| Another text, however, has received some (though less) attention in this connection, namely Gen 22:2 . 4138 The differences between this text and the Markan acclamation are considerably less pronounced. Although γαπητς could conceivably reflect a variant of κλεκτς (cf. Luke 9:35; other manuscripts of John 1:34 ), 4139 in the LXX it sometimes is used to translate yahid (an only son), including in Gen 22 , 4140 where it adds to the pathos of God " s call to a father to sacrifice His son; for Mark, in which Jesus» Sonship is defined in terms of the cross (14:36; 15:39), this makes good sense. That the Fourth Gospel would draw on such a tradition also makes sense, given the prevalence of the «only, that is, beloved» son motif of 1:14,18. New Disciples (1:35–42) The Baptist " s general testimony to the reader (1:29–34) gives way to a specific testimony to his disciples (1:35–36), who trust his witness (contrast 1:19–28) and experience Jesus for themselves (1:37–39; cf. 3:25–30). These disciples in turn become witnesses themselves (1:40–42). John weaves his sources into a theology of witness here, and emphasizes that even those who tentatively accept another " s witness must also experience Jesus for themselves to be fully convinced (1:39,46). On 1:36, see comment on 1:29. 1. Historical Plausibility In contrast to the previous paragraphs of the Fourth Gospel, we lack corroboration from the Synoptic accounts here (a matter which seems not to trouble the writer, in whose day perhaps numerous other sources besides the Synoptics and his own eyewitness traditions were extant; cf. already Luke 1:1). 4141 Although the Fourth Gospel is well aware of the historical tradition of the Twelve (6), 4142 he shows no interest in recounting the occasion of their call ( Mark 3:13–19 ; Matt 10:1–4; Luke 6:12–16) or the Synoptic call stories of the fishermen ( Mark 1:16–20 ; Matt 4:18–22; Luke 5:1–11; although the writer is well aware that some are fishermen and may know the Lukan tradition– John 21:3–6 ). The readiness of those disciples to abandon their livelihoods on the occasion depicted in Markan tradition (or to lend Jesus use of their boat in Luke) may actually make more sense historically if they had encountered Jesus on a prior occasion, as this narrative in John would suggest. 4143 |
| Peter certainly remains one of the most prominent disciples throughout the Fourth Gospel, as in the other gospels. Given the model for gospel genre found in Matthew and Luke, one most naturally expects report of a commission at the end of the Gospel (which could be and is, to a significant degree, fulfilled in 20but which could also be developed further). Even here Jesus is correcting as well as encouraging Peter (especially if the three questions recall the three denials, 13:38). 10931 The passage is consistent with, but develops, the role of Peter found earlier in the Gospe1. It also may provide a model for other church leaders (cf. 1Pet 5:1–2 ). 2. The Demand of Love Loving Jesus demands fulfilling his commands (14:15), particularly the command to love one another as Jesus did (13:34); in Peter " s case, this general call includes a specific command to care for Jesus» sheep, for whom Jesus cares. The appointed undershepherds of the old covenant scattered when they saw a wolf coming (10:12–13), but Peter was to care for the sheep as Jesus did, ultimately to the point of offering his life (21:18–19, 22), as he had once promised he would (13:36–37). As noted above, Peter is given three opportunities to affirm his love for Jesus (21:15–17)–possibly three in number to balance Peter " s three denials (13:38). Peter was «grieved» by the Lord " s questions (21:17)–a strong