Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[GTh] From Two Traditions to Five Gospels

Expand Messages
  • Frank McCoy
    INTRODUCTION There is WAY too much attention focused on the Synoptic Problem because what we actually have is a FIVE GOSPEL PROBLEM. i.e., the problem of
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 24 5:40 PM
      INTRODUCTION

      There is WAY too much attention focused on the Synoptic Problem because
      what we actually have is a FIVE GOSPEL PROBLEM. i.e., the problem of
      uncovering the relationships between Mark, Matthew, Luke, JOHN and
      THOMAS. The tendency as respects the odd couple of Thomas and John is
      to treat each one as either being later than the Synoptic gospels or
      else being independent of them. This tendency is perhaps the natural
      tendency to take for those trained to think in terms of the Synoptic
      Problem and in terms of the high degree of literary parallelism we find
      between the Synoptics, but is it correct?

      In this post, a preliminary stab at trying to resolve the Five Gospel
      Problem. It will be argued that they arose out of a five stage process
      that began with two traditions. It will, further, be VERY tentatively
      concluded that the relationships between the five gospels are something
      like this:
      Mark: Thomas and an original version of John are possible sources
      Thomas: Mark is a possible source
      John--Stage 1 material: Mark is a possible source
      John--Stage 2 material: Mark is the primary source, John Stage 1
      material is the secondary source
      Matthew: Mark is the primary source, Thomas is the secondary source
      Luke: Mark is the primary source, Matthew is the secondary source,
      Thomas is the tertiary source and John is a rarely used fourth source.

      To a large degree, this post is a rewriting of a previous post I made on
      4-14. However, it goes into a considerable amount of new territory as
      well.

      I WHAT APPEARANCES SUGGEST

      Of the five gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, John and Thomas, there are
      clear literary relationships between three of them , i..e., Mark,
      Matthew and Luke.

      The most widely accepted theory of their literary relationship is the
      Two Source Theory--according to which Matthew and Luke independently
      used Mark and a second postulated gospel, conventionally referred to as
      Q, as their sources.

      However, between Mark, John, and Thomas (and, if it ever existed, Q), no
      clear literary dependencies have been established.

      This has led to the idea that there originally were four gospel
      traditions:
      1. the Markan tradition--the tradition underlying Mark
      2. the Q tradition--the tradition underlying Q
      3. the Johannine tradition--the tradition underlying John
      4. the Thomasine tradition--the tradition undelying Thomas

      The Thomasine tradition appears to be closest to the Q tradition. This
      is for two reasons: (1) both Thomas and the postulated Q primarily
      consist of sayings of Jesus and (2) as is pointed out by Bill Arnal in
      "The Rhetoric of Marginality: Apocalypticism, Gnosticism, and Sayings
      Gospels" (Harvard Theological Review 88:4 1995, pp. 471-94), Thomas and
      the postulated Q "share approximately forty separate sayings (p. 471)."

      Conversely, the Thomasine tradition appears to be the least related to
      the Johannine tradition. This is for two reasons (1) Thomas is a
      sayings gospel, while John is a narrative and discourse gospel and (2)
      Thomas and John share almost no separate sayings.

      As for the Johannine tradition, it appears to have had at least two
      stages in its development. Chapter 21 clearly is a later addition to
      it--the gospel having originally ended at the close of Chapter 20. John
      6:1-7:14 also appears to be a later addition to it. So, in the Gospel
      of John (p. 10), Rudolph Bultmann states, "For example Jn 6.1 reports a
      journey of Jesus to the other bank of Lake Gennesaret, although chapter
      5 is set in Jerusalem: 7:15-24 harks back to directly to the Sabbath
      healing that lies far off in chapter 5." Bultmann suggests that this is
      due to 6:1-7:14 being displaced pages. However, this is unlikely
      because there is no readily recognizable place to move this narrative
      unit. So, it appears that, most likely, it is, like Chapter 21, a later
      addition to John.

      I will refer to the postulated Original John (i.e., John less 6:1-7:14
      and 21) as John stage1 and these two postulated additions to it as John
      stage 2

      The style of writing is very similar in both John stage 1 and John
      stage 2. Indeed, it is only by indirect means that we can delineate
      what is the postulated John stage 2. As a result, they appear to
      reflect two stages in the development of the Johannine tradition, with
      John stage 2 simply reflecting a later stage in the development of this
      tradition than John stage 1.

