The Gospel of John and the Religious Quest. Johannes Nissen
Читать онлайн книгу.
of humankind (v. 4). Hence, there is no doubt whatsoever that the Word plays a crucial role in God’s creation, cf. also the Christ hymn in Col 1:15–20.
Two aspects of the Prologue point to the cosmic significance of the Word. First, the Greek words en archē in verse 1 are usually translated by the phrase “in the beginning.” This is a reference to the creation story in Gen 1. But the meaning of the words is probably broader than that. In Greek philosophy the term archē is often connected to the doctrine of the elements. A Hellenistic audience might have heard this as well when reading the beginning of John’s Gospel. Accordingly, the author of the gospel wanted to stress that the Word (Logos) is the crucial and most important element, transcending all others, but at the same time encompassing them all.57 In other words, Logos is the elementary grounding of life.
Secondly, it should be noted that the concepts of life and light are of great importance in the Gospel. Of specific interest is the concept of life, since this term is usually connected to the fundamental salvific concept of eternal life (e.g., 5:40; 10:10). Some scholars therefore argue that this must also be the case in the beginning of the Prologue. This interpretation would give a Jesus-centered understanding of v. 4. On the other hand, to others it appears that the jump from Logos in all creation to the specific mission of Jesus is far too abrupt. They also think that if vv. 4–5 refer to Jesus, then the explicit references to the coming of Jesus would seem tautological.58 In fact, it is more natural to understand “life” in vv. 3–4 in a broader sense than eternal life—as being about the life of creation, life as a pre-supposition for everything else in our existence.
The first part of the Prologue, then, reflects an inclusive and cosmological Christology which is of great importance for the religious dialogue. This is in line with the insight of the early church fathers, such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen. They developed the idea of Logos Spermatikos, of the Spirit of Christ being present like seeds in non-Christian cultures and religions.59 The Spirit of Christ is sprouting forth, sometimes undetected but sometimes in real beauty and splendor, in poetry, rituals, holy scriptures, and so on; cf. Acts 17:23–28. God has manifested “Godself” in Logos in all cultures and religions in preparation for the decisive, definitive manifestation in the God-man of Jesus Christ. Consequently, what seems to be true, good, and noble in the different peoples, cultures, and religions has its origin in him.
This Logos Christology makes sense as a means of describing God’s working in all human lives. On the other hand the Fourth Gospel also affirms that religion as a human phenomenon is deeply ambiguous: “The light shines in darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it” (1:5).
The Incarnated Word as the Interpretation of God
The response to this fundamental ambiguity in the human being may be found in the second part of the Prologue, which in a confessional form expresses the unique character of the Christian message. The climax is the incarnation in v. 14: “The word became flesh and lived among us.” After the incarnation the Word is not just present in the world as that which shines in the darkness—cf. the concept of Logos Spermatikos. Now God has revealed himself in his fullness in the only begotten Son. In him is grace and truth. No one is comparable with him, not even Moses. The law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ, that is in his person (1:17). The uniqueness of Jesus is underlined even in the concluding verse 18. No one has ever seen God—but the only Son, the incarnated Word, has interpreted him to all mankind. The linguistic form of the verb (in Greek: aorist) is a clear indication that the verse refers to the historical and personal life of Jesus. God’s real nature is expressed in his encompassing love and power.
There is a yearning among human beings to see God. John does not deny this, but he insists that it is merely through the incarnated Word that man is able to know who God is. It is in believing in Jesus, the incarnated Word, that people can see God, cf. 1:18 and 14:9: “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.” In the middle of the Prologue (vv.11–13) the emphasis is on human decision. Jesus came to his own (i.e., all people or perhaps just the Jewish people), but his own did not accept him. However, to all those who did receive him was given the power to become the children of God. These words remind us of the thrust of the entire gospel: that those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, may have life in his name (20:31); the point is that they are born of God.
Particularity and Universality in the Interpretation of Christ
This analysis of the Prologue shows that from its very beginning the Gospel is cosmic and universal in perspective. The issues are all ultimate: the origin and meaning of creation, the attainment of authentic life, and the search for God. These are elements common to all religious systems. But a Christian interpretation cannot remain here; and so John moves from these universal elements to the earthly, historical Jesus. The movement is from the universal to the particular, from the global to the local, from eternity to history, from the impersonal to the personal. Men and women are called to follow that movement, and thereby realize that Jesus Christ is the unique revealer of the living God (1:18).
The Gospel as a whole also reflects a movement in the opposite direction: from the historical and concrete to the universal and cosmic. A salient feature is the emphasis on the universality of Christ. One of many examples is the cross of Jesus with its inscription: “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews,” written not only in Hebrew, but also in Latin and Greek (19:20), that is, the major languages of that time. Towards the end of his public work Jesus is found by some Greeks wishing to see him (12:20ff.). He answers their request by speaking of his suffering, death, and glorification, and says that he will draw all people to himself when he is lifted up from the earth (12:32). The universal importance of Jesus is also underlined by the use of many different titles of Christ; this is particularly evident in 1:35–51, cf. “Images of Christ” in Part Two.
The tendency to move from the more particular to the universal is characteristic of many religious systems of that time, since their location in the Eastern Mediterranean area brought them under the influence of Greek culture. A similar development might well have taken place within the Johannine tradition. A growing number of scholars have noticed that the Johannine community was in dialogue with a wide spectrum of groups and ideologies in the first century.60 The gospel in its present form may represent an attempt to communicate with a great variety of dialogue partners. Nevertheless, John’s insistence on the universal dimension is not due simply to the impact of a more cosmopolitan culture. Rather, the universalism of the message flowed from the universal significance of Christ himself. Jesus revealed God, and only faith in this Jesus was an adequate response.61
The Gospel, then, is not the end-product of a succession of encounters with other groups and viewpoints that have influenced John’s theology. On the other hand, the author seems to be quite sensitive to movements and currents of his time. John’s attempt to express his Christian experience in a language that would awaken echoes in a non-Christian world around him should always remain an inspiration and model for us to continue the same process in our own times.62 In what follows we shall see examples of how contemporary religious dialogue has been inspired by the Prologue and the Logos Christology.
Contemporary perspectives
Syncretism and accommodation
The first example is the Norwegian theologian and missionary Karl Ludvig Reichelt who in his mission to Buddhism did not hesitate to translate Logos with the Chinese term Tao.63 Reichelt rejects the charge that this implies syncretism. On the contrary he argues that “Tao has found its full realization in Christ.”64
According to Filip Riisager,