Part 93
Luke's narrative ends more positively than Mark's in that the crowds 'beat their breasts' and Mark's women are joined in their witness of the events by 'all his acquaintances'. Using the language of Ps 38:11, this is probably intended to include the apostles who are not reported as fleeing at the arrest and who at Acts 1:21 are said to have been constantly with him.
(23:50—24:12) The Tomb Luke's account of the events at the tomb is closer to Mark than to either Matthew or John. Joseph is described as a member of the council rather than as a Christian. He lays Jesus in the tomb, the women watch what is happening and then go away to prepare spices so that they might anoint him after the sabbath rest is over. Whereas Mark says that the women watch 'where' Jesus is laid, for it must not be thought that they later were to go to the wrong tomb, Luke, though sharing this concern, says 'how' he was laid, that is, unanointed. Anointing of the corpse was necessary to hinder the process of decomposition which would almost certainly have begun before the delayed anointing by the women. Luke does not name the women at this point. They have watched Jesus on the cross, seen the burial, prepared the spices, will witness the empty tomb and receive the message of the two men. In Luke, the women are the faithful witnesses. The 'two men' are angelic beings who also appear at the ascension (Acts 1:10). The message of the angels is for the women, rather than given to them in order to be passed on to the disciples
(24:35). The story, both in its characters and its significance, stands somewhat apart from the gradual development that marks Luke's narrative as a whole. It really conveys the actions of one who is already ascended and contemporary with Luke's community. Jesus' witness to himself which he gives within the story speaks of him as being already 'glorified' (v. 26). This, however, does not suggest a different source which is not fully in line with Luke's own outlook, nor does it put a question mark against the ascension as the point of glorification. The story reflects the times and outlook of the life of the community as Luke would have it be after the ascension. His own understanding made the time between the resurrection and the ascension a period of teaching and convincing. He had to place it then. But, unlike the rest of the stories, it speaks not of a past event but of one that is contemporary with every age. Jesus, unrecognized, travels with his church on its pilgrimage and in its perplexity. Its heart is warmed as it hears the Scriptures (v. 32), but Jesus himself is discerned in 'the breaking of the bread'.
(Mk 16:7). There is no command to go to Galilee, for Luke insists that all must happen within the environs of Jerusalem (24:49). The women respond to the message and 'remember'. They acknowledge its truth and their names are now given. The apostles, however, do not believe them. v. 12 is textually doubtful and it could be taken over from John; its 'linen cloths' are in his account and were not used earlier by Luke (23:53). On the other hand, its thought is entirely at one with Luke's picture of Peter who was to be kept from Satan's clutches (22:31—3). He does not share the scepticism of the others which represents the nadir of their discipleship. The women are the first witnesses to the resurrection; Peter is ready to be the first witness of the risen Lord (24:34). In Luke, the women play the part which, in the Fourth Gospel, is reserved for the beloved disciple (20:8).
Jesus now appears in what is in fact the most unashamedly materialistic of all the resurrection narratives. Lacking the unwillingness of Thomas actually to put the witness of Jesus to the test (Jn 20:26-8), the story tells how Jesus himself answers their doubts by eating in front of them. If it is accepted that the Emmaus story reflects Luke's thoughts about the later church and her relationship with her Lord, this story, which leads straight into the ascension, reveals Luke's emphasis upon the actual physicality of the Lord's body in a way that outstrips the thinking of the other NT writers. Everything in Luke depends upon the certainty of the resurrection. Whilst this story may be composed in the service of combating Gnosticism (Talbert 1966), it is more likely described in this way in order to maintain the reality of the eyewitness testimony. The women beheld his death, burial, and the empty tomb. Disciples do not believe their testimony for they need more certain evidence. When Jesus does appear to them—even after his appearance to Peter—they still need convincing. Others had been summoned from the dead (i Sam 28:13). Jesus» however, was no ghost but was the very
(24:13-49) Resurrection Appearances Luke's resurrection narratives are quite distinctive and reflect his own particular concerns. The form in which he narrates them is determined by the fact that he alone of the evangelists witnesses to an ascension event which is separated out from the resurrection, brings the resurrection appearances to an end, and takes up the physical body of Jesus into heaven. The ascension becomes the point at which it is deemed appropriate to 'worship' him (24:52). Until then, his followers neither recognize the
959 LUKE
his community and that blessing is brought into the present. Acts will show just how effective that has been. The disciples worship. The gospel ends as it began, with the praise of God in the temple.
person with whom they had walked, lived, and engaged from those early days in Galilee. They have to become convinced and reliable witnesses to the resurrection (Acts 1:22). Jesus now 'open[s] their minds to understand the scriptures'. For Luke, it is fundamental that Jesus' whole career fulfilled the Scriptures—but it needed the risen Jesus to make the real connection, for they do not obviously find their fulfilment in his life. They do so only when they are read with the prior conviction that Jesus is the Messiah, and, even then, there is more tension between the promise and the fulfilment than Luke allows. Jewish ignorance of that connection was not necessarily blameworthy (Acts 13:27). Jesus commands the disciples to remain in Jerusalem until after the gift of the Spirit, for that event will accomplish the eschatological renewal of Israel which, from Luke's point of view, must take place before the universal witness can be begun. They will be clothed with 'power from on high', for the Spirit will empower their witness and move it out until it becomes world-wide
Alexander, L. (1993), The Preface to Luke's Gospel, SNTSMS 78 (Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press). Allison, D. C. (1998), Jesus of Nazareth (Minneapolis: Fortress). Bailey, K. E. (1976), Poet and Peasant (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
(1980), Through Peasant Eyes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans). Borg, M. J. (1994), Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship (Valley Forge:
Trinity). Brown, R. E. (1977), The Birth of the Messiah (London: Geoffrey Chap-
man). Caird, G. B. (1963), Saint Luke (London: Penguin Books). Conzelmann, H. (1960), The Theology of St Luke (London: Faber &
Faber). Crossan, J. D. (1991), The Historical Jesus (San Francisco: Harper). Doble, P. (1996), The Paradox of Salvation, SNTSMS 87 (Cambridge:
(Acts 6:10; 9:17; 10:47; 19:21).
(24:50—3) The Ascension It is not certain that this passage describes an ascension of Jesus, for the two crucial clauses that would make it so are omitted from some M S S. That Jesus 'was carried up into heaven' and that the disciples 'worshipped him' are not included in a number of versions. After a long period when they were described as additions, introduced to bring the gospel to a firm conclusion, the majority of commentators now opt for their integrity. They believe that the two clauses were omitted because, with their inclusion, the gospel passage seemed to be at variance with the more obvious description of the ascension with which Luke begins Acts. It is just that contradiction, however, that makes it difficult to accept the ending of Luke as another account of the one event. The real problem is that, whereas Acts talks of Jesus' period of teaching and confirming as lasting forty days (Acts 1:3), Lk 24 has this final scene on Easter day itself. This time difference should not, however, be pressed. We have already seen that the Emmaus story stands somewhat outside the sequence of events, and it is this that actually sets the timing whilst itself causing difficulties for including everything within the one day. Time is subservient to what Luke was certain had to be done between the resurrection and the ascension. The forty days of Acts 1:3 witnesses to this same emphasis and should no more be pressed than the time sequence in Lk 24. Other differences between the two accounts are minimal. The cloud is emphasized in Acts because it not only receives Jesus, but also veils him from the disciples. It is their perplexity that dominates the Acts story and that is countered by the gift of the Spirit and the success of the mission. In the gospel, Jesus has already demonstrated his credibility. The ascension sets the seal on that. It represents in story form the fundamental belief that Jesus is Lord. What the infancy narratives proclaimed, what the voice which accepted his response to his baptism acknowledged (3:22), what Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration discussed in glory (9:31), and what everything from 9:51 has moved towards is now completed. The whole of that life is now caught up into God's presence. Jesus blesses
Cambridge University Press). Esler, P. F. (1987), Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts SNTSMS 57
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Evans, C. F. (1955), "The Central Section of St Luke's Gospel', in D.
Nineham (ed.), Studies in the Gospels (Oxford: Blackwell).
