| John 14:1–17 John 14:18–26 John 14:27–31 1 Be not troubled 18 Not as orphans 27b Be not troubled 3 I will come 181 will come 28 I will come 10 I am in the Father 20 I am in the Father 28 The Father is greater 12 Go to the Father 28 I go to the Father Believes in me 21 Keeps my commands 15 If you love me, keep commands 21 One who loves me keeps commands 31 I love the Father, let us so 16 The Paraclete 26 The Paraclete 30 Prince of the world Although he must omit material to make the pattern fit (and some items do not fit), he at least demonstrates the repetition of ideas, some following clear patterns. It is also possible that most of the unified Farewell Discourse as a whole yields a chiastic structure as follows: A Jesus» departure, glory, love in community (13:31–38 or-14:1) Β Jesus» coming and abiding presence (14or 14:2–15:17) C The World (15:18–16:12) a The world " s hatred (15:18–25) b The Spirit " s testimony to the world (15:26–27) á The world " s hatred (16:1–4) b» The Spirit " s testimony to the world (16:5–12) B» Jesus» Coming and Abiding Presence (16:13–33) Á Jesus» departure, glory, and unity of community (17:1–26) If this basic structure is correct, unity (17:21–23) and love (13:34–35) are essentially synonymous images; secession from the community, as in 1 John, would thus prove equivalent to hatred and death. The discourse provides an interpretive crux, corresponding to the narrator " s perspective, though the narrator has often remained silent in this Gospe1. 8020 Even before current literary-critical emphases, however, commentators could recognize that the discourse in John 13–17 clarifies the significance of the passion events of John 18–20 . 8021 A Testament of Jesus? Scholars have offered various proposals concerning the specific genre or generic associations of this discourse. Given the pervasiveness of the Last Supper tradition in early Christianity ( 1Cor 11:23 ), a meal setting for the discourse (mentioned in passing in John 13:2,4 ) may be presupposed even if John is conspicuous by his lack of emphasis on it; 8022 in this case, ancient Mediterranean readers might view the discourse as taking place in a symposium setting. 8023 This was in fact a common literary setting for important discourses and dialogues. 8024 Most traditional Jews would have continued to discuss Passover among themselves for a few hours after the meal, 8025 providing an opportunity for a discourse such as this one after the Last Supper. Some even understand the passage as Jesus» commentary on his Passover meal with his disciples–albeit before John redacted the Passover to the cross (19:36). 8026 Because little dialogue occurs, however, the observation of a general symposium setting exercises little influence on interpretation. |
| 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.) |
| That Jesus had many brothers is not surprising; families often had many children with a wide range of ages. 6319 Honoring kinship ties was very important, 6320 and brothers were normally the closest and most trustworthy of allies, 6321 which makes the unbelief of Jesus» brothers (7:5) all the more disconcerting. (Intrafamily strife was considered particularly tragic.) 6322 Although Jesus» younger siblings seem to have achieved prominence in the later church (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; 1Cor 15:7 ; Gal 1:19; 2:9,12 ; Jas 1:1; Jude 1), it is not clear that John is polemicizing against them in that later role here (any more than he polemicizes against Peter, a prototypical disciple). They serve a literary function in the narrative, challenging disciples to have deeper faith and to endure rejection by their families, 6323 a common early Christian situation ( 1Cor 7:15–16 ; 1Pet 3:1 ; Matt 10:21). 6324 The statement that «not even his brothers were believing in him» (7:5) follows immediately after the apostasy of many of his disciples (6:66); likewise, believers experienced both tragic defection from their ranks (1 John 2:19) and familial opposition (cf. Matt 10:21, 35–37). If Jesus» brothers serve any function related to their genetic kinship with Jesus, it might be an apologetic purpose, to counter or guard against the charge of nepotism that would allow Jesus» relatives to assume so much rank in the early church. Josephus defends Moses against such a charge regarding Aaron (Josephus Ant. 4.26–28, 34, 58), and John may wish to show that the charge cannot be laid against Jesus. 6325 Or, if John does qualify popular allegiance to Jesus» physical family, it may be in a manner similar to that in which he challenges thoughtless devotion to Peter, ever reminding believers that Jesus alone is the chief shepherd and lord (cf. 13:24, 38; 21:15–22). (That this Gospel would be sensitive to such questions is not surprising. Early eyewitness tradition indicates that John son of Zebedee, with whose tradition, at least, most scholars associate this Gospel, once shared leadership in the conservative Jerusalem church with both Peter and James; Gal 2:9 .) |
| 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 |
