| 10505 The term κεται was common for lying in a tomb; to merely sample some Roman Jewish inscriptions, see, e.g., CIJ 1:8, §4; 1:12, §§6–7; 1:14, §§10–11; 1:15, §§12–13; 1:16, §§14–15; 1:17, §17; 1:19, §20; 1:21, §23; 1:23, §28; 1:24, §30; 1:26, §35; 1:30, §42; 1:31, §45; 1:32, §§46–47; 1:35, §§51–52; 1:36, §53; 1:37, §§55–56; 1:38, §58; 1:39, §§62–63; 1:49, §78; 1:52, §79; 1:56, §81; 1:60, §86; 1:62, §88; 1:66, §93; 1:69, §97; 1:70, §§99–100; 1:74, §105. 10506 Winandy, «Vestiges,» suggests this connection helps explain the beloved disciplés faith (20:8). 10507 Marsh, John, 634; Beasley-Murray, John, 372; cf. Osborne, «Napkin,» who suggests that Lazarus was still subject to death (cf. the «veil» of Isa 25in light of 25and later rabbinic tradition) but Jesus was not. 10508 Hunter, John, 184, arguing (undoubtedly correctly–cf. 20:19–but for the wrong reason) that Jesus» transformed body passed through his grave clothes (cf. also Salvoni, «Proof»). 10509 Hunter, John, 184. Sanders, John, 420, argues that the point is that they are «laid out in an orderly manner,» not that Jesus» body passed directly through the clothes. 10510 E.g., Gen. Rah. 100(though R. Judah disagrees). Cf. 1Cor 15:35–38, 53–54 . 10511 Schneiders, «Veil,» 96. Robert, «Suaire,» makes a similar argument from the Aramaic Targumim; but such an argument could at most address John " s traditions, not his present Greek text. 10512 Σουδριον is not specifically technical, appearing among «toilet articles» listed in a dowry (Deissmann, Studies, 223), but appears nowhere in the LXX. 10513 Whitacre, John, 473. For a description of the tomb in the early Middle Ages by a pilgrim reported in Bede Homilies on the Gospels 2.10, see comment on 19:38–42. 10514 Sloyan, John, 222. 10515 Cf. Koester, Symbolism, 36; Ellis, Genius, 8. 10516 The plural in her claim in 20may reflect a plural in John " s source (Kysar, John, 296, comparing Mark 16:1 ). 10517 Beasley-Murray, John, 372. 10518 Bruce, John, 385. 10519 Historians often reconstructed what was most probable on the basis of information they did have, including a person " s characteristic behavior. But it is noteworthy that the later apocryphal gospels usually fit the Synoptic tradition less wel1. |
| 5932 Jesus is essentially the Father " s voice in 5:37–40; one might compare him to a bat qo1. 5933 E.g., Westcott, John, 91; Morris, John, 330; Michaels, John, 82; Bruce, John, 136; Beasley-Murray, John, 78. 5934 Schnackenburg, John, 2:125, cites, e.g., 1QS 5.11; CD 6.7. See most fully Culpepper, School, 291–99, on darash and ζητω. 5935 So here, e.g., Dodd, Interpretation, 82; Hunter, John, 62; Brown, John, 1:225, citing, e.g., m. " Abot 2:7; see comment on 1:4. It was «the most meritorious of all good deeds» (Sandmel, Judaism, 184). 5936 So also Odeberg, Gospel, 224. 5937 Refuting someone on the basis of the very arguments or witnesses that person cites in his support was good rhetorical technique (e.g., Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 311, §101D; 340, §112D; 343–344, §114D; 446, §150D; Matt 12:37; Luke 19:22; Tit 1:12–13 ). 5938 See Culpepper, School, 298–99. They do not «will» to come to him (5:40), though they had «willed» to listen to John momentarily (5:35). 5939 DeSilva, «Honor and Shame,» 520 (citing Seneca the Younger De constantia sapientis 13.2,5; Epictetus Ench. 24.1). 5940 Not needing such glory was commendable (e.g., Scipio in Macrobius Comm. 2.10.2, in Van der Horst, «Macrobius,» 225), though Diogenes the Cynic claimed to deserve public praise (Diogenes Laertius 6.62). 5941 Seeking glory was honorable only if sought in the right places ( Rom 2:7 ; Polybius 6.54.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 5.25.1; 5.27.2; Cicero Earn. 10.12.5; 15.4.13; Sest. 48.102; Valerius Maximus 2.8.5, 7; 4.3.6a; 5.7.ext.4; 8.14; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 94.63–66; Orphic Hymn 15.10–11; Prov 22:1 ; see comment on 12:43). 