| 35 Marxsen, Mark, 150, thus objects to applying Mark " s term «Gospel» to Matthew and Luke, arguing that Matthew is a collection of «gospels» and sermons (pp. 150 n. 106; 205–6), and Luke a «life of Jesus» (150 n. 106). He is uncomfortable with the language of a Gospel «genre» (25). 36 Aune, Environment, 83, cites Quintilian 2.42; Cicero Inv. 1.27; Sextus Empiricus Against the Professors 1.263–264 for the three major categories (history, fiction, and myth or legend), though noting that they overlapped in practice (Strabo Geog. 1.2.17, 35); for distinctions between mythography and history proper, see Fornara, Nature of History, 4–12. 38 This view was proposed by K. L. Schmidt, who provided analogies among later folk literatures of various cultures. He is followed by Kümmel, Introduction, 37; cf. Hunter, Message, 30; Deissmann, Light, 466. 39 Downing, «Literature»; Aune, Environment, 12, 63; Burridge, Gospels, 11, 153. Rhetorical principles influenced narrative techniques; see, e.g., Dowden, «Apuleius.» 40 Koester, Introduction, 1:108; Kodell, Luke, 23; cf. Perry, Sources, 7. This is not to mention Lukés architectonic patterns (for which see Goulder, Acts; Talbert, Patterns; idem, Luke; Tannehill, Luke). 41 E.g., Socratics Ep. 18, Xenophon to Socrates» friends. Diogenes Laertius includes compilations of traditions, but from a variety of sources. 42 Cf. Papias frg. 6 (Eusebius Hist. ecc1. 3.39), on the hypothesis that Papias " s «Matthew» is our «Q» (cf. Filson, History, 83; rejected by Jeremias, Theology, 38). Downing, «Like Q,» compares Q with a Cynic «Life» (cf. Mack, Lost Gospel 46); contrast Tuckett, «Q.» 43 Justin 1 Apo1. 66.3; 67.3; Dia1. 103.8; 106.3 (see Stanton, New People, 62–63; Abramowski, «Memoirs,» pace Koester). 45 This is not to deny the Synoptics» substantial dependence on tradition, but tradition is not so dominant (as Jones, Parables, 36, seems to suggest) as to prohibit pursuit of literary coherence. 46 Quintilian 10.6.1–2. One should also be ready to add improvisations during the speech (10.6.5). |
| Crucifixion victims often had wounds, and those who had been wounded often showed their wounds to make a point (see comment on 20:20); that Jesus did so stems from pre-Johannine tradition (Luke 24:39–40, though 24is textually uncertain). Soldiers who carried out crucifixions often used rope 10755 but also used nails through the wrists, 10756 which seem to have been used for Jesus (20:25, 27). Dibelius, noting that Matthew and Mark omit the piercing of hands and/or feet, which appears only as hints in the Easter narratives of Luke (24:39) and John (20:20,25,27), thinks the hints of piercing stem from Ps 22rather than historical recollection. 10757 But Dibelius " s skepticism on this point is unwarranted for several reasons: all four extant first-century gospels omit it in descriptions of the crucifixion (as well as many other explicit details, such as the height of the cross, shape of the cross, and other variables we must reconstruct secondhand); Mark and Matthew include the briefest resurrection narratives, Mark without any appearances, so one would not expect them to recount it there; and finally, Luke and John probably supply independent attestation of a tradition that predates both of them, yet neither allude clearly to Ps 22:17 . 10758 Putting hands into Jesus» wounds would convince Thomas that this was the same Jesus (see comment on 20:20); no trickery would be possible. 10759 John omits another tradition in which Jesus confirms his bodily resurrection by eating with the disciples (Luke 24:41–43), preferring the stronger proof of his corporal resurrection. 10760 In the third-century Vita Apollonii by Philostratus, Apollonius invites two of his disciples to grasp him to confirm that he has not, in fact, been executed; 10761 but the Christian resurrection narratives were widespread in the Roman Empire by the time Philostratus dictated his stories. 10762 2C. The Climactic Christological Confession (20:28–29) Ancient writers often used characterization to communicate points about «kinds» of people. Nicodemus was slow to believe (3:2; cf. 7:50) but eventually proved a faithful disciple (19:38–42). Likewise, Thomas had missed the first corporate resurrection appearance, which convinced most of his fellow disciples; given the problem with secessionists in some Johannine communities (1 John 2:19), his missing might provide a warning to continue in fellowship with fellow believers (to whatever extent Thomas " s fellow disciples had already been disciples and believers when Jesus first appeared at that point!) Nevertheless, Thomas becomes the chief spokesman for full christological faith here (20:28–29)–and the foil by which John calls his readers to a faith deeper than the initial resurrection faith of any of the twelve disciples (20:29). |
| The people here are essentially the leaders of the people who bear primary responsibility for leading them to oppose Jesus: hence «the Jews» (18:38; 19:7,12,14) are the «leading priests and officers» (19:6, 15). A flat, composite character, they speak with one voice like a chorus in a Greek tragedy. 9924 1. Preferring a Terrorist (18:38b-40) Pilatés first presentation of Jesus leads to repudiation; the chief priests, who supposedly hand over Jesus for a treason charge (18:33–35) and will claim no king but Caesar (19:15), yet want freedom for an insurgent instead (18:40). 9925 Their real objections to Jesus» claim to be «son of God» may lie elsewhere (19:7; cf. 5:18; 10:33–36), but John " s Asian audience will undoubtedly hear in their claim a support for the emperor cult (19:15), for lack of allegiance to which the Jewish Christians are being betrayed to the Roman authorities. 1A. Pilatés Attempt to Free Jesus (18:38b-39) The conflict between Pilate and the Jewish leaders continues to unfold, emphasizing the responsibility of the leaders of Jesus» own people without denying that of Pilate. 9926 Luke shares with John Pilatés threefold claim to find no guilt in Jesus (Luke 23:4, 14, 22; John 18:38; 19:4, 6 ); if John " s source is not ultimately Luke, then both draw on a common passion tradition here. If Jesus was no threat, Pilate would naturally be inclined to release him (18:39), just as an equally unscrupulous governor a few decades later would release another harmless prophet the chief priests wanted silenced (Josephus War 6.305). 9927 The negative response of the priestly aristocracy is predictable, and one familiar only with this Gospel and not the rest of the gospel tradition (e.g., Mark 15:6–15 ) 9928 might assume that the «Jews» who protest here (18:40) represent the elite with whom Pilate has been dealing (18:28, 35). But the elite often spoke for the masses who trusted and followed them, and John " s audience probably already knows the basic passion story from other sources (cf. |
| The wounds in the «hands» means wounds in the forearms; «hand» can carry this sense and very likely carries the sense here, since crucifixion nails had to be driven higher up the arm than the hand unless ropes were also used; otherwise a person " s weight would tear the hands rather than allow the nails to suspend one on a cross. 10688 Whether or not John knows the tradition about Jesus showing his feet as well as hands (Luke 24:39–40), 10689 he mentions only the hands and the side; the side recalls the source of living water ( John 19:34 ) he has now come to give (20:22; 7:37–39). That the disciples rejoice when they see him is to be expected; one need not seek parallels in mystery religions. Granted, worshipers of Isis rehearsing the recovery of Osiris might cry, «We have found him; let us rejoice!» 10690 But joy is the natural response to finding what was lost in general (Luke 15:6, 9, 32), characterized arrival speeches, 10691 and was certainly a natural response to receiving their teacher back from the dead. Johannine literature often refers to joy (15:11; 16:20,22,24; 17:13; 1 John 4; 2 John 12; 3 John 4 ) but derives it from more commonplace images than dying-and-rising mystery deities (3:29; 4:36; 16:21). If one need seek parallels, joy was sometimes eschatological in early Judaism 10692 –as was the resurrection; perhaps less revealing, some later texts also associate joy with the Torah, 10693 and Jesus is the Word (1:1–18). Given the circumstances in the story, it is hard to imagine the disciples failing to rejoice, but John mentions it specifically because it fulfills Jesus» promise in 16:20–24. 1D. The Commissioning (20:21) Comparing Jesus» final commissions in Matthew and Luke-Acts (which also reflect characteristics of OT commissions), 10694 it is clear that John preserves substantial elements of his commission from the tradition. 10695 More important, however, are the ways John adapts both traditional and distinctive elements to climax a commissioning hinted throughout his Gospe1. Both John (1:19–36) and the first disciples (1:41–42, 45–46; 4:39) are prototypical witnesses; Jesus himself functions as the narrative model for the activity of the Spirit-Paraclete, who empowers disciples after Jesus» resurrection to continue his mission (14:16–17,26; 15:26; 16:7–11); the announcements concerning the risen Jesus also serve as narrative illustrations of this proclamation (20:18, 25, 28). |
