The Word Come Down

Backgrounds of the Johannine Logos

Craig Downey

NT 3225 Prof. Loren T. Stuckenbruck 24 April, 2010

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 1

Johns prologue has been the source of unending debate and speculation. Where should modern readers locate the background to Johns Logos imagery? There have been many attempts, but increasingly, as the scholarly world grows in its knowledge of 1st century Judaism, the trend has moved away from locating the Logos imagery in Hellenism and instead scholars have focused increasing on Judaic parallels and precedents. Famously, Bultmann argued that the Logos derived, not from Hellenism, but from Gnostic redeemer myths. So, too, Bultmann rejected the Old Testament as a source for the Johannine Logos. Bultmann writes: The figure of Logos is derived, rather, from a tradition of cosmological mythology which also exercised an influence upon Judaism, especially upon Philo. In the literature of the Old Testament and of Judaism there is a figure, Wisdom, which is also a parallel to Johns Word. Both figures, Word and Wisdom, appear side by side in Philo. In Gnosticism, which also influences Philo, the figure Logos has not merely cosmological but also soteriological functions. It is within this sphere that the origins of the Johannine Logos lies.1 While scholars have increasingly found Bultmanns treatment lacking there are still insights to be gleaned from Bultmanns attempt. Bultmann points to a number of areas scholars have looked to in order to find the source of the ever allusive Johannine Logos imagery. Bultmanns treatment also attempts to take the cosmological and soteriological aspects of Johns Logos imagery seriously. On top of this Bultmann also rightly maintained that the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel is connected to the Christology of the rest of the Fourth Gospel.2 This can be seen in the way that key words from the Prologue play out in the rest of the Gospel. Light, for example, is prominent in the descriptions of the Logos in the Prologue3 and continues to be an important term throughout Jesus public ministry.4 So too, the description of the Logos coming

1 2

Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2007), 64. Noted in Fossum, The Image of the Invisible God: Essays on the Influence of Jewish Mysticism on Early Christology (30; Freiburg, Schweiz: Universittsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995), 110. 3 Jn 1.4,5,7,8,9. 4 Jn 3.19, 20, 21, 8.12, 9.5, 12.35, 36, 46.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 2

to his own and being rejected in Jn 1.11 12 parallels Jesus ministry and acceptance/rejection amongst the Jews. Noting these insights of Bultmann, an attempt to offer an explanation for the Fourth Gospels Logos imagery should offer a coherent account of the Logos cosmological and soteriological significance while also helping to explain the relationship between the Logos Christology of the Prologues and the Christology of the rest of the fourth Gospel. The question of the relationship between the Prologue and the body of the Gospel can be nuanced further. How is the Words agency in the Prologue related to the agency motif running throughout the Fourth Gospel? As Gods agent Jesus is often presented in a paradoxical oneness with God and yet subordinate. Similarly, in the Prologue the Word is both with God ( , and equal to God ( ). 5 What background to the Fourth Gospels Logos might help draw a corollary between these two patterns? Furthermore, given a particular background what might we say about the Gospels monotheistic outlook? Can such a background help explain how the Gospel can treat Jesus in highly exalted terms while still maintaining a monotheistic background? In addressing these questions I will briefly look at various proposals for a background to Johns Logos Christology. Philo on a number of occasions has been drawn upon to help understand Johns Logos Christology and is worth briefly exploring here. So, too, the Wisdom traditions have been drawn upon, as too have the Angel of the Lord traditions. Others have looked to the Targums, and to the Memra tradition growing out of the Targums. Each of these proposals have their own strengths and weaknesses which I will attempt to address. In light of the perceived weaknesses one further background needing to be explored is that of the Old

Similarly Andrew Lincoln recognizes this tension writing, This is the same paradox the distinctiveness and yet the oneness of the relationship between the Logos and God this is set out in the very first words of the prologue (1:1).Lincoln, Truth on Trial: The Lawsuit Motif in the Fourth Gospel (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000), 85.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 3

Testament. I will argue that the Old Testaments traditions, and more specifically the imagery of Deutro-Isaiah, has uniquely shaped the Fourth Gospels Christological presentation. These traditions offer not only a widely available background for the Fourth Gospels Word imagery, but, as I will argue, also offer unique opportunities for relating the Christology of the body of the Fourth Gospel to the Prologue. Attempts at locating Johns Logos The Wisdom traditions have often been put forward as the appropriate background for Johns prologue. Scholars have noted the similarities between the Johns presentation of the Logos in the Prologue and the presentation of Wisdom as found in the Wisdom literature of Proverbs, Sirach, Baruch, and the Wisdom of Solomon.6 Given the way Johns opening words draw upon Gen 1.1, and the way that Wisdom is regularly associated with creation, this identification is a relatively obvious identification. The significant conceptual parallels in a wide range of Wisdom literature only reinforce this identification.7 As helpful as the Wisdom traditions are, they are not without difficulties. Jarl Fossum points out, If the Christology of the Prologue participates in the general Christology of the Gospel as a whole, we should be able to draw on Sophianology in the exegesis of the highlights of the Gospel.8 Fossum perhaps doesnt recognize the value that the Wisdom traditions do bring to the exegesis of the Fourth Gospel. Wisdom becomes closely associated with Torah in a number of texts.9 In the Prologue a contrast is set up between the Law given through Moses, and grace and truth which come
6

