Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Yuri Kuchinsky · 08-14-2002, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Clarice O'C:
<strong>If Jesus is the bridegroom in John 2 and 3, who is the bride? God? See John 3:29, "It is the bridegroom to whom the bride belongs." And I'm wondering if there is any significance to the fact that "bridegroom" isn't used again in John after Chapter 3.

Thanks,
Clarice</strong>

Hello to Clarice, and to my old pal Peter Kirby.

I have examined John 2:1-11 in some detail here,

4 versions of TURNING WATER INTO WINE ~ Yuri Kuchinsky
<a href="http://www.styx.org/yuku/pepys/4vdt.htm" target="_blank">http://www.styx.org/yuku/pepys/4vdt.htm</a>

This long file is the result of a long discussion on the Johannine Literature List. I'm arguing that the original version of John 2:1-11 didn't yet have a "bridegroom". The whole story seems much better preserved in the Diatessaronic texts, which I supply.

Perhaps people would like to see my analysis. I'd be grateful for any comments. Johannine scholars didn't seem to find anything wrong with the main substance of my analysis.

All the best,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- <a href="http://www.trends.ca/~yuku" target="_blank">http://www.trends.ca/~yuku</a> -=O=- Toronto

"One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea"
--Walter Bagehot (1826-1877)

Joe Mendoza · 08-16-2002, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by Clarice O'C:
Since the gospel of John is said to be highly gnostic, if that's true do you think that
...

Hylic - Body
Psychic - Soul
Pneumatic - Spirit

... are or can be represented in John's language? Body and spirit are already there.
Would "body" be Jesus' body and "spirit" be the holy spirit or some such thing?
"Soul" is in John once, in 12:27.

Hi Clarice,

Yes, I think that the gospel of John is organized around the three natures of man; Physical, social and transcendental.

I am also of the opinion that within the book of John, Jesus does not represent an historical person outside of our selves, but represents aspects of our selves. (Not that I deny the existence of an historical Jesus, I just believe that within the context of the 'gospel of John' an historical Jesus is irrelevant. John is speaking of other things. For John, Jesus is a useful literary device).

So the body would be both the body of Christ and our bodies. The spirit would be both the Holy Spirit and our own spirit (not that there is a difference).

I am using this discussion group as a useful means of organizing some inchoate ideas that I have about John. These ideas are not completely developed and are sure to be revised by the time we finish with this study.

It is interesting that the word "soul" is only used once in John. I'm not sure why. But the concept of the social self seems to be present.

-Joe

Joe Mendoza · 08-16-2002, 03:58 PM

Now I'd like to tackle the second part of this chapter.

The cleansing of the Temple would make more historical sense if it were placed at the end of Jesus' ministry (where the synoptic Gospels place it) than if it is placed at the beginning. It would have been a major attack on the religions and political authorities of the time and would have resulted in a major response such as the arrest and execution of Jesus. It makes no sense that Jesus would perform and act of physical violence and that the authorities would react so mildly.

But John is not a historical book; it is a how-to book. It is not a biography; it is an "enlightenment" manual.

The book of John is divided into three parts (the three Passovers). These three parts deal with the natural self (the Hylic), the social self (the Psychic) and the transcendent self (the Pneumatic).

The Temple represents Jesus' body (it even explicitly says so in verse 21), it also represents the body of all of those who read the book and who are on the road to enlightenment. The seller represent the various instinctive (and selfish) passions and desires of the body.

The journey to the spiritual begins with the physical. Before we can realize the spiritual we must first put the body (the Hylic) into order. Know thyself begins with knowing thy body. At the beginning of the journey to enlightenment, these selfish instincts are in control and are preventing us from starting on our journey. They must be put into their place.

John is correct to place this event at the beginning of the journey. The event's position in the history of Jesus' ministry is irrelevant. Its symbolic place is what is important, and that symbolic place is at the beginning.

-Joe

Eric Neal · 08-19-2002, 03:11 PM

A few comments on the Cana miracles:

1. Jesus implies that the concern of his mother will be his when his hour comes (2.4). His mother's concern at Cana was of this incomprehending material world -- the lack of wine and need for festive joy. We have already noted this link with Jesus thirsting on the cross and being given sour wine. When Jesus' hour comes the one who promised others need never thirst himself now shares the concerns of the flesh and is given the sour wine that the flesh expects. This is all part of his transfer into glory, and en route he transfers his mother to his beloved disciple. Futher, in a gospel that elsewhere is at pains to stress the inferiority of being born of the flesh it is difficult to take the mother-son relationships as anything but another symbol here.

(Note also that the temple cleansing is not the only episode transferred from the final passover to the earlier chapters. Accounts and discussions of drinking wine/blood and eating bread/flesh have also been shifted to the earlier chapters of the gospel, reserving the passion scenes for their fulfilment.)

2. The Cana water-wine miracle is also linked with the healing of the nobleman's son (4.46). This, too, has its fulfilment in the end chapters of the gospel. The main point Jesus makes in this healing is how inadequate is the one who needs to see signs to believe. The nobleman rises to the occasion and believes before he sees his son raised from the point of death. Links with the Thomas episode after Jesus resurrection are not overly subtle.

