Programación del HMI

The field of reference for the SFR covers areas in the narrative where names and/or titles of Son or Father intersect with actions and/ or positions of Son or Father. Semantic domains are passages dominated by lexicology from the semantic field of reference; thus, semantic domains are passages with high concentration of SFR language. Semantic domains reveal crucial points in the narrative where symbols develop, explain, and intensify the Gospel’s presentation of the SFR. the semantic field of reference delineates the lexical parameters for charting John’s Christological Symbology; thus, the symbology follows a semantic path in the narrative. In sum, this field of reference comprises the full range of lexicology that portrays the SFR in the narrative.

390

Figure

This range of reference is based on the pairing of Son and Father in the narrative, which is confirmed by lexical statistics.

closely linked in the narrative plot; therefore, they are also semanticall

However, Paul W. Meyer contends that although occurrences of “Father” and “Son” are frequent, the actual pairing of these terms as coordinates is infrequent; therefore, Meyer advises interpreters to “break the habit” of coordinating t

Meyer cautions that until this habit is broken, the way God functions as Father cannot be

391 _{This research takes into account the following caution given by Gilbert V}

Palmer: “Style criticism has often focused on word counts and similar gatherings of statistical information, but scholars have become increasingly aware that such numerical frequencies in themselves say nothing.

They need interpretation to be relevant

definitive but remains open for discussion. It is not the absolute uniqueness of a phenomenon that points to typical Johannine language but

interconnections it establishes

important than a word's frequent appearance

“John’s Literary Unity and the Problem of Historicity,” in

2007), 222. The semantic analysis carried out in this study confirms the “exceptional frequency” of SFR symbolism/symbolic and themes, noting their importance in the

154

Figure 2: Semantic Field of Reference

This range of reference is based on the pairing of Son and Father in the narrative, which is confirmed by lexical statistics.391 As main characters, the Son and Father are closely linked in the narrative plot; therefore, they are also semantically paired in the text. However, Paul W. Meyer contends that although occurrences of “Father” and “Son” are frequent, the actual pairing of these terms as coordinates is infrequent; therefore, Meyer advises interpreters to “break the habit” of coordinating the words “Father” and “Son.” Meyer cautions that until this habit is broken, the way God functions as Father cannot be

This research takes into account the following caution given by Gilbert Van Belle and Sydney Palmer: “Style criticism has often focused on word counts and similar gatherings of statistical information, but scholars have become increasingly aware that such numerical frequencies in themselves say nothing.

to be relevant. Even then, the evidence for one or another position is rarely

definitive but remains open for discussion. It is not the absolute uniqueness of a phenomenon that points to typical Johannine language but rather the exceptional frequency of the characteristic and the network of

interconnections it establishes. Of these two characteristics, the development of networks may be more important than a word's frequent appearance” (emphasis mine). Gilbert Van Belle and Sydney Palmer,

Unity and the Problem of Historicity,” in John, Jesus, and History (vol. 1; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 222. The semantic analysis carried out in this study confirms the “exceptional frequency” of SFR symbolism/symbolic and themes, noting their importance in the Johannine network of symbols.

Positions and Actions of the Son Names and Titles of the Son Positions and Actions of the Father Names and Titles of the Father

This range of reference is based on the pairing of Son and Father in the narrative, As main characters, the Son and Father are

y paired in the text. However, Paul W. Meyer contends that although occurrences of “Father” and “Son” are frequent, the actual pairing of these terms as coordinates is infrequent; therefore, Meyer he words “Father” and “Son.” Meyer cautions that until this habit is broken, the way God functions as Father cannot be

an Belle and Sydney Palmer: “Style criticism has often focused on word counts and similar gatherings of statistical information, but scholars have become increasingly aware that such numerical frequencies in themselves say nothing.

