In secular Greek sources, a paraklêtos is usually a legal
counsellor, someone called in to assist a person summoned before a tribunal.
The Jews did not have a highly developed range of terminology for court
officials. The Hebrew word oêd “witness”,
could cover people giving testimony, lawyers, prosecutors, defenders; or even
legal contracts or articles produced as evidence. Small wonder that hellenising
Jews, such as Philo of Alexandria and Flavius Josephus, gratefully used Greek
terms, including paraklêtos (1) and that second-century Rabbis
even adopted the Greek term as a loanword, peraqlît in
their Aramaic writings.(2) We need to explore to what extent a juridical
meaning for paraklêtos would fit in John’s gospel.
Our immediate point of departure could be 1 Jn 2:1, the only NT text outside John where paraclete occurs. There it is stated that even if we have sinned we need not lose confidence; for we have a paraklêtos in heaven who intercedes for us. It is clear that in this case the paraclete is Jesus himself for he is mentioned by name and his intercession is linked to his sacrificial death. In Jn 14:16 it is understood that Jesus is the first paraclete: “I will send you another paraclete.” If we combine both texts we find Jesus portrayed as standing before God’s throne acting as a pleader on our behalf. The legal context is obvious.
We should not forget that in ancient jurisprudence a king or governor was automatically the judge. Judging court cases was simply one aspect of ruling. Even if lower judges were appointed to try minor cases, the political ruler was by definition the highest judge. In such a situation, courtiers naturally assumed the role of counsels for the prosecution, legal advisers or pleaders, as the case might be. Since Yahweh was considered the supreme ruler and ultimate judge, the proceedings in his heavenly court were quite naturally imagined to resemble juridical hearings with angels arguing different sides. In Isaiah’s vision of God’s court, the people of Israel are accused of treason. God is prepared to mete out severe punishment but decides to grant Isaiah a last chance (Is 6:1-13). The whole book of Job reflects debates before God’s throne. The angel who acts as prosecutor, called “satan”, that is, “opponent”, challenges Job’s real virtue. God tests Job, with the result that similar arguments begin on earth. Finally, the case is settled in favour of Job’s integrity. God’s justice as a ruler is vindicated at the same time. (3) It is highly instructive to note that the angels who plead for Job, the ‘mediators’ in Job 16:19-22 and 33:23-26, are given the title of ‘peraqlit’in the Aramaic Targum.
For the Essenes at Qumran, events in the world only made sense against the background of a gigantic cosmic struggle. In heaven two armies stood facing each other, locked in irreconcilable conflict. On the one side stood Belial commander of the forces of darkness; on the other, Michael, head of the angels that had remained faithful to God. In preparation for the definitive battle at the end of times, both leaders made efforts to establish strongholds on earth. Belial was trying to seduce and ensnare people, in order to see them condemned by God; Michael, on his side, sought to protect the virtuous interceding with God on their behalf.
The Qumranic documents do not call Michael a paraclete though that is obviously the role they attributed to him.
“I am the angel,
the intercessor for Israel’s generation.
I see to it that no one can defeat it totally
for every evil spirit launches attacks against it.” (4)
They do, however, give him the extraordinary title “spirit of truth”. Angels, it should be remembered, are often referred to as ‘spirits.’ In one remarkable passage, Michael and Belial are contrasted as ‘the spirit of truth’ and ‘the spirit of falsehood’. And the two notions are explained. Those who commit falsehood, sinners, walk on the ways of darkness because “in the hand of the angel of darkness lies complete domination over the children of falsehood”. The angel of darkness, it says, causes righteous people to go wrong. “All their sins, mistakes, transgressions, and criminal acts happen under his clomination until his end will come”. But the “spirit of truth”, who is “the prince of lights”, has control over those virtuous people who walk on the ways of light. God himself and “the angel of his truth” are a support for all children of light. (5)
Here we are close to Johannine ways of speaking. In 1 Jn 4.6 we are told to distinguish ‘the spirit of truth’ from ‘the spirit of falsehood’. But, most of all, the paraclete is emphatically and repeatedly identified with ‘the spirit of truth’. “The Father will give you another paraclete, who will be with you forever, the Spirit of Truth. . .” (14:16-17). “But when the paraclete will come whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth who proceeds from the Father, he will witness in my favour” (15:26).
