Freethought & Rationalism Archive

S.C.Carlson · 03-09-2007, 12:07 PM

I think Michael Goulder had an argument that Paul was the BD.

Pierson Parker tried to float John Mark as the BD.

You can add Bauckham to Hengel (#7)

You can add Witherington III to #5

Stephen

Ben C Smith · 03-09-2007, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson

I think Michael Goulder had an argument that Paul was the BD.

I did not know that! Seems quite a stretch. In my wildest ecclesiastical fantasies I would not have thought to make that connection. I wonder what his angle was.

Ben.

Ben C Smith · 03-09-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Disciples.htm

James son of Zebedee is the only major "disciple" that is not named in John, but that is named in the synoptics.

You mean besides John son of Zebedee?

Quote:

This is a duplicate of the synoptic introduction scene, but while it says that there are four disciples, only three are named. From the other synoptics we know that the 4th and unnamed disciple has to be James son of Zebedee.

Why not John son of Zebedee?

Ben.

Solo · 03-09-2007, 02:28 PM

I would put my money on none of the above. I think the "beloved disciple" is the Johanine oracular entity of the "Paraclete" who was at the events of Last Supper, Crucifixion, and the Tomb in spirit, as the authorized witness from, and counsellor to, another age.

John 21, written, it is generally agreed by another author than the preceding chapters, identifies the beloved disciple in 21:24 acting ex voto (Jn 15:26), as the Paraclete.

Sorry to add to the confusion

Jiri

Malachi151 · 03-09-2007, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

You mean besides John son of Zebedee?

Why not John son of Zebedee?

Ben.

Yes, but John son of Zebedee was always mentioned as a tag along to James. James was always primary to John, just as Andrew was a secondary tag along to Peter.

judge · 03-09-2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Disciples.htm

James son of Zebedee is the only major "disciple" that is not names in John, but that is named in the synoptics.

Good point, but as TedM points out John is not named in the gospel of John either. So it would seem any argument in this respect toward james would also apply to John (the traditional author) ...No?

Malachi151 · 03-09-2007, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Good point, but as TedM points out John is not named in the gospel of John either. So it would seem any argument in this respect toward james would also apply to John (the traditional author) ...No?

Surely the tradition is bogus. The gospel's author is unknown, and not any of the apostles.

John and James are excluded from the text by the author because their sect was divergent at that point.

It's not just that two names are left out, but two of the most important names according to the synoptics are left out, around which there was controversy both in the synoptics and in the writings of Paul.

Even Paul mentions John and James as pillars, so why aren't they here? They are intentionally excluded because they are "anathema", but the author still included the most important, James, as the unknown "disciple whom Jesus loved", who during the crucifixion the author turns into "the brother of the Lord".

judge · 03-09-2007, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Surely the tradition is bogus.

Maybe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

The gospel's author is unknown,

Possibly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

and not any of the apostles.

I dont know how we can know for sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

John and James are excluded from the text by the author because their sect was divergent at that point.

Ok,..but what was their sect?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

It's not just that two names are left out, but two of the most important names according to the synoptics are left out, around which there was controversy both in the synoptics and in the writings of Paul.

What was the contoversy with John?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Even Paul mentions John and James as pillars, so why aren't they here?

I could understand why the author would leave himself out (if possibly it were John) but not why james would be intentionally left out, if it was intentional.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

They are internationally excluded because they are "anathema",

Again I dont know how we know this about James and or John, but perhaps I am missing something?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

but the author still included the most important, James, as the unknown "disciple whom Jesus loved", who during the crucifixion the author turns into "the brother of the Lord".

I ammnot sure why james is more important, or why the absence of John doesn't eaqually point to John being the "disciple whom Jesus loved".

Malachi151 · 03-09-2007, 04:56 PM

Again, in the synoptics James is always mentioned first, with his brother John as a side character.

Likewise, there is no "John the Just", there is "James the Just", James is also named in the Gospel of Thomas as Jesus' favorite disciple.

James is also the one who is more prominent in Acts.

And again, James is the one who is called "the Lord's brother".

As for the conflict, this is shown in Galatians:

Quote:

Galatians 2:
7 On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised. 8 For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Peter, and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10 All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.

11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"

Its also shown in Mark:

Quote:

Mark 10:
35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask."
36 "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked.
37 They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory."
38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40 but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."
41 When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John.

Solo · 03-10-2007, 05:31 AM

Hey, what do you know, Raymond Brown too thinks the "Beloved Disciple" is the psychic witness of the Spirit - the Paraclete

Jiri

03-10-2007, 05:31 AM	#30
Solo Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 2,579	Beloved Disciple as Incarnation of the Paraclete Hey, what do you know, Raymond Brown too thinks the "Beloved Disciple" is the psychic witness of the Spirit - the Paraclete Jiri

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-09-2007, 12:07 PM	#21
S.C.Carlson Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 1,307	I think Michael Goulder had an argument that Paul was the BD. Pierson Parker tried to float John Mark as the BD. You can add Bauckham to Hengel (#7) You can add Witherington III to #5 Stephen

03-09-2007, 02:28 PM	#24
Solo Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 2,579	I would put my money on none of the above. I think the "beloved disciple" is the Johanine oracular entity of the "Paraclete" who was at the events of Last Supper, Crucifixion, and the Tomb in spirit, as the authorized witness from, and counsellor to, another age. John 21, written, it is generally agreed by another author than the preceding chapters, identifies the beloved disciple in 21:24 acting ex voto (Jn 15:26), as the Paraclete. Sorry to add to the confusion Jiri

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.