| The real calendrical issue in this chapter is not an annual feast, but the Sabbath (5:9; as in the parallel 9:14), 5727 and Jesus» claim to divine authority as God " s shaliach to adapt Sabbath rules. From Jesus» perspective he is not undermining the Sabbath, but challenging «the Jews " » interpretation of it (7:22–24). The purpose is not to undermine the Sabbath but to support the high Christology in which Jesus acts as his Father does. 5728 John is not the only Gospel author to inform us that Jesus» religious accusers felt that his Sabbath behavior was «unlawful» (εξεστιν, 5:10; Mark 2:24,26; 3:4; 10:2; 12:14 ; Luke 14:3); but from John " s perspective, their view of unlawfulness misses the heart of God " s word (18:31). The chapter ultimately leads into a comparison of Jesus with God " s earlier messenger, Moses, through whom Israel received Torah, arguing that Jesus is much greater than Moses (5:45–47). This theme is further developed in ch. 6, where Jesus becomes a manna-giver far greater than Moses. The continuity between the chapters is considerably greater than advocates of transposition recognize. 1B. Bethesda (5:2) Scholars today often credit John with topographic reliability in matters such as the one at hand; external evidence confirms the existence of a pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem before the city " s destruction, even though it is usually held that John writes over two decades after that event. 5729 Qumran " s Copper Scroll attests Judean awareness of the pool " s title before 70 C.E. (3Q15 11.12–13, «By Bethesdatayin, in the pool where you enter is a smaller basin»). 5730 John cites the pool by its «Hebrew» 5731 name, but, while our current manuscripts have variants of the name (e.g., «Bethzatha»), «Bethesda» seems to be the most likely reading, especially in view of Qumran " s Copper Scrol1. 5732 The pool is near the «sheep gate» (5:2), which, like the rest of old Jerusalem, was near the temple (Neh 3:31–32; 12:39–40; cf. John 2:14–15 ). A lame man might be excluded from some sacred precincts ( Lev 21:18 ; cf. |
| 5110 E.g., 1QS lO.lff.;4Q180 frg. 1, line 2; 1 En. 1:1–3,8; 5:7–8; 25:5; 38:4;48:1,9; 50:1; 58:1; 61:4, 12; 93:2; Jub. 11:17; T. Job 4:11/9. Despite Josephus " s presentation of the Essenes (Josephus Ant. 18.18), even the Scrolls do not deny free will (Nötscher, «Schicksalsglaube»; Driver, Scrolls, 558–62; Marx, «Prédestination»; Sanders, Judaism, 251). 5111 Though in v. 11 some of them may have been «born» in darkness, with sufferings. Many ancients viewed character as inborn, not changed (Pindar O1. 13.12; also 11.19–20; but others recognized that character changed (Valerius Maximus 6.9.pref.–6.9.9; cf. 2 Chr 24:17–22). 5112 Neh 9:7; Jer 33:24 ; Sir 46:1 ; 2Macc 1:25; Jub. 1:29; 22:9–10; 1QS 1.10; 2.5; 9.14; 11.7; 1QM 10.9–10; 12.1, 4; 15.1–2; 17.7; lQpHab 5.3; 9.12; 10.13; 4QpPs 37 frg. 1; Mek. Pisha 1.135ff.; Sir. 9.118ff.; Gen. Rab. 1:4; cf. Urbach, Sages, 1:524–41. For individual Gentiles becoming part of that chosen people, see Jos. Asen. 8:9/11; for application of the title to believers in Jesus, e.g., Col 3:12; 2 Thess 2:13; 1 Clem. 50.7. 5113 E.g., Pss. So1. 9:4; Sipre Deut. 319.3.1; cf. Sirach in Boccaccini, Judaism, 105–9; Winston, «Determinism»; Philo in Winston, «Freedom»; Carson, «Responsibility»; Wolfson, Philo, 1:424–62; rabbis in Urbach, Sages, 1:268–69. Later rabbinic theodicy explained that Israel chose God (Sipre Deut. 312.1.1–2; Num. Rab. 14:10; see comment on John 1:10–11 ). See further comment on 6:43–44. 5114 Many Gentile thinkers (e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.40; 4.6.5; Marcus Aurelius 11.36; Plotinus Enn. 3.1) and early Christians (Justin Dia1. 141; 1 Apo1. 43; Tatian 8–11; Ps.-Clem. 12.3–4; 13.1–2) also argued for free will; earlier Greeks accepted human responsibility (Homer Od. 1.32–43; Chrysippus in Aulus Gellius 7.2; Aristotle E.E. 2.6.1–11, 1222b-1223a; Lucretius Nat. 2.225–265). 5115 E.g., Josephus War 2.162–163 (Pharisees); m. Abot 3:15/16; " Abot R. Nat. 37, 39A. Brown, Essays, 151–54, argues that even the Scrolls affirm both, though their double predestination deconstructs their logic for free will (in a way, he says, John does not, 154–55). |
