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

RE: [John_Lit] Messiah

Expand Messages
  • Bob MacDonald
    Mart wrote of: Incarnation, which would be nonsense to a Jew. I am surprised that incarnation would be considered non-sense. Incarnation is exactly making
    Message 1 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Mart wrote of: Incarnation, which would be nonsense to a Jew.

      I am surprised that incarnation would be considered non-sense. Incarnation
      is exactly making sense. Would you say then that there is no affinity for
      this doctrine in the TNK - or as Jeffery Hodges points out, in the
      traditions of Judaism of the period?

      Mary Coloe in her book God Dwells with Us, argues that John's writing is
      organized around the replacement of the temple by the body of Jesus - but at
      the same time, stone, tabernacle and temple from Bethel to Solomon are
      images of God dwelling with the people. Is there no room for anticipation -
      more - even knowledge of the presence of God in the experience of the chosen
      people?

      Bob

      mailto::BobMacDonald@...
      + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

      Catch the foxes for us,
      the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
      for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
      http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
    • Big_Mart_98
      ... Yes I do mean halakhically observant . I ll look up the other bit over the weekend. It does seem to me that the Johannine literature already hints at
      Message 2 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com, Horace Jeffery Hodges
        <jefferyhodges@y...> wrote:
        > Martin wrote:
        >
        > <Judaism [in Jesus's time] was certainly more or less
        > Hellenistic, the more so the more educated the
        > believer. There were plenty of conservative Jews,
        > mainly among the poor. I still do not feel that any
        > pious Jew could accept the Christology we find in the
        > Johannine corpus.>
        >
        > By "pious," do you mean halakhically observant? There
        > is a distinction, among some scholars, between Torah
        > Judaism and Enochian Judaism. The Qumran group --
        > again, according to some scholars -- is thought to
        > draw from both traditions.
        >
        > See this website on "The Coming of Melchizedek"
        > (11Q13):
        >
        > http://www.gnosis.org/library/commelc.htm
        >
        > This seems to treat Melchizedek as a quasi-divine
        > being who is also an "anointed one" who will be cut
        > off. Given that he appears in Genesis 14:18ff as King
        > of Salem and Priest of God Most High -- apparently a
        > human being -- then I wonder if it's true that no
        > "pious Jew could accept the Christology . . . in the
        > Johannine corpus."
        >
        > I think that we need to recall that the Judaism of
        > Jesus's time was rather diverse.
        >
        > Jeffery Hodges
        >
        > =====
        Yes I do mean "halakhically observant". I'll look up the other bit
        over the weekend. It does seem to me that the Johannine literature
        already hints at the Divine Christ, though it is not yet far
        developed. No Jew would accept that unless s/he were so Hellenized as
        to be, in effect, no longer a Jew.

        Mart.
      • Big_Mart_98
        ... - but at ... anticipation - ... the chosen ... The presence of God is one thing, incarnation another. Many people must have felt the presence of God,
        Message 3 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          > Mary Coloe in her book God Dwells with Us, argues that John's writing is
          > organized around the replacement of the temple by the body of Jesus
          - but at
          > the same time, stone, tabernacle and temple from Bethel to Solomon are
          > images of God dwelling with the people. Is there no room for
          anticipation -
          > more - even knowledge of the presence of God in the experience of
          the chosen
          > people?
          >
          > Bob
          >
          The presence of God is one thing, incarnation another. Many people
          must have felt the presence of God, possibly even the collaborationist
          High Priests on the day of atonement. John may be saying what Mary
          Coloe says it is, but it is precisely at this point that it has
          departed from Judaism.

          Mart.
        • Jeffrey B. Gibson
          Big_Mart_98 wrote: It does seem to me that the Johannine literature ... FWIW, I think you work from some unexamined assumptions about the meaning of the term
          Message 4 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Big_Mart_98 wrote: It does seem to me that the Johannine literature

            > already hints at the Divine Christ, though it is not yet far
            > developed. No Jew would accept that unless s/he were so Hellenized as
            > to be, in effect, no longer a Jew.

            FWIW, I think you work from some unexamined assumptions about the meaning of the
            term "divine". And I'm rather curious to know how you can be as certain as you
            apparently are about what "a Jew" would and would not accept.

            In any case, "John" accepted Jesus as the full and binding revelation of
            Israel's God. Do you consider him not a Jew? And what criteria are you using to
            define ""in effect" Jewishness" and "in effect, no longer a Jew"?. Would Philo,
            certainly a "Hellenized Jew" agree with you, do you think ?