For a listing of the relevant parallels see: Epp, "Widsom, Torah, Word: The Johannine Prologue and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel," in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation (ed. Hawthorne; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 130-135, Evans, Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John's Prologue (Sheffield, Eng.: JSOT, 1993), 83-94. 7 Job 28.23ff., Ps 104.24, Prov 3.19, Prov 8.22 31, Wis 8.5 6, 9.9. cf. Targ Neof. Gen 1.1, Frag. Targ. Gen 1.1. Philo identifies Wisdom with Logos: Leg All 1.65, Heres 191, Somn 2.242 45. 8 Fossum, The Image of the Invisible God, 110. 9 Bar 4.1, Sir 24.23, 4 Mac 1:17, 2 Bar 38.2-4, 77.16.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 4

through Jesus (Jn 1.17). If, as Jay Eldon Epp and others have argued, Jesus is being presented as a replacement of Torah, an identification of Jesus with Wisdom becomes significant for a number of passages.10 Battles over Torah are often at the center of Jesus hostile encounters with the Jews.11 An identification with Jesus and Wisdom does becomes important for a passage like Jn 8.51 59 where Jesus words, whoever obeys my word echoes Biblical language of obedience to Gods Law.12 The difficulty in maintaining this line of argument is that in the main body of the Gospel, Jesus really doesnt supplant the Law. Rather Jesus acts in fulfillment of Scriptures; Scripture testifies on Jesus behalf.13 John 1.17 may well play better into the ongoing presentation of Jesus as the Prophet like Moses of Deut 18.15 -22,14 one who is greater than Moses. Furthermore, Wisdom isnt especially associated with soteriology. Wisdom on its own provides little insight into the agency motif that runs through the Gospel. As helpful as Wisdom might be, Fossum is correct in questioning the overall relevance of the Wisdom as a comprehensive background to the Johannine Logos. Wisdom provides a helpful general background, but little else in terms of actual specifics as the Gospel plays out. Scholars for a long time have noticed the similarities between Johns prologue and Philos presentation of Gods Logos.15 Philo can call the Logos Gods first-born word, the eldest of his angels, the great archangel of many names; the name of God, man according to

10 11

Epp, "Widsom, Torah, Word: The Johannine Prologue and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel." 5.17-49 is concerned with Sabbath healing, 6.30 -58 debate Ps 78.24, 7.14 29 another Sabbath healing, etc. See particularly Ibid., esp. 360 - 362, Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003). 12 Keener notes: Deut 4.2, 33.9, 1 Chron 10:13, esp. Ps 119:9, 17, 67, 101, 158, Jn 17.6, 1 Jn 2.5, Jub 2.8; CD 6.18, 10.14, 16, 20.17, 1Q5S 5.9, 8.3, 10.21, Sib Or 1.52 53. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 765 n.613. 13 Jn 5.39, 12.38 40, 13.18, 15.25, 19.24, 19.36-37 14 Cf. Jn 1.45, 3.13, 5.19 30, 5.45 47, 6.14 15, 6.32 33, 7.16 21, 7.38 43. 9.28 34. 15 Evans, Word and Glory, 100-114, Tobin, "Logos," in Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. Freedman; New York, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1992), 348-356, Tobin, "The Prologue of John and Hellenistic Jewish Speculation," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, no. 2 (1990).

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 5

Gods image, and he who sees Israel (Conf. Ling 146). The Logos is placed nearest, with no intervening distance, to the only existence One (Fug 101). Philo can call the Logos, The instrument of creation through whom it was framed (Cher. 127). In all of this and in the numerous statements Philo makes about the Logos there appears to be a genuine parallel to Johns use of Logos.16 However, when it comes to Philo it is easy to be overwhelmed by the similarities without paying sufficient attention to the differences. While Philo is undoubtedly heir to a Jewish exegetical training, being a wealthy aristocrat, he also had ample opportunity to be schooled in Platonic and Stoic Philosophy.17 Platonic and Stoic philosophy permeates Philos writings. For Philo the incorporeal invisible world of ideas is the real world, only grasped by the mind, beyond which God lies.18 Alan Segal describes Philos usage of Logos, Philo wants the logos, the goal of the mystical vision of God, to serve as a simple explanation for all the angelic and human manifestation of the divine in the Old Testament.19 The Logos, for Philo, is the intermediary between the corporeal world and the incorporeal world, a way of knowing the unknowable God, a means for the utterly transcendent God to act in the world without compromising that transcendence.20 As helpful as Philos treatments of the Logos first appear, special care must be taken to avoid becoming overly optimistic. While heir to Alexandrian Jewish exegetical traditions, Philos upper social location and education hardly make him representative of the typical Diaspora or Alexandrian Jew.21 While it is possible that, given

16 17

A large list of parallels is helpfully presented in Evans, Word and Glory, 101-103. On Philos socio-political background see Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 Bce - 117 Ce) (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996), 158-162. 18 Dunn, Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation (London: SCM Press, 1989), 225 - 226. Tobin, "Prologue," 255-267. 19 Segal, Two Powers in Heaven (Leiden: Brill, 1977), 169. Quoted in Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Cntecedents and Early Evidence (Bd 42; Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 1998), 108. 20 Her. 205. Quaest. In Exod. 2 68 21 Barclay helpfully comments that: It should be clear by now that the fullness of our knowledge about Philo cannot be used to construct... the typical Diaspora Jew. Philo is not typical of Jews in Alexandria, still les of Egyptian or North African or Mediterranean Jews. Of course he is not wholly sui generis. He draws on a long theological

