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

sour wine

Expand Messages
  • Kevin O'Brien
    Greetings, re sour wine. I ve come late into this particular topic. Hoping my efforts are of help. (1) Granting vinegar or vinegar laced with myrrh was offered
    Message 1 of 24 , Mar 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Greetings,

      re sour wine.

      I've come late into this particular topic. Hoping my efforts are of help.

      (1) Granting vinegar or vinegar laced with myrrh was offered to Jesus on the cross, it being identified as sour wine,
      (2) Granting that Luke 22.17-18 par. "fruit of the vine" = wine and refers as well to sour wine,
      (3) Granting that Luke 22.18 par. is a vow to abstain from wine or its substitute ,
      (4) Granting that Luke 22.20 par. is Jesus' vow to abstain from wine of any kind and is not to be placed at the Last Supper in the space of the same meal (which is hardly credible) but in a post-Resurrection context such as the Lukan Acts 10.41 -- and finally that Jesus on the cross did not break his vow made at the Last Supper to abstain from wine of any kind, we can understand why in the three Synoptics Jesus did not drink what was offered, i.e. he refused the sour wine or any of its substitutes.

      All this has decided reference to the report in the Fourth Gospel, "... ELABEN TO OXOS hO IHSOUS". The verb here cannot be translated in the sense that Jesus drank the fluid since firstly it contradicts the three Synoptic reports and secondly it would follow that Jesus on the cross broke the Last Supper vow before the coming of the era of the Kingdom of God.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Felix Just, S.J.
      Dear Colleagues and Friends, First, thanks to Jeffery Hodges and those few who participated in the discussion of his paper(s). Conversation may of course
      Message 2 of 24 , Apr 2 3:20 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Colleagues and Friends,

        First, thanks to Jeffery Hodges and those few who participated in the
        discussion of his paper(s). Conversation may of course continue on his or
        anyone else's papers, or any other topics, as people wish.

        For the coming week, we were scheduled to discuss Leticia A.
        Guardiola-Saenz' “Female Bodies Mapping Jesus' Ministry in the Gospel of
        John”. However, Leticia has not submitted her paper and just informed me
        that she does not have time to finish it. Thus, we now have a two-week
        break before the final two papers on our calendar:

        April 2-15 (break weeks)
        April 16-22 Paul N. Anderson: “Truth and Liberation: The Work of the
        Parakletos and the Transformation of the Self”
        April 23-29 Elizabeth Danna: “Characterization of the Greeks in John 12”

        Elizabeth's paper is already available at
        http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust/John/SBL-Discussions.html, and Paul's paper
        will be available shortly.

        Felix
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Felix Just, S.J. - Dept. of Theological Studies
        Loyola Marymount University - 7900 Loyola Blvd.
        Los Angeles, CA 90045-8400 - Ph (310) 338-5933
        Homepage: http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      • Horace Jeffery Hodges
        ... So far as I can see, it was wine -- not vinegar -- that was laced with gall/myrrh. ... Why should one grant that it also refers to vinegar? Yes, I know
        Message 3 of 24 , Apr 3 7:32 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Kevin O'Brien wrote:

          > (1) Granting vinegar or vinegar laced with myrrh was
          > offered to Jesus
          > on the cross, it being identified as sour wine,

          So far as I can see, it was wine -- not vinegar --
          that was laced with gall/myrrh.

          > (2) Granting that Luke 22.17-18 par. "fruit of the
          > vine" = wine and
          > refers as well to sour wine,

          Why should one grant that it also refers to vinegar?
          Yes, I know that vinegar in those days was soured
          wine, but the terms were different: "oksos" vs.
          "oinos". So, why grant that "fruit of the vine"
          included vinegar? Surely the expression referred to
          "oinos" and was understood that way. After all, Jesus
          was drinking wine, not vinegar, at the Last Supper,
          wasn't he? Doesn't the verse mean that Jesus would
          abstain from wine (and indicate nothing for or against
          vinegar)?

          > (3) Granting that Luke 22.18 par. is a vow to
          > abstain
          > from wine or its
          > substitute ,

          By substitute, "vinegar"? Again, why grant this?

          > (4) Granting that Luke 22.20 par. is Jesus' vow to
          > abstain from wine of
          > any kind and is not to be placed at the Last Supper
          > in
          > the space of the
          > same meal (which is hardly credible) but in a
          > post-Resurrection context
          > such as the Lukan Acts 10.41

          Your point here is a bit unclear to me. Could you
          clarify this?

          > -- and finally that
          > Jesus
          > on the cross did
          > not break his vow made at the Last Supper to abstain
          > from wine of any
          > kind, we can understand why in the three Synoptics
          > Jesus did not drink
          > what was offered, i.e. he refused the sour wine or
          > any
          > of its
          > substitutes.

          So far as I can see, he is shown as explicitly
          refusing the wine mixed with gall/myrrh, but is he
          explicitly shown refusing the vinegar? Can you cite
          the verse?

