Name: Stephen T. Adair Student ID Number: 2060329784 Email Address: [email protected]Course Name: The Gospel of John Course Number: NT 634 ISR103 Assignment Number: Assignment 4 Audio Number: N/A Project Number: N/A Date of seminar (if applicable): N/A Course instructor for seminar (if applicable): Location of seminar (if applicable): N/A **The Module Number, Audio Number (if applicable), and Project Number (if applicable) must be accurate in order to process the lesson and record the grade. The correct information is stated in the Course Study Guide. --------------------------------------------------------------- Study Guide Code/Date/Version found on the first page of the Study Guide: 20090910 Degree Program: MA in Biblical Studies Address: PO Box 2132 City: Mossel Bay State: Western Cape Zip: 6500 Country: South Africa Telephone: +27 44 690 5133 --------------------End of Coversheet-------------------- PLEASE TYPE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS LESSON SUBMISSION AS THEY APPEAR IN YOUR STUDY GUIDE HERE
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
found on the first page of the Study Guide: 20090910
Degree Program: MA in Biblical Studies
Address: PO Box 2132
City: Mossel Bay
State: Western Cape
Zip: 6500
Country: South Africa
Telephone: +27 44 690 5133
--------------------End of Coversheet--------------------
PLEASE TYPE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS LESSON SUBMISSION AS
THEY APPEAR IN YOUR STUDY GUIDE HERE
Page 2 of 33
Write a research paper of ca. 4000 words, including introduction and conclusion (your footnotes and bibliography are excluded from the word count), on one of the following questions:
(1) Why does John use “logos” for Jesus in the prologue? (Phillips 2006)
(2) What does “Lamb of God” mean in John 1:29? (Skinner 2004)
(3) Is there a “Cana-to-Cana” cycle? (Moloney 1979, Talbert 1970)
(4) What is Mary’s significance in John 2:1-11? (Matand Bulembat 2007)
(5) What is Jesus’ position to the temple in John 2:13-25? (Coloe 2001, Um 2006)
(6) What is meant by “born of water and the Spirit” in John 3:5? (Wai-Yee, 2001)
(7) Does “World” in John 3:16 refer to Israel? (Botha/Rousseau 2005)
(8) Is John 4:1-42 patterned after a betrothal type scene? (McWhirter 2006)
(9) Does John 6:51-58 refer to the Eucharist or to Christology? (Menken 1997)
(10) Was 7:53-8:11 part of the original Gospel? (Watson 1999)
(11) Does John 14:6 exclude other religions from salvation? (Culpepper 2002)
(12) What are the “greater works” of John 14:12? (Köstenberger 1995)
(13) Does 14:31 make sense where it stands? (Bevan 2003)
(14) How does John 20:22 relate to Acts 2:1-4? (Hatina 1993)
(15) Does the term “the Jews” indicate that John is anti-Jewish? (Kierspel 2006)
(16) What is the purpose of the Gospel according to 20:30-31? (Carson 2005)
Follow this general outline:
a) Describe the most important interpretations concerning the chosen topic (ca. 750 words).
b) Analyze relevant texts and questions related to the topic (ca. 2000-2500 words).
c) Critically evaluate the interpretations outlined at the beginning in light of your study (ca. 750 words).
Besides the textbooks, use the book/essay/article mentioned after the question (see bibliography for full reference) and at least another eight (8) scholarly sources, at least four of which must come from the bibliography in this study guide and at least two other works located through the ATLAReligion database.
Page 3 of 33
INTRODUCTION
John’s Gospel opens with an eloquent and succinct confession of the person of Jesus Christ.
Whilst the Synoptic Gospels begin their accounts either at Jesus birth1, or at the
commencement of His public ministry2, John begins his account in eternity past, portraying
Jesus as the “Λόγος”, the eternal word, through whom all things were created.
Thus, the Fourth Gospel is very different in style to the Synoptic Gospels. Barth commented
that this difference was that in the Synoptics Jesus Christ is depicted as the Son of God, but in
John, the Son of God is depicted as Jesus Christ3.
