“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Conclusion)
Conclusion
In the previous eight posts I have been systematically discussing the role “the world” (Greek: kosmos) plays as a character in the Fourth Gospel. I have examined a number of specific texts, against the backdrop of several concerns expressed by other scholars. We have arrived at a few conclusions. The Johannine Jesus is from above. The Johannine kosmos consists of both the realm and the people down below. This simple positional contrast is symbolic of the greater divide that exists between Jesus and the world (as character) in John’s Gospel. The two are at odds, but only insofar as the world conspires to bring this about. As the one who comes from above, Jesus has set off on a mission to make God known to humanity. He is both the creator and savior of the world. Like a wayward child, the world will ultimately reject its creator and destroy its savior. The world’s rejection of Jesus amounts to a rejection of the Father who sent him, and by extension, the coming Paraclete as well as Jesus’ followers. Thus, as a character in the Fourth Gospel, the world represents the human forces that stand in opposition to Jesus, and in this way, functions even if surreptitiously, as the story’s primary antagonist. As a character, the world carries the promise of great things but consistently betrays that promise for a darkened perspective that opposes rather than celebrates the plan and people of God.
“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Part Seven)
(4) The World Rejoices at Jesus’ Departure (16:20)
By now, the reader is aware that it is necessary for Jesus to return to the Father in order to complete the mission for which he was sent. Though the end result of his departure (resurrection) will ultimately be a cause of rejoicing for his followers, Jesus knows that in the interim they will weep and mourn (16:20a). However, the world, which has been continuously characterized by its opposition to Jesus, will rejoice at Jesus’ departure. Since the world does not know Jesus, its rejoicing over his departure is rooted in its ignorance. Jesus’ crucifixion, to which the Evangelist refers as his glorification, will initially appear to the world as the silencing of Jesus once and for all. But, this event will ultimately be a triumph over which the disciples will rejoice. In this regard, Frank Moloney comments:
The reader knows that a death through being lifted up on a cross lies in the immediate future. This death will bear all the appearances of a victory for the forces which are lining up against Jesus. But their rejoicing will be short-lived as, for this author, the brute facts of history do not reflect the true significance of the death of Jesus. The departure of Jesus through the cross will create the mikron when Jesus will not be seen, but the sorrow of the disciples will be turned into joy.[1]
When the world rejoices over Jesus’ departure it does so because it hates Jesus (7:1-7; 15:18-21; 17:14-15), fails to understand him (12:19), and rejects the God who sent him (14:15-17). Against the backdrop of this accumulated information, what else should the reader expect than the world’s shallow satisfaction at their perceived victory over Jesus?
“The World” as Character in the Fourth Gospel (Part Six)
(3) The World Rejects the Spirit of Truth (14:15-17)
In 14:15 Jesus exhorts his disciples to demonstrate their love for him by keeping his commands. If they do, Jesus promises to petition the Father to send another advocate (allon parakleton) to remain with them during his absence. Throughout the history of Johannine research, much has been written about the parakletos, though the importance of allos is often overlooked. It is a given that parakletos is John’s unique term for the Holy Spirit. Numerous translations have been proposed—“helper,” “representative,” “advocate,” “comforter,” “intercessor”—though it is difficult to translate the term faithfully with an economy of words.[1] While more is intended than any of these definitions communicates on its own, the reader progressively understands that parakletos is John’s technical term for the coming spirit that will assist his followers after his departure to the Father.
Of greater relevance to our argument here, is the evangelist’s use of the term allos. Prior to the Hellenistic period allos was used to refer to “another of the same kind,” in contradistinction to heteros, which denoted “another of a different kind.”[2] Though this distinction appears to have faded somewhat during the Hellenistic era—and particularly in the semitized Greek of the gospels—there is evidence of its use in the NT.[3] John employs allos 33 times while the term heteros appears once (19:37), but seemingly without the specific nuance stated above. However, given John’s penchant for synonyms (e.g., phileo/agapao, apostello/pempo, etc.), there is good reason to believe a1llov has been chosen and maintained almost exclusively throughout the gospel for a specific reason. Thus, the use of allon parakleton communicates that the promised Paraclete is of the same kind (or nature) as both the Father and Son.[4] The advocate—to whom Jesus also refers as the “Spirit of truth”—is intimately related to both the Father and Son, and will come to assist Jesus’ followers in the same ways they have.
