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

[John_Lit] Re: the Beloved Disciple

Expand Messages
  • MichaEl Hait
    One person who is noticeably absent from the Fourth Gospel is James, the Lord s brother. Especially when held in view of Jesus appointment of the beloved as
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 13, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      One person who is noticeably absent from the Fourth Gospel is James, the
      Lord's brother. Especially when held in view of Jesus' appointment of the
      beloved as Mary's son from the cross, it seems quite possible that James was
      the beloved disciple.

      Michael
      ______________________________________________________
    • SUN
      Michael, Taking John7:2-9ff and Johannine characterizations in consideration, it seems that James, the brother of Jesus, is an unlikely candidate for the
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 13, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Michael,

        Taking John7:2-9ff and Johannine characterizations in consideration, it seems that James, the brother of Jesus, is an unlikely candidate
        for the unknown disciple. I have found Sandra M. Schneiders's article "'Because of the Woman's Testimony...': Reexaminating the Issue of
        Authorship in the Fourth Gospel," NTS 14 (1998), 513-535 intriguing. I wonder what you all think.

        Poling Sun
        Hong Kong Baptist Theological Seminary

        MichaEl Hait wrote:

        > One person who is noticeably absent from the Fourth Gospel is James, the
        > Lord's brother. Especially when held in view of Jesus' appointment of the
        > beloved as Mary's son from the cross, it seems quite possible that James was
        > the beloved disciple.
        >
        > Michael
        > ______________________________________________________
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > Subscribe: send e-mail briefly describing your academic background & research interests to johannine_literature-subscribe@egroups.com
        > Unsubscribe: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@egroups.com
        > Contact list managers: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@egroups.com
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/johannine_literature
        > http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
      • Ken Durkin
        ... From: SUN I have found Sandra M. Schneiders s article Because of the Woman s Testimony... : Reexaminating the Issue of Authorship in
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 20, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: SUN <sun@...>
          I have found Sandra M. Schneiders's article "'Because of the Woman's
          Testimony...': Reexaminating the Issue of Authorship in the Fourth Gospel,"
          NTS 14 (1998), 513-535 intriguing. I wonder what you all think.>
          > Poling Sun
          > Hong Kong Baptist Theological Seminary

          Poling
          Yes, it's excellent. I like especially her argument that the BD must be one
          of the three mentioned at the foot of the cross. But it's just the word
          "son" that puts me off. A good explanation is offered, and if I didn't have
          such a strong view re identity I could be persuaded.
          Ken Durkin
          OU/UK
        • Peter Hofrichter
          ... Salzburg/Austria I did not yet read the above mentioned article but it seems to be similar to my own opinion. I am convinced that a correction of the scene
          Message 4 of 4 , Jan 20, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            >----- Original Message -----
            >From: SUN <sun@...>
            >I have found Sandra M. Schneiders's article "'Because of the Woman's
            >Testimony...': Reexaminating the Issue of Authorship in the Fourth Gospel,"
            >NTS 14 (1998), 513-535 intriguing. I wonder what you all think.>
            >> Poling Sun
            >> Hong Kong Baptist Theological Seminary
            >
            >Poling
            >Yes, it's excellent. I like especially her argument that the BD must be one
            >of the three mentioned at the foot of the cross. But it's just the word
            >"son" that puts me off. A good explanation is offered, and if I didn't have
            >such a strong view re identity I could be persuaded.
            >Ken Durkin
            >OU/UK
            >
            >
            Salzburg/Austria
            I did not yet read the above mentioned article but it seems to be similar
            to my own opinion. I am convinced that a correction of the scene under the
            cross was the starting point of the figure of the beloved disciple.
            Originally under the cross there stood only the woman disciple Mary (of
            Magdala). When Jesus saw her whom he loved he said to her "Woman, behold
            your son" pointing to himself in this misearable situation. But this
            metaphoric address was disturbing the readers. Therefore one tried to
            replace her by his real mother or to add the real mother whose name was
            unknown and to make Mary her sister. Also the remark "her whom he loved"
            may have made troubles. A possibility to dissimilate here something
            seemingly impropriate was to make her a male disciple and to make Jesus to
            address this beloved disciple together with his mother. This explanation
            may seem very strange at the first moment. But Mary of Magdala was
            according to "John" also the only one to visit tomb of Jesus. In gnostic
            literature she playes a predominant role as woman disciple sometimes in
            concurrence to Peter. Ma be, also in Cana originally not the mother of
            Jesus but his disciple Mary of Magdala was the central person who enabled
            Jesus by her faith to reveal his glory. Therefore he may have called
            himself under the cross metaphorically her "son". The significance of Mary
            of Magdala at the end of the Gospel (cross and resurrection) must have been
            prepared and introduced by a similar weight at its beginning. - As soon as
            the artificial figure of the beloved disciple was createrd here it made its
            way also in other parts of the Gospel. But I do not think that he replaced
            anywhere else Mary of Magdala, definitely not at the last supper in Jn 13.

            >
            >
            >
            >------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >Subscribe: send e-mail briefly describing your academic background &
            >research interests to johannine_literature-subscribe@egroups.com
            >Unsubscribe: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@egroups.com
            >Contact list managers: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@egroups.com
            >
            >------------------------------------------------------------------------
            >
            >eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/johannine_literature
            >http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.