Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by davidmartin »

mlinssen wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:56 am
Leucius Charinus wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 5:58 am So do you have links to the indices for Codex I and II ?
Only hardly legal ones, and Brill and such. Google is your friend
a bit off topic, can i ask a question on Thomas?
The final saying most translations say something like "i shall make her male so that she will be a living spirit like you males"
implying 'the males' are by default living spirits which doesn't make sense
wouldn't it be preferable to translate it 'I shall make her male so that she will be a living spirit that appears male'
now its clearer her spirit resembles a male spirit, the act of transformation is what makes it living, not the gender
i thought the coptic supports that because it's still talking about her spirit in general when it says 'like you males'
the translators have the wrong usage of 'like' ?
its not 'like you males are living spirits' but 'she will look like you spiritually'

:facepalm: - i would put a facepalm in the translation, why not. Jesus is in effect face palming
'I shall make her male so that in transforming she will become a living spirit, and moreover she will in outward spiritual appearance look like you males'
this isn't completely faithful to the text but so what it was Peter's fault anyway
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by mlinssen »

davidmartin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 4:45 pm
mlinssen wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:56 am
Leucius Charinus wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 5:58 am So do you have links to the indices for Codex I and II ?
Only hardly legal ones, and Brill and such. Google is your friend
a bit off topic, can i ask a question on Thomas?
The final saying most translations say something like "i shall make her male so that she will be a living spirit like you males"
implying 'the males' are by default living spirits which doesn't make sense
wouldn't it be preferable to translate it 'I shall make her male so that she will be a living spirit that appears male'
now its clearer her spirit resembles a male spirit, the act of transformation is what makes it living, not the gender
i thought the coptic supports that because it's still talking about her spirit in general when it says 'like you males'
the translators have the wrong usage of 'like' ?
its not 'like you males are living spirits' but 'she will look like you spiritually'

:facepalm: - i would put a facepalm in the translation, why not. Jesus is in effect face palming
'I shall make her male so that in transforming she will become a living spirit, and moreover she will in outward spiritual appearance look like you males'
this isn't completely faithful to the text but so what it was Peter's fault anyway
https://www.academia.edu/42110001/Inter ... tion_v1_9_

The best Thomas translation ever david; the most transparent one, the easiest traceable one, the most accurate one. Fully verifiable from the Coptic directly to the English, well well well

Hey and it's for free, well whaddayaknow?

Just take 114 from there, comment on it and then we'll talk - your answer lies there for most if not all
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by Leucius Charinus »

mlinssen wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 12:06 am
davidmartin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 4:45 pm
a bit off topic, can i ask a question on Thomas?
The final saying most translations say something like "i shall make her male so that she will be a living spirit like you males" implying 'the males' are by default living spirits which doesn't make sense .....
https://www.academia.edu/42110001/Inter ... tion_v1_9_

The best Thomas translation ever david; the most transparent one, the easiest traceable one, the most accurate one. Fully verifiable from the Coptic directly to the English, well well well

Hey and it's for free,
I hope you start to get some traction from the "professional Christian translators".
well whaddayaknow?
Am about to drive a thousand kms. Be well.
Just take 114 from there, comment on it and then we'll talk - your answer lies there for most if not all
Page 122

114

said Simon Peter to they : let! ⲙⲁⲣ.ⲓ.ϩⲁⲙ come-forth of heart/mind us : the(PL) women be-worthy not of the life said IS : lo-behold myself I will draw
[dop] she/r in-order-that I will make-be she/r [al] male So-that she/r will come-to-be likewise she/r [dop] a(n) Spirit he be-living he resemble [dop]
you(PL) [al] male : woman every in-case she/r will make-be she/r [al] male she/r will go-inward to the(F) reign-of(F) king of the(PL) heavens

re: [dop] from page 5

With the goal of the translation being that every single word and letter be translated, an issue posed itself with the so-called direct object prefix of Coptic, a word
that under certain circumstances is mandatory to be used in front of the direct object. It can be either an ⲛ- or an ⲉ-, and those can change into their pronominal forms ⲙⲙⲟ⸗ and ⲉⲣⲟ⸗ as well, and they can't be translated into English in this context but are marked instead with '[dop]', which stands for 'direct object prefix'.

Where are you up to atm in your "Complete Thomas Commentary" and when do you expect to finish with this last saying 114?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by mlinssen »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 3:41 am I hope you start to get some traction from the "professional Christian translators".
I never will until it's too late, and even then I'll only get criticism, of which only a minority will be helpful
Where are you up to atm in your "Complete Thomas Commentary" and when do you expect to finish with this last saying 114?
57 as I just picked it up again, while I'm not in any hurry.
It may take 3-5 years, perhaps 10, or never.
I've shown the way, anyone can continue - it's not like I have magical powers or anything. Just a very critical eye, and full control and overview - that's all it takes. The Translation already provides the latter, I'm surprised that no one has already finished the remainder
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by davidmartin »

btw Ignatius quotes/is aware of saying 5 'know what is in front of your face etc'
that may be sure evidence he knew Thomas c. 110, this one isn't in the canonicals, right?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by mlinssen »

davidmartin wrote: Sun May 22, 2022 11:23 pm btw Ignatius quotes/is aware of saying 5 'know what is in front of your face etc'
that may be sure evidence he knew Thomas c. 110, this one isn't in the canonicals, right?
Oh, very interesting!

