Percepción de la población respecto al servicio de agua potable

In response to Barr’s comments on biblical semantic studies, this thesis aims to examine both the textual context and the wider context of the key Pauline

anthropological terms. In the following chapters, the key terms are to be examined by attending to their textual context, their usage in various Pauline epistles. However, it is important to first investigate how the key terms are employed in contemporary Greek literature—an attempt to attend to the wider context by identifying the semantic range of the key terms.

Although there are numerous work written in Koiné Greek in the first century, this section mainly focuses on the work by Philo, Epictetus, and Plutarch due to the following reasons. First, they are contemporary authors of Paul, which is a key consideration in conducting synchronic semantic studies. Second, like Paul, they are thinkers (as theologian or philosopher) in the first century. Third, they also represent different philosophical or theological backgrounds: Philo as a representative of Hellenistic Judaism, Epictetus and Plutarch as representatives of Hellenism with the former representing Stoic and the latter representing Platonist. Fourth, each of them contributes a considerable volume of work. In other words, unlike many other fragmented first century Koiné Greek manuscripts that are currently available, their work resembles the corpus of Pauline epistles. Consequently, the key anthropological terms are used in their work with a range of connotations. Thus, this serves as a good reference in understanding the semantic range of these terms.

In the following part, the general usage of the four key terms, , ,

, and , in the work of Philo, Epictetus, and Plutarch are presented. The purpose of this section does not aim to provide an exhaustive

analysis of the key anthropological terms. Instead, it aims to provide a general overview of their semantic range in the first century Koiné Greek literature.

2.5.1  in First Century Koiné

The occurrences of  are 1698, 101, and 1019 times in the work of Plutarch, Epictetus, and Philo respectively.268 In most cases, the term simply denotes physical body. For instance, in Plutarch’s work Theseus, the phrase  is used to describe the strength of the physical body of  (Theseus).269 In Epictetus’ work Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae, people on earth are portrayed as: 

.270 In this text,  denotes physical body. Similarly, the term points to physical body in Philo’s work. For instance, the phrase  in Legum allegoriae I portrays an organic body that is capable of motion.271 This meaning of  as physical body is also extended to the connotation of a dead body, a corpse. For example, in De

Abrahamo occurs in the following text: 

272_

The word  points to the corpse of Abraham’s wife.

Intriguingly,  is also used by Philo to denote the cosmos as having a body. In Philo’s account of creation, the world (cosmos) is portrayed as having a . The

268 _{The occurrences are based on the statistical database of Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG)}

regarding the Greek texts of these authors.

269 _{Plutarch, Thes. 6.2.}

270 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 1.1.}

271 _{Philo, Leg. 1.3–4.}

world before creation is depicted as , and the created world is portrayed by this phrase: .273

In summary, the connotation of  is not limited to denote physical body in the first century Koiné Greek literature. The word is also used in a metaphorical sense to describe the cosmos having a body.274

2.5.2  in First Century Koiné

 occurs 1141 times in Plutarch’s work.275 The key connotations of  are as follows. First, the term is employed to depict the centre of the inner life of a human being. For instance, Plutarch writes in Marcius Coriolanus that 

 .276 The term  is described as the seat of human imagination, leading to creating different sensations (vision and sound). Second,  denotes physical life. In Comparatio Pelopidae et Marcelli, the parallel between life and soul in 

 is used in the context of portraying death.277 Third,  is used to describe the seat of emotion and thought. For example, the term denotes human’s inner courage in Pyrrhus: .278 Fourth, the term

273 _{Philo, Opif. 36.}

274

TDNT also discusses the semantic range of  in the first century Koiné Greek, indicating that physical ody and the living body of the cosmos are common meanings in that era. Schweizer, “,” TDNT 7:1036–41.

275 _{The occurrence is based on the statistical database presented in TLG.}

276 _{Plutarch, Cor. 38.3.}

277 _{Plutarch, Comp. Pel. Marc. 3.5.}

depicts the invisible soul, together with the physical body, forms a human life. In portraying the impact of a plague Plutarch writes in his work Pericles:

.279 The two aspects of a human life are represented by  and .

The occurrence of  in Epictetus is 63 times. First, the term denotes the seat of emotion and thought. For instance,  is associated with understanding and apprehension in Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae: 

.280 is also portrayed as being attracted to the appearance of good: 

 .281 Second, the term depicts the inner life or invisible part of a human, which is a constituent of a human being. For instance, Epictetus writes: 

.282,

, and  are considered to be the three constituents of a human.

In Philo’s work,  occurs 1833 times.283 First, the term is used to depict the inner life of a human being, which is the seat of reason, emotion, and desire. In De specialibus legibus 4, Philo states: 

.284 Second, Philo uses  to denote a part of human person, which connect a person to God. In

279 _{Plutarch, Per. 38.1.} 280 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 1.5..} 281 Epictetus, Diatr. 3.3. 282 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 3.7.} 283

The occurrence is based on the statistical database presented in TLG; it includes the only occurrence of the form  in Aet. 111.2.

his discussion of Abraham (and Moses’ comment on Abraham), Philo argues that

.285 Third, Philo even goes further by describing  as the dwelling place for God’s Spirit. In De virtutibus, Philo states that 

286

In summary,  carries the following connotations in first century Koiné: the seat of reason, emotion, desire, the inner life of a human person, part of the constituent of a human being, and the inner or invisible part of a human being in which God’s Spirit dwells.287

2.5.3  in First Century Koiné

 occurs 313 times in the work of Plutarch. There are several meanings connoted by . First, the term denotes wind in the air. For instance,  is used to describe the wind brought by a descending cloud: 

.288 This connotation is very common in Plutarch’s work.289

Second,  connotes breath. This can be illustrated by the

284 _{Philo, Spec. 4.92.}

285 _{Philo, Post. 27.}

286

Philo, Virt. 217.

