Re(2): [John_Lit] Re: John as Title
- firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>If that's the case, then Origen and Heracleon were arguing like a coupleNice point, Ramsey! How much have we learned, anyway?
>19th-21st century readers way back in the 3d century, in their dispute
>where John's words ended in 1:15-18.
Paul N. Anderson
Professor of Biblical and Quaker Studies
George Fox University
Newberg, OR 97132
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 04 April 2000 20:06
Subject: Re(2): [John_Lit] Re: John as Title
> Looking at the distinctive JB material in John lately, I've been wondering
> it there was a JB independent tradition or distinctive theological content
> that has made it into the Johannine tradition and was developed
> While Bultmann's Gnostic Offenbarungsreden theory falls short on a number
> of fronts, I wonder what may have been the case regarding Essene
> perspective, reflecting some upon Charlesworth's work here.
Boismard OP - Of all the NT writings, 1Jn... presents... the greatest number
of theological contacts with the writings from Qumran. (Charlesworth ed Jn &
Dead Sea Scrolls)
This is one of the reasons why I reckon 1Jn is much earlier than final
edition of 4G.