5942 Cf. Michaels, John, 82. Brown, John, 1:226, suggests an allusion to Moses (leading naturally into 5:45–47), who sought God " s glory (Exod 34:29); cf. comment on 1:14–18. At least some later rabbis believed that Moses exalted God above everything else and after death God exalted him (Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1:20). 5943 See comment on 14:13–14; comment on agency, pp. 310–17 in the introduction. Cf. also Sanders, John, 73. It is unlikely that this stems from Isaiah (pace Young, «Isaiah,» 223); though God " s name is a dominant motif in Isaiah, «coming» in his name more likely alludes to Ps 118:26 . |
| 5134 Brown, John, 1:151, notes that Eusebius placed it eight miles south of Scythopolis (Beth Shean) and that the Madaba map places it just northeast of the Dead Sea; but he prefers Ainun (cf. Ridderbos, John, 144). 5135 E.g., Bruce, History, 159; Brown, John, 1:151; Kysar, John, 57; Hunter, John, 43, following Albright. Boismard, «Aenon,» identifies it with Ain Far " ah, in the heart of Samaria. John " s geographical notes (1:28; 3:23; 5:2; 9:7; 11:54) are generally accepted as reliable (Dunn, «John,» 299). 5138 Freed, «Samaritan Influence,» 580–81, lists Aenon and Salim (3:23), Sychar (4:5), and Ephraim (11:54) as probably Samaritan. 5140 See Josephus Ant. 18.113–114,124–125; Kraeling, Jonh, 85,90–91,143–45. For Nabatean relations with neighbors, see Matthiae, «Nabatäer.» John " s attraction to influential supporters of Antipas such as soldiers and tax gatherers (Luke 3:10–14) may also have suggested a political threat (Meier, «John,» 226–27). 5141 See Negev, «Nabateans.» For Nabatean technology in the building of Petra, see Hammond, «Settlement»; for their sculpture style, McKenzie, «Sculpture»; for their religion, see Lindner, «Heiligtum»; Jones, «Inscription.» 5142 Kraeling, John, 92–93, noting that he was safe in Judea or Samaria but on the eastern bank of the Jordan was in Antipas " s territory. 5147 Cf. how Agamemnon " s death at his return home provides suspense concerning what Odysseus could have faced on his return home had he not avoided it (Homer Od. 13.383–385). 5148 Dodd, Tradition, 280–81, may be correct that the record of this controversy is a historical reminiscence, but he errs in failing to see the Gospel " s theological reason for recording it. 5153 Cf. Stauffer, Jesus, 65. The lack of water in many places in Galilee could explain its absence in much of his itinerant ministry (cf. Kraeling, John, 174), though not around the lake of Galilee. 5154 «Coming» was salvific (6:35); those who plotted Jesus» execution to prevent «all» from coming (11:48–50) would actually bring about what they hoped to avoid (12:32). |
| Central to the setting is the matter of ritual purification; John " s disciples disagree with traditional views about purification (3:25), as does the Fourth Gospel " s author (2:6; cf. 11:55). 5127 Yet his disciples, perhaps like some of his followers in the late first century, also held an inadequate view of purification; they may have seen Jesus as competition (3:26). As in 1:29–37 John again needs to point his disciples to the greater one (3:27–30). John, who offers the best form of Jewish purification, offers merely purification in water; Jesus offers a baptism in the Spirit (1:31–33; 3:5). 5128 That purification and baptismal questions are central to this section is clear from its unity with 4:l-3. 5129 Μετ τατα (3:22) is a frequent transitional device in John (5:1,14; 6:1; 7:1; 19:38; 21:1) 5130 and Revelation (1:19; 4:1; 7:9; 9:12; 15:5; 18:1; 19:1; 20:3) which also occurs seven times in Luke-Acts and on only two other occasions in the NT. 1A. Jesus» Ministry and John " s Ministry (3:22–23, 26) Regardless of the applicability to followers of the Baptist in the time in which the Fourth Gospel was written, a historical reminiscence likely stands behind the tension between John " s and Jesus» followers. 