Introduction to John
Overview
Mark’s Gospel begins with John the Baptist. Luke backs his starting point up to the parents of the Baptist. Matthew’s opening genealogy starts with Abraham and works down to the birth of Jesus. The first phrase of John’s Gospel reaches farther back—all the way back—to the beginning, evoking the opening words of Genesis and its account of the world’s creation with the phrase “In the beginning” (1:1).
After his majestic opening (1:1–18), John narrates four momentous days at the outset of Jesus’ ministry (1:19–51) then presents what Jesus said and did in a cycle of events beginning and ending in Cana, framing a trip to Jerusalem and back (2:1–4:54). In chapters 5–12 the narrative shows Jesus in relation to Israel’s feasts. The feast in chapter 5 is unnamed, and then Jesus is presented in relation to the Passover in chapter 6 and the Feast of Tabernacles (ESV “Booths”) in chapters 7–9. Jesus is at the Feast of Dedication in chapter 10, then goes to Jerusalem for the Passover, where he will be betrayed (chs. 11–12).
There are three Passovers in chapters 1–12 (2:13; 6:4; 11:55), necessitating at least three different years for these events to unfold. Chapters 13–20, by contrast, relate the events of an eight- to ten-day period (20:26). Jesus was betrayed on Thursday night after the events of chapters 13–17, put on trial through the night into early morning, then crucified on Friday (chs. 18–19). He rose from the dead on the third day—that Sunday morning (ch. 20). Eight days later, presumably the Monday one week after the resurrection, he appeared to Thomas at the end of chapter 20. The breakfast on the beach in chapter 21 takes place on an unspecified later morning (“after this”; 21:1) prior to Jesus’ ascension, which took place forty days after his resurrection (Acts 1:3).
Title
Reliable early manuscripts of John’s Gospel (among which are P66 and P75) present its title as “The Gospel according to John.” Other high-quality early manuscripts (such as Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) present a shortened form, “According to John.” There are no manuscripts of any NT Gospel bearing variations on this formula; all the witnesses to the titles of the Gospels have either the full title or a shortened version. Martin Hengel1 has persuasively argued that the uniform manuscript titles of the four canonical Gospels most likely stem from the opening phrase of Mark’s Gospel, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ” (Mark 1:1), and that these books would have needed titles from the time of their production and distribution. The fact that the manuscripts do not reflect a wide variety of titles but are consistent in their presentation of the one phrase or its shortened form indicates that these books always bore these titles.
Author
Western culture has suffered from a widespread fad in scholarship involving profound skepticism about authors and authorship.2 Scholars have posited that Homer did not write the Iliad and the Odyssey, Shakespeare did not write the plays for which he is famous, and Moses did not write the Pentateuch, Isaiah did not write his book, and John son of Zebedee did not write the Gospel attributed to him.
The evidence, however—from the titles on the manuscripts to the statements found within the Fourth Gospel itself, as well as those made about it by people nearest its time of composition—points to the conclusion that John son of Zebedee wrote the Fourth Gospel. Those positing a different author often set aside primary source data and reliable early testimony in favor of elaborate theories reflecting deep suspicion of the evidence in our possession.
No manuscript attributes the Fourth Gospel to anyone other than John. In the body of the Fourth Gospel, we find it claiming to have been written by the beloved disciple (John 21:20–25). When we investigate which disciple this could be, the evidence points to John son of Zebedee. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus took only Peter, James, and John with him to heal Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37), to his transfiguration (Luke 9:28), and to pray on the night when he was betrayed (Matt. 26:37). Such evidence indicates that Peter and the two sons of Zebedee enjoyed unique intimacy with Jesus and one another.
In John’s Gospel, Peter is named along with the sons of Zebedee in 21:2. John’s Gospel also shows Peter and the beloved disciple communicating with each other at the Last Supper through signals (cf. “motioned”; 13:24), and the beloved disciple asks Jesus about the delicate issue of who would betray him (13:25). Later Peter and the beloved disciple run to the empty tomb together (20:4). Since this Gospel was never attributed to James, whom Herod killed at a relatively early point (Acts 12:2), it does not seem likely that James son of Zebedee was the beloved disciple. When joined with the universal early attribution of the Fourth Gospel to John son of Zebedee, the most natural conclusion is that John has chosen to refer to himself as the beloved disciple.
