| 9328 Within the story world, however, the disciples understand his meaning no more than they understood the passion predictions in the Synoptic Gospels. They wished to ask him the meaning of his words (16:17–18) but did not, presumably because their previous inquiries had merely exposed their ignorance (13:36–38; 14:5–7, 8–9; cf. perhaps 14:22–23). 9329 Although disciples of teachers were supposed to learn partly by asking questions, 9330 novices were supposed to learn quietly. 9331 John portrays the disciples as a foil for Jesus, hence novices in his presence (cf. comment on 3:4). Jesus knows what they want to ask him about, fitting John " s portrayal of Jesus» divine knowledge in this Gospel (see comment on 2:23–25). 2. Messianic Travail (16:20–22) Jesus» «hour» of death (2:4) would finally come (16:21), though it would also become an hour of revelation to his followers (16:25). Although tears were appropriate to farewells in general (e.g., Josephus Ant. 4.194; Acts 20:37–38), «weeping» (16:20) appears in this Gospel only in conjunction with death, whether that of Lazarus (11:31,33) or that of Jesus (20:11, 13, 15); the death of the latter is specifically in view here. The term λπη in 16:20–22 probably includes another wordplay: it can include «sorrow,» as in 16:6, or «pain,» as in childbirth. 9332 Just as grief was particularly appropriate at the time of a loved onés death, the transformation of sorrow into joy (16:20,22) fits the image of eschatological joy at the resurrection of the righteous (cf. 20:20). 9333 In early Christian belief, Jesus» resurrection was the first installment of the resurrection of the righteous ( 1Cor 15:23 ; Phil 3:21 ); in John " s theology, it introduces the believers immediately into the experience of resurrection life (14:19; cf. 3:16). In one Jewish work of uncertain date, God tells Adam that though those who lured Adam into sin are rejoicing, God would turn their joy into sorrow (χαρν ... λπην) and Adam " s sorrow into joy; 9334 it is possible, however, that this work here reflects the language of the Fourth Gospe1. |
| The present description of the report of Lazarus " s raising (12:17), like the account of Lazarus " s raising itself, somewhat resembles the description of the future resurrection (5:28: μνημεον; φωυ/φωνω), functioning as a public advance notification of that day. Those who had believed (11:44) now functioned as witnesses (12:17), which fits John " s paradigm for discipleship. The interest of the crowds (12:18) again shows that John recognizes the diverse Jewish responses to Jesus; his «enemies» are not his fellow Jews, but the «Pharisees» (12:19). That the Pharisees tell one another, «You are doing no good» (12:19), is vintage Johannine irony; 7829 they mean, «We have proved ineffective in stopping Jesus» («profit nothing,» as in 6:63), but they actually comment on their own deficit of righteousness. Further, their complaint about «the world» is telling; they may mean «the rabble,» but their words become an unintended prophecy (cf. 11:51) of Gentiles turning to Jesus (12:20; cf. 11:48), 7830 which must have been compounding the offense of Christianity for the enemies of John " s audience. 7831 As in 11:48, their words are also exaggeration on a literal level even for John; every member of the world follows Jesus no more than every individual already honors the Father (5:23); John is not a universalist. But the word becomes widespread and crosses all boundaries of culture and geography. Gentiles and the Cross (12:20–36) The rest of the chapter (12:20–50) moves directly into the passion. 7832 The Pharisees had unwittingly prophesied the coming of Gentiles to Jesus (12:19); proleptically this coming begins in 12:20–21. The coming of Gentiles (12:20–21) marks the final prerequisite for the «hour» of Jesus» glorification (12:23). 