      II EVIDENCE THAT APPEARANCES ARE DECEIVING

      As we have seen, the appearances, based on factors like the sharing of
      separate sayings and similar writing styles, are that:
      1. the Thomasine tradition is closest to the Q tradition and most
      distant from the Johannine tradition
      2. the Johannine tradition appears to have had at least two stages in
      its development: (1) John stage 1 and (2) John stage 2.

      However, I suggest, beliefs and understandings are significant tell-tale
      markers as well and, so, need to also be taken into account..

      I further suggest that, when these additional factors are taken into
      account, then the possibility of a radically different picture arises.

      In particular, as respects a list of 19 questions regarding beliefs and
      understandings, it is the case that:
      1. Mark and John stage 2 have identical answers
      2. Thomas and John stage 1 have identical answers.
      3. Mark/John stage 2 and Thomas/John stage 1 have contrary answers.

      This suggests that John stage 2 is more closely related to Mark than it
      is to John stage 1 and that Thomas is most closely related to John stage
      1.

      These two suggestions, in turn, bring into question the two widespread
      current scholarly opinions that (1) all of John belongs to a single
      tradition and (2) Thomas is most closely related to Q.

      Here are the 19 questions:
      Question 1: Were there two meals with bread and fish--the first of which
      involved feeding 5,000 men and was followed by Jesus appearing to his
      disciples while they were in a boat and in the midst of a storm?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 6:35-51,8:2-8, Jn 6:4-21,21:12-13)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 2: Were some of Jesus' disciples fishermen?
      Ml/J2 Yes (Mk 1:16-20, Jn 21:2-11)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 3: Is Jesus a pre-existent divine being who played a role in
      the creation of the Cosmos?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 77:1, Jn 1:1-3)
      Question 4: Can one eat the body of Jesus and drink his blood?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 14:22-25, Jn 6:53-58)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 5: Is Jesus the Holy One of God?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 1:24, Jn 6:67-69)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 6: Is Jesus the Light?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th J1 Yes (Th 77:1, Jn 1:5,9:5)
      Question 7: Did the disciples of Jesus include the sons of Zebedee?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 1:19-20, Jn 21:2)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 8: Did Thomas use loftier language in describing Jesus than any
      of the other disciples?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 13:4, Jn 20:28)
      Question 9: Does Mary Magdalene speak to Jesus?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 21:1, Jn 20:16)
      Question 10: Did the family of Jesus or, at least, the brothers of Jesus
      not believe in him?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 3:21, Jn 7:5)
      Th/J1 No
      Question 11: Are there people who are sons/children of light?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 50:2, Jn 12:36)
      Question 12: Did Jesus teach at the synagogue in Capernaum?
      Mk/J2 Yes (Mk 1:21, Jn 6:59)
      Th/Jn1 No
      Question 13: Can Jesus provide a type of water that is, yet, an
      intoxicating wine?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 13:5, Jn 2:9a)
      Question 14: Is Jesus the Son who received some or all of the things of
      his Father?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes (Th 61:3, Jn 3:35)

      THE QUESTIONS WHICH FOLLOW, i.e., 15-19, HAVE EXPLANATIONS FOR THEIR
      ANSWERS UNDERNEATH MY SIGNATURE (FRANK MCCOY)

      Question 15: Where was the central focus of Jesus' ministry?
      Mk/J2 North: Galilee/Sea of Galilee
      Th/J1 South: Jerusalem/Judea/Samaria/Perea
      Question 16: Must one must be reborn as spirit to enter the Kingdom?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes
      Question 17: Do the teachings of Jesus, in some meaningful sense,
      supersede the Law?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes
      Question 18: Should women be permitted to have leadership roles in the
      Jesus movement?
      Mk/J2 No
      Th/J1 Yes
      Question 19: Who was the legitimate successor to Jesus as the earthly
      head of his movement?
      Mk/J2 Simon Peter
      Th/J1 James the brother of Jesus

      III FROM TWO TRADITIONS TO FIVE GOSPELS IN FIVE STAGES

      STAGE 1--TWO ORIGINAL TRADITIONS

      The evidence of the answers to these nineteen questions is explicable in
      terms of the hypothesis that there originally were two gospel
      traditions: Tradition A, which had the beliefs/understandings found in
      Th/J1, and Tradition B, which had the beliefs/understandings found in
      Mk/J2.