          > All this has decided reference to the report
          > in the Fourth
          > Gospel, "... ELABEN TO OXOS hO IHSOUS". The verb
          > here
          > cannot be translated
          > in the sense that Jesus drank the fluid since
          > firstly
          > it contradicts
          > the three Synoptic reports

          Does it? How? Can you cite the contradiction? And how
          would you translate "elaben"? It certainly does not
          sound as though Jesus rejected the vinegar.

          > and secondly it would
          > follow that Jesus on the
          > cross broke the Last Supper vow before the coming of
          > the era of the
          > Kingdom of God.

          Only if one grants your premise, that "fruit of the
          vine" refers both to "oinos" and to "oksos", but I see
          no obvious reason to grant this.

          Jeffery Hodges

          =====
          Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
          Department of English Language and Literature
          Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
          447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
          Yangsandong 411
          South Korea

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
          http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
        • Horace Jeffery Hodges
          Isn t this the week for Paul N. Anderson: “Truth and Liberation: The Work of the Parakletos and the Transformation of the Self”? So . . . why this delay
          Message 4 of 24 , Apr 16 5:33 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Isn't this the week for "Paul N. Anderson: �Truth and
            Liberation: The Work of the Parakletos and the
            Transformation of the Self�? So . . . why this delay
            of the Parakletos?

            =====
            Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
            Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
            447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
            Yangsandong 411
            South Korea

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
            http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
          • Paul Anderson
            ... Thanks, Jeffery; my mistake in not getting the paper to Felix until after he had departed for the weekend -- and where he has gone we could not come -- nor
            Message 5 of 24 , Apr 16 9:17 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com writes:
              >why this delay

              >of the Parakletos?

              Thanks, Jeffery; my mistake in not getting the paper to Felix until after
              he had departed for the weekend -- and where he has gone we could not come
              -- nor could our e-mail messages. But he will return, at any moment, and
              we await with anticipation the joy of his coming.

              The paper was presented at the Christian Theology and Biblical Studies
              Section of the Nashville meetings, where the larger theme was on a
              theology of self. As the NT presenter (among four), the theme they asked
              me to develop was on the impact of the Holy Spirit upon the self as
              described in John, so that's the way I approached the issue.

              In getting into the task, I developed first the theological and
              applicational impressions of the text, and then moved toward the
              exegetical task. The latter produced a fair bit of dissonance when viewed
              in the light of the former; I'd be interested to see what folks think of
              the interplay. (It has been requested by the editors of Horizons in
              Biblical Theology, so that's the publication venue I have in mind.)

              Thanks, Jeffery, for the nudge.

              Paul
            • Felix Just, S.J.
              Dear Colleagues, Do not let your hearts be troubled... if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again... (Jn 14:1-3). Sorry about the mixup in the
              Message 6 of 24 , Apr 17 1:26 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Colleagues,

                "Do not let your hearts be troubled... if I go and prepare a place for you,
                I will come again..." (Jn 14:1-3).

                Sorry about the mixup in the discussion schedule, but as Paul Anderson told
                you, he didn't send his paper to me before I left for Holy Week and the
                Easter weekend. Now I'm back at the computer, and as soon as my student
                assistant has a chance to convert his paper to HTML format, I'll post it to
                the JL website.

                Meanwhile, we thought it would be good to postpone the discussion of Paul's
                paper (so more people have a chance to read it) until after Elizabeth's
                paper. Thus the upcoming schedule is:
                now until April 22 - continued "open" discussion
                April 23 - April 29 - Elizabeth Danna, “Characterization of the Greeks
                in John 12”
                April 30 - May 6 - Paul Anderson, “Truth and Liberation: The Work of
                the Parakletos and the Transformation of the Self”

                Elizabeth's paper is still available at
                http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust/John/SBL1999.html or
                http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust/John/SBL-Discussions.html, and Paul's will
                be there soon, by Thursday at the latest.

                Felix
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                Felix Just, S.J. - Dept. of Theological Studies
                Loyola Marymount University - 7900 Loyola Blvd.
                Los Angeles, CA 90045-8400 - Ph (310) 338-5933
                Homepage: http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              • Paul Anderson
                ... Thanks, Felix; I support this plan. Again, I apologize for the delay. Verily, Paul
                Message 7 of 24 , Apr 17 3:12 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com writes:
                  >Meanwhile, we thought it would be good to postpone the discussion of
                  >Paul's
                  >paper (so more people have a chance to read it) until after Elizabeth's
                  >paper.

                  Thanks, Felix; I support this plan. Again, I apologize for the delay.

