Abstract
The introduction to the commentary is quite brief. It is designed to provide a basic orientation to reading the Gospel text from the perspective of the Fourth Evangelist. Instead of beginning with extended discussion of authorship, date, and historical setting, Thompson starts by comparing John to the Synoptic Gospels in order to identify what is shared and what is distinctive. She emphasizes that all of the Gospels develop traditional material, although John seems to interpret and arrange it with more freedom. The Fourth Gospel “bears the distinctive stamp of a creative mind” (p. 8).
This observation raises questions about John’s relationship to “the Jesus of history,” which is a highly disputed question (p. 9). Scholars often mine the Synoptic Gospels to recover early traditions about Jesus, while giving little attention to John. Here I appreciate Thompson’s nuanced approach, which asks how the Fourth Evangelist works with tradition. She points out that the Gospel notes that people of Jesus’s time did not fully grasp who he was. The writer assumed that Jesus’s identity could not be understood through sight and hearing alone, and the narrative sometimes clearly distinguishes what one could discern before and after the resurrection (2:22; 12:16). The writer’s concern was that readers understand not only who Jesus was but who Jesus is for the believer.
Throughout the commentary Thompson notes points at which the perspective of the writer is “back to front” (pp. 9, 283, 365). By that she means that the “front” part of the story, which concerns Jesus’s pre-Easter ministry, is understood in light of the “back,” which includes Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection, references to the Spirit’s post-Easter instruction (14:26), and reflection on the story of Jesus in light of Israel’s Scriptures (2:17, 22; 12:16).
In the account of the footwashing, for example, Peter voices what would have been a common pre-Easter perspective: Jesus’s washing of the disciples’ feet seemed completely inappropriate (13:6, 8). But the narrative introduction to the scene alerts readers that what is about to unfold must be understood in light of what is to come. It anticipates Jesus’s imminent death, which will be the consummate expression of divine love. It will complete his mission on earth and be the beginning of his return to the Father (13:1).
Thompson’s clear sense of the post-resurrection perspective of the writer is integrated into her theological understanding of the message. She rightly points out that the resurrection makes faith in Jesus possible and it provides substance for that faith. It is the resurrection that enables the Fourth Evangelist to portray the entire story of Jesus around the central theme of life. This interpretive approach is highly valuable for those engaged in conveying the Gospel’s theological significance for contemporary audiences through preaching and teaching.
A major challenge in writing a commentary is that many people will consult specific pages when studying a particular passage, but few actually read the entire volume. Therefore, it is important to note that some of Thompson’s most significant theological work is done in connection with 5:19–47, which is the discourse that follows the healing of the invalid at the pool of Bethzatha. This passage is rarely the focus for preaching or teaching, yet here is where Thompson finds “the epitome” and “the heart of Johannine Christology” (pp. 130, 136).
The passage identifies God as the living Father, who has life in himself and has granted that the Son might have life as he does. In having life, Jesus is both dependent on God and one with God. Since he has life as God does, Jesus is also empowered to give life to others. In one sense, giving life means bringing people into fellowship with God, who is the source of all life. Jesus’s action also involves raising the dead and exercising judgment. Thompson notes that resurrection and life are not synonymous, since the final resurrection can lead either to life in fellowship with God or to condemnation. But she emphasizes that the themes of judgment and life are thoroughly interwoven, since what is at stake in judgment is precisely life in its fullest sense.
The theme of life informs Thompson’s interpretation of the crucifixion in important ways. For her, the Good Shepherd discourse summarizes “the heart of John’s theology of Jesus’ death” (p. 226). There Jesus identifies himself as the shepherd who provides life in abundance (10:10). When the flock is in danger, the shepherd puts himself in their place and willingly faces death in order that they might live. It is an act of self-giving love that “expresses God’s love for the world”; and by conveying the fullness of love, Jesus’s death “brings to completion the life-giving work of the Father through the Son” (p. 269).
I would emphasize that John’s construal of Jesus’s death as an expression of love that gives life is extremely important for contemporary preaching and teaching. The crucifixion is a brutal dimension in the story of Jesus, yet it cannot be bypassed. There are some who insist that Jesus’s death was the sacrifice needed to satisfy the demands of divine justice. But John’s Gospel works with a different frame of reference. If the greatest expression of love is to give one’s life for another (15:13), then the crucifixion conveys Jesus’s love for his own and God’s love for the world estranged from its Creator (3:16; 13:1). The gift of love creates relationship, and for John that relationship is life.
Throughout the commentary there are valuable excursuses on major themes. The one on life and eternal life brings together many dimensions of Johannine thought. The theme of life is related to creation in the opening lines of the Gospel, where the Word brings all things into being and gives life (1:3–4). Next, the story of Jesus’s ministry recounts acts of healing and providing, which culminate in his self-giving death and resurrection, all of which convey the message of life. The Spirit too is an agent of life, by bringing people to new birth (3:3–8; 20:22). The consistent message of the Gospel is that true life in both the present and the future “derives its meaning from the love, fullness, and presence of God” (p. 91).
What I find less compelling in this commentary is the discussion of characters in the narrative. For example, interpreters have often noted the depiction of Nicodemus in John 3 is profoundly ambiguous. The nocturnal setting and Nicodemus’s incomprehension have been understood in sharply differing ways. Thompson, however, moves quite quickly to a positive reading of Nicodemus, which does not bring out the narrative tension. The same is true of the story of the invalid at Bethzatha, who is healed by Jesus and later reports Jesus to the Pharisees who are hostile because of the Sabbath violation that the healing entailed. Here Thompson acknowledges that the man’s actions are “somewhat ambiguous,” and interpreters have often been sharply critical of him (p. 119). But she moves rather quickly to a sympathetic reading of the man, even though more attention to the contradictory elements in the portrayal of his character would have been helpful.
This is a fine commentary that brings Thompson’s well-respected scholarship on John’s Gospel into a text that will serve a wide range of readers. Her work is thoughtful, theologically informed, and will contribute to the work of those engaged in communicating the message of the New Testament to contemporary listeners.