7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

1/20

New Testament Studieshttp://journals.cambridge.org/NTS

Additional services for New Testament Studies:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click here

The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret

Morna D. Hooker

New Testament Studies / Volume 21 / Issue 01 / October 1974, pp 40 - 58

DOI: 10.1017/S0028688500008766, Published online: 05 February 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0028688500008766

How to cite this article:Morna D. Hooker (1974). The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret. New

Testament Studies, 21, pp 40-58 doi:10.1017/S0028688500008766

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/NTS, IP address: 189.235.125.24 on 11 Sep 2014

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

2/20

Mew Testament

Stud.2 i , pp . 40-58

MO RN A D . H O O K ER

T H E J O H A N N I N E P R O L O G U E A ND

THE MESSIANIC SECRET*

In 1892 Adolf Ha rna ck , writing on the relation of the Prologue to the Fo urt h

Gospel, posed the question in these words: ' W ha t is the aim of the Gospel,

what is the aim of the Prologue? Are these aims identical or is the Prologue

really an introdu ction to the G o sp el ?. .. Is it the key to understanding the

Gospel?'

1

My aim in this paper is to consider once again this question of the

function of these opening verses. What did the authoror redactorof the

gospel aim to achieve by beginning his book in this way?

From the time of the earliest exegetes, the first eighteen verses of John's

gospel have been regarded as of special significance, and they have for many

years been spoken of as the Prologue. The difference between these verses

and the rest of the gospel is obvious - so obvious, indeed, that they are often

assigned to a separate source. Many assume that they could not have been

written by the evangelist; some argue that they are a later addition to the

gospel. This last drastic solution raises as many problems as it attempts to

solve: for not only does the gospel begin strangely without these verses, but

their later addition to the gospel seems inexplicable; the more commentators

emphasize (rightly or wrongly) the difference between these verses and the

rest of the gospel, the harder it becomes to understand how any redactor

came to consider them a suitable introduction. Whatever the truth in this

m atte r, however, as the gospel stands a t present, these verses are intended to

offer an introduction to the events which follow.

Commentators on Mark's gospel have in recent years drawn a parallel

between the opening verses of that gospel and the Jo ha nn ine P rologue. T he

existence of a Marcan prologue is far less obvious, and seems to have been

first suggested by R. H. Lightfoot.

2

The parallel was used by Lightfoot to

elucidate Mark's purpose. The present paper attempts to reverse this

process, and investigates the possibility th at M ark 's literary m ethod may help

us to understand John's.

Un like Jo hn i. 1-18, the style of M ark i. 1-13 in no way distinguishes it

from the rest of the gospel. Nevertheless, there are certain noteworthy

features in these introductory verses. The opening words of Mark i. 1 -

probably to be understood as a title - are, of course, in a class of their own.

* A paper read at the meeting of S.N.T.S. at Southampton, 31 August 1973.

1

't )b er das Verhaltnis des Prologs des vierten Evangeliums zum ganzen We rk ', pp . 189-231 in

Zeitschrift fur Theologieund Kirche n (1892), 191.

2

Th eGospel Message ofSt Mark (1950 ), p p. 15 ff.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

3/20

J O H N ' S P R O L O G U E A N D T H E M E S S I A N I C S E C R E T 41

The next two verses are also unusual: for though there are explicit quota-

tions of scripture elsewhere in the gospel, as well as many scriptural echoes,

it is only here that the evangelist himself explicitly states that the events

which he is recording were happening KCCQCOS y^ypcnrrcci. Also noteworthy

in these introductory verses are the threefold reference to the Holy Spirit

(mentioned again only in iii. 29, xii. 36 and xiii. 11), the account of the voice

from heaven (which has a parallel in ix. 7) and the conflict with Satan (which

is referred to again in iii. 20-30). It is clear to us that these verses stand apart

in a sense, from the account of

th e

ministry which is to follow. Yet they are in

narrative form, as is the rest of thegospel,and the vocabulary, though unusual,

finds echoes in later chapters; certainly the differences are not enough to

suggest that these verses are by anyone other than the evangelist.

Mark, then, gives us a prologue in narrative form; John offers us something

which, though it relates events, is much closer to being a theological discourse.

Yet the difference should not be exaggerated. For if narrative is typical of

Mark, discourse is typical of John . The bulk of the rest of John 's gospel -

until we come to the passion narrative - is theological discourse, held

together by a slight narrative framework: his material is essentially a brief

account of certain activities of Jesus, together with lengthy theological

comment on the significance of those activities, usually in the mouth of

Jesus

himself.

In the Prologue, the order is reversed: we have theological

statements, with a couple of references to John the Baptist to ' anchor' what

is being said in history.

1

Yet the juxtaposition of historical narrative and

theological interpretation is in many ways similar to the rest of the gospel.

Controversy regarding the Johannine Prologue has so concentrated on the

question of the

'

poetic' style that it has perhaps been overlooked that as far

as form and content is concerned, we might well expect Jo hn to write a pro-

logue in this way. The vocabulary of these verses, also, with one or two

exceptions which we must examine later, links it with the chapters which

follow.

2

R. H. Lightfoot, drawing attention to the special character of Mark i.

1-13, spelt out the parallelism between these verses and the opening verses of

John:

3

Both prologues dwell upon therelation of Jesus Christ to Jo hn theBaptist. ..and

in each book

it

is shown that, however great and God-sent the forerunner, his work

pales into insignificance when setagainst thearrival ofH im whose wayhadbeen

prepared by Joh n. A nd just

as

St Jo hn 's prologue reaches

its

highest point

at

verse

14,

'T h e Word became flesh'..

.so St

Mark's prologue reaches

its

highest poin t

in

the words

of

verse

n ,

' T h o u

art my

beloved Son,

in

thee

I am

well please d' .

. .

1

M. D. Hooker, 'John the Baptist andthe JohanninePrologue',JV.T.S. xvi (1970), 354-6.

a

Thereareechoes,forexample,in ii.11;iii.19;v.26, 37; vii. 22f.; viii. 12, 32, 38;ix. 5; xi.

4,2 5; xii. 35f., 46; xiv.7ff.;xvi. 3; xvii.1-4,14, 17. The references to John's witnessaretakenup

ini. 19-36andiii. 25-30.

s

Op.

cit.

pp. i8f.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

4/20

42 MORNA D. HOO KER

Andfinally,ust as in John the narrative proper only begins at verse 19, so also in

Mark the narrative proper only begins with the account of the Lord's activity in

verses 14 and 15, when He comes into Galilee with the announcement that the

time is ripe, and God's promises are now in process of accomplishment.

To these parallels we can ad d the fact tha t M ark (by means of his reference

to the Old Te stam ent scriptures which have now been fulfilled) clearly

demonstrates that Jesus is the culmination of God's purposes, the one to

whom God 's promises poin t; an d that Jo hn sees in Jesus the Aoyos made

flesh - that Aoyos which has been th e expression of Go d's activity from the

beginning. Mark records that Jesus is acknowledged from heaven as 6 uios

uou 6 dyccTrriTos - a phrase almost iden tica l in m eanin g with John 's uovoyevfis

uids.

1

According to M ark, the Ho ly Spirit is at work in wh at Jesus d oes:

John, in his Prologue, refers to this same activity of God at work in Jesus in

terms of the Word made flesh. Mark, in his brief account of the temptation,

depicts a conflict between Jesus a nd Sa tan : Jo h n speaks of light coming into

darkness and the darkness being unable to master it.