This conclusion from within John’s Gospel is supported by universal testimony from the early church that John son of Zebedee wrote this book.3 Some have suggested that the first-person plural statement in John 21:24 suggests something like an editorial committee or later community, but John makes a similar first-person plural statement in 3 John 12.4
Date and Occasion
John could have written his Gospel at any point between the resurrection of Jesus and his own death, which likely came near the end of the first century. Early church tradition held that John wrote Revelation near the end of the first century, but we have no explicit statement as to when John wrote his Gospel. John’s Gospel seems to assume knowledge of the deeds and teachings of Jesus recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (cf. John 3:24 and Mark 1:14),5 but that does not necessarily mean John wrote after they did. After all, John was with Jesus when Jesus did and taught what the other Gospels record, and John knew and worked with Peter and other early Christians, so he would have known how they told the story of Jesus.
John states the reason he wrote in 20:31: “That you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” John no doubt wanted unbelievers to start believing and believers to continue believing.
Genre and Literary Structure
John’s interpretive perspective, which includes his understanding of the world, its problems, and how Jesus solves them, as well how to interpret earlier Scripture and write a narrative that continues its story—in short, every aspect of John’s worldview—has been quarried, hewn, sculpted, and textured by Scripture. That is to say, John was a biblical theologian. John’s heart, mind, and soul were enlivened by the way Jesus taught him to understand the OT’s accounts of how God created and redeemed, covenanted and promised. Jesus not only taught John, he also sent the Holy Spirit (20:22), with the result that the OT’s commands, counsel, and covenants, as well as its patterns, promises, and paradigms, determined how John approached the incomparably difficult task of describing what Jesus said and did, and why it matters (cf. 21:25).
All this leads to the assertion that the best phrase for describing the kind of literature found in the Gospel of John is biblical narrative. This category recognizes the material similarity between the narratives in the Bible that take for granted everything Moses presented in the Torah, the narratives of the Latter Prophets, and the interpretations of the same in the Former Prophets and Writings. This material similarity stems from a shared understanding of creation, man, sin, redemption, and the promise of a new creation that become the wellspring of hope and the substance of faith.
John operates from the same worldview and employs the same literary techniques used by authors of biblical narrative from Moses to the unnamed writers of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, and his perspective is deepened by the words of OT prophets such as Isaiah, psalmists such as David, and sages such as Solomon. Thus the NT Gospels are a lot more like the OT narratives whose story they purport to continue than like Greek biographies of significant figures.
The choice to write in Greek rather than Hebrew appears to have been an outworking of the command Jesus gave his disciples to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:18–20). The apostles wrote in Greek not to distinguish their books from OT biblical narratives but to put the story in the lingua franca of the day, to make known God’s mighty works among the nations. The commentary that follows seeks to understand how John intended the words he used to activate a dynamic between his narrative and the OT, a dynamic that presents Jesus as the culmination, fulfillment, resolution, and realization of everything anticipated in the Law and the Prophets.
As to literary structure, a pervasive feature of biblical narrative and poetry is the arrangement of material into chiastic shape. I am fairly confident of the chiastic structure that will be presented below for John 1:1–18 and John 2–4. I suspect a wide-angle chiastic structure of John 5–12, 13–17, and 18–21. More work needs to be done on these matters, and I do not consider the suggestions made in the commentary to be the last word. I would not be surprised to find that John has arranged the whole of his Gospel into chiastic shape, but the key to that locked secret remains elusive.6
Theology of John; Its Relationship to the Rest of the Bible
John had the daunting task of attempting to use words to describe how the most important person who ever lived did the most important things ever accomplished, leading up to the single most important execution that has ever taken place, followed by the unprecedented resurrection of the executed innocent, in fulfillment of the most important body of literature ever written to that point in human history. John discharged his task by employing strategies utilized by previous biblical authors. The genre constraints and expectations of “biblical narrative” provide the medium for his message. These strategies, constraints, and expectations include the reuse of broad biblical categories of thought, repetition of key phrases, engagement with potent themes, and careful deployment of significant terms. Often the categories, themes, and terms evoke prior biblical writings, making the understanding of the OT that John learned from Jesus a necessary prerequisite for understanding John’s presentation of Jesus. This means John’s Gospel and the OT must be read in light of each other, each expositing and informing the other.
