| Similarly, the Gospel naturally stresses signs of grace whereas the Apocalypse stresses signs of judgment; but it may be more than coincidence that the first of John " s seven signs, turning water to wine (2:9), reflects the first of Moses» signs in Exodus, turning water to blood (Exod 7:20; cf. Jub. 48:5), 1071 a prominent source of judgment imagery in two of Revelation " s three sets of seven plagues (8:8–11,16:3–4). John does not mention the marriage supper (Rev 19), but this concept provides part of the eschatological backdrop for John 6 and perhaps also chs. 2 and 21. The new Jerusalem naturally occurs only in Revelation (3:12, ch. 21), but the idea complements well the Fourth Gospel " s emphasis on the genuine Jewishness of the true people of God, as well as his negative portrayal of the earthly Jerusalem. The new Jerusalem " s dimensions probably simply represent the presence of God (a cube, like the holy of holies, 21:16); 1072 its gates (Rev 21:12–13) are part of the imagery of the renewed city (Isa 60:18; Ezek 48:30–34 ), and are thus not incompatible with (though neither are they identical to) the sheepfold image of Jesus as the way and door ( John 10:7, 9; 14:6 ). John " s «dwelling» motif, expressed by his characteristic menö, is replaced by katoicheö and the motif of the heavenly temple (e.g., Rev 21:3); but this fits the contrasting eschatological perspectives of the two books. Revelation " s temple imagery (e.g., 3:12, 4:6, 5:8, 8:3, 15:2) is apocalyptic, but fits well theologically with John " s portrayal of Jesus» replacement of the temple (2:21, 8:35,14:2); they function in a roughly equivalent manner on the theological level (Rev 21:22; cf. the tabernacle in 7:15,13:6,15:5; John 1:14 ). Only Revelation includes the common Jewish image of the book of life (Rev 3:5, 20:12), but an apocalyptic image is hardly mandatory for a gospel; John, unlike the Synoptics, does stress eternal life as a possession in the present. White robes (Rev 3:4–5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9; but cf. John 19:40; 20:12 ), the «new name» (Rev 2:17; 3:12; 7:3; 14:1; 22:4; cf. 17:5; 19:16; cf. John 1:42; 10:3 ), the crown imagery (Rev 2:11; 4:4; 12:1; 14:14; 19:12), angels (Rev passim; cf. John 20:12 ), the morning star (Rev 2:28; 22:16), the «nations» (Rev 2:26; 11:18; 12:5; 15:4; 19:15; 21:24; 22:2; but cf. John " s kosmos), thunder (Rev 4:5; 8:5; 11:19; 16[Exod 19:16; Ezek 1:4,13 ]; cf. John 12:29 ), a cry for vengeance (Rev 6[reflecting the OT; cf. 4 Ezra 4:33–37]), darkness (Rev 6:12–14; John omits the Synoptic tradition " s darkness at the cross), trumpets (1:10; 4:1; 8:2), locusts (9:3–11 [ Joel 2:4–5 ]), and antichrist imagery (Rev 13; though cf. 1 John 2and possibly John 5:43; 10:1 ), are examples of apocalyptic motifs that play little or no part in the Fourth Gospe1. But this should simply be expected on the basis of different genres. |
| 5965 Most likely John employs traditional materials but weaves them into the whole; cf., e.g., Segalla, «Struttura»; Barrett, Essays, 48; Anderson, Christology, 87–89. 5967 E.g., Koenig, Hospitality, 28; Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:950–66 (from multiple attestation and coherence). 5968 Witherington, Christology, 98–99. It is possible, however, that Mark simply redacted this same earlier tradition. 5969 E.g., Higgins, Historicity, 30; Johnston, «Version»; Barnett, «Feeding,» 289; Painter, «Tradition»; Manus, «Parallels»; Smith, John (1999), 146. 5972 Bagatti, «Dove,» favors a site close to the fourth-century shrine near et-Tabgha. Tabgha is, however, just a few miles south of Capernaum, whereas the feeding seems to have occurred in the Transjordan far from Capernaum (Smith, John 149). «The mountain» cannot be that of 4:20–21 (too far from the lake and on the wrong side); perhaps it is simply the «known mountain» of gospel tradition ( Mark 6:46 ; Matt 14:23, also both articular). 