| The section heavily emphasizes love for Jesus and the association of love for him with keeping his commandments. Keeping the commandments (in the context, especially love–13:34–35) seems a prerequisite for acquiring or continuing in the activity of the Spirit. God " s blessings also were often conditional on keeping his commandments, as in 14:15 8551 (e.g., Exod 15:26). Early Judaism generally believed in the renewal rather than the abrogation of Torah in the end time. 8552 Faith and love, the central requirements of the covenant in Deuteronomy, also appear as the basic requirements here; 8553 in biblical covenant tradition, those who love God will keep his commandments (Exod 20:6; Deut 5:10; 7:9; 11:1,13; 30:16 ). 8554 Thus, for John as for the law, love is not mere sentiment but defined by specific content through God " s commandments. 8555 Does this imply that for John the Spirit can be earned? Evidence suggests that many Jewish people thought in terms of meriting the Spirit, 8556 prophecy, 8557 or (sometimes interchangeably in the accounts) the divine presence; 8558 Christian tradition could certainly speak of God giving the Spirit only to the people who obey him (Acts 5:32). 8559 Yet by contrast, early Christian tradition, which viewed the Spirit as more widely available than did most contemporaries, often viewed it simply as an eschatological gift ( Rom 5:5 ; Gal 3:2 ; cf. Ezek 36:24–27 ). Clearly for John the Spirit is not simply merited; apart from Jesus» presence, the disciples can do nothing (15:5), and the Spirit is received through faith (7:39). At the same time, the Spirit comes only to the disciples, to those committed to Jesus (14:17); those who obey (14:15) receive greater power for obedience (14:16–17), moving in a cycle of ever deeper spiritual maturation. For John, an initial «experience» without continuing perseverance is not ultimately salvific (15:6; 8:30–31); the Spirit comes to believers and forms them into stronger believers (on the inadequacy of initial signs-faith, see introduction) who in turn become more obedient to the life of the Spirit. God " s answers to Israel were conditional on obedience (e.g., Deut 7:12 ), but both promise and commandments were given only to a people already redeemed by God " s covenant mercy (Exod 20:2). 8560 |
| The manna could also prefigure God s eschatological provision for his people, 6145 and later rabbinic tradition promised eschatological manna. 6146 This picture is not unlikely; Jewish texts, at least from later rabbinic circles, spoke of an eschatological banquet. 6147 The later rabbis also expected a new exodus, 6148 but reflected a broader early Jewish expectation (see comment on 1:23), 6149 a hope rooted in the biblical prophets (e.g., Hos 2:14–15; 11:10–11 ; Isa 2:3; 12:2; 40:3) 6150 and emphasized in early Christianity. 6151 Undoubtedly John " s audience was familiar with the hope of eschatological manna (Rev 2:17). Some Jewish traditions emphasized that the final redeemer would bring down manna like Moses did, 6152 as commentators on John 6 have long pointed out; 6153 these traditions do not seem to predate the third century but represent a natural midrashic assumption based on the new Moses and new manna motifs. An Amoraic tradition that connected the clouds with Aaron and the well with Miriam connected manna with Moses. 6154 The contrast with Moses» «gift» is explicit in 6:32; that Jesus is greater than Moses is important in this context (5:45; 7:19). 6155 The Father " s supreme gift is what matters most (e.g., 3:16), and that is where the discourse is headed (6:37, 39; cf. the Son " s gift in 6:27, 33–34, 51–52). The bread Jesus announces is more essential than the manna given in Moses» day, for it is the " true bread» (6:32). The position of «true» or «genuine» in this sentence is emphatic. 6156 Calling this bread the «genuine» bread is characteristic of metaphors in this Gospel: Jesus, rather than John, is the «true light» (1:9); those who worship in the Spirit rather than merely in the temple are «true worshipers» (4:23); Jesus (perhaps in contrast to Israel) is the «true vine» (15:1). In the same way, God is true (7:28; 17:3), Jesus» judgment is true (8:16), and so is the beloved disciplés witness (19:35). In Platonic thought, the appearance was merely the symbol of the ideal reality behind it, but if such an idea is present here, 6157 it is only remotely so. The vertical dualism of apocalyptic thought blended this Hellenistic conception with analogous ancient Near Eastern ideas to emphasize the superiority of the heavenly mode1. 6158 |
