The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by mlinssen »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:35 pm There is no Coptic to Greek translation nor is there any Greek to Coptic translation.
So, what is there?
Matthew and Luke introduce a parable likening the kingdom to leaven that is put into dough; Thomas has a parable likening it to a woman who does certain things. The two parables are clearly related but have diverged on the basis of reinterpretation of the symbols and analogical meaning of the kingdom itself.

(The colostrom in Thomas -- if that's the original word -- is very much a side point: it is not the point of comparison with the kingdom as the leaven is in the canonical gospels.)
You do what apologists do: your centre of the universe is Christianity and the NT, and everything that is different from that gets discarded without further ado
Besides, transcriptions (which is what are reproduced in this thread) are not translations. The two are quite different.
Content is what is produced in this thread, and chances of that content turning into different content upon translation.
But you ignore all that and dive immediately into context, because you either agree with my findings or can find no arguments against them.
Again, you do what apologists do: you ignore the content, drag the topic onto your terrain and into your context, and then make irrelevant comments that still don't disprove any of the points made - nor do they prove anything else but the (sometimes quite) different application by the canonicals of largely the same content, which is no news whatsoever to anyone, nor debated by anyone

I likely have to remind you that the core topic is Coptic provenance of Thomas, and the chances of Greek getting copied into Coptic or vice versa, for this particular logion.
I'll repeat the very large letters at the end of the OP, and I'll leave some out this time as the phrase apparently was too long to captivate your attention:
Which would make a solid case for Coptic Thomas being the source to the canonicals, and the original over any Greek version
Can you stay on topic? Or should the question be whether you want to stay on topic?
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by gryan »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 2:49 pm Thomas logion 96:

[ⲡⲉϫⲉ] ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ ϫⲉ ⲧ ⲙⲛ̄ⲧ ⲉⲣⲟ ⲙ̄ ⲡ ⲉⲓⲱⲧ` ⲉ ⲥ ⲧⲛ̄ⲧⲱ[ⲛ ⲉ ⲩ] ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
ⲡⲉϫⲉ- ⲓⲥ ϫⲉ- ⲧ- ⲙⲛⲧ- ⲣⲣⲟ ⲛ- ⲡ- ⲉⲓⲱⲧ ⲉ- ⸗ⲥ ⲧⲟⲛⲧⲛ+ ⲉ- ⲟⲩ- ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she is-comparable to a woman

ⲁ ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ [ⲁ ⲥ ϩⲟ]ⲡ ϥ` ϩⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ϣⲱⲧⲉ
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ⲕⲟⲩⲓ ⲛ- ⲥⲓⲣ ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϩⲱⲡ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ϩⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ϣⲱⲧⲉ
did she take [dop] a little [al] first-milk did she hide him in a(n) dough

ⲁ ⲥ ⲁⲁ ϥ ⲛ̄ ϩⲛ̄ ⲛ[ⲟϭ ⲛ̄] ⲛ ⲟⲉⲓⲕ` ⲡⲉⲧ ⲉⲩⲙ̄ ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟ ϥ ⲙⲁ[ⲣⲉ ϥ ⲥⲱ]ⲧⲙ̄
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ⲉⲓⲣⲉ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲛ- ϩⲟⲉⲓⲛⲉ ⲛⲟϭ ⲛ- ⲛ- ⲟⲉⲓⲕ ⲡⲉⲧ ⲟⲩⲛ- ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙⲙⲟ⸗ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲙⲁⲣⲉ- ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲥⲱⲧⲙ
did she make-be him of some(PL) great [al] loaf he-who there-be ear within he let! he hear

The usual recipe from my translation: first row is MS transcript, second row is Crum (and KELLIA CDO) dictionary entry, third row is translation

You'll all be familiar with it, its parallels can be found in the NT:

Matthew 13:33 Ἄλλην (Another) παραβολὴν (parable) ἐλάλησεν (spoke He) αὐτοῖς (to them): “Ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (is) ἡ (the) βασιλεία (kingdom) τῶν (of the) οὐρανῶν (heavens) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἐνέκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of flour) σάτα (measures) τρία (three), ἕως (until) οὗ (of it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Luke 13:20 Καὶ (And) πάλιν (again) εἶπεν (He said), “Τίνι (To what) ὁμοιώσω (shall I liken) τὴν (the) βασιλείαν (kingdom) τοῦ (-) Θεοῦ (of God)? 21 ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (it is) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἔκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of meal) σάτα (measures) τρία (three) ἕως (until) οὗ (it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Re: "a little"

I note that there is a saying used twice by Paul has something in common with gThomas that is lacking in gMatt/gLuke-- "a little."

μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ

A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

How does the Greek adj. μικρός line up with the Coptic word for "a little"? Are the two words good equivalents for this possible parallel between Paul and gThomas? Are they used in translations of Greek to Coptic or Coptic to Greek elsewhere?
Last edited by gryan on Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by StephenGoranson »

I will attempt a more general comment.
If Coptic Gospel of Thomas were somehow as early as you, mlinnsen, propose, despite papyrus evidence suggesting to non-expert non-authority-in-Coptic me,
and
were gThomas the Christianity-obliterator, as you, ml, propose, it seems not to have done that.
Without that apparent (?) contradiction, it might be easier to discuss other aspects of the text. Or maybe I'm mistaken.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by mlinssen »

StephenGoranson wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:42 am I will attempt a more general comment.
If Coptic Gospel of Thomas were somehow as early as you, mlinnsen, propose, despite papyrus evidence suggesting to non-expert non-authority-in-Coptic me,
Stephen, my arguments for Coptic Thomasine Priority are solely and entirely based on textual criticism - you ignore any and all arguments there, and counter with the "papyrus evidence" alone.
And this is the last time that I will repeat myself on that, and I will just conclude that you indeed have nothing against my Coptic Thomasine Priority, nor any of their arguments - save for that
StephenGoranson wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:42 amwere gThomas the Christianity-obliterator, as you, ml, propose, it seems not to have done that.
You paraphrase my words there, have at it, fine. Yet you assume I was talking about the past?
You must have not read my viewtopic.php?p=124745#p124745

Nor my viewtopic.php?p=125131#p125131

Or my viewtopic.php?p=125146#p125146

Look for the word "co-exist" in those; and perhaps you will find something else to talk about as well
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by mlinssen »

gryan wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:33 am
mlinssen wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 2:49 pm Thomas logion 96:

[ⲡⲉϫⲉ] ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ ϫⲉ ⲧ ⲙⲛ̄ⲧ ⲉⲣⲟ ⲙ̄ ⲡ ⲉⲓⲱⲧ` ⲉ ⲥ ⲧⲛ̄ⲧⲱ[ⲛ ⲉ ⲩ] ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
ⲡⲉϫⲉ- ⲓⲥ ϫⲉ- ⲧ- ⲙⲛⲧ- ⲣⲣⲟ ⲛ- ⲡ- ⲉⲓⲱⲧ ⲉ- ⸗ⲥ ⲧⲟⲛⲧⲛ+ ⲉ- ⲟⲩ- ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she is-comparable to a woman

ⲁ ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ [ⲁ ⲥ ϩⲟ]ⲡ ϥ` ϩⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ϣⲱⲧⲉ
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ⲕⲟⲩⲓ ⲛ- ⲥⲓⲣ ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϩⲱⲡ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ϩⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ϣⲱⲧⲉ
did she take [dop] a little [al] first-milk did she hide him in a(n) dough

ⲁ ⲥ ⲁⲁ ϥ ⲛ̄ ϩⲛ̄ ⲛ[ⲟϭ ⲛ̄] ⲛ ⲟⲉⲓⲕ` ⲡⲉⲧ ⲉⲩⲙ̄ ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟ ϥ ⲙⲁ[ⲣⲉ ϥ ⲥⲱ]ⲧⲙ̄
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ⲉⲓⲣⲉ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲛ- ϩⲟⲉⲓⲛⲉ ⲛⲟϭ ⲛ- ⲛ- ⲟⲉⲓⲕ ⲡⲉⲧ ⲟⲩⲛ- ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙⲙⲟ⸗ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲙⲁⲣⲉ- ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲥⲱⲧⲙ
did she make-be him of some(PL) great [al] loaf he-who there-be ear within he let! he hear

