Abstract
An ever-expanding range of interpretive approaches continues to inundate biblical scholarship. Come and Read has helpfully assembled contributions from four of these approaches (narrative, intertextual, sociocultural, and rhetorical) around three sub-genres in John’s Gospel: elevated prose in John 1, discourse in John 10, and narrative prose in John 20. The goal is that these diverse interpretations of John’s Gospel will show “not only how these interpretive methods are employed, but also their interaction with and interdependence on one another, and the variety of payoffs that each renders” (pp. 1–2).
The first section concentrates on the prologue of John 1:1–18. Sherri Brown’s narrative approach highlights the way the prologue introduces the major characters and themes of the Gospel, thereby equipping the audience to understand the rest of the narrative. Lindsey S. Jodfrey offers a sociocultural reading informed by queer theory’s challenge to binary categories. She argues that John’s contrast between light and dark does not affirm the binaries it presupposes because the divine Word’s movement into the world transgressively blurs the insider-outsider dichotomy (p. 48). Craig S. Keener tackles one aspect of an intertextual reading of the prologue by showing that John’s logos language references the gift of the Torah on Mt. Sinai (Exod 34). The fourth contribution is Jo-Ann A. Brant’s study of the deliberate rhetorical ambiguity of the prologue as a means to stir readers’ minds to a renewed appreciation of the divine gifts in Jesus.
The second section explores the Good Shepherd discourse and the conflict at the Festival of Dedication in John 10. Dorothy A. Lee’s narrative interpretation demonstrates how the two sections hold together as Jesus discloses himself as the gatherer of the sheep despite opposition (p. 93). Warren Carter’s sociocultural approach reads the good shepherd motif against the broad landscape of Greco-Roman political discourse to show how Jesus’s use of the image clashes with (and is a mimicry of) imperial rhetoric. Catrin H. Williams offers an intertextual reading of John as invoking an “intricate network of Jewish scriptural associations” that draws the reader into an understanding of Jesus as shepherd beyond any single scriptural image (p. 112). The section concludes with Alicia D. Myers’s rhetorical study of the boldness of Jesus’s speech (parrēsia) including his use of a riddle (paroimia) as a positive evaluation of Jesus’s character.
The final section treats the narratives of the empty tomb and resurrection appearances of John 20. Craig Koester’s narrative approach highlights the tension of the chapter as “a dramatic narrative that demonstrates how seeing does not guarantee believing” (p. 141). Angela N. Parker’s sociocultural interpretation presents a womanist reading of the appearance to Mary Magdalene that resists the tendency to suppress Mary’s role as an early Christian leader. Helen K. Bond offers an intertextual treatment of John 20 by highlighting the ways John might have reused the Synoptic Gospels even as he weaves in additional images and themes from the Jewish Scriptures and Greco-Roman world. Kasper Bro Larsen’s rhetorical approach concludes the work by discussing the vividness of John 20 in light of the rhetorical categories of ekphrasis and energeia as techniques used to persuade the reader to believe in Jesus.
Evaluation of this work is difficult because the selections are quite distinct in their approaches and varied in their interpretations. Come and Read offers a range of interesting insights on the Gospel of John from both seasoned scholars and new voices. The contributions are well-written and present interesting exegetical and hermeneutical insights. The clustering of different approaches around a specific text is noble and a welcome change to the narrow parochialism of biblical scholarship. However, the book’s goal of capturing comparison, interaction, and interdependence among the contributions is harder to perceive. This results in two issues with the work.
First, the different goals of the various contributions make comparison across the essays difficult. Some essays lean more on the hermeneutical and illustrate a particular usefulness of theory as it is applied to a text (Jodfrey, Parker). Others tend to emphasize the historical and literary backgrounds of the text with illustrative primary sources (Keener, Carter, Larsen). Still others prefer a more focused, complete analysis that moves commentary-like through the interpretation of the text (Lee, Koester). These differences are not so much the result of the interpretive approaches as they reflect different goals. Some scholars argue a specific point, while others put forth a broader reading. Such unevenness hampers the dialogue between the approaches.
Second, the essays are not written for a reader to get a sense of the interpretive debates on a single passage or the places in which the different approaches diverge and intersect. If one is specifically focused on an aspect of Johannine scholarship such as the rhetoric of John’s Gospel, the book is an excellent resource. But as a “deliberate conversation” (p. 2) between approaches, the book could do more to aid the reader. Perhaps an introduction or conclusion to each section could better guide the reader to this end. As it stands, the book displays excellent Johannine scholarship but struggles to bridge the divide between the approaches.
Overall, Come and Read offers a strong collection of contributions to the study of John and expertly presents the complexity of biblical interpretation in the twenty-first century. While the work is not well-suited for a college classroom or a general reading audience, it is a good resource for the academic community or a graduate class on John’s Gospel.