| The historical tradition and probably even the site of Jesus» tomb remained known to the writer of this Gospe1. John may emphasize the honorable nature of Jesus» burial, the genuine nature of his physical death, and that Jesus» disciples knew the site where he was buried. (Although John does not narrate the presence of others besides Joseph and Nicodemus in 19:38–42, he clearly supposes that element of the passion tradition in 20:1–11.) 4A. A New Tomb in a Garden Only Matthew explicitly notes the use of Joseph " s own family tomb (Matt 27:60), fulfilling Isa 53:12, but the tradition behind Mark 15probably presupposes it; 10352 » how else would Joseph acquire a tomb so quickly? (Most burial sites were private, the property of individual families.) 10353 Further, archaeological evidence for the tombs in this area may suggest that the tomb belonged to a person of some material substance. 10354 The «newness» of the tomb ( John 19:41 ) may suggest that wealth had come into his family only in his own generation or that rising prominence had led him to move closer to Jerusalem from another home. 10355 The dead were often buried in fields and gardens, so a tomb in a garden area (19:41; cf. 20:15) is not unlikely. 10356 Some read the garden symbolically, as a reversal of humanity " s expulsion from God " s garden ( Gen 3:22 ). 10357 Those who connect Jesus» mother with the new Eve (see comment on 19:26–27) could therefore find a new Adam motif in the context. If this were the case, however, it would be surprising that John " s term for garden (κπος) differs from the common LXX rendering for the Genesis garden (see comment on 18:1, 26). More likely, if John has any symbolic meaning in view, he recalls Jesus» arrest in a garden, underlining the injustice of his execution; in the former garden, Jesus was «bound» by hostile officers (18:12), whereas here he is «bound» by allies determined to honor him posthumously (19:40). 10358 By recalling the earlier section, John may heighten the irony: gardens were normally pleasant places (e.g., Eccl 2:5 ; Song 4:12,15–16; 6:2,11 ), but there Jesus was unjustly arrested, and after his unjust execution he was deposited in one. They were appropriate places to be buried (2 Kgs 21:18,26, LXX), but the connection with the arrest may be in the background. |
| 5595 Because John employs the same term in 2:6–7, we may infer a continuation of the replacement motif highlighted there and frequently in John " s water motif. 5596 Just as Jesus» gift is greater than the waters of ritual purity, it is greater than the gift of Jacob " s wel1. For John " s biblically informed audience, the term used may also allude to Gen 24:14–46 , which accounts for nine of the seventeen uses of υδρα in the LXX. In that passage Rebekah runs home when she learns the identity of the person with whom she was speaking ( Gen 24:28 ; see also Exod 2:20); here the Samaritan woman runs to her people after a revelation of her conversant " s identity. Her claim that he revealed all that she had done (4:27) overstates the case, 5597 but may suggest that she had defined herself, as much of her society would have, in terms of her past history with men; it also fits Jesus» revelation of peoplés character when they encounter him (1:42, 47; 15:22). The Samaritan woman " s words of invitation («Come, see,» 4:29) explicitly echo the witness of Philip in 1(see comment there). 5598 No less than Philip, she becomes a model for witness; in this case, however, she brings virtually an entire town! 5599 (As noted on 1and 1:46, «come and see» was a frequent phrase, including for halakic investigation.) 5600 It is possible that it may also be relevant that her οτς στιν, although phrased as part of a question, fits the Johannine language of confession by the faith it prefigures (1:15, 30, 33, 34; 4:42; 6:14, 50, 58; 7:40–41). 5601 The narrative thus places her on a par with Jesus» other disciples who brought his message to the world (cf. 17:20). 5602 (Maccini doubts the connection with Philip, contrasting the two narratives; 5603 but the differences are dictated by the necessity of the different story lines, and are not substantial enough to reduce the positive comparison between the two characters.) Granted, once they encounter Jesus for themselves, they are no longer dependent on her testimony (4:41–42) as they were at first (4:39); but it was likewise Nathanael " s encounter with Jesus, not solely Philip " s testimony, that led to Nathanael " s confession (1:47–49). |
