Ethics and the Gospel of John: Toward an Emerging New Consensus?

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 280-304
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Skinner
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
English Language ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Ethical Systems

For decades the scholarly consensus held that the Fourth Gospel was either devoid of ethics or that its ethical material was narrow, exclusive, and sectarian. In recent years, that consensus has begun to show signs of wear. This article examines the more recent turn to ‘implied’ ethics by looking at four English-language books on the subject published in the past four years. This examination is undertaken with a view to tracing a newly emerging consensus, which holds that (1) the Gospel of John has ethical material, and (2) that material must be taken seriously by those reflecting on ancient ethical systems in general and New Testament ethics in particular. Further, the emerging consensus holds that the implied ethics of the Fourth Gospel, far from being strictly sectarian, are useful for reflecting on and/or constructing models of normative Christian behavior.

The Aramaic Origin of the Gospel of John

1923 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 305-344
Author(s):  
Charles C. Torrey
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Gospel Of Mark ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
High Importance ◽  
The Past ◽  
The New Testament

In the numerous discussions of the Greek of New Testament documents with reference to the question of translation from Aramaic originals, the Fourth Gospel has generally been left out of account. The language of the Synoptists has been examined very diligently from this point of view, especially during the past two or three decades, and at least one competent Semitic scholar has published material of high importance. Wellhausen, in his “Evangelium Marci” (1903) and especially in his “Einleitung in die Drei Ersten Evangelien” (1905; 2d ed., 1911), argued, perhaps not quite conclusively, for an Aramaic original of our Gospel of Mark; and he and many others have discussed, in a somewhat desultory fashion, the question of possible written Semitic sources for portions of Matthew and Luke. To the majority of New Testament scholars it probably would seem superfluous, to many perhaps even ridiculous, to raise similar queries in regard to John, whether it be proposed to regard it as a formal translation, from beginning to end, or as “based on Semitic sources”—whatever this vague and unprofitable formula may mean. Since the time when the origin and authorship of the book first began to be discussed, its essentially Hellenistic character has rarely been questioned. It is generally taken for granted at the present day, even by those scholars who are most inclined to look for “translation Greek” in the New Testament. The reasons for this are obvious, and good as far as they go.

The Beloved Disciple, the Fourth Evangelist, and the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Thatcher
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
The Past ◽  
Historical Individual ◽  
Source Of Information ◽  
Beloved Disciple

Discussions of the authorship of the Gospel of John must answer two questions: who is the Beloved Disciple who is portrayed as the book’s primary source of information, and how is this individual related to the author, John the evangelist? On the first question, scholars are divided on whether the Beloved Disciple is a real historical individual or an ideal symbolic figure. Data from the text itself and from social-science perspectives on the reputations of key figures from the past suggest that both are correct: the Beloved Disciple was a legendary associate of Jesus whose presentation reflects his reputation as a source of information that was critical to the Johannine theological outlook. On the second question, data suggests that the evangelist was not the Beloved Disciple but rather a disciple of that individual, perhaps basing his own book on an earlier document produced by the Beloved Disciple.

Passover and Eucharist in the Fourth Gospel

1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-337
Author(s):  
J. K. Howard
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
People Of God ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Past ◽  
The People ◽  
The Future ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
New Israel ◽  
Acts Of God

The events of the Exodus, in which the Passover occupied a central and dominant place, were one of the most deeply rooted of all Israel's traditions. The Passover itself lay at the very heart of the covenant concept and forms the basis of the Heilsgeschichte which records the redemptive acts of God for His people Israel. In later Judaism it became overlaid with eschatological ideas, especially those associated with a Messianic deliverance for the people of God, as God's saving act in the past became the prefigurement of an even greater saving act in the future. The Passover night was thus a night of joy for all Israel, the night on which Israel's future redemption, effected through the Messiah, would be revealed. The early Christians, however, believed that this Messianic deliverance had already appeared in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and consequently, in Preiss' expression,‘the totality of the events of the Exodus centering on the Passover’ together with its associated ideas occupied a dominant position in Christian soteriological thought in the New Testament period, especially as Jesus Himself had instituted the eucharist in a distinctly Paschal setting. We may trace, as has been done in recent years, the idea of the Exodus complex of events running as a constant theme through the New Testament writings, and Jesus is pictured both as a second Moses leading His people forth from a bondage far greater than the slavery of a human despot, from the thraldom of sin and death, and as the Antitype of the very Passover sacrifice itself, through which the redemption of the New Israel was effected.

scholarly journals The midwife of truth: The nature of irony and a rationale for its prevalence in the Gospel of John

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bruce W. Bell
Keyword(s):  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Conceptual Level ◽  
Passion Narrative ◽  
Sustained Use ◽  
Meaningful Engagement ◽  
Major Treatment ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Conceptual Link ◽  
The Way

