>Dear B-Greeks,
>
>I don't see an important difference between Cindy's view that
>EIMI + PROS signifies parts of a complex unity and the other view
>(Rolf's?) that it signifies separation. The notion of parts of a whole,
>obviously, supports both views, i.e. there are "parts" and they
>comprise a "whole". Emphasizing one or the other aspect does not
>negate the other.
>
>The best word for the whole in Jn 1:1 is *syzygy*.
>
>Looking elsewhere in According to John for a comparable construction
>will probably be fruitless, because the incarnation places Jesus outside
>the syzygy (in our world), i.e. *while* walking the Earth, he is not PROS
>TON QEON.
I find the first paragraph of this post helpful. However, I cannot say
that for the remainder of this post. First, in what sense is John 1:1 a
syzygy? Is this some sort of biological analogy for Will? If so, in
what sense?
Second, the Johannine view of reality may be somewhat different from
Will's. In what sense was Jesus PROS TON QEON prior to the Incarnation?
That has been the topic of considerable debate/discussion in the recent
threads on John 1.
Furthermore, how does the Johannine narrative world represent Jesus'
relationship with the Father? Obviously, Jesus has come from "outside"
the narrative world of the Gospel; he has descended. And, he is going
to ascend to the Father via crucifixion/exaltation. However, in John's
presentation, Jesus, by a variety of narrative techniques, lives on the
boundary of the narrative world in union with the Father (beyond that
world).
Note:
5:17, esp hO PATHR MOU hEWS ARATI ERGAZETAI KAGW ERGAZOMAI
5:19, esp OU DUNATAI hO hUIOS POIEIN AF hEAUTOU OUDEN EAN MH TI BLEPHi
TON PATERA POIOUNTA
7:29, esp EGW OIDA AUTON, hOTI PAR AUTOU EIMI KAKEINOS ME APESTEILEN
8:16, esp hH KRISIS hH EMH ALHQINH, hOTI MONOS OUK EIMI, ALL EGW KAI hO
PEMPSAS ME PATHR
8:19, esp EI EME HiDEITE, KAI TON PATERA MOU AN HiDEITE
8:23, esp hUMEIS EK TOUTOU TOU KOSMOU ESTE, EGW OUK EIMI EKTOU KOSMOU
TOUTOU.
8:26, esp KAGW hO HKOUSA PAR AUTOU TAUTA LALW EIS TON KOSMON
8:29, esp hO PEMPSAS ME MET EMOU ESTIN. OUK AFHKEN ME MONON
16:32, esp KAI OUK EIMI MONOS, hOTI hOPATHR MET EMOU
In John 17, Jesus prays as if he no longer is a part of the narrative
world; it is as if he already has returned to the Father. His
relationship with the disciples, his presence with them is described as
in past time. Yet, he still is in the narrative world of the Gospel. In
John 17, the dilemna of Jesus' whereabouts, a constant source of dramatic
irony throughout the Gospel, reaches its highest level of tension outside
the Prologue.
So, it appears to me that Will's cavalier statement that Jesus is not
PROS TON QEON in the Gospel greatly oversimplifies the rather complex
narrative structures of the Johannine portrait.
David Perkins
David W. Perkins
Good Shepherd Episcopal Church
PO Box 2172/806 Concordia
Vidalia, LA 71373
318 336-7405
dwperk@mail.iamerica.net