1

Professor: Prof. John Yieh Subject: THEO5950 Special Topics on Biblical Studies I: Johns Gospel and Epistles: Interpretation and Influence Student: Zaw Latt Aung (s1155018014) M.Th (I) A Critical Review: J. Louis Martyn, A Synagogue-Church Drama: Erecting the Wall of Seperation, in History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (1979), p. 27-63 and Robert Kysar, The Expulsion from the Synagogue: The Tale of a Theory, Voyages with John (2005), p.237-246 Table of Content Introduction 1. A Critical Review: J. Louis Martyn, A Synagogue-Church Drama: Erecting the Wall of Seperation 1.1. Literary Analysis 1.2. A Blind Beggar Receives his Sight 1.3. Transposition into Dramatic form 1.4. He is excluded from the synagogue and enters the Church 1.5. Exclusion from the Synagogue According to Other Sources 2. The Expulsion from the Synagogue: the Tale of a Theory 3. Some discussions on the views of J. Luis Martyn and Robert Kysar Conclusion 2 2-3 3-4 4 4 4-6 6-7 7 1 2 2

Introduction

There are many authors those who have written about the Gospel according to John, such as Ernest Haenchen, Hartwing Thyen, Rudolf Schnackenburg and etc. And I am going to make reviews on two books but not on the whole of each book rather their specific topics. One is written by J. Louis Martyn and another is of Robert Kysar. Especially Robert Kysar made some arguments on Martyns point of view by using some argument of scholars. Both of topics are discussing about historical context of the book of John especially on Christian-Jewish Hostility. Both of them are using some miracle story to approve their approach and argument. 1. A Critical Review: J. Louis Martyn, A Synagogue-Church Drama: the Wall of Seperation 1.1. Literary Analysis We can see when we compare John with the Synoptic Gospel there are many things that John followed the tradition, for e.g. the baptism of Jesus and the preaching of John the Baptist, Jesus calling the disciples, healing miracles and etc.. But some are particular and strange in John it couldnt be matched with synoptic. Especially in John 4:46-54, 5:1-9 and 9:1-7; we can see that there are counterparts in these three comparing with the Synoptic Gospels. In John miracle stories are formed in Drama frame is something liked as sequence of scenes. That we can possibly distinguish about the careful attention to style and to accents characteristic of the discourses. 1 1.2. A Blind Beggar Receives his Sight And according to John 9, a miracle on a Blind Beggar receives his sight, Martyn wrote that it is a narrative and purposefully base on Christian tradition and constructed for a particular aim and especially for the careful reader to distinguish the traditional element from the fourth Gospel. When we compare with Mark about this miracle story the opening verses of Mark 2:11,12a, 12b and John 9:1, 6-7 are quite similar. But later parts, John made a dramatic expansion of the miracle story (vv.8-41). According to John, there are 7 sequences of scene. They are as followed. 1. Jesus, his disciples, and the blind man 2. The blind man and his neighbors
1

Erecting

vv. 1-7 8-12

J. Louis Martyn, A Synagogue-Church Drama: Erecting the Wall of Seperation, in History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, ( Louisville : Westminster John Knox Press,1979), p. 32

