| The cry «Hosanna!» renders the Hebrew of Ps 118:25 , 7820 and similar Hebrew cries for salvation could address kings ( 2Sam 14:4; 2 Kgs 6:26); coupled with the branches (see below), this suggests that the crowds hoped for him as a king or national deliverer. 7821 Hence he is «king of Israel,» as Nathanael recognized (1:49). In John " s Gospel this royal expectation recalls 6:15, but on this occasion Jesus does not retreat, for his hour of enthronement on the cross is approaching. Ironically, the leaders of his people will claim no king but Caesar (19:15). 3. Scripture Fulfilled (12:14–16) The disciples did not recognize the allusion to Zech 9:9 7822 until after Jesus» death and resurrection (12:14–16), 7823 obvious as it may seem in retrospect. 7824 If extant later sources may reflect ideas circulating in the late first century, they suggest that this verse was understood messianically in early Judaism. 7825 Most ancient Mediterranean hearers would honor the image of a ruler who was merciful and kind to his enemies. 7826 John " s special touch is evident even in the details. It was not an unusual practice to abbreviate a narrative by omitting intermediaries, 7827 as Matthew seems to do on some occasions (Matt 8/Luke 7:3–4; Matt 9/ Mark 5:35 ); thus no one will be alarmed that Jesus himself «finds» the donkey (12:14), in contrast to the fuller version in the probably more widely circulated version of the passion week ( Mark 11:1–6 ). 7828 After all, even in that version, Jesus was ultimately responsible for locating the donkey ( Mark 11:2 ). But what is most theologically significant is that in John " s language Jesus finds the donkey–just as he gives the sop (13:26) and in other ways shows himself sovereign over the details of the Passion Narrative. That the disciples did not understand at first fits John " s version of the Messianic Secret. After Jesus» glorification, the Spirit would come (7:39) and cause the disciples to remember Jesus» message (14:26); his glorification thus allowed the disciples to recall Jesus» action and understand it in light of Scripture here (12:16). John had earlier offered a similar comment about the disciples after the resurrection remembering Jesus» costly zeal for the temple (2:22). The repetition suggests a key hermeneutical point for John: the biblical record and Jesus» ministry and glorification should be read in light of one another, led by the Spirit who continues his presence. 4. Immediate Responses to Jesus» Entry (12:17–19) |
| Jesus may have withdrawn from public baptisms at this point to avoid competing with John, and so weakening John " s position before the Pharisees. 5230 But the Fourth Gospel may emphasize Jesus» withdrawal for the same reason it emphasizes that his disciples baptized rather than he himself (4:2): it emphasizes that Jesus will baptize in the Holy Spirit (1:33), 5231 which is not yet possible in the story world (7:39). Of course, even the comment that Jesus did not himself baptize probably preserves early tradition; the Synoptics certainly provide no indication that he baptized. Further, it may have been common practice that the leader of the party did not baptize. 5232 But in the context of the Gospel " s whole water motif, pneumatology and Christology, John may de-emphasize Jesus» baptism after mentioning it to retain the emphasis on Jesus» greater baptism to come once he is glorified (cf. 3:5; 7:37–39). See further comments on 3:26. 3B. Samaria (4:4) A number of scholars have proposed a Samaritan or partly Samaritan context for the Fourth Gospe1. 5233 Although a fully Samaritan context is unlikely, a Galilean interest in the Samaritan mission is likely, given its successes (Acts 8:12–17,25); 5234 thus a Johannine interest in the subject is likely. (Some also suggest that the early Samaritan mission had proved controversial and required legitimation; 5235 while this observation may be true in the early period, it would probably not be relevant by John " s day.) Another cause for interest may be that Samaritans are among the closest parallels (excepting two stories in the Synoptic tradition) in Jesus» ministry to the interest of Gentile God-fearers which the Johannine community was still encountering in its day. Further, Samaritans would be known by at least some people outside Palestine, due to the Samaritan Diaspora. 5236 Both in Eretz Israel and in the Diaspora, Samaritans spoke Greek and were substantially hellenized 5237 (although also probably as orthodox as most Judeans; see comment below). Nevertheless, many Diaspora Christians would know little about Samaritans beyond what they found in the gospel traditions (hence cultural explanations such as 4:9); 5238 it may be noteworthy that the NT epistles never allude to them (although even such Gospel staples as Pharisees occur only rarely in relevant passages, e.g., Phil 3:5 ). This may suggest a genuinely Palestinian tradition. |
