| The cry «Hosanna!» renders the Hebrew of Ps 118:25 , 7820 and similar Hebrew cries for salvation could address kings ( 2Sam 14:4; 2 Kgs 6:26); coupled with the branches (see below), this suggests that the crowds hoped for him as a king or national deliverer. 7821 Hence he is «king of Israel,» as Nathanael recognized (1:49). In John " s Gospel this royal expectation recalls 6:15, but on this occasion Jesus does not retreat, for his hour of enthronement on the cross is approaching. Ironically, the leaders of his people will claim no king but Caesar (19:15). 3. Scripture Fulfilled (12:14–16) The disciples did not recognize the allusion to Zech 9:9 7822 until after Jesus» death and resurrection (12:14–16), 7823 obvious as it may seem in retrospect. 7824 If extant later sources may reflect ideas circulating in the late first century, they suggest that this verse was understood messianically in early Judaism. 7825 Most ancient Mediterranean hearers would honor the image of a ruler who was merciful and kind to his enemies. 7826 John " s special touch is evident even in the details. It was not an unusual practice to abbreviate a narrative by omitting intermediaries, 7827 as Matthew seems to do on some occasions (Matt 8/Luke 7:3–4; Matt 9/ Mark 5:35 ); thus no one will be alarmed that Jesus himself «finds» the donkey (12:14), in contrast to the fuller version in the probably more widely circulated version of the passion week ( Mark 11:1–6 ). 7828 After all, even in that version, Jesus was ultimately responsible for locating the donkey ( Mark 11:2 ). But what is most theologically significant is that in John " s language Jesus finds the donkey–just as he gives the sop (13:26) and in other ways shows himself sovereign over the details of the Passion Narrative. That the disciples did not understand at first fits John " s version of the Messianic Secret. After Jesus» glorification, the Spirit would come (7:39) and cause the disciples to remember Jesus» message (14:26); his glorification thus allowed the disciples to recall Jesus» action and understand it in light of Scripture here (12:16). John had earlier offered a similar comment about the disciples after the resurrection remembering Jesus» costly zeal for the temple (2:22). The repetition suggests a key hermeneutical point for John: the biblical record and Jesus» ministry and glorification should be read in light of one another, led by the Spirit who continues his presence. 4. Immediate Responses to Jesus» Entry (12:17–19) |
| Jesus withdraws from the intense conflict in Jerusalem (ch. 5) and encounters a different sort of response in Galilee (ch. 6). The «other side» of the lake (6:1) contrasts with Jesus» usual Galilean location on the west side of the lake (e.g., 2:1, 12; 4:45–46), though the exact location is uncertain. 5972 That crowds would flock to Jesus (6:2) fits the rest of the gospel tradition (e.g., Mark 9:15 ; Matt 4:24) and what we know about the response of crowds to popular teachers. 5973 Johns mention of the «mountain» in v. 3 could reflect a minor allusion to the Moses tradition that will dominate the following discourse, especially given the repetition of the mountain in 6:15; probably Matthew had already employed the mountain image to this end (Matt 5:l). 5974 Its primary literary function here, however, appears to be an inclusio with 6:15, 5975 suggesting either that Jesus withdrew on both occasions from overzealous multitudes (6:2) or that Jesus withdrew from militant but uncomprehending followers (cf. 2:23–25) the way he had from active opponents (5:45–6:1). The nearness of the Passover (6:4) explains the flourishing of grass (6:10), which was not always available in much of the «wilderness» (e.g., 1 En. 89:28). The grass already present in the gospel tradition (Matt 14:19)–especially the «green» grass ( Mark 6:39 )–suggests that the nearness of the Passover is a genuine historical reminiscence. 5976 Grass could recall biblical images of abundant provision for livestock sometimes linked with God " s provision for his people ( Deut 11:15 ), but John " s audience would probably not seek biblical allusions in this aspect of the setting. 5977 The primary function of the grass in 6is probably simply to indicate that the ground was easier to sit on (e.g., Virgil Ed. 3.55). The mention of Passover and spring further suggests that at least a year has passed since 2in the story world, developing John " s plot. The language of this verse probably alludes to the language of 2(especially εγγς and «feast of the Jews»; cf. also 11:55; Tabernacles in 7:2), suggesting that one read both passages in light of the impending Passover; Jesus encounters rejection in both passages because he defies traditional expectations of his messianic role. 5978 The most important function of John s mention of Passover is thus that it sets the rest of the chapter in the context of the paschal lamb, and perhaps in the context of the earlier gospel tradition " s passion narrative. Just as Jesus» entire ministry becomes a transfiguration (1:14) and John places the temple cleansing before the public ministry (2:14–22) to bracket the whole, John again invites us to understand Jesus» whole ministry in terms of the passion leading to the cross. (See comments on eucharistic interpretations of the discourse, below.) |
