Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Purpose of john’s gospel / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Purpose of john’s gospel.

Journal articles on the topic 'Purpose of john’s gospel'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 1 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Purpose of john’s gospel.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

JENSEN, MATTHEW D. "The Fourth Gospel and the Apostolic Mission: John’s Common Evangelical Theology." Unio Cum Christo 2, no. 2 (October 1, 2016): 127. http://dx.doi.org/10.35285/ucc2.2.2016.art11.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract: This article seeks to redress the imbalance of seeing John’s theology as distinctive and dissimilar to the other Gospels and New Testament documents by observing the essential consistency between the theology of the Fourth Gospel and the apostolic mission described by Paul in Galatians 2:1–10. First, it considers the origin of the New Testament documents in the mission of the apostles described in Galatians 2:1–10 and locates the apostles’ commonly agreed-on gospel message in 1 Corinthians 15:3–5. Second, the article examines the Fourth Gospel, paying close attention to the intrusive narrator’s comments about the purpose (John 20:30–31) and explicit use of the Old Testament (12:38, 39–40; 19:24, 28, 36–37) to demonstrate that John’s theology and epistemology was fundamentally the same as that of the other apostles.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Crider, Amy L. "Leaders on ladders: the power of story in John’s Gospel." Perichoresis 16, no. 3 (July 1, 2018): 17–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/perc-2018-0014.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract In his Gospel, John reveals this key leadership principle: effective leaders harness the power of narrative to illuminate the metanarrative and connect people to it. John uses narrative techniques to make invisible spiritual realities visible and thus succeeds in connecting people to the metanarrative. John forges a link between people and the metanarrative by showing individuals how their own stories fit into the biblical metanarrative, fulfilling his purpose: ‘These are written that you may believe…’ (20:31). The church is transmitted through the ages by leaders who write. Because the metanarrative is a story and story is accessible to all audiences, the biblical metanarrative is not dependent on culture, time, or context; it transcends the ages, enabling John to lead and write from the present as well as for the future. Thus, John illuminates the metanarrative not only for the infant church but for all Christians to come. Christian leaders today also need to communicate so their people can see their place in the metanarrative of Scripture.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Lookadoo, Jonathon. "The Reception of the Gospel of John in the Long Recension of Ignatius’s Letters." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 42, no. 4 (May 26, 2020): 496–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0142064x20914525.

Full text

Abstract:

The reception of Pauline and Johannine writings in the three centuries after their composition is of interest to NT researchers, and Ignatius of Antioch’s letters have rightly been taken into consideration when studying NT reception history. This article aims to fill a lacuna in reception historical studies of Ignatius’s epistles by exploring the role of John’s gospel in the fourth-century long recension. The long recension employs John when discussing Christology, Trinity, unity, Jewish-Christian identity, resurrection and for polemical purposes. This article thus contributes to ongoing reception historical studies of the NT within Ignatian literature, examines how the Gospel of John was employed by a fourth-century author and explores ways in which John is utilized to expand, update and modify the Ignatian middle recension.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Hedrick, Charles. "Vestigial Scenes in John: Settings without Dramatization." Novum Testamentum 47, no. 4 (2005): 354–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156853605774482126.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractJohn 2:12 comprises little more than a scene setting and plays no evident role in John's overall narrative. Thus it is surprising to find it in a text whose "author" knows that space is limited (John 21:25) and so narrates things serving a soteriological purpose (John 20:30-31). This paper compares John 2:12 to other similar brief independent "scenes" in the gospel, and identifies their literary character as "vestigial scenes": these are scene settings, which for some reason are not dramatized. The paper concludes by exploring reasonable options for explaining their presence in the text.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Heath, Jane. "Imperial Negotiation in John’s Gospel." Expository Times 122, no. 6 (February 15, 2011): 279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00145246111220060202.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Hägerland, Tobias. "John’s Gospel: A Two-Level Drama?" Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25, no. 3 (March 2003): 309–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0142064x0302500304.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Louth, Andrew. "The Paschal Heart of John’s Gospel." Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology 29, no. 2 (February 12, 2020): 161–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1063851220906545.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Seed, Caroline Grace. "Reception of the Gospel of John among the Isawa of Northern Nigeria and the Qiang of Western China, 1913–35." International Bulletin of Mission Research 44, no. 3 (September 11, 2019): 257–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2396939319872095.

Full text

Abstract:

This article examines the early mission history of the reception of the Gospel of John among two very different people groups, the Isawa of northern Nigeria and the Qiang of western China. It considers the similarities in their pre-Christian religion in terms of monotheism, messianic expectation, and self-understanding as children of Israel in order to theorize theological reasons for the positive reception of John’s Gospel. It concludes that John’s Gospel is the ideal place to start reading with monotheistic groups.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Furlong, Dean. "Theodore of Mopsuestia: New Evidence for the Proposed Papian Fragment in Hist. eccl. 3.24.5-13." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 39, no. 2 (November 1, 2016): 209–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0142064x16675269.

Full text

Abstract:

Eusebius records Papias on the origins of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark but provides nothing comparable on John’s gospel, leading some scholars to conclude that Papias was silent concerning it. Others, however, suggest that Eusebius knew of Papias’s account of John’s gospel and chose not to record it. Charles Hill has argued at length that an unattributed passage in Eusebius’s Church History preserves the substance of Papias’s comments on John’s gospel. Richard Bauckham has raised objections to Hill’s hypothesis, arguing that while the problem of ‘order’ (τάξις) is common to Papias and the unattributed fragment, the solutions given by each are quite different. This study will provide a fresh analysis of the question, and will suggest new evidence in favour of Hill’s hypothesis from the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Waqas, Syed M. "The Qur’ānic Dialogue with the Mystical Theology of Logos in John’s Gospel." Teosofi: Jurnal Tasawuf dan Pemikiran Islam 10, no. 2 (December 20, 2020): 179–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.15642/teosofi.2020.10.2.179-203.

Full text

Abstract:

The Qur’ān, the “Holy Writ” of Islam, builds its rationale of revelation on the scriptural model of biblical tradition. Embracing direct divine intervention in worldly affairs as the first principle within the constrictions of monotheistic theology, the Qur’ān resurrects biblical purview of an intermediary agency linking the transcendent divine with the terrestrial human, which the author of John’s Gospel identifies as “Logos”. This article argues that the Qur’ānic conception of kalām-Allah, at a conceptual level, engages with John’s mystical theology of the divine origin of the Logos-incarnate and reinterprets the conception as well as its application. This cornerstone of John’s theology formulates a crucial basis for the Qur’ānic narrator’s self-reflection through both content and form of revelation as such. Biblical literature written prior to Johannine appropriation of Logos does not cohere with John’s mystical paradigm, which the Qur’ān, on the other hand, brings to a whole new level of theological maturation. The Qur’ān dialogues with John’s Gospel at multiple levels on the principal question of God’s personal interaction with humanity and presents its nuanced metaphysical construct in conversation with the Logos principle, but in distinction from John’s incarnation theology.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Gaston, Thomas E. "Does the Gospel of John Have a High Christology?" Horizons in Biblical Theology 36, no. 2 (September 18, 2014): 129–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341279.

Full text

Abstract:

John’s gospel is often presented as having a “high” Christology but are alternative readings possible or even more credible? In this essay I re-evaluate the foundations of the purported high Christology of John’s gospel in light of recent Johannine scholarship. I will argue that some conventional readings of John are precarious and common proof texts, when read properly, are more indicative of a low Christology. I will also acknowledge that some passages might indicate a high Christology and warrant further study. If the Gospel of John has, in fact, a low Christology then this has implications for both the dating of the gospel and its relevance for the quest for the historical Jesus.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Shinall, Myrick C., and Christopher M. Hallum. "The Betrayal of the Unreliable Narrator: Deconstruction, Dualism, and the “Other Disciple” of John 18:15–16." Biblical Interpretation 24, no. 3 (July 19, 2016): 400–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00243p06.

Full text

Abstract:

One of the most troubling aspects of the Gospel of John is its tendency to create rigid dualisms between insiders and outsiders. This article uses the technique of deconstruction to undermine John’s characterization of the ultimate outsider: Judas. John inadvertently gives the reader the freedom to identify the anonymous figure of the other disciple who lets Peter into the high priest’s courtyard as Judas. Such identification leads to a deconstructive reading of the Gospel of John in which dualism collapses. With its ambiguities and aporias, the Gospel of John allows for the redemption of Judas when read deconstructively. The instability John’s dualism calls into question the validity of any strict binary that labels people as insiders or outsiders.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Luther, Susanne. "The Authentication of the Past: Narrative Representations of History in the Gospel of John." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 43, no. 1 (September 2020): 67–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0142064x20949383.

Full text

Abstract:

Narrative historiography in John’s gospel operates with a number of literary strategies, such as historical referentiality and eyewitness testimony, which serve to authenticate the narrative and to inscribe the (hi)story of Jesus into ancient history. At the same time, these authentication strategies are counteracted or ‘ruptured’ (for example, by strategies of ﬁctional literature), which situate John’s narrative of this-worldly history within a symbolic, metahistorical framework; yet these strategies are not to be perceived as detrimental to the reception of the text as a factual text. This article discusses two narrative strategies through which referentiality and authenticity are created as well as counteracted in the Johannine text; it also describes the forms and functions of these literary strategies that support the christological conception of history in John’s gospel.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Cameron, Michael. "Augustine and John’s Gospel from Conversion to Confessiones." Augustinian Studies 48, no. 1 (2017): 263–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/augstudies2017101241.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Hylen, Susan E. "The Shepherd’s Risk: Thinking Metaphorically with John’s Gospel." Biblical Interpretation 24, no. 3 (July 19, 2016): 382–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00243p05.

Full text

Abstract:

One of the characteristics of the good shepherd of John 10:11–18 is a phrase that is usually translated “he lays down his life” (vv. 11, 15, 17, 18). Although interpreters often acknowledge the alternate meaning, “he risks his life,” this option is usually rejected. This article sees the notion of risk as an important element of John’s metaphorical presentation of Jesus as shepherd. Drawing on cultural conventions of shepherding, the literary context, and metaphor theory, the author argues that John portrays Jesus as one who risks his life for the sheep, and not simply as one who dies for them. This idea of a shepherd who risks his life for the flock can illuminate the reader’s understanding of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, and the way that disciples are called to follow him.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Hoekema, Alle G. "St. John’s Gospel. A Gallery of Hieratic Art." Exchange 40, no. 3 (2011): 299–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157254311x579686.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Isbell, Charles David. "Essays Introducing a Jewish Perspective on the Gospel of John." Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry 2, no. 1 (March 24, 2020): 17–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no1.02.

Full text

Abstract:

This article’s aim is to highlight the impact that plain sense readings of the Gospel of John have on educated Jewish and Christian lay persons but who typically do not aspire to learn or appropriate current scholarly theories seeking to explain sacred texts in a technical and often inordinately complex fashion. Essay topics include: 1) the anonymous author (“John”), the relationship of his gospel to the Synoptic Gospels, his interpretation of Jewish actions and customs, and his influence on a distinct group of early Christians, the “Johannine” community; 2) John’s portrayal of Jesus’ self-identification in using the divine name YHWH; 3) John’s description and interpretation of various Jewish responses to Jesus, as well as the author’s understanding of the reasons for Jews rejecting the message and person of Jesus; and 4) John’s portrayal of the early break between Judaism and Christianity, laid entirely at the feet of “the Jews.”

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Montanaro, Andrew. "The Use of Memory in the Old Testament Quotations in John’s Gospel." Novum Testamentum 59, no. 2 (March 9, 2017): 147–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341560.

Full text

Abstract:

The variances of the Old Testament quotations in John’s gospel from their source texts have been explained as John’s theological re-appropriation of these sources. However, this paper identifies within these variations what David Carr calls “memory variants,” ultimately showing that John was recalling the ot from memory. Furthermore, the verbatim quotations are usually taken from Psalms, which contain poetic constraints that enhance memory recall. These observations correspond strongly to the fact that the gospel of John, like other ancient documents, was produced in a culture that was predominately oral, wherein the handing on of tradition depended primarily on memorization.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Rodríguez, Rafael. "What is History? Reading John 1 as Historical Representation." Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 16, no. 1 (April 27, 2018): 31–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/17455197-01601003.

Full text

Abstract:

As Pontius Pilate nearly asked, What is history? This article draws upon memory and media studies to question the notion that we find history within the text of the Fourth Gospel. Rather than trying to identify and isolate history within John’s Gospel, our discussion aims to recover how the Gospel works as a set of historical claims, joining with or competing against other historical claims within the social sphere of its author, redactor, and/or audience. After a précis of memory’s and media’s significance for our question (What is history?), we will localize these abstract issues by turning to the Johannine portrayal of John the Baptist and his testimony for Jesus. This approach respects the Fourth Gospel as a written text that developed and was compiled/redacted in the late first century without imposing a rigidly atemporal conception of Johannine theology onto John’s claims about events six or seven decades earlier.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Wilson, Andrew P. "“Beholding the Man”: Viewing (or is it Marking?) John’s Trial Scene alongside Kitsch Art." Biblical Interpretation 24, no. 2 (April 18, 2016): 245–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00242p06.

Full text

Abstract:

One of the grand scenes of the Passion narratives can be found in John’s Gospel where Pilate, presenting Jesus to the people, proclaims “Behold the man”: “Ecce Homo.” But what exactly does Pilate mean when he asks the reader to “Behold”? This paper takes as its point of departure a roughly drawn picture of Jesus in the “Ecce Homo” tradition and explores the relationship of this picture to its referent in John’s Gospel, via its capacity as kitsch devotional art. Contemporary scholarship on kitsch focuses on what kitsch does, or how it functions, rather than assessing what it is. From this perspective, when “beholding” is understood not for what it reveals but for what it does, John’s scene takes on a very different significance. It becomes a scene that breaks down traditional divisions between big and small stories, subject and object as well as text and context. A kitsch perspective opens up possibilities for locating John’s narrative in unexpected places and experiences. Rather than being a two-dimensional departure from the grandeur of John’s trial scene, kitsch “art” actually provides a lens through which the themes and dynamics of the narrative can be re-viewed with an expansiveness somewhat lacking from more traditional commentary.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Walsh, Richard. "Gospel Judases." Postscripts: The Journal of Sacred Texts, Cultural Histories, and Contemporary Contexts 2, no. 1 (May 20, 2007): 29–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/post.v2i1.29.

Full text

Abstract:

The canonical Judas is not a developed, literary character, but, rather, a sign within Christian discourse of the fated, traitorous disciple who came to an appropriate reward. Christian mythology employs that figure in order to demarcate boundaries between insiders and outsiders. The discourse uses that Judas as a scapegoat to exorcise evil. When modern critics remove the individual gospels from the canon, their readings depict several different Judases: for example, Mark’s apocalyptic victim, Matthew’s repentant murderer, Luke’s apostate apostle, and John’s thieving demon. Such readings expose the determinism that creates the gospel Judases and the (at least, potential) anti-Semitism that creates the canonical Judas. More importantly, reflection on such “isms” creates the mythic space necessary for the modern critic’s mythic self-definition. As a result, the modern Judases are themselves signs within some modern mythology, stressing individual freedom, rather than canonical mythology. As these modern Judases fail as exemplars of human freedom, Judas remains a sign of alienation and victimization.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Silva, Alvaro. "Literary Devices in John’s Gospel (Revised and Expanded Edition)." Mayéutica 44, no. 98 (2018): 491–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/mayeutica2018449849.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Seo, Hyung-Suk. "Logos and Cosmos in the Prologue of John’s Gospel." Canon&Culture 4, no. 1 (April 30, 2010): 215–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.31280/cc.2010.04.4.1.215.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Youm, Cheolho, and Yeonjin Kwon. "A Study on Metaphorical Expression Patterns of John’s Gospel." Journal of Language Sciences 22, no. 3 (August 30, 2015): 133–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.14384/kals.2015.22.3.133.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Ripley, Jason. "Atonement and Martyrdom in the Gospel of John." Horizons in Biblical Theology 42, no. 1 (April 30, 2020): 58–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341403.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Does the Gospel of John portray Jesus’ death as an atoning sacrifice? This paper offers a new approach to the revelation vs. sacrifice impasse in scholarship, arguing that Jesus’ atoning death in John should be understood with reference to the non-cultic atoning deaths of the Jewish martyrdom traditions. After critically engaging scholarship, I contextualize John within post-biblical debates regarding sacrificial martyrdom, focusing on the competing reconfigurations of non-cultic atonement in the Maccabean literature. I subsequently show how Jesus’ atoning martyrdom reveals his anti-violent way of the cross as the true martyrdom and atoning sacrifice accepted by God, thereby resolving key tensions within Johannine scholarship. I then demonstrate how this vision of atonement addresses John’s understanding of sin as ignorance and addresses an audience itself facing threats of martyrdom (John 16:2). I conclude with some reflections on how John’s vision of atonement critically differs from later theological theories, particularly penal substitution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Miller, Susan. "“I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10): An Ecological Reading of John’s Gospel." Expository Times 124, no. 2 (September 17, 2012): 64–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0014524612456806.