T he ' gai n' of Lightfoot's in terpretation of M ark , as he himself saw it, was

th at ' we find placed in ou r han ds a t the outset the key which the evangelist

wishes us to have, in order that we may understand the person and office of

the central Figure of the bo ok'.

2

H ow successfully M ark has done this becomes

apparent if we omit the first thirteen verses and begin to read the gospel at

verse 14, at the same time imagining that we know nothing about this

'central Figure of the book'. To do so is to find ourselves very much in the

situation of those whose reaction is described in Mark's narrative. We meet

a strange itinerant preacher, who announces with authority that God's

kingdom is about to burst upon

us,

who performs ce rtain rem arka ble m iracles,

and who continually challenges the authority of the religious leaders. If we

read the book in this way, ou r reaction is to exclaim with some of the ch ara c-

ters in the story: 'What is this new teaching? He commands even unclean

spirits with authority and they obey him' (i. 27) ;

3

'W ho then is this, tha t th e

wind and sea obey him ?' (iv.

4 1 ) ; '

By wha t a utho rity do you do these things?

W ho gave you autho rity to do the m ?' (xi. 28). Th e comm on people, the

disciples, the religious leaders, are all shown by their reaction to be un-

comprehending, and we can sympathize with their obtuseness.

Mark, however, does not allow us to read the gospel in this way. He does

what every writer of detective fiction studiously avoids doing - he spells out

the solution for us on the first pag e. After tha t th e clues are blatan tly obvious.

Tho se wh o know that Jesus is the fulfilment of God's promises, tha t he is

God's beloved Son, that the Spirit of God is at work in him, and that he has

fought with Satan, know the answers to the questions which are continually

1

C. H . T u rn e r , ' 6 u 6s uou 6

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

5/20

JOHN S PROLOGUE AND THE MESSIANIC SECRET 43

being asked

by the

participants

in the

story. Un like

the

mo dern writer

of

detective fiction, Markdid notwish hisreaders to bepuzzled. Hewished

them

to

see and recognize

the

truth which

he

was setting

out

before the m :

that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, and that the Spirit of God himself

was at work in wh at he did. To rea d M ark 's gospel after read ing the Prologue

isto read with the spectacles of faith: the messianic secret is anopen secret

for those who have been allowed tooverhe ar th e words from heave n,for to

them the significance of what is happening is obvious,and the obtusenessof

crowds, disciples and religious leaders who failed to comprehend seems cul-

pable. Mark demonstrates thetruth that the'facts ' alone are insufficient:

those with eyes of faith interpret what ishapp ening correctly- others deny

Jesus '

authority orattribute it to the wrong source. Men andwomenare

divided in M ark's na rrativ e into those who acknowledge Jesus and those who

reject him

-

and

to

acknowledge him

is to

confess that

he is the

Christ,

the

Son of God, and torecognize the Spirit of Godatworkinhim. The faithto

which

the

disciples

are

called

-

together with

the

readers

of

the gospel

-

is

precisely tha t w hich is revealed to us in the o pening verses: anditis p recisely

this estimate ofJesus which divides disciple from unbeliever, for those who do

not see and understand the divine revelation are those who remain outside,

and who are offended by what Jesus does.

The messianic secret

in

Mark was once interpreted

as

something which

divided believer from unbeliever during the ministry of

Jesus.

Later, itwas

seen as representing the tension between the non-messianic m inistry of Jesus

and the messianic interpretation of the Church- between ' then' and 'now'.

Whether

or not

there

is

some truth

in

either

or

both

of

these positions,

it is

certainly true that the messianic secret in Mark indicates a tension in the

presentexperience of the evangelist and his reade rs: their g eneration is

divided into those who have eyes to see and those who hav e not. T he prob lem

is not simply tha t me n a nd wom en failed to recognizethenthe one whom they

now

acknowledge

to be

M essiah; bu t th at the question ' W ho is h e? ' can still

be given totally opposing answers.

W hen we turn to Jo hn we have,ofcourse,no'messianic secret'. Jesusis

twice pointed outby Joh n theBaptist as thelamb ofGod.

1

TheBaptist

explains that hisknowledge ofthis is nothuman, buthas come to him by

revelation; he has seen the Spirit descend and rest on Jesus

-

this is how he

knows him to bethe one who baptizes with the S pirit, andthe SonofGod.

These words remind usagain ofthe M arcan prologue- but what in Mark

was spoken for the ear ofthe re ader alone isin Jo hn shouted aloud by the

Baptist. T he disciples acknowledge Jesus as Messiah from the very be ginn ing;

2

1

The title is puzzling, and no satisfactory solution has ever been given. Perhapsitis best under-

stood

in

relation

to

the Evangelist's arrangement ofsignsand discourses, by which he shows Jesus

tobethe one who is the fulfilment ofall the Jewish festivals:inhim are brought together all the

functions of the old rituals

-

but now they are effective

for

the world.

2

i-

4 ' J

49-

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

6/20

44 MORNA D. HOOKER

Jesus himself sets o ut his claims openly throu ghou t the gospel in no unc ertain

manner .

1

Yet just asinMark we meeta division between those who accept

the claims of Jesus (however imperfectly understood ) and those who do not,

so too in John there is

a

division between those who are ' his ow n' and ' the

Jew s ' .

T he cause of the division, too, is very much the same as in M ark. Tho se

who reject Jesus

do so

because

the

t ruth

is

hidden from the m : they m ay

converse with Jesus bu t they are un able to unders tand wh at he is saying, and

the au thor ity which he claims is in their view not God-given b ut an auth ority

he has taken upon himself.

But if Messiahship is spoken of open ly, w ha t

is

it tha t

is

hidden? An examin-

ation of those passages where Jesus meets opposition an d w here his hea rers

reject his teaching shows that for John the point atissueis the questionof

Jesus ' origin: those who reject him fail to recognize that he is 'from above'.

This question is raised inevery deb ate between Jesus and the Jews, and the

fundamental cause of the dispute is set out in the opening discourse between

Jesus and Nicod em us: the latter is una ble to unde rstand Jesus because he has

no t been born ccvcoQev an d the refore can u nd ersta nd onlyat afleshly, nota

spiritual level. Nicodemus cannot grasp heavenly things, while Jesus is the

Son of man who descended from heaven (iii. i13). The monologue which

follows (iii. 14-21) in troduces the them e of Jesus as the light which has com e

into the world, and

it

is natural to find this reference to light followed by the

final appearance of Jo hn the Baptist in this gospel, once again bearing witness

to Jesus asinchapter iby declaring that he himselfis not the Christ, butis

sent to bear witness to the greater one who follows him.

2

Here, too, we have

a short monologue (whether in the mouth of the evangelistorthe Baptistis

not clear) whose themes echo thoseofthe conversation between Jesus and

Nicod emus. The Baptist, as the one who bears witness to Jesus and his divine

origin, standsincontrast toNicodemus, who fails torecognize the truth .

3

T he failure o f' the Je w s' to recognize

Jesus '

divine origin is demonstrated

thro ugho ut the gospel. Th eir enm ity arises from the fact tha t Jesus makes

himself equal with God (v.17 f.); they attem pt tostone him becausehe

claims to beone w ith God (x.30-9) ; in both instances the Jew s fail to

recognize th at the activity of Jesus is the activity of God. The crowds do no t

believein him because they think they know where he comes from- though

of course they do not, since he is sent from God (vi. 41

f.;

vii. 25-30).