(1970), Resurrection and the New Testament (London: SCM). Saint Luke (1990), TPI NT Commentaries (London: SCM). Fitzmyer, J. A. (1981; 1985), The Gospel According to Luke, AB (New
York: Doubleday).
(1989), Luke the Theologian (New York: Paulist Press). Franklin, E. (1975), Christ the Lord (London: SPCK).
(1994), Luke: Interpreter of Paul, Critic of Matthew, JSNTSup 92 (Sheffield: JSOT). Goulder, M. D. (1989), Luke: A New Paradigm, JSNTSup 20 (Sheffield:
JSOT). Herzog, W. R. II (1994), Parables as Subversive Speech (Louisville, Ky.:
Westminster/John Knox). Hull, J. M. (1974), Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition (London:
SCM). Lampe, G. W. H. (1962), 'Luke', in Peake's Commentary on the Bible, ed.
M. Black and H. H. Rowley (London: Nelson). Maddox, R. (1982), The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark). Marshall, I. H. (1978), The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
(1980), The Acts of the Apostles, Tyndale NT Commentaries (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press). Moessner, D. P. (1989), Lord of the Banquet (Minneapolis: Fortress). Moule, C. F. D. (1977), The Origin of Christology (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press). Nolland, J. (1989-93), Luke, WBC (Dallas: Word). Sanders, E. P. (1985), Jesus and Judaism (London: SCM). Sanders, J. T. (1987), The Jews in Luke—Acts (London: SCM). Schiissler Fiorenza, E. (1983), In Memory of Her (New York: Cross-
road). Scott, B. B. (1989), Hear Then the Parable (Minneapolis: Fortress). Talbert, C. H. (1966), Luke and the Gnostics (Nashville: Abingdon). Vielhauer, P. (1968), 'On the "Paulinism" of Acts', in L. E. Keck and J.
L. Martyn (eds.), Studies in Luke—Acts (London: SPCK). Wilson, S. G. (1973), The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke—Acts,
SNTSMS 50 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Young, B. H. (1998), The Parables (Peabody: Hendrickson).
6o. John R E N E K I E F F E R
death and resurrection (chs. 20-1). Despite his main theological purpose, the evangelist shows a vivid interest in geographical and historical details, which makes his gospel sometimes a better source of historical information than the Synoptics.
A. Special Features of the Gospel of John. 1. In comparison with the Synoptics, John's gospel is much more unified in content and style. It has sometimes been called 'seamless, woven in one piece' (cf. Jn 19:23). The differences between John and the Synoptics have been used in both positive and negative ways, especially concerning their reliability. But one should not forget all that unites John with the other gospels: it is about Jesus' public life, death, and resurrection, with concrete biographical indications that may not always satisfy a modern historian.
B. The Gospel of John in a Historical Perspective. 1. The unity of the gospel is sometimes marred by contradictions: twice Jesus brings his activity to an end (10:40-2 and 12:37-43). Jesus>
first sign in Cana is followed by different signs in Jerusalem, but in 4:54 a miracle in Galilee is called the second one. In 7:3— 5 Jesus' brothers speak as if the Master had not done any signs in Jerusalem, despite 2:23 and ch. 5. In 16:5 Jesus seems to ignore the questions Peter and Thomas had already put in 13:36 and 14:5. In 14:31 Jesus says, 'Rise, let us be on our way', yet he continues his farewell discourse. In 20:30-1 the reader is given a conclusion but the book continues inch. 21. Some of the contradictions are not very important, but it is impossible to ignore the question of an evolution behind our present gospel.
2. My view is that John in his structure and in many details has been inspired by Mark, perhaps even by Luke (or common traditions behind Luke and John). But John also has his own information, which allows him to treat his material in a sovereign way (Kieffer 1987-8; 1992). He wants primarily to showthat Jesus really is the Messiah and the Son of God (cf. Jn 20:31). Matthew has already dared to group Jesus' preaching into five or six longer discourses in order to favour his own theological purpose; John is even bolder when he freely organizes his material according to his theological views, making no stylistic difference between what Jesus, the Baptist, or he himself has to say.
2. Different theories have been proposed: (i) Rearrangements: the best known hypothesis is that originally ch. 6 was placed before ch. 5. Bultmann (1971) proposes many other rearrangements, which are hardly acceptable. (2) Sources: in his commentary Bultmann also proposes three different sources behind our gospel: a sign-source, a Gnostic source, and a passion narrative source. Moreover he thinks that a later redactor has reworked the gospel, adding to it sacramental and traditional eschatological material (for other source analyses, see Fortna 1970; 1988; Boismard 1977). I am sceptical about the possibilities of reconstructing different sources behind the Gospel of John. (3) Different editions: with other exegetes such as Lindars (1972), my belief is that parts of the gospel have been added in a second edition, e.g. chs. 6; 15—17; 21. Probably the evangelist himself reworked his gospel in a process of're-reading' to which others also have contributed. (4) The history of the Johannine community: in Brown (1979) we find a reconstruction of the history of the Johannine community. Between 50 and 90 there were two groups, one centred around a man who had known Jesus and would become the 'beloved disciple'; this group accepted Jesus as a Davidic Messiah. Another group was critical about the temple cult and understood Jesus against a Mosaic background. The fusion of these two groups was the catalyst for the development of a high Christology, which was expressed in a first version of the gospel. About 90 CE the community became more anti-Jewish under the influence of converted pagans. This was reflected in a new version of the gospel. Around 100 CE a faction gathered around the author of the Johannine letters and fought against the Docetists who overinterpreted the divine aspect in the gospel and neglected Jesus' humanity.
3. The Johannine presentation is permeated with contrasts between light and darkness, life and death, truth and falsehood, heaven above and the earth below. Ambiguous expressions are used to create a kind of suspense. Subtle ironic devices suppose that the reader is shrewder than those who meet Jesus without understanding. The Master who stands in the centre of the text is described with the help of lively metaphors. His encounters, his words, and his miracles often have both a concrete and a metaphorical meaning. One could speak of a kind of progressive 'metaphorization' of words and deeds in the Johannine text (Kieffer 1989). Sayings of Jesus in the Synoptics, and even in the Gospd of Thomas, are stamped by simple images and parables. In John these give way to long and complicated monologues and dialogues, with a rather limited vocabulary used very skilfully.
4. In the Prologue Jesus Christ is identified with the Word of God. Already in the beginning of his activity he cleanses the temple, a symbolic action that, like the miracle at Cana in ch. 2, announces that the new cult around the risen Christ will replace Jewish feasts and ceremonies. In chs. 3-4 the discussions with Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman show that the Son of Man, who comes from above and will be elevated on a cross, will give his Spirit, independently of Jewish and Samaritan places of worship. In chs. 5-6 the reader is informed about Jesus' life-giving power. The polemic with the Jews in chs. 7—8 and the healing of the blind man in ch. 9 concern Jesus' identity, a subject that continues throughout chs. 10-12. In the farewell discourses in chs. 1317 Jesus finally reveals for his disciples his deep connection with his Father and the Spirit whom he will send after his
Such reconstructions are interesting but are difficult to prove. They simply project contradictions in the Johannine literature onto a historical axis.
961 JOHN
4. In presenting the material I shall draw attention to these different geographical and dramatic groupings without putting them into the centre of the commentary; proper analysis of the structure and development of each single scene is more important.
3. My own view is that the main author, whom I call 'the evangelist', tries to unite his community by transmitting the testimony of the beloved disciple. This person is presented in such a way that the reader who knows the synoptic tradition can identify him with John the son of Zebedee. Historically it is possible that somebody other than the apostle John was the mediator, but the evangelist wants us to identify the beloved disciple with the apostle. This is quite in agreement with an old tradition we find in Irenaeus (Adv. haer. 2.22.5; 3-1-1! cfEusebius, Hist. ecd. 5.20. 4—8). The final version of the gospel was probably produced about 90—100 in Ephesus (see details in Hengel 1993).
