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

Re: Redating gospel of John/Berger

Expand Messages
  • Mike Grondin
    ... I think you do the early-daters no favor by citing this innocent ... These are your words, I assume - not Berger s. In any case, even if Jesus was
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 13, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- frides lameris wrote:
      > In order to show that Bergers approach to an early
      > dating of John is not just ONLY an intellectual exercise,
      > but that very much he also recognises that the whole
      > early dating approach has its roots in a very innocent
      > perception, (which I share) I offer in this post a translation
      > of the final remark Klaus Berger is adding (p.302) to his
      > stimulating book 'Im Anfang war Johannes, Datierung
      > und Theologie des vierten Evangeliums':

      I think you do the early-daters no favor by citing this "innocent
      perception" (as below):

      > It is not a doctrine about something at all, but the impression
      > that a man makes, who is completely transparent for the divine
      > presence in his own existence. That is an event (or: a happening)
      > that, in this sense, is new.

      These are your words, I assume - not Berger's. In any case, even if
      Jesus was perceived as you say, he would certainly not have been the
      first (or last) person in history whom some acquaintances believed
      to have exhibited "the divine presence in his own existence". There
      is no new (or unique) "event" here.

      > And now Berger adds himself words for which I ask
      > your special attention:
      >
      > 'Because the Gospel of John paints this primary impression
      > of Jesus so uncomparably intensive, it stands by
      > content ('sachlich') and temporarily at the beginning.'

      Although I'm not opposed to early dating for (the first edition of)
      GJn, this is not a particularly good argument for it, as stated.
      Do you mean to say that no one writing at a date later than the
      synoptics could possibly have crafted such a picture? What are the
      grounds for such an assertion? How would you rule out that this was
      not in fact the author's "impression" from first-hand acquaintance,
      but rather was simply the picture he wanted to paint?

      Mike Grondin
      Mt. Clemens, MI
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.