Does not your view assume that the theology of the evangelist was going to be constructed in progress by himself, while he writes? I don't believe. The text is so much theological from first to last verse, that it can only explain a theology already formed.Nasruddin wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:36 amIt only has no distinction from our third party viewpoint, knowing what we already think we can interprete from the later passages in the Gospel. But at the scene at the Jordan these later revelations had not yet been given, so there is a clear distinction for the audience at this point between who Jesus was and who his father was.
The readers knew in advance that their Fourth-Gospel Jesus was one with the Father. In addition, the presence of the original Incipit where the Light was mentioned, and not the Word, makes it clear that the theology was there even before the rest of the gospel. The Light was God.
It seems to me that John is addressing the curiosity of the Jews about Jesus, as opposed to the curiosity by the same Jews that was concerned in a first time about him.
John the Baptist does not indicate that he is trying to reveal any new information about the God/Spirit that he claims directs his actions. It is the identity of an as yet unknown person (Jesus) that is the focus of John's mission.
Hence the Jews are moved to ask about the true identity of Jesus, as opposed to be moved to ask about the true identity of John.
Which means that John is still an adorer of YHWH. The only difference between him and the other adorers of YHWH is that he knows that the Son of an alien God has just descended on the earth.