| The disciples have reason to be fearful of «the Jews» within the story world. These authorities (see introduction, pp. 214–28) engineered the execution of their teacher, and the authorities» Roman allies normally sought to stamp out followers of leaders regarded as treasonous. 10669 But their fears do not take into account Jesus» promise to return to them (which they do not at this point believe); they act like the secret believers John has so often condemned for acting «on account of fear of the «Jews»» (7:13; 19:38; cf. 12:42). But whereas some secret believers became more public with their faith under persecution (19:38), those who had been faithful to Jesus in happier times now have abandoned and denied him (16:31–32; 18:25, 27). If the first disciples had reasons to fear, John " s audience probably has similar reasons to fear the successors of the Judean authorities in their own day and therefore will learn from the model of assurance Jesus provides in this passage. Although John informs his audience only that the doors were «shut,» this itself is sufficient, given the circumstances for which they were shut (20:19), to imply that they were secured shut, that is, locked or bolted (cf., e.g., Matt 25:10). Normal residences had doors with bolts and locks, 10670 which one might especially secure if expecting hostility (T. Job 5:3). Those familiar with the passion tradition might envision a spacious room in well-to-do upper-city Jerusalem ( Mark 14:15 ; Luke 22:12; Acts 1:13), where such features would also be likely to be assumed. John may record that the doors were locked for two reasons. First, he may wish to underline the nature of the resurrection body 10671 –corporeal (20:20) but capable of acting as if incorporeal (20:19), 10672 though presumably not like the «phantoms» of Greek thought that could pass through the thong of a bolt in a door 10673 (which would contradict the image of 20:20). Some have argued that Jesus» body was not yet glorified, on the basis of 20(some cite also Luke 24:39–43); they suggest that John merely neglects to mention that the disciples opened the doors for him. But the repetition of the closed doors in 20:26, again as the context of Jesus» sudden appearance among them, is emphatic; John wishes to underline that Jesus appeared despite closed doors and to the disciples» astonishment. 10674 As Witherington notes, «The one who could pass through the grave clothes and leave a neat pile behind would not find locked doors any obstacle.» 10675 Second, through the locked doors, John underlines the fear of the disciples before Jesus» coming, a deliberate contrast to the boldness implied for their mission to the world after he has imparted his presence to them(20:21–23). 10676 |
| Through the Baptist " s witness, Andrew became a follower of Jesus (1:36–37, 40); through Andrew " s witness, Simon became a follower of Jesus ( l:40–42a); but in both cases, the inquirers became true disciples only through a personal encounter with Jesus for themselves (1:29, 38–39,42; cf. 8:31). In both cases, Jesus knows the character of the person who approaches him; he knows his sheep (10:14, 27) whom the Father gave him (10:29; 17:9), and indeed knows the hearts of all (2:23–25). Andrew here becomes the second witness, demonstrating that the Baptist " s literary role as witness is paradigmatic and not merely limited to the Baptist himself (note «first» in 1:41, implying both the priority of witness to onés family–cf. 7:5–and that he continued to testify to others after Peter). Andrew «finds» Simon in 1much as Jesus later finds Philip (1:43); this is characteristic Johannine vocabulary (e.g., 5:14) but also functions paradigmatically for witness; Andrew continues to appear in this Gospel as one who introduces the resources or interest of others to Jesus (6:8–9; 12:22.) That Andrew announces Jesus» messiahship (1:41) may reflect his interpretation of John " s testimony about the lamb (1:29) interpreted through the grid of his own experience of Jesus. In the same way, Philip " s testimony about Jesus» messiahship provides the categories for Nathanael to interpret Jesus» supernatural knowledge (1:45,49). In John " s theology, both the christological witness of disciples and the personal experience of Christ become necessary for adequate faith. In the language of the First Epistle, one needs the right Christology ( 1 John 2:22–24) through the apostolic witness ( 1 John 4:6) as well as the testimony of the Spirit (1 John 2:20, 27; 3:24; 4:13; 5:7–8); the latter is supposed to be inseparable from the former (1 John 4:1–6; cf. John 15:26–27 ). When some other prospective disciples encounter Jesus for themselves, they discover that he already knows them, which convinces them of his identity as well (1:48–49; 4:17–19, 29). We may envision such a response to 1here; but why is it not narrated in this case? 4221 Perhaps John wishes to save Peter " s confession for 6:69. |
