Jude 1:4 a corruption?

 

Does God Share His Glory?

If God shares his glory with Jesus and "God gives his glory to no one," how is Jesus not God?

I believe the pattern of Scripture demonstrates that there are two aspects of God's glory that fit into two different metaphysical categories. 

There is the glory pertaining to his essence, and there is the glory pertaining to his energies.

"Essence" of God, refers to the divine nature or substance of God. Let's call the glory associated with the ontology of God (nature/substance/essence) Essential Glory

"Energies" of God, on the other hand, refer to the actions, operations, or power of God in the world, which are knowable and directly experienceable. Let's call this glory that pertains to the energetic work of God, Energetic Glory.

The divine energies are understood in orthodox theology as the means by which we can know and participate in God, while the divine essence remains transcendent.

The essence (Essential Glory) is not communicable, the energies of God (Energetic Glory) is. 

God does not share his essential nature/substance, 

God does share his energies (i.e., knowledge, power, and influence) with creation.

In making a distinction between Essential Glory and Energetic Glory, let's look at the following examples in Isaiah and the New Testament. 

Examples of Essential Glory:

Isaiah 24:15 (ESV) 

 ¹⁵ Therefore in the east give glory to the LORD;
in the coastlands of the sea, give glory to the name of the LORD, the God of Israel.

Isaiah 42:5, 8-9 (ESV) 

⁵ Thus says God, the LORD,
who created the heavens and stretched them out,
who spread out the earth and what comes from it,
who gives breath to the people on it
and spirit to those who walk in it ...

⁸ I am the LORD; that is my name;
my glory I give to no other,
nor my praise to carved idols.
⁹ Behold, the former things have come to pass,
and new things I now declare;
before they spring forth
I tell you of them.”

Isaiah 48:5, 9-13 (ESV) 

⁵ I declared them to you from of old,
before they came to pass I announced them to you,
lest you should say, ​‘My idol did them,
my carved image and my metal image commanded them.’

  ⁹ “For my name's sake I defer my anger;
for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you,
that I may not cut you off.
¹⁰ Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver;
I have tried you in the furnace of affliction.
¹¹ For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it,
for how should my name be profaned?
My glory I will not give to another.
¹² “Listen to me, O Jacob,
and Israel, whom I called!
I am he; I am the first,
and I am the last.
¹³ My hand laid the foundation of the earth,
and my right hand spread out the heavens;
when I call to them,
they stand forth together.

Romans 1:22-23 (ESV) 

  ²² Claiming to be wise, they became fools, ²³ and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Romans 11:33-36 (ESV)
³³ Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
³⁴ “For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
³⁵ “Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
³⁶ For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

Ephesians 1:17 (ESV) 
¹⁷ that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him

Philippians 4:19-20 (ESV) 
¹⁹ And my God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. ²⁰ To our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen.

1 Timothy 1:17 (ESV)
¹⁷ To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

Jude 1:25 (ESV) 
²⁵ to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.

Revelation 4:9-11 (ESV)
⁹ And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to him who is seated on the throne, who lives forever and ever, ¹⁰ the twenty-four elders fall down before him who is seated on the throne and worship him who lives forever and ever. They cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
¹¹ “Worthy are you, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things,
and by your will they existed and were created.”

Examples of Energetic Glory:

Psalms 84:11 (NASU20) 
¹¹ For the LORD God is a sun and shield;
The LORD gives grace and glory;
He withholds no good thing from those who walk with integrity.

Isaiah 4:5-6 (ESV) 

⁵ Then the LORD will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over her assemblies a cloud by day, and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory there will be a canopy. ⁶ There will be a booth for shade by day from the heat, and for a refuge and a shelter from the storm and rain.

Isaiah 6:3 (ESV)

“Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts;
the whole earth is full of his glory!” 

Isaiah 28:5 (ESV) 

In that day the LORD of hosts will be a crown of glory,
and a diadem of beauty, to the remnant of his people,

Isaiah 40:3-5 (ESV) 

³ A voice cries: “In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD;
make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

⁴ Every valley shall be lifted up,
and every mountain and hill be made low;
the uneven ground shall become level,
and the rough places a plain.
⁵ And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed,
and all flesh shall see it together,
for the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”

Isaiah 46:13 (ESV) 

¹³ I bring near my righteousness; it is not far off,
and my salvation will not delay;
I will put salvation in Zion,
for Israel my glory.”