| The setting of the prayer is essentially the same as that of the last discourse, excepting the specific mention of a change in Jesus» posture. «Lifting up» onés «eyes» was a common posture of prayer (11:41; cf. Mark 6:41; 7:34 ) in early Judaism (1 Esd 4:58; 4 Macc 6:6, 26) 9401 and appeared among Gentiles. 9402 Because God was envisioned as being in heaven, 9403 both Jews 9404 and Gentiles 9405 regularly lifted their hands in prayer, supplication, or worship. Reciprocal Glory of Father and Son (17:1–5) John 17:1–5 alludes back to previous declarations that the hour of glory had come, through which the Father and Son would glorify one another in the cross (12:23–24, 28; 13:31–32). 9406 In the context of the entire Gospel, Jesus» return to glory here includes his exaltation but takes place by way of the cross. 9407 The reader of the Fourth Gospel is by now prepared for such a statement, but we should not miss the striking offensiveness of the language: glory was partly honor, whereas the cross was one of the greatest humiliations conceivable to the ancient Mediterranean mind. 9408 Jesus «looks for glory in the last place» the world would expect it. 9409 In this passage as in others, a complex of associations cluster together, including Jesus» glory and love, God " s name, and the revealing of God " s word; 9410 this is the natural outworking of the analogy with Moses introduced in 1:14–18 (see comment there). Thus Jesus» crucifixion and exaltation to the Father is the theophany that will reveal the divine name to the disciples. Jesus and the narrator had been declaring that his «hour» would «come» from 2onward (7:30; 8:20); from 12they have been declaring that it had finally arrived (12:27; 13:1; 16:32; cf. Mark 14:41 ). The request that the Father glorify the Son so that the Son might glorify the Father was in effect a request that the Father now hasten the cross (12:23–24; 13:31–32), revealing the Son " s love for, and devotion to, the Father. 9411 This prayer is strikingly different from Jesus» Gethsemane prayer in the Markan passion tradition, but John undoubtedly intends this prayer to complement Jesus» revulsion to the cross, not to contradict it. It continues the Johannine «Gethsemane» prayer of 12:27–28 9412 and fits «Your will be done» at the close of Mark 14:36 . Jewish literature often declared the eschatological sanctification 9413 or glorification of God " s name. Jewish literature also recognized that God must be praised or glorified in the present. 9414 Because onés «name» involved onés «honor,» it is not surprising that some texts link name and glory. 9415 |
| That Jesus glorified the Father «on the earth» (17:4) refers to the whole of his earthly ministry. Jesus was not «of the earth» (3:31) but spoke in earthly analogies (3:12) and, in a sense, provided, to some degree, an earthly analogy in his incarnate life to explain the character of God in humanly comprehensible form; finally, he would be lifted up from the earth into glory (12:32). 9434 In the cross, he finished the work the Father called him to do (cf. 4:34; 19:30), though his followers still need to be «completed» or perfected in unity (17:23). His request for glorification in 17repeats the thought of 17:1, except that it adds the notion of Jesus» precreation glory. This is no Jewish-Christian adaptation of the Hellenistic concept of apotheosis for heroes; 9435 Jesus is not becoming God but returning to the glory he shared with the Father before creation. His preincarnate glory appears in 12:41, but his precreation glory harks back to the very opening of the Gospel (1:1–2), manifested in a way obscure to the people among whom he lived in the Gospel (1:10–11,14). Prayer for the Disciples (17:6–24) The prayer is arranged chronologically; after Jesus prays for himself in 17:1–5, he turns to prayer for his disciples. 9436 Jesus» prayer for the disciples falls into two primary sections: his prayer for his current disciples (17:6–19, esp. 17:11–19) and his prayer for his future disciples (17:20–24; cf. this concern in 20:29–31). The first prayer primarily concerns protection from the evil one who works in the world into which they are sent but of which they are not a part (17:15); their separation from the world recalls Jesus» own, as in 15:18–25. The second prayer focuses on another issue apparently still paramount in John " s day: the unity of believers, that the world might recognize Jesus» activity among them (17:21–23). 1. What Belongs to Jesus and the Father (17:6–10) Jesus gives the Father " s message to the disciples because he has the Father " s message (17:6–8); likewise, Jesus has the disciples precisely because they, too, belong to the Father (presumably through divine ordination) and hence have been entrusted to the Son (17:9–10). This paragraph continues the emphasis on the solidarity and (still more so) the mutual sharing of the Father and the Son that is introduced in 17:1–5. |
