| The naturalistic explanations always end up explaining away considerable early evidence and arguing from the silence of the lack of evidence that remains. 2604 Let us say that John was quite interpretive in Jesus» discourses, even more than we argued in our chapter on the discourses (above). But we have also argued that John was at most one step removed from an eyewitness account. While disciples often revered their teachers (though many also felt free to disagree respectfully with them in time), even among Greeks first-generation students rarely turned their teachers into gods, at least in the pre-Christian period. Neither Plato (who was quite interpretive) nor Xenophon deified Socrates, nor did they appeal to his resurrection and continuing presence. How much more implausible is it that Jewish monotheists would do so? That we hear of no early Christian reaction against such teaching in the period between Paul and John–that is, during the era from which most or all of our NT comes–suggests that a common understanding developed from something in Jesus» own life or teaching, before or after the event of the resurrection. 3. John " s Christology and Christian Tradition It is true that John does move beyond Wisdom Christology; unlike Wisdom, Jesus is eternally préexistent, 2605 and John brackets not only his prologue (1:1, 18) but the main narrative of his Gospel (1:1; 20:28) with the christological title «God.» 2606 But Paul also seems to assume this identification of Jesus as the divine Lord in his own Christology ( Phil 2:6–7 ) 2607 and exposition of the Scriptures ( Rom 10:9–13 ; Phil 2:10–11 with Isa 45:6, 23); although he occasionally seems to apply the OT title «God» to Christ ( Rom 9:5 ; 2608 cf. 2 Thess 1:12; 2609 Tit 2:13 ), 2610 he usually applies to him the title «Lord,» which usually translates the divine name in the OT, and applies this title far more frequently to Jesus than he does to the Father. 2611 Pauls usage presumably goes back to the tradition of the Aramaic speaking church of Palestine ( 1Cor 16:22 ), 2612 probably to Jesus» first Galilean followers; the more hellenized portion of the urban churches of Jerusalem and Antioch (cf. Acts 6:1, 9; 11:19–20) would have spoken more Greek. Like other early Christian writers, Paul applies OT language for Gods coming to Jesus» return, 2613 and Paul already does this in 1 Thessalonians–roughly two decades after Jesus» resurrection, and in one of Paul " s most «Jewish» letters (in the sense of reflecting Jewish eschatological motifs uncommon among Gentiles). Likewise, the writer of Hebrews (1:8–13; 3:3–4) and other early Jewish Christian authors affirm that Jesus is God, though distinct from God the Father. 2614 |
| As in subsequent Jewish thought, knowledge of God was always dependent on his prior self-revelation; God often acted in history so that people «might know that I am YHWH» (the phrase appears fifty-four times in Ezekiel alone). 2083 Exodus, like John, stresses the role of signs in revealing God " s glory (Exod 16:7). Pharaoh did not know YHWH (Exod 5:2), but Egypt would come to know God s supremacy (7:5,17; 8:10, 22; 9:14, 29; 10:2; 14:4,18) and Israel (6:3–8; cf. 16:12) would come to know YHWH as their own God in his redemptive acts. 2084 As in John, God " s identity or character was a primary object of knowing in Isaiah (43:10–11), 2085 and only God " s people were in genuine covenant relationship with him. 2086 Whereas the Greek approach to knowledge was often metaphysical, the OT emphasis was a relationship which «continually arises from personal encounter.» 2087 3. Johannine Knowledge of God Although many theologically loaded terms recur frequently in the Fourth Gospel (e.g., believe, life, save) the most common by far are the two verbs meaning «know,» γινσκω and οδα. 2088 The theme of intimacy with Jesus and the Father is developed with other language as well, such as «fellowship» (e.g., 1 John 1:3–7), terms for indwelling, other terms of relationship («with,» «sent from»), and especially Spirit-language; but we focus in this section on the terms translated «know.» 3A. Distribution of Terms Although some have attributed slightly different nuances to Johns two terms for «know,» 2089 a survey of his usage will show that their semantic ranges overlap and that he uses them basically interchangeably. (That the «new covenant» passage of Jer 31 cf. Heb 8:11] employs γινσκω and οδα interchangeably might possibly have influenced John s usage, but probably he would have used both terms for variety anyway.) Both terms signify «recognition» 2090 and " realization»; 2091 both are directly related to witness; 2092 and both can be used confessionally. 2093 The usage «investigate or find out» occurs only once, hence cannot be figured into the count (7:51, γινσκω). The following breakdown further confirms that John uses the two terms interchangeably, as well as employing them as part of his polemic against his community " s opponents. |
