Page 2 of 5

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2023 1:32 pm
by MrMacSon
rgprice wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 12:02 pm
But the fact is that "Lord" is far from the name YHWH, while Jesus, a.k.a. Ἰησοῦς, a.k.a. Y'shua is much closer to Yahweh.

Of course both Y'shua and Yahweh start with the same letter.
.
  • nb.* Y'shua = God saves/rescues and Ἰησοῦς would have / does mean the same, too ie. God saves/rescues

    * see what that is? (an abbreviation for note bene aka 'note well' ie. a bit like a nomen sacrum)

rgprice wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 12:02 pm I wonder if there is any version of the nomina sacra that is interpreted as "Jesus" that could be conflated with some writing of some version of Yahweh? Ya, Yah, YHWH, etc...?
  • Ha: just before reading this I was thinking the same thing about Yahweh/YHWH and κύριος

    (more on this below)

rgprice wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 12:02 pm We don't actually know the pronunciation of YHWH. It is presumed to be "Yahweh". But what if it was Yehweh?
  • I understand Y-h.w-h can be or even should be 'pronounced' / articulated as an audible breath in [and] breath out


Besides —


.Noun

.κῡ́ριος • (kū́rios) m (genitive κῡρίου); second declension
  1. (gen.) lord, master, guardian, ruler, owner
  2. (Koine, direct address) "Sir"
  3. (Septuagint, New Testament) God (i.e., the God of Israel)
.Usage notes
  1. In the Septuagint, κύριος is regularly used to translate יהוה (a.k.a. the Tetragrammaton), as well well as אֲדׂנָי.
  2. During the Koine period, the nominative became more regular for direct address (as opposed to just the vocative).
  3. Patristic usage expanded the use of κύριος to address the Holy Spirit as well.

— beforehand, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BA%C ... E%BF%CF%82 has:


.Adjective

.κῡ́ρĭος • (kū́rios) m (feminine κῡρĭᾱ, neuter κῡ́ρĭον); first/second declension
  1. (of people) ruling, governing, having power
  2. (of things) decisive, critical, authorized, valid, legal, entitled
  3. (of times) fixed, set, appointed
  4. (of language) literal
  5. main, major, primary, principal

And


Etymology

Learnedly, from Ancient Greek κύριος (kúrios, “who has power”) (noun and adjective)

For sense "mister" (term of address), from Koine Greek Κύριος (Kúrios) & semantic loan from French monsieur or Italian signore.



Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2023 2:10 pm
by MrMacSon
MrMacSon wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 1:32 pm
  • I understand Y-h.w-h can be or even should be 'pronounced' / articulated as an audible breath in [and] breath out


.[noun] Usage notes
  1. In the Septuagint, κύριος is regularly used to translate יהוה (a.k.a. the Tetragrammaton), as well well as אֲדׂנָי.
  2. During the Koine period, the nominative became more regular for direct address (as opposed to just the vocative).
  3. Patristic usage expanded the use of κύριος to address the Holy Spirit as well.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BA%C ... E%BF%CF%82
.

  • πνεῦμα - pneuma - was the then Greek word for "breath" and, in a religious context, for "spirit" or "soul"

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2023 2:28 pm
by rgprice
I've been convinced for a long time that the name "Jesus" really refers to "Yahweh". That in whatever way, the original writer of the Pauline letters was referring to the Lord "Yahweh" all along. And that somehow this came to be interpreted as "Jesus".

There are so many complications, because the LXX refers often to "the name of the Lord" and this name must have been known on some level. The name is rendered in a variety of ways, but was also forbidden in some circles and rendered in different ways in different circles.

It seems to me that one way or another "Paul" was using a stand-in for the Tetragram and that later came to be interpreted as "Jesus".

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2023 3:13 pm
by MrMacSon
Yes.