| 7052 In either case, the works are plainly from the Father (cf. 5:20, 36; 10:25, 32, 37; 14:10–11; 15:24); believers» opponents could not accuse them of diverting God " s glory. That one «must» perform Jesus» works during the light is Johannine language for divine necessity (3:7,14, 30; 4:4, 24; 10:16; 12:34; 20:9). That people could not work after nightfall because it had grown dark was common knowledge (applicable to battles and other activities; 7053 used as an image in 11:10; 12:35); obviously, modern lighting was not available. John applies this image figuratively, as he does light, darkness, and night elsewhere (e.g., 1:4–5; 3:2; 11:10; 12:35; 13:30); but whereas in 11:9–10 the emphasis lies on Jesus» obedience to the Father " s timing, here it lies on Jesus» power as the light to impart sight to the blind, both literally (9:6–7) and figuratively (9:39–41). Jesus parabolically demonstrates that he is the light of the world (9:5; see comment on 1:4), alluding to his announcement earlier that day (8:12), by healing the blind. 1C. Spittle (9:6) The use of spittle appears elsewhere in the Jesus tradition ( Mark 7:33 ), including for healing blindness ( Mark 8:23 ). Many ancient reports of cures mention the use of a curative drug, 7054 even when Asclepius appeared to suppliants in his temple in dreams. 7055 Spittle was sometimes used superstitiously, to avert an ill, 7056 and sometimes associated with curative powers. 7057 That Vespasian reportedly healed blindness with spittle (Tacitus Hist. 4.81; Suetonius Vesp. 7) 7058 may suggest that John contrasts Jesus with the Roman emperor (Vespasian " s son Domitian was then reigning); the account seems to have circulated widely. More likely, however, the stories about both Vespasian and Jesus draw on purportedly curative properties of spittle more widely known. Jewish tradition sometimes reports curing through spittle, 7059 though Jewish custom probably borrowed it from the more widespread ancient custom. 7060 Such usage would have rendered its symbolic effect more comprehensible. |
| 7571 . Miracle stories often include messengers sent to request a miracle worker " s coming. 7572 It seems to have been customary to report to a rabbi if someone close to him, such as his teacher, was ill, so that the rabbi could visit him. 7573 The message of Mary and Martha, however, is an implied request (11:3), as in 2:3; in both cases, Jesus fails to act immediately (2:4; 11:6). If Martha presses her request by her mention of «whatever» Jesus «asks» (11:22), she echoes Jesus» mother in 2:5. 7574 Such polite forms of insistence would have been intelligible in an ancient Mediterranean milieu (see comment on 1:37–39). In John 2 , Jesus does the sign secretly, so that only his disciples and the servants know (2:9, 11); in ch.ll, however, he does his sign even in front of those who will respond negatively (11:46)–because now his hour has come (2:4). The purpose of Lazarus " s sickness was not «for death» (προς θνατον, 11:4; applied figuratvely in 1 John 5for spiritual death). Instead, the purpose of the sickness is to provide opportunity for God to manifest his glory (11:4; cf. 11:40), 7575 as in 9:3; John " s teaching that suffering can provide the opportunity for divine intervention foreshadows the significance of Jesus» own death and resurrection. Lazarus " s sickness and raising also lead to and prefigure Jesus» death and resurrection. 7576 Of course, in John " s theology physical death could also bring God glory (12:23–24; 13:31; 21:19), just as Jesus» signs would (2:11). To the informed, repeated reader of this Gospel, the promise of Jesus» glorification through Lazarus " s death constitutes a double entendre: Jesus is glorified because Lazarus " s raising leads directly to Jesus» arrest and passion, by which he is «glorified» (12:23–24). Given the urgency of the request for a miracle worker, Jesus» delaying could appear to dishonor the family and trivialize its suffering; 7577 even if Lazarus would have died before his arrival, the family was counting on his rapid arriva1. |
