AN I MADVE R S I O N E S Johannine Soteriology and Aristotelian Philosophy A Hermeneutical Suggestion on Reading John 3,16 and 1 John 4,9 The objective of this short study is a modest one: to propose a hermeneutical reading of Johannine soteriology based on John 3,16 and 1 John 4,9. I am proposing a possible answer to the question in what sense Jesus was ‘the cause’ (1) of salvation by examining the two Johannine verses from the particular philosophical standpoint of the Aristotelian categorization of the various causes. The aim is to offer a precise reading of Johannine soteriology with respect to (1) a definition of what constitutes the cause of salvation and (2) the important distinction between the means (understood as the four conjoint Aristotelian causes) and the mode (understood as faith) of salvation. This distinction between the means and mode of salvation is significant in that it allows us to position the place of Jesus as a cause of salvation very precisely within the means of salvation. I will briefly outline Aristotle’s distinction of causes, discuss Philo’s exemplary use of the Aristotelian distinction of causes in his interpretation of the biblical account of creation, examine the two passages, John 3,16 and 1 John 4,9, and, finally, discuss how the categorization of causes sheds light on our understanding of Johannine soteriology with respect to the distinction between the means and mode of salvation. 1. The Distinction of Causes in Aristotle The most famous of ancient philosophical discussions of the notion of cause (2) is the one of Aristotle. The Stagirite proposed that the notion of a ‘cause’ is a complex nexus of interrelated causes, each of which bears equally on the phenomenon that is called in its singularity a cause. Aristotle explicitly spoke of cause as a ‘fourfold’ phenomenon (983a) (3) and of ‘several causes (1) The question is raised in Heb 5,9 where it says that Jesus ‘became (the) cause of eternal salvation for all who obeyed him (ejgevneto pa'sin toi'" uJpakouvousin aujtw'/ ai[tio" swthria" aijwnivou)’. v (2) It exceeds the scope of this essay to discuss the complex doxographic history of the development of cause(s) among the Greeks. For a review of the notion of cause as expressed by ‘prepositional metaphysics’ and the blending of prepositional phrases with specific causes in Greek thought, see G.E. STERLING, “Prepositional Metaphysics in Jewish Wisdom Speculation and Early Christian Liturgical Texts”, Studia Philonica Annual 9 (1997) 219-238. Sterling provides an excellent discussion of Platonic, Peripatetic and Stoic positions on the notion of cause. (3) For the Greek text, German translation and commentary, see M. BALTES, Die philosophische Lehre des Platonismus. Der Platonismus in der Antike. Grundlagen – System – Entwicklung (Stuttgart 1996) IV, 128-129, 407-408.