This paper seeks to explore John’s use of the term “Λόγος” within the prologue to the Fourth
Gospel. Linguistic and cultural aspects are briefly reviewed prior to a brief review and
discussion of key interpretations. Finally, conclusions are drawn on John’s intention in
identifying Jesus as the “Λόγος”.
LINGUISTIC DEFINITIONS
Linguistically five words are significant to John’s prologue. The first is the Greek word
Λόγος. However, two Hebrew words (אמר [ēmer] and דבר [dibra]) and their Aramaic
equivalents (מאמר [mēmra] and דבר [dābār]) are also of importance.
Λόγος
Λόγος carries several different meanings, including: word, speech, language, narrative,
statement, pronouncement, question, report, account, sermon, teaching, call, and sense4. The
1 As is the case in Matthew and Luke.
2 As is the case in Mark.
3 Tanner, K., “Karl Barth’s Christology”: in: Webster, J., “The Cambridge Companion to Karl Barth”,
Cambridge University Press, 2000, p131.
Page 4 of 33
root word (λεγ) provides means to gather, collect, select, report, or speak5. Λόγος should be
properly understood to refer to what is communicated, rather than the precise language used;
in other words, it refers more to the message itself than to the words employed to relay the
message.
Heraclitus influenced the meaning of the word through his philosophy of Λόγος as didactic
discourse or teaching6. Hence Λόγος may be understood to mean “rational consideration,
understanding or persuasion”7 rather than simple or unintelligible utterance.
(ēmer) אמר
The Hebrew word אמר is translated “word, saying, or speech”8. This word first appears in
Genesis, where God’s word is shown to be active in creation9 has a wide range of אמר .
meaning, and can be used of normal speech, but may also be used to describe authoritative
discourse, such as found in the prophetic formula “thus saith the Lord” frequently employed
to oracles of judgement10
.
In Aramaic, the Hebrew word אמר (ēmer) becomes מאמר (mēmra)11
.
(dābār) דבר
”is normally translated “speak דבר12
. It refers to what is said, to the actual “word” itself;
whereas ēmer is essentially oral the physical act of speaking13. Of particular interest is
4 Balz, H., Sxhneider, G., “Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament”, William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1990 (Electronic version from PC Study Bible Version 5; Biblesoft, 1988-2007 -
note page numbers not available with this product). 5 Ibid.
6 Brown, C., “New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology”, Volume 3, Paternoster
Press, 1986, p1081. 7 Kittle, G., Friedrich, G., Bromiley, “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament”, Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1989 (Libronix Electronic Version; page numbers not available). 8 VanGemeren, W. A., “New International Dictionary of Old Testament Words”, Volume 1,
Paternoster Press, 1997, p443. 9 For instance: Gen. 1:3 – “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.”
10 For example Ex. 4:22 (KJV) or as it appears in the NIV – “This is what the LORD says”.
11 Koehler, L., Baumgartner, W., “The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament”,
Koninklijke Brill NV, 1994-2000 (electronic version employed – no page numbers available with this
product)
Page 5 of 33
the theological significance of the association of dābār with God. Here, dābār can mean a
message from or about God, including a command14
, an ordinance or decree15
, a statute16
,
counsel, or even law17
(Torah)18
.
In Aramaic, the Hebrew דבר (dābār) word becomes דבר (dibra)19
.
CULTURAL BACKGROUND
Several attempts have been made to explain John’s description of Jesus as the Λόγος
by comparison with various cultural backgrounds prevalent at the time of writing. These
possible cultural influences may be summarised under six main categories, viz.:
Association of Λόγος with Gnosticism;
Association of Λόγος with Greek philosophy;
Association of Λόγος with the philosophy of Philo;
Association of Λόγος with Wisdom in the Wisdom Literature;
Association of Λόγος with the Old Testament “Word of God”;
Association of Λόγος with the Jewish Targums.