<p>The Gospel of John is renowned for its pervasive use of irony. While this phenomenon is widely recognized by scholars, there have been only a few attempts to explain the “how” of Johannine irony and no meaningful attempt to explain its “why.” The last major treatment of the topic was by Paul Duke in his 1985 work, Irony in the Fourth Gospel, which provides an account of how Johannine irony works through an analysis of local and extended ironies. Other examinations, such as Gail O’Day’s Revelation in the Fourth Gospel in 1986, explore irony as a corollary of some other thematic concern. The reticence of scholars to delve deeper into the nature of Johannine irony is understandable given that as Duke puts it, irony laughs at all pretensions, especially the pretension of claiming to have grasped irony.  This study undertakes the demanding but necessary task of describing irony to a level that allows meaningful engagement with ironic texts, while accepting that it remains ultimately indefinable. Particular attention is paid to historical shifts of understanding of the nature of irony and the implications this has for appreciating irony at a conceptual level. From a survey of the Johannine scholarship, a comprehensive but non-exhaustive overview of the Fourth Gospel’s use of irony is derived. No previous work has attempted to approach the subject in this way. The main advantage of doing so is that it allows for the identification of broad patterns of irony and the way it functions in the narrative. This in turn provides a framework for proceeding to an examination of particular texts and the identification of a possible rationale.  The present study assesses several hypotheses to explain why the author of the Fourth Gospel makes such sustained use of irony. The preferred hypothesis is that it is intrinsically linked to a predominant Johannine theme of alētheia (truth). Drawing on the conceptual link between irony and truth, it argues that the truth theme is a deliberate literary strategy employed by the author to entice the reader to seek certain propositional truths within the narrative. This ultimately serves the author’s desire to evoke revelation and response in line with the Gospel’s purpose statement in 20:31.  The argument that irony serves the Johannine truth theme is tested with particular reference to the Prologue (1:1-18) and the Passion Narrative (chapters 18-19). The study establishes that irony serves as the link between appearance and reality in the narrative. Its subtle and engaging qualities make irony the most suitable vehicle to testify to the Gospel’s propositional statements in a manner that fulfils the author’s stated Christological (a revelation of Jesus’ true identity) and soteriological (a response that leads to salvation) purposes.</p>

Was Heracleon a Valentinian? A New Look at Old Sources

2006 ◽  
Vol 99 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kaler ◽  
Marie-Pierre Bussières
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
New Look

Heracleon was a great second-century Christian thinker, and the author of the first known commentary on a New Testament text, the Gospel of John. Although we do not have Heracleon's commentary itself, Origen integrated a great deal of it into his own commentary on the fourth gospel.

The Leninist Theory of Perception

Dialogue ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Goldstick
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Present Article ◽  
English Language ◽  
Theory Of Knowledge ◽  
Standard English ◽  
Philosophical Debate ◽  
The Past ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Alternative Reading

In the standard English-language reference work, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Paul Edwards (New York and London, 1967), we find the following blunt statement on the subject of “orthodox Marxism's” theory of knowledge:Its epistemology is naive representationism.The use of the word “naive” will alert the reader to the unsurprising fact that the reference here is a definitely unfriendly one. More interesting is the way in which this characterization, based on an interpretation of Lenin's Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, has become generally accepted in English-speaking philosophical circles over the past forty years. The purpose of the present article is to explain the representationalist interpretation, challenge it in favour of an alternative reading of Lenin's text, and make some substantive comments on issues arising from the philosophical debate between the representationalist and anti-representationalist positions outlined.

scholarly journals Current Knowledge on the Background, Pathophysiology and Treatment of Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesia—Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 4377
Author(s):  
Michał Hutny ◽  
Jagoda Hofman ◽  
Aleksandra Klimkowicz-Mrowiec ◽  
Agnieszka Gorzkowska
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Search Strategy ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
The Past ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Remedial Strategies ◽  
Primary Drug ◽  
Language Literature ◽  
Deep Brain

Levodopa remains the primary drug for controlling motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease through the whole course, but over time, complications develop in the form of dyskinesias, which gradually become more frequent and severe. These abnormal, involuntary, hyperkinetic movements are mainly characteristic of the ON phase and are triggered by excess exogenous levodopa. They may also occur during the OFF phase, or in both phases. Over the past 10 years, the issue of levodopa-induced dyskinesia has been the subject of research into both the substrate of this pathology and potential remedial strategies. The purpose of the present study was to review the results of recent research on the background and treatment of dyskinesia. To this end, databases were reviewed using a search strategy that included both relevant keywords related to the topic and appropriate filters to limit results to English language literature published since 2010. Based on the selected papers, the current state of knowledge on the morphological, functional, genetic and clinical features of levodopa-induced dyskinesia, as well as pharmacological, genetic treatment and other therapies such as deep brain stimulation, are described.

