Abstract
Stan Harstine, Professor of Religion at Friends University in Kansas, is a seasoned Johannine scholar. Having studied, taught, and written on the Fourth Gospel for over 20 years, he offers his expertise in a new monograph, Reading John through Johannine Lenses. As the title suggests, Harstine adopts the metaphor of optical lenses to illustrate the manner in which various methodologies impact the trajectories and results of scholarly inquiry.
In order to explicate his thesis, Harstine applies a few specific “lenses” to the Gospel of John. He offers a comparative study of both diachronic and synchronic approaches—more specifically, historical, narrative, and rhetorical criticism. Harstine notes that traditional diachronic methodologies, which operate under the assumption that the text developed over time, have yielded results that have been “less than satisfactory or conclusive” (p. 103). Thus, more recent anachronic approaches, which deal with the final form of the text, seek to understand the communicative aims of the text and the meaning therein. Even such methodologies that examine the text as a unified whole, however, yield results that vary widely depending upon methodological approach.
As a counterpoint, Harstine identifies an additional interpretive lens for the Fourth Gospel comprised four Leitwörter: life, word, receive, and believe. These keywords are garnered from the Prologue and found throughout the Gospel. More than simply keywords, however, the terms serve as thematic lodestones for John’s message. Although these themes are often regarded as “separate individual pillars” of the Gospel, Harstine suggests they serve as “interlocking timbers” that move the plot forward (p. 107).
The author utilizes all of the aforementioned lenses and more throughout the course of five chapters. In Chapter 1, Harstine examines John’s Prologue through diachronic, synchronic, and thematic lenses. In Chapter 2, he chooses two themes from the Prologue as an interpretive lens and test case. Using “light” and “life,” Harstine proceeds to demonstrate why themes identified in the Prologue are crucial to the literary and theological development of the Gospel as a whole. In other words, “When the prologue is seen as an intentional introduction to the contents of the Gospel of John, many elements that follow can be understood more precisely” (p. 36). The next three chapters 5, 12, and 17, respectively, are devoted to John, as the four key Leitwörter intersect most prominently in these chapters. For each chapter, Harstine applies each of the chosen methodologies. A final, brief chapter is then devoted to concluding observations.
In sum, Harstine does not suggest that his Johannine lenses replace familiar diachronic and synchronic methodologies. Rather, he proposes that approaching John through a Johannine lens can bring clarity and unity to the Gospel and even serve as a lens through which to filter the conclusions of other methodologies. For example, understanding the development of the tightly woven themes throughout the Gospel minimizes the appearance of seams, interpolations, and varying stages of development. Harstine argues that the repeated appearance of the key themes and key points “with an increasing level of complexity” throughout the Fourth Gospel increases the likelihood of a unified text and single authorial voice (p. 111). Indeed, the scholar makes a convincing case for interpreting the Fourth Gospel, first and foremost, through the filter of its own literary and theological context.
A problematic aspect of the monograph, however, regards clarity. Unlike most academic works, Harstine provides no introductory chapter in which he makes clear the purpose, audience, and methodology. He devotes less than one page to an overview explaining how different lenses impact one’s interpretation. He then jumps immediately into discussing various methodologies that have been applied to John’s prologue. In successive chapters, he continues to investigate various methodologies and themes while readers are left to discern on their own where the argument is going. Not until the concluding chapter of the book do the various strands of discussion coalesce into a clear argument. In short, Harstine’s thesis and methodology are sound, but they are unclear until the last few pages of the monograph. An informative introduction would resolve this issue completely. In the absence of such an introduction, the current reviewer recommends reading the conclusion prior to Chapter 1.
In regard to audience, the book is largely geared toward scholars. Harstine writes accessibly and often explains difficult terms, but the complexity of the issue and the maze of interpretive methodologies would likely be overwhelming for non-academics. Further, the price point of the book will make purchase prohibitive for most.
To conclude, Harstine is to be commended for his synthesis and summary of various methodological approaches to John. Johannine scholars will appreciate his fresh exegesis of the Fourth Gospel in the light of key recurring terms and themes.