7833 1. The Coming of Gentiles? (12:20–22) John could intend Diaspora Jews here, 7834 perhaps as representatives of the Gentiles. 7835 More likely, however, John has Gentile Greeks in view (see comment on 7:35); 7836 as Brown points out, nothing less dramatic than «the understanding that the first Gentiles have come to Jesus explains his exclamation that the hour has come» (12:23). 7837 Many Diaspora Jews did come to the feasts (Josephus War 5.199), though probably not frequently. 7838 But many interested Gentiles would also attend; 7839 most of these would have been «God-fearers,» a widely attested class of Gentiles interested in Judaism. 7840 Probably a fairly large percentage of the visiting Greeks would be from the region, especially from Syria and the Decapolis. 7841 |
| 10526 See also Byrne, «Faith»; Talbert, John, 250; cf. 1Pet 1:8 . Faith here refers to faith in the resurrection (20:25, 27, 29; Hoskyns, Gospel, 540). 10527 The need to understand Scripture after the resurrection also fits the gospel tradition in Luke 24:25–27, 32,44–47 (Beasley-Murray, John, 373). 10528 Westcott, John, 290, favors Ps 16:10 , but no clues allow us to narrow down the range of possible verses. John 2could refer to Ps 69in John 2:17 , but that is likely only if the entire psalm is in view. 10529 See, e.g., Sipre Deut. 306.28.3; 329.2.1; b. Pesah. 68a; Sanh. 90b; Gen. Rab. 20:10. 10530 A frequent rabbinic interpretive method, e.g., Mek. Nez. 10.15–16,26,38; 17.17; Pisha 5.103; b. Ber. 9a; 35a; B. Qam. 25b; Git. 49a; Ker. 5a; Qidd. 15a; 35b; Menah. 76a; Naz. 48a; Nid. 22b-23a; Roš Haš. 3b; 34a; Sanh. 40b; 51b; 52a; Sabb. 64a; Tem. 16a; Zebah. 18a; 49b-50b; Exod. Rab. 1:20; cf. CD 7.15–20; Chernick, «Application.» 10531 Typical in Jewish sources (e.g., t. c Ed. 3:4; Sipre Num. 1.4.1; see much fuller documentation in comment on 7:23). 10532 Throughout this Gospel, δε usually stands for divine necessity (e.g., 3:14, 30; 10:16). 10533 E.g., Euripides Medea 928; Diodorus Siculus 17.37.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.67.2; 8.39.1; losephus Ant. 4.320. 10534 Their going out in 20may be simply «to them» (cf. 7:50) rather than to their homes (NRSV; NASB); in 20they are all together. 10535 Cf. Schneiders, «Encounter,» who argues that lohn presents Mary as the official witness of the resurrection, symbolic for the Johannine community (though her allusions to Song of Songs may be more dubious). 10536 Okure, «Commission.» Mary " s testimony may or may not (cf. Maccini, Testimony, 240–52) teach specifically about women " s testimony, but it prefigures Christian testimony in general, which implies the participation of women in that witness. 10537 Sanders, Figure, 280. 10538 Dio Cassius 58.4.5–6; 63.11.2–12.1. Josephus cites Jews» willingness to die for the law (Ag. Ap. 1.42–43). |
| 5024 Explicit references to Moses appear far more widely in the Gospel (1:17, 45; 3:14; 5:45–46; 6:32; 7:19, 22–23; 9:28–29) than references to Jacob (only in 4:5, 12) or Abraham (8:39–40, 52–53, 56–58) or David (7:42). The Johannine audiencés opponents seem to appeal heavily to Moses» law to support their position (cf. esp. 5:45–46; 9:28–29). 5027 Odeberg, Gospel, 72 (on 1 En. 70:2; 71:1; 2 En. 1–24; 3 En. passim; Γ. Levi 2; 2 Bar. passim; Ascen. Isa. passim), 73–88 (Hermetic and Mandean texts), 89–94 (rabbinic literature). See also Borgen, «Agent,» 146 n. 4, following Odeberg; cf. Grese, «Born Again»; Kanagaraj, «Mysticism»; idem, «Mysticism» in John; DeConick, Mystics, 67. Talbert, John, 101, thinks 3may counter Christian mystics (as in 1 John 4:1 ). 5028 Borgen, «Agent,» 146; idem, «Hellenism,» 104–5, citing Philo QE 2.46 (on Exod 24:16), which is probably authentic. Borgen, «Agent,» 146, connects John " s «Son of Man» with Philós «Man after God " s image» (Confusion 146; Alleg. Interp. 1.43). 