4

T he

great debateincha pter viii is centred on the question to which Jesus knows

the answer b ut the Jews do not(since they judg e according to the flesh)-

namely whence

he

comes and wh ither h e

is

going (viii. 14

f.; cf.

vii. 41

f.);

1

For exam ple in iv. 26; v. 17; viii. 28; ix. 37; x. 24f.;xviii. 20f.

2

Asin i.6-8, 15, and i. 19-28, 29-36, the Baptist's witness to Jesus here consists of a negative

statement abouthimself,andapositive statement aboutJesus.Cf. M. D. Hooker, op . cit.

s

Since the Baptist witnesses to the tru th about

Jesus,

it can hardly be he, as some commentators

suppose, who is referred to as SKTtis yns-

4

How far they are from comprehendingisdemonstrated by the fact that they argue about Galilee

versus Bethlehem See vii. 41f.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

7/20

J O H N ' S P R O L O G U E AND TH E M E S S I A N I C S E C R E T 45

they are from below, and belong to this world, but he is from above, and does

not belong to it, for he comes from God (viii. 23-30); he comes from God, but

they do not understand him, because they are not children of God (viii.

42-7).

When Jesus declares:' Before Abraham was, lam' , they again attempt

to stone him (viii. 58 f.). The same question of Jesus' origin appears in ix. 29:

'We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know

where he comes from.' Finally, the theme of Jesus' divine originisprominent

in the trial scene, where Jesus first tells Pilate that his kingdom is not K

TOO

KOCTUOU TOUTOU

(xviii. 36), and is later asked by Pilate: FI60EV el ou;

(xix. 9). In these scenes Pilate is cast in the role of a middleman who puts the

questions, for the real dispute is between Jesus and the Jews.

1

Underlying many of these disputes are themes central to the prologue

- light (iii.

19-21;

viii. 12 ff.; ix. 5, 39) and life (iii. 15, 36; v. 24-6; vi. 51 f.)

and truth (iii. 33; viii. 44-6; xviii. 37-8). As in Mark those who have

read the introductory verses understand what is obscure to many of the

main actors in the drama, so here those who have read the Johannine Pro-

logue comprehend words ofJesus which otherwise seem irrelevant. The most

puzzling Johannine discourse is immediately illuminated by a re-reading of

the Prologue.

The theme of the Aoyos, too, is recognizable in the disputes about the

activity of Jesus interpreted as that of God himself (v. 17 f.; x. 30-9).

Although Aoyos is not used again in John in precisely the way that it is used

in the Prologue, the word does occur significantly elsewhere. In v. 37-47, for

example, the Jews fail to recognize the works of Jesus as the activity of the

Father: 'His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen;

and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him

whom he has sent' (v. 37 f.). To fail to recognize Jesus is to fail to accept

God's word.

In chapter viii, the difference between the disciples of Jesus and his op-

ponents is that the former continue in his word

v.

31), whereas those who

oppose him demonstrate that his word finds no place in them v.37). Those

who accept him are children of God, and those who reject him are children

of the devil vv.39 ff.); 'He who is of God hears the words

(TOC

priuocToc) of

God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God'

v.47). It is clear that Jesus' words are those of God

himself,

since he goes on

to claim: ' before Abraham was, I am'

v.

58). The Jews should keep his

word, as he has kept his Father's word vv.51-5)- The words of Jesus are not

spoken on his own authority, but have been given to him by the Father

(xii. 44-50). The identification is explicitly made in xiv. 23 f.: 'If a man

loves me, he will keep my word.. .He who does not love me does not keep

my words; and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who

sent me.' In xvii. 6, 8, 14, 17,Jesus says that he has passed on to the disciples

1

xviii.34 f.; xix. 6 f.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

8/20

46 MORNA D. HOOKER

the word or words given to him by the Father: they have received them, and

know th at Jesus has come from the Fath er a nd been sent by him.

The 'word ofG od ' iscrucial inx. 3 4-6 , whe re Jesus quotes Ps. lxxxii.6

to demonstrate that those

to

whom

the

word

of

God came were p roperly

called 'gods'. How much more, then, is

it

right to call him whom the F athe r

consecrated and sent into the world ' the Son of G o d ': the activity of Jesus

is

that of God

himself,

and demonstrates that God's word has indeed come

in

him.In allthese disputes between Jesus and the Jew s, the themeofGod's

word iscentral.

In Mark's gospelit is the 'messianic secret' which divides men into those

who,

being blind, remain blind and incapable of recognizing the truth, and

the disciples, who for all their incomprehension come to grasp the truth that

Jesus

is

the Son

of

God. Even the disciples, however, because they find

the

secret ha rd to com prehend, share to

a

large exten t in the general hardness of

heart and blindness to the truth: their eyes are like those of the blind man

at

Bethsaida, only partly opened. They are liable toslip back into aposition

where they see things from men's viewpoint, instead offrom God's (M ark

viii.

33).* In the Fo urth Gospel there isasimilar bew ildering p atte rn of belief

and disbelief: the twelve follow

Jesus,

though not fully comprehending him,

but there are also disciples who cease

to

believe and 'J ew s' w ho sometimes

believe.

I t

is worth asking what clues are given us regarding the causes of this

belief anddisbelief.

In

vi. 60, many of

Jesus'

disciples take offence, declaring

'This is a hard saying: who can listen toit? ' Even ifwedonot regard vv .

51-8 as a later addition to thediscourse, the'h ar d saying ' seems to refer

to the identification of Jesus w ith the bre ad w hich cam e down from heav en,

rather than tothe pa rticular eucharistic interp retation. This is made clear

by the reply of Jesus

in

verse 62 : w hat will their reaction be

if

they see

the

Son of M an ascend to where he was before?

ItisJesus'

claim to be the bread

which comes down from heaven which causes many

to

turn back. Here we

have

the

theme

of

heavenly origin. But

we

hav e also

the

very significant

contrast with Moses:it was not Moses who gave bread toyour fathers,but

God who gives bread toyou. T his b read is already identified in Jewish

thought with the Torah, the Word of God.Itis the claim of Jesu stobe this

bre ad (which readers of the Prologue will of course unde rstand ) which causes

unbelief.

2

What Moses gave was not the true bread, but points forward

to

what is to come. By contrast with the failure of many disciples to believe this

we have the confession of Peter in 0. 68: 'You have the words of eternal life.'

In chapter viii we have

a

more confused situation.

In

verse 31 we read of

1

According to their response, they are sometimes 'inside', sometimes 'outside'. See C. F.D.

Moule, 'Mark 4: 1-20 yet once more',in

Neotestamentica

et

Semitica

ed. E. E. Ellis and M.Wilcox

(1969),

pp. 98f.

a

Th e contrast w ith Moses is even more pointed if John is contradicting an inte rpreta tion which

identified Moses with the manna. This identification is perhaps found inTarg um Neofiti Exodus

xvi. 15;

see G. Vermes, ' He is the Bread', in

JVeotestamentica etSem itica

ed. E. E. Ellis and M. Wilcox

(1969),

pp. 256-63.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

9/20

J O H N ' S PR OL OG UE AND TH E MESSIANIC SEC RE T 47

Jews who believed in

Jesus.