| The Pharisees sarcastically demand whether they, too, are blind (9:40). 7186 Jesus responds (9:41) that their very claim to see makes them all the more responsible for the light that has come to them; if they refuse to believe, their sin remains (8:24; 15:24; 16:9); those satisfied with their own condition were the ones condemned to remain in it (cf. Rev 3:17). 7187 Just as the Paraclete will later prosecute the world in defending the disciples (16:7–11), Jesus, who has entered the world for judgment (9:39), convicts the Pharisees. The present context may not be the first to have connected spiritual blindness (9:39–41) with the image of sheep (10:1–4). Many Jewish people may have known the story in which blind sheep who could not follow their master were judged and hurled into the abyss of fire (1 En. 90:26–27); because their judgment follows that of the fallen angels and pagans, the scene probably refers to the final judgment and damnation of the sinners from Israe1. 3. The Shepherd and the Thieves (10:1–10) The Pharisees have excluded the healed man from their synagogue community, as if they have the authority to decide who does and who does not belong to the covenant people (9:34). 7188 In response, Jesus defends the healed man and convicts the Pharisees (9:39–41). In 10:1–18, which assumes the biblical image of sheep as God " s people, he turns to the question of the true and false owners of the sheep, showing that he is the shepherd (probably a divine allusion from Ezek 34 ) and they the false shepherds of Ezek 34 . Shepherds had to battle thieves, robbers and wolves for the sheep " s safety; in this Gospel, Jesus» shepherdly defense of the blind man against his opponents, the «thieves,» would therefore eventuate in his death at their hands (10:15). For the sake of treating material in greater detail in the commentary, we have divided 10:1–18 into a discussion on the shepherd and the thieves (true and false owners) in 10:1–10 and a discussion of the true shepherd " s sacrifice (10:11–18, which briefly contrasts the owner with mere hirelings). 3A. The Shepherd/Door Parables |
| 86 . If a man " s heart does not condemn him ( cf . 1 John 3: 21) for having rejected a commandment of God, or for negligence, or for accepting a hostile thought, then he is pure in heart and worthy to hear Christ say to him: ‘Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God’ (Matt. 5: 8). 87 . Let us try to use our intelligence in training our senses, especially the eyes, the ears and the tongue, not allowing them to see, hear and speak in an impassioned way, but only to our profit. For nothing can more easily slip into sin than these organs, when they are not trained by the intelligence. Again, there is nothing more apt for keeping them safe than the intelligence, which guides and regulates them and leads them towards what is necessary and what it wishes. For when they are rebellious, the sense of smell becomes effeminate, the sense of touch becomes indiscriminate, and innumerable passions come swarming in. But when they are subordinate to the intelligence, there is deep peace and settled calm in the whole person. 88 . The fragrance of a costly aromatic oil, even diough kept in a vessel, pervades the atmosphere of the whole house, and gives pleasure not only to those near it but also to others in the vicinity; similarly the fragrance of a holy soul, beloved of God, when given out through all the senses of the body, conveys to those who perceive it the holiness that lies within. When in the presence of one whose tongue utters nothing harsh and discordant, but only what is a blessing and benefit for those who listen, whose eyes are humble, whose ears do not listen to improper songs or words, who moves discreetly and whose face is not dissolute with laughter but rather disposed to tears and mourning, which of us will not feel that such a soul is filled with the fragrance of holiness? Thus the Saviour says: ‘Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven’ (Matt. 5: 16). 89 . What Christ our Godcalled the ‘narrow way’ (Matt. 7: 14), He also called an ‘easy yoke’ and ‘light burden’ (Matt. 11 : 30). How could He equate these things when they seem to be contraries? For our nature, certainly, this path is harsh and steep, but those who pursue it wholeheartedly and with good hope, and who aspire after holiness, find it attractive and full of delight, for it brings them pleasure, not affliction. Hence they eagerly follow the narrow and painful way, greatly preferring it to that which is broad and spacious. Listen to St Luke, who tells us how the apostles, after being beaten, departed from the presence of the council rejoicing ( cf . Acts 5: 41), even though this is not the natural effect of a beating. For scourges normally cause, not pleasure and joy, but pain and suffering. Yet if, because of Christ, they resulted in joy, what wonder is it if other forms of bodily hardship and ill-treatment have, because of Him, the same effect? |
