Notes on God in the Gospel of John

[Clear]

Hi Longfellow

1) WHEN DID CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY (I.E. THE PROMISE OF A MESSIAH/CHRIST) BEGIN?

Longfellow said : “Oh. I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about Jewish beliefs. When you say "early Judeo-Christian," how early is that? Before His ascension, or after?”

The term “Judeo-Christian” refers to literature and theology that interconnects or bridges “Jewish” and “Christian” theology and traditions.

The specific “origin” of Christianity (or proto-christianity) depends on what literature one uses as historical context.

For example, one can use the early Jewish and Christian literature where Adam himself was educated regarding and promised a Messiah; a Christ. IF this is correct, then a form of Christianity or Messiahism existed from the very beginning.

For example, the apostolic Father Ignatius taught Christians of his day that “It is utterly absurd to profess Jesus Christ and to practice Judaism. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity,...” Ignatius to the Magnesians 10:3 and Ignatius would have good reason to claim if he was familiar with Judeo-Christian literature of the early era.

For example, the promise and belief in a Christ/Messiah was present long before Jesus’ birth.

This seemed to be the case in ancient Judeo-Christian literature. I gave an example from Biblical, Jewish 1 Enoch in post #14 where pre-rabbinic Judaism described The Son of Man or Messiah thusly: “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells…for the Lord of the Spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the Spirits in eternal uprightness.” (1st Enoch 46:1-6)


Early Christian Literature also describe many examples where they believed Adam was promised a Christ (i.e. a Messiah). Seth, the son of Adam relates the promise of a Christ, given to Adam when Seth says:

“He (Adam) spoke to me about this in Paradise after I picked some of the fruit in which death was hiding: ‘Adam, Adam do not fear […] I am consigning you to death, and the maggot and the worm will eat your body.’...But after a short time there will be mercy on you because you were created in my image, and I will not leave you to waste away in Sheol. For your sake I will be born of the Virgin Mary. For your sake I will taste death and enter the house of the dead.... And after three days, while I am in the tomb, I will raise up the body I received from you.” (Testament of Adam 3:1-4)

Another example comes from the syncretic Judao-christian witness of Enoch where God relates to the prophet enoch what he (God) said to Adam : “And I said [to him], ‘You are earth, and into the earth once again you will go, out of which I took you. And I will not destroy you, but I will send you away to what I took you from. Then I can take you once again at my second coming. And I blessed all my creatures….” 2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1

Another example from the early text Apocalypse of Adam relates Adams interaction with Three angel who relate the promise of a future Christ. Adam says : “The men [spoke] , saying to me, ‘Rise up, Adam, from the sleep of death, and hear about the aeon and the seed of that man to whom life has come, the one who came forth from you and from Eve your wife…Now then, my son Seth, I will reveal to you what was revealed to me by those men whom I once saw before me. The Apocalypse of Adam 2:1-6-7, ch 3:1;

The Life of Adam and Eve (apo) text relates the same promise of a Christ to Adam thusly: “And the Lord turned and said to Adam, ‘From now on I will not allow you to be in Paradise. And Adam answered and said, ‘Lord, give me from the tree of life that I might eat before I am cast out.’ Then the Lord spoke to Adam, ‘You shall not now take from it…But when you come out of Paradise, if you guard yourself from all evil, preferring death to it, at the time of the resurrection I will raise you again and then there shall be given to you from the tree of life, and you shall be immortal forever.” 28:1-4

Another example of this promise to Adam appeared in earlier chapters of the same text:

“Seth, man of God, do not labor, praying with this supplication about the tree from which the oil flows, to anoint your father Adam; it shall not come to be yours now (but at the end of times. Then all flesh from Adam up to that great day shall be raised, such as shall be the holy people; then to them shall be given every joy of Paradise and God shall be in their midst and there shall not be any more sinners before him, for the evil heart shall be removed from them, and they shall be given a heart that understands the good and worships God alone Life of Adam and Eve (Apocalypse) 13:2-6;

