Abstract
Catrin Williams and Christopher Rowland (eds), John’s Gospel and Intimations of Apocalyptic, Bloomsbury T&T Clark: London and New York, 2013; 344 pp.: 9780567618528, £70.00/$120.00 (hbk), 9780567119100, £22.99/$34.95 (pbk)
Apocalyptic literature is characterized by the disclosure of mysteries. A visionary may learn about the course of history or perhaps travel to the heavenly realms above. But John’s Gospel has little of this. It narrates the ministry of Jesus on earth and emphasizes salvation in the present rather than the future. John Ashton, however, has described John’s Gospel as an apocalypse in reverse, because it depicts revelation of heavenly realities on earth, through a revealer who not only speaks the message but also incarnates it.
This welcome collection of essays explores Ashton’s proposal. The essays in Part 1 deal with ‘Intimations of Apocalyptic’ in John by focusing on the central question of revelation. A significant point is that apocalypses themselves show revelation taking place in various ways. They are concerned that heavenly secrets be disseminated to an earthly audience, not only to the visionary himself. Since the Johannine Jesus comes from above to bear witness to a God whom no one has ever seen, John might be called an apocalyptic gospel. Moreover, apocalypses sometimes work with a two-stage approach to revelation, in which the initial disclosure is later followed by additional insights into its meaning. In a similar way, the Spirit-Paraclete reminds believers of the revelation Jesus has already provided and then leads them into a new sense of truth.
Part 2 turns to John’s ‘Apocalyptic Milieu’ by concentrating on the problem of evil. One proposal is that John’s Gospel shows an emerging Gnostic perspective, which contrasts the good Father who reigns above with the father of the devil, who rules this world. But other essays find closer connections to Jewish traditions, like those in the Dead Sea Scrolls, where good and evil spirits operate through human agents. Especially important is Jesus’ petition that God protect his followers from the evil one, after his own return to the Father (John 17.15). Despite the Gospel’s emphasis on the present reality of salvation, it recognizes that evil continues to operate in the time before the final judgement.
Part 3 asks how apocalyptic categories shed light on the Gospel’s function for its readers. For example, apocalypses emphasize the importance of the written text as an authoritative means of communication, and the two conclusions of the Gospel also treat the written text as a definitive presentation of Jesus’ message (20.30–31; 21.24–25). If apocalypses call for readers who are open to visionary experience and ready to engage riddles and figurative language, John’s Gospel expects similar things of readers.
These essays help redefine the categories with which we approach apocalyptic writings and John’s Gospel. Instead of limiting the comparison to eschatology, they propose new ways to consider what each type of literature helps us see in the other. The result is not a new consensus, but a promising series of leads, which invite discussion around questions of how the hidden purposes of God are revealed.