Isaiah 60:1-3 (ESV) 

  ¹ Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.
² For behold, darkness shall cover the earth,
and thick darkness the peoples;
but the LORD will arise upon you,
and his glory will be seen upon you.
³ And nations shall come to your light,
and kings to the brightness of your rising.

Isaiah 62:2 (ESV)

The nations shall see your righteousness,
and all the kings your glory,
and you shall be called by a new name
that the mouth of the LORD will give.

John 5:44 (ESV) 

  ⁴⁴ How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?

John 8:49-54 (ESV)

 ⁴⁹ Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. ⁵⁰ Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the judge. ⁵¹ Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” ⁵² The Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham died, as did the prophets, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ ⁵³ Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” ⁵⁴ Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’

John 11:4 (ESV) 

 ⁴ But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”

John 11:40-42 (ESV) 

  ⁴⁰ Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God?” ⁴¹ So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. ⁴² I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.”

John 17:4-5 (ESV) 

⁴ I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. ⁵ And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

John 17:22-24 (ESV)
²² The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, ²³ I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. ²⁴ Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.

Luke 9:26 (ESV)
²⁶ For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.

Acts 7:54-55 (ESV)
⁵⁴ Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. ⁵⁵ But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.

Romans 6:4 (ESV) 
⁴ We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

Romans 8:30 (ESV)

And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Hebrews 1:3-4 (ESV)

 ³ He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, ⁴ having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

1 Peter 1:21 (ESV)
²¹ who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

2 Peter 1:16-17 (ESV)
¹⁶ For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. ¹⁷ For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,”

1 Thess 2:12

¹² we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.

1 Peter 5:10

¹⁰ And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you.

John 3 is an Interlude having parallels with 1John

John 3 is mostly an interlude, having parallels with 1 John. The table shows parallels between John 3 and 1 John. 

I don't believe John 3:11-21 are Jesus' words or that John 3:31-36 are the words of John the Baptist. Rather, it is the narration of the evangelist/author of John and 1 John.  Important clues, in addition to the parallels with 1 John, are the plurals of John 3:11-12.

The indication that an interlude narration begins in verse 11 is

(1) “you” is in the plural both in verses 11 and 12 (although Jesus was only speaking to Nicodemus)
(2) “we speak what we know and testify what we have seen” contains 4 plural verbs
(3) “our” is plural in reference to “our testimony” 

According to UBS Handbooks for New Testament (20 Vols.) on John 3:11, “The shift from singular to plural should be carefully noted. The verse begins with the first person singular (I) addressing the second person singular (you). The shift is then made to the first-person plural (we... our) addressing the second-person plural (none of you). A number of theories exist as to why this shift is made, but the most probable solution is that John has shifted the time perspective from Jesus' day to the time in which he writes his Gospel. If so, then “we” represents the Christian believers of John's own day who are in dialogue with the Jews represented by “you (plural).”

In John 3:12, “you” throughout the verse is plural, so it must not only be addressed to Nicodemus. (UBS Handbooks for New Testament (20 Vols.))

With respect to John 3:31-36, the UBS Handbooks for New Testament (20 Vols.) notes, "It is possible that these words are the comments of the author of the Gospel. This is the opinion held by TEV, NEB, RSV, and Gdsp. If this is the case, there is a parallel between verses 14-21 (or 16-21) and the present passage. That is, the earlier section represents the author's commentary on Jesus' dialogue with Nicodemus, while this passage serves as a commentary on the relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist.”

Red-letter Bibles need a reprint.

Paul's Attestation of the Virgin Birth

 Paul attests to the virgin birth indirectly in the following ways:

1. Adam Christology of Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15.

2. Use of Greek terminology in Galatians 4. 

Adam Christology of Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15

Paul's comparison of Adam and Jesus suggests the idea of a unique or miraculous origin. Paul refers to Adam as a type of Christ in Romans 5:14, where he writes, “Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.” (NIV) In the ESV translation of Romans 5:14, Paul refers to Adam  as “a type of the one who was to come.” Jesus being a type of Adam is an indication that like Adam, Jesus is a direct creation by God, brought into existence without sin. It was necessary that a type of Adam be the remedy for the sin that entered the world. In 1Cor 15:45, Paul refers to Jesus as the “last Adam.”

