DCHindley

It is merely illustration, not for your benefit, but for the sake of other forum members. It is not meant as criticism.

As I think about it, Tertullian may have read the passage from the Old Latin translation, but I am not finding any online text of the Old Latin of Luke 18:18 to see if it may read Praeceptor. NA-27 does not include a critical note involving διδάσκαλε in 18:18, so I am assuming that the Old Latin text, if extant, also translated it as magister. Then again, he may have read the Greek text and translated it as Praeceptor on his own.

I only suggested his translation may have influenced by the Old Latin text of Lk 12:7. Again, I see no variant in NA-27 involving διδάσκαλε in 12:7 to suggest it translated the Greek other than Praeceptor.

I know you were deliberately reproducing material as it appears in the literature, but it was way too compressed to be comprehensible for most of the members here. As you may have noticed, I separated each sentence above to make it easier for list members to digest. All I want to do is make scholarship comprehensible for members.

Please, don't take things so personally. BC&H, especially under the new guidelines, is for reasoned discussions about matters touching on Biblical Criticism and History. The Owners and Moderators have expressed a desire to discourage discussions driven more by passion or dislike than by reason.

It is for those who want to raise their level of consciousness. If reasonable persons are awry in their interpretations, they need exposure to more information and introduction to other ways to interpret the issues raised by the evidence.

Citing tertiary literature as authoritative with out a little unpacking doesn't help, but hinders. We are not all professional critics with a PhD from a top notch college like Oxford.

Respectfully,

DCH

stephan huller

I am not allowed to publish untranslated German text in this forum but the German cultural critic Eugen Friedel identifies Adonai as part of the Marcionite godhead - the just god. http://books.google.com/books?id=8b9...arcion&f=false

Jeffrey Gibson

The OP was whether there were any studies/discussions anywhere of Luke's use of ἐπιστάτης as title for Jesus. Citing and quoting these studies is hardly a hindrance. It was exactly what was called for.

And btw, Oxford is a University, not a college.

Jeffrey

stephan huller

Irenaeus demonstrating yet another of his bizarre Hebrew explanations

2. The remainder of those who are falsely termed Gnostics, and who maintain that the prophets uttered their prophecies under the inspiration of different gods, will be easily overthrown by this fact, that all the prophets proclaimed one God and Lord, and that the very Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things which are therein; while they moreover announced the advent of His Son, as I shall demonstrate from the Scriptures themselves, in the books which follow.3. If, however, any object that, in the Hebrew language, diverse expressions [to represent God] occur in the Scriptures, such as Sabaoth, Eloe, Adonai, and all other such terms, striving to prove from these that there are different powers and gods, let them learn that all expressions of this kind are but announcements and appellations of one and the same Being. For the term Eloe in the Jewish language denotes God, while Eloeim(6) and Eloeuth in the Hebrew language signify "that which contains all." As to the appellation Adonai, sometimes it denotes what is nameable(7) and admirable; but at other times, when the letter Daleth in it is doubled, and the word receives an initial(8) guttural sound--thus Addonai--[it signifies], "One who bounds and separates the land from the water," so that the water should not subsequently(9) submerge the land. In like manner also, Sabaoth,(10) when it [is spelled by a Greek Omega in the last syllable [Sabaoth], denotes "a voluntary agent;" but when it is spelled with a Greek Omicron--as, for instance, Sabaoth--it expresses "the first heaven." In the same way, too, the word Jaoth,(11) when the last syllable is made long and aspirated,denotes "a predetermined measure;" but when it is written shortly by the Greek letter Omicron, namely Jaoth, it signifies "one who puts evils to flight." All the other expressions likewise bring out(1) the title of one and the same Being; as, for example (in English(2)), The Lord of Powers, The Father of all, God Almighty, The Most High, The Creator, The Maker, and such like. These are not the names and titles of a succession of different beings, but of one and the same, by means of which the one God and Father is revealed, He who contains all things, and grants to all the boon of existence.4. Now, that the preaching of the apostles, the authoritative teaching of the Lord, the announcements of the prophets, the dictated utterances of the apostles,(3) and the ministration of the law--all of which praise one and the same Being, the God and Father of all, and not many diverse beings, nor one deriving his substance from different gods or powers, but [declare] that all things [were formed] by one and the same Father (who nevertheless adapts this works] to the natures and tendencies of the materials dealt with), things visible and invisible, and, in short, all things that have been made [were created] neither by angels, nor by any other power, but by God alone, the Father--are all in harmony with our statements, has, I think, been sufficiently proved, while by these weighty arguments it has been shown that there is but one God, the Maker of all things. But that I may not be thought to avoid that series of proofs which may be derived from the Scriptures of the Lord (since, indeed, these Scriptures do much more evidently and clearly proclaim this very point), I shall, for the benefit of those at least who do not bring a depraved mind to bear upon them, devote a special book to the Scriptures referred to, which shall fairly follow them out [and explain them], and I shall plainly set forth from these divine Scriptures proofs to [satisfy] all the lovers of truth. (Adv Haer 2.35.2,3)