scholarly journals The midwife of truth: The nature of irony and a rationale for its prevalence in the Gospel of John

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bruce W. Bell
Keyword(s):  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Conceptual Level ◽  
Passion Narrative ◽  
Sustained Use ◽  
Meaningful Engagement ◽  
Major Treatment ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Conceptual Link ◽  
The Way

<p>The Gospel of John is renowned for its pervasive use of irony. While this phenomenon is widely recognized by scholars, there have been only a few attempts to explain the “how” of Johannine irony and no meaningful attempt to explain its “why.” The last major treatment of the topic was by Paul Duke in his 1985 work, Irony in the Fourth Gospel, which provides an account of how Johannine irony works through an analysis of local and extended ironies. Other examinations, such as Gail O’Day’s Revelation in the Fourth Gospel in 1986, explore irony as a corollary of some other thematic concern. The reticence of scholars to delve deeper into the nature of Johannine irony is understandable given that as Duke puts it, irony laughs at all pretensions, especially the pretension of claiming to have grasped irony.  This study undertakes the demanding but necessary task of describing irony to a level that allows meaningful engagement with ironic texts, while accepting that it remains ultimately indefinable. Particular attention is paid to historical shifts of understanding of the nature of irony and the implications this has for appreciating irony at a conceptual level. From a survey of the Johannine scholarship, a comprehensive but non-exhaustive overview of the Fourth Gospel’s use of irony is derived. No previous work has attempted to approach the subject in this way. The main advantage of doing so is that it allows for the identification of broad patterns of irony and the way it functions in the narrative. This in turn provides a framework for proceeding to an examination of particular texts and the identification of a possible rationale.  The present study assesses several hypotheses to explain why the author of the Fourth Gospel makes such sustained use of irony. The preferred hypothesis is that it is intrinsically linked to a predominant Johannine theme of alētheia (truth). Drawing on the conceptual link between irony and truth, it argues that the truth theme is a deliberate literary strategy employed by the author to entice the reader to seek certain propositional truths within the narrative. This ultimately serves the author’s desire to evoke revelation and response in line with the Gospel’s purpose statement in 20:31.  The argument that irony serves the Johannine truth theme is tested with particular reference to the Prologue (1:1-18) and the Passion Narrative (chapters 18-19). The study establishes that irony serves as the link between appearance and reality in the narrative. Its subtle and engaging qualities make irony the most suitable vehicle to testify to the Gospel’s propositional statements in a manner that fulfils the author’s stated Christological (a revelation of Jesus’ true identity) and soteriological (a response that leads to salvation) purposes.</p>

A Review of Graham Twelftree, In the Name of Jesus: Exorcism Among Early Christians

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-136
Author(s):  
Blaine Charette
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Similar Vein

AbstractIn this study of the divergence of perspective in the New Testament on the subject of exorcism, Twelftree provides the reader with a reliable introduction and guide. The consistent historical approach to the topic significantly limits the review of the biblical evidence (there is little attention to the literary/theological concerns of the NT authors) but means that a strong feature of the book is its review and critique of academic literature written in a similar vein. For the most part the interpretive conclusions are sound (albeit with some examples of special pleading). Specific areas of criticism are as follows: 1) a certain confusion attaches to the classifications Twelftree uses to describe the exorcisms of Jesus and his followers; 2) the discussion on possible reasons for the absence of exorcisms stories from the Fourth Gospel is unconvincing and unduly negative towards the exorcism stories of the synoptic tradition; and 3) the study would have gained much by considering exorcisms within a larger biblical theological context and through greater attention to literary and canonical approaches.

The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel

2005 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent Nongbri
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
New Testament ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Second Century ◽  
The Other ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
Justin Martyr ◽  
John's Gospel

The thesis of this paper is simple: we as critical readers of the New Testament often use John Rylands Greek Papyrus 3.457, also known as P52, ininappropriate ways, and we should stop doing so. A recent example will illustrate the problem. In what is on the whole a superb commentary on John's gospel, D. Moody Smith writes the following about the date of John:For a time, particularly in the early part of the twentieth century, the possibility that John was not written, or at least not published, until [the] mid-second century was a viable one. At that time Justin Martyr espoused a logos Christology, without citing the Fourth Gospel explicitly. Such an omission by Justin would seem strange if the Gospel of John had already been written and was in circulation. Then the discovery and publication in the1930s of two papyrus fragments made such a late dating difficult, if not impossible, to sustain. The first and most important is the fragment of John chapter 18 … [P52], dated by paleographers to the second quarter of the second century (125–150); the other is a fragment of a hithertounknown gospel called Egerton Papyrus 2 from the same period, which obviously reflects knowledge of the Gospel of John…. For the Gospel of Johnto have been written and circulated in Egypt, where these fragments were found, a date nolater than the first decade of the second century must be presumed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document