D. Suggested Outline. Prologue: The Word became Flesh and Revealed the Father (1:1-18)
First Book: Jesus Reveals his Glory to this World (1:19—12:50)
1:19—3:21: First geographical grouping: The Baptist's Testimony (1:19—34) Jesus' First Disciples (1:35-51) The First Sign at the Wedding in Cana (2:1-12) Temple Cleansing in Jerusalem (2:13—25) Dialogue with Nicodemus (3:1—21)
C. Structure. 1. The first part (1:19-12:50), now often called 'the book of signs', is regularly distinguished from a second one called 'the book of glory' (13:1—20:31; see Brown 1966). In that outline ch. 21 is usually considered as an appendix written by a member of the Johannine school (and 7:53—8:11 as a nonJohannine text; see JN APP). It is difficult to come to a consensus concerning the first part. One can state that it is punctuated by seven miracles (two at Cana and Capernaum, two near the Sea of Galilee, two in Jerusalem and one at Bethany near Jerusalem), and by different tableaux and discussions (the meetings with the Baptist and his disciples, with Nicodemus and with the Samaritans, the temple cleansing in Jerusalem, the disputes in Jerusalem, the acclamation near Jerusalem, the anointing at Bethany). One can often find chiastic and concentric schemes in the text, but it is difficult to establish the author's plan with their help alone.
3:22—5:47: Second geographical grouping: The Baptist's Last Testimony (3:22-30) Jesus Comes from Above (3:31-6) Jesus' Work in Samaria (4:1—42) The Second Sign at Cana: The Healing of the Royal
Official's Son (4:43-54) Jesus Heals a Lame Man: He Gives Life to Whom he Wishes
(5:i-47) 6:1—10:39: Third geographical grouping: Jesus Feeds 5,000 and Walks on the Sea: He is the Bread of
Life (6:1-71) Jesus at the Festival of Booths (7:1-8:59) Jesus Restores Sight to the Blind Man (9:1—41) Jesus is the Door and the Good Shepherd (10:1—21) Jesus at the Festival of Dedication (10:22-39)
2. The whole book may be considered as a unity. If the geographical indications are studied, four cycles become apparent. A first grouping (1:19-3:21) leads from the region across the Jordan (1:28) to Cana (2:1, n) and Capernaum in Galilee (2:12), and finally to Jerusalem (2:13, 23). A second grouping (3:22-5:47) starts in Judea, probably across the Jordan (3:26), and takes the reader through Samaria (4:4) to the second stay at Cana in Galilee (4:46) and finally to Jerusalem (5:1). A third grouping (6:1—10:39) starts on 'the other side' of the Sea of Galilee (6:1-16; cf 6:17, 22, 25) and leads again to Jerusalem in Judea. The last grouping (10:40-21:23) carries one from the region across the Jordan (10:40) to Jerusalem (12:12), through Bethany (11:1), and finally back to the Sea of Tiberias in Galilee (see Gyllenberg 1960; 1980; Kieffer 1985). The regions across the Jordan and on the other side of Galilee are somehow starting-points. Galilee and Samaria are, with the exception of the end of ch. 6, regions where Jesus is well received, whereas in Judea violent discussions during Jewish feasts lead to various threats to kill him (5:18; 7:1,19-25; 8:37, 40; 10:31-9; 11:53). 3. If one considers more closely the Christological aspects in the Fourth Gospel, one can observe a dramatic progression from Jesus' initial signs and encounters (2:1-4:54), his works and discussions at Jewish feasts in Jerusalem (5:1—10:39), the climactic sign of raising Lazarus and the bridge section on the coming of Jesus' hour (11:1-12:50), to Jesus' farewell at the Last Supper (13:1-17:26), and finally his hour of passion, death, and resurrection (18:1—21:23). The Prologue and the encounter with the Baptist can be considered as two Christological introductions, and both 20:30-1 and 21:24-5 as ^wo conclusions (see a slightly different version in Mlakuzhyil 1987).
10:40-21:25: Fourth geographical grouping: Back across the Jordan (10:40-2) Jesus who Raises Lazarus Must Himself Die (11:1—54) Jesus is Anointed and Acclaimed before his Death
(11:55-12:36) Faith and Unbelief (12:37-50)
Second Book: Jesus Reveals the Glory of his Death and
Resurrection to the Disciples (13:1—21:25)
Jesus Washes the Feet of his Disciples and Points out the
Traitor (13:1—30) The First Part of the Farewell Discourse (13:31-14:31) The Second Part of the Farewell Discourse (15:1-16:40) The Third Part of the Farewell Discourse (16:4/7—33) Jesus' Prayer to his Father (17:1—26) Jesus' Passion, Death, and Burial (18:1-19:42) The Risen Christ (20:1-21:25)
Prologue: The Word became Flesh and Revealed the Father
(1:1-18)
In a kind of overture the narrator gives his readers the impression that his story will be told 'from a transcendent and eternal vantage point' (Stibbe 1993: 22—3). The author uses subtle imagery to sum up main themes in the following work. As elsewhere in the Jewish tradition, light, life, and darkness,
JOHN 962
prove Jesus' inferiority. Moreover, the joining of 'what has come into being' to v. 3 would yield a strange Greek sentence, which would be correct only if the expression were changed to hongegonen. There is a parallel text in iQS 11:11: 'without Him not a thing is done'. The author now describes the Word's function in creation, as either the instrument by which God created, or as the fountain-head which made creation possible. The whole creation is marked by God's Word and reveals God, in opposition to later Gnostic speculations where the world is created by an evil demiurge. The Word in John is both an instrument and a model, similar to Col 1:16, 'all things have been created through him'. But in this text creation is also 'for him', whereas in John the goal of creation is the Father. w. 4—5, 'What has come into being in him was life.' One could also translate: Tn what has come into being, there was life'; 'In what has come into being, he was life'; or 'What has come into being, was life (alive) in him'. But the NRSV translation best fits the context. Life and light have in these verses soteriological connotations: the creating Word of God is the fountainhead of spiritual life and light for all people. The author is specially interested in a moral choice between light and darkness. The image of a cosmic battle corresponds to humankind's spiritual struggle, and therefore the translation 'did not overcome it' fits the context better than 'did not understand it' or 'did not accept it', w. 6-8, these verses interrupt the cosmic viewpoint and introduce the description of the Word's incarnation. In a similar way Luke introduces Jesus' birth by the preparatory birth of John the Baptist (Lk 1-2). The expression para theou in v. 6 can mean, as in classical Greek, 'from God' or, as in later Greek, 'by God'. John the Baptist is only a witness to the light of the Word, whereas Jesus himself is the light (Jn 3:19; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-6). Jesus' testimony is greater than the Baptist's (5:36). This is probably an attack against disciples of the Baptist who considered him as a messianic figure (see also John's negative utterances about himself in 1:20—7). w9—I1
which are elements of the creation, are meant to symbolize spiritual realities. Life and light which were created in the beginning by the word of God (Gen i) are manifested in the Word both before and after creation. The theme of light leads to that of the visible glory of the Word (v. 14) whereas the theme of life gives birth to that of the fullness from which believers receive (v. 16). The prologue begins with what appeals to the ear, the Word, and finishes with what the eye cannot see, God (v. 18). Through the Word, who is both light and life, the invisible and unheard God is revealed.
There has been much discussion about a pre-Christian or Christian hymn which the author may have used and adapted to fit his purpose. On these hypotheses, w. 6-8 and 15, on the Baptist, are generally considered as later additions (see different reconstructions in Rochais 1985; cf Schnackenburg 1977-9: i). But these views are open to objection; the whole prologue may have been written by the same author in a kind of solemn prose, with chiastic phrases which are developed by amplifications and contrasts. Moreover there is a kind of concentric construction with a centre in w. 12-13 and different sentences that correspond to each other around this centre. This is especially clear for w. 6—8 and 15 on the Baptist, but also for the beginning in w. 1—3 and the end in w. 17—18 (cf. Culpepper 1979-80).
