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

Re: [John_Lit] John 20:31

Expand Messages
  • Martin Edwards
    ... historical point ... Class of ... Tcherikover: Hellenism and the Jews. Regards, Mart.
    Message 1 of 22 , May 3 10:18 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Bullin"
      <bill.bullin@u...> wrote:

      >
      > But I am a bit worried that I may have entirely missed your
      historical point
      > which I suspect may be linked to Martin Goodman and his *The Ruling
      Class of
      > Judea*, (1987).
      >
      > Bill Bullin (Private Student, East Sussex).

      Tcherikover: Hellenism and the Jews.

      Regards,
      Mart.
    • Bill Bullin
      ... *The Ruling ... Bill: As in the Israeli historian and papyrologist, Victor Tcherikover, *Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews*, (1966)? Incidentally,
      Message 2 of 22 , May 4 4:26 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        > > But I am a bit worried that I may have entirely missed your
        > historical point which I suspect may be linked to Martin Goodman and his
        *The Ruling
        > Class of Judea*, (1987).
        > >
        > > Bill Bullin
        >
        > Tcherikover: Hellenism and the Jews.
        >
        > Regards,
        > Mart.

        Bill: As in the Israeli historian and papyrologist, Victor Tcherikover,
        *Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews*, (1966)?
        Incidentally, there is a potential economic connecting web linking 1 John
        3:17, Mark 12: 33-34, Luke 18:30, Mark 10:30, Luke 10:12, Mark 10:22 and
        //'s. Luke 22:26 is interesting too, since one might expect the contrast
        with the 'greatest' would be the 'least' not the youngest; the contrast is
        the more so if it is postulated that Peter was the oldest and therefore
        assumed the role of leadership Strangely too the Lucan Jesus seems to be
        referring to the least in the same breath as mentioning the one who serves
        tables. Was the one serving elevated to the place of honour that we know was
        occupied by the BD? Judas appears to have departed having been offered the
        bread but before the wine was distributed. On my Josephian hypothesis, Judas
        shares in the fate of the baker but not in the fate of the butler. Jesus and
        the others.

        For those who postulate John Mark as the BD, it is as well to make the point
        explicitly by paraphrasing Acts; "After some days Paul said to Barnabas,
        'Come, let us return and visit the believers in every city where we
        proclaimed the word of the Lord and see how they are doing'. Barnabas wanted
        to take with them the BD But Paul decided not to take with them one who had
        deserted / withdrew from (APOSTANTA) them in Pamphilia and had not
        accompanied them in the work. The disagreement became so sharp that they
        parted company; Mark took the Beloved Disciple away with him and sailed away
        to Cyprus." Acts 15:36-39. Paul's objection to Mark may relate to him not
        having visited the cities they talked of revisting, rather than his previous
        withdrawl per se.

        Bill Bullin (Private Student, East Sussex).
      • Bill Bullin
        ... Bill Bullin comments: According to Raymond Brown, AB Vol. I (1971), 512-513, PISTEUEIN is used 98 times in the Fourth Gospel. However of these 98 examples
        Message 3 of 22 , May 5 7:08 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Mark Matso wrote:

          > But dating doesn't' really get at the central issue of the purpose of
          > the 4G, and the way that "to believe" is used in the gospel (the most
          > uses of the verb in the NT, around 85 times!).
          >
          Bill Bullin comments:

          According to Raymond Brown, AB Vol. I (1971), 512-513, PISTEUEIN is used 98
          times in the Fourth Gospel. However of these 98 examples , 36 (6 x 6) use
          the preposition EIS after PISTEUEIN, 'believe into'. In the whole Johannine
          corpus this construction occurs 37 times of which 31 relate to Jesus. This
          strongly parallels the concept of *baptism into* the Name or into Jesus.
          Brown (513) adds: "Although there are various stages in the development of
          faith..., in general John uses PISTEUEIN EIS for true, salvic faith."

          Later though he also tells us: "It is worthy of note that in the Gospel most
          of the uses of PISTEUEIN (74 out of 98), occur in chs i-xii or the Book of
          Signs. This division of frequency agrees with the thesis that in the Book
          of Signs Jesus is presenting to men the choice of believing, while in the
          Gospel of Glory (chs xiii xx) he is speaking to those who already believe
          and, thus, in presuming faith. It is true that in xiv 10 Jesus decries the
          inadequacy of the faith of the disciples and that he tries to increase their
          commitment (xiv), but the groundwork of faith has been laid. The emphasis on
          the response of the disciples in the Book of Glory is in terms of love which
          is the perfection of the commitment of the believer," 513.