                  Verily,

                  Paul
                • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                  I hesitate to post an email on Greeks since everybody may already be tired of hearing about them, but this is the week for discussing Elizabeth Danna s
                  Message 8 of 24 , Apr 22 7:21 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I hesitate to post an email on "Greeks" since
                    everybody may already be tired of hearing about them,
                    but this is the week for discussing Elizabeth Danna's
                    paper. Anyway, here goes. Elizabeth states the
                    following:

                    -------------------------------------------------------

                    Let us now turn to characterisation. (In this paper I
                    am building on studies done by Mark Allan Powell on
                    the Synoptics and by David Gowler on Luke-Acts, using
                    a selection of their categories of characterisation).
                    The first of our categories of characterisation is
                    that of direct definition. The first thing that comes
                    under this category is that the Greeks have come up to
                    Jerusalem for Passover (12:20). This indicates that
                    they are either God-fearers or full-fledged
                    proselytes. To which group do they belong? Scholars
                    are divided on the question. Those who think that the
                    Greeks are God-fearers include Carson, Morris,
                    Lindars, and Lagrange; those who think that they are
                    proselytes include Marsh, Brown, Bultmann, and Kossen.
                    My own view is that the text does not make it clear
                    into which group they fall. This leads me to ask
                    whether the matter is really that important to the
                    implied author. If it were, he would specify to which
                    group they belong. What is important to him, I
                    suggest, is that they are Greeks, that is, that they
                    are Gentiles.

                    -------------------------------------------------------

                    I'd like to draw attention to the following statement:

                    "This indicates that they are either God-fearers or
                    full-fledged proselytes".

                    Are these the only alternatives? Couldn't they also be
                    Greek-speaking Jews who had been born as Jews? The
                    answer to this question might depend upon who the
                    Greeks are in John 7:35. If the answer is that they
                    are Greek-speaking Jews who had been born as Jews,
                    then -- of course -- they are not Gentiles (which
                    would, I presume, alter Elizabeth's analysis of the
                    significance of the emergence of the Gentiles for
                    Jesus's hour of crucifixion).

                    Jeffery Hodges

                    =====
                    Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                    Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                    447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                    Yangsandong 411
                    South Korea

                    __________________________________________________
                    Do You Yahoo!?
                    Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                    http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                  • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                    I forgot to mention one other point. If the Greeks in John 12 were full-fledged proselytes , wouldn t they be considered Jews rather than Gentiles anyway?
                    Message 9 of 24 , Apr 22 10:41 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I forgot to mention one other point. If the Greeks in
                      John 12 were "full-fledged proselytes", wouldn't they
                      be considered Jews rather than Gentiles anyway?

                      =====
                      Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                      Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                      447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                      Yangsandong 411
                      South Korea

                      __________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                      http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                    • Richard Anderson
                      Prof. Hodges asks: If the Greeks in John 12 were full-fledged proselytes , wouldn t they be considered Jews rather than Gentiles anyway? In Reclaiming the
                      Message 10 of 24 , Apr 23 5:19 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Prof. Hodges asks: If the Greeks in
                        John 12 were "full-fledged proselytes", wouldn't they
                        be considered Jews rather than Gentiles anyway?

                        In Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Schiffman writes:

                        "No doubt non-Jews would have been prohibited from entering
                        the temple since even proselytes were forbidden entry into the
                        middle Court until the fourth generation (Temple Scroll 39:5-7).
                        Indeed, in the End of Days, non-Jews as well as proselytes were
                        to be excluded from the sanctuary described in Florigium (1-
                        2I4)."

                        The relevant portion is that "even proselytes were forbidden entry into the
                        middle Court until the fourth generation (Temple Scroll 39:5-7)."


                        Richard H. Anderson
                        Wallingford PA
                        http://www.geocities.com/gospelofluke
                      • Piet van Veldhuizen
                        Thank you, Elizabeth Danna, for your paper. I had never studied this pericope. Reading it superficially, and perhaps under influence of long-ago sunday school
                        Message 11 of 24 , Apr 24 3:42 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thank you, Elizabeth Danna, for your paper.

                          I had never studied this pericope. Reading it superficially, and perhaps
                          under influence of long-ago sunday school teaching, I always saw those
                          Greeks as the religious tourists, by whom Jesus does not want to be
                          distracted from his mission. This is not the time for sightseeing, this is
                          the hour of decision.
                          Now your paper shows quite convincingly that John uses discipleship
                          terminology here, and that the Greeks come in much the same chain-like way
                          in which the disciples came in John 1.

                          Speaking about the "much-anticipated hour", you state that it has been
                          mentioned several times before, "and always it has been said that the hour
                          has not yet come." This is not true: in John 4 Jesus says that "the hour
                          will come and is now" - and here we have a difficult kind of contrast
                          between John 4 and John 12. In John 4, the immediacy of the "hour" is
                          realized in Jesus presenting himself in a very direct way to the woman: "I
                          am (the Messiah), the one who is talking to you". It is a moment of
                          revelation, of reciprocal disclosure between Jesus and this woman. In John
                          12 the presence of the "hour" seems not to be realized in a fullness of
                          contact and disclosure, but rather seems to isolate Jesus from the people
                          around him. The last part of 12,36 confirms this. Therefore I have some
                          difficulty in reading the coming of the Greeks as an open-ended story in
                          which we can "step in" - it seems rather to be open-ended because in this
                          moment, nobody can pretend to be a follower of Jesus.