| In claiming that they are born from one Father, even God, they echo a long line of biblical and Jewish tradition. 6844 In the context of the Fourth Gospel, however, their claim to be born from God is certainly ironic: they accuse Jesus of blasphemy for making the same claim (5:18; 10:36), and the informed reader understands that those who lack the Spirit have not been born from God (3:1–8). Just as epideictic rhetorical practice invited one to stress onés subjects positive origins, 6845 one could also deride another by ridiculing his low birth (e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.41). 6846 The claim not to be born from sexual immorality (8:41) 6847 is thus a claim that they are born from the source they have always claimed, rather than being the product of a secret adulterous union. Some scholars think that they are throwing in Jesus» face charges of his own illegitimacy, 6848 in view of later traditions in which Jesus was illegitimate. 6849 This suggestion is possible; one born illegitimately (or whose paternity at least could be challenged) could be ridiculed for this. 6850 But for several reasons the validity of this suggestion remains at best unclear: 6851 first, it is not clear that such charges were sufficiently widespread by the end of the first century to be assumed by John " s audience or that of his tradition (though this is possible). 6852 Second, because Jesus» interlocutors in the story world here, like most of his interlocutors in the Gospel, interpret him too literally, they may take his charge as implying that they do in fact stem from an adulterous union. 6853 Alternatively, they could understand «fornication» in its spiritual sense referring to idolatry 6854 (although this too is unclear). 6855 Most importantly against the view that they are charging Jesus with illegitimacy, in this context his dialogue partners remain on the defensive; they do not begin to accuse him until 8:48. Had they been born from God (3:3–6), they would undoubtedly love one who came forth from God (8:42; cf. |
| In the Synoptic tradition and probably the broader passion tradition, Jesus is too weak to carry his cross, and it is carried by Simon of Cyrene. 10082 Given the unlikehilood that the soldiers would simply show mercy to a condemned prisoner, scholars are probably correct to suppose that Jesus was too weak to carry the cross and that his executioners preferred to have him alive on the cross than dead on the way. 10083 Since crucifixion sometimes lasted days (Josephus Life 420–421), the quickness of Jesus» death (multiply attested, Mark 15:44 ; John 19:31 ) reinforces the notion that Jesus was already quite weak. 10084 In such circumstances, that the soldiers would have drafted a bystander is not improbable; 10085 one would not expect them to carry the beam themselves if they could «impress» another into service. 10086 That the Synoptic report is undoubtedly historical does not render impossible a historical basis for John " s account: it is in fact most likely that the soldiers would have sought to make Jesus carry his own cross at the beginning, following standard custom, until it became clear that he could not continue to do so. But merely reporting (or inferring) those initial steps is hardly John " s point; by emphasizing Jesus» carrying his own cross, he emphasizes Jesus» continuing control of his passion. Just as condemned criminals must bear their own instrument of death, Jesus chose and controlled his death. 10087 As Drury puts it, in lohn Jesus bears his own cross «as befits the one who alone can bear the sin of the world» (1:29). 10088 1B. Golgotha (19:17b) Golgotha (19:17) was undoubtedly near the site of the Holy Sepulchre; that traditional location was outside the city walls but only roughly a thousand feet north-northeast of Herod " s palace, where Pilate was staying. 10089 The traditional Protestant «Garden Tomb» is a substantially later site and cannot represent the site of Jesus» burial; 10090 by contrast, the Catholic Holy Sepulcher and tombs in its vicinity date to the right period. 10091 The tradition of the latter vicinity is as early as the second century (when Hadrian erected a pagan temple there; he defiled many Jewish holy sites in this manner) 10092 and probably earlier. Good evidence exists, in fact, that this site dates to within the first two decades after the resurrection. This is because (1) Christian tradition is unanimous that Jesus was buried outside the city walls and no one would make up a site inside (cf. Heb 13:12; John 19:41 ); (2) Jewish custom made it common knowledge that burials would be outside the city walls; 10093 (3) the traditional vicinity of the Holy Sepulchre is inside Jerusalem " s walls; (4) Agrippa I expanded the walls of Jerusalem sometime in the 40s C.E. 10094 |