Full text

Abstract:

In the synoptic gospels Jesus proclaims the imminence of the Kingdom of God but in John’s Gospel Jesus is concerned with the gift of eternal life. Interpretations of John’s Gospel have emphasised the relationship between salvation and an individual’s faith in Jesus. Several passages feature accounts of the meeting of Jesus and characters who come to faith in him such as the Samaritan woman, the blind man, Martha, and Thomas. The focus on the faith of individuals and their desire for eternal life has downplayed the importance of the natural world. An ecological strategy of identification, however, illustrates the ways in which Jesus is aligned with Earth. He offers the Samaritan woman living water, and he identifies himself as the bread of life (6:35), the light of the world (8:12), and the true vine (15:1). This strategy of identification highlights images of fruitfulness and abundant harvests. This approach, moreover, emphasises the presence of God in the processes of nature, and the gift of eternal life is described in terms of the abundance of the natural world. An ecological interpretation of John’s Gospel challenges the view that salvation may be defined purely in terms of the gift of eternal life to an individual, and points to an understanding of salvation as the restoration of the relationship of God, humanity, and Earth.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Adamczewski, Bartosz. "Czy Jan był czwartym Synoptykiem?" Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne 31, no. 1 (February 5, 2018): 78–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.30439/wst.2018.1.7.

Full text

Abstract:

A detailed comparative analysis of the fragments Jn 4 and Acts 8 reveals that Jn 4 is linked to Acts 8 with the use of 48 sequentially ordered correspondences.These correspondences are mainly conceptual-thematic (John’s use of Lucan ideas), but also linguistic (John’s use of Lucan phrases, keywords, etc.).In order to illustrate the ideas from Acts, John often used motifs borrowed from other works (all three Synoptic Gospels, the Septuagint, the Pauline letters,the First Letter of John, etc.). However, it is the Acts of the Apostles that constitutes the main base text (hypotext) for the conceptual structure of the Fourth Gospel. This surprisingly close structural-conceptual connection of the Fourth Gospel to the Acts of the Apostles permits us to regard John as in fact the fourth Synoptic.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Shitikov, Pyotr M. "Metaphor “CHRIST IS THE SHEPHERD” in Versions of John’s Gospel." Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates 3, no. 3 (2017): 145–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.21684/2411-197x-2017-3-3-145-155.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Silva, Álvaro. "Jesus in John’s Gospel: Structures and Issues in Johannine Christology." Mayéutica 43, no. 96 (2017): 426–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/mayeutica2017439648.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Barth, Markus. "Ultimate Reality and Meaning in the Light of John’s Gospel." Ultimate Reality and Meaning 12, no. 2 (June 1989): 84–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/uram.12.2.84.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Hodges, Horace Jeffery. "Crossing the Sacred-Profane Divide in Gnosticism and John’s Gospel." Trans-Humanities Journal 4, no. 1 (2011): 163–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/trh.2011.0007.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Maier, Harry O. "The Father, the Son, and John on Location in the Farewell Discourse." Journal of the Bible and its Reception 7, no. 1 (April 28, 2020): 7–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2019-0018.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractUsing the tools of social geography, specifically those developed by Edward Soja, Henri Lefebvre, and Oliver Sacks, this article explores the Gospel of John’s spatial reference to place as it appears in Jesus’ Farewell Discourse (John 14–17) and the ways it uses narrative to create places for the practices and conceiving of religious identity. Although application of spatial study to John’s gospel is relatively rare in Johannine studies, it promises a great deal of insight, especially because John’s gospel is filled with numerous references to place and a rich variety of prepositional phrases. Through narrative, John offers a spatial temporalization (following Soja, a ‘thirdspace’) for audiences to inhabit and interpret the world around them. John’s Father-Son-Paraclete language of unity (which the Christian tradition has interpreted metaphysically and soteriologically without reference to time and space) creates a place for Johannine discipleship in which listeners reenact the dynamic relationship of its three divine actors. John establishes a particular mode of spatial identity by presenting Father, Son, and Paraclete, together with the narrative’s antagonists and protagonists in particular spaces with a set of behaviors associated with each location. The Johannine reference to Jesus going to prepare a place for his disciples after his death (John 13:36), and the reference to a mansion with many room (John 14:2–4) is traditionally interpreted as a reference to the afterlife or a heavenly domain. Scholars have debated whether this represents a futurist or a realized eschatological teaching. A spatial application offers new insights by viewing it from a social geographical perspective as a spatial location “in the world,” lived out locationally “in” the Paraclete, in rejection by the “world.” Metaphysical unity language refers to a narrative of rejection and suffering, which reveals the identity of Johannine believers “in but not of the world.” In this regard, John reflects sapiential themes found in the Hebrew Bible and the intertestamental period that tell of wisdom dwelling on earth and also being rejected.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Estes, Douglas. "Dualism or Paradox? A New ‘Light’ on the Gospel of John." Journal of Theological Studies 71, no. 1 (January 30, 2020): 90–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jts/flz168.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Modern scholarship maintains the Gospel of John is dualistic. This view is uneasily held as there is a growing move to distance the gospel from the original history-of-religions concept of dualism that reached its peak in the mid-twentieth century with expectations of incipient Gnosticism in John. Instead of further nuancing the dualistic-sounding ideas in John, this essay challenges directly the claim that John is dualistic—and it proposes that what is often understood to be a dualistic metaphysic is actually paradoxical language as part of the Gospel’s oral and literary language games. Starting with a survey of how dualism entered into the scholarly purview of John, the essay then turns to the meaning and function of paradox in the ancient world. Since scholars point to John’s ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ imagery as the most prominent example of dualism, this essay uses the paradox language of ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ as a test case to demonstrate how paradox, and not dualism, is a more accurate and historical descriptor for John’s communicative strategy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Herman, Daniel Horatius. "Pokok Anggur yang Benar: Eksegesis dan Eksposisi Yohanes 15:1-3." HUPERETES: Jurnal Teologi dan Pendidikan Kristen 2, no. 1 (December 25, 2020): 72–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.46817/huperetes.v2i1.48.