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 6

Philos popularity among Alexandrian Jews, Johns Gospel is influenced by these traditions,22 such an influence exists only on a very superficial level. Johns Gospel lacks a similar Stoic and Platonic influence which are essential for the development of Philos concept of Logos. Given Philos heavy indebtedness to Stoic and Platonic philosophy for his development of the Logos language, it is difficult to see the Fourth Gospels Word become flesh as growing out of a similar Hellenized account of the Logos. Such a leap would be thoroughly incomprehensible without abandoning the Middle-Platonic and Stoic framework Philo works with.23 It is difficult, then, to maintain Philos Logos as a comprehensive background. Philos Logos is cosmological and metaphysical while the Fourth Gospels is cosmological and soteriological. If Johns Gospel is influenced by Philo or similar Jewish-Hellenistic thinking, it is at best a superficial, verbal influence without a corresponding similarity in content. Given such a vast difference it is better to look elsewhere for a background which corresponds more closely with the actual content of the Fourth Gospels Logos. Philos value lies in the way that he treats the Angel of the Lord traditions. Philo generally treats appearances of angels, especially the Angel of the Lord traditions, as manifestations of Gods Logos. Jarl Fossum and his student Charles Gieschen point out the connection in Philo is similarly made between Gods Logos and the Angel of the Lord in other

tradition which flourished in the intellectual circles of Alexandrian Judaism, and he frequently mirrors the social attitudes of that elite. To an extent, then, we may take Philo to represent the intellectual and social stance of his own social class. But first he must be considered as an individual, wrestling with the peculiar tensions of this particular calling. Barclay, Diaspora, 159. Cp. McGrath, The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009), 56-58. 22 Keener aptly observes that such influence is possible. Philo was prominent enough in Alexandria that Jewish Apologists may have used his writings. A long standing Alexandrian Jewish influence existed in Ephesus where the Gospel of John is traditionally associated with. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 344. 23 Tobin similarly writes: Philo and Hellenistic Jewish exegetes of like mind would certainly have found such an identification impossible. Tobin thinks, however, that the identification of Logos with the heavenly man in Philos writing provides a context in which the identification of Logos with the particular man Jesus is possible. Along with Barclay, I am less convinced than Tobin that Philo represents a typical Hellenistic Jewish incorporation of the Logos. Tobin, "Prologue," 267.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 7

texts.24 Wis 18.15-16, for example, presents Gods all-powerful Word leaping from heaven carrying the sharp sword of Gods command. In context, Wis 18.15 16 is a description of the Passover in Ex 12.21 29. The imagery in Wisdom looks to be drawn from imagery of Gods destroying angel in 1 Chron 21.16. This connects the destroyer of Ex 12.23 with that of the destroying Angel of the Lord in 1 Chron. A similar connection between the Angel of the Lord and Gods Logos occurs in Ezekiels Exagoge where instead of the Angel of the Lord appearing to Moses, Gods Logos shines forth.25 This is very similar to the way Philo calls the Logos Gods Archangel, the eldest of his angels. There initially seems to be good support for identifying the Logos in the Fourth Gospel with the Angel of the Lord based on these traditions. To connect this tradition to the Fourth Gospels Logos, Gieschen and Fossum put Wis 18.1516 forward as a background to Rev19.12-15, one of the few other passages in the New Testament where Logos appears as a title of Christ. In Rev 19.12-15 the rider on the white horse is called the Word of God, and a sharp sword issues forth from his mouth. This move isnt without difficulties. While Wisdom 18.15-16 shares an initial striking similarity in imagery, the similarities begin to break down upon closer inspection. In Revelation the sharp sword issues forth from the riders mouth. This imagery fits far closer with that of Is 49.2 and is combined with Is 11.4. 26 In Is 49.2 Gods servants mouth is like a sharp sword (Targ. Isa. 49:2 reads: he placed his words in my mouth like a sharp sword). In Is 11.4 the root of Jesse shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth (LXX he shall strike the earth with the word of his mouth). Later on it will be argued that the Servant imagery in Isaiah is connected to the Word imagery of Is 40-55 in the Fourth Gospel. Such a connection offers a far closer parallel to the imagery of the

24 25

Fossum, The Image of the Invisible God, 111-113, Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology, 105-107. Fossum, The Image of the Invisible God, 113, Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology, 107. 26 Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mich. Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 961.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 8

rider on a white horse in Rev 19 and suggests at least an underlying Christological interpretive tradition of Second Isaiah. The differences between Rev 19 and Wis 18 are striking, making the connection Fossum and Gieschen try to draw much less convincing. In the book of Wisdom, Gods Word is personified as a stern warrior whereas in Revelation there is an actual rider who bears the name Word of God. Gods Word in Wis 18 carries a sharp sword in contrast to the rider in Revelation who has a sword issuing from the riders mouth. The Angel of the Lord tradition is attractive in that it provides a context in which Gods Word could be indentified with a personal agent. The Angel of the Lords association with the Exodus narrative and function as a destroyer provides a strong soteriological and eschatological emphasis missing from Philo and a general Wisdom background. Furthermore, even if Wis 18.15-16 does not provide the connection to Rev 19.13-15 that Fossum and Gieschen are looking for, there is enough evidence between Wis 18.15-16, Philo, and Ezekiel the Tragedian to make the suggestion of a Word/Angel of the Lord Christology attractive for Johns Gospel. This connection isnt without difficulties however. The first objection comes by way of geography. Philo, and Ezekiel the Tragedian both come from Alexandria and so, too, the book of Wisdom is generally associated with Alexandria.27 This tradition appears to be localized to Alexandria and lacks greater geographical attestation. This lack of geographical diversity warrants greater care before determining if Johns Gospel is indebted to this tradition or not. If it could be conclusively shown that Rev 19.13-15 had this tradition in mind, it would make a strong argument in favor of seeing a similar angelomorphic Logos Christology in John Prologue. The connections between Wis 18.15-16 are far from conclusive however, as argued above. A second difficulty comes in that Johns Gospel does not ever explicitly call Jesus the Angel of the Lord or more generically