| The call material in 21:19–23 may link with the call story of 1:37–39, bracketing the Gospe1. 4158 The presence of an anonymous disciple here who might match the beloved disciple in the later passage is not, however, a necessary part of the link. One disciple is later named as Andrew (1:40), whereas the other remains anonymous. Some think that the other disciple here is the «beloved disciple» (13:23; 19:26–27; 20:2–8: 21:7, 20, 24). 4159 Granted, this would fit the Gospel " s contrasts between Peter and the beloved disciple, since the anonymous disciple here functions with Andrew as a witness to Peter («we» in 1:41). 4160 But the text never emphasizes the other disciple, and there is no reason to identify the latter with the «beloved disciple» who first appears explicitly in 13:23. 4161 2A. Low-Key Hospitality Because travel was less safe after dark (robbers normally acted at night; Job 24:14 ; Jer 49:9 ; Obad 5) and because people did not normally follow others around without reason, the reader would know that Jesus understands the two disciples» motives even if the reader were as yet unfamiliar with Jesus» supernatural knowledge (1:42, 48). 4162 Like God " s questions to Adam in the garden or to Cain in the field ( Gen. 3:9,11; 4:9 ; see 4:10), Jesus» in 1is thus rhetorical (as with the more hostile crowd in 18:4, 7). One could «seek» Jesus for more than one reason (e.g., 7:19; 18:4). In a status-conscious culture, it was appropriate for the disciples (whether wishing to become his disciples or merely to express respect) to defer to Jesus with the title «Rabbi» 4163 (although this did not identify Jesus with the post-70 C.E. rabbinic movement, it did imply their recognition that he was a teacher). 4164 This was a title that both his disciples (1:49; 4:31; 9:2; 11:8; 20:16) and other inquirers (3:2; 6:25) would apply to him; it also applied to John the Baptist (3:26). For John it seems an honorable title, but ultimately means only «Teacher» (1:38; 20:16), 4165 hence proves christologically incomplete. Those who would doubt John " s Jewishness because he translates «Rabbi» read the later dominance of the title into an earlier period or assume too much knowledge of Semitic languages on the part of Diaspora Jews. Interestingly, while John often interprets Semitic terms for his audience (also 1:41; 9:7), Matthew, whose Jewishness is also almost certain, 4166 rarely translates. But Matthew usually omits Marks Aramaic (except for Jesus» cry of dereliction in Mark 15:34 , which he changes to Hebrew) and does not use «Messiah» (as John twice 4:25], and alone, among the earliest extant Christian writers, does; Matthew uses «Christ»). 4167 |
| Dodd regards the vision of God as Greek, contending that the motif has little importance in the OT and Judaism. 2147 He is partly right: Johns language in this case reflects Greek motifs, albeit especially by way of hellenized Judaism. But on another level, the Greek motif is insufficient by itself to explain Johns usage, expecially given his biblical allusions (e.g., 12:40). John never means abstract contemplation of a metaphysical reality; 2148 if anything, the frequency with which he employs vision on the literal level suggests encounter with the incarnate Jesus of history. 2149 Although John does not draw the vision analogy explicitly, his comparison of Jesus with Moses» serpent in John 3may identify faith in the historical Jesus with God " s promise: «Whoever looks will live» ( Num 21:8–9 ). Further, the motif of spiritual sight and blindness in the Jesus tradition (e.g., Mark 4:12; 8:18 ; Matt 13:13–16; 15:14; 23:16; cf. Acts 28:27; Eph 4:18 ) was rooted in the OT images. 2150 The motifs of eschatological vision, 2151 spiritual blindness and sight representing straying from or following God " s way, 2152 and spiritual sight representing spiritual insight into God " s character and mysteries, 2153 persisted in «intertestamental» Palestinian Judaism. Most strands of Judaism continued to apply this language, 2154 often even to revelations of God himself. The rabbis had to explain biblical passages referring to Israel seeing God; 2155 they commented on the rare persons who in some sense «beheld» his presence in the present time 2156 but especially focused on the eschatological vision of God. 2157 According to some later rabbis, obedience to the Law produced nearness to, and in some sense vision of, God; 2158 Merkabah literature stressed the mystical vision of God. 2159 John may use the imagery of heavenly ascents (cf. comment on 3:3, 13; cf. Rev 1:10), but usually he uses the term more figuratively: spiritual perception of the true character of Jesus and the realm «above,» insight which enabled an intimate relationship with (not merely a mystical experience of) God. Given John " s predominantly realized eschatology, it is also possible that he implies a realization of the eschatological vision of God in Jesus (cf. 3:3, 36; 8:51, 56; 12:41; Heb 11:13; 12:14; 1 John 3:2 ; Rev 1:7). 2160 4. Vision of God in the Fourth Gospel |
| 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.) |
