1983 - Adele Reinhartz - John 20.30-31 and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel

7/27/2019 1983 - Adele Reinhartz - John 20.30-31 and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel

1/249

McMaster University

DigitalCommons@McMaster

Open Access Dissertations and Theses Open Dissertations and Theses

3-1-1983

John 20:30-31 and the Purpose of the FourthGospel

Adele Reinhartz

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Dissertations and Theses at DigitalCommons@McMaster. It has been accepted for

inclusion in Open Access Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@McMaster. For more information, please

contact [email protected].

Recommended CitationReinhartz, Adele, "John 20:30-31 and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel" (1983). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 1395.http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/opendissertations/1395
http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/opendissertationshttp://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/open_dissmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/open_disshttp://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/opendissertationshttp://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/


2/249

-.,

JOHN 20:30-31 .AND

/THE PURPOSE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL

by

ADELE REINHARTZ, M.A.

\A Thesis

. Submitted to the School of Graduate Studiesin Partial Fp,lfilment of the Requirements

of the DegreeDoctor of Philosophy

McMaster University March, 1983


3/249

JOHN 20 :30-31 A ~ DTHE PURPOSE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL

'>


4/249

\

\.- ,~\ ~\ \.~ ''---', /

..

f-"

Gospel

I)o

... .

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (1983)(Religious Studies)

TITLE: John 20:30-31 and th e Purpose of th e Fou

AUTHOR: Adele Reinhartz. B. A. (Uqiversity of Torooto)M. A. (MOMB.ster University)J

SUPERVISOR: Professor E. P. Sanders

NUMBER OF PAGES: v. 242

,

I i


5/249

-ABSTRACT

The thesis examines the relationship between John 20 :30-31 andthe purpose of the Fourth Gospel. I t argues that the passage expresses apu se which. is reflected in both the structure and the con tent o f the.Gospel whole. This purpose is to convince the reader that faith in

of God. can and indeed should be based on the'" ."

signs as recorded in the Gospel. In order to achieve this purpose, theGospel uses the following arguments: the reade r i s seeking salvation;

salvation is attained through faith in Jesus; faith in Jesus can be based on/ hi s signs; even the reader who has not seen Jesus' s igns himself can

':wttness" them through the agency of the Gospel. The thesis demonstrateswhere and how the Gospel develops these arguments. \

The thesis is intended to contribute to the discussion of severalIssues which are central to Johannine studies. I t examines an aspect ofthe Issue of the purpose of the Gospel which has not been the subject ofeknslve scholarly attention. namely the way In wh ic h the author(s) of theGospel meant their document to funct ion in the lives of it s readers. Indoing so , it discusses in detail three of the christological titles, "Christ"." So n o f God". and "Prophet". and sheds light on the ways in which theGospel demonstrates the appropriateness of these titles to Jesus. In addit ion,J It argues against the interpretations of the term semeion as used In 20:30-31and of the Gospel's view of a faith based on signs. Finally, the thesis offerssome suggestions concerning the identity of the intended reader of the Gospel.

III v


6/249

~ '

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I " 'ould I tke to extend my sincere thanks to the many people whohave helped to bring this study to completion. Drs. A.! . Baumgar ten,B. F. Meyer and M. Hillmer were most helpful with, their suggestions andcomments. A special debt is owed to Dr. E. P. Sande rs whose promptand careful reading of all 'material and incisive comments aided immeasur-,ably in th e formulation and development of the thesis.

The final draft of the thesis was typed by Mrs. Eileen Alderton,whose profess ional skil l and careful work are evident on every page.

\McMaster University and the Socia l Sciences and umanities ResearchCouncil of Canada freed my time and energy for is work by theirgenerous financial support. My parents, Hen ia an Norbert Reinhartz,gave freely of themselves, especially by providing lOVing care for mydaughter when I needed extra hours of working time. Most of all, 1 wishto thank my husband, Barry Walfish, for the hours spent hearing aboutthe Gospel of John, for his editorial skills. and for the countless otherways in which he made the process easier for me.