Full text

Abstract:

The various interpretations of John 15:1-3 point to errors in the method of interpretation. Of course, Jesus only had one purpose. This research aims to find the meaning of the true teachings of Jesus that will lead every believer to the true Christian life, so that the wrong meaning, which confuses Christian to Understand the teachings of Jesus, can be anticipated. This study uses a hermeneutic research method that specifically exegesis to the discussion texts. This research examines the context of Jesus in the Gospel of John as a whole; the Old Testament context relating to John 15:1-3; and reviews in general, the context of the chapters around John 15:1-3 and concludes based on these steps. John 15:1, explains Jesus' statement as Yahweh and the statement of Jesus as the embodiment of Israel. John 15:2a describes “the cut branches” referring to all Israelites who rejected Jesus. Meanwhile "the cleansed branches" (15:2b) refers to Jesus' disciples and all the Israelites who believed in Him. The statement in John 15:3 is a statement that Jesus' disciples were in a state of cleanness. For the first recipients of John's Gospel, these verses meant believing Jews were "a branch bearing fruit" and "cleansed" whereas unbelieving Jews were "a cut branch."Penafsiran yang beragam atas Yohanes 15:1-3 menunjukkan kesalahan metode penafsiran. Tentu saja Yesus hanya mempunyai satu maksud. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan makna ajaran Yesus yang benar yang akan menuntun setiap orang percaya kepada kehidupan Kristen yang benar, sehingga makna yang keliru, yang menyebabkan kebingungan terhadap ajaran Yesus akan dapat diantisipasi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hermeneutika yang secara khusus mengeksegesis teks-teks pembahasan. Penelitian ini mempelajari Konteks Yesus dalam Injil Yohanes secara keseluruhan; konteks Perjanjian Lama yang berhubungan dengan Yohanes 15:1-3; dan meninjau secara umum, konteks pasal-pasal di sekitar Yohanes 15:1-3 serta menyimpulkan berdasarkan langkah-langkah tersebut. Yohanes 15:1 menjelaskan pernyataan Yesus sebagai Yahweh dan pernyataan Yesus sebagai perwujudan Israel. Yohanes 15:2a menjelaskan “ranting-ranting yang dipotong” menunjuk pada semua orang Israel yang menolak Yesus. Sementara “ranting-ranting yang dibersihkan” (15:2b) menunjuk pada murid-murid Yesus dan semua orang Israel yang percaya kepada-Nya. Pernyataan dalam Yohanes 15:3 adalah pernyataan bahwa murid-murid Yesus sedang dalam keadaan bersih. Bagi penerima pertama Injil Yohanes, ayat-ayat ini berarti orang-orang Yahudi yang percaya adalah “ranting yang berbuah” dan “dibersihkan” sedangkan orang-orang Yahudi yang tidak percaya adalah “ranting yang dipotong."

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Kim, Sung-Sup. "Engrafting: The Image of Union in Calvin’s Commentary on John’s Gospel." Journal of Reformed Theology 4, no. 2 (2010): 112–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156973110x523539.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis essay examines the concept of union with Christ in Calvin’s theology. I focus on Calvin’s commentary on the Gospel of John 13-17 in which Calvin employs the organic aspects of engrafting in order to develop the doctrine of union with Christ. Although Calvin fully acknowledges the mystic nature of this union, he carefully prevents his doctrine from falling into that of mysticism. I explicate the different meanings with which Calvin uses the image of engrafting and the firm limits he places around it. The result shows how Calvin’s exegesis feeds into the development of a doctrine.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Bennema, Cornelis. "The Giving of the Spirit in John’s Gospel – A New Proposal?" Evangelical Quarterly 74, no. 3 (April 16, 2002): 195–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-07403003.