Another version of this promise to Adam is in later chapters:

“And the Lord said to him, “I told you that you are dust and to dust you shall return. 3 Now I promise to you the resurrection; I shall raise you on the last day in the resurrection with every man of your seed.” Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 41:1-3;

The early Hellenistic Synagogal prayers reflect this same belief. The narrative of prayer #12 reads, regarding Adam:

“But having subjected to him the creation, You have given to him, through sweat and hard labors, to provide by himself the nourishment for his own family, while you are causing all things to grown, and to ripen. And in time, having caused him to fall asleep for a while, you called (him) by an oath to a new birth; having dissolved the boundaries of death, you promised life by resurrection! 51 And not only this; but also those who poured forth from him… Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers (Prayer #12)



Jewish literature such as the Haggadah also confirms this ancient belief. This Jewish version reads: “Also, Adam’s prayer, to be given of the fruit of the Tree of Life, was turned aside, with the promise, however, that if he would lead a pious life, he would be given of the fruit on the day of resurrection, and he would then live forever. The Haggadah (The Punishment);

Yet another version of this Story concerning Adam and Seth comes from the Christian literature, Gospel of Nicodemus. The text begins with the Angel saying to Seth: ‘What do you desire, Seth? Do you desire, because of the sickness of your father, the oil that raises up the sick, or the tree from which flows such oil? This cannot be found now. Therefore go and tell your father than after the completion of fifty-five hundred years from the creation of the world, the only-begotten son of God shall become man and shall descend below the earth. And he shall anoint him with that oil. And he shall arise and wash him and his descendants with water and the Holy spirit. And then he shall be healed of every disease. But this is impossible now. Gospel of Nicodemus- Christ’s descent into hell

Such literature from both Jewish sources and Christian sources that agree on certain theological points are called "Judeo-Christian" literature.

The point here is that IF such early Judeo-Christian beliefs are correct, then Adam was the first Christian and person who was taught concerning a future Christ or Messiah. This early belief does not, typically, coordinate with modern Christian assumptions. Christians tend to believe the early Prophets referred to a Messiah, but the connection between old testament promises of a Messiah and to the arrival of that Messiah as Jesus are more tenuous than ancient Judeo-Christianity.

 

[Clear]

Hi Thomas

1) CHRISTIANS AND JEWS HAVE ALWAYS PRODUCED SACRED/HOLY LITERATURE (αγιαγραφε - hagiagraphy) THAT DESCRIBES THEIR ANCIENT BELIEFS

Thomas quoted: "A. Suciu and I. Saweros classify The Investiture of Abbaton, the Angel of Death among the Pseudo-Apostolic Memoirs (p. 529)... The portrait that emerges is a collection of works which were either intended as hagiographies (especially the Pseudo-Apostolic Memoirs and the various Acts) or else works which could be readily adopted for that purpose."
I agree with this.
Such literature as the various versions of biblical literature and all other early literature were meant to be hagio/graphies (sacred / writings) to those who created them and to those for whom they were sacred.



Thomas quoted: "Coptic Christians in post-Chalcedonian Egypt created a genre of literature known today as “pseudo- apostolic memoirs.” These feature tales of various early Christian figures in texts that, the authors claim, were hidden away in a house or library in Jerusalem until they were rediscovered by illustrious fourth-century homilists.”
I don’t think most early Judeo-Christian literature was “hidden” from others. (Some was)

While the Nag Hamadi literature was buried (presumably when persecution of those using non-church approved texts arose) and the Dead Sea Scrolls were “hidden” (presumably to protect the library from invading romans around 70 a.d.), most of the literature was not “hidden” but merely “undiscovered”.

For example Sinaiticus (arguably the most important New and Old Testament Uncial known, was simply discovered by Tischendorf by serendipity. (It’s a wonderful story) and others such as the Brooklyn papyria, Lawrences Enoch, by sheer diligent effort or by almost accidental discovery.