| 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). |
| 10685 Hilhorst, «Wounds.» See Virgil Aen. 2.270–279; 6.446,494–499; Silius Italicus 13.825; cf. also Philostratus Hrk. 10.2 (where a spirit appears the same age as when he died). Thus one might amputate a corpsés extremities so its ghost could not exact vengeance (Aeschylus Cho. 439). 10686 Plutarch Caesar 37.3. 10687 Tertullian Against Marcion 4.40, used Jesus promising his body as bread against the docetic view of Jesus» body as a phantom; cf. Luke 24:39. 10688 E.g., Yamauchi, «Crucifixion,» 2. 10689 Yohanan " s skeleton from Givat ha-Mivtar confirms that legs were occasionally nailed in this period, as in early Athens (Stanton, Gospel Truth, 119; Brown, John, 2:1022; Brown, Death, 950–51; cf. Ps 22:16 ); piercing of feet was shameful even for a corpse (Homer I1. 22.396–397). 10690 E.g., Seneca Apoco1. 13, applied to Claudius " s arrival in the realm of Hades because he favored Eastern cults. 10691 Menander Rhetor 2.3,385.7–8 (i.e., the rhetor greeting a city in which he arrives or an official arriving there). 10692 E.g„ 1QM 17.7; Tob 13:10, 13–14; Jub. 23:30; 1 En. 5:7; 25:6; 47:4; 103:3; Pss. So1. 11:3; Sib. Or. 3.619; 2 Bar. 14:13; see comment on John 3:29 . 10693 E.g., b. Yoma 4b; Lev. Rab. 16(purportedly from Ben Azzai); Pesiq. Rab. 21:2/3; 51:4; Urbach, Sages, 1:390–92; see comment on John 15:11 . 10694 See Hubbard, Redaction. 10695 On the agreement of diverse sources concerning the sending and mission, cf. Guillet, «Récits.» That John substitutes a Gentile mission for an earlier Jewish one is nowhere implied (see Martyn, «Mission»). 10696 See, e.g., Mek. Pisha 1.150–153; on the Spirit and succession, see more fully the comment on 14:16. 10697 Lenski, John, 1368–69, suggests that they will dispense Christ " s peace. 10698 E.g., Laurin, John, 261; Bengel, Gnomen, 491. 10699 See our introduction, pp. 310–17; cf. also Barrett, John, 569. 10700 Stott, «Commission,» 5, borrows the anachronistic language of «a trinitarian framework» but accurately captures the relationships in their Johannine framework. |
| 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 . |
| 432 The Gospel is more advanced than Mark (Burridge, «Gospels and Acts,» 530), though for a professional orator this would not have been a significant claim. 434 See, e.g., Rhet. Alex. 25.1435a.32–1435b.24 (esp. 1435b.7–16, 19–22); Photius Bibliotheca 166.109a (on Antonius Diogenes Thüle); see further Rowe, «Style,» 123–24; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 84 (citing Quintilian 8.2.22). 435 See Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 17; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 88 (citing Quintilian 9.2.65–95); cf. 2Pet 3:15–16 . Stamps, «Johannine Writings,» 620, cites as Johannine examples the abrupt shifts between 5and 6and between 14and 15:1. 436 Thielman, «Style of Fourth Gospel,» 175–77 (citing, e.g., Hermogenes, Issues 240.24–241.9; Diogenes Laertius 4.13–14; 9.6,16; Demetrius 2.101). 439 Maximus himself preferred clarity and simplicity (albeit in Atticist terms) except when pursuing such grandeur (Trapp, Maximus, xxxiv n. 64, cites as examples of the latter Or. 2.10; 10.9; 11.12; 21.7–8; 41.2). 440 Thielman, «Style of Fourth Gospel,» 173–75, cites Philo Worse 79; Heir A; Longinus Sub1. 9.3. Stamps, «Johannine Writings,» 620, notes asyndeton as a feature of Johannine sublimity (see comment below). 441 E.g., Thielman, «Style of Fourth Gospel,» 182 (cf. John " s use of solemnity, 177–78; emphasis and obscurity, 178–80). 442 Thielman, «Style of Fourth Gospel,» 172, cites John " s redundant use of pronouns, sayings (e.g., 1:15, 30; 4:29, 39; 13:16; 15:20), and on a broader compositional leve1. 443 Burridge, «Gospels and Acts,» 527. John frequently repeats favorite theological terms even though he often varies them with favorite synonyms (see comments on theological language in ch. 7 of the introduction). For the normal preference for stylistic variety, see, e.g., Rowe, «Style,» 155. 446 See Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 228 (citing esp. Demetrius 103,211); for examples of some forms of rhetorical repetition in John, see esp. comment on 6:38–39. 449 Cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 2,4; Menander Rhetor 2.4,393.21–22; 2.7,411.23–29; but cf. also 2.7,411.29–31. On this preference in Koine, cf. Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 84. |
