| With minor variations the Baptist " s claim appears in all four extant gospels ( Mark 1:7 ; Matt 3:11; Luke 3:16). Even in early generations, ancient transmission permitted considerable variation in relatively minor details (see our introduction); «loosening» and «carrying» the sandals convey the same image of servility, hence function identically on the semantic leve1. 3990 (Indeed, Daube relates that «carrying the master " s things before him to the bath-house and taking off his shoes [when he comes home] » were the primary illustrations of slaves» services in rabbinic texts.) 3991 Although John and Luke may stand alone among the four authors in challenging partisans of the Baptist, none of the four elected to pass up the Baptist " s christological testimony before Jesus» arriva1. 3992 In view of biblical promises, the Baptist " s respect for a coming king (e.g., Isa 9:6–7; Jer 23:5–6 ; Dan 7:14 ) who would, like most kings, judge makes sense on the historical level; so do his later doubts that Jesus was fulfilling that role (Matt ll:3/Luke 7:19). 3993 5. A Historical Note (1:28) The Fourth Gospel " s proposed location for the Baptist " s ministry in 1may have some theological significance (it is not in Judea), but a theological intent cannot exhaust its function (a Galilean site would have served the narrators theological purpose much better). The specific place-name thus has little purpose except as a historical observation, 3994 one which challenges the assumptions of many modern scholars that this Gospel lacks any historical interest. That much of the Baptists ministry occurred in Perea «beyond the Jordan» (1:28; 3:23; 10:40) might not convey much theological insight to many of the Gospels readers (aside from its location outside the power centers of Judean Judaism), 3995 but it fits the evidence other sources provide about the Baptist. Although the reports place the influence of Johns itinerant ministry in both Judea and Galilee, Josephus " s reports suggest that Herod Antipas must have captured John while he was in Perea. 3996 Evidence for the specific reading for the city (more textual evidence favors «Bethany,» but it is easier to see how a scribe misread «Bethabara» as the familiar «Bethany» than the reverse) is debatable, 3997 but «Bethabara» seems to have come into vogue late because of the obscure location of the proposed Bethany of earlier manuscripts. 3998 In the final analysis the question probably ultimately makes no theological difference for the Gospel (being «beyond the Jordan,» it could not literally be the Bethany of John 11:1; 12:1 ), which underlines our point: the specific place-name is likely a matter of historical rather than theological interest. The location of a Bethany beyond the Jordan is unknown; «Not even Origen could find it.» 3999 But it may refer to the area of Batanea in Philip " s tetrarchy rather than to a town. 4000 |
| Jesus would remain with them just «a little while» (13:33; cf. the first «little while» of 16:16); as he has been saying (cf. aorists, plus «now» in 13and perhaps «immediately» in 13:32), his departure is imminent. These are the same words he had offered the crowds in 7:33. Further, like «the Jews,» the disciples could not yet follow Jesus where he was going (13:33), that is, to the Father by way of the cross (13:3; 14:5–6). «The Jews» (representing the elite Jewish opponents of John " s Jewish audience; see introduction, ch. 5) could not follow Jesus where he was going (7:34–36) because they would die in their sin rather than lay down their lives for God " s will (8:21–22). The disciples could not yet follow Jesus because they are not yet prepared to die; but they would follow him in death later (13:36–38; cf. 21:18–19). Jesus had been «with» them for a time (12:8, 35; 14:9; 16:4); in contrast to his enemies, however, who would never find him, his disciples would find him in a new way when he returned–that is, he would be with them in a new way. Sandwiched between Jesus» comments about following him is a commandment. This commandment is relevant to the context, for it includes readiness to die: to love as he did would require laying down their lives for one another (13:34). The foot washing (13:3–10) illustrated this love, because it foreshadowed the salvific work of the Suffering Servant (13:1–2, 31–38). The commandment also articulated how believers could represent the most vital aspect of Jesus» presence among themselves after his departure: by loving one another, they would continue to experience his love. 3. Following Jesus» Model (13:34–35) The exhortation to «love one another» (13:34–35) implied unity in the face of diversity (17:21–23), such as Jewish, Gentile, and Samaritan believers in Jesus might experience (4:39; 10:16). Representatives of various social groups now constituted together a new «in-group,» and frequent early Christian exhortations to mutual service seem directed toward blending such diversity. 8307 In the Johannine community, love is partly cohesiveness to the community; secessionists lack such love (1 John 2:19; 3:14). 8308 Ethnic and other forms of reconciliation within the Christian community are essential to its identity as a Christian community; without such evidences the world cannot see the character of Jesus (13:35). |