. Even then, the evidence for one or another position is rarely definitive but remains open for discussion. It is not the absolute uniqueness of a phenomenon that points to

he characteristic and the network of Of these two characteristics, the development of networks may be more

” (emphasis mine). Gilbert Van Belle and Sydney Palmer, (vol. 1; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 222. The semantic analysis carried out in this study confirms the “exceptional frequency” of SFR

155

clear.392 Meyer’s argument prompts the question of whether in John’s Gospel the Father be understood apart from the Son or the Son be understood apart from the Father. Anderson defends the pairing of Father and Son, arguing that Meyer overlooks the mention of the Father’s sending the Son, which occurs in all major parts of the Gospel. Anderson argues, “In nearly all of John's narrative, dialogue, and discourse sections where the Father is mentioned, some aspect of the Son’s emissary mission is also narrated.”393 Besides Anderson’s observation, Meyer also fails to consider instances where Father and Son are represented together, in form of other designations.394 Even though the Son and Father are individual characters, it is virtually impossible to separate them semantically in the Johannine narrative. The Fatherhood of God, therefore,

manifests primarily within the context of the Sonship of Jesus. The author combines attributes of God with the concept of a “father” to present to the audience both the transcendence and the immanence of God.395

The field of reference for this study covers four areas: 1) names and titles of the Son, 2) names and titles of the Father, 3) actions of the Son in relation to the Father, 4) actions of the Father in relation to the Son.396 Within this field of reference are semantic

392 _{Meyer, “‘The Father’: The Presentation of God in the Fourth Gospel,” 263.}

393

Paul N. Anderson, “The Having-Sent-Me Father: Aspects of Agency, Encounter, and Irony in the Johannine Father-Son Relationship,’” Semeia 85 (1999): 37.

394

These include: 2:16-17; 3:16, 35; 5:19-23, 25-27; 6:27; 8:18-19; 8:42; 10:18, 25, 36-36; 14:14; 17:1; 20:17, 21. One could also include the 47 occurrences of the designation “Son of God,” where the terms “Son” and “God” not only appear in very close proximity but also point to the SFR.

395

Judith A. Diehl, “The Puzzle of the Prayer: A Study of John 17” (PhD diss,. University of Edinburgh, 2007), 111.

396 _{This field of reference includes personal pronouns representing the names/titles and}

156

domains that contain clusters of symbols/symbolic language and themes. Semantic domains can comprise a pericope, discourse, or entire chapter(s).

The names and titles of the Son are: Λόγος (1:1, 14), µονογενής (1:14, 18; 3:16, 18),  ν (v, 18)397  µνς το θεο (Lamb of God: 1:29, 36), ησος (Jesus: 244 times), ησος Χριστός (Jesus Christ: 1:17), Χριστός (Christ: 1:[20, 25],41, [3:28; 4:25, 29; 7:26, 27, 31, 41, 42; 10:24], 11:27; [12:34] 20:31),  υός398 (the Son: 3:17, 35, 36[x2]; 5:19[x2], 20, 21, 22, 23[x2], 25, 26; 6:40; 8:36; 14:13; 17:1[x2]) µονογενής υός (only begotten Son: 3:16, 18) υς το θεο (Son of God: 1:34, 49, 3:18; 5:26; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20:31), υς νθρώπου (Son of Man: 1:51; 3:13, 14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, [34x2]; 13:31),399  υς ωσήφ (son of Joseph: 1:45; 6:42),  γιος το θεο (the holy one of God: 6:69), προφήτης (prophet: [1:21], 1:45; 4:19, 44; 6:14; 7:40 [52, 53], 9:17), and αββι (rabbi: 1:38, 49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2 11:8).400

397 _{Edwin Abbot suggests punctuating the words, µονογενς θες  ν, as though they were}

three distinct titles—µονογενς, θεός, and  ν (qualified by ες τν κόλπον το πατρς). Abbott explains that the Greeks and Philo called God “that which is” (neuter τ ν) and in Rev 1 :4, 8, John adopts the title for God. Edwin Abbott, Johannine Grammar (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1906), 55- 56. Therefore, this study reads µονογενς, θες and  ν as three distinct titles of the Son.

398

According to Mlakuzhyil, in John,  υός is used 17 times as an absolute title for Jesus; the title is used almost exclusively by Jesus himself. Mlakuzhyil, Christocentric Literary Structure of the

Fourth Gospel, 261. Unlike the title “the Son of God, “which is sometimes used as a Messianic title, the

absolute title “the Son” usually indicates the unique divine Sonship of Jesus to God the Father. Mlakuzhyil,

Christocentric Literary Structure of the Fourth Gospel, 264.

