| Craig S. Keener Revelation of Jesus. 16:5–33 ALTHOUGH A GRADUAL SHIFT takes place from the emphasis on persecution in 16:1–4, there is no decisive break here with the preceding context. When Jesus was with the disciples, they did not need warning about future sufferings (16:5), presumably because he would protect them (18:8–9). But now that he was going and their hearts were burdened with sorrow (16:6), he had to assure them that the Paraclete would continue to reveal him to them and through them (16:7–15). He had warned them of coming sufferings (15:18–16:4), but they could not bear further revelation of such matters now (16:12); when the Paraclete would come, however, he would prepare them for the rest, telling them more things to come (16:13), presumably including events such as those narrated in the book of Revelation (if, as we have argued, John and Revelation reflect the same community). The coming of the Paraclete would enable the disciples to go on the offensive (15:26–27) because through him Jesus would remain among them (16:13–15). In him they would have victory over the world, despite their tribulation (16:33). His Departure for Their Good (16:5–7) In the context of the disciples» discouragement due to the world " s hostility (16:1–6), the Paraclete would come to prosecute the world (16:8–11). The disciples could be strong in the face of persecution, despite Jesus» absence, because the Paraclete would be with them (v. 7); this suggests that the Paracletés prosecution of the world is on their behalf and through their testimony. 9191 They grieved that Jesus was «going» (16:5–6), but resurrection joy would soon swallow their grief concerning the cross (16:22; cf. 1Pet 1:6 ). 9192 Jesus» return would provide them the Spirit, who would continue Jesus» presence with them. Because of their grief (16:6), Jesus assures them emphatically («I tell you the truth») 9193 that they will be better off with him departing to send them the other advocate he has mentioned (14:16). 9194 The Paraclete is better for them than Jesus in the flesh would have been (16:7) because he re-presents Jesus dynamically to the world in each hostile situation. Jesus had also challenged the world concerning sin, righteousness, and judgment, and the prophetic Spirit, proclaiming the same Jesus through his community, would continue the challenge. 9195 This continuity between the two should not be understood as identity, as in the docetic reading of John, 9196 nor even to imply that the Spirit cannot bring new teachings; 9197 the Spirit will say some new things (16:12–13) but in continuity with Jesus» revelation. 9198 But it does mean that Jesus himself is present in the Spirit, though only those in his community recognize his presence. 9199 The World " s Prosecutor (16:8–11) |
| Craig S. Keener The ultimate model for love and service. 13:1–38 THE FOOT WASHING IN JOHN is the narrative introduction for the final discourse, part of the lengthy prolegomena to the Passion Narrative. Jesus» impending death dominates this scene. It intersperses Jesus» words and example of service (13:1, 3–10, 12–17, 31–35) with foreshadowings of his betrayal (13:2, 10–11, 18–30), then opens directly into discussion about Jesus» departure by way of the cross (13:36–38; 14:3–6). 8048 This scene therefore paves the way for the Farewell Discourse (13:31–17:26). 8049 By the foot washing Jesus prefigures his impending glorification, which is the theological subject of most of the context (12:16, 23, 28,41; 13:31–32). This act identifies Jesus as the Suffering Servant and defines his passion as an act of loving service. At the same time, however, it also summons Jesus» followers to imitate his model, serving and loving one another to the extent of laying down their lives for one another (13:14–16, 34–35). The Setting (13:1–3) John again links Jesus» imminent «hour» with the Passover season (13:1). (On the «hour,» see comment on 2:4; cf. 12:23.) In contrast to the Synoptic picture of the Last Supper, however, Jesus» closing hours before his arrest in this Gospel are «before» Passover (13:1). This detail fits John " s chronology (13:29; 18:28; 19:14, 31, 42), 8050 which ultimately supports his portrayal of Jesus as the paschal lamb (1:29,36; 19:36). At this point, however, John underlines a different aspect of the chronology: Jesus loved his own «to the end» (13:1). This is Johannine double entendre: it can imply «to the utmost,» «fully,» as well as «to the point of his death.» 8051 Such a double entendre reinforces the measure of God " s love in the Fourth Gospel (3:16) and early Christianity ( Rom 5:5–9 ): Jesus» death. The preceding context also illustrates Jesus» love (11:5) that would cost him his life (11:7–16), but here the specific objects of his love in the Lazarus story give way to all of «his own» (cf. 10:3) who would be remaining in the world (17:11). |