27

Winston, "Solomon, Wisdom Of," in The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (ed. Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1996), 6:120 - 6:127.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 9

an Angel. The Fourth Gospel would have to assume a common knowledge of the angel of the Lord/Logos tradition. The one piece of evidence that might argue in favor of identifying Jesus as the Angel of the Lord comes out of Jn 17.11-12. In the course of his prayer Jesus states that God has given him his name. As similar as this is to Ex 23.21, the ideas in each are subtly different enough. In Ex 23.21 Gods name is on or in an Angel (LXX - , MT - ). In Jn 17 Gods name is given to Jesus suggesting a much more active

possession rather than passive possession like that of the Angel of Ex 23.21. As attractive as the identification of Logos with the Angel of the Lord traditions are, these traditions are difficult to locate in the body of the Fourth Gospel. It is probably better to look elsewhere for a precedent that can be better supported. Another fertile ground scholars have looked to in hopes of find a sufficient background for Johns prologue comes from the Targums. In the Targums, the Memra ( ) of the Lord often functions periphrastically. But in other places the Memra appears to be genuinely functioning as an independent agent.28 To what extent the Memra of the Lord is genuinely hypostatic is still widely contested.29 Even if it could be shown that the Memra is never conceived of in genuinely hypostatic terms, the level of independence expressed in the Memra tradition still offers an appropriate amount of individuation to suggest the Fourth Gospel could have drawn upon this tradition. In many ways the discussion of the Memras independence mirrors the discussion of the passages in the Old Testament where Gods Word is presented in dramatically personified terms.30 The Memra traditions extend that level of personification to the

28

Targ. Hab. 1.12, Your Word endures forever. O Lord, you created it to administer justice; Targ. Amos 4.11, My Word loathed you just as the Lord loathed Sodom and Gamorrah. Quoted in Evans, Word and Glory, 127 128. 29 For a brief list of opinions for or against see the brief discussion of Memra in Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 349 - 350. As well see Evans, Word and Glory, 124-129. 30 Cf. Ps 33.6, 107.20, 147.15, Is 9.8, 45.23, 55.10-1.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 10

extent that it has to be genuinely asked if the Memra traditions can at times present the Memra of the Lord as a true hypostatic entity. When it comes to Memra in Johannine study C.K. Barrett is more often than not quoted as having famously said, Memra is a blind alley in the study of Johns logos doctrine.31 Scholarly opinion seems to be shifting more towards attributing greater value in seeing Memra as a viable background for Johns Logos Christology.32 Complicating this discussion however are uncertainties over the dating of traditions in the Targums. The Targums date from a much later period than the writings of the New Testament, but scholars generally agree that the Targums preserve synagogue traditions from the 1st century and earlier. Criteria have been put forth to help in determining what traditions might be considered early enough to be of value.33 Given the difficulties associated with the Targums and Memra it is wise to be cautious before wholeheartedly grabbing onto the Memra as the background for Johns prologue. If the Memra tradition were known by the author of the Fourth Gospel, they could very well have provided fertile language for expressing the agency of Jesus. In terms of the parameters set out, the Memra comes closer than the other areas explored here as possible background material. The Memra functions cosmologically and can function as well soteriologically. The usage of Memra provides ample opportunity to say both the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The question then becomes how might it be determined that the Prologue here is drawing on the concept? The difficulties in dating however make it difficult to say for certain that the Fourth Gospel was familiar with this usage. Perhaps in light of these difficulties it is best to assign the
31

Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John; an Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (New York,: Macmillan, 1962), 153. 32 Evans, Word and Glory, 125-129. Boyarin, "The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John," Harvard Theological Review, no. 3 (2001). McNamara, "Logos of the Fourth Gospel and Memra of the Palestinian Targum (Ex 1242)," Expository Times, no. 4 (1968), Ronning, The Jewish Targums and John's Logos Theology (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010). 33 Evans, Word and Glory, 28-28.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 11

Memra traditions to a general background rather than a specific background from which the Fourth Gospel could have drawn upon. An Isaianic Background? The traditions above, while each having something to commend, either lacked sufficient explanatory power in tying the Prologues Logos to the body of the Gospel, or lacked enough evidence to provide sufficient correlation with the Gospels usage of Logos. Most were helpful as general background material with which John may have been familiar, but each lacked enough substantive support from the body of the Fourth Gospel. Next I turn to the Old Testament which is another general background area scholars have looked to in order to help explain the Fourth Gospels Logos imagery. Discussions of the Prologue of Johns Gospel are often bogged down both by trying to determine an appropriate background to the Logos of vv.1.1 -5, and in attempting to determine the structure of the Prologue at a previously hypothetical stage. Scholars often note the intrusive nature of vv.1.6 8, but it is rarely considered that v.1.6-8 provides an opportunity to ground the identity of the Logos/life/light in a particular framework. If vv.1.6-8 are indeed functioning in this manner they deserve a closer look. The content of Johns testimony in v.1.6-8 isnt spelled out in detail but more generally states that Johns testimony relates to Jesus as the Light/Word. Johns testimony is taken up to v.1.15 where the Prologue adapts the traditional Baptist saying of Mk 1.7and Mt 3.3 adding, , .34 This addition points temporally back to Jesus identity as the Word who was with God from the beginning. Johns testimony continues in three scenes from vv.1.19 34. Jn 1.19 emphasizes that what follows is the content of Johns testimony. Johns quotation from Is 40.3 locates that testimony within the
34

Cf. Mt 3.3, Mk 1.3

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 12

dramatic framework of Is 40- 55, while his repetition of the first part of his testimony from v.1.15, in v.1.27, and v.1.30 continues to point back to Jesus identity as the Word with God in the beginning. The location of Johns testimony within the larger dramatic framework of Second Isaiah is important to note. The influence of Second Isaiah on the Gospel of John can hardly be overstated.35 Direct quotations from Isaiah in v.1.23 and in v.12.38, 40 bracket Jesus public ministry. A third quotation from Is 54.13 occurs in Jn 6.45. On top of that the Fourth Gospel, especially in the trial narratives of chapters 5-9, draws heavily on the judicial language and themes featured in Second Isaiah.36 By locating Johns testimony within the drama of Second Isaiah the Fourth Gospel allows echoes of Isaiahs servant figure to be heard which might otherwise be missed:37 The servant is a light to the nations (Is 42.6, 49.6), John testifies concerning Jesus as the light (Jn 1.7-8); The servant is like a lamb led to the slaughter who carries the sins of the people (Is 53.4, 7), John calls Jesus the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (Jn 1.29, cf. 1.36); The servant has Gods Spirit upon him (Is 42.1), John testifies he has seen the Spirit come down upon the Son of God (Jn 1.33-34);38 Though not part

