|
Within the early church, the Johannine Community stood outside the mainstream apostolic church and hence, developed a literary corpus distinct from those churches.[1] The Fourth Gospel and the three Epistles of John reveal the distinguishing qualities of this community. Their unique Christology, pneumatology and theology are reflected even in the vocabulary of these works. In the prologue to the Fourth Gospel, for instance, the Evangelist uses lo/goj as a title for Jesus Christ to signify the revelatory and pre-existent significance of the incarnate Son of God. Nowhere else in the New Testament is this word used with reference to Christ. Likewise, the Fourth Gospel uses para/klhtoj (commonly transliterated, paraclete) as a title for the Holy Spirit. This word is also used in the first Epistle of John as a title for Jesus Christ. In the New Testament, para/klhtoj is exclusive to the writings of the Johannine community. This word contains significant theological insight into the person of the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ as well as providing insight into the Johannine community.
Para/klhtoj is the passive verbal adjective form of parakale/w. In all five instances that this word appears in the New Testament, para/klhtoj functions substantivally in either the nominative (Jn 14:25, 15:26, 16:7) or the accusative (Jn 14:16, 1 Jn 2:1) case. Interestingly, the noun, para/klhsij, and the verb, parakale/w, do not appear in the Johannine writings. The word is a compound from two separate roots, the preposition para\ meaning "alongside" and the verb kalew meaning "I call." As such, an etymological definition of para/klhtoj would be "the one who is called alongside." This definition, however, does not adequately elucidate the sense of the word as it appears in Johannine literature.
Among Johannine scholars, therefore, there are three prevalent source theories that attempt to explain the origin and meaning of para/klhtoj as it pertains to Johannine literature:[2]
Given the diversity of the Palestinian religious milieu, evidence of interdependence between the literature of the period and the Johannine literature, it seems entirely possible that each of these theories influenced the Johannine conception of para/klhtoj.[3] Yet, in the Johannine literature, the word para/klhtoj has evolved beyond the limitations of all these source theories.
The para/klhtoj of Johannine literature has many unique characteristics or functions apart from those reflected in these sources. Generally, the Johannine para/klhtoj is connected with the Spirit of truth or Holy Spirit who is given, sent to the disciples to abide with them and in them (Jn 14:16-17, 26). He teaches about everything, reminds the disciples about all that Jesus Christ said and he testifies concerning Jesus Christ (Jn 14:26, 15:26). As the Evangelist writes, "he will prove the world wrong about sin, righteousness and judgment" (Jn 15:8). Yet, the para/klhtoj does not speak his own words but instead speaks the words of the Father and the Son. In John 16:13-14, the para/klhtoj has an eschatological function, declaring the things to come, guiding the disciples into truth (cf. Jn 16:9-11) and glorifying Jesus Christ. He possesses all that Jesus Christ, the first para/klhtoj (Jn 14:16; 1 Jn 2:1), possesses and subsequently, reveals the significance of Christ and the Christ-event to the world (Jn 16:14-15).
Given these varied functions, most English translations cannot convey a complete sense of para/klhtoj as intended in Johannine literature. In particular, the common translations, helper, intercessor, advocate, counselor, comforter, do not convey the revelatory and eschatological functions of the Johannine para/klhtoj.[4] Yet, given that the Johannine usage of para/klhtoj is also distinct from all other pre-Christian and contemporaneous literature, it is doubtful that the word possessed a definition outside the Johannine community that embodied all the characteristics and functions attributed to it in their literature. As with lo/goj, the Evangelist has embraced a Greek word and breathed into it profound Christian significance. As such, para/klhtoj should either be translated in its common equivalent, advocate, or it should simply be transliterated.
As noted previously, though the Evangelist primarily uses the title para/klhtoj for the Holy Spirit, it is also applied to Jesus Christ. Jesus is implicitly identified as a para/klhtoj in John 14:16 and explicitly in 1 John 2:1. The former reference does not provide any significant insight into how the Johannine community understood Jesus as a para/klhtoj; the latter reference clearly identifies him as an advocate, providing legal defense and intercession for believers before God the Father.
In 1 John, the importance of the Holy Spirit as para/klhtoj is secondary to the role of Jesus Christ. Interestingly, however, the Evangelist seems to conscientiously describe Jesus Christ in similar language as that of the para/klhtoj in the upper room discourses of the Fourth Gospel. Jesus is the Holy One that anoints, teaches and gives all knowledge (1 Jn 2:20, 27). He abides with and in the believers (1 Jn 2:24-27). His incarnation is the standard by which the believers are instructed to discern spirits (1 Jn 4:2) and his command that his disciples are to love one another is the ultimate standard of the Johannine community (1 Jn 3:23-24, 4:20). As such, taken with the words of Christ in the Fourth Gospel, it seems that the relationship between Jesus as para/klhtoj and the Holy Spirit as para/klhtoj is similar to that of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. John the Baptist and the Holy Spirit are both lamps that testify to the light. Nevertheless, the Holy Spirit certainly exceeds John the Baptist in importance; the Evangelist, perhaps more than any other New Testament writer, asserts the divine personhood of the Holy Spirit.
The title para/klhtoj for the Holy Spirit is unique to the Fourth Gospel and therefore, enhances the Christian understanding of the Holy Spirit. Johannine pneumatology, as a result of the way in which para/klhtoj is applied in the Gospel, uniquely conveys the prosecutorial, revelatory and eschatological mission of the Spirit, the supportive role of the Spirit in the life of the believer and emphasizes the Spirit's personality and relationship to the triune Godhead.
