| 6641 For attestation of the figure in the Jesus tradition, cf. Luke 2:32; applied differently, Matt 5:14. «Light of the world» also appears in pagan texts, not surprisingly in an invocation to Helios the spirit, power, and life of the world (Macrobius Sat. 1.23.21, in Van der Horst, «Macrobius,» 225). 6642 Comfort, «Pericope.» 6643 See Hanson, Gospel, 116, noting that John employs Zech 14in John 7:38 . 6644 E.g., Westcott, John, 123; Glasson, Moses, 60; Dodd, Interpretation, 349; Brown, John, 1:343–44; Longenecker, Exegesis, 153; Yee, Feasts, 80. Philo also associated the festival with light (Bernard, John, 2:291). 6645 E.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.118; m. Sukkah 5:3–4; h. Sukkah 52b-53a (a Tanna); see also Safrai, «Temple,» 895. Glasson, Moses, 60–61, less convincingly finds an allusion in Zech 14:6–7, the Tabernacles lection (see comment on 7:38). Although Hanukkah ( John 10:22 ) is «the feast of lights» (Josephus Ant. 12.325), John only makes the association with the biblical festival of Sukkoth. 6646 Noted here by, e.g., Hunter, John, 86; Longenecker, Exegesis, 154; some may have expected its eschatological restoration (Glasson, Moses, 64). The older ritual may have revered God as the creator of light (Urbach, Sages, 1:60). 6647 Scripture ( Ps 105:39–41 ; Neh 9:12, 15) and subsequent Jewish tradition connected these various symbols of wilderness sojourn (Glasson, Moses, 62–63; see comment on 7:38). 6648 See Prov 4:19 ; cf. also, e.g., Gen. Rab. 60:1. 6649 E.g., 1QS 3.21; 4.11 (the way of those outside the community); a hymn in 1QS 11.10 ( ); Pesiq. Rab. 8:5; see also Charlesworth, «Comparison,» 414. 6650 E.g., Job 33:30 ; Ps 56:13 ; cf. Job 3:16; 18:18 ; Ps 38:10; 36:9; 49:19 ; Prov 29:13 ; Eccl 12:2 . 6651 Cf. 1QS 3.7 ( ); see also Charlesworth, «Comparison,» 414; Coetzee, «Life,» 64. 6652 Odeberg, Gospel 286–87. Charlier, «L " exégèse,» thinks Jesus claims deity here. 6653 E.g., Isocrates Nie. 46–47, Or. 3.36; Plutarch Praising 15, Mor. 544D; see further references under the introductory comment on John 5:31–47 . |
| Jesus was «troubled» (12:27) to face death, and prayed accordingly. Throughout the Mediterranean world people considered praiseworthy those heroes who faced suffering bravely, often without tears or signs of sorrow, 7868 though stories could also underline the humanity of their heroes by showing them distraught by hostile odds. 7869 In other cases one might face death bravely simply because she knew it was fated, hence inevitable. 7870 Philosophers exhorted people to «pray simply for the Good and leave the decision to the god,» though the vast majority of people continued to pray simply for what they wanted. 7871 The Gospels do not fit such philosophic or sometimes heroic expectations; 7872 Jesus would go to the cross to obey his Father " s will, but not as if death were not a trauma for him. This is true of John as of the Synoptics. Those familiar with the passion tradition would now understand the source of John " s «hour» (e.g., 2:4; 7:30; 8:20) if they had not recognized it previously: in the passion tradition, Jesus had prayed for his «hour» to pass ( Mark 14:35 ). John here likely echoes–and adapts–the same tradition that independently appears in the Synoptic account of Geth-semane. 7873 Whereas the Markan line of tradition, probably dependent on an earlier passion narrative, emphasizes Jesus» trauma at Gethsemane ( Mark 14:32–42 ; Matt 26:36–46; Luke 22:39–46), John brings it forward to 12and turns the prayer into a question («Shall I say, »Save me from this hour? " »). («My soul is troubled» likely reflects Ps 41LXX some argue that the immediate context of that verse may also inform the background of Jesus» Gethsemane prayer in Mark.) 7874 John thereby tones down the intensity of Jesus» agony before the cross yet hardly brings Jesus» character into line with Greco-Roman expectations for heroism. In idiomatic language, 7875 John emphasizes that Jesus» soul is «troubled» in the face of death (which is shortly to follow; «now» signifies the imminence of Jesus» hour, e.g., 13:1, 31); as in 11:33, this statement contradicts philosophers» de-mands. 7876 In contrast to some of his second- and third-century readers, most of John " s initial audience were not philosophers or aristocrats and might resonate better with this portrait of one who shared their humanity (1:14). 7877 |