| The most critical element of the setting, however, is the behavior of the crowds in 6:2. That they «follow» him (6:2) suggests the language of discipleship, though the narrative concludes by reinforcing a critical motif in Johannine soteriology: it is not those who begin to follow Jesus, but those who persevere who remain his disciples (6:60–71). Their initial faith is not fully adequate, for it is merely «signs-faith» (cf. comment on 2:23–24), based on his healings of the sick (6:2) similar to the examples John provides in 4:46–53 and 5:1–9. The rest of the narrative indicates that these would-be disciples never move beyond signs-faith, never moving from seeking what Jesus could do for them to what they could do for him (6:14,26, 30). Nevertheless, Jesus «lifting his eyes» and seeing the crowds (6:4) may recall 4:35: Jesus beholds a potential harvest (παρω occurs with «eyes» elsewhere in John only in 17:1). 2. The Human Solutions (6:5–9) As the discourse will point out, the flesh can accomplish nothing; only the Spirit can give life (6:63). Mere human power was inadequate to feed such a crowd. Although John later informs us that Judas held the money bag (12:6; 13:29), Jesus directs his question to Philip (6:5), perhaps testing one of those who has already made a profession of faith in him (1:43–46; 6:6). Jesus» signs in the Gospel test the response of those who witness them, and here Jesus tests the faith of his disciples in advance. 5979 It appears that other teachers also entrusted disciples with the funds to provide for their academy. 5980 More to the point in this instance, people also sometimes tested the genuineness of others» resolve or understanding; 5981 teachers likewise sometimes put questions to their disciples purely to test them. 5982 In the larger context of John " s Christology, an experienced reader of the Gospel might even recall God testing his people in the same way (e.g., Gen 22:1 ; Exod 15:25; 16:4; 20:20; Deut 13:3 ; Judg 2:22–3:1; 7:4; 2 Chr 32:31; Jer 17:10; 20:12 ). Jesus here tests his disciples» faith, to prepare them for larger tests to come (6:67–71). 5983 |
| Yet this does not mean that the prologue was the first passage of the Gospel written. More likely, John added it only after completing his first draft of the Gospel, making it the «fruit of meditation» on the Gospe1. 2852 A Redacted Hymn? Even if, as we believe, the prologue circulated as part of the earliest published form of the Gospel, many scholars also believe that this prologue may incorporate and redact an earlier hymn familiar to the Johannine communities. 2853 Ancient writers were not shy about incorporating poetry, familiar to their audience, that could make a useful point (e.g., Menander Rhetor 2.4, 393.9–12). Thus many scholars note that most of the prologue is rhythmic. 2854 Given the purported frequency of other christological hymns in the earliest Christian literature, 2855 it is more reasonable to attribute this proposed hymn to Christian 2856 rather than non-Christian sources. 2857 (The early analysis of J. Rendel Harris rightly points to abundant connections between John s Logos and Jewish Wisdom texts, but Harris " s reconstruction of a pre-Christian hymn to Sophia 2858 is a purely speculative interpretation of those correspondences and exceeds the evidence.) 2859 Given the variety of hymns that must have circulated in early Christianity, it should not surprise us if allusions to this hymn were limited (they might appear in 1 John 1 and Rev 19). If John uses an earlier hymn, he adapts it to fit the rest of his Gospel better, especially adding the lines about John the Baptist. 2860 Proposals to reconstruct the hymn are as varied as the proponents, and our list of proposals is not intended as complete. 2861 Among earlier scholars, Cecil Cryer reasonably suspected a hymn with a symmetry of tristiches and distiches, though he had to omit material to make his pattern work (besides the standard omission of 1:6–8,15, he regarded 1as a marginal gloss). 2862 Burrows suggests an Aramaic source, retaining all the lines, although he is sensitive to variations in the metrical pattern. 2863 |
| Humphrey Green adds 1:2, 14e to the lines Bernard had excluded in his Aramaic reconstruction, to produce two parallel strophes (each consisting of tristich, distich, tetrastich, and a closing epistrophe of one distich). 2864 J. C. ÓNeill envisions a Greek source of three strophes, each of ninety-two syllables; to make the syllable count fit, however, he has to omit substantial material, sometimes without textual support (parts or all of 1:6–9,12d, 13b, 14a, 15,16,17). 2865 Rudolf Schnackenburg suggests four original strophes (1:1,3; 1:4,9; 1:10, 11; 1:14, 16), 2866 although he finds three sections of the completed prologue (1:1–5; 1:6–13; 1:14–16 or 18). 2867 Coloe finds two sections with three strophes each, reflecting the structure of Genesis 1 . 2868 Mathias Rissi sees eight parallel lines in four strophes in 1:1–13, but suggests that 1:14–18 represents a poem of a completely different structure. 2869 Boismard " s inclusio (the Word as God in 1:1,18) is very likely, 2870 but his chiasmus is forced (especially making 1re-creation, and 1:4–5 a «gift»); it produces uneven symmetry in line counts and subordinates more prominent elements of meaning to those which can fit the parallels he seeks. 2871 Unfortunately, these are not the most speculative proposals. Teeple believes that the original Jewish hymn " s Logos was accidentally identified with Jesus as the hymn was reworked by a gnostic redactor. 2872 W. Bindemann thinks that the verses about John the Baptist were added at the hymn " s incorporation into the Gospel (not unreasonable by itself), and that it was originally a Jewish wisdom hymn expanded by Hellenistic Jewish gnosticizing and transformed into a Christian hymn by adding land l:17bc. 2873 David Deeks finds two sources for John " s prologue: a Christian gnostic myth 2874 and a source from John " s church. 2875 He contends that a scribe added 1:7c, requiring the addition of material in 1:8–9 to explain 1:7c; 2876 1is either from the gnostic source or is a later addition; 1was added by pro-Baptist scribes; 2877 l:14e, 16b-17 were probably added by a Paulinist redactor after publication, and these conclusions allow us to trace the history of the Gospel after its publication. 2878 In contrast to most scholars (who merely subtract from the prologue), Paul Trudinger revives the view that the prologue originally included 3:13–21, 31–36 (but not 1:6–8, 15;3:22–30). 2879 |
| 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). |
| 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 ). |
|
|