In keeping with my attempt to answer the question What Is Biblical Theology?,7 this discussion of John’s theology will be organized around John’s contributions to the big story of the world, symbols summarizing and interpreting that story, and truths arising out of the story and its symbols, giving rise to worship, culture, and a certain way of life.
Story
John plugs his narrative into the wider story the Bible tells by manifestly adding to what Genesis says about how everything got started. No other Gospel begins the way John does, with overt assertions that Jesus, identified as the Word (1:1–4, 14), both was with God and was God from the beginning (1:1), a statement so bold he rephrases and repeats it (1:2); and that, through Jesus, God created all things (1:3). John’s prologue explores some of the implications of this new revelation about the nature of God: namely, that Jesus the Messiah is God incarnate. This revelation marches inexorably toward the Christian understanding of the tri-unity of God. John makes suggestive comments about how Jesus is the source of life and light for all people (1:4, 9); how the world did not recognize its Creator and the Jews refused to receive him (1:10–11); how the new birth leads to welcoming Jesus and receiving a new status as children of God (1:12–13); how at the incarnation Jesus tabernacled among his people (1:14); how the grace and truth in Jesus fulfills the revelation of the same in the law of Moses (1:17); and how Jesus came from the Father’s bosom to make him known. Still, much of what John says is tantalizingly brief, and many things are left unexplored.
John seems content to assert the reality that Jesus has always been God and has always been with God, establishing a unity and diversity within the Godhead. From there, John tells the story of Jesus such that his Gospel is both a straightforward historical narrative and a pervasively allusive biblical-theological account whose resonance with the OT is so full and sophisticated that it takes its place as one of the great achievements of human art. The Gospel according to John is, of course, more than art, being a revelation of God himself inspired by the Holy Spirit, but it is not less. Like a symphony studied centuries after its creation, its melodies and harmonies charm those who hear only the surface, while astounding those who explore its depths.
Also like a master composer of music, John does not explicitly state what everything means, as I will try to do in this commentary. Instead, he lets the rhythms and reminiscences, signals and hints provoke his audience to worship Jesus, surpassing the wonder one might feel in response to the music of a Bach or a Beethoven. John intends his audience to stand amazed at the Nazarene.
The OT’s story begins in the pristine and pure garden of Eden. There everything God made was good, but man sinned, bringing God’s words of judgment, including a curse on the ground. As the narrative unfolds and the prophets and poets interpret that narrative, it becomes clear that the words of hope God spoke in Genesis 3:15 about the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head produce an expectation that God will raise up a redeemer, seed of the woman, seed of Abraham, seed of David, through whom the adversary will be silenced and the curse rolled back, resulting in a renewal of creation, a swallowing up of death itself. God’s people will enjoy God’s presence in a new heaven and new earth.
That wide-angle story of exile from Eden with the hope of a return is enacted on a small scale as God makes covenants with Abraham and Israel. God promised land to Abraham in Genesis 12:7. Abraham left that land because of a famine, an outworking of the Genesis 3:17 curse on the land. But God brought Abraham back to that land and revealed himself to him (Genesis 15). Similarly, another famine forced Abraham’s descendants out of the land, and Jacob and his sons went to Egypt. Once again, God brought Israel out of Egypt and restored them to the land, revealing himself to them at Sinai with words reminiscent of his Genesis 15 revelation of himself to Abraham (cf. Ex. 20:2; Gen. 15:7).
The genealogy in Genesis 5 hints at Adam’s role as the son of God (Gen. 5:1–4; cf. Luke 3:38); at the exodus God identifies Israel as his firstborn son (Ex. 4:22–23), later promising that the king from David’s line would be a son to him (2 Sam. 7:14). As Adam was driven from Eden for his sin, so Israel was driven from the Land of Promise for breaking the covenant. The one hailed as the “Son of God . . . the King of Israel” (John 1:49) came to succeed where Adam and Israel failed—to bruise the serpent’s head, conquer death, and set in motion a new and greater exodus leading to the enjoyment of a new and better Land of Promise, a new heavens and earth.