          The 36 examples of PISTEUEIN EIS may represent something of a schema uniting
          the whole document (bearing in mind the distribution of the 144 'pater's as
          noted by Dunn), whilst the 74 examples may be a sub schema in chs 1-12, (73
          the gematria of CHOKMAH is related to 74 through the first prime number
          magic square where 37 is the central square, of the 8 remaining sub-squares
          another is 73 whilst opposite squares equal 74. This prime number square
          appears to be the schema underlying Qoholeth, if A.G. Wright's numerical
          analysis is accepted). It is tempting to search for two 'lost' examples of
          PISTEUEIN in the Johannine variants, since that would give a total of 100
          (10 x 10), dividing into 36 (6 x 6) examples of PISTEUEIN EIS leaving a
          remainder of 64 (8 x 8). As it is, 98 less 74 leaves 24 which is itself a
          priestly number relating to the annual rotation of priestly divisions in the
          temple.

          Are these figures significant and if so what did they mean to the Evangelist
          and those who add their witness to his? And is Brown's acceptance of a
          division into a Book of Signs and a Book of Glory significant in respect of
          the question originally posed concerning John 20:21 and the responses so far
          discussed. Hmmm. Food for thought.

          Bill Bullin (Private Student, East Sussex).
        • geomelick@AOL.com
          Bill: According to my reconstruction of the Last Supper, Mark, as the youngest of the disciples, was washing the disciples feet. When the controversy
          Message 4 of 22 , May 5 8:28 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Bill:

            According to my reconstruction of the Last Supper, Mark, as the youngest of
            the disciples, was washing the disciples' feet. When the controversy occurred,
            Jesus took over the foot washing duties, the greatest becoming as the
            youngest. He then placed Mark at his side, saying "Whoever receives this child in my
            name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me" (Luke
            9:48). The author or redactor reported this in slightly changed form in John
            13.20 This is how Mark came to be lying close to the breast of Jesus.

            George Melick MA
            Drexel University, Retired


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • McGrath, James
            An interesting suggestion, but I m probably not alone in desiring more information. What evidence do you have that John Mark was present at this meal, was the
            Message 5 of 22 , May 5 8:34 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              An interesting suggestion, but I'm probably not alone in desiring more
              information. What evidence do you have that John Mark was present at
              this meal, was the youngest of the disciples, and perhaps most
              importantly, that although disciples could not be asked to untie their
              teacher's sandals, they could be given the duty of footwashing?

              Looking forward to hearing more about your interesting reconstruction!

              James McGrath



              *****************************
              Dr. James F. McGrath
              Assistant Professor of Religion
              Butler University, Indianapolis
              http://religion.sytes.net
              *****************************



              -----Original Message-----
              From: geomelick@... [mailto:geomelick@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 10:28 AM
              To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [John_Lit] John 20:31


              Bill:

              According to my reconstruction of the Last Supper, Mark, as the youngest
              of
              the disciples, was washing the disciples' feet. When the controversy
              occurred,
              Jesus took over the foot washing duties, the greatest becoming as the
              youngest. He then placed Mark at his side, saying "Whoever receives
              this child in my
              name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me"
              (Luke
              9:48). The author or redactor reported this in slightly changed form in
              John
              13.20 This is how Mark came to be lying close to the breast of Jesus.

              George Melick MA
              Drexel University, Retired


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              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
              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • geomelick@AOL.com
              James: My hypothesis is based on two suggestions about Mark. The first is that he was the BD and the second is that he was the son of Simon Peter. The latter
              Message 6 of 22 , May 6 6:23 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                James:

                My hypothesis is based on two suggestions about Mark. The first is that he
                was the BD and the second is that he was the son of Simon Peter. The latter
                suggestion has a long history. In commenting on 1 Peter 5:13 Henry Alford wrote
                that Mark was "perhaps the actual son of St. Peter, bearing this name." For
                this view he cited Oecumenius and Bengel. According to Swete, ho huios mou in
                this verse does not involve spiritual relationship of the kind expressed by
                teknon in Paul's letters. In commenting on this verse William Barclay wrote
                that "Mark might quite well be literally Peter's son." In the Encyclopedia
                Americana F. C. Grant wrote that the reference "would be more natural if the
                relationship was physical as well as spiritual." What surprises me is that no one
                else to my knowledge has tried connecting these two suggestions.

                As a young boy, Mark would have stayed close to his father when away from
                Capernaum and thus would have been present at the meal although not initially at
                the table. According to Richardson, "It would be the duty of the youngest
                member of the group of disciples attached to a rabbi to perform such acts of
                menial service as foot-washing."

                My most recent SBL paper is posted on my website www.beloveddisciple.net, and
                an earlier paper presented at a national SBL meeting is on
                www.fourthgospel.com. Go to unpublished papers and click on "M".

                George Melick, MA
                Drexel University (Retired)


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