3. The blind man and the Pharisees 4. The Pharisees and the blind mans parents
5. The Pharisees and the blind man

13-17 18-23 24-34 35-38 39-41

6. Jesus and the blind man 7. Jesus and the Pharisees

This is skillfully frame and arrange base on little story 1-7, other verses such as 5:1-18(the lame man) and 18:28-19:16a (Jesus trial before Pilate) all will be shown us as the skillful dramatist is the evangelist himself. 2 1.3. Transposition into Dramatic form There are transpositions in each scene (1-7). They were expressed about the relationship and the situations between Jewish and the followers of Jesus and at the same time it was connected with the situation of Johns church and city. Especially v.21-22 mentioned that the very sharp distinction and dividing between Jewish and Jesus. Its meant that one must choose whether to be a disciple of Moses or of Jesus. 3 And parents avoided to say who healed their son and they worried for something will happen because of their knowledge, that is acknowledging and confessing Jesus as a healer or Messiah. It was shaped that in Johns context if someone who confessed Jesus as a Messiah who will be excommunicated from the synagogue. So, Jewish leader said that We know that God spoke to Moses, but as for this man, we dont know where he comes from,v-29. In the last scene 7, it was mentioned and followed by addition (Sermon), Truly, truly, I say unto you,--- . I am the door; if anyone enters by me, he will be saved. It is Johns climax of this story. It is Johns form of composing and preaching style in his writing and his gospel. 1.4. He is excluded from the synagogue and enters the Church Martyn stated that in John 9, it was presented as a formal drama with two-level stage so that each is actually a pair of actors playing two parts simultaneously and such a way as strongly to suggest that some of its elements reflect actual experiences of the Johannine
2

Ibid., p.38 Ibid., p.44

community. It seems to reflect about the experiences in the dramatic interaction between the synagogue and the Johannine church. So, the most important thing that we need to be careful is to observe and need to be aware of the two - level stage.4 1.5. Exclusion from the Synagogue According to Other Sources Martyn gave some arguments with some sources to affirm the excommunication of Jewish to the followers of Jesus. They are 1) Jewish ban, 2) the kind of disciplinary action taken against Christians according to Acts. 3) Behind Lukes portrait of the parting of ways in Acts 18 and 19 stands an event which was, in reality, excommunication from the Synagogue (Pauls move away from the synagogue Acts18:7, withdraw from them and separated the disciples 19:9. (4) The formal separation between church and synagogue has accomplished in Johns milieu by means closely related to the 18 Jewish Benediction Against Heretics.(e.g. Avery early form of the Twelfth Benediction of Jewish prayer was discovered in 1896 and it was included about the facts against with Christians) 2. The Expulsion from the Synagogue: the Tale of a Theory Kysar made some critiques on Brown (the excommunication of Christians from the synagogue and the Fourth Gospel implied the existence of crypto-Christian, who remained in the synagogue) and Martyn (the expulsion of Johannine Christians from their synagogue has two layers Jesus time and the later time of the Church). Kysar strongly criticized on both of Brown and Martyn, their discoveries was instrumental in creating a new and unfriendly environment for the Christian Jews who continued to worship in the synagogue.5 Kysar argued that John was written for a limited number of Christian congregations within a defined region6. Kysar mentioned that the usage of the word aposynagogos ( expelled from the synagogue) John 9:22, 12:42 and 16:2, it is not the only usage for the expelling Christian but also for Unrepentant and it is just formal usage of the religious discipline or rules. Whether Jews or Jewish Christian if they might had been some discontent, they will drove them out by a particular congregation

Ibid. p.46

Robert Kysar, The Expulsion from the Synagogue: The Tale of a Theory, Voyages with John (Waco,Texas: Baylor University Press, 2005), p. 238-39
6

Ibid., p.240

Kysar strongly used Rreinhartzs views to against concerning with the expulsion theory that there were many Jews 12:10-11 and according to this verses many of the Jews were deserting and they were believing in Jesus. Here, it this point the view is different from Browns and Martyns discovery. The situation was become upside down. Therefore Kysar mentioned that we have assumed that we can look through the text to reconstruct its original context and this will enable us to understand what the text was intended to mean!7 Kysar quoted another scholar L. T. Johnson, he never directly address the supposition that the Johannine Christians were expelled from their Jewish worshiping community.8 And Kysar mentioned about postmodernist perspective on reading the bible (1) that a factual history is impossible, 2) that the origin of a document is not necessarily definitive in terms of its meaning, and 3) that the past is forever unstable and uncertain. And investigation of the past unusually tells us more about the investigator that about the past.9 Therefore in conclusion, Kysar said that the theory of the expulsion from the synagogue is being interested by scholars but it is problematic. So, the prognosis for such theories as the expulsion from the synagogue is not good. Why Kysar said like that is that Kysar was interested in the impact of story or present application rather than the historical analysis, as Martyns view because Martyns concern is to find the real historical context and setting (in the text and behind the text). So, his concern is mostly majority report (excommunication (aposynagogos) of Jewish and Christian ) but less minority report( there were Jews Christian or crypto- Jews). 3. Some discussions on the views of J. Luis Martyn and Robert Kysar As we always said that No one is perfect, so there are some week points and strong points concerning with the views of J. Luis Martyn and Robert Kysar. According to Martyn, I really appreciate on his approach and the method which he dealt on the miracle stories especially he made a comparative approach on John 9:1-4 the blind beggar received his sight with Mark 2:11, 12. He approached with 7 stages or scenes to shape a normal miracle story to a beautiful and artificial dramatic form. This can be seen that how John was arranged with purposefully on the authors sermon and message. It is clear and more understandable in order to know about the context in the text and the context behind the text. For my understanding on Martyns view is that he was not only telling about the excommunication of Synagogue but also expressed about there are many Jews who wanted to
7