| 7377 Diodorus Siculus 33.1.1. They knew the paths through the hills in hilly Thessaly (Livy 32.11.2). 7379 On analogy with 8:44, one could imply that such thieves were children of the devil (cf. Jub. 11:11), but the popular interpretation of 10as applying directly to the devil ignores his absence from this context. 7380 T. Ab. 10:5A (κλπται, ο βουλμενοι φνον εργζεσθαι και κλψαι και θυσαι και πολσαι). Bandits killed a father and son in Diodorus Siculus 34/35.11.1. 7381 A thief who breaks in with the intention to kill is to be executed, but one who kills a thief intending only to steal is himself executed (p. Sanh. 8:8, §1; cf. Exod 22:1–3). 7382 Ancient moralists sometimes posed the dilemma between the flatterer who does not seek onés good but seems to, and the frank friend (esp. Plutarch Flatterer 1–37, Mor. 48E-74E). 7383 Philosophers could speak of «good life» (τ ε ζην), which was better than mere «life» (Epictetus Diatr. 1.4.31, following Plato Crito 48B). Jewish tradition could speak of those who do alms and righteousness being «filled with life» (πλησθσονται ζως, Tob 12:9). 7384 We have elsewhere argued that, pace much twentieth-century scholarship, some sort of passion predictions by Jesus are historically likely (Keener, Matthew, 431–33, on Matt 16:21). But such anticipations of the passion are also important from a literary perspective; see Aristotle Poet. 15.10, 1454ab. 7385 Anacharsis Ep. 7, to Tereus. John prefers καλς in this context (10:11, 14, 32–33; cf. 2:10), but his sense is not appreciably different from αγαθς (1:46; 5:29; 7:12, though all these could connote more moral virtue). Classical Greek distinguished the two (αγαθς more applying to moral goodness), but the distinction was rare in Koine (Thiselton, «Semantics,» 93); some texts employ them together (Let. Arts. 46). Barrett, John, 373, points out that Exod. Rab. 2:2 portrays David as a «good» () shepherd; but unless that text reflects wider tradition, it merely illustrates the broader principle here. |
| Mayor, James Mayor, Joseph B. The Epistle of St. James. 3d rev. ed. n.p.: MacMillan, 1913. Repr., Minneapolis: Klock 8t Klock Christian, 1977. Mazar, «Excavations» Mazar, Benjamin. «Excavations near Temple Mount Reveal Splendors of Herodian Jerusalem.» BAR 6, no. 4 (July/August 1980): 44–59. Mazar, «Josephus» Mazar, Benjamin. «Josephus Flavius and the Archaeological Excavations in Jerusalem.» Pages 325–29 in Josephus, the Bible, and History. Edited by Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989. Mbiti, Religions Mbiti, John S. African Religions and Philosophies. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970. McArthur, «Day» McArthur, Harvey K. «On the Third Day.«» NTS 18 (1971–1972): 81–86. McCabe, «Water and Spirit» McCabe, Robert V. «The Meaning of »Born of Water and the Spirit» in John 3:5 .» Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 4 (1999): 85–107. McCaffrey, House McCaffrey, James. The House with Many Rooms: The Temple Theme ofjn 14,2–3. Rome: Pontificial Biblical Institute, 1988. McCane, «Bones» McCane, Byron R. «Bones of Contention? Ossuaries and Reliquaries in Early Judaism and Christianity.» Second Century S (1991): 235–46. McCane, «Burial Practices» McCane, Byron R. «Burial Practices, Jewish.» Pages 173–75 in Dictionary of New Testament Background. Edited by Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter. Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity, 2000. McCane, «Dead» McCane, Byron R. « «Let the Dead Bury Their Own Dead»: Secondary Burial and Matt 8:21–22.» HTR 83 (1990): 31–43. McCasland, «Way» McCasland, S. V. »«The Way.»» JBL 77 (1958): 222–230. McClelland, ««Super-apostles»» McClelland, Scott E. « " Super-apostles, Servants of Christ, Servants of Satan»: A Response.» JSNT 14 (1982): 82–87. McCown, «Structure» McCown, Wayne. «The Hymnic Structure of Colossians 1:15–20.» EvQ 51 (1979): 156–62. McCoy, «Thucydides» McCoy, W. J. «In the Shadow of Thucydides.» Pages 3–32 in History, Literature, and Society in the Book of Acts. Edited by Ben Witherington, III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. |