| One may dispute whether the «other sheep» are Diaspora Jews, like much of John " s probable audience, 7435 or Gentiles, 7436 which John " s audience would have to know had joined Christian groups in large numbers. Some might adduce in favor of Diaspora Jews «Gods scattered children» in 11:52, since the high priest would have meant Diaspora Jews rather than Gentiles in 11:50; the high priest does prophesy that Jesus will die on others» «behalf» (11:50). But the high priests own intention is irrelevant to the deeper sense the narrator intends for his audience; clearly the high priest intends Jesus» vicarious death differently from how John intends his audience to hear it (11:51). Moreover, «scattered children of God» is the narrator " s interpretation rather than the high priest " s phrase in any case (11:52), and in this Gospel the term must refer to believers in Jesus (1:12). Also possibly in favor of Diaspora Jews are the texts in the biblical prophets from which the image is drawn ( Jer 23:1–8; 31:1–10 ; Ezek 34:5–6; 37:21–28 ). 7437 But if John views Gentiles as spiritual proselytes to Israel (cf. 3:5) and challenges the sufficiency of ethnic descent from Abraham (8:34, 39), he might apply these same biblical images for the people of God to include Gentile converts. (In contrast to later Gentile Christian teachings about a new Israel replacing the old, however, John would think in terms of Gentiles being grafted into the covenant community through conversion to biblical Judaism; cf. Rom 11:16–24 .) John " s emphasis on a mission to the «world» broader than «the Jews» (1:10; 4:42; 12:32) probably also implies the inclusion of Gentile believers. 7438 Most importantly, John implies the Gentile mission in 7and 12(see comment there). If «other sheep» at least includes Gentile Christians, it is significant that they become part of the «flock,» which in the Hebrew Scriptures was the people of God (cf. Eph 2:15–19 ). 7439 But it was already understood that when Gentiles converted to Judaism they became part of the Jewish people (e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.210). Jesus» death (10:15) is the prerequisite for the ingathering of Gentiles (10:16), which fits Johannine theology (12:20–24) 7440 and might also serve an apologetic function, if it is necessary to explain why the Jesus tradition includes so little outreach to Gentiles. As in Jewish tradition about God and Israel, the «oneness» of the people in this Gospel (10:16; 11:52) mirrors (10:30, 38; 5:44; 17:3) and derives from (17:11, 21–23) the oneness of God and Jesus. 7441 The Samaritans recognized that Jesus was «savior of the world» (4:42), which would have to include Gentiles. 7442 |
| 10200 Who are the bystanders who give Jesus drink in 19:29? Because John " s audience probably knew the basic story of the passion in a form similar to the Synoptic passion narratives, they may have assumed that those who offered Jesus the drink did so in mockery ( Mark 15:36 ). It is also grammatically possible–though hardly historically conceivable, given the soldiers at the cross–that John allows his audience to think of the disciple and Jesus» mother as the subjects of the verb ( John 19:26–27 ), in which case they seek to care for Jesus» need. 10201 But on the theological as well as the historical level, John apparently expects his audience to presuppose the hostility of those providing the drink, for they fulfill the role of persecutors in the psalm to which John here alludes. Whether the scriptural allusion is to Ps 22 or to Ps 69 , 10202 both place the righteous sufferer " s thirst in the context of persecution. The probably widespread passion tradition followed in Mark ( Mark 15:23 ) was understood by Matthew as a reference to Ps 69:21 (68LXX): they gave me «gall» (Matt 27:34). 10203 The other line of this verse in the psalm indicates that the psalmist " s persecutors gave him vinegar for his thirst. 10204 Likewise, the popular passion tradition included a citation from Ps 22 ( Mark 15:34 ); because Jewish traditions could allude to a larger context by citing only a small sampling, John may suspect (reasonably) that Jesus recited more of the psalm, including its cry of thirst ( Ps 22 10205 That John intends an allusion to one of these verses is clear in his observation that Jesus declared his thirst so «Scripture might be fulfilled» (19:28). 10206 Most significantly, those already familiar with the passion tradition would recognize once more that Jesus himself remains in control of the events surrounding his death, consciously fulfilling Scripture (10:18; 13:26). In the popular passion tradition, the sour wine lifted to Jesus» mouth is part of the ridicule heaped against him (conjoined with the skepticism that Elijah would rescue him; Mark 15:36 ); here, however, Jesus deliberately invites the sour wine to fulfill Scripture (19:28–29). |
