Johannite Church ~AD 90

Page 2 of 3 (55 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 54 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 33842
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 16 2012 12:01 PM

George Somsel:
Thus, depending on how you choose to use the term "Johannine theology" there either is or is not such a theology depending on whether you tie it to John the Apostle.

I've always seen the term tied to the corpus just as Pauline theology is tied to a separate corpus. While there is often an implication that the Johannine theology finds its roots in the apostle John, there is no implicit assumption regarding the author of the texts. If you search your entire Logos library for the term "Johannine theology" I believe you will find this to the the standard usage of the term.

Next you're going to tell me there are no Thomasite Christians in IndiaBig Smile

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 16 2012 12:31 PM

I don't read 2-3 Jn, Apocaplypse

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 3:02 PM

Have You looked at the negative review where Brown is accused to be a structuralist?

Rosie Perera:
There's a book called The Community of the Beloved Disciple: The Life, Loves and Hates of an Individual Church in New Testament Times by Raymond E. Brown (Paulist Press) that gets referenced in 187 of my Logos resources.
There's 10 pages on the Johannine Church in: http://www.logos.com/product/3939/a-history-of-the-first-christians I bought that one on thursday 3 days ago, waiting for the base package-package to arrive on DVD, I don't feel like downloading everything.
From contents: http://www.logos.com/images/pagescans/churchhistory1/image002.jpg

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 8899
fgh | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 3:55 PM

Unix:
I bought that one on thursday 3 days ago, waiting for the base package-package to arrive on DVD

Base packages are now 15% off. If you payed the full price, you can contact Logos and they'll refund you the difference.

"The Christian way of life isn't so much an assignment to be performed, as a gift to be received."  Wilfrid Stinissen

Mac Pro OS 10.9.

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 4:10 PM

I received a 20% discount on the Original Languages base-package. Plus I had a coupon, so I got a discount on the Catholic Foundations package. So the bargaining went well. Otherwise I wouldn't have bought anything. I have no money left now after my initial buy (that included some more items: the Hermeneia upgrade (3 vols.) and the Believers commentary on Proverbs, Church Origins -collection (10 vols) of which many useless). Logos products are so expensive, and I live largely on state aid.

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 33842
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 6:02 PM

Unix:
negative review where Brown is accused to be a structuralist?

No, and I have trouble viewing Brown as a structuralist. In fact, I find it difficult to think of "structuralist" as a negative whether I think of it as a term coming out of folklore (Propp), linguistics (Saussure), anthropology (Lévi-Strauss) ... Structuralism is no longer "cutting edge" academia but it still provides some useful insights especially in Biblical narratology.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 1523
Josh | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 8:12 PM

I just watched a fantastic debate between Dr. Mark Hitchcock and Hank Hanegraaff. They debated over the date of Revelation - Hitchcock for a 95AD date and Hanegraff for a pre-70AD date. It was most professional and filled with great information. Both men did a good job, but Mark certainly stole the show.

Debate on the Date of Revelation (on Vimeo):

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Apr 22 2012 8:44 PM

Josh:
I just watched a fantastic debate between Dr. Mark Hitchcock and Hank Hanegraaff. They debated over the date of Revelation - Hitchcock for a 95AD date and Hanegraff for a pre-70AD date. It was most professional and filled with great information. Both men did a good job, but Mark certainly stole the show.

Both are incorrect since the Apocalypse was written 132-35.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 12:43 AM

George Somsel:

Both are incorrect since the Apocalypse was written 132-35.

 

I wanted to stay out of it but George has a gift and always draws me in (or in the words of Michael Corleone: "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in")

The quote above (from George not Corleone) is indeed the proof that the surest way to promote wild and unsubstantiated speculations is to announce them with great boldness and unflinching certainly. 

Reading the above, I was almost tempted to believe that someone found new archaeological evidence (like a dedication of the original autograph with a date stamp or an ATM receipt) or a lost but now authenticated testimony of an eye witness asserting that Apocalypse was written around 132-35.

Who needs internal evidence (clues from Revelation itself that are matched with historical facts from the reigns of likely emperors such as   Claudius (41–54), Nero (54–68), the later years of Domitian (81–96), or the reign of Trajan (98–117) and external evidence (testimony of the church fathers) when you can randomly assign a date?

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 1:41 AM

I'll have to wait still a few days for the overseas delivery. But I took a look now on Amazon in the preview. It has mid-lengthy notes, and I got annoyed (again) over two things:

  1. That it has references to the Apocalypse
  2. That You people are talking so much about Apocalypse. Apocalypse got nothing to do with the Gospel according to Jn.