| Fasting, then, is valueless or even harmful when not combined with prayer. In the Gospels the devil is cast out, not by fasting alone, but by ‘prayer and fasting’ (Matt. 17: 21 ; Mark 9: 29); and of the early Christians it is said, not simply that they fasted, but that they ‘fasted and prayed’ (Acts 13: 3; compare 14: 23). In both the Old and the New Testament fasting is seen, not as an end in itself, but as an aid to more intense and living prayer, as a preparation for decisive action or for direct encounter with God. Thus our Lord’s forty-day fast in the wilderness was the immediate preparation for His public ministry (Matt. 4: 1-11). When Moses fasted on Mount Sinai (Exod. 34: 28) and Elijah on Mount Horeb (3 Kgs. 19: 8-12), the fast was in both cases linked with a theophany. The same connection between fasting and the vision of God is evident in the case of St. Peter (Acts 10: 9-17). He ‘went up on the housetop to pray about the sixth hour, and he became very hungry and wanted to eat; and it was in this state that he fell into a trance and heard the divine voice. Such is always the purpose of ascetic fasting – to enable us, as the Triodion puts it, to ‘draw near to the mountain of prayer’. 10 Prayer and fasting should in their turn be accompanied by almsgiving – by love for others expressed in practical form, by works of compassion and forgiveness. Eight days before the opening of the Lenten fast, on the Sunday of the Last Judgment, the appointed Gospel is the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats (Matt. 25′: 31-46), reminding us that the criterion in the coming judgment will not be the strictness of our fasting but the amount of help that we have given to those in need. In the words of the Triodion: Knowing the commandments of the Lord, let this be our way of life: Let us feed the hungry, let us give the thirsty drink, Let us clothe the naked, let us welcome strangers, Let us visit those in prison and the sick. Then the Judge of all the earth will say even to us: ‘Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you.’ 11 |
| Sermon for the Feast of the Apostle Matthew 2015 The Apostle and Evangelist Matthew, like the Evangelist John, was one of the twelve Apostles, whereas the Evangelists Mark and Luke were of the Seventy. The Apostle Matthew was first called Levi, as we are told in Luke’s Gospel. As Peter was called Simon ( cf. St. Mark 3:16, St. Luke 6:14) and Paul was called Saul ( cf. Acts 13:19), each of them receiving a new name from Christ. Levi was a tax collector (i.e., publican) and spent his days in the tax collector’s booth (i.e., custom house), in Capernaum, collecting money from his fellow citizens. We can understand the type of employment Levi had, and how his countrymen thought of his trade, by reading what he wrote regarding publicans in his Gospel. We find that the word “publican” is used as a derogatory term and is often synonymous with “sinner” and “heathen.” For example, Matthew writes that if we love others as they love us we do not deserve a reward because even publicans do the same (St. Matt. 5:46-47). He also mentioned that Christ was viewed negatively because he was accused of eating with publicans and sinners (St. Matt. 9:10-11; 11:19). Another reference is made when he writes that if a Christian is corrected by an elder of the Church but does not listen, he is to be treated as a heathen and a publican (St. Matt. 18:17). Lastly, we see that publicans are even grouped with harlots, when Jesus, speaking to the Pharisees, said: “Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you” (St. Matthew 21:31). One day while Levi was applying his trade in the custom house, Jesus walked by and, upon seeing him, said, “Follow me.” It is said of Levi that at that moment, “he left all, rose up, and followed Him” (St. Luke 5:27, cf. St. Matthew 9:9). Next, the Apostle Luke writes: Levi made him a great feast in his own house: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them. But [the] scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, “Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?” And Jesus answering said unto them, “They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (5:29-32) |