                          Why did you not comment upon the role of Philip and Andrew in this pericope?
                          They played this mediating role already in John 6, and of course they were
                          part of a longer chain in John 1. Comparing with the Synoptics, where they
                          are only mentioned in the list of twelve, I must conclude that John
                          deliberately gives them a (relatively) prominent role. When you speak about
                          the anonymity of the Greeks and the focussing of attention, I think
                          something should be said about those two disciples mentioned by name.

                          Finally, I think it is not all-important to know the ethnic and religious
                          status of these Greeks. Essential is the kind of figure drawn by their
                          appearance: at the moment that Jesus reaches the centre-point of his mission
                          (Jerusalem, the "hour"), these Greeks evoke the wide world. Their appearance
                          underlines, by contrast, the utter concentration on this centre-point in
                          place and time. The question remains: are they presented as a threat to
                          Jesus' concentration (the perspective of worldwide discipleship could have
                          distracted him from this ultimate concentration), or are they rather by
                          their appearance confirming the world-wide significance of Jesus' mission in
                          that very hour of truth?

                          Kind greetings,

                          Piet van Veldhuizen
                          <mailto:pi.veldhuizen@...>
                        • Maluflen@aol.com
                          In a message dated 4/24/2001 7:04:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, pi.veldhuizen@wxs.nl writes:
                          Message 12 of 24 , Apr 24 5:50 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In a message dated 4/24/2001 7:04:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
                            pi.veldhuizen@... writes:

                            << Why did you not comment upon the role of Philip and Andrew in this
                            pericope?
                            They played this mediating role already in John 6, and of course they were
                            part of a longer chain in John 1. Comparing with the Synoptics, where they
                            are only mentioned in the list of twelve, I must conclude that John
                            deliberately gives them a (relatively) prominent role.>>

                            Almost, but not quite true. Andrew is mentioned in Matt 4:18 and in the
                            Markan parallel to this text -- not, however, in the calling of Simon (plus
                            James and John) as told in Lk 5:1-11. Thus, what you say about the Synoptics
                            in general is true of Luke. And I would agree with you that John seems to
                            give especially Andrew, but also Philip, a prominent role because of his
                            virtual suppression in Lk. Is there significance, for this particular
                            passage, in the fact that these two apostles alone have Greek names? I don't
                            have the means of checking this at the moment, but I suspect this point is
                            routinely made in the commentaries. Also, what do you think of the recent
                            arguments of Klaus Berger that Andrew is the beloved disciple in John?

                            Leonard Maluf
                          • Elizabeth Danna
                            ... Thanks Richard for the help. I haven t got access to many books at the monent, so I can t give references. But I do remember hearing that many Jews
                            Message 13 of 24 , Apr 24 1:24 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Richard Anderson wrote:

                              > Prof. Hodges asks: If the Greeks in
                              > John 12 were "full-fledged proselytes", wouldn't they
                              > be considered Jews rather than Gentiles anyway?
                              >
                              > In Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Schiffman writes:
                              >
                              > "No doubt non-Jews would have been prohibited from entering
                              > the temple since even proselytes were forbidden entry into the
                              > middle Court until the fourth generation (Temple Scroll 39:5-7).
                              > Indeed, in the End of Days, non-Jews as well as proselytes were
                              > to be excluded from the sanctuary described in Florigium (1-
                              > 2I4)."
                              >
                              > The relevant portion is that "even proselytes were forbidden entry into the
                              > middle Court until the fourth generation (Temple Scroll 39:5-7)."

                              Thanks Richard for the help. I haven't got access to many books at the monent,
                              so I can't give references. But I do remember hearing that many Jews
                              considered proselytes to be second-class Jews.


                              Elizabeth Danna
                            • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                              Paul, thank you for an interesting paper. I suspect that the anxiety of doing theology and biblical exegesis in tandem has a social as well as personal
                              Message 14 of 24 , Apr 29 5:44 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Paul, thank you for an interesting paper. I suspect
                                that the anxiety of doing theology and biblical
                                exegesis in tandem has a social as well as personal
                                dimension -- �well, he's doing theology, not serious
                                biblical scholarship�.

                                More specifically, you worry about your
                                theological/(experienced) approach being at odds with
                                your exegetical/(perceived) approach. You point toward
                                a resolution of this tension in the �eschatologically
                                present workings of God� in bringing to bear �the
                                existential impact of these texts�, which opens one
                                �to the truth about oneself [that] ultimately leads
                                one to openings regarding the character of our
                                Ultimate Concern � God � and vice versa�. I take it
                                that you mean that the divided self, by recognizing
                                its division, is opened up to unity offered by God�s
                                truth as revealed by the workings of the spirit (i.e.,
                                the Paraclete).