| Many of the bystanders responded in faith (11:45; cf. 11:15,40); the language suggests that the majority did so. 7676 (On the significance of such signs-faith, see comment on 2and related texts.) That John calls the bystanders «the Jews» indicates his continuing confidence that even among those who constitute the primary opposition (see introduction on «the Jews»), faith remains possible. Although it is not part of his purpose to emphasize it, John may even share the earlier Christian optimism in an eschatological repentance of his Jewish people ( Rom 11:26 ). 7677 But the specter of rejection remains, for some of the bystanders took word to the authorities that Jesus was again in Judea and doing signs that were influencing others» opinions ( John 11:46 ). In an analogous setting in the Fourth Gospel, a report about Jesus» signs directed toward the elite is intended not as witness (as in 7:46; 9:30–33) but as betrayal (5:15–16); given the equally immediate hostile response, such is probably in view here. New Testament miracle stories frequently include rejection, but nearly all other ancient miracle stories lack this element, although its converse, acclamation, is common. 7678 The motif of rejection or persecution after miracles 7679 undoubtedly stems from the ministry of Jesus and/or the experience of his earliest followers. 2. The Elite Plot Jesus» Death (11:47–53) The plot of the leaders (11:47–53) fittingly follows the Lazarus narrative (11:1–44); Jesus is the resurrection and the life, but to give Lazarus life must set his own in danger (11:8, 16). In this epitome of Johannine irony, Jesus would die on behalf of others (11:50). 7680 2A. Historical Plausibility Mark also draws on a tradition in an earlier passion narrative in which leaders plot against Jesus ( Mark 14:1–2 ), very likely in response to his demonstration and teaching in the temple earlier that week ( Mark 11:15–18 ). In John, the demonstration in the temple opens Jesus» public ministry, framing it with the ethos of the passion week and the Jerusalem leaders» hostility. In John, the immediate precedent and provocation for the final plotting is Lazarus " s resuscitation. Because this was Jesus» climactic sign before the cross, it suggests a rejection of his whole public ministry (1:11). 7681 |
| «One who is sent» (13:16) represents an agent, a familiar concept in this Gospel (see introduction; on the interchangeability of πμπω and αποστλλω, see 20:21). That those who received an agent received the sender (13:20) fits this motif and is attested elsewhere in extant Jesus tradition ( Mark 9:37 ; Matt 10:40–41). Jesus» promised blessing to those who serve one another takes the form of a beatitude (13:17), which appears on only one other occasion in this Gospel (20:29), although it is frequent in Revelation (Rev 1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7,14). That the form occurs in this Gospel only twice need not link these two passages together; the form was common in early Christian texts, 8197 in the early Christians» Bible, 8198 in early Judaism, 8199 and appeared in non-Jewish Greek sources as wel1. 8200 If the two passages are to be compared, however, it appears significant that 20is a strategic verse which casts its theological shadow over the signs-faith of the entire Gospe1. The beatitude here may similarly function to underline the importance of mutual service. Verse 17 also echoes a familiar line of Jewish and other ancient ethics, namely, that behavior should correspond to knowledge (cf. Jas 1:22; 4:17; 1 John 3:18 ). 8201 Although John will address the betrayal in more detail (13:21–30), he introduces the matter here (13:18–19), framing it with the warning that Jesus» disciples will share his experience of betrayal and suffering (13:15–16, 20; cf. 15:18–20). Judas lifting his heel in betrayal at a meal (cf. 13:2) appears in striking contrast to Mary " s washing Jesus» feet in service at another meal (12:2–3); Judas lifting his heel likewise contrasts with Jesus washing his disciples» (including Judas " s) feet in this immediate context. The mention of the «heel» therefore serves an immediate literary function in the narrative in addition to its presence in a biblical quotation and its general cultural significance. The specific image in the psalm that Jesus quotes ( Ps 41:9 ) might be that of a horse or mule kicking the person feeding it; 8202 probably more likely here, showing another the bottom of onés foot is an expression of contempt (cf. Mark 6:11 ). 8203 |
