The Drama of Christian Theology in the Gospel of John. David Suter Graduate Student, D University of Chicago. Christian Theology in the Gospel of John

Transcription

1 Christian Theology in the Gospel of John earlier. The one point which might be called an idiosyncrasy in his synthesis is the identification of the source stratum N (for "nomadic"), which might be compared with Eissfeldt's L, or Pfeiffer's S. However, despite the excellence of his presentation, so many opinions have been reported, then either accepted or rejected without demonstration in either case (since demonstration or disproof remains beyond our capabilities at present), that one is left with the uneasy feeling that there is remarkably little that we can be sure about in our efforts to reconstruct the history of Hebrew literature. As one reviewer of the German edition has said: "Die alttestamentliche Einleitungswissenschaft lebt starker denn je von Hypothesen... Wiirde man nur die Dinge notieren, die eine gewisse Einhelligkeit der heutigen Forschung zeigen, so miisste 'die Einleitung' aufein erstaunliches Minimum zusammenschrumpfen."19 And one cannot but feel considerable sympathy for Aage Bentzen's apology, in the Preface to the second edition of his introduction: "I admit that I very often find that Introductions say more than I think can be said on different subjects. " But handbooks are necessary, and it may be that so discerning a report as Fohrer's on the current state of research may result in progress toward certainty in a few of the many disputed areas of our work. 19 H. Breit, Lutherische Monatshefte, V (1966), 387. The Drama of Christian Theology in the Gospel of John David Suter Graduate Student, D University of Chicago History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel* by J. Louis Martyn is an interesting and important attempt to deal with the setting of the Fourth Gospel. Martyn makes no claim to dispel all of the mists which conceal that setting (p. xi), but rather he concentrates on the Jewish elements of the Gospel and seeks to illuminate for us the debate taking place between church and synagogue at the end of the first century. The results of this historical study lead the author to some conclusions regarding the use of christological titles in the theology of the Gospel ofjohn. The starting point of this study is a form-critical analysis of the healing narrative in John, chapter 9. Martyn points to the divergent character of traditions which John shares with the synoptic tradition, and specifically to the differences between the healing miracles in the Johannine and synoptic traditions (p. xxi). In chapter 9, the healing of the man born blind contains * J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (New York: Harper & Row, 1968). xxi + I68 pages. $7.oo. 275

2 The Journal of Religion the three elements of the healing miracle forml (the description of the illness, the healing, and the confirmation of the miracle either by demonstration of health or by description of the crowd's amazement); but verses 8 and 9, which contain the confirmation of the miracle, are also the beginning of a dramatic expansion2 of the traditional miracle story-an expansion in which, for a time, Jesus is allowed to disappear offstage. Martyn shows that the dramatic expansion is constructed according to the law of stage duality, which dictates that only two characters (or groups) may speak at one time,3 and he indicates that the expansion is most likely from the hand of the Evangelist, since Martyn finds a relationship between the accents struck in the expansion and those found in the discourses (p. xxi). We might note here that Martyn has reversed the focus of form criticism by using it to distinguish between traditional elements and composition in a Gospel in order to say something about the history and theology found in the Gospel rather than to separate the tradition into its original units. This technique was first called Redaktiohsgeschichte [redaction criticism] by Willi Marxen in his study of Mark.4 Martyn then develops the thesis that there are two levels to the drama in chapter 9-the einmalig (" once upon a time") level of the story about Jesus healing a blind beggar and a second level which is the "witness to Jesus' powerful presence in actual events experienced by the Johannine church" (p. io). He finds the clue to the two levels in 9:4a: "It is necessary for us to work the works of him who sent me, " (p. 7), which he renders following codex Vaticanus (B) and codex Bezae (D). The " us " refers to the Johannine church, and Martyn shows that the second level in the drama in chapter 9 tells the story of the exclusion from the synagogue (and reception in the church of John's community) of a Jew who confesses Jesus to be the Messiah. To confirm this position Martyn attempts to define the meaning of droouvvdywyos, a term found only in John, and to find its historical reference. The procedure used here is a good example of careful historical argument. Martyn lists the various requirements of a historical counterpart dictated by 9:22 and then reviews all of the possible correlates, rejecting all which do not fulfil his requirements. He argues convincingly that the historical correlate to John 9:22 is to be found in the twelfth benediction relating to the heretics in an early version of the Eighteen Benedictions, and that Berakoth 28b-29a indicates that this benediction against Christian heretics was enacted and promulgated by the Jamnia academy about A.D. 85 (p. 36). This correlate indicates that the 1 The reader is referred to Rudolf Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (New York, 1963), pp. 209 ff. 2 Martyn ascribes this insight to J. M. Thompson in "An Experiment in Translation," Expositor, 8th ser., XVI (1918), The reader is referred to Bu'ltmann, p. 188, who in turn cites Axel Olrik, "Gesetze der Volksdichtung," Zeitschriftfiir deutsches Altertum, LI (1909), I-12, and E. Fascher, Die formgeschichtliche Methode (Giessen, 1924), p Willi Marxen, Der Evangelist Markus, Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte des Evangeliums (Gottingen, 1956). 276