Immediately, however, they take on the normal

character of Johannine Jews, hostile to Jesus and to his words. Why? One

can of course explain such inconsistencies by referring to sources - though

this does not explain why the evangelist was content with inconsistency. Once

again, it is worth noting what it is which causes belief to change todisbelief.

It is those who abide in the word of Jesus, who are truly his disciples; the

truth sets them free. It is this suggestion that the Jews need to be set free

which sparks off their indignation: 'We are descendants of Abraham, and

have never been in bondage to anyone.' In the ensuing conversation, Jesus

demonstrates that the proud descendants of Abraham are slaves to sin and

therefore no true children of Abraham. Those in whom the word of Jesus

finds no place seek to kill him, v. 37. They are not children of God, but

children of the devil, because they do not love the one who comes from God,

and cannot bear to hear his words,

vv.

42 f. Once again we have the claim of

Jesus to come from God; we are told, moreover, that for the Jews to be true

children of God it is not enough for them to be descendants of Abraham -

indeed, to be merely that is to be in bondage They must accept Jesus and his

word. Those who have read John i. u -13 understand why this step is

necessary.

Moses pointed forward to the coming of Christ, the true bread; Abraham

rejoiced to see his day. In v. 37-47 the evangelist has already spelt out the

fact that Moses wrote of Jesus, and that, in refusing to hear Jesus, they are

failing to accept the witness of Moses. ' If you believed Moses, you would

believe me, for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe Moses' writings,

how will you believe my words?' vv.46 f.). The question at issue is how they

read Moses: 'You search the scriptures', Jesus says totheJews, 'because you

think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to

me;

yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.' Life has come into

the world, but they will not accept it; they will not

seek

the glory which comes

from God. They do not hear the testimony of God himself to Jesus. 'His

voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; and you do not

have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent'

vv.37 f.). To those who know that the word of God, active throughout

history, and speaking in the Torah, has now been made flesh, and that the

God whom no man has seen has been made known by his Son, the claims of

Jesus here are comprehensible, since it is obvious that the scriptures point to

Jesus: those who have not understood what is set out in the Prologue are, in

every sense, in the dark.

In chapter ix we have an acted parable on the theme of belief andunbelief.

Jesus,

the true light, opens the eyes of the man born blind. In the course of the

chapter, his inner eyes of faith are gradually opened, while the Pharisees

become confirmed in unbelief. The climax of their confrontation comes in

their second meeting, and the irony of the situation is brought out in

vv.

28

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

10/20

48 MORNA D. HOOK ER

and 29, in the words of the Jewish authorities:

'

You are his disciple, bu t we

are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for

this m an , we do not know w here he comes from.' The Pharisees fail to recog-

nize that God not only spoke to Moses, but is speaking through 'this man'.

The healed man is astonished: 'You do not know where he comes from', he

exclaims. 'If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.' Once again

it is the question of

Jesus '

origin which causes division, and which separates

the believer from the non-believer. The man who confesses that Jesus comes

from God is cast out of the synagogue. But in the final com ment of Jesus we

see that it is the Jew s who have becom e blind. H is coming has brou gh t not

only light but judg em ent, because men are blind to the tru th.

The se final words rem ind us of the w ords of Jesus

in

Mark about the

blindness of those who do not accept him. Another close parallel is found in

John xii. Here, as often, Jesus speaks ofhispresence in the world in terms of

light, a reference which readers of the Prologue will understand: his hearers

must walk in the light, lest they are overtaken by darkness. The failure of

the crowd to believe is summed up by the evangelist in quotations from Isa.

liii.

1 (used in similar circumstances by Paul, Rom. x. 16) and vi. 10: 'He

has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they should see with

their eyes and perceive with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.' This

is said by the evangelist to refer to Christ's glory, which Isaiah saw; Isaiah

therefore wrote of Christ. The 'secret' which is hidden from the crowd in

John is not the mystery of the kingdom, nor the messianic identity of

Jesus,

but the glory spoken of in the Prologue. In the final verses of this chapter,

Jesus spells out the meaning of

belief:

to believe in him is to believe in him

who sent him. He has come as light into the world

but those who do not

believe in him remain in darkness. Once again, the key to understanding this

discourse of Jesus is pu t into the hand s of those who have re ad the Prologu e.

Fifty years ago, E. F. Scott suggested that 'in the fourth Gospel the Mes-

sianic idea

is

replaced by th at of the L ogo s'.

1

Some have objected that,

apart from the Prologue, the Logos idea is conspicuous by its absence. But

Scott was surely right. The idea of the Logos is as central

and as hidden

in Jo h n as the idea of Jesus of N aza reth as Messiah is central in M ark. Ju st

as the Messianic identity of Jesus is a secret in M ark , so the iden tity of Jesus

with the Logos is a secret in Jo h n not deliberately hidden, but certainly not

known tothose who oppose Jesu s, and never spelt ou t specifically inhis

debates with th em ; bu t as in M ark there are innum erable clues which can be

understood by those who know the secret because they have becom e disciples

of

Jesus,

so in Jo h n there are m any mysterious passages, incom prehensible to

those who th ink only in terms of the flesh, which ma ke sense to those who have

believed in Jesus and been m ade children of God ,

2

and recognize in him the

1

The FourthGospel, itsPurpose an d Theology (1920), p. 6.

2

i.12f.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

11/20

J O H N ' S P R O L O G U E A N D T H E M E S S I A N I C S E C R E T 49

Logos ofGod.

1

And just as, in Mark, the secret is on occasion shouted aloud,

but falls on deaf

ears,

so in John, Jesus speaks of himself in terms which to us

seem obvious - but which the Jews fail to comprehend. The Johannine

'secret' explains the claims of Jesus to come from above: for Jesus is the

divine A6yos. Those to whom this secret is not revealed are blind and uncom-

prehending - and yet culpable, since, having the scriptures, they should have

recognized Jesus; the disciples, as in Mark, do not fully comprehend, and yet

are prepared to follow, having glimpsed something of the truth, and to them,

in chapters xiv-xvii, the themes of

i.

1-18 are set out most clearly. To those

of

us

who read the gospel, however, all is plain - provided that we first read

the Prologue; for as in the case of Mark, if we leave these verses aside and

begin at i. 19, we find ourselves sharing the bewilderment of Jesus' contem-

poraries: 'Isn 't this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we

know? How does he now say "I have come down from heaven"?' (vi. 42);

'Are you greater than our father Abraham who died?. . . . Who do you

claim to be? ' (viii. 53). It is only because we know that Jesus is the Word

made flesh that we are able to understand his words in this gospel; only

because we have been given this clue to the significance of what he does that

we are not offended by his claims.

A contrast is often drawn between Mark's use of miracle stories and the

Johannine understanding of miracles as 'signs'. Yet the similarities are also

worth noting. In both gospels there are different levels in understanding the

miracles. In Mark, the common reaction is one of astonishment - the crowds

marvel at the miracles; but for those with some understanding, they have

greater significance, for they are pointers to the true identity of Jesus. 'Who

then is this?' (iv. 41). In John, also, there are two levels of understanding.

But here the messianic question is brought out into the open: 'Can this be

the Christ?' (iv. 29). ' When the Christ appears, will he do more signs than

this man has done?' (vii. 31). The deeper meaning of the miracles, which is

hidden from the crowds who waver between belief and

unbelief,

is that they

are manifestations of

his

glory. As in Mark, the miracles set out the secret of

Jesus' person to those with eyes to see.