5973 Cf., e.g., p. B. Mesi c a 2:11, §1; Hor. 3:4, §4; Diogenes Ep. 2. For crowds rushing on other popular persons, e.g., Livy 33.33.1–2. 5974 E.g., Montefiore, Gospels, 2:29; Allison, «Jesus and Moses»; idem, Moses, 172–80. Jesus» sitting reflects a common posture for teachers (Luke 4:20; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 18:5; Dalman, Jesus-Jeshua, 45–46; see Keener, Matthew, 164), so one need not predicate dependence on Matthean tradition here. 5977 The suggestion that the grass alludes to Isa 40(Young, «Isaiah») is forced, as would be an allusion to grass as the food of irrational beasts (Philo Alleg. Interp. 3.251). 5978 Passover was associated with hopes for a new, eschatological redemption (t. Ber. 1:10–11; Keener, Matthew, 617; also Tg. Neof. on Exod 12:42, though contrast the simpler Tg. Ps.-J. on Exod 12:42; cf. Josephus War 2.223–227; Ant. 20.105–112). 5979 See Anderson, Christology, 192–93, although he lays too much stress on signs» value for testing vis-à-vis their value for attesting. 5980 E.g., Lev. Rab. 34:16; Pesiq. Rab. 25:2. Disciples sometimes procured supplies (Liefeld, «Preacher,» 228, citing b. c Abod. Zar. 35b); this is certainly the case with Jesus» disciples in John (4:8). |
| 562 Феодорит. Hist. eccles. lib. I. c. 34, p. 66. ed. Vales; Филосторг. Hist. eccles. lib. II. n. 17. 573 Epist. lib. IX. epist. 105 ad Seren. Patr. curs. compl. latin. t. 77. col. 1027. Лютеране, как известно, ссылаются на это обстоятельство, желая видеть в нем подтверждение того, что, будто бы, и сами древнехристианские пастыри отвергали иконопочитание, признавая его идолослужением. Но выяснение Григорием Великим необдуманного, по отношении к иконам, поступка еп. Серена, показывает совершенно другое, именно, то, что древние пастыри осуждали только боготворение икон, но, отнюдь, не достодолжное их чествование, почитая последнее вполне законным, полезным и даже необходимым. 583 Златоуст. Бесед. на кн. Быт. 57 . ч. II. стр. 287 и 288. Петерб. 1853 г.; бл. Августин In Exod. quaest. 71. Opp. t. III. P. I. p. 331. Antverp. 1700 an., – Enarrat. Psal. 113. t. IV. p. 976. ibid. Феодорит. In Exod. quaest. 37 et 38. 589 Serm. coutr. Judaeos. Patr. curs. compl. graec. t. 93. col. 1597–1605. Подобным образом учил Стефан Бострский, так написав о сем в своем сочинении против Иудеев: «Относительно почитания икон, мы смело говорим, что сие дело доброе и святое, как и все, делаемое во имя Божие. Что же касается до идолов и истуканов, то мы их отвергаем: ибо они скверны и бессмысленны, равно, как и те, которые их делают. Иное есть икона св. пророка, иное – истукан или статуя Сатурна и Венеры, Солнца и Луны» (См. Дамаск. Orat. 3 de imagin. Орр. t. I. p. 370 Paris. 1712 an). 590 Episc. ad Ioann, epist. Synod. et ad Thom, episc. claudiopol. Binii. concil. IIV act. V I univers. concil.) t. V. p. 664–682, ed. 1656. 591 Epist. 1 et 2 ad Leon. Isavr. imperat. Binii concil. (VII univers. concil.) t. V, p. 501–512, ed. 1636 an. 614 Advers. haeres. lib. V. с. 19. n. 1. Можно заметить, что лютеране, в подтверждение того, будто бы, Ириней совершенно отвергал призывание святых, начиная с ангелов, ссылаются на то место, где он, противопоставляя, совершающиеся в Церкви, именем Христовым истинные чудеса – лживым и призрачным чудесам гностиков, совершающийся у них, посредством волшебства, выразился, между прочим, так, что Церковь совершает свои знамения и чудеса «не через призывания ангельские или чарования, или еще через другой какой-либо нелепый способ, но через чистую, непорочную и открытую молитву к, Творцу всего, Господу, и через призывание имени Господа нашего Иисуса Христа» (Advers. |
