451

CRITICAL NOTES

A N O T E ON J O H N 16 33 A N D I J O H N 2 13-14
In Johannine studies t o d a y there is a noticeable tendency t o stress the Jewish cast
1

and background of t h e fourth gospel and t h e first epistle of John and t o minimize t h e
extent of hellenistic influence (apart from Judaism which had, of course, already ab
sorbed a large amount). There are, however, strong and clear voices t o remind us t h a t
John was familiar with t h e thought of t h e pagan world and was not averse t o making
2

use of it. For the most part this employment of hellenistic material is seen in his choice
of vocabulary, b u t it has also been suggested t h a t t h e evangelist occasionally adapts
3

imagery borrowed from the cultic lore of Graeco-Roman civilization. T h e purpose of

this note is t o examine the possibility t h a t in John's presentation of Jesus and the young
male Christian as KCLWLVLKOS we have another such adaptation.
I t is worth noting, first of all, t h a t the verb VLKOLV occurs twenty-eight times in t h e
N T . It appears in t h e Apocalypse seventeen times, in I John six times, and once in
the fourth gospel. Paul uses it thrice (Rom 3 4 which is a citation of t h e L X X rendering
of Ps 51 6; and Rom 12 21 bis) and Luke once (11 22). T h e noun is used in I John
at 5 4. I n a passage in I Cor 15 t o which reference will be made later, Paul uses VKOS
three times. It occurs once in Matthew (12 20). Hence it is clear, even if we prescind
from the Apocalypse, t h a t the use of words connoting "victory" in t h e N T is predominantly Johannine. In the fourth gospel it is " t h e world" which Jesus says he has conquered (16 33); in I John the "strong young m e n " are addressed as having conquered
"the evil one" and then, more generally, the Christian is described as overcoming the
"antichrists" (4 4) and, like Christ, " t h e world" (5 4-5).
Who is " t h e evil one" and in what sense has t h e world been conquered? 4 The an-

1
For some of the more important literature on the Jewish character of the fourth
gospel see the bibliography supplied b y R. E. Brown (The Gospel According to John,
pp. lxv f.). For a recent a t t e m p t to interpret the first epistle in terms of a Jewish sectarian document, see J. C. O'Neill, The Puzzle of 1 John.
2
C. H. Dodd, C. K. Barrett, F . C. Grant, and, of course though from a different
standpoint R. Bultmann. On the whole question of exaggerating the Hebraic character of the N T at the cost of overlooking the Hellenic contribution, see J. B. Skemp,
The Greeks and the Gospel.
3
While not ignoring the O T motifs in the story of the first miracle at Cana Barrett
(The Gospel According to St. John, p . 158) acknowledges t h a t John may have drawn
material from Dionysiac sources. It is, he says, "far too characteristic of John t o use material with a twofold, Jewish and pagan, background, for us easily t o set aside the parallels t o the miraculous transformation of water into wine which have been noted in
Hellenistic sources." J. B. Estlin (The Johannine Writings, p. 380) and, with more
reserve, C. H. Dodd (Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel, p. 225) make similar
observations. Barrett also seeks the origin of the title "Saviour of the World"
(John 4 42) in "Greek sources" (p. 204).
* The "antichrist" is he who "does not confess J e s u s " (I John 4 3; cf. II John 7)
and is therefore not distinguishable from " t h e J e w s " or " t h e world" which would not
listen t o Jesus (John 8 43-44, 15 18-25). T o overcome antichrist is, consequently, synonymous with overcoming the world.

452

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

swer lies in the figure of "the prince of this world" who is described in the fourth gospel
as "cast o u t " and "judged," and it is he who represents the complexus of Christ's adversaries.

There are three mentions of

in the gospel

(12 31, 14 30, 16 il) and these are generally taken as references t o Satan. Barrett notes,
correctly, t h a t in rabbinic writings "prince of the world" is frequent b u t does not refer
to Satan but t o the Angel of Death.

He goes on t o say " a t least at this point John does

7

not seem t o be in close touch with Hebrew and Jewish t h o u g h t . " What he overlooks
and what seems t o be ignored by commentators as a rule, is t h a t if t h e evangelist's
phrase be taken t o mean death (either exclusively or with t h e secondary meaning of
Satan), it makes excellent sense in each case; by his death Jesus destroys death (12 31;
cf. Rev 20 14) ; death seeks t o lay hands on Jesus b u t it has no claim on him (14 30) ;
the paraclete will show t h a t the judgment which has in fact been executed is a con
demnation not of Jesus b u t of death (16 il ; cf. 5 24). T h e casting out and judgment of
death call t o mind Paul's exclamation in I Cor 15 54

eis VKOS

and leads us to a consideration of John 1633: kv * 0,

ey .

