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

Re: [John_Lit] Re: John as Title

Expand Messages
  • Gregory Bloomquist
    I have come to the discussion late, so my apologies if what follows has been stated by others. If so, please simply disregard it. Re. 1.15: perhaps the author
    Message 1 of 13 , Apr 6, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      I have come to the discussion late, so my apologies if what follows has
      been stated by others. If so, please simply disregard it.

      Re. 1.15: perhaps the author of the FG, who also delights in ambiguity,
      means more than one thing from the verse. We usually think in temporal
      terms when reading this text, just as Nicodemus thought in temporal not
      spatial terms when he heard Jesus' use of ANO^THEN.

      But, if, in 1.15, we switch to a functional understanding of ERXOMENOS
      OPISO^ MOU not as spatial but as a paraphrase for discipleship (i.e.,
      "disciple") and see EMPROSTHEN MOU and PRO^TOS MOU as a question of
      degree, not time (i.e., "greater than me" or "preferred above me"),
      then, one possibile translation would be:

      "The one who appears to be my follower-disciple has become greater
      than/superior to me (my teacher?) because he always was (i.e., did not
      just come into being, as John did) greater in rank than me."

      This is not intended to discount the temporal readings, but only to
      suggest that the temporal readings are there to mask in riddle-fashion
      what is "really" being said.

      Maybe this is what Jeff meant; if so, I couldn't agree more! :-)

      --
      L G Bloomquist
      http://www.bloomquist.on.ca
      visitalk.com PCN: 2001-1149-0865
    • Jeffrey L. Staley
      ... Yes, this is the idea. You said it very well! (And thanks for including the Greek, which I didn t remember quite rightly.) I would prefer, however, to
      Message 2 of 13 , Apr 6, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Gregory Bloomquist wrote:

        > I have come to the discussion late, so my apologies if what follows has
        > been stated by others. If so, please simply disregard it.
        >
        > Re. 1.15: perhaps the author of the FG, who also delights in ambiguity,
        > means more than one thing from the verse. We usually think in temporal
        > terms when reading this text, just as Nicodemus thought in temporal not
        > spatial terms when he heard Jesus' use of ANO^THEN.
        >
        > But, if, in 1.15, we switch to a functional understanding of ERXOMENOS
        > OPISO^ MOU not as spatial but as a paraphrase for discipleship (i.e.,
        > "disciple") and see EMPROSTHEN MOU and PRO^TOS MOU as a question of
        > degree, not time (i.e., "greater than me" or "preferred above me"),
        > then, one possibile translation would be:
        >
        > "The one who appears to be my follower-disciple has become greater
        > than/superior to me (my teacher?) because he always was (i.e., did not
        > just come into being, as John did) greater in rank than me."
        >
        > This is not intended to discount the temporal readings, but only to
        > suggest that the temporal readings are there to mask in riddle-fashion
        > what is "really" being said.
        >
        > Maybe this is what Jeff meant; if so, I couldn't agree more! :-)
        >

        Yes, this is the idea. You said it very well! (And thanks for including the Greek, which I didn't remember quite rightly.) I would
        prefer, however, to keep the translation as much a riddle as possible, and put in a footnote the doubled meaning(s).

        Jeff
      • Jeffrey L. Staley
        ... An interesting way of looking at it. This would preserve, in v. 15, an authentic riddle of John then? It is unusual that the author likes the saying
        Message 3 of 13 , Apr 6, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          ProfRam@... wrote:

          > Another way of putting it is that perhaps the Gospel of John begins the way
          > it does precisely because the author had a tradition of John's pronouncement
          > in 1:15 and 30. So he put 1:1-5 first and then verse 6 simply in order to
          > illustrate v 15, by showing that Jesus preceded John in eternity even though
          > John's ministry preceded his in time. Could it possibly be that simple?
          >

          An interesting way of looking at it. This would "preserve," in v. 15, an "authentic" riddle of John then? It is unusual that the author
          "likes" the saying enough to repeat it twice, and has John allude to it even in 3:28. Do you think John's [real, historical] prophetic
          activity was explicitly messianic in some way?

          Jeff
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.