| 10201 Cf. the mourning women of Luke 23:27, who may have provided a merciful narcotic (b. Sanh. 43a; Stauffer, Jesus, 135; Blinzler, Trial, 252–53). Some used pennyroyal or mint stored in vinegar to revive those who had fainted (Pliny Nat. 20.54.152); but these were probably not available. People could also use wine to deaden pain ( Prov 31:6–7 ; Tibullus 1.2.1–4; 1.7.39–42; Ovid Her. 14.42; Silius Italicus 13.273–275). 10206 Some (e.g., van der Waal, «Gospel,» 39) apply it more generally to Israel " s rejection of Jesus (1:11), but the Jewish identity of the torturer is not clear here, nor is this act the Gospel " s most decisive or climactic act of repudiation. 10209 «Javelin» appears in miniscule 476, probably accidentally; see Sanders, John, 409; Blinzler, Trial, 256 n. 38. Less probably, Schwarz, «Johannes 19.29,» suggests instead the misreading of the Aramaic «ëz as »êzôb, «switch» as «hyssop.» 10214 Clearly some Diaspora Jews applied the Passover to figurative or spiritual principles (Philo Sacrifices 63). Jewish people expected a new exodus (see comment on 1:23), which probably implied a new Passover of some sort (later, Exod. Rab. 19:6; Pesiq. Rab. 52:8). 10215 The contrast is often observed, e.g., Goguel, Jesus, 172; Stendahl, Paul, 74; Brown, Death, 34. 10218 So Stauffer, Jesus, 141. Later midrash could view «finished» in Gen 2in terms of dedication (Exod 39:32). 10219 Given the multiple attestation that it was the day of preparation for the Sabbath, most commentators concur that lesus was crucified on a Friday (see Brown, Death, 1350–51). 10221 Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 271, suggest that kings nodded approval (citing Hom. Hymn, Hymn to Aphrodite 222, where Zeus does this; we might add Zeus in Maximus of Tyre Or. 4.8; 41.2; Callimachus Hymns 3 [to Artemis], lines 39–40; Athena in Callimachus Hymn 5 [on Pallas " s Bath], lines 131–136). 10223 E.g., Ovid Metam. 10.43 (exhalata anima); Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.14; T. Ab. 17A; L.A.E. 45(«gave up the spirit,» OTP2:286); 2 En. 70:16; cf. Jas 2:26. One also breathed out (e.g., Homer I1. 13.654, ποπνεωυ; Euripides Phoen. 1454, ξπνευσαν; Herac1. 566, κπνευσαι) onés life, or «breathed» (exanimatus est) onés last (Cornelius Nepos 15 [Epaminondas], 9.3). |
| 7377 Diodorus Siculus 33.1.1. They knew the paths through the hills in hilly Thessaly (Livy 32.11.2). 7379 On analogy with 8:44, one could imply that such thieves were children of the devil (cf. Jub. 11:11), but the popular interpretation of 10as applying directly to the devil ignores his absence from this context. 7380 T. Ab. 10:5A (κλπται, ο βουλμενοι φνον εργζεσθαι και κλψαι και θυσαι και πολσαι). Bandits killed a father and son in Diodorus Siculus 34/35.11.1. 7381 A thief who breaks in with the intention to kill is to be executed, but one who kills a thief intending only to steal is himself executed (p. Sanh. 8:8, §1; cf. Exod 22:1–3). 7382 Ancient moralists sometimes posed the dilemma between the flatterer who does not seek onés good but seems to, and the frank friend (esp. Plutarch Flatterer 1–37, Mor. 48E-74E). 7383 Philosophers could speak of «good life» (τ ε ζην), which was better than mere «life» (Epictetus Diatr. 1.4.31, following Plato Crito 48B). Jewish tradition could speak of those who do alms and righteousness being «filled with life» (πλησθσονται ζως, Tob 12:9). 7384 We have elsewhere argued that, pace much twentieth-century scholarship, some sort of passion predictions by Jesus are historically likely (Keener, Matthew, 431–33, on Matt 16:21). But such anticipations of the passion are also important from a literary perspective; see Aristotle Poet. 15.10, 1454ab. 7385 Anacharsis Ep. 7, to Tereus. John prefers καλς in this context (10:11, 14, 32–33; cf. 2:10), but his sense is not appreciably different from αγαθς (1:46; 5:29; 7:12, though all these could connote more moral virtue). Classical Greek distinguished the two (αγαθς more applying to moral goodness), but the distinction was rare in Koine (Thiselton, «Semantics,» 93); some texts employ them together (Let. Arts. 46). Barrett, John, 373, points out that Exod. Rab. 2:2 portrays David as a «good» () shepherd; but unless that text reflects wider tradition, it merely illustrates the broader principle here. |
