One view of the Fourth Gospel's dating is given by Robert Mounce:
"More recently, the traditional arguments for a late date have been countered by the view that it must have been written prior to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. For John not to have mentioned this incredibly important event of Jewish history is held to be highly improbable. Carson suggests AD 80– 85 as a reasonable date."
Mounce, Robert H. John (The Expositor's Bible Commentary) (Kindle Location 1233-1236). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
I am more convinced by the late dating of GJohn, but I could accept D.A. Carson's ca. 85 CE dating--it is feasible, even if the date is not correct. In a fairly recent work, Stanley Porter also offers reasons why the omission of Jerusalem's temple destruction is not the coup de grĂ¢ce for a late date.
Now concerning Poimandres (part of the Hermetic literature), yes, some themes might be similar to GJohn--even some of the language. But that does not prove GJohn uses Poimandres as a polemical foil. Nor do the surface commonalities between GJohn and Poimandres demonstrate textual dependence since the subjects discussed in both works were customarily featured in the ancient world. Compare the DSS and Gnostic works.
As for dating GJohn or any other ancient document, historians don't merely rely on style. NT scholars (for example) use internal and external evidence to determine when a document might have been written. So it is not simply a matter of style, but historians look for corroboration and they explore intertextuality inter alia. There is so much to historical spadework and dating things that are written: the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for ecclesiastical history is quite enlightening.
13 comments:
You say,
"Nor do the surface commonalities between GJohn and Poimandres demonstrate textual dependence since the subjects discussed in both works were customarily featured in the ancient world."
The language is of interest as much as the subject - other examples?
I primarily had DSS works and Gnostic writings in mind. Most Johannine commentaries supply numerous examples of works that have themes resembling the Johannine themes.
See page 290 of this work: https://books.google.com/books?id=UFCvAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA290&lpg=PA290&dq=poimandres+and+gospel+of+john+similarities&source=bl&ots=q80jmOmFgP&sig=U6Znckti--FR74C6CBKVHBmzUAU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRlaCctqvcAhXC21MKHdsNAuEQ6AEwDnoECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=poimandres%20and%20gospel%20of%20john%20similarities&f=false
See page 7ff of this book: https://books.google.com/books?id=GJx8YIx59IEC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=poimandres+and+gospel+of+john+similarities&source=bl&ots=-t5SL_4QaY&sig=xgrVR39BTKZP9DQ5WIdGdZZTllU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRlaCctqvcAhXC21MKHdsNAuEQ6AEwEXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=poimandres%20and%20gospel%20of%20john%20similarities&f=false
I believe the latter work by Hera was originally a dissertation which is online for free.
A discussion of Johannine dualism and other kinds from the ancient world: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/Ladd_Johannine.html
"The scrolls showed that the dualism of the Fourth Gospel has nothing to do with Gnosis but is, rather, Palestinian in origin."
Can one separate like this?
Scholars usually think Gnosticism is a later development anyway. At most, there was probably incipient Gnosticism in the first century and it seems to have been a deviant heresy, departing from Judeo-Christian belief. So John's dualism is likely Palestinian, and most certainly not platonic or Gnostic.
Terms need to be more specific. Not gnosticism but rather Hermeticism.
Could you clarify your point? I'm not sure what you're addressing; will check the messages later in the evening (EST).
Hermeticism is dated to pre-first century.
Here is what I wrote in my book about Tertullian, based on a number of Gnosticism books:
[Petr] Pokorny is no doubt correct when he observes that the evidence for a first century [CE] form of Gnosticism is not “unequivocally attested.” But we can surmise that an incipient form of Gnosticism probably obtained in the first century in view of the data contained in John’s Gospel and the Pauline Epistles. See Petr Pokorny, Colossians: A Commentary (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991), 117.
But see https://books.google.com/books?id=-_ZNUYnnPIMC&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=incipient+gnosticism+first+century&source=bl&ots=2yW0IwVp4H&sig=Ao_Ddc-u-iQ5V18J9ng9ndqm_ws&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiC3qW7xbPcAhUkgK0KHe5dDWc4ChDoAQhaMAg#v=onepage&q=incipient%20gnosticism%20first%20century&f=false
He doesn't like "incipient Gnosticism" or "proto-Gnostic as descriptors of the first century situation.
Hermeticism possibly dates to pre-first century at the earliest; but some prefer a first century CE date. It's hard to be dogmatic.
I agree that we cannot be dogmatic but their does seem to be a number of scholars who now think that the term "Gnostic" as a pigeon hole is misleading. When one points out that the early church fathers argue against "gnosticism" one has to first recognize exactly which type of writing they are combating. Probably contemporary.
It would be useful to know what lines of thinking and evidence indicated that GJohn should be no earlier that 85CE?
I agree that a reevaluation of Gnosticism has occurred. As for the fathers, most of the teachings they're combating are clear to me. Read Irenaeus and Hippolytus: also check out Tatian and Tertullian. They're usually specific about their targets.
One thing influencing Carson's dating of GJohn is John's omission of the temple destruction. More later.
Here's a little more about the ca. 85 CE dating for GJohn. From the NIV study Bible that D.A. Carson edited:
Almost any date between about AD 55 and 95 is possible. None of the arguments for a more precise date is entirely convincing. But if we must suggest a date for when John wrote the Fourth Gospel, we may very tentatively advance AD 80–85. One of many reasons for this is to allow some time between the writing of John’s Gospel and the writing of his three letters, which were probably written in the early 90s and which combat an incipient form of Gnosticism and respond in part to a Gnostic misunderstanding of the Fourth Gospel (see Introduction to 1-3 John: Gnosticism).
Zondervan. The NIV Zondervan Study Bible, eBook: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message (Kindle Locations 242554-242556). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
Zondervan. The NIV Zondervan Study Bible, eBook: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message (Kindle Locations 242551-242554). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
See also https://www.jstor.org/stable/42611102
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/58821862.pdf
Post a Comment