| Moses is frequently the object of faith in the LXX of the Pentateuch (Exod 4:1,8,9,31; 14:31; 19:9); most often, however, Moses leads the people to «believe» in God (Exod 4:5; 14:31; Num 14:11; 20:12 ; Deut 9:23; 32:20 ). Just as God " s people should believe in both God and his prophet Moses (Exod 14:31), they should believe in both God and Jesus ( John 14:1 ). As noted in our section on signs in the previous chapter, the Fourth Gospel emphasizes Jesus as the one greater than Moses. Faith is a common motif in the Fourth Gospel (e.g., 4:21; 14:1); the world (16:9), even the world closest to Jesus (7:5), is characterized by unbelief, but such unbelief serves as a foil for faith. 2810 Faith is sometimes related to witness (never pejoratively, 1:7; 4:39; 19:35; cf. 9:18), including the witness of Scripture (2:22; 5:38, 46–47; cf. 20:9), but especially to signs (1:50; 2:11, 23; 4:39; 10:41–42; 11:15, 42; 12:11; 13:19; 14:29; 17:21; 20:8, 25, 27). Signs-faith is one possible stage of faith, but although it is better than no faith (10:37–38; 12:37; 14:10–11) its status remains ambiguous throughout the Fourth Gospel, because it remains inadequate of itself, short of the ultimate stage of faith (4:41–42, 48, 50, 53; 6:30, 36; 7:31; 11:40; 16:30–31; 20:29–31). 2811 «Signs faith» must develop further to become «mature faith.» 2812 Even at their initial occurrence, signs can provoke either faith or rebellion ( 11:45–46, 48; cf. 12:10–11, where unbelievers also dread the witness). A true believer must also become a witness, a confessor (12:42). John " s narrative, like the narratives of the exodus story and Mark, chronicle the epic of faith: in the exodus story, Israel continues in unbelief despite many signs; in Mark and John, the disciples» faith grows from initial acceptance toward full understanding, allegiance, and confession (cf. 2:11; 6:69; 16:30–33). 2813 «Believe» thus refers to the proper response to God " s revelation, 2814 a faithful embracing of his truth, as in OT «faithfulness»; it is a conviction of truth on which one stakes onés life and actions, not merely passive assent to a fact. 2815 |
| 2048 Hengel, Judaism, 1:229; cf. Painter, «Gnosticism,» 6; Dupont-Sommer, Writings, 46. Yamauchi, «Colosse,» 145, points to the differences. 2049 Many writers comment on the prominence of knowledge in the Scrolls, see, e.g., Fritsch, Community, 73–74; Allegro, Scrolls, 132–33; Patte, Hermeneutic, 220. 2050 See Flusser, Judaism, 57–59; Painter, John, 6; cf. Drane, «Background,» 120. Vanderlip, «Similarities,» 13–158, thinks John is closer to gnostic and hermetic usage; but the latter may borrow heavily from John. 2051 1QM 13.3; Wilcox, «Dualism,» 89, cites 1QS 3.1; 1QH 11.8; cf. 1QS 8.9; 9.17. See also Yadin, War Scroll, 259, on 1QM 1.8, if his reconstruction is accurate. 2055 Lohse, Colossians, 25–26, citing 1QS 4.4; lQSb 5.25; 1QH 12.11–12; 14.25. Painter, «Gnosticism,» 2, cites 1QS 3.6–7; 4.6. 2060 The fourth benediction in Oesterley, Liturgy, 62; m. Ber. 5calls this benediction the Chônen ha-dáath (Oesterley, Liturgy, 64). 2063 Brown, Epistles, 278–79. Intellectual knowledge without obedience was inadequate (Kohlen Theology, 29–30; Marmorstein, Merits, 43). This is also true of John (Manson, Paul and John, 96–97. 102–3); contrast gnosticism (Finegan, Records, 106). 2069 E.g., b. Ber. 33a; Sanh. 92a; see Wewers, «Wissen,» 143–48 (treating 3 Enoch on pp. 144–45. and rabbinic texts on 146–48); Bultmann, «Γινσκω,» 701. Cf. p. Ber. 2:3, §5 for a prayer for knowledge which would lead to repentance and redemption. 2073 Kadushin, Mind, 201–22; for God " s nearness in Jewish literature, cf. Schechter, Theology, 21–45. 