The Biblical God is not infinite

What do they believe? What do you think? Talk about religion as it exists today.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 1165
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The Biblical God is not infinite

Post by mlinssen »

bbyrd009 wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 11:10 am
mlinssen wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 1:11 am
Four is an arbitrary number indeed, but it is his whole story behind it that is so very worthy of reading, concise and to the point

I see the gospel of Thomas not in the context of any religion, certainly not Christianity. John just tries to make its author look bad, giving away which text was earlier
ok well ill check out DMR, ty
the gospel of Thomas im skeptible of tbh, prolly the usual misgivings
but may i suggest that John was hiding wisdom from the wise, less than trying to trash Thomas?
[/quote]

A bit of both, I'd say - John was also trying to convey wisdom, exactly as Thomas did, and it weas the exact same wisdom. Long story there that I ahven't unravelled yet

Check out my translation of Thomas, you will be surprised at the dozens of words that are different (yet literally translated) from all other "translations". Guillaumont, Layton, Lambdin: all Christian authors who interpreted the text through their NT lens

https://www.academia.edu/42110001/Inter ... oncordance

Some examples below; it's a literal translation, word-by-word. I'm working on an Interpretation and Commentary which will be more legible yet still fully traceable to its Coptic source

Logion 74: said he : oh slaveowner there-be many of the going-round within the(F) separation there-is-not anyone However in the(F) sickness

Logion 96: said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she liken to a woman did she take a little of first-milk did she hide him in a dough did she make-be he of some(PL) great loaf he-who there-be ear within he let! he hear

Logion 97: said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she liken to a woman she bear-under a jar he fill of flour she walk on a path she been-distantiated did the ear of the jar break did the flour pour behind she on the(F) path did…? she know not is did…? not she understand to-toil have make-be she split inward to her house did she place the jar downward did she fall as-regards he he empty

bbyrd009
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:52 am
Location: Ute City, COLO

Re: The Biblical God is not infinite

Post by bbyrd009 »

mlinssen wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 11:54 pm
bbyrd009 wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 11:10 am
mlinssen wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 1:11 am
Four is an arbitrary number indeed, but it is his whole story behind it that is so very worthy of reading, concise and to the point

I see the gospel of Thomas not in the context of any religion, certainly not Christianity. John just tries to make its author look bad, giving away which text was earlier
ok well ill check out DMR, ty
the gospel of Thomas im skeptible of tbh, prolly the usual misgivings
but may i suggest that John was hiding wisdom from the wise, less than trying to trash Thomas?
A bit of both, I'd say - John was also trying to convey wisdom, exactly as Thomas did, and it weas the exact same wisdom. Long story there that I ahven't unravelled yet

Check out my translation of Thomas, you will be surprised at the dozens of words that are different (yet literally translated) from all other "translations". Guillaumont, Layton, Lambdin: all Christian authors who interpreted the text through their NT lens

https://www.academia.edu/42110001/Inter ... oncordance

Some examples below; it's a literal translation, word-by-word. I'm working on an Interpretation and Commentary which will be more legible yet still fully traceable to its Coptic source

Logion 74: said he : oh slaveowner there-be many of the going-round within the(F) separation there-is-not anyone However in the(F) sickness

Logion 96: said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she liken to a woman did she take a little of first-milk did she hide him in a dough did she make-be he of some(PL) great loaf he-who there-be ear within he let! he hear

Logion 97: said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she liken to a woman she bear-under a jar he fill of flour she walk on a path she been-distantiated did the ear of the jar break did the flour pour behind she on the(F) path did…? she know not is did…? not she understand to-toil have make-be she split inward to her house did she place the jar downward did she fall as-regards he he empty

[/quote]ok tks, i'll check it out :)
User avatar
Geocalyx
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:59 pm

Re: The Biblical God is not infinite

Post by Geocalyx »

Nice! I did a literal translation of Apocryphon of John into my native tongue (turned it into a free verse sort of deal after noticing it has a certain rythm to it and rhymes in places) and have been working on a Thomas one. Thomas really is a complex piece of work! I'm not sure how

Logion 74:
said he : oh slaveowner
there-be many of the going-round within the(F) separation
there-is-not anyone However
in the(F) sickness

gets truncated to "many are looking into the well, but there is nothing in it" so often in local translations, for one, and there is nowhere any mention how that child could also be old in seven "sins" as opposed to "days", or for instance logion 74 featuring accumulation of vovels in Coptic;
ⲡⲉϫⲁϥ ϫⲉ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ
ⲟⲩⲛϩⲁϩ ⲙⲡⲕⲱⲧⲉ
ⲛⲧϫⲱⲧⲉ
ⲙⲛⲗⲁⲁⲩ ⲇⲉ ϩⲛⲧϣⲱⲛⲉ
... or at least a sense of vocational fluidity that has seldom been accounted for.
The text is taken way too lightly for all its nuance and no amphibolic setups are taken into account in general (seems like 20th century translators were all like OMG full GoT translate ASAP get help from Greek original NOW go go go) so I'm glad to see people doing stuff like this.

Carry on the good work!
davidmartin
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The Biblical God is not infinite

Post by davidmartin »

Geocalyx wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:19 am Nice! I did a literal translation of Apocryphon of John into my native tongue (turned it into a free verse sort of deal after noticing it has a certain rythm to it and rhymes in places) and have been working on a Thomas one. Thomas really is a complex piece of work! I'm not sure how

Logion 74:
said he : oh slaveowner
there-be many of the going-round within the(F) separation
there-is-not anyone However
in the(F) sickness

gets truncated to "many are looking into the well, but there is nothing in it" so often in local translations, for one, and there is nowhere any mention how that child could also be old in seven "sins" as opposed to "days", or for instance logion 74 featuring accumulation of vovels in Coptic;
ⲡⲉϫⲁϥ ϫⲉ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ
ⲟⲩⲛϩⲁϩ ⲙⲡⲕⲱⲧⲉ
ⲛⲧϫⲱⲧⲉ
ⲙⲛⲗⲁⲁⲩ ⲇⲉ ϩⲛⲧϣⲱⲛⲉ
... or at least a sense of vocational fluidity that has seldom been accounted for.
The text is taken way too lightly for all its nuance and no amphibolic setups are taken into account in general (seems like 20th century translators were all like OMG full GoT translate ASAP get help from Greek original NOW go go go) so I'm glad to see people doing stuff like this.

Carry on the good work!
Re: saying 74. I believe the scholars are correcting what they see as scribal errors
The word for well is ϣⲱⲧⲉ (show-te)
The first 'well' is ⲕⲱⲧⲉ (kow-te)
The second 'well' is ϣⲱⲛⲉ (show-ne)
Coptic spelling can vary especially with vowels and between dialects
Now in this case... unless the scholar is aware of a variant spelling (Crum doesn't appear to list these as known variants) then the 'correction' is open to question
A good scholar would give evidence for their corrections, maybe the scribe made many mistakes, maybe there's a pattern, maybe they can't make sense of it without a correction, or a suspected Greek original they think explains it. It's a game. Surely at least sometimes the 'correction' is mistaken. There should be whole books on this subject really for a text like Thomas, but i'm not aware of any so what ML is doing seems very valuable to me
Sometimes I think what we see as scribal errors is just an incomplete knowledge of the language. Little plays on words that meant something and have been lost. Something like that might be going on here even if it ends up that 'well' is the correct translation overall
It's harder too because Coptic has no gaps between letters, so the TE and NE could be part of other words and the ϣⲱ 'show' is a short form for well. Crum does list ϣⲱⲱ as a variant for ϣⲱⲧⲉ, so could that make sense?
Post Reply