| Craig S. Keener True Purification. 2:1–25 AT A WEDDING, JESUS sets aside the purificatory purpose of waterpots that embody traditional religious practices (for comment on Johns water motif, see also comment on 1:25–26, 31; 3:5). At the Gospels first Passover festival, Gods lamb then purifies the temple itself, starting the path of conflict with Judean leaders that leads to the passion of the Gospel " s final Passover. Relationship versus Ritual Purification (2:1–11) Signs-faith is less valuable than faith that merely responds to the Spirit " s witness (20:29); it is nevertheless a better place to begin than no faith at all (14:11). In 2:1–11, disciples who have already begun to believe Jesus (in 1:35–51) come to a new level of faith through Jesus» first sign. Outsiders to the establishment again receive deeper insight (2:9) than those closest to the heart of the social order. Perhaps most significantly, Jesus, who acts with divine authority, does not hesitate to suspend ritual law (again symbolized by water; cf. 1:33; 2:6; 3:5) in favor of a friend " s honor. The Jesus of this narrative prefigures the Jesus of the following narrative, who will act in judgment against the social and religious order represented by the temple. The following interpretive dialogue will reinforce the point that it is Jesus» gift of the Spirit, rather than ritual or heritage, that brings life (3:3–6). Thus this narrative also introduces Jesus» «hour» (2:4), beginning the conflict with the Judean religious and political establishment that in John must inevitably lead to the cross. 4354 1. Preliminary Questions Scholars have offered various proposals about this passagés role in the structure of 2:1–4:54, paralleling the two explicit Cana miracles as a deliberate inclusio. Although details vary, the intervening section moves from a Jewish to a non-Jewish (Samaritan) setting, with extensive christological discourse between. 4355 Some fail to identify a historical core to the account, hence doubt its basic historicity. 4356 Without privileging particular presuppositions about miracles, however, and given John " s consistent rewriting, and hence obscuring, of his sources, evidence for the historicity of the event could be argued in either direction. Royal banquets appear frequently in later Jewish parables, 4357 but one could use the observation about abundant banquet stories to argue for historical veracity as well as against it; the stories are frequent because banquets were frequent, and the Synoptic tradition indicates that the historical Jesus frequently attended banquets. 4358 The account is strictly Johannine in style but, though missing in Synoptic tradition, seems characteristic of Jesus 4359 and not objectionable on Christian presuppositions. 4360 John probably applies prior tradition here as in those cases where we can test his dependence on tradition; yet, as with his other narratives, he clearly reworks this one into his own unique framework and idiom as wel1. |
| Craig S. Keener Conflict Over the Healing of a Blind Man. 9:1–10:21 This narrative demonstrates Jesus» claims in the previous context and chronologically follows directly on Jesus» departure from the temple on the last day of the festival (7:37; 8:59). It probably begins not far from the temple (cf. 9:7). This section opens with the healing of a blind man (9:1–7) and closes with the recognition that this miracle was not what one expected from a demon (10:21). The narrative between includes Pharisaic charges that Jesus» healing cannot be from God (9:16,22,24), a response from the formerly blind man that challenges the logic of their paradigm (9:25, 27, 31–33), and a response from Jesus, who reverses the charge and shows that it is his opponents who are not from God (9:40–10:18). 