term John elsewhere uses of the disciples» sorrow over Jesus» death (16:20). He still felt loyalty for Jesus; but Jesus demands a love that is demonstrated by obedience (14:15), which Peter " s recent behavior failed to demonstrate (18:25–27). Peter is certain that he remains faithful to Jesus–despite his recent lapse in such readily promised fidelity (13:37–38)–and that Jesus must know this, for he knows «all things» (21:17; cf. 16:30; 18:4). That Jesus» knowledge has already led him to refuse to trust untrustworthy believers (2:23–25) might lead the first-time reader– and perhaps Peter–to doubt whether Peter will do any better on this commitment than he did in his first assurance that he would die for Jesus (13:37). Yet Jesus was merely testing and confirming him, for, as Jesus accurately predicted Peter " s betrayal (13:38), he also predicts here that Peter will eventually die for Jesus (21:18). |
| 3255 E.g., Sophocles Searchers 212–215 (Sei. Pap. 3:44–45); Euripides Antiope 69–71; Pirithous 22–24 (Sei. Pap. 3:124–125); Virgil Aen. 1.28; Ovid Metam. 2.714–747; 3.1–2, 260–261; 4.234–244; 5.391–408; 10.155–219; 14.765–771; Achilles Tatius 1.5.5–7; Apuleius Metam. 6.22; Apollodorus 3.8.2. On very rare occasions a mortal escaped, outwitting the deity (Apollonius of Rhodes 2.946–954). 3257 E.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.244–246,275; Athenagoras 20–22; Theophilus 1.9; Ps.-Clem. 15.1–19.3. 3258 E.g., Euripides Bacch. 94–98; Appian R.H 12.15.101; Ovid Metam. 3.261–272, 280–309; 4.416–530. 3259 E.g., Euripides Hipp. 1–28,1400–1403 (because deities desire honor, Hipp. 8); Apollonius of Rhodes 3.64–65. 3263 E.g., Ovid Tristia 1.2.4–5. Even if Homer authored both the Iliad and the Odyssey, it remains noteworthy that the former portrays a much less harmonious pantheon; later Roman sources (e.g., the Aeneid) also portray their deities more favorably than the Iliad. 3264 Odysseus in Euripides Cyc1. 606–607. In prayer, pagans often piled up as many names of the deity they were entreating as possible (e.g., Homer I1. 1.37–38, 451–452; 2.412; PGM 4.2916–2927; Cleanthes» Hymn to Zeus; more restrained, ILS 190) and reminded a deity of favors owed, seeking an answer on contractual grounds, as many ancient texts attest (e.g., Homer Il. 1.39–41; 10.291–294; Od. 1.61–62,66–67; 4.762–764; 17.240–242; Apollonius of Rhodes 1.417–419; Virgil Aen. 12.778). 3265 E.g., Pliny Nat. 2.5.17; Seneca Dia1. 7.26.6; Nat. 2.44.1–2.45.1; Maximus of Tyre Or. 5.1; 35.1. 3268 Cf., e.g., Diogenes Laertius 7.1.134, 148; Seneca Nat. 1.pref.13. Pantheism was also more widespread (cf. Virgil Georg. 4.221–222, 225; Aeschylus frg. 34, from Clement of Alexandria Stromata 5.14, p. 718; Aeschylus LCL 2adds Philodemus On Piety 22). 3270 Frequently, e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 2.1.25; cf. the identification also in Ps-Aristotle De mundo (according to Grant, Gods, 78). 3271 E.g., Chariton 3.3.16; Plutarch Isis 1, Mor. 351DE; T. T. 8.2.4, Mor. 720A. Cf. Plato Alcib. 1.124C: Socrates spoke of his guardian (επτροπος) as θες. |
| 6380 " Abot R.Nat. 40 A. 6381 E.g., Hesiod Op. 719–721; Pindar Pyth. 2.76; Horace Sat. 1.4.81–82; Martial Epigr. 3.28; Dio Chrysostom Or. 37.32–33; Marcus Aurelius 6.30.2; Josephus Ant. 13.294–295; 16.81; War 1.77,443; Philo Abraham 20; Spec. Laws 4.59–60; Sib. Or. 1.178; T. Ab. 12:6–7 Β; 1QS 7.15–16; 4Q525 frg. 2, co1. 2.1; Sipre Deut. 1.8.2–3; 275.1.1; " Abot R. Nat. 9,40A; 16, §36 B; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:2; b. c Abod. Zar. 3b; c Arak. 15a; 16a; Pesah. 118a; Sanh. 103a; Ta c an. 7b; p. Péah 1:1; Tg. Ps.-Jon. on Gen 1:16 ; Tg. Neof. 1 on Lev 19:18 ; Tg. Qoh. on 10:11. 