NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion - Volume 60, Issue 1, 2006

This contribution is written on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the foundation of the Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift in 1946. It sketches the vicissitudes of the journal over this period, the policy of the editorial board, the relationship to the more ‘popular’ journal Vox Theologica, and the importance of Forschungsberichte and reviews of theological literature. The Dutch Theological Journal, originally, was a joint venture of the theological faculties of the state universities of Leiden, Groningen, Utrecht and Amsterdam. In the 1990s the theological faculties of Brussels and the Free University in Amsterdam joined the editorial board. It has always been an ‘academic’ journal to which scholars from the various branches of theology contributed. Special importance has been accorded – both by editors and readers – to the reviews. Especially in its early decades, the editors thought it to be the leading Dutch theological journal and wanted to maintain a high level of scholarship, which could lead to devastating critiques of books which in their view did not meet the required standards.

The Gnostics claimed for themselves a special knowledge of God. They believed that the creator of heaven and earth was not identical with the supreme deity. This article examines the language that the Gnostics used to speak about the supreme God. One of the most frequent expressions applied to God was ‘The One Who Is’ or ‘You Who Are’: we will ask about the possible origins of these expressions in Exodus 3:13-14 and Platonic philosophy. The language of negation was another way to speak about the unspeakable. To the same purpose, the Gnostics frequently resorted to symbols, puzzles, paradoxes, or even a series of virtually meaningless sounds.

In this article it is argued that the idea of the ‘Good’ presupposes that it is taken in an absolute, contentless sense. In line with G.E. Moore’s open question argument, a position is adopted that envisages ‘good’ as transcending any description or intuition. The idea of the Good, it is further argued, manifests itself phenomenologically in the experience of the question of the Good. This question cannot be matched with any definite answers. As an example, the tragedy of Hitlerism and its outcome (shoah) are referred to. Any imaginable response to the question of the good always comes too late. It is suggested that philosophical attempts at answering this question should render themselves to the destruction of the prevailing moral traditions. It is also suggested that readiness to self destruction in confrontation with the question of the good, is a criterion for the viability of those traditions.

The Acts of John contains two autobiographical speeches of the apostle in which he narrates his call as Jesus’ disciple. The first account is found in the context of a gospel narrative (cc. 88-105), which concentrates on the apostle’s exclusive experiences about his Master. Jesus appears in multiple forms, a phenomenon that has been labelled ‘polymorphy’ by previous scholarship. This article proposes that the epistemology of the text originates from Plato’s Symposium, especially the famous Diotima-speech. The prayer of John (cc. 113-114) gives another version of his commission, and reflects ascetic views. It will be suggested that the epistemology of both passages is related to the emergence of Neo-Platonism and they were added to the Acts of John (originating from Asia Minor) in Alexandria at the end of the AD second century.