθέντας καὶ τοὺς ἐξ Ἐπιδάμνου.

Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos, Book 9 Section 297 (9.297) edition
καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ σῶμα σώματος δύναται ἀφαιρεῖσθαι. εἰ γὰρ σῶμα ἀπὸ σώματος ἀφαιρεῖται, ἤτοι τὸ ἴσον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ἀφαιρεῖται ἢ τὸ ἄνισον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνίσου· ἀλλ’ οὔτε τὸ ἴσον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ἀφαιρεῖσθαι δύναται, ὡς διδάξομεν, οὔτε τὸ ἄνισον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνίσου, ὧς ὑπομνήσομέν· οὐκ ἄρα σῶμα ἀπὸ σώματος ἀφαιρεῖται.

Polybius, Histories, Book 12 Chapter 20 Section 8 (12.20.8) edition
ὁ δὲ χωρὶς τῶν ἄλλων οὐδὲ τοὺς ἱππεῖς προέθετο, μετωπηδὸν ἄγων τὴν δύναμιν ἐν τόποις ἐπιπέδοις, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ἴσου ποιεῖ τοῖς πεζοῖς.

Origen, Commentarii In Evangelium Joannis, Book 32 Section|Fragment 176 (32.176) edition
καὶ ἄκουε τοῦ »Ἵνα πιστεύητε« ὡς ἴσου δυναμένου τῷ >ἵνα † πιστεύητε ἐενεργῆτε<, παραμένοντες τῷ πιστεύειν καὶ μηδεμίαν ἀφορμὴν πρὸς τὸ μετατίθεσθαι ἴσχοντες.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 1 Book 9 Section 64 (1.9.64) edition
116. ἀντί νυ πολλῶν] ὅτι τὸ ἀντί ἐπὶ τοῦ ἴσου ἐστί· τὸ γὰρ λεγόμενον, ἴσος ἐστὶ πολλοῖς ὁ εἷς ἀνὴρ, ὅταν ᾖ θεοφιλής.

Old Testament, Exodus, Chapter 26 Verse 24 (26.24) edition
καὶ ἔσται ἐξ ἴσου κάτωθεν· κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ ἔσονται ἴσοι ἑκ τῶν κεφαλῶν εἰς σύμβλησιν μίαν· οὕτως ποιήσεις ἀμφοτέραις, ταῖς δυσὶν γωνίαις ἴστωσαν.

Xenophon, Anabasis, Book 3 Chapter 4 Section 47 (3.4.47) edition
Σωτηρίδας δὲ ὁ Σικυώνιος εἶπεν· οὐκ ἐξ ἴσου, ὦ Ξενοφῶν, ἐσμέν· σὺ μὲν γὰρ ἐφʼ ἵππου ὀχῇ, ἐγὼ δὲ χαλεπῶς κάμνω τὴν ἀσπίδα φέρων.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 1 Chapter 77 Section 4 (1.77.4) edition
ἀδικούμενοί τε, ὡς ἔοικεν, οἱ ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον ὀργίζονται ἢ βιαζόμενοι: τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου δοκεῖ πλεονεκτεῖσθαι, τὸ δ’ ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείσσονος καταναγκάζεσθαι.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 1 Chapter 99 Section 2 (1.99.2) edition
ἦσαν δέ πως καὶ ἄλλως οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι οὐκέτι ὁμοίως ἐν ἡδονῇ ἄρχοντες, καὶ οὔτε ξυνεστράτευον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ῥᾴδιόν τε προσάγεσθαι ἦν αὐτοῖς τοὺς ἀφισταμένους.