Liv


7/249

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DESCRIPTIVE NOTE iiABSTRACT ii iACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i .TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION jCHAPTE:R ONE: The MeanlOg of Semeia in 20:30 20CHAPTER TWO: The Johannine View of Signs-Faith 54CHAPTER THREE: "Life in his Name" as a Desirable Goal 72CHAPTER FOUR: Believing and Salvation 88CHAPTER FIVE: "Signs" and" Jesus ' Eschatological Identity 10 6CHA PTER SIX: H ea ri 1l g i s Bel ieving 19 7CHAPTER SEVEN: Conclusion 208APPENDIX 216BlBUOGRAPHY 235

v


8/249

L-';TRODCCTION

Chapter twenty of the Gospel of John concludes with the followingwords:

Now Jesus did many signs in the presence of the disciples,which are not written in this book; but these are writtenthat you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son ofGod, and that believing you may have life in his name.(20 :3Q-31)1

,One of the few points of agreement in Johannine stud ie s i s that t he se wordsconstitute an explicit statement of purpose fo r the Gospel as a whole.

The general consensus on this point can be observed by turning tothe many co=entar ies on the Gospel of John, in which the note on 20 :30":31will typically begin with a comment to this effect. 2 I t is therefore not

1English quotations from the Fourth Gospel will be taken 'from theRevised Standard Version unless otherwise noted. See bibliography for fullreferences to items cited in the footnotes.

2For example, Barrett, Gospel According to St. John, p.575,begins h is co=en t to 20:31 by saying "Both the purpose of the gospel andthe author's theology are s u= e d up in this verse." Bultmann, Gospel ofJohn, p. 697, describes 20:30-31 as "a clear conclusion to the Gospel, inwhich the selective character of the narrative is stressed and it s purposedeclared." That 20:30-31 is the Gaspe I 's statement of purpose and conclusion i s accepted even by some of those scholars who do not v iewchapter 21 as a later addition, such as Lagrange, Evangile selon saintJean, pp. 519 ff ., and Vaganay, "Le Finale du Quatrieme Evangile",pp.512-28. One of the few dissenting voices appears to be that of E. C.Hoskyns, Fourth Gospel, p.656, who argues tha t the term "many othersigns" in 20 :30 refers to the resurrection appearances alone. 10 h is view,the Gospel ends properly at 21 :25, because "the Christian gospel ends

1

.


9/249

2surprising that 20:30-31 sbould play an important role in the scbolarlydiscussion of the purpooe of the Gospel. \\hat is perhaps surprising,boweve r, is the fact that, despite this consensus , there are nearly as

many theories concerning tbe purpose of the Fourth Gospel as there are \theorists. W. C. Van U nni k and J. A. T. Rob inson, for example, arguethat the Gospe l was intended as a missionary document directed towardsDiaspora J e w ~ . 3 Rudolf S c h n a c k e n b ~ ) l ' K , and C. K. &:rrett , on the other

hand, suggest that the Gospel was aimed at a primarily, Cbristianaudience, with the goal of educating them and deepening their faith. 4C. H. Dodd views the Gospel as addressing

3Yan Unnik, "Purposetl; Robinson, "Destination".4Scbnackenburg. "Die Messiasfra:ge"; Barrett , Gospel of John and

Juda ism, pp.1-19. Both of these works contain an expl ici t refutat ion ofth e views of Van Unnik and Robinson. The conclus ion that the Gospel isdirected towards Christians is reached by many other scholars, such asH. B. Kossen and G. L. Allen, who suggest that the Gospel addressesDiaspora Jews who had already become Christians. Allen suggests thatsuch Jewish Christians were still observing the Jewish law, and that theGospel aimed to dissuade them from doing so . See Allen, "JewishChristian Church", pp.88-92, and Kossen, "Greeks". pp.97 -110 . Haral dRiesenfeld's s tudy o f the h ina clause in the Jobannine wri tings , "Zu denjohanneischen hina-Satzen", supports the theory that the Gospel hasChristian readers in mind. He concludes that th e form of the hinaclause seems rela ted to th e strengthening of the Christian community andno t tO,any missionary purpose.

properly, not with the appearance of the risen Lord to His disciples, andtheir belief in ,Him [Hoskyns' interpretation of 20:30-31], bu t with aconfident statement that this mission to the world, undertaken at Hiscommand and under His authority, will be the means by which many are

\ saved." This func ti on , he argues, is served by chapter 21.

'-.....-.-.


10/249

.- -

3non-Christians who are concerned about eternal life andthe v.ay to it , atld may be ready to follow the Christian",-ay if this is presented to them in terms that are intelligibly related to their previous rel igious interests andexperience. 5

The source critic R. T. Fortna suggests that one of the main motives ofthe evangelist was to correct and deepen the christology of the signssource which formed the basis of his narrative. 6 J. L. ~ r t y n , whoaccepts the main outline of Fortna's source theory, 7 would see the motive

of the Gospel's redaction of the source not in the desire to correct an inade-quate christology but in the need to adapt to historical circumstances, andespecially_ to tie deteriorating relationship between the church and synagogue in the evangelist's city. 8

Snood, Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, p.9. A similar theoryis argued by C. F :-D. Moule, "Intention of the Evangelists".