| In 12:46, discussion about beholding (12:45) may recall Jesus» previous declaration that he is the light (12:35–36), another motif in this Gospel (1:4–9; 3:19–21; 5:35; 8:12; 9:5; 11:9–10); 7983 his «coming into the world» reinforces the Gospel " s testimony to Jesus» incarnation to save the world (cf. 12:47; 1:9; 3:19; 6:14; 9:39; 11:27; 16:28; 18:37; 1Tim 1:15 ). Jesus is the light who, when seen and believed, delivers his followers from darkness. In this context, John " s emphasis on light suggests that those who are not blinded (12:40) can see the light (12:45) of his glory as Isaiah did (12:41), and those who respond in faith will be saved (12:46). In 12another Johannine motif emerges; though Jesus did not come to condemn (3:17; cf. 8:15), his coming itself constitutes a dividing line of judgment (3:19; 9:39; cf. 12:31), and he will act as God " s agent at the judgment (5:22, 24, 27, 29–30; cf. 8:16, 26), whereas his opponents judge inaccurately (7:24, 51; 8:15; 18:31). The image in 12shifts from «seeing» Jesus (12:45) to «hearing» his words (which in this case applies to hearing with or without obeying). 7984 Those who reject the light do not require additional judgment from Jesus; they have simply rejected the salvation that would deliver them from the judgment already otherwise theirs (see esp. 3:17–21). Eschatologically, however, they would be judged by his word they had heard; their very opportunity to respond raised the standard of judgment. 7985 On the judgment at the last day according to Jesus» word (12:48), see comment on 5:24; 7986 they would also be accused by the Father " s previous word in the Torah delivered through Moses, which testified to Jesus (5:39,45). Jesus» word (12:48) is in fact the same as the Father " s word (cf. 3:34; 5:47; 17:8), for all that he spoke he spoke in obedience to the Father (12:49–50). Jesus» teaching that those who reject him as God " s agent reject God himself (12:48) fits Johannine theology (13:20; 14:6; cf. 1 John 2:23 ) but is plainly earlier Jesus tradition ( Mark 9:37 ; Matt 10:40; Luke 9:48). 7987 This word would serve as the criterion for judgment on the «last day» (12:48), a common Johannine expression for the time of the resurrection (6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24) of both righteous and unrighteous (5:29). 7988 |
| 1Tim 1:17 ) underlines that his honor alone is what counts. 2C. The Witness of Moses (5:45–47) Jesus here challenges the views of the very people who claimed to be Moses» disciples (see 9:28). For John, it is the disciples rather than the Pharisees who truly «believe» Scripture (2:22; cf. 1:45), in contrast to the view articulated by his Pharisees, who think that they alone understand it (7:49). The claim in 5:46–47 that these Pharisees did not «believe» Moses 5946 was the sort of polemic that would hardly endear Johns Jesus to his opponents– or to subsequent generations of antinomian Christians who doubted the relevance of Israel " s Scripture. Earlier Gospel writers also had presented Jesus articulating such a pro-Mosaic position (e.g., Matt 5:17–18; Luke 16:17, 31). Whatever other factors in John " s milieu contributed to the present language of his Gospel, he believed that Jesus» words were rooted in earlier biblical revelation (5:47). Although John " s Pharisees do not represent all of early Judaism or even all of its elite, their fidelity to Moses is perfectly believable in the light of the rest of early Jewish piety; it clearly exalted Moses. 5947 He was the most righteous of all people in history. 5948 Contrary to 1 Kgs 3:12, he was also the wisest of all people in history. 5949 Commenting on Exod 7:1, some traditions virtually divinized Moses in the way many Greeks had divinized Plato and other philosophers. 5950 (See further comments on 6:14–15.) It was no wonder that Moses «was by far the best-known figure of Jewish history in the pagan world.» 5951 The witness of Moses proved important in the polemic of some streams of gospel tradition (e.g., Luke 16:31; 24:27,44; Acts 26:22; 28:23; 2Cor 3:7–18 ). Various early Jewish texts present Moses as a continuing advocate or intercessor for Israel, 5952 as he had been in the Bible (Exod 32:32; Jer 15:1 ). If John regards this tradition as well enough known that his audience may have grasped it, he may imply that these Jewish leaders regarded Moses as an advocate, 5953 the way the Fourth Gospel presents the Spirit on behalf of believers (14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) and 1 John presents Jesus (1 John 2:1); 5954 but here Jesus declares that Moses will be their accuser (5:45), 5955 as he elsewhere teaches that Jesus» words (12:48) and the Spirit (16:8–11) wil1. |