Against the backdrop of contemporary thinking this means that the paraclete, whom Jesus will send, will act as Michael did: protecting those who seek the truth, pleading for them before God, defending their cause against the powers of darness.
Otto Betz is so overcome by the parallelism with Michael that he contends the paraclete whom Jesus promised was the archangel himself.(6) This misses the point. The whole of John’s gospel climaxes in the sending of the Holy Spirit, as we saw in section one. Jesus is stating that his Holy Spirit will act as a paraclete and will be the new ‘spirit of truth’ who defends Jesus’ disciples.
This function of the Spirit was not a Johannine invention. Jesus himself had assured his disciples that they need not be afraid of how to defend themselves before kings and governors. For the Spirit of the Father would speak on their behalf (Mt 10:20). What is new in John’s gospel is that the whole of Jesus’ life, and that of his disciples, is seen as a court case. For Jesus came into this world as the word, the life, the truth; but his own people did not want to receive him (1:10-11). Jesus did not come to judge and yet his very coming as a stumbling block forced on people a krisis, a judgment. If they refused to accept him, they stood condemned by that very fact (3:17-19). That is why in John’s gospel most scenes reflect argumentation before God’s tribunal, not only the hearing before Pilate which John presents so dramatically (Jn 18-19), but also the repeated conflicts with the Jewish leaders (5:9b-47; 6:25-65; 7:14-36; 8:12-59; 10:22-39). As Rudolf Bultmann rightly observed, the historical debate with the Jews disguises what is happening on a higher level: the clash before God’s throne between the world and the Word. (7) The whole of John’s gospel is a vindication of Jesus’ right and the world’s wrong.
Jesus’ disciples take part in this cosmic struggle. They are still being persecuted, misunderstood, maligned. It is here that the function of the Spirit as pleader and defender becomes manifest. The somewhat obscure passage of 16:8-11 should be seen in this light. The paraclete will not only show that Jesus’ disciples are right (15:26), but also he will prove the opposition to be in the wrong. He will demonstrate their unbelief to be a sin (16:9). He will vindicate God’s decision to withdraw Jesus from them (l6:10). He will provide evidence to show that God has already condemned the leader of the opposition, the prince of this world (16:11). The Spirit is thus the guarantee that Jesus’ disciples will be proved right in the end. (8)
Intercessors who plead before God on behalf of people, vvere also considered to guide their proteges. This was true both of angels and of human intercessors, such as Henoch, Noah, Abraham and Moses.(9) This explains why it is said that the paraclete will teach the disciples (14:26), remind them of what Jesus had said (14:26) and lead them into the fullness of truth (16: 13). For guiding the children of light was precisely the task of the ‘spirit of truth’. The paraclete’s admonishing function does in no way contradict his role as counsellor for the defence. Even in courts today, lawyers do not only address the bench, but also they counsel their clients. The Holy Spirit does more. He counsels them and preserves them in the truth so that they need not be tried in court.
1.Philo, Vita Mosis II, 134; De Specialibus Legibus I 237; Adversus Flaccum par 13,22; De Opifice Mundi par 23, 165; Josephus, Antiquitates III 315.
2. Schab 32a: Tos. Para 1; Ex.R. 18, 3; Tos pea 4, 21; cf. J.Behm, l.c.
3. This has been well worked out by H. Richter in Studien zu Hiob, Berlin 1959.
4. Testamentum Levi 5,6. Compare Dan 12:! where Michae is called the great prince, defender of Israel; see also Dan 10; 13:21.
5. IQS 3,18b-25.
6. O. Betz, Der Paraklet, Brill, Leiden 1963, pp. 154-l58. Apart from this ‘latius hos’ conclusion, this book can be recommended for the material gathered on intercession and interceders. See also N. Johansson, Parakletoi, Gleerup, Lund 1940.
7. R. Bultmann, Das Evangelium des Johannes, Vandenhoeck,Gottingen 1968, pp. 58-59; 223.
7. D.A. Carson, “The Function of the Paraclete in John 16:7-1 1”, Journal of Biblical Literature 98 ( 1979) 547-566. F. Manns, “Le Paraclet dans l’Evangile de Jean”. Studia Biblical Franciscana 33 (1983) 99-152.
8. O. Betz. Der Paraklet, ibid., pp. 100-l06.