Duvduv

This is not ipso facto evidence of the existence of any community, only of an author who produced a text incorporating different ideas. You cannot know more than that.

Diogenes the Cynic

We can tell it did not have a single author, but is an accreted work of layers and redactions. The final, canonical work is the result of a community even if it, hypothetically, it has some original memoir or singular narrative embedded within it. To say that a community produced the canonical Gospel of John is not necessarily to say that the community authored all its embedded sources.

Diogenes the Cynic

The work clearly did not have a single author, refers to a collective "we," and is hostile to other communities.

We can also see layers of redaction. it's a Gnostic text redacted to remove doceticism. Single authors don't redact themselves that way.

Duvduv

If there was repeated redaction then it also means repeated reissuing of the same text over and over to those who had the earlier version, and a point where this process stopped. However, we don't see anything of an earlier GJohn nor is there any information about any "community" anywhere that was a community exclusively using a GJohn.

Cesc

Obvioulsy its an accreted work, but I still don't see how you can conclude eo ipso that the final work is the result of a community.

Tanya, yes, gJohn is normally seen as reflecting a more developed theology and christology.But I believe some of those examples are seen as "more developed" simply because we date gJohn so relatively late. If somehow hypothetically it turned out that gJohn was the earliest gospel, we would have to explain this theology in another way, and that's what I think is interesting, because I think it would put early Christianity closer to the Jewish dualism from the intertestamental period and the Dead Sea scrolls. But there is much evidence for dating gJohn as the last (or third if Luke is the last).

outhouse

its dated later properly.

it shows quite clearly the division of christians from jews, which wasnt early.

outhouse

pretty much


but why couldnt it be god-fearers?

the movement failed in judaism very early.

gjohns mythical theology is simular to pauls theology is some aspects, which reflects god-fearers.

outhouse

I agree


but I wouldnt call it a gnostic text, as much as I would call it gnostic influenced

tanya

Sounds like blasphemy to me. Is that what you mean by "Jewish dualism"?

Am I missing something from reading Mark? Did he also describe Jesus as θεός?

Can you offer an illustration in literature, where a revision by the same or different author, led to a DEMOTION of the principal character?

outhouse

after reading a few scholarships on the topic, seems I was wrong

the Johannine communities did have a jewish background more so then a gentile/roman background.


but I would still like to investigate a possible god-fearer gentile connection