Review of The Gospel of John in Cultural and Rhetorical Perspective

Last updated on: August 10, 2010 at 12:01 am by James F. McGrath

Review of The Gospel of John in Cultural and Rhetorical Perspective 2010-08-10T00:01:00-04:00 James F. McGrath

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I am grateful to Eerdmans for sending me a review copy of Jerome Neyrey’s latest book, The Gospel of John in Cultural and Rhetorical Perspective (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009). The book is made up of previously-published studies, most of which are fairly recent, but the earliest of which goes back some 30 years. As such, the book brings together a life’s work in the realm of cultural anthropological and rhetorical study of the Gospel of John. Neyrey’s categorization of the volume seems accurate (see pp.vii, xii-xiii): it stands somewhere in between the commentary and the typical volume about a particular New Testament text viewed from a particular angle. In a sense, it is “more than a commentary” since it provides detailed study of key passages from the perspective of two types of methodological approach which share in common an emphasis on the importance of setting the Gospel of John (and any ancient text we try to interpret) in the context of the literature and culture of that time and place.

The aforementioned characteristics make it a difficult volume to summarize. But hopefully what I write here will make clear why it should be of great interest to anyone interested in the Gospel of John and/or in the application of cultural anthropology to the study of the New Testament. Although focused on John, in the process of studying this specific piece of literature Neyrey provides a wide array of general information about cultural values from Mediterranean societies, such as status, honor, space, labels, concepts of limited good, agency, patrons and clients, secrecy, and much more. Neyrey has the very helpful tendency to use charts and diagrams to clarify concepts and to highlight parallels of structure, language and concept between passages. A question he asks more than once is “What do we know if we know this?” (pp.81, 398; cf. 434) – in other words, he consistently shows a concern to make explicit how the general cultural information and literary parallels he discusses are relevant to our understanding of specific passages.

The only real criticism I have of the book relates to the treatment of the story of the Samaritan woman in John 4. Neyrey sums up Jesus’ statement to her and the woman’s recounting of the incident in terms of her “sexual history,” and he uses this phrase with surprising frequency (see pp.41-42, 70, 157, 160-161, 163, 166). I doubt that, if Jesus had told a man how many wives he had had, this phrase would have been used. But the ancient cultural context in which the Gospel of John was written didn’t treat women and men as equals, and so the more important question is whether the woman’s “sexual history” is the focus in the story as it is likely to have been understood in that time. It is not clear that Samaritans allowed women to initiate divorce, and at any rate it is unlikely that a woman who had been divorced by several men would have found a new husband so many times. And so the most likely scenario is that the woman had been widowed multiple times (a possibility Neyrey mentions in passing on p.156 without giving it much attention), perhaps in an echo of the story in the Book of Tobit. Nor is it clear that concubinage would have been viewed as sinful in this time and context. And so it seems that there is reason to doubt that the woman’s testimony about Jesus meant “Come see a man who told me everyone I ever did.” The woman in the story, I suggest, would more likely have been viewed as a tragic figure than a sexually promiscuous one.

Nevertheless, the failure to break free from the classic tradition of interpretation of this story illustrates well why a book like Neyrey’s is so important. In spite of my criticisms on this one particular point, the book on the whole is not characterized by cultural blind spots but by a wealth of relevant and helpful cultural material, with specific discussion of how knowledge about the cultural context clarifies the meaning of a great many parts of the Gospel of John. This book is a treasure trove for anyone interested in the Gospel of John or in perspectives from cultural anthropology on the New Testament. And anyone interested in Johannine Christology cannot afford to ignore Neyrey’s treatment of key passages, themes and concepts. I highly recommend this book!

Uncategorized

Previous Post

August 9, 2010

"Thank God My Opponents Are Pharisees!"

Next Post

August 10, 2010 Daniel Pink on Motivation

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz