From miser17@epix.net Wed Jun  3 00:42:49 1998
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 17:33:26 -0400
From: Stevan Davies <miser17@epix.net>
To: crosstalk@info.harpercollins.com
Subject: RE: Thomas 24



> There's a whole analysis of Q 11. 34-36 (the eye is the lamp of the body...)
> in Dale Allison 'The Jesus Tradition in Q' in this vein.
> 
> He outline 4 theories of vision in the ancient world:
> 
> 1. We see because the objects of sights give off 'effluences' - when these
> effluences enter our eye we see (Democritus, Epicurus, Leucippos)
> 
> 2. We see because the eye produces a 'visual ray' which reaches out and
> comes into contact with the objects in the world (Alcmaeon, Parmenides,
> Pythagoreans, Stoics)
> 
> 3. We see because both our eyes gives off and ray and objects produce
> emanations - when the light of the eye encounters the emanation we see
> (Plato)
> 
> 4. We see because of the medium between us and the object - this 'transfers'
> (so to say) the impression from the passive sender (object) to the passive
> receptor (eye) - the active mechanism is the 'in between' [the medium is the
> message] (Aristotle)
> 
> Hope this is of some interest - it's a short article - I could say more if
> you're intested,
> Jacob

Yes. I'd like to hear more.

Jesus, I suppose, holds theory 2. Thomas 24 is just about a perfect
statement of the position. But it would be nice to know what Allison 
thinks.

> GTh 24b)   "Whoever has ears, let him hear. There is
> light within a man of light, and he lights up the whole
> world. If he does not shine, he is darkness."

If both the Q and Thomas sayings reflect the same optical theory,
and it does not seem that the early Christians (aka canonical 
writers) were concerned in the slightest with optics, then you have
conceptual multiple attestation and dissimilarity arguments toward
the notion that the historical Jesus had an interest in the subject,
which would be the first I ever heard of Jesus holding an actual
opinion about something other than lifestyles. 

Steve