We have already seen that the world does not receive Jesus. In 14:17 the reader further learns that the world is not able to receive the Paraclete. This realization adds a new dimension to the world’s rejection of God and those he sends. It is not simply a case of the world choosing to oppose God. Rather, the world is unable to receive the things of God. The world neither sees nor knows God (14:17c) and therefore opposes God as a natural outworking of its internal orientation. By its very nature, the world rejects God, and by extension, both Jesus and the Paraclete.
[1] For more detailed information, see BDAG, 766 and TDNT, 5:804.
[2] See LSJ, s.v. heteros (especially section III, which provides several attested examples of the contrast between heteros and allos).
[3] An important example of this contrast is found in Galatians 1:6-7, where Paul refers to the gospel which the Judaizers preach as “another gospel (heteros euangelion) which is really not another (allo).”
[4] There is no denying that this language, along with other imagery from the Fourth Gospel, served as a repository for later Trinitarian formulations in the first four centuries of the church.
“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Part Five)
(2) The World Follows Jesus in Ignorance (12:19)
Along with its hatred for Jesus, the world is also ignorant of his origins and mission. The Prologue unveils many facts about Jesus: he is from above and existed before time (1:1-2), he is the agent of creation (1:3), the light of humanity (1:4), the giver of authority (1:12), the incarnate logos (1:14), and the revealer of the Father to humanity (1:18). While the reader navigates the Fourth Gospel with an awareness of these themes, most characters within the story are unaware and therefore have difficulty coming to terms with Jesus’ identity. Their moments of misunderstanding provide opportunities for the Johannine discourses, where Jesus clarifies elements of his mission and identity. There are occasions, however, when the world, or one of its representatives, confesses something of significance about Jesus. While these insights often occur in the context of Jesus’ sign-miracles,[1] this is problematic because the Fourth Evangelist does not regard a signs-faith as a legitimate response to Jesus. Rather, belief in Jesus’ word is legitimate while belief in his works falls short of the mark.[2]
The events of John 11:38-44 mark the turning point of the Fourth Gospel and usher in a series of responses to Jesus’ last and greatest sign. In 11:41-43, Jesus performs his seventh and final semeion in raising Lazarus from the dead—an act that not only foreshadows his own resurrection and power over death, but also serves as the impetus for his crucifixion at the hands of hoi Ioudaioi. The anger of the Jewish leaders and their plan to kill Jesus are recounted in 11:45-57. Then, in 12:1-19 the narrator describes a series of positive responses to Jesus: in vv. 3-8 Mary anoints Jesus and is praised for her actions; in v. 9 a large crowd of Jews comes to see both Jesus and Lazarus; in vv. 12-19 that same crowd appears, waving palm branches and acclaiming Jesus as a messianic king. Each of these responses to Jesus is a source of dismay for the Jewish leaders, though the final response causes the Pharisees to remark, “Look, the world has run off after him.” Though this statement is probably to be understood as hyperbole, it is significant that when the kosmos is described as following Jesus, it does so on the basis of what it has seen (Jesus’ works) rather than what it has heard and internalized (Jesus’ word). For the purposes of the evangelist, this response amounts to following Jesus in ignorance. The world may be following after Jesus, but it eventually stops when the works it seeks cease to occur.
Though this is seemingly a more positive moment for the world than the three previous examples we have examined, the world’s pursuit of Jesus will not last. Ultimately, nearly everyone will abandon Jesus, providing further proof that the signs-faith the world has expressed is not genuine (Johannine) belief. The world runs after Jesus, but only because it hopes to gain that which the world values. Against the backdrop of Jesus’ death, the world’s abandonment of him reveals that it was following in ignorance all along.
