1 / 10

Religion 317 Gospel of John Dr. Donald N. Penny

Religion 317 Gospel of John Dr. Donald N. Penny. I. Relationship to the Synoptics. Synoptic problem Why are Synoptics so similar while John is so different? Synoptics: similar chronologies; much overlapping content; very similar wording. John: very different. Two-source theory of Synoptics:

thao
Download Presentation

Religion 317 Gospel of John Dr. Donald N. Penny

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Religion 317Gospel of JohnDr. Donald N. Penny

  2. I. Relationship to the Synoptics • Synoptic problem • Why are Synoptics so similar while John is so different? • Synoptics: similar chronologies; much overlapping content; very similar wording. • John: very different. • Two-source theory of Synoptics: • Mk. and Q are sources for Mt. and Lk. • Literary interdependence explains similarities. • Jn. is independent of this process.

  3. John The Two-Source Theory

  4. Differences between John and Synoptics

  5. Differences between John and Synoptics –cont.

  6. Similarities between John and Synoptics • John the Baptist at beginning. • Passion narrative – same basic structure. • Stories in common: • Feeding the 5,000 (Jn. 6; Mk. 6 par.). • Walking on the Sea (Jn. 6; Mk. 6 par.). • Healing the official’s son (Jn. 4; Mt. 8 par.)? • Anointing in Bethany (Jn. 12; Mk. 14 par.; Lk. 7; 10). • Similar sayings: • “He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life” (Jn. 12:25; cf. Mt. 10:39 par.). • “He who receives any one whom I send receives me; and he who receives me receives him who sent me” (Jn. 13:20; cf. Mt. 10:40). • “Rise, take up your pallet, and walk” (Jn. 5:8; cf. Mk. 2:11 par.). • “All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him” (?). • Mt. 11:27 par. – “a thunderbolt fallen from the Johannine sky.”

  7. Conclusions about Origin of John • Differences show that John is basically independent of Synoptics. • Similarities raise possibility that John knew one or more of Synoptics. • Ancient fathers assumed John knew Synoptics and wrote to supplement. • Some 19th-cent. scholars argued John wrote to correct Synoptics. • Prevailing 20th-cent. consensus: John did not know Synoptics at all. • P. Gardner-Smith (1938): established view that John need not have known Synoptics. • Similarities are due to a common oral tradition. • Recent scholarship has challenged consensus. • Some: John knew Mk. or Lk. • Others: leave issue open.

  8. Synoptic tradition Q Mk. Mt. Lk. Oral tradition Jesus Johannine tradition Jn. 1, 2, 3, Jn.

  9. Implications for historicity • Either John or Synoptics:differences force historian to choose. • Can the historical Jesus have been a prophet/rabbi reluctant to make claims about himself (Synoptics) and at the same time the boldly self-proclaimed divine Son of God (John)? • Is it more likely that a reticent prophet/rabbi was reinterpreted by the church as the divine Son of God – or vice versa? • John’s account is more heavily theologized than Synoptics. • Clement of Alexandria (d. 215): after Synoptics gave “bodily facts,” John wrote a “spiritual gospel.” (More interested in theological interpretation than mere recollection.) • D. F. Strauss (1835): first to demonstrate that historical Jesus is to be found in Synoptics rather than John. • Showed that Jn. has put church’s theology in narrative form. • Synoptic portrait is closer to historical Jesus than John’s. • Most scholars agree that quest for historical Jesus must be based mainly on Synoptics.

  10. Implications for historicity – cont. • Both John and Synoptics contain mixture of history and theology. • Can’t say Synoptics purely historical; John purely theological. • Redaction criticism: Synoptic authors have edited traditions to reflect their own theological interests. • C. H. Dodd (1963): demonstrated that John is based on early tradition which may preserve nuggets of historical information. • Difference of degree: • Synoptics – historical Jesus lies closer to surface • John – theological interpretation is more explicit/thorough; historical traditions and sayings, though present, are harder to isolate from John’s interpretation. (Often hard to tell when John is quoting Jesus, giving his own theology, or putting words in Jesus’ mouth. Culpepper: Johannine Jesus sounds more like the author of John’s letters than like the Synoptic Jesus.) • Conclusion • Quest for historical Jesus is based mainly on Synoptics. • John is studied mainly for its deep, profound theology.

More Related