Romans 5:14-19 (RSV) 

 ¹⁴ Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. ¹⁵ But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. ¹⁶ And the free gift is not like the effect of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings justification. ¹⁷ If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

¹⁸ Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. ¹⁹ For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.

 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 (RSV) 

²⁰ But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. ²¹ For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (RSV) 

⁴⁵ Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. ⁴⁶ But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual. ⁴⁷ The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. ⁴⁸ As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven, so are those who are of heaven. ⁴⁹ Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. ⁵⁰ I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 

 

Use of Greek terminology in Galatians 4 

There are two Greek words for 'born' used in Galatians 4, γίνομαι (ginomai) vs γεννάω (gennaō)

The use of these two words for born differentiates Jesus being born vs. other humans being born. Gal 4:4 uses the word ginomai in reference to Christ, while Gal 4:23, 24, and 28 uses the form of the word gennaō in reference to humanity in general.  This differentiation is to indicate that Jesus’s was not born in the typical sense of natural reproduction.  

 

The BDAG lexicon gives a wide range of potential meanings for the word γίνομαι (ginomai):

 

1 to come into being through the process of birth or natural production, be born, be produced 

2 to come into existence, be made, be created, be manufactured, be performed

3 come into being as an event or phenomenon from a point of origin, arise, come about, develop

4 to occur as process or result, happen, turn out, take place

5 to experience a change in nature and so indicate entry into a new condition, become someth.

6 to make a change of location in space, move

7 to come into a certain state or possess certain characteristics, to be, prove to be, turn out to be

8 to be present at a given time, be there

9 to be closely related to someone or someth., belong to

 

The BDAG lexicon gives a narrower range of potential meaning for the word γεννάω (gennaō) with a stronger connotation of being begotten by parents:

1 become the parent of, beget

2 to give birth to, bear

3 to cause someth. to happen, bring forth, produce, cause

 

The word applied to Jesus, a form of the word “ginomai” implies being brought into existence in a more generic and broad sense, whereas the implication of “gennao” gives a more narrow implication of being begotten through parents. Thus, the distinction Paul is making in using two different words for “born” is that Jesus was brought into existence in apart from having the connotation of natural reproduction.  When it comes to others being “born,” Paul wanted to give the connotation of natural reproduction using the word gennaō.

 

Although Gal 4 is a great proof text for the virgin birth, it is not at all a proof text for preexistence and incarnation.

Galatians 4:4-5 (RSV) 

⁴ But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born (ginomai) of woman, born (ginomai) under the law, ⁵ to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.

Galatians 4:23 (RSV)

²³ But the son of the slave was born (gennaō) according to the flesh, the son of the free woman through promise.

Galatians 4:28-29 (RSV) 

²⁸ Now we, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. ²⁹ But as at that time he who was born (gennaō) according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now.

Also in Gal 4:4, Paul mentions that Jesus was “born of a woman” without specifying a human father. Some theologians suggest that this could be an indirect reference to the virgin birth.

The Raising of Lazarus, a Literary Creation?

Many scholars who specialize in the historical study of the New Testament approach the story of the Raising of Lazarus with a critical eye, and may view certain aspects of the story as non-historical or exaggerated.

Keith Yoder

Keith Yoder demonstrates in his paper, One and the Same? Lazarus in Luke and John, that the Lazarus of Luke 16 and the Lazarus of John 11-12 are largely one and the same. Yoder addresses such questions as (1) When was the story composed relative to the contiguous text? (2) How is it interwoven with the rest of John? (3) Whence came this otherwise unknown brother of Mary and Martha? (4) Why is his story here at this turn in the Fourth Gospel? The interpretation of John’s Lazarus narrative has languished in virtual stalemate for some time. Yoder brings new evidence to the table, to gain a fresh perspective on the composition of that story and its relationship to Luke 16, in the context of a carefully constructed array of network connections with earlier and later texts in John. Yoder identifies connections between Lazarus and the Temple Cleansing and how they illuminate why John moved his Cleansing from Crucifixion week all the way back to join with Jesus’ first miraculous sign at the wedding.