Polybius, Histories, Book 18 Chapter 23 Section 5 (18.23.5) edition
πῶς οὖν ὑμᾶς εὐλαβεῖσθαι καθήκει, μέλλοντας ἐξ ἴσου ποιεῖσθαι τὸν κίνδυνον πρὸς τοὺς αὐτούς; τί δὲ προορᾶσθαι τῶν προγεγονότων, ἀλλʼ οὐ τἀναντία διʼ ἐκεῖνα καὶ νῦν θαρρεῖν;

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 1 Chapter 143 Section 3 (1.143.3) edition
‘καὶ τὰ μὲν Πελοποννησίων ἔμοιγε τοιαῦτα καὶ παραπλήσια δοκεῖ εἶναι, τὰ δὲ ἡμέτερα τούτων τε ὧνπερ ἐκείνοις ἐμεμψάμην ἀπηλλάχθαι καὶ ἄλλα οὐκ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου μεγάλα ἔχειν.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 1 Book 11 Section 298 (1.11.298) edition
705. ἐκ τῶν περὶ τῆς Κικονίας λεγομένων ἐν Ὀδυσσείᾳ (9, 42) μετάκειται ὁ στίχος· ἔνθα καὶ εὔλογον αὐτοὺς τὰ λάφυρα ἐξ ἴσου μερίζεσθαι. ἐνταῦθα δὲ οὐκ ἐπέβαλεν ἐξ ἴσου μερίζεσθαι, ἀλλʼ ἀνάλογον ἑκάστῳ τοῖς ὀφειλομένοις· οὐ γὰρ ἐκ πολέμου λαφυραγω- γίας. Ζηνόδοτος οὐδὲ ἔγραφεν. μή τίς οἱ] ὅπως μηδεὶς ἀπέλθῃ στερηθεὶς τῆς ὁμοίας καὶ ἴσης τιμῆς· ἴσης γὰρ τῆς τὸ δίκαιον καὶ ἴσον ἐχούσης.

Polybius, Histories, Book 9 Chapter 4 Section 4 (9.4.4) edition
οὔτε μὴν ἄνευ τῶν ἱππέων παραστρατοπεδεύσαντες ἐθάρρουν πολιορκεῖν χάρακα καὶ τάφρον προβεβλημένους τοὺς ὑπεναντίους, πρὸς οὓς καὶ τὸν ἐξ ἴσου κίνδυνον αὐτοῖς ἀμφίδοξον εἶναι συνέβαινε χωρὶς τῶν ἱππέων.

Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos, Book 9 Section 298 (9.298) edition
ἴσον μὲν οὖν ἀπὸ ἴσου οὐκ ἂν ἀφαιρεθείη, 297—307 ~ Hyp. ΙΙΙ 85—88. 16 αἱ om. N 22 γὰρ N (iam addid. Bekk.); om. LEς 25 προβάντος N (iam scrips. Fabr.): προβάντες ς 30 σῶμα μὲν Fabr,: ἀσώματον μὲν G 8 τοῦ om. ς 12 <τοῦ> ἴσου N καθάπερ ἀπὸ πήχεως πῆχυς, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἔσται τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀφαίρεσις, ἀλλὰ παντελὴς τοῦ ὑποκειμένου ἀναίρεσις.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 6 Book 20 Section 53 (6.20.53) edition
100, 1. 〈εἰ δὲ θεός περ〉 ἶσον τείνειεν πολέμου τέλος] ἐξ ἴσου ὑπὸ θεῶν βοηθουμένων ἡμῶν. 3. μάλιστά γε etiam textus ‖ 5. καταναντίον 9. τῆς B: τοῖς ‖ 18. ὀρθοκρεράων

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 4 Book 23 Section 217 (4.23.217) edition
574. ἐς μέσον] ἐξ ἴσου, ἐκ παραλλήλου, μὴ ἑτεροβαρῶς. καὶ ἐπιφέρει μηδʼ ἐπʼ ἀρωγῇ. καὶ ἔστιν ἡ διάνοια θαρροῦντος τῷ δικαίῳ· οὐδένα γὰρ αὐτῶν διὰ τὸ ἀξίωμα καταχαρίσασθαι ἀξιοῖ.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 3 Chapter 10 Section 4 (3.10.4) edition
καὶ μέχρι μὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ἡγοῦντο, προθύμως εἱπόμεθα: ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἑωρῶμεν αὐτοὺς τὴν μὲν τοῦ Μήδου ἔχθραν ἀνιέντας, τὴν δὲ τῶν ξυμμάχων δούλωσιν ἐπαγομένους, οὐκ ἀδεεῖς ἔτι ἦμεν.

Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos, Book 3 Section 96 (3.96) edition
διχῶς οὖν τοῦ ἴσου προσαγορευομένου, ὅταν οἱ γεωμέτραι τὴν εὐθεῖαν γραμμὴν ὑπογράφοντες φῶσιν ‘εὐθεῖά ἐστι γραμμὴ ἡ ἐξ ἴσου τοῖς ἑαυτῆς μέρεσι κειμένη’, ἤτοι τὸ κατὰ τὸ πρῶ- τον σημαινόμενον λαμβάνουσιν ἴσον ἢ τὸ κατὰ τὸ δεύτε- ρον. ἀλλʼ εἰ μὲν τὸ κατὰ τὸ πρῶτον, τελέως εἰσὶν ἀνόη- τοι οὐδένα γὰρ ἔχει νοῦν τὸ εὐθεῖαν εἶναι γραμμὴν τὴν ἰσομεγέθη τοῖς ἑαυτῆς μέρεσι καὶ μήτε ὑπερέχουσαν ταῦ- τα μήτε ὑπερεχομένην ὑπὸ τούτων.

Polybius, Histories, Book 1 Chapter 18 Section 10 (1.18.10) edition
ἐξ οὗ συνέβη τοὺς Ῥωμαίους ἐπʼ ἴσου πολιορκεῖν καὶ πολιορκεῖσθαι τοῖς πράγμασιν. εἰς γὰρ τοῦτο συνήγοντο τῇ σιτοδείᾳ καὶ σπάνει τῶν ἀναγκαίων ὥστε πολλάκις βουλεύεσθαι περὶ τοῦ λύειν τὴν πολιορκίαν.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 5 Chapter 101 Section 1 (5.101.1) edition
ΑΘ. οὔκ, ἤν γε σωφρόνως βουλεύησθε: οὐ γὰρ περὶ ἀνδραγαθίας ὁ ἀγὼν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ὑμῖν, μὴ αἰσχύνην ὀφλεῖν, περὶ δὲ σωτηρίας μᾶλλον ἡ βουλή, πρὸς τοὺς κρείσσονας πολλῷ μὴ ἀνθίστασθαι.

Scholia in Homerum, Scholia in Iliadem, Volume 2 Book 23 Section 253 (2.23.253) edition
757. ὅτι μετενήνεκται ἐνθάδε ἀπὸ τῆς ἁρματοδρομίας. ἐκεῖ μὲν οὖν μεταστοιχὶ λέγει, ἐπὶ στίχον ἵστανται κεκληρωμένοι· ἐνταῦθα δὲ οὐκέτι, ἀλλὰ κατὰ ζυγὸν ἡ στάσις λέγεται, κατὰ μέτωπον πάντων ἐξ ἴσου ὄντων.

pseudo-Galen, De remediis parabilibus, Book 3 Chapter 9 (3.9) edition
[Πρὸς ὀδονταλγίας.] Ὕσσωπον ἢ ὀρίγανον μετὰ ὄξους ἑψήσας δὸς διακλύζεσθαι· ἢ πύρεθρον καὶ πέπερι καὶ ζέμμα καὶ μαστίχην ἐξ ἴσου δίδου διαμασᾶσθαι. ἄλλο. σταφίδας ἀγρίας κόκκους δ΄. μαστίχης κόκκους η΄. δίδου διαμασᾶσθαι.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 4 Chapter 117 Section 2 (4.117.2) edition
τοὺς γὰρ δὴ ἄνδρας περὶ πλέονος ἐποιοῦντο κομίσασθαι, ὡς ἔτι Βρασίδας ηὐτύχει: καὶ ἔμελλον ἐπὶ μεῖζον χωρήσαντος αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀντίπαλα καταστήσαντος τῶν μὲν στέρεσθαι, τοῖς δ’ ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου ἀμυνόμενοι κινδυνεύσειν καὶ κρατήσειν.