7009 Jesus» claim in this section to be the good shepherd (10:11) implicitly advances his previous claim to deity (8:58). Blindness and Sin (9:1–34) Contrary to what the elite supposed (9:34), the man was not born blind due to a sin (9:2–3), nor was his healer a sinner (9:16, 24); by contrast, the elite themselves are sinful and spiritually blind (9:39–41). The true connection between blindness and sin links together the entire section 9:1–41. But because 9:40–41 begin the response to the Pharisees which is continued in 10:1–18 and 9:35–39 begins Jesus» defense of the healed man, we have limited the first section to the material directly related to the healing and responses to it (9:1–34). The following section (9:35–10:18) traces Jesus» own response to the varied responses to his act, especially the responses of the healed man and the Jerusalem elite. Moreover, the contrast between physical and spiritual blindness (dependence on Christ and opposition to him) of 9:39–41 is already implicit at the beginning of this section. Jesus became invisible in some sense to his enemies in 8:59, so they could not see him; but here Jesus cures a man physically blind and so despised by his enemies (9:2, 34). (Indeed, worldly evaluations of the reasons for blindness form an inclusio around Jesus» healing and the man " s fidelity to him; 9:2, 34.) Epistemological terms («know») dominate the dialogue scenes and probably provide the metaphoric meaning of «sight» language also prominent in the chapter. 7010 |
| John Anthony McGuckin Holy Trinity ARISTOTLE PAPANIKOLAOU The Trinity is what Christians eventually came to refer to as the New Testament witnesses to a faith in Jesus as the Son of God, who as a result of his unique relation to the Father, reveals the Father and offers the eschatological gift of salvation by the power of the Holy Spirit. The New Testament itself does not give any definitive or creed-like statements about God as Trinity. What the earliest followers and interpreters of Jesus do is to continue to speak about Jesus and interpret his life, sayings, and deeds, together with the salvation he offers, in terms of Jesus’ relationship to the Father and the Spirit. Although there existed a variety of interpretations of Jesus in the earliest formulations of Christianity, two positions became predominant. The first consists of understanding Jesus as a divine mediator, but not generally seen as divine in the same degree as God the Father (often known as Pre-Nicene subordinationism); the second affirms Jesus as of equal divinity with the Father. It is important for the understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity to notice that these two positions share many common assumptions: (1) that Jesus is the Messiah and, as such, the one who fulfills the promise of salvation; (2) that this salvation consists in the bringing of creation into some form of renewed contact with the divine; and (3) as mediamediator of this contact between divinity and creation, Jesus is revealed as the divine Son of God. The core of the debates of the identity of Christ in the 2nd and 3rd centuries gravitated around the question of the degree and nature of divinity ascribed to Jesus by the church. These two parallel trajectories would ultimately culminate – and critically so – in the famous controversies of the 4th century between St. Athanasius of Alexandria and the Nicene theologians, and the so-called “Arians.” Athanasius would stand in continuity with Sts. Ignatius of Antioch and Irenaeus of Lyon in emphasizing salvation as humanity’s freedom from death and corruption, and that this freedom requires a conceptualizing of the God-world relation in terms of a communion between the created and the uncreated. The unequivocal declaration of the co-equal divinity of the Son with the Father occurs first in Athanasius, who argues that there is no freedom from death and corruption, and hence no eternal life, without a communion of the created with the full divinity as revealed in the person and work of Christ. |
| Craig S. Keener Jerusalem and its King. 12:12–50 ONCE JESUS ARRIVES IN JERUSALEM (12:12–19), people respond to him in various ways. The Gentiles seek him (12:20–22), provoking his remark that the time for his death had come (12:23–33). His own people, however, whose king he is (12:13–15), remained blind (12:37–43; cf. 9:39–41), unable to see Jesus» glory which Isaiah saw, which is the light (Jesus» discussion of which frames the comment on their blindness–12:34–36,44–50). Yet Jesus remained God " s agent and standard for judgment (12:44–50). The Arrival of Zion " s King (12:12–19) Earlier passages had introduced Jesus as rightful king of Israel (1:49), but also warned that his «own» as a whole did not receive him (1:11; or that they misunderstood his kingship–6:15; cf. 18:36–37). Both themes are present here, but John is careful to emphasize that his people as a whole would have been more open to him (12:17–18), but that it was the leaders who were responsible for their people being led wrongly (12:19). 