V6Fortna , "Source and Redaction". See also Becker, "Wunder undChr is to logi e" . For tna, Gospe l of s i g n s ~ g u e s that the Fourth Gospelconstitutes the redaction of a written si -source ("Signs-Gospel")which comprised the seven signs--narrat ives as well as a passion narrative. The- presence of a signs-source underlying-the present gospel isargued- by many other scholars, including Bultmann, Gospe l of John,Nicol, Semeia in the Fourth Gospel, and Teeple, Literary Origin. Fordiscussion and further bibliography, see Kysa Fourth Evangelist,pp. 9'-37, and Martyn, History and Theolo . 164-8.

7See Martyn, "Source Criticism"; p.248.8Martyn, His to ry and Theology, passim. His theory is based to

some degree on the conclusion that 9:22 and 16:2 ref lect Birkat Ha-Minim,(Jewish benediction against heretics recited in the synagogue). BirkatHa-Minim is interpreted by many, including Mar tyn and Barrett, Gospelof John and Judaism, p.188, "as the means by which Christ ians wereexcluded from the synagogue and therefore as the watershed in the

/


11/249

This small sampling indicates the wide range of theories of pur-pose as well as their foci. :'10st theories of purpose are concerned ",ith

~pinpointing the identity of the original addressees of the Gospel as well asthe Gospel's intention with respect to these readers. 9 Source and redaction

c ~ i t i c s , while dealing with the question of a d d r e s ~ e e , 10 view the Fourth-;'Gospel as the redaction of it s source or sources, and try to determine themotives of the redac to r. O thers focus on the impact of historical events on

.-""--- the Gospel and interpret the Gospel as an attempt to come to terms withthese circumstances. 11

):f' -, 9See , fo r example, Freed, "Samaritan Converts".

10Nicol, Semeia in the Fourth Gospel, p. 79, a r g u ~ s that the signssource was a missionary tract, whereas the Gospel was intended forbelievers.

11Brown 'S theory that 'the Gospel was written to win over Christiansof the apostolic churches to the Johannine co=uni ty , as well as to act as awarning against the dangers inherent in the establishment of church Qificesand in other developments also falls into this category. See Brown, "OtherSheep not of this Fold". Robinson, "Destination", pp.122f., focuses on theJewish background the t!tles, khristos, and huios tou theou. He arguesthat both are Jewish'messianic titles, and that therefore the author' s purpose is to encourage his Jewish readers to view Jesus as the fulfilment oftheir messianicexpectations.'

relationship between the synagogue and early church. I t ha s rece t ly beenargued, however, that Birkat Ha-'l\1inim was not directed against C istians,but against Jewish sectarians (Minim) and further, that Christians continuedto be welcome in the synagogues. See Kimmelman, "BirK'at Ha-Minim".Kimmelman's theory, while challenging the accepted interpretation of BirkatHa-l\1inim, does no t undermine Martyn's theory. Whether or not BirkatHa-Minim referred to Christians and whether or not 9:22 refers to BirkatHa-l\1inim, it s eems clear that the Gospe l intends it s readers to believe thateven in Jesus' lifetime the synagogue was excluding Jews who believed in Jesus.

- ,


12/249

5All of these theor ies take 20 :30-31 into consideration. For many

of them, the most important aspect of the passage seems to be the'

....

christological t i tles, "Christ" (khristos) and "Son of God" (huios tau theou).Indeed, the debat e surrounding the iden tity of the reader and religious andhistorical background of the Gospel has as a primary focus the meaning andbackground of the titles as well as th e relationship between them. 12 Asecond matter of concern is the correct reading of the verb translatedabove as "that you may believe". Manuscript evidence is equallY' dividedbetween the present subjunctive pisteuete and the aorist subjunctive