            JG
            --

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

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

            jgibson000@...
          • Bob Schacht
            What do you all make of the different usages of eat in the Greek Gospels? Most especially, all of the discussion of the Eucharistic passages missed something
            Message 5 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              What do you all make of the different usages of "eat" in the Greek Gospels?
              Most especially, all of the discussion of the Eucharistic passages missed
              something interesting:
              The Eucharistic advertisement in John 6:54-58
              54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I
              will raise them up on the last day;
              55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink.
              56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them.
              57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father,
              so whoever eats me will live because of me.
              58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your
              ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live
              forever."
              59 He said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum.
              60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, "This teaching is
              difficult; who can accept it?"
              61 But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it,
              said to them, "Does this offend you?

              The Greek phrase hO TRWGWN is used here for the verb 'to eat', whereas
              most of
              the time, the usual word seems to be phago or esthio-- including the
              eucharistic references in the Synoptics.

              TRWGW is used only twice in the rest of the NT! It occurs again in
              John 13:18 (NRS) I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have
              chosen. But it is to
              fulfill the scripture, 'The one who ate my bread has lifted his heel
              against me,'

              which Mike Grondin pointed out seems to be an intentional parallel to Psalm
              41:9;

              and also in Mat 24:38
              38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking,
              marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark,
              39 and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so
              too will be the coming of the Son of Man.

              and nowhere else!!!
              No wonder the folks in Capernaum had a hard time with this saying.
              What do you make of this peculiar choice for the verb "to eat"? What was
              "John" trying to say?

              Sometime lister Jeffery Hodges has his own ideas about this passage-- see
              ------------------------------------------------------
              http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~fjust/John/SBL1999.html
              Horace Jeffery Hodges, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
              Heavenly versus Earthly Food in Gnosticism, John's Gospel, and Early
              Judaism -- [online discussion
              March 25 - April 1, 2001, also on the related AAR paper: "Gift-Giving
              Across the Sacred-Profane
              Divide: A Maussian Analysis of Heavenly Versus Earthly Food in Gnosticism
              and John's Gospel"]
              ------------------------------------------------------

              What do you make of this?

              Bob Schacht, Ph.D.
              Northern Arizona University


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Henry Sturcke
              Mart, This is a rather broad assumption that overlooks the indications of hypostyzation of figures associated with God such as Wisdom. It is important not to
              Message 6 of 20 , Aug 29, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Mart,

                This is a rather broad assumption that overlooks the indications of
                hypostyzation of figures associated with God such as Wisdom. It is important
                not to reduce the diversity of Judaism in the second temple era in light of
                later rabbinic developments.

                Henry

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Big_Mart_98" <big_mart_98@...>
                To: <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 7:51 PM
                Subject: [John_Lit] Re: Messiah


                > --- In johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com, Horace Jeffery Hodges
                > > =====
                > Yes I do mean "halakhically observant". I'll look up the other bit
                > over the weekend. It does seem to me that the Johannine literature
                > already hints at the Divine Christ, though it is not yet far
                > developed. No Jew would accept that unless s/he were so Hellenized as
                > to be, in effect, no longer a Jew.
                >
                > Mart.
                >
                >
                > SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com
                > MESSAGE ARCHIVE:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/messages
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
                >
              • Big_Mart_98
                ... you using to ... Would Philo, ... I do not know whether he was or not. Help me out. Is there a general concensus on the age of the document? I haven t
                Message 7 of 20 , Aug 30, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  >
                  > In any case, "John" accepted Jesus as the full and binding revelation of
                  > Israel's God. Do you consider him not a Jew? And what criteria are
                  you using to
                  > define ""in effect" Jewishness" and "in effect, no longer a Jew"?.
                  Would Philo,
                  > certainly a "Hellenized Jew" agree with you, do you think ?
                  >
                  > JG
                  > --
                  I do not know whether he was or not. Help me out. Is there a general
                  concensus on the age of the document? I haven't read Philo, though I
                  have read quotations. How widespread do you think his way of thinking
                  was. Of course I am making assumptions, but so is everyone in this
                  field. That does not mean they are baseless.

                  Mart.
                • Big_Mart_98
                  ... important ... light of ... Good point. The idea seems ot have lasted a long time in Christianity, though not in (rabbinic) Judaism. Agia Sophia was the
                  Message 8 of 20 , Aug 30, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com, "Henry Sturcke"
                    <Henry.Sturcke@a...> wrote:
                    > Mart,
                    >
                    > This is a rather broad assumption that overlooks the indications of
                    > hypostyzation of figures associated with God such as Wisdom. It is
                    important
                    > not to reduce the diversity of Judaism in the second temple era in
                    light of
                    > later rabbinic developments.
                    >
                    > Henry
                    >
                    Good point. The idea seems ot have lasted a long time in
                    Christianity, though not in (rabbinic) Judaism. Agia Sophia was the
                    mother church of Orthodoxy till Mehmet's conquest.