3. The two Cana miracles thus link with the death and resurrection of Jesus and point symbolically to the deeper lessons for those disciples called to believe and walk in light of the author and be born from the author's 'above'.

Eric

Toto · 08-19-2002, 03:33 PM

The thread <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000509" target="_blank">Was Jesus a Samaritan</a> references an ebook (free download) that argues that Jesus was a Samaritan based on an analysis of the Gospel according to John. While you might not accept all of the author's conclusions, there are some interesting suggestions.

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

08-16-2002, 03:54 PM	#22
Joe Mendoza Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 10	Originally posted by Clarice O'C: Since the gospel of John is said to be highly gnostic, if that's true do you think that ... Hylic - Body Psychic - Soul Pneumatic - Spirit ... are or can be represented in John's language? Body and spirit are already there. Would "body" be Jesus' body and "spirit" be the holy spirit or some such thing? "Soul" is in John once, in 12:27. Hi Clarice, Yes, I think that the gospel of John is organized around the three natures of man; Physical, social and transcendental. I am also of the opinion that within the book of John, Jesus does not represent an historical person outside of our selves, but represents aspects of our selves. (Not that I deny the existence of an historical Jesus, I just believe that within the context of the 'gospel of John' an historical Jesus is irrelevant. John is speaking of other things. For John, Jesus is a useful literary device). So the body would be both the body of Christ and our bodies. The spirit would be both the Holy Spirit and our own spirit (not that there is a difference). I am using this discussion group as a useful means of organizing some inchoate ideas that I have about John. These ideas are not completely developed and are sure to be revised by the time we finish with this study. It is interesting that the word "soul" is only used once in John. I'm not sure why. But the concept of the social self seems to be present. -Joe

08-16-2002, 03:58 PM	#23
Joe Mendoza Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 10	Now I'd like to tackle the second part of this chapter. The cleansing of the Temple would make more historical sense if it were placed at the end of Jesus' ministry (where the synoptic Gospels place it) than if it is placed at the beginning. It would have been a major attack on the religions and political authorities of the time and would have resulted in a major response such as the arrest and execution of Jesus. It makes no sense that Jesus would perform and act of physical violence and that the authorities would react so mildly. But John is not a historical book; it is a how-to book. It is not a biography; it is an "enlightenment" manual. The book of John is divided into three parts (the three Passovers). These three parts deal with the natural self (the Hylic), the social self (the Psychic) and the transcendent self (the Pneumatic). The Temple represents Jesus' body (it even explicitly says so in verse 21), it also represents the body of all of those who read the book and who are on the road to enlightenment. The seller represent the various instinctive (and selfish) passions and desires of the body. The journey to the spiritual begins with the physical. Before we can realize the spiritual we must first put the body (the Hylic) into order. Know thyself begins with knowing thy body. At the beginning of the journey to enlightenment, these selfish instincts are in control and are preventing us from starting on our journey. They must be put into their place. John is correct to place this event at the beginning of the journey. The event's position in the history of Jesus' ministry is irrelevant. Its symbolic place is what is important, and that symbolic place is at the beginning. -Joe

08-19-2002, 03:11 PM	#24
Eric Neal New Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 1	A few comments on the Cana miracles: 1. Jesus implies that the concern of his mother will be his when his hour comes (2.4). His mother's concern at Cana was of this incomprehending material world -- the lack of wine and need for festive joy. We have already noted this link with Jesus thirsting on the cross and being given sour wine. When Jesus' hour comes the one who promised others need never thirst himself now shares the concerns of the flesh and is given the sour wine that the flesh expects. This is all part of his transfer into glory, and en route he transfers his mother to his beloved disciple. Futher, in a gospel that elsewhere is at pains to stress the inferiority of being born of the flesh it is difficult to take the mother-son relationships as anything but another symbol here. (Note also that the temple cleansing is not the only episode transferred from the final passover to the earlier chapters. Accounts and discussions of drinking wine/blood and eating bread/flesh have also been shifted to the earlier chapters of the gospel, reserving the passion scenes for their fulfilment.) 2. The Cana water-wine miracle is also linked with the healing of the nobleman's son (4.46). This, too, has its fulfilment in the end chapters of the gospel. The main point Jesus makes in this healing is how inadequate is the one who needs to see signs to believe. The nobleman rises to the occasion and believes before he sees his son raised from the point of death. Links with the Thomas episode after Jesus resurrection are not overly subtle. 3. The two Cana miracles thus link with the death and resurrection of Jesus and point symbolically to the deeper lessons for those disciples called to believe and walk in light of the author and be born from the author's 'above'. Eric

08-19-2002, 03:33 PM	#25
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The thread <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000509" target="_blank">Was Jesus a Samaritan</a> references an ebook (free download) that argues that Jesus was a Samaritan based on an analysis of the Gospel according to John. While you might not accept all of the author's conclusions, there are some interesting suggestions.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.