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

Re: [John_Lit] John and Paul

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    The Gospel of John was written some 30 years after the death of Paul and prior to the collection of the Pauline epistolary corpus. Although all of the New
    Message 1 of 52 , Aug 12, 2010
      The Gospel of John was written some 30 years after the death of Paul and
      prior to the collection of the Pauline epistolary corpus. Although all of
      the New Testament works inherited Pauline flavors from the scribes and
      copyists in the early centuries, I see no correlation between the Johannine
      and Pauline spheres. Focusing on GJohn, many on the list are familiar with
      my paradigm that there was a small Aramaic "Proto-John" that predated Mark
      and hence devoid of Pauline thought. Paul wrote between 48 or 49 and 64 CE
      while Proto-John was used in Greek translation (in my opinion) by John, the
      Presbyter (probably in Ephesus) as a template around which he fleshed his
      larger Greek gospel in the last decade of the 1st century.

      Of course, I could be wrong. I was once....in 1948, I think.


      Jack Kilmon
      San Antonio, TX

      From: "Matthew Estrada" <matt_estrada@...>
      Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 5:21 PM
      To: <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
      Subject: Re: [John_Lit] John and Paul

      > I just sold my very extensive library on John, but I am sure that someone
      > had
      > written a dissertation on the relationship between John and Paul's
      > writings.
      > Sorry, but can't remember who it was.
      > <font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:#0080ff;">Matthew Estrada</font>
      > <font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:#0080ff;">113 Laurel Court</font>
      > <font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:#0080ff;">Peachtree City, Ga 30269</font>
      > ________________________________
      > From: Murray Hogg <muzhogg@...>
      > To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Fri, April 24, 2009 3:08:32 PM
      > Subject: Re: [John_Lit] John and Paul
      > Hi Pete,
      > I'm responding in large part because I would hate you to feel your query
      > had
      > been overlooked (or even hijacked! <smile>) rather than because I have
      > much in
      > the way of substantial comment to offer.
      > A brief review of my personal library turns up very little indeed. I can
      > offer
      > only the observation (and I'm sure it won't be a revelation to you) that
      > Johannine scholars seem to make very few reference to Paul, and only then
      > in
      > order to make a point about theological parallels/distinctives or relative
      > chronology. There is, however, no substantial dealing with their
      > inter-relationship that I could find. I will say that one thing did strike
      > me:
      > given that the same literature goes to some effort to deal with the
      > relation of
      > Johannine and other contemporary thought forms (Jewish, gnostic, etc) it's
      > curious that it virtually ignores any relation between Johannine and
      > Pauline
      > thought.
      > If you don't mind waiting a few days, I've sent an e-mail to an
      > acquaintance
      > who's better informed than me and I'll let you know if he is able to
      > suggest
      > anything.
      > As it stands, it appears somewhat virgin territory ripe for exploration.
      > As such
      > I can offer very little insight - only I didn't, as I say, want you to
      > feel you
      > had been overlooked.
      > I'll be back in touch if I my acquaintance can provide any clues.
      > Blessings,
      > Murray
      > --
      > Murray Hogg
      > Pastor, East Camberwell Baptist Church, Victoria, Australia
      > Post-Grad Student (MTh), Australian College of Theology
      > PHILLIPS P.M. wrote:
      >> HI
      >> Many thanks for the comments on John and the Beloved Disciple as Paul
      >> (!!!!!!) and all that...
      >> But my question was whether anyone has specific suggestions for some
      >> research on John and Paul - it wasn't related at all to me thinking that
      >> Paul was the BD or that they went out for tea one night or that they
      >> were related through Auntie Susannah down in Antioch...sorry, nice
      >> diversionary conversations (although completely untestable or provable)
      >> but...
      >> If anyone has any specific bibliographic suggestions on texts which deal
      >> with the relationship between Johannine Literature and Pauline
      >> Literature, I'd still be glad to hear of it.
      >> Pete
      >> Pete Phillips
      >> Director of Research
      >> CBLC, St John's College, Durham
      >> Int: 43896
      >> Ext: 0191 334 3896
      >> Mob: 0787 633 7157
      >> Skype: pete.m.phillips
      > [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
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/messagesYahoo! Groups
      > Links
    • Tom Butler
      Matthew,      I m enjoying catching up on this string of e-mail exchanges in which you are engaged.  You are asking some interesting questions about the
      Message 52 of 52 , Aug 25, 2010
             I'm enjoying catching up on this string of e-mail exchanges in which you
        are engaged.  You are asking some interesting questions about the Fourth Gospel,
        and you have some interesting theories about how to answer those questions.  I
        believe that such an approach is what gives life to the serious study of the
        Bible and in particular to the study of the Fourth Gospel.
              I subscribe to the theory that may offer an explanation for
        the similarities between the writings of Paul, the synoptic Gospels and the
        Fourth Gospel.  That theory is that a community of scholars formed during the
        first century soon after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.  These world
        class scholars of the Hebrew Scriptures, especially of the Torah, were also
        Jewish Christians.   I suspect that such a community of scholars was busily at
        work recording the passion narrative and then building a larger narrative that
        was intended to maintain all of the wisdom of the more ancient Scriptures, while
        recounting the lessons and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.   Other scholars who
        visited that community engaged in discussion about their work as the community
        members struggled to produce a "Christian" Torah for use alongside
        the Septuagint source for the Scriptures they used regularly for worship.  These
        discussions among scholars could well have influenced the thinking both of the
        residential scholars and those who visited the community, thus ideas, language,
        use of sacred symbols that were being discussed may have appeared in documents
        that were "published" long before the "finished" Gospel (even the earliest
        versions of it) was "published."
              I think this theory or something like it could be used to explain the
        similarities in the use of symbolic language, the depth of
        theological reflection and even terms or phrases that appear in documents
        that appear to modern scholars to have come from different eras in history
        and/or different areas of the known world.
        Tom Butler

        From: Matthew Miller <logosmadeflesh@...>
        To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Fri, August 13, 2010 8:04:24 AM
        Subject: Re: [John_Lit] John and Paul

        I find Ephesians and the rest of the prison epistles are particularly
        striking in their comparisons to John and it's theology. One can instantly
        think of the way in which John, Ephesians and Colossians each describe
        Christ's role in creation. But there are other parallels as well. For

        Ephesians 4:8-9
        "Therefore it says, When he ascended on high, he led captive, a host of
        captives, and He gave gifts to men." Now this expression, "He ascended,"
        what does it mean except that He also descended into the lower parts of the

        John 3:13
        "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son
        of Man."

        While the later verse can also be an allusion to Proverbs 30:4, there is a
        similarity between Ephesians 4:9 and John 3:13 which is unique in the New

        Again this isn't the only comparison one could find within these letters.
        While some of these parallels could simply be chalked up to a common first
        century mileu, It's certainly interesting that tradition places John within
        this city, giving him at least access to this particular letter.

        Matthew Miller
        Canby Bible College

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

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