 |
FILOLOGÍA NEOTESTAMENTARIAVol. I - fascículo 1 - Mayo 1988 |
 |
|
FILOLOGÍA NEOTESTAMENTARIAVol. I - fascículo 1 - Mayo 1988 |
|
INDEX / ÍNDICE
ARTICLES / ARTÍCULOS
MATEOS, J.: Análisis de un campo lexemático. Eulogía en el Nuevo Testamento
HILHORST, A.: Termes chrétiens issus du vocabulaire de la démocratie athénienne
RIUS-CAMPS, J.: Pentecostés versus Babel. Estudio crítico de Hch 2
MARCO, A. di: Koinonía pneúmatos (2 Cor 13,13,- Flp 2,1)-pneûma koinônías. Circolarità e ambivalenza linguistica e filologica
MARTIN, F.: Naître entre juifs et chréttiens
BLACK, D. A.: Some Dissenting Notes on R. Stein's The Synoptic Problem and Markan «Errors»
GARCÍA ROMERO, F. A.: El Nuevo Testamento y los Post Homerica de Quinto de Esmirna
ABSTRACTS / RESÚMENES
ANALISIS DE UN CAMPO
LEXEMATICO. EULOGIA EN EL NUEVO TESTAMENTO
Juan Mateos
«Lexematic Fíeld» is the name given by the author to the group of meanings or sememes which present a certain lexeme within a corpus. The article attempts to analyse each of the sememes formed by the term eulogía in the New Testament.
The introduction gives a brief description of the method chosen to carry out the analysis, based on data provided by Concordances and Dictionaries of the N.T., and points out the causes that originate the diversity lexeme's meaning in different contexts.
The first part attempts to establish the semic nucleus of eulogía (componentíal analysis); it groups the fourteen cases in which this term appears in the N.T. and adopts Bauer's classification (Worterbuch, s.v.) as a basis. Taking etymology and the simplest meaning as a starting point (speak well), he establishes the term's semantic formula. This is developed by applying the semantíc categories of Aspect and Voice to its elements, differentiating between generic and specific semantic features. In this way the semic nucleus is established for eulogía in its intransitive use, and its definition is given.
The rest of the meanings or sememes derive from the first by adding or neutralizing certain features. The transitive use is created by adding a cognoscitive feature (praise, approval, thanks) or one of volition (blessing, promíse, promised gift). The suppression of the feature «verbality» produces the sememe «gift, donation, present».
In the second part the investigation is applied to N.T. texts, improving Bauer's classification, and studying five difficult cases in particular: Rom 16:18; 1 Cor l0:16; 2 Cor 9:5b.6 (bis); 1 Pt 3:9.
As a final summary, the outline of a dictionary article is presented on the term eulogía in the N.T.
TERMES CHRÉTIENS ISSUS
DU VOCABULAIRE DE LA DÉMOCRATIE ATHÉNIENNE
A. Hilhorst
It seems impossible to banish the determination to find through etymology the «true» meaning of words. This is shown by the author who quotes Barth and Küng. The methodological absurdity involved is evidenced by J. Barr.
However, the study of the semantic evolution of words can provide precise data on the history of ideas.
In this sense the author studies a group of words that formed part of the vocabulary of the Athenian democracy and which, in those very times or during Hellenism, suffered a broadening of meaning which removed all their technical character, and in the end they once more became terms with a precise sense, this time either within the Biblical Greek framework or, more generally, Christian, or at least being used with a certain predilection in contexts that trnsmit specifically religious notions. The new meaning does not exclude the former; on the contrary , both are almost always preserved, cf. Acts 18 and 20: ekklêsía = «church»; in Acts 19 = «assembly».
The author examines various terms, firstly politeía, after Herodotus, meant citizenship, government, constitution (parallel politeúô after Aristophanes) the change in the politícal system provokes the change in sense: from «participating in city affairs» it becomes simply «behave», sometimes with a moral implication, this being more accentuated in Hellenistic Jewish authors, in the N.T. and in certain Christian authors.
The term ekklesía means «people's assembly» since its very appearance (Herodotus). in Athens, the ekklêsía was the supreme State authority. But in Euripides and Xenophon it was already being ussed to refer to other assemblies, even non-official ones and this sense would continue to be frequent in the following centuries. Campbell has shown that the Christians adopted the wider meaning to refer to their communities and the Church in the universal sense. Its meaning should not therefore be deduced from ekkaleîn nor from the LXX expression ekklêsía kuríou.
