[B-Greek] John 1:1c
James Spinti
JSpinti at Eisenbrauns.com
Wed Jul 5 14:29:27 EDT 2006
Has anybody thought about checking the Patristic evidence? They knew
Greek :) And, they argued all this stuff out extensively, for about two
hundred years (B-Greek hasn't been doing it that long--yet!).
Unfortunately the IVP ACCS volume on John isn't done, so I don't know of
an easy way to get it all. Maybe a search for John 1:1 in an electronic
version of the Nicene/Ante-Nicene/Post-Nicene Fathers?
I realize that some of you will claim theological bias on the part of
the fathers, but Eusebius wasn't exactly Nicene in theology.
Just a thought.
James
________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for over 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of
> Awohili at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 1:37 PM
> To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Cc: Awohili at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 1:1c
>
>
>
>
> Another very early translation of John's Greek text is that
> of the Coptic
> Sahidic version (probably 2nd/3rd century). The Egyptian
> Copts were quite
> familiar with Koine, which was introduced to Egypt from the
> time of Alexander,
> and was still a spoken language at the time, and were careful
> translators of the
> NT. Many textual critics recognize the value of the Coptic
> NT for their
> field of study, considering it to be as relevant as the
> Vulgate and the
> Peshitta, for example..
>
> The Sahidic Coptic translation of John 1:1b says,
>
> auw p.SaJe ne.F.Soop n.naHr.m p.noute,
>
> meaning, "and the Word was (existing) *in the presence of* the God."
>
> Thus, they translated Greek PROS by their word *naHrn* (duly
> conjugated),
> signifying that this One was in God's presence, or in
> intimate association with
> Him.
>
> Solomon Landers
> .
>
> In a message dated 07/05/2006 10:06:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> frjsilver at optonline.net writes:
>
> Dear Friends --
>
> Perhaps the crux of the matter isn't the anarthrous
> predicative construction
> in 1c so much as the PROS in 1b, which has given us some
> food for thought.
>
> I notice that Latin renders PROS as _apud_; Church
> Slavonic, a little more
> literally, has _k"_ while Modern Russian renders this as _u_,
> much more like
> the Latin. Yet Modern Greek versions (no stable translations of the
> scriptures as yet) variously give the original PROS and -- to
> my taste -- the oddly
> appropriated PARA.
>
> Yet none of these languages suggests 'with' (or anything
> like it). Rather,
> all of them, with the weak exception of Church Slavonic,
> have much more the
> flavor of 'at'.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list