| Craig S. Keener The fish sign. 21:1–14 OTHER SOURCES MAY SUGGEST that Jesus revealed himself on a regular basis to the disciples immediately after the resurrection; Luke seems most emphatic about this point (Acts 1:3), though he omits the Galilean appearances and may therefore refer to a state after the disciples had returned to Jerusalem (reading Luke, one would not know that they had left Jerusalem). In any case, John is emphatic that this is the disciples» third revelation (21:14); that Jesus manifested himself to them also frames this sign narrative (21:1, 14), underlining the significance of this appearance. When John counts, it may be primarily to tie events together (compare 2:1,19; 2:11 with 4:54); this event takes the previous resurrection appearances to a fuller level, though Thomas " s christological confession was climactic. What is John " s point? In the light of the rest of the Gospel, Jesus again provides food for his people (6:10–11; cf. Rev 7:16–17; 12:6); the emphasis here will be spiritual food (4:32–34; 6:35; 10:9; see 21:15–17). Given the following dialogue, the point of the narrative seems to be to define more specifically the character of Jesus» call in 20:21, especially for church leaders: loving Jesus requires Jesus» servants to love Jesus» followers. The Setting: Failing at Fishing (21:1–3) These verses provide examples of typical Johannine language in the nontheological vocabulary when one would least expect it from a later hand: for example, «after these things» (21:1; see 3:22; 5:1,14; 6:1; 7:1). Likewise, only this Gospel calls the lake «the sea of Tiberias» (6:1) or mentions Tiberias at all (6:23). In the very incomplete list of Jesus» followers here, 10853 the two named characters besides Peter (who is necessary to the following story) are distinctly Johannine: only in this Gospel does Thomas appear outside lists of names (11:16; 14:5; 20:24–28) and is he called Didymus, meaning «Twin» (11:16; 20:24) ; 10854 and only in this Gospel do Nathanael and Cana appear (1:45–49; 2:1,11; 4:46). 10855 The «sons of Zebedee» admittedly weigh against the thesis that this epilogue stems from the same author or source, since the rest of the Gospel reflects a studied, probably deliberate avoidance of mentioning them; but it is noteworthy that even here they are not individually named. The mention of Thomas (21:2) provides a connection with the previous narrative (20:24–29), 10856 demonstrating that he did persevere. |
| 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. |
| By Jesus» day, however, a nearer context for a Galilean teacher was certainly early Judaism, and whatever the measure of Greek influence on its preference for the language, its most direct source was the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew Bible recognized God as Israel " s father by adoption in redemption 7904 and Jewish literature in general continued this tradition (e.g., Wis 2:16; 3Macc 5:7; 7:6). Jewish literature regularly calls God Israel " s (occasonally in Diaspora Judaism, humanity " s) «father.» 7905 Jewish tradition also employed this biblical image in prayer, though in a relatively restrained manner (3Macc 6:8). 7906 The form of synagogue Judaism we know from later rabbinic literature commonly calls God «our Father in heaven,» 7907 as scholars conversant in the material regularly point out. 7908 But even Jewish texts not intended for corporate use only rarely designate God as personally «my Father,» 7909 whereas Jesus nearly ahvays did. 7910 Matthew and John, the most explicitly Jewish of the extant gospels, also emphasize Jesus» use of «Father» most frequently. But while «Father» should be clear to John " s primarily Jewish audience and its peripheral Gentile adherents, the titlés significance should have been lost on anyone in the story world. For John, their failure to understand emphasizes their denseness, and appears to stem from a failure to believe. The voice came for their sakes (12:30; cf. 11:42); Jesus did not doubt his own identity (11:42), but they needed testimony and signs to believe (5:34; 10:38). Now the climactic time of Jesus» glorification had come; at the very point where the world system would seem to crush Jesus (12:32–33), the spiritual ruler of the world would be convicted and cast out (12:31). 