In the Athenian democracy the term leitourgíai was applied to the special obligations taken on by certain wealthy citizens to fund the costs of a ship's weapons or the forming of a chorus for dramatícal performances or other activities. Soon, however, the general meaning of «service» would appear, applied, already in Aristoteles, to religious service. In the LXX it refers mainly to worship and in the same way leitourgéô and leitourgós from the LXX and Polybius. But in the N.T. it is also to be found bereft of religious meaning, cf. Phil 2:30.
The jorêgía was a special form of leitourgía in classical Athens, and means supplying the funds necessary for having plays studied and performed at important feasts. Soon it would generalize, meaning «fund the costs of something» (already in the fifth century A.C. in Democritus) «subsidy», «provision, distribution», a meaning that would become very extended. Later it is used to refer to the ability which God gives to man, as in 2 Mc 1:25; 1 Pt 4:11.
Zeôrós, Zeôréô, Zeôría present considerable difficulties in their semantic evolution. According to H. Koller, zeôrós (from zeo-ôrós) would mean «director of the god's affairs», «observing of the god's will», and would apply to the person in charge of advising the consulting the oracle in his native city or participated in festivals abroad. Zeôréô would mean to hold the post of zeôrós; involving journeys: from this «see many things» (travelling) and later «see», «know» and «vision, theory». Zeôrós would never have the sense of «spectator» but always «representative». The latter statement is not exact, as can be seen in Aeschylus, Prom. 118 and Coeph. 246. In later times, although it is used for the vision of God, it has no technical character, cf. Jn 14:19.
The parrêsía «freedom to say all» (pan-rêsía) was a feature characteristic of citizens of the pólis, cf. Plato, Rep 557 b. Used outside publiccircles, it developed various shades of meaning. It will suffice to mention in the Greek Bible the sense of «confidence, assurance (before God)», lacking in technical character, cf. Jn 3:21.
PENTECOSTES VERSUS BABEL.
ESTUDIO CRÍTICO DE HCH 2
J. Rius-Camps
The article states that textual criticism problems are closely related to the historical style attributed to the narration, and that the detection of certain textual anomalies has led to postulate the existence of sources prior to the Lukan narration.
The author does not deny in principle that Luke could have used some source when composing the second book. However, on the one hand, the multiple hypotheses formulated by writers, often contradictory and lacking the possibility of proof, and on the other hand, the corroboration of a double register which shows up time and again in the different parts that make up the narration, leads to postulate a theological-narrative literary style, different to the purely historical one and common to the two books of Luke's work.
The frequent register changes are seen to be intentional. The reading,of the Acts of the Apostles since remote times as a book of history, cut off from the Gospel, has had consequences difficult to avoid. Not having understood the figurative meaning of the presence of representatives from all the nations as residents in jerusalem, the centre of judaism (Acts 2:9- 1 l), these were taken as jews from the Diaspore. The addition of «jews» (Acts 2:5) has contaminated both the Alexandrian and Occidental recensions, only escaping the Sinaitic version and some manuscripts from the Itala and Vulgate.
On the other hand, the eagerness to prove that Luke was inspired by similar lists from profane works when compiling the lists of nations has deviated the attention from its structure as a triptych , composed of two tertiary lists of peoples following ethnic criteria, one on each side, and the naming of nine nations in the centre, following geographical criteria. So Luke describes, in three-dimensional forre: - past, present and future;- the presence in Jerusalem of that same human race which had been obliged to scatter throughout the world owing to the confusion of languages which occurred in the mythical Biblical episode, and the reunification in Pentecost thanks to a «language» intelligible to all peoples, the language granted by the Spirit to express itself to the first community of believers.
The parenthetic clause «jews and Proselytes» (Acts 2:11) which some writers consider as an integral part of the list, in spite of the evident change of code (religious code), serves to avoid the Roman occupational army: - the only Romans who were really present in jerusalem; - from being considered as witness to the events.
The fact that certain variants in the Occidental recension confirm Luke's use of a double register: - figurative presence of «whole world» in Pentecost and real presence of the «Jews»; - is an indication that this recension preserves authentic Lukan readings. The many echoes of the Babel episode and the series of reminiscenses of the Baptist's preparatory preachings are some of the editorial forms used by Luke so that the readers associate the present scene or dissertation to other stories which serve as a background to its interpretation.
