06-23-2008, 02:58 AM | #1 | ||
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
John 21:15-17
Unlike AA who read John in Greek in a semester, and who is both smart, able and quick, it took me a bit longer.
And I come to a pericope which most know but still perplexes as to why the exchange is as it is.' Quote:
In the first two inquiries, Christ asks using agapw, and Peter answer each time using philw. Christ uses philw the third time. What escaped my notice the first million times I read it, was the word for sheep changed. The first time he uses the little sheep arnia. the second time he refers to bigger sheep, probata. And he uses different forms of feed. In the first and third time he uses boske, [boske means to "feed" or to "graze"] and but in the second injunction he uses poimane. This does not mean to feed but to shepherd. He's reminding him to "shepherd" his sheep. Watch over, not just feed. The distinctions appear subtle, but why. It is an interesting exchange upon which much has been written but it remain interesting to see the Greek distinctions and to ponder the teaching reason for the meanings. English version: 1617 Quote:
In one respect, I wonder if the initial injunction is a double symbol reflecting the Lamb of God, and projecting some imagery upon his children becoming the lambs of God. And by using poimane, he's pointing out that the apostle have become surrogate Shepherds a la the Good "Shepherd", through the use of poimane. The distinctions between philrw and agapw can better be explained by others, but the agapw means to love in a moral or social sense, which is the term initially used by Christ, and Peter uses the more intimate philew, affectionate kind. By the end of the encounter both are using the intimate affectionate kind of love, pointing to the grazing as shepherds of the flock. I note the English fails to fully translate ἐλυπήθη which is an aorist for to grieve or give pain, so Peter was quite hurt that he had to plead his affection a third time, or so it seems. Meanderings, I am certain and AA and Solon can assist the old dumb guy, but thanks for playing. 21 is a beautiful chapter and I'm trying to see how the entire 21 fit in together, with the beautiful Greek imagery at the beginning finishing up with a Greek play on words with some very Hebraic imagery. Still not certain what to make of it, but John is a beautiful work.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα Last edited by Archaea; 06-23-2008 at 04:11 AM. |
||
06-23-2008, 06:29 AM | #2 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
To be honest, I don't know that I completely agree. But when a PhD in Classics argues it, it's worth at least bringing up in the conversation before you disagree with it. I think the differences are at least a little significant, but perhaps we overplay it. As far as Peter being troubled or grieved, I always thought it was because he remembered denying Christ three times, and realized the connection between the three-time denial and the three-time confession.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
06-23-2008, 03:19 PM | #3 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
My responses are merely observations. First, Christ and the apostles probably spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew, so the changes are changes which the gospelist desired to emphasize, so it could just be a form of "elegant variation". If that's all it is, then so be it. Second, Greeks appeared very sensitive to changes in word, grammar and other aspects, so it would surprise me that the writer intended to convey no nuance by the shift. Perhaps your instructor is correct, but you now have a God speaking to his friends in very grand terms using agapw, shifting at the end to philew when his friends is trembling. Perhaps no sense is intended, but under the circumstances I could see why the speaker and receiver would sense otherwise. Philew seems more subservient in Peter's usage, but then again, this is coming from the Greek village idiot.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
06-23-2008, 04:17 PM | #4 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Other uses of filew and agapaw: Lk.6:32 "And if you love (AGAPE) those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love (AGAPE) those who love (AGAPE) them." Lk. 11:43 "Woe to you Pharisees! For you love (AGAPE) the front seats in the synagogues" Lk. 16:13 "No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love (AGAPE) the other" Jn. 5:20 "For the Father loves (FILEO) the Son" Jn. 16:27 ".. for the Father Himself loves (FILEO) you, because you have loved (FILEO) me.. " Jn. 20:2 "And so she [Mary] ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved (FILEO).. " 1 Cor. 16:22 "If any one does not love (FILEO) the Lord, let him be accursed." 2 Tim. 4:10 ".. for Demas, having loved (AGAPE) this present world" Tit. 3:4 "But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love (FILEO) for mankind appeared" Tit. 3:15 "Greet those who love (FILEO) us in the faith" Rev. 3:19 "Those whom I love (FILEO), I reprove and discipline.. " And, yeah, they probably spoke Aramaic, but since the Greek is as original as we can get, I don't see any harm in treating it as such. We treat Herodotus and Xenophon as primary sources, after all.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
06-23-2008, 07:12 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 1,866
|
Quote:
__________________
I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. - Epitaph of Nikos Kazantzakis (1883-1957) |
|
06-25-2008, 03:59 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
That's a very interesting thought I had never considered or heard before. Cool stuff.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|