The evangelist may have had in mind the gospel of Mark: 'The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God' (Mk 1:1). He wanted to prolong this 'beginning' by going back to God and the creation. In his prologue he mentions John the Baptist who in Mark opens the gospel proper. But, like Mark, he gives the reader a key to interpret his book: it will be about the revelation of Jesus who is both Christ and the Son of God, Jn 1:18 (see the purpose of John's book in 20:30-1; cf. Hooker 1974-5).
(1:1-11) The evangelist shows first how the Word which was with God came to what was his own. w. 1—2, the author alludes to Gen 1:1, but describes what was before the creation. If he has Mk 1:1 in mind, he wants to show that the gospel begins with the Word which was with God. God's Wisdom is created at the beginning (Prov 8:22), but John tells us about the uncreated Word. John usually uses pros with an implication of movement and one might therefore translate 'the Word was turned towards God' (so the Fr. TOB). This could be paralleled by an alternative translation of eis in v. 18: 'the only Son, who turns towards the Father's bosom'. Such a translation could fit the gospel's description of the Son's orientation towards the Father. But the preposition eis in v. 18 is probably used in place of en. The parallelism between w. i and 18 favours therefore the usual translation of v. i, 'was with God'. The Greek verb en has three different meanings in v. i: an existential (the Word was), a relational (was with God), and an identificational (the Word was God). Theos, 'God', is used without the article, which is normal in a predicate, but the author could have used it if he had wanted to underline a complete identification of the Word with God. Jesus is God (1:1, 18; 20:28), but normally it is his Father who is theos with a precedent article in Greek, v. 3, the expression ho gegonen, 'what has come into being' at the end of v. 3 probably must be taken together with v. 4, which was the normal interpretation among the Church Fathers before the heretics of the fourth century used it to
could be translated, 'There was the true light that enlightens everyone who is coming into the world,' but in that case 'everyone who is coming into the world' would be redundant. Another translation could take the remote 'Word' as the grammatical subject of the sentence (as in w. 10-11), but NRSV is probably right when it considers the just-mentioned 'light' as the subject of a periphrastic construction. Theologically it is the light of the Word who comes to a world created through him. Therefore one can say that he comes to what is his own (v. n). Some exegetes think that w. 9-11 describe the presence of the Word in Israel during the OT period and that v. 12 alludes to the faithful remnant of Israel. But the concentric structure of the prologue makes it more probable that w. 9-11 describe the time of Jesus' activity, since they correspond to v. 14 about the Word who became flesh. John's testimony in w. 6—8 introduces w. 9—11 and his testimony in v. 15 confirms v. 14. Moreover, in the rest of the gospel those who reject Jesus' witness can easily be identified with his own people who did not accept him. What v. 5 describes as a cosmic conflict is in w. 9—11 applied to the human world, which does not recognize or accept Jesus.
(1:12-13) All that was said about the Word before w. 12-13 and that which follows after has its centre in those who received the Word and became children of God. This agrees with the
963 JOHN
original reading, attested already in Pss and P75). The 'bosom' expresses the intimacy Jesus shares with his Father (see 13:25 on the beloved disciple), in his pre-existence, his mission on earth, and his return to the Father (cf. 17:5). He is therefore the proper revealer of God. Those who adhere to Jesus can in their turn see God (14:8—9).
aim of the entire gospel that 'through believing you may have life in his name' (20:31). The contrast between those who receive him in v. 12 and those who do not accept him in v. n is fundamental throughout the gospel. In 1:19-12:50 different attitudes in relation to Jesus are described, in 13:1-17:26 everything is concentrated on the disciples, 'his own', whom Jesus has loved to the end (13:1). Those who become disciples are allowed to be called 'children of God' and are in relationship with the only one who in the Fourth Gospel is called 'God's
First Book: Jesus Reveals his Glory to this World
(1:19-12:5°)
Son', v. 13, children of God cannot be born in a carnal way. The Greek has 'blood' in the plural, which might allude to the rabbinic doctrine (derived ultimately from Aristotle), that man's seed, considered as 'blood', is in the act of conception mixed with woman's blood. The mention of 'the will of man' reflects the prevailing idea that the male was the only active party in procreation. Some MSS have changed the plural 'bloods' into the singular in order to allude to the virgin birth of Jesus.
(1:19-3:21) First Geographical Grouping
(1:19-34) The Baptist's Testimony In 1:19-51 the evangelist develops some aspects of the prologue by means of a more concrete introduction to Jesus' activity. The testimony of the Baptist and the first disciples' discovery of Jesus introduce the reader to different features of the gospel's Christology. In contrast to the Synoptics the Gospel of John does not mention the events that surround the Baptist's activity and does not describe how Jesus was baptized by him. The evangelist wants the reader to see the decisive difference between the Baptist and Jesus, with the help of the former's testimony concerning himself (w. 19—28) and concerning Jesus (w. 29—34).
(1:14—18) The evangelist finally shows how the Word become flesh has revealed the Father, v. 14, in contrast to what is said in v. 13 about the 'carnal will', the Word that was with God becomes flesh. The author repeats logos, 'the Word', that he mentioned in v. i, but has had in mind all the time. The concrete word sarx, 'flesh', is used probably in order to refute Docetic views similar to those we meet in John's letters (i Jn 1:2-3:4:2; 2 Jny). 'Lived among us', or literally'put up his tent among us' is used of Wisdom in Sir 24:10. The temple in Jerusalem replaced the tabernacle in the desert as a dwellingplace for God. God's Wisdom is thus present in Israel and in its temple, but the presence of the Word in the flesh is physical. 'Among us' and 'we have seen' underline the Johannine witness to God's initiative. The Word's glory is dependent on the Father's presence in his only Son (cf. 17:5). Monogenes can mean 'only', 'unique', 'precious' (cf. Heb 11:17 about Isaac), or 'born from the one'. It is used four times in John (1:14,18; 3:16, 18), and once in i Jn 4:9. It seems to sum up the very special relationship between Jesus and his Father. 'Full of grace and truth' is best connected with 'only son', rather than with 'glory'. The expression reflects God's revelation to Moses as 'merciful and gracious' (Ex 34:6), i.e. 'full of loving initiative and of fidelity'. In the Word made flesh humanity can meet God's glory, v. 15, in w. 6-8 John testified to the light, but now he attests that the one who came after him in fact ranks ahead of him because he precedes him in time as God's Word. This anticipates v. 30. v. 16, the verse resumes what was said in v. 14, but concentrates on the word charis, 'grace'. Even if the preposition anti normally means 'instead of, the context favours NRSV 'upon' (cf. Philo, De postcritatc Caini, 145). The word pleroma, 'fullness', does not yet have the later Gnostic meaning of the pantheon of deities, but the normal one (as in e.g. LXX Ps 23(24):!). 'We' are all those who in v. 12 become children of God, in contrast to v. n, 'his own people', v. 17, what was given by Moses is not depreciated (as it often is in Paul), but 'grace and truth', already mentioned in v. 14, are considered as of higher dignity and fulfil the former revelation. The prologue now makes it explicit that the Word is identical with Jesus, the Messiah, v. 18, in contrast to Moses, who could not see God without dying (Ex 33:20), Jesus is said to be in the Father's bosom and is himself'God' (probably the
(1:19-28) The evangelist first lets the Baptist testify that he is not the Messiah, the prophet, or Elijah, v. 19, 'the Jews' in the Fourth Gospel is often used negatively for the authorities who are opposed to Jesus, especially the Pharisees and high priests, but sometimes also for ordinary people (6:41, 52). The expression can be treated in a neutral way (e.g. 5:1) or even have a positive connotation (4:22). The Jews are sent from Jerusalem, the centre of resistance to Jesus' message. They are associated with two religious factions, priests and Levites, probably as specialists on Jewish purifications which are so important in chs. 1—2. In v. 24 a second group is that of the Pharisees, w. 20-1, just as in w. 6-8 the Baptist underlines what he is not; there he was not the light, here he is not the Messiah, Elijah, or the prophet. The Hebrew mastah and the Aramaic mesicha', which in 1:41 and 4:25 are transcribed in Greek, mean 'the anointed one', a word derived from the anointing of kings. In Dan 9:25 a future anointed agent of God is expected and in the Dead Sea scrolls two such messianic figures are looked forward to, 'one of Aaron and one of Israel', i.e. a priestly Messiah and a kingly Messiah, who would be a descendant of David (see iQS 9:11). In Lk 3:15 people also wonder if the Baptist is the expected Messiah. According to Mai 3:1 and 4:5 (HB 3:23), Elijah would be sent as a messenger to prepare the way of the day of the Lord. In the Synoptics the Baptist is normally identified with Elijah as the forerunner of Jesus the Messiah (Mk 9:13 par. and Lk 1:17; 7:27). In the Fourth Gospel Jesus himself seems to be a figure like Elijah (see Jn 1:27), as he is in some Lukan texts (Lk 4:24-6; 9:51; Acts 1:2, 9-11). The expectation of the prophet is derived from Deut 18:18 and is also present in iQS 9:11 ('until the coming of a prophet'). It plays an important role especially in Jn 4 and in Samaritan theology, w. 22-3, in his self-presentation the Baptist quotes only Isa 40:3 and not Mai 3:1, unlike the Synoptics which identify him with Elijah. The evangelist adapts the citation to the only role the Baptist may assume, that of a voice preparing the way of the Lord. w. 24-5, 'Now they had been sent', the Greek text can also be translated: 'Also
JOHN 964
some Pharisees had been sent', as a partitive. Some MSS have added the article hoi in the beginning of the sentence: 'Those who were sent were Pharisees'. In any case, the author does not describe the situation during Jesus' time when the Pharisees often were opposed to the priests and the Levites. After 70 CE the Pharisees could more easily be identified with 'the Jews'. The new question put to the Baptist supposes that in order to be allowed to baptize he must be a kind of messianic figure. It may reflect discussions between Christians and the followers of the Baptist (see also 3:22—3; 4:1—2). w. 26—7, just as in the Synoptics, the Baptist underlines that he baptizes only with water. Instead of mentioning Jesus' baptism with fire, however, here he points out their inability to recognize the one who stands among them. In a way similar to the synoptic tradition he stresses his unworthiness in comparison to Jesus, but with different words (Mk 1:7-8 par.), v. 28, Bethany across the Jordan is difficult to locate and has therefore been changed to Beth-barah (see Judg 7:24) by Origen and in some MSS after him.