5131 The Synoptics allow for little overlap between John and Jesus, presenting Jesus as John " s successor and the fulfillment of his message. One might suppose that John, whose story world extends the ministry of Jesus to two or three years, overlaps Jesus and John the Baptist. For an apologetic against followers of the Baptist, however, the chronology followed in the Synoptic tradition would have worked well enough. (John apparently knew the tradition circulated through Mark and his Synoptic followers; 3seems to explicitly respond to it.) 5132 The Fourth Gospel thus allows the tension between the two movements to stand as early as Jesus» ministry, but clarifies the appropriate place of the Baptist movement through the Baptist " s own words. The Synoptics may well have suppressed the overlap as a potential embarrassment, 5133 although there is less evidence of tension with a Baptist community at that point. |
| 6628 Brown, John, 1:334, provides examples in Arabic literature. 6629 Jeremias, Parables, 228; Schnackenburg, John, 2:166; one possibility in Whitacre, John, 207–8. But it may be the «turning away» rather than the «writing» that is explicitly «on the earth.» 6630 Various scholars plausibly suggest a general allusion to God writing the law (Nugent, «Write»; Schöndorf, «Schreibt»); Whitacre, John, 207–8, notes that καταγρφω can apply to writing out an accusation (Zenon Papyrus 59), hence Jesus might cite commands they had broken. 6631 Keener, Background Commentary, 284–85. 6632 Cf. Hermogenes Issues 69.12–13; Libanius Declamation 36.47; perhaps Rhet. Alex. 4, 1427a.37–40. 6633 Jeremias, Parables, 228 n. 1; Hunter, John, 200; Sanders, John, 465; Morris, John, 888, all following T. W. Manson. Yet to Westcott, John, 126, the «very strangeness of the action marks the authenticity of the detai1.» 6634 Seven times in Musonius Rufus ναμρτητος means «free from error» (Van der Horst, «Musonius,» 309, on the NT hapax legomenon in John 8:7 ), but αμαρτα appears 13 times elsewhere in the Gospel (4 times in ch. 8) and about 150 times in the NT, usually in the sense «sin.» 6635 James, «Adulteress.» 6636 E.g., b. Sanh. 37b, bar. In such cases they presumably believed God himself would carry out the correct sentence (e.g., Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 9:6 ), a matter possibly of some relevance for the discussion in 8:18–19. 6637 Abrahams, Studies, 1:74, compares R. Akiba on the ordeal: the bitter waters will prove effective only if the accusing husband is guiltless himself. 6638 Cf., more homiletically, Augustine Tr. Ev. Jo. 33.5.4 (trans., p. 56): «There were left [but] two, the pitiable woman and Pity.» 6639 Schnackenburg, John, 2:188, divides the discourse into w. 12–20, 21–29, 30–36, 37–47, and 48–59. John " s transitions are often too smooth to allow us certainty on where to place breaks in our modern outlines. 6640 Bultmann " s proposed gnostic background for the image (John, 342 n. 5) lacks adequate supporting data (ÓDay, «John,» 632 n. 206); the phrase appears, e.g., in 4Q451 frg. 24, line 7 (where it may be eschatological; cf. frg. 9, co1. 1, lines 3–4). |
| If there are theological associations one would read them along the following lines: Jesus was later welcomed at a Bethany (11:1) known from the tradition ( Mark 11:1, 11–12; 14:3 ), though it was quite near Jerusalem ( John 11:18; 12:1 ; cf. Mark 11:1 ; Luke 24:50). Yet because the Gospel portrays Perea «beyond the Jordan» as Jesus» place of refuge, where he had shared ministry with John the Baptist (1:28; 3:26; 10:40), one might argue that he symbolically moves Bethany across the Jordan despite his literal acknowledgment that it was «near Jerusalem» (11:18). 