| Set before me for a law, O LORD, the way of Thy statutes, and I will seek after it continually. Give me understanding, and I will search out Thy law, and I will keep it with my whole heart ( Psalm 118:34–35 LXX). As anyone who has invested the effort into the reverent study of the Scriptures can attest, the rewards are well worth the effort. Fr. John Whiteford 1 Clark Carlton, The Way: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, (Salisbury, MA: Regina Orthodox Press, 1997) p. 137f. 2 See Wilbur Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text. Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 1980. http://www.revisedstandard.net/text/WNP/. 3 M. Kurt Goedelman, A Critical Look at the Jehovah’s Witness Bible, the New World Translation, Aug. 31, 2006 . See also: Aug. 31, 2006 . 4 C. P. Lincoln, " A Critique of the Revised Standard Version,» Bibliotheca Sacra, Volume 110 (Jan. 1953) pp. 50–66, Sept. 1, 2006 . 5 Bruce M Metzger, “The RSV-Ecumenical Edition,” Theology Today, Vol. 34, No. 3 (Oct. 1977), p. 316, Sept. 1, 2006 It is true that a Greek Orthodox representative was added to the translation committee, but the Jewish scholar was part of the translation when it was actually being done, and the Greek Orthodox representative was added after the real work of the translation was already completed. 6 For more on question of how “almah” should be translated, see: William F. Beck, What Does Almah Mean?, Sept. 2, 2006, , see also: Origen, Against Celsus, Book I, Chapters xxxiv -xxxv, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iv, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, trans. A. Cleveland Coxe (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), p. 410f. as well as: St. Jerome, Against Jovinianus, Book I, Chapter 32, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. vi, eds. Henry Wace and Philip Schaff (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), p. 370. 7 Adam Nicolson, God’s Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible, (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2003) p. 73. See also: History of the King James Version, Sept 4, 2006, . |
| 26 Πατρ κα Υς κα τ Πνεμα τ γιν στιν, οSapita Physica, м не относит к в––σιοποις κα ζωοποις κα σοφοποις νργει τε κα δναμις, Capita Physica, Theologica Etc., PG 150. 1185D; See also: 1185AB. 27 κα τ τριαδικν τς μετρας γνσεως, μλλον μς τν γγλων δεικνειν κατ εκνα το Θεο, ibid. 1165C. 29 It is noteworthy that, in contradiction to the initial similarity, the Neo-Platonic ladder of hypostases essentially differs by decrease in being. Secondly, Neo-Platonism does not attribute any cognitive ability to the One. 30 St. Gregory Palamas, in citing St. Maximus (PG 91, 297, 1253), refers to the saints as the living icons of Christ, ζσα τινες εκνες Χριστο, Capita Physica, Theologica Etc., PG 150, 1173C. 32 See, for example: Methody (Zinkovskiy), hieromonk, Term ‘προαρεσις’ and the Theology of Person, ΣΧΟΛΗ. Philosophical Study of Antiquity and Classical Tradition. Vol. VIII (2) (2014), 312–327. 34 S. Athanasius Alexandrinus, Oratio De Incarnatione Verbi, PG 25, 101BD–104AD; See also: PG 25, 16D. 35 At this point St. Athanasius clarifies that the parallel between the incarnation of the Word and the genesis of human being may appear to be peculiar, yet it is allied to the false choice of man and the false kind of knowledge. Also see: PG 25, 116AB. 36 κενωθντας τος νθρπους τ " даруемое этим Светом Бзлучать Н–м.:НАς περ Θεο ννοας, Oratio De Incarnatione Verbi, PG 25, 104 B; λογον γενσθαι, PG 25, 177C; 172BC. 37 Thus, St. Athanasius considers the ‘descending’ dynamics of the human idea of God, καταβανοντες τας ννοαις (Oratio Contra Gentes, PG 25, 17С), while St. Basil reflects on the dynamics wherewith the Scripture leads us to the idea of the Only-begotten Son of God (Homilia III In Hexaemeron, PG 29, 55B); On the vector of cognition see also: PG 29, 284C–285A, 292D–293A, 428D–429A, 457AC. 38 Human knowledge of God may be worthy or unworthy of Him, depending on the choice and effort of the bearer of knowledge: PG 29. 4 A. On the relationship between the freedom of God in creation and the concept of ‘προαρεσις’ also see: PG 29, 17C, 544CD; PG 30, 193C. |