287 _{TDNT also provides a discussion of the usage of  in the first century Koiné Greek}

literature. Dihle, “,” TDNT 9:616–7, 634–5., Dihle states that “the impalpable essential core of man, the bearer if thought , will and emotion, the quintessence of human life” are the key meanings of

 in the post-classical age. Dihle, “,” TDNT 9:616.

288 _{Plutarch, Num. 2.2.}

289

For instance,  denotes wind in the following work: Arist. 6.3; Cam. 34.4; Pel. 9.1;

usage of  in a phrase occurred in Demosthenes: .290 The phrase is used to describe the shortness of breath suffered by (Demosthenes).

 only occurs twice in Epictetus’ work. First, the word denotes a matter that God infuses into human eyes, enabling the capability of vision. In the following text from Dissertationes ab Arrano digestae,  is closely associated with

: 

.291 However, the relation between  and  is unclear. Second,  appears in an obscure passage in

Dissertationes ab Arrano digestae.  is portrayed as something could be disturbed, and it could be restored into a more settled state: 

 .292

 occurs 149 times in the work of Philo.293 The term carries different connotations. First,  means air. In his discussion of creation, De opificio mundi, Philo states that God created the incorporeal matter of water and of air: 

.294 Second,  connotes wind. In De opificio mundi, strong wind is depicted in the phrase .295 Third, the term points to soul or life. For instance, in his comments of Genesis, Philo

290

Plutarch, Dem. 6.3.

291 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 2.23.}

292 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 3.3.}

293 _{The occurrences are based on the statistical database presented in TLG.}

294 _{Philo, Opif. 29.}

writes: , as he attempts to explain why God does not create human life in places such as desert and ocean.296 Similarly, the clause, , occurred in Quod deterius potiori

insidiari soleat demonstrates the same connotation as Philo equates  and  in his explanation of the Genesis account.297 Fourth,  is employed to denote human spirit that dwells inside a person. In De gigantibus, the spirit of Moses is described as coming upon the seventy elders: 

.298

In summary,  carries the following connotations in first century Koiné Greek literature: air, wind, breath, a matter that gives human eyes vision state of mind, life or soul, and human spirit.299

2.5.4  in First Century Koiné

In Plutarch’s work,  carries four main connotations.300 First, the word is used in a physiological sense, denoting the human organ, heart. For instance, in his work

Quomodo adolescens poetas audire debeat denotes the physical heart in the

296

Philo, Alleg. Interp. 1.34.

297 _{Philo, Det. 81. Philo explains the meaning of  in Genesis 2.} 298 _{Philo, Gig. 24.}

299 _{For further discussion of the meaning of  in the first century Koiné Greek.}

Kleinknecht combines the Koiné Greek era and the Classical Greek era together under the section “ in the Greek World” to discuss the semantic range of , stating that the the term connotes wind, breath, life, and soul in the ancient Greek world. Kleinknecht, “,” TDNT 6:334– 9.

300

Based on the statistical database presented in TLG,  occurs 51 times in the work of Plutarch.

following sentence: .301 In the context,

 is used to describe the heart of  (Hector) beating. Second,  is used to portray emotion or the seat of emotion. In Quomodo quis suos in virtute sentiat profectus Plutarch quotes the words of  (Alcibiades), 

, to describe a heart being ‘moved,’ which points to emotion.302 Third, the term is associated with passion and desire. In

Quaestiones convivales, the word occurs in the text, 

 .303 Thus,  is employed to portray the seat of passion and desire.

 occurs once in Epictetus’ work.304 In Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae,  appears in the sentence 

.305 In this text,

 is used to describe a broken heart of a person who is trembling. In light of this, the meaning of  is associated with emotion.  occurs 39 times in the work of Philo.306 The word carries a range of meaning. First, it denotes the physical heart. In De specialibus legibus, the phrase  points to the two organs, brain and heart;307 and in De opificio mundi,  is listed with other body

301 _{Plutarch, Adol. poet. aud. 30A.}

302

Plutarch, Virt. prof. 84D.

303 _{Plutarch, Quaest. Conv. 647E.}

304 _{The occurrence is based on the statistical database presented in TLG.}

305 _{Epictetus, Diatr. 1.27.}

306 _{The occurrence is based on the statistical database presented in TLG.}

organs: .308 Second,  means mind. In Quod deus sit immutabilis,  is employed in the clause, 

, to portray evil people thinking wickedness.309 Third, Philo uses  as an equivalent to , a dominant power of human. For instance, in De specialibus legibus Philo mentions that  is equal to  in the following text: 

.310

In summary,  carries the following meanings in the first century Koiné Greek: heart as an organ, the seat of emotion, mind, and a dominant power of

human.311

This section provides an overview of the semantic range of the key anthropological terms, , , , and , by investigating their occurrences in the first century Koiné Greek literature, in particular, the work of Plutarch, Epictetus, and Philo.

308 _{Philo, Opif. 118.}

309 _{Philo, Deus. 20.}

310

Philo, Spec. 1.213–214.

311_{TDNT also discusses the semantic range of  in the ancient Greek world. Behm}

combines the Koiné Greek era and the Classical Greek era together under the section “ among the Greeks” and states that  denotes heart “in a physiological sense as the central organ” and metaphorically, “the central organ of intellectual life, the seat of reason, from which feeling, willing and thinking proceed” in the ancient Greek world. Behm, “,” TDNT 3:608–9.

104

In document Revista Alternativa Financiera Vol 10, No 10 (página 46-53)