                                I�m not sure that I see how this all fits together in
                                its details. Probably, I need to reread your paper and
                                reflect upon it (but have grading to do instead).

                                However, I wonder if you could link your interest in
                                the divided self with the biblical tradition of
                                �double-heartedness�. I�m not sure if these are the
                                same, but it might be profitable to engage them
                                together. Moreover, perhaps some value could come of
                                reflecting upon what it means �to remember� (a faculty
                                of the heart) in the biblical tradition. Remembering
                                is more than recall; it is performative, doing. To
                                remember the covenant means to fulfill the covenant.
                                The Paraclete is characterized as one who will
                                �remind� the disciples (and later believers, I
                                presume) of everthing that Jesus said to them (John
                                14:26). To remember what Jesus said means to do what
                                Jesus said, and while this occurs in the context of
                                community, it surely has a personal aspect as well.

                                I�ve probably muddied the waters by stirring around in
                                them, but others can perhaps clarify them again.

                                By the way, there appears to be a typo in one
                                sentence:

                                �Further, in the fifth Parakletos passage
                                (16:12-15)[,] the emphasis is upon the upon the way
                                the Spirit of Truth will lead people into all truth,
                                not speaking on his own behalf, but only that which
                                [he] hears from Jesus.�

                                I think that �he� is missing. (As for the added comma,
                                it�s only a suggestion.)

                                Jeffery Hodges

                                =====
                                Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                Yangsandong 411
                                South Korea

                                __________________________________________________
                                Do You Yahoo!?
                                Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                                http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                              • Paul Anderson
                                Thanks, Jeffery, you are correct on the typo. On the anxiety motif, don t psychologize it too far; I am really quite at home in doing theological and
                                Message 15 of 24 , Apr 30 7:14 AM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Thanks, Jeffery, you are correct on the typo. On the "anxiety" motif,
                                  don't psychologize it too far; I am really quite at home in doing
                                  theological and exegetical interpretation. My use of the term roots in
                                  the Rogerian model I was using, where Rogers sees anxiety as a result of
                                  incongruity between one's perceived and experienced self. You might look
                                  at that part again.

                                  Overall, it fits into the structure of theological analysis producing
                                  interpretation "x", and exegetical analysis producing interpretation "y".
                                  On the surface, they look incongruent, and yet, as one looks at the
                                  existential and theological meaning of "y", it is entirely congruent with
                                  "x".

                                  Take care,

                                  Paul
                                • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                  Paul, sorry to reply so late, but my whole family has been sick with colds, and I ve been staying home to ... Okay, I ll read the anxiety as a trope rather
                                  Message 16 of 24 , May 6, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Paul, sorry to reply so late, but my whole family has
                                    been sick with colds, and I've been staying home to
                                    care for my son. You wrote:

                                    > On the "anxiety" motif,
                                    > don't psychologize it too far;

                                    Okay, I'll read the 'anxiety' as a trope rather than
                                    your psychological state.

                                    > I am really quite at
                                    > home in doing
                                    > theological and exegetical interpretation.

                                    On this point, I think that you might want to reword
                                    the following passage:

                                    "All of a sudden, however, I come to feel a bit of
                                    anxiety creeping up. My self perception as one who
                                    takes seriously the plain meaning of the text first
                                    before eisegetically reading into the text what one
                                    thinks it ought to mean has just been eclipsed by the
                                    possibility that I may have done exactly that!"

                                    Do you really mean "before eisegetically reading", or
                                    do you mean "rather than eisegetically reading"? Also,
                                    the ending of this sentence is ambiguous -- done
                                    exactly what? I think that I know what you mean, but
                                    it's possible for the reader to be baffled even upon a
                                    re-reading.

                                    > My use of the term roots in
                                    > the Rogerian model I was using, where Rogers sees
                                    > anxiety as a result of
                                    > incongruity between one's perceived and experienced
                                    > self. You might look
                                    > at that part again.

                                    It's been many years since I looked at Rogers. My
                                    second field was psychology, but I left it behind. I
                                    rather like Rogers, though, and I appreciate your
                                    making him relevant again for me.

                                    Actually, this part about incongruity was what led to
                                    my psychologizing of your remark about anxiety. I
                                    wonder if your paper might not lend itself too readily
                                    to a psychologistic reading. Have you encountered this
                                    with anyone other than me? If not, maybe it's just me.

                                    > Overall, it fits into the structure of theological
                                    > analysis producing
                                    > interpretation "x", and exegetical analysis
                                    > producing interpretation "y".
                                    > On the surface, they look incongruent, and yet, as
                                    > one looks at the
                                    > existential and theological meaning of "y", it is
                                    > entirely congruent with
                                    > "x".

                                    I'll think some more about this in the context of your
                                    paper, and get back to you if I have any questions or
                                    observations.