| In 3:34, Jesus speaks God " s words (cf. 8:47; 12:47; 14:10,24) because God attested him by the Spirit (cf. also 1:32–33; 15:26); this declaration is primarily christological but also supplies a model for Jesus» followers, who will speak his words because the Spirit is with them (15:26–27; 20:22). Jesus might be the dispenser of the Spirit to humanity (cf. 15:26), 5199 just as the waterpots in 2were to be filled «to the brim.» Jesus is the giver in 4:10; 6:27; 14(cf. Rev 2:7), and the Son indeed exercises delegated authority to carry out God " s works («all things into his hand,» 3:35; 13:3). 5200 In the nearest of the texts in which Jesus is giver, he gives living water, presumably the Spirit (4:10). Conversely, if the subject and object of «give» are the same in 3and 3:35, then the Father gives Jesus the Spirit in limitless measure to Jesus in 3:34. 5201 The Father is the giver to humanity in 3:16,27, to the disciples through Jesus» intervention in 14and 16:23, but specifically to the Son in 3:35; 5:26; 11:22; 13:3; 17:2. That Jesus has the Spirit «without measure» would indicate that the Spirit abides on him (1:32–33) and could contrast him with the prophets, who, even according to later rabbinic tradition, had the Spirit only «by weight,» that is, by measure, meaning that each prophet spoke only one or two books of prophecy. 5202 Jesus provides a well springing forth within each believer (4:14), but the unlimited rivers of water flow from him (7:37–39). If this Gospel leaves a hint that these words reflect John " s thought, John " s words about the Spirit probably allude to his own witness of the Spirit attesting Jesus in 1:32–33. In this context the Son is clearly the special object of the Father " s love (see comment on love in the introduction), which the Father demonstrates by entrusting all things into his hand (3:35; cf. 5:27; 17:2). But the lack of specified object for «gives» (and perhaps its present tense) might support the idea of giving to the world, so in the end it is difficult to settle on the preferred interpretation; but «receives» the Spirit without measure might fit Jesus as the recipient better. The Father " s enormous love for the Son (3:35) becomes the Johannine measure of God " s love for the disciples (17:23), as Christ " s sacrifice attests (3:16). |
| The passage explains why the Baptist must decrease but Jesus» ministry increase: Jesus is the one from heaven, whose witness is essential (3:31–32); see comment on 3:12–13, to which this passage alludes (for the rejection of his witness, see comment on 1:10; 3:19–20). 5189 Jesus is the one from above (3:13), whereas Nicodemus, a representative of inquirers from the Judean elite and the world, was from below (cf. 8:23) and could only understand and speak of earthly things (3:12). In view of 3(see comment there), Jesus is also greater than Moses, 5190 and so also greater than John. Just as the one who was before John chronologically precedes him in rank (1:15), so also the one from heaven has rank over all the earth, including over John the Baptist. That those who behold and hear testify (3:32) is good Johannine language ( John 19:35; 1 John 1:1–2 ), but here refers specifically to Jesus» claim to testify what they had seen (3:11). Jesus already bears God " s seal of approval (6:27). That one who accepts Jesus» witness has «sealed» it with the testimony that God is true (3:33) seems to imply that those who receive him become further witnesses attesting the veracity of his claim. Persons of means typically offered their seal by means of a signet ring, 5191 sometimes to attest who enacted a transaction, 5192 who made an official decree, 5193 or who witnessed the execution of a document. 5194 One could employ the term figuratively for an ancient, quoted authority " s testimony. 5195 In Jewish tradition charity could provide a divine seal (σφραγς) before God meriting reward ( Sir 17:22 ), and one could be perfected by the seal (σφραγς) of martyrdom (4 Macc 7:15); these seals refer to God " s seal on people. Here, however, people also affix their testimony to God " s faithfulness, his truth in Jesus the Messiah (e.g., 1:7–8,15, 32,34; 3:26; 4:39; 15:27). 5196 But while Jesus accepts such other witnesses (5:33–35), his final, critical attestation continues to be from God himself (5:31, 34, 36–39; 8:16–18; esp. 6:27). 5197 Some later rabbis declared that God needed no one to attest his decrees but his own seal, which is truth (ΠΚ). 5198 |
