ST. CATHARINES CONCORDIA - Brock University

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
first-century Judaism (pp. xv, and 152).
John's Gospel was produced in "a culture of high residual orality";
therefore one m~ght expect John to c~le the Old Teslament Irom
mem y (pp. xvi. and l5 1).
John cites in keeping with his christologically motivated authorial
intent (pp. xiv-xvi, and 154-56).
Thus the data which Schuchard so ably prescnts may also be inte~pretcd in the
following way: John cites the Old Testament in the manner which best f~~rthers his
authorial purposes in bearing witness to the Christ. His first (and natural) inclination
is to cite the Bible of his community (OG). But there are occasions when the OG does
not represent the Hebrew in a way suited to his purpose and consequently he makes
his own translation. In other instances, since it is the scriptural content and not the
wording which serves Jolm's pui-pose, one may not be able to detect a specific textual
basis. And all of this was undertaken by one relying largely (albeit accurately) on his
memory, a Jew at homc in thc Grcck-spcaking world but who has not forgotten his
thoroughly Palestinian roots.
This const~~~ction may not be so neat and tidy as that which points to a singlc
textual source, namely the OG, for John's Old Testament citations. On the other hand
it may more accurately reflect 111e data and hence the reality of the situation.
A 'GOOD READ' FOR PASTORS?
Scrlptwe Within Scripture is obviously a book which ought to be of interest and
of valuc to the specialist, to the onc intcrcstcd in Johanninc studies, or in the ways in
which the New Testament makes use of the Old. But is it a book for pastors? With all
of the various parish demands upon his Lime, why might a pastor choose to read this
book (or one of a similar scholarly nahlrc) instcad of thc latcst "how to" papcrback?
'I'here are several reasons.
A pastor is committed to working with the Word. A study such as this one engages
him with that Word in the languages in which the Holy Spirit saw fit to give it. It gives
him an opporlunity to sharpen his critical faculties as he engages in scholarly debate
with the author. Such activity kccps him thinking biblically and hcncc theologically,
and this can have positive carry-over into all areas of his ministry.
In working through a book like Schuchard's one always ericounlers new ideas thal
piquc thc scholarly interest. Consider, for example, that the subject of the first two
lines of John 12:40 (a citation of Is. G) may not be God, as one tends to assume ("He
blinded their eyes..."), but rather the reference to Jesus' "report" (akoee) in the cilation
of Is. 53: 1 which immediately precedes. Why were the Jews unable to believe? It was
"because the content of Jesus' proclaniation blinded their eyes and hardened their
hcarts" (p. 100). Such an understanding accords with the Old Testament context of
the citation where "it is the content of the prophet's proclamation that causes offence
and thus 'blinds' the peoplt: of God" (p. 101). 01ie may not be immediately convinced