Full text

Abstract:

John 20:22 has always caused major interpretative problems for scholars because of its obscurity. The majority of Johannine scholarship interprets 20:22 as the so-called ‘Johannine Pentecost’, parallel to Acts 2. Others use 20:22 to support the Pentecostal position. We disagree with both views and put forward a new proposal, which contributes to a better understanding of 20:22 in four ways. First, we understand 19:30 in relation to 20:22, in that the proleptic giving of the Spirit at the cross foreshadows the actual giving of the Spirit on the resurrection evening. Second, we interpret 20:22 relationally, in that the disciples receive a new relationship with the Spirit that secures and sustains the disciples’ salvation. Third, the eschatological conditions for the reception of the Spirit (7:39 and 16:7) refer to two distinct events, namely to the start and the end of Jesus’ glorification. Fourth, we give a plausible account for the missiological cotext of 20:22.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Bennema, Cornelis. "The Giving of the Spirit in John’s Gospel – A New Proposal?" Evangelical Quarterly 74, no. 3 (April 16, 2002): 195–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-07403001.

Full text

Abstract:

John 20:22 has always caused major interpretative problems for scholars because of its obscurity. The majority of Johannine scholarship interprets 20:22 as the so-called ‘Johannine Pentecost’, parallel to Acts 2. Others use 20:22 to support the Pentecostal position. We disagree with both views and put forward a new proposal, which contributes to a better understanding of 20:22 in four ways. First, we understand 19:30 in relation to 20:22, in that the proleptic giving of the Spirit at the cross foreshadows the actual giving of the Spirit on the resurrection evening. Second, we interpret 20:22 relationally, in that the disciples receive a new relationship with the Spirit that secures and sustains the disciples’ salvation. Third, the eschatological conditions for the reception of the Spirit (7:39 and 16:7) refer to two distinct events, namely to the start and the end of Jesus’ glorification. Fourth, we give a plausible account for the missiological cotext of 20:22.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Strelov, Vladimir. "John 1:19–2:25 as a Synopsis of John’s Gospel." St.Tikhons' University Review 96 (August 31, 2021): 9–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturi202196.9-19.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Sturdevant, Jason S. "Incarnation as Psychagogy." Novum Testamentum 56, no. 1 (January 15, 2014): 24–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341441.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract In his homilies on John’s Gospel, John Chrysostom refers to Jesus’ actions as reflective of an adaptable psychagogy. Starting with this initial observation, this study examines key aspects of the Gospel through the lens of psychagogy, particularly its christology and its emphasis on revelation. This study proposes an alternative understanding to the mysteriousness of the Johannine Jesus, arguing that mysteriousness does not simply arise out of Jesus’ heavenly origins, but also serves an important psychagogical end: to inspire people to reevaluate their presuppositions about Jesus’ identity and mission.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Tripp, Jeffrey. "Jesus’s Special Knowledge in the Gospel of John." Novum Testamentum 61, no. 3 (June 10, 2019): 269–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341635.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Fourth Gospel portrays Jesus as having special knowledge of himself and his future, but also of the people and events around him. While John’s Jesus always has divine insight, he does not always share it. Jesus neither shares nor hides special knowledge haphazardly, but in service of two interrelated goals: sharing special knowledge persuades doubting characters in order to build a group of believers to receive the Spirit after his death. Jesus hides special knowledge in order to ensure a proper death at his hour. In this way, John explains how a character who exerts sovereign control throughout the Gospel is nevertheless betrayed and executed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

de Lang, Marijke H. "John 1.29, 36: The Meaning of Ἀμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ and John’s Soteriology." Bible Translator 68, no. 2 (July 27, 2017): 148–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2051677017694651.

Full text

Abstract:

The phrase “Lamb of God” in John 1.29 and 36 has been explained from various Old Testament texts, but it has generally been taken for granted that the words should be understood as sacrificial terminology. Isaiah 53 comes closest because it uses the same term ἀμνός, which could be appropriated by early Christians, perhaps not so much as a reference to Jesus’ sacrificial death, but more as describing Jesus’ obedience and submission to the will of the Father. In the soteriology of the Fourth Gospel, the death of Jesus plays a less prominent role than elsewhere in the New Testament. John’s emphasis is more on the “yes” to Jesus in the encounter with him than on Jesus’ death as saving event. If we acknowledge this specific Johannine soteriology, we may need to rethink the translation of some of the key terms in the Fourth Gospel, such as the singular ἁμαρτία and the expression τίθεναι τὴν ψυχήν ὑπέρ.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Cho, Kyu-Hong. "William Loader. Jesus in John’s Gospel: Structure and Issues in Johannine Christology." Toronto Journal of Theology 36, no. 1 (August 2020): 97–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/tjt-2019-0128.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