described: one when Jesus meets two of the Baptist's disciples and Andrew's brother Simon, w. 35—42, and another when he encounters Philip and Nathanael, w. 43—51. In both episodes a disciple expresses his joy to have found the expected Messiah (w. 41,45). Jesus invites some of them to 'come and see' (v. 39) or to 'follow' him (v. 43). The whole text underlines the concrete and the symbolic meaning of different ways of'seeing' Jesus or of 'being seen' by him, of 'coming' to him and of 'finding' him. (1:35-42) Jesus first meets two disciples of the Baptist, and then Simon, w. 35—7, in w. 29—34 me Baptist testified before a larger crowd, whereas in w. 35—7 his witness is directed towards the two disciples who leave him for Jesus, v. 38, the address 'Rabbi', usual in Matthew and Luke, is explained in Greek (didaskale, teacher). In Jn 3:26 the Baptist is also addressed as 'Rabbi', but elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel the title is reserved for Jesus, v. 39, 'Come and see' is usual in rabbinic literature, but gets a special meaning here by the double sense ofmenein, 'to stay' and 'to remain' with Jesus, and by an exact indication of time ('the tenth hour'), w. 40—2, as the evangelist is probably acquainted with the Gospel of Mark the anonymous disciple is best identified with one of the sons of Zebedee (see Jn 21:2), and presumably with the apostle John, since James had already died in 44 CE. Andrew confesses that Jesus is the 'Messiah'; as in 4:25 the reader is given the Greek equivalent, christos. Simon Peter is the son of John, as in 21:15—17 (contrast Mt 16:17, in Aramaic bar-yond). Jesus calls Simon 'Cephas', which is explained by the Greek petra, 'rock', as in Mt 16:16-18. But the Fourth Gospel puts the renaming of Peter early, after his brother's confession rather than his own. Matthew seems to have combined Simon's confession at Caesarea Philippi with the change of name in order to emphasize his importance in the church. (1:43-51) Jesus now meets Philip and Nathanael. w. 43-4, according to Mk 1:29 Simon and Andrew lived in Capernaum, but the Fourth Gospel seems to correct this by locating them at Bethsaida across the Jordan, which according to Jn 12:21 is in Galilee (more properly Gaulanitis). As in the synoptic tradition, Jesus explicitly calls a disciple to follow him (cf. Mk 2:14 par.). Philip is one of the twelve (Mk 3:18 par.) but probably not identical with the evangelist Philip (Acts 6:5; 8:4-8, 26-40; 21:8). v. 45, the Hebrew name Nathanael means 'God gives'. Some have tried to identify him with Matthew or Bartholomew, but he rather represents all Jews who understand the great gift of God. The particular man Jesus from Nazareth is seen as a messianic figure announced by Moses and the prophets (cf. Lk 24:37). But there may also be an allusion to a prophet like Moses in Deut 18:15—18. Jesus is the son of Joseph (as in Lk 3:23 and 4:22, but in contrast to Mk 6:3 where he is the son of Mary), v. 46, a typical Johannine irony makes Nathanael admit in the following discussion that something good comes from Nazareth (see Jn 1:49). v. 47, truly (alethos) underlines the signification of 'Israelite', perhaps as 'one who can see God', horon ton theon (e.g. Philo, DC mutations nominum, 81). v. 48, the fig tree symbolizes in rabbinic literature the place where one studies the Torah (see Ecdes. Rab. 5:11). That Jesus knows 'under' which 'tree' Nathanael was can also be compared with Daniel's prophetic knowledge (Sus 54, 58). v. 49, the title 'Son of God' has in the
(1:29—34) Now the evangelist refers to the Baptist's testimony about Jesus. In w. 29-31, different days in Jesus' first week are mentioned: 'the next day' in 1:29, 35,43, and 'on the third day' in 2:1. There will also be a last week before Jesus' death (12:1—19:31), and a week of appearances after the resurrection (20:1, 19). The evangelist replaces the synoptic baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:11 par.) by the Baptist's double testimony before the people of Israel: about Jesus as the Lamb of God (Jn 1:29— 31), and about Jesus on whom he has seen the Spirit descend (w. 32-4; Richter 1974). The image of the lamb has, in the tradition behind the gospel, a double connotation: both the Suffering Servant (see 12:38), who is like a lamb led to the slaughter (Isa 53:7), who bears our infirmities, and is crushed for our iniquities (Isa 53:4-5)—both 'bear' and 'take away' are possible translations of the Hebrew word nasa' in Isa 53:4, 12—and the passover lamb, alluded to at the death of Jesus (Jn 19:31, 34). Even if the passover lamb has no atonement function in Judaism, it receives this in the Christian tradition by its association with the death of Jesus and of the
Suffering Servant (cf i Cor 5:7 and i Jn 3:5). v. 30 resumes the same thought that was expressed in the prologue (v. 15). If the expression 'after me comes a man' alludes to Elijah, Jesus is considered as the hidden Elijah, who already existed before the Baptist. But the latter also underlines Jesus' pre-existence
(cf. 8:58), and, in contrast, his own ignorance (v. 31). w. 32—4, in the Synoptics the Baptist testifies to the baptism with the Holy Spirit before his encounter with Jesus. In the Fourth Gospel both the descent of the Spirit on Jesus and the baptism with the Holy Spirit are described as the object of the Baptist's witness. The scene culminates with the confession that Jesus is the 'Son of God', a reading already present in P66 and P", which probably is better than 'the Elect of God' we find in other MSS. As in the Synoptics the dove is a symbol for the Spirit; John adds that the Spirit remains over Jesus. In contrast to the Baptist's mission as a mere witness, Jesus is sent by his Father with a unique task and message.