5030 E.g., m. Roš Haš. 3:8; p. Roš Haš 3:9, §§1–6. Cf. deliverance from serpents in response to Jeremiah " s prayer in Liv. Pro. 2.3 (OTP 2:386; Greek, ed. Schermann, 81–82). 5031 Philo Creation 157; Agriculture 108; Alleg. Interp. 3.159; Migration 66. The «belly» frequently refers to pleasure in ancient texts (Euripides Cyc1. 334–335; Longus 4.11; Plutarch Pleas. L. 3, Mor. 1087D; Epictetus Diatr. 2.9.4; Achilles Tatius 2.23.1; Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 1.7; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 60.4; 3Macc 7:10–11; 4 Macc 1:3; Syr. Men. Epit. 6–8; Phil 3:19 ; Apoc. E1. 1:13), including in Philo (Spec. Laws 1.148–150, 192; 4.91). 5032 Exod. Rab. 3:12; Tg. Neof. 1 on Num 21:6 . Were the tradition earlier, one might appeal here to the messianic interpretation of Gen 3:15 , attested in the Targumim (McNamara, Targum, 121) and perhaps as early as the LXX (Martin, «Interpretation»). For texts identifying the serpent with the devil, see comment on 8:44. 5033 The identification of the Jewish lawgiver with «the lawless serpent» in Acts John 94 resembles gnostic anti-Judaism and not first-century tradition. Pace some, the source of Epiphanius Haer. 64.29.6 is probably not pre-Christian (Jacobson, «Serpent»). |
| 6727 E.g., Plutarch Superst. 5, Mor. 167B (including Judaism as a superstition in Superst. 8, Mor. 169C). Cf. freedom from fear of death (Cicero Nat. d. 1.20.56; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 80.6; Nat. 3.pref.l6; Epictetus Diatr. 1.17.25; 2.5.12; Heb 2:15). 6728 Seneca Ep. Luci1. 94.19. 6729 E.g., Aristotle Rhet. 1.9.27, 1367a; Plutarch S.S., Anonymous 37, Mor. 234B; Dio Chrysostom Or. 18, On Freedom; Epictetus Diatr. 1.4.19. Aeschylus Prom. 50 opines that none but Zeus is free from all troubles. 6730 Epictetus Diatr. 2.14.13. 6731 Seneca Dia1. 1.5.6. 6732 Brown, John, 1:355. 6733 E.g., Diodorus Siculus 10.34.8; Strabo Geog. 10.4.16. 6734 Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.42.2. For freedom from undue interference in internal Jewish affairs, see 1 Esd 4:49–50; Josephus Ant. 16.2. 6735 Arrian Alex. 4.11.8; Sallust Cati1. 51.31; Jug. 31.11; Speech of Macer 1,9; Letter to Caesar 2A; 10.3; Cornelius Nepos 8 (Thrasybulus), 1.2; Musonius Rufus 9, p. 72.9–10. 6736 Demosthenes 3 Philippic 36; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.23.18–19; 6.7.2; Appian R.H. 4.10.80; Maximus of Tyre Or. 23.4; cf. Philostratus Hrk. 4.1–2. 6737 Lucan C.W. 7.445; Cornelius Nepos 8 (Thrasybulus), 1.5; Cicero Att. 14.14; Phi1. 3.5.12; 3.11.29; 3.13.33; 6.7.19; 14.14.37; Seneca the Elder, Historical Fragments 1; Iamblichus V.P. 32.220; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.15.498; 1.486. 6738 Lysias Or. 2.21, §192; Demosthenes 3 Philippic 36; 4 Philippic 25; Isocrates Peace 105, Or. 8.180 (though employing νδραποδισμς); Sallust Jug. 102.6; Letter of Mithridates 10; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.23.20; Appian R.H. 8.9.56; Herodian 3.2.8; Cornelius Nepos 15 (Epaminondas), 5.3; 1Macc 2:11; Musonius Rufus relates it to freedom to speak out (παρρησα, see comment on 7:4) in 9, p. 72.23, 27–29; 72.31–73.3; 74.10–13) and to reason (16, p. 106.6–8). 6739 Culpepper, Anatomy, 157, thinks Jesus» interlocutors here mean freedom politically but are ironically self-evidently wrong. 6740 E.g., 3Macc 2:6; Josephus Ant. 3.19–20; 6.86. Some later rabbis celebrated this freedom also as ability to rule (Song Rab. 6:12, §1). |