O’Collins, Gerald. "William Loader, Jesus in John’s Gospel: Structure and Issues in Johannine Christology." Pacifica: Australasian Theological Studies 30, no. 1 (February 2017): 102–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1030570x17732804.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Koester, Craig R. "Catrin Williams and Christopher Rowland (eds), John’s Gospel and Intimations of Apocalyptic." Theology 118, no. 1 (December 18, 2014): 55–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040571x14551928q.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Spensley, Barbara E. "Book Review: Tyndale Commentary on John’s Gospel; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: John." Expository Times 116, no. 2 (November 2004): 69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452460411600219.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Cole, Zachary J., and Elijah Hixson. "A Majuscule Lectionary Manuscript of John’s Gospel at the University of Edinburgh." Expository Times 127, no. 6 (May 11, 2015): 261–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0014524615584741.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Manor, T. Scott. "Papias, Origen, and Eusebius: The Criticisms and Defense of the Gospel of John." Vigiliae Christianae 67, no. 1 (2013): 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157007212x641095.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The question of whether or not Papias recorded anything about John’s Gospel has garnered a lot of attention in the scholarly realms of New Testament and Patristics alike. Most notably, Charles E. Hill has recently argued that a portion of Eusebius’ testimony (HE 3.24.5-13) on the origins of the Gospel of John derives from the record of Papias. Aspects of Hill’s proposal are largely convincing, particularly the links he draws between Eusebius’ testimony and other writers who knew the Papian tradition. However, Hill has overestimated the influence of Papias on Eusebius’ account and missed a crucial, albeit subtle, correction by Eusebius against his hero, Origen. This article suggests that the argument for Gospel compatibility found in 3.24.8b-13 is Eusebius’ own direct response to the criticisms raised by Origen that the divergent chronology of the Gospel of John demonstrates its historical unreliability.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Reinsdorf, Walter. "How is the gospel true?" Scottish Journal of Theology 56, no. 3 (August 2003): 328–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930603001091.

Full text

Abstract:

In order to answer this question and for other purposes I intend principally to describe, comment on and include some of the thought of Hans Frei and Paul Ricoeur. I include Frei because he, while unable to ‘prove’ Jesus' presence, can ‘make sense of the gospel story’ in his own way, especially with his idea of the ‘history-like’ quality of the story which he believes prevents its acceptance as myth. I too cannot hope to ‘prove’ Jesus’ presence, nor would I account him as mythic. Frei does not, however, account for rhetorical persuasion. While he explains how we can accept the story as true by cutting between history and myth, it still remains to understand why and how the story is offered. But Ricoeur can help to answer the how and the why through his analysis of the coincidence of divine will and human contingency in biblical story, with Jesus as destined and God the Father as Destinator. I take this idea further by showing how in John's gospel Peter, through his own contingent acts of denial, his human fallibility, is rescued by love, the final contingency. Ricoeur also makes a case for ‘manifestation’ rather than ‘verification’ of the gospels, the one through poetic discourse superseding the other by scientific description. Hence, there is a rhetorical – literary argument for reader identity with Jesus, based in part on Aristotle's tragic emotions and in part on our human inconstancy and inconsistency as understood by Ricoeur and Montaigne to show how these qualities work out in Peter. Both Frei and Ricoeur find their way to the Jesus of faith past the Jesus of reason and myth to the Jesus of story. The goal of this article is to show how we are persuaded by John to identify with Jesus with the rhetoric of love.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Förster, Hans. "Possible Similarities in the Linguistic Structure of John 8.25b and John 8.45a." Bible Translator 68, no. 2 (July 27, 2017): 164–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2051677017711243.

Full text

Abstract:

It appears possible to point to linguistic structures in John 8.25b and 45a which exhibit similarities. While John 8.25b has seen discussion, the problems of John 8.45a have not been given much attention. This article argues that both passages contain structures which derive from Semitic influence on the Greek. This is important both for translating the sentences and for the question of the author of John’s Gospel and his background.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Cho, Jae Hyung. "Thomas in John’s Gospel and the Controversy on the Resurrection of the Body." Korean Journal of Christian Studies 116 (April 30, 2020): 105–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.18708/kjcs.2020.04.116.1.105.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!