The Johannine Tradition

• THE FOURTH GOSPEL The gospel tells us that it offers testimony by an eye-witness of the Crucifixion (19.35) and its references to a disciple whom Jesus especially loved (e.g., 19.26) have been taken to imply that the gospel was written by him or at least based on his witness. The identification of this disciple with John the son of Zebedee is a somewhat later tradition but a defensible one. For convenience, we'll refer to the author(s) as John.
  John 1.1-18: In the Beginning. Many of the issues which affect our understanding of this gospel are raised by its famous opening passage.
  Was the Word . . . and Word was God. The opening verses present us with Jesus seen as the prexistent creative Word of God, the Logos. This has sent scholars off searching for an influence on John of Greek philosophy, where this term originated, or of the adaptations of it in Jewish wisdom literature. But it is worth noting that this term--and some others used in the opening passage--does not recur in the rest of the Gospel. The gospel labels Jesus with many divine and Messianic titles, but the logos is not among them. It is mostly a stylistic question, as the assertion that the Word was God fits a gospel which is far clearer about the divinity of Jesus than, say, Mark, though in this gospel, too, Jesus generally uses "Son of Man" to refer to himself. Given its poetic quality, the passage may have begun as a separate hymn within the Johannine community before being added at some point as a preface to the gospel.
  • A Man Sent From God. Into this opening hymn have been inserted some remarks about John the Baptist. It has been suggested that verses 6-8 marked the original beginning of the gospel, parallel to the beginning of Mark. In all of the Synoptic Gospels, and in Peter's sermon of Acts 10.34-43, the public ministry of Jesus begins with recognition by John, continues with healing and preaching, and then leads to the Passion and resurrection; John also follows this broad template.
    -- Although it does not share Luke's account of the miraculous birth of John the Baptist, the Fourth Gospel does give special emphasis to the Baptist, and to making sure that the reader understands him subordinate role in the story. In the first interpolated passage, we are told that the Baptist "was not the light, but he came to testify to the light" (1.8), and a later interpolation has him testify that "He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me" (1.15). The same phrase recurs (1.30) in the account of John's baptism of Jesus, along with other declarations to the same effect. Immediately after than, two of John's disciples come to follow Jesus. And later we are told that John is happy to see Jesus's following growing; "He must increase, but I must decrease" (3.30). The signs he performs (unlike John) are seen by the crowds as signs that what John said about him was true (10.41).
    -- All this has led some scholars to see an apologetic against followers of John the Baptist as one of the purposes of this gospel. We know that there were those who continued to follow John, and we have evidence from the 3rd century A.D. that some of them came to believe that John rather than Jesus had been the Messiah, though we have no clear picture of what such groups may have believed at the time of the gospel. In Acts 19.1-7, Paul comes upon a dozen disciples who have been baptized only into John's baptism; he baptizes them again and lays hands upon them, at which they receive the Holy Spirit and begin to speak in tongues and prophesy.
  • And the Word Became Flesh. John's emphasis on Jesus as the cosmic Christ may have made his gospel a favorite with some of those later Christians whom we call Gnostics, but John did not mean to have the divinity of Christ cancel out his humanity. He tells us, for example, the story of the doubts of Thomas (20.24-29), who will only believe when he has touched the mark of the nails and placed his hand in the side of the risen Jesus. Elaine Pagels has argued that the Thomas passage is directed at a group of early Christians who followed the Gospel of Thomas. 1 John is more clearly directed at those inclined to play down or deny the humanity of Jesus.
  • And We Have Seen His Glory. This is not a gospel written to convert non-believers but a gospel of and for a community of believers, as the gospel's unusual use of "we" (here and alsewhere) suggests. The world is full of darkness, but we have seen the light.
  • His Own People Did Not Accept Him. One of the disturbing things about this gospel is its frequent use of "the Jews" (beginning with 1.19) for the opponents of Jesus, where other gospels specify more specific groups. This trait has allowed the gospel to be used as justification by anti-Semites. It is also another reason for believing that the work was written for internal use by the community that produced it, rather than as a tool for proselytizing.
    --One possible clue to the gospel's attitude would be the presence of references to explusion of believers in Jesus from the synagogue in 9.22, 12.42, and 16.2. Expulsions of that sort are generally dated to a decade or so after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. It has been suggested that the gospel may have been partly addressed to Jews who believed in Jesus but were loath to testify to it lest they be expelled from the synagogue. In any case, this rupture with Judaism is part of the background of John's gospel.
• The Last Supper. Although symbols of baptism and of the memorial supper are scattered throughout the gospel, the account of the Last Supper in John strikes some observers as less sacramental than in the Synoptic tradition. There are some important differences, though enough similarities to show that some traditions were held in common--the betrayal by Judas, for example. Such differences would normally be expected in accounts written down well after an event, especially since the disciples do not seem to have recognized the full import of the meal while it was taking place. They have, however, been stumbling blocks for some literalists, and a good deal of ingenuity has been spent in the effort to reconcile John with the Synoptics.
  • Dating the Events of the Last Week. In the Synoptics, the last meal of Jesus and his disciples seems to take place on the first day of unleavened bread (starting with Mark 14.12--but see Mark 14.1) and it is celebrated as a Passover meal. This is not the case in John, where the Jesus is already in Pilate's hands before the Passover meal is celebrated (18.28). John's dating seems to represent a separate tradition. It has the advantage of not placing the Crucifixion on the Passover.
  • Foot-Washing. Only in this gospel do we find the story of Jesus washing the feet of the disciples. This is not a regular part of the Passover celebration, nor does it come as they enter the room, as would a host's washing of his guests' feet. It is a symbolic act, a reversal of the role of master and disciple, in anticipation of Jesus's role as the suffering servant on the cross. (Others see elements of baptism here as well.) Peter has the act explained to him--perhaps in two different explanations (13.6-10 and 13.12-20), each followed by a reference to Judas. In the second of these passages, it is enjoined upon believers as an act of humility, and it is possible that some such practice was found in the Johannine community. One still finds it practiced on special occasions in some Christian churches.
  • Last Discourses. Unlike the Synoptics, John has Jesus use the supper as the occasion for teaching. The first version of this may have ended at 14.31, where Jesus says "Rise, let us be on our way." In the text as it stands, we have two more chapters of discourse, telling the disciples how to behave in the face of hardship, and another chapter (17) of Jesus praying for them.

• 1 JOHN The first epistle ascribed to John is clearly within the Johannine tradition. It may have been directed especially against those who could not reconcile the cosmic Christ with the humanity of Jesus and tended to devalue the latter. What makes it most valuable is less its polemic against a particular set of schismatics than its rhetoric against credulity and lack of love that may lead to schism.