Books by Benjamin Reynolds
Oxford University Press, 2020
The Gospel of John has long been recognized as being distinct from the Synoptic Gospels. John amo... more The Gospel of John has long been recognized as being distinct from the Synoptic Gospels. John among the Apocalypses explains John's distinctive narrative of Jesus's life by comparing it to Jewish apocalypses and highlighting the central place of revelation in the Gospel. While some scholars have noted a connection between the Gospel of John and Jewish apocalypses, Reynolds makes the first extensive comparison of the Gospel with the standard definition of the apocalypse genre. Engaging with modern genre theory, this comparison indicates surprising similarities of form, content, and function between John's Gospel and Jewish apocalypses.
Even though the Gospel of John reflects similarities with the genre of apocalypse, John is not an apocalypse, but in genre theory terms, John may be described as a gospel in kind and an apocalypse in mode. John's narrative of Jesus's life has been qualified and shaped by the genre of apocalypse, such that it may be called an 'apocalyptic' gospel. In the final two chapters, Reynolds explores the implications of this conclusion for Johannine Studies and New Testament scholarship more broadly. John among the Apocalypses considers how viewing the Fourth Gospel as apocalyptic Gospel aids in the interpretation of John's appeal to Israel's Scriptures and Mosaic authority, and examines the Gospel's relationship with the book of Revelation and the history of reception concerning their writing. An examination of Byzantine iconographic traditions highlights how reception history may offer a possible explanation for reading John as apocalyptic Gospel.
The book analyzes the background of ‘Son of Man’ from the ‘one like a son of man’ in Daniel 7 and... more The book analyzes the background of ‘Son of Man’ from the ‘one like a son of man’ in Daniel 7 and the interpretations of this figure in Jewish apocalyptic and early Christian literature. The conclusion is that the Johannine Son of Man is an apocalyptic figure, and thus ‘Son of Man’ does not function to draw attention to Jesus’ humanity in the Gospel of John. Nor is the title synonymous with ‘Son of God’. The 'Son of Man' title may overlap in meaning with other titles, particularly ‘Son of God’ and ‘Messiah’, but the ‘Son of Man’ as a heavenly, preexistent figure who brings judgment and salvation, points to aspects of Jesus’ identity that are not indicated by any other title.
Edited Volumes by Benjamin Reynolds
Reading the Gospel of John's Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs, 2018
The essays in Reading the Gospel of John’s Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic, an... more The essays in Reading the Gospel of John’s Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs seek to interpret John’s Jesus as part of Second Temple Jewish messianic expectations. The Fourth Gospel is rarely considered part of the world of early Judaism. While many have noted John’s Jewishness, most have not understood John’s Messiah as a Jewish messiah.
The Johannine Jesus, who descends from heaven, is declared the Word made flesh, and claims oneness with the Father, is no less Jewish than other messiahs depicted in early Judaism. John’s Jesus is at home on the spectrum of early Judaism’s royal, prophetic, and divine messiahs .
Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2018
The Son of Man sayings are some of the most contested in the Gospels. They preserve a phrase empl... more The Son of Man sayings are some of the most contested in the Gospels. They preserve a phrase employed by Jesus to refer to himself, yet the meaning in its various contexts has been hotly debated for centuries. Some critics identify allusions to other literature in the Bible, such as the book of Daniel, while others see this phrase simply as a strange Greek rendering of a relatively commonplace Aramaic phrase.
Benjamin Reynolds presents an extensive volume of critical readings and introduces readers to the broader context of the Son of Man problem and debate. The essays and articles in the volume provide access to over 50 years of scholarly research and include the most often cited texts, which address the various aspects of the Son of Man debate. In addition, Reynolds includes carefully selected essays that allow readers to trace different stages in the debate, providing an easy entry into the Son of Man scholarship and the numerous solutions that have been offered. Each section features an introduction and a list of annotated further readings.
Publisher's blurb:
This volume provides a comprehensive presentation of the anthropology of the ... more Publisher's blurb:
This volume provides a comprehensive presentation of the anthropology of the New Testament. Discussion begins with a survey of the context in which the New Testament was written, covering the Old Testament, early Jewish writings and the literature of the Greco–Roman world. The contributors proceed to examine the anthropological ideas found in the texts of the New Testament and in the thought of its various writers. The volume concludes with essays by Brian S. Rosner and Ephraim Radner, who reflect on the implications of the New Testament's anthropological ideas and point out further directions for theological anthropology.