| 3751 Philo may have claimed that God authored only the Ten Commandments by himself, to allow Moses more involvement in authoring other components of the law (Myre, «Caractéristiques»). Gnostics may have developed Philonic thought in constructing their view that God is not the source of all the law (Fallon, «Law»). 3752 See Whitacre, Polemic, 51. Cf. the contrast between Moses the servant and Christ the king of 1in Augustine Tract. Ev. Jo. 3.16. 3755 Greek views seem to have varied (cf., e.g., Xenophon Mem. 1.4.9; Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.19; Plutarch Isis 9, Mor. 354D; Isis 75, Mor. 381B; Chariton 1.14.1; Maximus of Tyre Oration 8.10 in Grant, Religions, 168; PGM 13.62 in Grant, Religions, 47; cf. Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 383A; Dio Cassius frg. 1.6.3; Hippolytus Haer. 1.16); for deities» selective revelations, see, e.g., Callimachus Hymns 2.9–10 (cf. Acts 10:41); for the danger of seeing them, e.g., Callimachus Hymns 5.98–102,111–116. Cf. some analogous ideas of God " s transcendence in traditional societies (Mbiti, Religions, 64). 3756 1QS 11.20; 2 En. 48:5; " Abot R. Nat. 2, 39 A; Sipra VDDen. pq. 2.2.3.2–3; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 16:13 ; Tg. Neof. on Exod 33:23; Tg. Onq. on Exod 33:20,23; see further under «Vision of God» in our introduction. This could apply even despite partial throne revelations (1 En. 14:19,21). 3757 Rissi, «Word,» 401, thinks John 1 " is directed against» those who claim «another and direct access to God» besides Jesus. See in more detail DeConick, Mystics, though she focuses on the Thomas tradition. 3758 Names 7; Creation 69; Spec. Laws 1.47; 2.165; see further Hagner, «Vision,» 82–84; Isaacs, Spirit, 30; Lee, Thought, 17; citing Cherubim 101; Names 2; Rewards 40 as direct parallels, and close parallels in Dreams 1.67; Unchangeable 56; Alleg. Interp. 2.36; Names 9–10; Rewards 44. 3759 Sib. Or. 3.12 (αρατος), 17 (probably pre-Christian); frg. 1, lines 8–11 (date unclear). 3761 Also, e.g., Rom 1:20 ; 1Tim 1:17 ; Aristobulus frg. 4 (second century B.C.E., in Eusebius Praep. ev. 13.13.5, in OTP 2:840); Orphica long version 11–12 (OTP 2:799); a line attributed to Euripides but possibly from a Jewish work in Clement of Alexandria (OTP 2:828, in «Fragments of Pseudo-Greek Poets,» third to second century B.C.E., intr. and trans. H. Attridge, 2:821–30); T. Ab. 16:4A. Cf. the danger of beholding death in T. Ab. 17:9–18:1A; 13:15–14(cf. the Greek Medusa?). |
| 4256 Cf. also the use of a person " s name when praising that person in an encomium, even by wordplays (Theon Progymn. 9.49–55). Contrast Stock, «Peter.» 4257 «Building» represents people-of-God language in the Hebrew Bible (Ruth 4:11; Ps 51:18; 69:35; 147:2 ; Jer 1:10; 24:6; 31:4, 28 ); cf. esp. Jeremias, Theology, 168; also Ladd, Theology, 109–10). Some connect the saying with the Abraham saying of Isa 51:1–2 (although the rare rabbinic parallels they cite, such as Yalqut Shim " oni 1.766; Exod. Rab. 15:7, are late; cf. Gen. Rab. 44:21); cf. Cullmann, «Πτρος, Κηφς,» 106; Bruce, Time, 60; Ford, «Abraham»; Manns, «Halakah»; Chevallier, «Pierre»; Siegel, «Israel,» 108; contrast Arnéra, «Rocher.» Jesus and his teachings, of course, represent the ultimate foundation in the gospel tradition (Matt 7:24–27; Luke 6:47–49), but his witnesses provide the next layer of the structure ( Eph 2:20 ). 4258 As in Mark 11:9 ; Matt 21:9; Luke 19:38; the Hallel was sung during Passover season (m. Pesah. 5:7; 9:3; 10:5–7; especially mentioned in connection with Sukkoth, e.g., m. Sukkah 3:10; 4:8; t. Sukkah 3:2; Gen. Rab. 41:1); cf., e.g., Stendahl, Matthew, 65; Michaels, John, 207; Jeremias, Eucharistic Words, 255–56. 