Jeffrey Gibson

No, at present you are begging the question (and ignoring all evidence to the contrary) when you assert not only that δαίμων generally (not originally?) meant an "indwelling god or divinity" (let alone "guardian spirit"), but that it was Christians who gave it the meaning "evil demon".


Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

The problem with this is that you have yet to show that he has "subverted" the word, let alone that he is not using it with a sense that it already -- and for some time before him -- bore.

Jeffrey

mountainman

Have a look at the OP.

The main part of the OP outlined the Greek usage of the word δαίμων.

I then assembled as an ADDENDUM the following points:

The addendum was introduced because of the relationship between the philosophical term "daimon" used by the Greek sources
and the philosophical term "heavenly twin" used by Mani and the Gnostic heretics.

I am not making the claim that these terms are related at a source level in the Greek language,
only that these terms appear to be highly related in their philosophical usage.



εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman

They look to be sources. I recognise Josephus AJ. I would have to look the others up. PMag I would guess to be a papyrus fragment.




I would like to see the expanded references for these citations.

All I am doing is asking questions.

You are the expert and I the novice.

If it is your opinion that the word "daimon" has been used by the Greeks in the derogatory sense as an "evil demon" then please provide the quotation and for most of all those reading it here, an English translation.





No I don't. I'd surmise its just a stub, a short list.


The LSJ appears to list a great many entries for the meaning of "daimon" which are quite positive in the sense that they refer to a god or a divinity which is NOT evil. There may be some exceptions, and if there are I would like to know what they are.



εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman

I may be begging the question but if this is the case I am begging for information that the question may be answered in the negative. This is a discussion forum one of the purposes of which is to ask questions in order to receive answers.

My agenda is that of a research student, not a know-it-all.

I do not have access to the libraries available to you, nor a detailed knowledge of their contents.

I do appreciate correction wherever appropriate.





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman

I am hoping that someone might provide a detailed example of an exception.

All the Greek usage that I have seen reflects a positive philosophical meaning akin to "guardian spirit".

The New Testament tells us that the "guardian spirit" is fit to be thrown into pigs.







Thanks.


εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Jeffrey Gibson

No, it didn't. What relationship is that? And where specifically do the gnostic heretics use the term "heavenly twin" in any fashion, not just, as you claim, philosophically? Please cite the Gnostic texts or the anti heresiarchical writings that outline what the Gnostics reputedly believed and said in which the Greek or the Coptic equivalent of "Heavenly Twin" (do you have any clue as to what these equivalents might be?) appears. Leaving aside the fact that you have once again not answered the questions that I asked of you or provided anything resembling evidence for your claim that "heavenly twin" was a central concept in Greek philosophy and that the word δαίμων was an integral part of the language used when discussing it --- I now ask you to tell me what you mean by "philosophical term". How is a "philosophical term" distinct from any other kind of term -- how would we identify a term as a philosophical one? I also ask you to tell me how you know that "heavenly twin" was a "philosophical term" and how specifically it is "related" to the alleged philosophical usage of the word δαίμων. Jeffrey

mountainman

Can we please discuss the addenda last?

The primary assertion of the OP is that Matthew is having Jesus cast the "daimones" (guardian spirits) into a pack of swine soon to be destroyed. I have described this as a subversion of the original Greek meaning for "daimon". The author seems to have been paving the way for the coming of the propaganda about the Christian replacement "guardian spirit", none other than the "Holy Ghost".





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Iskander

It is a very interesting observation, but if you are really serious about developing this idea into something you should stop discussing it here.

Do you know someone in Australia who might be interested in developing this theme with you as a study of cultural trends about that period?

I think you should broaden the object of your investigation and consider only the cultural aspect. Inference would spring from the study if successful.

tanya

Hi Jeffrey,
Many thanks for your thoughtful, and erudite rejoinder, well written, and much appreciated.

MT is not "the original Hebrew", it is one of the texts to be considered. I prefer to rely upon DSS, where available.

I doubt the validity of LXX. For me, the evidence is clear: DSS Deuteronomy shows YHWH, where LXX puts kurios. The change to kurios, in harmony with the tradition of calling Jesus "LORD", and the notion that he is ALSO a supreme deity, nearly, or, in some verses, identical with YHWH, was made, in my opinion, not a proven fact, by scribes in the employ of the Roman Army/leadership.

Jews may well have had NO CHOICE but to call YHWH "kurios". It is easy for us, today, to talk big about independence, free thought, scholarly disposition, and so on.....

Back then, disagreements led to a sword coming at one's head.

Think about Maimonides, great scholar of Judaism. Upon which documents was he compelled to rely? Were not all the documents given to him, filtered by way of the Muslims? How likely is it that he had available to him, something akin to DSS?

To me, it is simply inconceivable that YHWH could be equated with a mere human, i.e. a kurios.

I don't know whether or not ancient Jews considered daimon an adequate Greek translation of the original Hebrew, but, I do know that Jerome followed the Lucianic recension, in preparing the Latin Vulgate, and there we find "sculptilia", not demon, for Psalm 96:5.