Taken together, the chapters in this volume address the question that humans have been asking since at least the earliest days of recorded history: what does it mean to be human? The presence of this question in modern theology, and its current prevalence in popular culture, makes this volume both a timely and relevant interdisciplinary addition to the scholarly conversation around the New Testament.
The present volume developed out of a concern that revelation or the disclosure of heavenly myste... more The present volume developed out of a concern that revelation or the disclosure of heavenly mysteries is rarely considered part of “apocalyptic” within New Testament studies. While New Testament scholars tend to use the term “apocalyptic” primarily in reference to future eschatology, revelatory features and revealed content, such as cosmology and wisdom, are often neglected. Without making any attempt at redefinition, we hope that the present volume will broaden perspectives on what may be considered “apocalyptic.” In addressing each document or series of documents in the New Testament, the contributions of this book consider the ways an essentially revelatory approach to Jewish apocalyptic tradition has influenced and shaped New Testament thought. In turn, the essay authors evaluate ways in which those texts reflect the revelatory nature of “apocalyptic,” opening up new horizons for future study.
The essays in this volume engage specific New Testament texts and theological doctrines through t... more The essays in this volume engage specific New Testament texts and theological doctrines through the lens of one or more of the following questions: Should systematic theology dominate biblical theology or the reverse? Should they form a partnership of equals? How would such a partnership function? Is theology necessary or harmful for exegesis? Should theological peculiarities in the New Testament be considered in exegetical study? The contributors include both systematic theologians and New Testament scholars, and each explores their respective topics with a concern for reconsidering the relationship between biblical and systematic theology. These essays offer diverse ways of reevaluating how biblical theology and systematic theology function together as pillars, partners, or partisans. This volume contains a foreword by Tremper Longman, III, and postscript by Stan D. Gaede.
Journal Articles by Benjamin Reynolds
Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, 2024
The Semeia 14 definition of apocalypse defined apocalypses as a constellation of form, temporal c... more The Semeia 14 definition of apocalypse defined apocalypses as a constellation of form, temporal content, and spatial content, but temporal content (particularly eschatological features) remains the dominant lens through which the genre of apocalypse and related texts are understood. Defining apocalypses primarily in terms of eschatology, however, narrows the definition of apocalypse and dismisses some texts that reflect non-eschatological features of apocalypses. Form and spatial content are often neglected in the examination of apocalypses and “apocalyptic” texts. When we pay attention to form and spatial content, along with temporal content, new horizons open for considering what may be considered apocalypse-like. Jubilees and the Gospel of John are presented as two examples of revelatory texts that reflect the form and spatial content of apocalypses.
New Testament Studies 60.1, 2014
Co-authored with Madison Pierce
The perfect tense-form verb ἀναβέβηκεν in John 3.13 is usually in... more Co-authored with Madison Pierce
The perfect tense-form verb ἀναβέβηκεν in John 3.13 is usually interpreted in light of traditional verb theory, as a ‘past action with present results’. This interpretation introduces an apparent problematic chronology in that the Son of Man ascends before descending; however, recent developments in Greek grammar, particularly verbal aspect theory, provide a viable solution to this grammatical ‘problem’ and indicate that the Son of Man's descent precedes his ascent.
Early Christianity, 2013
The Gospel of John has a history of not being considered to be apocalyptic. Yet when apocalyptic ... more The Gospel of John has a history of not being considered to be apocalyptic. Yet when apocalyptic literature is understood to be primarily about revelation of heavenly things, the Gospel of John bears some intriguing similarities with Jewish apocalypses, such as the opening of heaven, the revelation of heavenly things, the Son of Man, and the importance of written revelation. Apocalyptic revelation raises questions about its relationship with the Old Testament law, and the Fourth Gospel, like the Jewish apocalypses, appears to interpret the law and prophets by continuing and explaining their true meaning. For the Gospel of John, the law and the prophets are fulfilled and explained in the apocalyptic revelation of Jesus, the Messiah and Son of God.
Das Johannesevangelium wurde und wird zumeist als nicht-apokalyptisch angesehen. Wenn man das primäre Anliegen apokalyptischer Literatur allerdings in der Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge sieht, dann lässt Johannes verblüffende Ähnlichkeiten mit jüdischen Apokalypsen erkennen, etwa die Himmelsöffnung, die Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge, den Menschensohn und die Bedeutung niedergeschriebener Offenbarung. Apokalyptische Offenbarung bestimmt ihr Verhältnis zum Gesetz des Alten Testaments in bestimmterWeise, und das vierte Evangelium scheint – ebenso wie die jüdischen Apokalypsen – Gesetz und Propheten so zu interpretieren, dass es an deren wirkliche Bedeutung anknüpft und diese auslegt. Für das Johannesevangelium sind Gesetz und Propheten in der apokalyptischen Offenbarung Jesu, des Messias und Sohnes Gottes, erfüllt und ausgelegt."
Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus, 2011
Scholarship has largely rejected the relevance of the Johannine Son of Man sayings as a source fo... more Scholarship has largely rejected the relevance of the Johannine Son of Man sayings as a source for solving the Son of Man debate. The suspicion of Jesus' words in John is the obvious reason for this rejection. Jn 9.35 presents an interesting test case for rethinking the authenticity of the Son of Man sayings in John. An examination of this saying reveals that it is discontinuous with early Christianity, Second Temple Judaism, and confessions of faith in John's Gospel. The combination of these factors suggests the possibility that the saying may have come from the lips of the historical Jesus.
Henoch Journal, 2008
The figure of the ‘one like a son of man’ in the Old Greek of Dan 7.13-14 is commonly understood ... more The figure of the ‘one like a son of man’ in the Old Greek of Dan 7.13-14 is commonly understood to arrive as the Ancient of Days ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν rather than be presented to the Ancient of Days as in Aramaic and Theodotion Daniel. Otfried Hofius has recently argued that the phrase ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν functions as the subject of the clause and is therefore not a descriptor of the ‘one like a son of man’. Hofius is correct that ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν should not function as the subject of the clause, and his critique calls into question the majority position. However, Hofius’ point also means that ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου also does not function as the subject of its clause and requires that a re-evaluation of the majority view is needed. Since the context of Old Greek Dan 7.13-14 indicates that only one figure is described, a new translation is needed in order to clarify that ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου and ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν are both descriptors of a single figure, while at the same time acknowledging that neither phrase serves as the subject of its respective clause.
Biblica, 2008
While studies of the Old Greek (OG) of Daniel 7,13-14 are not uncommon, they are often undertaken... more While studies of the Old Greek (OG) of Daniel 7,13-14 are not uncommon, they are often undertaken as part of a broader examination of the 'one like a son of man'. Rarely, if ever, do these studies focus on the description of this figure in the OG version and what readers of this version might have understood of this character. This study is an examination of the interpretation of OG Daniel 7,13-14, and the argument is made that the OG portrays the 'one like a son of man' as similar to the Ancient of Days and as a messianic figure.
Neotestamentica, 2007
Jesus’ use of the first person plural in John 3:11 is rarely given more than passing comment. The... more Jesus’ use of the first person plural in John 3:11 is rarely given more than passing comment. The common explanation that a group outside of the narrative speaks through Jesus ignores the literary context of the passage, which indicates a number of possible figures who could be included in Jesus’ use of the first person plural. These possibilities consist of the Father, John the Baptist, Jesus’ disciples, and the use of the “we” of majesty. While the Spirit has rarely been mentioned as a possible referent, the Spirit’s inclusion in Jesus’ “we” is more likely. Based on the similar content and manner of speaking and testifying shared by Jesus and the Spirit and the proximity of Jesus’ comments about the Spirit, the Spirit is the most plausible referent for inclusion in Jesus’ “we”.
Essays in Edited Volumes by Benjamin Reynolds
The Son of Man Problem: Critical Readings, 2018
The present volume is an anthology of essays about the Son of Man Problem and the Son of Man Deba... more The present volume is an anthology of essays about the Son of Man Problem and the Son of Man Debate. The essays were published between 1950 and 2016 and were chosen for inclusion in the volume for one of two reasons. First, either an essay has become a significant contribution to the Son of Man Debate, or second, the author is an important contributor to the Debate as a whole, and the essay reprinted here offers a window into that author's views on 'the Son of Man'. 1 In this introduction to 'the Son of Man', I will explain what is meant by 'the Son of Man Problem' and 'the Son of Man Debate', provide a brief history of interpretation of the phrase 'the Son of Man', and present some of the methodological issues involved in seeking a solution to the Son of Man Problem. I will conclude the introduction with a brief description of the four sections of this volume and the reasons why they are organized in these categories.
Reading John's Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs, 2018
*Published version now in Reynolds and Boccaccini, eds. Reading the Gospel of John's Christology ... more *Published version now in Reynolds and Boccaccini, eds. Reading the Gospel of John's Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs. AJEC 106. Leiden: Brill, 2018.