| Applying his motif of agency, John reports that just as those who opposed the disciples opposed Jesus (15:18–21), so those who oppose Jesus oppose his Father, who sent him (15:21, 23). The world " s hatred (15:19, 24–25; 17:14) will not surprise a reader by this point; Jesus had already warned that those who did evil were those who hated the light (3:20) and that the world hates one who reveals its sin (7:7). Jesus» «signs» and other works revealed enough of his identity and sender that those who hated him could be said to have beheld both him and his Father (15:24; cf. 14:7). 9142 Those who rejected him were without excuse; as Jesus has repeatedly emphasized, his works revealed his identity and sender, and hence rejection of him exposed the true state of his opponents» hearts (14:11; see comment on 10:32, 37–38). Jesus cites their own law against them (15:25). Because Jewish literature reports pagans speaking to Israel of «your law,» 9143 one could argue that the Fourth Gospel here preserves a non-Jewish perspective. But John repeatedly enlists the support of the law, which he accepts as authoritative (e.g., 2:17,22; 5:45–47; 19:36–37). Jesus applies to Scripture the formula «in order that [the word] might be fulfilled» (15:25; 13:18; 17:12), which elsewhere in this Gospel refers to Jesus» own teaching (18:9, 32) as well as to Scripture (12:38; 19:24, 36); it is difficult to think of a more authoritative claim for Scripture than that the events of the passion had to occur to fulfill it. The use of «your» or «their» law means «the law which even they profess to accept» (10:34) 9144 and probably implies irony (see our introduction, pp. 214–28). 9145 «They hated me without cause» reflects the language of various psalms ( Ps 35:19; 69:4; 109:3 ; cf. 35:7); 9146 because Ps 69comes from the same context as Ps 69:9 , quoted in John 2:17 , commentators generally prefer this reference if a specific text is in view. 9147 3. Witnesses against the World (15:26–27) In the context (15:18–25; 16:1–4), the passage about witness refers not to some timid words (cf. 20:19) but to a bold counteroffensive; the «world» far outnumbers believers, but believers depend on God, whose power can at any time overrule the purposes of the world (cf. 18:9; 19:11). That the world " s hostility frames these comments on witness does not imply that they are simply a later insertion into a foreign context: both 15:18–25 and 16:1–4 are constructed distinctively. The previous pericope (15:18–25) includes two quotations, one from Jesus himself (15:20) and one from Scripture (15:25). The following pericope (16:1–4) is carefully constructed and set apart from 15:18–25 by its inciusio, suggesting an intended break between 15:18–25 and 16:1–4. |
| 10113 Cullmann, State, 42–43; Blinzler, Trial, 251; Winter, Trial, 109; Reicke, Era, 186; Brown, Death, 963, cite Suetonius Calig. 32.2; Dom. 10.1; Dio Cassius 54.3.7; 54.8; Tertullian Apo1. 2.20; Eusebius Hist. ecc1. 5.1.44; cf. the herald in b. Sanh. 43a. The posting of the accusation on the cross is not well attested, either because those describing crucifixion had already mentioned it being carried (Bammel, «Titulus,» 353) or because the practice was not in fact standard although, given the variations among executions, in no way improbable (Harvey, History, 13); wearing tablets around the neck was not unusual in the broader culture (students in Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.1.557). Blinzler, Trial, 254, thinks the tablets included «black or red letters on a white ground.» 10119 Epigraphic data suggest that Aramaic probably predominated in Galilee (Horsley, Galilee, 247–49) despite Hebrew " s use as a holy language and the ideal of its use (pace Safrai, «Literary Languages»; idem, «Spoken Languages»; Let. Aris. 11, 30, 38; Sipre Deut. 46.1.2). 10122 E.g., Jub. 12:25–27; p. Meg. 1:9, §1; hence its use in the Mishnah, many DSS, and the Bar Kokhba materials (cf. Carmon, Inscriptions, 73). 10123 Brown, Death, 965; he also cites the five languages (Greek, Latin, Persian, Hebrew, and Egyptian) at Gordian Ill " s tomb. Talbert, John, 243, cites these plus the Greek and Latin warnings in the temple (losephus War 5.194). 10125 Tob 1:20; Sallust Cati1. 