(1:35—51) Jesus' First Disciples The text tries to link together two traditions, one on the Baptist's own activity and one concerning his meeting with Jesus, which in its turn results in the first disciples' encounter with Jesus. Two days are
965 JOHN
number 'six' may symbolically express incompleteness, and the jars filled to the brim completeness. The second injunction of Jesus in v. 8 indicates indirectly that the miracle has taken place, w. 9-10, we do not get the reaction of the guests, but the steward expresses their astonishment. Ironically enough the one who is normally responsible for the meal does not know where the wine has come from, whereas his servants know. There is a comic aspect to the story in the allusion to the guests' drunkenness. The bridegroom appears in the story only here, but soon the Baptist will speak of Jesus himself as the bridegroom (3:29). The wine's quantity and quality hint at the time of the messianic wedding (cf. Am 9:13-14; Isa 25:6; 54:4-8; 62:4-5).wn-i2, the reader is given the narrator's viewpoint on the miracle, and an echo from w. 1-2, with the happy conclusion that the disciples believed in Jesus. The 'brothers' make an appearance here, accompanying Jesus to Capernaum. In 7:3-5 they will show a rather sceptical attitude towards him.
Fourth Gospel a much profounder meaning than in the Jewish tradition, where it can be applied to an angel, a king, Israel, a judge, or a just man. Also the title 'King of Israel' fulfils an important purpose as will be shown in the discussion with Pilate (Jn 18:33-80) and in the inscription on the cross: 'King of the Jews' (19:19—22). w. 50—1, the reader is invited to expect greater things, that Jesus will soon reveal his glory (2:11), a beginning that will be concluded with the glorification on the cross. The final words of Jesus are still addressed to Nathanael, but also include all encounters with Jesus. By interpreting the gospel, the reader will see heaven opened. The angels of God ascend and descend not upon a ladder as in the dream of Jacob/Israel (Gen 28:12), but upon the Son of Man, who is the link between the Father and the world of humankind. The believing community will be able to see the unique revelation of the Son of Man (Neyrey 1982). (2:1-12) The First Sign at the Wedding in Cana In 2:1-4:54, which leads the reader from Cana back to Cana, the reader is confronted with Jesus' initial signs and works in Galilee, Jerusalem, and Samaria. In 2:11 the narrator draws attention to the account of the miracle in Cana by calling it the first of Jesus' signs. The healing of the official's son is considered as the second sign (4:53). In 20:30 the evangelist indicates that he has chosen only a few signs of Jesus. There have been learned and rather contradictory hypotheses about a 'signssource' which the evangelist might have used (Fortna 1970; 1988). The actual gospel invites the reader to count the different miracle-stories that are reported. One can easily come to the number seven before Jesus' death and resurrection: after the first two signs we have the healing of a lame man in 5:1—9; the feeding of the five thousand in 6:1—13; me walking on water in 6:16—21; the healing of a man born blind in 9:1-12; and as a climax the raising of Lazarus in 11:1-44, which anticipates Jesus' own death and resurrection. The main point of the wedding in Cana is therefore Christological and not to underline the sacramental aspects of water, wine, or wedding, or to show how important Jesus' mother is. The messianic time is inaugurated when Jewish purifications give way to the revelation of Jesus' glory (Olsson 1974). The miracle has been compared with stories about Dionysus, but OT models, such as the feeding miracles of Elijah and Elisha (i Kings 17:1-16; 2 Kings 4:1-7, 42-4), are closer to it. (2:1-2) It is difficult to know whether the author already has the Twelve in mind or only the disciples named in ch. i. Their invitation is mentioned after that of the mother of Jesus who has a special connection with Galilee (cf. 1:46). She is never called Mary in the Fourth Gospel, perhaps in order not to confuse her with other Marys (11:1; 19:25). The third day may be an allusion to the day of resurrection, but it also completes Jesus' first week. w. 3-5, in preparation of the miracle Jesus' mother takes the initiative, both before and after her son's answer. Jesus addresses his mother with 'woman', which has no derogatory significance (see also 19:26). By his apparent rebuke ('what concern is that to you and to me?'), Jesus wants her to understand that a miracle in Cana will lead to the hour of glorification on the cross, w. 6—8, the water jars are made of stone because they are used for purifications. The quantity of water is enormous for a private person, 120-80 gallons, but the miracle of the wine has rather an illustrative function. The
(2:13—25) Temple Cleansing in Jerusalem v. 13 is a rather abrupt transition from the sign in Galilee to the cleansing of the temple in Jerusalem, whereas w. 23-5 describe the narrator's understanding of the people's reactions and forms a bridge to the following discussion with Nicodemus. The narrator's point of view is 'an enlightened, post-resurrection' one (Stibbe 1993: 51), which is especially apparent in w. 17 and 22. In the synoptic tradition the cleansing of the temple is the main cause of Jesus' arrest, whereas in the Fourth Gospel the raising of Lazarus has that function. Therefore the temple scene is placed much earlier as an illustration of how Jewish institutions (as already seen in the case of Cana), are meantto be replaced by Jesus. The actual scene is described in a way which differs markedly from the synoptic account. Through the reactions of the Jews and the disciples the purification of the temple becomes a sign of the destruction and raising of another temple, Jesus' body. The metaphors go in two directions: from Jesus' zeal for the house of God to his body, and from his risen body to the cleansing of the temple.
v. 13, the Passover is mentioned also in 6:4 and 11:55. Here it introduces Jesus' allusions to his last Passover when he will die and rise from the dead. w. 14—16, in the Fourth Gospel people sell not only doves as in the synoptic tradition, but also cattle and sheep, which was quite possible to do in the outer area of the temple (hieron) at the time of Caiaphas. The whip of cords, not mentioned in the synoptic tradition, is probably only meant for cattle and sheep. The money-changers are named kermatistai in v. 14, but in v. 15 kollubistai as in the synoptic tradition. They exchanged Roman and Greek coins, with the image of the emperor (cf. Mk 12:16) or of gods, for Tyrian money which was allowed in the temple area. Unlike the synoptic account, in John Jesus does not cite Scripture (Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11) but speaks with authority about his own Father's house (cf. Lk 2:49). w. 17—18, the evangelist contrasts the disciples' understanding of Jesus' messianic action (in the light of Ps 69:10 where the present tense is replaced by the future) and the negative attitude of the Jews who ask him to legitimate his behaviour by signs. This request for 'signs' here and in Jn 6:30 is similar to the synoptic one (cf. Mk 8:11-12 par.), w. 19-22, in contrast to w. 14-15 Jesus speaks now of destroying the inner temple area (naos). The
JOHN 966
womb. Jesus alludes to Christian baptism, which the Baptist has already predicted in 1:33 (cf. also 7:38—9). There is no textual evidence supporting Bultmann's hypothesis that 'and water' has been added by a redactor (Bultmann 1971: 138). In order to explain the difference between natural birth and birth as a child of God (cf. 1:12—13) Jesus opposes flesh and spirit. The short parable on the 'wind' (the same word as 'Spirit' in both Hebrew, ruah, and Greek, pneuma) prepares the reader for the mysterious origin and destination of the Son of Man which will be revealed in the following verses, w. 9—15, the third question of Nicodemus in v. 9 is short and gives Jesus an occasion to reveal who he is and how he will influence humankind's rebirth. But before that Jesus rebukes the teacher of Israel for his lack of understanding (w. 10—n), an indirect attack on the Jewish contemporaries of the evangelist who do not accept the Christian testimony. As Son of Man Jesus is pre-existent and will ascend to heaven (v. 13), which is far more difficult to understand than the more earthly matter of baptism Jesus was speaking about (v. 12). At the end ofv. 13 most MSS, of different text types, add 'who is in heaven'. This difficult reading may be original and have been suppressed in important Alexandrian witnesses (among them Pss, P?5, and B). It underlines that even during his life on earth Jesus still has direct contact with heaven and can therefore testify to what he has seen (v. n). The 'we know' in v. n contrasts with the 'we know' in v. 2. Nicodemus' solemn declaration about what he knows as a representative Jew is insignificant in comparison with Jesus' personal knowledge of God. Nicodemus can now disappear and let Jesus reveal heavenly things about the Son of Man (w. 13—15) and about the Son of God (w. 16—18). Jesus is the light that attracts all believers (w. 19-21). In the Jewish tradition we have different heroes who have seen heavenly visions (e.g. Enoch, Isaiah, Daniel), but only Wisdom, the Word, or the Spirit are presented as coming from God. The perspective of crucifixion (v. 14) in the gospel tradition is a common way of introducing the theme of the Son of Man. In Num 21:9 the serpent is placed upon a pole, but already in the targums the serpent is put in an elevated place (see Neofiti i and Pseudo-Jonathan', cf. Wis 16:6—7). That the Servant of God is exalted and lifted up in Isa 52:13 may also have contributed to the interpretation of the crucifixion as an elevation and a glorification. To see or enter the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3, 5) is reformulated in v. 15 as having eternal life. w. 16—21, after the prologue this is the first time the evangelist speaks of God's initiative. It is also the first time the theme of 'loving' is introduced, which will play an important role in the rest of the gospel. In v. 16 we have a kind of gospel in miniature, where Jesus' death is combined with God's love for humanity, in order to give it eternal life. v. 17 develops what is hinted at in v. i6a, whereas v. 18 gives some precision on the importance of faith which was mentioned in v. i6b. The idea of a judgement, which was implicit in v. 18, is developed in w. 19-21 with the help of the sharp contrast between light and darkness. The whole section is concentrated on the sending of the Son and the double way people respond to it. In 12:46-8 the evangelist will evoke the last judgement, whereas here the judgement is already present in this life. In 3:16, 18 Jesus himself reaffirms what was said about God's only Son in the prologue (1:14, 18). In the rest of the gospel Jesus often speaks of himself simply as the Son. In
eschatological catastrophe for Jerusalem and its temple became an important item in the lawsuit against Jesus (cf Mk 13:2 par). Perhaps he was also charged for his prophecy about its reconstruction. 'The third day'may be inspired by Hos 6:2. By a typical Johannine misunderstanding the Jews continue to think of the forty-six years of rebuilding the temple. According to Josephus (Ant. 15.380) Herod started it about 20/19 BCTh£ scene would then take place about 27/8 CE, a satisfactory Johannine chronology to fit Jesus' death on the 14 Nisan in the year 30. w. 23—5, the reference to Passover and Jerusalem resumes what was said in v. 13. The author has mentioned only one sign in Jerusalem, but he probably includes what has happened in Cana. By his close relation to the Father Jesus has a profound knowledge of people and therefore cannot trust their rather superficial faith.