6382 The term παρρησα used here and in 7can also apply to boldness in witness (Acts 4:13,29, 31; 28:31; 2Cor 3:12 ; Eph 6:19 ). 6383 In general, see our introduction; on this passage, cf., e.g., Haenchen, John, 2:7–8. 6384 Brown, John, 1:307. 6385 Meeks, Prophet-King, 45–46, following Glasson. 6386 " Abot R. Nat. 38A; b. Pesah. 26a; cf. Matt 21:23; 24:1; Acts 2:46; more sources in Liefeld, «Preacher,» 191; Safrai, «Temple,» 905. Later tradition that apostates were unwelcome to bring offerings (Tg. Ps.-J. on Lev 1:2 ), however, may reflect the sort of antipathy some would feel if Jesus was «leading astray» the people (7:12). 6387 An uneducated peasant might be a more credible prophet on the popular level (Aune, Prophecy, 136, on Joshua ben Anania, Josephus War 6.301), but not for the elite (elites might even wrongly think someone unlearned on the basis of unkempt appearance; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.24.529). An honest commoner was of course better than a dishonest rhetor (Aeschines Timarchus 31); but because encomium biography often praised education, this deficiency would be viewed as unusual (Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 152–53, citing Menander Rhetor Treatise 2.371.17–372.2). Although some rhetoricians refused to speak extemporaneously (Plutarch Demosthenes 8.3–4; 9.3), extemporaneous speaking was common (see, e.g., Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 103), so this is not the basis for the crowd " s surprise. |
| 1482 E.g., Virgil Aen. 6.585–594; earlier for Macedonians, Arrian Alex. 4.11.1–9; 4.12.1. Even Greeks regarded neglect of onés mortality as hubris (Sophocles Ajax 758–779). 1483 See P. Pet. 3.43 (2), co1. 3.11–12 (Ptolemies); Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 1.27–28; Dio Chrysostom Or. 32.26. Scholars regularly refer to this phenomenon (cf., e.g., Brown, «Kingship»; Jones, Chrysostom, 105; Ramsay, Luke, 139; Knox, Gentiles, 11; Conzelmann, Theology, 11; Lohse, Environment, 216–18); some parallels exist even between ancient Egyptian and Roman divine kingship (Ockinga, «Divinity»). 1484 Even early in his reign people had been calling him δεσπτης and θες (Dio Cassius 67.13.4), and Rome had long been sensitive concerning secret gatherings unsanctioned by the state, especially in Rome itself (Livy 39.15.11; 39.18.9). 1485 The early literature is colored by distaste for Domitians evil temperament and deeds (Pliny Ep. 9.13.2; Tacitus Hist. 4.86; Plutarch Mor. 522E; Suetonius Titus 9), but it may well have been earned. 1488 Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 7–8; Aulus Gellius 15.11.3–5; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.488; cf. Jones, Chrysostom, 45; Koester, Introduction, 1:316. 1489 See Eusebius Hist. ecc1. 3.17; Koester, Introduction, 1:316; Reicke, Era, 293–302; Ramsay, Churches, 91; Parkes, Conflict, 87. It is unclear whether by «Jewish ways» (LCL) and «atheism» Dio Cassius 67.14.1–2 includes Christians, but the policies described in Pliny " s correspondence with Trajan (Ep. 10.96–97; cf. Fishwick, «Pliny») were no doubt instituted under Domitian (Ramsay, Empire, 212–13, 259–61; pace Downing, «Prosecutions»). Pliny himself was usually more humane (cf. Bell, «Pliny»). 1490 Lohse, Environment, 83. Domitian apparently disliked Judaism (Suetonius Dom. 12; Ramsay, Church, 268, 355), despite its official exemption from emperor worship (Goppelt, Times, 107; Reicke, Era, 284–86). 1492 Klauck, «Sendschreiben,» attributes the persecution not to Domitian per se but to pagan urban society as a whole. Significantly, compromise with the world is a greater danger than persecution for most of the seven churches; see Talbert, Apocalypse, 25; Smith, «Apocalypse»; Giesen, «Ermutigung.» But three of the churches faced persecution; both problems are in view (Keener, Revelation, 37–39; Beale, Revelation, 28–33). |
| 7852 Riley, Fruits, 29, notes that an embryo is already growing in the wheat seed as it falls; usually after two days in moist soil, it breaks through the seed coating. 7853 Barrett, John, 423, suggests that though the article is generic, it might allude to Christ as the specific grain; but this grammatical explanation is not likely. 7857 Cf. 1 En. 108:10; 2 Bar. 51:15–16; m. «Abot 4:17; »Abot R. Nat. 32, §71B; b. Tamid 32a; Lev. Rab. 3:1; Deut. Rab. 11:10; Ecc1. Rab. 4:6, §1; Daube, Judaism, 137. Boring et a1., Commentary, 106, suggest that the summons of the analogous Matt 16resembles the typical prebattle speech of generals: risking life in battle more often than not yields its preservation (Tyrtaeus frg. 8.11–13). 7860 E.g., the oath to Augustus and his descendants, 3 B.C.E., in IGRR 3.137; OGIS 532; ILS 8781 (Sherk, Empire, 31); or to Gaius, 37 C.E., in CIL 2.172; ILS 190 (Sherk, Empire, 78). 7862 Xenophon Anab. 3.2.39; also Boring et al, Commentary, 106, citing Tyrtaeus frg. 8.11–13 (seventh century C.E.) and Ps.-Menander. See Publilius Syrus 242. 7863 E.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.212; 1.191; 2.218–219,233–235. Sanders, Judaism, 239, cites Josephus War 2.169–174; Ant. 15.248; 18.262; Ag. Ap. 2.227–228; Philo Embassy 192; cf. Dio Cassius 66.6.3. 7865 On the two ways in ancient literature, Seneca Ep. Luci1. 8.3; 27.4; Diogenes Ep. 30; Plutarch Demosthenes 26.5; Deut 30:15 ; Ps 1 ; 4Q473 frg. 1 (developing Deut 11:26–28 ; probably also 4Q185 frg. 1–2, co1. 2, lines 1–4); m. «Abot 2:9; T. Ash. 1:3, 5; Ecc1. Rab. 1:14, §1; Lev. Rab. 30:2; Deut. Rab. 4–3;SongRab. 1:9, §2; Matt 7:13–14; Luke 13:24; Did. 1.1–6.2; Barn. 18.1–21.9; cf. the two roads after death in Virgil Aen. 6.540–543; Cicero Tusc. 1.30.72; 4 Ezra 7:3–16, 60–61; 8:1–3; T. Ab. 11:2–11A; 8:4–16B; »Abot R. Nat. 25A; b. Ber. 28b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 27:2; Gen. Rab. 100:2. 7866 Coulot, «Quelqúun,» provides arguments that 12probably stems from Jesus. On serving as following, persevering, and discipleship here, see Cachia, «Servant.» |
| Craig S. Keener Jerusalem and its King. 12:12–50 ONCE JESUS ARRIVES IN JERUSALEM (12:12–19), people respond to him in various ways. The Gentiles seek him (12:20–22), provoking his remark that the time for his death had come (12:23–33). His own people, however, whose king he is (12:13–15), remained blind (12:37–43; cf. 9:39–41), unable to see Jesus» glory which Isaiah saw, which is the light (Jesus» discussion of which frames the comment on their blindness–12:34–36,44–50). Yet Jesus remained God " s agent and standard for judgment (12:44–50). The Arrival of Zion " s King (12:12–19) Earlier passages had introduced Jesus as rightful king of Israel (1:49), but also warned that his «own» as a whole did not receive him (1:11; or that they misunderstood his kingship–6:15; cf. 18:36–37). Both themes are present here, but John is careful to emphasize that his people as a whole would have been more open to him (12:17–18), but that it was the leaders who were responsible for their people being led wrongly (12:19). 1. Authenticity of the Core Tradition That someone would go out to meet with respect an important teacher (11:20), signs worker (12:18) or king (12:13) is not unlikely (see comment on 11:20); that crowds already present loudly welcomed many incoming pilgrims is virtually certain. Yet because Jesus» claim to kingship is often doubted, some are doubtful that the triumphal entry happened. If people hailed Jesus as king, why did the Romans not intervene suddenly? But the Gospels present the grandness of the event in the light of their theology about Jesus» identity; most of the accounts do not require us to suppose an originally large-scale notice. 