The Johannine discourses also, though they are so different from the

Marcan parables, nevertheless serve the same function and produce the same

effect. In Mark the parables are used Christologically, presenting a challenge

to discipleship, and setting out the supreme importance of the choice. The

Johannine discourses have a similar role. In both gospels, parable and dis-

course inevitably lead to division and rejection and dispute, as well as to

discipleship and understanding. The parable becomes paradoxically a way of

1

Cf. T.

W.

Manson,On Paul and John (1963), pp.

158

f.: 'One is tempted to think that the

peculiarity of the discourse in the Fourth Gospel arises just from this; that it is the Logos that speaks

in the person ofJesus. The Jewish interlocutors get at cross-purposes with the Johannine Christ

because they think they are holding a debate with Jesus the son of Joseph from Nazareth, whereas

they are really listening to the incarnate word of God.'

4 NTS xxi

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

12/20

50 MORNA D. HOOKER

concealing the tru th ; the discourse leaves men bewildered instead

of

enlight-

ened. Thesecret ofJesus' identity is in both cases the key to under-

standing.

Since the 'secret'

to

which men are blind

is

different

in

the two gospels,

we naturally findadifference in th e way in w hich m essianic terms a re u sed.

In M ark , the belief tha t Jesus is perhaps J o h n the Baptist or Elijah or one of

the prophets

is

contrasted with

the

confession th at

he is the

Christ.

The

crowd

-

and Herod too,

in

chapter vi

-

do not even begin to guess that Jesus

is

the

Messiah. Thro ugh out

his

ministry,

the

secrecy

of

his messiahship

is

concealed from them. Com pare with this Jo hn 's gospel, where ' M essiah'

is included with the other terms,inboth i.20f. and 25 and invii. 4 1. T he

messianic possibility is no longer, as in M ark, one th at is not even m en tion ed :

the secret

in

J o h n

is the

truth tha t Jesus

has

come from above. T her e

is

already

a

hin t of this in M ark

xii.

3 5- 7; in Jo h n it has moved into the central

place.

Similarly,

the

term 'Son

of

G od ' belongs

in

Mark

to

the 'secret' and is

deliberately hid de n: Jesus himself does not use the phrase

-

though for Mark

himselfit is a farmore significant term th an 'M ess iah '. It is thesonship

of Jesus which isacknowledged from heave n in i. 11 and ix.7,and by the

centurion inxv. 39, an d in the early chapters itisas'Son of G od ' that the

unclean spirits acknowledge Jesus (hi. 11 and

v.

7). In Joh n,

on

the other

ha nd , Jesus speaks of himself openly a s ' Son of G od'

-

bu t the true significance

of the title is not grasped by his hearers. The real difference between Mark

and Joh n

at

this point is that in the former the sonship ofJesus is deliberately

hidden, whereasinthe latterit is simply not understood: the glory has been

revealed, b ut m en have been b lind. T o some extent this reflects the different

ways in which the evangelists app roa ch the problem of responsibility:

although both emphasize the divine purposeonthe one hand and hum an

failure on the other, the emphasis

in

M ark is on the former, and in Jo h n on

the latt er: to use

a

Pauline m etapho r, the ' ve il ' in Jo hn is on the hum an side.

It is perh aps wo rth noting ano ther link between the evangelists in their use of

this title : in both M ark (i. 10 f.) and Jo hn (i. 32 -4) , as also in Ro m . i. 3

f.,

th e

designation of Jesus as Son of God is linked w ith the S pirit of God.

A final parallel between M ark and Jo h n may be seen in their treatm ent of

Jesus '

death.

In

Mark,

the

und erstanding of Jesus

as

Messiah

and

Son

of

God is linked closely with his death: no real explanation of this is ever given

-

bu t the acknow ledgement of Jesus

as

Son

of

God comes abo ut throug h

his

de ath . R eade rs of the gospel are privileged

to

overhear the tru th, spoken

by

the voice from heaven, in the P rologue- itwould indeed be more accurate to

describe itasa 'Son ofG od ' secret rather than a messianic secret: inspite

of manifest clues in the course of the gospel,itis only by

Jesus '

death that the

truth about him becomes generally known- see ix. 7-9 and xv. 39. In John,

the Prologue sets out for us the truth about Jesus' glory; and though

in

the

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

13/20

J O H N ' S PR OL OG UE AND TH E MESSIANIC SE CRE T 51

course of the gospel signs of his glory are seen, it is only in the hour of his

death that Jesus is fully glorified, and the truth made plain.

The Johannine Prologue, then, serves the same function as its Marcan

equivalent; without it the chapters which follow are incomprehensible to us,

as to the Jewish opponents in the story. Notwithstanding the arguments of

those who have considered it an addition to the gospel, it seems that these

verses give us, as R. H. Lightfoot remarked, 'the key to the understanding of

this gospel

5

.

1

They are not only closely related in theme to the rest of the

gospel, but are (to quote Lightfoot again) 'designed to enable the reader to

understand the doctrines of the book'.

2

We are led to the conclusion that

these verses have always formed the essential opening paragraphsof thegospel.

It would be interesting to discover a parallel to this literary device of Mark

and John. Did other authors set out to give an explanation to the ensuing

drama in their opening pages? In some Greek plays, of course, we find

prologues which set out the purpose of the dramatist, and summarize the

plot: but the parallel is not close. C. R. Bowen, writing on 'The Fourth

Gospel as Dramatic Material',

3

commented that the very term 'prologue'

suggested a drama - but promptly mixed his metaphors by speaking of the

verses as ' a striking of the great major chords whose harmony is to vibrate

until the last curtain falls'.

4

Looking at Jewish literature, we find that the

book of Ecclesiasticus opens with a prologue

but it is closer to the literary

model of Luke i. 1-4 than to John i. Nor does Philo provide a parallel - the

closest approach to one is found in the introductory section ofDe Legatione

ad

Gaium.

5

A better parallel is perhaps to be seen much closer to hand, in the other

gospels. The opening chapters of Luke, like the Johannine Prologue, are most

often discussed in terms of authorship, style and sources. If instead we think

about the function of these chapters, it is noticeable that they provide us with

the same kind of information as the Marcan and Johannine Prologues, and

that they do so by spelling out the truth about Jesus with the help of titles and

descriptions which are rarely used in subsequent chapters. In the 'infancy

narratives' Luke gives his readers the key to understanding the events which

follow: the angels announce the identity of

Jesus,

and the various psalms

explain the significance of what is happening, and its relationship to God's

activity in the past. As in Mark and John, we have emphasis in these chapters

on a new significant activity of God (in terms of his Spirit, here associated

especially with the birth of Jesus) and on the relationship between Jesus and

John the Baptist. When Luke reaches the point which is for Mark the begin-

op at

p 78

a

Ibid.

p.

11.

Cf. C. K. Barrett's comment

on John

i. i: 'John intends that the whole of

his

gospel

shallbe read in the lightof this

verse.

The deeds and wordsof Jesusare the deeds and words of God;

if

this be not true the book is blasphemous.'

The Gospel according to St John

(1955),

in loc.

3

J.B.L.

XLIX

(1930),292-305.

4

Ibid.p. 298.

6

Philo also beginsDe Vita Mosiswith a declaration of

his

purpose in writing.