Plutarch, Apophthegmata Laconica, Chapter 2 Section 1 (2.1) edition
Ἀγησίλαος ὁ μέγας παρὰ πότον ποτὲ λαχὼν συμποσίαρχος, ἐρωτηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ οἰνοχόου πόσον ἑκάστῳ προσφέρῃ, εἰ μὲν πολὺς οἶνός ἔφη ἔφη * ἐστὶ παρεσκευασμένος, ὅσον ἕκαστος αἰτεῖ· εἰ δὲ ὀλίγος, ἐξ ἴσου δίδου πᾶσι.

pseudo-Galen, De remediis parabilibus, Book 3 Chapter 25 (3.25) edition
[Πρὸς ἥλους δόκιμον, κᾂν ἐν κεφαλῇ εἰσίν.] Σανδαράχης, σχιστῆς, χαλκάνθου, μίσυος καὶ ἀσβέστου ζῶντος καὶ σάπωνος ὅλα μίξας ἐξ ἴσου, τὸ ἄσβεστον διπλοῦν λειώσας μετὰ πρωτείου ζωμοῦ τοῦ σάπωνος χρῶ. θαυμάσιον γάρ ἐστι.

Pausanias, Description of Greece, 4 7 11 (4.7.11) edition
πρό τε δὴ τηλικούτων κακῶν κέρδος εἶναι καλῶς τινα ἀποθανεῖν, πολὺ δὲ εἶναι ῥᾷον ἀηττήτοις οὖσιν ἔτι καὶ τὰς τόλμας καθεστηκόσιν ἐξ ἴσου προθυμίᾳ τοὺς ἀντιτεταγμένους ὑπερβαλεῖν ἢ προαποβαλόντας τὸ φρόνημα ἐπανορθοῦσθαι τὰ ἐπταισμένα.

Scholia Euripidem, Scholia in Euripidis Hippolytum, Chapter 2 Section 1361 (2.1361) edition
1361. πρόσφορα: προσεχόντως. B. σύντονα δʼ ἕλκετε: ἀντὶ τοῦ συντόνως, ἤγουν ἁρμοδίως καὶ προσεχόντως καὶ συμφώνως, μὴ ὁ μὲν ἄνω, ὁ δὲ κάτω, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ἴσου βαστάζετε ἡ δὲ μεταφορὰ ἀπὸ τῶν μουσικῶν τόνων.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 3 Chapter 12 Section 3 (3.12.3) edition
εἰ γὰρ δυνατοὶ ἦμεν ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου καὶ ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι καὶ ἀντιμελλῆσαι, τί ἔδει ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου ἐπ’ ἐκείνοις εἶναι; ἐπ’ ἐκείνοις δὲ ὄντος αἰεὶ τοῦ ἐπιχειρεῖν καὶ ἐφ’ ἡμῖν εἶναι δεῖ τὸ προαμύνασθαι.

Sozomenus, Historia Ecclesiastica, Book 6 Chapter 7 Section 6 (6.7.6) edition
τοὺς ἰδίους ἀπολαμβάνειν θρόνους, ὡς παρανόμως ἐκβεβλημένους τῶν ἐκκλησίων. Εἰ δέ τις αὐτῶν κατηγορεῖν βούλεται, ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου κινδύνου τοῦτο ποιεῖν: δικαστὰς δὲ εἶναι τοὺς ὀρθῶς δοξάζοντας ἐν τῷ ἔθνει ἐπισκόπους, καὶ ἐκ τῶν πέλας ἐπαρχιῶν,

Plutarch, Nicias, Chapter 17 Section 4 (17.4) edition
ὁ μὲν γὰρ Εὐριπίδης μετὰ τὴν ἧτταν αὐτῶν καὶ τὸν ὄλεθρον γράφων ἐπικήδειον ἐποίησεν· οἵδε Συρακοσίους ὀκτὼ νίκας ἐκράτησαν ἄνδρες, ὅτʼ ἦν τὰ θεῶν ἐξ ἴσου ἀμφοτέροις· Euripides; Bergk, Poet. Lyr. Graeci, ii (4) p. 265
Last edited by Secret Alias on Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7462
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:57 am

