Re: John as the putative B.D.
- --- In johannine_literature@y..., "Kevin O'Brien" <symeon@l...>
> If Luke 22:8 was historically uttered by Jesus, then John theApostle cannot be the B.D. and/or the evangelist because John
18:28 contradicts it! If John the Apostle wrote or reported John
18:28, then Jesus could not have uttered Luke 22:8. This brings
in its turn the questions of Inerrancy and Inspiration. I opt
definitely for John 18:28 as historical and Luke 22:15 as
I may simply prove my ignorance here, but is there any reason
why Jesus, knowing what his own predicament would be on the
Friday (cf Jn 13:1), could not have oraganized an early Passover.
There was no need for the gospel writers to mention that it was
early, it was just that year's Passover. The reason it could not be
on the correct day was obvious. Surely there were times when
such shifts were necessary and, of all people, would not the One
who was the true paschal lamb (1 Cor 5:7) have had the
authority to shift it on this occasion.
Just a thought,
- Dear Kevin O'Brien,
Further to my suggestion that Jesus may have had an 'early'
Passover, it is clear that there was some flexibility with the feast.
In Numbers 9:10-11 there was an allowance to celebrate the
Passover in the second month, rather than the first. Israel
actually did this (2 Chron 30); even many who were unclean
were alowed to celebrate - despite the sancturary's rules for
cleanness - because of Hezekiah's prayers on their behalf. More
than that, however, the whole people decided to continue the
Passover for another week - for which no special provision
seems to have been made.
It is true that Jesus was neither a month later, nor did he extend
the feast, my point is only that there was some flexibility with it.
There was surely some room to move for the Lamb who was the
fulfilment of the type given in the Passover.
I apologize that this post is not particularly Johannine, but for one
who would keep open the debate that the Apostle John was the
BD, it seems appropriate.