MASTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY THESIS APPROVAL. The following thesis entitled LIVING WATER: NARRATIVE BAPTISMAL CATECHESIS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

MASTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY THESIS APPROVAL The following thesis entitled LIVING WATER: NARRATIVE BAPTISMAL CATECHESIS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN and written by Justin Doering Kane has been Submitted to the Concordia Theological Seminary Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY This Thesis stands Approved on this ______ day of _____________________, 20_____ having been read by the undersigned members of the Thesis Committee ____________________________________ Rev. Dr. Charles A. Gieschen, Ph.D., Advisor ____________________________________ Rev. Dr. David P. Scaer, Th.D., Reader ____________________________________ Rev. Dr. William C. Weinrich, D.Theol., Reader ____________________________________ Rev. Dr. Naomichi Masaki, Ph.D., STM Supervisor

LIVING WATER: NARRATIVE BAPTISMAL CATECHESIS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

by Justin Doering Kane Master of Sacred Theology, Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, Indiana, 2011

A THESIS

Submitted to the Faculty of Concordia Theological Seminary in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SACRED THEOLOGY

Fort Wayne, Indiana May, 2011

For my wife Andrea and our children Elizabeth and Karl and in loving memory of our first and second begotten children who rest with Christ

CONTENTS FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... vii PREFACE ........................................................................................................................ viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................x ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1.

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1 Why Water? ..................................................................................................................3 History of Research ......................................................................................................5 A Sacramental Approach ............................................................................................11 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................15

2.

JESUS CHRIST, THE BAPTIZED AND THE BAPTIZER .....................................17 Day 1: The Witness of John the Baptist (John 1:19–28) ............................................22 Day 2: The Baptism of Jesus (John 1:29–34) .............................................................27 Day 3: Jesus‘ First Disciples (John 1:35–42) .............................................................45 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................51

3.

BAPTISM AS WEDDING .........................................................................................53 A Wedding on the Third Day .....................................................................................53 They Have No Wine ...................................................................................................59 Jesus Changes Water into Wine .................................................................................62 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................67

4.

BAPTISM AS BEGETTING FROM ABOVE ..........................................................69

iv

A Man of the Pharisees ...............................................................................................70 Baptism as Regeneration From Above .......................................................................75 The Filial Character of Discipleship ...........................................................................83 The Kingdom of God ..................................................................................................87 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................94 5.

THE MESSIANIC BRIDEGROOM AND HIS BRIDE ............................................96 Baptism as Betrothal ...................................................................................................97 An Empty Vessel ......................................................................................................101 Give Me a Drink .......................................................................................................104 Baptism as Living Water ..........................................................................................106 Conclusion ................................................................................................................108

6.

THE WAY OF DEATH: ABANDONING THE LIFE OF DISCIPLESHIP..........110 The Pool of Bethesda ................................................................................................111 Jesus Heals a Paralytic ..............................................................................................117 Baptism as Rising to Walk in Discipleship ..............................................................119 Conclusion ................................................................................................................125

7.

THE WAY OF LIFE: THE CRUCIFORM CHARACTER OF DISCIPLESHIP IN JOHN 9 .............................................................................127 Jesus Heals a Man Born Blind ..................................................................................128 The Cruciform Character of Discipleship.................................................................130 Baptism as Enlightenment ........................................................................................136 Conclusion ................................................................................................................137

8.

CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................112

v

Blood and Water Flow from Jesus' Pierced Side ......................................................141 The Interpretive Key .................................................................................................144 Conclusion ................................................................................................................145 WORKS CITED ..............................................................................................................147

vi

FIGURES Figure 1. The Narrative Structure of John the Baptist's Witness to the Light ...................18 Figure 2. The Historical Exodus and Eschatological Exodus ............................................21 Figure 3. Christological Confessions .................................................................................51 Figure 4. The Red Sea and Jordan Crossings ....................................................................52 Figure 5. Water to Wine.....................................................................................................62 Figure 6. John 1 and John 3 ...............................................................................................82 Figure 7. Betrothal Narrative Pattern .................................................................................99 Figure 8. Jesus and Jacob's Well ......................................................................................100 Figure 9. The Healing at the Pool of Bethesda ................................................................116 Figure 10. The Healing at the Pool of Siloam .................................................................136

vii

PREFACE The generative idea for this thesis was conceived in 1998 during my first year of studies at Concordia Theological Seminary. Tasked by Charles Gieschen with writing an exegetical paper for a class on the Gospel of John, I decided to address the topic of water symbolism. John‘s frequent use of water symbolism, especially in chapters 1–5, intrigued me. Were these references to water somehow interconnected? In other words, did they flow from the same source? Is there a connection between John‘s use of water symbolism and the sacrament of baptism? These initial questions have occupied my thoughts ever since, generating a M.Div. thesis, two exegetical sectional papers, and this present work. Each stage of development has marked corresponding stages in my own theological development. My original aim was to prove exegetically that water symbolized the sacrament of baptism believing that John‘s interest in baptism extended beyond the sedes doctrinae. I hypothesized that John selected narratives including water, the material element of baptism, in order to evoke allusions to the sacrament in the minds of his readers/hearers. My efforts to prove this original hypothesis raised methodological questions. How does water as a symbol for baptism function within a particular narrative? How does the symbol of water relate to other narrative elements? What semantic contribution does the surrounding constellation of narrative elements such as context, characters, plot, etc. . . .

viii

make? Are the narratives themselves, and not simply the symbol of water, baptismal? If so, could John have selected specific narratives in order to teach a comprehensive theology of baptism? The present work is the fruit of theological reflection on these and similar questions. Nearly eight years of parish experience has expanded my interest to include the practical application of my findings. If John wrote his Gospel, at least in part, to prepare his readers/hearers to receive the sacrament of baptism by teaching a comprehensive theology of baptism through narrative catechesis, then we could and arguably should do the same. Having laid the theoretical foundation with this thesis, the practical task of developing a catechetical program based upon the Gospel of John remains.

ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is the product of theological reflection on the Gospel of John over the course of several years that began during my studies for the Office of the Holy Ministry at Concordia Theological Seminary. Among the outstanding faculty, several teachers have had a formative influence on me as an exegete in particular. Charles Gieschen, who served as my thesis advisor, introduced me to Koine Greek and scholarly study of the Johannine literature. Over the years, he has been a source of professional and personal encouragement and counsel. His feedback on prior drafts has proven invaluable. David P. Scaer, who served as a reader for this thesis, opened my eyes to the rich sacramental character of the Scriptures, ―like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old‖ (Matt 13:52). William Weinrich, who also served as a reader for this thesis, motivated ever-deeper theological reflection on the Gospel of John. The Department of Exegetical Theology at Concordia Theological Seminary has inspired confidence in my abilities as an exegete, awarding me Best Exegetical Paper in 2002 for my M.Div. thesis and selecting me to present exegetical sectional papers in 2006 and 2008 at the annual Exegetical Symposia held at Concordia Theological Seminary. The Graduate Committee at Concordia Theological Seminary is also gratefully acknowledged for extending the submission deadline for this thesis.

x

Several other individuals have provided counsel, critique, and encouragement to me over the years including James Gier, Donald Hunter, Thomas Olson, Andrew Smith, Ronald Wachs, the sainted Robert Woods, Kathleen Mangold, Clare Miller, and Beverly Yanke. I also thank the congregation of Immanuel Lutheran Church in Conover, NC for granting me time to devote toward this endeavor. Finally, my wife Andrea has always believed in me, patiently and lovingly encouraging me to complete this thesis so that I can begin a dissertation and achieve my dreams. Soli Deo Gloria

xi

ABBREVIATIONS

All abbreviations of ancient and modern literature are from The SBL Handbook of Style (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1999).

xii

ABSTRACT Kane, Justin, D. ―Living Water: Narrative Baptismal Catechesis in the Gospel of John.‖ STM thesis, Fort Wayne, Indiana: Concordia Theological Seminary, 2011. 165 pp. This paper approaches Johannine water symbolism from a sacramental perspective demonstrating how John teaches a highly developed theology of baptism through narrative catechesis. Forged from John the Baptist‘s witness to the Light, John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism is traced in select narratives from John 1–9. Narrative elements such as context, characters, plot, etc. . . . are also examined for their semantic contributions as part of John‘s narrative approach to catechesis. The study concludes with an examination of the flow of blood and water from Jesus‘ side in John 19 as the interpretive key to Johannine water symbolism.

xiii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION The catechetical task of making disciples of all nations confronts the Church in every generation with challenges influenced by place and time. Throughout her history, the Church has adopted various teaching methodologies best suited to meet these challenges. Western society, the context in which we find ourselves, has recently undergone a dramatic paradigm shift from modernism to postmodernism necessitating a corresponding paradigm shift in the Church‘s approach to catechesis. The rational and systematic presentation of propositional truths, so well suited to meet the challenges posed by modernism, is ill-suited to meet the challenges posed by postmodernism with its a priori rejection of propositional truth.1 In today‘s postmodern context, how can the Church faithfully answer Pilate‘s question, ―What is truth?‖ Early Christians responded by recounting Jesus‘ signs, parables, and sayings along with the historical events of his life, death and resurrection. Then, as now, the answer lies with narrative catechesis. What is narrative catechesis? Simply put, narrative catechesis is teaching through storytelling and is arguably the oldest and most widely used form of instruction.

1 ―An Explanation of the Small Catechism‖ appended to Dr. Martin Luther‘s Small Catechism is the epitome of the Modernist approach to catechesis in the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, ironically termed ―A Short Explanation‖ in the 1943 edition. Martin Luther, Luther’s Small Catechism with Explanation (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005), 45–252. For an overview of Postmodernism thought, see Gene E. Veith, Jr., Postmodern Times: A Christian Guide to Contemporary Thought and Culture (Wheaton, Il: Crossway Books, 1994).

1

Catechetical narratives may be fiction or non-fiction. Myths, epics, histories, biographies, fables, parables, family histories, even jokes are all examples of narrative catechesis. The characters, context, plot, and various literary devices such as symbolism, metaphor, irony, and humor are all designed to convey the central point. The thesis of this study is that the Gospel of John teaches a highly developed theology of baptism through narrative catechesis, employing water symbolism to construct a baptismal motif. John evokes allusions to Christian baptism by narrating events from Jesus‘ earthly ministry centered around water, the tangible element in Christian baptism, casting a baptismal template for water symbolism from John the Baptist‘s baptism and Christological witness. Outlining this baptismal template will enable us to discern the recurring pattern of baptismal catechesis and trace the development of John‘s baptismal motif.2 This study gives voice to a sacramental interpretation of Johannine water symbolism in current scholarly discussion providing insight into the methodology of first-century Christian catechesis. Insights gained from this study will challenge pastors and teachers to rethink their approach to catechesis as they tackle the Church‘s catechetical task in a postmodern age. Select narratives from John 1–9 will be analyzed for baptismal vocabulary, concepts, and themes. The flow of

2 William Freedman defines a motif as ―a recurring theme, character, or verbal pattern, but it may also be a family or cluster of literal or figurative references to a given class of concepts or objects . . . . It is generally symbolic—that is, it can be seen to carry a meaning beyond the literal one immediately apparent; it represents on the verbal level something characteristic of the structure of the work, the events, the characters, the emotional effects or the moral cognitive content. It is presented both as an object of description and, more often, as part of the narrator‘s imagery and descriptive vocabulary.‖ William Freedman, ―The Literary Motif: A Definition and Evaluation,‖ Novel 4 (1971): 127–128, cited by R. Alan Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel (FFNT; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 183.

2

blood and water from Jesus‘ pierced side in John 19 will also be examined as foundational for Johannine water symbolism. Finally, conclusions will be drawn with regards to the meaning and function of water in each narrative. Why Water? Why water? Water is a very important expanding3 core symbol4 in the Gospel of John, occurring more repeatedly than Light and Bread.5 Water appears in the Gospel‘s most important contexts: Jesus‘ baptism, inaugural sign at Cana, Jerusalem appearances, final Passover, crucifixion—the most important context and deepest disclosure of Jesus‘

3 An expanding symbol ―is repetition balanced by variation, and that variation is in progressively deepening disclosure. By the slow uneven way in which it accretes meaning from the succession of contexts in which it occurs; by the mysterious life of its own it takes on and supports; by the part of its meaning that even on the last page of the novel it appears still to withhold—the expanding symbol responds to the impulses of the novelist who is aware that he cannot give us the core of his meaning, but strains to reveal now this aspect of it, now that aspect, in a sequence of sudden flashes.‖ Edward K. Brown, Rhythm in the Novel. The Alexander Lectures, 1949–50 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1950), 56–57, cited by Culpepper, Anatomy, 190. 4 Core symbols are ―those whose centrality is demonstrated by their higher frequency of recurrence and their appearance in more important contexts.‖ Culpepper, Anatomy, 190. Craig Koester distinguishes between core and supporting symbols. ―The core symbols in John‘s Gospel are often expressed in metaphors, but the supporting symbols are not; they are often imbedded in the fabric of the narrative, making them more difficult to identify.‖ Craig R. Koester, Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), 4–8. 5 Culpepper, Anatomy, 193. Water appears in the following narratives: the Witness of John the Baptist (John 1:19–34); The Wedding in Cana (John 2:1–1); Jesus and Nicodemus (John 3:1–21); Controversy of Baptism (John 3:22–30); Jesus and the Woman of Samaria (John 4:1–42); Jesus and the Royal Official (John 4:46–54); Healing at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:1–18); Jesus Walks on the Sea (John 6:16–21); Jesus at Tabernacles (John 7:37–44); Healing at the Pool of Siloam (John 9:1–41); The Footwashing (John 13:1–20); The Flow of Blood and Water (John 19:28–37); The Miraculous Catch of Fish (John 21:1–14). Water occurs predominantly in the first half of the Fourth Gospel or Book of Signs (John 1–12). The Prologue can be included even though water is not explicitly mentioned. John 1:1 echoes Genesis 1:1 LXX evoking the entire creation account whereby God formed the earth ―out of water and by water‖ (2 Pet 3:5) and ―the Spirit of God hovered over the water‖ (Gen 1:2 LXX). John‘s prologue and the Genesis creation account share several thematic elements. The intimate connection between the Spirit, Water and Life is forged in creation. See Craig A. Evans, Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue (JSNTSup 89; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 77–79.

3

identity6—and reinstatement of Peter. Water frames key phases of Jesus‘ earthly ministry: Cana to Cana (John 2:1–4:54), Jesus‘ passion (John 13:1–19:37), and earthly ministry (John 1:29–21:23). Water is integral to Johannine Christology revealing Jesus‘ Glory as the Christ, the only-begotten Son of God. John the Baptist was sent baptizing with water to reveal the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. Following his baptism, Jesus began making and baptizing more disciples than John the Baptist. At Cana, Jesus reveals his Glory as the messianic bridegroom by changing water into wine. Jesus tells Nicodemus that the children of God are begotten from above of water and Spirit. Jesus offers living water to the Samaritan woman beside Jacob‘s Well and the Jews in Jerusalem. Jesus heals a paralytic beside the Pool of Bethesda and restores sight to a man born blind using the Pool of Siloam. Water touches both shores of Johannine contrasts serving as its own antithesis. For example, water can symbolize life, death, or life and death concurrently. John utilizes this unique capacity of water to illustrate the baptismal passage from death to eternal life through a series of narrative encounters with Jesus centered around a water symbol. In the Old Testament, water communicates God‘s real presence and activity in the world by his Logos and Spirit (Gen 1). Old Testament water symbolism is multi–

6 John, the only Evangelist who was an eye-witness of Jesus‘ death and crucifixion (John 19:26– 27, 35), does not mention the three hour period of darkness as Jesus hung dying on the cross (Mark 15:33 and parallels). One familiar with the Synoptic accounts expects John to include this symbolically significant detail given his use of light as an expanding core symbol. John‘s omission may reflect his assertion in the Prologue that, ―the light continues shining in the darkness, but the darkness did not overcome it‖ (John 1:5; emphasis mine). A hint of light peaks through the darkness shrouding Jesus‘ death with the reappearance of Nicodemus ―who earlier had come to Jesus by night‖ (John 19:39; cf. 3:1,2). John focuses the symbol of light on Jesus‘ resurrection rather than its absence during his crucifixion.

4

faceted, reflecting the broad spectrum of God‘s use of water for creation, procreation, providential care, judgment, deliverance, and sanctification.7 John draws repeatedly from this deep semantic well of Old Testament water symbolism to develop his baptismal motif. Water flows from the Gospel of John into the sacramental life of the Church. Through baptism, what the Lamb of God accomplished in taking away the sin of the world is conveyed through the Father‘s gift of the Holy Spirit. Baptism delineates the boundary of the Church as the Kingdom of God in the world but not of the world. Symbols rarely, if ever, exist in a semantic vacuum. Contextual elements such as time, space, characters and events contribute semantically to the tenor conveyed by the symbol. John supplies these contextual elements in narrative form, arranging and combining elements to develop various baptismal themes within and across narratives. An adequate interpretation of Johannine water symbolism, therefore, must account for the semantic contributions of these contextual elements and the narrative framework in which they occur. History of Research Despite water‘s prominence in the Gospel of John, water symbolism has attracted relatively little interest among scholars. For much of the 20th Century, scholarly discussion and debate over water symbolism centered around the question of

7 Wai-Yee Ng, Water Symbolism in John: An Eschatological Interpretation, Studies in Biblical Literature 15 (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2001), 155–179.