Unix:
There's 10 pages on the Johannine Church in: http://www.logos.com/product/3939/a-history-of-the-first-christians I bought that one on thursday 3 days ago, waiting for the base package-package to arrive on DVD
That volume was enticing, so I put it in my wish list I can't afford to buy it immediately, I'll have to wait AT LEAST 4 weeks.
Rosie Perera:
There's a section on "The Johannine Sect" in the Sheffield New Testament Study Guide: John.
I really hate the NIV. It's Gnostic, see: http://www.christianforums.com/t7645280-post60345676/#post60345676
Rosie Perera:
There's also a section on "The History of John’s Church" in the NIV Application Commentary volume on 1-3 John.

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 1523
Josh | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 2:40 AM

George Somsel:

Josh:
I just watched a fantastic debate between Dr. Mark Hitchcock and Hank Hanegraaff. They debated over the date of Revelation - Hitchcock for a 95AD date and Hanegraff for a pre-70AD date. It was most professional and filled with great information. Both men did a good job, but Mark certainly stole the show.

Both are incorrect since the Apocalypse was written 132-35.

Hi George,

Dr. Mark Hitchcock has released his full doctoral dissertation on this very subject. HERE is the pdf (you might need to right-click and Save As).

It contains a ton of scholarly research on just this one subject. However, I'm guessing you'd never actually give it the time of day because you've already dogmatically subscribed to a later date.

Have a nice day. Smile

 

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 2:55 AM

Alain Maashe:

Who needs internal evidence (clues from Revelation itself that are matched with historical facts from the reigns of likely emperors such as   Claudius (41–54), Nero (54–68), the later years of Domitian (81–96), or the reign of Trajan (98–117) and external evidence (testimony of the church fathers) when you can randomly assign a date?

That conclusion is drawn from internal evidence in the Apocalypse.  There is no correlation to the reigns of any of the Roman Emperors since it has been incorrectly assumed that Rome is the main subject of particularly Re 13.  It is not the Roman Empire nor the Emperors who are there under consideration but rather the kingdoms of the world in general in the same fashion as Daniel discusses the kingdoms from Nineveh through Antiochus Epiphanes in the form of animals.  Chapter 14 deals with the destruction of Jerusalem and Judeah-Samaria noting that the blood flowed for a distance of ~200 mi with the center in the Mt Zion.  The spread of the gospel throughout the entire Roman Empire is signified by the dimensions of the perfect cube of the New Jerusalem (like the Holy of Holies) which measures ~1500 mi on a side.  The date of 132-135 is derived from the calling of Jesus "the morning star."  This was an ascription assigned by Akiba to bar Kochba and was intended as a messianic title.  Your problem, Alain, is that you think you know much more than you really do.  You may know the traditional interpretations, but you have no understanding of the book itself (and that is not simply regarding the Apocalypse).

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 3:15 AM

You sound more convincing than the others on that T.

SO, now that we are done with that, let's focus on the OP and title of this thread, the time around AD70-90. If the Johannite Church would have disappeared after the author of the Gospel died, how come the Gospel according to Jn was preserved? I bet the Johannite Church was alive until AD90.

George Somsel:
The date of 132-135 is derived from the calling of Jesus "the morning star."  This was an ascription assigned by Akiba to bar Kochba and was intended as a messianic title.

I'm sure it's a great volume, so placed a pre-order on it. It'll prove great to be able to do searches in it, that's important in a T where there's limited litterature issued (Jn Church). Interesting also that Melito was somewhat early. No doubt he was read in ancient times, otherwise I don't think any manuscript would have been preserved.

MJ. Smith:
Melito in the Popular Patristics series is heavily Johannine. We just need to get it out of pre-pub.

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 645
Dean J | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 5:12 AM

Josh:

I just watched a fantastic debate between Dr. Mark Hitchcock and Hank Hanegraaff. They debated over the date of Revelation - Hitchcock for a 95AD date and Hanegraff for a pre-70AD date. It was most professional and filled with great information. Both men did a good job, but Mark certainly stole the show.

Debate on the Date of Revelation (on Vimeo):

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Thanks for posting these. As a firm believer in the Neronic date, I enjoy reading and listening to these kinds of discussions. 

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 2:47 PM

I cancelled the Church Origins -collection (which cointains http://www.logos.com/product/3939/a-history-of-the-first-christians) and I'm getting a refund on it.

