Saturday, January 8, 2022

The similarities and dissimilarities of Hellenistic Judaism in Philo and the Opening Prologue of the Gospel of John

On the similarities and dissimilarities between the Hellenistic Judaism found in Philo and the opening prologue of the Gospel of John (1:1-18), Urban C. Von Wahlde wrote the following:

 

John 1.1-2

 

First, the context of the discussion of ‘the Word’ is similar in both Philo and John. Both employ the term Word while commenting on the Genesis account of creation: John in the opening words of the Hymn and Philo in De Op. 7-25. While Wisdom is said to exist before creation it is not said to be involved in the act of creation itself.

 

Second, in both John (1.1) and Philo (Som. 1.228-230) the Logos is said to be θεος, ‘divine’—(without an article). This designation is regularly understood to attribute divinity to the Logos but in such a way as not to be a challenge to the unicity of God.

 

John 1.3

 

In John and in Philo, creation is said to take place διαυτου (i.e., ‘through the Word’) rather than by the dative (λογω), which would be simply an ‘instrumental dative’ as in the Wisdom literature. For the author of the Hymn, for Philo, and for authors elsewhere in the NT, the choice of such expressions was not haphazard but was intended to reflect the existence of and activity of a mediating figure in creation. This mediating figure was understood to be the Word. This is not present in the Wisdom literature.

 

John 1.4-5

 

. . . In Philo, there is an association of life with the Logos. However, within the works of Philo this association is less direct. . . . in Philo’s view the first day of creation is when the intelligible world is created and on the remainder of the days, the various parts of the world perceptible by the senses are created. The breath of God is the cause of life and becomes breath (πνευμα) is part of the intelligible, non-corporeal creation, it is part of the creative activity of the Logos. Therefore it can be said that the Logos is connected with the giving of life.

 

John 1.12

 

In Philo and in John, the believer is said to be a ‘child of God’. But again there are differences. In Jn 1.12, we are told that Jesus, the Word, gave all who believed in him ‘the power to become children of God’. In Philo, the process is more complex. The Individual first becomes a son of the Word, and then a son of God (Conf. 147).

 

John 1.14

 

In the Gospel and in Philo, the Logos is said to have a special filial relation to God. Again, this is not to say that the filial relation is precisely the same in both. There can be no doubt that Jesus is understood as ‘son’ in the Gospel; but in the Hymn, the issue is somewhat more complex. Tobin points to the similarity of μονογενης in Jn 1.14 to Philo’s use of προτογονος (Conf. 63 and Conf. 146) in reference to the Logos. While there can be no doubt that the Hymn understands the Word to be a ‘son’ of God, I do not believe this is expressed by the term μονογενης. Following D. Moody and others, I would hold that μονογενης does not mean ‘only begotten’ bur rather ‘unique’. Moreover, the description of Jesus as μονογενης has a polemical purpose, namely to distinguish the sonship of Jesus from that of the believer who is given the power to become a child of God (v. 12). Yet there is some similarity cannot be denied. (Urban C. Von Wahlde, Gnosticism, Docetism, and the Judaisms of the First Century: The Search for the Wider Context of the Johannine Literature and Why It Matters [Library of New Testament Studies 517; London: T&T Clark, 2015, 2016], 173-75)