35

Gunter Reim writes, No other Old Testament writing stamped the theology of John as strongly as did Deutro Isaiah, and no other New Testament author was as strongly influenced by Deutro-Isaiah as was John. Quoted in Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2003), 378. 36 See especially Lincoln, "Trials, Plots and the Narrative of the Fourth Gospel," Journal for the Study of the New Testament, no. 56 (1994), Lincoln, Truth on Trial. Testimony ( and cognates), judgment ( and cognates), truth ( and cognates) are major themes associated with the trial themes in Is 40 55. At issue in the trial is Gods character as God, his name and glory also feature as major motifs in the trial, as do glory and name feature as prominent themes in Johns Gospel. 37 These connections are also picked by Williams, "The Testimony of Isaiah and Johannine Christology," in "As Those Who Are Taught": The Interpretation of Isaiah from the Lxx to the Sbl (eds. McGinnis and Tull; vol. 27 of; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006), 111. 38 Jn 1.34 could also read, which would provide a further parallel to Isaiahs chosen servant (42.1). It is difficult to see why a scribe would change such a standard formula like to , unless perhaps the scribe saw the allusion to Isaiahs servant here . While probably represents the more difficult reading, age and diversity of argue against this. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft; United Bible Societies, 1994), 172. Cf. Williams, "Testimony of Isaiah," 111-112.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 13

of Johns testimony, one further parallel between Isaiahs servant and John 1s presentation of Jesus might be suggested. Isaiahs servant is designated as Israel in Is 49.3 (cf. Is 42.1 LXX). Jesus, the Son of Man, by way of the imagery of Jacobs ladder is identified with Jacob/ Israel in v.1.51. This picks up on Andrews identification of Jesus as the Messiah and becomes more convincing in light of other similar messianic treatments of Isaiahs servant, especially the identification of the Son of Man with Isaiahs servant in1 Enoch 48.4.39 The quotation of Is 53.1 in Jn 12.38 also presents Jesus as Isaiahs Suffering Servant, the arm of the Lord.40 This connection is led up to in the preceding verses. It has been pointed out that a striking number of similarities with Is 52.7-15 exist in Jn 12.12-36.41 Is 52 features an account of Gods return to Zion followed by the account of the Suffering Servant in 52.13 53.12. This is broadly paralleled in John 12 with Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem which is quickly followed by the arrival of Jesus hour (Jn 12.23ff.) The quotation of Ps 118.25 -26 in Jn 12.13 with its reference to the one who comes in the name of the Lord echoes back to Johns testimony of the one coming after him and his quotation of Is 40.3.42 Most importantly, however, is that in Jn 12.35-36 Jesus, as in the Prologue, is once again identified as the light ( ) providing a connection between the servant and the Word. The way that the Fourth Gospel seems to be identifying the Word of God with Isaiahs servant invites further investigation. One of the major themes that runs through Second Isaiah is that of a cosmic trial. God puts Israel and the nations on trial while allowing himself to also be tried.43 This trial motif has the purpose of particularly emphasizing the superiority of God over
39

Davila points also to the titles Righteous One (1 Enoch 38:2?; 47:1, 4; 53:6) and Elect One (39:6; 40:5; 45:3, 4; 48:6; 49:2, 4; 51:3, 5; 52:6, 9; 53:6; 55:4; 61:5, 8, 10; 62:1) as allusions to Isaiahs servant. Enoch as Divine Mediator (1998); available from http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/divinity/rt/otp/dmf/enoch/. 40 Cf. Is 40.10 11, 51.5, 9, 52.10, 59.16, 63.5 (Rev 19.13 picks up on the imagery of Is 63.1-3), 63.12. 41 Williams, "Testimony of Isaiah," 118-121. 42 Ibid., 119. 43 [insert trial theme verses Second Isaiah cf Lincoln]

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 14

any of the other so-called gods of the nations. Emphasis is also placed on Gods identity as the savior/redeemer of Israel.44 The case God puts forward highlights Gods ability to proclaim the future which is set in contrast with the inability of the other nations so-called gods to do the same.45 This is often closely tied in with Gods self designation, , 46 a phrase important for the Fourth Gospel. Most importantly for the Fourth Gospels identification of Gods Word with Isaiahs servant, is the role both Isaiahs servant and Gods Word play in the trials of Second Isaiah. The coming of Gods servant whom God has called is especially important as a witness to Gods ability to declare the future.47 Gods plan is particularly carried out by this servant.48 One unusual feature of the servant that may have been picked up by Jewish interpreters is the presentation of the servant in Is 52.13 who will be lifted up ( , -LXX), glorified ( , -LXX ), and highly exalted. This is particularly interesting given the description of Isaiahs throne room vision in Is 6 where God is described as high ( )and exalted () .49 This is especially interesting in that in Is 42.8 and 48.11 God says he will not give his glory to another.50 As seen above, Gods ability to declare the future is an important feature of the presentation of Second Isaiah. Closely related to this and also occupying a significant role in the trial of Second Isaiah is Gods Word ( , LXX or ) which, in dramatic personified terms, functions as the means by which God will accomplish his plans (Is 45.23,