[1] The Johannine semeia have traditionally been identified as follows: 2:1–12 (changing of water to wine); 4:46–54 (healing of an official’s son); 5:1–9 (healing at the pool of Bethesda); 6:1–15 (multiplication of loaves and fish); 6:16–21 (walking on the water); 9:1–12 (healing of the man born blind), and 11:38-44 (the raising of Lazarus). Though his position has garnered little support, Andreas Köstenberger (“Seventh Johannine Sign: A Study in John’s Christology.” BBR 5 [1995]: 87–103) departs from the traditional listing of semeia by replacing the walking on water (6:16–21) with the cleansing of the temple (2:13–22).
[2] On the contrast between belief in Jesus’ works v. belief in Jesus’ word, see this theme as it unfolds in three volumes by Francis J. Moloney, Belief in the Word: Reading John 1-4 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993); Signs and Shadows: Reading John 5-12 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996); and Glory Not Dishonor: Reading John 13-21 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998).
Nijay Gupta Reviews Cornelis Bennema
The latest Review of Biblical Literature is up and in it, Nijay Gupta reviews Cornelis Bennema’s, Encountering Jesus: Character Studies in the Gospel of John. I was interested to read his review for several reasons. First, issues related to Johannine characterization are among my primary research interests (I wrote a dissertation on the subject!). Second, I also reviewed Bennema’s book and was a bit disappointed. Earlier he wrote a nice piece in Biblical Interpretation aimed at developing a comprehensive theory of character (“A Theory of Character in the Fourth Gospel with Reference to Ancient and Modern Literature”, BibInt 17 [2009] 375-421), but I felt like his book relied a bit too heavily on an overly conservative understanding of the nature of a Gospel. (BTW, you can find an excerpt or full text of most of Bennema’s publications on character here.) I thought Nijay’s critique of the book was helpful and he also pointed to one of my own concerns: Bennema’s failure to treat the Johannine Jesus as a character. Jesus is the only fully-developed character in the narrative. As such, he deserves treatment….or at least rationale for why Bennema chooses not to treat him.
As I mentioned a few posts back, I am presently editing a book with the Library of New Testament Studies (2012) on characterization in the Gospel of John. Bennema is a contributor to that book and his essay will look to expand upon his theory of character. For those of you with interests in the Fourth Gospel and/or character studies, keep an eye out.
“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Part Four)
I continue this series of posts with the reminder that I am approaching the Fourth Gospel from a consciously narrative-critical position and, in the process, I’m looking at how “the world” (Greek: kosmos) functions as one of John’s characters.
(1) The World Hates Jesus and His Followers (7:1-7; 15:18-21; 17:14-15)
The first of three references to the world’s hatred for Jesus comes in the context of a conversation between Jesus and his brothers about the impending Feast of Tabernacles. In 7:1-4 Jesus is in Galilee when his brothers encourage him to travel to Judea to make his ministry public at the upcoming feast (see v. 4). That this advice is driven by their derision is made clear in v. 5: “For his brothers did not believe in him.” Jesus responds to their challenge by contrasting his divinely appointed time, which has yet to come, with their ability to come and go on the basis of any human whim (v. 6). In v. 7 Jesus describes the world in two ways: (1) it is characterized by evil deeds, and (2) it hates Jesus because he bears witness to its evil deeds. This hatred will manifest itself in a number of ways, one of which is complicity in Jesus’ condemnation and death.
The other two references to the world’s hatred of Jesus occur in the Farewell Discourse (13:1-17:26). In that section of the gospel, Jesus prepares the disciples for his departure by encouraging them to persevere, providing insights into forthcoming events, and praying for his disciples and all future believers.
