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

Re: [John_Lit] Re: Hofrichter's and Berger's views?

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 1/19/2004 3:24:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, ... I m sorry, but this is anything but obvious to me. I would rate the likelihood of any
    Message 1 of 17 , Feb 14, 2004
      In a message dated 1/19/2004 3:24:10 AM Pacific Standard Time,
      Peter.Hofrichter@... writes:


      > Anyhow, in the childhood story of Luke, which seems to be a
      > midrash-like paraphrase to the Logos hymn, Jn 1,14 is obviously alluded
      > there where the sheperts come to Bethlehem and say: "Let us see the
      > word having become (reality)". The "word" which is here changed to
      > "rhema" is now the word of the angel spoken before to the sheperts, but
      > clearly not the preexistant Jesus himself.

      I'm sorry, but this is anything but "obvious" to me. I would rate the
      likelihood of any relationship of this Lukan text to Jn 1:14 as theoretically
      conceivable, but extremely unlikely.

      Leonard Maluf


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Peter.Hofrichter
      ... Dear Leonard I published an article about this evidence already 12 years ago: Johannesprolog und lukanische Vorgeschichte, in: A. Denaux (Hg.), John and
      Message 2 of 17 , Feb 18, 2004
        Am 15.02.2004 um 02:36 schrieb Maluflen@...:

        > In a message dated 1/19/2004 3:24:10 AM Pacific Standard Time,
        > Peter.Hofrichter@... writes:
        >
        >
        >> Anyhow, in the childhood story of Luke, which seems to be a
        >> midrash-like paraphrase to the Logos hymn, Jn 1,14 is obviously
        >> alluded
        >> there where the sheperts come to Bethlehem and say: "Let us see the
        >> word having become (reality)". The "word" which is here changed to
        >> "rhema" is now the word of the angel spoken before to the sheperts,
        >> but
        >> clearly not the preexistant Jesus himself.
        >
        > I'm sorry, but this is anything but "obvious" to me. I would rate the
        > likelihood of any relationship of this Lukan text to Jn 1:14 as
        > theoretically
        > conceivable, but extremely unlikely.
        >
        > Leonard Maluf

        Dear Leonard

        I published an article about this evidence already 12 years ago:
        Johannesprolog und lukanische Vorgeschichte, in: A. Denaux (Hg.), John
        and the Synoptics (BETL 101), Leuven 1992, 488-497. It is printed again
        in my collection: Logoslied, Gnosis und Neues Testament, Hildesheim
        (Olms) 2004. In my book "Modell und Vorlage der Synoptiker", Hildesheim
        (Olms) 2002, you can find also two chapters on this relation.

        Here only some short hints. Let us start from the end: "ekeinos
        ex�g�sato": Jesus is sitting among the scribes and explaining the
        scripture. "ho wn eis ton kolpon tou patros": He says to his parents:
        Did you not know that I must be in what belongs to My Father? "Kai
        etheasametha t�n doxan autou": cf. the brightness shining around the
        sheperts and the song of the angels: Glory is with God in the hight...
        "kai hoi idioi auton ou katelaben": In the hostel there was no space
        for them. "eis ta idia �lthen": Joseph went with his spouse to his
        father-town Bethlehem. "kai ho kosmos auton ouk egnw": It happened at
        the time of Emperor Augustus. � Let us jump to the beginning: In his
        introduction Lk1,1-3 Luke uses all key terms of Joh 1-3: arch�, logos,
        panta, God ("Theo"phile), of course, in the significance of the earthly
        life of Jesus. The diptychon of the annunciations and birthes of John
        and Jesus in the middle needs some more detailled explanation.

        Sincerely
        Peter Hofrichter







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.