tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post3672684879150226245..comments2023-09-07T12:03:43.350-07:00Comments on Theological Sushi: The Pentateuchal Framework and Christology of the Fourth GospelB. C. Hodgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02828477115799852133noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post-73572154513144173772013-06-22T14:30:36.523-07:002013-06-22T14:30:36.523-07:00I think the Christology of John is taught in the o...I think the Christology of John is taught in the other Gospels, so Christ's presentation of Himself as YHWH is clearly what He taught in His earthly ministry. However, whether the I AM sayings are a part of the Spirit's framing of that teaching in that way through John, or is a part what Christ literally said would make little difference to me in terms of what is true concerning Christ's witness to Himself.<br />However, it seems very clear that one of the reasons Christ is crucified and hated by the Jewish leaders is His claim to be the divine Messiah, so the picture in John is historical, even if not literal. <br />But as I said before, I would have no reason to believe it wasn't also literally what Christ said in His earthly ministry.B. C. Hodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02828477115799852133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post-38419712072699263862013-06-22T03:33:00.116-07:002013-06-22T03:33:00.116-07:00*not to believe Jesus actually said them?*not to believe Jesus actually said them?Ben Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13320578490724889835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post-73572644347707146922013-06-22T03:32:03.402-07:002013-06-22T03:32:03.402-07:00Okay. So take the 'I am' sayings - are you...Okay. So take the 'I am' sayings - are you basically saying that you don't see it as a problem if they are examples of post-resurrection theologizing, but you see no reason to be believe Jesus actually said them?Ben Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13320578490724889835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post-34707087285439710872013-06-21T14:54:18.020-07:002013-06-21T14:54:18.020-07:00I would take them all as historical, simply becaus...I would take them all as historical, simply because I don't have any reason to say that they are not. It isn't necessary, of course, to believe they are historical in the sense that Jesus said them on earth, simply because the presentation of Christ is from the Spirit of Christ, and is therefore, an anthology of Christ's witness to Himself anyway. But I would take what is said therein as historical, covering teachings or emphases that the Synoptic witness either doesn't cover or moves over quickly.<br /><br />I'll give you an example. John records the conversation about Christ speaking of His body as the temple that He will raise up in three days. That conversation is nowhere to be found in the Synoptics, so one might think John just filled that in, according to ancient practice, to present Jesus as the Word who is tabernacled among men.<br />However, in Matthew 26:61 // Mark 14:58, the Jewish leaders allude to the conversation. <br />Now, it could be that John just incorporates this tradition into his Gospel, but it's ironic that it happens to fit into the entire theology and framework with which John is arguing. It is also interesting that he doesn't change the terminology from temple to tabernacle to fit his Pentateuchal theme better. There are quite a few instances like this that would give me pause in suggesting that John's presentation of Christ is not actually from the mouth of Christ in His earthly ministry; but, again, it isn't necessary to see the text as truly the words of Christ that paint a self portrait of Christ as YHWH of the Pentateuch.B. C. Hodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02828477115799852133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6376955256463224749.post-59114709894409816152013-06-21T08:10:07.025-07:002013-06-21T08:10:07.025-07:00Just out of interest, how historical (in the '...Just out of interest, how historical (in the 'real-time' sense of the word) do you take Jesus' speeches in John's gospel to be?Ben Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13320578490724889835noreply@blogger.com