4001 This argument, however, appears strained. Although it would be compatible with John s use of symbolism, it is probable that the references to «beyond the Jordan,» which would make little sense to John " s audience (except for the transplanted Palestinian minority), reflect the Baptist " s actual historical ministry there, as noted above. It was also customary when mentioning» more than one site of the same name to distinguish them, so John " s Bethany «across the Jordan» would be naturally read as a Bethany distinct from the Bethany near Jerusalem of the gospel passion tradition. The Spirits Witness about Jesus (1:29–34) In the preceding section, John the Baptist defers all honor to Jesus. This section explains more of Jesus» identity. 4002 A prophet, like a teacher, could have «disciples» ( 1Sam 19:20; 2 Kgs 2:3; Isa 8:16). 4003 In 1:19–28, John negatively testifies that he himself is not the eschatological king, Elijah, or the Mosaic prophet, but that one whose slave he was not worthy to be was already among them. In 1:29–34, he positively testifies that Jesus is the lamb (as in 1:36), and he recognized his identity as Son of God (1:34, probable reading) and Spirit-bringer (1:33) because the Spirit was on Jesus (1:32–33). The «next day» provides a transition to a new christological confession to John " s disciples. Although some ancient writers preferred disjunctive episodes, many connected events of various occasions into a chronological sequence that made them easier to follow (cf. Mark 1:21,29 ). 4004 Some have found symbolic significance in the number of days in the introductory narratives (see comment on 2:1), but John could intend them literally (cf. 12:12), providing a sample of meaningful days at the beginning of Jesus» ministry. While it would be an exaggeration to say with Origen that John «leaves no room for the temptation story» and that one cannot harmonize John with the Synoptics here, 4005 John is not interested in the temptation story here; nor was chronological sequence a necessary feature of ancient biography. 4006 In view of the Gospel " s penchant for double entendres, that the Baptist saw Jesus «coming» (ερχμενον) to him (1:29) may suggest a narrative confirmation of the one «coming» (ερχμενος) after John (1:27). 1. The Sin-Bearing Lamb (1:29, 36) |
| Pagans could also distinguish temporary resuscitations followed by death from perpetual life (Philostratus Hrk. 2.9–11, third century C.E.). 7624 This is not to suggest that women " s religious activities were not prominent in many circles (see, e.g., Abrahamsen, «Reliefs»; idem, «Women»; Kraemer, «Ecstatics»; idem, «Ecstasy»; idem, Maenads; Brooten, Leaders) but that in public discourse most ancient circles featured it less dominantly than men " s in comparison to Luke and John, as a firsthand survey of the ancient sources will revea1. Fehribach, Bridegroom, 83–113, finds community types in Jesus» relationships with the various women in this Gospel, including here; yet this argument seems less plausible here than at some other points. 7626 Gravesites were to be outside residential areas (cf. Heb 13:11–12; 4 Bar. 7:13; Wilkinson, Jerusalem, 146). For regularly visiting gravesites to mourn, see, e.g., Apol1. Κ. Tyre 30–31. 7629 It is especially significant when a wifés name appears before a husband " s (MacMullen, «Women,» 209–10; Flory, «Women»). 7632 Michaels, John, 191; often used, e.g., for «the snorting of horses» (Morris, «Jesus,» 48). Cf. μβρμημα in Lam 2LXX. 7633 The term κλαω (11:31,33) may bear less than wholly negative connotations for a repeated reader, since joy follows such weeping in every other appearance of it in this Gospel (16:20; 20:11–16). 7635 E.g., Carson, John, 415; ÓDay, «John,» 690–91. Story, «Attitude,» suggests that Jesus «rebuked» himself; but see Lindars, «Rebuking.» 7636 Evans, John, 121–22; Bruce, John, 246; Sloyan, John, 143; Whitacre, John, 289. It was understood that onés pain could become anger and lead to lashing out (Plutarch Cor. 21.1–2). Carson, John, 416, suggests Jesus is angry at perhaps sin and death as well as their unbelief. 7637 Marsh, John, 433; Borchert, John, 359–60. Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 200, suggest «indignation» at Mary " s public challenge in 11:32, questioning whether he has acted like «a true friend.» This would make sense, but can 11really be a challenge? I think it more likely intended praise that proves inadequate, since Jesus calls for higher faith. |
