We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2009
The point of departure for this study is the hypothesis that the Johannine discourses are composed from oral (and written) traditions. Accordingly, they do not presuppose one or more comprehensive written sources which run throughout the Gospel. The general problem to be analysed can be formulated in this way: How was a unit of tradition used? There is a wide range of possibilities, from a verbatim and complete quotation to the use of small fragments, even just one word. In this paper we shall attempt to distinguish between a ‘quote’, where a self-contained unit of tradition is repeated, and a paraphrastic use, where small fragments, a phrase or a word, are paraphrased into new sentences.
1 For a recent formulation of such a hypothesis for the sources of John see Lindars, B., Behind the Fourth Gospel (London, 1971)Google Scholar. For the view of the author see Borgen, P., Bread from Heaven, Novum Testamentum Supplement, 10 (1965)Google Scholar; idem, ‘God's Agent in the Fourth Gospel’, in Religions in Antiquity, Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough, ed. Neusner, J., SHR 14 (Leiden, 1968), pp. 137–48Google Scholar; idem, ‘Observations on the Targumic Character of the Prologue of John’, N.T.S. 16 (1970), 288–95Google Scholar; idem, ‘Some Jewish exegetical traditions as background for Son of Man sayings in John's Gospel’, in L'lZvangile de Jean, ed. M. de Jonge, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 44 (Leuven, 1977), pp. 243–58Google Scholar; idem, review of Beutler, J., Martyria (Frankfurt am Main, 1972)Google Scholar, in Biblica, lv, Fasc. 4 (1974), 580–3; idem, review of Gunter Reim, Studien zum alttestamentlichen Hinter-grund des Johannesevangeliums, in T.L.Z. ci (1976), 2, col. 127–30; ‘John and the Synoptics in the Passion Narrative’, N.T.S. 5 (1959), 246–59Google Scholar; idem, ‘Logos was the true Light’, Nov. T. 14 (1972), 115–30.Google Scholar
2 It is impossible to draw a sharp line between these two usages, but borderline cases have then to be discussed as part of the analysis.
3 See for example Bacher, W., ‘Talmud’, The Jewish Encyclopedia, 12 (New York, 1906), i ff., and introductions to the Talmud.Google Scholar
4 See Conzelmann, H., Der erste Brief an die Korinther (Göttingen, 1969) p. 230Google Scholar; Gerhardsson, B., Memory and Manuscript (Uppsala, 1961), p. 290.Google Scholar
5 See the comparison among the various versions of the Institution of the Lord's Supper made by Jeremias, J., The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (London, 1964), pp. 101–14, 138–203.Google Scholar
6 Cf. Conzelmann, H., An die Korinther, p. 237Google Scholar; Jeremias, J., The Eucharistic Words, p. 106.Google Scholar
7 In the exposition, vv. 27 ff. and in υ. 26 έσθίω is used, although it does not occur in the quote, υυ. 23 ff. The term is used as part of the story of the institution in Matt. 26. 26; cf. John 6. 53.
8 Cf. Conzelmann, H., An die Korinther, pp. 201 f.Google Scholar Cf. Héring, J., Le Royaume de Dieu et sa venue (2Neuchâtel, 1959), p. 224 n. IGoogle Scholar; Jeremias, J., The Eucharistic Words, p. 104.Google Scholar
9 Borgen, P., Bread from Heaven, pp. 91 f.Google Scholar
10 See Bultmann, R., Das Evangelium des Johannes, Krit. exeget. Kommentar (18Göttingen, 1964), p. 237Google Scholar; Brown, R. E., The Gospel according to John (I–XII) (Garden City, N.Y., 1966), p. 490.Google Scholar
11 The most specific analysis in recent years on the use of sources in John 12. 44–50, as well as in the Johannine discourses in general, is that of R. Bultmann, Das Evangelium des Johannes. Among the critics of Bultmann's theory of a Revelatory Source (Offenbarungsreden), etc., see Brown, , John (I–XII), pp. xxix–xxxii.Google Scholar
12 See Dodd, C. H., Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge, 1965), pp. 343–7Google Scholar; Borgen, P., ‘God's Agent in the Fourth Gospel’, in Religions in Antiquity, Essays in memory of E. R. Goodenough, ed. Neusner, J., SHR 14 (Leiden, 1968), pp. 138–9.Google Scholar
13 Cf. Dodd, , Historical Tradition, p. 344.Google Scholar
14 See e.g. Brown, , John (I–XII), pp. 490–1.Google Scholar
15 John 3. 17, 18; 5. 22, 30; 7. 24, 51; 8. 15, 16, 26, 60; 16. 11; 18. 31; Matt. 7. i, 2; 19. 28; Luke 6. 37; 22. 30. For the usage elsewhere in the NT, see the reference in the next footnote.