 

Keith L. Yoder. “One and the Same? Lazarus in Luke and John” Novum Testamentum Vol. 64 Iss. 2 (2022) p. 184 – 209 ISSN: 1568-5365

PDF Download Available at: https://works.bepress.com/klyoder/60/download/

Warren Carter

Warren Carter is a New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the historical Jesus. In his book "John and Empire: Initial Explorations," Carter argues that the Gospel of John was written in the context of the Roman Empire, and that it reflects the social, political, and religious tensions of its time.

Regarding the story of the Raising of Lazarus, Carter suggests that it should be read as a "sign" or "miracle" story that conveys a theological message, rather than as a straightforward historical account. He notes that the story contains several elements that are characteristic of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

Carter also points out that the story of Lazarus appears only in the Gospel of John, which was written later than the other three canonical gospels. He suggests that this may indicate that the story was a later addition to the Christian tradition, rather than a historical account of a specific event.

Overall, while Carter does not explicitly argue that the story of Lazarus is entirely fictional, he approaches it with a critical eye and suggests that its historicity may be called into question.

James Dunn

James Dunn was a New Testament scholar who passed away in 2020. He was known for his work on the historical Jesus, the New Testament, and early Christianity. Regarding the historicity of the Raising of Lazarus, Dunn's views are somewhat nuanced.

In his book "The Evidence for Jesus," Dunn suggests that while the story of the Raising of Lazarus may have some historical basis, it has been embellished and mythologized over time. He notes that the story contains several elements that are characteristic of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

However, Dunn also argues that the story has theological significance, and that it serves as a powerful symbol of Jesus' power over death and his ability to bring new life. He suggests that the story should be read primarily as a theological narrative, rather than as a straightforward historical account.

C.K. Barrett

C.K. Barrett was a British New Testament scholar and theologian who wrote extensively on the Gospel of John.

Regarding the historicity of the Raising of Lazarus, Barrett suggested that the story should be read as a theological narrative rather than as a historical account. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, he noted that the story contains several elements that are typical of miracle stories in the ancient world, such as the emphasis on eyewitness testimony and the portrayal of Jesus as a powerful wonder-worker.

Barrett also noted that the story is unique among the miracle stories in the Gospel of John, in that it is portrayed as a "sign" rather than a straightforward miracle. He suggested that the story should be understood as a symbolic representation of Jesus' power over death and his ability to bring new life.

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann was a German Lutheran theologian and New Testament scholar who was one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century.

In his study of the Gospel of John, Bultmann argued that the Gospel was not intended to be read as a historical account of Jesus' life and teachings, but rather as a highly symbolic and theological work. He suggested that the story of Lazarus was not a historical account of an actual event, but rather a symbolic narrative designed to convey theological meaning.

Bultmann suggested that the story of Lazarus was meant to emphasize Jesus' power over death and to prepare readers for the coming resurrection of Jesus. He noted that the story contained many symbolic elements, such as the use of the number four (which he suggested represented the four directions of the world), the emphasis on the timing of Lazarus' death and resurrection (which he suggested was meant to parallel Jesus' own death and resurrection), and the portrayal of Lazarus as a representative of humanity (who is raised from death by Jesus).

Harold Attridge

Harold Attridge was an American biblical scholar and theologian who was known for his work on the New Testament and early Christianity. He was a leading figure in the study of the Gospel of John, and his approach to the text emphasized its literary and theological dimensions.

In his study of the Gospel of John, Attridge argued that the story of Lazarus was not intended to be a historical account of an actual event, but rather a highly symbolic and theological narrative. He suggested that the story was designed to convey the author's theological concerns, including the themes of life, death, and resurrection.

Attridge noted that the story of Lazarus contains many elements that are typical of ancient literary fiction, including the detailed descriptions of characters and settings, the use of dialogue, and the inclusion of dramatic events. He suggested that these literary features are evidence that the story was not intended as a straightforward historical account, but rather as a literary creation designed to convey theological meaning.

Despite his view that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation, Attridge did not dismiss its significance for the Gospel of John or for the broader Christian tradition. Rather, he argued that the story is a powerful and evocative narrative that speaks to fundamental aspects of Christian faith and belief.

Gerd Theissen

Gerd Theissen is a German Protestant theologian and New Testament scholar who is known for his contributions to the study of early Christianity and the historical Jesus. He has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the story of Lazarus.