51.43; 52.14; CPJ 2:251–52, §445; 2:255–57, §448; BGU 5.16.51–5.17.52; P.Oxy. 513; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 4.5.3; 4.15.6; Appian C.W. 4.5.31; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 4.5; Herodian 7.3.2; Josephus Life 370–371; Heb 10:34. 10126 E.g., Polybius 11.30.1–2; also in illegal lynchings (e.g., Herodian 8.8.6); also in beatings (Longus 2.14); see comment on scourging, above. 10127 Artemidorus Onir. 2.61; Brown, Death, 870, adds Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.69.2; Valerius Maximus 1.7.4; Josephus Ant. 19.270. 10129 Brown, Death, 870, thinks the Gospels might «reflect a local concession,» noting that Josephus War 2.246 and Ant. 20.136 do not mention Celer " s disrobing; but this would be an argument from silence. (Brown, citing Melito of Sardis On the Pasch 97 in favor of nakedness and Acts of Pilate 10.1 in favor of a loincloth, ultimately doubts that we can know either way [p. 953].) Nakedness was probably the rule of thumb (in public Roman punishments, e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.69.2; in non-Roman executions, e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.191; 2.53). |
| 8851 If later tradition is relevant, the vinés usefulness in a sukkah was quite limited (cf. b. Sukkah 11a, 22b). 8852 Cadman, Heaven, 175. More pervasive are connections with the «branch»; see, e.g., Isa 11:1; cf. Isa 4:2; Jer 23:5; 33:15 ; Zech 3:8; 6:12; 1QH 6.15; 7.19; 8.6,8,10; 4Q174,3.12; cf. T. Jud. 24:4, if not an interpolation. 8854 Painter, John, 48; Feuillet, Studies, 88–89; Culpepper, John, 214; Wisdom is identified with the law in 24:23. 8855 Samian Hera had a vine branch in her hair (Callimachus Aetia 4.101; the Diegesis associates this with her conflicts with Dionysus). Perhaps Philo allegorized Ganymede, Zeus " s wine pourer, as God " s forth-flowing Logos (Dillon, «Ganymede»; idem, «Logos»). 8856 Diodorus Siculus 1.15.8, who also reports, however, that the Egyptians (who link him with Osiris) believe that he prefers ivy (Diodorus Siculus 1.17.5). 8861 Caragounis, «Vineyard,» argues that μπελος became «vineyard» and κλματα «vines» in pre-Christian Koine. Given the description of pruning, «vine» is a better translation in John 15 than «vineyard,» but the semantic overlap illustrates the importance of both vine and vineyard data. 8862 On the Qumran interpretation of Isa 5:1–7, see 4Q500, in Baumgarten, «Vineyard.» The vine image is also consistent with the Jesus tradition " s use of «fruit»; see comment below. 8863 E.g., Augustine Tract. Ev. Jo. 80.1.2 (citing Jer 2and Isa 5:4); Köstenberger, John, 159; Strachan, Gospel, 176; Hunter, Message, 78; idem, John, 148; Barrett, «Old Testament,» 164; idem, John, 472; Hoskyns, Gospel, 474; Sanders, John, 337; Richardson, Israel, 187; Fenton, John, 158; Morris, John, 668; van der Waal, «Gospel,» 36; Hickling, «Attitudes,» 353; Ellis, Genius, 225; Painter, John, 48; Carson, Discourse, 91. 8864 E.g., 3 Bar. 1:2; Exod. Rab. 30:17; 34:3; SongRab. 2:16, §1; 7:13, §1; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 16:9. Some texts explicitly conjoin this image with God " s flock as well (e.g., Mek. Pisha 1.162; Sipre Deut. 15.1.1; cf. John 10:1 ). |
| Like the rest of the Fourth Gospel, John here insists that Jewish believers remain faithful to the God of Israel through fidelity to Jesus, not through satisfying the synagogue leadership (12:42–43). This is because Jesus is God " s faithful agent; he neither spoke (14:10; cf. 16:13) nor acted (5:30; 8:28, 42) on his own (12:49), but only at the Father " s command (12:49; see comment on 5:19). 