1. Authenticity of the Core Tradition That someone would go out to meet with respect an important teacher (11:20), signs worker (12:18) or king (12:13) is not unlikely (see comment on 11:20); that crowds already present loudly welcomed many incoming pilgrims is virtually certain. Yet because Jesus» claim to kingship is often doubted, some are doubtful that the triumphal entry happened. If people hailed Jesus as king, why did the Romans not intervene suddenly? But the Gospels present the grandness of the event in the light of their theology about Jesus» identity; most of the accounts do not require us to suppose an originally large-scale notice. 7803 In the bustle of a city milling with pilgrims, more of whom were arriving throughout the day, the Romans need not have noticed this relatively obscure event. 7804 The Roman garrison was concentrated on the Temple Mount, and Jesus was hardly the only Passover pilgrim welcomed by the crowds already present. More importantly, leaders of the municipal aristocracy, normally charged with keeping peace for the Romans, were also concentrated on the Temple Mount at this season (being mainly priests) and had they been notified of the entry in time to stop it–which assumes a much longer period of acclamation than is likely–they preferred not to act in front of the crowd anyway ( Mark 11:32; 14:2 ). In John the leaders, who are now Pharisees, continue to be concerned about the opinions of the crowd (12:19). |
| 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. |
| Craig S. Keener The passion. 18:1–19:42 THE «HOUR» JESUS ANNOUNCED as early as 2has arrived; Jesus is the paschal lamb that John announced in 1:29. Peter Ellis suggests that John " s Passion Narrative fits a chiastic structure, as follows: 9506 A Arrested in a garden, bound and led to trial (18:1–12) Β True high priest tried; beloved disciple present (18:13–27) C Jesus, king of Israel, judged by Pilate, rejected by his people (18:28–19:16) B» True high priest carries wood of his own sacrifice (like Isaac); beloved disciple present (19:17–30) Á Bound with burial clothes, buried in a garden (19:31–42) Because many of the features on which he focuses to achieve this structure are so secondary and because the units may be adapted to suit the proposed structure, the suggested chiasmus ultimately proves less than persuasive. It does, however, evidence some patterns that point to the narrative artistry of their designer. More persuasive is the observation by Ellis and others that irony pervades the narrative. Thus Judas who went forth into «the night» in 13now returns in darkness to arrest the light of the world; Pilate the governor questions if Jesus is a king when the readers know that he is; Pilate demands, «What is truth?» when the readers know that Jesus is (14:6); the soldiers hail Jesus as «king of the Jews» in mockery, unaware that Jesus truly is the king of Israel (1:49), whose lifting up on the cross must introduce his reign. 9507 Historical Tradition in the Passion Narrative We must address some preliminary issues concerning John " s narratives and the history behind them (especially as preserved in the Synoptics) before examining the specific texts in John 18–19 . 9508 Where John diverges from the traditions reported in the Synoptics, we do think likely that John adapts rather than contradicts the passion sequence on which they are based, probably at least sometimes on the basis of other traditions and probably at least sometimes for a measure of theological symbolism. Although, on the whole, we think John essentially independent from the Synoptics, the Passion Narrative is different; John " s audience probably already knows the basic passion story from other sources (cf. 1Cor 11:23–25 ). Their prior knowledge would not render John " s version of the story any less intriguing to his audience, however: stories were told repeatedly in the ancient Mediterranean, and a good story could build suspense even if one knew the final outcome. 9509 John " s very adaptations, at least wherever they might diverge from the traditions commonly known among his ideal audience, invite his audiencés special attention. Where theological symbolism guides his adaptations, it is generally in the service of Christology: Jesus is the Passover lamb (cf. 1:29), who lays down his life freely (10:17–18). 1. The Genre of the Passion Narratives |
