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

Re: [John_Lit] Re: Question about John 4 and Gen24/29/Ex2

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... Jack, I wonder if it time to ask Kym to refrain from drawing attention to his book with every post he makes to John-Lit? It is the mark of a crank. I am
    Message 1 of 6 , Mar 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      "kymhsm " wrote:

      > Dear Piet,
      >
      > I have not drawn any comparisons with OT well scenes but you
      > may be interested in what I have found, especially as you
      > compare this well scene with what you have called `betrothal
      > narratives'. In my book `The Amazing Structure of the Gospel of
      > John' I argue that the whole gospel is built on the structure of
      > Genesis 1&2.

      Jack,

      I wonder if it time to ask Kym to refrain from drawing attention to his book
      with every post he makes to John-Lit? It is the mark of a crank.

      I am sorely tried not to let him know onlist how tiresome this is.

      Yours,

      Jeffrey
      --

      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

      1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
      Chicago, IL 60626

      jgibson000@...
    • kymhsm <khs@picknowl.com.au>
      Dear Jeffrey, I am sorry for the offence. I actually feel awkward about mentioning my book myself and try to do it as little as possible. I do think you have
      Message 2 of 6 , Mar 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Jeffrey,

        I am sorry for the offence. I actually feel awkward about
        mentioning my book myself and try to do it as little as possible. I
        do think you have been a little harsh by saying that I am "drawing
        attention to (my) book with every post (I) make(s) to John-Lit". Do
        a search - I do not mention it in every post. The last time I
        mentioned it was in response to a question from you.

        In my previous post which provoked your complaint I only
        mentioned it in response to a request for material from Piet.
        However, having reread his post I see that I was wrong to do so
        as he was after material prior to 1960. I apologize again.

        If I do mention it it is only because I (feel I) need to offer some
        substantiation to the ideas which I have expressed - particularly
        about the structure of John - which I know, despite their very
        conservative theology, are not mainstream. I will try to do so in
        the future.

        Sincerely,

        Kym Smith
      • Jeffrey B. Gibson
        ... [snip] Kym, Thank you for your gracious reply -- it is probably more than I deserve. And once again, apologies for posting my grumblings on list. Yours,
        Message 3 of 6 , Mar 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          "kymhsm " wrote:

          > Dear Jeffrey,
          >
          > I am sorry for the offence. I actually feel awkward about
          > mentioning my book myself and try to do it as little as possible. I
          > do think you have been a little harsh by saying that I am "drawing
          > attention to (my) book with every post (I) make(s) to John-Lit". Do
          > a search - I do not mention it in every post. The last time I
          > mentioned it was in response to a question from you.

          [snip]

          Kym,

          Thank you for your gracious reply -- it is probably more than I deserve. And
          once again, apologies for posting my grumblings on list.

          Yours,

          Jeffrey
          --

          Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

          1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
          Chicago, IL 60626

          jgibson000@...
        • Elizabeth Danna
          I have been following this discussion, and I m reminded of some reading that I did while writing my thesis. There is a thorough discussion of this matter in an
          Message 4 of 6 , Mar 4, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            I have been following this discussion, and I'm reminded of some
            reading that I did
            while writing my thesis. There is a thorough discussion of this matter
            in an article by
            Lyle Eslinger, "The Wooing of the Woman at the Well: Jesus, the Reader
            and
            Reader-Response Criticism," Literature and Theology 1/1 (1987) pp
            167-83.
            Eslinger argues that some of the vocabulary of this scene has sexual
            overtones,
            and that the scene picks up on a recurring Old Testament type-scene in
            which a man or
            his representative meets his future wife at a well (Gen. 24:10-61;
            29:1-20; Ex. 2:15b-21).
            According to this reading, through the first half of the encounter “both
            characters are
            engaging in a bit of covert verbal coquetry.” Or so it seems. But if
            the woman intends
            her language to be interpreted as verbal coquetry, Jesus does not intend
            his language to
            be so interpreted, and he soon rebuffs her by telling her to get her
            husband. According to
            Eslinger, the reader becomes clued into the carnal interpretation of the
            encounter by
            picking up the type-scene references and the overtones of the language.
            All this, plus the
            overtly nuptial atmosphere of 2:1-11 and 3:27-30, in turn leads the
            reader to expect a
            betrothal between Jesus and the woman; an expectation which is
            frustrated when Jesus
            indicates at v. 17 that he is not interested in romance with her.
            Through chapters 1-3 the reader
            of John’s Gospel has watched as various characters have fallen into the
            trap of
            misunderstanding Jesus’ words and actions; but the narrator has given
            the reader “inside
            information” which allows him to avoid falling into the trap. For
            example, at 2:19-21
            “the Jews” misunderstand Jesus because they think that he is referring
            to the Temple
            building, but the reader knows that he is not, and thus understands.
            Here in chapter 4,
            according to Eslinger, the reader falls into the trap along with the
            Samaritan woman by
            coming to expect a betrothal, and thus gains personal experience of how
            difficult
            understanding Jesus can be. In falling into the trap the reader makes
            an error “far worse
            than that of the Samaritan woman, because it was an error in judgement,
            not one of
            ignorance.”
            I must admit that I find this reading amusing - but how convincing
            is it? In
            focusing on the overtones of the language and on the betrothal aspects
            of the Old
            Testament type-scenes, Eslinger has picked up on an aspect of this
            narrative which is
            there - he has not imagined it. The Old Testament type-scene references
            and the
            overtones of the language are indeed there to be picked up on. But in
            stressing the
            betrothal aspects of the narrative as he does, Eslinger minimises
            another aspect of the
            narrative which is more important - its salvation-history aspect. To
            return to the Old
            Testament narratives which Eslinger calls type-scenes for the Johannine
            narrative: it is
            true that in these narratives the meeting at a well leads to marriage.
            But more important
            is the fact that the relationships which begin in this manner are steps
            in the formation of
            the people of God. So also this New Testament wellside meeting
            represents a step in the
            redefinition of the people of God. As to the idea of the narrator
            deliberately trapping the
            reader, I find this unlikely for a first-century narrative, especially
            one whose implied author
            wants to win the implied reader over to his point of view. It should
            also be noted that, this
            approach makes both Jesus and the woman act in ways contrary to the
            cultural scripts of
            their culture.