The Spirit of truth, the para/klhtoj, in the Fourth Gospel, is presented quite differently from the Holy Spirit of the Synoptics. In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the Holy Spirit is the empowering force behind the ministry of Jesus Christ and the Spirit's role at Pentecost and in the life of the church is only foreshadowed. In the Fourth Gospel, however, the personality of the Spirit is developed. Clearly, the Evangelist conceives of an active and powerful co-regent of heaven that is intimately involved in the life of the believing community. The Fourth Gospel presents the Spirit as revealing the truth and the significance of the unfolding events; he prosecutes and convicts the world concerning that truth; and, he will glorify Christ Jesus. The Holy Spirit of the Evangelist is a co-equal, co-eternal, co-active person of the triune Godhead and is identified as such with greater clarity than in the Synoptics.
The unique, higher pneumatology of the Johannine literature had practical implications and as such, found expression in community life. The Epistles of John testify to a community that relied heavily upon the revelatory mission of the Spirit. It seems likely that their reliance on the Spirit in governing community life developed as a result of the Fourth Gospel's testimony concerning the para/klhtoj. The message of the Fourth Gospel concerning the para/klhtoj suggests a helper that teaches and guides individuals into all the truth. In the first Epistle of John, the Evangelist reinforces the revelatory and instructional importance of the para/klhtoj to the Johannine community (Jn 2:20, 27).[5] In v. 27, the Evangelist evidently conceives of the para/klhtoj as the agent through whom God has affected the promises of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34); that is, the para/klhtoj teaches believers of the Johannine community all things and therefore, it is not necessary for them to teach one another concerning the truth (1 Jn 3:27; cf. Jn 14:26). It was only necessary for the community to discern the teachings of the para/klhtoj as the believers received them. This emphasis on pneumatic revelation and instruction, however, appears to have caused divisions within the community as false teachers began to teach false doctrine while claiming pneumatic inspiration. As such, the Evangelist of the first Epistle of John writes his community to set forth guidelines for discerning the right Spirit of truth, the para/klhtoj (1 Jn 4:1-6; cf. 2 Jn, 3 Jn). In doing so, the Evangelist sets forward the importance of the first para/klhtoj, Jesus Christ, and his earthly ministry as the standard of truth.
The para/klhtoj of the Johannine community is one of the most significant titles of the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Due to its origin, its meaning, its varied uses in extra-biblical literature and its context in Johannine literature, the word para/klhtoj conveys significant theological insight. The para/klhtoj is our intercessor, our helper, our defender, the prosecutor of the world and the Spirit of truth. The para/klhtoj is also the revealer and God's chief agent in Johannine eschatology. Without the Johannine understanding of para/klhtoj, the New Testament picture of the Godhead and their involvement with humanity would be drastically inferior. The para/klhtoj passages teach the believer that God is intimately and personally amongst his children and alongside them in service and in authority.
Aland, Kurt, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger and Allen Wikgren. The Greek New Testament, Fourth Revised Edition. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart, 1994.
Balz, Horst and Gerhard Schneider. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, Volume 3, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1993.
Bauer, Walter, Wilbur F. Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Brown, Colin. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Volume 1, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.
Brown, Raymond E. The Community of the Beloved Disciple, New York: Paulist Press, 1979.
Bultmann, Rudolf. The Gospel of John: A Commentary. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1971.
Enhanced Strong's Lexicon. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995.
Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Abridged in One Volume, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1985.
Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament (Revised Edition), Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1993.
Louw, Johannes P. and Eugene A. Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament based on Semantic Domains. New York, New York: United Bible Societies, 1988, 1989.
Martyn, J. Louis. History and Theology in Fourth Gospel, Nashville: Abingdon, 1979.
Swanson, James. A Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible (New Revised Standard Version).
Logos Scholar's Library: Logos Library System 2.1d [cd-rom]. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995-1998.
[1] See Raymond E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple, New York: Paulist Press, 1979, and J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in Fourth Gospel, Nashville: Abingdon, 1979.
[2] Other suggestions such as comforter, based upon the appearance of the word in Greek versions of the Old Testament in Job 16:2, or a purely etymological suggestion are generally rejected by scholars, see J. Behm, The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Abridged in One Volume, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1985, 800-14, and G. Braumann, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Volume 1, ed. Colin Brown, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975, 88-92. Also mentioned in the latter article is the definition convincer suggested by Snaith. I did not reference Snaith's definition, as it does not find any support in any of my primary sources.
[3] Before and especially since Bultmann, intertextual studies by such scholars as Martyn, Brown, Charlesworth, and others have demonstrated relationships between Johannine literature and Gnosticism, Mandeans, Samaritans, Qumranians, Hellenistic Judaism and other religious and philosophical groups of the first century. A simple, undeniable thesis of all these works is that the Evangelist was certainly steeped in the diverse religious milieu of his era.
[4] In order to best describe its function in Johannine literature, para/klhtoj should perhaps be rendered revealer. However, as I will point out shortly, the word should not be translated according to the function that its given in the literature but rather it should be translated according to its meaning in the historical context.
[5] In these verses, the Evangelist is almost certainly referring to the glorified Christ but nevertheless, Christ is acting in the role of para/klhtoj (see 1 Jn 2:1 that begins this chapter) and the language is not dissimilar from Holy Spirit's role as para/klhtoj. As such, it is reasonable to draw insight from these passages with regards to the Johannine community's understanding of the para/klhtoj in general.