4

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

14/20

52 MORNA D. HOOKER

ning of the gospel, we find that we have embarked on the story proper, and

these events no longer, as in Mark, formakey, bu t are pa rt of the n arrative.

Those who have read chaptersiand ii know why Jo hn should now app ear as

forerunner; the descent of the Spirit and the voice from heaven confirm what

we already know.

1

M atthew 's infancy nar rative offers us a less rew arding parallel, though once

again

we are

given significant information abou t Je su s:

his

descent from

Abraham and David; his conception through the Holy Spirit; the promise

th a t he will save his people from their sins. The stories in c ha pte r ii symbolize

the late r events of the gospel: the com ing of the m agi with the ir gifts, and the

slaughter of the inno cents, po int to the kingship of Jesusand to the rejection

and suffering associated with it; the death of the children and the flightto

Egypt mark

him out as a

Mosaic figure, who will shortly challenge

the

curr ent interpre tation of the To rah . He re, too, we find titles such as 'C hr ist '

and ' the king of the Je w s' being used of

Jesus.

2

A parallel of a different kind w ith the Jo ha nn in e P rologue ca n, of course,

be found in th e wisdom C hristology ofHeb . i. 1-4 and Col. i. 15-20. There is

perh aps a para llel in function, as well as con tent, since both these Christological

statemen ts formafoundation on which the argum ent of the subsequent pages

is based. In Hebrews, the first four verses set out the relation of Christ to God,

to the universe,

to

God's previous activity

in

the world, to hum anity and

to

angels; the rest of the epistle spells out the consequences.

In

Colossians,

the

statements about Christ's relation

to

God,

to

the universe, and

to

mankind,

set out in i. 15-20, form the basis of Paul's arguments in the rest of the epistle.

In Hebrews, as inJo hn , this wisdom C hristology dem onstrates Ch rist's

superiority to the revelation of the Old Testam ent, an d this m ay wellbe the

case alsoinColossians.

3

Professor Kase m ann, writing on the purpose of the Jo ha nn ine Prologue,

4

has

suggested that the key to understandingitis to be found invv.14-18.Inthe

last part of this paper

I

turn

to an

exam ination of these verses.

1

The title 'Son of Go d' has already been used, together wi th'S on of the Most Hig h','S av iou r',

'C hr ist ' and 'L or d' ; the fact th at Jesus is the expected King of David's line has also been stressed.

Throughout Luke

iii

angels and Spirit-inspired men and women act in the role of a Greek chorus,

pointing out the significance of events, and showing how Old Testam ent expectationisbeing fulfilled.

Cf. P. S. Minear, 'Luke's Useofthe Birth Stories', in

Studies in

Luke-Acts ed. L. E. Keck and J.L.

Martyn (1966), pp. 111-30.

2

A similar suggestion that the birth-narratives in Luke and M atthew are parallel to the M arcan

and Johann ine Prologues (identified as Mark i. 115 and Jo hn i. 1-34) has been made by O . J.F.

Seitz in ' Gospel prologues:

a

common patt ern ?',

J.B.L.

LXXXIH

(1964), 262-8. Contrast H. van den

Bussche, Jean

Commentaire de VEvangile Spirituel

(1967),p.65, who compares with the Johannine

Prologue the formal introductions in the other gospels-Mark i. i, Luke i. 1-4, and Matt.i.117.

8

SeeW. D. Davies,

Paul and Rabbinic Judaism

(2nd edn 1955), pp. 147-52, 172-5; M. D. Hooker,

'Were there False Teachers in Colossae?', pp. 315-31 inChrist an dSpirit in the New Testament,

ed. B. Lindars and S. Smalley, 1973.

4

E.Kasemann,

New

Testament Questions

of

Today

(1969),

p .

152, trans,

from Exegetische Versuche

undBesinnungen, 11(2nd

edn

1965).

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

15/20

J O H N ' S P R O L O G U E A N D T H E M E S S I A N I C S E C R E T 53

It has been argued recently by Professor Borgen

1

that the opening verses of

the Prologue are an exposition of Gen. i. 1-5. It has also been suggested by

several writers that the background of

vv .

14-18 is found in the revelation

on Sinai described in Exod. xxxiii.

2

The links with the latter passage are, I

believe, even closer than has hitherto been recognized.

In xxxiii. 12-23,Moses makes two requests of Yahweh. First, in v.13, he

asks:

' If I have found favour in thy sight, show me now thy ways, that I may

know thee and find favour in thy sight.' This request is apparently granted in

the promise: ' My presence will go with you'; through God's presence with

them, God's people will be distinct from all other people. The second request

comes in

v.

18, where Moses says: ' I pray thee, show me thy glory'. This

request is only partly granted: the Lord will make his goodness pass before

Moses, and will proclaim his name, Yahweh, but Moses may not see his face.

The subject of vv . 14-18 in John i is glory, and this, together with the

contrast between Christ and Moses inv.17, and the phrase

TTATIPTIS

x^P

lT

S

Kal &Ar|0Eias in

v.

14, which has been interpreted by many commentators as

equivalent to the phrase na.Ni TCrrai found in Exod. xxxiv. 6,

3

all point us

at once to Exod. xxxiii-xxxiv. When we examine that passage more carefully,

we discover other ideas which are echoed in John i. We have already noted

the promise that God will be present with his people, and that his presence

will distinguish Israel from other nations. The term nJ"Otf is used inv.16 by

the Targums, and already God's presence has been symbolised by the tent

in vv.7-11 (LXX OTcnvri). With this we may compare the reference to 'his

own' in John i. 11 and the phrase eoKi'ivcoaev EVf|nivin

v.

14. The form of

Moses' request in Exod. xxxiii. 13 is interesting: 'If I have found favour,

show me thy ways, that I may.. .find favour in thy sight.' The noun jn

used twice here is, of course, the term which is normally translated by

XOtpiS-

4

Is it this idea of favour given to one who has already received favour,

which lies behind the notoriously difficult phrase in John i. 16, x^P

lv aVT

^

XOtpiTOS? Those who have received the grace of being God's own people

receive also the grace of his presence among them

v.

14).

1

P.

Borg en,' Observations on the Targu mic character of the Prologue of Jo hn ', JV.T.S.xvi (1960),

288-95.

8

E.g. M. E. Boismard, StJohn s Prologue (1957), pp. 136-40.

3

E.g. C. H .D o d d , Th e

Interpretation

of the Fourth

Gospel

(1953),p . 175;C. K.Barret t ,

TheGospel

according

to

St

John

(1955),in

loc.

Note

the

equivalence between

3T and

trAi^pris.

* Al though,as wehave al ready noted, m any c omm entators associate th ephrase x^P'S

KCCI

&W|9EKX

in

B

14(see also v. 17)with theH eb re w DBK l *TOn>th eusua l LX X render ingofthat phra se isEXeos

a,

and

almost every occurrence of the word x^P'S represents

the

Hebrew

lfj. It is

used

for

onlyinEsther ii.9(andinii. 17, whereitrenders both terms). C. H . Dodd,loc.

cit.,

argues that

occurrences

in

Ecclus.

and in

Symmachus

and

Theodotion indicate that x^P'S later replaced EAeo;

asatranslationfor"IDfi- This may explain its use in John i.14and 17. Asfarasx

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

16/20

54 MORNA D. HOOKER

In Exod. xxxiii. 17-23 the Lord promises that he will make his glory pass

by Moses, who will see only

a

rear view,

for

'you cannot see my face;

for

man shall not see me and live' (v.20). As John putsitini.18, 'no one has

ever seen God'; but John continues:

he

' who is in the bosom of the Father,

he has made him known'. Is John here deliberately contrasting Moses, who

was placed at God's side, but allowed to see only God's rear view, and Christ,

who isinthe bosom of the Father?