                    Mart.
                  • Rick M. Sumner
                    (Mart) ... collaborationist ... (Rick) I wonder what you make of the Self-Glorification Hymn ? I shall be reckoned with the angels, my dwelling is in the
                    Message 9 of 20 , Aug 30, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      (Mart)
                      > The presence of God is one thing, incarnation another. Many people
                      > must have felt the presence of God, possibly even the
                      collaborationist
                      > High Priests on the day of atonement. John may be saying what Mary
                      > Coloe says it is, but it is precisely at this point that it has
                      > departed from Judaism.

                      (Rick)
                      I wonder what you make of the "Self-Glorification Hymn"?

                      "I shall be reckoned with the angels, my dwelling is in the holy
                      council.
                      Who [...] and who has been despised like me? And who has been
                      rejected of
                      men like me? And who compares to me in enduring evil? No teaching
                      compares
                      to my teaching. For I sit [...] in heaven. Who is like me among the
                      angels?
                      Who could cut off my words? And who could measure the flow of my
                      lips? Who
                      can associate with me and thus compare with my judgment? I am the
                      beloved of
                      the King, a companion of the holy ones and none can accompany me.
                      And to my
                      glory none can compare, for I [...]. Neither with gold I will crown
                      myself,
                      nor with refined gold [...]"(4Q431 and 4Q427 fr.7)

                      It seems to me that the Teacher of Righteousness has just been
                      deified.

                      And what about:

                      'To proclaim the jubilee to the captives'( Is 61:2)...and from the
                      inheritence of Melchelzedek, for Melchelzedek who will return to
                      them what is rightfully theirs. He will proclaim to them the
                      jubilee, thereby releasing them from the debt of all their
                      sins."(11QMelch col 2 v 4-6)

                      Melchizedek has just taken over God's role.

                      On a similar note, Philo notes:

                      "Moses therefore describes the perfect man as being neither God nor
                      man, but, as I said before, something on the border between
                      uncreated and the perishable nature."(On Dreams 2.234)

                      It's a short step from this to deification, I would think.

                      So how can you safely say that deification is a departure from
                      Judaism?

                      Regards,
                      Rick Sumner
                      Calgary, Alberta Canada
                    • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                      ... Let me get this straight. You haven t read Philo and yet you feel you can speak with confidence and authority about what a Jew in the Hellenistic period
                      Message 10 of 20 , Aug 31, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Big_Mart_98 wrote:

                        > >
                        > > In any case, "John" accepted Jesus as the full and binding revelation of
                        > > Israel's God. Do you consider him not a Jew? And what criteria are
                        > you using to
                        > > define ""in effect" Jewishness" and "in effect, no longer a Jew"?.
                        > Would Philo,
                        > > certainly a "Hellenized Jew" agree with you, do you think ?
                        > >
                        > > JG
                        > > --
                        > I do not know whether he was or not. Help me out. Is there a general
                        > concensus on the age of the document? I haven't read Philo, though I
                        > have read quotations. How widespread do you think his way of thinking
                        > was. Of course I am making assumptions, but so is everyone in this
                        > field. That does not mean they are baseless.

                        Let me get this straight. You haven't read Philo and yet you feel you can speak
                        with confidence and authority about what "a Jew" in the Hellenistic period would
                        and not accept or what they recognized as things that, if accepted, would put
                        them beyond the pale?

                        Would you be kind enough to tell us what research actually ** does** inform your
                        rather global and apodictic claims about what a 1st century orthodox Jew would
                        and would not believe? What of the array of ancient Palestinian and Diaspora
                        Jewish literature **have** you read?

                        Please forgive me if I sound blunt on this matter. It's not my intention. But
                        I'd really like to have the answers to these questions.

                        JG

                        --

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

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

                        jgibson000@...
                      • Big_Mart_98
                        - What of the array of ancient Palestinian and Diaspora ... intention. But ... Not a lot, but I have read a lot of academic works which refer to them. The
                        Message 11 of 20 , Sep 1, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          -
                          What of the array of ancient Palestinian and Diaspora
                          > Jewish literature **have** you read?
                          >
                          > Please forgive me if I sound blunt on this matter. It's not my
                          intention. But
                          > I'd really like to have the answers to these questions.
                          >
                          > JG
                          >
                          Not a lot, but I have read a lot of academic works which refer to
                          them. The orientation of the scholars I have read is probably
                          somewhat different from your own.

