Apprehension of Jesus in the Gospel of John. By Josaphat C. Tam. WUNT 2/399. Edited by Jörg Frey. Tübingen, GER: Mohr Siebeck, 2015. 265 pp. Paper, €89,00.

Tam is an assistant professor at Evangel Seminary in Hong Kong. This book is a revision of his 2014 Ph.D. thesis at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland.

The key word in the title is “apprehension.” Tam clarifies this on page 1:

These terms [seeing, hearing, knowing, witnessing, remembering, and believing] appear in every chapter of GJohn [Gospel of John], in ways not found in any other gospels. They pertain to what I call “apprehension,” that is relating to how the characters encounter and grasp Jesus the divine logos in the gospel. The author puts very clearly in the beginning… [In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God] (1:1). Thus, grasping the divine, the Christ and the Son of God (20:31), remains the author’s complicated and yet important task towards the readers. In this regard, I use the umbrella concept of “apprehension of Jesus.”

Tam (pp. 8-9) rightly rejects the notion that “sign faith” is an inferior kind of faith. He also (pp. 39-41) briefly summarizes the conclusions of various scholars regarding the meaning of pisteuō (believe). He has pertinent arguments against the common myths that pisteuō eis… (believe in…) is a superior kind of faith, while pisteuō + dative (believe…) or pisteuō hoti… (believe that…) are supposedly inferior kinds of faith. He rightly concludes, (p. 41), “…these two expressions are used synonymously in GJohn. Thus, he who ‘believes’ God (…) in 5:24 belongs to the same category of persons as he who believes ‘in’ God (…) in 12:44. The first has eternal life (5:24) and the second does not remain in darkness (12:46).”¹

In light of this, one might expect chapter 3 to give a good treatment of John 2:23-24. He starts out well (pp. 65-66):

In John 2:23, John mentions that many people saw (theōreō) Jesus’ “signs” just as his disciples did (2:11). They appear to have believed in Jesus’ name in the manner that is required in 1:12. Contrary to many commentators, from the plot of the narrative up to 2:23, the author provides no clues for us to identify their faith as “shallow” or “inauthentic.” On the contrary, the portrayal of their faith, though based on signs, falls in line with what the author has been persuading the readers about so far.

Unfortunately, after such a promising start, Tam makes a huge assumption: That Jesus not entrusting Himself to these believers implies that they actually remained unbelievers. Tam goes on to claim:

Nevertheless, a negative judgment is ascribed to Jesus in 2:24. How is the people’s faith different from the disciples’? I assert that the difference hinges, not on the so-called “signs faith,” but on Jesus’ own authoritative discernment…The discernment rests exclusively on Jesus himself. One really knows Jesus only when Jesus recognizes that one does. True faith, like that of the disciples, goes hand in hand with Jesus’ omniscience.

Tam claims, “This [John 2:23-25] that some professing faith could be unreliable.” No, the testimony that these people believed is not their self-profession. John himself says that they believed.

Despite not correctly apprehending Johannine soteriology (pardon the pun), Tam’s volume organizes a huge topic within John in an accessible way. He examined J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida, eds., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament based on Semantic Domains (N.p.: United Bible Societies, 1988), to find every reference to seeing (horaō/eidon, theaomai, theōreō, blepō); hearing (akouō); knowing (ginōskō); witnessing/testifying (martureō, marturia); remembering (mimnēskō, hupomimnēskō, mnēmoneuō) and believing (pisteuō). Tam rightly sees a semantic relation between these terms. Analyzing a comprehensive concept has the potential to unlock some interpretive issues which word studies of the individual words might not.

Unfortunately, part of his analysis compares apples with oranges. He does so by including some “communication” words under apprehension. He says (42): “According to Louw and Nida, the apprehension vocabulary all belong to Domains 24–36, falling under domains relating to (1) sensory events and states (24.1-75); (2) learn (27.1-62); (3) know (28.1-83); (4) memory and recall (29.2-18); (5) think (30.1-122); (6) hold a view/believe/trust (31.1-107); (7) understand (32.1-61); (8) communicate (33.1-489); and (9) guide, discipline, follow (36.1-43)” [underlining and bold added].

The underlined category, “communication,” is definitely out of place. Tam (44) lists one pair of words under Louw-Nida’s communication category martureō (to testify) and marturia (testimony):

4. Witnessing (Domain 33: Communicate). 33.262 martureō, marturia (33.264 also). Common terms in other domains but with different lexical features: Domain 31 Hold a view/Believe/Trust…

Yes, a linkage does exist between testimony and believing. Eyewitness testimony is given for the express purpose of encouraging others to believe the testimony. The first pair of uses of martureō, marturia in John’s Gospel occur in John 1:7, a verse that also uses pisteuō (believe):

He [John the Baptist] came for testimony [marturia]—to testify [martureō] about the light—so all might believe [pisteuō] through him. [Faithful Majority Translation]

Although a relationship exists between testimony and belief, only one is a term of apprehension. Why? John’s belief (apprehension) concerning Jesus had occurred prior to his testifying about Him. Martureō and marturia refer to John’s testifying for the purpose that Israel might believe (apprehend) in Jesus as the Christ.

Tam compares apples and oranges when he treats communication words as terms of apprehension. Let me anticipate an objection. An eyewitness is someone who apprehends first-hand, but fear might prevent that witness from testifying. However, all forty-seven uses of martureō and marturia in John’s Gospel refer to the giving of testimony.

Another issue is that Tam does not neatly distinguish apprehension by unbelievers from that of believers. Clearly, the Last Discourse (John 13–17) weighs heavily towards believer apprehension.

Despite the foregoing criticisms, Tam’s work opens some avenues for further study. He has four charts showing the “distribution of apprehension vocabulary” (the Greek words listed immediately above) for John 1–4 (48), 5–12 (82-84), 13–17 (127), and 18–21 (168-69).

I compiled statistics for the Majority Text. Four hundred twenty-eight of Tam’s apprehension words (omitting martureō and marturia) appear in 313 verses (of 879). The number of uses per chapter are: 1 (27), 2 (11), 3 (19), 4 (23), 5 (20), 6 (31), 7 (21), 8 (33), 9 (38), 10 (22), 11 (27), 12 (27), 13 (12), 14 (28), 15 (6), 16 (20), 17 (11), 18 (6), 19 (12), 20 (23), 21 (11). Of course, one would want to distinguish responses by believers from those of unbelievers.

Tam does not understand that everyone who believes Jesus for His promise of everlasting life has it. He wrongly sees John addressing both believers and unbelievers. His Calvinistic assumptions will be evident to the discerning reader. His view of faith does not nail its meaning, but he is closer than most, because he does reject some common misconceptions.

The book can be helpful for a few readers of this journal. It is not for the neophyte. It certainly is not for the casual reader.

John H. Niemelä
Message of Life
Knoxville, TN

____________________

¹ Tam is not crystal clear on the meaning of pisteuō (believe). He could have benefitted from Gordon H. Clark, Faith and Saving Faith (Jefferson, MD: Trinity Foundation, 1983).