[Dialogue] 8/26/10, Spong: The Origins of the New Testament, Part XXXV: The Epilogue of John

[Af]

Print this Article 

 
Not a member?Subscribe now! 








We bring your attention to a major series of lectures entitled "Building a New Christianity for a New World" in Atlanta from September 16-September 19, 2010:
9/16  7 p.m. Trinity Presbyterian Church — "Why Traditional Christianity is Dying: The Religious Challenges of our Generation"
9/17  7 p.m. The Cathedral of St. Philip — "Redefining God in Today's Scientifically Oriented World"
9/18  9 a.m. The Cathedral of St. Philip — 1) "Rethinking the Role of Jesus in Today's Post-Darwinian World" 2) "The Role of Christians in a Scientific, Multi-Cultural and Multi-Faith World"
9/19  4 p.m Morehouse College Martin Luther King Jr. International Chapel — "Religious Victimization: Are Sexuality and Gender the Basis of a New Segregation?"





Thursday August 26, 2010 

The Origins of the New Testament, Part XXXV
The Epilogue of John

The last chapter of John's gospel, known as the Epilogue, is not believed by most scholars to be part of the original text of this gospel. A careful reading of chapter 20 makes it clear that this was how the original evangelist chose to end his story. Listen to his closing words: "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples that are not written in this book but these are written that you may believe, that Jesus is the Christ, and that believing you may have life in his name." After that one expects no more. Yet chapter 21 has been added. It seems not to follow from or to fit in with anything said in chapter 20. The scene has shifted from Jerusalem to Galilee. A significant amount of time has elapsed. The disciples seem not motivated at all by the appearances of Jesus recorded in chapter 20. They have clearly passed the stage of mourning and have returned to their Galilean homes and picked up the pieces of their pre-Jesus lives. They have even gone back to the source of their livelihood as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee. One other aspect to chapter 21 of John is that it replicates fairly closely the details of a Lucan narrative (see Luke 5:1-16), which Luke asserts was a miracle story not of the risen Christ, but of the Galilean Jesus near the beginning of his public ministry. Despite these problems, I have always been attracted to this Epilogue and it has played a major role in my understanding of the Easter event. I close my columns on John's gospel by describing how that connection came into being.
Earlier in my career, I made an extensive study of all of the resurrection narratives in the New Testament. This study resulted in the publication of a book entitled Resurrection: Myth or Reality?. In that book, I tried to sort out the elements that seemed to culminate in the enormous power that was connected with the Easter moment. I asked four questions: Who was it who stood in the center of the resurrection experience? Where were the disciples when the experience of resurrection dawned? When was the moment in time in which the meaning of resurrection broke through in the lives of the disciples? What was the context, the setting, in which the Easter experience emerged? I then began to explore the clues present in the New Testament that might lead to new conclusions about this central exp erience in our faith story.
As I worked through not only all of the specific resurrection texts, but also anything else that might throw light on the Easter experience, recognizing that every word in Paul and in each gospel was actually written as post-Easter narratives, I came to these conclusions.
Peter is the crucial, central figure in the Easter story. Peter is singled out as the one who first saw. Paul says, "He appeared first to Cephas." Mark, the first gospel to be written, has the messenger say, "Go tell the disciples and Peter." Luke has the disciples claim, "The Lord has risen and has appeared to Peter." John portrays Peter as the first one who entered the tomb and saw its emptiness, including the burial clothes neatly placed where his hands and feet would once presumably have been. In Matthew and in other parts of the gospel text, Peter is the one who makes the first confession at Caesarea Philippi. He is always listed first when the disciples are named. In John's gospel, Jesus is quoted as saying to Peter, "When you are converted strengthen your brethren," as if Peter would be the first one who would enable the others to see. The primacy of Peter in the entire gospel tradition seems to me to rest on the fact that Peter was the f irst one whose eyes were opened to see both the meaning of Jesus and his resurrection. Then I searched every Peter story in the gospels looking for resurrection clues. I believe that they are there, from the story of Peter after the feeding of the multitude in John, saying "Lord, to whom shall we go, you have the word of eternal life," to Peter demanding to be washed all over when Jesus washes the feet of the disciples. All Peter stories I concluded ought to be read as resurrection stories for they show Peter's coming to faith very clearly. So I filed my first conclusion. Peter stood at the center of the resurrection tradition.
Secondly, I pursued the "where" question. The New Testament is divided between the competing claims for primacy in the resurrection tradition between Galilee and Jerusalem. Mark has the Easter messenger direct the disciples to return to Galilee with the promise that, "there you will see him." Matthew says that it was only in Galilee that the raised Christ ever appeared to the disciples. Luke, however, counters this Galilean tradition by asserting that the appearance of the risen Christ occurred only in Jerusalem and its environs, thus overtly refuting the Galilean tradition. John supports Luke by insisting on the primacy of Jerusalem, but then to the end of John's gospel was attached the Epilogue that centers the resurrection squarely in Galilee. A deeper analysis of these competing texts, however, reveals that the Galilee tradition was not only earlier, but it was the more primitive and the more original. It is noteworthy that all the Jesus sightings, the visions, th e aspects of his bodily physicality, the feeling of his flesh and the touching of his wounds are associated with the later and clearly secondary Jerusalem tradition. So Galilee emerged from this study as the answer to the question about where the disciples were when the resurrection experience dawned. Building on that conclusion, I then looked at other stories that might also contain Easter references, from the disciples mistaking him for a ghost coming to them out of the darkness, to Jesus walking on the water, to the account of the transfiguration, which portrays him as translucent. I noted that all of these were set in Galilee.