KOINÔNIA PNEUMATOS
(2Cor 13,13; Flp 2,1) - PNEUMA KOINÔNIAS. CIRCOLARITÀ E AMBIVALENZA LINGUISTICA E
FILOLOGICA
A. S. Di Marco
The article presents the following question: the meaning of the phrase koinônía pneúmatos includes that of pneûma koinônías? From here another more general question is proposed: circularity in language?
The frequency of expressions of the A.B.+ B.A. type is shown in the Bible, in literature and in everyday speech. Examples are given to verify this, not only in yuxtaposed sentences but also those far apart, setting up a sort of «distant circularity». Finally, other examples are quoted that seem to contradict not only the former, but also the very statement of linguistic circularity, as in them such circularlty is explicitly excluded (cf. Mk 2:27). Nevertheless, the need to express rejection by opposition leads perhaps to an acceptance of what is rejected. This may be valid in other situations. Perhaps our statements are not absolute, but refer to particular cases and are not always absolutely true.
It then goes on to a consideration of the genitive in the expression koinônía pneúmatos. It examines the differences, not always absolute, between «objective» and «subjective» genitive. It makes it clear that the genitive is equivalent to all flexional cases and exercises the functions of any other. It is «adjectival case».
It goes on to consider the logical aspect, the relation, accepted or disputed, between grammatical and logic categories and ambiguity or «vagueness» of language. This is why the linguistic phenomenon of the genitive must be accepted for what it is. The hypothesis can be drawn that the genitive is always objective and subjective at the same time. lt would be one more case of polisemia, supported by texts from Rom l: 17 and Mk l: 1.
Another indication that the phenomenon analysed is not an isolated ressource, but something deeper and essential to language, can be seen in the circularity theory (ambivalence-reciprocity) of language, which appears as a linguistic «universal»: it is the mutual influence between different parts of linguistie assertions, to the point that the end of a sentence or text is active from the very beginning of that sentence or text. Proof is given by converting active sentences into passive. Innumerable mutual influences of this kind exist in language, and also occur between language and reality, one language and another. The «circular structure» seems to be found particularly in religious language.
Linguistic circularity can also be appreciated by means of «communication» and «reception» theories; the message «circulates» between the emitting agent and the receiving agent. lt also has logical and ontological implications, as argument works by inserting concepts within others, until arriving at the principle of «to each action corresponds an equal and a contrary reaction». Circularity exists between language, thought and reality. Logics, mathematics and ontology are circular.
The conclusion, which returns to the exegetical Biblical terrain, brings to mind the «hermeneutical circle», whose origin probably lies in ancient rhetoric. Today, the «hermeneutical circle», has become a general principle, as much as a tool for investigation as a universal philosophical principle for interpretation and knowledge (of the world). But the hermeneutical circle must be correct, not warped.
In view of this, it can be said that l) many examples of linguistic and philological circularity exisc; 2) it is possible that not everything in language is circular; 3) when two words or linguistic elements are close it may happen (although unconsciously) that they are understood not just in one sense but also in the opposite.
Bearing in mind these points and limitations, the phrase koinônía pneúmatos could also mean pneûma koinônías.
NAÎTRE ENTRE JUIFS ET
PAÏENS
F. Martin
Using A. J. Greimas'semiotic theory, the article investigates, on the basis of Mt 2, the figure of speech of the fulfilment of the Scriptures or of the Prophets (cf. Mt 2:15,18,23). The passages quoted by the evangelist, separated from the books to which they belong, appear in they Gospel story; one of the texts interprets the other.
Seen from this perspective, the Old Testament does not offer the historical, geographical and religious picture into which the Gospel is set, nor does it provide the key to its interpretation. On the contrary, the Old Testament, as a secondary story, is textually contained in and semiotically interpreted by the New Testament narrative.
The article lends preference to the text's descriptive level and attempts to discover how the figurative groups presented in it make their own and interpret the figures contained in the prophet's quotations.
The three fulfilment quotations in Mt 2 are related to places: Egypt (2:15), Bethlehem-Rama (2:18) and Nazareth (2:23). The appearance of these three place-names coincides with the moment when the story introduces the hero into a world of social relations: the East with tbe Wise Men; the jews with their king, their high priests and their scribes. The child is caught up in the clash between two worlds, and the encounters are at the same time the result and the cause of numerous journeys: the Wise Men come from Orient, pass through the jerusalem Court, stop in Bethlehem and return by a different route; joseph lees to Egypt; Herod sends his agents to the district of Bethlehem; the child is brought back from exile, introduced into the land of Israel and installed in Nazareth. The fulfilment quotations concern one or other of these movements. This means to say that the place-names have a structuring role throughout the sequence.