| Like the rest of the Fourth Gospel, John here insists that Jewish believers remain faithful to the God of Israel through fidelity to Jesus, not through satisfying the synagogue leadership (12:42–43). This is because Jesus is God " s faithful agent; he neither spoke (14:10; cf. 16:13) nor acted (5:30; 8:28, 42) on his own (12:49), but only at the Father " s command (12:49; see comment on 5:19). 7989 By again reinforcing the portrait of Jesus as God " s faithful agent, John reminds his hearers that their opponents who in the name of piety opposed a high view of Jesus were actually opposing the God who appointed him to that role. «The Father " s commandment is eternal life» (12:50) is presumably elliptical for «obedience to the Father " s command produces eternal life,» but also fits the identification of the word (1:4), Jesus» words (6:68), and knowing God (17:3) with life. For John, the concept of «command» should not be incompatible with believing in Jesus (6:27; cf. 8:12; 12:25), which is the basis for eternal life (3:15–16; 6:40, 47; 11:25; 20:31); faith involves obedience (3:36; cf. Acts 5:32; Rom 1:5; 2:8; 6:16–17; 15:18; 16:19, 26; 2 Thess 1:8; 1Pet 1:22; 4:17 ). Jesus always obeys his Father " s commands (8:29), including the command to face death (10:18; 14:31); his disciples must follow his model of obedience to his commandments by loving one another sacrificially (13:34; 14:15, 21; 15:10,12). 7803 Matthew " s stirring of «the entire city» (Matt 21:10), however, may invite the reader to compare this event with an earlier disturbance of Jerusalem (Matt 2:3). 7804 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 306; Catchpole, «Entry.» In favor of reliability, see also Losie, «Entry,» 858–59. 7805 In view of ancient patronal social patterns, Jesus» numerous «benefactions» would also produce an entourage, seeking favors, that could potentially double as a political support base, exacerbating his threat to the political elite (DeSilva, Honor, 135). 7806 Also for Matthew (Matt 21:10–11); in Luke those who hail him are disciples (Luke 19:37, 39); even in Mark, where «many» participate, those who go before and after him are probably those who knew of his ministry in Galilee ( Mark 11:8–9 ). This may represent a very different crowd from the one that condemned him (Matt 27:20–25; Mark 15:11–14 ; Luke 23:13, 18, 21, 23)–certainly in John, where the condemning «Jews» are the «high priests» (19:6–7, 12–15). |
| The healed man responds with a heightened Christology as soon as the word makes a more adequate interpretation possible (9:38). Gentiles sometimes prostrated themselves before rulers, 7174 and Jewish people apparently often followed suit; 7175 even looking at another " s feet instead of another " s face showed respect for the other " s higher status. 7176 It could connote intense respect (e.g., Rev 3:9) or that one was begging or seeking mercy. 7177 Thus the term by itself need not indicate worship of a deity; but in its broader Johannine context (4:20–24; 12:20–21), including John " s Christology (1:1, 18; 20:28), it fits the Johannine portrait of Jesus» deity and invites John " s own audience to worship Jesus. 7178 2. Jesus Convicts the Pharisees (9:39–41) In 9:39–41 John epitomizes and makes more explicit the guiding irony that dominates the whole of ch. 9. 7179 John earlier affirms that Jesus did not come to judge the world (3:17; also 12:47); here (9:39) he claims that he came to bring about judgment (a characteristic messianic mission); the judgment here is to divide people into two groups, those who heed the light and those who reject it (also 3:19; cf. 1 John 2:11 ). One who presses far enough, however, will have the paradox resolved (12:44–49). John " s words about spiritual blindness develop his dualism of light and darkness (see comment on 1:4–5). Greek and Roman tradition could play on the irony of the spiritual sight of a blind seer like Tiresias; 7180 one Greek philosopher allegedly blinded himself physically to make his mental contemplations more accurate. 7181 But pagan sources more frequently viewed figurative blindness as a primarily intellectual than as a primarily moral fault, 7182 and the Jewish tradition provides much more abundant source material for John " s irony. 7183 Isaiah the prophet offered the standard text about spiritual blindness adopted by John (Isa 6:9–10 in John 12:40 ), but the image was common in the biblical prophets (Isa 29:9; 42:18–19; 56:10; Jer 5:21 ; Ezek 12:2 ), the Jesus tradition (cf. Matt 13:14–15; 15:14; 23:16; Mark 4:12; 8:17–18 ; Luke 8:10; perhaps Luke 4:18; cf. Acts 28:26–27), and appears in other early Jewish sources. 7184 John " s irony sometimes turns on convicting the leaders from their mouths, but sometimes on paradox from Jesus» own. 7185 |