The usual recipe from my translation: first row is MS transcript, second row is Crum (and KELLIA CDO) dictionary entry, third row is translation

You'll all be familiar with it, its parallels can be found in the NT:

Matthew 13:33 Ἄλλην (Another) παραβολὴν (parable) ἐλάλησεν (spoke He) αὐτοῖς (to them): “Ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (is) ἡ (the) βασιλεία (kingdom) τῶν (of the) οὐρανῶν (heavens) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἐνέκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of flour) σάτα (measures) τρία (three), ἕως (until) οὗ (of it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Luke 13:20 Καὶ (And) πάλιν (again) εἶπεν (He said), “Τίνι (To what) ὁμοιώσω (shall I liken) τὴν (the) βασιλείαν (kingdom) τοῦ (-) Θεοῦ (of God)? 21 ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (it is) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἔκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of meal) σάτα (measures) τρία (three) ἕως (until) οὗ (it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Re: "a little"

I note that there is a saying used twice by Paul has something in common with gThomas that is lacking in gMatt/gLuke-- "a little."

μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ

A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

How does the Greek adj. μικρός line up with the Coptic word for "a little"? Are the two words good equivalents for this possible parallel between Paul and gThomas? Are they used in translations of Greek to Coptic or Coptic to Greek elsewhere?
ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ is the word in there, Sub-Akhmimic for https://coptic-dictionary.org/entry.cgi?tla=C1054

'Small, few, young'. Why do I translate it with little (I see not enough difference between small and little, and prefer the latter in Thomas). Because Thomas uses all three words:

(From the English-Coptic concordance in my Translation)

being-few ⲥⲃⲟⲕ+ Verb 20, 73

The mustard seed is actually fewer than all the seeds, not smaller or "more little" (or μικρότερον, as Matthew and Mark have it), just as the workers for the harvest are few in logion 73: Matthew 9:37 has ὀλίγοι there, and you can easily recognise Matthew's Greek in Thomas' ⲉⲣⲅⲁⲧⲏⲥ - a fine example of verbatim agreement across Greek and Coptic (it's a Greek loanword in Coptic, one of the +/- 500 in Thomas)

little ⲕⲟⲩⲓ Adjective 4, 8, 37, 46, 65, 96
little-person ⲕⲟⲩⲓ Noun masculine 22

I'll start straight away with the infamous logion 22 where little persons take milk and "will enter the kingdom": those could be young a well, but:

young ϣⲏⲙ Adjective 4, 21, 37
young-thing ϣⲏⲙ Noun 41

But the crux is in logion 37, where both this and the next word is: ⲛⲓ ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲛ̄ ϣⲏⲣⲉ ϣⲏⲙ - those ... children ... (young as well as little appear here as adjectives to the same noun) and with all things combined, given the presumption that Thomas, like us, uses different words for different things, I can only translate as I have, after having tried all possible combinations.
The "sacrifice" I had to take (sic) is that the man who doesn't have in his hands gets taken away the "young-thing" that he has; it is what it is but that is the literal, fully normalised translation and it must be the starting point to anything beyond that. He holds something fresh in his hand, nascent - that is one of the perks when you start off with a fully normalised translation

So, in Thomas the colostrum is little, just like in Paul the leaven is little. Native Coptic in Thomas, no Greek loanword mikros in Coptic AFAIK - nothing matches here

Now, how about outside Thomas? 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Galatians 5:9

Take your pick from these Coptic bibles:

https://copticarabicbible.files.wordpre ... nglish.pdf (alas, no Paul)

http://lexicity.com/resources/coptic/texts/ - too many to choose from but a handy resource for Coptic texts

Or, of course, the Coptic Scriptorium: https://coptot.manuscriptroom.com/home (oh, only "OT")

I usually go with https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?v ... pSahHorner - that place has it all

Gal 5:9 ϣⲁⲣⲉⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲛ̅ ⲑⲁⲃ ⲧⲣⲉⲡⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲧⲏⲣϥ̅ ϥⲓ.

