From: "Antonio Jerez" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Thomas and synoptics Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:57:48 +0100 ---------- > Från: Stevan Davies > Till: crosstalk@info.harpercollins.com > Ämne: Re: Thomas and synoptics > Datum: den 2 oktober 1997 18:19 First of all a big apology. I made a great blunder by sending the list with Thomas/Synoptic parallels that I sent. Due to confusion (in my brain) I have sent sayings in Thomas that have parallels in ALL the synoptics mixed with sayings that only have parallels in Thomas and Matthew/Luke. This of course is not the right thing to do since Steve and me were supposed to discuss Thomas sayings that are present in all three synoptics. By sending that kind of list I have been mixing two kinds of problems: a) if Mark is dependent on Thomas, or Thomas on Mark b) if Thomas is dependent on Mtt/lLuke or Mtt/Luke dependent on Thomas. I have now revised the list and have now only shown sayings in Thomas that are present in Mark and Matthew and/or Luke. This of course makes the list a lot more relevant to the discussion Stevan and I are engaged in. Due to this revision I wouldn't any longer call the parallels between Thomas and Mtt/Luke "overwhelming" as compared to the parallels between Thomas and Mark. But I would still say that the parallels are a lot more. My new list would look like this: Verses in GThomas that look a bit closer to the version in GMark than in GMatthew and GLuke: Thomas 9 = Mark 4:2-9 Thomas 47d = Mark 2:21 (the only thing in this verse that tilts the balance in favour of Mark is the use of the word "sew" in both Thomas and Mark) In total two pretty weak parallels. Three if anybody thinks Steve has made his case for placing Thomas 20 among the parallels where Thomas and Mark are closer than the other two synoptics. Sayings in Thomas that are closer to Matthew and Luke than Mark. In total 14 sayings. Thomas 3= Luke 17:20-21 Thomas 5 = Luke 8:17 Thomas 14a= Luke 10:8-9 Thomas 14b=Mt 15:11 Thomas 31= Luke 4:23-24 Thomas 33b= Luke 10:33 Thomas 41= Mt 13:10-13 Thomas 44= Mt 12:31-32 Thomas 46b= Mt 11:11 Thomas 47c= Luke 5:37-39 Thomas 99a= Mt 12:47/Luke 8:20 Thomas 99b= Mt 12:50 Thomas 104= Luke 5:33 Thomas 106= Mt 17:19-20 Stevan picked some sayings from my (defective) list to start the discussion. Here is the first one. > Mt 13:12 For to him who has will more be given, > and he will have abundance; > but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. > > Mk 4:25 For to him who has will more be given; > and from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. > > GTh 41 Whoever has something in his hand will receive more and > whoever has nothing will be deprived of even the little he has. > ============= > > The only difference between the Mt version and the Mk version > is the addition in Mt of "and he will have abundance." As this > is lacking in GTh the GTh version is more similar to Mk than Mt. > > ============= I suppose Stevan is using the NRSV for the translation of the Synoptics. Don't know which translation he is using for GThomas. I'm using the Patterson/Meyer and the Meyer (from his Thomas book). For the Synoptics I used first the Scholars version (which Stevan said was shit!), but have now switched to the NIV. I append the versions of the saying as the NIV translates them. I have also added Luke's versions of the saying. First, Stevan is right that Matthew has "and he will have an abundance", in contrast to Mark and Thomas. So I delete my assertion that Matthew is closer to Thomas than Mark. But Thomas is not closer to Mark than to the other synoptic writer - Luke. Contrary to Thomas all synoptics have "whoever has will be given more". Thomas adds "IN HIS HAND". I don't know if we should make to much about Thomas having "recieve" and the synoptics having "be given". In Meyer's own translation it also says "be given". I don't know enough about the difference between "recieve" and "be given" in coptic (or greek) to make a judgement on what is right. In the last part of the saying all the synoptics are unanimous in having "even what he has". Thomas differs by having "even THE LITTLE he has". As for the difference between "taken away" in the synoptics and "deprived" in Thomas I don't know what to do about it. Is it synonymous in both coptic and greek? In total I find that the sayings in Luke and Mark are closest to each other. Luke and Mark are about the same in relation to Thomas. If Lukr had also added Matthew's "and in abundance" I would have given this saying to Stevan to add to his list of closer Thomas/Mark- parallels. As it is now I delete the saying from my list and put it under "undecided" sayings. Does anybody else on the list have any views on this saying? Mark 4:25 Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him Matt 13:12 Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. Luke 8:18 Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has will be taken from him. Luke 19:26 ..to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away GTh 41 Whoever has something in his hand will recieve more, and whoever has nothing will be deprived of even the little he has > GTh 90 Come unto me, for my yoke is easy and my lordship is > mild, and you will find repose for yourselves. > > Mt 11:28 Come unto me all who labor and are heavy laden and I > will give you rest. > ============== > > As this saying does not exist in Mark at all it does not support > the argument that sayings in Mt/Lk are more similar to their > parallels in Th