John shows that Jesus has come as the expected son of David, the Son of God who will bring Israel’s history to its anticipated climax, by presenting Jesus in relation to Israel’s feasts. The relationship between Jesus and Israel’s feasts invites us to consider John’s development of biblical symbolism.
Symbol
Israel’s feasts were symbolic reenactments of what God had done for them. Passover commemorated the exodus from Egypt, Tabernacles celebrated God’s provision and protection in the wilderness, and Weeks seems to build on the creation week to point to the cycles of life under God’s law in God’s land (cf. Deut. 16:16). John mainly highlights Jesus in relation to Passover (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55; 12:1; 13:1; 18:39) and Tabernacles (7:2; cf. 7:1–10:21). John also includes an unnamed feast (5:1) and mentions the Feast of Dedication (10:22), which celebrated the rededication of the temple after the Maccabean revolt in 167–164 BC.
These feasts summarized liturgically God’s mighty acts in the past, embedded them in present experience, and shaped expectations of the way God would fulfill his promises in the future. The yearly celebrations impressed the contours of God’s character and way of acting on the consciousness of the worshiper. The symbols were used in worship to communicate a whole worldview meant to condition the hearts of those who hoped for more like this in the future.
Throughout the writings of Israel’s prophets we find indications that God would do for Israel in the future what he did for them in the past; he saved Israel with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm at the exodus, and he would extend his arm a second time; he brought Israel through the Red Sea and Jordan River, and he would be with them when they passed through the waters; he gave manna from heaven, and he would prepare a table in the wilderness; he provided water from the rock, and he would make streams in the desert; he gave Israel the land, and he would make it like Eden. In all this, Israel’s prophets, guided by the institution of the feasts, used the historical acts of God celebrated in the symbols to depict the way God would save his people in the future.
The repetition of patterns and events in Scripture attuned people like John to pick up on occasions recalling those repetitions. John saw Jesus do things corresponding to significant events, patterns, and symbols in Israel’s Scriptures, and he interpreted Jesus as the fulfillment to which the Scriptures pointed. This is why he records the Baptist’s heralding Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:29, 36), saw significance in a wedding on the third day (2:1), and recounted how Jesus discussed the manna from heaven after feeding the five thousand (6:1–71); and it is why the narrative set at the time of the Feast of Tabernacles (which celebrated the pillar of fire in the wilderness and the water the people drank from the rock) has Jesus calling people to come to him if they are thirsty (7:37–39) and to follow him and not walk in darkness (8:12). John understood Jesus as the “good shepherd” who would take his people to the kingdom God has prepared for them (10:1–21).
More could be said about how symbols function in John’s Gospel, but I will reserve further thoughts for the exposition in the body of the commentary. At this point we turn to consider the way that the stories and the symbols give rise to certain bedrock truth convictions.
Truth
Stories explaining the world give rise to foundational truths and assumptions. That is to say, the Bible does not present Moses or other biblical authors as starting with philosophical truth claims, illustrated by invented stories. Rather, Moses and the other biblical authors encountered God, heard the story of what he had done, and derived truth from the stories. We believe God to be the Creator because Genesis 1 shows him creating the world, not because we reasoned our way to a philosophical claim and then made up a story to fit.
We could go on and on listing propositions like the ones that follow, propositions we learn from the story John tells: Jesus is God. God keeps his word, enforcing commands and fulfilling promises. God made the world good and will overcome evil. Man is lost in sin and unable to save himself. The Spirit gives life to those who embrace Jesus and his teaching by faith. The OT narratives inform the Christian sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The world will respond to followers of Jesus the same way they responded to Jesus himself. Jesus has been raised from the dead and will return to take his followers to the place he has gone to prepare for them.
To encounter Jesus in John is to encounter one who inspires us to thank and praise God. That is to say, the Gospel of John provokes the worship of Jesus.