In his book "The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition," Theissen argues that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation rather than a historical account of an actual event. He suggests that the story was intended to convey theological meaning and to establish Jesus as a powerful figure with the ability to perform miracles.

Theissen notes that the story of Lazarus contains several features that are typical of ancient literary fiction, including the emphasis on dialogue, the use of vivid imagery, and the inclusion of dramatic events. He argues that these features suggest that the story was not intended as a straightforward historical account, but rather as a symbolic narrative designed to convey theological ideas.

Despite his view that the story of Lazarus is a literary creation, Theissen emphasizes the importance of understanding the social and historical context in which it was written. He notes that the story reflects the concerns and beliefs of the early Christian community and sheds light on the ways in which they understood Jesus and his role in the world.

Nicodemus a Literary Creation?

Several scholars have suggested that Nicodemus, a character in the Gospel of John, is a literary creation rather than a historical figure. Some of these scholars include:

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann, a prominent German theologian and New Testament scholar, argued that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his influential commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel of John: A Commentary” (1971). Bultmann maintained that the character of Nicodemus is a representative figure rather than a historical person, intended to represent those Jews who were drawn to Jesus but could not fully comprehend his teachings. He argued that the Gospel of John is a theological rather than a historical work, and that the character of Nicodemus serves as a symbol of the struggle to understand and believe in Jesus as the Son of God.

Raymond Brown

Raymond Brown, an American Catholic priest and respected biblical scholar, did not argue explicitly that Nicodemus is a literary creation, but he did note the lack of historical evidence for the character's existence in his influential commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel According to John I-XII" (1966). Brown acknowledged that the character of Nicodemus appears only in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any other historical sources, and he suggested that it is possible that the character was invented by the author of the Gospel as a literary device to illustrate the themes of belief and unbelief. However, Brown also noted that it is difficult to definitively conclude that Nicodemus is a purely fictional character, as there may be historical reasons why he is not mentioned in other sources, and there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.

D. Moody Smith

D. Moody Smith was a notable American scholar of the New Testament and early Christianity. In his book “John Among the Gospels: The Relationship and Contribution of the Fourth Gospel to the Synoptic Tradition,” he argues that Nicodemus is a literary creation by the author of the Gospel of John. Smith notes that Nicodemus only appears in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any of the other gospels or in any other ancient texts, and that the character is used primarily as a foil for Jesus to expound his teachings on being born again.

Smith also points out that Nicodemus is presented as a member of the Jewish ruling council, which is at odds with the portrayal of the Jewish authorities in the rest of the Gospel of John. Smith suggests that the character of Nicodemus was created as a way for the author of John to distance himself from Judaism and to portray the Jewish leaders as ignorant and hostile to Jesus' message.

Overall, Smith argues that Nicodemus is a literary device rather than a historical figure, created by the author of the Gospel of John to serve a specific theological purpose within the text.

C.K. Barrett

C.K. Barrett, a British biblical scholar and theologian, did not argue explicitly that Nicodemus is a literary creation, but he did suggest that the character may have been invented by the author of the Gospel of John as a literary device to explore the themes of faith and unbelief. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, Barrett noted that Nicodemus is a complex and ambiguous character who appears only in the Gospel of John and is not mentioned in any other historical sources. Barrett suggested that it is possible that the character was invented by the author of the Gospel as a way of exploring the contrast between those who believe in Jesus and those who do not, and that Nicodemus serves as an example of someone who is initially skeptical but eventually comes to faith. However, Barrett also acknowledged that it is difficult to definitively conclude that Nicodemus is a purely fictional character, as there may be historical reasons why he is not mentioned in other sources, and there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.

Urban C. von Wahlde

Urban C. von Wahlde, in his book “The Gospel and Letters of John: Interpreting Biblical Texts Series” argues that Nicodemus is a literary creation. He suggests that the Nicodemus story serves to present Jesus as the revealer of God to those who are searching for the truth, as Nicodemus himself is depicted as doing. Von Wahlde also notes the symbolic significance of Nicodemus' nocturnal visit to Jesus, which suggests a spiritual blindness or lack of understanding on the part of Nicodemus.