T h e "affliction" t o which t h e disciples will be exposed is

persecution culminating in martyrdom (cf. Rev 7 1 4 ) t h e "eschatological woes" at

tendant upon the ushering-in of " t h e last h o u r " (I John 2 18). But Jesus has "con
quered" the world which inflicts the punishment of death upon those who defy its
standards and those standards are, paradoxically, carriers of death of another order
(cf. John 5 24). The world, consequently, can scarcely be distinguished here from t h e
prince of the world 8 in whose power it lies (I John 5 19). If we take in t h e
epistle t o be, like the prince of this world in t h e gospel, primarily an agent of death, it
is easier t o correlate I John 5 19 with John 16 33: the world, i. e., makind, lies subject
t o death unless it listens t o the life-giving word of Jesus; if it listens, then it passes im
mediately from death t o life (John 5 24) because Jesus has conquered death for those
who are his. This is why the presbyter can say in I John 5 18 t h a t does not
" t o u c h " those born of God, just as the has no claim on Jesus. Moral
evil for John is, as John 9 40-41 shows, principally the obstinate refusal t o "see," i. e.,
t o "listen," and as such it confines the " b l i n d " t o a living death. Hence we may say
t h a t the personified representative of evil, whether he be called Satan (John 13 27),
the devil (John 8 44, 13 2; I John 3 8,10), the evil one (John 17 15; I John 2 13-14, 3 12,
5 18) or the prince of this world, is essentially a " m u r d e r e r , " 9 an agent of death. I t is
this enemy of man whom Jesus conquers.
s Bultmann (Das Evangelium des Johannes, p. 330) speaks for t h e generality of
commentators when he says " D e r () ist natrlich nicht der
Tod sondern der Teufel."
6
This is clearly seen in Lev. R. 18, Deut. R. 2,5 (both of which cite rabbis of the
early second century A.D.) and Apoc. Bar. 21 23. See T. W. Manson, On Paul and John,
p. 27 and H. A. Kelly, " T h e Devil in the Desert," CBQ, 26 (1964), pp. 201-02.
? Op. cit., p. 355.
8
So, too, C. K. Barrett, op. cit., p. 416.
9 As Manson (op. cit., p. 120) puts it: " H e is the fons et origo of all moral evil
(I J n 3,8). As such he is the cause of death t o mankind . . . The great work of Christ
is t h a t he breaks this t y r a n n y . " See John 8 44.

453

CRITICAL NOTES

The image of Jesus as a conqueror is peculiar t o the fourth gospel and t o the Apoc
alypse (Rev 3 21, 17 14), but we find it transferred, as noted, t o the Christian and, in
an unusually emphatic way, t o the (because they are)

(I John 2 13-14).

It is this last text especially which suggests t h a t the imagery has overtones of classical
mythology.
There is no need t o demonstrate the widespread cult of Herakles throughout the
Graeco-Roman world as conqueror of death and evil. 1 0 What needs t o be underlined
here is t h a t those who were about t o become ephebi ()11 poured a libation of wine
to Herakles Alexikakos and offered a lock of hair as a symbol of the bloom of youth. 1 2
It is with Herakles t h a t the ephebus then identifies, " y o u t h against noisome disease
and d e a t h " as Miss Harrison put it. 1 3 It was, moreover, t o Herakles Alexikakos or
Apotropaios t h a t Apollonius erected a shrine in Ephesus, and this would have been
contemporaneous with the circulation of the Johannine writings. x * Finally, it is surely
not without significance t h a t a generation after the publication of the Johannine writ
ings Justin M a r t y r explicitly contrasts Jesus, the veritable yiyas
the

with Herakles,

of myth. 1 *

It does not seem extravagant t o conclude t h a t the man (or school, if it be insisted)
who consciously sets forth Jesus as the fulfillment of the whole Jewish system of wor
ship also, though far less distinctly, 1 6 presents him as the authentic realization of certain
pagan cult figures.
J . EDGAR B R U N S
S T . M I C H A E L ' S C O L L E G E , U N I V E R S I T Y OF TORONTO

10

As early as the Iliad 5, 395 and Pindar, Olympians 9,33. The way in which
Euripides portrays him as a vanquisher of death is perhaps most appealing (Alcestis
837 t o the end). The account of Herakles' conquest of a lustful demon in Philostratus'
Life of Apollonius of Tyana (viii,7) is also relevant t o our over-all consideration. Some
thing of the spirit of the Greek accounts of Herakles' encounters with death may be
found in the fifth (?) century Coptic Book of the Resurrection of Christ by Bartholomew
the Apostle (M. R. James, Apocryphal New Testament, pp. 182-83) in which Christ
laughs at death and frightens him.
11
From the fourth century B.C., , originally an Athenian institution,
spread through the Greek world, especially in Asia Minor; cf. article " E p h e b i " in
OCD, p. 317.
12
Photius citing Eupolis, Athenaeus citing Pamphilos, and Hesychius. The texts
are given in J . E. Harrison's Themis, pp. 378 f.
* Op. cit., p. 379.
14
Lactantius (Institutiones v. 3 M.P.L. 6,560) writes "sub Herculis Alexicaci
nomine constitutum," but Philostratus (op. cit., id.) uses the term
'.
*s Apol. i, 54 and Dial 69.
16
But in the same way t h a t he alludes t o gnostic beliefs in I John 2 26-27 and 3 9
(see C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, pp. 58-61, 74-78).

^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.