2D. Judgment on the World " s Ruler (12:31) Jesus came not to judge the world (3:17; 12:47), but the moment of judgment nevertheless arrived in him. The world " s judgment was at hand: the context is Jesus going to the cross (12:32–33); that judgment was coming «now» (12:31) revealed the eschatological significance of the cross in history (cf. 12:27; 13:31, 36; 16:5, 22; 17:5, 13). Jesus» death signaled defeat for the «prince of the world» (12:31; cf. 14:30; 16:11). Another document probably circulating in the same circle of believers as this Gospel depicts Satan being «cast out» from heaven in strikingly similar language, at the time of Jesus» exaltation (possibly on the cross; Rev 12:4, 9). |
| While 14designates the Spirit as «another Advocate,» so relating the Spirit to Jesus (see comments on the Paraclete as Jesus» successor, above; 1 John 2:1), 14assigns the Spirit " s presence wholly to believers in Jesus, excluding «the world.» In the context of the Fourth Gospel, «the world» is all those outside Jesus» following and is exemplified particularly by the Judean religious authorities who probably stand for the opposition in John " s day. This passage fits its context by explaining Jesus» return and abiding presence among believers. 8721 The Spirit of truth, foreign to a world that could not know the truth or perceive the risen Christ (14:17, 19; cf. 1 John 3:1 ), would come to the disciples (14:17–18). As John puts it, assuming the more widely accepted reading: 8722 μες γινσκετε αυτ, τι παρ» μν μνει και ν μιν εσται. Although the «with» and the «in» may be equivalent, 8723 if the μνει be read as a present and the εσται as a future, the present presumably refers to God " s Spirit as present in Jesus and the future to the time when the Spirit would indwell the believers directly. 8724 This would fit the Johannine temporal perspective on pneumatology: although the availability of the Spirit could be pro-leptically implied as early as Nicodemus (3:5), the Spirit would be fully available only after Jesus» glorification (7:39,20:19–23). (On the background of the dwelling image, see comment on 14:2–3.) 4B. Jesus Comes to Them (14:18) Jesus promises to «come» to the disciples (14:18); in this context (14:16–17), the coming must refer to his coming in 20:19–23 to impart the Spirit to them (cf. 14:3,23). 8725 At the same time, that he will not leave them bereaved as «orphans» suggests that his presence will continue with them through the Spirit. «Orphan» language was sometimes applied figuratively to the loss of important figures in peoplés lives, certainly applicable to Jesus for the disciples (13:33). 8726 Although «orphan» technically referred to the fatherless, it could also apply to other sorts of bereavement, 8727 such as a proselyte rejected by her family on account of her destruction of their gods. 8728 But the «fatherless» image is likely here. Because teachers could be compared with fathers, great teachers who died could be said to leave a generation «fatherless»; 8729 this fits Jesus» own portrayal of his relationship with them (see comment on 13:33). 8730 In a general sense, the image fits the context of the Paraclete as Jesus» successor; in a pre-Christian testament, Mattathias, nearing death, exhorted his sons that their brother Simeon, a man of counsel (νρ βουλς), would be a father to them (1Macc 2:65). 8731 But more specifically, because Jesus will overcome death and bring his eternal presence to them, they will not be fatherless in this manner. |