                                    Jeffery Hodges

                                    =====
                                    Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                    Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                    447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                    Yangsandong 411
                                    South Korea

                                    __________________________________________________
                                    Do You Yahoo!?
                                    Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                                    http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                                  • Paul Anderson
                                    Thanks, Jeffery, for the comments; any coments on the contents of the essay? Paul
                                    Message 17 of 24 , May 6, 2001
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Thanks, Jeffery, for the comments; any coments on the contents of the
                                      essay?

                                      Paul
                                    • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                      ... I ve had trouble focusing for the past week, but I ll try now. First, I wonder about the divided self in your summary of how Carl Rogers sees it: anxiety
                                      Message 18 of 24 , May 7, 2001
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Paul Anderson wrote:

                                        > Thanks, Jeffery, for the comments; any coments on
                                        > the contents of the
                                        > essay?

                                        I've had trouble focusing for the past week, but I'll
                                        try now.

                                        First, I wonder about the divided self in your summary
                                        of how Carl Rogers sees it:

                                        "anxiety ... is at least partially caused by the
                                        degree of incongruity between one�s perceived self and
                                        one�s experienced self."

                                        I recognize the helpfulness of this distinction, but
                                        it seems to me that there is a third element here --
                                        one's ideal self. I think that I have a perceived
                                        self, an experienced self, and an ideal self, and I
                                        would like to think that the Parakletos would help me
                                        toward being my ideal self -- indeed, even helping me
                                        to see what my ideal self should be.

                                        The therapeutic goal of congruence is a worthy one,
                                        but it seems to me that there has to be a telos beyond
                                        congruence. I think that this is the difference
                                        between psychology's therapeutic goal and religion's
                                        moral aim.

                                        So, this probably leaves me a bit uneasy about
                                        interpreting religious aims in psychological terms. I
                                        have a similar unease about interpreting John's Gospel
                                        in existentialist terms. Authenticity is -- I agree --
                                        a worthy personal goal, but moral language points
                                        further, higher, than existentialist language.

                                        I think that this tension between the therapeutic and
                                        religious worldviews characterizes your paper, but
                                        it's not easy to identify those points where the
                                        tension threatens to tear your synthesis apart.

                                        I can try, however. Here is a passage where you
                                        express the work of the Parakletos in bringing us to
                                        truth:

                                        "We are delivered from fear, from anxiety, from
                                        inauthenticity, from duplicity. Being opened to the
                                        truth sets us free inwardly because our perceived and
                                        experienced selves move toward greater congruity, and
                                        our divided selves move closer to life-producing
                                        wholeness."

                                        My intuition is that the Parakletos is doing more than
                                        bringing about congruity between the perceived and
                                        experienced selves -- it is making clear to us that
                                        both of these selves fall short of our ideal self.

                                        I pointed to John 14:26 last week -- the work of the
                                        Parakletos in "reminding" us of what Jesus said. What
                                        the Johannine Jesus said can be greatly at odds with
                                        both our perceived and experienced selves. For
                                        instance, John 13:12-17 exhorts one to the ideal of
                                        service. Perhaps I have a perceived self that says
                                        that I am a good person and an experienced self that
                                        confirms this -- until I discover that being "good" is
                                        quite different than I thought. I begin to form a
                                        conception of an ideal self that corresponds neither
                                        to my perceived self nor to my experienced self.

                                        Maybe this gets at my feeling of hesitancy about
                                        affirming your paper's analysis. I'll leave it at this
                                        for now and see what you (and/or others) think.

                                        Jeffery Hodges

                                        =====
                                        Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                        Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                        447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                        Yangsandong 411
                                        South Korea

                                        __________________________________________________
                                        Do You Yahoo!?
                                        Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                                        http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                                      • Lorna Wilson
                                        Jeffery, This is an off-list comment and I hope you can help me... I am a member of the forum but not sure which paper or individual topics we are discussing
                                        Message 19 of 24 , May 8, 2001
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Jeffery,

                                          This is an off-list comment and I hope you can help me...

                                          I am a member of the forum but not sure which paper or individual topics we
                                          are discussing right now.

                                          I know a couple of weeks ago we were going to have "free discussion" for a
                                          while until we went back to the papers.

                                          Can you let me know if we have started reviewing papers again and if so what
                                          is the website address to view them.