| Crucifixion victims often had wounds, and those who had been wounded often showed their wounds to make a point (see comment on 20:20); that Jesus did so stems from pre-Johannine tradition (Luke 24:39–40, though 24is textually uncertain). Soldiers who carried out crucifixions often used rope 10755 but also used nails through the wrists, 10756 which seem to have been used for Jesus (20:25, 27). Dibelius, noting that Matthew and Mark omit the piercing of hands and/or feet, which appears only as hints in the Easter narratives of Luke (24:39) and John (20:20,25,27), thinks the hints of piercing stem from Ps 22rather than historical recollection. 10757 But Dibelius " s skepticism on this point is unwarranted for several reasons: all four extant first-century gospels omit it in descriptions of the crucifixion (as well as many other explicit details, such as the height of the cross, shape of the cross, and other variables we must reconstruct secondhand); Mark and Matthew include the briefest resurrection narratives, Mark without any appearances, so one would not expect them to recount it there; and finally, Luke and John probably supply independent attestation of a tradition that predates both of them, yet neither allude clearly to Ps 22:17 . 10758 Putting hands into Jesus» wounds would convince Thomas that this was the same Jesus (see comment on 20:20); no trickery would be possible. 10759 John omits another tradition in which Jesus confirms his bodily resurrection by eating with the disciples (Luke 24:41–43), preferring the stronger proof of his corporal resurrection. 10760 In the third-century Vita Apollonii by Philostratus, Apollonius invites two of his disciples to grasp him to confirm that he has not, in fact, been executed; 10761 but the Christian resurrection narratives were widespread in the Roman Empire by the time Philostratus dictated his stories. 10762 2C. The Climactic Christological Confession (20:28–29) Ancient writers often used characterization to communicate points about «kinds» of people. Nicodemus was slow to believe (3:2; cf. 7:50) but eventually proved a faithful disciple (19:38–42). Likewise, Thomas had missed the first corporate resurrection appearance, which convinced most of his fellow disciples; given the problem with secessionists in some Johannine communities (1 John 2:19), his missing might provide a warning to continue in fellowship with fellow believers (to whatever extent Thomas " s fellow disciples had already been disciples and believers when Jesus first appeared at that point!) Nevertheless, Thomas becomes the chief spokesman for full christological faith here (20:28–29)–and the foil by which John calls his readers to a faith deeper than the initial resurrection faith of any of the twelve disciples (20:29). |
| 1F. Authority for Forgiveness (20:23) Immediately after breathing on them and announcing the Spirit, Jesus grants them the authority of representative forgiveness. 10720 It is anachronistic to read into this passage the later Catholic doctrine of penance or others» views about admission to baptism; 10721 it is likewise anachronistic to read into it Protestant polemic against the Catholic interpretation of the passage. Read on its own terms, the passage makes good sense as it stands. Because the Spirit would continue among them (20:22), they would be able to carry on Jesus» work (cf. 16:7–11); 10722 given the backdrop of 16:7–11, which explains the meaning of the Spirit " s coming here, the disciples announce both righteousness and judgment based on peoplés response to Christ (cf. 14:6). 10723 Although the promise is given directly to those present at the time (20:19), it will no more exclude later generations of Christians (such as John " s audience, 17:20–22) than it would Thomas once he believes (20:24). If the Spirit is for later Johannine Christians as well as for the first ones (3:5; 1 John 2:20, 27), then they, too, will bear witness (15:26–27) and be recipients of the Spirit (16:7), who prosecutes the world concerning sin, righteousness, and judgment (16:8–11). 10724 The passive is a divine passive; forgiveness comes from God; further, in John " s perspective, only Jesus» sacrifice takes away sin (1:29). In the perspective of Johannine Christians, however, believers can play a role in other believers» forgiveness, at least by prayer (1 John 5:16–17); 10725 the present passage speaks of believers» ministry to nonbelievers, mediating God " s forgiveness through the word they bring (20:21; 16:8–11). 10726 (We mean «word» in its Johannine sense; by proclaiming the message of Jesus, to whom the Spirit testifies, believers proclaim Jesus the word himself, who is revealed by the Spirit to unbelievers.) In the Synoptics, the disciples had already exercised such discretion based on evidence of repentance ( Mark 6:11 ; Matt 10:14; Luke 9:5); John has, however, omitted that preresurrection ministry of the disciples, probably to avoid playing down the full role of Christ before the resurrection and the full role of the Spirit and believers after 20:19–23. 10727 Some take the perfect tense as meaning that «the apostolic sentence is forthwith confirmed–is effective as soon as spoken.» 10728 Others suggest that the perfect tense here, like the future perfect in Matt 16:19; 18:18, may be intended literally, that is, that those who pronounce forgiveness are merely confirming what has already taken place from God " s perspective. 10729 |