Y'hoshua/Y'shua = Y-hw-h saves
  • (Y'hoshua, aka known as 'Joshua', = Moses' right-hand man/successor | forrmerly O'shea/Hosea)
Y'hoshua/Y'shua —> Ἰησοῦς/Iesous (etc ie. —> ISEVS in Latin —> Jesus in Engish)

But what if
  • Y-hw-h —> ΚΣ and ΘΣ
then
  • ΚΣ —> ΙΣ/ΙHΣ and IC/IHS IS/IHS, etc.,
then
  • Ἰησοῦς/Iesous (eventually)

ie. 'Jesus' was/is essentially an eventual personification of Y-hw-h


rgprice wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 2:28 pm There are so many complications, because the LXX refers often to "the name of the Lord" and this name must have been known on some level. The name is rendered in a variety of ways, but was also forbidden in some circles and rendered in different ways in different circles.
Lord in the LXX (or variations of it) are often—if not mostly (or even exclusively)—a substitution for Y-hw-h


Kyrios...is used in the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew scriptures about 7000 times, in particular translating the name God YHWH (the Tetragrammaton), and it appears in the Koine Greek New Testament about 740 times, usually referring to Jesus ...
  • ... the designation is intended to assign to Jesus the Old Testament attributes of God

    [ ... the designation was intended to assign to Jesus attributes of the 'OT God' ]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrios
.

That wikipedia webage notes
  1. Paul used κῡ́ριος for Jesus 163 times
    • Kyrios is a key element of the Christology of Apostle Paul.
      • That page says, "Most scholars agree that the use of kyrios, and hence the Lordship of Jesus, predated the Pauline Epistles, but that Saint Paul expanded and elaborated on that topic," but that may well not be true.
  2. The Gospel of Mark never applies the term kyrios as a direct reference to Jesus.
    • But, when Mark uses kyrios (e.g., in 1:3, 11:9, 12:11, etc.), it is in reference to YHWH/God.
    • And, Mark also uses κῡ́ριος in passages where it is unclear whether it applies to God or to Jesus, eg. in 5:19 or 11:3.
  3. The Gospel of John seldom uses kyrios to refer to Jesus during his ministry, but does so after the Resurrection, although the vocative kyrie (meaning sir) appears frequently

Interestingly,


In Classical Athens, the word kyrios referred to the head of the household [ie. mere, everday mortal men], who was responsible for his wife, children, and any unmarried female relatives. It was the responsibility of the kyrios to arrange the marriages of his female relatives, provide their dowries, represent them in court, if necessary, and deal with any economic transactions they were involved in worth more than a medimnos of barley. When an Athenian woman married, her husband became her new kyrios.

The existence of the system of kurioi elsewhere in ancient Greece is debated, and the evidence is not clear-cut, but Cartledge has argued that in Sparta kurioi existed, although in Gortyn they do not appear to have done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrios#Classical_Greece
.


Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2023 8:35 pm
by Leucius Charinus
MrMacSon wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 2:28 am
Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Feb 26, 2023 9:32 pm ... whoever composed Paul also preserved (and had before them as they wrote) a "Christianised" LXX (that is an LXX with runes (nomina sacra)
  • Maybe. Maybe not.
    That begs the question as to where a pre-Pauline "Christianized LXX" would have come from; unless you're positing very late writing of the Pauline letters.
The logic I invoke is that whoever wrote the NT (including Paul) was hellbent on importing legions of copy/pasted Greek material from the Greek LXX. This basically implies that they had to first construct an authoritative SOURCE version of the Greek LXX. Anything else would be prone to all sorts of errors. Consequently I think it reasonable that the establishment of a standard Greek LXX was the first priority. In this process, knowing that they were going to introduce 'runes' (nomina sacra) in the NT, they introduced runes into the LXX and thus "Christianised" it in a distinctive manner.

The direct link between the Old and the New is given by the 'rune' shared by Joshua in the Old and Jesus in the New.

I think this process is independent of the chronology. That is this process happened whether or not Paul was early or late.

Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Feb 26, 2023 9:32 pm Generally speaking most commentators assign the 'runes' to an editor of the NT collection.
  • I'm not sure about that.
Nobody is. There is no general theory for the appearance of the 'runes'.
Michael Avi-Yonah wrote:"The use of abbreviations is, on the whole, as foreign to the Greeks as it is congenial to the Romans and Byzantines.
I'd suggest that the use of these abbreviations is an indicator of Roman provenance. The Jewish writings used one major abbreviation. OTOH Roman culture was totally obsessed with the use of abbreviations in a myriad of forms.

p.11

The main categories of words commonly abbreviated (by the ROmans and Byzantines) are:


(1) Proper Names:

(a) of individuals: some greek and almost all Roman praenomina, names of Old and New Testament personages and saints, common Christian names.
(b) Collective: names of provinces, districts, towns, town-quarters, demotic names, names of phylai and Roman tribes, names of subdivision of synoecized towns.