| 1976g Review of Hans Urs von Balthasar, Engagement with God , tr. John Halliburton, London: SPCK, 1975, Downside Review 94 (April), pp.153-154 1976h Review of Alain Riou, Le Monde et l’Eglise selon Maxime le Confesseur , Théologie Historique 22, Paris: Beauchesne, 1973, Eastern Churches Review 8.1, pp.92-93 1976i Review of Benedicta Ward, The Wisdom of the Desert Fathers , Fairacres Publications 48, Oxford: SLG Press, 1975, and The Sayings of the Desert Fathers (The Alphabetical Collection) , London: Mowbrays, 1975, Sobornost: The Journal of the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius 7.3 (Summer), pp.219-20 1977 Articles and Lectures 1977a ’Eric Gill’, Sobornost: The Journal of the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius 7.4 (Winter-Spring), pp.261-9 1977b ’The Philosophical Structures of Palamism’, Eastern Churches Review 9.1-2, pp.27-44 1977c ’Poetic and Religious Imagination’, Theology 80 (May), pp.178-187 Newspaper and Magazine Articles 1997d ’Christmas as a Christian Festival’, letter to The Times , Dec 3, p.15 1978 Articles and Lectures 1978a ’A Person that Nobody Knows: A Paradoxical Tribute to Thomas Merton’, Cistercian studies 13.4, pp.399-401; reprinted in the Advent 2002 issue of The Merton Journal 1979 Books 1979a The Wound of Knowledge: Christian Spirituality from the New Testament to St John of the Cross , London: Darton, Longman & Todd; American edition: Christian Spirituality: A Theological History from the New Testament to Luther and St John of the Cross, Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1980; re-issued as The Wound of Knowledge: A Ttheological History from the New Testament to Luther and St John of the Cross , Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 1998; revised edition: The Wound of Knowledge: Christian Spirituality from the New Testament to St John of the Cross , London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1990; Cambridge, Mass: Cowley Pubns. 1991 Articles and Lectures 1979b ’Barth on the Triune God’ in S.W. Sykes (ed.) Karl Barth: Studies of his Theological Method , Oxford: Clarendon; reproduced in Wrestling with Angels , pp.106-149 |
| Nicodemus, by contrast, had to be named because he recurs in 7and 19:39.) The contrast between Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman (as well as some other characters) would frustrate a normal ancient Jewish reader " s expectations (although John s own original audience already may be predisposed to suspect that the Judean elite is more hostile); in matters of ministry as well as Christology, one dare not judge by outward appearance (7:24). Because Nicodemus eventually believes (19:39), this text illustrates the wide spectrum of believers in Jesus. 5210 Other, more subtle narrative connections are also possible, like the comparison with Jesus» crucifixion scene, the epitome of his rejection by his own people in contrast to the positive Samaritan reception. 5211 1. Theological Themes in the Narrative Jesus crosses at least three significant barriers in the story: the socioethnic barrier of centuries of Jewish-Samaritan prejudice; the gender barrier; and a moral barrier imposed by this woman " s assumed behavior. The heart of the story appears in 4:23–24: the Father has been seeking true worshipers who will worship him in Spirit and truth, and that was why the Father sent Jesus (4:4) to this particular woman. Outward markers, which John " s religious contemporaries would contemplate, such as her gender, religious tradition and ethnicity, and past moral activity, prove irrelevant in revealing the sort of person God seeks to worship him. Indeed, whereas Jesus sought Philip (1:43), he did not seek out members of the religious elite; even open-minded Nicodemus had to come to Jesus (3:2); but Jesus went to great lengths and took serious risks to reach the Samaritan woman. 5212 All of these barriers appear individually in other Gospel traditions. Thus Jesus ministers to Samaritans in Luke (10:33; 17:16–19), 5213 and Gentiles appear at notorious points in Mark (7:26–29) and Q (Matt 8:5–13; Luke 7:1–10); the later church found these few traditions particularly usefu1. Still more clearly, women appear in prominent roles in the gospel tradition, 5214 with an undoubtedly historical core. 5215 Although later Christians like Paul seem to have moderated this emphasis for apologetic reasons, many of these traditions, distinctly progressive by ancient Mediterranean standards, remained. 5216 Jesus» banquets with sinners, as well as complaints of the pious against this practice, are also significant in the tradition and undoubtedly reflect a historical nucleus. 5217 Mark " s account of the Syro-Phoenician woman combines two of these issues, 5218 but John " s account of the sinful Samaritan woman underlines three of these issues latent in the Jesus tradition. |