| 95 The rest of this section is fairly closely dependent on Nemesius, On human nature 42 (Morani 1987 , 120, I. 25–121, I. 6) 96 For this argument for the unmoved mover, see Aristotle, Physics VIII.5, Metaphysics F.8. 97 ‘Constituent powers’ (systatikai dynameis): relating to essence or being as accidents to substance. See Gersh (1978), 247, n. 205. 98 Maximus sees diastoli as moving down the branches of the ‘Tree of Porphyry’ and systoli as moving up it. The ‘Tree of Porphyry’, taken from Porphyry’s Introduction to Aristotle’s Categories, represents the various universals as an interrelated structure – a kind of ‘tree’ – with the more specific universals as branches of the more general universals. 99 Cf. John Damascene, Exposition of the Faith 13. 100 This introduces a borrowing from Nemesius, On human nature 3 (Morani 1987 , 41–2), also cited by John Damascene, Exposition of the Faith 13 (Kotter 1973 , 37). This definition of place ultimately derives from Aristotle, Physics IV.4. 101 Maximus here and elsewhere (e.g. in sections 5 and 40) seems to use the third person singular imperfect of ‘to be’ (en) in an absolute way to mean ‘exists eternally’. I do not think this is a Neoplatonic usage– Plotinus regards eternity (let alone the One) as being beyond past and future tense, and characterized by an absolute use of the present tense (see Enneads III.7.3.34–6). It is, perhaps, a Christian usage, derived from John 1:1 (En archei en ho logos): Cyril of Alexandria, in his Commentary on St John’s Gospel, comments that ‘Used of God, the word “was” introduces the meaning of his absolute eternity, his being older than any temporal beginning, and removes the thought that he might be made’ (Book 1, c.7, on John 1 :6f.: Pusey 1872 , I.91, II. 5–8). It is also found in the scholia on the Corpus Areopagiticum, ascribed to Maximus (many of which are, however, by John of Scythopolis): on Divine Names 5.8 (which explains how tenses apply to God), we read: ‘“He was”, and what is understood to be included in this, agrees with nothing else than God, because “he was”, considered as anterior to every beginning’ (PG 4. 328A8–11), which is very close to Cyril, but not actually a citation: see also 316BC where the use of en is justified specifically in relation to John 1:1 , though it is not explained there what it means. |
| 5578 . Although it is important to affirm again the uncertainty of our knowledge of many Samaritan beliefs in this period, it may be relevant that Samaritans apparently expected the Taheb to be a sort of teacher, as in 4:25. 5579 Some later Jewish rabbis, who turned even Elijah into a halakist, 5580 also expected the messiah to explain the nature of God " s redemption when he would come. 5581 It may be significant that her term for «announce» (ναγγλλω) is concentrated in Isaiah, where it often applies to the proclamation of redemption (e.g., Isa 52:5). 5582 Jesus then reveals his identity to the woman: «I, the one speaking with you, am he» (4:26). This is the climax to which the narrative has been building; one may compare accounts of disguised heroes listening to others longing for their coming and finally revealing themselves to those who awaited them. 5583 Though even Mark may restrict the Messianic Secret primarily to Israel ( Mark 5:19 ), the nature of Jesus» revelation to the woman is extraordinary and contrasts starkly with his veiled allusions to Nicodemus. Jesus» particular words, γ εμι, are naturally construed to mean, «I am (he),» as they normally would in such a dialogue (e.g., 9:9); 5584 but given the more explicitly christological use of γ εμι in John " s discourses elsewhere, we may suspect that we have here another double entendre pointing to a deeper identity than the Taheb (see 8:58; cf. 6:20; 8:28; 18:5). 5585 The entire phrase is quite close to the LXX of Isa 52:6, where God is speaking: γ εμι αυτς λαλν. 5586 8Β. The Disciples Return (4:27) When the disciples find Jesus speaking with a woman, they are amazed (4:27). 5587 As noted above (comment on 4:7), some Jewish sages had warned against speaking with women in public, and society was still more suspicious of private conversations. In the Greek world as well, philosophers and moralists who associated with women drew criticism. 5588 Some virtuous men of the remote past were even thought to have divorced their wives for having been seen speaking with a man, especially if his reputation was questionable. 5589 Yet if the criterion of dissimilarity establishes anything, one matter it would establish is that women did in fact travel with Jesus ( Mark 15:40–41 ; Luke 8:2–3). The Gospels choose not to report the scandal this practice may have caused in more conservative circles of sages. |
|
|