Secret Alias wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:46 am
Apparently its a thing - https://books.google.com/books?id=UrxGD ... 82&f=false
I see. Apparently it is an Ionic or Lesbian thing; my training is in Attic and, to a lesser extent, Koine and Homeric. Seriously doubt this was an issue in manuscripts of the OG/LXX, though. Willing to be shown otherwise.
Secret Alias wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:49 am
I am more interested in the possibilities with ἴσος. So the genitive ΙΥ (ιυ) is supposed to be ίησοΰ or ί(η)σ(ο)ΰ. But the genitive masculine and neuter of ἴσος is ῐ̓́σου as well. One less 'missing letter' and according to our theory the genitive of the Hebrew 'ish' expressed in Greek as ΙΣ would also be Ισου. Does it make more sense to suppose that ΙΥ arose as a weird mystical way of expressing ίησοΰ or as I would suppose because Ισου might be read as the genitive form of ἴσος? You already know what I am leaning towards. The point is that this hasn't been considered as alternative explanation.
How do we know that the abbreviations known to us in the scholarly literature as nomina sacra started with Ἰησοῦς? I mean, it is not an unreasonable guess, but could they not have started with Θεός, Κύριος, or Χριστός? Have you explored any of those routes?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:59 am

We don't it's just an alternative theory right now. I do think that most people suppose that the name above all names is ΙΣ. I have always supposed it was the first nomen sacrum. I was influenced in that respect by Trobisch. We occasionally speak to one another.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7462
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:00 am

Secret Alias wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:49 am
Does it make more sense to suppose that ΙΥ arose as a weird mystical way of expressing ίησοΰ or as I would suppose because Ισου might be read as the genitive form of ἴσος? You already know what I am leaning towards. The point is that this hasn't been considered as alternative explanation.
What does the Greek word for "equal" have to do with verses in which we find ΙΣ in our Christian manuscripts? I am not following.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:05 am

Here's an example of why the nomina sacra might have been developed:
Ὅτι ἕνεκά σου θανατούμεθα ὅλην τἡν ἡμέραρ, ἐλογίσθημεν ὡς πρόβατα σφαγῆς, κ. τ. ἑ. Ὀ Παῦλός φησι (26)· Καθʼ ἡμέραν ἀποθνήσκω. νἠ τὴν ὑμετέραν καύχησιν, ἤν ἔχω ἐν Χριστῷ Ἴσοῦ. Διὰ τί δέφησιν, « ἕνεκα σοῦ; » Ὅτι ἐξῆν ἡμῖν μετατάξασθαι καὶ ἀφεῖναι τὴν πατρῴαν πολιτείαν, καὶ εἶναι ἐν ἀσφαλείᾳ· [Origen, Selecta in Psalmos [Dub.], Chapter 43 Paragraph 20 (43.20) ]
I am saying that IF early Christians read the nomen sacrum as going back to ΙΣ rather than Ἰησοῦς THEN confusion might have arisen.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:11 am

For instance:
Ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς τῷ Κέλσῳ λεγόμενα. ἐν οἷς σφόδρα μὲν ἐλάχιστά ἐστι τὰ περὶ Χριστιανῶν πλεῖστα δὲ ὅσα περὶ Ἰουδαίων. φησὶν οὖν· εἰ μὲν δὴ κατὰ ταῦτα περιστέλλοιεν Ἰουδαῖοι τὸν ἴδιον νόμον, οὐ μεμπτὰ αὐτῶν, ἐκείνων δὲ μᾶλλον, τῶν καταλιπόντων τὰ σφέτερα καὶ τὰ Ἰουδαίων προσποιουμένων. εἰ δ᾿ ὥς τι σοφώτερον εἰδότες σεμνύνονταί τε καὶ τὴν ἄλλων κοινωνίαν (ὡς) οὐκ ἐξ ἴσου καθαρῶν ἀποστρέφονται, ἤδη ἀκηκόασιν ὅτι οὐδὲ τὸ περὶ οὐρανοῦ δόγμα ἴδιον λέγουσιν ἀλλ᾿, ἵνα πάντα ἐάσω, καὶ Πέρσαις, ὥς που δηλοῖ καὶ Ἡρόδοτος, πάλαι δεδογμένον. [Against Celsus 5.41]
Yes it could be figured out that this is not a reference to the Savior. But maybe instances arose where confusion reigned. I haven't found them yet. But clearly as you point out. The nomen sacrum becomes noticeable in the genitive state. Maybe it wasn't meant to signal the holiness of the name. Only that the Savior, not something else, was meant.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:31 am