(2) Administrative Terms:

(a) of individuals: titles of office, Roman, Late Roman and Byzantine, especially the imperial protocol; Late Roman and Byzantine honorific appellations of the various classes of officials, usually in superlative; provincial, municipal, and village functionaries; functionaries connected with local institutions, such as the prytanis.
(b) Collective: collective appellations of capital towns, towns, townlets, head villages and villages; generic appellations of town districts, town boundaries, etc; corporative municipal institutions, the assembly, the council; appellations of their resolutions.


(3) Military Terms:

(a) Individual: title of soldiers, lower and higher officers, commanders of irregular corps of auxiliaries.


(4) Commerce: Money in general, Greek and Roman denominations, weights and measures (of length and cubic), special signs used in the nilometers and in cadasters, names of goods, names of trades and professions, especially those of artisans.


(5) Religion:

(A) Pagan: names of gods, sacred functions and feasts, titles of priests, expressions of adoration and worship.
(B) Christian
(a) Individual: all degrees of secular and regular clergy, church servants and assistants, with their proper honorific appellations.
(b) Collective: religious bodies and institutions, churches and monasteries.
(c) Expressions relating to the Deity, divine attributes, the persons of the Trinity and the Virgin Mary, titles of saints, prophets and maryrs, phrases taken from prayers and liturgical formulae, terms refering to the Church and the Christian way of life and feelings.


(6) Funerary: expressions relating to the deceased, the fact of his decease, the length of his life; consoling words and phrases addressed to him; appreciations; terms refering to the tomb and burial.


(7) Dedicatory: expressions refering to the building; the act of building in general as refering to the building or the builder; special terms deonting the laying of the foundations or the completion of the structure; description of the architect, the founder or the construction; stock phrases used in dedication or on the lintel of churches or houses, especially the formula of Ps. cxxi. 8.


(8) General and various:

(a) Dating: terms connected with dating, general expressions for the divisions of time, names of days, months (Macedonian, Roman, Egyptian, and Attic), eras and other indications of period (eponymic regions, consulates or archonships, eras of provinces and towns, of Diocletian, era of indiction)
(b) Family relations and legal relations;
(c) common grammatical terms, pronouns personal and relative, conjuctions and prepositions;
(d) special technical terms relating to gladiators (...) their classes and prizes.


Michael Avi-Yonah,
Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions
Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine
(Jerusalem: Government of Palestine, 1940)

As reprinted in
Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions
Al. N. Oikonomides
Professor of Classics
Loyola University
Chicargo. Illinois
ARES Publishing 1974


Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2023 3:59 am
by rgprice
But what about the earliest patristic writers? Do they use nomina sacra?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomina_sa ... evelopment
Hurtado, following Colin Roberts, rejects that claim in favour of the theory that the first was ιη (Ἰησοῦς), as suggested in the Epistle of Barnabas, followed by the analogous χρ (Χριστός), and later by κς and θς, at about the time when the contracted forms ις and χς were adopted for the first two.

It seems that if the early patristic writers spell out the name Ἰησοῦς, they had to have gotten it from somewhere.

And truly not a single patristic writer discusses the nomina sacra?

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:22 am
by dbz
We still have to encounter the first Jesus or Christ spelled out in full in a Greek MS - I've come to 7th CE and not seen anything...
[...]
But would this be basic knowledge for scholars? Those with a Divinity degree, Theology degree, perhaps a certain chair?
Is this basic knowledge for biblical academic? If yes, for whom? If no, why not?


--by mlinssen » Jul 09, 2022 "IS XS: No Jesus or Christ spelled out in early MSS" earlywritings.com
In the developed Byzantine usage the fifteen nomina sacra in their nominative and genitive forms are as follows: […] Scholars differ in accounting for the origin and development of the system of nomina sacra.