| For Andrew being one of the Baptist " s disciples, we have no other evidence, and Andrew " s commitment to his family " s fishing cooperative with Zebedeés family ( Mark 1:20 ; Luke 5:10) 4153 would not favor the idea that he was a full-time follower of the Baptist. Since one could follow a teacher seasonally (see comment on 1:40–42), perhaps the Baptist could also accept «disciples» who only came and listened to him during the daytime when he was in the area. Whereas the Perean Bethany (1:28) placed the Baptist within range of Judean questioners a few days earlier (1:19), the story world (which probably presupposes some readers familiar with Palestinian topography) may presuppose that he is now nearer the lake of Galilee, for whether the narrative supposes that Jesus still resided in Nazareth (1:45–46; cf. Matt 4:13) or had already settled in Capernaum (2:12; cf. the language of Luke 4:16), his disciples could hardly have followed Jesus home from a Perean Bethany in a single day (1:39). Various details of the narrative cohere with historical data from Jewish Palestine, but these data were also available to the implied audience. The narrative thus makes sense either as history or as the writer " s creation from whole cloth; like most of the Fourth Gospel, it cannot be verified or falsified to a high degree of probability. Like the rest of the Fourth Gospel " s narratives, however, we suspect that it rests on some historical tradition, because the degree of convergence where our other Gospel accounts independently corroborate John indicate that he writes within the general biographical genre and shift the burden of proof to those inclined to read the narrative novelistically. 2. Following Jesus Home (1:37–39) Although the Baptist " s disciples who «followed» Jesus initially did so literally (1:37; cf. 11:31; 20:6), the writer " s usage elsewhere infuses the narrative with the term " s deeper nuances (1:43; cf. 8:12; 10:4; 21:22); 4154 their initial following represents «the precursor of real discipleship.» 4155 The language of following (κολουθω, δετε οπσω, οπσω λθω) represents standard Jewish language for discipleship. 4156 By this period, «disciple» meant not only «learner» but more specifically «adherent,» requiring one to adhere to a great teacher and his schoo1. 4157 |
| 2A. Resurrection Appearances (20:15–29) The resurrection appearances in John 20 become paradigmatic for all believers» encounters with Jesus, which give way to believers» relationship with Jesus (14:21–23; 20:19–23). Because of her devotion to Jesus, Mary functions as one of the more positive paradigms for witness in this section, as well as the first one. 10535 She was the first agent Jesus commissioned with the message of his resurrection and of believers as God " s children. 10536 Witnesses who said that they had seen Jesus alive from the dead (e.g., 1Cor 15:1–8 ; virtually all the narrative accounts also suggest significant conversation with him rather than fleeting appearances) were so convinced of the veracity of their claims that many devoted their lives to proclaiming what they had seen, and some died for it; clearly their testimony was not fabricated. 10537 Ancients also recognized that the willingness of people to die for their convictions verified at least the sincerity of their motives, arguing against fabrication. 10538 As noted above, some scholars deny the empty-tomb tradition; most, however, affirm that the disciples believed they had seen Jesus alive. Yet some scholars even find ways to deny the historical value of the resurrection appearances; Mack, for example, suggests that before the Gospels we have only Paul " s account of «visions.» 10539 But although the language Paul employs is general enough that it could include visionary experiences, he is reporting earlier Palestinian tradition in 1Cor 15:3–7 10540 and Palestinian Jews did not speak of nonbodily resurrections (see discussion of the Jewish resurrection belief above). Nor would anyone have persecuted them for simply affirming that they had seen someone who had been dead; apart from the bodily character of the resurrection–the sort that would leave an empty tomb–people would merely assume they claimed to see a ghost, a noncontroversial phenomenon. 10541 Ghosts were «phantasms» that appeared especially at night (Plutarch Brutus 36; Caesar 69.5, 8; Cimon 6.5), but this is not what the resurrection narratives report (Luke 24:40). 10542 Further, Jesus «appeared» to his followers in Acts 1but there provided concrete proofs of his physicality (cf. Luke 24:39–40). 10543 Finally, Paul himself distinguishes between the Easter appearances and mere visions (cf. 1Cor 9:1; 15:8 ; 2Cor 12:1–4 ). 10544 |