| Photo: patriarchia.ru It is very easy for people, especially outsiders, to miss the fundamental fact about the Church. It is easy to assume that the Church is fundamentally an organization or (worse yet) a collection of clergy. That is perhaps because the Church is obviously organized (in the case of Orthodoxy, one is tempted to say, “ loosely organized”), and it does have clergy, whose dress and titles set them apart and make them very visible. But the Church is not primarily an organization, or even a holy organization, despite some external organized features, such as officers, rules, and power structure. That is, the essence of the Church is not institutional. In a recent edition of the Biblical Archaeology Review there was an article provocatively entitled “Jesus Found in Ancient Arabia”. The title is perhaps a touch misleading, because it focuses not upon Jesus Himself being found in Arabia, but upon early archaeological traces of Christian communities found there. But the title is more significant than it knows, for those communities did indeed consist of the presence of Jesus Himself in Arabia during the time when the Church flourished there. The essence of the Church consists of the presence of Jesus. Through the gatherings of Christians in Arabia, Jesus was indeed found alive and living there—and also in Thessalonica, Corinth, Rome, and Philippi. And later He turned up in Moscow, London, and New York. This is because Jesus promised to show up and be present wherever two or more of His disciples gathered together in His Name (Matthew 18:20). This is why St. Paul repeatedly referred to the Church (literally, the gathering or assembly; Greek the κκλησα/ ekklesia ) as “the body of Christ”. This description was not simply one metaphor among many (i.e. church as a household or a vine or the city of God), but the main and controlling metaphor to describe the reality of the Church. Just as one lives, is present, and works through one’s body, so Jesus lives, is present, and works through the gathering of Christians whenever they gather in His Name. That is why St. Paul makes the astonishing claim that the Church is “the fullness of Christ”, the One who “fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:23). |
| Craig S. Keener The Witness of the First Disciples. 1:19–51 ALTHOUGH THE GOSPEL " S NARRATIVE opens with 1:19, the implied reader knows Jesus» origin from 1:1–18 (and most of John " s earliest audience probably were already Christians; see introduction). That the narrative can open abruptly after the prologue (especially the preparation of 1:6–8,15) is to be expected, and a Diaspora audience conditioned by Mediterranean dramatic culture would feel at home here. Greek dramas often started by informing the viewer of what had happened prior to the opening of the play. The Odyssey opens abruptly and afterwards explains more of Odysseus " s travels through flashbacks, but its hearers could also presuppose what they knew of Odysseus from stories about him in the Iliad (if they knew that work first; probably they heard both repeatedly). The prologue introduces John the Baptist as a model witness for Jesus, leading immediately into a section (1:19–51) about the nature of witness and disciple-making for Jesus, which John the Baptist (1:19–28) opens. 3790 Apart from the prologue, the evangelist starts his Gospel essentially where Mark did and early Christian evangelists often did (Acts 1:22; 10:37; 13:24). 3791 This witness also fits the Gospel " s specifically Jewish framework by opening with a witness to Israel (1:31,49) embraced by true Israelites (1:47). 3792 The writer of the Fourth Gospel wishes his audience not only to continue in the faith themselves (20:31), but to join him in openly confessing Christ (12:42–43), proclaiming him in a hostile world (15:26–27). The Witness of the Forerunner to Israel (1:19–28) In 1:19–34, as in 3:27–36, John the Baptist models the activity of a «witness» (1:8) by deferring all honor to Jesus. This model may counter the tendency of some to exalt John unduly at Jesus» expense (see comment on 1:6–8); it may also respond to some leaders in the Johannine circle who have proved too ambitious for personal honor (3 John 9). This context explains who John is not (1:20–21), his function as a witness to another (1:22–27), and his testimony for the other (1:29–34). |
|
|
