| Most striking are the authorities» appeals to group knowledge («we know,» 9:24, 29) and the healed man " s mistaken supposition that he could still speak as a member of their community (9:31). Rhetorical claims to group knowledge (οδαμεν) could be dishonest (Luke 20:21) or could represent affirmations of faith (e.g., Rom 2:2; 3:19; 7:14 ; 2Cor 5:1 ). Here they may recall the first use of οδαμεν in the Gospel, when Nicodemus makes a moderate claim about Jesus» identity («We know that you are a teacher who has come from God,» 3:2) and Jesus countered that «we» (presumably himself and his Father) speak what «we know,» divine revelation from above (3:11). Being able to view these competing claims to knowledge from outside the narrative world, the latter claim rooted in heavenly revelation, would certainly encourage Johannine Christians. This is especially the case given admissions of inadequate knowledge (9:29) and claims to knowledge that the Gospel " s narratives prove inadequate (6:42; 7:27). 7101 Although this epistemological conflict surfaces most dramatically here, surrounding narratives provide its context. The previous encounters between Jesus and the authorities during this festival (chs. 7–8) offer sufficient perspective. Jesus knows his identity and knows the Father, whereas his opponents, despite their false claims and partial knowledge, do not (the use of οδα in 7:27–29; 8:14,19, 55); the rough synonym γινσκω 7102 functions in the same polemical fashion with challenges, condemnations, and responses (7:27, 49, 51; 8:27–28,32,43,52,55). The crucial significance of this conflict is resolved only in Jesus» following discourse (10:4–6, 14–15) and appended material (10:27, 38), which interpret the correct epistemology of Jesus and his followers in terms of the covenant knowledge of God and his people in the earlier biblical record (see comment there). 7103 While various forms of discipline were practiced in this period, and one who grants a high degree of historical verity to John " s narrative can argue that the healed man did in fact confront religious teachers or leaders in Jerusalem, no one can deny that John has framed the dialogue in his own language relevant for his own audience (see introduction on the genre and setting of this Gospel). |
| 5932 Jesus is essentially the Father " s voice in 5:37–40; one might compare him to a bat qo1. 5933 E.g., Westcott, John, 91; Morris, John, 330; Michaels, John, 82; Bruce, John, 136; Beasley-Murray, John, 78. 5934 Schnackenburg, John, 2:125, cites, e.g., 1QS 5.11; CD 6.7. See most fully Culpepper, School, 291–99, on darash and ζητω. 5935 So here, e.g., Dodd, Interpretation, 82; Hunter, John, 62; Brown, John, 1:225, citing, e.g., m. " Abot 2:7; see comment on 1:4. It was «the most meritorious of all good deeds» (Sandmel, Judaism, 184). 5936 So also Odeberg, Gospel, 224. 5937 Refuting someone on the basis of the very arguments or witnesses that person cites in his support was good rhetorical technique (e.g., Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 311, §101D; 340, §112D; 343–344, §114D; 446, §150D; Matt 12:37; Luke 19:22; Tit 1:12–13 ). 5938 See Culpepper, School, 298–99. They do not «will» to come to him (5:40), though they had «willed» to listen to John momentarily (5:35). 5939 DeSilva, «Honor and Shame,» 520 (citing Seneca the Younger De constantia sapientis 13.2,5; Epictetus Ench. 24.1). 5940 Not needing such glory was commendable (e.g., Scipio in Macrobius Comm. 2.10.2, in Van der Horst, «Macrobius,» 225), though Diogenes the Cynic claimed to deserve public praise (Diogenes Laertius 6.62). 5941 Seeking glory was honorable only if sought in the right places ( Rom 2:7 ; Polybius 6.54.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 5.25.1; 5.27.2; Cicero Earn. 10.12.5; 15.4.13; Sest. 48.102; Valerius Maximus 2.8.5, 7; 4.3.6a; 5.7.ext.4; 8.14; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 94.63–66; Orphic Hymn 15.10–11; Prov 22:1 ; see comment on 12:43). 