Remember. Even the biblical writings are pseudographic (i.e. the authorship is unknown) to the extent that no one knows or can tell us who wrote any of the various biblical and non-biblical texts in the earliest periods.

The New Testament (and certainly the old testament) writings were simply created under conditions that the authorships cannot be determined.



2) REGARDING THE “TWO POWERS” AND “THREE POWERS” MODEL INTRODUCED BY THOMAS

Thomas said in post #35: “Also nonsense is your attribution of the "Two Powers" model to me.”

Thomas, you, yourself claimed, in post #25 “I also accept the Two Powers hypothesis. But I do not see any Three Power hypothesis.” (post #25).

When you said you “accept the Two Powers hypothesis”, I assumed this meant that you “accept the Two Powers hypothesis.”

If you mis-spoke, or I misunderstood, you will have to explain why you now do not accept the "Two Powers" model..
Can you also explain the “Two Powers” and the “Three Powers” model. (as I requestion earlier)



3) EARLY CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ARE INDEPENDENT OF LATER, CONFLICTING THEOLOGICAL MODELS

Clear said : “Whether your model of “two powers” is correct, or whether the ancient Christian model of three individuals in the trinity is correct, it is irrelevant to the fact that the ancient Judeo-Christians themselves, did believed in God, his Son, and in the Holy Spirit since they witness to their belief in their literature.”
Thomas replied: “Nonsense. You have argued yourself that context is important to understanding what they thought and what they were saying.”

You are confused.

Historical context IS very important to understanding historical Judeo-Christianity. Whatever theories you and I generate, they do not change the historical beliefs of the early Judeo-Christians. History does not “run backwards” nor does it change.

This historical principle doesn’t mean their theology was correct, and yours is incorrect.

However, IF you claim your theories are “better” or “more correct” than the theology of the ancient Judeo-Christians, the question follows as to why you think your beliefs are to take priority over or to be preferred to the beliefs of the ancient Judeo-Christians.

For example, Clement was the convert of the apostle Peter and the co-worker of the apostle Paul. Why would your theology be preferred over than of Clement, who was taught the earliest and most authentic form of Christianity by the apostles themselves?



4) ANCIENT CHRISTIANS CREATED LITERATURE OF MULTIPLE KINDS

Thomas said: "Coptic Christians in post-Chalcedonian Egypt created a genre of literature known today as “pseudo-apostolic memoirs.”

Historians have made the exact same point about all of the biblical texts.
No one knows who wrote any of the books and thus, the real authors are unknown and thus they are all pseudoepigraphs.



Thomas said: “These feature tales of various early Christian figures in texts that, the authors claim, were hidden away in a house or library in Jerusalem until they were rediscovered by illustrious fourth-century homilists – though these attributions too are fictions. “
Firstly, While Archbishop Timothy simply claims he found his source texts in the Jerusalem library. If you know this is untrue, can you quote where he makes any claim that his source texts were “hidden”.

Secondly, thank you for updating your New (and more correct) attribution of Abbaton as being discovered in the 4th century. This is more correct than your prior claim of it’s origin in the 700s.

Thirdly, such texts were not “hidden” in the Jerusalem library just as 4th century Sinaiticus was not “hidden” in St. Mary’s monastery. They were simply there and undiscovered. This contrasts with such texts as the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Nag Hammadi library that WERE hidden away.

I do agree that almost all Christian literature, including the New Testament were written (partly) to create a distinct identity for Christianity and distinguish it from second Temple Judaism.



5) MORE INACCURATE DATING. WHAT IS THE MOTIVE TO INTRODUCE ERRORS IN DATING?

Thomas said: “The oldest text dates from the 10th century. Its origin is somewhere between the 5th and 7th centuries.”

This is a silly and inaccurate Statement. You realize that readers can simply google the dates for various early literature?

For example, we’ve already corrected your dating of Abbaton since it’s introduction by Bishop Timothy was written in the 300s a.d. (he died in the 380s). Timothy could not have written the introduction in the 700s.