12
VanGemeren, W. A., “New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis”,
Volume 1, Paternoster Press, 1997, pp912-3. 13
Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., White, W. “Vine's complete expository dictionary of Old and New
Testament words”, Thomas Nelson, 1996, pp239-240. 14
For example, Num. 15:31 15
For example, Psalm 147:19. 16
For example, Zec. 1:1-6. 17
For example Is. 1:10. 18
VanGemeren, W. A., “New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis”,
Volume 1, Paternoster Press, 1997, pp912-3. 19
Ibid.
Page 6 of 33
Association of Λόγος with Gnosticism
Bultmann contrasted John’s Gospel with the Synoptics, concluding that the New Testament
(outwith the Gospel of John, and a few Pauline references) is very restrained in claiming that
Jesus was the Son of God20
. Bultmann noted that the Synoptics portray Jesus as the Son of
God by virtue of the “divine power and authority” evident in His ministry, and asserted that
ascribing Jesus the title “Son of God” was consistent with Jewish perceptions of David and
the prophets.21
Bultmann postulated that the Fourth Gospel was heavily influenced by Gnostic or Hellenistic
thought which effectively mythologized the person of Christ. Moreover, Bultmann maintained
that “the Λόγος” was a Gnostic term associated with the Hellenistic myth of pre-existence22
.
This view was predicated upon Bultmann’s presupposition that scripture is essentially
mythological in character23
. Bultmann held that the New Testament authors in general
and the author of the Fourth Gospel in particular, used mythological language to
express their view of Christ, and the task of the modern interpreter is strip the
mythology from the true message24
. Bultmann’s “dethmythologising” of the New
Testament led him to reject the virgin birth of Christ25
, deny the miracles that He
performed26
and deny the reality of His resurrection27
.
Bultmann, therefore, dismisses the idea of Jesus’ pre-existence simply because to his
modern understanding this concept is unbelievable, and thus must of necessity belong
20
Bultmann, R. K., “Theology of the New Testament”, Baylor University Press, 2007, p129. 21
Bultmann, R. K., pp130-131. 22
Bultmann, R. K., p132. 23
Bultmann, R., “New Testament and Mythology”, Fortress Press, 1984, p1. 24
Bultmann used the term “Kerygma” to refer to the central core of the message which he regarded as
trustworthy. In holding to this way of thinking, Bultmann places considerably more trust in his own
presuppositions of the text and in “modern understanding” than he does in the New Testament text
itself. For a fuller discussion of this limitation in Bultmann’s approach, see Grant, R. M., Tracy, D. “A
Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible”, 2nd Ed., Fortress Press, 1984, p45. 25
Bultmann, R. “Jesus Christ and Mythology”, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1957, p16. 26
Ibid, p61. 27
Bultmann denied that the resurrection was an historical event, but regarded it as an eschatological or
spiritual event. Ibid, p32.
Page 7 of 33
to the realm of myth. This leads Bultmann to the conclusion that in referring to Jesus
as the Λόγος, John is simply borrowing the mythological terminology of his time, which was
heavily influenced by Gnosticism. Bultmann’s theory was comprehensively repudiated by
Evans, who concluded that the antecedents of John’s Λόγος theology are most likely found in
Old Testament scriptures and the various “interpretative speculations that accompanied
them”28
.
Moreover, it is extremely unlikely that the author of the Fourth Gospel could have held
Gnostic views, as he appears to challenge Gnostic thinking emphatically with his assertion
that “the Word became flesh”29
. As this assertion is anathema to the Gnostic, it may be
concluded that Bultmann’s argument is untenable.
Association of Λόγος with Greek philosophy
The concept of the Λόγος first appears in Greek thought through the philosophy of
Heraclitus30
, who regarded the Λόγος as the universal reason that animates and rules the
world31
.
The Λόγος concept was later developed by the Stoics32
, who associated the Λόγος with God.
For them the Λόγος was the power that put sense into the world, maintaining order in
creation rather than chaos33
. They also referred to the seminal logos, (“λόγος
28
Evans, C. A., “Word and glory: on the exegetical and theological background of John's prologue”,
Volume 89 of Journal for the study of the New Testament, Continuum International Publishing Group,
1993, pp75-76 and pp194-199. 29
John 1:1. 30
Heraclitus lived in Ephesus ca. 535-475 BC. 31
“The Catholic Encyclopaedia”, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09328a.htm 32
A Greek philosophical school found in Athens by Zeno of Citium ca. 300BC. 33
Barclay, W., “The Daily Study Bible: The Gospel of John – Volume 1”, The Saint Andrews Press,
1975, p35.