2074 E.g., m. " Abot 3:2, 6; Mek. Bah. 11.48–51 (Lauterbach 2:287); see comments on Matt 18in ch. 7 of our introduction, on Matthean Christology, p. 306. 2080 E.g., Ward, «Hosea,» 393, interprets knowledge of God in Hos 4as Israel " s historic teaching. 2082 For the full semantic range, see Brown, Driver, Briggs, Lexicon, s.v., " » and « » 393–96 (instruction, under niphal, 394; obedience, 395; intellectual, 395; etc.) 2084 Enz, «Exodus,» points out that «know» is a key term in both works (209) and that Exodus likewise relies heavily on the verb rather than the noun (214). The lxx also prefers οδα here. |
| 1 John 3:17 ); but in the gospels which record the saying, the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus and/or the urgency of serving him while he remains with them, since he was soon to depart. 5. The Danger to Lazarus (12:9–11) The narrative (12:10–11) rings with irony: Jesus went to Judea, risking his life to give life to Lazarus; now Lazarus " s new life may cost him his life. The paradigm for disciples could not be clearer: those who would follow Jesus must be prepared to die (12:25,27), for the world will hate them and wish to kill them (15:18; 16:2). But faith would not be decreased by such martyrdom-producing new life; the sign of Lazarus " s new life brought others to faith (12:11; cf. 11:45,48). 7534 He would also go to Lazarus, who was dead (11:14–15), which Thomas ironically misinterprets–yet inadvertently correctly applies–as lesus going to the realm of death and his disciples following him there (11:16). 7535 Since «friend» applies to all disciples (15:15), there is no reason to find in the cognate «beloved» (11:3) an allusion to the «beloved» disciple (pace Nepper-Christensen, «Discipel,» and others; see our introduction, pp. 84–89) or to one of two such disciples in the Gospel (Vicent Cernuda, «Desvaido»). 7537 There are other exodus parallels (e.g., 3:14), but paralleling the signs and plagues could work at best only at the level of general categories (contrast explicit parallels in Rev 8–9; 16): perhaps darkness for healing the blind (Exod 10:21–22; John 9:5 ), but then why does John mention darkness in 8and 12:35, 46 but mention only «night» in 9:4? Crop-destroying locusts (Exod 10:13–14) could oppose the bread of life, but its exodus background is really manna; likewise, Jesus heals (4:50–53; 5:8–9; 9:7) but the object is not boils (Exod 9:9–11). 7538 Pearce, «Raising»; cf. the caution of Smith, John (1999), 217. A connection with Luke 10:38–39, while unlikely, is more plausible than the allusion to the parable of Lazarus (Luke 16:20; the figure in the parable–who is not raised–could as easily derive from the event later reported in John; both stories are quite different, as noted by Streeter, Gospels, 389); Eleazar was a common name (see below). |
| Lcvinc, B. «Leviticus, Book of.» ABD, 4:312321. Ed. by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992; Malamat, A. «The Exodus: Egyptian Analogies.» In Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence, pp. 1526. Ed. by E.S. Frerichs and L.H. Lesko. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997; Mayes, A.D.H. Deuteronomy. London/Grand Rapids: Marshall-Morgaii-Scott/Eerdmans, 1981; McBride, S.D. «Polity ofthe Covenant People: The Book of Deuteronomy.» InCi (1987): 229244; McConville, J. G «Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law and the Politics of Legal Administration.»750r97 (2002): 1936; Mendenhall, G. «Ancient Oriental and Biblical Law.» BA 17 (1954): 2646; Mendenhall, G. «The Census List of Numbers 1 and 26. » JBL 77 (1958): 5266; Mendenhall, G. «Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition.» BA 17 (1954): 5076; Repr. with corrections in Biblical Archaeologist Reader 3, pp. 2553. Ed. by E.F. Campbell Jr. and D.N. Freed-man. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970; Milgrom, J. Numbers. JPS Torah Bible Commentary. Philadelphia: JPS, 1990; Miller, J.M., and J.H. Hayes. A History of IsraelandJudah. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986; Miller, P.D. «Moses My Servant.» 7»tf41 (1987): 245255; Monet, P. LesNowelles fouilles de Tanis. Np., 192933; Muilenburg, J. «The " Officé of Prophet in Ancient Israel.» In The Bible in Modern Scholarship, pp. 7497. Ed. by J.P. Hyatt. Nashville: Abingdon, 1965; Nicholson, E.W Deuteronomy and the Tradition. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967; Nicholson, E.W. The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wetthausen. Oxford: Clarendon, 1998; North, C.R. «Pentateuchal Criticism» In The Old Testament and Modem Study, 4883. Ed. by H.H. Rowley. Oxford: Clarendon, 1951; Noth, M. A History of Pentateuchal Traditions. Trans, by B.W Anderson. Englcwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972. Originally published as Uberlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch. Stuttgart, 1948; Noth, M. Numbers. Trans, by J.D. Martin. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968; Noth, M. The Deuteronomistic History, JSOTSupp 15. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1981. Originally published as Uber-lieferungsgeschichtliche Studien. 2 cd. Tubingen: MaxNiemeyer, 1957; 3 ed. unaltered, 1967; |
| Спасский И. А. Исследование библейской хронологии: Магист. дис./КДА. Киев, 1897. Темномеров А. М., свящ. Учение Священного Писания о смерти, загробной жизни и воскресении из мертвых. СПб., 1899. Тихон Задонский , свт. Творения: В 5 т. М., 1889. Тов Э. Текстология Ветхого Завета. М., 2001. Толковая Библия , или Комментарий на все книги Священного Писания Ветхого и Нового Завета: В 12 т./Под ред. Лопухина А. П. . СПб., 1904 – 1913. Триодь постная: В 2 ч. М., 1992; М., 2003. Триодь цветная. М., 2003. Феодорит Кирский , блж. Изъяснение трудных мест Божественного Писания. М., 2003. Феодорит Кирский , блж. Творения: В 7 ч. М., 1855–1861. Феофан (Быстрое), архим. Тетраграмма, или ветхозаветное имя IHWH (Ягве): Магист. дис./МДА. Сергиев Посад, 1905. Феофан Затворник , свт. Мысли на каждый день года по церковным чтениям из Слова Божия. М., 1890; М., 2007. Феофил Антиохийский , св. К Автолику//Ранние отцы Церкви. Брюссель, 1988. Экземплярский В. И. Библейское и святоотеческое учение о сущности священства: Докт. дис./КДА. Киев, 1904. Юнгеров П. А. Введение в Ветхий Завет : В 2 кн. М., 2003. Юнгеров П. А. Очерк истории толкования ветхозаветных книг Священного Писания. Казань, 1910. Юнгеров П. А. Учение Ветхого Завета о бессмертии души и загробной жизни: Магист. дис./КазДА. Казань, 1899. Cassuto U. A Commentary on the Book of Exodus. Jerusalem, 1967. Childs B. S. Introduction to the Old Testament as scripture. Philadelphia, 1979. Crenshaw J. L. Theodicy in the Old Testament. Philadelphia; L., 1983. Culley R. С Studies in the structure of Hebrew narrative. Philadelphia, 1976. De Wit R. The Date and route of the Exodus. L., 1960. Eissfeldt O. The Old Testament: An introduction. N.Y., 1965. Fishbane M. Biblical interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford, 1985. Fohrer G. Introduction to the Old Testament. Nashville, 1968. Fokkelman J. P. Narrative art in Genesis. Amsterdam, 1975. Hayes J. H. An introduction to Old Testament study. Nashville, 1979. Licht J. A commentary on the Book of Numbers 1-Х. Jerusalem, 1985. |
