tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post2900501071862444158..comments2024-03-21T14:59:20.729-04:00Comments on NT Blog: Andronicus and Junia prominent among "the apostles"Mark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-88116891574917053372009-09-17T10:37:02.334-04:002009-09-17T10:37:02.334-04:00Thanks, Doug. It is only a minor point, but the m...Thanks, Doug. It is only a minor point, but the more I think about it, the more I reckon that the NET Bible style translation is problematic here.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-11944330130614710922009-09-17T10:36:09.229-04:002009-09-17T10:36:09.229-04:00Thanks, Mark. Yes, I have wondered about 1 Cor. 1...Thanks, Mark. Yes, I have wondered about 1 Cor. 15, but as you point out there is the time sequence element there, and the fact that Paul is clearly commenting on a tradition that he has received (1 Cor. 15.1-3). What is different in the proposed translation of Rom. 16.7 is the appeal to a group of "the apostles" as if an external group.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-54112546666084922262009-09-17T10:31:43.325-04:002009-09-17T10:31:43.325-04:00Thanks, sundaypage. Good question. I suppose tha...Thanks, sundaypage. Good question. I suppose that the way that Paul has structured it actually ends up placing emphasis on ἐπίσημοι. They are not just apostles, they are *outstanding* among the apostles. That's how I'd take it, I think.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1000401122113520272009-09-17T10:30:11.472-04:002009-09-17T10:30:11.472-04:00Thanks, Judy. It's useful to have the reminde...Thanks, Judy. It's useful to have the reminder about "the pews". This is what glorious (?!) academic isolation can do for you. I suppose that the "Junia" translation is only as influential as the translation one is using. In fact, there is a real irony in my having said that in a post where the Logos ref-tagger is automatically displaying NASB, which makes Junia into "Junias" the "kinsman"! I must see if I can change that default setting.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-13376918801068660552009-09-15T16:31:54.653-04:002009-09-15T16:31:54.653-04:00I like that sort of detail, and I think its kind o...I like that sort of detail, and I think its kind of the coping stone of a generally persuasive caseDoughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10326403777027937887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-60768397019395518252009-09-15T07:09:55.721-04:002009-09-15T07:09:55.721-04:00Mark
Mark Bonnington here, from Durham, UK versio...Mark<br /><br />Mark Bonnington here, from Durham, UK version. Thanks for the Pod and Post on this. <br /><br />I'm sypathetic to the case you make but I want to pick up the point about 'the apostles' as a group external to Paul as an un-pauline usage. It's helpful to bring this question to bear on the discussion, but isn't it hard to press in the light of the transition from 1 Corinthians 15.7 to 15.8 - 'all the apostles' to '..also to me'. Linguistically, the time sequence means that here Paul does describe the apostles as a complete group excluding him. Of course he dosn't believe this for a moment and, sure, he goes on to make clear that he is 'least of the apostles' in 15.9 but the move from 7 to 8 surely blunts the claim that Paul would <i>always</i> be careful in his use of language to include himself amongst the apostles.<br /><br />All good wishes<br /><br />MarkAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11955490992660153339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-8496116748862535012009-09-15T07:05:00.520-04:002009-09-15T07:05:00.520-04:00Mark,
Thank you for your explanation. This verse ...Mark,<br /><br />Thank you for your explanation. This verse has always puzzled. If Pau's true meaning was that Junia and Andronicus were apostles, why didn't he just say that they were "ἐπίσμοι ἀποστόλοι?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-52756051358356218392009-09-15T03:01:30.942-04:002009-09-15T03:01:30.942-04:00Mark,
I'm not sure that you're correct in...Mark,<br /><br />I'm not sure that you're correct in stating that Junia is "now universally taken to be a woman". It's probably true amongst reputable biblical scholars, but I don't think it's reached all those in the pews yet. It's actually quite a difficult case to argue with people who have only ever learned English and aren't really all that sure about things like nouns and verbs, subjects and objects, let alone the more arcane aspects of grammar. Sadly, most of them don't care enough to follow you through the outline of how Greek works that is necessary to convince.<br /><br />Thanks for posting this, though. Helpful.Judy Redmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04350638846246966802noreply@blogger.com