| 5644 Homer I1. 13.624–625; Od. 6.207–208; 14.57–58; Euripides Cyc1. 355; Apollonius of Rhodes 2.1131–1133; 3.193; Greek Anth. 7.516. 5645 Tob 5:10–15; 7:8–9; 10:6–10; Ps.-Phoc. 24; m. " Abot 1:5, 15; 3:12; t. Demai 3:9; b. Ber. 63b; Luke 7:36; Acts 16:15; see further Koenig, Hospitality, 16. For lodging in synagogues or school-houses, cf. b. Qidd. 29b; p. Meg. 3:3, §5. Abraham provided the supreme example (Gen. Rab. 48:9; 50:4; Num. Rab. 10:5; Song Rab. 1:3, §3), though sometimes transferred to other figures (T. Job 10:1–4). Among early Christians, e.g., Rom 12:13 ; 1Tim 3:2 ; 1Pet 4:9 ; Heb 13:2. 5649 Talbert, John, 118, citing especially Josephus War 3.459; 7.70–71; cf. War 4.112–113; 7.100–103,119. 5651 E.g., Aeschylus Supp1. 26; Euripides Herc. fur. 48; Aristophanes Frogs 738, 1433; Epictetus Diatr. 1.22.16; Plutarch Borr. 7, Mor. 830B; Arrian Ind. 21.2; 36.3; Pausanias 2.20.6; 4.34.6; 9.26.8; Athenaeus Deipn. 7.288f. 5652 Pausanias 1.40.3 (Artemis); 8.31.2 (Kore); the mother goddess in Orphic Hymns 14.8; 27.12; 74.4. 5653 Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 12.1.8; Josephus Life 244,259; OGIS 90; CPJ 1:185–86, §38; 2:31, §151. Especially Heracles (Demosthenes Or. 60, Funeral Speech §8). 5657 See more fully Longenecker, Christology, 142–43. The title may function in something of a messianic sense in Isa 19:20; cf. «the Lord " s salvation» in Τ Dan 5:10; human deliverers in Judg 3:9, 15 ; 1Sam 10LXX; Neh 9:27. 5658 For special love for onés native land, see also, e.g., Seneca Ep. Lucil 66.26; Menander Rhetor 2.4, 392.8–9; Iamblichus V.P. 32.214. 5659 Davies, Land, 329; Brown, Community, 39; Schnackenburg, John, 1:462; Van Belle, «Faith.» The term applies most easily to onés place of origin, not onés citizenship (Philostratus Hrk. 44.1). 5661 More peripheral, first-time readers might have taken such language philosophically (Anaxagoras called heaven his «fatherland» in Diogenes Laertius 2.7; cf. the world in Musonius Rufus 9, p. 68.15–16, 25; citizenship in the world, ibid. 68.21–22; Diogenes Laertius 2.99; 6.2.63, 72; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 28.4; Marcus Aurelius 12.36), but the sense is clear after reading the Gospel as a whole. |
| 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 . |
| 5842 Though ργον is a common term (over 130 occurrences in the LXX of the Pentateuch alone) it is significant here that it can apply to God " s act of creation ( Gen 2:2–3 LXX; Wis 13:1; Sib. Or. 1.22; cf. the verb in Philostratus Hrk. 25.8). Less likely is the proposal of Manns, «Oeuvres,» that Jesus carries out Jewish tradition " s «works of mercy.» 5843 For a probable implicit traditional link between Gen 2and Ezek 37 , see comment on John 20:22 . 5844 E.g., L.A.E. 51:1–2; 2 En. 33:1–2 J; Barn. 15.8; possibly T. Ab. 19:7A; 7:16B; see further the comment on John 5:25–30 . 5845 It may be associated with the feast in 7and perhaps identified as the (partly realized) eschatological «day» in John 8:56; 9:4; 11:9; 14:20; 16:23,26 ), perhaps partly associated with the cross (12:7; 19:31) and/or resurrection (the first day, 20:1,19). 5846 John 6does not count because «make» is properly attached to «sit down.» 5847 Elsewhere God «made» the human mouth, a synecdoche for God making people in various physical conditions (Exod 4:11). 5848 Such a relationship often invited reciprocity: Israel must love God ( ; Josh 22:5; 23:11; Neh 1:5; Dan 9:4 ). 5849 Possibly Ign. Magn. 7.1 (δι» εαυτο) alludes to John here (even in the shorter recension), especially in view of Ignatius " s νευ του πατρς οδν εποησεν. 5850 Meeks, «Agent,» 55. On the activity of the agent, see «agency» under Christology in our introduction, pp. 310–17. 5851 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.32, εξ εμαυτο (John consistently prefers π, as in, e.g., Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 396, §135D). In John 10it indicates Jesus» independence from those who want him dead, but explicitly not independence from the Father; cf. 18:34. 5852 Sipre Deut. 5.1.1; 19.1.1; 25.5.1. 5853 Talbert, John, 125–26, takes the language of honor here as cultic (citing Josephus Ant. 1.156; 6.21; 1Tim 1:17; 6:16 ; Rev 4:9, 11; 5:12). On the early Christian understanding of Jesus receiving worship within the identity of the one God, see Bauckham, God Crucified, 34–35. |