| 6145 2 Bar 29:8; Mek. Vay. 3.42ff.; 5.63–65. Cf. the manna restored with the ark (2Macc 2:8; cf. 4 Bar. 3:11). 6146 Many commentators, often following Billerbeck, Kommentar, 2:481,4:890,954 (e.g., Dodd, Interpretation, 335; Cullmann, Worship, 96); see further Rev 2:17; probably also 4Q511 frg. 10.9. This image continued in Christian tradition (Sib. Or. 7.149), in which Christ was the holy manna-giver (γλε μαννοδτα, Sib. Or. 2.347). Cf. also the préexistent manna (b. Pesah. 54a; Hoskyns, Gospel, 294, cites Sipre Deut. 355). 6147 E.g., m. " Abot 3:16; 4:16; b. Ber. 34b; Sanh. 98b; see further Feuillet, Studies, 70–72, and our introductory comments on John 2:1–11 ; probably also lQSa (=lQ28a) 2.11–12, 19–21. Kuzenzama, «Préhistoire,» suggests that receiving Torah was the prerequisite. 6148 Lev. Rab. 27:4; Ruth Rab. 5:6; Ecc1. Rab. 3:15, §1; Pesiq. Rab. 31:10; 52:8. Israel would continue to celebrate the exodus in the messianic era but would celebrate the kingdom more (t. Ber. 1:10; b. Ber. 12b). 6150 See, e.g., Glasson, Moses, 15–19, on Isaiah. For exodus typology in the Hebrew Bible, see Daube, Pattern, passim. 6152 E.g., early Amoraic tradition in Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5:8; Num. Rab. 11:2; Ruth Rab. 5:6; Ecc1. Rab. 1:9, §1; in some cases (Exod. Rab. 2:6; Deut. Rab. 9:9) Moses himself would lead Israel in the end time. On the hidden Messiah tradition, see comment on John 8:59 . 6153 E.g., Edersheim, Life, 334; Billerbeck, Kommentar, ad loc; Dodd, Interpretation, 83; Hunter, lohn, 71. 6154 See b. Ta c an. 9a; Num. Rab. 1:2; 13:20; Song Rab. 4:5, §2; Tg. Jon. to Deut 10:6 ; though cf. also Abraham in Gen. Rab. 48:12. Tannaim might recount similar details without the names (Sipre Deut. 313.3.1; 355.6.1). Haggadah also commented on the adjustable flavors of manna (Sipre Deut. 87.2.1; Exod. Rab. 5:9; 25:3), that it fell sixty cubits deep (b. Yoma 76a), that more fell nearer the homes of the righteous (b. Yoma 75a), and that it was préexistent (b. Pesah. 54a). 6155 That the second line repeats the final «gives/gave bread from heaven» fits typical ancient Mediterranean speech forms (πιφορ, ντιστροφ; Anderson, Glossary, 23, 54; idem, Rhetorical Theory 163; Rowe, «Style,» 131; in the NT, see Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 579; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 86; in the LXX, see Lee, «Translations of OT,» 779), thereby drawing further attention to the contrast. |
| Janowski, Sühne als Heilsgeschehen. Studien zur Sühnetheologie der Priesterschrift und zur Wurzel KPR im Alten Orient und im Alten Testament (WMANT 55) Neukirchen-Vluyn 1982; 2 2000; ders., Tempel und Schöpfung. Schöpfungstheologische Aspekte der priesterschriftlichen Heiligtumskonzeption, in: ders., Gottes Gegenwart in Israel. Beiträge zur Theologie des Alten Testaments, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1993, 214–246; E.A. Knauf, Der Exodus zwischen Mythos und Geschichte. Zur priesterschriftlichen Rezeption der Schilfmeer-Geschichte in Ex 14 , in: R.G. Kratz u.a. (Hg). Schriftauslegung in der Schrift. FS O.H. Steck (BZAW 300) Berlin 2000, 73–84; I. Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence. The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School, Minneapolis 1995; K. Koch, P – kein Redaktor! Erinnerung an zwei Eckdaten der Quellenscheidung: VT 37, 1987, 446–467; M. Köckert, Das Land in der priesterlichen Komposition des Pentateuch, in: D. Vieweger/E.J. Waschke (Hg.), FS S. Wagner, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1995, 147–162; F. Kohata, Jahwist und Priesterschrift in Exodus 3–14 (BZAW 166) Berlin 1986; Th.M. Krapf, Die Priesterschrift und die vorexilische Zeit. Yehezkel Kaufmanns vernachlässigter Beitrag zur Geschichte der biblischen Religion (OBO 119) Freiburg/Göttingen 1992; N. Lohfink, Die Priesterschrift und die Geschichte: Congress Volume Göttingen (VT.S 29) Leiden 1978, 183–225; S.E. McEvenue, The Narrative Style of the Priestly Writer (AnBib 50) Rom 1971 ; E. Otto, Forschungen. zur Priesterschrift. ThR 62, 1997, 1–50; S. Owczarek, Die Vorstellung vom Wohnen Gottes inmitten seines Volkes in der Priesterschrift, Zur Heiligtumstheologie der priesterschriftlichen Grundschrift (EHS XXI–11/625) Frankfurt 1998; L. Perlitt, Priesterschrift im Deuteronomium?: ZAW 100 Suppl., 1988, 65–88. Th. Pola, Die ursprüngliche Priesterschrift. Beobachtungen zur Literarkritik und Traditionsgeschichte von. Hp g (WMANT 70) Neukirchen/Vluyn 1995; A.de Pury, Der priesterschriftliche Umgang mit der Jakobs-geschichte, in: R.G. Kratz u.a. (Hg.), Schriftauslegung (s.o.); L. |
| Ellis, World Ellis, E. Earle. The World of St. John. New York: Abingdon, 1965. Ellul, Apocalypse Ellul, Jacques. Apocalypse: The Book of Revelation. Translated by George W. Schreiner. New York: Seabury, 1977. Ellul, «Targum» Ellul, Danielle. «Le Targum du Pseudo-Jonathan sur Genèse 3 à la lumière de quelques traditions haggadiques.» Foi et vie 80, no. 6 (1981): 12–25. Elman, «Suffering» Elman, Yaakov. «The Suffering of the Righteous in Palestinian and Babylonian Sources.» JQR 80 (1989–1990): 315–39. Emerton, «Binding» Emerton, John A. «Binding and Loosing–Forgiving and Retaining.» JTS NS 13 (1962): 325–31. Endres, Interpretation Endres, John C . Biblical Interpretation in the Book of Jubilees. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph 18. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1987. Engberg-Pedersen, Divide Engberg-Pedersen, Troels, ed. Paul beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and Stoics Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. Paul and the Stoics. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox; Edinburgh: T8cT Clark, 2000. Engle, «Amphorisk» Engle, Anita. «An Amphorisk of the Second Temple Period.» PEQ 109 (1977): 117–22. English, «Miracle» English, E. Schuyler. «A Neglected Miracle.» BSac 126 (1969): 300–5. Ensley, «Eternity» Ensley, Eugene C. «Eternity Is Now: A Sermon on John 14:1–11 .» Interpretation 19 (1965): 295–98. Ensor, « John 4.35 .» Ensor, Peter W. «The Authenticity of John 4.35 .» EvQ 72, no. 1 (2000): 13–21. Enz, «Dualism» Enz, Jacob J. «Origin of the Dualism Expressed by «Sons of Light» and »Sons of Darkness. " » Biblical Research 21 (1976): 15–18. Enz, «Exodus» Enz, Jacob J. «The Book of Exodus as a Literary Type for the Gospel of John.» JBL 76 (1957): 208–15. Epp, «Wisdom» Epp, Eldon Jay. «Wisdom, Torah, Word: The Johannine Prologue and the Purpose of the Fourth Gospe1.» Pages 128–46 in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney Presented by His Former Students. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. |