5

sacramentalism.8 At one extreme, Rudolph Bultmann argued the Christian sacraments were ―superfluous‖ to the Evangelist, citing the lack of clear, non-symbolic sacramental references in the Gospel.9 Bultmann dismissed clear sacramental references such as ὕ δ α η ο ρ θ α ὶ in John 3:5 as textual corruptions perpetrated by a later ecclesiastical redactor.10 At the other extreme, Oscar Cullmann argued the Christian sacraments were central to the Evangelist, citing the use of Johannine narratives in early Christian lectionaries and baptismal liturgies.11 The Evangelist‘s task, according to Cullmann, was to connect the community of disciples whose worship centered around Jesus‘ sacramental presence in baptism and the Eucharist with the historical Jesus. John‘s Gospel, therefore, is replete with sacramental references and allusions. Raymond Brown took a mediating position.12 On the one hand, he acknowledged some passages to be sacramental based upon intrinsic and extrinsic criteria. He notes, for instance, the use of certain Johannine narratives by early Christians for pre-baptismal instruction. On the other hand, Brown suggests this may not have been the Evangelist‘s original intent. A host of scholars have adopted variations of these basic positions. In light of this lack of

8 Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John I–XII, Anchor Bible 29 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987), cxi–cxii. Raymond Brown provides a good summary of the main positions in his magisterial commentary. 9 Rudolph Bultmann, The Gospel of John, trans. G. R. Beasely-Murray, R. W. N. Hoare, J. K. Riches (Oxford: Basil Blackwell Press, 1971), 472. 10 Brown, Gospel, xxx, xcii; cf. Francis Moloney, ―When is John talking about sacraments?‖ ABR 30 (O 1982): 17–18, and 29, note 26. 11 Oscar Cullmann, Early Christian Worship (Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall Press, 1953), 102. 12 Brown, Gospel, cxiii.

6

consensus, Francis Moloney suggests the following criteria for determining a sacramental reference.13 1. A rigorous search for elements in the text itself which indicate that the author is referring to some form of Sacramental ritual and symbol. 2. The use of certain passages in the liturgical practice, the literature and the art of the early post-New Testament Church. 3. Its polemic tone, that is as it makes the distinction between the Christian community and the synagogue. 4. The presence of the absent one. That is, where Jesus may be found. Though Moloney provides a useful framework for determining sacramentalism in a passage, scholarly debate continues unabated. Lost in the debate has been the development of John‘s rich baptismal theology through the examination of water symbolism. Only a handful of studies are devoted to water symbolism in the Gospel of John. C. H. Dodd briefly identified four symbolic uses of water.14 First, water symbolizes cleansing. Dodd cites the healing at the Pool of Siloam and the Footwashing in the Upper Room as examples. Second, water symbolizes the lower creation. According to this Hermetic concept, the heavenly sphere was refined by fire and pneuvma. Water is the residual uJgra; fuvsi~ (―moist nature‖) of this creative process.

13 Moloney, ―When is John talking about sacraments?,‖ 17, 18, 22, 24. 14 C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 138.

7

Examples include the distinction between the baptisms done by John the Baptist and those done by Jesus and his disciples and the Cana sign. Third, water symbolizes Torah, Wisdom, or the Holy Spirit as Jewish forms of divine revelation coming down like water from above. Fourth, water symbolizes life emanating from God as the fount and source of all life. John‘s reference to living water is most likely based upon God‘s selfidentification as a ―fountain of living waters‖ (Jer 2:13; cf. John 4:10; 7:38). According to Dodd, ― . . . . it is the rich accumulation of symbolical meaning about the figure that gives its main significance to the water-symbol in the gospel.‖15 More recent studies have sprung from the decisive shift in Johannine studies away from traditional historical-criticism (e.g., Form, Source, Redaction) toward newer, literary approaches in the latter decades of the 20th Century.16 Birger Olsson wrote a short excursus on living water addressing the symbolic use of water in John 4 and 7.17 Around the same time, L. Sciberras examined patristic interpretations of water symbolism in his dissertation.18 E. Becerra attempted the first comprehensive study of Johannine water symbolism.19 Becerra identified three periods or stages:

15 Dodd, Interpretation, 138. 16 Ng, Water Symbolism, 49–58. Ng‘s work is the basis for the following historical sketch. 17 Birger Olsson, Structure and Meaning in the Fourth Gospel: A Text–Linguistic Analysis of John 2:1–11 and 4:1–42, trans. J. Gray, ConBNT 6 (Lund: Gleerup, 1974). 18 L. Sciberras, ―Water in the Gospel of St. John According to the Greek Fathers and Writers of the Church,‖ (Thesis for the licentiate, Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Jerusalem, 1974–75). 19 E. Becerra, ―Le symbolisme de l‘eau dans le Quatrième Évangile,‖ (Dissertation, Université des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg, 1982).

8

1) purification 2) revelation, wisdom, or the law of the new order and 3) the eschatological work of the Holy Spirit. R. Alan Culpepper broke new ground in Johannine studies in his seminal work Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel.20 Culpepper studied the Gospel as a unified literary work rather than a disjunctive historical source text. Utilizing literary-critical tools, Culpepper approached the Gospel written in a particular way (e.g., plot, time, movement) to convey meaning. Rather than dissect the text into discreet forms or redactional layers, this new approach preserves the integrity of the text in its final form as a literary whole. Literary devices such as symbolism, irony, structure, plot, as well as their place in the narrative and impact upon the Gospel‘s meaning became objects of scholarly research. Judith Kowalski studied water units and their role in the overall narrative framework of the Gospel in her dissertation.21 Kowalski‘s chief contribution was identifying the interconnectedness of the various water units in the Gospel as a whole. Craig Koester attempted a comprehensive study of Johannine water symbolism in 1995.22 Koester identified a two-fold symbolic structure. Christology is the primary level of symbolic structure dealing with some aspect or action of Jesus shedding light on Jesus‘ role as teacher or rabbi, Messiah and/or king, and as God or divine.23 Often, these

20 R. Alan Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel (FFNT; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983). 21 Judith Kowalski, ―‗Of Water and the Spirit‘: Narrative Structure and Theological Development in the Gospel of John,‖ (Dissertation, Marquette University, 1987). 22 Craig R. Koester, Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995). 23 Koester, Symbolism, 39–41.