| The Feast of Tabernacles (Exod. 23:16; Lev. 23:34–44 ; Num. 29:12–40 ; Deut. 16:13–15 cf. Neh. 8:13–18). This was an eight-day feast beginning the fifteenth day of the seventh month in the religious calendar. Thus the people generally had just enough time to go from their homes to the tabernacle or temple after the Day of Atonement. Its purpose was probably twofold. It was a thanksgiving for the crops already gathered. It was therefore sometimes called the Feast of Ingathering (Exod. 23:16; 34:22). To this feast they would take the tithes of the previous year’s harvest and increase of cattle. It also celebrated God’s care for the Israelites during the forty years of wandering in the desert. Three practices engaged in during the week commemorated the providential care for their fathers. During the week the people dwelt in booths in imitation of their fathers dwelling in tents in the wilderness ( Lev. 23:40–43 ; Neh. 8:14–15). Great candelabra with many lights were erected in the Court of the Women in commemoration of the pillar of fire which guided the people in the wilderness by night. On the last day of the feast a pitcher of water was brought from the pool of Siloam by the multitude and poured out with great ceremony at the foot of the altar in the Court of the Priests in commemoration of the water which the Israelites had received from the Lord out of the rock (Exod. 17:5–6; Num. 20:11 ). John has given an account of one Feast of Tabernacles which Jesus attended (ch. 7). The Scriptures The Jews of New Testament times, including Jesus, regarded the Old Testament as the word of God ( John 10:35 ). At that time they had come to think of their Scripture as composed of three groups of books: the Law, the five books of Moses; the Prophets, including many books of history as well as most of the books of prophecy; and the Writings, including the Psalms and many other books of our Old Testament (Luke 24:44). In their minds the books of the Law came from God through Moses ( John 7:19, 9:28–29 ). Moses was insistent that the commandments and the other things he wrote should be received and kept as coming from God ( Deut. 6:6; 31:9–13, 24–26 ) and from the time of the settlement in the land of Caanan these books of Moses were regarded as God’s law (Josh. 1:8; 8:32–36). There were, however, long periods of neglect of the law. At the time of the captivity the Jews must have been permitted to take with them to Babylon copies of the law and of other treasured books – history and prophecy and the Psalms and books of wisdom. A new interest in the study of the law was stirred during the Babylonian Exile. At that time the Jewish captives, being in a strange land and deprived of their temple and their sacrificial system would gather in groups for a study of the law, the singing of the Psalms and prayer ( Ezek. 8:1 ; Ps. 137 ). |
| More likely, praying «in onés name» might evoke praying «on the merits of» or because of another " s status before the one entreated. Thus the patriarchs had earned Israel favor before God, and they could seek God " s favor on account of their ancestors» favor (Exod 32:13; Deut 9:27; 2 Chr 6:16–17). 8523 Biblical tradition was clear that God answered the prayers of the righteous (e.g., Ps 34:15–18 ; Prov 15:8, 29; 21:27; 28:9 ) 8524 and the repentant (2 Chr 7:14; Neh 1:6); but God in his mercy often showed favor to the descendants of the righteous ( Deut 9:5 ), and prayer «in Jesus» name» could mean prayer predicated on his merit alone. (Some also find the background for «in his name» in the biblical tabernacle traditions; one praying in or toward God " s house would secure an answer to prayer.) 8525 A related proposal draws on the ancient Mediterranean role of a broker; 8526 patrons could write letters of recommendation to procure for their clients favors from other members of the elite, and others could use their favor as agents to secure favor for others as wel1. For example, a prince in the king " s special favor might secure whatever he asked for his friends. 