It's really beautiful, isn't it? I can just go there, click some, copy paste, and here we have these beautiful Coptic fonts. That, on a side note - it touches the core of my line of regular work and this would have been inconceivable just decades ago. The amount and scale of advancement on all different kinds of IT biotope aspects simply is astonishing. On a technological level, we are gods among gods really - just Sunday evening contemplations here, sorry LOL

I put some extra space in that highlighted part: a little [of] leaven.
You can see that a different noun is used, but the same adjective as in Thomas!

1 Corinthians 5:6ⲛ̅ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩⲡⲉⲧⲛ̅ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ ⲁⲛ· ⲛ̅ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̅ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲁⲛ ϫⲉ ϣⲁⲣⲉ ⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲛ̅ ⲑⲁⲃ ⲧⲣⲉⲡⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲧⲏⲣϥ̅ ϥⲓ. 7ϥⲓ ⲙ̅ⲡⲓⲑⲁⲃ ⲛ̅ⲁⲥ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛ̅ϩⲏⲧⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ̅ ϫⲉ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛⲉϣⲱⲡⲉ ⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲛ̅ⲃⲣ̅ⲣⲉ ⲕⲁⲧⲁⲑⲉ ⲉⲛⲧⲉⲧⲛ̅ϩⲉⲛⲁⲑⲁⲃ· ⲕⲁⲓⲅⲁⲣ ⲁⲩϣⲱⲱⲧ ⲙ̅ⲡⲉⲛⲡⲁⲥⲭⲁ ϩⲁⲣⲟⲛ ⲡⲉⲭ̅ⲥ̅. 8ϩⲱⲥⲧⲉ ⲙⲁⲣⲛ̅ⲣ̅ϣⲁ ϩⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲑⲁⲃ ⲁⲛ ⲛ̅ⲁⲥ. ⲟⲩⲇⲉ ϩⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲑⲁⲃ ⲁⲛ ⲛ̅ⲕⲁⲕⲓⲁ ϩⲓⲡⲟⲛⲏⲣⲓⲁ. ⲁⲗⲗⲁ ϩⲛ̅ϩⲉⲛⲁⲑⲁⲃ ⲛ̅ⲧⲃⲃⲟ ϩⲓⲙⲉ

Likewise. No one in his right mind would pick the word in Thomas, it is dangerously close to ambivalence and confusion - which is exactly the point, of course, like so many other things in Thomas

Sorry, long answer there
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by neilgodfrey »

mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 am
neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:35 pm There is no Coptic to Greek translation nor is there any Greek to Coptic translation.
So, what is there?
I followed that sentence by answering that very question, pointing what is there.
neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:35 pm
Matthew and Luke introduce a parable likening the kingdom to leaven that is put into dough; Thomas has a parable likening it to a woman who does certain things. The two parables are clearly related but have diverged on the basis of reinterpretation of the symbols and analogical meaning of the kingdom itself.

(The colostrom in Thomas -- if that's the original word -- is very much a side point: it is not the point of comparison with the kingdom as the leaven is in the canonical gospels.)
You do what apologists do: your centre of the universe is Christianity and the NT, and everything that is different from that gets discarded without further ado
I was hoping for an actual argument, not a hand-waving rejection of my reading as invalid because it is in some unexplained way "apologetics" and "centred on Christianity and the NT".

Do you have an actual argument addressing the actual points I made?

mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 am
Besides, transcriptions (which is what are reproduced in this thread) are not translations. The two are quite different.
Content is what is produced in this thread, and chances of that content turning into different content upon translation.
You are ignoring my point again and simply repeating your own. There really is a difference between transcription and translation. Just planting dictionary meanings of each word against its Coptic or Greek in the Coptic or Greek text is not a translation. That is a transcription. Translations are more challenging and require some knowledge of the respective languages, not just the ability to use a dictionary.
mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 amBut you ignore all that and dive immediately into context, because you either agree with my findings or can find no arguments against them.
So now mind-reading is another one of your areas of expertise?