| 10621 Schnackenburg, John, 3:318; Brown, John, 2:992; McPolin, John, 255; Morris, John, 841; Bruce, John, 389; Carson, John, 644; Whitacre, John, 476; Smith, John (1999), 377. 10622 One could try to distinguish the prohibition for Mary from the invitation to Thomas by suggesting that Mary as a woman might be impure ( Lev 15:19–30 ), but apart from lacking clues in the text, this position would violate Johannine thought about purity as well as about gender (e.g., 2:6; 4:9). 10623 One might sever the first imperative grammatically from the following statement if one could take 20:17 " s γρ as anticipatory («since,» for the following clause) rather than causal (for the preceding; McGehee, «Reading»), but Johannine style makes that suggestion less likely. 10624 Bruce, John, 389; Carson, John, 644. 10625 Cf. McPolin, John, 255. 10626 Schneiders, «Encounter,» 165. 10627 Witherington, Acts, 112–13. 10628 This real presence was, however, stronger than the mere epistolary presence that such language conventions as «absent in body, present in spirit» could imply ( 1Cor 5:3 ; Col 2:5; 1 Thess 2:17; Isocrates Nic. 51–52, Or. 3.37; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 32.1; Achilles Tatius 5.20.5; Stowers, Letter Writing, 60; Funk, «Parousia» 264; cf. Diogenes Laertius 7.1.24; contrast Diogenes Ep. 17). 10629 E.g., Homer I1. 12.15. The Iliad regularly predicts (e.g., I1. 21.110; 23.80–81) but does not narrate Achilles» death. 10630 Homer Il. 6.403; 22.506–507. 10631 E.g., Homer Od. 23.266–284. 10632 Apollonius of Rhodes 3.64, 75, 1135; 4.241–245. Writing after Euripides, this must be expected. 10633 E.g., Ovid Metam. 14.824–828; Diogenes Laertius 8.2.68; Phaedrus 4.12.3; cf. Euripides Iph. au1. 1608, 1614,1622. See more fully Talbert, «Immortals.» 10634 See also 2 En. 67:1–3; Gk. Apoc. Ezra 5:7; more fully, Palatty, «Ascension»; Luke, «Ascension»; Tabor, «Divinity»; Begg, «Disappearance.» 10635 Seealso Jos. Asen. 17:8, MSS; T. Ab. 4:5; 8:1; 15:11; 20:12A; 4:4; 8:1; 10:2B; cf. Jub. 32:20–21. 10636 Because of Heracles» apotheosis, people searched only vainly for his corpse (Diodorus Siculus 4.38.3–5); Romulus «vanished» (Plutarch Camillus 33.7); other deified persons, such as Aeneas, also «disappeared» (φανσθη, Diodorus Siculus 7.5.2; the term applies to Heracles in Lysias Or. 2.11, §191), as did Moses in Josephus Ant. 4.326. Boring et a1., Commentary, 163–64, also compare the first-century B.C.E. traditions of Romulus " s ascension (Livy 1.16.2–8; Ovid Metam. 14.805–851; Vir. illustr. 2.13; Plutarch Numa 11.2–3), even by horses and carriage (Ovid Fasti 2.475–510; cf. 2 Kgs 2:11–18), and Job " s children in T. Job 39:8–40:4. |
| It is well known that the categorical rejection of the historicity of John, so familiar in earlier critical exegesis, can no longer be maintained. We may still find writers stating that the Fourth Gospel cannot be seriously considered as a witness to the historical Jesus, but these represent a type of uncritical traditionalism which arises with age, even in heterodoxy. 425 Charlesworth suggests that today nearly all John scholars «have concluded that John may contain some of the oldest traditions in … the Gospels.» 426 John " s Distinctive Style and Adaptation of the Gospel Form Given that John is closer to the Synoptics than to other writings, and that both fall within the spectrum of the ancient biographical genre, one must still seek to account for the differences. 427 Johns narrative progressively nuances the character of the genre, adapting expectations with which readers more accustomed to such gospels as the Synoptics would have approached his work. That John " s biography of Jesus differs from those of the Synoptic writers is evident; what accounts for these differences? 