399 _{Mlakuzhyil states that  υός το θεο may sometimes be used as a Jewish Messianic title}

for Jesus (e.g. 1:49; 11:27) or in the deeper theological sense as a Christian designation of Jesus as the true divine Son (e.g. 19:7; 20”31). The absolute  υός in relation to  πατήρ always refers to Jesus’ divine Sonship (e.g. 3:17; 5:19-30; 14:13; 17:1), whereas υς το νθρώπου points to the human Jesus. This is clear from the fact that though both “the Son (of God)" and “the Son of Man” are said to be “glorified” (11:4; 17:1 and 12:23; 13:31 respectively), the former is never spoken of as “being lifted up” as is the latter (3:14; 8:28; 12:34). “According to Mlakuzhyil, because ‘the Son of Man’ has a mysterious heavenly origin (3:13; 6:62), this Christological title may be considered a theological bridge between the Messianic title ‘the Christ’ and the divine title ‘the Son’ (of God). Mlakuzhyil, Christocentric Literary Structure of the

Fourth Gospel, 270-271).

400 _{In John, κύριος (Lord) is a term of respect (sir), so it is not in this field of reference. Neither is}

157

In the Gospel, the primary title for God is πατήρ, which occurs 122 times,401 while θεός402 occurs 83 times.403 The Father is also referred to as  πέµψας (4:34; 5:24, 30, 37; 6:38, 39, 44; 7:16, [18], 28, 33; 8:16; 9:4; 12:44, 45, 49; 13:20; 14:24; 15:21; 16:5).404

The Son’s actions in relation to his Father include the following, his: being with the Father (1:1-2, 18 [16:32]; 17:5), coming from the Father (7:28, 8:42; 13:3; 16:27, 28, 30; 17:8), coming from heaven (6:38, 50, 51, 58, 62), coming in the Father’s name (5:38), going/ascending to the Father (7:33, 13:1, 3; 14:1, 12, 28; 16:10 [17]; 16:28; 17:11, 13; 20:17), working in the Father’s name (10:25), showing the Father’s works (10:32), doing the Father’s works (10:37-38), explaining the Father (1:18), giving salvation and eternal life / taking sin away (1:12; 3:17, 29, 36; 5:21), doing the Father’s will (4:34; 6:38-40, [9:31]), pleasing the Father (8:29), seeking the Father’s will (5:30), seeking the Father’s glory (7:18), glorifying the Father (17:4), equality/unity with the Father (5:18; 10:30, 33,

401

“Father” occurs 122 times in 99 verses, 1:14, 18; 2:16; 3:35; 4:21, 23(x2); 5:17, 18, 19(x2), 20, 21, 22, 23(x2), 26, 36(x2), 37, 43, 45; 6: 27, 32, 37, 40, 44, 45, 46(x2), 57(x2), 56, 65; 8:16, 18, 19, 27, 28, 38, 41,42,49,54; 10:15(x2), 17, 18, 25, 29(x2), 30, 32, 36, 37, 38(x2);11:41: 12:26, 27, 28, 49, 50; 13:1, 3; 14:2, 6, 7, 8, 9(x2), 10(x3), 11(x2), 12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28(x2), 31(x2); 15:1, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 23, 24, 26(x2); 16:3, 10, 15, 17, 23, 25, 26, 27(x2), 28(x2), 32; 17:1, 5, 11, 21, 24,; 18:11; 20:17(x3), 21).

402

Thompson comments “‘God’ is not a name. In fact the Johannine God has no name. Even though the Gospel several times says that God has given his name to Jesus, we are never told what that name is. God’s name is to be found, apparently, only through Jesus.” Thompson, “God’s Voice You Have Never Heard,”189.