You seem not to realize that your own argument is about applying a context to certain words. Without context language can have no meaning. I write the word "Fire". No-one can tell what that word means without some context.
mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 amAgain, you do what apologists do: you ignore the content,
No. I addressed the content of the words.
mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 amdrag the topic onto your terrain and into your context, and then make irrelevant comments that still don't disprove any of the points made
You mean that I dared disagree with your interpretation and demonstrated by content and its contexts that your terrain and context for it all is invalid -- and that you prefer hand-waving rhetoric to an actual detailed rebuttal.
mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 am - nor do they prove anything else but the (sometimes quite) different application by the canonicals of largely the same content, which is no news whatsoever to anyone, nor debated by anyone
And that very point undermines your case that there is an issue of direct translation between the Coptic and Greek in these respective gospels or that the idea of one had to necessarily precede the idea of the other.
mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:51 amI likely have to remind you that the core topic is Coptic provenance of Thomas, and the chances of Greek getting copied into Coptic or vice versa, for this particular logion.

I'll repeat the very large letters at the end of the OP, and I'll leave some out this time as the phrase apparently was too long to captivate your attention:
Which would make a solid case for Coptic Thomas being the source to the canonicals, and the original over any Greek version
Can you stay on topic? Or should the question be whether you want to stay on topic?
Are you asking me to apologize for disagreeing with you? Are you saying I should shake and tremble when I read words in large fonts and should discipline myself to step into line when I see a point repeated? and should note and agree with every word you argue?

Sorry, I am not familiar with such absolute certainty, and when I pose what I see are problems with the arguments presented with such certainty, and am met with a response that is hand-waving rhetoric and D-grade mind-reading and sly insults -- I tend to suspect the one who is so certain just may have a feet of clay that he cannot possibly admit to himself.
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by gryan »

mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 8:44 am
gryan wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:33 am
mlinssen wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 2:49 pm Thomas logion 96:

[ⲡⲉϫⲉ] ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ ϫⲉ ⲧ ⲙⲛ̄ⲧ ⲉⲣⲟ ⲙ̄ ⲡ ⲉⲓⲱⲧ` ⲉ ⲥ ⲧⲛ̄ⲧⲱ[ⲛ ⲉ ⲩ] ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
ⲡⲉϫⲉ- ⲓⲥ ϫⲉ- ⲧ- ⲙⲛⲧ- ⲣⲣⲟ ⲛ- ⲡ- ⲉⲓⲱⲧ ⲉ- ⸗ⲥ ⲧⲟⲛⲧⲛ+ ⲉ- ⲟⲩ- ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ
said IS : the(F) reign-of(F) king of the father she is-comparable to a woman

ⲁ ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ [ⲁ ⲥ ϩⲟ]ⲡ ϥ` ϩⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ϣⲱⲧⲉ
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ⲕⲟⲩⲓ ⲛ- ⲥⲓⲣ ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ϩⲱⲡ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ϩⲛ- ⲟⲩ- ϣⲱⲧⲉ
did she take [dop] a little [al] first-milk did she hide him in a(n) dough

ⲁ ⲥ ⲁⲁ ϥ ⲛ̄ ϩⲛ̄ ⲛ[ⲟϭ ⲛ̄] ⲛ ⲟⲉⲓⲕ` ⲡⲉⲧ ⲉⲩⲙ̄ ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟ ϥ ⲙⲁ[ⲣⲉ ϥ ⲥⲱ]ⲧⲙ̄
ⲁ- ⸗ⲥ ⲉⲓⲣⲉ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲛ- ϩⲟⲉⲓⲛⲉ ⲛⲟϭ ⲛ- ⲛ- ⲟⲉⲓⲕ ⲡⲉⲧ ⲟⲩⲛ- ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ ⲙⲙⲟ⸗ ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲙⲁⲣⲉ- ⲛⲧⲟϥ ⲥⲱⲧⲙ
did she make-be him of some(PL) great [al] loaf he-who there-be ear within he let! he hear