The first challenge is the historicity of John’s Gospel. If John does not present a historical portrait of Jesus and his time, there is less likelihood of finding evidence of early Jewish Messianism in John’s Gospel. Related to this, the second challenge arises from the aspect of Johannine scholarship epitomized in J. Louis Martyn’s two-level reading of the Gospel, in which the life of Jesus in the Gospel reflects the life of the Johannine community that writes and revises the Gospel based on their experiences. The third challenge is connected to the so-called “high Christology” of John. The general understanding of New Testament scholarship is that the Fourth Gospel’s Christology stands at the end of a long trajectory of Christological development as Jesus moves from prophet or messiah to divinized, preexistent Son of God. These three challenges to reading John as evidence of Jewish Messianism underlie Johannine scholarship.
At the same time, since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Johannine scholars have come to recognize that the Fourth Gospel has a close relationship with early Judaism. But where differences exist, Johannine scholarship has tended to view those differences as adaptations of the early Christian tradition or the Johannine community’s critique or correction of Jewish belief or other Jesus-followers’ beliefs. Even when scholars have recognized that John indicates parallels with early Judaism, the tendency is not to consider that the Johannine perspective might possibly reflect a Jewish sectarian perspective.
In our discussions, let’s consider why the Gospel of John might reflect shared messianic expectations. What meaning and relevance do they have for the variegated expectations of early Jewish messianism? What does it mean that John shares ideas, interpretive methods, language, descriptions, festivals, names, places, and messianic expectations with other Jewish texts from the period? What does it mean for the Fourth Gospel and New Testament Christology that John has so many Jewish expectations connected to the identity of Jesus? Can we accept Boyarin’s statement from his Sixth Enoch Seminar paper as a point of departure: “Jews came to believe Jesus was God, because they already believed that the Messiah would be a divine redeemer incarnated in a human body; they just argued about who that human being was” ?
The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and the Shaping of New Testament Thought, 2017
In this essay, I contend that contrary to scholarly consensus the Gospel of John should be recogn... more In this essay, I contend that contrary to scholarly consensus the Gospel of John should be recognized as representative of Jewish apocalyptic thought, particularly in the Gospel’s revealed cosmology, its vision of God in the person of Jesus, and its “visionary showing."
Rejection: God's Refugees in Biblical and Contemporary Perspective, 2015
Parables of Enoch: A Paradigm Shift. Jewish and Christian Texts 11., 2013
Uploads
Books by Benjamin Reynolds
Even though the Gospel of John reflects similarities with the genre of apocalypse, John is not an apocalypse, but in genre theory terms, John may be described as a gospel in kind and an apocalypse in mode. John's narrative of Jesus's life has been qualified and shaped by the genre of apocalypse, such that it may be called an 'apocalyptic' gospel. In the final two chapters, Reynolds explores the implications of this conclusion for Johannine Studies and New Testament scholarship more broadly. John among the Apocalypses considers how viewing the Fourth Gospel as apocalyptic Gospel aids in the interpretation of John's appeal to Israel's Scriptures and Mosaic authority, and examines the Gospel's relationship with the book of Revelation and the history of reception concerning their writing. An examination of Byzantine iconographic traditions highlights how reception history may offer a possible explanation for reading John as apocalyptic Gospel.
Edited Volumes by Benjamin Reynolds
The Johannine Jesus, who descends from heaven, is declared the Word made flesh, and claims oneness with the Father, is no less Jewish than other messiahs depicted in early Judaism. John’s Jesus is at home on the spectrum of early Judaism’s royal, prophetic, and divine messiahs .
Benjamin Reynolds presents an extensive volume of critical readings and introduces readers to the broader context of the Son of Man problem and debate. The essays and articles in the volume provide access to over 50 years of scholarly research and include the most often cited texts, which address the various aspects of the Son of Man debate. In addition, Reynolds includes carefully selected essays that allow readers to trace different stages in the debate, providing an easy entry into the Son of Man scholarship and the numerous solutions that have been offered. Each section features an introduction and a list of annotated further readings.
This volume provides a comprehensive presentation of the anthropology of the New Testament. Discussion begins with a survey of the context in which the New Testament was written, covering the Old Testament, early Jewish writings and the literature of the Greco–Roman world. The contributors proceed to examine the anthropological ideas found in the texts of the New Testament and in the thought of its various writers. The volume concludes with essays by Brian S. Rosner and Ephraim Radner, who reflect on the implications of the New Testament's anthropological ideas and point out further directions for theological anthropology.