9

roles are revealed progressively as with the witness of John the Baptist, Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and the man born blind.24 Discipleship is the secondary level of symbolic structure tied in with the life, concerns, and context of the Johannine community. The acts of discipleship prescribed either reflected the life and struggles faced by the community or exhorted the community to renewed action, binding the community together. Larry Paul Jones provided the first extensive study of Johannine water symbolism in 1997.25 Jones traces water‘s symbolic meaning as it expands throughout the Gospel. He describes each narrative‘s context and literary structure to determine water‘s meaning and function within each narrative and within the Gospel of John as a whole. Jones operates with the following definition of a symbol. A two-fold definition of a symbol emerges from this. First, we can define a symbol as a literary device that points beyond itself to something that defies clear and definitive perceptual expression, that is, it points to something far greater than itself. Secondly, a symbol in some way ‗embodies‘ that which it represents, that is, it does not merely bear revelation, it is revelation itself.26 Though Jones argues persuasively that the symbol of water ―points to something far greater than itself‖ and ―‗embodies‘ that which it represents‖ and ―is revelation itself,‖ he

24 Koester, Symbolism, 25. 25 Larry Paul Jones, The Symbol of Water in the Gospel of John, JSNTSup 145 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997). 26 Jones, Symbol of Water, 19.

10

nevertheless consistently discounts any symbolic references or allusions to Christian baptism.27 Wai-Yee Ng published the only other significant monograph on the subject of Johannine water symbolism in 2001.28 Ng studies water symbolism as an alternative approach to Johannine eschatology. After tracing the literary development of Johannine water symbolism throughout the Gospel, Ng focuses on the symbolic meaning of water in John 4. She concludes by examining the theological significance of the water motif through John‘s use of the Old Testament. The depths of Johannine water symbolism, however, remain to be plumbed, especially with respect to baptismal theology. A Sacramental Approach John‘s complex symbolism allows, even encourages, the reader to understand multiple layers and complementary facets of meaning communicated by a single signifier or set of signifiers. According to Culpepper, Again in contrast to signs, what symbols convey cannot be stated apart from the symbol; tenor and vehicle cannot be reduced to a one-to-one relationship. Both usually reserve a ―surplus of meaning‖ or ―semantic energy‖ from past associations so that a given symbol may evoke different aspects of the same tenor or different tenors, and various symbols may be used to convey different features of the same tenor . . . . As a result, the more skillful and perceptive the reader the more deeply he or she will enter into the message and the mystery of a symbolic narrative.29

27 Jones, Symbol of Water, 50, 75–76. 28 Wai-Yee Ng, Water Symbolism in John: An Eschatological Interpretation, Studies in Biblical Literature 15 (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2001). 29 Culpepper, Anatomy, 182–183.

11

Again, Culpepper notes, John‘s development of the symbolism of water, like that of light, moves from the earlier contexts in which its meaning and associations are more clearly defined, even if they change from one passage to another, to the point where the author assumes that mere references to the symbol, or words or images connected with it, will evoke the rich constellation of earlier references and associations. The impact is profound and moving, for the symbols increasingly elude efforts to interpret them and thereby invite further contemplation.30 Water accumulates symbolic meaning throughout the Gospel up to the flow of blood and water from Jesus‘ pierced side within the single most important context and the deepest disclosure of Jesus‘ identity. Given water‘s prominent role and the significance of Jesus‘ crucifixion and death in the Gospel of John, earlier references to water must be interpreted precisely in light of this water flowing from Jesus‘ pierced side. The flow of blood and water functions as the interpretive key to Johannine water symbolism unlocking the Gospel‘s deep well of rich baptismal theology. In Christian baptism, John‘s catechumens tangibly appropriate the water symbol‘s ―rich accumulation of symbolical meaning‖ disclosed through successive narratives in the Gospel: Cleansing, New Creation, Regeneration, Torah, Wisdom, the Holy Spirit, and Eternal Life. Through narrative catechesis, John draws from water‘s deep well of ―surplus meaning‖ or ―semantic energy,‖ plumbing the depths of its symbolic value to develop his overall baptismal motif. John wrote his Gospel to those who were not eyewitnesses of Jesus‘ life, death, and resurrection in order to elicit faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God. He writes,

30 Culpepper, Anatomy, 195.

12

η α ῦ η α δ ὲ γ έ γ ξ α πη α η ἵ λ α πη ζ η ε ύ [ο ]ε η ε ὅ η η Ἰ ε ζ ν ῦ ο ἐ ζ η η λ ὁ ρ ξ η ζ η ὸ ο ὁ π ἱ ὸ ο η ν ῦ ζ ε ν ῦ , θ α ὶ ἵ λ α πη ζ η ε ύ ν λ η ε ο δ σὴ λ ἔ ρ ε η ε ἐ λ η ῷ ὀ λ ό κ α η η α ὐ η ν ῦ (John 20:31).31 Absent at Jesus‘ first post-resurrection appearance to his disciples, Thomas declared, ―Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe‖ (John 20:25). Eight days later, Jesus appeared to his disciples a second time. He directs Thomas to put his fingers into the nail marks and his hand into his wounded side. Seeing the evidence of Jesus‘ crucifixion in his resurrected body, Thomas confessed, ὁ θ ύ ξ η ό ο κ ν π θ α ὶ ὁ ζ ε ό ο κ ν π (John 20:28). Jesus replies, ὅ η η ἑ ώξ α θ ά ο κ ε πε πί ζ η ε π θ α ο ; κ α θ ά ξ η ν η ν ἱ κ ὴ ἰ δ ό λ η ε ο θ α ὶ πη ζ η ε ύ ζ α λ η ε ο (John 20:29), pronouncing a blessing for those who believe without the benefit of seeing. Oscar Cullmann writes. ―The evanglist has placed these words at the end of the book, as the crown of his whole work, since his readers are among those who have not seen and yet ought to believe. The problem raised by this situation underlies the whole Gospel.‖32 John addresses this problem through narrative catechesis. He identifies three distinct disciple groups—the disciples of Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus. The underlying question for John‘s catechumens is, ―Whose disciple are you?‖ Those who

31 KJV, NKJV, RSV, NIV, NET, and ESV each render both ἵ ν α clauses with an optative sense, that is, ―may believe‖ or ―might believe‖ and ―may have life‖ or ―might have life.‖ Rendering the first as a purpose clause and the second as a result clause, John writes these things ―in order that you believe with the result that you have life in his Name.‖ 32 Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 40 (emphasis original).