44

Is 41.10-20, 43.1-7, 14-28, 44.1-5, 21-23, 45.14-17, 46.3-4, 47.4, 48.17-19, 48.8-18, 25-26, 50.1-3, 51.1-8. 51.2223, 53.3-6, 52.9-10, 54.5-10. 45 Is 41.20-24., 26-29, 43.8-13, 44.6-8, 24-28, 46.8-11, 48.3-5, 14-16. 46 with predicate and absolute: Is 41.4, 43.10, 25, 45.8, 18, 19, 45.22, 46.4 , 9, 48.12, 17, 51.12, 52.6. 47 Note the way that Is 41.25 42.8 picks up on Gods announcement of the future and follows closely on the trial of Idols in Is 41.21-24. 48 Is 42.1-9, 49.1-7, 52.13-53.12. 49 Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2009), 35-36. 50 See the interesting discussion of Is 42.8 in Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, 386-388.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 15

55.10-11).51 Andrew Lincoln identifies this well saying, The effective fulfillment of Yahwehs word is the deciding factor in the case, and this is reflected later in the closing section of DeutroIsaiah in 55:10 11...52 The similarities of roles in the trial that Isaiahs servant and Gods Word play in the trial, provide an opportunity for the Fourth Gospels identification of the Word with Isaiahs servant. Facilitating this connection is the common wording in the description of the servant in Is 53.10 and the description of Gods Word in Is 55.11. In Is 53.10 it is through the servant (lit. by his hand) that Gods will is prospered () . In Is 55.11, Gods Word does not return until it accomplishes that which God purposed and succeeds in the thing which God sent it for ( ) . Is 53 is quoted

in Jn 12.38, and as I will argue below, Is 55.10-11 is alluded to in the Fourth Gospel. Other features of Second Isaiah are also available to draw upon for the Fourth Gospels presentation of the Logos. Gods identity as creator plays an important role in Second Isaiahs claim that YHWH is superior to any of the other nations gods.53 This provides an important link to creation which the Fourth Gospel could have capitalized on in identifying the Word as Gods agent in creation. Light and Darkness are contrasted in Is 42.7-8, 45.7, 49.6, 8, 50.10 providing ample opportunity for the prologue to reflect on the contrast between light and dark. If the framing of Jesus public ministry with the identification of Jesus as Gods WordServant is as important as argued for above, it should help shed light on the Christological paradoxes presented through the body of the Fourth Gospel. The Fourth Gospels Christological paradoxes are especially tied to Jesus agency which is intimately connected with the trial themes

51 52

Cf. Is 40.8. Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 40. 53 Is 40.12-14, 21-22, 25-26, 28, 41.18-20, 24.5, 45.7-8, 12, 18, 48.13, 51.13.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 16

running throughout Jn 5- 9 and beyond.54 Jesus works place him at odds with the Jewish elite prompting cries of blasphemy to which Jesus claims submission to God.55 This works clearly in favor of the Fourth Gospels Monotheistic emphasis. The question is whether this is capable of being held in tension with the Gospels high treatment of Jesus as he equates himself with God through use of the divine title . This use of the divine title by Jesus goes well beyond any idea of mere agency.56 In chapter 5 Jesus does acts which his contemporaries perceive as usurping Gods prerogative and so they accuse Jesus of making himself equal with God (Jn 5.18). This is wrapped up in the fact that not only did Jesus break Sabbath, but claimed justification for this act, not by some legal precedent as in the Synoptics,57 but by identifying himself in a unique way as Gods son. Jesus response to the Jews charge is to subordinate himself to the will of God claiming that he is doing Gods works, not his own. This could be taken to indicate that Jesus denies the charge of equality with God.58 The difficulty with this is that Jesus in Jn 5.19 23

54

The connection between Jesus works and the trial motif are noted by Borgen, "The Scriptures and the Words and Works of Jesus," in What We Have Heard from the Beginning (ed. Thatcher; Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2007), 39-40. 55 Jn 5.17-20, 36, 7.3, 7.21, 10.25, 32- 33, 37-38, 14.10-11, 15.24, 17.4. 56 See esp. Jn 8.51. Contrary to McGrath, Only True God, 61 - 62. It is hard to imagine, given the Angel refusal traditions of texts like Tob 12.16 22, Apoc. Zeph 6.11 15, Ascen. Is. 7.18 23, 8.1-10, Rev. 19.10, 22.8-9, etc., an agent of God using the divine name in the way that Jesus does in Jn 8.51. Jesus there is claiming much more than to be just a functional representation of God. Gods self-designation in Second Isaiah functions to highlight Gods uniqueness over and above any other god, especially as the one who should be worship in contrast to the other gods. McGraths example of Yahoel isnt as convincing as might initially appear. While Yaheol does bear a combination of divine names, Apoc. Abr. 10.11, I have been sent to thee to strengthen thee and bless thee in the name of God argues against McGraths claims. It is unthinkable that Yaheol would appear Abraham and say, I AM in the way Jesus does. See the counter arguments in Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 224-228, so too, Carrell, Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (95; Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 53 -56. 57 Mth 12.1-14, Mk 12.1-8, Lk 6.1-5. 58 McGrath rightly recognizes that Jesus denies putting himself on par with God in a way that would detract from Gods glory. McGrath, Only True God, 59-61. The question remains whether Jesus is claiming equality in another sense, one comfortably home in monotheism. It is not clear from McGraths discussion whether he would affirm this or not. His discussion of the Logos suggest that he would perhaps affirm this precisely in the terms he uses to describe the Logos in Philo. For both [John and Philo], then, the Word is an expression of the reality of God himself and yet distinct from and subordinate to God in a way that from our standpoint can only be described as paradoxical. McGrath, Only True God, 57.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 17

