Publication: El cuerpo místico en San Pablo: un problema sintáctico
Loading...
Files
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2018-03-15
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Como se reconoce habitualmente en los estudios que tratan el tema, la idea de “cuerpo místico” en los textos de Pablo de Tarso está ligada al sintagma ἐν Χριστῷ. Esta opinión fue defendida en época moderna por A. Deissmann (1892), que revisó la literatura clásica y los Setenta para encontrar antecedentes de dicha locución. Su aportación, en definitiva, fue asegurar que Pablo de Tarso no se sometió a tradición clásica alguna y sí, en cambio, a la lengua hebrea, concretamente a la preposición be, y que este sintagma reviste un valor propio y nuevo, el místico. Asoció también ciertas expresiones del título mesiánico en genitivo a la misma idea, peculiaridad que ha venido siendo denominada “genitivo místico”. Sin embargo, una revisión de la bibliografía más importante sobre este tema permite descubrir que las dudas respecto a estas afirmaciones han aparecido al menos desde los primeros años del siglo pasado. Son de destacar en este sentido los trabajos de Bang (1920) y Dobschütz (1923-1924), cuyas ideas, basadas en la comparación de los usos de ἐν Χριστῷ, διὰ Χριστόν, διὰ Χριστοῦ y otros sintagmas apuntan a una situación más complicada. Con todo, durante el siglo XX no ha cambiado en lo sustancial la idea de que en las cartas de Pablo (sean estas las consideradas auténticas, sean también las seudónimas) hay un misticismo anclado en el sintagma ἐν Χριστῷ. Pero las diversas aportaciones de algunos autores han matizado la idea y despojado de algunos ejemplos clásicos a la teoría: Neugebauer (1961) menciona cuatro valores para este sintagma:local, temporal, modal y adjetival. Destaca entre todos, ya en el siglo XXI, Timms, que en su tesis doctoral concluye que ningún ejemplo de este sintagma apunta a un cuerpo místico. Estas dudas, en definitiva, invitan tanto a investigar de nuevo el material examinado por Deissmann como a buscar nuevos enfoques del conjunto. En esta línea, la aportación de mi tesis parte de la idea de que Pablo de Tarso es el autor que abre el catálogo del NT y que, como judío ortodoxo que era, hubo de basarse en los Setenta para encauzar su mensaje en el mundo griego. Mirar hacia los Setenta significa volver sobre la preposición be, pero no para analizar su influencia sino para repasar cómo fue traducida al griego. Del material expresado con ἐν+ dativo mi trabajo destaca el referido a “prestar atención a alguien o algo” y el uso para indicar causa, medio y agente. Una vez seleccionados los usos más interesantes en relación con ἐν Χριστῷ, los he aplicado a Yahvé, a los pronombres de segunda persona singular y a sustantivos abstractos...
It is usually recognised in the studies dealing with the topic that the idea of a “mystic body” in Paulʼs genuine Epistles is linked to the syntagm ἐν Χριστῷ. This view was defended in modern times by A. Deissmann (1892), who studied the Greek classical tradition and Septuagint in order to find the antecedents of this construction. His contribution in short was to ensure that Paul of Tarsus was not subjected to the classical tradition but, instead, he did to the Hebrew as a language, specifically to the use of the preposition be. Therefore Deissmann favoured the idea that the syntagm ἐν Χριστῷ has an own and new meaning, the mystic one. He also supported the contention that certain messianic expressions in the genitive could have the same meaning, which was known since then as a “mystic genitive”. On the contrary, a review of the most relevant bibliography on this topic informs us about the doubts that the Deissmannʼs view generated since the early years of the past century. In this sense the studies of Bang (1920) and Dobschütz (1923-1924) are to be mentioned, whose ideas, based on the comparison of the uses of ἐν Χριστῷ, διὰ Χριστόν, διὰ Χριστοῦ and other syntagms, point to a more complicated situation. However, in spite of these two contributions, during the twentieth century hasnʼt changed the idea that in the pauline letters (both authentic or pseudonimous) there is some mysticism abchored in the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ. But the various contributions on the subject of some authors have nuanced the main concept and have also deprived some basic passages from the main general theory. For instance, Neugebauer (1961) mentions four different uses for this syntagm. Timms in our century, emphasizes among all (in his PhD 2000) that no example of ἐν Χριστῷ points to a mystic of the Christʼs body. In short, these ideas encourage both to investigate again the material assembled by Deissmann and to seek new approaches to the topic. Having this in mind, my own PhD begins assuming that Paul was the first New Testament author from the chronological point of view and that he, being also an orthodox Jew, based himself on the Septuagint language in order to create his message for the Greek world. Consequently, a new look to the Septuagint means to turn back to a fundamental issue, not only to ascertain its influence but to examine how this syntagm was translated into Greek...
It is usually recognised in the studies dealing with the topic that the idea of a “mystic body” in Paulʼs genuine Epistles is linked to the syntagm ἐν Χριστῷ. This view was defended in modern times by A. Deissmann (1892), who studied the Greek classical tradition and Septuagint in order to find the antecedents of this construction. His contribution in short was to ensure that Paul of Tarsus was not subjected to the classical tradition but, instead, he did to the Hebrew as a language, specifically to the use of the preposition be. Therefore Deissmann favoured the idea that the syntagm ἐν Χριστῷ has an own and new meaning, the mystic one. He also supported the contention that certain messianic expressions in the genitive could have the same meaning, which was known since then as a “mystic genitive”. On the contrary, a review of the most relevant bibliography on this topic informs us about the doubts that the Deissmannʼs view generated since the early years of the past century. In this sense the studies of Bang (1920) and Dobschütz (1923-1924) are to be mentioned, whose ideas, based on the comparison of the uses of ἐν Χριστῷ, διὰ Χριστόν, διὰ Χριστοῦ and other syntagms, point to a more complicated situation. However, in spite of these two contributions, during the twentieth century hasnʼt changed the idea that in the pauline letters (both authentic or pseudonimous) there is some mysticism abchored in the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ. But the various contributions on the subject of some authors have nuanced the main concept and have also deprived some basic passages from the main general theory. For instance, Neugebauer (1961) mentions four different uses for this syntagm. Timms in our century, emphasizes among all (in his PhD 2000) that no example of ἐν Χριστῷ points to a mystic of the Christʼs body. In short, these ideas encourage both to investigate again the material assembled by Deissmann and to seek new approaches to the topic. Having this in mind, my own PhD begins assuming that Paul was the first New Testament author from the chronological point of view and that he, being also an orthodox Jew, based himself on the Septuagint language in order to create his message for the Greek world. Consequently, a new look to the Septuagint means to turn back to a fundamental issue, not only to ascertain its influence but to examine how this syntagm was translated into Greek...
Description
Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Filología, leída el 08-09-2017