The Father, the Son, and John on Location in the Farewell Discourse

Using the tools of social geography, specifically those developed by Edward Soja, Henri Lefebvre, and Oliver Sacks, this article explores the Gospel of John’s spatial reference to place as it appears in Jesus’ Farewell Discourse (John 14–17) and the ways it uses narrative to create places for the practices and conceiving of religious identity. Although application of spatial study to John’s gospel is relatively rare in Johannine studies, it promises a great deal of insight, especially because John’s gospel is filled with numerous references to place and a rich variety of prepositional phrases. Through narrative, John offers a spatial temporalization (following Soja, a ‘thirdspace’) for audiences to inhabit and interpret the world around them. John’s Father-Son-Paraclete language of unity (which the Christian tradition has interpreted metaphysically and soteriologically without reference to time and space) creates a place for Johannine discipleship in which listeners reenact the dynamic relationship of its three divine actors. John establishes a particular mode of spatial identity by presenting Father, Son, and Paraclete, together with the narrative’s antagonists and protagonists in particular spaces with a set of behaviors associated with each location. The Johannine reference to Jesus going to prepare a place for his disciples after his death (John 13:36), and the reference to a mansion with many room (John 14:2–4) is traditionally interpreted as a reference to the afterlife or a heavenly domain. Scholars have debated whether this represents a futurist or a realized eschatological teaching. A spatial application offers new insights by viewing it from a social geographical perspective as a spatial location “in the world,” lived out locationally “in” the Paraclete, in rejection by the “world.” Metaphysical unity language refers to a narrative of rejection and suffering, which reveals the identity of Johannine believers “in but not of the world.” In this regard, John reflects sapiential themes found in the Hebrew Bible and the intertestamental period that tell of wisdom dwelling on earth and also being rejected.

Faith, Eternal Life, and the Spirit in the Gospel of John

John’s understanding of faith, eternal life, and the Spirit lies at the centre of scholarly debates about the ways in which the Gospel sets out its views about the means to and effects of salvation. The vocabulary employed by John to express its core soteriological concepts is no longer investigated in complete isolation from more narrative-centred approaches to the text. With regard to the possible origin(s) of its language of faith and eternal life, scholars continue to interpret the relevant vocabulary in terms of John’s indebtedness to Second Temple Judaism and Synoptic tradition, although increasing focus is placed on the relational and ethical overtones, in addition to the individualistic and theological/christological connotations, of John’s realized-eschatological appropriation of the concepts in question. The Spirit in John’s Gospel, particularly the function of the Spirit-Paraclete in the Farewell Discourse, is investigated against a much broader tradition-historical and exegetical canvass.

John 4:23-24 in North African Preaching

This paper explores the possibility of recovering a tradition of Donatist readings of John’s Gospel, by highlighting five of the so-called Donatist ‘anonymous’ homilies of the Vienna Collection (Sermones Escorial. 16, 19, 20, 22 and 23; cf. Leroy 1994/1999; Bass 2014/2016; Dossey 2010; and Shaw 2011). After pointing out their relatively limited, threefold Johaninne interest – chapters 4 and 8, and the ‘farewell discourse’ of chapters 14-17 (Tilley 1997) – I then focus on Sermo Escorial. 16, presenting its exegetical and theological strategies in the light of Donatist ecclesiology and its North African context. Here, I argue that a particular use of John 4:23, in conjunction with a modified form of a well-known concept of Cyprian (nulla salus extra ecclesiam), stands in sharp opposition to any of Augustine’s interpretations of the same verse. Thus, I suggest, Augustine seems both to correct Donatist views of salvation and the church, as well as a Donatist reading of the verse in question. This thesis is to be linked up with other Johannine citations in future research.