| Ecstasis, lit. «being outside oneself’: In contemporary Orthodox theology, a constitutive aspect of personhood that involves the state of being free from the finitude inherent in created nature, and is realised in communion with God. Ecumenical: See Oikoumene. Epiclesis: See Anaphora. Filioque: The Western addition to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed stating that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Hesychasm: A monastic movement practising prayer in stillness (hesychia). Associated particularly with use of the Jesus Prayer (»Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me») and with the vision of uncreated light which can be experienced in prayer. Hypostasis: In contemporary Orthodox theology, a constitutive aspect of personhood indicating uniqueness and irreplaceability. Kanon, lit. «rule»: (i) A regulation concerning church organisation or discipline; (2) a hymn of nine odes, each connected to a scriptural ode. Kenotic: Related to God " s »self-emptying» (Greek kenosis) in the Incarnation, cf. Phil 2:7 . Millet: In the Ottoman empire, a subject «nation» defined by religion. Mystagogy: Introduction into a holy mystery. The term may be applied to an explanation of the significance of a mystery of the Church (St Maximus " s Mystagogy is an exposition of the Divine Liturgy) or to the sacrament itself. Oikoumene, lit. »inhabited earth»: Originally applied to the «known» or »civilised» world of the Eastern Roman, or Byzantine, period. In the present day, the term often refers to the whole Christian world. The derivative «oe/ecumenical» indicates councils representing the Churches from the whole known world, rather than from just one region, and to the Patriarch of Constantinople as bishop of the imperial city. Oriental Orthodox: The Syrian, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian and Malankara (Indian) Orthodox Churches, which reject the Council of Chalcedon. These Churches were formerly known as »non-Chalcedonian» or «Monophysite». Pentarchy, lit. »rule of five»: The theory of church structure adopted in the fifth century, ascribing particular honour to five patriarchal sees: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Jurisdiction over the known world (apart from the self-governing Church of Cyprus) was divided among these patriarchates. Romios/Rum: «Roman», i.e. »of the Eastern Roman Empire». The Turkish form Rum referred to the Christian «nation» in the Ottoman empire, and is still in use. In Greek, Romios and the abstract noun Romiosyni refer to a modern Greek culture rooted in Christian Byzantium rather than in classical antiquity. Synergy: »Cooperation» between humans and God (cf. 1Cor.3:9 ). The term describes the relationship between God " s grace and human freedom. «Theotokos», lit. »Birth-giver of God»: Title of the Virgin Mary rejected by Nestorius but affirmed by the Council of Ephesus. The title underlines that God himself was conceived and born of a woman; he was not subsequently united to «the man Jesus». |
| 10788 Other rhetoricians employed the same technique: Lysias, for example, complains that his only problem in prosecuting Eratosthenes is to know when to stop reciting his crimes. 10789 He warns that even if they executed Ergocles many times, they would not have avenged all the wrongs he had done. 10790 Aeschines also declares that recounting all his opponent " s crimes from one year would consume his entire court day. 10791 Rhetoricians also employed such language for praise: for example, one doubts that anyone could recount all the great deeds of those who died for Athens in battle. 10792 A rhetorical biographer would not recount further civil honors of Rufus of Perinthus because such honors cannot compare with Rufus " s «skill and learning.» 10793 Most rhetoricians provided the examples they did include as models for imitation (see introduction, pp. 14–16, 19, 46). Jewish writers could speak of God " s deeds and expect them to elicit a response. 10794 John could have written other signs but provides a basic sample for a specific purpose, namely to elicit adequate faith (20:31). In this Gospel, signs are inadequate to guarantee solid faith (cf. 2:23; 4:48; 6:2, 30), but they can provoke one to begin on that journey (e.g., 2:11; 6:26; 7:31; 9:16; 12:37). John had «written» these things (20:31), and as in 19:22, he uses the perfect tense, signifying the continuing impact of what he has written. 10795 In John " s (and often early Christian) style, however, «written» in the perfect most often refers to Scripture (2:17; 6:31, 45; 8:17; 10:34; 12:14, 16; 15:25). 10796 Because he is inspired by the Paraclete (see pp. 115–22, 979–81), the author of the Fourth Gospel may quietly suggest that his work belongs in the same category with the Scriptures of old. 10797 Purpose of the Conclusion Surely this conclusion (20:30–31) emphasizes the purpose of the Gospel, which should imply something about the sort of audience the Gospel originally addressed. 10798 Because John says, «that you may believe,» many think that the purpose of the Gospel is evangelistic. |