| 9087 Philo Sacrifices 130 and the texts in Barrett, John, 477; L.A.B. 23:9, 24:3, 25(amicus Do-mini); Sipre Num. 78.1.1; Exod. Rab. 45:2. Moses» special closeness to God also appears in Diaspora magical texts; see Gager, Moses, 140–45. Sib. Or. 2.245 is probably a Christian interpolation. 9088 Moses (four times); Israel (three times); sometimes Aaron, once each for Joshua, Noah, Abraham, and the three patriarchs (Johnston, «Parables,» 591). 9090 See Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 236; in ancient texts, Homer I1. 6.212–231; Cicero Fam. 13.34.1. 9091 Mitchell, «Friends,» 259, citing Cicero Amtc. 6.22; Aristotle N.E. 8.11.6, 1161a. Xenophon Cyr. 1.6.45 warns that those who treat potential friends as «slaves» will suffer justly. Slaves could not be friends in Aristotle N.E. 8.11.6–7, 1161b. 9092 Philo Migration 45; cf. Seneca Dia1. 1.5.6. The contrast between the image of «friends» and «slaves» in general is common, e.g., Sallust Jug. 102.6–7 (allies vs. subjects). 9094 Contrast Bousset " s overemphasis, which misses the context, on the «not servants» paradigm as a possibly anti-Pauline Christ mysticism (Kyrios Christos, 211–12). 9098 Wis 8describes her as a μστις, an initiate into Mysteries; this is related to God " s special love for her and her living with him (8:3). 9099 Some third-century C.E. paganism portrays personal knowledge of a deceased hero by conversation rather than dependence on dreams and visions, but this might reflect the spreading influence of early Christian spirituality (cf. Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, lxi-lxii, lxxvi). 9100 Hays, Vision, 154, comments on the remarkably egalitarian language here and its implications for the meaning of leadership in John " s community. 9101 It is a title in Luke 12(though stylistically a Lukan preference); cf. the charge in Matt 11:19; Luke 7:34. 9105 E.g., T. Ab. 2:3A. See fuller comment on 8:39–40. Abraham could share this chosen status with others, such as Jacob and Moses (Num. Rab. 3:2). 9106 Also rehearsed annually in the Passover haggadah, if these details were in wide use by the end of the first century (m. Pesah. 10:4). |
| Robbins, «Prefaces» Robbins, Vernon K. «Prefaces in Greco-Roman Biography and Luke-Acts.» Perspectives in Religious Studies 6, no. 2 (1979): 94–108. Robbins, «Pronouncement Stories» Robbins, Vernon K. «Classifying Pronouncement Stories in Plutarch " s Parallel Lives? Semeia 20 (1981): 29–52. Robbins, Teacher Robbins, Vernon K. Jesus the Teacher: A Socio-rhetorical Interpretation of Mark. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992. Robbins, «Test Case» Robbins, Vernon K. «Socio-rhetorical Criticism: Mary, Elizabeth, and the Magnificat as a Test Case.» Pages 164–209 in The New Literary Criticism and the New Testament. Edited by Edgar V. McKnight and Elizabeth Struthers Malbon. Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1994; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. Roberge, «Composition» Roberge, Miche1. «La composition de Jean 6,22–59 dans l " exégèse récente.» Laval théologique et philosophique 40 (1984): 91–123. Robert, «Malentendu» Robert, René. «Le malentendu sur le nom divin au chapitre VIII du quatrième évangile.» Revue thomiste 88 (1988): 278–87. Robert, «Mot» Robert, René. «Le mot final du prologue johannique: A propos d " un article récent.» Revue thomiste 89 (1989): 279–88. Robert, «Précédent» Robert, René. «Un précédent platonicien à l " équivoque de Jean 1,18.» Revue thomiste 90 (1990): 634–39. Robert, «Solution» Robert, René. «Une solution pour Jean, I, 16: Kai charin anti charitos.» Revue thomiste 84 (1984): 243–51. (NTA 29:31). Robert, «Suaire» Robert, René. «Du suaire de Lazare à celui de Jésus: Jean XI,44 et XX,7.» Revue thomiste 88 (1988): 410–20. Roberts, Fragment Roberts, C. H. An Unpublished Fragment of the Fourth Gospe1. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1935. Roberts, ««Only Begotten»» Roberts, R. L. «The Rendering " Only Begotten» in John 3:16 .» Restoration Quarterly 16 (1973): 2–22. Robertson, Luke Robertson, A. T. Luke the Historian in the Light of Research. New York: Scribner, 1923. Robertson and Plummer, Corinthians Robertson, Archibald, and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. 2d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1914. |
|
|