5942 Cf. Michaels, John, 82. Brown, John, 1:226, suggests an allusion to Moses (leading naturally into 5:45–47), who sought God " s glory (Exod 34:29); cf. comment on 1:14–18. At least some later rabbis believed that Moses exalted God above everything else and after death God exalted him (Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1:20). 5943 See comment on 14:13–14; comment on agency, pp. 310–17 in the introduction. Cf. also Sanders, John, 73. It is unlikely that this stems from Isaiah (pace Young, «Isaiah,» 223); though God " s name is a dominant motif in Isaiah, «coming» in his name more likely alludes to Ps 118:26 . |
| 6564 See comment on 7concerning the well as a proposed background for the Scripture. 6565 Aune, Prophecy, 155; see comment on 6:14–15. 6566 Painter, John, 72–73; Bruce, Time, 41; Ellis, Genius, 8; Duke, Irony, 67; Ridderbos, John, 277. Cf. Smith, John (1999), 175 (irony, whether because Jesus was from Bethlehem or because he was Messiah without being from there). A Bethlehemite Messiah was a widespread expectation (Longenecker, Christology, 109; Keener, Matthew, 103; also Tg. Mic. 5:1, though it polemically explains away possible ideas of preexistence; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 35:21 , for Messiah " s revelation near Bethlehem; pace Dodd, Interpretation, 90–91). There may also be an allusion here to 2Sam 7LXX, as in 4QFlor 10.11 (Lane, Hebrews, 25), though the verbal parallel is far from coercive. On evidence concerning Jesus as descendant of David, see Matt 1:6; Luke 3:31; Rom 1:3 ; b. Sanh. 43a, bar.; Julius Africanus Letter to Aristides; Eusebius Hist. ecc1. 3.20; further, e.g., Meier, Marginal Jew, 216–19. 6567 Duke, Irony, 24, citing Sophocles Oedipus the King. 6568 Cf. Jerome Letter 58 to Paulinus 3; Paulinus of Nola Epistles 31.3; Finegan, Archeology, 20–23. 6569 Malina, Windows, 106. 6570 E.g., Terence The Lady of Andros 1–27; The Self-Tormentor 16–52; The Eunuch 1–45; Phormio 1–23; The Mother-in-Law 1–57; The Brothers 1–25; Phaedrus 2.9.7–11; 3.pro1.23; 4.pro1. 15–16; Appian R.H. 3.7.3; 7.5.28; 8.10.68; C.W. 1, introduction 1; 4.8.64; Aulus Gellius 6.19.6; 17.4.3–6; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 4.1–2; 25 (Atticus), 7.1–11.6; Herodian 4.3.2, 5. Such adversarial relations weakened the state or other institutions that it plagued (Sallust Jug. 73.5; Livy 2.60.4; 3.66.4; Herodian 8.8.5). 6571 E.g., Acts 23:7; Chariton 5.4.1–2 (Callirhoés beauty); 5.8.4; 6.1.2–5; Plutarch L.S. 1, Mor. 772C; Josephus Life 139, 142–144. 6572 For the sending of officers to arrest one or transfer detention, see P.Oxy. 65. 6573 See Keener, Matthew, 351–53, 538–49,613–16; cf. Meier, Marginal lew, 3:289–388. |
| 9309 Cf. Schlier, «Begriff,» 269, who says that the Spirit illuminates the work of Jesus in his glory. In Wis 8:3, Wisdom δοξζει, but the object is her own nobility. 9310 John Chrysostom believed that the Spirit would glorify Jesus by performing greater miracles, as in 14(Hom. Jo. 78). 9313 E.g., 1 En. 1:2; 72:1; 74:2; 75:3; Jub. 32:21; 3 Bar. 1:8; 5:1; 6:1; 4 Ezra 4:1; Rev 1:1; b. Ber. 51a; Ned. 20ab; cf. gnostic traditions in Paraphrase of Shem (NHL 308–28) and Hypsiphrone (NHL 453). It also appears in negative polemic ( Gal 1:8 ; Col 2:18), some of which reflects the Prometheus myth (b. Sabb. 88a; Gen. Rab. 50:9; 68:12; 78:2). 9314 T. Mos. 1:14; 3:12; Sipra Behuq. pq. 8.269.2.15; b. Ned. 38a; Acts 7:38; cf. Isaacs, Spirit, 130. Aelius Aristides claimed that Athena passed on what she received from her Father (37.4–7, in Van der Horst, «Acts,» 57). 9316 Cf., e.g., Diogenes Laertius 6.1.11 (Antisthenes); Achilles Tatius 3.10.4; 1Macc 12:23; T. Job 18(OTP 1:847)/18(ed. Kraft, 40). 9317 Diogenes Laertius 6.2.37 (LCL); cf., e.g., Crates Ep. 26–27 (to the Athenians); Anacharsis Ep. 9:12–14 (to Croesus). In early Christian literature, see, e.g., Sent. Sext. 228. See further the comment on 15:15. 