My friend and colleague Steve keeps on sending me juicy bits of αλλα-riffic goodness as fodder for the paper I'm working on. He's sent me items from the NA27 apparatus where variants include αλλα in some way (which I haven't blogged on yet, though I might sometime). Today he sent me this tidbit from Gospel of Thomas. The source is the Critical Edition of Q (amazon.com), (RBL Review) in the Hermeneia Commentary series.
This is interesting because there are (at least) two sources for this logion: Nag Hammadi II 2 (though in Hermeneia Q, this is a translation/retroversion of the Coptic) and P.Oxy 654. The difference I'm interested in is found in G.Thom. 3.3 (yes, there are several other differences). This is interesting to me because I would class it as a "non-negative" instance; and that is what my paper is supposed to be on. The surrounding content is roughly the same, but one source uses αλλα and the other uses και. There is a difference in the two; it shows what swapping a simple conjunction (here αλλα and και) can do to our understanding of a text.
First, from Nag Hammadi:
Gos. Thom. 3.1–3 (Greek Translation from Coptic of Nag Hammadi II 2)
(1) Λέγει Ἰησοῦς·
ἐὰν οἱ ἡγούμενοι ὑμᾶς εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν·
ἰδοὺ ἡ βασιλεία ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ἐστιν,
φθήσεται ὑμᾶς τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ.
(2) ἐὰν (δʼ) εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν·
ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ ἐστίν,
φθήσονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἰχθύες.
(3) ἀλλὰ ἡ βασιλεία ἐντὸς ὑμῶν ἐστιν καὶ ἐκτὸς ὑμῶν.
Gos. Thom. 3.1–3 (Nag Hammadi II 2)
(1) Jesus says:
If those who lead you say to you:
Look, the kingdom is in the sky,
then the birds of the sky will precede you.
(2) If they say to you:
It is in the sea,
then the fish will precede you.
(3) Rather, the kingdom is within you, and outside of you.
Now, P.Oxy 654:
Gos. Thom. 3.1–3 (P. Oxy. 654)
(1) λέγει Ἰ[η(σοῦ)ς·
ἐὰν] οἱ ἕλκοντες <ὑ>μᾶς [εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν·
ἰδοὺ] ἡ βασιλεία ἐν οὐρα[νῷ,
ὑμᾶς φθήσεται] τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρ[ανοῦ·
(2) ἐὰν δʼ εἴπωσιν
ὅ[τι ὑπὸ τὴν γῆν ἐστ[ιν,
εἰσελεύσονται] οἱ ἰχθύες τῆς θαλά[σσης προφθάσαν]τες ὑμᾶς·
(3) καὶ ἡ βασ[ιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ] ἐντὸς ὑμῶν [ἐσ]τι [κἀκτός.]
Gos. Thom. 3.1–3 (P. Oxy. 654)
(1) Jesus says:
[If] those who entice <you> [say to you:
Look,] the kingdom is in the sky,
[there will precede you] the birds of the sky.
(2) [But if they say]:
It is under the earth,
[there will enter it] the fish of the sea [ahead of] you.
(3) And the kingdom [of God] is within you, [and outside.]
What's the difference? Well, the retroversion/translation of Coptic from Nag Hammadi (with αλλα) seems to be a bit cleaner with more symmetry (note unity/parallel structure in vv. 1-2 and absence of same in P.Oxy 654). In Nag Hammadi, the αλλα clause essentially replaces the statements beforehand. The kingdom isn't localized to the sky, it isn't localized to the sea; instead it is everywhere. It's not like the fish and birds are closer to it than you, or that they'll get there before you. The "ones who lead you" are wrong; the kingdom isn't above the earth or below the earth, it is within you and outside of you.
In the Oxyrhynchus version, however, the και doesn't mean that the previous material is corrected/replaced; instead it is just more information on the stack. The kingdom is everywhere; not just in the sky, not just 'under the earth'; it's everywhere. So the "ones who entice you" are somewhat correct, it is true that the kingdom is above the earth and under the earth; but it isn't limited to those locales. Know that the kingdom is both within you and outside of you.
Update (2008-04-25): Wieland Willker (see his Textcritical commentary, you'll find it useful) emailed the following because comments weren't working for him for some reason:
Sometimes KAI functions simply as a punctuation mark.
Perhaps this is the case here:
It is under the earth,
[there will enter it] the fish of the sea [ahead of] you.
PERIOD.
The kingdom [of God] is within you, [and outside.]
Just a thought ...
He's given us a good reminder: when translating, the Greek doesn't always have to have a word or words in the target that represent it, it could be represented by punctuation. And sometimes, (e.g. asyndeton, ellipsis) the target language needs to supply words to fully convey the original. Anyway, here was my response.
Hi Wieland.
Thanks for the note. I understand what you're saying. I'd say that και has a basic function (an additive function seen in both its conjunctive and adverbial forms), and that there is a range or spectrum for that functionality. This is reflected in translation; it can be translated as a simple full-stop in several circumstances. But the presence of και implies some sort of relationship with the clause that precedes, whether translated or not.
I suppose that's my primary point -- that the relationship between clauses is different when one uses και as compared to when one uses αλλα. Obvious, yes, but I think some folks get so focused on putting English to Greek that they forget to stop and understand what's going on in the Greek, particularly with function words like conjunctions and particles. Please note I'm *not* saying you're doing that, just wanted explain some underlying motives/biases I have.
Thanks again for the comment -- I appreciate your work!