                                          Thanks,

                                          Lorna Wilson


                                          >From: Horace Jeffery Hodges <jefferyhodges@...>
                                          >Reply-To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
                                          >To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
                                          >Subject: Re: Re(2): [John_Lit] Paul Anderson's "Truth and Liberation: The
                                          >Function of the Joha
                                          >Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 17:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
                                          >
                                          >Paul Anderson wrote:
                                          >
                                          > > Thanks, Jeffery, for the comments; any coments on
                                          > > the contents of the
                                          > > essay?
                                          >
                                          >I've had trouble focusing for the past week, but I'll
                                          >try now.
                                          >
                                          >First, I wonder about the divided self in your summary
                                          >of how Carl Rogers sees it:
                                          >
                                          >"anxiety ... is at least partially caused by the
                                          >degree of incongruity between one�s perceived self and
                                          >one�s experienced self."
                                          >
                                          >I recognize the helpfulness of this distinction, but
                                          >it seems to me that there is a third element here --
                                          >one's ideal self. I think that I have a perceived
                                          >self, an experienced self, and an ideal self, and I
                                          >would like to think that the Parakletos would help me
                                          >toward being my ideal self -- indeed, even helping me
                                          >to see what my ideal self should be.
                                          >
                                          >The therapeutic goal of congruence is a worthy one,
                                          >but it seems to me that there has to be a telos beyond
                                          >congruence. I think that this is the difference
                                          >between psychology's therapeutic goal and religion's
                                          >moral aim.
                                          >
                                          >So, this probably leaves me a bit uneasy about
                                          >interpreting religious aims in psychological terms. I
                                          >have a similar unease about interpreting John's Gospel
                                          >in existentialist terms. Authenticity is -- I agree --
                                          >a worthy personal goal, but moral language points
                                          >further, higher, than existentialist language.
                                          >
                                          >I think that this tension between the therapeutic and
                                          >religious worldviews characterizes your paper, but
                                          >it's not easy to identify those points where the
                                          >tension threatens to tear your synthesis apart.
                                          >
                                          >I can try, however. Here is a passage where you
                                          >express the work of the Parakletos in bringing us to
                                          >truth:
                                          >
                                          >"We are delivered from fear, from anxiety, from
                                          >inauthenticity, from duplicity. Being opened to the
                                          >truth sets us free inwardly because our perceived and
                                          >experienced selves move toward greater congruity, and
                                          >our divided selves move closer to life-producing
                                          >wholeness."
                                          >
                                          >My intuition is that the Parakletos is doing more than
                                          >bringing about congruity between the perceived and
                                          >experienced selves -- it is making clear to us that
                                          >both of these selves fall short of our ideal self.
                                          >
                                          >I pointed to John 14:26 last week -- the work of the
                                          >Parakletos in "reminding" us of what Jesus said. What
                                          >the Johannine Jesus said can be greatly at odds with
                                          >both our perceived and experienced selves. For
                                          >instance, John 13:12-17 exhorts one to the ideal of
                                          >service. Perhaps I have a perceived self that says
                                          >that I am a good person and an experienced self that
                                          >confirms this -- until I discover that being "good" is
                                          >quite different than I thought. I begin to form a
                                          >conception of an ideal self that corresponds neither
                                          >to my perceived self nor to my experienced self.
                                          >
                                          >Maybe this gets at my feeling of hesitancy about
                                          >affirming your paper's analysis. I'll leave it at this
                                          >for now and see what you (and/or others) think.
                                          >
                                          >Jeffery Hodges
                                          >
                                          >=====
                                          >Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                          >Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                          >447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                          >Yangsandong 411
                                          >South Korea
                                          >
                                          >__________________________________________________
                                          >Do You Yahoo!?
                                          >Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                                          >http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                                          >
                                          >SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          >UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          >PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com
                                          >
                                          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >
                                          >

                                          _________________________________________________________________
                                          Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                                        • Paul Anderson
                                          ... I agree, Jeffery, and yet, rather than seeing the ideal self as a third category, I would regard it (in Johannine terms) as the truth into which the
                                          Message 20 of 24 , May 8, 2001
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            >I think that I have a perceived
                                            >self, an experienced self, and an ideal self, and I
                                            >would like to think that the Parakletos would help me
                                            >toward being my ideal self -- indeed, even helping me
                                            >to see what my ideal self should be.

                                            I agree, Jeffery, and yet, rather than seeing the ideal self as a third
                                            category, I would regard it (in Johannine terms) as "the truth" into which
                                            the Spirit of Truth, the Parakletos, guides one. In that sense, "the
                                            truth" of Christ informs one's experienced self and one's perceived self.

                                            > Authenticity is -- I agree --
                                            >a worthy personal goal, but moral language points
                                            >further, higher, than existentialist language.

                                            Existential is different from existentialist; the later is not my
                                            perspective. However, when you look at Bultmann's NT Theology as well as
                                            his commentary on John, there is ample room for discussing Johannine
                                            theology in existential terms. Of course, congruity and incongruity
                                            relate to moral realities as well as one's aspirations and ideals, so I
                                            don't think I've overlooked that. The point here is to identify how it is
                                            that one is liberated by truth, at least inwardly, and the Rogerian
                                            theraputic model seems quite parallel to the convincing work of the
                                            Parakletos here in John 16.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >What
                                            >the Johannine Jesus said can be greatly at odds with
                                            >both our perceived and experienced selves. For
                                            >instance, John 13:12-17 exhorts one to the ideal of
                                            >service. Perhaps I have a perceived self that says
                                            >that I am a good person and an experienced self that
                                            >confirms this -- until I discover that being "good" is
                                            >quite different than I thought. I begin to form a
                                            >conception of an ideal self that corresponds neither
                                            >to my perceived self nor to my experienced self.
                                            >
                                            Right. And here's where I connect the liberating/transforming work of the
                                            Parakletos with John's Christology. The saving/revealing initiative of
                                            God scandalizes all that is of human origin -- including religious and
                                            conventional understandings of what is expected, and even what is "ideal."
                                            Here's where the works of Martyn/Brown/Rensberger and Bultmann converge.
                                            The cosmos is scandalized by the truth-bearing initiative of God in that
                                            it must take a stand for or against the Revealer. In so doing, it too is
                                            convicted of the truth.