The usual recipe from my translation: first row is MS transcript, second row is Crum (and KELLIA CDO) dictionary entry, third row is translation

You'll all be familiar with it, its parallels can be found in the NT:

Matthew 13:33 Ἄλλην (Another) παραβολὴν (parable) ἐλάλησεν (spoke He) αὐτοῖς (to them): “Ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (is) ἡ (the) βασιλεία (kingdom) τῶν (of the) οὐρανῶν (heavens) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἐνέκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of flour) σάτα (measures) τρία (three), ἕως (until) οὗ (of it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Luke 13:20 Καὶ (And) πάλιν (again) εἶπεν (He said), “Τίνι (To what) ὁμοιώσω (shall I liken) τὴν (the) βασιλείαν (kingdom) τοῦ (-) Θεοῦ (of God)? 21 ὁμοία (Like) ἐστὶν (it is) ζύμῃ (to leaven), ἣν (which) λαβοῦσα (having taken), γυνὴ (a woman) ἔκρυψεν (hid) εἰς (in) ἀλεύρου (of meal) σάτα (measures) τρία (three) ἕως (until) οὗ (it) ἐζυμώθη (was leavened) ὅλον (all).”

Re: "a little"

I note that there is a saying used twice by Paul has something in common with gThomas that is lacking in gMatt/gLuke-- "a little."

μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ

A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

How does the Greek adj. μικρός line up with the Coptic word for "a little"? Are the two words good equivalents for this possible parallel between Paul and gThomas? Are they used in translations of Greek to Coptic or Coptic to Greek elsewhere?
ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ is the word in there, Sub-Akhmimic for https://coptic-dictionary.org/entry.cgi?tla=C1054

'Small, few, young'. Why do I translate it with little (I see not enough difference between small and little, and prefer the latter in Thomas). Because Thomas uses all three words:

(From the English-Coptic concordance in my Translation)

being-few ⲥⲃⲟⲕ+ Verb 20, 73

The mustard seed is actually fewer than all the seeds, not smaller or "more little" (or μικρότερον, as Matthew and Mark have it), just as the workers for the harvest are few in logion 73: Matthew 9:37 has ὀλίγοι there, and you can easily recognise Matthew's Greek in Thomas' ⲉⲣⲅⲁⲧⲏⲥ - a fine example of verbatim agreement across Greek and Coptic (it's a Greek loanword in Coptic, one of the +/- 500 in Thomas)

little ⲕⲟⲩⲓ Adjective 4, 8, 37, 46, 65, 96
little-person ⲕⲟⲩⲓ Noun masculine 22

I'll start straight away with the infamous logion 22 where little persons take milk and "will enter the kingdom": those could be young a well, but:

young ϣⲏⲙ Adjective 4, 21, 37
young-thing ϣⲏⲙ Noun 41

But the crux is in logion 37, where both this and the next word is: ⲛⲓ ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲛ̄ ϣⲏⲣⲉ ϣⲏⲙ - those ... children ... (young as well as little appear here as adjectives to the same noun) and with all things combined, given the presumption that Thomas, like us, uses different words for different things, I can only translate as I have, after having tried all possible combinations.
The "sacrifice" I had to take (sic) is that the man who doesn't have in his hands gets taken away the "young-thing" that he has; it is what it is but that is the literal, fully normalised translation and it must be the starting point to anything beyond that. He holds something fresh in his hand, nascent - that is one of the perks when you start off with a fully normalised translation

So, in Thomas the colostrum is little, just like in Paul the leaven is little. Native Coptic in Thomas, no Greek loanword mikros in Coptic AFAIK - nothing matches here

Now, how about outside Thomas? 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Galatians 5:9

Take your pick from these Coptic bibles:

https://copticarabicbible.files.wordpre ... nglish.pdf (alas, no Paul)

http://lexicity.com/resources/coptic/texts/ - too many to choose from but a handy resource for Coptic texts

Or, of course, the Coptic Scriptorium: https://coptot.manuscriptroom.com/home (oh, only "OT")

I usually go with https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?v ... pSahHorner - that place has it all

Gal 5:9 ϣⲁⲣⲉⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲛ̅ ⲑⲁⲃ ⲧⲣⲉⲡⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲧⲏⲣϥ̅ ϥⲓ.