continues to claim this special son-ship culminating in 5.22 - 23 where Jesus says that God has given the judgment of all things to him so that all should honor him just as they honor the father. This is similar to Jn 10.30 39 where Jesus claims he and the Father are one which is particularly striking given the importance of the Shema for Jews. Jesus claim prompts the Jews to again cry blasphemy. Jesus, as in Jn 5.19-23, points to his good works as an indicator that he is authorized by God to act in this fashion. This leads to Jn 10.34 36 where Jesus argues by way of qal wahomer that given his special relationship with God, his identification with God isnt blasphemous. Both John 5 and John 10, then, appear to affirm that Jesus is claiming equality with God, but in such a way to be consistent with the Monotheistic outlook of the second temple period. How then do Jesus works, which might otherwise be taken as a denial of Jesus equality with God, function in these settings? Jesus works, defined in terms of the will of the Father, are first set out in Jn 4.35. Scholars have often noted a number of broad similarities between John 4 and Isaiah 55. John presents Jesus as the giver of living water which will satisfy in the age to come ( Jn 4.10 14) which parallels Isaiah 55.1-3, an extension of an eschatological invitation to those who are thirsty ( ).59 Jesus invitation to the foreign Samaritan woman broadly parallels Is. 55.4-5 which proclaims a time when foreigners will call on Israel.60 Franklin Young interestingly notes a further parallel with Second Isaiah. In Second Isaiah, Gods declaration

59

A connection is sometimes made between Jn 4.8 ( ) and Is 55.1 ( , , , ). This connection is possible, but it is removed enough that it only becomes convincing as part of a broader interplay between Is 55 and Jn 4. See Carson, The Gospel According to John (Leicester, England Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 220. 60 The connection between the Woman and Isaiah 55 has been noted by Ibid. Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to St. John (3vols.; New York: Crossroad, 1982), 430.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 18

( ) of things from the beginning serves to highlight Gods sovereignty.61 The Samaritians statement in Jn 4.25 that the Messiah will reveal all things ( ) and Jesus response in Jn 4.26 ( ) picks up closely on the language of Is 52.6.62 Within these parallels, and within the broader interplay of John and Second Isaiah, it is easy to see Jesus description of his works in terms of Is 55.11. Note the striking similarities:63
Is 55.10-11 LXX , , , , , , . John 4.32-34 . ; .

Seeing Jn 4.34 as an identification of Jesus with Gods Word in Is 55.10-11 offers a unique opportunity to lead into the harvest imagery of Jn 4.35-38.64 Such a move builds upon the , structure of Is 55.10 -11 which isnt unprecedented in the Fourth Gospel.65 Gods word is likened unto the rain and snow which comes down soaking the earth bringing forth blossoms and thereby giving seed to the sower and bread for food. Similarly Jesus as Gods Word, comes down, doing Gods will and completing his work, resulting in an eschatological harvest which provides the food Jesus say he has in Jn 4.34.

61

Is 41.26, 28, 42.9, 43.9, 44.7, 45.19, 46.9-10, 47.13, 48.14. Young, "A Study of the Relation of Isaiah to the Fourth Gospel," Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und Kunde der lteren Kirche , no. 46 (2009): 226-228. 62 Is 52.6 ( , incorrectly reference as Is 52.5 by Young). Ibid.: 226. 63 Also recognized by Dahms, "Isaiah 55:11 and the Gospel of John," EvQ, (1981): 86-87. 64 Similar harvest imagery provides a general background, Is 55.10-11 provide a better opportunity to explain Jesus harvest imagery. Cf. Joel 4.13, Is. 17.3, Hos. 6.11, Jer. 51.33. In the synoptic: Matt 9.37- 38, 13.29, Mk 4.29, Lk 10.2. Craig Keener notes Amos 9.13 as a particularly fruitful source for the imagery of imagery for understanding Jesus words in Jn. 4.31-36. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, 625. 65 See below.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 19

A similar use of Isaiah 55 occurs in Jn 6.26-71.66 The Fourth Gospels Midrash of Ps 78(77LXX) is set against the backdrop of Is 54 in Jn 6.45. A link between Is 55.2-3 and Ps 7867 provides the background for Jesus injunction in 6.26-27 to seek food that remains in the age to come which he the Son of Man gives. This combination of Is 55 and Ps 78 also offers a thematic coherence to Jn 6.22-71.68 This attunes readers ears to then hear the echoes of Is 55.10-11 in Jn 6.33 and 6.38. In Jn 6.33, as with John 4.34-38, the , structure of Is 55.10 -11 provides an opportunity for Gods Word, Jesus, to lay claim to being the bread comes down from heaven. This identification is continued in Jn 6.38 in the language reminiscent of Jn 4.34: . Jesus works are also connected with his glory. The glory of Jesus, a prominent theme throughout the Fourth Gospel, but especially the farewell discourse of Jn 13 16, is connected with Jesus hour in Jn 12.23. The hour of 12.23, pointing forward toward the cross, feeds into the association of Jesus identity as the Word/Servant in Jn 12.38 as seen above. Jesus hour and glory are again taken up in Jn 17.1-5. The works which Jesus completes glorifies the Father which leads Jesus to pray for the glory which he enjoyed before the world existed (Jn 17.4-5). This takes up the language of 4.34 where Jesus was presented as Gods Word in Isaiah. By looking to the time before the world was created Jesus points back to his identity as Gods Word in the Prologue. The hour of Jn 17.1, in line with Jn 12.23, points forward to the cross where Jesus finishes his work (Jn 19.28, 30).69