                          Mart.
                        • Big_Mart_98
                          - ... It s a fair point that it is only a short step to deification, but I don t feel that it has actually been made in any of the sources you quote. On the
                          Message 12 of 20 , Sep 1, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            -
                            > "Moses therefore describes the perfect man as being neither God nor
                            > man, but, as I said before, something on the border between
                            > uncreated and the perishable nature."(On Dreams 2.234)
                            >
                            > It's a short step from this to deification, I would think.
                            >
                            > So how can you safely say that deification is a departure from
                            > Judaism?
                            >
                            > Regards,
                            > Rick Sumner
                            > Calgary, Alberta Canada

                            It's a fair point that it is only a short step to deification, but I
                            don't feel that it has actually been made in any of the sources you
                            quote. On the other hand I realize from this discussion that I have
                            behaved unhistorically in reading rabbinic Judaism back into the
                            period in question.

                            Regards,
                            Mart.
                          • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                            ... A problem that may be operating here, and to which I tried to draw attention before, is that you have not yet stated what your definition of deification
                            Message 13 of 20 , Sep 1, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Big_Mart_98 wrote:

                              >-
                              >
                              >
                              >>"Moses therefore describes the perfect man as being neither God nor
                              >>man, but, as I said before, something on the border between
                              >>uncreated and the perishable nature."(On Dreams 2.234)
                              >>
                              >>It's a short step from this to deification, I would think.
                              >>
                              >>So how can you safely say that deification is a departure from
                              >>Judaism?
                              >>
                              >>Regards,
                              >>Rick Sumner
                              >>Calgary, Alberta Canada
                              >>
                              >>
                              >
                              >It's a fair point that it is only a short step to deification, but I
                              >don't feel that it has actually been made in any of the sources you
                              >quote. On the other hand I realize from this discussion that I have
                              >behaved unhistorically in reading rabbinic Judaism back into the
                              >period in question.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              A problem that may be operating here, and to which I tried to draw attention before, is that you have not yet stated what your definition of "deification" actually is, let alone that your definition is something that Philo or the author of John or of the Hymn Rick refers to would have accepted. Could you clarify please?

                              JG
                              --
                              Jeffrey B. Gibson
                              Chicago, Illinois
                              e-mail jgibson000@...



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                              ... Possibly. But then again, without knowing who these scholars are or what the acdemic works are that you have read, it would be very difficult to say.
                              Message 14 of 20 , Sep 1, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Big_Mart_98 wrote:

                                >-
                                >What of the array of ancient Palestinian and Diaspora
                                >
                                >
                                >>Jewish literature **have** you read?
                                >>
                                >>Please forgive me if I sound blunt on this matter. It's not my
                                >>
                                >>
                                >intention. But
                                >
                                >
                                >>I'd really like to have the answers to these questions.
                                >>
                                >>JG
                                >>
                                >>
                                >>
                                >Not a lot, but I have read a lot of academic works which refer to
                                >them. The orientation of the scholars I have read is probably
                                >somewhat different from your own.
                                >
                                >
                                Possibly. But then again, without knowing who these scholars are or what
                                the acdemic works are that you have read, it would be very difficult to
                                say. Care to name a few names?

                                JG

                                --
                                Jeffrey B. Gibson
                                Chicago, Illinois
                                e-mail jgibson000@...



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Big_Mart_98
                                - ... attention before, is that you have not yet stated what your definition of deification actually is, let alone that your definition is something that
                                Message 15 of 20 , Sep 2, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  -
                                  > >
                                  > A problem that may be operating here, and to which I tried to draw
                                  attention before, is that you have not yet stated what your definition
                                  of "deification" actually is, let alone that your definition is
                                  something that Philo or the author of John or of the Hymn Rick refers
                                  to would have accepted. Could you clarify please?
                                  >
                                  > JG
                                  > --
                                  > Jeffrey B. Gibson
                                  > Chicago, Illinois
                                  > e-mail jgibson000@c...
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  As an unbeliever I do not have a definition myself. If, however, the
                                  writers in question believed that Yahweh was the one and only god (or
                                  God), I doubt whether they believed that Jesus was him (or Him)
                                  incarnate. The Docetists found a way out by declaring him only
                                  apparently human. I assume, and please correct me if this is wrong,
                                  that you believe that Jesus was a real human being. On that, at least,
                                  we agree.

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