9321 In the Q tradition cf. Matt 11:27; Luke 10:22; for Jesus passing to the disciples what he received from the Father, cf., e.g., Luke 22:29. 9322 Cf., e.g., Holwerda, Spirit, 132. Brown (John, 2:728) divides 16:16–33 into a chiasmus: prediction of a test and subsequent consolation (16:16, 31–33); intervening remarks of disciples (16:17–19,29–30); and promise of blessings to be enjoyed by disciples (16:20–23a, 23b-28). But the structure is too general to be clear, and remarks about a test and consolation appear elsewhere in the section (16:20–21). 9324 Pass, Glory, 233 (cf. also Westcott, John, 231–32; Phillips, «Faith,» 89; Derrett, «Seeing»), tentatively suggests a distinction between the two terms here «behold» (for bodily sight) and «see» (for spiritual vision); in view of Johannine usage, however, the terminological distinction cannot hold (see «vision» in our introduction; also Sanchez Navarro, «Acerca»). |
| Farewell speeches often included warnings (e.g., Josephus Ant. 4.177–193), but like some other early Christian examples of this genre (e.g., Mark 13 ; Acts 20:28–31), the words of warning in 15:18–25 reflect the traditional apocalyptic perspective of suffering before the end. The Gospel " s emphasis on realized eschatology underlines the immediacy of the eschatological situation of tribulation; one may also compare the similar result of imminent eschatology in the book of Revelation. 1A. Part of the Context Some argue that the focus of 15:18–16is quite different from ch. 14; 9113 certainly the focus moves from the relationship of believers with God and one another (13:31–15:17) to the relationship of believers to hostile society. Yet one need not view 15:18–16:4 as an independent discourse formed under circumstances distinct from the rest of the Gospel; 9114 the Gospel as a whole is basically consistent in its dualism (see introduction). 1B. The Worldview of the Passage The worldview presupposed in 15:18–25 is one common to sectarian groups, in which apocalyptic ideologies (in the modern sense of that expression) often prevai1. Some early Christian writers, such as Luke, seem to represent a socioeconomic stratum and social conditions that provide more optimism for engaging the broader culture from a Christian perspective. Thus Acts includes eschatology (1:11; 3:19–21; 10:42; 17:31; 24:15; 26:6–8) but focuses more on the current mission (1:6–8); one finds favorable and just officials (5:34; 10:4; 13:7; 18:12–16; 19:31; 22:29; 23:9, 23–24; 25:25; 26:31–32; 27:43) and others (e.g., 28:2,10,21). John, however, expects his audience to view the world as hostile, with a perspective comparable to other Johannine literature (1 John 2:15–17; 4:4–5; 5:19; Rev 13:7–17). 9115 This admittedly characterized also those who, while working within society, shared an apocalyptic worldview ( Rom 12:2; 13:11–12 ; 1Cor 10:11 ; Gal 1:4; 2 Thess 2:1–13). 9116 Such hostility from the out-group would also help define the boundaries and strengthen cohesiveness of the in-group. 9117 |
| 1052 Cf. Wilson, Luke and Pastoral Epistles, ix, who offers Lukés authorship of the Pastorals as «an extreme hypothesis, that of common authorship, in order to see what the evidence will bear.» 1054 For one thorough treatment of Revelations vocabulary, see Aune, Revelation, ccvii-ccxi. For some further documentation on Revelation passages cited below, see Keener, Revelation, loc. cit. 1056 Rhetoricians learned various styles for different kinds of speeches (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Demosth. 45–46). Though rarely excelling in all, it was not uncommon to compose works in multiple genres (Seneca Controv. 3.pref.8; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Demosth. 23) ; cf. also Rowe, «Style,» 151, 155). Style should be appropriate to a speech " s circumstances (Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 88; cf. 83 n.l). 