| 960 Smith, «Gospels,» 12,19. If «scripture» is defined as what a community receives as a message inspired by a deity rather than as specific addenda to a canon, earlier Christians seem to have embraced much apostolic proclamation in this manner (e.g., 1 Thess 2:13; Acts 14:3). 961 Smith, «Gospels,» 15–18. Because the Essenes saw themselves as «recipients of a new covenant,» he suggests they may even have been close to writing their own new testament (17; perhaps in the sense of eventually delimiting their body of authoritative texts). 963 Berg, «Pneumatology,» 72–73, summarizes various distinctions that different scholars have drawn (Swete, Barrett, Braun, Betz). 964 Nagy, «Prologue,» xxx-xxxi (citing Arabic performances in modern Egypt). Studies in India also show poets «possessed» by the hero whose stories they recount (xxxi-xxxii). 965 As also in Hebrew tradition (e.g., Judg 5vs. 4:21); although this should not be overplayed (John is not poetry despite the rhythm and repetition of many of the discourses), a reteller " s homiletical freedom may help explain why he takes more liberty than the Synoptists (cf., e.g., Bruce, John, 6). 966 Kragerund, Lieblingsjünger; he identifies the two especially in ch. 7,113–29. For his view of Peter, cf. ch. 3, 53–66. 968 See Berg, «Pneumatology,» 67,70, who argues that John " s pneumatology is «distinctive» (especially when he personalizes the Spirit in the Paraclete sayings), but that he «does not deviate radically» from early Christian pneumatology. 970 Sasse, «Paraldet»; Boring cites as advocates of such a position also Weinel, Windisch, and Streeter. 971 Hill, Prophecy, 151; Boring, Sayings, 49; Johnston, Paraclete, 131; Bürge, Community, 211. Cf. Philostratus Hrk. 45.7, where prediction of a future poet to announce Achilles» works is fulfilled in Homer. 975 Keener, Matthew, 26–27, 57; see further Hill, «Prophets»; idem, Prophecy; Bauckham, «Apocalypse»; Dunn, «Jesus Tradition»; Aune, Prophecy. 977 Aune, «Matrix»; cf. idem, Prophecy, 197; Hill, Prophecy, 88.1 am less convinced, however, that 11and other texts distinguish prophets from the saints (Aune, Prophecy, 197,206); the community itself is prophetic (19:10), and the parallelism in that case could be either synthetic or synonymous. |
| John " s vertical dualism with Jesus in 3:13; 6:62; 20:17) and descending (cf. the Spirit «descending» from «heaven» «upon» Jesus in 1:32; Jesus in 3:13; 6:33, 38, 41, 42, 50, 58). 4341 Thus, he is not only the «Son of Man» who will come from heaven ( Dan 7:13–14 ), but is the mediator between heaven and earth, on whom the angels must trave1. The «angels of God ascending and descending» is a direct quote from Gen 28:12 . Thus, in short, Jesus is Jacob " s ladder, the one who mediates between God in heaven and his servant Jacob on earth (cf. 14:6); thus the «true Israelite» (1:47) may receive the revelation of God as his ancestor did ( Gen 28:12 ; cf. 32:1, an inclusio). 4342 As Jacob " s ladder, he is also Bethel, God " s house ( Gen 28:19 ), 4343 an image that naturally connects with Jesus as the new temple (1:14; 2:19–21; 4:20–24; 7:37–39; 14:2,23). Many commentators have investigated subsequent Jewish, particularly rabbinic, traditions about Jacob as background for the present passage. Because the Hebrew reference to angels descending «on it» (bn) could be translated «on him,» that is, «on Jacob,» some Jewish traditions portrayed angels traversing Jacob. 4344 In some rabbinic traditions angels beheld Israel " s heavenly image engraved in heaven, then descended to find the earthly Jacob on earth. 4345 The Palestinian Targum also indicates that angels ascended and descended to see Jacob; thus some commentators suggest that 1portrays Jesus as the true Jacob. 4346 Others, also pointing to Philós earlier picture of a heavenly Israel, find an analogous portrait in John, in which Jesus represents the heavenly and Nathanael the earthly Israe1. 4347 While contemporary Jewish backgrounds are welcomed and later evidence is sometimes all that we have, this passage makes more sense against the widely available background in Genesis itself than against the uncertainly dated and possibly not widely available background many scholars have suggested. Although John s «upon» could be read in support of the rabbinic interpretation that angels descended on Jacob, the LXX attests the more widepread interpretation in his day that angels ascended and descended the ladder (which, like the pronoun, is feminine in Gen 28LXX), the more natural contextual sense in Genesis. |
|
|