Craig Keener

Craig Keener discusses the possibility that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel of John: A Commentary” (2 volumes, 2003). Keener notes that the character of Nicodemus appears only in the Gospel of John, and that there is no independent historical evidence for his existence. Keener suggests that the character of Nicodemus may have been created by the author of the Gospel as a literary device to illustrate the themes of light and darkness, and to contrast Nicodemus's lack of understanding with the understanding of Jesus and other characters in the Gospel.

R. Alan Culpepper

R. Alan Culpepper has suggested that Nicodemus is a literary creation in his book “Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design” (1983). In the book, he argues that Nicodemus serves as a representative of those who are initially attracted to Jesus but have difficulty accepting his teachings. Culpepper notes that Nicodemus's nighttime visit to Jesus in John 3, his silence during the trial of Jesus in John 7, and his assistance in the burial of Jesus in John 19 all contribute to his role as a representative figure rather than a historical person.

Warren Carter

Warren Carter is another scholar who has argued that Nicodemus is a literary creation. In his book “The Gospel According to John and Its Literary Genius,” Carter suggests that Nicodemus is a composite character created by the author of the Gospel of John to represent the conflicted Jewish leadership. He notes that Nicodemus appears in only two episodes in the Gospel of John and serves to highlight the theme of belief and disbelief that runs throughout the Gospel. Carter argues that the author of John created Nicodemus to represent those who are open to Jesus but struggle to believe, and those who are closed-minded and resistant to Jesus' message.

James Dunn

James Dunn is a British New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the historical Jesus, the Apostle Paul, and the early Christian movement. In his commentary on the Gospel of John, Dunn suggests that Nicodemus may be a literary creation representing a particular type of Jewish believer in Jesus, rather than a historical figure. He notes that the name “Nicodemus” means “victory of the people,” which could be a symbolic name for a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin who comes to faith in Jesus. Dunn also highlights the fact that Nicodemus is referred to as a “ruler of the Jews” in John's Gospel, which may suggest that he is meant to represent the Jewish elite who were skeptical of Jesus. However, Dunn does not explicitly argue that the story of Nicodemus is a parable or fictional account.

"The Disciple that Jesus Loved" a Literary Creation?

 

Numerous scholars attest that “the disciple that Jesus loved” of the Gospel of John is a literary creation.

James Dunn

James Dunn, a British New Testament scholar, has written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “The Evidence for Jesus”, Dunn suggests that the “beloved disciple” is not a historical figure, but rather a literary creation intended to represent the ideal disciple.

Dunn argues that the “beloved disciple” was created by the author of the Gospel of John as a way of emphasizing the importance of the disciple's relationship with Jesus, rather than his identity as a specific historical figure. According to Dunn, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a model for all Christians to follow, rather than as a specific individual who actually existed.

Dunn also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was intended to counteract the influence of other Christian groups that were competing with the Johannine community, and to emphasize the unique message of the Gospel of John.

Overall, while James Dunn does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific theological and literary purposes, rather than being based on a specific historical individual.

Raymond Brown

Raymond Brown was an American Catholic priest and New Testament scholar who was widely regarded as one of the foremost experts on the Gospel of John. In his seminal two-volume commentary on the Gospel of John, “The Gospel According to John (I-XII)” and “The Gospel According to John (XIII-XXI),” Brown provides a detailed analysis of the text and its historical context.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Brown acknowledges that there is no clear evidence to identify him with any particular historical figure, and suggests that the character may be a literary creation or composite of several historical individuals. He notes that the character is largely defined by his relationship to Jesus, and serves as a model of discipleship.

However, Brown also notes that the character's presence in the Gospel reflects the importance of personal relationships in early Christian communities, and suggests that the character may represent a particular group or faction within the Johannine community that produced the Gospel. Brown ultimately concludes that the question of the historicity of the character is less important than the Gospel's message about the relationship between Jesus and his disciples.

Overall, Brown's work on the Gospel of John recognizes the complexity and ambiguity of the text and its characters, and emphasizes the importance of historical and literary context in interpreting it. While he suggests that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” may be a literary creation, he also acknowledges the character's symbolic significance and importance in the Gospel's message.

Warren Carter

Warren Carter, an American New Testament scholar, has also written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “John and Empire: Initial Explorations”, Carter argues that the “beloved disciple” is a literary creation intended to represent the ideal disciple, rather than a specific historical figure.