3 Christian Theology in the Gospel of John drama in chapter 9 can well represent the situation between church and synagogue in John's city. In Part II of his book, Martyn points out that the structure of chapters 5 and 7 is parallel to that of chapter 9.5 He then argues that the drama in chapters 5 and 7 is a two-level drama like the one in chapter 9. The einmalig level of that drama refers to Jesus, while the second level refers to Jewish attempts to try to put to death a Jewish-Christian preacher who continues to work among the Jews. The difference in the picture ofjesus' ministries in Jerusalem (Judea) and Galilee in John from that in the Synoptic Gospels lies not in the einmalig level (as a report of Jesus' actual trips to Judea) but in the second level. The journeys between Judea and Galilee represent the movement of the Jewish-Christian preacher between the Jewish quarter of his city (where he has most likely been excommunicated from the synagogue) and the gentile portion (p. 58). In thejewish quarter the Christian preacher would be subject to Jewish law, as Jesus is in Judea (p. 58, n. 94) ; but outside the Jewish quarter he is safe, as John represents Jesus in Galilee. The evidence for the two levels6 in chapters 5 and 7 is not so clear as in chapter 9 (where the remark about excommunication from the synagogue reveals the situation clearly to us). Martyn claims that 5:18 is a clue to the two levels (p. 54); however, one need only presuppose the postresurrection theology of the church to explain verse I8b. There are not two dramatic levels implicit in that verse. More germane to the argument is the interesting study of the charge 7rAdvos or Mesith [deceiver] (pp. 62 ff., cf. John 7:47 ff. and Matt. 27:62-66). Martyn suggests that TrAdvos [one who leads Israel astray to the worship of other gods] was a charge that was used against Jewish- Christian preachers who worked among the Jews during the Tannaitic epoch. Unless one assumes that Jesus himself advocated worship of a god alongside God (i.e., himself), this charge would not have been the historical charge against him; but it could have been leveled at a Jewish-Christian preacher in John's community. John 5: 18 would then reflect the theological basis for this charge, although it cannot by itself offer us a clue to the two dramatic levels. Martyn's study of the dramatis personae (pp. 69 ff.) in John's drama shows that the characters represent a strange combination of figures belonging to the einmalig level as well as figures belonging to John's time (e.g., " the chief priests and the Pharisees," pp ). All in all, the hypothesis that the second level in chapters 5 and 7 represents a Jewish-Christian preacher 6 Martyn wisely avoids using the parallel structures to argue that John, chapter 6, is out of place. He likewise avoids an attempt to make each part of chapters 5 and 7 correspond to 9. The varations (such as chapter 6) are just as important to his argument as the parallel structures are. 6 Martyn points out quite properly that he doubts that the author of John "was himself analytically conscious of what I have termed the two level drama, for his major concern in this regard was to bear witness to the essential integrity of the einmalig drama ofjesus' earthly life and the contemporary drama in which the Risen Lord acts through his servants" (p. 77; italics are Martyn's). 277

