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

RE: [GTh] Suggested Locales for John, Thomas and Mark

Expand Messages
  • Frank McCoy
    ... From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adaire Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 3:12 PM To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 5 , May 1, 2007
      -----Original Message-----
      From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      Of Adaire
      Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 3:12 PM
      To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [GTh] Suggested Locales for John, Thomas and Mark




      <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=1127921/grpspId=1705074057/m
      sgId=7756/stime=1177964053/nc1=3848644/nc2=2/nc3=3>
      Very interesting Frank. Have you ever looked at this cronology with
      Ramon K. Jusino's hypothesis for John in mind? Could Mary be a
      daughter of Phillip? <http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/magdalene.html>
      http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/magdalene.html

      Adaire Cain:

      Thanks for this tip about where Jusino's hypothesis can be found on the
      web.

      I strongly recommend that you read The Gospel of Mary by Esther A de
      Boer. She goes well beyond Jusino in developing the argument that Mary
      the Magdalene is the Beloved Disciple. For example, she (p. 179)
      states, "In this excursus I, like Jusino, want to argue that Mary
      Magdalene may be concealed in the male anonymous disciple, but, unlike
      Jusino, my argument does not draw on the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of
      Philip nor on textual inconsistencies in Jn 19.25-27 and 20.1-18 or
      Brown's research on the Johannine community. My argument is based on
      the Gospel of John considered as a meaningful unity, on the importance
      of 20.17, on the parallels between 1.35-40 and 20.15-18 and on John's
      conservative, but also affirmative, attitude towards women as disciples
      and apostles."

      Hmmm, I'm not aware of any tradition about Philip having a daughter
      named Mary. In the Acts of Philip, he has a sister named Mariamne who
      accompanies him to the city of Opheorymus, which is secondarily
      identified as being Hierapolis.

      The Acts of Philip is late, so this tradition is likely invalid. Still,
      there is a possibility that it is correct and that the woman variously
      called Miriamne/Mariamne/Mary the Magdalene in the literature was his
      sister.

      If, as I have suggested, Tradition A1 (upon which Thomas is based) and
      Tradition A2 (upon which a postulated Original John is based) both
      originated in the preachings of Philip, this would help to explain the
      prominence of this Mariamne/Miriamne/Mary the Magdalene in these two
      traditions.

      Frank McCoy
      St Paul, MN USA 55109



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Frank McCoy
      ... From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Toli Bohonik Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 9:46 PM To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
      Message 2 of 5 , May 2, 2007
        -----Original Message-----
        From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        Of Toli Bohonik
        Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 9:46 PM
        To: gthomas@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [GTh] Suggested Locales for John, Thomas and Mark


        (Frank McCoy wrote)
        > This explains why the only time we have a geographic reference in
        Thomas
        > is Th 60, where Jesus is apparently in Samaria because he observes a
        > Samaritan going to Judea. In this case, the one geographic reference
        is
        > given to indicate where Thomas was written, i.e., in Samaria.


        (Toli responded)
        I appreciated your essay, it represents a lot of work. Interesting.

        But I did want to point out tha "Judea" is mentioned twice, both in GT43
        and GT60. So there are three geographic references. One to Samaria
        and two to Judea.


        Hi Toli:

        Thanks for catching my error. What I should have said is that the only
        time in Thomas where we have a reference to the geographic location
        where Jesus is speaking is in Thomas 60. Elsewhere in Thomas, the
        geographic location of where Jesus is speaking is not given. But, in
        Thomas 60, he speaks while observing a Samaritan going to Judea. Since
        Samaria and Judea were immediately adjoining, this places Jesus inside
        Samaria at the time that he is speaking. I suggest that this is the
        only time in Thomas where the geographical location of Jesus at the time
        he is speaking is given because it was deliberately given for the
        purpose of "signalling" to the reader that Thomas was written in
        Samaria.

        Frank McCoy

        <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=1127921/grpspId=1705074057/m
        sgId=7758/stime=1178080406/nc1=3848644/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.