Taken together, the chapters in this volume address the question that humans have been asking since at least the earliest days of recorded history: what does it mean to be human? The presence of this question in modern theology, and its current prevalence in popular culture, makes this volume both a timely and relevant interdisciplinary addition to the scholarly conversation around the New Testament.
Journal Articles by Benjamin Reynolds
The perfect tense-form verb ἀναβέβηκεν in John 3.13 is usually interpreted in light of traditional verb theory, as a ‘past action with present results’. This interpretation introduces an apparent problematic chronology in that the Son of Man ascends before descending; however, recent developments in Greek grammar, particularly verbal aspect theory, provide a viable solution to this grammatical ‘problem’ and indicate that the Son of Man's descent precedes his ascent.
Das Johannesevangelium wurde und wird zumeist als nicht-apokalyptisch angesehen. Wenn man das primäre Anliegen apokalyptischer Literatur allerdings in der Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge sieht, dann lässt Johannes verblüffende Ähnlichkeiten mit jüdischen Apokalypsen erkennen, etwa die Himmelsöffnung, die Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge, den Menschensohn und die Bedeutung niedergeschriebener Offenbarung. Apokalyptische Offenbarung bestimmt ihr Verhältnis zum Gesetz des Alten Testaments in bestimmterWeise, und das vierte Evangelium scheint – ebenso wie die jüdischen Apokalypsen – Gesetz und Propheten so zu interpretieren, dass es an deren wirkliche Bedeutung anknüpft und diese auslegt. Für das Johannesevangelium sind Gesetz und Propheten in der apokalyptischen Offenbarung Jesu, des Messias und Sohnes Gottes, erfüllt und ausgelegt."
Essays in Edited Volumes by Benjamin Reynolds
The first challenge is the historicity of John’s Gospel. If John does not present a historical portrait of Jesus and his time, there is less likelihood of finding evidence of early Jewish Messianism in John’s Gospel. Related to this, the second challenge arises from the aspect of Johannine scholarship epitomized in J. Louis Martyn’s two-level reading of the Gospel, in which the life of Jesus in the Gospel reflects the life of the Johannine community that writes and revises the Gospel based on their experiences. The third challenge is connected to the so-called “high Christology” of John. The general understanding of New Testament scholarship is that the Fourth Gospel’s Christology stands at the end of a long trajectory of Christological development as Jesus moves from prophet or messiah to divinized, preexistent Son of God. These three challenges to reading John as evidence of Jewish Messianism underlie Johannine scholarship.
At the same time, since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Johannine scholars have come to recognize that the Fourth Gospel has a close relationship with early Judaism. But where differences exist, Johannine scholarship has tended to view those differences as adaptations of the early Christian tradition or the Johannine community’s critique or correction of Jewish belief or other Jesus-followers’ beliefs. Even when scholars have recognized that John indicates parallels with early Judaism, the tendency is not to consider that the Johannine perspective might possibly reflect a Jewish sectarian perspective.
In our discussions, let’s consider why the Gospel of John might reflect shared messianic expectations. What meaning and relevance do they have for the variegated expectations of early Jewish messianism? What does it mean that John shares ideas, interpretive methods, language, descriptions, festivals, names, places, and messianic expectations with other Jewish texts from the period? What does it mean for the Fourth Gospel and New Testament Christology that John has so many Jewish expectations connected to the identity of Jesus? Can we accept Boyarin’s statement from his Sixth Enoch Seminar paper as a point of departure: “Jews came to believe Jesus was God, because they already believed that the Messiah would be a divine redeemer incarnated in a human body; they just argued about who that human being was” ?
Even though the Gospel of John reflects similarities with the genre of apocalypse, John is not an apocalypse, but in genre theory terms, John may be described as a gospel in kind and an apocalypse in mode. John's narrative of Jesus's life has been qualified and shaped by the genre of apocalypse, such that it may be called an 'apocalyptic' gospel. In the final two chapters, Reynolds explores the implications of this conclusion for Johannine Studies and New Testament scholarship more broadly. John among the Apocalypses considers how viewing the Fourth Gospel as apocalyptic Gospel aids in the interpretation of John's appeal to Israel's Scriptures and Mosaic authority, and examines the Gospel's relationship with the book of Revelation and the history of reception concerning their writing. An examination of Byzantine iconographic traditions highlights how reception history may offer a possible explanation for reading John as apocalyptic Gospel.
The Johannine Jesus, who descends from heaven, is declared the Word made flesh, and claims oneness with the Father, is no less Jewish than other messiahs depicted in early Judaism. John’s Jesus is at home on the spectrum of early Judaism’s royal, prophetic, and divine messiahs .