1

In Exod. xxxiii. 19 we read that God is to make all his goodness pass before

Moses,and that he will proclaim his name, Yahweh.

In

vv .5-7 of the next

chapter we read how God fulfils his promise: he descendsinthe cloud and

stands with Moses there; passing before him, he proclaims 'Yahweh,

Yahweh, a God merciful andgracious, slow toanger, andaboundingin

steadfast love and faithfulness' - nNl nDn~2 iV Later Jewish exegesis

understood these verses as anexpositionofthe thirteen divine attributes,

2

and we have already seen that two ofthese areechoed inthe Johannine

phrase TtAripris

X&PITOS

KCCI&Ar|0eias. They are all summed up, apparently,

in

the

phrase used

in

Exod. xxxiii. 19

-

aitj-bs :

3

are

they perhaps also

summed up by John in the word TrAripoopia? In Exod. xxxiv the divine name,

Yahweh, heads the list of divine attributes, all of which are concerned with

God's dealings with his people;inthe rest of John's gospel the divine name,

' I am', will be used repeatedly by Jesus in making various claims

-

many of

them associated in Jewish thought with the role of the Torah.Inevery case,

the evangelist stresses the importance of what Jesus is for the believer;

4

as he

putsit in i.16, 'of this irAripcoua we have all received'.

In Exodus, Yahweh himself proclaims the name Yahweh. In John i. 18

it isuovoyevfis 0e6s (orYios) who 'declares':

5

theverb used by John is

riyelcr0ai, andthough this isnot used by the Septuagint in Exod. xxxiii-

xxxiv,itconveys well the sense of the divine self-proclamation-expressed in

xxxiii. 19and xxxiv. 5 in therather oddHebrew construction

np2

Nip -

which reveals the character ofGod.John's language here seems to have been

1

Cf. John v. 37 and vi. 46. The background of the former passage is perhaps also the theophany

on Sinai; cf. W. A. Meeks,

The Prophet-King, Nov.Test.Supp.

xiv (1967), 299

f.

There may also be an

intentional contrast with Ecclus. xlv.1-5.

2

Cf.

T. Bab. RoshHashanah 17*; Rashi

on

Exod. xxxiii. 19 and xxxiv. 6. Already within the

biblical tradition, we see the beginningofthis development, with the reiterationofthe themes of

these verses;

cf.

Numb. xiv. 18; Neh. ix. 17; Pss. lxxxvi. 15, ciii. 8, cxlv. 8; Joel ii. 13;Jonah iv.

2.

3

The LXX reads here: 'Eycb trapeAcuaoprai -n-p6TEpds crou Tfj 66 nov. This may reflect

a

variant

Hebrew reading, Hiapa, but more probably shows influence byv.

22.

The reading underlines the fact

that the disclosure of God's glory is his self-revelation.

4

Note the verbs used with the ' Iam' sayings; 'come'invi. 35, 'follow' inviii. 12, 'enter'in

x. 7, 9, 'know' in x. 11, 14, 'believe'

in

xi. 25, 'come'

(to the

Father)

in

xiv.

6

and 'abide

in '

xv. 1, 5.

6

It is appropriate that it is the one who is the

X6yos

made

flesh

who performs this function. At this

point in the Prologue, we are reminded again of the unity between God and theA6yo;,now expressed

in terms of the unity between Jesus Christ and the Father. Cf. H. van den Bussche,

op .

cit.pp. 105

f.,

who suggests that v.18bcorresponds tov. 1.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

17/20

J O H N ' S P R O L O G U E A N D T H E M E S S I A N I C S E C R E T 55

influenced also by Ecclus. xliii. 31 : TIS EopotKEV CCUTOV KCU EK5iriyr)aETai;

1

In John xvii Jesus says that he has manifested the Father's name to those

who have kept God's word: the context links this with the mutual glorifying

of Father and Son.

It may possibly be objected that the suggested use of Exodus lacks con-

sistency, since John is at one and the same time seeing Christ's glory as

continuous with that revealed on Mount Sinai, and contrasting Christ with

the figure of Moses. This, however,isprecisely John's point - and one repeated

throughout his gospel;

2

Christ is not only the one who has seen the face of

God, but is himself the source of divine 86oc, full of grace and truth. The

difference is brought out in the use of different verbs in i. 17; the Law was

given through Moses (in the theophany on Mount Sinai) - but grace and

truth themselves have come through Jesus Christ. There is therefore not only

a partial antithesis between Christ and Moses,

3

there is also an antithesis

between Christians and Moses, who are both recipients of the revelation.

So it is we

v.

14) who have seen his glory, and the glory is that of the Logos;

it is we

v.

16) who have received x

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

18/20

56 MORNA D. HOOKER

TTOV

T 6

uXripcoua xcrroiKficrai.

1

In John, the glory

of

God

is

revealed

in the

Xoyos made flesh,

and

those

who see him

receive

of

this irAripcoiJia.

In

Colossians, the TrAripco|joc dwells in Christ, and the Church is filled in him

(i.

19;

ii .

9 f. Cf.

Eph.

i.

23).

In

Heb .

i. 1-4,

also, we find linked together th e

ideas of Christ's unique relationship with God, his role as agent of creation,

his continuing work in upholding allthings, hischaracter asreflectionof

God's glory and expression of his being, and his work inredem ption. T hese

themes are expanded throughout chapters

i

and

ii, and

here too we find

tha t m en are given

a

share in wha t has been revealed in Christ

-

sonship and

glory (ii. 10).

But why should John,

in

his exposition of these ideas, brin g together the

term Aoyoj and the imagery

of

Exod . xxxiii-xxxiv? Th ere is, of course,

an

immediate and obvious link between the A6yos and the idea of the Torah,

God's word, which was itself symbolized by light and life, terms which have

been used already in the opening verses of the Prologue -just as there isan

obvious link between the ideas

of

light and

a

glory which can be seen.

Is

ther e perh aps also ano ther link with th e word Xoyos to be found in the Exodus

passage in Yahw eh's words to Moses in xxxiii. 1 7 : ' even this word w hich you

have spoken

I

will do' ? Certainly Jo hn might have described his gospel as the

account of God performing the word spoken by Moses.

John spells out this truth for us

in

v. 37

f., a

passage which appears

to be

ano ther echo of Sinai. In rejecting

Jesus,

the Jew s are showing that they ha ve

never heard God's voice or seen his form or received his word. They search

the scriptures

-

w hich bea r w itness to Jesus

-

and fail to recognize that they

speak of him. God himself is glorified

-

i .e . revealed

2

-in what Jesus does:

throughout

the

gospel, discourses

and

signs

and the

arrangement

of

the

material ro un d the pa tter n of Jewish festivals spell out the tr ut h tha t this

revelation is the fulfilment of everything that went before, and that Moses is

the witness who speaks ofJesus.