4259 Cullmann, Peter, 18, and especially primary references in n. 11; cf. n. 12. Cullmann holds that «Petros» was also an Aramaic name (e.g., Gen. Rab. 92:2; Exod. Rab. 52:3; contrast Meier, Matthew, 181; Williams, «Personal Names,» 104), but Paul " s letters indicate that «Kephas» was the earlier name (Cullmann, Peter, 19 n. 14; contrast Edersheim, Life, 360). The pun indicates identity between Petros and Petra (Cullmann, «Πτρα,» 98; idem, «Πτρος, Κηφας,» 106; Brown, «Rock,» 386; Richardson, Theology, 309; contrast Lampe, «Petrusnamen). 4261 Smith, Magician, 147, doubts that all Jesus» disciples were Jewish, contending that «Galileans with pure Greek names like Philip are dubious.» 4262 Palestinian inscriptions in CIJ; cf. also, e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.255; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:252; Freyne, Galilee, 172–73; Goodman, State, 88, 175; Meyers, «Judaism and Christianity,» 77–78; Davies, «Aboth,» 138–51. For some nuancing in the other direction, cf. also Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 26; Sandmel, «Theory»; Feldman, «Hellenism.» |
| 7267 Alciphron Farmers 16 (Pithacnion to Eustachys), 3.19, par. 1–2; this remains common today in some African towns where I have stayed. Either the robber or the homeowner might be bound (Xenophon Anab. 6.1.8; Matt 12:29); a homeowner could kill a thief if he came at night or armed (Cicero Mi1. 3.9; Exod 22:2; Eshnunna 13; cf. Eshnunna 12). 7273 Phaedrus 4.23.16; 2Cor 11:26 ; m. Ber. 1:3; b. c Abod. Zar. 25b; Ber. lia; B. Qam. 116b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 27:6; Gen. Rab. 75:3; Exod. Rab. 30:24; cf. sources in Friedländer, Life, 1:294–96; Hock, Context, 78 n. 19; Tannaitic sources in Goodman, State, 55. In ancient romances, robbers also carried off young women (Achilles Tatius 2.16.2; 2.18.5; 3.9.3). 7275 E.g., Horace Ep. 1.2.32–33; Apuleius Metam. 8.17; 1 Esd 4:23–24; Sib. Or. 3.380; Josephus Ant. 14.159–160,415,421; 20.5,113,124; Life 105; Treat. Shem 6:1; 7:20; b. Sanh. 108a; Lev. Rab. 9:8. The poor may have been less frequent targets (Dio Chrysostom Or. 7, Euboean Discourse, §§9–10). 7278 MacMullen, Relations, 2, and many sources cited in his notes; he compares the dogs with those outside many contemporary Anatolian villages, «able to tear a man in pieces.» They often targeted wolves (Longus 1.21), but dogs could prove faithful to their masters (Appian R.H. 11.10.64; Sei. Pap. 3:460–63 in 3 B.C.E.; Xenophon Mem. 2.3.9; Plutarch Themistocles 10.6; p. Ter. 8:7; cf. some tamed in Xenophon Eph. 4.6; 5.2; one surprisingly tame in Philostratus Hrk. 2.2). 7280 E.g., Aristophanes Wasps 952; Virgil Georg. 3.406–408; Phaedrus 3.15.1; Babrius 93.3–11; Plutarch Demosthenes 23.4; Valerius Flaccus 1.158–159. 7282 Against the masses (κλπτοα και λωποδτοα, Epictetus Diatr. 1.18.3, though he thinks them just misled; cf. ληστς in 1.18.5) or those who think they control the body (Epictetus Diatr. 2.19.28). 7283 Cicero Phi1. 2.25.62 (rapinas); technically it was the duty of governors to suppress robbers (Plutarch Cicero 36.4). 7284 The exception might be a use for someone deceptive and cunning (Xenophon Cyr. 1.6.27), which could be positive toward onés enemies (1.6.28). That Jesus is a «good thief» here (Derrett, «Shepherd»; cf. Matt 24:43) is highly unlikely; that the lack of identification of Jesus with the thief would make the parable early (Robinson, Studies, 72, who wrongly makes the tradition of Rev 3:3; 16late) is likewise unlikely. |