| The blind man himself becomes a paradigm of growing discipleship; when he confesses Jesus openly, he moves from recognizing him as a «man» (9:11) to a «prophet» (9:17) and a man from God (9:33), and with Jesus» revelation recognizes him as «Son of Man» and «Lord» (9:35–37). 7011 The end of this account contrasts starkly with the man healed in ch. 5 who did not proceed to become a disciple (5:1–16); for point-by-point contrasts with that account, see comments there. This man, like others who did the truth, would come to the light (3:19–21; cf. 9:3; 5:14). 1. Jesus Heals One Blind from Birth (9:1–7) Blindness «from birth» was considered especially difficult, 7012 though John mentions the duration of the malady (9:1; cf. 5:5) at least partly to lead into the disciples» question of who merited his birth in this state (9:2). Ancients generally believed that, under extraordinary circumstances, blind persons could be healed; 7013 thus some contended that Isis both cured eye diseases and made blind, 7014 and in a list of healings at Epidauros, the lame and blind appear in a summary (perhaps as the most dramatic cures). 7015 The Jesus tradition multiply attests that Jesus healed some blind people; 7016 there the opening of blind eyes, like the healing of the lame (5:9), reflects signs of the messianic era (Isa 35:5–6). Redaction critics often argue that, given Jesus» reputation for healing blindness and the pre-70 character of traditions like the pool of Siloam, the core account (9:1, 6–7) is authentic, the rest being Johannine theologizing on that story. 7017 Most regard 9:22, along with 12and 16:2, as a reflection of the situation with which the Johannine community was struggling. 7018 Whatever John " s degree of adaptation here, he certainly seeks to be relevant to his audience. In contrast to the staging of the rest of the Gospel, Jesus is missing from twenty-seven of forty-seven verses; to merit such extended discussion without Jesus» presence, the circumstances of the story must be particularly relevant to the experience of John " s audience. 7019 1A. The Timing (9:1) |
| The chapter also reflects standard Jewish motifs, such as the unity of God " s people, their love for God, God " s glory, obedience to God " s message, the election and setting apart of God " s people, and the importance of obeying God " s agent (Moses in Jewish tradition). One writer links such motifs specifically to the Cairo Geniza manuscript of the Palestinian Targum to Exod 19–20, 9387 another points to parallels with a hymn from Qumran; 9388 in short, most of the motifs reflect common Judaism, yet reinterpreted in a christocentric manner and reapplied to the christologically defined community. Further, to whatever degree John has adapted the discourse and prayer to encourage his audience in their particular situation, 9389 it is clear that a prayer of Jesus before his passion already stands in the passion tradition ( Mark 14:36 ). 9390 But whereas, in Mark, Jesus prays for the Father to spare him from the passion if possible ( Mark 14:36 ), here he recognizes and accedes to the Father " s purpose, requesting the hour of glorification (17:1). 9391 John does not deny Jesus» reluctance to face the cross (12:27) but places heavier emphasis on Jesus» obedience. 9392 Traditionally some have viewed Jesus» intercession in this passage in terms of the OT role of high priest 9393 (Jesus» role in some early Christian traditions; Heb 2:17; 3:1; 4:14–15; 5:10; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1; 9:11); the chapter title «Jesus» High-Priestly Prayer» has circulated since the theologian David Chyträus (1531–1600). 9394 But Jewish tradition also emphasized the intercessory role of prophets; 9395 more significantly, the probably testamentary character of the final discourse might point to patriarchal blessings, 9396 particularly the prayer and blessing of Moses ( Deut 32–33 ), 9397 as background. But because the content of these blessings does not parallel John 17 very closely, 9398 » one may need to look to the experience of John " s audience for more of the content. A variety of backgrounds are possible, but most important within the context of the Fourth Gospel is that Jesus becomes, before his exaltation, the first Paraclete, or intercessor ( Rom 8:26; 1 John 2:1 ; see extended comment on 14:16). 9399 This suggests that John 17 models part of the ministry of the Paraclete who would come after Jesus» departure (14:16) and of those who share his ministry (15:26–27). 9400 The Fourth Gospel presents the Paraclete especially as an advocate or prosecutor in the disciples» conflict with the world, but Jesus has also been promising them more direct access to the Father in prayer once he goes to the Father (14:13–14; 15:7, 16; 16:26–27). |