W e have seen tha t it is Ch ristians, as mu ch as Christ, who stand in contrast

to Moses in Jo h n i. A similar idea is to be found inI ICor. iii.1-iv . 6, where

the contrast between Moses and Christ slides into

a

contrast between Moses

and the Christian: for it is we whose faces are unveiled and unashamed. The

theme of this passage, too, is glory

-

though now

it

is the glory which Moses

reflected after speaking

to

God

on

Sinai; M oses' irrad iation was, however,

according toPa ul, only temp orary and imperfect, w hereas the glory C hris-

tians now see and reflect is the gloryofChrist. W ha t kind of glory is this?

Its source, we learn in

I I

Cor. iv. 6, is God , w ho said,

at

creation, ' L et light

shine out of da rkn ess'; Pau l, in

a

pa ttern the reverse of

John 's ,

leads us back

from the light of the glory glimpsed on Sinai and seen in Jesus Christ to the

1

Th e two terms used to introduce the two sections in Col. i,E KCOVand&p)tf,are used by Philoin

association with A6yos indeConf. 146.

2

Cf.G. B. Caird, 'The gloryofGodin the Fourth Gospel:anexerciseinbiblical sema ntics',

N.T.S. xv (1969), 265-77.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

19/20

J O H N ' S PR O L O G U E A N D TH E MESSIA N IC SEC R ET 57

light of creation. For both Paul and John, Christ is the fulfilment of God's

eternal purpose, which was only partly revealed on Sinai. The full unveiling

of God's glory is now seen by Christians.

1

In the course of

his

argument in II Corinthians iii, Paul speaks of faith in

Christ in terms of the removal of the veil; the veil is removed not only from

Moses' face, but from the scriptures and from the hearts of those Jews who

turn to Christ. So we return to the theme of the messianic secret. For the veil,

here, serves the same purpose as the blind eyes and hard hearts spoken of by

the evangelists. And the truth which is obscured is the same as in John - it

is the glory ofChrist;it is the fact that the old covenant points forward to the

new, and that the glory as revealed by Moses is brought to completion in

Christ. As Paul sums it up in Rom. x. 3 f., where he is grappling again with

the problem of Israel's failure to see the truth, Christ is the TAOSof the Law.

The Jews seek to establish their own righteousness, and are ignorant of the

righteousness of God; they do not realize that though the Law speaks of a

righteousness based on works, it also points forward to a righteousness based

on faith.

2

It seems likely that Paul's argument in II Corinthians has developed out of

the kind of understanding of the Law which we find in Jewish writings, and

which forms the background of the opening verses of John i. In passages such

as Proverbs viii and Ecclesiasticus xxiv, wisdom is associated with God's work

of creation, and identified with the Law: the divine plan was with God from

the beginning, and

was

revealed to Israel at Sinai.

3

We

find the Rabbis speak-

ing of the Torah as part of the eternal purpose of God - created before the

world: a passage in the Babylonian Talmud, for example, describes the angels

as asking what Moses is doing on Mount Sinai. 'He has come to receive the

Torah,' replies the Lord, at which they exclaim, 'That secret treasure, which

has been hidden by Thee for 974 generations before the world was created,

Thou desirest to give to flesh and blood.'

4

To Paul it is clear that it is Christ

himself who

is

the secret treasure or wisdom, hidden by God from all eternity.

5

John expresses this same belief in his own way: ' In the beginning was the

1

Paul brings out clearly the idea that

Christians

in turn reflect this glory by

becoming

what Christ

himselfis.See especially II Cor. iii.18and iv. 4. Cf. similar ideasin Johni. 12 f., Col. ii. g f., iii. 10,

andHeb. ii. 10.

2

A similar argument is used by Paul in I Cor. ii, where he speaks

of a

hidden wisdom, concealed

fromthe rulers ofthisage, but revealed to Christians. Paul uses language appropriate to the Corin-

thian

situation, speaking of

wisdom

instead of

righteousness,

but the argument that man must rely

onGod's wisdom, not his own, is parallel to his argument in Romans and Galatians that man must

rely

on God, and not his own

works.

The two ideas are brought together in I Cor. i. 30, in the state-

ment

that Christ is both our wisdom and our righteousness. If Paul is thinking of Christ as the ful-

filment

of

God's age-long purpose, the one to whom the scriptures pointed, though theirmeaning

wasuntil his comingveiled,it was perhaps a simple step for him toexpressthis in termsof wisdom-

not

simply because the Corinthians had a special interest in that term, but

because

Judaism had

already identified the Torah with wisdom. For other expressions of this idea of the secret now

revealed

in Christ, see Rom. xvi. 25 f; Col. i.

25

f., ii. 2 f.; Eph. iii. 3 ff.

3

Cf. also'the identification of Torah and wisdom in rabbinic writings, e.g. Gen. R. 1. 1. 4;

Lev.

R. xi. 3.

*

T. Bab. Shabbath

88 A.

5

I Cor. ii. 7; cf. Col. i. s6. The 'end' in both cases, as in II Cor. iii-iv, is our glorification.

7/25/2019 S0028688500008766a.pdf

20/20

58 MORNA D. HOOKER

word . ..the word becam e flesh.. .a nd we saw his glo ry .. .full of grace and

tru th. ' O ver against the Jewish claim tha t Go d's eternal purpose was finally

revealed atSinai, we have the C hristian claim tha t the To rah only pointed

forward

to

the revelation m ade

in

Christ.

1

In both I I Corinthians and Romans we see Paul wrestling with the pro-

blem of reconciling faith in Jesu s as Christ not only with his conviction th at

God had spoken through

the Old

Te stam ent, bu t also with

the

failure

of

the Jews

to

recognize the tru th.

In

think ing ab ou t possible situations

in

the

early Ch urc h, recon struc ting v arious so-called false Christologies, heresies and

problems, it is easy to overlook the obvious and most pressing problem which

confronted these early Christians- the relation of Ch ristian faith to their

Jewish heritage. It is difficult for us, nineteen centuries or so after the division

between Jew andChristian hasbeen made, toappreciate thet r aumaof

those who found the new wine of Christia n faith bursting the skins of Ju da is m

- yet knew that God had spoken both through Moses and the prophets, and

most decisively in Jesus of Na zar eth .

I t

is not surprising

to

find the Fourth

Evangelist, like Paul, still grappling with this basic problem - and this,Isug-

gest, is the reason why he w rote his Gospel, an d his Pro logue, as he did. T h e

secret which he and the readers share, but which is hidden from the Jewish

nation, is the truth spelt out for us in the first eighteen verses of his gospel -

that in Jesus Christ the God who has spoken

in

time past is fully revealed.

There

is no

contradiction between

old and

new, only glorious fulfilment,

because the scriptures themselves speak

of

Christ. Those who are blind

to

this are indeed

in

darkness

-

but those who possess this key see

the

glory

of God.

1

The question which so often puzzles commentators, as to the precise point in the Prologue where

the author first speaks of the incarnation, would perhaps be for him a meaningless question. The

A6yosnow made flesh was with God at the beginning, and has made God known throughout history;

the light has always shone in darkness, and the coming of the light has continually been rejected by

men, both in the past and in the events described by Jo hn in his gospel. I t

is

therefore entirely appro-

priate that the Baptist, whose function is to witness to Jesus, should appear in both sections of the

Prologue, binding the two parts together and assuring us that the historical figure towhomhe

points is the A6yo; made flesh- that the one who reveals the glory of God is himself the light which

has shone since creation, and that the one who comes after the Baptist in time is the one who has

existed since before time began.