In John 15 Jesus speaks to his disciples at length about the necessity of abiding in him as a means to accomplishing God’s will and remaining in his love (vv. 1-17). In this context Jesus again mentions the world’s hatred for him. Because the world hates Jesus, it will also hate those who follow him (v. 18). This does not mean that the world is fully incapable of showing love. On the contrary, the world loves those whose perspectives and choices mirror its own (v. 19). Jesus cautions his disciples that the world will treat his followers in the same way they have treated him (vv. 20-21). This warning is not only a prediction of future persecution for the disciples but also an implicit exhortation to perseverance. Again it is clear that the world is characterized by hostility toward Jesus and those who are associated with him.
The third reference to the world’s hatred comes during Jesus’ prayer in John 17. In 15:18-21 Jesus warned that the world would persecute his followers simply because of their association with him. Picking up on this theme once again, Jesus acknowledges that the world hates his followers because he has given them the Father’s message (v. 14a) and because they are not of the world (v. 14b). It is noteworthy that Jesus asks the Father not to remove them from the world, but rather to protect them from the evil one (e0k tou= ponhrou=, v. 15). This protection will be necessary because, as Bennema notes, “after Jesus’ departure from the world, the story of the disciples and the world begins.”[1] In order for the Johannine disciples—as well as the future believers for which Jesus prays—to continue facing the hatred of the world, it will require a special protection from the wiles of the evil one.
One of the distinctive features of Johannine discourse is the use of dualistic contrasts (e.g., light v. darkness, truth v. lie) to make a theological point. In these three passages, another contrast emerges: one can be associated either with Jesus or the world, but not both.[2] This contrast unveils the extreme opposition between the two, and further explains the reason for the world’s hatred of Jesus and his followers. The world’s unrighteousness and hostility toward Jesus are several stitches in a much larger tapestry of its rejection of God and the one whom he has sent.
[1] Bennema, Encountering Jesus, 31 (emphasis added).
[2] This dualism seems to have been characteristic of the teaching in the Johannine community. See, for instance, 1 John 2:15-16, “Do not love the world (kosmos) or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the father is not in him. For all the things in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—are not from the father but the world.”
“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Part Three)
It is widely recognized that the Johannine Prologue (1:1-18) sets both the literary and theological agendas for the gospel story. There, the reader learns that Jesus is the agent of all creation, including the totality of humanity (1:3, 10-11). Because of its unique relationship to God through Jesus, the world carries the promise of great things, most of which never materialize. Among the most important of these is the promise of knowing the God whom Jesus reveals.[1] In this regard, Barrett has written, “the world made through the Word is a world capable of knowing, or of reprehensibly not knowing, its Maker.”[2] The failure of the world to know God is demonstrated explicitly in the passages considered below, and implicitly in numerous interactions between Jesus and other uncomprehending characters. There can be little doubt that misunderstanding is one of the key themes in John’s presentation of Jesus’ life and mission.[3] Throughout the Fourth Gospel Jesus is met with a steady stream of characters whose most consistent trait is an inability to know him in a way that would be deemed legitimate by Johannine standards. Many characters fail to comprehend even the most transparent elements of his message, mission, or identity. Though there is not space here to develop this argument in greater detail, it must be kept in mind nonetheless. Two proleptic statements from the Prologue describe this unfolding reality in the story:
1:10 – He was in the world (en to kosmo), and though the world (ho kosmos) was created through him, the world (ho kosmos) did not know him.
Three different nuances seem to be present in this verse. The first use of kosmos refers to the physical realm into which Jesus has entered. The second occurrence refers to the created order while the third refers to humanity. This statement prepares the reader for the world’s rejection of Jesus and builds upon 1:5, where the narrator comments that “the darkness has not comprehended the light.” Verse 11 reiterates what v. 10 communicated:
1:11 – He came to his own place (ta idia) and his own people (hoi idioi) did not receive him.