I came next to the "when" question and confronted the familiar time symbol "three days." A study of the New Testament reveals that this symbol is wobbly at best. Paul and Mark say "On the third day." Matthew and Luke change that time designation to "after three days," a variation that sounds similar, but clearly is not, for "on" and "after" do not result in the same day. According to a literal reading of the gospels, the time from burial on Good Friday to the empty tomb at dawn on Sunday morning is only 36 hours, or a day and a half. Mark, however, has the messenger say only that they will see him in Galilee, but Galilee is a seven- to ten-day journey from Jerusalem, so this "seeing" could not possibly occur inside the literal "three day" symbol, whether it is "on" or "after." Luke stretches the appearance stories to forty days, culminating with the first account of the ascension. John has resurrection appearance stories occur in Jerusalem over a period of eight days, but then in the Johannine Epilogue the resurrection appearances seem to cover a period of months. These were the data that drove me to conclude that the phrase "three days" is not only a symbol, but one that was never intended to be a literal measure of time. That insight opened me to the possibility that the time between the crucifixion and the Easter experience needs to be expanded at least to months. My third conclusion thus became that I needed to destabilize and de-literalize the symbolic time marker of three days and to extend the time between crucifixion and resurrection significantly.
Finally, when I searched for the context in which resurrection dawned, I found the key phrase in Luke, "He was known to us in the breaking of bread." That valuable clue led me to look at all the feeding stories in the gospels for resurrection clues. So I examined the stories about the feeding of the multitude with a limited number of loaves and fishes, I examined the various accounts of the Last Supper, and I even looked at the parables of Jesus that focused on a great banquet. In each of these places I found elements of the interpretive meal in which the risen Jesus made himself known and present.
My study drove me to these conclusions: First, whatever Easter was, Peter stood at the center of it and was the first to "see" and was thus the one who opened the eyes of the others so that they could also see. Secondly, Galilee was the original setting in which the meaning of Easter dawned, while the Jerusalem tradition was secondary. That is why the Jerusalem stories feature a supernaturalized Jesus and insist on the resurrection being understood as a resuscitated Jesus. Third, I concluded that the moment of Easter dawned slowly and over a period of months after the crucifixion. Finally, I became convinced that the common meal of the church was designed to be a liturgical reenactment of what the original resurrection experience was, so that liturgical meal must have played a role in the beginning. With these conclusions in hand, I returned to the gospels in search of a resurrection narrative that was based on these four principles.
I found it only in the Epilogue to the Fourth Gospel, which I now regard as the most authentic, and maybe even the earliest, of the resurrection narratives in the New Testament. It is about Peter fighting his way through to a new understanding. It is set in Galilee. It clearly occurs some time after the crucifixion. It concludes by suggesting that it was during a beachside, early morning Eucharist that the experience of their living Lord broke through first to Peter, then to the twelve.
The Epilogue of John thus grew in significance for me. Further study opened me to the possibility that this narrative might well have been an earlier tradition that floated freely during the oral period and found two very different resting places, first in Luke and then in the Epilogue of John. My supposition is that someone, perhaps a member of the Johannine School, recognized its authenticity and decided to attach it to the Fourth Gospel. That decision preserved, I believe, the earliest and most authentic memory of the dawning of Easter and, at the same time, true to the Johannine principle, it was clear that this experience could never be literalized, for it was not bound inside either time or space. It is fitting that with this story the Fourth Gospel is drawn to its second conclusion and that is why John says that "to know Jesus is eternal life." 

&nda sh; John Shelby Spong
 




Question and Answer 
With John Shelby Spong


John Arvey, from Sunnyvale, CA asks:
You have discussed the influence of astronomy on our God view. What do you think will happen when life on other planets is discovered? Will this expand or contract your image of God?
John Arvey, from Sunnyvale, CA asks:
You have discussed the influence of astronomy on our God view. What do you think will happen when life on other planets is discovered? Will this expand or contract your image of God?



Dear John:
In a word, I believe nothing will happen. I assume it's inevitable already. Our image of God is always too small. Our problem is that we cannot think in God categories. God is the same. Our image of God expands every time we discover something more about life, the universe or our own humanity. 

– John Shelby Spong






Send your questions to support at johnshelbyspong.com 






 
Print this Article 

 
Not a member? Subscribe now! 












 

Thanks for joining our mailing list, elliestock at aol.com, for A New Christianity For A New World on 11/09/2008 
REMOVE me from this list | Add me to this list | Manage my e-mail settings | Contact Customer Service 
Copyright 2010 Everyday Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
4 Marshall Street, North Adams, MA 01247
Subject to our terms of service and privacy policy 





 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100826/a048be87/attachment-0001.html>