12Barrett, Gospel of John and Judaism, p.17, ch:!'llenges this interpretation: "John 20:30f.does not mean, '. . . in order that you may believethat Je su s is th e Christ, ' that is, the Son of God (in the s imple mess ianicsense), bu t '. . . in order that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ '(the recognized title of th e early Christian tradition), and acknoWledge thatthis title signifies that he is nothing less than the divine -Son of God, whohas come down from heaveQ as the redeemer with divine atthority. ' "It is probable, according to Barrett, that John wrote for. Christians sincehe uses the titles in their Christian sense. For Martyn, History and Theology, p.98t, the presence of the term khristos in the conclusion illus

t ~ t e s the centrality of the issue of Jesus ' messiahship and of the correctinterpretation of his signs in the JeWish-Christian debate in John's time.For Fortna, Gospel of Signs, pp.197f, the presence of the terms khristosand huios tou t heou in 20 :30-31 bears witness to the christological intento f the Signs-Gospel to which 20:30-31 originally belonged. These examplesillustrate the observation that the interpretations of the terms, and especially the christological t it les, can and have been used to support almost.any theory of purpose. As Schnackenburg, Johannesevangelium, 3:402,points out, Johannine scholars are necessarily caught in a hermeneuticalcircle: th e meaning of the christoiogical titles cannot be determinedwithout knowing th e background of th e Gospel, and the background of theGospel cannot be understood apart from the meaning of. these t it les .

.-'0'.,'. ..::


13/249

>

c6

pisteusete. The former implies a continuing belief on the part of thereader, suggesting that the intended r eader i s Christian, whereas thelatte; can refer to a future coming to faith, suggesting that the reader isnoi ye t Christian. 13 While the importance of these words to the meaningof the passage and therefore the purpose of the Gospel cannot be denied,they express only a part of the purpose as stated in 20:30-31. Similarly,while the theories in which these tf;lrms figure so prominently discussquestions important to the understanding of the Gospel. they do not speakdirectly to the quest ion of the Gospel's purpose as it is formulated in2 0 : 3 0 ~ J

The purpose of the Gospel as stated in 20:30-31 i s expressed in the,

hina clause: "These (signs) are written in order that (hina) you may believe. . .' and. . . have l ife in his name." In other words, the purpose of theGospel is to present the reader with a written record of a selection ofJesus' signs in order to serve a s a basis for hi s faith and therefore hisI

13The major manuscripts supporting the present subjunctive areBezae, Alexandrinus and those of the Byzantine tradition. The aorist~ c t i v e is supported by Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and possibly also p 66.This reading is followed in Nestle's critical edi tion . Riesenfeld, "Zu .den johanneischen hina-Slitzen", p. 220. suggests that the normal usageof the hina clauses is the present subjunctive, a conclusion which wouldtend to s u p ~ o r t the theory that the Gospe l is directed towards Christians.I t mus.t be pointed out, however, that theories of purpose cannot be hungon this point alone, both because the Gospe l is not consistent in it s useof tenses, and also because the aorist subjunctive does not necessarily

h ~ to.have a future connotation. See Schnackenburg, "Messiasfrage,"Pl>. 257ft, Brown, Gospel According to John, p.1056, and MacRae,Fa"Nh in the Word, p. 57. '


14/249

7salvation. Hence, the emphasis of 20:30-31 is not on the ident ity of thereader, nor on the evangelist's attitude towards either his sources orhis addressees, bu t on the Gospel's perception of itself and its role as awri tten document. To be sure, there are scholars who recognize this asthe purpose of the Gospel as stated in 20:30-31. G. W. MacRae, fo rexample, writes tha t "John is consciol1'l>ly aware of his function as awri ter of the story of Jesus W. H. G. Thomas argues that everythingin the Gospel is subservient to the precise purpose stated in 20 :30-31,namely that the Gospel's record of,signs may lead the reader to a definiterelationship with Jesus. 15 There are, however, no full-length studies ofthe G o ~ p e i ' s purpose which focus on its self-description as stated in\2 0 : 3 0 - 3 ~ \ 1 6

Two reasons may be suggested for this gap in Johaooine scholarship.The first and most obvious reason is that 20:30-31 does -not answer thequestions which are generally considered important for determining thepurpose of the Gospe l. Although the passage addresses its readers directly,by the use of the second person plural form of the verbs, 17 it does inform

14MacRae , Faith in the Word, p.56.15_ Thomas, "Purpose of the Fourth Gospel" , pp.254ff.16 Van Uooik, ; 'Purpose", p.389, begins hi s analysis, with 20:30-31,

focussing primarily on the Jewish background and meanings of the titlekhristos.

17 - - kh-plsteuete, e ete.