| While the inadequacy of signs-faith is a motif that climaxes in 20:29, signs-faith still appears as valid faith in the Fourth Gospel (including in that verse, especially given the essentially positive characterization of Thomas in the Gospel). 2400 In contrast to some commentators, we affirm that signs primarily serve a positive, revelatory function in the Fourth Gospe1. 2401 Although they do not control onés response, and response to the Spirit " s testimony in the word is a higher stage of faith, they are among Jesus» works which testify to his identity (10:32, 37–38; 14:10–11; 20:29–31). Whereas Jesus» signs in the Synoptics especially authenticate his mission, 2402 the Fourth Gospel analyzes the signs in a christological context, using them and the frequently subsequent discourses to interpret Jesus» identity and to call for faith. 2403 John applied the signs symbolically, 2404 but was not alone in such a practice; Philo and Plutarch similarly read symbolic meaning into signs. 2405 When the signs» symbolic language is taken into account, John " s applications are consistent with Jesus tradition he follows, as Dodd notes: «When the Fourth Evangelist presents the works of healing as «signs» of the coming of »eternal lifé to men, he is rightly interpreting these sayings in our earliest sources.» 2406 The Synoptics also call Jesus» miracles signs; although the term appears in response to an inappropriate request for validation, Jesus» response indicates that earlier miracles have provided such validation, which will be finally authenticated by the resurrection (Matt 12:38–39; 16:1–4; Mark 8:11–12 ; Luke 11:16,29–30; cf. John 2:18; 6:30 ). But John emphasizes the «sign» function of Jesus» miracles: they point to a reality that must be interpreted. He develops his theme of signs especially from the term " s use in the biblical exodus narratives. 2407 Whereas early Judaism did not always associate the Messiah with miracles, the exodus narrative made it impossible not to associate «signs» with Moses. |
| This primary concern of the biblical authors led them to modify traditional mythical motifs in very significant ways. Most importantly, the chief actor or subject of the biblical writings is God , rather than multiple gods, a hero or a king. As with much ancient mythology, Israel’s popular stories are often etiological: that is, they explain the occurrence of specific actions or things in the life of the nation such as ritual celebrations or natural phenomena (the autumnal New Year festival, for example, or the pillar of salt, Genesis 19:26). In any case, the presumed historical events behind these accounts are presented in such a way as to offer a theological interpretation of those events. A good example is the Exodus tradition(s) [compare Exodus 1-15 with Psalms 77/78 and 80/81]. Here, underlying mythical elements (conflict, destruction, rebirth) have been reshaped to proclaim through the written account the truth of God’s saving activity in and for His people Israel. The result is a ritual retelling, and thus a reactualization, of what actually occurred in the framework of Israel’s salvation history. We take it for granted that historiography will record for us an accurate picture of “what really happened,” events that are demonstrably factual. To the Israelites, however, the aim of written “history” is not primarily to record facts or provide a record of actual past events. Their sagas, for example, convey above all theological and spiritual meaning for the present . Those epic stories (e.g., of Noah or the Patriarchs) are built on an indispensable, if irrecoverable, kernel of historical reality. Their true significance, however, lies in their ability to relate that past event to the present life of the people. History for the ancient Israelites is meaningful only to the extent that it is living history, extending, as it were, from the past into the present life of the people. Accordingly, the Hebrew concept of “remembrance” signifies reactualization : to remember the past is to experience its conditions and challenges in the immediate present. |
|
|