than sayings in Mk are. It is an irrelevancy. > > ================= True. Mea culpa. This saying belongs to the larger problem of the relationship between Thomas/Mt/Lk. > Mk 4:21"No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. > If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the > tear worse. > > GTh 47 > An old patch is not sewn onto a new garment, > because a tear would result." > > Luke 5:36 > No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. > If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the > new will not match the old. > =================== > > This is a bit confused because Thomas, or a copyist, has managed > to reverse new and old. But, in any event, since the claim is that > Thomas here is closer to Luke than to Mark, a glance will reveal > that no, in fact Thomas is closer to Mark than to Luke, who has > added "and the patch from the new will not match the old" missing > in both Mk and GTh. > > ===================== I think I have created some kind of confusion here. Actually on my list (even the defective one) I have given this saying to you (under Thomas/Mark parallels), but at the same time I also put the same saying on my side (under Thomas/Mt/Luke parallels). The saying should actually be Thomas 47d= Mark 2:21. I give it to you, even if the connecting link between Thomas and Mark is very thin - the word "sew". > Mk 2:22 > And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. > If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine > and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine > into new wineskins." > > GTh 47 . And new wine is not put into old > wineskins, lest they burst; nor is old wine put into a new > wineskin, lest it spoil it > > Lk 5:37And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. > If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will > run out and the wineskins will be ruined. > 38No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. > ================= > Thomas has a nice parallel structure here, missing in the other > two. The only difference between Luke and Mark here is the > specification, by Luke, missing in Thomas, that "the wine will > run out" just in case readers are too dim to fathom what might > happen if wine bursts its wineskin. Again the Mark version is > closer to Thomas than Luke's is. > > =============== > > Both Luke and Thomas share another proverb in this set, > although not in the same order. Nothing much can be concluded from > this except that putting an old/new wine proverb near another > old/new wineskin-wine proverb is pretty predictable. > > GTh 47 No man drinks old wine and immediately > desires to drink new wine > > Lk 5:39And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, > for he says, `The old is better.'" > =============== > Stevan says that "nothing much can be concluded from this" i e the fact that Luke and Thomas share a saying that is missing in the other synoptic versions. This is a strange reasoning. More about this later. But first I give a parallel version from NIV and Meyer: Mk 2:22 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins. GTh 47c No person drinks aged wine and immediately desires to drink new wine. New wine is not poured into aged wineskins, or they might break, and aged wine is not poured into a new wineskin, or it might spoil. Lk 5:37-39 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, "The old is better". Mt 9:17 Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wine- skins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved. The first thing to notice is that Thomas and Luke have something in common against the other synoptics. Actually Thomas has right at the beginning a close paraphrase of Luke's "and no one after drinking old wine..." (which Luke has at the end). In my view this is a closer link between Thomas and Luke than Stevan's point that Thomas and Mark both lack Luke's "the wine will run out". In this case what is in the texts is more telling than what is not there. Steve also says about this "proverb" that "nothing much can be concluded from this except that putting an old/new wine proverb near another old/new wineskin-wine proverb is pretty predictable." I don't see any predictable in it at all. The saying in Thomas and Luke is not just any saying about old/new wine - with a slight variation it is the same saying making the same point. Another point is that Thomas, in Meyer's translation, in most instances lacks references to a person doing the actual pouring of the wine. Thomas just says laconically "new wine is not poured...aged wine is not poured. Mark for example has "no ONE pours...if HE does...No, HE pours". In this Thomas is the lone man. In actual wording (as a whole) and word order Mark is not closer to Thomas than Luke. The synoptics have almost everything in common against Thomas. Again - what sticks out most is the parallel between Thomas and Luke in "no one drinks aged wine and immediately..." I still think this saying belongs where I have placed it on my list What do others on crosstalk think? Steve wrote: > I don't see much point in going on about this. You are of course free to do as you want. But I am still interested in knowing what you make of my specific criticism of the parallels Thomas/Mark you brought up in your article. I may be out flying. Who knows? And what about the Ceasea Philippi scene that you claim has closer parallels to Mark than the other synoptics? I still don't see it. Best wishes to all Antonio antonio jerez antonio.jerez@swipnet.se