| Because we lack other sources by which to test it, we can comment only briefly on the essential historicity of this narrative. 4750 Its recurrent symbolic significance indicates considerable Johannine interpretation and idiom, but cannot be used to dismiss the possibility of a historical nucleus any more than, say, the Johannine features in his account of the feeding of the five thousand in ch. 6. 4751 Certainly the wordplays indicate a Greek-speaking audience, 4752 but Jerusalems aristocracy probably spoke mainly Greek, 4753 and in any case no one argues for a verbatim transcription of the dialogue without a prior transposition into Johannine idiom. That Jesus historically spoke of a rebirth of some sort is likely. 4754 Jesus probably spoke of some sent «from heaven» (i.e., from God; Mark 11:30 ) and viewed his own role as unique (see introduction, ch. 7). Beyond asserting a basic historical nucleus, however, it is impossible on purely historical grounds to determine the degree to which the dominant Johannine idiom has shaped that nucleus. 1. Nicodemus Comes to Jesus (3:1–2) By appealing to what his community «knows» and broaching the matter of Christology (albeit from an inadequate starting point), Nicodemus " s assertion sets the stage for the rest of the discourse. 4755 Nicodemus suggests that Jesus is a teacher «from God,» 4756 a phrase which for John " s audience, familiar with Johannine idiom, would be equivalent to claiming that Jesus is «from above,» but which to Nicodemus within the story world undoubtedly would bear a less exclusive sense (cf. 1:6). The story includes a contrast between the «teacher of Israel» who fails to comprehend heavenly realities (3:10) and the teacher from God who reveals them (3:2). Although no one doubted that some men of God could still work signs, the general Pharisaic view that prophets were rare or vanished may have contributed to Nicodemus being impressed with the testimony of Jesus» signs (despite their limited halakic value in the same tradition). 4757 Nicodemus points out that «no one can» do signs like those Jesus has done (2:23) unless God is with him (3:2); Jesus develops Nicodemus " s δναται, which is repeated throughout the following narrative (3:3,4, 5, 9): what no one can do is enter the kingdom without rebirth–or, in more general terms, do anything of the Spirit by means of the flesh (cf. 15:5). 4758 1A. Nicodemus (3:1) |
| Plate 55 Icon of the myrrh-bearing women at the tomb. By Eileen McGuckin. The Icon Studio: www.sgtt.org the New Testament the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection, based on apostolic memories and oral traditions, vary widely in detail. However, the fact and centrality of the resurrection constitute the bedrock of the Christian faith, attested by more than five hundred eyewitnesses ( 1Cor. 15.5–8 ). The gospels indicate that Jesus anticipated his death as blood covenant renewal and viewed his resurrection as God’s vindication of his ministry (e.g., Mk. 8.27–31; 14.22–5, 36, 61–2 ; cf. Acts 3.13–15). Matthew, Luke, and John link Jesus’ resurrection with the gift of the Spirit and the inauguration of the early Christian mission ( Mt. 28.16–20 ; Lk. 24.44–9 ; Jn. 20.19–23 ; cf. Acts 2.32–3). The Gospel ofJohn magnificently integrates the life, death, resurrection, and enthronement of the Son of God as the mutual glorification between the Father and the Son, marking the decisive victory over the power of death and the gift of abundant life through the Spirit, available to believers in the present as well as the future ( Jn. 1.14 ; 5 .24–9; 7.37–9; 12.30–1; 14.15–24; 17.1–5). In this similar rich vein, the Apostle Paul provides the most detailed theological explication of the death and resurrection of the incarnate Son ( Gal. 4.4–6 ; Rom. 1.1–4 ) and Lord of glory ( 1Cor. 2.8; 15.1–4 ). For Paul, the death and resurrection of Jesus the Christ mark the cosmic shift from the old age of sin, corruption, and death to the new era of grace, life, incorruption, and transformed bodily immortality ( Rom. 3.21–6; 5.12–21; 8.18–39 ; 1Cor. 15.50–7 ). In Paul, as in John, God’s powers of salvation are at work both now and in the future in those who are united with Christ through faith and baptism, and who enact the pattern of Jesus’ death and resurrection by crucifying their sinful passions and offering themselves as living sacrifice to God ( Rom. 6.1–23; 8.9–13; 10.9–13; 12.1–2 ; 2Cor. 4.7–18 ; Gal. 3.16–24 ). |