The neuter plural use of idios in the first half of the verse is a reference to the world as the physical realm into which Jesus has entered. The masculine plural use of idios in the second half of the verse refers to humanity. Together, these two verses function in much the same manner as the synthetic parallelism in poetic passages of the Hebrew Bible. Specifically, the second verse reiterates and clarifies the meaning of the first.
These two programmatic statements describe a future reality that will unfold throughout the narrative, especially in Jesus’ interactions with human characters. As a character in the Fourth Gospel, the world represents the comprehension, internal orientation, and outward behavior of all who oppose the light (cf. 1:5). As a character that opposes and misunderstands Jesus’ mission, the kosmos has a number of representatives in John’s Gospel—“the Jews,” the crowds, individuals such as Nicodemus and Martha, and even the disciples. For the purposes of these reflections, kosmos is defined as the representative totality of humanity in John’s story world, characterized by an internal disposition and outward response of misunderstanding and hostility toward Jesus. Though there are exceptions in the Fourth Gospel, this is the general rule for defining humanity’s response to Jesus. In the next few posts I will examine examination of passages where the world as a character is explicitly described or depicted.
[1] One important facet of Jesus’ mission in John is his role of “the revealer of God” (cf. 1:18).
[2] C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, 2d ed. (London: SPCK, 1978) 161.
[3] With the exception of the Beloved Disciple, all other Johannine characters display an inability to fully understand Jesus, his message, and his mission. Misunderstood statements, ironic speech, and double entendre are the means by which these misunderstandings often occur. When characters misunderstand Jesus it often leads to one of the Fourth Gospel’s lengthy discourses, and these are the means by which the evangelist clarifies the misunderstood elements of Jesus’ mission or identity.
“The World” as Character in the Gospel of John (Part Two)
Despite the previous criticism of their work (see last paragraph of this post), both Lars Kierspel and Cornelis Bennema provide, at the very least, a satisfactory foundation for treating the Johannine kosmos as a character. They note that in the gospel, the world is described as having human emotions and responses to Jesus; even though the reader is never formally introduced to the world as a character, the narrator’s depiction of the world establishes its impact upon events and other characters in the story.[1]
This series of posts will plow a narrow swath through the text of the Fourth Gospel, focusing specifically on those places where the world, as a character, represents a human race that is at odds with the plan of God as inaugurated by Jesus. In what follows, I will argue that kosmos, when used of humanity, is macrocosmic, and that it refers to all humanity within John’s story world, and to individual Johannine characters in particular. Next time I will look at kosmos in the Johannine Prologue; then I will use a narrative approach to isolate and discuss five examples in John that illustrate the relationship between Jesus and ho kosmos: (1) the world hates Jesus and his followers (7:1-7; 15:18-21; 17:14-15), (2) the world follows Jesus in ignorance (12:19), (3) the world rejects the spirit of truth (14:15-17), (4) the world rejoices at Jesus’ departure (16:20), and (5) the world does not know the Father (17:25). I will use these passages to illustrate the promise and unfulfilled hope displayed by the world in the Fourth Gospel.
[1] At first glance it might seem strange to treat “the world” as a character alongside other “established” Johannine figures such as Peter, Mary, Martha, and Nicodemus. In recent years a handful of studies have appeared that examine other entities in narrative literature and consider their role as characters. The best example of this recent approach in Johannine studies is Stan Harstine, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel: A Study of Ancient Reading Techniques (JSNTSup 229; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002). Harstine treats Moses as a legitimate character, though he only appears in references to OT passages and in metonymical references to Torah.
Back in February I was working on an essay about the role of “the world” as a character in the Gospel of John (it will eventually be published in a book entitled Character Studies in John, edited by Steve Hunt, Francois Tolmie, and Ruben Zimmermann). I mentioned my reflections in a brief post, but never had a chance to explore the idea further. Now that I’ve got a little bit of time I’ve decided to discuss it a little more. Over the next few posts I will look at the promise and unfulfilled hope of the kosmos in the Fourth Gospel.