| 3738 Sir 26:15 . The preposition differs (as most scholars cited above would point out, stressing ντ in 1:16); but LXX readers might have suspected an allusion; prepositions were losing some force by the Koine period. 3740 So also others, e.g., Boismard, Prologue, 62. Dumbrell, «Law,» proposes that Christ here fulfills God " s original purpose in the law-giving of Exod 19–20 as opposed to the second law-giving in Exod 34; this requires us to assume that the Johannine community accepted a difference between the two gifts of Torah (a possible reading of John because midrashically natural, but not clear in the text). 3743 Against Pancaro, Law, 540; cf. even Epp, «Wisdom,» 139: «Torah has been displaced–superseded by Jesus Christ,» though he notes that the contrast is temporal rather than qualitative (pp. 140–41). 3744 The argument that John must oppose Torah because Jesus speaks of «your law» falters on the analogy that he also calls Abraham «your father,» «though obviously no disparagement of Abraham is intended (cf. 8.39–40), but rather of their appeal to him» (Whitacre, Polemic, 65–66). 3746 Pancaro, Law, 534–46, argues correctly that the parallelism here is antithetical rather than synthetic. Some ancient versions, including the Peshitta, understood (and translated) an implicit adversative (see Baarda, « John 1 ,17b,» also suggesting that «grace» was missing in an underlying text). 3750 1 Esd 9:39; LA.B. 11:2; " Abot R. Nat. 1 A; Sipre Deut. 305.1.2; Ned. 38a; cf. Barrett, John, 169; Sib. Or. 11.37 (Egypt, maybe first century B.C.E.); cf. texts that stress Torah as God " s gift, e.g., Sipre Deut. 32.5.10; Lev. Rab. 35:8; Num. Rab. 19:33. Moore, Judaism, 1:398, cites also the ancient Ahabah Rabbah preceding the Shema. Despite Moses» greatness, others were worthy that Torah should have been given through them: Ezra (t. Sanh. 4:7; b. Sanh. 21b; p. Meg. 1:9, §3); yet Moses was «the best-known figure of Jewish history in the pagan world» (Gager, Moses, 18), and pagans called Moses the νομοθτης of the Jews (Gager, Moses, 25; for positive views, see 25–79; for deficiencies, 80–112). |
| The following sermon is a rabbinic debate. 6121 In the early 1960s Peder Borgen observed that the biblical quotation in 6is repeatedly paraphrased in midrashic manner throughout 6:32–58. 6122 He argued that the discourse interprets the text in 6:31, following the homiletical form later known to us in midrashim. Because the broad pattern in Philo and the NT resembles the later rabbinic pattern, the pattern probably was common in early Judaism. 6123 Borgen also builds on the early Jewish interpretation of manna as Torah. 6124 So convincingly did Borgen array various sources that the shifts in methodology since that time have not undercut his basic argument, which has continued to retain support 6125 despite continued nuancing on details. 6126 In John the bread from heaven has been given the life-giving functions of Torah and wisdom. The presence of the bread is pictured with features from the theophany at Sinai and the invitation to eat and drink extended by wisdom. He who shares in the (preparatory) revelation at Sinai accepts the invitation and «comes to» wisdom/Jesus ( John 6,45 ). The midrashic formula of «I am» receives in this context the force of the self predication of wisdom with overtones from Gods theophanic presentation of Himself. By combining ideas about the Torah, the theophany at Sinai and the wisdom, John 6,31–58 follows the lines suggested by the prologue (1,1–18) where the same combination has been made. 6127 In 6the crowds quote from the Bible, but Jesus interprets the text quite differently (6:32): the one who gives the bread from heaven is not Moses, but God himself (cf. Exod 16:4; Ps 78:19–20 ; Neh 9:15), as Moses himself openly acknowledged (Exod 16:4, 6–8, 15, 29, 32). Such a form of correction became a common enough exegetical method. 6128 The subject of Ps 78in the context is God. (For that matter, most early Jewish interpreters, even those who claimed that Moses» virtue merited the gift, would have sided with Jesus in declaring God the giver of manna.) 6129 Thus the real giver of bread from heaven is God, and what they should seek is not a wilderness prophet like Moses but the gift of God which is greater than the earthly manna in the wilderness. |
|
|