| We don’t breathe life into our souls simply by being informed about different religious views, but by the living examples of those who conquered death, through the sacrifice of love. No soul is nourished with religious informative views, but by the spirit of the heroism of love. In this pericope is highlighted the consequences of having mere religious information and knowledge, but not being changed by it for the sake of the common good, for the sake of love. Firstly we see a certain Jewish lawyer, an authority of the Law try to test and justify himself to Jesus about the law. But Jesus does not clarify a point of law. He transforms law to gospel, to truth. One must take the same risks for others, with one’s life and possessions that the Samaritan did! Therefore we see Jesus reverses the question from one of legal obligation (who deserves my love) to one of gift-giving (to whom can I show myself neighbour). Secondly, we see that the certain Jewish priest and Levite who also represented the teachers of the Law and leadership of the people, followed the letter of the Law but not its Spirit/truth or life giving force (Deut 6:5; cf. Lev 19:18). If love for neighbor meant anything, it meant to care for the sons of your people and not to avoid them. But we see in this pericope that when they saw a Judean stripped, wounded, and half dead lying on the road, they ‘’passed by on the other side’’ (Lk 10: 31-32). They could not be bothered helping their own people for the sake of up keeping their beliefs, their cherished purity regulations! Their theology (belief) and spirituality (life) were disconnected. Ironically, the Samaritan, a presumed enemy of Jews who was not an expert in the law, is highlighted as the good neighbor because of his loving actions toward the wounded Jew ignored by fellow Jews. When he saw the wounded man lying on the road ‘’he had compassion’’ (Lk 10:34). This is the emotion attributed to Jesus (Lk 7:13). Compassion is not simply a feeling but translates itself into the self-giving that takes risks, that disposes of the self and one’s possessions and then allows the other to leave without clinging to them (Lk 10:35). It is a feeling that transforms you into love, into showing mercy to others. |
| On the one hand, the term might be qualified by a parallel expression in 13(cf. 12:27; 14:1), suggesting that John figuratively stretches the sense to include emotional disturbance without anger per se; it may stem from observing Mary " s grief and wailing (11:33). 7633 Some think that «anger» overstates the case, though «troubled» is too weak. 7634 But 13may refer to a similar yet different emotion, and the term employed here does indicate anger when applied to humans. 7635 If Jesus is angry, one may think he is angry at sin, Satan, or death as a consequence of sin. 7636 While that proposal may be good theology (and may also fit the experience of some subsequent healers and exorcists, and perhaps of Jesus as well, cf. Mark 1:25; 4:39; 9:25 ; Luke 4:39), it lacks direct support in this text. More likely, he is angry at the lack of faith on the part of those who should be exercising it, 7637 as God was angry at Israel " s unbelief despite his previous signs (e.g., Num 14:11 ) or Jesus was angry with the unbelief of disciples in Mark (e.g., Mark 4:40 ; cf. Mark 1:43; 3:5 ). In both cases (11:33, 38), it occurs immediately after statements that Jesus could have done something before Lazarus died (11:32,37)–perhaps implying disbelief that he could do something now. Jesus is not, however, angry with their grief itself; he seems emotionally moved more by Mary " s tears (11:33) than by Marthás words, and responds by weeping himself (11:35). 7638 In any case, Jesus» internal disturbance over others» pain emphasizes his humanity «and/or the passionate nature of his divinity.» 7639 It reveals his character, which leads to his suffering on others» behalf (cf. 1:29; cf. Heb 4:15–5:8). By weeping, Jesus shows his solidarity with the mourners (11:35). That Jesus asked where the burial site was (11:34) would have suggested to his hearers that he wanted to join in mourning at the burial site (cf. 11:31); their invitation to «Come and see» (11:34) is an invitation to join in the mourning. 7640 Perhaps more significantly, his question, «Where have you laid him?» anticipates Mary Magdalenés question about where Jesus has been laid (20:15), 7641 underlining the implicit contrast between Lazarus, who awaits Jesus to raise him, and Jesus whose body is already gone (as well as the contrast between Lazarus " s burial by his family and Jesus» by two leaders of «the Jews» yet not the expected disciples). |