It's really beautiful, isn't it? I can just go there, click some, copy paste, and here we have these beautiful Coptic fonts. That, on a side note - it touches the core of my line of regular work and this would have been inconceivable just decades ago. The amount and scale of advancement on all different kinds of IT biotope aspects simply is astonishing. On a technological level, we are gods among gods really - just Sunday evening contemplations here, sorry LOL

I put some extra space in that highlighted part: a little [of] leaven.
You can see that a different noun is used, but the same adjective as in Thomas!

1 Corinthians 5:6ⲛ̅ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩⲡⲉⲧⲛ̅ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ ⲁⲛ· ⲛ̅ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̅ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲁⲛ ϫⲉ ϣⲁⲣⲉ ⲟⲩ ⲕⲟⲩⲓ̈ ⲛ̅ ⲑⲁⲃ ⲧⲣⲉⲡⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲧⲏⲣϥ̅ ϥⲓ. 7ϥⲓ ⲙ̅ⲡⲓⲑⲁⲃ ⲛ̅ⲁⲥ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛ̅ϩⲏⲧⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ̅ ϫⲉ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛⲉϣⲱⲡⲉ ⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲟⲩⲱϣⲙ̅ ⲛ̅ⲃⲣ̅ⲣⲉ ⲕⲁⲧⲁⲑⲉ ⲉⲛⲧⲉⲧⲛ̅ϩⲉⲛⲁⲑⲁⲃ· ⲕⲁⲓⲅⲁⲣ ⲁⲩϣⲱⲱⲧ ⲙ̅ⲡⲉⲛⲡⲁⲥⲭⲁ ϩⲁⲣⲟⲛ ⲡⲉⲭ̅ⲥ̅. 8ϩⲱⲥⲧⲉ ⲙⲁⲣⲛ̅ⲣ̅ϣⲁ ϩⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲑⲁⲃ ⲁⲛ ⲛ̅ⲁⲥ. ⲟⲩⲇⲉ ϩⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲑⲁⲃ ⲁⲛ ⲛ̅ⲕⲁⲕⲓⲁ ϩⲓⲡⲟⲛⲏⲣⲓⲁ. ⲁⲗⲗⲁ ϩⲛ̅ϩⲉⲛⲁⲑⲁⲃ ⲛ̅ⲧⲃⲃⲟ ϩⲓⲙⲉ

Likewise. No one in his right mind would pick the word in Thomas, it is dangerously close to ambivalence and confusion - which is exactly the point, of course, like so many other things in Thomas

Sorry, long answer there
Thanks! That was not too long. I read it all, and checked the parallel usages, and clicked the links. I see that you have addressed the specifics of my question with great detail and care! This gives me much to ponder.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven')

Post by mlinssen »

You are welcome gryan, it's a pleasure conversing with you. I never noticed the little leaven in Gal and Cor, that broadened my horizon. I'm doing a bit of research now to see whether I can find the Coptic word of Thomas in any Coptic NT...
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven') (P75 and Chester Beatty)

Post by mlinssen »


Luke 13:20 Καὶ πάλιν εἶπεν “Τίνι ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ; 21 ὁμοία ἐστὶν ζύμῃ, ἣν
λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἔκρυψεν εἰς ἀλεύρου σάτα τρία, ἕως οὗ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον.”