Logion 5

IS said know him who is within the presence of your(SG) outward face and he who is hiding to you(SG) will uncover outward to you(SG).
There is not anyone Indeed who, while he is hiding, will not reveal outward

.
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by schillingklaus »

Ignatius is a late forgery and says thus nothing about 110.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by davidmartin »

Sure but Ignatius has 2 recensions and the longer one is a late reworking job I agree with you on that
I'm talking only about the short recension here, could a Thomas quote help date it?

In the Syriac Epistle to Polycarp it says this:
"For this purpose you are of both flesh and spirit, that you may entice those things which are visible before your face and may ask as regards those which are concealed from you that they too may be revealed to you"

Compared to Thomas
"Recognize what is before you, and what is hidden from you will be revealed to you; for there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed"

If there is no other known source for this it points to Thomas, even if it didn't the fact Ignatius is using a non-canonical saying as canonical points to an early date before the gospels being the only valid source of such sayings. It makes it look like Thomas was known to Ignatius. He clearly knows the Odes of Solomon as well something I was doubtful of till now. This stuff is a few decades earlier than say Irenaeus.
BTW Polycarp is a suspect for the author of the pastorals I read that on here on an old post
Thomas was around way before 150 is what it looks like and this proves it

And I think there's more Thomas quotes like this. I only just started looking yesterday and this one popped up straight away

From a printed book that set me back £1.99!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/173 ... UTF8&psc=1
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by mlinssen »

davidmartin wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 1:18 am Sure but Ignatius has 2 recensions and the longer one is a late reworking job I agree with you on that
I'm talking only about the short recension here, could a Thomas quote help date it?

In the Syriac Epistle to Polycarp it says this:
"For this purpose you are of both flesh and spirit, that you may entice those things which are visible before your face and may ask as regards those which are concealed from you that they too may be revealed to you"

Compared to Thomas
"Recognize what is before you, and what is hidden from you will be revealed to you; for there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed"

If there is no other known source for this it points to Thomas, even if it didn't the fact Ignatius is using a non-canonical saying as canonical points to an early date before the gospels being the only valid source of such sayings. It makes it look like Thomas was known to Ignatius. He clearly knows the Odes of Solomon as well something I was doubtful of till now. This stuff is a few decades earlier than say Irenaeus.
BTW Polycarp is a suspect for the author of the pastorals I read that on here on an old post
Thomas was around way before 150 is what it looks like and this proves it

And I think there's more Thomas quotes like this. I only just started looking yesterday and this one popped up straight away

From a printed book that set me back £1.99!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/173 ... UTF8&psc=1
DeConick usually has good parallels, yet not this time:

Matthew 10.26 (Qmatt) 'For nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.'
Luke 12.2 (Qluke) 'Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.'
Mark 4.22 'For there is nothing hidden except to be revealed; nor is anything secret, except to come to light'
Luke 8.17 'For nothing is hidden that will not be revealed, nor is anything secret that will not become known and come to light.'
Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions 3.13 'For if you had been willing to hear, that saying would have been exemplified in you, of him who said that "there is nothing hidden which shall not be known, nor covered which shall not be disclosed".'
Manichaean Kephalaia 65 'Know what is in front of your face, and then what is hidden from you will be revealed to you.'

Gathercole has none better:

Bibliography for GTh 5: H.-C. Puech, ‘Un logion de Jésus sur bandelette funéraire’, Revue de l’HistoiredesReligions147(1955),126–129,repr.inH.-C.Puech, EnQuêtedelaGnose,vol.II:Sur l’évangile selon Thomas: Esquisse d’une interprétation systématique (Paris: Gallimard, 1978), 59–62;W.Schrage,‘EvangelienzitateindenOxyrhynchus-LogienundimkoptischenThomas-evangelium’, in W. Eltester, ed. Apophoreta: Festschrift Ernst Haenchen (Berlin: Töpelmann, 1964), 251–268; S.R. Johnson, ‘The Hidden/ Revealed Saying in the Greek and Coptic Versions of Gos. Thom. 5 & 6’, NovT 44 (2002), 176–185; A. Luijendijk, ‘“Jesus says: ‘There Is Nothing Buried That Will Not Be Raised’.” A Late-Antique Shroud with Gospel of Thomas Logion 5 in Context’, ZAC 15 (2011), 389–410; Eisele, Welcher Thomas, 131–149; A. Luijendijk, ‘An Orthodox Corruption of the Gospel of Thomas’ (forthcoming).

Which highly likely means that you have a solid point, david
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Christus/Chrestus in the Original Texts

Post by davidmartin »

maybe, i don't know. at least it's a bit clearer in my own head!
i finished checking the rest and found 1 other parallel to Thomas

"He who is near to me is near the fire, and he who is far from me is far from the kingdom"

In Epistle to the Smyrnaeans
"Why have I also surrendered myself to death, to fire, to the sword, to the wild beasts? But he who is near to the sword is near to God, he that is among wild beasts is in company with God"

this has already been commented on. i think it got around in a few places outside Thomas but was from Thomas originally
well, that's 2 possible hits

the funny thing is Ignatius is seemingly going round trying to unite everyone under the bishops so they believe the same thing which kind of shows this wasn't how things were before. it's about as far back as we can go and see it start coming together in the early 2nd century. Ignatius is still a kind of prophet bishop, he see's and hears stuff in visions but if one tiny thing these bishops are saying is different from before and anyone objects to this they are heretics and outsiders. The whole suspicion is that it was different enough from before that the origins are now outside of orthodoxy and you can see the point where it happened and they didn't do a good enough job to cover it up. Exactly what I was hoping to find
Post Reply