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

Re: [John_Lit] Mary

Expand Messages
  • kymhsm
    Mart,
    Message 1 of 48 , Nov 11, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Mart,

      <<<Any idea why this Gospel does not name Jesus's is
      mother? It cannot be just sexism , because of the women who
      are named.>>>

      I suspect John's not naming Mary may be for the same reason
      that he is not named. As you would (most likely) know, I believe
      that the Gospel of John followed the Revelation (their dates
      being 62 and 68 respectively). John was named in the
      Revelation, a book which could only be understood in seditious
      terms by the Roman authorities. He does not name himself in
      the gospel – using, instead, the `Beloved Disciple' – to avoid any
      connection with the John of the Revelation and the possible
      consequences if the Roman authorities were to obtain a copy of
      the Apocalypse and pursue its author. In the Gospel John, the
      BD takes Mary into his own care, tradition has it that she went
      with him to Ephesus. As the mother of Jesus, the `Lord of lords
      and King of kings' whose followers worshipped him in place of
      Caesar, she was also in some danger. The silence, then, was
      protection for these two major characters at a time still so close
      to the violence and – to whatever degree – continuing hatred of
      Christians which would have made them persons of
      considerable interest to the authorities.

      Kym Smith
      Adelaide
      South Australia
      khs@...
    • geomelick@AOL.com
      Frank: F. C. Grant saw no problem in a combination of figurative and literal meanings in 1 Peter 5:13. In his article on Mark in the Encyclopedia Americana he
      Message 48 of 48 , Dec 4, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Frank:

        F. C. Grant saw no problem in a combination of figurative and literal
        meanings in 1 Peter 5:13. In his article on Mark in the Encyclopedia Americana he
        wrote: "Further, the intimate reference in 1 Peter, joining Mark's greeting
        with Peter's and those of the church in 'Babylon' (Rome?), would be more natural
        if the relationship was physical as well as spiritual." According to Swete,
        huios does not involve a spiritual relationship which in the Pauline Epistles
        is expressed by teknon.

        I have argued previously that Mark was forbidden by Jesus to accompany Peter
        during the Galilean ministry. This did not preclude him from being a disciple
        of John the Baptist. (Mathetes means learner or pupil.) J. E. Bruns wrote
        two articles about the confusion between John and John Mark. In one he quotes
        a document which claims Mark was with the servants at Cana. According to Mark
        6:31, the trip which ended in the feeding of the five thousand was supposed
        to be for a rest and there was no reason to make Mark stay home. Mark could
        have been present when his grandmother was healed, in the fishing boat, and with
        Peter when he went to Jerusalem for the Passover.

        Mark's limited contact with Jesus explains why we have just these relatively
        few stories about Jesus. There were many other things which Jesus did. Could
        John 21:24f be Mark's ending to his notes?

        George Melick, Drexel University (Retired)
        9 Attleboro Court
        Red Bank, NJ 07701
        http://georgemelick.tripod.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.