The Divine Lamp

Jun 02 2007

Outlines to the Prologue of John’s Gospel

Published by Dim Bulb at 10:36 am under Bible, Notes on the Gospel of John, Uncategorized

The following outline is from Father Felix Just S.J., Ph.D. Please note the material is copyrighted and is being used in accordance with his generous terms of usage.
A) 1-2: The Divine WORD was with God eternally.
B) 3: All things came into being through it/him (the Word).
C) 4-5: In him was life and light, which darkness did not overcome.
D) 6-8: [John was not the light, but came to testify about the light.]
E) 9-10: The True Light was in the world, but the world did not recognize him.
F) 11: He came into his own realm, but his own people did not accept him.
G) 12: THOSE WHO DO BELIEVE IN HIM BECOME CHILDREN OF GOD.
F’) 13: These believers are not ordinary human offspring, but are born of God.
E’) 14: The Incarnate WORD reveals God’s glory, full of grace and truth.
D’) 15: [John testified about the priority of the one coming after him.]
C’) 16: Out of his (the Word’s) fullness, we all received grace upon grace.
B’) 17: Grace and truth came into being through Jesus Christ.
A’) 18: The only-begotten Son has revealed God.

Here is Father Just’s literal translation of the prologue arranged according to the above outline.

Here is a slightly different outline from Father Dom Henry Wansbrough:

A1) Origin with God (1:1-2)

B1) Creation (1:3-5)

C1) John the Baptist (1:6-8)

D1) The word gives light (1:9)

E1) Rejection (1:10-11)

F) Power to become sons of God (1:12a)

E2) acceptance (1:12b-13)

D2) We saw his glory (1:14)

C2) John the Baptist (1:15)

B2) Re-creation (1:16-17)

A2) Return to God (1:18)

You can view Father Wansbrough’s pdf booklet here. Scroll down to pages 36-37 to see what he has to say about the structure.

Finally, here is the outline I prefer:

A1) Everything came to be through the eternal Word to whom John bore witness (1:1-8)

B1) The true light was in the world and was rejected by his own (1:9-11)

C) To those who believe he gave power to become children of God (1:12-13)

B2) The Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory (1:14)

A2) Grace and truth came to be through Jesus Christ to whom John bore witness (1:15-18)

The parallels between the A1 and the A2 sections are obvious. The parallels between the B1 and B2 sections are partly antithetical (”rejection” contrasting with “we beheld his glory”) and partly thematic (”was in the world” paralleling “the Word became flesh”).

Here is a fine, 8 page article from THE AUSTRALIAN BIBLICAL REVIEW which looks at various proposed structures and suggests a new one. The work also contains some helpful notes. It was written by Dr. Mary Coloe of the Catholic University of Australia.

For various outlines to the entire Gospel of John go here.

Share and Enjoy:

4 responses so far

4 Responses to “Outlines to the Prologue of John’s Gospel”

# Robon 02 Jun 2007 at 7:20 pm

I’ve always thought that it would have made more sense to put John’s gospel first in the New Testament, seeing how he actually goes back further than Genesis 1:1 and gives us a new look at the beginning of the Universe previous to the Creation of the Earth. Actually, this makes me curious as to why it was eventually placed fourth in the canon of the gospels.
# thedivinelampon 02 Jun 2007 at 8:11 pm

I recall reading somewhere that Matthew’s gospel was the one most often appealed to in catechetical instructions and that this may account for its placement first. Certainly the deeper theology of John’s Gospel would be enough reason to place it last. In the end, the order of the Gospels probably reflects the belief (heavily influenced by Augustine) that this was the order in which they were written.
# Robon 03 Jun 2007 at 1:18 am

-the order of the Gospels probably reflects the belief (heavily influenced by Augustine) that this was the order in which they were written.-

Good point. I had forgotten. I took an online course at Notre Dame and this information was presented. Of course, there was the later idea that Mark was really first and the idea that it was a condensation of Matthew was disparaged. However, someone very learned in my class explained, in a chat room, how the “primacy” of Matthew, and it’s originally being written in hebrew, were still very valid possibilities. Unfortunately, I lost all the notes to that class and now can’t remember why I
thought he was right!

That’s neither here nor there, but I do recall something from that class concerning the gospels of John and Mark. There are some passages that are common only to John and Mark, not to the other two. One of the Fathers noted this, and it suggests that John may have had access to a copy of Mark, or to it’s oral version, when he wrote his Gospel.
# thedivinelampon 03 Jun 2007 at 9:25 am

“First of all, it is obvious that John supposes the synoptic tradition. He takes it for granted that his readers know who the twelve are, and therefore gives them no introduction (6:67). He does not mention Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist, but he evidently supposes that the reader knows of this baptism when he records the Baptist’s testimony in 1:32-34. In many instances John’s meaning would be difficult to understand were he not already familiar with the Synoptic story.

Whether John made us of the writtin synoptics is another question. Probably a majority position today would be that he used, or at least had read, Mk’s Gospel. At times John not only parallels the Markan order, but also uses expressions peculiar to Mark. To this we might add that it is chronologically possible that Mark was already well known in the Christian world for which the Gospel of John was intended. However, other authors are convinced that what is common in Mk and Jn can be explained on the basis of a common oral tradition, the peculiar Marcan terms included.” (The Jerome Biblical Commentary 63:18)