8527 Given the loving intimacy between the Father and the Son in this Gospel, the reader is secure that with Jesus as the agent or the one in whose name disciples ask, their request will be answered. This assumes, however, that they, too, have a close relationship with the Son. In earlier biblical usage, «name» often connoted reputation, so that when God acted «on account of his name,» he defended his honor, a matter readily understood in the ancient Mediterranean with its emphasis on honor and shame. «In God " s name» could signify a representative acting on God " s behalf (Exod 5:23; Deut 18:19–22 ; Jer 14:14–15 ), according to his command ( Deut 18:5,7 ), by his help ( Ps 118:10–11 ; Prov 18:10 ), or using his name for a miraculous act (2 Kgs 2:24). In prayer, which might suit this context ( John 14:13 ), calling on the deity " s name meant addressing him (1 Kgs 18:24–26, 32; 2 Kgs 5:11; Ps 9:2; 18:49 ); similarly, in 1 Chr 16:2, when David blessed the people in the Lord " s name, he apparently was calling on the Lord to bless them. That various early Jewish circles could employ «name» as a polite surrogate for pronouncing the divine name also fits this usage. 8528 Which of these usages (or what combination of them) is in view here, given John " s general usage? |
| The order of the services seems to have been eulogies, benedictions, reading and interpretation of the law, reading and interpretation of the prophets, sermon, and benediction. The interpretations were stereotyped translations of the Hebrew Scriptures into the current Aramaic; they were usually given by a scribe if one was present. Any man might be called on to read the different portions of the Scriptures or for a sermon or exhortation, or a man might ask for the privilege of preaching. The benediction was usually pronounced by a priest if one was present; if not, by anyone. We learn from Luke 4:16 that the Lord Jesus was accustomed to regular attendance at the Synagogue in Nazareth and could be depended upon to take a part in the worship. Times of Worship The important times of worship for the Jews of New Testament days were the weekly Sabbath and the annual feasts The Sabbath . In the days of the Lord Jesus, and indeed throughout the Intertestamental Period, the Jews had great reverence for the Sabbath as a day of worship, particularly worship in the synagogues. Moses had delivered to the people of Israel rather stringent commandments concerning the Sabbath day (Exod. 20:6–11; 31:14–17; 35:2–3; Lev. 23:3 ; Num. 15:32–36 ), but the emphasis in these commandments was on resting on the Sabbath day rather than worshipping. In actual practice, it seems that from the settlement in the land of Canaan until the Babylonian Exile people were lax, if not negligent, in observance of the Sabbath. But it is very probable that during the Exile groups would gather on the Sabbath day for Scripture study, Psalm singing, and prayer. After the restoration of the people to their homes in Palestine, the reforms under Nehemiah reemphasized the Sabbath as a day of rest (Neh. 13:15–22); and with the institution of the Synagogue, it came to be a day of worship, also. Before the time of the Lord Jesus many of the scribes, in emphasizing the law of the Sabbath, had gone to extremes in the matter of burden bearing and laboring on the Sabbath, and had laid down many rigid rules, and then had provided ways of escape from their own rulings by means that were just as foolish. One prominent cause of conflict between Jesus and the synagogue authorities was the disregard on His part for those Sabbath regulations which had been set forth by the scribes, but which were not in the law given through Moses. The Feasts |
| 4658 E.g., p. Ta c an. 4:5, §13, which may compare the amount of bird offerings to mikvaot but attributes Jerusalem " s destruction to fornication. 4659 E.g., lQpHab 9.6–7; T. Levi 15:1; T. Mos. 5:4; 6:8–9; see Keener, Matthew, 561, 613. Apocalyptic texts frequently critique the priesthood (see Freyne, Galilee, 187–89). 4662 Witherington, Christology, 115, comparing Neh 13:4–9,12–13. See also Evans, «Action,» opposing Sanders " s view, below. Borg, Conflict, 163–99, emphasizes Jesus» opposition to his contemporaries» understanding of holiness. 4664 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 65, cites Mai 3:3; Pss. So1. 8; CD 5.6–8. He doubts that the temple system as a whole was corrupt (Judaism, 90–91), but the complaints are multiply attested in various streams of early Jewish tradition (cf. Josephus Ant. 20.181, 206; lQpHab. 9.4–5; Τ Levi 14:1; 2 Bar. 10:18; t. Menah. 