That's what we have now, here's what Chester Beatty II has:

THE CHESTER BEATTY BIBLICAL PAPYRI DESCRIPTIONS AND TEXTS OF TWELVE MANUSCRIPTS ON PAPYRUS OF THE GREEK BIBLE
FASCICULUS II
THE GOSPELS AND ACTS
BY FREDERIC G. KENYON

https://chesterbeatty.ie/assets/uploads ... xt-Opt.pdf

The book is almost a century old so the font can't be copy-pasted, and I don't feel like transcribing the Greek, so here's a screenshot:
Chester Luke 13-19.png
Chester Luke 13-19.png (671.04 KiB) Viewed 1369 times
Highlighted what is added in the MSS, bold what is absent, underlined what's different, separated by /
Again, I have just pasted the Greek here so forgive me the presence of diacritics, please:

Luke 13:20 Καὶ πάλιν εἶπεν “Τίνι ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ; 21 ὁμοία ἐστὶν ζύμῃ, ἣν
λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἔκρυψεν εἰς ἀλεύρου σάτα τρία, ἕως οὗ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον.”

A 100% match, for a change

P75 has exactly what our Greek has:

https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Han ... r.Verbi%29
1B.8r

Screenshot attached, I have marked the verse with red lines at its start and end:
Mater verbi P75 Luke 13-20.png
Mater verbi P75 Luke 13-20.png (2.13 MiB) Viewed 1369 times
Well, exactly the same! There is something in the lacuna, which is underlined in red, and given the commentary in Chester Beatty it highly likely says ενεκρυψεν

So very odd and awkward that the Nestle-Aland 28 attests to the latter, whereas it completely misses out on the marvelous opportunity of noticing the MEGA tree (viewtopic.php?p=125634#p125634) in the preceding verse, isn't it?

https://www.academic-bible.com/en/onlin ... 192cc882d/
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The peculiar case of the parable of the colostrum (aka 'leaven') (P75 and Chester Beatty)

Post by andrewcriddle »

mlinssen wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 11:47 pm
Luke 13:20 Καὶ πάλιν εἶπεν “Τίνι ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ; 21 ὁμοία ἐστὶν ζύμῃ, ἣν
λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἔκρυψεν εἰς ἀλεύρου σάτα τρία, ἕως οὗ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον.”

That's what we have now, here's what Chester Beatty II has:

THE CHESTER BEATTY BIBLICAL PAPYRI DESCRIPTIONS AND TEXTS OF TWELVE MANUSCRIPTS ON PAPYRUS OF THE GREEK BIBLE
FASCICULUS II
THE GOSPELS AND ACTS
BY FREDERIC G. KENYON

https://chesterbeatty.ie/assets/uploads ... xt-Opt.pdf

The book is almost a century old so the font can't be copy-pasted, and I don't feel like transcribing the Greek, so here's a screenshot:

Chester Luke 13-19.png

Highlighted what is added in the MSS, bold what is absent, underlined what's different, separated by /
Again, I have just pasted the Greek here so forgive me the presence of diacritics, please:

Luke 13:20 Καὶ πάλιν εἶπεν “Τίνι ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ; 21 ὁμοία ἐστὶν ζύμῃ, ἣν
λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἔκρυψεν εἰς ἀλεύρου σάτα τρία, ἕως οὗ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον.”

A 100% match, for a change

P75 has exactly what our Greek has:

https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Han ... r.Verbi%29
1B.8r

Screenshot attached, I have marked the verse with red lines at its start and end:

Mater verbi P75 Luke 13-20.png

Well, exactly the same! There is something in the lacuna, which is underlined in red, and given the commentary in Chester Beatty it highly likely says ενεκρυψεν

So very odd and awkward that the Nestle-Aland 28 attests to the latter, whereas it completely misses out on the marvelous opportunity of noticing the MEGA tree (viewtopic.php?p=125634#p125634) in the preceding verse, isn't it?

https://www.academic-bible.com/en/onlin ... 192cc882d/
Nestle Aland notes MEGA in Luke 13:19 as a reading of many manuscripts including P45

Andrew Criddle

Edited to Add I think you may be using an online Nestle Aland without footnotes you really need a proper Nestle Aland.
Post Reply