1057 Cf. Newport, «Prepositions»; idem, «Εκ»; idem, «Evidence»; idem, «Meanings.» Among the most thorough treatments are Thompson, Syntax (who observes that the Apocalypse is « " Jewish Greek», to the fullest extent» of that expression); and Aune, Revelation, clx-ccvii, who also notes the Semitic «interference» (clxii). Of course, most apocalypses were originally composed in Hebrew or Aramaic (Moore, Judaism, 2:280), so conventions inherent in the genre may have affected the style Revelation " s writer adopted. 1058 Morrice, «John,» 43–44, emphasizes his use of Ezekiel in particular. Vanhoye, «Livre,» analyzes Revelation " s creative reapplication of Ezekiel " s imagery. 1059 The OT allusion forms are closer to the Hebrew than to the LXX (Koester, Introduction 2:252; Tenney, Revelation, 26–27; Trudinger, «Text,» 84–85), but the LXX itself is full of Semitic rhythms. 1060 E.g., Ezek 10:1,44:4 ; Dan 10:5 ; cf. also 4 Ezra (e.g., 11:2,5,7,10,12,20,22,24,25,26,28,33, 35,37) and 1 Enoch (e.g., 14:14–15,18,85:3); the simple, «and I saw» (a visionary statement plus the typical Semitic coordinating conjunction) is even more common (e.g., 1 En. 17:3,6,7,8,18:1,2,3,4, 5,9,10,11,12; 2 En. 20:1; 3 En. 42:3,44:7). Like 1QS, Revelation has few explicit quotes from the OT (e.g., 1QS 5.15; 8.14) but is full of allusions. (Ellis, «Uses,» 215 n. 27, observes that nearly 70 percent of the verses contain OT allusions.) Prophetic language was typically recycled in Hellenistic oracular practice as well (Parke, Sibyls, 15). |
| 235 Reidar Aasgaard, The Childhood of Jesus: Decoding the Apocryphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas (Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2009), 168. 237 Ibid. 176, who also cites Chartrand-Burke’s 2001 University of Toronto Ph.D dissertation for this view. Hannah, ‘The Four-Gospel “Canon” ’, 627, supposes that the author has domesticated a gnostic legend, but is not confident that it came from a written source. 238 See C. E. Hill, ‘The Epistula Apostolorum: An Asian Tract from the Time of Polycarp’, Journal of Early Christian Studies, 7 (1999), 1 – 53. 240 John Barton, ‘Marcion Revisited’, in Lee Martin McDonald and James A. Sanders (eds.), The Canon Debate (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2002), 341 – 54, at 342 – 3. 242 The Syriac translation, made in the fourth or fifth century, has it addressed to Hadrian’s successor Antoninus Pius (138 – 61). But fragments of a fifth-century Armenian translation of the work have been discovered and they agree with Eusebius. 243 The author who incorporated Aristides’ apology into Barlaam transferred this section to a later part of his dialogue (ch. 15). The Syriac and Armenian have the original placement. The translation is that of D. M. Kay in ANF 10. 244 See Justin, Dial. 10.2; 100.1; 2 Clement 8.5; Theophilus, To Autolycus 3.12; Irenaeus, AH 1.7.4; 3.5.1; 3.11.7; 4.34.1. 245 Bart D. Ehrman (ed. and tr.), The Apostolic Fathers: I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache (Cambridge, Mass. and London: Harvard University Press, 2003); Michael W. Holmes (ed. and tr.), The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3rd edn. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2007). Both collections include The Martyrdom of Polycarp even though, while Polycarp is a rightful Apostolic Father, stricdy speaking, the author of the Martyrdom is not. A recent and readable introduction to these writers is Paul Foster (ed.), The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers (London: T. & T. Clark, 2007). 246 A Committee of the Oxford Society of Historical Theology, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1905). |
| 5842 Though ργον is a common term (over 130 occurrences in the LXX of the Pentateuch alone) it is significant here that it can apply to God " s act of creation ( Gen 2:2–3 LXX; Wis 13:1; Sib. Or. 1.22; cf. the verb in Philostratus Hrk. 25.8). Less likely is the proposal of Manns, «Oeuvres,» that Jesus carries out Jewish tradition " s «works of mercy.» 5843 For a probable implicit traditional link between Gen 2and Ezek 37 , see comment on John 20:22 . 5844 E.g., L.A.E. 51:1–2; 2 En. 33:1–2 J; Barn. 15.8; possibly T. Ab. 19:7A; 7:16B; see further the comment on John 5:25–30 . 5845 It may be associated with the feast in 7and perhaps identified as the (partly realized) eschatological «day» in John 8:56; 9:4; 11:9; 14:20; 16:23,26 ), perhaps partly associated with the cross (12:7; 19:31) and/or resurrection (the first day, 20:1,19). 5846 John 6does not count because «make» is properly attached to «sit down.» 5847 Elsewhere God «made» the human mouth, a synecdoche for God making people in various physical conditions (Exod 4:11). 5848 Such a relationship often invited reciprocity: Israel must love God ( ; Josh 22:5; 23:11; Neh 1:5; Dan 9:4 ). 5849 Possibly Ign. Magn. 7.1 (δι» εαυτο) alludes to John here (even in the shorter recension), especially in view of Ignatius " s νευ του πατρς οδν εποησεν. 5850 Meeks, «Agent,» 55. On the activity of the agent, see «agency» under Christology in our introduction, pp. 310–17. 5851 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.32, εξ εμαυτο (John consistently prefers π, as in, e.g., Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 396, §135D). In John 10it indicates Jesus» independence from those who want him dead, but explicitly not independence from the Father; cf. 18:34. 5852 Sipre Deut. 5.1.1; 19.1.1; 25.5.1. 5853 Talbert, John, 125–26, takes the language of honor here as cultic (citing Josephus Ant. 1.156; 6.21; 1Tim 1:17; 6:16 ; Rev 4:9, 11; 5:12). On the early Christian understanding of Jesus receiving worship within the identity of the one God, see Bauckham, God Crucified, 34–35. |
| 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. |
| 10486 As early as L.A.E. 51:2, an emphasis on the seventh-day resurrection may polemicize against the Christian eighth-day tradition. 10487 Pace Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 344. 10488 Grant, Gods, 40–41. It already existed in other areas, such as the northern coast of the Black Sea (Blawatsky and Kochelenko, Culte) or farther to the east (cf. Cumont, «Mithraeum»; Francis, «Graffiti»); it later spread widely in the Roman army (Daniels, «Army»; Gager, Kingdom, 134; Serban and Baluta, «Mithraism»; Koester, Introduction, 1:372–74; Burkert, Cults, 7, 42) but even then remained limited to particular parts of the empire (Frank, Aspects, 49–50; Nock, «Mithraism,» 113; Daniels, «Army,» 273; Bianchi, «Epilegomena,» 879). 10489 Manns, «Christologie johannique,» thinks the sevenfold repetition of «Lord» in 20:1–29 provides an inclusio with the seven christological titles in 1:19–51; this is possible, but one wonders how many readers (and especially hearers) would have counted. Bousset " s proposal that John omits the title because Christ " s followers are not his servants in the Johannine community (15:15; Kyrios Christos, 212) is utterly inadequate (cf. 15:20), especially in view of the abundant postresurrection use. 10490 Cf. Dibelius, Tradition, 191, though he admits that, on Jewish presuppositions, a resurrection meant «that the body of Jesus had not remained in the grave,» and hence does not claim that Paul did not believe the tomb was empty. 10491 Weeden, Mark, 102. 10492 Boyd, Sage, 275. 10493 Cf. death a month after a beating, due to swelled intestines (Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.10.588). Apuleius Metam. 10.11 cites a drug to simulate death (cf. also Diogenes Laertius 8.2.61), but his novel is full of magic herbs that can do almost anything, here accommodating the story line (cf. the similar plot device in Achilles Tatius 3.15–21; 5.18.2; 7.6.2). 10494 Schweizer, Jesus, 48. For a fuller defense of the empty-tomb traditions, see Craig, «Tomb»; idem, «Historicity»; idem, «Rise?» 146–52; Ladd, «Resurrection»; on the bodily character of the resurrection, see Craig, «Resurrection,» 47–74. |
|
|
