The Spiritless Son of Man: Disentangling λόγος and πνεῦμα in the Fourth Gospel

The phrase ‘the Word became flesh’ (Jn 1.14) is underdetermined. The author apparently depended on mutually informed context to communicate its meaning. In recent years, Francis Watson and Troels Engberg-Pedersen have proposed different contexts for understanding John, but have agreed that, when the appropriate context is provided, λόγος and πνεῦμα can be read synonymously. On the basis of this judgment, Watson and Engberg-Pedersen each settle on an ‘adoptionist’ reading of John: that the Word became flesh when the Spirit descended on Jesus (Jn 1.32–34). Both scholars argue that the adoptionist perspective ‘works’ when posited throughout the rest of the narrative. However, I argue that these readings are unable to fully incorporate John’s Son of Man theme. I argue that John’s Jesus is subtly depicted as the Son of Man both before he receives the πνεῦμα and after he gives it up. Furthermore, if the ‘adoptionist’ view is ruled out then the traditional reading––that Jn 1.14 refers to the miraculous conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit––becomes a more attractive possibility. John may know this tradition through oral reports, but the ambiguity of Jn 1.14 may also serve as indirect evidence for the growing view that John knows the Synoptic Gospels.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
Published
2025-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x251313793
Primary Topic
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Spiritless Son of Man: Disentangling λόγος and πνεῦμα in the Fourth Gospel

Benjamin Luke Beavers
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
article

The Spiritless Son of Man: Disentangling λόγος and πνεῦμα in the Fourth Gospel

Benjamin Luke Beavers
article en

Abstract

The phrase ‘the Word became flesh’ (Jn 1.14) is underdetermined. The author apparently depended on mutually informed context to communicate its meaning. In recent years, Francis Watson and Troels Engberg-Pedersen have proposed different contexts for understanding John, but have agreed that, when the appropriate context is provided, λόγος and πνεῦμα can be read synonymously. On the basis of this judgment, Watson and Engberg-Pedersen each settle on an ‘adoptionist’ reading of John: that the Word became flesh when the Spirit descended on Jesus (Jn 1.32–34). Both scholars argue that the adoptionist perspective ‘works’ when posited throughout the rest of the narrative. However, I argue that these readings are unable to fully incorporate John’s Son of Man theme. I argue that John’s Jesus is subtly depicted as the Son of Man both before he receives the πνεῦμα and after he gives it up. Furthermore, if the ‘adoptionist’ view is ruled out then the traditional reading––that Jn 1.14 refers to the miraculous conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit––becomes a more attractive possibility. John may know this tradition through oral reports, but the ambiguity of Jn 1.14 may also serve as indirect evidence for the growing view that John knows the Synoptic Gospels.

Journal for the Study of the New TestamentVol. 47(4)
Marquette University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.