403 _{θεός is used for the Father 76 times in 63 verses: 1:1(x2), 2, 6, 12, 13, 18, 29, 34, 36, 49, 51;}

3:2(x2), 5, 16, 17, 21, 33, 34(x2), 36; 4:10, 24; 5: 18(x2), 25, 42, 44; 6:27, 28, 33, 45(x2), 46, 69; 7:17; 8:40, 41, 42(x2), 47(x3), 54; 9:3, 16, 24, 29, 31(x2), 33; 10:33, 35, 36; 11:4(x2), 22(x2), 27, 40, 52; 12:43; 13:3(x2), 31, 32(x2); 14:1; 16:2, 30; 17:3; 19:7; 20:17, 31; 21:19.

404

According to Meyer, “God is referred to as “the Father” (absolute) 74 times; with the possessive “my/your [sg.]” (always with Jesus as the antecedent), another 25 times; with the addition of “who sent me/him,” another 7 times; in the anarthrous nominative/vocative of prayer, 9 more times; and as an (anarthrous) predicate, 3 times. This yields a total of 118 occurrences of “Father” for God. For purposes of comparison, one may note that God is referred to with θεός (“God”) only 45 times; this count does not include the 31 instances of θεός as a genitive modifier (as in  υός θεο), “ the Son of God" 19 times], τέκνα θεο, “children of God” [2 times],  µνς το θεο, “the Lamb of God” 12 times], etc.), nor the use of 9e6ç as a predicate (1:1; 8:54) or predicate accusative (10:33), but it does include all uses of θεός with prepositions (22 times) and the one vocative (20:28).” Meyer, “‘The Father’: The Presentation of God in the Fourth Gospel,” 269.

158

38; 14:10-11, 20; 17:11, 21, 22, 23), seeing the Father work (5:19; 8:38), seeing Father (6:46), hearing the Father (5:30; 8:26; 15:15), living by the Father (6: 57), knowing the Father (7:29; 8:55; 10:15; 17:25), judging with the Father (8:16), speaking for the Father (8:28, 38; 14:24), honoring the Father (8:43), obeying the Father (8:55; 14:31 ) doing the Father’s work (9:4; 17:4) receiving the Father’s commandment (10:18) is the way to Father (14:6), asking from the Father (14:16; 17:15, 20), loving the Father (14:31), sending the Spirit from the Father (15:26), speaking plainly of the Father (16:25),

manifesting the Father’s name (17:6, 26), giving the Father’s word (17:14), and drinking the Father’s cup (18:11).

In the Father’s actions relating to the Son, the Father is with the Son (8:29; 16:32), gives the Son (3:16; 6:32), gives to the Son (3:35; 5:22, 26, 27, 5:36; 6:37, 38; 10:29; 13:3; 17:2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 22, 24; 18:11) sends the Son (3:17, 34; 4:34, 5:24, 30, 36, 38; 6:29, 38, 39, 44, 57; 7:16, [18], 28, 29, 33; 8:16, 18, 26, 8:42; 9:4; 10:36; 12:44, 45, 49; 13:20; 14:24; 15:21; 16:5; 17:3, 8, 18, 21, 23, 25; 20:21) loves the Son (3:35; 5:20; 10:17; 17:23, 24, 26) works (5:17), shows the Son his actions (5:20, 21), testifies of the Son (5:37; 8:18), seals the Son (6:27), teaches the Son (8:28), glorifies the Son (8:54; [12:28], 13:31-31; 17:1, 5), is glorified in the Son (14:13), hears the Son ([9:31], 11:41- 42), knows the Son (10:15), sanctifies the Son (10:36), gives commandment/speaks to the Son(10:18; 12:49-50), honors those serving the Son (12:26), abides in the Son (14:10), and sends/gives the Spirit in the name of the Son (14:26; 15:16).

The Gospel narrative contains several semantic domains for the SFR connected to clusters of symbols and symbolic language. These domains include 1:1-18, 5:17- 47; 6:26-65; 7:17- 39; 8:12- 59; 10:14- 38; 12:27- 50; 14:1-31; 15:1-10; 15:21- 16:15; 16:23-

159

33; and 17:1- 26. Mapping out a semantic field of reference and identifying the semantic domains of the SFR will provide a narrative blueprint for charting John’s Christological symbology.