Or this is a bit clearer:

Εἶτ᾿ οὐκ οἶδ᾿ ὅπως ὁ Κέλσος τὴν προθυμίαν τῶν μέχρι θανάτου ἀγωνιζομένων ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ ἐξομόσασθαι χριστιανιασμὸν παρατιθέμενος ἐπιφέρει ὡσπερεὶ ἐξισῶν τὰ ἡμέτερα τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν τελεστῶν καὶ μυσταγωγῶν λεγομένοις καί φησι· μάλιστα μὲν, ὦ βέλτιστε, ὥσπερ σὺ κολάσεις αἰωνίους νομίζεις, οὕτως καὶ οἱ τῶν ἱερῶν ἐκείνων ἐξηγηταὶ τελεσταί τε καὶ μυσταγωγοί· ἃς σὺ μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀπειλεῖς, ἐκεῖνοι δὲ σοί. πότερα γὰρ αὐτῶν ἀληθέστερα ἢ ἐπικρατέστερα, ἔξεστι σκοπεῖν. λόγῳ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ ἴσου περὶ τῶν σφετέρων σφίσιν ἑκάτεροι διαβεβαιοῦσθε· τεκμηρίων δὲ εἰ δέοι.

In the next place, Celsus, after referring to the enthusiasm with which men will contend unto death rather than abjure Christianity, adds strangely enough some remarks, in which he wishes to show that our doctrines are similar to those delivered by the priests at the celebration of the heathen mysteries. He says, Just as you, good sir, believe in eternal punishments, so also do the priests who interpret and initiate into the sacred mysteries. The same punishments with which you threaten others, they threaten you. Now it is worthy of examination, which of the two is more firmly established as true; for both parties contend with equal assurance that the truth is on their side. [8:48]
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Ish(u), Ye(ho)shua, and the nomina sacra.