13

accept his witness in the Gospel to Jesus as ―the Christ, the Son of God‖ receive Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit and eternal life in his Name. In baptism, John‘s catechumens are ―begotten of water and the Spirit‖ (John 3:5), confess that Jesus is ―the Christ, the Son of God‖ (John 20:31; cf. 11:27), and receive ―life in his Name‖ (John 1:12; 20:31). Like the representative characters in the narratives, John‘s catechumens do not fully comprehend the symbolic significance of the narrative upon one hearing; rather, upon repeated hearing they comprehend John‘s symbolic allusions to the ongoing sacramental presence of Jesus among them. Early Christians gathered around Baptism, the proclamation of the Word, and the Eucharist in order to experience Jesus‘ ongoing sacramental presence revealed by the Paraclete (John 14:15–21).33 Oscar Cullman argues that John‘s task is to relate ―the Lord of the community present especially in these two sacraments and the life of Jesus.‖34 Catechesis in a post-ascension context needs to connect the historical presence of Jesus with his sacramental presence within the worshipping congregation. Again, Cullmann writes, “The implicit assumption of this Gospel is that the historical evens, as here presented, contain in themselves, besides what is immediately perceptible, references to further facts of salvation with which these once-for-all key events are bound

33 Cullmann writes, ―In the early Church there are only these two celebrations or services—the common meal, within the framework of which proclamation of the Word had always a place, and Baptism. This is the reason for the close connexion in early Christianity between Baptism and the Lord‘s Supper.‖ Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 31–32. 34 Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 58 (emphasis original).

14

up.”35 John bridges the temporal gap between Jesus‘ historical presence and sacramental presence by narrating historical events from Jesus‘ earthly ministry centered around the sacramental element of water. Water ties the particular event in the life of Jesus to an aspect of baptism and the new life of discipleship in the kingdom of God. Just as Jesus‘ signs point to his death and resurrection, the symbol of water points to participation in his death and resurrection through baptism. The Spirit, who is given in baptism, incorporates those who are baptized into the spiritual body of Jesus. In the climactic verse of his prologue, John declares ―And the Logos became flesh and tabernacled among us and we beheld his Glory, the Glory as of the only-begotten Son of the Father, full of grace and truth‖ (John 1:14). The incarnate Logos still tabernacles among the worshipping congregation of his disciples who now see his Glory in the living water of baptism. Conclusion Our study begins in Chapter 2 by tracing John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism. John forges this template from John the Baptist‘s witness to Jesus at his baptism. As the Lamb of God, Jesus takes away the sin of the world and baptizes with the Holy Spirit. We trace this baptismal template for water symbolism in the chapters that follow. In Chapter 3, we examine Jesus‘ transformation of water into wine as the first of these water symbols. By providing an overabundance of wine, Jesus reveals his

35 Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 56 (emphasis original).

15

identity as the messianic bridegroom who weds humanity under the baptismal covenant of grace and truth. Jesus‘ symbolic action symbolizes the transformation of the covenantal relationship between God and humanity achieved by his sacrificial death as the Lamb of God. In Chapters 4 to 7, we examine the narrative encounters between Jesus and four representative characters centered around different water symbols demonstrating how John employs each narrative‘s characters, plot, setting, structure, and water symbol to teach a different aspect of baptismal theology. Our study concludes in Chapter 8 with our examination of the flow of blood and water from Jesus‘ pierced side as the semantic fount of Johannine water symbolism.

16

CHAPTER TWO JESUS CHRIST, THE BAPTIZED AND THE BAPTIZER Johannine water symbolism is intrinsically baptismal, issuing from the semantic wellspring of John the Baptist‘s baptism with water. The symbolic action of baptizing with water conveys John the Baptist‘s Christological witness to the Light. The Evangelist John forges a baptismal template for water symbolism wherein baptism functions as Christological revelation. Water becomes the opportunity for a theophany of the Glory of the Lord (Isa 40:5) when the Spirit descends and remains upon the Lamb of God. John teaches, therefore, that baptism with water is the Spirit‘s ongoing theophany of the Lamb of God as the Glory of the Lord. Through a series of theophanic encounters with Jesus centered around a water symbol, John develops a rich theology of baptism as the two-fold work of the Lamb of God. In this chapter, we will outline John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism through a study of John the Baptist‘s baptism with water within its narrative context. This will enable us to discern the recurring baptismal pattern exhibited by Johannine water symbolism in subsequent narratives and trace the development of John‘s baptismal motif. John begins his narrative catechesis with the witness of John the Baptist (John 1:19–42). Changes in time (Τ ῇ ἐ πα ύ ξ η ν λ ) (John 1:29, 35, 43) and characters (Priests and Levites; Jesus; Andrew and Philip) delineate three scenes over three successive days (John 1:19–28; 1:29–34; 1:35–42). These three days fit within a broader