4 The Journal of Religion working among the Jews is a very possible means of understanding that dramatic passage. The hypothesis proves to be quite fruitful in the discussion of theological terms that follows Martyn's analysis of the two dramatic passages. It is interesting that Martyn overlooks one other possible clue to the two dramatic levels in chapters 5 and 7. That clue is the use of AV'Ev in 5: I8. Basically means "to loose." With reference to commandments, laws, and statements Av'a it means "to repeal, annul, abolish. "7 The phrase AV'Ev 7r oudfflarov does not appear elsewhere in the New Testament to give us a clue 5 to its use here, and Matt. I2:2 uses a clumsy expression, o3ik E'orv TrwTOLEv 4Ev aa/fldrw, to express the idea of breaking the sabbath. Does John 5: 18 refer to breaking the sabbath, as Martyn renders it (p. 54), or to abolishing the sabbath, as Arndt and Gingrich claim?8 Perhaps a study of Rabbinic materials would throw some illumination on this question; however, if 5: i8 refers to abolishing the sabbath, it would have possible implications for the relationship of the Jewish and Christian communities in John's city that would separate them by more than Martyn indicates in his study. Have the Christians erected a wall on their side of the divider Martyn shows was erected by the Jews, by abolishing the sabbath and holding worship only on Sunday? If so, this step would represent quite a step beyond Jewish Christianity. Once the two dramatic passages have been examined, Martyn proceeds to a discussion of the christological titles used in the passages and of their theo- logical significance in the Fourth Gopel. The fifth chapter of his book shows the same care for historical method that his study of dcroavvcdywyos in his second chapter did. He refuses to use early Christian sources directly as evidence for concepts present in ancientjudaism (p. 86). The issue at hand is a distinction between the Davidic Messiah (who is not characterized as a wonder worker in Jewish sources) and the Mosaic Prophet (who, as Martyn shows, is conceived of in a specific way as a miracle worker). Martyn criticizes Mowinckel for using the Gospel ofjohn as evidence for the association of the two figures in ancient Judaism (p. 86). The Christian gospel can be used directly as evidence only for Christian developments. Martyn cites evidence from ancient Judaism and John for the development of a " Mosaic Prophet- Messiah " (as distinct from a Davidic Messiah) as an influence in the Judaism with which John had to contend (pp. 99 ff.). The sixth chapter of History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel presents an analysis of John, chapter 6, designed to cast light on the Jewish-Christian debate (as seen from the Christian side) taking place in John's community. The presentation is fairly subtle in distinguishing between the reflected positions of several different groups. The major point of the chapter is the 7 William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich., I963), under Av'w 4. 8 Ibid. 278

5 Christian Theology in the Gospel of John claim that in the discussion between Nicodemus and Jesus and in chapter 6 of the Gospel John is saying that it is the election of God and not rabbinic midrash which determines the Messiah. Jesus may have done the deeds of the Mosaic Prophet-Messiah, and Nicodemus wants to demonstrate this by midrashic discussion. Jesus' replies proclaim that election and decision render midrash irrelevant (pp. I Io-i i). In John 6:27-34 the comparison between Moses and the Son of Man does not show how the latter figure is like Moses. To do so would be to follow the midrashic manner of determining the Messiah. John ignores this form of discussion and claims that God and not Moses authenticates this bread "which comes down from heaven" (6: 33). Martyn states: " Far from being predicated on certain exegetical patterns such as the Moses-Messiah typology, faith has only one essential presupposition: the presence of Jesus and his self-authenticating word, 'I am the bread of life'" (p. II9). A final chapter is designed to show how John leads his reader from the recognition of Jesus as the Mosaic Prophet-Messiah to the confession of him as the Son of Man. Martyn demonstrates that four times (3: 13, 6:53, 8:28, and 9:35 ff.) an announcement or recognition (9:35 ff.) ofjesus as the Son of Man culminates a series which begins with the recognition of Jesus as the Mosaic Prophet-Messiah (pp. I22-25). John is trying to lead his audience into a more adequate recognition and confession ofjesus. In the Son of Man Martyn finds the reason for the two-level drama which he had discovered (pp. I27-35). The Son of Man is an apocalyptic figure who originally functioned on one of the two levels of apocalyptic visions. John, however, has essentially altered those two levels from present and future (below and above) to past and present, the levels of his drama; and Jesus as the Son of Man appears in both levels. Martyn has one final section showing how the promised Paraclete makes the Son of Man effectively present in the work of the Christian witness in John's city (pp. 135 ff.). While Luke must write Acts to handle the second level, John is able to combine the past and the present into one drama (p. 138). The two-level drama makes clear that the Word's dwelling among us and our beholding his glory are not events which transpired only in the past. They do not constitute an ideal period when the Kingdom of God was on earth, a period to which one looks back with the knowledge that it has now drawn to a close with Jesus' ascension to heaven as the Son of Man. These events to which John bears witness transpire on both the einmalig and the contemporary levels of the drama, or they do not transpire at all. In John's view, their transpiring on both levels of the drama is, to a large extent, the good news itself [p. 142]. It is interesting to note that (p. I29, notes) Martyn essentially accepts Perrin's position that there was no concept of an apocalyptic Son of Man in ancient Judaism;9 however, in the body of his text he operates under the g Norman Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching ofjesus (New York, 1967), pp. 164 if. 279

6 The Journal of Religion assumption that there was such a concept (pp. I29-32). I surmise that Martyn did not read Perrin's position until his own book was about to go to press. The presence or absence of such a concept in ancient Judaism does not affect Martyn's arguments in the least, as he himself notes (p. 129, n. 185). I note with interest, however, that he claims the office of judge as a major feature of the Son of Man where he appears. The Son of Man is explicitly assigned this office only in I Enoch, Matthew (25:31 ff.), and John. Elsewhere the figure (or figure of speech, as the case may be) is royal in character with no explicit elaboration as a judge. This observation is generally overlooked but could have some bearing on the future discussion of the role of the Son of Man in John. Martyn has shown us part of the contribution which John makes to Christian theology through the development of a two-level drama to express his theological ideas concerning the present witness of the Son of Man. It occurs to me, however, that John's contribution should be seen primarily in the art of the specific drama which he creates and in the excellence of the theological ideas which he expresses. The presence of the two levels, past and present, may possibly be considered a basic feature of the form " Gospel" rather than an exclusive feature of any one Gospel. A Gospel basically proposes to tell the story of Jesus with reference to the present of the believer. For example, Mark may be shown to contain an early Christian christological contest in the guise of a story about Jesus. Luke has broken the form by allowing Acts to carry the second level. John's major contribution to the Gospel as a form could be that in the drama which he has created in the form of a Gospel he has managed to incorporate more concretely the present of the believer. Martyn has hinted (p. ioi, n. 161) that this study may be the basis of a commentary on the Fourth Gospel taking seriously the present findings concerning the settling of John. To judge by the taste afforded us in this present book, such a commentary would be a major contribution. Faith and Reason: Essays in the Philosophy of Religion by R. G. Collingwood* Julian Hartt / Professor Philosophical Theology Tale University Mr. Rubinoff's subtitle is excessively modest. In the Editor's Introduction, and in the introductions to each of the major divisions of the Collingwood material he presents in this volume, he mounts an interesting and important argument * R. G. Collingwood, Faith and Reason: Essays in the Philosophy ofreligion. Edited and with an Introduction by Lionel Rubinoff (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, Inc., 1968). 31x pages. $