13.21 in Avigad, Discovering, 130; cf. Stauffer, Jesus, 67). 4665 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 68. Qumranites applied requirements for ritual purity of the sanctuary even to Eden (4Q265 frg. 7,2.11–17). 4668 A coin from 132 C.E., during the Bar Kokhba revolt, indicates the hope for a restored temple after 70 (Carmon, Inscriptions, 81, 178, §§178–179), as do many texts (e.g., 2 Bar. 4:3; 32:4; t. Roš Haš. 2:9; Šabb. 1:13; p. Ber. 1:5, §5; Gen. Rab. 65:23; Num. Rab. 14:8; 15:10; Lam. Rab. proem 33), and probable indications in the sixth-century Beth Alpha mosaic (Dequeker, «Zodiaque»); cf. also the plea for Jerusalem " s rebuilding in the fourteenth benediction of the Amidah (Oesterley, Liturgy, 65) and surrogate temple features in synagogues (e.g., Friedman, «Features»). Worship probably continued on the site of the temple until 135 (Clark, «Worship»). 4669 E.g., 1 En. 90:28–29; Tob 13:10; 14:5; Sib. Or. 3.657–660,702,772–774. The Aramaic may diverge from the Ethiopie of 1 En. 91:13, but the reconstruction of the Aramaic is problematic, so 1 En. 91probably also refers to the future temple. 4670 11QT cols. 30–45; 4Q174, 3.2; 4Q509, 4.2, 12; 4Q511 frg. 35, line 3; notes in Maier, Scroll 98–116; Yadin, «Scroll,» 41; Lincoln, Paradise, 149; Broshi, «Dimensions.» |
| Jesus intimately shares the secrets of his heart with his disciples, treating them as friends, as God treated Abraham and Moses by revealing himself to them. The parallels with John 16:13–15 indicate that the Spirit of truth would continue passing down the revelations from the Father and Jesus to the disciples. Jesus passed on what he heard from the Father (5:20; 8:26); the Spirit would pass on to disciples what he heard from Jesus (16:13). Just as Jesus heard and saw the Father (5:19–20; 8:38), his disciples would see and hear him. (It is doubtful that the Fourth Gospel restricts this relationship to the literal level of visionary experience, but at least in the Pauline apostolic circle, visions were probably part of such experience– 2Cor 12:1 ; cf. Acts 2:17.) 9099 John therefore portrays friendship with Jesus as an intimate relationship with God and his agent, one that John believed was continuing in his own community, and one that no doubt set them apart from the synagogue, which had a much more limited understanding of continuing pneumatic revelation. They are his friends, and therefore objects of his self-sacrifice (15:13), if they do what he commands them (15:14). The paradoxical image of «friends-not-slaves» who «obey» Jesus» commandments is meant to jar the hearer to attention; friendship means not freedom to disobey but an intimate relationship that continues to recognize distinctions in authority. (Authority distinctions remained in patron-client relationships; at the same time, Jesus» complete sharing with his disciples resembles the Greek notion of «equality» in friendships.) 9100 By obeying, they continue to make themselves more open recipients of God " s love, «abiding» and persevering in ever deeper intimacy with God. Disciples as Jesus» «friends» might stem from Jesus tradition 9101 and may have become a title for believers (3 John 15) as in some philosophical groups. 2G. Chosen and Appointed (15:16) Jesus several times refers to the chosenness of his disciples (6:70; 13:18; 15:16, 19). It may be relevant that the choosing of apostles or other special groups of ministers appears elsewhere in early Christian tradition; 9102 normally disciples chose their own teachers, but according to the Synoptic tradition, Jesus had chosen these disciples. 9103 Yet John probably invites deeper theological reflection than that observation alone entails, fitting his theme elsewhere of Jesus» foreknowledge (e.g., 1:51; 2:19; 6:70–71). If one argued for an Abraham allusion in 15(I think a Moses allusion more likely), one might also see an Abraham allusion in the «chosen» of 15:16. Jewish teachers commented frequently on Israel " s «chosenness.» 9104 But both in the Bible ( Gen 18:19 ; Neh 9:7; Ps 105:6 ; Isa 41:8) and in some later Jewish traditions, 9105 this chosenness stemmed from God " s initial choice of Abraham. Nor could it be neglected that God had chosen Abraham and the other patriarchs because of grace ( Deut 26:5 ; cf. Deut 7:7–8 ). 9106 |
|
|