In the first part of the analysis, Jerusalem or the clash between two worlds, the opposition is examined (1: 1) between the static world of the Jews/Herod and the dinamic world of the pagans/Wise Men, whose journeying expresses the intensity of a longing. lt is the same opposition that exists between the static, self-sufficient Book and the mobility of the sign/star. The Wise Men's question represents a double threat: to genealogical succession and to the Messiah as exclusive patrimony of the Jews. The intention behind Herod's program is to avoid both dangers.
The execution of Herod's programme (1:2) has a startling result: l) t,he Wise Men are diverted from their itinerary and 2) the Book's prophecies are fulfifled. Preventing the Wise Men's return to jerusalem, the angel's message prevents the new born child being returned to judaism. But the Jewish universe cannot tolerate the Messiah's existence outside the Book's control. The Book says and contains an, so all must be reduced to its dimension.
The second part of the analysis (2) examines the three fulfilments. The coming of Jesus makes an evaluation of both worlds, jewish and pagan, which represent two opposite poles. Each, separately, silences the Word: the jews, with the immobility of the Scriptures; the pagans, attaching it to a semiology that confuses the Word with things. Both, the static Scriptures and humanity's desire must mect so that the Word can sound out.
First fulfilment (2.1), Hosiah's prophecy (Mt 2:15): Out of Egypt have I called my son. Herod's action leads the child to the land of refuge, Egypt, a pagan land, where the life under threat is protected and grows, but it lacks the simbolic system without which the subject leads a dispersed existence. The fulfilment of Hosiah's word provides the third element capable of articulating thejewish and pagan systems. The Lord takes on the thematic role of father; he has withdrawn the child from Bethlehem/judea, land of the Fathers and he takes him away from Egypt/Mother. Being a son is only granted by the Lord.
Second fulfilment (2.2), jeremiah's prophecy (Mt 2:18): Rachel weep,'ng for her children. The slaying makes a voice sound outside the book's written word. Herod wants to prevent the existence of the real Messiah but at the same time, as according to what is written the Book's Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, he eliminates the possibility of that Messiah's existence.
Each of those two worlds, represented by Bethlehem and Egypt respectively (2.3), presents its own resistence to the coming of the Word. Jesus, its bearer, wffl have to address first of aB the jewish people, whose lie must be revealed, so that tbe Scripture's truth be liberated.
Third fulfilment (2.4). From what point could the bearer of the Word make it heard in both worlds? Settling in Nazareth means «entering in the land of Israel,» but keeping at a distance from iudea. The journey is not just the annulment of exile; the land of Israel, characterized by its own division, brings judea, sole dominion of the separatist law, together with Galilee, composed of a multitude of semi-pagan regions.
The bearer of the Word had to leave pagan country and enter into the land of Israel, as the latter is in possession of the code without which nobody can enter the simbolic system or, consequently, live apart from the confusion of things, where desire is unable to find verbal expression. Settling in Nazareth is not only the geographical end of the journeys, but the coming together in one place of what had been carried out before in two separate lands. From chis single place, what was said to one could be heard by the other.
The name Nazorean covers both places in the former itinerary, Bethlebem and Egypt. lt is the name by which the Messiab, who is neitherjewish nor pagan, is the person cafied, named and recognized by all. It refers to one single subject, situated in the place where two parts of a separate world come together, and the division runs through the very subject, who belongs to both. He is the only subject capable of bearing the Word that up to that moment God had conveyed through the multitude ' of prophets. Everything said by them from the beginning converges towards this fulfilment, as it deals with the very possibility God has of communicating with man.
SOME DISSENTING NOTES
ON R. STEIN'S THE SYNOTIC PROBLEM AND MARKAN ERROR
David Alan Black
El articulo ataca la tendencia aún existente en algunos biblistas a perpetuar una lingüística anticuada, que es a menudo inexacta y, a veces, errónea. Se refiere concretamente a la obra de Robert H. Stein, que acepta la prioridad de Marcos basándola en parte en la supuesta «inferioridad» gramatical éste comparado con Mateo y Lucas. En Marcos existen peculiaridades gramaticales, pero Stein no demuestra que lo sean las que él señala ni indica dónde están las verdaderas diferencias de gramática.