16 See Büchsel, F., Hentrich, V., ‘κplνω’, Th.W.N.T. 3, 920–42.Google Scholar
17 See also Siphre Deut, 311. Schlatter, A., Der Evangelist Johannes (Stuttgart, 1930), pp. 98 f.Google Scholar
18 John 3. 15, 35; 4. 14, 36, etc.; Mark 10. 30, etc.; Gal. 1. 4, etc.; Hebr. 6. 5. Cf. Syr. Baruch 14. 13, etc.; Aboth 2. 7, etc. See Borgen, , Bread from Heaven, p. 165 and n. 4.Google Scholar
19 See Foerster, W., ‘σ
ω κτλ’, Th.W.N.T. 7, 982–99.Google Scholar
20 Schlatter, , Der Evangelist Johannes, p. 175Google Scholar; Borgen, , Bread from Heaven, p. 167.Google Scholar
21 Dodd, , Historical Tradition, p. 355.Google Scholar
22 Ibid. pp. 355–6.
23 Bühner, J.-A., Der Gesandte und sein Weg im 4. Evangelium, WUNT, 2, Series 2 (T¨ubingen, 1977), pp. 138–52Google Scholar; Borgen, P., in Religions in Antiquity, pp. 140–1.Google Scholar
24 See Marsh, J., The Gospel of St John (Harmondsworth, 1968; reprint 1974), p. 474Google Scholar; Brown, , John I–XII, p. 491Google Scholar; Lindars, B., The Gospel of John (London, 1972), p. 440Google Scholar; Schlatter, , Der Evangelist Johannes, p. 277.Google Scholar
25 Cf. Schnackenburg, R., Das Johannesevangelium, 2 (Freiburg, 1971), 524.Google Scholar
26 Against Boismard, M.-E., ‘Le caractère adventice de Jo. xii: 45–50’, Sacra Pagina, ed. Coppens, J. et al. , 2 (Paris, 1959), 190–1.Google Scholar
27 See Bühner, J.-A., Der Gesandte, pp. 149 f., 209.Google Scholar
28 See Borgen, in Religions in Antiquity, p. 141; idem, ‘Some exegetical traditions as background for Son of Man sayings in John's Gospel (Jn iii. 13–14)’, in de Jonge, M. (ed.), L'Évangile de Jean, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 44 (Leuven, 1977), 250.Google Scholar
29 See Schlatter, , Die Sprache und Heimat des vierten Evangelisten, B.f.Chr.Th. vi, 4 (Güutersloh, 1902), 85.Google Scholar
30 See Bühner, , Der Gesandte, p. 209.Google Scholar
31 See Borgen, , ‘The place of the Old Testament in the formation of New Testament theology; Response’, N.T.S. 23 (1977), 68 f.Google Scholar
32 See Bühner, Der Gesandte; Borgen, , in Religions in Antiquity, pp. 137–48Google Scholar; Meeks, W. A., The Prophet-King, Novum Testamentum Supplements, 14 (Leiden, 1967), 301–5.Google Scholar
33 See Brown, , John I–XII, p. 492Google Scholar; Schnackenburg, , Johannesevangelium, 4, 2, 529.Google Scholar
34 Borgen, , ‘Observations on the Targumic character of the Prologue of John’, N.T.S. 16 (1969/1970), 288–95Google Scholar; idem, ‘Logos was the true Light’, Nov. T. 14 (1972), 115–29.Google Scholar
35 See Brown, , John I–XII, pp. lxii f., etc.Google Scholar
36 Cf. Deut. R. 8. 6, where it is said that another Moses will arise and bring another Torah from heaven.
