Day 1. We had some excellent papers to start off the first day of the colloquium.
John Ashton commenced the precedings with a well-written look at some of the historical traditions behind the connections between the Gospel of John and the apocalyptic genre. I find it fascinating that this sort of discussion always brings us to 1 Enoch. There are different views regarding what we do with any sort of connection between 1 Enoch and John, but the two texts have surprising similarities. One of the other questions that arises is whether the Fourth Evangelist is consciously replicating an apocalyptic structure or if such a structure was just part of his worldview.
Judith Lieu gave the next paper and discussed the issues of text and authority. She raised some excellent questions about writings in apocalypses (such as heavenly tablets) and the relationship these writings have with the written apocalypse. In relation to John, this comes to a head specifically in 20:30-31 and 21:24-25. The Gospel is a book and we find a reference to other books whether actually written or not. There are no conclusions here, but we are again left with some interesting connections between John and apocalypses.
April DeConick's paper addressed the relationship with the Gospel and Gnosticism. Discussion centered around John 8:44 and the Father of lies and gave us plenty to think about and discuss.
Tomorrow will be more papers. We begin with Ian Boxall and the relationship between the Gospel and Revelation.