Johannine Literature Seminar 2024 Programme

Session 1

Cor Bennema, London School of Theology, ‘Volition in the Johannine Writings’

Volition is a neglected subject in Johannine scholarship. People in the realm below do not know God, are enslaved to sin and under the devil’s influence. While Jesus came to make God known, liberate people and invite them to enter God’s realm, John indicates that people are incapable of coming to Jesus to experience this reality, except by divine initiative. Part I presents the argument that all people have volition but their volition is affected by the different forces that operate in John’s polarized narrative world. Part II examines how divine volition intersects with human volition. Frey (2018) argues that divine drawing precedes human belief and divine hardening precedes human unbelief. Contra Frey’s symmetry, I will argue that while human belief is effected by prior divine action, the cause for human unbelief is found in people themselves, under the influence of external forces (cf. Tops 2022; Attridge 2014). In fact, people’s rejection or acceptance of Jesus are both volitional acts, but not entirely autonomous because external forces (whether the devil or God) influence human volition.

Simon Dürr, Pädagogische Hochschule Karlsruhe, ‘Seeing and Interpreting the Light: Resonances of Johannine Anthropology with Ancient Philosophical Traditions about the Human Calling’

This paper investigates the resonances of Johannine anthropology with ancient philosophical traditions about the vocation of human beings in the cosmos.  In particular, the two-part structure of such a vocation, first, seeing the world in relation to God and, second, interpreting this insight in one’s life and actions, which finds full expression in Epictetus, but is more widespread in ancient philosophical tradition, opens new aspects for a fuller understanding of some of the language of seeing and witnessing in the fourth Gospel. A brief look at 1 John finds similar resonances, though with a more concretely ethical import.

Ben Castaneda, Edinburgh Theological Seminary, ‘The Johannine Jubilee: Reading Restoration in 1 John’

In this paper I will explore the presentation of Jesus as the agent of eschatological restoration in 1 John. Building on the work of Paul Sloan and Logan Williams in Gospels scholarship, I will argue that distinctive features of 1 John’s argumentation incorporate and reformulate scriptural and Second Temple traditions associated with the Jubilee. In this paper, I will focus on two of these features. First, Jesus is identified in 2:1–2 as the heavenly “advocate” (παράκλητος) before the Father and as the “atoning sacrifice” (ἱλασμός; cf. 4:10) concerning our sins. Over against many commentators who downplay the connection, I would contend that this is a reworking of the Day of Atonement legislation in Leviticus 16 and specifically Lev 25:9, inaugurating the Jubilee year. As a parallel, remission of sins and a heavenly mediator likewise feature in 11QMelch, a text shaped by Jubilee traditions. Second, the communal love ethic described in 1 John (e.g., 3:16–18) serves as an outworking of Jesus’s sacrifice for sins. I argue this reformulates the Jubilee legislation and its receptions (e.g., Lev 25:35, 39; Deut 15:7), with compassion for one’s poor and needy “brother” motivated by love.

Session 2

Gwangsoo Lee, University of St Andrews, ‘The Death of the Good Shepherd Discourse in John 10 and Its Background’

There is an agreement that the shepherd-sheep analogy plays a crucial role in John’s Christology. However, there are different views on its background. Some claim the influence of the Greco-Roman context. Jerome H. Neyrey, for example, argues for significant similarities between the rhetorical tradition of the “Noble Death” and John’s discourse on the noble shepherd. However, he overlooks the anomaly of Jesus’ death in light of the shepherd analogy of ancient Israel. Many cling to the Jewish background. John Quasten, for example, argues that an understanding of the parable requires a look at the conditions of pastoral life in the Holy Land. This position naturally leads to an examination of the biblical background. Jesus teaches his willing death (vv. 11, 15, 17), and his teaching causes controversy among his hearers (vv. 19–21). This reaction is evidence of the difference between Jesus’ use of the shepherd-sheep analogy and the audience’s precedent. I argue that Jewish Scripture and Greco-Roman literature have the typical shepherd imagery, but John unusually describes the death of Jesus in shepherd language.

Marlene Reid, University of Aberdeen, ‘Rhetorical Parallels: Connecting John 4:1-43 “inside” the Gospel of John’

In John 4, disclosure of the Samaritan woman’s verbalization of five references to the identity of Jesus is connected to rhetorical parallels throughout the Gospel. First, reference to a “prophet προφήτης” (4:19), evokes the expected προφήτης like Moses of Deut 18:18 with verbalization in the Gospel (i.e., 1:21, 25; etc.). Second, she refers to “knowing the Μεσσίας is coming, Οἶδα ὅτι Μεσσίας ἔρχεται (4:25). The cognate verb Οἶδα disclosed the woman’s knowledge of the coming Μεσσίας. She proclaimed, “he will reveal to us all things” ἀναγγελεῖ ἡμῖν πάντα. Most importantly, the Μεσσίας is connected to the Jewish Μεσσίας of the Hebrew Bible paralleled with Andrews’ usage, “we have found the Μεσσίας” (1:41). Third, “Come, see a man” δεῦτε ἴδετε ἄνθρωπον (4:29) influenced the Samaritans and its counter verb Ἔρχεσθε καὶ ἴδετε “cone and see” in similar instances (1:39; etc.). Fourth, she engaged fellow Samaritans, “can this be the Christ?” μήτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός; (4:29). The usage of Χριστός confirms the Jewish Χριστός as the focus of the dialogue (i.e., 1:20, 25; etc.). Fifth, the Samaritan villagers identify Jesus as “Savior of the world,” ὁ σωτὴρ τοῦ κόσμου (4:42). The word, σῴζω and its cognate σωτὴρ inform the continuity between the Samaritan’s recognition of ‘Jesus as the Savior’ (i.e., 3:17; etc.) and his self-identification of “I, who speak to you, am He” (4:26; etc.).

Samuel Voo, Vancouver School of Theology, ‘Implications of Johannine Exegetical-compositional Technique for the Debate on the “Jewishness” of the Fourth Gospel’

This paper seeks to address the ongoing debate about the Jewishness of John from the evidence of a particular subset of ancient compositional techniques in John that scholars today call “composite allusions.” Composite allusions are here defined as multiple allusions within a single literary unit that direct the reader / audience to more than one literary source or tradition; sources and traditions, furthermore, which interact together in their receiving literary context for an exegetically discernible purpose. First, this paper will sketch a methodological overview for detecting and analyzing such allusions, which includes an integration of recent insights from ancient media criticism; secondly, I will seek to demonstrate notable parallels between such Johannine composite allusions and composite allusions within other Jewish literature of the late Second Temple Period; and, finally, I will argue on the basis of such parallels that this evidence strengthens the case for the “Jewishness” of John.

Session 3: John and Paul