Philipp F. Bartholomä, «John 5,31-47 and the Teaching of Jesus in the Synoptics. A Comparative Approach.»
Within Johannine scholarship, the assumed differences between Jesus’ teaching in John and in the Synoptics have frequently led to a negative judgment about Johannine authenticity. This article proposes a comparative approach that distinguishes between different levels of similarity in wording and content and applies it to John 5,31-47. What we find in this discourse section corresponds conceptually to a significant degree with the picture offered in the Synoptics, though couched in a very different idiom. Thus, the comparative evidence does not preclude us from accepting this particular part of Johannine speech material as an authentic representation of the actual content of Jesus’words.
Biblica_1:Layout 1 21-11-2011 12:59 Pagina 390
390 PHILIPP F. BARTHOLOMÄ
evidence. Having established the methodological necessity for a dis-
tinction between wording and content, our study has shown that while
semantically the Jesus of John 5,31-47 does not stand in close prox-
imity to the Synoptic Jesus, conceptually only two proposition of this
discourse (John 5,33a.45a) have no parallel in Matthew, Mark, or
Luke (i.e., a [0/0-level of closeness]). Further, none of these Johan-
nine words significantly add to or even contradict the theology of the
Synoptic Jesus. Not only are there no significant dissimilarities or
contradictions in content, but the main propositions of this discourse
section resemble conceptually (some to a lesser, some to a greater
degree) the teaching of Jesus as represented elsewhere in the canon-
ical Gospels. While the motif of the Father testifying to Jesus is not
absent in the Synoptics (John 5,31-32.36.37b par., Luke 11,20 par.;
Matt 11,4-5 par. [0/1-level of closeness]), the reference to the Baptist
as another important witness to his ministry is completely in line with
Jesus’ synoptic teaching (John 5,33b-35 par., Matt 11,7-11 par. [0/2-
level of closeness]; cf. also Mark 11,30-33). Other key themes of Jo-
hannine thought likewise resemble the Synoptic Gospels, such as the
Father sending the Son (John 5,37a.38b.[36] par., Matt 10,40; Luke
10,16 [0/2-level of closeness]), the lack of belief and refusal to come
to Jesus (John 5,38b.40.43 par.; Matt 17,17 par.; 21,32 par.; 23,37
par.; Luke 15,28 [1/1- and 1/2-levels of closeness]), the charge against
his hearers for not seeking the glory of God (John 5,44 par.; Matt 6,1-
2.5.16; 23,5-7 [0/2-level of closeness]), as well as the allegation of not
having the word and the love of God in them (John 5,38a.42 par.;
Mark 4,16-17; Luke 11,42 [1/2-level of closeness]). Finally, the tes-
timony of Scripture about Jesus is obviously a prominent theme in
John’s synoptic counterparts as well (John 5,39.45b-47 par.; Luke
24,44; Matt 5,17; Luke 16,31 [1/2- and 0/2-levels of closeness]).
A few years before Dodd, W.F. Albright, commenting on the re-
lationship between the Fourth Gospel and the Synoptics, argued that
“there is no fundamental difference in teaching between John and the
Synoptics, (…) [and] there is absolutely nothing to show that any of
Jesus’ teachings have been distorted of falsified, or that a vital new
element has been added to them†37. In regard to the Johannine dis-
course section examined in this article, our findings have proved his
37
W.F. ALBRIGHT, “Recent Discoveries in Palestine and The Gospel of
Johnâ€, The Background of the NT and Its Eschatology (eds. W.D. DAVIES –
D. DAUBE) (Cambridge 1956) 170-171.
FOLLOW US