Para leer esta reseña en español clic aquí
Lazarus, Mary and Martha: A social-scientific and theological reading of John, Philip F. Esler and Ronald A. Piper, Minneapolis: Augusburg Fortress, 2006, 208 pp.
Social-scientific criticism seeks to ask a different set of questions of the text than traditional methods of historical interpretation. This results in new insights being given to texts. Esler has previously written a number of articles and books utilizing social-scientific criticism.
This idea of the publication was initiated following the presentation of a conference address entitled, “The Raising of Lazarus: Multidisciplinary Perspectives”. The multidisciplinary aspect of the present book includes the use of early Christian art to support the main thesis.
The authors argue that the raising of Lazarus is a key text in the Fourth Gospel. And it is not to be understood as normal in a Christological way, prefiguring the resurrection of Jesus. But rather that it is prototypical of the destiny of those who believe in Jesus. Early Christian art is then used as empirical evidence to support this interpretation.
The theological implication of this then is against modernist and postmodernist disinterest in the fate of the dead. But rather it highlights how important the future destiny of the believer was in the early church. So the authors conclude, “this brilliant Johannine narrative throws down the challenge that failure to confront the ultimate questions of death and its aftermath risks driving a wedge between Christians today and the long line of people before us whom we collectively remember, and, even more, call our own.” (p. 158).
In terms of general principles, Lazarus, Mary and Martha are understood to be prototypes establishing a social identity with those who follow Jesus. This identity is typified by being a family that Jesus loves, and they reciprocate that love. This relationship with Jesus is one in which hope is needed in confronting death in a hostile society.
Parallel texts in the synoptics are considered and there are two appendices which discuss the concept of the Jews in John and the textual reading of the spice used by Mary in the anointing of Jesus.
One obvious point of weakness in the argument concerns the social identity of the distinctive community for whom John writes. The existence of such a community is an essential part of the argument. However if their colleague at St. Andrews University, Richard Bauckham is right, then no such community existed because the gospels were originally written for all Christians (p. 5).
This is a stimulating study which helps readers to appreciate the use of social-scientific analysis, but far more importantly the demonstration of the love of Jesus in the raising of a typical follower and its implication for followers today. As such it combines academic insights, with pastoral concern and presents an apologetic thrust.
David Ford, Profesor del Nuevo Testamento, Fundación Universitaria Seminario Bíblico de Colombia, Medellín, Colombia.