"And this is eternal life; (aionios zoe gk) that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."

The main questions that the examiners want you to answer about the Johannine teaching on eternal life are:

• How far is Johannine teaching on eternal life distinctive?
• When does eternal life begin?
  - John and the Synoptics
  – John and other NT writings
  – A summary
  – an explanation of future eschatology in John – a ‘conservative approach’ (D Carson)
  – a ‘radical approach’ R Bultmann
  – a ‘liberal approach’ Schnackenberg
• What must a person do to obtain eternal life?
• What is the relevance of Johannine teaching on eternal life for today?

The phrase ‘eternal life’ (aionios zoe) does appear in the Synoptics. The Rich Young Ruler asks Jesus what he must do to ‘inherit eternal life?’ (Mk 10:17-22) Scholars are agreed that the word aionios, which means ‘of the age’ refers to ‘the age to come’ , when there will be a fulfillment of God’s will on earth, seen in judgement, reward of the righteous and punishment of the wicked. Jesus’ answer to this question assumes a traditional futurist eschatology – obey the Torah and you will have ‘treasure in heaven’. See also Luke 10: 25-28. The assumption is that if the questioners obey the Torah, they ‘will live’ or have ‘treasure in heaven’, all good futurist stuff.

However, our study of C H Dodd and J Jeremias has suggested that there is also a fair helping of realized eschatology in the synoptics. What about earlier in Lk Ch 10 vs 8-12 where Jesus commissions the disciples and instructs them to tell the people they go that ‘The Kingdom of God has come near.’? Or more clearly in Luke 11:20 and parallels, where Jesus, speaking of his powers as as exorcist states that ‘.. if it is by the finger of God that I cast out the demons, then the kingdom of God has come to you.’ And what about the miracles of Jesus presented in the Synpotics as the signs of the Messianic age in Mt 11:2-6 and parallels? Our study of the parables has shown that they are well capable of an interpretation consistent with realized eschatology.

H Conzelmann, (and after him, J Jeremias) suggested that both future and realized eschatology were held together in a tension within the Synoptics. That whilst recognising that in Jesus, the key eschatological event had already happened, and that the decisive action from God has been accomplished, nevertheless, there was still a future consummation of the will of God, where wrong would be set to right, and all would rise to give an account of their lives before God to receive reward or punishment. Oscar Cullman used the wartime analogy of the difference between D-Day (when the decisive phase of the war began) and VE Day when the victory which was inevitable because of the results of D-Day, was finally achieved and seen to be achieved.

The significance of Jesus in the Synoptics seems to be that he brought salvation by inaugurating a change in the ‘the times’ – ie, Jesus, at His place in history, has brought in a new phase of salvation history - the Kingdom of God, which people can choose to respond to or not. (Remember Luke’s 3-fold salvation history?) Although there is a sense that all history has been leading up to Jesus, it is to the Torah and the Prophets that we are expected to look for signals of His arrival. On the other hand, John, seems to want to emphasise the change in people brought about as they encounter Jesus. This is not to deny that John had a sense of salvation history as worked out in the creation and the history of the Jews BUT transcending and dominating all of this is the Logos, the Christ, who was pre-existent with the Father, who came from, and returns to the Father, and continues with the Father. His eternal existence means that His work of salvation is essentially to be seen in the continual NOW. Thus Schnackenberg can say that John’s presentation of eternal life is "a product of his Christology", for it is in John and not in the synoptics that we find the sense of Jesus as the Eternal Logos, dominating not only time, but also eternity.

This tension appears too in the writings of Paul. In what are assumed to be his earliest letters, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians, Philippians, there are plenty of clear references to the Parousia, which seems to have been the way that the Early Church interpreted future eschatology – Jesus appearing again on earth as eschatological judge at some time in the future. However, there’s also plenty of indication that Paul felt that when a person became a believer, there was a radical change in their existence because of what Jesus had accomplished and was continuing to accomplish in His exalted position at the right hand of God. Specifically, the believer had been transferred from one kingdom to another, was living a life that was essentially grounded in the life of Christ Himself. (Gal 2: 19-20; 5:25; Romans 8:35-39 – amongst others – actually the whole of Colossians is about this, but see esp. the beginning of Chapter 3)

Now, as the Pauline corpus (body of writing) generally pre-dates the Gospels as we have them, and in view of the similarity between the two presentations of this aspect of eschatology, I think we might conclude that either the Johannine view of eschatology predates the Synoptics’ view (J A T Robinson would agree with me here) OR the 4^th Evangelist held on to an aspect of primitive eschatology that saw salvation largely as an event that happened to an individual, rather than the Synoptic view of creating a ‘Kingdom of God’ community on earth.