According to Carter, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a model for the Johannine community to follow, and represents the ideal way of following Jesus in a context of Roman imperial power. Carter suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created to provide a counter-narrative to the Roman imperial ideology of power and domination, and to offer a vision of a different kind of community based on love, service, and mutual support.

Carter also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created as a way of highlighting the importance of the Johannine community's unique message and identity, and to distinguish it from other Christian groups of the time. According to Carter, the “beloved disciple” serves as a symbol of the Johannine community's distinctive beliefs and practices, rather than as a specific historical figure.

Overall, while Warren Carter does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific theological and literary purposes, and that its primary function is symbolic rather than historical.

R. Alan Culpepper

R. Alan Culpepper, an American New Testament scholar, has also written extensively on the Gospel of John and the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved”. In his book “Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design”, Culpepper argues that the “beloved disciple” is a literary creation, rather than a specific historical figure.

According to Culpepper, the character of the “beloved disciple” serves as a narrative device used by the author of the Gospel of John to provide an eyewitness perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus. Culpepper suggests that the character was created to lend credibility and authority to the Gospel's account of Jesus, and to provide readers with a sense of immediacy and intimacy with Jesus' teachings and actions.

Culpepper also suggests that the character of the “beloved disciple” was created as a way of highlighting the theme of love that is central to the Gospel of John. According to Culpepper, the “beloved disciple” serves as a symbol of the kind of relationship that all believers are called to have with Jesus, and represents the ideal of love and devotion to which all Christians should aspire.

Overall, while R. Alan Culpepper does not argue that the “beloved disciple” is a purely fictional creation, he does suggest that the character was created for specific literary and theological purposes, rather than being based on a specific historical individual.

Rudolf Bultmann

Rudolf Bultmann was a German Lutheran theologian and New Testament scholar who made significant contributions to the study of the Gospel of John. Bultmann is perhaps best known for his emphasis on the existential interpretation of the New Testament, which stressed the importance of understanding the text in terms of its relevance to contemporary human experience.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Bultmann argued that the character is a literary creation rather than a historical figure. He noted that the character is not mentioned in any of the synoptic Gospels, and that his presence in the Gospel of John is largely defined by his relationship to Jesus.

Bultmann suggested that the character may have been invented by the author of the Gospel as a way of expressing his own views about the nature of discipleship and the relationship between Jesus and his followers. He also noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity make him a convenient literary device for the author.

Overall, Bultmann's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in terms of its symbolic and existential significance, rather than as a straightforward historical or biographical account. He viewed the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation that reflects the author's own theological and philosophical concerns.

Tim Mackie

Tim Mackie is an American biblical scholar and co-founder of The Bible Project, which is a non-profit animation studio that produces animated videos on various biblical topics, including the Gospel of John. While he is not a traditional academic scholar with a PhD in New Testament studies, he has been trained in biblical languages and has a deep knowledge of the Bible.

In his videos on the Gospel of John, Mackie suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation. He argues that the character was created to represent the ideal disciple, and that his anonymity and vague description allow readers to project themselves onto the character and see themselves as the beloved disciple.

Mackie also suggests that the Gospel of John as a whole is a highly literary work, filled with symbolism, metaphor, and narrative devices. He argues that the story of the raising of Lazarus, for example, may be a literary creation intended to represent the theme of resurrection and new life, rather than a historical event.

Overall, while Tim Mackie's approach to the Gospel of John is not traditional, he offers a unique perspective on the text that emphasizes its literary and theological richness.

Harold Attridge

Harold Attridge is an American New Testament scholar who has written extensively on the Gospel of John and other New Testament texts. In his commentary on the Gospel of John in the “The HarperCollins Bible Commentary,” Attridge suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation.

Attridge argues that the character serves a theological purpose in the Gospel, representing the ideal disciple who is able to understand and embody Jesus' message of love and compassion. He notes that the character's anonymity and vague description allow readers to identify with him and see themselves as beloved disciples.

At the same time, Attridge emphasizes the historical and literary complexity of the Gospel of John, suggesting that it cannot be reduced to a simple binary of historical fact or fiction. He argues that the Gospel reflects the historical context of its composition, while also employing literary devices and symbolism to convey theological and spiritual meaning.