7803 In the bustle of a city milling with pilgrims, more of whom were arriving throughout the day, the Romans need not have noticed this relatively obscure event. 7804 The Roman garrison was concentrated on the Temple Mount, and Jesus was hardly the only Passover pilgrim welcomed by the crowds already present. More importantly, leaders of the municipal aristocracy, normally charged with keeping peace for the Romans, were also concentrated on the Temple Mount at this season (being mainly priests) and had they been notified of the entry in time to stop it–which assumes a much longer period of acclamation than is likely–they preferred not to act in front of the crowd anyway ( Mark 11:32; 14:2 ). In John the leaders, who are now Pharisees, continue to be concerned about the opinions of the crowd (12:19). |
| 4309 See the thesis of Keener, «Pneumatology»; idem, «Knowledge.» 4310 Blackburn, «ΑΝΔΡΕΣ,» 193; for philosophers, see Musonius Rufus frg. 48, p. 140.17–19; in Jewish texts, e.g., Sir 48:24 ; Mek. Sir. 7.17–18 (Lauterbach, 2:55); t. Pisha 2:15. 4311 The polemical contrast with the accusers is particularly evident in the term " s association with true testimony (5:31; 8:13, 14, 16, 17; 10:41; 19:35; 21:24) and with the Father " s character and witness (3:33; 5:32; 7:28; 8:26; 17:3). The adjective and its cognates could be applied to other ethnic groups (e.g., αληθινο Egyptians were recognizable by their speech; P. Giess. 40, co1. 2, line 27). 4312 See Whitacre, Polemic, 81, 210–11 n. 190; Pancaro, «Israel,» 398; idem, Law, 288–304; Collins, Written, 11–14; on «the Jews,» see our introduction, pp. 214–28. There is little to commend the suggestion of Painter, «Church,» 360, that the language suggests nationalistic expectations, which are then confirmed in «King of Israel» in 1:49. 4313 Meeks, " Jew,» 181. 4314 Cf. Trudinger, «Israelite.» Hanson, Gospel 37, finds Bethel allusions as early as 1:30–31, 33 (to Gen 28:16 ), but this is dubious. 4315 E.g., Let. Arts. 246; T. Iss. 1:12. 4316 Augustine Tract. Ev. Jo. 7.21.1 thinks it symbolizes sin and death (based on fig leaves in Gen 3:7 ); Fenske, «Feigenbaum,» sees an allusion to the Jewish people (based on Mark 11:12–25 and Nathanael as a «true Israelite»). 4317 Hunter, John, 27; Boice, Witness, 108; Hanson, Gospel, 39; before Strack-Billerbeck, Westcott, John, 27, cited p. Ber. 2:8. Pancaro, Law, 304; Hoskyns, Gospel, 182; Schnackenburg, John, 1:317, mention but do not endorse this solution. For studying Torah under or among trees, see, e.g., Sipra Behuq. pq. 7.268.2.3; p. Ber. 2:7, §2; Hag. 2:1, §4; Gen. Rab. 62(two accounts, one purportedly Tannaitic); Eccl Rab. 5:11, §2; cf. Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5(following Braudel interpretation, 102). 4318 See the partial list in Safrai, «Education,» 965. 4319 E.g., Plutarch Rom. 4.1; b. Ta c an. 24a. |
| 4581 John frequently mentions signs (2:11,18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2,14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:4,41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 20:30), sometimes in connection with seeing and believing (2:11, 23; 4:48; 6:30; 7:31; 11:15,45,47; 12:37). 