Не удалось извлечь искомое из базы ((( |
|
|
| We should remember that whereas John strongly emphasizes realized eschatology, he does not thereby abandon all future eschatology (e.g., 5:28–29; 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 12:48; 21:22–23). That Jesus was no longer physically present with the Johannine community was obvious, and the Lukan tradition of an ascension was the most obvious spatial solution to the current fact (Luke 24:50; Acts 1:9–11; cf. Mark 16:19 ; Rom 8:34 ; Eph 1:20 ; Col 3:1–2; Heb 1:3). Matthew, Mark, and John close before the point where the event would be described (Mark even before resurrection appearances), but the ascension is presupposed by Jesus» Parousia from heaven, a teaching found in Paul " s earliest letters (e.g., Phil 3:20; 1 Thess 4:16; 2 Thess 1:7). 10627 It appears multiply attested outside the Gospels, at least on a theological level ( Eph 4:8–10 ; 1Tim 3:16 ; Heb 4:14; 7:26; 8:1; 9:24; 1Pet 3:22 ). That the Spirit came as another advocate, standing in for Jesus, suggests that John also understood that Jesus would be absent from the community, while not «in spirit,» yet in body (cf. 1 John 2:1 ). 10628 Jesus would not only go to the Father and return to give them the Spirit; though it is not John " s emphasis, he also implies that Jesus would remain with the Father until the «last day,» when those in the tombs would arise. It is also clear that ancient writers could predict events never recounted in their narratives but that the reader would understand to be fulfilled in the story world; the Greek East " s favorite work, the Iliad, could predict, without recounting, the fall of Troy, which was already known to the Iliad " s tradition and which it reinforced through both subtle allusions and explicit statements in the story. 10629 The book ends with Hector " s burial, but because the book emphasized that Hector was Troy " s last adequate defender, 10630 this conclusion certainly implies the tragic demise of Troy. The Odyssey predicts but does not narrate Odysseus " s final trial, 10631 but in view of the other fulfillments in the story, the reader or hearer is not left with discomfort. The Argonautica will not directly address Medeás unpleasant slaying of Pelias yet hints at that tradition. 10632 Likewise, that Mark probably ends without resurrection appearances ( Mark 16:8 ) hardly means that Mark wanted his readers to doubt that they occurred (cf. Mark 14:28 )! John probably assumes the tradition of the ascension more widely held by his audience, just as he has probably assumed their knowledge of a more widely circulated passion tradition in earlier narratives. |
| It is therefore more likely that John does refer to ministry among Gentiles by means of the Jewish dispersion. The «dispersion» itself refers in any case to the Jewish people scattered abroad, from whom Jesus might receive a more favorable reception than among his people in Palestine. 6474 But, as in their similar misunderstanding in 8:21–22, the opponents unwittingly and ironically speak an element of truth: through Jesus» followers (17:20–21), many among the Dispersion and the Greeks would become his followers (10:16). 6475 They also speak other unwitting truth: Jesus was «going away» by death (7:34), and his death was inseparably connected with the coming of the Greeks (12:20–23), the other sheep (10:15–16). Responses to Jesus» Revelation (7:37–52) John " s movement rarely fits modern outlines, lending some degree of arbitrariness to the outline we have endeavored to construct. Because 7:37–39 could climax the teaching of 7:14–36, one could retain it with that previous section; but because the chronological marker («last day») is significant, I have included it in a following section, which emphasizes responses to Jesus. One can trace a common structure in these two sections: Jesus teaches in the temple at the feast (7:14–24; 7:37–39); people speculate about his identity (7:25–29, 31; 7:40–43); the attempt to arrest him fails (7:30,32–36; 7:44–52). 6476 Each section builds suspense to its climax, reveals deep divisions within Judaism concerning Jesus» identity; and demonstrates God " s sovereign plan in withholding Jesus» «hour» for its appropriate time. 1. Source of Rivers of Life (7:37–39) John places this pivotal announcement in the midst of two sections of his confrontation in the temple (7:10–36; 7:40–52). Given the centrality of the water symbolism earlier (2:6; 3:5; esp. 4:14), this pivotal position here is not surprising. The surrounding structure is not chiastic, but nevertheless balances some central themes in both sections: the charge that the multitudes are being led astray (7:12,47); Moses or his law (7:19–23, 51); judging righteously (7:24, 51); division (7:31, 43); the question of Jesus» origin (7:26–28, 42); the intention to seize him (7:30,44); the speculation that he might be the Christ (7:31,41). |
|
|