428 Certainly John " s style, first of all, is distinctive. 429 The distinctiveness is most evident in the discourses (John " s most distinctive literary feature vis-à-vis the Synoptics, discussed in our following chapter) but hardly limited to them. Because this commentary " s focus is the Fourth Gospel " s Mediterranean context, we may focus our remarks about John " s style here on the elements that lend themselves most readily to comparison with other ancient style (though, for further discussion, see ch. 2 of the introduction on discourses, and comments on individual passages). A standard Greek grammar rightly observes that in the technical sense John " s discourses lack «rhetorical art.» 430 John " s style is uniform whether in narrative or discourse, 431 whereas rhetorically trained writers preferred to adapt speeches even to their specific audiences. Lack of indication of technical rhetorical training does not, however, imply a lack of some rhetorical strategies familiar from the milieu. 432 At various points in the commentary, we observe parallels from ancient rhetorical conventions, not because John or his aides would have consciously drawn on rhetorical training but because they are the closest available sources we have for studying speeches disseminated in an ancient Mediterranean context. Many of these parallels apply to the rhythmic patterns in Jesus» speech; such features may, however, simply represent standard techniques of oral patterning for an oral culture, an area that invites much more detailed exploration. 433 |
| 6156 Some suggest that this adjective may reflect later rabbinic discussion concerning whether manna was angels» food (Billerbeck, Kommentar, 2:482; Brown, John, 1:262). The idea is early enough ( Ps 78:25 ; Wis 16:20) but probably irrelevant here; «true» is a frequent christological adjective in John (see comment on 1:9). 6158 Cf. Buchanan, Hebrews, 134–35; Montefiore, Hebrews, 135–36; Clifford, «Tent,» 226; Cassuto, Exodus, 322. 6162 Also Painter, John, 49. Wisdom also offers food and drink in Prov 9:5 ; cf. 24:13–14; «divine law» as food in Porphyry Marc. 26.411–413,416. Some (e.g., Smith, John 160; Turner, Spirit, 63) also cite Isa 55in view of 55and the contextual quotation of 54:13. John " s midrash probably does read the wisdom materials in light of Isa 54–55, but the sapiential background is most conspicuous. One drinks of wisdom also in Philo Flight 166. 6163 The contrast is more rhetorical than substantive; one thirsts for more of Wisdom and one thirsts for nothing but Jesus, but one could also thirst for more of Jesus and nothing but Wisdom without contradicting the sayings. Cf. Isa 49:10, drawn on in the Johannine community (Rev 7:16). 6164 Most commentators note the frequent predicative «I am» sayings (e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 167; Brown, John, 1:534; Michaels, John, 96). 6168 Barrett, John, 68–69, citing 6:39,40,44, 54; cf. 1Pet 1:5 . The «last day» represents the life of the coming world in Exod. Rab. 52(a probably Amoraic legend about a Tanna). Although «last» can mean eschatological without meaning «final» (1 John 2:18, but this is anarthrous), the proposal that, despite Jesus» audience in the story world, «last day» refers to merely the last day of a «church age» (Strombeck, Rapture, 187–88) is without exegetical merit. 6170 Rhetoricians classified opening repetitions as αναφορ or επαναφορ (or, more technically, when repeating several words, επιβολ); see Anderson, Glossary, 19 (cf. 52); Rowe, «Style,» 131; elsewhere in the NT, Watson, «Speech to Elders,» 200; Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 170; Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 579; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 86; in LXX, see Lee, «Translations of OT,» 779. |
|
|