            Elizabeth Danna
          • Mary Coloe
            An addition to the discussion is the awareness that the FG already sets up Jesus as the bridegroom in John 2 and 3. In the Cana scene it is Jesus, not the
            Message 5 of 6 , Mar 4, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              An addition to the discussion is the awareness that the FG already sets up
              Jesus as the bridegroom in John 2 and 3. In the Cana scene it is Jesus,
              not the bridegroom as would be the custom, who produces the good wine, so
              as the wine provider at a wedding he is presented as the bridegroom, and
              then at the end of chapter 3 the Baptist speaks of Jesus as the bridegroom.
              So that by the time we enter in John 4 our reading should have prepared us
              for this 'man meets woman at well' scene. Ezekiel 37 and the parable of
              the two sticks, i think is also pertinent. When Judah and Samaria are
              joined again in covenant (marriage) then I will put my sanctuary among
              them, my dwelling shall be with them (v. 26). So I read this scene, with
              all its marriage/covenant symbolism as the wooing back of Samaria so God
              can dwell in their midst - hence all the discussion about where is the
              proper sanctuary - this mountain or Jerusalem.

              Dr. Mary Coloe pbvm
              Australian Catholic University Limited
              (ABN 15050 192660)

              Locked Bag 4115
              Fitzroy. VIC 3065 AUSTRALIA

              ph (61 + 3) 99533137 Fax (61 + 3) 99533245
              M.Coloe@...
            • kymhsm
              Dear Elizabeth, Having spoken of Lyle Eslinger s comparison of John 4 with the OT well scenes, you wrote:
              Message 6 of 6 , Mar 4, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Elizabeth,

                Having spoken of Lyle Eslinger's comparison of John 4 with the
                OT well scenes, you wrote:

                <<<I must admit that I find this reading amusing - but how
                convincing is it? In focusing on the overtones of the language
                and on the betrothal aspects of the Old Testament type-scenes,
                Eslinger has picked up on an aspect of this narrative which is
                there - he has not imagined it. The Old Testament type-scene
                references and the overtones of the language are indeed there
                to be picked up on. But in stressing the betrothal aspects of the
                narrative as he does, Eslinger minimises another aspect of the
                narrative which is more important - its salvation-history aspect.
                To return to the Old Testament narratives which Eslinger calls
                type-scenes for the Johannine narrative: it is true that in these
                narratives the meeting at a well leads to marriage. But more
                important is the fact that the relationships which begin in this
                manner are steps in the formation of the people of God. So also
                this New Testament wellside meeting represents a step in the
                redefinition of the people of God.>>>

                With no expectation that you would agree with the whole scheme
                that I propose and ignoring any reference to `my
                you-probably-know-what', I suspect that the connection I have
                drawn across the chiastic structure of 4:16-27 (#3248) brings
                together the betrothal theme of the encounter at the well and the
                `salvation-history aspect' which you found lacking in Eslinger's
                article. Jesus, as the True Husband, draws out the True Bride –
                those who worship neither here nor there but in Spirit and in truth
                – of which the Samaritan woman became a part. The Husband
                and Bride theme shows `the formation of the people of God' in
                the most intimate way possible.

                It also adds to the climax Mary Coloe has indicated was building
                up to the well scene.

                If I might throw in an extra thought: if I am right in my acceptance
                of a. the priority of the Revelation over the gospel and b. the
                common authorship of the two, then I believe the reason for the
                strong marriage theme in the gospel was the indelible effect on
                John of the vision of the glorified Bride in the zenith of the
                Apocalypse.

                Sincerely,

                Kym Smith
                Adelaide
                South Australia
                khs@...
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.