Unix:
Church Origins -collection (10 vols) of which many useless).
Unix:
I got annoyed (again) over two things:

  1. That it has references to the Apocalypse

There's 10 pages on the Johannine Church in: http://www.logos.com/product/3939/a-history-of-the-first-christians I bought that one on thursday 3 days ago, waiting for the base package-package to arrive on DVD


I don't like the NET Bible all that much, but I'll check that dictionary entry!
MJ. Smith:

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 2875
David Ames | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 5:34 PM

EDIT: redundant

Posts 2875
David Ames | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 5:45 PM

Unix:

I canceled the Church Origins -collection (which contains http://www.logos.com/product/3939/a-history-of-the-first-christians) and I'm getting a refund on it.

(...)

I don't like the NET Bible all that much,

Yes, Very expensive set but thanks for pointing out the reference.

Also the Value of the NET is it's footnotes.

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 6:42 PM

George Somsel:

Alain Maashe:

Who needs internal evidence (clues from Revelation itself that are matched with historical facts from the reigns of likely emperors such as   Claudius (41–54), Nero (54–68), the later years of Domitian (81–96), or the reign of Trajan (98–117) and external evidence (testimony of the church fathers) when you can randomly assign a date?

 

That conclusion is drawn from internal evidence in the Apocalypse.  There is no correlation to the reigns of any of the Roman Emperors since it has been incorrectly assumed that Rome is the main subject of particularly Re 13.  It is not the Roman Empire nor the Emperors who are there under consideration but rather the kingdoms of the world in general in the same fashion as Daniel discusses the kingdoms from Nineveh through Antiochus Epiphanes in the form of animals.  Chapter 14 deals with the destruction of Jerusalem and Judeah-Samaria noting that the blood flowed for a distance of ~200 mi with the center in the Mt Zion.  The spread of the gospel throughout the entire Roman Empire is signified by the dimensions of the perfect cube of the New Jerusalem (like the Holy of Holies) which measures ~1500 mi on a side.  The date of 132-135 is derived from the calling of Jesus "the morning star."  This was an ascription assigned by Akiba to bar Kochba and was intended as a messianic title.  Your problem, Alain, is that you think you know much more than you really do.  You may know the traditional interpretations, but you have no understanding of the book itself (and that is not simply regarding the Apocalypse).

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

George,

I do not claim to be an expert on the book of Revelation (there is someone named George that is already making that claim). I do not claim that my knowledge of the subject matter is only second to John’s himself.  I do not claim to be one of the few persons alive who has the only real understanding of the book and its background.  I do not claim to know more than reputed scholars across the conservative/liberal spectrum who have researched and written extensively on the topic. I certainly do not dismiss their findings a single sentence.  Actually the more I learn the more I understand my limitations and my lack of knowledge.

However, what I have been taught and what I teach my students is that if you go against the overwhelming consensus and the accepted body of evidence (especially when the options are 2000 year old and have stood the test of time), you better have solid evidence to back up your arguments.  I also tell them something that you might find helpful: do not confuse your conclusions with evidence (unfortunately you presented a lot of the former and none of the latter).

Your link of the dating (132-135) with Akiba and bar Kochba is so farfetched that I was looking for a punch line (I am serious). This is recognized as an allusion to Num 24:17 (the same place where Akiba got his inspiration). It is also well known that Num 24:17 was interpreted messianic ally well before the 2nd century and also was included in messianic proof-texts used in pre-Christian Judaism.

Feel free to correct me on that and show the legion of scholars that concur with you, this might help me get acquainted with more developed arguments than what you have presented so far

Maybe, just maybe there is a reason why experts in the field have not embraced your view on the background and dating on Revelation. It is not just be because they do not understand the book as well as you

Posts 1649
Room4more | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 6:55 PM

ding. ding    Left Hug ...  Right Hug...............got my popcorn.......

DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.

Posts 1523
Josh | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Apr 23 2012 7:28 PM

Dean053:

Josh:

I just watched a fantastic debate between Dr. Mark Hitchcock and Hank Hanegraaff. They debated over the date of Revelation - Hitchcock for a 95AD date and Hanegraff for a pre-70AD date. It was most professional and filled with great information. Both men did a good job, but Mark certainly stole the show.

Debate on the Date of Revelation (on Vimeo):

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Thanks for posting these. As a firm believer in the Neronic date, I enjoy reading and listening to these kinds of discussions. 

No problem.

 

Page 2 of 3 (55 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next > | RSS