| 5394 Occasionally pagans also suggested that mortals who rejected deities did so because they did not recognize who they were (e.g., Apollo to Daphne, albeit in erotic circumstances, in Ovid Metam. 1.514–515). 5395 Boers, Mountain, 166. Most interpreters through history have viewed her as a model for conversion, but Reformed commentators also typically portrayed her as insolently ridiculing Jesus (see Farmer, «Samaritan Woman»). But given some portrayals of bold flirtation in sources of this period, if the narrative is at all already headed in that direction (4:17), a somewhat more curious and playful banter might be in view (cf. also the widely coveted woman in dialogue with Socrates in Xenophon Mem. 3.9.18). 5402 Cf., e.g., Pesiq. Rab. 47:3, where God asks Job if he considered himself greater than Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Moses, or Aaron; the question assumes that any normal person recognizes that he or she is not. 5403 That Jesus made such claims is historically likely; cf. the Q material in Matt 12:41–42; Luke 11:31–32. 5404 Whitacre, Polemic, 89; Lightfoot, Gospel, 134. For John " s use of «greater,» see comment on 1:50. 5405 For 4:13, cf. perhaps Xenophon Oec. 7.40, where drawing water with a leaky jar was an old Greek figure for laboring in vain. 5406 E.g., Sipre Deut. 32.5.10; see comment on 1:17. Greeks and Romans spoke of wine as του δρου του Διονσου (Plutarch frg. 54, from Scholia on Hesiod Op. 368–369 in Plutarch LCL 15:146–47) and (sometimes coupled or contrasted, e.g., Euripides Bacch. 275–280) bread as the «gift of Ceres» (Ovid Metam. 11.122). Origen Comm. Jo. 13.26–39 thinks the point of this passage is that Jesus» water is greater than that of Scripture (allegorizing the well). 5407 E.g., m. " Abot 1:4, 11; 2:8; Mek. Vay. l:74ff.; see much more fully the comment on John 1:25–26 . Schnackenburg, John, 1:430, cites the late Yalqut Shim " oni 2.480 for Torah becoming a spring within a student. Greeks could compare oracular prophecy to streams of water (Plutarch Obso1. |
| 8076 Dunn, Baptism, 188. One may contrast interpretations in which the foot washing prefigures Christian baptism (Robinson, Studies, 166; cf. Sylvia Mary, Mysticism, 126–27; Moloney, «Reading»). 8078 Thomas, Footwashing, 126–85, argues that the Johannine community probably employed it as a religious rite. Early Christians retained it as part of baptism, and it persists among some German Pietists and some Anabaptists and Pentecostals today (Martin, «Footsteps,» 43), as well as in Catholic Holy Thursday rites (I owe this observation to Joseph Carey). 8079 Thomas, Footwashing, 42–44 (citing Homer II. 16.235; Od. 22.454–480; Strabo Geog. 7.328; Fabius Pictor De jure sacerdotis 16; Pliny Nat. 24.102). 8083 Carcopino, Life, 39–10. The saying in Lucian Demonax 4 also may correlate unwashed feet with ignorance (hence perhaps with lower-class status). 8084 The tradition that Jerusalem " s streets were swept daily (b. Pesah. 7a) may nostalgically exalt old Jerusalem (cf. tamer epideictic representations of cities such as Isocrates Panathenaicus; Panegyricus; Aelius Aristides Oration to Rome); Jerusalem is idealized as early as Utopian imagery in Let. Aris. 116 and, eschatologically, Tob 13:9–18; 5Q15 (see Licht, «Town Plan»). 8087 Aulus Gellius 1.9.8. On Greco-Roman foot washing for hygiene, see Thomas, Footwashing, 44–46; on Jewish foot washing for comfort, see 31–35. 8095 Gen. Rab. 60:8. A donkey owner had to wash a donkey " s feet (Epictetus Diatr. 1.19.5). Cf. Hierocles, p. 58.27–30=Stobaeus Eel 4.25.53 (Van der Horst, «Hierocles,» 157). 8096 Barrett, John, 440, cites Mek. Nez. 1 on Exod 21to argue that Jewish, unlike Gentile, slaves were exempted from such labor (also Beasley-Murray, John, 233); but cf. also comment on 1:27. 8099 See Thomas, Footwashing, 40–41. This may have been limited by some to Gentile slaves only (see note 48). 8103 It was less common in Greco-Roman thought, though not absent even there (see Lincoln, Ephesians, 235, citing Josephus War 4.494; Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.10; 3.24.56; see esp. Good, King). |
|
|