Worship
Jesus declares in John 4:23 that the Father is seeking people who will worship him in Spirit and truth. The story gives rise to symbols that summarize, interpret, and reinforce its significance, and from the story we derive truths teaching us about God and his world. What we learn from the truths and see in the beauty of the symbols about the grandeur of the story provokes our hearts to offer to God the thanks and praise due him for his incomparable love and power and goodness and, in a word, glory. We were made for this. We long to celebrate something beyond ourselves with undiluted joy over its undiminished greatness. The God who loved the world by sending his only begotten Son, whose deeds the world’s books cannot contain (21:25), will never disappoint us. Our praise will never exceed his worth. John’s Gospel gives ample reason for God’s people to present their bodies as living sacrifices in reasonable acts of worship (Rom. 12:1–2).
Culture
Stories create culture, and the story of Jesus in the Gospel of John anticipates a people who will seek to imitate the character and virtue of Jesus. These people are taught by John’s Gospel that Jesus will send them the Holy Spirit as another comforter; the world will treat them as it treated him; and they will be in the world but not of it as the Father protects them, just as Jesus prayed he would. The norms and values commended by the Gospel of John fit with the stories and symbols, the truths and responses prompted by the narrative, and where these expectations and principles are understood as “normal,” one finds a culture generated by John’s Gospel and the rest of Scripture.
Way of Life
John’s Gospel presents Jesus and his followers pursuing a way of life consisting of, among other things: devotion to the living God of the OT; recognition of Jesus as God’s Son, who reveals him to the world and carries forward his program; teaching others the truth so they might believe in Jesus and be delivered from God’s wrath; solidarity with others who believe, a unity that transcends place of origin, ethnic identity, or anything else typically distinguishing people from each other; expectation that God will answer prayer as Jesus said he would; a habit of abiding in Christ by abiding in his words; and hope that Jesus will return to consummate what he began.
This way of life and culture grows from a worshipful response to the truths learned from the symbols that interpret and communicate the story John tells. In that way of life, we are on the path to understanding John’s theology. As we proceed through the Gospel, more detail will be added to the outline sketched here.
Preaching from John
This Gospel was meant to be proclaimed. It was my own privilege to preach through the Gospel of John between August 2013 and February 2015. I heartily commend the exercise. You will never regret preaching from John.
Interpretive Challenges
There are, of course, interpretive disputes on which positions must be taken. In the commentary that follows, I depart from some reigning points of consensus. For instance, I offer an alternative understanding to the one preferred by many at present concerning Jesus’ identity as the “only begotten” Son of God. These choices will be discussed further below. In addition, I am not impressed by the claim that John is interested in there being exactly seven “I Am” statements in his Gospel, or seven signs. There are more than seven “I Am” statements, and John does not seem to me to have been interested in enumerating exactly seven signs. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, so the exposition to follow will have to speak for itself.
Outline of John
The final arbiter of all interpretation is the question of what the author intended. While John almost certainly held a mental conception of the structure of his Gospel in whole and in part, he almost certainly did not think of it along the lines of the analytical outlines (Roman numeral I, Point A, etc.) so commonly employed in our culture.
Given the pervasive use of chiasm and inclusio and related literary devices in biblical literature, it seems likely that John’s mental conception of the structure of his Gospel, in whole and in part, was probably more chiastic than anything else. For this reason, while I am presenting an analytical outline in deference to the expectations of my own culture, I am also providing what appear to me to be the chiastic structures intended by John. Corresponding parts of a chiasm often interpret and develop each other, with the center of the chiasm occupying pride of place in the author’s arrangement, revealing the big idea of his presentation. The center points of chiasms sometimes function as narrative turning points, and arranging the material chiastically would serve as an aid to memory.
I will present first an overview of the analytical outline, followed by a series of chiastic structures John seems to have built into his Gospel, and conclude with a more detailed analytical outline, with subpoints.