There is a great deal of Judeo-Christian literature written in the early centuries that describe early Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices. For example, I quoted Christian Abbaton from the 300s where god left Adams body for 40 days without putting Adams spirit into his body.

Instead of quoting the story from 4th century Abbaton ” and He left him lying for forty days and forty nights without putting breath into him. “ I could simply have quoted from the Nag Hamadi library (of the third century a.d.) version that also references that God “left his molded body forty days without soul”. And he withdrew and left him.” (On the origin of the world) The point is that there are, typically, multiple specific references to certain early beliefs in multiple types of early literature.

We have MANY, MANY texts from the earliest period, written by the Judeo-Christians themselves, describing their early beliefs, that come from much earlier periods than those you seem familiar with.

For examples: The testament of the twelve patriarchs was written in the First or second century b.c. 1 Enoch was written in the second or third century b.c. Barnabas was late first (or early second) century a.d. The Didache and 1st Clement were both written close to the same time as John was writing revelations. Most of the Dead Sea Scrolls I have quoted come from about 150 b.c. and no later than approx. 70 a.d. Jubilees comes from 2nd century b.c.

MANY of these early Judeo-Christian texts come from and represent the very early periods of Judeo-Christian literature.
My two volumes of Charlesworth Jewish epigraphs are about two thousand pages of early Jewish Literature that mostly come from the b.c. era. The Talmudic quotes I usually offer from the mishna come from approx. 200 a.d. and quotes I typically use from the Palestinian Talmud are from approx 400-450 a.d. The Brooklyn Papyri and it’s temple correspondence date from approx 450 B.C.
Your claim that the oldest texts dating from the 10th century is strange (to me).

Remember also, that While YOUR bible doesn’t have such texts, your bible is NOT the same bible as the ancients had.
You and I have already BOTH confirmed this in our discussion of John 1:18 in it’s early and later versions which are not the same.

Not only was the early text different than our modern versions, the early bibles were different in other ways. For example, 4th century Sinaticus contained Barnabas and Hermas; Both the ancient and modern eastern Tawedo bible contains Jubilees (2nd century B.C.), Baruch (2nd century B.D.) and other epigraphs such as Enoch (3th century B.C. – 1st century A.D. - syncretic)

For example, if we want greater context regarding what early Judeo-Christian beliefs were regarding Adam and his fall, we could reference Baruch, or Jubilees and other early Texts.

None of these are among the texts you claimed : “The oldest text dates from the 10th century. But instead all are much earlier (Enoch is 1300 years earlier than the 10th century…)



6) EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TEXTS HELP FILL IN THE GAPS IN BIBLICAL NARRATIVES
Thomas said: “There is no Scriptural record of the dialogue between Jesus and the disciples on the Mount of Olives as the Abbaton states, nor did the book supposedly seen by Timothy, nor the Jerusalem Library of the Apostles actually exist.”

I agree that our current western English versions of the bible do not describe what Jesus taught the disciples and others during the 40 days he spent with them. Nor does the modern, western text most in the west grow up with, describe what happened to Jesus during the 3 days his Body lay in the tomb while his spirit remained alive.

Biblical John 21:25 reminds us that There is much that is missing from the Biblical Narrative when it says : "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

This is why I said that, if historians want to know what the early Christians believed Jesus taught during those 40 days that are missing from the modern bibles, one must turn to other literature created by the early Judeo-Christians where they themselves describe their early beliefs.

The same is true if Christians want to know what early Judeo-Christians believed happened to Jesus’ Spirit while his body lay in the tomb. They must turn to other ancient Christian literature describing their ancient beliefs on such subjects.

Perhaps I misunderstood your claim regarding the "Two Powers" versus "Three Powers" theories.
Can you explain these theories and explain what they have to do with John 1:1 or is the discussion evolving into a different discussion?

My interest lies in early Judeo-Christianity so I will not be familiar with many modern theories and so, you will know much more about these two theories than I will and I appreciate your explanation and why they are relevant.

Thank you in advance for the explanation Thomas.