[B-Greek] Re. Paulines vs. Hebrews

yancywsmith yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sat Sep 2 15:32:05 EDT 2006


I don't feel so bad now, I thought I was the only one using b-greek  
furtively as a procrastination junkie!
Has anyone taken a look at J. Chrysostom's comments on Hebrews,  
especially his interpretation of it as a LOGOS PARAKLESEWS?

Yancy Smith
yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
5636 Wedgworth Rd.
Fort Worth, TX 76133
817-361-7565




On Sep 2, 2006, at 10:43 AM, cwestf5155 at aol.com wrote:

>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: cwestf5155 at aol.com
>  To: cwconrad2 at mac.com
>  Sent: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 9:42 AM
>  Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Re. Paulines vs. Hebrews
>
>   I'm actually interested in hearing Carl expand his comments.  
> Generally, Hebrews is recognized as having a high quality of  
> literary Greek along with Luke-Acts and is hailed as the first  
> Christian literary masterpiece by Deissmann.
>
>  What evidence we have from the early church appears to indicate  
> that they (eg. Origin) saw a major difference between Paul's Greek  
> and the Greek of Hebrews based on literary style, which they had to  
> deal with if they wanted to assert that it was Pauline. Clement  
> noted the purity of its Greek, but then said that it was Luke's  
> translation of an epistle that Paul wrote in Hebrew!
>
>  One thing that sets Hebrews apart is its use of rhetorical  
> techniques--not only a good understanding of rhetoric, but things  
> such as the use of alliteration and rhythm. Check out M.R. Cosby's  
> rhetorical analysis of Heb 11. His thesis suggests that the  
> features that he finds make ch. 11 prominent, but it isn't  
> inconsistent with the rest of the epistle. Most now note the  
> consequent orality of the epistle--it sounds like it was meant to  
> be read out loud.
>
>  Another thing is the high level of vocabulary. While I am very  
> leery of the claims that an author wouldn't/couldn't use a markedly  
> different vocabulary letters written in different contexts,  
> probably the difference between Hebrews and the Pauline Epistles is  
> something that requires a higher reading level, as most of us know.  
> Scholars have done statistical comparisons of the vocabulary (which  
> I read with a jaundiced eye).
>
>  The repeated use of "periodic sentences" which involve long  
> complexes similar to Luke 1:1-4 are thought to be part of the high  
> literary style--the hypotaxis that Carl mentions. It's interesting  
> that Carl finds this awkward, which may indicate an artificial (?)  
> attic influence. But then I think that we often find less  
> accessible language (such as what scholars consider appropriate) to  
> be awkward.
>
>  There is extensive use of the LXX and of Pauline epistles, but the  
> approach (as Carl notes, the most extended argument in the NT), and  
> other things like the way faith is discussed are very different.
>
>  Its structure is different from the Pauline epistles, and,  
> incidentally, from other contemporary Greek and Latin exhortatory  
> letters. L. Wills and others have suggested that the "word of  
> exhortation" (TOU LOGOU THS PARAKLHSEWS in 13:22) was the form of  
> the Hellenistic sermons in the synagogues. However, there are some  
> similarities with 1 Peter and 1 John.
>
>  Check out D.A. Penick's 'Paul's Epistles Compared with One Another  
> and with the Epistle to the Hebrews', The American Journal of  
> Philology 42:1 (1921). Obviously dated, but focuses on your interest.
>
>  My participation is invariably a sign of procrastination and/or  
> stress over something like indexing or in this case, the beginning  
> of the academic year!
>
>  Cindy Westfall
>  Assistant Professor
>  McMaster Divinity College
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: cwconrad2 at mac.com
>  To: sdchar at gmail.com
>  Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>  Sent: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 5:08 AM
>  Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Re. Paulines vs. Hebrews
>
>
> On Saturday, September 02, 2006, at 00:58AM, Scott Charlesworth
> <sdchar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How would listers describe the differences between Pauline Greek  
>> (say Galatians
> and Colossians) and that used by the author of Hebrews? Does the  
> latter by
> virtue of its subject matter draw more on Septuagintal terminology?  
> Of course
> both authors were using the Greek of their day and their vocabulary  
> should be
> found in contemporaeous papyrus documents. But might Hebrews be  
> expected to draw
> more heavily from the LXX pool than the Paulines ?
>
> This is a rather superficial response, but off the "top of my head"  
> what comes
> to mind is (a) a marked rhetorical bent in argumentation that goes  
> far beyond
> what the unquestioned Pauline letters display (esp., say, in 1  
> Corinthians and
> Romans); (b) a sort of elaborate Platonic distinction between  
> heavenly realities
> and earthly "shadows"; (c) what seems to me at times a rather  
> awkward hypotactic
> concatenation of clauses which are harder to follow.
>
> I would expect Cindy West, who made Hebrews her doctoral focus, can  
> give a more
> meaningful response to your question, and as she has been active on  
> this list
> lately, I expect that she will.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> cwconrad2 at mac.com
> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
> ---
> 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
>     Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures,  
> email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> __
> Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures,  
> email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
> ---
> 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