Se desarrollan los puntos siguientes, propuestos por Stein:
1) En Mc 10,20, Stein considera incorrecto el uso del aoristo medio efulacámên (Mc 10,20); Mateo y Lucas emplean la forma activa, «correcta». Sin embargo, aunque la función de la voz media es básicamente reflexiva, si su valor es reflexivo o no ha de ser examinado en cada caso. En los LXX, fuláttô es con frecuencia deponente, y Marcos puede haber seguido este uso.
2) Stein opone el uso de krábattos (Mc 2,4) al de klínê, klinídion (Mt 9,2.6; Lc 5,18.19), considerando el primero equivalente al inglés pad, término de argot para bed, «cama/lecho». El autor opina que califica krábattos como término de argot se debe solamente a la traducción inglesa (pad) propuesta por Stein.
Para Stein, el término ekbállei (Mc 1,12) para expresar la acción del Espíritu sobre jesús resulta «crudo y confuso» si se compara con aéjqê o égeto, usados, respectivamente, por Mt 4,1 y Lc 4,1. Pero el uso en Marcos depende del contexto y del tema, sin que el empleo de ekbállei diga nada sobre datación relativa de los evangelios ni sobre su dependencia literaria.
3) Stein critica la sintaxis de Mc 4,41, donde un verbo singular lleva dos sujetos. Robertson, por el contrario, la pone como ejemplo de la «construcción pindárica». El caso, además, no es único en el NT (cf. Sant 5,3; 1 Cor 15,50; Ap 21,16).
4)La sintaxis de Mc 16,6: íde o tópos, contiene, según Stein, dos incorrecciones: íde, singular dirigido a un sujeto plural (Mt 28,6: ídete) y o tópos en nominativo en vez de acusativo (Mt: tón tópon). Íde, sin embargo, se ha convertido en una partícula exclamativa, como idoú, y, en consecuencia, no rige acusativo (cf. Jn 1,29; 19,26.27).
5) Stein pone reparos a la sintaxis de Mc 5,9-10, donde se pasa de un plural (polloí esmen) a un singular (parekálei) y de nuevo a un plural (autoús); Lc 8,30-31, en cambio, usa el plural a lo largo del pasaje. La fluctuación de Marcos puede deberse, sin embargo, a un punto de vista diferente.
El autor resume lo dicho en las siguientes pautas:
l) No hay reglas rígidas sobre el uso del lenguaje. Éste depende de la situación, intención del autor, lugar y tiempo.
2) Hay que tener siempre presente la distinción entre los niveles culturales del lenguaje, que son sociales, y las variaciones funcionales, que dependen de la situación. Puede quizá justificarse el intento de determinar el nivel cultural del estilo de Marcos, pero para los estudios sinópticos no se gana nada argumentando a partir de variaciones funcionales, como la voz de fullássô.
3) El lenguaje de cada evangelista es un idiolecto. Las diferencias no son errores; la idea de «error» nace de la insistencia en la rigidez gramatical, sin reconocer la relatividad del lenguaje.
4) Habría que analizar, más que palabras aisladas, pasajes extensos; el análisis debería tener por punto de partida la macroestructura del texto.
EL NUEVO TESTAMENTO Y
LOS POST HOMERICA DE QUINTO ESMIRNA
F. A. García Romero
The article attempts to throw light on the controversy over the possible inspiration in Christian poets of the Post Homerica by Quintus Smyrnaeus.
The problem centres on two questions: are the Post Homerica distanced from the Homeric gods? Is their stoic inspiration identified with Christian inspiration?
Points of contact with the Christian poets of the fourth and fifth centuries (Gregorius Nazianzenus, Nonnus and others) are clear, but must the conclusion be reached that the Post Homerica are Christian poems? In fact, no coincidence, and even less parallelism, is to be found with the N.T. and New Testament apocrypha.
The article analyses two passages (QS VII 41-44.88-89), from which it examines the use of the verb anístêmi and the opposition psujé-sôma, as well as the idea of post mortem reward or punishment. Thee conclusion reached is that classical tradition (Plato, the Stoics) is to be found even in ideas that differ from Homeric epics. Another question altogether is whether or not these ideas haye fitted in well with Christian thought. So it is not proved that Quintus Smyrnaeus was a Christian author; he is en epic author far removed from his model, who reflects the influence of stoicism and the ideas of his time.