What seems distinctive about John’s presentation of the start of eternal life when compared with other NT Literature is what Schnackenberg calls "the present character of eternal life in John." Whereas in the Synoptics, the most obvious references to the fulfilment of the Kingdom of God are future references (like the parable of the Great Feast and the Sheep and the Goats, John "tilts his emphasis to the present enjoyment of eschatological blessings." (D Carson) This is summed up in 5:24 as Jesus says "he who hears my word and believes in him who sent me has eternal life; he does not come into judgement, but has passed from death to life." The evangelist comments in 3:18 that "he who believes in Him is not condemned, but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the Son of God. See also 10:28; 11:25-26, where Jesus links eternal life not to some future event, but as being in his gift, now, for all those who believe. In the truest sense, death cannot touch them, even physical death is transitory, because they have eternal life in themselves. So compared with the Synoptics, John’s emphasis on a fundamental change in the quality of existence the moment one becomes a believer in Jesus seems to me to be very powerful, and comparable with some of the statements in the Pauline epistles quoted earlier, especially in Galatians and Colossians.

Given the 4^th Evangelists’ distinctive emphasis on eternal life beginning now, some scholars have questioned the existence of fairly frequent references scattered throughout the gospel to futurist eschatology, claiming that they are a radical departure from eschatology found elsewhere in the NT. Some of these Johannine references are couched in very traditional, even formulaic, terms : 5:28-29; 6:44, 54 where Jesus talks of ‘raising them up on the last day’ but also others which are, perhaps more ambiguous, eg 4:14, 23, 36; 14:3; 17:24, where future blessings are promised. There are several possible explanations for the inclusion of such references:–

• Despite its apparently radical emphasis on realized eschatology, essentially, the eschatological teaching of the 4^th Gospel actually reflects the eschatological views found elsewhere in the NT. 4^th evangelist believed that although the essential life-giving event had happened in history with the incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, there would be a future consummation of the victory won by Jesus, in which there would be a general resurrection either to judgement or to ‘life in all its fulness’. Don Carson comments that although it is characteristic of John to emphasise the present enjoyment of eschatological blessings, ".. this is never at the expense of any future hope: the time is coming when those who are in the graves will come out to face the judgement of the One to whom wall judgement has been entrusted by the Father." Carson rejects as unnecessary, suggestions by Bultmann that a later redactor added in several verses which contain Jewish future eschatology, in order to make the 4^th Gospel acceptable to the Church at large. This is because he feels that a thorough reading of the Gospel shows that "the interweaving of the two strands (of eschatology) lies at the heart of all Christian eschatology, including this book." He also rejects CK Barrett’s suggestion that the formulaic ‘and I will raise him up at the last day’, refers only to unbelievers being raised to receive judgement. Carson points to 6:40, 54 to demonstrate that the ‘raising up’ applies precisely to those people who have received life from Christ. It also applies coherently to unbelievers who "will rise to be condemned" because they have been condemned already. (3.18)
  
  The problem with Carson (and others’) view is that there are plausible grounds for doubting whether the references in Ch 5 and 6 which specifically refer to a ‘last day’ of resurrection and judgement, are part of the original text of the Gospel.
  
  Furthermore, it is possible to understand the other ‘future’ references as talking, not about some future judgement on earth, but about blessings to be enjoyed after Jesus’ resurrection on this earth or in the ‘heavenly world’ above, ie after we have died!
  

• The second possible reason* for the ‘futurist references’in Chs 5 and 6 is that they were added by a later church redactor. This view was put forward by Bultmann, who believed, and attempted to demonstrate, that the 4^th Gospel was an amalgam of several literary sources, which could be identified by painstaking study of the texts. One of the sources he identifies is ‘the ecclesiastical redactor’, who from time to time adds his comments which reflect the understanding of the community on the other sources which have been put together by the evangelist to create the 4^th Gospel. Bultmann attributes Ch 21 to the ecclesiastical redactor, who is explaining for the benefit of the community, the significance of the death of the ‘Beloved Disciple’.
  