                                            This is more fully developed in the second part of the paper, and as I
                                            continue to think about it, the exegetical part indeed seems quite
                                            congruent with the earlier theological analysis.

                                            Thanks, Jeffery, for your meaningful engagement!


                                            Paul Anderson
                                            >
                                            >
                                          • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                            Paul, thanks for your substantive reply. It doesn t entirely allay my concerns, but I see that you have already considered these concerns even before my
                                            Message 21 of 24 , May 8, 2001
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Paul, thanks for your substantive reply. It doesn't
                                              entirely allay my concerns, but I see that you have
                                              already considered these concerns even before my
                                              voicing of them.

                                              > The point here is to identify how it is
                                              > that one is liberated by truth, at least inwardly,
                                              > and the Rogerian theraputic model seems quite
                                              > parallel to the convincing work of the
                                              > Parakletos here in John 16.

                                              Is the therapist a (the?) Paraclete? This is not meant
                                              as a facetious remark. I am curious about how far your
                                              use of Rogers takes you.

                                              On a different point: Do you know of any critically
                                              sound works that defend the construction of a Biblical
                                              theology? I'm working on a little theological project
                                              (maybe a big one) on the Biblical understanding of the
                                              heart as the active core of the human being and of
                                              remembering as doing. The project entails drawing upon
                                              different Biblical passages to construct a Biblical
                                              theology of remembering, but I don't want my method to
                                              degenerate into a parody of prooftexting. My intuition
                                              is that there is a certain kind of unity to the Bible
                                              but that it's not an unproblematic unity. How does one
                                              legitimately construct a Biblical theology that
                                              presuppose some sort of unity despite the varied
                                              voices that one finds in the text? Any suggestions?

                                              Jeffery Hodges

                                              =====
                                              Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                              Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                              447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                              Yangsandong 411
                                              South Korea

                                              __________________________________________________
                                              Do You Yahoo!?
                                              Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
                                              http://auctions.yahoo.com/
                                            • Paul Anderson
                                              ... I use the modest language of a parallel with intentionality, Jeffery. I think there may be some overlap, and in the best cases I might imagine a
                                              Message 22 of 24 , May 9, 2001
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com writes:
                                                >Paul, thanks for your substantive reply. It doesn't
                                                >entirely allay my concerns, but I see that you have
                                                >already considered these concerns even before my
                                                >voicing of them.
                                                >
                                                >> The point here is to identify how it is
                                                >> that one is liberated by truth, at least inwardly,
                                                >> and the Rogerian theraputic model seems quite
                                                >> parallel to the convincing work of the
                                                >> Parakletos here in John 16.
                                                >
                                                >Is the therapist a (the?) Paraclete? This is not meant
                                                >as a facetious remark. I am curious about how far your
                                                >use of Rogers takes you.

                                                I use the modest language of a "parallel" with intentionality, Jeffery. I
                                                think there may be some overlap, and in the best cases I might imagine a
                                                therapist furthering the work of the Parakletos. Likewise, I believe the
                                                convincing work of the Parakletos is therapeutic, although I see that work
                                                as having a larger goal than personal transformation, as important as that
                                                is. So, I would envision the parallel to have some overlap, but not
                                                necessarily so.

                                                In terms of continuity with the Johannine tradition, I envision closer
                                                connections with the personal transformation that happens in the meeting
                                                for worship. Across traditions and forms, the human-divine encounter
                                                evokes a renewed perspective, including one's appraisal of self. The
                                                Johannine theology of encounter emerges epistemologically, I believe, from
                                                transformative experiences, and it likewise draws the reader into such
                                                experiences.
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > How does one
                                                >legitimately construct a Biblical theology that
                                                >presuppose some sort of unity despite the varied
                                                >voices that one finds in the text? Any suggestions?

                                                The work of the Bible and Christian Theology section of SBL, along with
                                                the Lilly-funded consultation headed up by Ulrich Mauser has done some
                                                good work here (the session in which my paper was presented), and standard
                                                texts on biblical theology abound. The challenge, of course, is that one
                                                must take seriously the "theologies" within the canonical corpus even in
                                                coming out with a "biblical" perspective on any theological topic.

                                                Any comments from others?

                                                Paul
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.