| John " s primary purpose in emphasizing her witness is undoubtedly less apologetic (cf. 1Cor 15:5–8 ) than didactic. The faith of Jesus» mother births his public ministry in 2:3–5; more critically as a parallel here, the Samaritan woman " s testimony brings her whole town to meet Jesus for themselves (4:39–42). This sort of testimony and invitation is the same method of witness John recommends for male disciples (1:46). Further, Mary " s message (20:18) is precisely that of the male disciples after her (20:25), the sort of witness on which the Spirit would summon subsequent generations to faith (20:30–31). Appearances to the Disciples (20:19–29) Jesus» first appearance to the disciples (20:19–23) provides the pneumatological climax to the Gospel, the fulfillment of the Paraclete sayings and much of the rest of the final discourse; here Jesus «comes again» to them. But Jesus» second appearance (20:24–29) demonstrates the futility of discipleship without the requisite Christology; Thomas " s skepticism illustrates what disciples would be like without hope in the resurrection. This second appearance to the gathered disciples provides the central climax for the Gospel because it climaxes John " s Christology and his faith motif, defining the basis for sufficient, persevering faith; the Gospel " s primary conclusion, 20:30–31, flows directly out of 20:24–29. 1. Appearance to the Ten (20:19–23) The two major aspects of John " s pneumatology (rebirth and prophetic empowerment) 10639 are fulfilled together in Jesus» «return» to give the disciples the Holy Spirit. One may also note the recurrent context of persecution; although the closed door may allow John to communicate something about the resurrection body (see below and in 20:26), its most explicit function in 20is to indicate that the disciples were afraid of persecution until Jesus came to them, just as John " s audience experiences persecution and requires the empowerment of the Paraclete for boldness to confess Christ. They require an adequate Christology as a foundation for boldness, and boldness to maintain such an offensive Christology. |
| None of this is to deny that Jesus probably visited Jerusalem on numerous occasions. 4601 Gospel portrayals of Jesus as a Galilean pilgrim fit our expectations for most Galileans; although travel to Jerusalem required a three-day journey, 4602 many Galileans must have traveled frequently to festivals. 4603 Normally they traveled in groups, 4604 so in the logic of the narrative as it stands Jesus» family and disciples may well have traveled together (2:12–13; cf. 7:10). Because this is one of the passages which allows and invites examination from the standpoint of other extant traditions, we examine below some features of historical tradition which John develops. In the Johannine context, however, John " s point is striking. Jesus sets aside a purification ritual «of the Jews» in 2:6; here he disrupts a public festival «of the Jews» (2:13). 4605 The link between the two passages portends his «hour» (2:4), the destruction of his body (2:19–21); the cross overshadows the Gospel from this point forward, and (given his placement of Jesus disrupting the temple) in the looser theological sense in which John likely intends it, John " s Passion Narrative coincides with the whole of his public ministry. (Other links between 2:1–11 and 2:13–23 include the third day 19] and Jesus «showing» a sign which «manifests» his glory 4606 The Jerusalem temple is for Jesus a place of conflict in this Gospe1. Jesus here assaults the dignity of the temple (2:14–15), later finds in the temple one who will betray him (5:14), and encounters in the temple those who wish to kill him (8:59). Granted, he teaches in the temple (7:14; 18:20), but his teaching involves conflict with the Judean religious establishment (7:28; 8:20; 10:23; cf. 11:56), and while in the temple Jesus declares himself the foundation stone of a new temple (7:37–39). While it is undoubtedly true that much of John " s audience was too young to have visited the temple in Jerusalem and would perhaps picture it in terms of local temples in Asia, 4607 there is no question that the role of the temple would have remained a central issue of contention for Jewish Christians in the final decade of the first century C.E. Certainly most Jews had always valued the temple, including Diaspora Jews. 4608 Nevertheless, a minority of Jews before 70, mainly sectarian, opposed the temple or felt threatened by the establishment that controlled it. 4609 After 70 such sentiments undoubtedly appeared vindicated, and those groups able to reorganize themselves may have continued to use the Jerusalem temple as a symbol for the hostility of the Judean religious establishment, those leaders who had had sufficient resources to gain a broader hearing in the wider Judean community. John " s enmity focuses on the Jerusalem authorities; Jerusalem " s crowds are impressed with Jesus» public signs (2:23), but most (cf. 3:2) of the establishment is not (2:18). 2A. Historical Probability |