66

Swancutt, "Hungers Assuaged by the Bread from Heaven," in Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel (eds. Evans and Sanders; vol. 148 of; Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), esp. 239. Other scholars have seen the interplay of Is 55 and Jn 6. Burkett, The Son of the Man in the Gospel of John (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 130-141, Young, "Fourth Gospel," 228-229. 67 Is 55.2: , . Ps 78(77).25 , . Swancutt, "Hungers," 237. 68 Ibid., 235-237. 69 Cf. Dahms, "Isaiah 55:11 and the Gospel of John," 85-88. Jesus completion ( aor. ptc.) of the Gods works in v17.4 is perhaps best seen as part of a temporal collapsing of Jesus hour from 12.23 to 19.28, 30.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 20

Turning back to Jn 5 and 10 it becomes clearer as to the nature of Jesus works. Jesus works in Jn 4.34 indicate that they are to be seen more broadly in terms of Second Isaiah where Gods Word functions uniquely to do Gods will in accomplishing the acts which will vindicate God precisely as God. More specifically Jesus is identified in the Fourth Gospel as Gods Word of Is 55.10-11 which accomplishes his eschatological purposes related to the trial of Second Isaiah. Gods Word in Isaiah in this sense is directly related to the identity of God. Identifying Jesus specifically with Gods Word in Isaiah provides a context in which Jesus can claim to be subordinate to God, and yet also claim a oneness with God that not just any agent of God could claim. Conclusion All of this argues in favor of seeing the Fourth Gospels Logos language against the background of Second Isaiah. The striking similarity between Gods Word and Isaiahs servant provides a rationale for the Fourth Gospels identification of Jesus as Gods Logos with God in the beginning and part of Gods very identity. Whereas the wisdom tradition offered some general background to Johns Logos usage, Isaiahs treatment of the Word of God offers far more specifics for understanding the Gospel. Philo, the Angel of the Lord, and the Memra traditions all were valuable in some sense or another, but each are difficult to tie clearly to the Fourth Gospel in a convincing way. Not so with Second Isaiah. The Fourth Gospel not only alludes to, but explicitly quotes from Isaiah. Connecting the Logos of the Prologue with Gods Word in Second Isaiah also offers particularly relevant data for working through the Christological paradoxes of the Fourth Gospel. This works in close combination with the allusions to Second Isaiah already present in the Fourth Gospel.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 21

Bibliography Enoch as Divine Mediator. Last Updated Date 1998 [cited 4/16/2010 2010]. Available from http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/divinity/rt/otp/dmf/enoch/. Barclay, John M. G., Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 Bce 117 Ce). Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996. Barrett, C. K., The Gospel According to St. John; an Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text. New York,: Macmillan, 1962. Bauckham, Richard, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2009. Beale, G. K., The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, Mich. Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999. Borgen, Peder. "The Scriptures and the Words and Works of Jesus," Pages xix, 423 p. in What We Have Heard from the Beginning. Edited by Tom Thatcher. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2007. Boyarin, Daniel. "The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John." Harvard Theological Review 94,3 (2001): 243-284. Bultmann, Rudolf Karl, Theology of the New Testament. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2007. Burkett, Delbert Royce, The Son of the Man in the Gospel of John. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Supplement Series 56. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991. Carrell, Peter R., Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John. Monograph Series / Society for New Testament Studies 95. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Carson, D. A., The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England Grand Rapids, Mich.: InterVarsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991. Dahms, John v. "Isaiah 55:11 and the Gospel of John." EvQ 53 (1981): 78-88. Dunn, James D. G., Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. London: SCM Press, 1989. Epp, Eldon Jay. "Widsom, Torah, Word: The Johannine Prologue and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospel," Pages 128 -146 in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 22

Evans, Craig A., Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John's Prologue. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Supplement Series 89. Sheffield, Eng.: JSOT, 1993. Fossum, Jarl E., The Image of the Invisible God: Essays on the Influence of Jewish Mysticism on Early Christology. Novum Testamentum Et Orbis Antiquus 30. Freiburg, Schweiz: Universittsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995. Gieschen, Charles A., Angelomorphic Christology: Cntecedents and Early Evidence. Arbeiten Zur Geschichte Des Antiken Judentums Und Des Urchristentums Bd 42. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 1998. Hurtado, Larry W., Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2003. Keener, Craig S., The Gospel of John: A Commentary. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003. Lincoln, Andrew T. "Trials, Plots and the Narrative of the Fourth Gospel." Journal for the Study of the New Testament,56 (1994): 3-30. Lincoln, Andrew T., Truth on Trial: The Lawsuit Motif in the Fourth Gospel. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000. McGrath, James F., The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009. McNamara, Father Martin. "Logos of the Fourth Gospel and Memra of the Palestinian Targum (Ex 1242)." Expository Times 79,4 (1968): 115-117. Metzger, Bruce Manning, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft; United Bible Societies, 1994. Ronning, John L., The Jewish Targums and John's Logos Theology. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010. Schnackenburg, Rudolf, The Gospel According to St. John. New York: Crossroad, 1982. Segal, Alan, Two Powers in Heaven. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity. V. 25. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Swancutt, Diana M. "Hungers Assuaged by the Bread from Heaven," Page 476 p. in Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel. Edited by Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders. Vol. 148. Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Craig Downey The Word Come Down | 23

Tobin, Thomas H. "The Prologue of John and Hellenistic Jewish Speculation." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52,2 (1990): 252-269. Tobin, Thomas H. "Logos," Pages 348-356 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1992. Williams, Catrin H. "The Testimony of Isaiah and Johannine Christology," in "As Those Who Are Taught": The Interpretation of Isaiah from the Lxx to the Sbl. Edited by Claire Mathews McGinnis and Patricia K. Tull. Vol. 27. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006. Winston, David. "Solomon, Wisdom Of," Pages 6:120 - 6:127 in The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1996. Young, Franklin W. "A Study of the Relation of Isaiah to the Fourth Gospel." Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und Kunde der lteren Kirche 46,46 (2009): 215-233.