      In this case, the unique features of Tradition A included these beliefs
      and understandings:
      1. a belief that Jesus is a pre-existent divine being who played a role
      in the creation of the Cosmos
      2. a belief that Jesus is the Light
      3. an understanding that Thomas used loftier language in describing
      Jesus than any of the other disciples
      4. an understanding that Mary Magdalene on good speaking terms with
      Jesus
      5. a belief that one can be a son/child of light
      6. a belief that Jesus can provide us a type of water that is, yet, an
      intoxicating wine
      7. a belief that Jesus is the Son who received some or all of the things
      of his Father
      8. a belief that the teachings of Jesus, in some meaningful sense,
      supersede the Law
      9. an understanding that the central focus of Jesus' ministry was in the
      south: Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Perea
      10. a belief that one must must be reborn as spirit to enter the Kingdom
      11. a belief that women should be permitted to have leadership roles in
      the Jesus movement
      12. an understanding that James, the brother of Jesus, had been the
      legitimate successor to Jesus as the head of his movement.

      In this case, the unique features of Tradition B included these beliefs
      and understandings:
      1. an understanding that there had been at least two meals with bread
      and fish--the first of which involved feeding 5,000 men and was followed
      by Jesus appearing to his disciples while they were in a boat and in the
      midst of a storm
      2. an understanding that some of Jesus' disciples had been fishermen
      3. a belief that one can, in some meaningful sense, eat the flesh of
      Jesus and drink his blood
      4. a belief that Jesus is the Holy One of God
      5. an understanding that Jesus' disciples included the two sons of
      Zebedee
      6. an understanding that the family or, at least, the brothers, of Jesus
      did not believe in him
      7. an understanding that Jesus had taught at the synagogue in Capernaum
      8. an understanding that the ministry of Jesus was primarily in the
      north: Galilee/the Sea of Galilee
      9. a belief that women should be barred from leadership roles in the
      Jesus movement
      10. an understanding that Simon Peter had been the legitimate successor
      to Jesus as the head of his movement

      STAGE 2--TRADITION A ENGENDERS TRADITIONS A1 AND A2

      The two gospels engendered out of tradition A are Thomas and a
      postulated original John (i.e., our John less 6:1-7:14 and 21).

      As respects these two gospels:
      1. One is a sayings gospel and the other is a narrative gospel
      2. They share only a few parallel passages
      3. There are some important doctrinal differences. For example, in the
      original John, Jesus is called the Christ and he is bodily resurrected.
      Neither is the case in Thomas.

      To explain this situation, I propose this hypothesis:
      Tradition A split into two basically isolated and divergent streams of
      tradition, tradition A1 and tradition A2. Thomas is based on tradition
      A1 and the original John is based on tradition A2.

      In this case, we have:
      Tradition A ---> Tradition A1 + Tradition A2

      However, it does not appear that there was a similar splitting of
      Tradition B

      The written material engendered out of tradition B are Mark and the John
      Stage 2 material (i.e., John 6:1-7:14 and 21)

      As respects these two writings:
      1. Both are narrative style
      2. There are no evident doctrinal differences
      3. There is a MAJOR PARALLEL PASSAGE, i.e., Mk 6:32-53//Jn 6:1-21, with
      even many details the same--which indicates literary dependency
      4. While Mark ends with a prophecy that the risen Jesus will appear to
      his disciples in Galilee but does not give the location for this in
      Galilee, the John Stage 2 material ends with this location in Galilee
      identified as being by the Sea of Galilee/Tiberias--a clear indication
      that the direction of the apparent literary dependency is from Mark to
      the John Stage 2 material.

      To explain this situation, I propose this hypothesis:
      Mark is based on Tradition B. The John Stage 2 material is also based
      on Tradition B--including, but not limited to, this tradition as
      rendered in Mark

      In this case, we have:
      1. Tradition B ---> Mark
      2. Tradition B (including, but not limited to, this tradition as
      rendered in Mark) ---> the John Stage 2 material

      In this case, unlike with Tradition A, there was no splitting of
      Tradition B.

      STAGE 3--THREE PRIMARY GOSPELS ARE WRITTEN

      Since (1) Tradition 1A engendered Thomas and (2) Tradition 1B engendered
      the Original John and (3) Tradition B first engendered Mark, these three
      gospels can be spoken of as the three primary gospels.

      As respects these three primary gospels of Mark, Thomas and Original
      John:
      1. There is some, although not a lot, of over-lap between Mark and the
      Original John in their narratives, with most of the over-lap regarding
      Passion Week
      2. There is some, although not a lot, of over-lap between Mark and
      Thomas as respects the sayings of Jesus
      3. There is no over-lap between Thomas and the Original John as respects
      narrative (Thomas has none) and very little over-lap as respects the
      sayings of Jesus.

      This situation strongly suggests that the Markan community was in
      contact with both the Thomasine and Original John communities, but that
      the Thomasine and Original John communities were not in contact with
      each other.

      If, as this suggests, the Markan community was a middle term between the
      Thomasine and Original John communities, then arguably, four plausible
      scenarios for the three primary gospels are:
      1. Mark was written first, with Thomas and Original John being written
      later independently of each other, but each having Mark as a source
      2. Thomas and Original John were independently written, with Mark being
      written later and having both as sources
      3. Thomas was written first, Mark was written second having Thomas as a
      source, and Original John was written third having Mark as a source
      4. Original John was written first, Mark was written second having
      Original John as a source, and Thomas was written third having Mark as a
      source.

      In this case, where <---> means that the direction of dependency is
      uncertain, we have:
      Thomas <---> Mark <---> Original John

      STAGE 4 TWO SECONDARY COMPOSITIONS ARE WRITTEN

      Since the Original John and Markan communities were in contact with each
      other, this raises the possibility that something was written based on
      both Original John and Mark.

      Indeed, we have a ready example in the John Stage 2 material. This
      material has an influence from Mark because of this sequence of events:
      Tradition B (including, but not limited to, this tradition as rendered
      in Mark) ---> the John Stage 2 material
      Further, since this material is an addition to the Original John,
      creating what we now call John, it was also influenced by the Original
      John.

      Since the Thomasine and Markan communities were in contact with each
      other, this raises the possibility that something was written using both
      Mark and Thomas as sources.

      Indeed, I suggest that Matthew was written using both Mark and Thomas as
      sources. There is a clear literary dependency between Mark and Matthew
      and most scholars think the reason is that Matthew used Mark as a
      source. Too, as I have pointed out in numerous posts over the past
      several years, there is evidence that Matthew also used Thomas as a
      source.

      In this Stage 4, there are two points made with great emphasis:
      1. the supremacy of Peter--so, in Matthew, Jesus gives Peter the keys of
      the Kingsom and, in John Stage 2, Jesus appoints Peter to be the
      shepherd of his sheep.
      2. the risen Jesus appeared in Galilee--at a mountain in Matthew and at
      the Sea of Tiberias in John Stage 2.

      STAGE 5 A TERTIARY COMPOSITION IS WRITTEN

      At some point in time, all four of the previously composed Mark,
      Matthew, Thomas and John would have been widely enough circulated to
      have been known to, and used as sources by, someone writing a
      compostion.

      Indeed, I suggest that Luke used all four as sources. He prefaces his
      gospel by stressing that he has utilized sources in writing it. Most
      scholars agree that he used Mark as a source. As I have pointed out in
      numerous posts in the past several years, there is a lot of evidence
      that he used both Matthew and Thomas as sources. There are some Passion
      Week things shared by Luke and John which are explicable in terms of
      Luke having known of John.

      As a result, it appears, from two original traditions, five gospels were
      eventually engendered--Mark, Matthew, Thomas, John and Luke.

      IV WHAT ABOUT Q?

      In these five postulated stages, there is no place for Q or for a Q
      tradition.

      Indeed, Q and the Q tradition are unnecessary. After all, most of the Q
      tradition consists of material common to Matthew and Luke and this
      common material can be explained through the simple hypothesis that
      Matthew was one of the sources utilized by Luke in writing his gospel.

      V THE HEBREWS AND THE HELLENISTS

      In a previous post, I laid out some evidence that, in the original
      Jerusalem Assembly, there were two main groups, the Hebrews and the
      Hellenists. Both belonged to the Essenic tradition in a broad sense
      (i.e., including not only the Essenes proper, but the followers of John
      the Baptist and the Therapeutae as well), but the Hebrews were most
      strongly influenced by the Essenes proper, while the Hellenists were
      most strongly influenced by the Therapeutae. Further, the leader of the
      Hebrews had been Peter, but the leader of the Hellenists had been James,
      the brother of Jesus, who is aka James the Just. Finally, they had a
      major dispute over the role of women, with the Hellenists wanting to
      empower women, but not the Hebrews. While the source (i.e., Acts) is
      late (probably second century CE, perhaps c. 115), the evidence in it
      evinces knowledge of the beliefs of the Essenes proper and the
      Therapeutae and, so, this evidence appears to come from a pre-70 CE
      source used by Luke--for, after all, both the Essenes proper and the
      Therapeutae had apparently disappeared by c. 70 CE.

      Here is the post:

      http://groups..yahoo.com/group/gthomas/message/7529
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gthomas/message/7529>

      Now, the key thing, is that, as respects questions 18 (Should women be
      permitted to have leadership roles in the Jesus movement?) and 19 (Who
      was the legitimate successor to Jesus as the earthly head of his
      movement?), Tradition B takes Hebrew positions (i .e., they have Peter
      being the legitimate successor of Jesus as leader of his movement and
      they do not think that women should be empowered) while Tradition A
      takes Hellenist positions (i.e., they have James the Jesus being the
      legitimate successor of Jesus as leader of his movement and they think
      that women should be empowered).

      In light of this observation, I propose the hypothesis that Tradition A
      arose among the Hellenists and that Tradition B arose among the Hebrews

      VI THE FIVE GOSPEL PROBLEM--A TENTATIVE PARTIAL SOLUTION

      In this post, a preliminary stab at trying to resolve the Five Gospel
      Problem and it will be VERY tentatively concluded that the relationships
      between the five gospels are this:
      Mark: Thomas and an original version of John are possible sources
      Thomas: Mark is a possible source
      John--Stage 1 material: Mark is a possible source
      John--Stage 2 material: Mark is the primary source, John Stage 1
      material is the secondary source
      Matthew: Mark is the primary source, Thomas is the secondary source
      Luke: Mark is the primary source, Matthew is the secondary source,
      Thomas is the tertiary source and John is a rarely used fourth source

      VII--SHOULD THERE BE A SHAKING OF FOUNDATIONS?

      In the world-perspective of Tradition B, Jesus' ministry was primarily
      in Galilee and there it was centered on villages and towns (but not the
      two cities of Sepphoris and Tiberius), his movement was a peasant
      movement with he being a carpenter and his top four disciples being
      fishermen, he was a citizen of Galilee, his brothers did not believe in
      him, his chief disciple was Simon Peter, he was baptized by John and he
      made only one journey to Jerusalem during his ministry period.

      To the best of my knowledge, these aspects of the world-perspective of
      Tradition B are accepted as true by an overwhelming majority of
      scholars.

      However, none of these aspects of the world-perspective of Tradition B
      is to be found in Paul's genuine epistles. Granted, he says little
      about the earthly Jesus--still this should raise questions about the
      validity of these aspects of the world-perspective of Tradition B.

      FAR more importantly, none of these aspects of the world-perspective of
      Tradition B is to be found in Tradition A either. This is particularly
      significant since Tradition A appears to be as old as Tradition B and
      TWO of the three primary gospels reflect it.

      Has, then, the time come for scholars to take a new cold and hard look
      at the truthfulness of these aspects of the world-perspective of
      Tradition B. That is to say, has the time come for a shaking of
      foundations?

      Frank McCoy
      2036 E. Magnolia Ave.
      St. Paul, MN USA 55119
      Explanations for the Answers Given on Questions 16-20:
      16. Where was the central focus of Jesus' ministry? In Mark, until the
      final week of Jesus' life, he spends all his time in Galilee and
      adjacent areas like Syrophoenicia and the Decapolis. In John 2, outside
      of a few verses, Jesus spends all his time by the Sea of Galilee. In
      Thomas, the only explicit geographic reference to where Jesus spent any
      time is found in 60, where he is in Samaria, close to Judea, watching a
      Samaritan going to Judea and carrying a lamb. Thomas contains no
      reference to Galilee or to Galileans. In John 1, Jesus is in Galilee
      only in 1:43-2:12 and 4:46-54. Most of the rest of it takes place in
      Jerusalem, with some time also in Samaria, the rest of Judea, and Perea.
      17. Is it posited that one must be reborn as spirit to enter the
      Kingdom? This is not posited to be the case in either Mark or John 2.
      This is posited to be the case in John 1--see Jn 3:3-7. This is also
      posited to be the case in Thomas. See Section IV, subsection C, of this
      post:

      http://groups..yahoo.com/group/gthomas/message/7738
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gthomas/message/7738>

      18. Do the teachings of Jesus, in some meaningful sense, supersede the
      Law? This is not the case in John stage 2. Nor is this the case in
      Mark--where the teachings of Jesus modify how the Law is interpreted,
      particularly as respects the Sabbath ordinances, and perhaps even
      nullify its dietary ordinances (Mk. 7:18-19), although this is
      disputable, but do not supersede the Law. The teachings of Jesus do
      appear to supersede the Law in John stage 1 (Jn 1:17). They do
      supersede the Law in Thomas--where the ordinances of the Law are harmful
      to one (Th 14), but one can find eternal life through the words of
      Jesus, at least if one properly understands them (Th 1).
      19. Should women be permitted to have leadership roles in the Jesus
      movement? In Mark, the answer is negative. Their primary role was to
      minister to Jesus (Mk 15:41). Further, Mark ends, in 16:1-6, with the
      women proving their incompetence to handle responsibility by failing to
      tell anyone else that Jesus has risen from the dead. In John stage 2,
      the answer is also negative. The only significant players in it are all
      men. Tellingly, in Jn 21:14, it is said that this was the third time
      that the risen Jesus appeared to his disciples. This is, though, the
      fourth time that the risen Jesus manifested himself--the first being to
      Mary the Magdalene and then the next three to his male disciples. So,
      in Jn 21:14, Mary the Magdalene is explicitly excluded from being a
      disciple. In Thomas, in marked contrast, a woman can be a disciple (Th
      61:4). So, in Thomas, this question is to be answered affirmatively.
      In John stage 1, too, this question is to be answered
      affirmatively--for, in it, women competently handle responsibility. So,
      in Jn 4:39, a woman competently evangelizes a Samaritan city. Again, in
      Jn 20:18, Mary the Magdalene competently handles the responsibility of
      telling others that Jesus has risen from the dead. Tellingly, in John
      1, the risen Jesus first appears to her. Further, in the three mentions
      of the Beloved Disciple (i.e., 13:23-26a, 19:25-27, and 20:1-10), she
      is with him in two of them (i.e., in the second and third), as is Peter
      (i.e., in the first and third) and, so, in this sense, she is on a par
      with Peter as an intimate associate of the Beloved Disciple.
      20.Who was the legitimate successor to Jesus as the earthly head of his
      movement? In Mark, it is Peter. So, in Mk 16:7, the young man in the
      tomb begins his instructions to the women with these words, "But go,
      tell his disciples and Peter...". Peter has been one of "his disciples"
      up to this point in Mark, so he is differentiated here from "his
      disciples" because, with Jesus now dead, he has been elevated above them
      as the new earthly head of the Jesus movement. In marked contrast, in
      Thomas, James the Just, the brother of Jesus, is the earthly head of the
      Jesus movement (Th 12). With John stage1 and John stage 2, the
      situation is complicated. However, it appears that, in John 1, the
      Beloved Disciple is James, the brother of Jesus, and that he is the
      superior of even Peter. However, in John stage 2, the Beloved Disciple
      is named John and he is subordinate to Peter--who the risen Jesus
      appoints to be his successor. See this post:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusDynasty/message/26


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Frank McCoy
      A Correction to the Post sent earlier today: The last website address is truncated. It reads on the previous post:
      Message 2 of 2 , Apr 24 7:28 PM
        A Correction to the Post sent earlier today: The last website address is
        truncated. It reads on the previous post:

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusDynasty/message/26

        It should end, though, with 2613, as below:

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusDynasty/message/2613

        Frank McCoy


        <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=1127921/grpspId=1705074057/m
        sgId=7749/stime=1177461725/nc1=3848643/nc2=2/nc3=3>




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.