| Jesus» own teaching provokes a crisis that drives away some and confirms the commitment of others. Sometime in the decade in which this Gospel was written some Johannine communities experienced similar division over what the author of the First Epistle believed was the truth of Jesus» teaching (1 John 2:19–20). For those who heard Jesus through the grid of their cultural presuppositions rather than allowing his parabolic language to challenge their preunderstanding, Jesus» words proved too incompatible with their beliefs. Jesus explains the nature of his metaphor (6:63), but only those who persevere as his disciples will ultimately comprehend his teaching (16:25–30). 1. Too Hard to Accept? (6:59–65) The misunderstanding Jesus» words allow perpetuates John " s misunderstanding motif (cf. comment on 3:4). Jewish sages, like other ancient Mediterranean sages, often spoke in riddles; the historical Jesus, like other Palestinian Jewish sages, employed parables. 6237 His audience in this Gospel, however, proves incapable of understanding, just as those who heard his parables without persevering into his inner circle for the interpretations often failed to understand. The language used for the dispute it provokes as it divides Jesus» hearers (such division being frequent in responses to Jesus–cf. 7:43; 10:19) could even suggest that the disputants came to blows (6:52). 6238 If so, such blows could well préfigure also the times of violent conflict in which John was writing. 1A. Setting (6:59) Although narratives more frequently open with a setting, John concludes Jesus» discourse by informing us of its specific setting (6:59): a synagogue in Capernaum. 6239 While John reports little about Capernaum (2:12; 4:46), members of John " s audience familiar with the Jesus tradition will probably recall that Jesus received a significant hearing in Capernaum (e.g., Mark 2:1–2 )–but may also recall that it proved inadequate for widespread salvation, given the measure of revelation Jesus offered there (Matt 11:23/Luke 10:15). 6240 If some of them recalled the opening scene from the body of Mark " s Gospel, they would also recall that Jesus encountered conflict with a demon in that synagogue ( Mark 1:21–28 ). |
| By the criterion of embarrassment, Jesus» betrayal by Judas (6:71) is surely historica1. Knowledge of abandonment by one close to a person could generate scandal and mass abandonment. 6287 Perhaps due to outside polemic against the tradition, the evangelists seem embarrassed by it and have «to explain that Jesus knew all along, or at least in advance, that Judas would betray him (Matt. 26.25; John 6.64,71 and frequently in John).» 6288 John may amplify this emphasis in response to polemic from the synagogue: some, aware of Judas " s role in the passion tradition ( Mark 14:10 ; cf. perhaps 1Cor 11:23 ), may have used it to contest Jesus» omniscience (cf. 2:23–25). 6289 Then again, John could simply anticipate such a charge; 6290 in any case, it is not an unlikely charge. It could be seen as dishonorable to fall prey to others» deception and treachery. Thus Josephus stresses that he released his opponents unharmed when they promised to stop opposing him–even though he knew that they would break their promises (Josephus Life 263). 6291 But John may also emphasize Judas to emphasize the danger of apostasy to disciples who appear to have persevered so far; at some point the Johannine community faced a large number of defectors whose secession shook the confidence of others ( 1 John 2:19). 6292 The emphasis on «the Twelve» would increase the heinousness of his betrayal 6293 but would also increase this sense of warning. 6294 Twelve was associated with a variety of symbols in antiquity, 6295 including astrological ones, 6296 but these prove far less relevant than a nearer context. Historically, Jesus probably chose «Twelve» disciples to symbolize the remnant of Israel, 6297 much as the Qumran community did. 6298 (Many other teachers had more disciples than twelve, especially over the course of time. Rabbinic tradition, e.g., emphasizing the small immediate circle of Johanan ben Zakkai, may emphasize mainly the brightest students who became great teachers in their own right.) 6299 That one of those «chosen» in some sense is here lost (6:70; cf. 6:44) sounds a firm warning to members of John " s audience who trusted too securely in their salvific status, although Jesus ultimately foreknew those who would persevere (cf. 13:18; 15:16, 19). (Compare Mark 13:22 : false prophets would lead astray even the «elect,» if that proved possible.) |