--Metzger, Bruce M. (1981). Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography. Oxford University Press. p. 36. ISBN 978-0-19-536532-0.
[O]ne can even argue—if we didn’t have the Gospels and Acts imagining a 30s AD date for the religion’s origin, or if we decided to reject that as fiction—that Paul’s letters are more or at least as congruous with the Hasmonean date for the origins of Christianity rather than the Roman, i.e. Paul wrote in the 50s BC, not AD.
[...]
one argument for it is that it would make more sense of Paul’s telling us Aretas had a governor occupying or embargoing Damascus he had to flee from (2 Cor. 11:32-33). In the AD scenario, that requires supposing that incident happened during the Aretas-Judean conflict in 36-37 AD. No other date fits. Though we have no explicit account of Aretas occupying or embargoing Damascus in that war (it’s plausible given what we know, but not directly attested). However, some scholars suggest Paul means by ethnarch in that passage a diplomatic prefect, i.e. the marshal of a “Nabataean Quarter” of Damascus. Though we have no evidence for that being a thing either (though again it is nevertheless also plausible). By contrast, if Paul meant an incident in the 70s or 60s BC, he would have meant Aretas III rather than Aretas IV, who did in fact rule Damascus from 85 to 72 BC.

That this would perfectly align Paul’s entire chronology and ministry with the Talmudic Jesus executed in the 70s BC is indeed intriguing. But alas, this can only be speculated. There isn’t enough evidence to argue it’s probable. Meanwhile the same remarkable coincidence exists between Paul having had to dodge Aretas’s officials in 36, and the date our Gospels and Acts imply for the origin of the religion. The agreement is equally apposite.


--Richard Carrier comment-26307—10 July 2018—per "Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once!". Richard Carrier Blogs. 28 June 2018.

While "architect" is not the most common translation for the term "demiurge," it is not entirely inappropriate, as the demiurge is often associated with the creation and design of the physical world
  • If the term δημιουργός (dēmiourgós) provided by Plato in Timaeus 29a, became—in cultist slang jargon —shortened to ιουργός (ΙΟΥΡΓΌΣ), then it may be the source for the nomina sacra ΙΣ, i.e. Jesus/ιησοῦς (ΙΗΣΟΥ͂Σ).
  • "-ουργός". Wiktionary.

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:55 am
by rgprice
@dbz Very interesting, but seems to require too many inferences and suppositions...

Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2023 12:12 pm
by MrMacSon
rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 28, 2023 3:59 am
But what about the earliest patristic writers? Do they use nomina sacra?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomina_sa ... evelopment
Hurtado, following Colin Roberts, rejects that claim in favour of the theory that the first was ι̅η (Ἰησοῦς), as suggested in the Epistle of Barnabas, followed by the analogous χ̅p (Χριστός), and later by κ̅ς̅ and θ̅ς̅ , at about the time when the contracted forms ι̅ς̅ and χ̅ς were adopted for the first two.

It seems that if the early patristic writers spell out the name Ἰησοῦς, they had to have gotten it from somewhere.
.
I'm not sure any 'patristic writer' spelled out the name Ἰησοῦς (see dbz's quote of mlinssen) ... doesn't the Epistle of Barnabas have (ie. use) nomina sacra? (the author of the Epistle of Barnabas would almost certainly not have been a patristic Father and I'm not sure the categorisation 'patristic writer' is ever used or applicable: maybe 'patristic-era writer'(?))

Hurtado special pleads that "Christians wanted to show a special reverence for the name of ΙΗϹΟΥϹ and that this was the initial nomina sacra" (quote from Frank T. Miosi, 'Nomina Sacra and the Nag Hammadi Library')

Miosi has


Traube assigned their origin to Hellenistic Jews who used them to write the Greek equivalent ΘΕΟϹ for the Hebrew Tetragrammaton הוהי,YHWH. Paap preferred to find their origin with Jewish Christians who wanted to give ΘΕΟϹ the same distinction that was given to the term for ‘God’ in Hebrew texts. This Christian origin theory was supported by Schuyler Brown who argued that ΚΥΡΙΟϹ was the initial term that was contracted, and that this was then extended to ΘΕΟϹ and [then] to the specific [Christian] divine names ΙΗϹΟΥϹ and ΧΡΙϹΤΟϹ. L Hurtado drops the intermediate steps and contends that Christians wanted to show a special reverence for the name of ΙΗϹΟΥϹ and that this was the initial nomina sacra.