An overview of the analytical outline:
- I. Grace upon Grace (1:1–18)
- II. Four Momentous Days (1:19–51)
- III. From Cana to Cana (2:1–4:54)
- IV. Jesus and the Feasts (5:1–11:57)
- V. The Raising of Lazarus (11:1–44)
- VI. The Hour Has Come for the Son of Man to Be Glorified (11:45–17:26)
- VII. Denial, Death, Resurrection (18:1–20:31)
- VIII. Breakfast on the Beach (21:1–25)
John seems to have built several chiastic structures into his Gospel:
John 1:1–18
- 1:1–5: The Word as God, Agent of Creation, Life, and Light
- 1:16–18: The Revelation of the Father in the Son
John 2–4
John 5–11
- John 5: The dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and live
- John 11: Jesus calls Lazarus to come out from the tomb
John 12–17
- John 12: The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified
- John 17: The hour has come, glorify your Son
John 18–21
- John 18: Peter denies Jesus three times at a charcoal fire
- John 21: Peter confesses love for Christ three times at a charcoal fire
A detailed analytical outline of John’s Gospel:
- I. Grace upon Grace (1:1–18)
- II. Four Momentous Days (1:19–51)
- III. From Cana to Cana (2:1–4:54)
- A. The First Sign in Cana: New Wine at a Wedding on the Third Day (2:1–12)
- B. Passover and a New Temple (2:13–25)
- C. Nicodemus (3:1–21)
- D. The Baptist (3:22–36)
- E. The Samaritan Woman (4:1–42)
- F. The Second Sign in Cana: New Life on the Third Day (4:43–54)
- IV. Jesus and the Feasts (5:1–11:57)
- A. The Healing and Teaching at the Unnamed Feast (5:1–47)
- B. Feeding the Multitude, Crossing Water, and Providing Manna at Passover (6:1–71)
- C. Water from the Rock, Light for the World, Sight, and the Good Shepherd at Tabernacles (7:1–10:21)
- D. The One-with-the-Father Christ Protects His People at Hanukkah (10:22–42)
- V. The Raising of Lazarus (11:1–44)
- VI. The Hour Has Come for the Son of Man to Be Glorified (11:45–17:26)
- A. Approaching the Final Passover (11:45–12:50)
- 1. When Jesus Wasn’t Wanted (11:45–12:11)
- 2. The King Comes for Judgment (12:12–33)
- 3. That the Word Might Be Fulfilled (12:34–50)
- B. The Footwasher, the Way, the Vine, and the Giver of the Spirit (13:1–16:33)
- 1. The Footwasher (13:1–20)
- 2. Treachery, Love, and Denial (13:21–38)
- 3. The Way, the Truth, and the Life (14:1–14)
- 4. The Indwelling Spirit (14:15–31)
- 5. Abide in Christ (15:1–17)
- 6. The Haters and the Helper (15:18–16:4a)
- a. The Haters (15:18–25)
- b. The Helper (15:26–16:4a)
- 7. Jesus Will Send the Spirit (16:4b–15)
- 8. Your Sorrow Will Turn to Joy (16:16–33)
- C. The Lord’s Prayer (17:1–26)
- A. Approaching the Final Passover (11:45–12:50)
- VII. Denial, Death, Resurrection (18:1–20:31)
- VIII. Breakfast on the Beach (21:1–25)
1 Martin Hengel, The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000).
2 See, e.g., the Introduction in Homer, The Iliad: Books 1–12, ed. William F. Wyatt, trans. A. T. Murray, 2nd ed., vol. 170, LCL (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 1–6.
3 See especially Charles E. Hill, The Johannine Corpus in the Early Church (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).
4 For further discussion of Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel, see Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel: Issues and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002); and D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005).
5 See Richard Bauckham, ed., The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998).
6 The arrangement proposed by David Deeks and cited by Peter Leithart fails to persuade because the points of contact highlighted in the commentary that follows prove more convincing (cf. Peter Leithart, Deep Exegesis: The Mystery of Reading Scripture [Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2009], 169). See also the extensive discussion of chiasmus in John’s Gospel by John Breck, The Shape of Biblical Language: Chiasmus in the Scriptures and Beyond (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2008), 165–201; and John W. Welch and Daniel B. McKinlay, eds., Chiasmus Bibliography (Provo, UT: Research Press, 1999).
7 James M. Hamilton Jr., What Is Biblical Theology? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014).