7989 By again reinforcing the portrait of Jesus as God " s faithful agent, John reminds his hearers that their opponents who in the name of piety opposed a high view of Jesus were actually opposing the God who appointed him to that role. «The Father " s commandment is eternal life» (12:50) is presumably elliptical for «obedience to the Father " s command produces eternal life,» but also fits the identification of the word (1:4), Jesus» words (6:68), and knowing God (17:3) with life. For John, the concept of «command» should not be incompatible with believing in Jesus (6:27; cf. 8:12; 12:25), which is the basis for eternal life (3:15–16; 6:40, 47; 11:25; 20:31); faith involves obedience (3:36; cf. Acts 5:32; Rom 1:5; 2:8; 6:16–17; 15:18; 16:19, 26; 2 Thess 1:8; 1Pet 1:22; 4:17 ). Jesus always obeys his Father " s commands (8:29), including the command to face death (10:18; 14:31); his disciples must follow his model of obedience to his commandments by loving one another sacrificially (13:34; 14:15, 21; 15:10,12). 7803 Matthew " s stirring of «the entire city» (Matt 21:10), however, may invite the reader to compare this event with an earlier disturbance of Jerusalem (Matt 2:3). 7804 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 306; Catchpole, «Entry.» In favor of reliability, see also Losie, «Entry,» 858–59. 7805 In view of ancient patronal social patterns, Jesus» numerous «benefactions» would also produce an entourage, seeking favors, that could potentially double as a political support base, exacerbating his threat to the political elite (DeSilva, Honor, 135). 7806 Also for Matthew (Matt 21:10–11); in Luke those who hail him are disciples (Luke 19:37, 39); even in Mark, where «many» participate, those who go before and after him are probably those who knew of his ministry in Galilee ( Mark 11:8–9 ). This may represent a very different crowd from the one that condemned him (Matt 27:20–25; Mark 15:11–14 ; Luke 23:13, 18, 21, 23)–certainly in John, where the condemning «Jews» are the «high priests» (19:6–7, 12–15). |
| Jesus» phrase «keep my word» (8:51–52, 55; 14:23–24; 15:20; cf. 17:6; Rev 3:8, 10) echoes biblical language for obeying God " s law and word through his prophets. 6914 Never «seeing» death is, of course, idiomatic for never experiencing it (cf. also Luke 2:26; Heb 11:5); 6915 God often allowed the righteous to avoid having to «see» sorrows. 6916 («Taste death» in 8is an equivalent idiom to «see death»; 6917 paraphrase was a standard rhetorical exercise and the rewording is thus not significant–cf. 13:10–11; Theon Progymn. 1.93–171.) A phrase like «not die» could appear in conjunction with «live» as a way of making it more emphatic. 6918 In contrast to those who wanted to kill as their spiritual progenitor did (8:40, 44), Jesus came to bring life (8:51; 10:10) from his Father. If they rejected him, however, they would «die in their sins» (8:21, 24). 5. Greater Than Ahraham (8:52–59) Jesus» interlocutors zealously assert their descent from Abraham (8:33), a claim which Jesus allows genetically (8:37) but challenges spiritually (8:39–44). The interlocutors conversely deny that Jesus is greater than Abraham (8:52–53); Jesus responds that he is not boasting (8:54–55), but that Abraham himself recognized Jesus» superiority (8:56), and that Jesus existed eternally before him (8:58)–a blatant assertion of deity which could not easily be misinterpreted (8:59). 5A. Assuming Abrahams Superiority (8:52–53) Jesus» hearers misunderstood (8:52), yet should have understood his words about not dying (8:51; for this being accepted language for death, see comment above on 8:51): some of Jesus» Hellenistic Jewish contemporaries could claim that those who conquer fleshly passions, like the patriarchs of old, do not die but live for God (4 Macc 7:18–19; cf. Matt 22:32). 6919 In one Jewish story possibly in circulation in some form by the time of the Fourth Gospel " s publication, Abraham refused to submit to the angel of death, requiring God to remind him that all the righteous before him, including the prophets, have died. 6920 Again, however, Jesus» adversaries misinterpret his words about death by construing him more literally than necessary (8:52; cf. 6:52). |
|
|