| Although the statement that whoever «does» sin is its «slave» (8:34) could suggest a wordplay in Aramaic, 6765 it is probably simply a natural Johannine idiom (7:19; 8:38; 1 John 3:4, 8–9); 6766 most of John " s puns work in Greek. It reflects more fundamentally the basic notion that one serves either God or something else (cf. Matt 6:24). 6767 Because Jesus had exposed their sin, they now were fully responsible for it (8:24; 15:22). Slaves were considered part of the household 6768 but were not permanent; although they could be inherited, 6769 they could also be freed, 6770 confiscated, 6771 or sold away to other slaveholders; 6772 by contrast, sons as a rule remained (8:35; disinheriting was relatively rare). 6773 (John probably plays on the sense of «remain»; in many passages in his Gospel it implies perseverance, e.g., 8:31; 15:4–5.) 6774 Many other texts also contrasted the roles of children and slaves (8:35; cf. Rom 8:15 ). 6775 Some later rabbinic traditions elaborate the same contrast with regard to the status of Israe1. 6776 The background allusion may well be the contrast between Hagar and Ishmael on one hand and Sarah and Isaac on the other ( Gal 4:22–31 ). 6777 In early Christianity, the goal was to be children rather than merely slaves (Luke 15:21–24, 29; Gal 3:23–4:7 ; cf. John 15:15 ). In contrast to the slave, the son is not only free but can grant freedom (8:36); 6778 indeed, wealthy slaveholders often manumitted slaves with whom they had grown up. 6779 This is the second of three Johannine references to the Father " s house (8:35; 2:16; 14:2). The text in ch. 2 defines the house as the temple, then interprets it as Christ " s resurrection body; the text in ch. 14 refers to the place where believers may dwell forever in Jesus» presence through the Spirit. The present text " s emphasis on the descendants but not slaves dwelling permanently in the household fits this new temple imagery (see comment on 7:37–39), suggesting that «house» is a typical Johannine double entendre. Ezek 46:16–17 indicates that the princés inheritance of land is permanent only for his descendants, not for his servants; further, only the undefiled ministers would really have a place in God " s house, the temple (44:9–16; cf. 48:11), where God would dwell with his people forever (43:7,9; 48:35). 6780 The image in 14of preparing a place for the disciples in God " s house might connote the places the priests would have in the eschatological temple ( Ezek 45:4–5 ; cf. 40:45–46,42:13,44:16). Because in the Fourth Gospel the eschatological temple is Jesus himself, those who «abide» in him (15:4) would likewise continue permanently in the Father " s household. |
| For Jesus» interlocutors to claim that the Lord is «their God» yet not to know him was for them to propagate falsehood (8:54–55), a sin of which Jesus has already accused them for resisting the truth (8:44–46). The biblical covenant motif included the claim that God would be Israel " s God and they would be his people; 6925 in its fullest form, this covenant motif also promised that his people would «know» him, that is, relate to God in covenant (e.g., Jer 31:31–34 ; see introduction, ch. 6; comment on 10:3–4). One could not belong to the covenant while failing to «know» God; and Jesus has already charged that they must not know God, because if they really listened to God they would recognize his agent (8:42–43,47). Jesus did not seek his own glory (8:50); it was his Father who glorified him (8:54). In the total Johannine context, the Father would glorify Jesus through his purpose for him in the cross (12:23–24). Isaiah emphasized that God would not share his glory with any other purported deity (Isa 42:8; 48:11). 6926 If they claim Abraham as their father (8:56)–and Jesus does not deny that Abraham is their father ethnically (8:37) 6927 –then they ought to embrace Jesus» revelation joyfully as their ancestor Abraham did (8:56; cf. 8:39–40). Another witness in advance for Jesus, John the Baptist, in whom Jesus» interlocutors rejoiced for a time (5:35), also rejoiced to see Jesus (3:29). That Abraham had «seen» Jesus» «day» 6928 should not have been surprising–to anyone who believed that Jesus was who he claimed to be (cf. Matt 13:16–17; Luke 2:26). But when did Abraham see Jesus» day? It is unclear if Jesus refers here to a specific Jewish tradition, but if he does, it is interesting that some traditions interpreted Abraham " s laugh ( Gen 17:17 ) as joy in response to God " s revelation. 6929 Others believe that 8alludes to an appearance of the préexistent Logos alongside two angels in Gen 18:2, 13 . 6930 Other suggestions point to more specifically eschatological understandings of Jesus» «day.» Various Jewish traditions emphasized that Abraham saw the future or at least some aspects of it in his vision in Gen 15:12–21 . |
|
|