| 2C. Christology A major point of division between the Jewish Christians and the synagogue authorities, of course, was the identity of the Messiah. 1707 Differences concerning the nature of the Messiah were also bound to create conflict: if Jesus were God, to dishonor him would be to dishonor God (1 John 2:23); 1708 conversely, if he were not, «the Jews» in John would be right: worshiping him 1709 would be blasphemy. 1710 The Fourth Gospel confronts the sort of tensions such a conflict would raise, perhaps both to support the Johannine community and to call for a commitment on the part of some outside who would yet hear the Gospel " s message. There are suggestions in the text that John addresses not only believers facing conflict with their synogogue officials, but also purported «secret believers» in the synagogue (12:42–43), and that faithfulness to the Jesus form of Judaism is thought to be worth even the price of schism in those who claimed to be the people of God (7:43; 9:16; 10:19). This does not mean, as some have argued, 1711 that John " s readers had a deficient Christology that simply mirrored Judaism. 1712 Indeed, a cursory reading of 1 John would suggest that most of the community was able to withstand christological challenges. Instead, they may have been facing persecution because of their high Christology (Jesus as deity), and John may have thus been reaffirming their faith. 1713 Minim who remained in the synagogue even at a much later period 1714 need not have been Ebionite; although they were afraid to confess Christ openly, the rabbis assumed they would be reluctant to deny him. 1715 The later Gentile church recognized the deity of Christ as a major area of conflict with Judaism. 1716 In rabbinic literature, minim often argued for a plurality in the deity, sometimes as a ditheism. 1717 John 5 also suggests that Jesus» deity had become a major issue of debate between the Johannine community and the synagogue. 1718 As Alan Segal observes, «the characterization of the Jews in the FG, though tendentious and exaggerated, must be based on a real Jewish charge against Christians, for the position attributed to them corresponds to the position rabbis take against unnamed heretics in rabbinic literature.» 1719 Although Jewish Christians were far from the only Jewish group these rabbis would have criticized as «ditheistic,» 1720 they must have been included. 1721 Thus the centrality of Christology in Jesus» debates with his opponents in the Fourth Gospel is not surprising. 1722 2D. Pneumatology |
| Suggesting that the Fourth Gospel is not directly dependent on the Synoptics need not imply that John did not know of the existence of the Synoptics; even if (as is unlikely) Johannine Christianity were as isolated from other circles of Christianity as some have proposed, other gospels must have been known if travelers afforded any contact at all among Christian communities. 381 That travelers did so may be regarded as virtually certain. 382 Urban Christians traveled ( 1Cor 16:10,12,17 ; Phil 2:30; 4:18 ), carried letters ( Rom 16:1–2 ; Phil 2:25 ), 383 relocated to other places ( Rom 16:3,5 ; perhaps 16:6–15), and sent greetings to other churches ( Rom 16:21–23 ; 1Cor 16:19 ; Phil 4:22 ; Col 4:10–15). In the first century many churches knew what was happening with churches in other cities ( Rom 1:8 ; 1Cor 11:16; 14:33; 1 Thess 1:7–9), and even shared letters (Col 4:16). Missionaries could speak of some churches to others ( Rom 15:26 ; 2Cor 8:1–5; 9:2–4 ; Phil 4:16; 1 Thess 2:14–16; cf. 3 John 5–12 ) and send personal news by other workers ( Eph 6:21–22 ; Col 4:7–9). Although we need not suppose connections among churches as pervasive as Ignatiuse letters suggest perhaps two decades later, neither need we imagine that such connections emerged ex nihilo in the altogether brief silence between Johns Gospel and the «postapostolic» period. No one familiar with the urban society of the eastern empire will be impressed with the isolation Gospel scholars often attribute to the Gospel «communities.» John could have known one, two, or more other published gospels and yet have chosen not to follow their model or employ them as sources in writing his own. 384 (Xenophon, for example, knows of an earlier work recounting the retreat of Greek mercenaries from Persia, mentioned in Hel1. 3.1.2, but later composes his own eyewitness account.) If, as is likely, Mark circulated widely (and hence could provide a primary framework for both Matthew and Luke), John might even safely assume his readers» knowledge of it. 385 Certainly a few decades earlier the tradition was widely known; given its circulation in Jerusalem and Antioch, «it is historically quite unlikely that Paul would have no knowledge of the Jesus-tradition» that circulated in Jerusalem, Antioch, and Damascus, locations he had frequented. 386 By John " s day, such tradition would be even more pervasive. In other words, independence need not mean anything so dramatic as that Mark and John «developed the gospel form independently.» 387 John " s very divergence from the Synoptics probably led to its relatively slower reception in the broader church until it could be explained in relation to them. 388 |
|
|