| That Jesus «manifested himself» to the disciples (21:1; this provides an inciusio with 21:14) is also Johannine language (1:31; 2:11; 3:21; 7:4; 9:3; 17:6) and, on a theological level, reflects the expectation in 14:21–23 of postresurrection encounters with Christ (albeit normally in the Spirit after the first encounter of 20:19–23). Jesus was, literally, «on the sea» (21:1); this is acceptable language for «beside the sea» ( Mark 4:1; 5:21 ; cf. John 21:4,9–10 ). It might recall Jesus» theophany on the sea (6:19; cf. Mark 6:47–49 ); but this is probably overexegesis (see 6:16). When John concludes the narrative by reminding the reader that this is the «third» time Jesus was revealed to the disciples (21:14), he includes in this count only the two appearances in the upper room (20:19–23,24–29). Like John " s other counts (2:1,11; 4:46, despite the plural «signs» in 3:2), however, his language may indicate only the third time in the narrative, not the third appearance altogether. 10857 That John 21 does not enumerate all the gospels» resurrection appearances but counts only those in this Gospel seems to me a further piece of evidence favoring Johannine authorship of this chapter. 10858 This passage reflects knowledge of the tradition that Peter and at least some of his colleagues (21:3)–here presumably the sons of Zebedee (21:2)–were fishermen, a tradition undoubtedly widely known in the early church (cf. Mark 1:16–20 ). 10859 It has often been argued as well that the passage reflects knowledge of the same tradition as appears in Luke 5:1–10; although the argument depends, to some degree, on the relative paucity of extant traditions available for our modern perusal, it is probably correct. Peter acts in character, taking the lead in 21(13:24; 18:10,15; cf. Mark 14:31, 37 ), as some students in ancient schools were known to do. 10860 He also displays for Jesus his physical prowess in 21and 21:11; this might appeal to heroic or masculine ideals in the ancient Mediterranean world–perhaps acceptable provided it was used to demonstrate loyalty to his Lord (as it was in 21:7, ll). 10861 This might also be in character; at least some ancient people viewed fishermen as «tough,» inured to the labors of their trade. 10862 |
| 2. Was God Once a Man Like Us? The Bible teaches and orthodox Christians through the ages have believed that God is Spirit (John 4:24; 1 Timothy 6:15,16), He is not a man (Numbers 23:19; Hosea 11:9; Romans 1:22, 23), and has always (eternally) existed as God — all powerful, all knowing, and everywhere present (Psalm 90:2; 139:7-10; Isaiah 40:28; Luke 1:37). By contrast, the Mormon Church teaches that God the Father was once a man like us who progressed to become a God and has a body of flesh and bone (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22; " God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! " from Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-347; Gospel Principles, p. 9; Articles of Faith, p. 430; Mormon Doctrine, p. 321). Indeed, the Mormon Church teaches that God himself has a father, and a grandfather, ad infinitum (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 373; Mormon Doctrine, p. 577). 3. Are Jesus and Satan Spirit Brothers? The Bible teaches and orthodox Christians through the ages have believed that Jesus is the unique Son of God; he has always existed as God, and is co-eternal and co-equal with the Father (John 1:1, 14; 10:30; 14:9; Colossians 2:9). While never less than God, at the appointed time He laid aside the glory He shared with the Father (John 17:4, 5; Philippians 2:6-11) and was made flesh for our salvation; His incarnation was accomplished through being conceived supernaturally by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin (Matthew 1:18-23; Luke 1:34-35). By contrast, the Mormon Church teaches that Jesus Christ is our elder brother who progressed to godhood, having first been procreated as a spirit child by Heavenly Father and a heavenly mother; He was later conceived physically through intercourse between Heavenly Father and the virgin Mary (D&C 93:21; Journal of Discourses, 1:50-51; Gospel Principles, p. 11-13; Achieving a Celestial Marriage, p. 129; Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp. 546-547; 742; Ezra Taft Benson, Come unto Christ, p. 4; Robert L. Millet, The Mormon Faith: Understanding Restored Christianity, p. 31). Mormon doctrine affirms that Jesus, all angels, Lucifer, all demons, and all human beings are originally spirit brothers and sisters (Abraham 3:22-27; Moses 4:1-2; Gospel Principles, pp. 17-18; Mormon Doctrine, p. 192). |
|
|
