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

Re: [John_Lit] Re: Jesus and JB in Jn

Expand Messages
  • Yuri Kuchinsky
    On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, kymhsm wrote: [Yuri:] ... Kym, Still, I m wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you re advocating, would have constituted a
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
      On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, kymhsm wrote:

      [Yuri:]
      > >So I would not necessarily agree that the mythological > events
      > from the OT would have overwhelmed the historical base of the >
      > gospels to a very great degree.>

      > The 'historical base' is not 'overwhelmed', but John has used the
      > Genesis structure to in clude ideas additional to those in the
      > plain text. He has shown two main things with this stucture.
      > >From Genesis 1 (Jn 1:1-11:44), that the Word who became flesh
      > and dwelt among us, Jesus, was the one created all things (c.f.
      > Jn 1:3) and, from Genesis 2 (Jn 11:45-20:29), to express a
      > sublime First Adam / Second Adam theology - all the more
      > sublime because it is the pre-Fall Adam with whom he is
      > drawing the parallels.

      Kym,

      Still, I'm wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you're advocating,
      would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove the mention of the
      baptism of Jesus by John.

      In other words, the baptism of Jesus by John seems to have been a real
      historical event. So do you think that the Genesis motifs, alone, could
      have been enough reason for masking this event in Jn?

      So there seem to have been some other reasons for masking this event in
      Jn...

      Yuri.

      Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

      The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
      equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian
    • kymhsm
      Dear Yuri, ... advocating, would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove the mention of the baptism of Jesus by John. ... real historical event.
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
        Dear Yuri,

        > Still, I'm wondering if the dependence on Genesis, that you're
        advocating,> would have constituted a sufficient warrant to remove
        the mention of the > baptism of Jesus by John.
        >
        > In other words, the baptism of Jesus by John seems to have been a
        real > historical event. So do you think that the Genesis motifs,
        alone, could > have been enough reason for masking this event in Jn?>

        I do not think that John has masked JB's baptism of Jesus at all. It
        is just that he has not detailed the event. Rather, he has spoken of
        the *significance* of the event in identifying the Christ.

        The Genesis structure may have been sufficient reason not to detail
        it because that structure is built mostly upon the *events* of the
        gospel. For instance, the six days in which something new was created
        in Gen 1 are reflected by the six miracles or signs of Jn 2:1 -
        11:45. We are accostomed to thinking of seven signs but it seems that
        Jesus' walking on the water (while undoubtedly a sign for the
        apostles) does not bear the same significnce as the healings etc.

        On the other hand, John does include the event of Jesus' clearing of
        the temple without that affecting the structure, though he excludes
        it from the signs (and so from the Genesis structure) by placing it
        between the first two signs, both of which he nominates as such
        (2:11; 4:54).

        Sincerely,

        Kym Smith
        Adelaide
        South Australia
        khs@...
      • Horace Jeffery Hodges
        ... For John the Baptist s disciples, I would expect more preparation and commitment associated with a baptism, but I doubt that the multitudes coming for
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 3, 2002
          Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

          > Well, Jeffery, I suppose this would depend on just
          > how meaningful you
          > think JB's baptism was. If one thinks of it as a
          > mere formality, something
          > that required little in the way of preparation and
          > commitment, then being
          > baptised by JB would be no big deal at all. But I
          > think such a view of
          > JB's baptism may be a little oversimplified.

          For John the Baptist's disciples, I would expect more
          preparation and commitment associated with a baptism,
          but I doubt that the multitudes coming for baptism fit
          this. Simply referring to a baptism by John the
          Baptist is thus too little to base a strong view on. I
          still vote for time spent with John the Baptist beyond
          the Jordan as suggesting more.

          > I think it's quite reasonable to suppose that a very
          > high Christology for
          > Jesus was something that was late in developing. So
          > then don't you think
          > that this particular feature of Jn, i.e. absence of
          > the scene where Jesus
          > is being baptised by JB, was also a late
          > development?

          It's a reasonable position.

          > Well, I'm now proposing that there had indeed been
          > an earlier version of
          > Jn that did feature Jesus being baptised by JB. So,
          > in such a case, now we
          > may have identified some traces of that earlier
          > text.

          Maybe, but so far, I haven't been convinced by your
          posts because I have always seen other possible
          interpretations. Also, the MG really looks like a
          medieval harmonization based upon the four gospels and
          later Christian traditions.

          But, I admit that I haven't studied it closely. I
          doubt that I will due to lack of time and to my
          willingness to accept the standard scholarly position
          -- especially in cases where I lack time to develop
          the expertise needed for making an independent
          verification.