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:35 am

I am trying to make sense of the hymn of Jesus. The earliest commentary I see is the account of the martyrs of Gaul. In that discussion it is clear 'Christ' is a fully mortal human - the prototypical martyr. All of which makes the model of mythicists difficult to accept - i.e. that there was just a 'god' who floated down from heaven at the beginning of the narrative and back up at the end. That can't be the Pauline reality. So here is what I get:
  • Phil 2:5 the martyrs at Gaul understood the apostle to be telling them to have the same understanding as 'Christ' who is clearly a human being (see below)
  • Phil 2:6 ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ - 'Christ' is said to be of the same 'form' as God. We know Paul's thinking from elsewhere 'the earthly man' here is being compared, juxtaposed against 'the heavenly man' in what follows. That's why εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ is referenced here. Because Adam was made after an anthropomorphic divinity there is the potential for Adam to become as the anthropomorphic divinity. But what does 'did not think εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ to be used for his own advantage mean? Clearly it goes back to 2:5 - i.e. the appeal that EVERYONE can be like the 'heavenly anthropos.' As such there are three classes of 'men' here - (1) the perfect man (let's call him ΙΣ for simplicity sake) the god Adam was formed after (2) Christ who is Paul's 'last man' and who must be 'Jesus' assuming there was such a figure in early Christianity and then (3) the rest of us who are made divine through Christ.
  • Phil 2:7 - ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος. 2:6b and 2:7a run into one another - viz. as “being born in the likeness of men and being found in human form” (ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος). But Marcion and Marcellus of Ancyra read "ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπου." Here is John Chrysostom:
    What then say the heretics? See, say they, He did not become man. The Marcionites, I mean. But why? He was made in the likeness of man (ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπου). But how can one be made in the likeness of men? By putting on a shadow? But this is a phantom, and no longer the likeness of a man, for the likeness (ὁμοιώματι) of a man (ἀνθρώπου) is another man. And what will you answer to John, when he says, The Word became flesh? John 1:14 But this same blessed one himself also says in another place, in the likeness of sinful flesh. Romans 8:3 And being found in fashion as a man. See, they say, both in fashion, and as a man. To be as a man, and to be a man in fashion, is not to be a man indeed. To be a man in fashion is not to be a man by nature. See with what ingenuousness I lay down what our enemies say, for that is a brilliant victory, and amply gained, when we do not conceal what seem to be their strong points. For this is deceit rather than victory. What then do they say? Let me repeat their argument. To be a man in fashion is not to be a man by nature; and to be as a man, and in the fashion of a man, this is not to be a man. So then to take the form of a servant, is not to take the form of a servant. Here then is an inconsistency; and wherefore do you not first of all solve this difficulty? For as you think that this contradicts us, so do we say that the other contradicts you. He says not, as the form of a servant, nor in the likeness of the form of a servant, nor in the fashion of the form of a servant, but He took the form of a servant. What then is this? For there is a contradiction. There is no contradiction. God forbid! It is a cold and ridiculous argument of theirs. He took, say they, the form of a servant, when He girded Himself with a towel, and washed the feet of His disciples. Is this the form of a servant? Nay, this is not the form, but the work of a servant. It is one thing that there should be the work of a servant, and another to take the form of a servant. Why did he not say, He did the work of a servant, which were clearer? But nowhere in Scripture is form put for work, for the difference is great: the one is the result of nature, the other of action. In common speaking, too, we never use form for work. Besides, according to them, He did not even take the work of a servant, nor even gird Himself. For if all was a mere shadow, there was no reality. If He had not real hands, how did He wash their feet? If He had not real loins, how did He gird Himself with a towel? And what kind of garments did he take? For Scripture says, He took His garments. John 13:12 So then not even the work is found to have really taken place, but it was all a deception, nor did He even wash the disciples. For if that incorporeal nature did not appear, it was not in a body. Who then washed the disciples' feet?
    The fact that Marcellus of Ancyra has the same reading shows it is not a specifically 'Marcionite' reading. Clearly the original understanding is a comparison of Christ to the heavenly man. The reading of Marcellus and Marcion was "Who being in the form of God did not consider being equal with God a thing to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, having been made in likeness of man and found in appearance as man." All of this must go back to 2:6 where Christ takes advantage of unique situation afforded him for the betterment of everyone. This must have originally been read by the heretical traditions as the fully human Christ 'emptying himself' - i.e. pouring out his mortality - and being filled with the divine seed and being made into a second god - viz. being made after ΙΣ in substance so he can be crucified as an image for everyone's benefit.
  • 2:8- καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος 8 ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου already discussed "Who being in the form of God did not consider being equal with God a thing to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, having been made in likeness of man and found in appearance as a man."
  • 2:9 - "Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
My take away - just look at the the final lines. God ... gave him the name that is above every name that at the name of Jesus ..." There are two things we should be aware of. The first is that the act of God giving Christ the name Jesus could either have happened (1) when the messiah was born or (2) at his crucifixion/resurrection. To my ears at least the sense is that 'Jesus' was already 'Christ's' name but that he was given the name above all names AFTER his crucifixion on behalf of everyone or on behalf of everyone BEFORE his crucifixion.

The Διὸ in 2:9 seems to connect to the act of death or crucifixion - i.e. that the name above all names was given after he became a servant and crucified himself. This means the name above all names can't be Jesus because that was his name from before. Also the ἵνα (so, so that, that) in 2:10) reinforces this i.e. 'everyone and everything will bow at the name of Jesus' BECAUSE he was granted ANOTHER NAME which is the name above all names. The martyrs at Gaul ἐξομολογήσηται this - i.e. that Jesus Christ offered himself up for them and they are returning the favor. But the name above all names can't be Jesus because he already had this from before.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Post Reply