4582 When Israel saw how God destroyed the Egyptians, they «believed» both the Lord and his servant Moses (Exod 14:31); this text probably also informs John " s Christology of one greater than Moses ( John 14:1 ). As mentioned above (see comment on 2:9), the passage may also suggest implications for discipleship in John " s situation outside the narrative world. If the Judean elite and local synagogue authorities represent the Fourth Gospel " s primary opposition (see introduction, ch. 5), it may not be surprising that, apart from the disciples, only the servants knew the source of the wine (2:9). Only those without power genuinely recognized the value of the signs attesting Jesus. 4583 The Old and New Temples (2:12–22) By setting aside the ritual purpose for which the waterpots were designated (2:6), Jesus began a road of conflict that would lead to his final «hour» of death (2:4). The next pericope expounds those implications for the passion more fully: Jesus» body must be destroyed before his resurrection, a sign and an event that will supersede the old temple order. 4584 Both Scripture and Jesus» teaching (2:17, 22) confirmed this truth before it happened (13:19; 14:29); the Spirit would later cause the believers to understand Jesus» warning in retrospect (14:29). 4585 Unlike the Synoptic accounts of Jesus» act in the temple, John emphasizes the contrasting responses of Jesus» opponents and disciples. 4586 Jesus» dialogue with Nicodemus will articulate even more explicitly this theme of new life replacing the old ways. 1. Transition (2:12) Technically, 2is a transitional paragraph between 2:1–11 and 2:13–22. It allows a geographical 4587 and chronological transition and provides necessary historical information about Jesus of Nazareth " s residence in Capernaum, explaining why tradition strongly identified him with both communities (cf. |
| 4584 Ellis, Genius, 47, and Smalley, John, 89, also emphasize the theme of replacement that connects 2:1–11 with 2:13–22. 4585 Ellis, Genius, 45, finds some common threads in the narrative, though they may be insufficient to establish his chiasmus: Jesus in Jerusalem at Pesach (2:13, 23–25); the disciples remember (2:14–17, 22); and Jesus will raise the temple they would destroy (2:18–21). 4587 Jesus presumably «descended» to Capernaum because, on the lake, it was lower in elevation than Cana (Barrett, John and Judaism, 37). 4588 E.g., Horsley, Galilee, 194. Evidence also exists for a Gentile (Roman) presence there; see Laughlin, «Capernaum»; Matt 8:5–12/Luke 7:1–10. 4589 See Herford, Christianity, 211; Osiek, «Community.» But Taylor, «Capernaum,» questions the strength of archaeological evidence for an explicitly Jewish-Christian presence before the fourth century C.E. 4592 That the disciples must also adopt Jesus» original household (cf. 19:26) might call Gentile Christians to continue to embrace Jesus» ethnic siblings, although its point may be more specific in familial terms. 4593 He might have «cleansed» it whenever he witnessed abuses (see Köstenberger, John, 76–78, who also notes the accounts» links to their respective contexts); but Jesus» freedom for long after challenging the establishment does not comport well with what we know of municipal elites. 4594 Origen Comm. Jo. 10.20–22; Wiles, Gospel, 15. Augustine, by contrast, argues for two cleansings (Cons. 2.67; Oden and Hall, Mark, 160–61)–as if historically the Sadducees would have allowed his survival during any subsequent visits to Jerusalem! 4599 Some associate the act with Sukkoth (Manson, Servant-Messiah, 78), but this is less probable. 4600 Though Martin Kahler described Mark as a «passion narrative with an extended introduction,» the title fits John no less (see Collins, Written, 87–93). 4603 Freyne, Galilee, 181. Horsley, Galilee, 144–46, challenges the contention that they made pilgrimage three times annually; but he certainly overstates the rarity of visits from Judeans and Galileans. |
|
|