17

six-day framework (John 1:19–2:11) evoking new creation and covenant themes. Our study follows this three-day narrative structure in keeping with our assertion that John uses narrative elements such as structure, characters, and symbols catechetically. In John 1:19–28, a delegation of priests and Levites travels beyond the Jordan from Jerusalem to ascertain whether or not John the Baptist is the Christ. John the Baptist‘s eschatological identity is critical to understanding his baptism with water. Through his interlocutors, John the Baptist addresses two key catechetical questions: ―Who is John the Baptist?‖ that is, ―What is his eschatological identity?‖ and ―Why was John the Baptist baptizing if he was not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?‖ In John 1:29–34, John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the Lamb of God upon witnessing the Spirit descend and remain upon Jesus at his baptism. John addresses the additional catechetical questions: ―Who is Jesus?‖ and ―Why was Jesus baptized by John the Baptist?‖ Finally, in John 1:35–42, two of John the Baptist‘s disciples follow Jesus upon hearing John the Baptist once again identify Jesus as the Lamb of God. Through Andrew and Philip, John illustrates discipleship of Jesus as the proper response to John the Baptist‘s witness to the Light. In this way, John frames John the Baptist‘s objective witness to Jesus at his baptism (John 1:29–34) with the subjective responses of rejection through unbelief (John 1:19–28) and acceptance through faith (John 1:35–42). John 1:19–28 Unbelief

John 1:29–34 Theophany

John 1:35–42 Faith

Figure 1. The Narrative Structure of John the Baptist‘s Witness to the Light

18

The narrative progresses from the darkness of unbelief to the enlightenment of faith. At the center stands the true Light of the Glory of the Lord revealed as the Lamb of God through John the Baptist‘s baptism of Jesus with water. Before proceeding to these narrative sections, we turn our attention first to the common context in which each occurs. The scene opens in Bethany beyond the Jordan where John the Baptist is making and baptizing disciples. John does not disclose this location, however, until the very end of the scene for dramatic effect. The semantic contribution of geographic symbolism to John the Baptist‘s baptism heightens the tragic significance of the Jews‘ rejection of his witness to the Light. Two points are noteworthy. First, John the Baptist is baptizing with the water of the Jordan. Second, he is stationed beyond the Jordan (πέ ξ α λ η ν ῦ Ἰ ν ξ δ ά λ ν π ) (John 1:28). The Jordan is the primary source of fresh ―living‖ water in the region making it a natural symbol of life. The fertile Jordan plain stands in sharp contrast to the arid Transjordan to the east. John the Baptist specifically used the ―living‖ water of the Jordan for his baptism rather than water from a natural spring or drawn from a well. He also baptized in the Jordan rather than a mikveh (―immersion pool‖) used for ritual cleansing and subsequently for Jewish proselyte baptism. Geographic symbolism often stems from historical figures or events associated with the location (e.g., Jacob‘s Well). This is especially true with respect to biblical geography. The Jordan plays a prominent role in salvation history, serving as the geographical, political, and theological

19

border of the kingdom of God on earth. Crossing the Jordan is fraught with symbolic meaning drawn from salvation history (e.g., Josh 3:1–4:24). John the Baptist drew upon the Jordan‘s rich symbolism to herald the new eschatological exodus of the children of God. The entire exodus experience from enslavement in Egypt to national independence in the Promised Land became the definitive narrative of the Jewish people into which Jews were incorporated through the covenant of circumcision. As the prophetic voice of Isaiah 40:3, John the Baptist calls Israel to make straight the way of the Lord by receiving his baptism with water and joining him beyond the Jordan in the Transjordan wilderness. The Exodus, therefore, provides not only a historical framework for understanding the baptisms of John the Baptist and Jesus but also the semantic reservoir from which to draw. Water frames Israel‘s exodus deliverance from Egypt through the Sinai wilderness to the Promised Land of Canaan. The Red Sea (Exod 14:1–15:21) and Jordan crossings (Exod 3:1– 4:24) were liminal events, namely, passages from one state of being to another. By crossing the Red Sea and then the Jordan, God literally and figuratively delivered the Israelites from death to life. John the Baptist, however, reverses the geography by baptizing beyond the Jordan. Jerusalem becomes Egypt and the Jordan becomes the Red Sea.1 John the Baptist‘s baptism with water and Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit correspond

1 Cf. Rev. 11:8 where Jerusalem, the great city, is spiritually (πλ ε π κ α η η θ ῶο ) called Sodom and Egypt. Jesus echoes John the Baptist‘s critique when he cleanses the Temple and equates his Jewish opponents with the Babylonians who destroyed the First Temple in 587 B.C.E. (John 2:13–23).

20

respectively to the Red Sea and Jordan crossings as deliverances from death to life through water. Thematic Pattern Death Water Historical Exodus Egypt Red Sea Eschatological Exodus Cosmos Baptism with Water

Life Death

Water

Life

Sinai Sinai

Jordan

Canaan

Jesus‘ Ministry Jesus‘ Ministry

Baptism Kingdom of God with the Holy Spirit

Figure 2. The Historical Exodus and Eschatological Exodus Just as the Red Sea and Jordan crossings framed the historical Exodus, John the Baptist‘s baptism with water and Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit (i.e., Jesus‘ death and resurrection; cf. Mark 10:38; Luke 12:50) frame the eschatological Exodus led by Jesus from death to eternal life into which those who receive his baptism are incorporated. Isaiah 40:3 serves as the textual basis for this typology. The new exodus, patterned after the original exodus and the return from exile in Babylon, is one of the dominant eschatological themes in the poems of Isaiah 40–55.2 The new exodus on the highway through the wilderness (Isa 40:3) typified by the exiles‘ return from Babylon follows an already established exodus typology. The movement of the new exodus

2 Bernard W. Anderson, ―Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah,‖ in Israel’s Prophetic Heritage: Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg, eds. Bernard W. Anderson and Walter J. Harrelson (New York: Harper and Bros., 1962), 177-195.