Page 8 of 33
σπέρματικος”), which constituted the seed of λόγος, sown in each human being, giving
mankind an implicit notion of the divine34.
There has been a long held view that there is a strong association between John’s use of the
Greek term Λόγος and Greek philosophy, particularly that of the Stoics35
. This argument
holds that John wrote his gospel in order to engage a Greek, rather than a Jewish, audience36
.
Whilst there are striking similarities between the Greek concept of the Λόγος and the
portrayal of Christ in the Fourth Gospel, there are also some equally striking differences. For
instance, Greek thought never regarded the Λόγος as personal, but rather as an impersonal
force or power37
. But in the Fourth Gospel, the Λόγος became flesh and dwelt among us38
.
Noting both similarities and differences in the Greek and Johannine use of Λόγος. F. F.
Bruce noted that “it is not in Greek philosophical usage, however, that the background
of John’s thought and language should be sought….The true background to John’s
thought and language is found not in Greek philosophy but in Hebrew revelation.”39
Association of Λόγος with the philosophy of Philo
Philo was a Hellenized Jew living in Alexandria ca 20 BC - 50 AD, who fused Jewish
theology and Greek philosophy. Philo followed Plato in distinguishing between God’s perfect
idea and imperfect matter, and used the term Λόγος to refer to an intermediary divine being or
demiurge.
34
Kärkkäinen, V. M., “An Introduction to the Theology of Religions: Biblical, Historical, and
VanGemeren, W. A., “New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and
Exegesis”, Volume 1, Paternoster Press, 1997.
Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., White, W. “Vine's complete expository dictionary of Old
and New Testament words”, Thomas Nelson, 1996.
Webster, J., “The Cambridge Companion to Karl Barth”, Cambridge University Press,
2000.
Page 28 of 33
APPENDIX 1: DODD’S COMPARISON OF JOHN’S PROLOGUE WITH THE WRITINGS OF PHILO
The following comparison of the prologue to the Fourth Gospel and Philo has been reproduced from
Dodd’s original work1, expanded to include translations from the Greek using Yonge’s translation of
Philo2 and Ronning’s notes of Dodd’s work
3.
Gospel of John Philo
VEn avrch/| h=n o` lo,goj
In the beginning was the Word (1:1)
Before creation, God conceived in His mind the κόσμος νοητός, which is His λόγος (On Creation of the World, 24).
o` lo,goj h=n pro.j to.n qeo,n
the Word was with God (1:1)
God sent forth His younger son, the κόσμος αίσθητος, but kept the elder, the κόσμος νοητός (λόγος), παρ’ έαυτῷ (That God is Unchangeable, 31).
qeo.j h=n o lo,goj
The Word was God (1:1)
The anarthrous θεός may be used of the λόγος, while ό θεός is reserved for the Self-existent (On Dreams, 1. 228-30).
pa,nta diV auvtou/ evge,neto
All things were made by him (1:3)
God is the αίτιος ὑφ γέγονεν, the λόγος is ὃργανον δί οΰ (On the Cherubim, I27).
God is the cause of creation, while the λόγος is the instrument through
which it is framed
evn auvtw/| zwh. h=n
In him was life (1:4)
Dodd found no direct correlation, but pointed to Philo’s interpretation of the command to flee to the cities of refuge as a command to flee to “highest word of God, which is the fountain of
wisdom, in order that by drinking of that stream he may find
everlasting life instead of death” (On Flight & Finding, 97).
Dodd also pointed to Philo’s statement “that a man who lives in an
irrational manner [ἀλόγως] is separated from the life of God” (On the Posterity of Cain. 68-9).
Commenting on Ex. 24:10, which in the LXX says “they saw the place where the God of Israel stood”, Philo says that those that follow Moses as their guide will see this place, for it is natural for them to