Overall, while Attridge's approach to the Gospel of John is nuanced and complex, he is among the scholars who view the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation.

D. Moody Smith

D. Moody Smith was an American New Testament scholar who specialized in the Gospel of John and the letters of Paul. In his commentary on the Gospel of John in the “The Anchor Yale Bible,” Smith suggests that the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation.

Smith argues that the character serves as a literary device in the Gospel, representing the ideal disciple who is able to understand and embody Jesus' message of love and compassion. He notes that the character's anonymity and vague description allow readers to identify with him and see themselves as beloved disciples.

At the same time, Smith emphasizes the historical and cultural context of the Gospel, suggesting that it reflects the concerns and interests of the Johannine community that produced it. He also notes the complex interplay of history and theology in the Gospel, suggesting that it cannot be reduced to a simple binary of historical fact or fiction.

Overall, while Smith acknowledges the historical complexity of the Gospel of John, he is among the scholars who view the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved” as a literary creation.

Wayne Meeks 

Wayne Meeks was an American New Testament scholar who specialized in early Christianity, and in particular the social and cultural context of the New Testament texts. In his influential book, “The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul,” Meeks does not specifically address the question of the “disciple whom Jesus loved.”

However, in his essay “The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism,” Meeks suggests that the Gospel of John was written for a specific religious community with a particular theological agenda. He argues that the Gospel was not meant to be a straightforward historical or biographical account of the life of Jesus, but rather a theological interpretation of his teachings and significance.

Meeks notes that the Gospel of John employs a number of literary devices and symbolic elements, including the character of the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” to convey its theological message. While Meeks does not directly address the question of whether the character is historical or fictional, his work on the Gospel of John suggests that he views it as a complex and highly symbolic text that cannot be reduced to a simple binary of fact or fiction.

Overall, while Meeks does not offer a definitive position on the historicity of the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” his work on the Gospel of John suggests that he views the text as a product of a particular religious community with a theological agenda, rather than a straightforward historical or biographical account.

Vincent Henry Stanton

Vincent Henry Stanton was a British theologian and biblical scholar who made important contributions to the study of the New Testament, including the Gospel of John. Stanton's work on the Gospel of John focused on its literary and historical features, as well as its relationship to the wider context of early Christianity.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” Stanton argued that the character is likely a literary creation rather than a historical figure. He noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity suggest that he was not a prominent figure in the early Christian community, and that his presence in the Gospel may reflect the author's theological and literary concerns rather than historical reality.

Stanton also emphasized the symbolic and theological significance of the character, noting that his relationship with Jesus serves as a model of discipleship and that his presence in key moments of the Gospel underscores the importance of Jesus' love for his followers.

Overall, Stanton's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in its historical and literary context, while also recognizing the symbolic and theological significance of its characters and themes. While he suggested that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is likely a literary creation, he also recognized the importance of the character's role in the Gospel's depiction of discipleship and Jesus' relationship with his followers.

G. H. C. MacGregor

G. H. C. MacGregor was a Scottish biblical scholar who contributed to the study of the New Testament, including the Gospel of John. MacGregor's work on the Gospel of John focused on its literary and theological features, as well as its historical and cultural context.

With respect to the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” MacGregor argued that the character is a literary creation and not a historical figure. He noted that the character's anonymity and lack of a clear identity may reflect the author's desire to emphasize the importance of discipleship and the relationship between Jesus and his followers.

MacGregor also suggested that the character may have been intended to represent the ideal disciple or the community of Jesus' followers as a whole. He noted that the character's close relationship with Jesus and his understanding of Jesus' teachings may reflect the author's vision for the ideal relationship between Jesus and his followers.

Overall, MacGregor's work on the Gospel of John emphasized the importance of understanding the text in its literary, theological, and historical context. While he believed that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” was a literary creation, he also recognized the significance of the character's role in the Gospel's depiction of Jesus' relationship with his followers.

C.K. Barret

C.K. Barrett, in his book “The Gospel According to St John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text” (2nd edition, 1978), argues that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” is a literary creation. He notes that the character is never named, and that there is no evidence outside of the Gospel of John that such a disciple ever existed. Barrett suggests that the character is a symbolic representation of the ideal disciple, and that the author of the Gospel of John may have used this character to convey theological messages.