P. Comfort finds value in Brown’s suggestion regarding the abbreviation of ΚΥΡΙΟϹ as a replacement for the Tetragrammaton and adds the alternative possibility that the ΚΥΡΙΟϹ abbreviation was used by Christians in relation to Jesus in order to distinguish it from ΚΥΡΙΟϹ as used in non-Christian texts to refer to Caesar or to other gods.
.

And the start of the paragraph in the Wikipedia article that includes the excerpt above starts

Linguist George Howard argues that κ̅ς̅ (κύριος) and θ̅ς̅ (θεός) were the initial nomina sacra, created by non-Jewish Christian scribes who "found no traditional reasons to preserve the tetragrammaton" in copies of the Septuagint.

(I'm not sure the attribution to 'non-Jewish Christians' is appropriate as it probably cannot be verified (as with Paap appealing to 'Jewish-Christians' as noted by Miosi in the excerpt above)
  • ie. it should probably simply say:

    the initial nomina sacra [were] created by scribes who found no traditional reasons to preserve the tetragrammaton in copies of the LXX



rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 28, 2023 3:59 am And truly not a single 'patristic writer' discusses the nomina sacra?
  • Probably not. They just use them. I presume Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, etc., did too: it's likely that modern, English versions we mostly get exposed to have replaced their original nomina sacra with words ...

    ... as dbz notes: mlinssen has noted:
    dbz wrote: Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:22 am
    We still have [yet] to encounter the first Jesus or Christ spelled out in full in a Greek MS - I've come to 7th CE and not seen anything ...
    [...]
    But would this be basic knowledge for scholars? Those with a Divinity degree, Theology degree, perhaps a certain chair?
    Is this basic knowledge for biblical academic? If yes, for whom? If no, why not?



    --by mlinssen » Jul 09, 2022 "IS XS: No Jesus or Christ spelled out in early MSS" earlywritings.com

There's this from SA in a post in a thread he started titled, 'The Emphatic Article ה and the Origin of Nomina Sacra':
Secret Alias wrote: Tue May 31, 2022 4:22 pm
So again ... In the same way as a Samaritan distinguished an ordinary 'man' from Man the god they added the emphatic suffix ה

איש ordinary man and אישה Man the god *

I have argued that originally Greek speaking Christians used the overbar in the same way:

ις for איש and ι̅ς̅ for אישה *

If we expand this for the later orthodox practice of abbreviation many of the same words are distinguished by an overbar to indicate a divine version of the ordinary thing:

Θεός and θ̅ς̅
Samaritan אל and אלה = THE (truly divine) God

Ἄνθρωπος and α̅ν̅ο̅ς̅
ις for איש and ι̅ς̅ for אישה = THE (truly divine) Man

Κύριος and κ̅ς̅
Samaritan רב and רבה = THE (truly divine) Lord

χρηστός and χ̅σ̅
Samaritan טוב and טובה = THE (truly divine) Good

חילה ,חייולה, חילה רבה "the (truly divine) (Great) Power, Powerful (One)" both a Samaritan and early Christian divine epithet

I have no idea how a suffixed ה in Samaritan Aramaic became later adapted to use of an overbar in Christian scribal habits. But it might have something to do with Yahweh.


* this might go to the point I made (by the following quotation) in another post above; though I think the point might be more applicable to Κύριος and κ̅ς̅ than to "איש ordinary man and אישה Man the god" (given nomina sacra probably started with Κύριος and Θεός):

MrMacSon wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 3:13 pm
Interestingly,


In Classical Athens, the word kyrios referred to the head of the household [ie. mere, everday mortal men], who was responsible for his wife, children, and any unmarried female relatives. It was the responsibility of the kyrios to arrange the marriages of his female relatives, provide their dowries, represent them in court, if necessary, and deal with any economic transactions they were involved in worth more than a medimnos of barley. When an Athenian woman married, her husband became her new kyrios.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrios#Classical_Greece
.


Re: Pauline origin of the nomina sacra?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2023 1:02 pm
by MrMacSon