          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! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
          http://sports.yahoo.com
        • Yuri Kuchinsky
          ... Dear Michael, The Magdalene Gospel is clearly not all of one piece, and there are substantial differences between different parts of MG. So, it really
          Message 4 of 17 , Mar 6, 2002
            On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, michael Hardin wrote:

            > These would be my questions Yuri:
            >
            > 1) In that the MG text reflects
            > synchronization/harmonization of the canonical
            > gospels, in what textual tradition would a greek
            > 'retranslation' stand (what is presupposed)? Or are
            > there affinities with several textual traditions?

            Dear Michael,

            The Magdalene Gospel is clearly not all of one piece, and there are
            substantial differences between different parts of MG. So, it really seems
            like a compilation, or a sort of a synopsis, of various gospel texts.

            Many segments of MG look a lot like harmonisations of various single
            gospel texts. Yet other segments represent straight narrative from single
            gospels.

            In general, I would say that MG reflects Western text of the gospels. Of
            course Western text is a lot better attested in Old Latin and in Semitic
            languages than in Greek. Myself, I'm quite sceptical that the Greek text
            should always be seen as the most reliable.

            > 2) The prologue as an early christians hymn (sans the
            > references to JTB) needs no defending. But also a
            > hymn grounded in a midrash of Gen 1 (Borgen)? I think
            > so. Kym Smith's Genesis observations are intruiging
            > here.
            >
            > If one wishes to see an earlier than canonical Jesus
            > tradition ( as do many Thomas/Q questers), I am not
            > persuded that MG would fit until I had examined the
            > passion narrative. As a meta-narrative where does it
            > place the death of Jesus, before or after Passover?
            > This would be a strong indication of it's provinence
            > at least East/West.

            The Passion Narrative in MG is a very complex patchwork of various texts.
            There's actually not much harmonisation that goes on there. Passages from
            the Synoptics and from Jn are usually cited sequentially, and there seems
            to be quite a lot of redundancy and repetition. Which would confirm, at
            least in my view, that this is not a well developed gospel harmony, but
            rather a synopsis of the gospels. Essentially, I see MG as the earliest
            version of the Diatessaron.

            > The Johannine tradition is of far more historical
            > value than given by the present state of NT research

            Yes, you may well be right about this.

            > who seem to reflect Clement of Alexandria. Dodd &
            > Robinson have laid an excelent foundation in this
            > regard. This is not to say that the gospel was not
            > produced in stages, only to say that perhaps Kym Smith
            > is correct to observe that it was the events which
            > upon reflection were associated with the
            > 'mythical/prophetic' archtypes, not the other way
            > around. (It is hish to time to stop paying homage to
            > Bousset)
            >
            > Some quick thoughts:
            >
            > MG 1.3 sound definitely post-Nicean so if it is early
            > it is already coming under the corrector's hand.

            Well, I've always avoided dealing with the first chapter of MG, because
            it's so different from our standard opening of Jn, although being similar
            to it in some respects. There are also problems with exact translation of
            this passage. You may observe that my translation of this first chapter is
            not exactly literal, so what you think may be post-Nicean elements may
            also be just my translation.

            > Can you identify that hand?

            It's very difficult to say. As I say, the first chapter presents its own
            very special problems of translation and interpretation. It may well have
            been expanded at a later stage.

            > MG 1.4 'law & prophets', a Matthean phrase if there
            > ever was one [can we call this the Matthean
            > thunderbolt in the Johannine gospel? ;)]

            Again, this may just be my translation... Whenever one really wants to
            deal with such stylistic aspects, one really needs to go directly to the
            Middle English text. But other chapters of MG don't usually present so
            many problems as this first chapter.

            > Strange that Zechariah could become high-priest, as
            > though he was from one of the four families, more
            > importantly, of Annas or Boethus (MG 2.3).

            Boismard has already studied these passages in considerable detail, and he
            seems to find a lot of primitive material there (L'EVANGILE DE L'ENFANCE
            (LUC 1 - 2) SELON LE PROTO-LUC (Etudes bibliques 35), Paris, J. Gabalda,
            1997). Myself, I haven't dealt with these passages too much, and went on
            to other stuff.

            > 3.29 The worship of Mary. Another indicator of the
            > author's hand? (as is the use of St. as in St. John)
            > The rise of a cult of Mary is not possible to
            > demonstrate prior to the fourth century (at the
            > earliest).

            Well, I don't see more "worship of Mary" in MG, necessarily, than in the
            standard texts. But perhaps we should stick more with the Johannine
            passages in this discussion.

            All the best,

            Yuri.

            Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

            Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
            it is time to reform -=O=- Mark Twain
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.