Benjamin Reynolds presents an extensive volume of critical readings and introduces readers to the broader context of the Son of Man problem and debate. The essays and articles in the volume provide access to over 50 years of scholarly research and include the most often cited texts, which address the various aspects of the Son of Man debate. In addition, Reynolds includes carefully selected essays that allow readers to trace different stages in the debate, providing an easy entry into the Son of Man scholarship and the numerous solutions that have been offered. Each section features an introduction and a list of annotated further readings.
This volume provides a comprehensive presentation of the anthropology of the New Testament. Discussion begins with a survey of the context in which the New Testament was written, covering the Old Testament, early Jewish writings and the literature of the Greco–Roman world. The contributors proceed to examine the anthropological ideas found in the texts of the New Testament and in the thought of its various writers. The volume concludes with essays by Brian S. Rosner and Ephraim Radner, who reflect on the implications of the New Testament's anthropological ideas and point out further directions for theological anthropology.
Taken together, the chapters in this volume address the question that humans have been asking since at least the earliest days of recorded history: what does it mean to be human? The presence of this question in modern theology, and its current prevalence in popular culture, makes this volume both a timely and relevant interdisciplinary addition to the scholarly conversation around the New Testament.
The perfect tense-form verb ἀναβέβηκεν in John 3.13 is usually interpreted in light of traditional verb theory, as a ‘past action with present results’. This interpretation introduces an apparent problematic chronology in that the Son of Man ascends before descending; however, recent developments in Greek grammar, particularly verbal aspect theory, provide a viable solution to this grammatical ‘problem’ and indicate that the Son of Man's descent precedes his ascent.
Das Johannesevangelium wurde und wird zumeist als nicht-apokalyptisch angesehen. Wenn man das primäre Anliegen apokalyptischer Literatur allerdings in der Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge sieht, dann lässt Johannes verblüffende Ähnlichkeiten mit jüdischen Apokalypsen erkennen, etwa die Himmelsöffnung, die Offenbarung himmlischer Dinge, den Menschensohn und die Bedeutung niedergeschriebener Offenbarung. Apokalyptische Offenbarung bestimmt ihr Verhältnis zum Gesetz des Alten Testaments in bestimmterWeise, und das vierte Evangelium scheint – ebenso wie die jüdischen Apokalypsen – Gesetz und Propheten so zu interpretieren, dass es an deren wirkliche Bedeutung anknüpft und diese auslegt. Für das Johannesevangelium sind Gesetz und Propheten in der apokalyptischen Offenbarung Jesu, des Messias und Sohnes Gottes, erfüllt und ausgelegt."
The first challenge is the historicity of John’s Gospel. If John does not present a historical portrait of Jesus and his time, there is less likelihood of finding evidence of early Jewish Messianism in John’s Gospel. Related to this, the second challenge arises from the aspect of Johannine scholarship epitomized in J. Louis Martyn’s two-level reading of the Gospel, in which the life of Jesus in the Gospel reflects the life of the Johannine community that writes and revises the Gospel based on their experiences. The third challenge is connected to the so-called “high Christology” of John. The general understanding of New Testament scholarship is that the Fourth Gospel’s Christology stands at the end of a long trajectory of Christological development as Jesus moves from prophet or messiah to divinized, preexistent Son of God. These three challenges to reading John as evidence of Jewish Messianism underlie Johannine scholarship.
At the same time, since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Johannine scholars have come to recognize that the Fourth Gospel has a close relationship with early Judaism. But where differences exist, Johannine scholarship has tended to view those differences as adaptations of the early Christian tradition or the Johannine community’s critique or correction of Jewish belief or other Jesus-followers’ beliefs. Even when scholars have recognized that John indicates parallels with early Judaism, the tendency is not to consider that the Johannine perspective might possibly reflect a Jewish sectarian perspective.
In our discussions, let’s consider why the Gospel of John might reflect shared messianic expectations. What meaning and relevance do they have for the variegated expectations of early Jewish messianism? What does it mean that John shares ideas, interpretive methods, language, descriptions, festivals, names, places, and messianic expectations with other Jewish texts from the period? What does it mean for the Fourth Gospel and New Testament Christology that John has so many Jewish expectations connected to the identity of Jesus? Can we accept Boyarin’s statement from his Sixth Enoch Seminar paper as a point of departure: “Jews came to believe Jesus was God, because they already believed that the Messiah would be a divine redeemer incarnated in a human body; they just argued about who that human being was” ?