21

typified by the movement from Babylon through the wilderness to Jerusalem corresponds to the movement from Egypt through the wilderness of Sinai to the Promised Land. By citing Isaiah 40:3, John the Baptist announces the advent of the eschatological exodus. The movement, however, is from Jerusalem to the wilderness beyond the Jordan rather than from the wilderness beyond the Jordan to Jerusalem. Having set the stage, we now proceed to John‘s narrative. Day 1: The Witness of John the Baptist (John 1:19–28) John begins his Gospel with John the Baptist‘s witness to the Light before Jesus‘ own people (John 1:11) represented by a delegation of priests and Levites. On stage stand the two main characters, John the Baptist and the priests and Levites who speak collectively. Off stage stand the Pharisees who sent the delegation and the disciples of John the Baptist. Each of these characters contributes semantically to John the Baptist‘s baptism as the subject (John the Baptist) and intended direct objects (Disciples of John the Baptist; Priests and Levites; Pharisees) of the verbal action. For now, we will concentrate on the main characters. The semantic contribution of John the Baptist‘s disciples will be examined later in this chapter and that of the Pharisees in Chapter 4. The priests and Levites serve a two-fold representative role as mediators between God and his own people. On the one hand, the priests and Levites represented God before the Jewish people. They spoke authoritatively in God‘s stead, especially with regard to questions of ritual purification. The delegation‘s composition, therefore, suggests that John the Baptist‘s baptism, a liturgical act, in particular prompted this

22

official inquest.3 John‘s Jewish contemporaries likely echoed their authoritative appraisal of John the Baptist and his baptism. On the other hand, the priests and Levites officially represented the Jewish people before God. In this respect, their response to John the Baptist, his witness, and baptism represented the official response of Jesus‘ own people. More precisely, they represented the Pharisees, Jesus‘ principal antagonists, who dispatched them and are, at times, simply referred to as ―the Jews.‖ All four Gospels present John the Baptist as the prophetic forerunner of the Christ. The Synoptic Gospels clearly portray him as the prophet Elijah. John the Baptist dressed the part, wearing clothes made of camel‘s hair and a leather belt, eating locusts and wild honey, and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins in the wilderness (Matt 3:4; Mark 1:4–6). Luke goes even further, giving a birth narrative parallel to Jesus‘ complete with singing (Luke 1:5–80). John provides none of this historical or biographical data. His characterization of John the Baptist, though consistent with the Synoptic Gospels, is uniquely Johannine. For John, who John the Baptist is not is nearly as significant as who he is. Asked, ―Who are you?‖ John the Baptist emphatically replies, ―I am not the Christ!‖ (ἐ γ ὼ ν ὐ κ ε ἰ μ ὶ ὁ ρ ξ η ζ η ό ο ) (John 1:20). John adamantly refutes (θ α ὶ ὡμ ο λ ό γ η ζ ε ν θ α ὶ ν ὐ κ ἠ π ν ή ζ α η ο , θ α ὶ ὡμ ο λ ό γ η ζ ε ν ) (John 1:20) any messianic attributions to John the Baptist from his own

3 Cullmann writes, ―According to chapter 1.19–28 a deputation of priests and Levites was sent to the Baptist. In the composition of the delegation, the context of public worship of the passage is

23

lips. John the Baptist‘s denial, however, strongly suggests that first-century Jewish messianic expectations included a baptism with water. Presumably, a self-identification as the Christ would have sufficed as justification for his baptismal ministry. Questioned further, John the Baptist denies being Elijah (Mal 4:5; cf. Matt 17:12; Mark 9:13) and the Moses-like Prophet (Deut 18:15–18; cf. John 4:19(?); 6:14), the priestly and prophetic harbingers of the messianic age. Ironically, references to these two figures reinforce the polemical character of John the Baptist‘s baptism. Elijah prophesied at a time of unprecedented apostasy in the Northern Kingdom during the reign of Ahab and Jezebel. Moses led the Israelites out of idolatrous Egypt into the wilderness in order to meet with and worship the Lord. Despite his emphatic denials, Elijah and Moses do figure into John‘s characterization of John the Baptist. However, this is not in accordance with the expectations of John the Baptist‘s interrogators. John casts John the Baptist in the role of Moses in the eschatological exodus of the children of God. He is a man sent from beside God (ἀ πε ζ η α ι κ έ λ ν ο πα ξ ὰ ζ ε ν ῦ ) (John 1:6), a position of exalted status thought by many first-century Jews to be inhabited by Moses.4 God‘s sending John the Baptist to the Jews parallels his sending Moses to the ancient Israelites (Exod 3:10). John the Baptist is

immediately evident. The delegation is composed of men who specialize in questions of liturgical propriety.‖ Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 60. 4 Wayne A. Meeks, The Prophet–King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology, SupNovT 14 (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 100–285; see also Charles A. Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence, Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 42 (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 163–167.

24

also a witness to the Light (John 1:7) and a burning and shining lamp (John 5:35), language evocative of Moses through whom God communicated the Torah, symbolized by light, and whose face radiated the light of the Glory of the Lord (Exod 34:29–35). In John 3, John the Baptist identifies himself as the friend of the bridegroom (John 3:9). In later rabbinic writings, this role is attributed to Moses.5 Pressed for a positive self-identification, John the Baptist quotes Isaiah 40:3, ―I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‗Make straight the way of the Lord‘‖ (Isa 40:3; John 1:23). The Gospels unanimously attest to John the Baptist being the voice of Isaiah 40:3 (Matt 3:3; Mark 1:2–3; Luke 3:4–6). John the Baptist‘s identification as the voice of Isaiah 40:3 is in keeping with John‘s overall Moses-like character portrayal of John the Baptist. As the archetypal prophet and author of the Torah, Moses was the voice of God in the wilderness (Exod 20:18–20). Only in the Gospel of John, however, does John the Baptist identify himself as the voice. As the voice of Isaiah 40:3, John the Baptist called the Jews to, ―Make straight the way of the Lord!‖ This was done, in part, by receiving his baptism with water. Ritual ablutions with water were common throughout the ancient world.6 The generative idea behind such ablutions was the removal of that which prevented communion with God (or the gods). This basic notion is reflected in the proverbial saying, ―Cleanliness is next to

5 Calum M. Carmichael, ―Marriage and the Samaritan Woman,‖ NTS 26 (1980): 332–346. 6 W. F. Flemington, The New Testament Doctrine of Baptism (London: SPCK, 1964), ix–x.

25

godliness.‖ Humankind‘s uncleanness, whether understood in physical (e.g., dirt; bodily discharges), moral (e.g., human behavior), or spiritual terms (e.g., original sin; actual sins) prevents communion with the divine. