4159Re: [John_Lit] Re: Oral Tradition
- Feb 5, 2004
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter.Hofrichter" <Peter.Hofrichter@...>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [John_Lit] Re: Oral Tradition
> In my view you have to differenciate between the parable and its
> interpretation. The parable is one thing. It belonged to the traditions
> available to Mark. The interpretation is another thing and was given by
> Mark himself and layed into the mouth of Jesus. One of the purposes or
> probably the main purpose of the interpretation was to explicitely
> de-christologize the term and concept of the Logos like the
> "Hellenistenbuch" already did before. The sawyer is Jesus and the Logos
> is the seed he spreads or his spoken word. Matthew and Luke appearantly
> were no longer aware of this primary intention and changed the absolute
> "Logos" simply to the "logos qeou". After all, I do not hink that the
> pericope of the sawyer has something to do with johannine circles, but
> only with Mark rejceting all Logos-speculations along with he "Gospel
> of John" he had before his eyes. Both, "John" and after him Mark, by
> this same procedure exalted Jesus from the Logos (Philo and Prologue)
> to God himself. This is the line not only of "John" and Mark, but also
> of the following Gospel writers Matthw and Luke. According to all
> Gospels in Jesus has appeared God (= Yaweh) himself, and what he speaks
> is the Logos or the word of God.
Perhaps, though, the thought in Mark is that Jesus is the Logos of God as a
personified divine being and that his message is the Logos of God as speech.
That is to say, I question an either/or alternative as respects the nature
of the Logos of God in Mark.
Let us look at these pairs in Mark 8:36-38:
8:36b my sake and the gospel
838a me and my words (logoi)
8:38b The Son of Man and the angels--the holy.
I suggest that the right column are equivalents, so that the gospel = the
words (logoi) spoken by Jesus = the angels. The last part of the equation
is the key one--for Philo believed that the words (logoi) of God are
personified as angels. So, I suggest, the right hand column consists of the
Logos of God as broken down into individual spoken words (logoi) of God. In
this case, the gospel spoken by Jesus is the Logos of God as broken down
into the individual spoken logoi (words) of God that are personified in the
I suggest that the left column are also equivalents, so that me = me = the
Son of Man. Since this Son of Man is said to have God as his Father in
8:38, he is a Son of God. This is significant--for Philo believed that the
Logos of God as personified in a divine being is a Son of God.
So, I suggest , in Mark 8:36-38, we have three pairs in which the left pair
is the Logos of God as personified in a divine being, and in which the right
pair is the Logos of God as broken down into the individual spoken words
(logoi) of God that are personified in the angels. If so, then Mark's Jesus
is the Logos of God as personfied in a divine being and what he speaks,
i.e., the gospel, is the Logos of God as the individual spoken words (logoi)
of God that are personified in the angels.
In this case, there is no exaltation of Jesus from the Logos to God Himself
Perhaps it's questionable whether this is the case in John either. Why
would the Johannine community keep the Prologue in John, where Jesus is the
Logos of God as a personified divine being, if they later exalted him from
the Logos to God Himself?
1809 N. English Apt. 15
Maplewood, MN 55109
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>