| 180 The construction of the Arm. is uncertain, but the general sense is plain. The preposition “with” in the first place seems to represent σν, in the second place πρς. 186 Cf. Matt, I. 23. – The translator has read μεθ μν for μεθ μν: there is no distinction in sound in the later Greek pronunciation. 189 Cf. c. 71; and Just. M. Ap. I, 47 θαυμαζντων τ γεγενημνα: Dial. 118: τοτο θαυμζων σαις φη. 191 III, xxvi. 2: “In eo autem quod dixerit: Ipse Dominus dabit signum, id quod erat inopinatum generationis ejus significavit. . . . Sed quoniam inopinata salus hominibus inciperet fieri, Deo adjuvante, inopinatus et partus virginis fiebat,” etc. 192 The transposition of «son » and « child » would seem to be an oversight: see however Just. M. Ap. I, 35 (παιδον . . . νεανσκος]: and note that the whole passage is quoted differently in c. 56 below. 193 Isa. IX. 6. – So in IV, lv. 2: cf. III, xx. 2. So above, c. 40. But in c. 56 we have “Angel of great counsel,” as in III, xvii. 3: cf. Just. M. Dial. 76. 196 V, i. 1: “non cum vi . . . sed secundum suadelam . . . suadentem, non vim inferentem:” cf. IV, lix. 1: Βα θε ο πρσεστιν · γαθ δ γνμη πντοτε συμπρεστιν ατ: lx. 1: λλ μ βιαζομνου. Compare Ep. ad Diognetum 7: ς πεθων, ο βιαζμενος · βα γρ ο πρσεστι τ θε. 201 This is Justin’s interpretation in Ap. 1, 35: ο ρχ π τν μων· μηνυτικν τς δυνμεως το σταυρο, προσθηκε τος μους σταυρωθες. 202 Cf. Just. M. Dial. 101: νειδος μν γρ μν τος ες ατν πιστεουσιν νθρποις πανταχο στιν. Justin is interpreting νειδος νθρπων (Ps. xxii. 7). 204 Cf. Just. M. Ap. 1, 34: Οπου δ κα τς γς γεννσθαι μελλεν, κ.τ.λ., quoting Mic. v. 2, which Irenæus quotes below, c. 63. 205 So in IV, xx. 2: “cui repositum est,” corresponding to πκειται, the reading which Justin defends in I 120. 207 Cf. Just. M. Ap. 1, 32: οδας γρ προπτωρ ουδαων, φ ο κα τ ουδαοι καλεσθαι σχκασι. See on this whole chapter Introd. pp. 6 ff. 208 The translation is uncertain. Cf. Justin, ibid.: μεθ ν εθς δοριλωτος μν γ ουδαων παρεδθη. |
| John 5:2 ), and that entire Psalm assures its hearers that the God who acted in the past exodus would act again ( Ps 77:8–15 ). 5752 Such an exodus allusion is not particularly clear, and even John " s biblically literate audience may not have recognized it even if he intended it. Other proposed allusions, if any allusions are present, are, however, weaker. While some see the passage as a baptismal reference, 5753 others find the basis for baptismal interpretation «fragile» 5754 or see an antibaptismal motif reflected in the fact that the water was not efficacious. 5755 The last point is the most likely, given earlier references to water in the Gospel, but it depends almost entirely on the cumulative support of the other references. There is no reference to purification, and while replacement by the Spirit could have been implied by replacement of a popular healing shrine, there is no definite evidence that this is the case in this text. What demonstrates that this water text fits into the others is the clear antithetical parallel it provides with ch. 9, 5756 where the evidence of ritual water and the Spirit (in the context of Sukkoth) is much clearer. 1C. The Johannine Context This miracle story provides a direct foil for the miracle story in 9:1–14, together coupling a positive and negative example of response to Jesus. Being touched by Jesus is inadequate without perseverance (8:31–32). Other ancient texts also sometimes coupled the lame and the blind; even though other healings might be mentioned in the context, a summary statement could focus specifically on the lame and the blind, perhaps as the most dramatic cures. 5757 Culpepper lays out the parallel structure of the passages as follows: 5758 Lame man Blind man (1) History described (5:5) (1) History described (9:1) (2) Jesus takes initiative (5:6) (2) Jesus takes initiative (9:6) (3) Pool " s healing powers (3) Pool of Siloam, healing (9:7) (4) Jesus heals on Sabbath (5:9) (4) Jesus heals on Sabbath (9:14) (5) Jews accuse him of violating Sabbath (5:10) (5) Pharisees accuse Jesus of violating Sabbath (9:16) (6) Jews ask who healed him (5:12) (6) Pharisees ask who healed him (9:15) (7) Doesn " t know where or who Jesus is (5:13) (7) Doesn " t know where or who Jesus is (9:12) (8) Jesus finds him and invites belief (5:14) 5759 (8) Jesus finds him and invites belief (9:35) (9) Jesus implies relation between his sin and suffering (5:14) (9) Jesus rejects sin as explanation for his suffering (9:3) (10) Man goes to Jews (5:15) (10) Jews cast man out (9:34–35) (11) Jesus works as his Father is working (5:17) (11) Jesus must do the works of one who sent him (9:4) Contrasting of characters was a common enough rhetorical device; John presents both a positive and a negative paradigm of initial discipleship, fleshing out the warning for perseverance in 8:30–36. |
|
|
