Introduction to the Problem: Any attempt toward presenting a thorough history of interpretation of the impartation of the Spirit in John 20:22 will quickly face the difficulty of categorizing the various views within a satisfactory taxonomy (my own attempt at this may be found in Rosen, The Meaning and Redemptive-Historical Significance of John 20:22 [Peter Lang, 2022], 5-55). This difficulty stems from several factors: (1) the surprising degree of interpretive diversity among the proposals presented by scholars; (2) the overlap of many of these interpretations, which often incorporate aspects of other views and sometimes appear to swallow them whole; (3) the disparate ways in which scholars frame the interpretation in terms of the degree of Spirit-reception, or the functionality of this reception, or how it relates to Pentecost or the Paraclete sayings; and (4) a lack of clarity and/or thoroughness in the articulation of some scholars—their views are hard to categorize because they are vague or cursory.
Contribution of the Paper: This paper will not attempt any such categorization of the seemingly endless proposed interpretations of this crux interpretum. Nor will it attempt to defend any particular interpretation of the verse. Instead, the goal here is to offer a thorough enumeration of the interpretive questions that any exegete will want to consider in the attempt to determine the meaning of this text and to offer a thorough and coherent interpretation thereof. Thus, the hope is to provide a useful guide to the issues to assist the exegete who seeks to navigate them. The thesis of the paper is that a thorough enumeration and categorization of such interpretive questions will provide a useful heuristic framework facilitating more satisfactory interpretive results.
The following is a sampling of such interpretive questions:
Questions Related to the Action of Christ (ἐνεφύσησεν, “he breathed/blew on [them]”)
• How is ἐμφυσάω best translated? As “breathe” or “blow”? (Cf. Klink)
• Should the act of breathing be understood in light of Gen 2:7? (So most scholars). In light of Ezek 37:9? (Peterson). The DSS? (Tigchelaar). In light of non-Jewish and extra-biblical cultural contexts? (Suggestions include reading the action in light of the folklore of the Kurds [Levonian], an African understanding of breath [Tarr], or Indian sources [Derrett]).
• Should the act of breathing be understood as somehow actually conveying the Spirit (e.g., Rea, Meyer, Burge, Thompson, Rainbow, Levison) or as symbolically pointing toward the Spirit’s bestowal (Warrington, Bennema, Beasley-Murray)?
• Should the act of breathing be understood as an ad extra representation of ad intra realities? (e.g., Holmes, Teer)
Questions Related to the Command of Christ (λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον, “Receive the Holy Spirit”)
• How is the imperative λάβετε best understood?
1. As anticipatory (of Pentecost)? (e.g., Carson)
2. As a command that the disciples may choose either to obey or disobey?
3. As a performative utterance? (e.g., Turner)
4. As explanatory of the act of breathing/blowing?
• What is the significance of the aorist tense-form imperative?
• Does αὐτοῖς serve as the indirect object of λέγει, as the dative complement of ἐνεφύσησεν, or as both?
• How is πνεῦμα ἅγιον to be understood? As a reference to the Holy Spirit? Or as impersonal?
Questions Related to the Extent/Degree, Nature, and Function of the Spirit’s Impartation
How to relate John 20:22 to other passages within and outside of John
• How does John 20:22 relate to the Lukan narrative describing reception of the Spirit on Pentecost?
• How does John 20:22 relate to John 1:33?
• How does John 20:22 relate to the work of the Spirit as described in John 3:3–8; 4:23–24; 6:63; 7:37–39?
• How does John 20:22 relate to the work of the Spirit in the lives of pre-glorification (cf. John 7:39) believers?
• How does John 20:22 relate to various OT prophecies that predict Spirit-reception?
Another pertinent question addresses the “quantitative” issue:
• Was this a purely symbolic, parabolic, anticipatory, and prophetic action and command that simply pointed to Pentecost for fulfillment? Thus, nothing is here imparted.
• Was this a partial or temporary bestowal of the Spirit?
• Was this a full or complete bestowal of the Spirit? If so, in what sense?
• Was this bestowal of the Spirit part of a process? If so, what is the nature of this process? When did it start and end?
Another important question aims at clarifying the qualitative or functional issue:
• Was this bestowal of the Spirit life-giving? If so, in what sense?
• Was this bestowal of the Spirit ministry-empowering? If so, in what sense?
• Was this bestowal of the Spirit revelatory? If so, in what sense?
• Some regard this as the complete fulfillment of the Paraclete sayings (e.g., Brown; Barrett), while others see Pentecost as the fulfillment of the Paraclete sayings (e.g., Carson), while still others would take a both-and approach that posits a partial fulfillment or a fulfillment of certain aspects of the Paraclete sayings on Resurrection Day (e.g., Ervin, Williams [?]).