(3:1—21) Dialogue with Nicodemus This scene contrasts Nicodemus' earth-bound understanding with Jesus' wide perspective on God and the Spirit. The mysterious origin and direction of the wind prepares the reader for the heavenly things that Jesus is about to reveal. The Son of Man will be lifted up on the cross as a link between heaven and earth, and as a sign of God's love. The text moves from the night in the beginning of the dialogue to the light which those who do what is true will receive. Three short questions of Nicodemus receive three answers which progessively become longer and in w. 16-21 end up in a kind of commentary (by Jesus or by the evangelist). Nicodemus in this chapter still hesitates before Jesus' claims. In 7:50—1 and 19:39 he will spiritually evolve and become a secret disciple of Jesus.
w. i-2», Nicodemus, a Pharisee, a teacher, and a 'leader of the Jews' (cf. 7:26, 48, 50-1), is presumably a member of the synedrion, a legal assembly which may at this time have comprised c.jo members representing three groups: the chief priests, the elders, and the scribes, of whom some were Pharisees. He encounters the personification of a higher wisdom. In Lk 18:18 a certain ruler also questions Jesus, but in the Fourth Gospel the discussion with an important representative of the Jewish faith takes place at the beginning. 2/7-3, Nicodemus, like the people in Jerusalem, is probably impressed by the Jesus' signs (Jn 2:23), but he still has to learn in what sense Jesus 'has come from God'. Jesus answers him with a solemn double 'Amen', a revelation formula characteristic of the Fourth Gospel. He does so indirectly by speaking of how one is able to 'see' (in v. 5 to 'enter') the kingdom of God. Only in these two verses does the Fourth Gospel mention the synoptic theme of the kingdom of God, but in 18:36 Jesus answers Pilate that he is king in a kingdom which is not from this world. According to the ideas of that time a child was conceived by his father. In a similar way a child must be born from above (cf. 1:12-13 and i Jn 3:9)- But the answer of Nicodemus shows that the evangelist also considers the mother's contribution to birth. The Johannine sayings are similar to the synoptic theme of becoming like a child in order to enter the kingdom (Mt 18:3 par.), w. 4-8, the Greek expression anothen in the Fourth Gospel generally means 'from above' (Jn 3:31; 19:11, 23), but Nicodemus interprets it as 'again', which is quite possible in Greek. Moreover, the evangelist lets him imagine the irony of an old person entering his mother's
967 JOHN
(cf. 1:32). This sense is also specified by the following verse, w. 35—6, for the first time the Father's love for the Son is mentioned (cf. 5:20; 10:17; I5'-9~IO> 17:23—4, 26). In the expression 'has placed all things in his hands' (cf. 10:28-9; I3:3) the Greek en does not mean 'by means of his hand' but is used for eis. In the gospel different powers are given to the Son by his Father: to judge (5:22, 27), to have life in himself (5:26), to have disciples (6:37; 17:6), to speak God's words (12:49; I7:^)» to receive the name and the glory from God (17:11—12, 22), to have authority over all people (17:2). Here what is given into his hand is the message pertaining to different responses to the Son. Therefore humankind is divided into two groups. The power of Jesus' hand protects those who believe and gives them eternal life (cf. w. 15—16), but becomes implicitly also God's hand that punishes those who do not believe. (4:1-42) Jesus' Work in Samaria The theme of the new cult that Jesus inaugurates is now further developed by his encounter with Samaritans, who stand outside normal Jewish faith. The dialogue with the Samaritan woman gives the reader more profound instruction on the living water (w. 7-14) which Jesus the Messiah and true teacher can give (w. 16—26). After the woman's testimony (w. 27—30) and the dialogue with the disciples on spiritual food and the mission's result (w. 31—8), Jesus meets the Samaritans who come to believe in him (w. 39-43). Jacob's well, the woman's many husbands, the food that the disciples bring to Jesus, the time of harvest, are concrete starting-points for discussions about spiritual matters. With the exception of w. 1—3 there is no reason to consider this narrative as composite (as e.g. Bultmann 1971: 176 ff does; for arguments against him, see Olsson 1974).
the beginning of the dialogue with Nicodemus baptism was evoked (cf. Mk 16:16), in the end all is concentrated on faith.
(3:22-5:47) Second Geographical Grouping
(3:22-30) The Baptist's Last Testimony In the beginning of this scene different rites of purification with water are mentioned: the Baptist's, the Jews', and Jesus'. They serve to introduce the Baptist's second testimony about Jesus the Messiah, w. 22-4, the evangelist does not indicate precisely where in the Judean countryside Jesus is baptizing. The discussion in v. 26 alludes to Jesus' meeting with the Baptist across the Jordan. Perhaps the evangelist supposes that Jesus is now baptizing there, a normal starting-point for his ministry. He will return there in 10:40-1. The Baptist has gone to
'Aenon near Salim', probably near Scythopolis (Lagrange 1936: 92—3). His move permits Jesus to take his own initiative, though this is partly corrected in 4:2. Contrary to the Synoptics, the Fourth Gospel does not describe the Baptist's imprisonment and death, w. 25—6, the evangelist only mentions different kinds of baptisms, without indicating their differences. He also alludes to conflicts between disciples of John and disciples of Jesus. He lets the Baptist himself solve the conflict, w. 27—30, the Baptist does not directly answer the question put to him, but he simply describes his own function as subordinate to that of Jesus. The evangelist reworks here the synoptic tradition where Jesus calls himself the bridegroom (Mk 2:18—22 par), and makes this the object of the Baptist's testimony. In Jn 1:20 the Baptist denied that he was the Messiah or Elijah, but now he seems to allude to Mai 3:1 and consider himself as Elijah who is sent ahead of the Messiah (cf. Mk 1:2 par). The Baptist, in Jn 1:23, was presented as a voice crying in the wilderness. He decreases now to the degree that his joy is fulfilled by listening to the bridegroom's voice. The 'friend of the bridegroom' corresponds to the sosebin mentioned in the Mishnah (m. Sank. 3:5). According to i Mace 9:39 there was more than one such friend.
(4:1—3) These three verses try to explain Jesus' return to Galilee, where he fulfils his second miracle. His departure seems to be the consequence of the Pharisees' negative reaction to his success in Judea, but that reason remains unsatisfactory, because the Pharisees also had some influence in Galilee. Perhaps the author (or a redactor?) wants the reader to understand that just as the Baptist left Bethany for Aenon, so Jesus has to leave Judea because of the Pharisees, who are the controlling authorities in Jerusalem (cf. 1:24). The author also corrects 3:22, 26 by noting that Jesus did not baptize himself. In the rest of the gospel neither Jesus nor his disciples baptize. Many good M S S have in v. i kyrios, 'the Lord' in place of 'Jesus', but this is probably a correction in order to improve the text where Jesus is twice the subject.
(3:31—6) Jesus Conies from Above The Johannine style marks the whole gospel and makes it difficult to decide whether w. 31-6 belonged originally to the dialogue with Nicodemus, or are a continuation of the Baptist's testimony, or finally are the evangelist's personal summary of 3:1—30 (which is most likely; a similar difficulty occurs at Jn 2:16—21). The contrast between earthly things and heaven is the point of departure for a meditation about the difficulties of accepting the Son's own testimony, v. 31, this verse reflects the contrast between 'earthly things' and 'heavenly things' in v. 12. It also makes clear that w. 3 and 7 are fulfilled in Jesus who is the one 'who comes from above' and 'is above all', w. 32-3, as in the prologue, the evangelist underlines the testimony which comes from spiritual insight and hearing. This witness is not accepted by all (cf. v. n), but those who receive it set a seal on it, which means they recognize that God speaks the truth through the testimony of Jesus, v. 34, by accepting the testimony of the one who has been sent, the believer can verify that he speaks the words of God. The Spirit was mentioned in w. 5-8. In our verse it is not clear who is meant by 'he' who gives the Spirit, but in the context it is more likely that it is God than Jesus. The expression ou gar ek metrou is not good Greek, but probably means that God lets his Spirit remain over Jesus
(4:4—15) These verses describe Jesus' first dialogue with the Samaritan woman, w. 4-5, in the Fourth Gospel the Greek (e)dei, 'must', often indicates a work or an operation according to God's will (see 3:14, 30; 9:4; 10:16; 12:34; 2O:9)- Jesus has come to Samaria in order to do God's work. Sychar is not mentioned in the OT, but is probably Soker which is in the Mishnah and the Talmud. One can identify it with the modern 'Askar, about 1.5 km. from Jacob's well. The evangelist alludes also to Sikem, today Tell Balata, when he mentions 'the plot of ground' given to Joseph (cf. Gen 33:19; 48:22; Josh 24:32). v. 6, 'about noon', literally 'at the sixth hour', as in 19:14, a rather unusual time to travel. The Greek word pege in w. 6,14, seems to indicate that the well is supplied by a living source of water. It is probably covered with a stone, so Jesus can sit on it (Gk.
JOHN 968
Gerizim, the mount of blessings (Deut 11:29) where the Samaritans thought Jacob had his heavenly vision (Gen 28:11—17). The Samaritans call him tahev ('the one who will come again') and consider him as a teacher and political leader rather than as a kingly Messiah, w. 21—2, the evangelist underlines that Jesus himself is a Jew (cf v. 9) and that salvation comes to the nations through the Jews (cf. Isa 40:1—31 and the synoptic tradition). But at the same time Jesus questions the two places of worship, Mt. Gerizim and Jerusalem, w. 23—4, 'in spirit and truth' is a double phrase with a single sense,
epi, 'upon'). Although there are many wells in Genesis, not one is directly called 'Jacob's well'; however, Jacob meets Rachel at a well (Gen 29:1—12). In 1:51 the evangelist has already alluded to Jacob/Israel, w. 7-15, Jesus' words, 'Give me a drink', and the mention of Jacob's well, are probably meant as an allusion to two scenes in the OT: the demand for water in the desert (Ex 17:2) and the gift of water at Beer (Num 21:16), which is celebrated by a famous song: 'Spring up, O well! Sing to it' (Num 21:17). m ^e LXX and in the targums 'Beer' is considered as a 'well' and not as a place. In the targums the place Mattanah is interpreted as 'gift'. Therefore the targum Pseudo-Jonathan considers the well as God's gift. In the Dead Sea scrolls the well is a symbol of the law given to Israel (CD 6:4—11), whereas Philo considers it as an image of wisdom (De ebrietate, 112—13; ^e somniis, 2.267—71). This is more or less the background of Jesus' first dialogue with the Samaritan woman. Jesus' demand for water is only an introduction to the counter demand of the woman for living water (v. 15). The water Jesus can give is a 'gift of God' (v. 10). Those who drink of it will never be thirsty (v. 13). Jesus is greater than the ancestor Jacob, because his teaching will replace the law or wisdom that the Jews or the Samaritans regard as God's gifts. The fullness of grace that was mentioned in the prologue
similar to 'Spirit of truth' in 14:17; 15:26; 16:13. It means an
openness towards the Spirit whom Jesus gives (3:6; 4:14) and the truth that he reveals (1:14, 17; 14:6). 'God is spirit' has nothing to do with the Enlightenment description of the nature of God, but underlines that God will give his Spirit through his Messiah. The new cult revealed by Jesus will supplant Jewish and Samaritan worship, as much as it replaces Jewish purification rites (1:33; 2:6—11; 3:25—30) and the temple cultin Jerusalem (2:13-22). w. 25-6, when speaking of the Messiah the woman goes beyond normal Samaritan expectations. The purpose of the dialogue is to have her recognize Jesus not only as the expected prophet but also as the Jews' Messiah. In 1:41 Andrew asserted that he had encountered him; in 1:19-23 and 3:28-30 the Baptist admitted that he himself was not the Messiah. To the Samaritan woman Jesus explicitly reveals that he is the Messiah. When he answers ego eimi, one cannot avoid seeing a link with the absolute use of the revelation formula in 8:24, 28 and 13:19. (4:27-38) The evangelist portrays Jesus' dialogue with the disciples, w. 27—30, the woman's missionary activity among her people makes it possible for them to be 'on their way' to Jesus. In the meantime Jesus is engaged in a dialogue with his disciples. That the woman leaves her jar has been interpreted in various ways (readiness to leave everything; desire to forget her past actions; wish to come back; readiness to go to her people). The best explanation is probably that she now relies on Jesus' promise in v. 14. w. 31-4, unlike the dialogue with the Samaritan woman, Jesus here is not the initiator, but the misunderstanding concerning the food to be eaten is similar to that of the water to be drunk. Whereas Jewish traditions could regard Wisdom as the substance of a meal (e.g. Prov 9:5; Sir 24:21), Jesus considers the will of God (cf. 5:30; 6:38) to be his food. The will of the Father is that the one he has sent (i.e. his 'apostle') completes his messianic work (cf. 5:36; 17:4). In the Fourth Gospel all missionary activity starts with the Father and leads back to him. w. 35-8, the harvest is mentioned in the synoptic parables on the growth of the kingdom of God (Mk 4 par). The Fourth Gospel adapts Jesus' words to the actual situation in Samaria. He uses two proverbs, one on the interval between sowing and harvesting (v. 350), and one on the difference between the sower and the reaper (v. 37). Concerning the first proverb Jesus says that a miraculous event has occurred, as he has just sown the Father's message in Samaria and can already gather a harvest. That this proverb forms an iambic trimeter is probably accidental. The other proverb is often used in a negative way in the OT (e.g. Deut 20:6; 28:30; Job 31:8; Mt 25:24), but Jesus gives it a positive meaning in Jn 4:38: both sower and reaper can rejoice together (v. 36). Who are the others who have laboured? Several answers have been