Ibid., p. 241 Ibid., p. 242 Ibid., p.243

believe Jesus and who believed Jesus but because of the expulsion they denied Jesus as a Messiah. And also some wish to hold dual both Moses and Jesus the messiah. Martyns work mainly based on John 9:1-42 in order to approve his theory. Therefore, in the Journal of Biblical Literature, T A Barkill mentioned that Dr. Martyn has come to think that several points of correspondence between certain Johannine Passages and certain rabbinical data not only illuminate noteworthy aspects of the conceptual milieu in which the evangelist worked, but also reflect significant historical developments occurring in his own city at the time of writing10. In my opinion I agree with J Luis Martyns view and like his approach. In the general sense John is something look liked the book which didnt like Jesus tradition or encouraging the people those who are facing with oppressing or excommunication because Johns Jesus is the One who started the initiation to the Gentiles or Samaritan. But in the other 3 Synoptic they never put Jesus as the initiator to the Gentiles because it was the tradition and also the reality. We cant combine Jewish and Christian in the tradition. For example, when we study on Mark, Marks ministry was seemed primarily focusing on the Jews because when we see that the most of connections between Jesus and Gentiles, actually Jesus was not the initiator but rather Gentiles are initiators (7:24-30). Mark expressed that sometime Jesus gave His help with unwillingly and apparently reluctance. Thus Mark presents Jesus as envisioning the proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles as part of the eschaton which spans the time signaled by the imminent destruction of the temple to the glorious coming of the son of Man.11 Even our great apostle Paul, he couldnt get the unity or combine Christian(Gentiles and Jews) and Jewish but rather he made flexible Soteriology or Interdependent Soteriology between Jewish and Christians (Roman 11:28-36). Therefore, I am not so agree with the view of Kysar but it doesnt mean I against with him because his view is something look liked defending from Jews Christian and Crypto - Jews and because he wants to try for the sense of relationship between Christians and Jewish of present day. And Jewish is main group and majority and Christian is something liked a paraJewish or Heretic Jews. These two cant be combined. But what I agree with Kysar is that the situation in John is just for the limited numbers of Jewish congregation because there are not only Christian are excommunicated but also Jews were deserting. But Kysar view is seem and
10

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3263306?seq=1

Andreas J. Kostenberger and Peter T. OBrien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A biblical theology of Mission, (Downers Groves: Inter Varsity Press, 2001), p.83

11

something like as debating with Martyns view. Actually, it didnt mean in that sense because Kysar trying to argue and defending for the Jews, crypto Jews, and not all Jews denied Jesus but there are many Jews who believed in Jesus for the sake of present relationship between Judaism and others. Conclusion Therefore, to conclude these two views, according to Martyn, both of contexts, context in the text and behind the text are in the same condition, talking about the hostility of Jews and Christians. But it didnt means there was no Jews Christian. According to Kysar, he critique and defend on Martyns view ( Jew Christian and Crypto-Jews), his view is just trying to get clear view and not to be misunderstood on the Jews by Christians or others in both past and present day. So, Martyns view is more historical and traditional. And also it is applicable for the church and it is undeniable events in the history.