  Bultmann suggests that the redactor added 5:28-30 "in an attempt to reconcile the dangerous statements (my italics) in vv24 ff with traditional (future) eschatology." Thus he assumes that the emphasis on the enjoyment of eschatological blessings in the present, which undoubtedly forms the key element in Johannine theology, was considered unorthodox by the church of the day. Bultmann suggests that the redactor thinks that the krisis (verdict) taking place in Jesus’ ministry was "an anticipation of the last judgement, so that the resurrection of the dead at the end of time would ‘confirm his Word before all men’. "
  
  Similarly, in Ch6:39, 40 and 44, Bultmann suggests that the phrase "and I will raise him up on the last day" is a ‘refrain’ which was added to bring the 4^th Gospel’s eschatology into line with the future hope that the church of his day held to be orthodox.
  
  
  Furthermore, there are literary reasons for suggesting that these verses may have been added in by a later redactor. John Russell (Fourth Gospel Booklet 2 p 19) suggests that the verses add nothing to the understanding of the text, and that if they are removed, the text not only continues to flow but actually reads more easily as a continuum of ideas. Try it yourselves and see.
  
  The problems with Bultmann’s suggestions include - the very suggestion of an ecclesiastical redactor. The arguments on which he posits the existence of this editor are, perhaps, too rigid – (1) there appears to be a dominant theme of present eschatology (2) there are verses which, however, suggest a future perspective. (3) the two views are mutually incompatible (4) therefore the ‘rogue’ future verses must have been added by someone else.
  
  –the circular nature of his reasoning as to the Sitz im Kirche in which the ‘futurist’ formula has been added. (1) Although there are references to both future and present eschatology in the 4^th Gospel, the dominant theme is present eschatology. (2) The evangelist believed in present eschatology (3) there are ‘futurist’ verses in the Gospel (4) they cannot reflect the view of the evangelist because he only taught present eschatology (5) their inclusion must be accounted for by reference to a community belief in future eschatology (6) acceptance by the wider community must have necessitated the inclusion of ‘futurist’ verses in the text (7) The dominant eschatology of the 4^th Gospel is realized eschatology … and so on.
  
  – The references to a future eschatology are not confined to the passages containing the formulaic "and I will raise him up on the last day". As we have already seen, there are several other, albeit ambiguous verses which refer to blessings ‘to come’.
  
  –although it is true that, compared to the Synoptics, there appears to be a considerable shift of emphasis towards present eschatology, (a) the Synoptics are not so devoid of present eschatological material as might be supposed (just look at Dodd’s work in The Parables of the Kingdom) and (b) other NT material eg the Pauline corpus reflects a view of what it means to be ‘in Christ’ that rather closely reflects that of the 4^th Gospel (see references above). Bultmann’s suggestion that references to future eschatology were included to bring the 4^th Gospel’s radically different eschatology into line with orthodox church teaching become less persuasive.
  
  – Bultmann’s claims to be able to identify different sources in minute detail on stylistic grounds are questioned by a substantial number of scholars.
  

- Third, the 4^th Gospel does contain references to future blessings, but these are referring either to blessings to be enjoyed by believers after Jesus'’resurrection, or to a fulfilment in the "heavenly world".

So what of John’s teaching on how to enter Eternal Life?

Scholars note that John’s teaching on life, indeed his total eschatology, depends on an understanding of Christology. As the prologue says ‘In Him was Life, and that Life was the Light of men.’ As Schnackenberg says Jesus "has life fundamentally and inherently in himself." In Ch5 :26, the evangelist can say that "as the Father has life in Himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself." This use of Light as an expression for Life is a metaphor common in most religions, but in the Jewish context, the Torah was viewed as the light of life "Thy word is a light to my feet and a lamp to my path." D Carson observes that John takes this metaphor and uses it to install Jesus as the Light that brings life in the place of the Torah. This is a contrast to the synoptics, where Jesus may have felt free to interpret the Law and is certainly presented as its fulfilment, but does not replace it.

I am still working on this, dears.

Bultmann has compared John and Paul’s teaching on Life with that of a group of Gnostics in Syrian Palestine known as Mandeans. He notes parallels between John’s ‘Revealer’ sent from the Father to "bring to men the saving message" and gnostic myths in which part of ‘the light’ fell into the ‘darkness’ and was rescued by ‘Gnosis’ or Revelation from God, which ‘"illuminated man as to his true origin and true being" and gives him the power to return to "his heavenly homeland". (Sorry about the gender imbalance, dears. Inclusive language hadn’t been thought of when Bultmann was writing!) Bultmann assumes reliance by Paul and John on Gnostic thought, however, and many scholars eg Carson, would want to argue that it is presuming too much to assume such dependence.

Return to Eschatology Base Page