stephan huller

The Manichaean interpretation of Pauline material was probably developed from Marcionite sources:

1. FAUSTUS said: Why do we not receive the Old Testament? Because when a vessel is full, what is poured on it is not received, but allowed to run over; and a full stomach rejects what it cannot hold. So the Jews, satisfied with the Old Testament, reject the New; and we who have received the New Testament from Christ, reject the Old. You receive both because you are only half filled with each, and the one is not completed, but corrupted by the other. For vessels half filled should not be filled up with anything of a different nature from what they already contain. If it contains wine, it should be filled up with wine, honey with honey, vinegar with vinegar. For to pour gall on honey, or water on wine, or alkalies on vinegar, is not addition, but adulteration. This is why we do not receive the Old Testament. Our Church, the bride of Christ, the poor bride of a rich bridegroom, is content with the possession of her husband, and scorns the wealth of inferior lovers, and despises the gifts of the Old Testament and of its author, and from regard to her own character, receives only the letters of her husband. We leave the Old Testament to your Church, that, like a bride faithless to her spouse, delights in the letters and gifts of another. This lover who corrupts your chastity, the God of the Hebrews in his stone tablets promises you gold and silver, and abundance of food, and the land of Canaan. Such low rewards have tempted you to be unfaithful to Christ, after all the rich dowry bestowed by him. By such attractions the God of the Hebrews gains over the bride of Christ. You must know that you are cheated, and that these promises are false. This God is in poverty and beggary, and cannot do what he promises. For if he cannot give these things to the synagogue, his proper wife, who obeys him in all things like a servant, how can he bestow them on you who are strangers, and who proudly throw off his yoke from your necks? Go on, then, as you have begun, join the new cloth to the old garment, put the new wine in old bottles, serve two masters without pleasing either, make Christianity a monster, half horse and half man; but allow us to serve only Christ, content with his immortal dower, and imitating the apostle who says, "Our sufficiency is of God, who I has made us able ministers of the New Testament." (1) In the God of the Hebrews we have no interest whatever; for neither can he perform his promises, nor do we desire that he should. The liberality of Christ has made us indifferent to the flatteries of this stranger. This figure of the relation of the wife to her husband is sanctioned by Paul, who says: "The woman that has a husband is bound to her husband as long as he liveth; but if her husband die, she is freed from the law of her husband. So, then, if while her husband liveth she be joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband be dead, she is not an adulteress, though she be married to another man." (2) Here he shows that there is a spiritual adultery in being united to Christ before repudiating the author of the law, and counting him, as it were, as dead. This applies chiefly to the Jews who believe in Christ, and who ought to forget their former superstition. We who have been converted to Christ front heathenism, look upon the God of the Hebrews not merely as dead, but as never having existed, and do not need to be told to forget him. A Jew, when he believes, should regard Adonai as dead; a Gentile should regard his idol as dead; and so with everything that has been held sacred before conversion. One who, after giving up idolatry, worships both the God of the Hebrews and Christ, is like an abandoned woman, who after the death of one husband marries two others. (Faustus in Augustine Book 15)

Jeffrey Gibson

Do you really think anyone is taking the time to read these off topic screeds of yours? More importantly, do you really think anyone is interested in reading them?

Jeffrey

stephan huller

I don't know. I know at least one lonely guy from Chicago that keeps coming back for more.

stephan huller

I think it is interesting to suggest that all the various "Lord" terms in the Greek gospels go back to rabbun. If I managed to publish the idea I'd have to reference you in the footnotes. Imagine, you and I linked together forever in print.

Jeffrey Gibson

You are assuming I'm reading what you write rather than just noting that you are piling stuff up.

And thanks for yet another ad hominem.

Jeffrey

stephan huller

the reason I am exploring the use Hebrew adon is because of the translation of the OT in the Targums and Geniza fragments (= rabbun).