| The closing paragraph of this section, 12:44–50, suggests that, on the story level, Jesus has come out of hiding for one remaining public discourse. This passage is extremely significant, but not because it introduces many new conceptions. Essentially it repeats in typically Johannine language Jesus» teachings from previous discourses, summarizing and epitomizing the message of Jesus in the Gospel to that point. 7976 Although some scholars dissent, applying 12:44–50 only to the triumphal entry, 7977 most see it as a summary of Jesus» preceding discourses. 7978 Whitacre suggests that 12:44–50 emphasizes his words as 12:37–41 emphasized his deeds. 7979 Although the summary suits John " s theological purposes, he likely draws from traditional materials. 7980 Positioned at the end of the narratives that precede the passion and immediately preceding the prologue to the farewell disourse, this unit recapitulates the themes that have preceded and prepares the reader for their fulfillment in the Passion Narrative which follows. Ancient writers frequently recapitulated or summarized themes at the conclusion of a work or, in many cases, a section. 7981 This strategic location before the Paraclete sayings and passion may also suggest that the historic elements of Jesus» mission noted in this pericope are continued in the present by the Paraclete, who continues to mediate Jesus» presence (14:16–17,26; 15:26–27; 16:7–15). First, Jesus is God " s agent (see introduction); believing in him is believing in the Father and is essential to genuine faith in the Father (12:44; cf. 14:1). 7982 In this context, the link between believing in Jesus and believing in the Father (again in 14:1) functions as a summons to secret «believers» in the synagogue (12:42): just as one dare not be ashamed to confess God in the Shema, one dare not be ashamed to confess Jesus. The kind of belief Jesus demands pleases God who sent him rather than humans (12:43), hence is not the inoffensive private faith of those unwilling to suffer expulsion from the synagogue or the possibly comcomitant trouble with Roman authorities. Thus, playing on the different levels of faith in his Gospel, John asks of Israel in the language of Isaiah, «Who has [genuinely] believed our report?» (12:38). |
| 1 John 3:17 ); but in the gospels which record the saying, the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus and/or the urgency of serving him while he remains with them, since he was soon to depart. 5. The Danger to Lazarus (12:9–11) The narrative (12:10–11) rings with irony: Jesus went to Judea, risking his life to give life to Lazarus; now Lazarus " s new life may cost him his life. The paradigm for disciples could not be clearer: those who would follow Jesus must be prepared to die (12:25,27), for the world will hate them and wish to kill them (15:18; 16:2). But faith would not be decreased by such martyrdom-producing new life; the sign of Lazarus " s new life brought others to faith (12:11; cf. 11:45,48). 7534 He would also go to Lazarus, who was dead (11:14–15), which Thomas ironically misinterprets–yet inadvertently correctly applies–as lesus going to the realm of death and his disciples following him there (11:16). 7535 Since «friend» applies to all disciples (15:15), there is no reason to find in the cognate «beloved» (11:3) an allusion to the «beloved» disciple (pace Nepper-Christensen, «Discipel,» and others; see our introduction, pp. 84–89) or to one of two such disciples in the Gospel (Vicent Cernuda, «Desvaido»). 7537 There are other exodus parallels (e.g., 3:14), but paralleling the signs and plagues could work at best only at the level of general categories (contrast explicit parallels in Rev 8–9; 16): perhaps darkness for healing the blind (Exod 10:21–22; John 9:5 ), but then why does John mention darkness in 8and 12:35, 46 but mention only «night» in 9:4? Crop-destroying locusts (Exod 10:13–14) could oppose the bread of life, but its exodus background is really manna; likewise, Jesus heals (4:50–53; 5:8–9; 9:7) but the object is not boils (Exod 9:9–11). 7538 Pearce, «Raising»; cf. the caution of Smith, John (1999), 217. A connection with Luke 10:38–39, while unlikely, is more plausible than the allusion to the parable of Lazarus (Luke 16:20; the figure in the parable–who is not raised–could as easily derive from the event later reported in John; both stories are quite different, as noted by Streeter, Gospels, 389); Eleazar was a common name (see below). |
| John Anthony McGuckin Yannaras, Christos (b. 1935) see Contemporary Orthodox Theology Appendix Foundational Documents of Orthodox Theology Contents 1 Creed of Nicea 650–1 2 Creed of Constantinople 651–2 3 Documents of the Third Ecumenical Council of Ephesus 652–9 4 The Definition of Faith of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon 659–60 5 The Definition of Faith of the Fifth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople 660–70 6 The Definition of Faith of the Sixth Ecumenical Council 671–3 7 The Definition of Faith of the Seventh Ecumenical Council 674–6 8 The Five Theological Orations of St. Gregory of Nazianzus (the Theologian) 676–734 9 Excerpts from the “Exposition of the Orthodox Faith” by St. John of Damascus 734–71 These documents are adapted from the source collections presented in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Church (series 2), Eerdmans, Grand Rapids; and T&T Clark, Edinburgh. Especially NPNF: vol. 7, 1893 (St. Gregory of Nazianzus), vol. 9, 1899 (St. John of Damascus), and vol. 14, 1900 (Seven Ecumenical Councils). Texts modernized and clarified by the editor. Original text and all secondary references related to it can be accessed from www.ccel.org/fathers.html. Introduction The range of the Encyclopedia of Eastern Orthodoxy is immense in both geographical and temporal terms. Its topical coverage, from the front of the alphabet to the end, allows for easy access for a researcher on any major theme that they may wish to follow up. This appendix tries to offer more. It is attached to the main body of the articles, in a sense as if it were the words of the ancients themselves (indeed, that is chiefly in what it consists) telling of the Orthodox faith directly, viva voce, rather than having it presented by contemporary commentators and exegeted in historical context. Both things, of course, are useful and necessary, and should complement one another invaluably. But if someone were to ask, “What are the essential primary texts of the Orthodox faith?” it might be easy enough to answer that here in this appendix one will meet with a good collection of them. Not all of them, by any means, but a representative sample of what the major theologians and dogmatic bishops (fathers) of the early church thought were essential architectural elements of the building. |
| The various resurrection narratives vary considerably in length, focus, and detai1. If Q included a resurrection narrative (a thesis that would probably be greeted with skepticism, since most of it is held to be sayings, but for which we lack concrete evidence either way), most of the Gospel writers treated it as one among many; given the many witnesses of the risen Christ ( 1Cor 15:6 ), it is hardly surprising that numerous accounts would exist and different Gospel writers would draw on different accounts. The four gospels differ in detail, but in all four the women become the first witnesses, and Mary Magdalene is explicitly named as one witness among them (also Gos. Pet. 12:50–13:57). 10388 The variation in length of the Gospels» resurrection narratives (Luke 24 is long though recapitulated briefly in Acts 1; Mark 16:1–8 and Matt 28 are quite brief; John includes both Judean and Galilean appearances) may represent the desire to make optimum use of the scroll length instead of leaving a blank space at the end (as sometimes happened, Diogenes Laertius 6.2.38). Josephus seems once caught unexpectedly by the end of his scroll (Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.320); Matthew, approaching the length limit of his standardized scroll (see introduction, p. 7), may hasten to his conclusion; Luke may have sufficient space remaining to provide further detail before his closing. John " s «second» conclusion (ch. 21) fits the Gospel if John employed a scroll of standardized length, but by early in ch. 20 it would be clear to either the Fourth Gospel " s author or a later disciple how much space would remain at ch. 20 " s completion. 2. Pagan Origins for the Christian Resurrection Doctrine? Supposed pagan parallels to the resurrection stories are weak; Aune even declares that «no parallel to them is found in Graeco-Roman biography.» 10389 Whether any «parallels» exist depends on what we mean by a «parallel»; but plainly none of the alleged parallels involves a resurrected person, probably in part because resurrection in its strict sense was an almost exclusively Jewish belief. Most pagans would have preferred to play down a savior " s human death (cf. Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 7.14). 10390 Ancients commonly reported apparitions of deceased persons (e.g., Apuleius Metam. 8.8; 9.31; " Abot R. Nat. 40A) 10391 or deities, and hence occasionally those of persons who had become immortal (e.g., Plutarch " s reports of Romulus more than half a millennium earlier), 10392 but these are not resurrection appearances. |
|
|
