What is the Gospel of John? by Marianne Meye Thompson
“What is the Gospel of John?” Marianne Meye Thompson
In this essay, “What is the Gospel of John?” Marianne Meye Thompson raises a literary and historical question, but the very purpose of the essay, as Thompson says, is a theological question: What is the gospel of John all about? What is it for? How does it serve us? Hence, the main point of the essay is what the gospel is and how God is the one who determines the gospel’s truth.
The writer starts off her explanation with literary and historical observations. She argues that the distinction between the gospel of John and the Synoptic gospels—specifically, that “John is theology and the Synoptics are history”—is not particularly helpful. Firstly, all the gospels present Jesus’ earthly ministry and his mission. Secondly, John is a first-order account of the life of Jesus because John has presented the historical significance of Jesus just as it really was: God “dwelled among us.” Thirdly, she adds, since “there is no such thing as theology in the abstract, it is not particularly useful to speak of the gospel as theology versus history” (334, Thompson). Yet the characteristics of John are different from those of the Synoptic gospels. These characteristics, according to Thompson, ultimately illuminate what a gospel is and what the gospel is.
The writer further shows the distinction between a gospel and the gospel. According to Thompson, John is a gospel because it is a narrative account of God’s encounter with humankind through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. John also shows us that it is the gospel by demonstrating what a gospel does. The gospel presents an interpreted account of God’s encounter with humankind through Jesus and narrates how that embodied encounter engenders both belief and unbelief (335).
Further, Thompson says that John is not read appropriately. She cites 3:16, which is read in a primarily individualistic and spiritualized way. It is read as though God’s work has to do only with salvation from “up there.” This reading method doesn’t tell us what to believe, what to hope for, or how to live.
Thompson proposes that John write clearly about the relationship between God and Jesus and say that they are one. Hence, we are to believe in one God and that Christianity is monotheistic. She cites, “As the Father has life in himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life in himself” (5:26). Secondly, John tells us what we hope for. We certainly hope for eternity, but that does not limit an eschatological hope. It is our present hope that we participate in the life of God, abiding in God and being with God because we have seen God through Jesus. Thirdly, John explores how we are to live. We are to embody God’s love and life in the world and discern dualism. John challenges the church to discern what is from God and what is from the world. Finally, John challenges people who pride themselves in the doctrine to live in accountability, as they are brothers and sisters who are “born of God.” Thus, Thompson says that John has contextualized the gospel, which fulfills his purposes for the readers.
Thompson laments that there is a lack of faithful interpreters of Scripture. First, Thompson believes that there is a necessity of spiritual maturity and a pure soul for fair interpretation of the Scripture. Secondly, she also sees the necessity of biblical knowledge as well as theological knowledge. Thus, to be able to interpret the Scriptures today, one should follow the so-called fourfold method with recent literary and historical methods. Following these methods will serve Scripture and its readers well.
Evidently, Scripture tells us what God has done for us and what we await in the present life. John has convinced us how God is part of our everyday life through his truth, grace, and love. He is present among us, embodied among us, and living in and through us. All of this is good news to us.
I agree with the main point that the gospel is what God has done for us. John shows all that in his gospel. Thus, John is ‘the gospel’ in its truest sense. John presents what a Christian should know and follow. Being a Christian is not about heavenly things only, but also about embodying godly characteristics in this world.
Thompson suggests the need for proper interpretation of Scriptures. I too believe that spiritual maturity and a pure soul are important for the proper interpretation of Scriptures. When a man interprets Scripture without spiritual maturity and a pure soul, usually, he tends to rely heavily on his human experience and seek to substitute the Scripture. In the process of exegesis, the passage will be full of ambiguous meanings that leave a negative impact on the whole congregation. Therefore, there should be a proper interpretation of the Word of God. Today, as a matter of fact, many cults have come out of the unbalanced, immature interpretation of the Scriptures.
Having said this, we cannot ignore the biblical and theological knowledge either. The interpreter should have, at least, basic biblical and theological understanding to interpret the Scripture. In my experience, I have heard many sermons on the gospel of John back home in Nepal. The majority of the speakers were poorly educated seminary graduates or unskilled public speakers. Some of them merely have had basic biblical knowledge and theological understanding. Contrary, they are very spiritually mature and live life uncompromisingly for the sake of the gospel. Their interpretation of Scripture does not stem from a rigorous exegetical analysis and understanding of the Bible. In this case, the historical, cultural, and theological aspects of the Scripture largely go unnoticed. Their understanding of Scripture is two-dimensional: black and white. However, their foundation for interpretation relies solely on purity and mature, spirit-filled life. Thus, there should be a balance between biblical knowledge and spiritual maturity for the ministry.