15/249

3later readers of the origin, background, and ldent ity of the o r i ~ d j : l r e s - ,sees. Neither does the passage provide any clear informatiin' about thehistor ical circumstances which influenced the writing of the Gospel. ' 20 :30131is therefore considered to reflect only "a general motive to articulate thekerygma of the faith". whereas the document as a whole i s cons idered to,reflect one or more specific purposes. 18

The second reason is that while 20 :30-31 states the GOspel's Own viewof its purpose, the passage is not in fact considered by many scholars tobe adequate or even correct. This conclusion is not only reflected in thetreatment of 20:30-31-in the various theories of purpose. bu t is also statedexplicitly by some Johannine scholars. For example. Robert Kysar sug-gests that the questio? of purpose must be dealt with on two levels:

First , does the writer make an explicit statement ofpurpose anywhere in the Gospel? Second, do otherpassages imply a purpose and a ,destination which mightno t be explicitly s t a t e ~ .

Aiter discussing the Gospel's' explicit statement in 20 :30-'31. Kysar proceed,s to list the reasons why this s t a t e m ~ n t is "less than adequate". 20Similarly. 'D. M. Smith comments on the inappropriateness of 20:30-31 astl summary of Jesus' ministry. 21

\18Kysar, Fourth Evangelist, p. 147.

20Kysar. John, The Maver ick Gospel. p.15.21Smith "Setting and Shape". p.231.


16/249

\

9The dismissal of 20 :30-31 as being inappropriate is based on two

conside ra ti on s. The first concerns th e self-description of the Gospel asa written record of some of Jesus' signs. According to most scholars,the term semeia in this passage refers pr imari ly to the seven or eightso-called signs narratives, such as th e Wedding at Cana (2:1-11), and thefeeding of the multitudes (6:1-14), with the possible addition of the postresurrection appearances to the d i s c i p 1 ~ s (20 :1_29).22 The second con-sideration is the attitude towards signs-fai th assumed by 20:30-31.20 :30-31 clearly implies t ha t fa ith can and indeed should be based on thes igns tha t Jesus did. This positive evaluation of signs-faith is reflectedelsewhere in the Gospel, such as 2:11 and 12:37. On the basis ,?f otherpassages suchas 4:48 and 20:29, however, it is often conclude


17/249


18/249


19/249


20/249


21/249


22/249


23/249


24/249


25/249


26/249


27/249


28/249


29/249


30/249


31/249


32/249


33/249


34/249


35/249


36/249


37/249


38/249


39/249


40/249


41/249


42/249


43/249


44/249


45/249


46/249


47/249


48/249


49/249


50/249


51/249


52/249


53/249


54/249


55/249


56/249


57/249


58/249


59/249


60/249


61/249


62/249


63/249


64/249


65/249


66/249


67/249


68/249


69/249


70/249


71/249


72/249


73/249


74/249


75/249


76/249


77/249


78/249


79/249


80/249


81/249


82/249


83/249


84/249


85/249


86/249


87/249


88/249


89/249


90/249


91/249


92/249


93/249


94/249


95/249


96/249


97/249


98/249


99/249


100/249


101/249


102/249


103/249


104/249


105/249


106/249


107/249


108/249


109/249


110/249


111/249


112/249


113/249


114/249


115/249


116/249


117/249


118/249


119/249


120/249


121/249


122/249


123/249


124/249


125/249


126/249


127/249


128/249


129/249


130/249


131/249


132/249


133/249


134/249


135/249


136/249


137/249


138/249


139/249


140/249


141/249


142/249


143/249


144/249


145/249


146/249


147/249


148/249


149/249


150/249


151/249


152/249


153/249


154/249


155/249


156/249


157/249


158/249


159/249


160/249


161/249


162/249


163/249


164/249


165/249


166/249


167/249


168/249


169/249


170/249


171/249


172/249


173/249


174/249


175/249


176/249


177/249


178/249


179/249


180/249


181/249


182/249


183/249


184/249


185/249


186/249


187/249


188/249


189/249


190/249


191/249


192/249


193/249


194/249


195/249


196/249


197/249


198/249


199/249


200/249


201/249


202/249


203/249


204/249


205/249


206/249


207/249


208/249


209/249


210/249


211/249


212/249


213/249


214/249


215/249


216/249


217/249


218/249


219/249


220/249


221/249


222/249


223/249


224/249


225/249


226/249


227/249


228/249


229/249


230/249


231/249


232/249


233/249


234/249


235/249


236/249


237/249


238/249


239/249


240/249


241/249


242/249


243/249


244/249


245/249


246/249


247/249


248/249


249/249

1983 - Adele Reinhartz - John 20.30-31 and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel

Documents

Transcript of 1983 - Adele Reinhartz - John 20.30-31 and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel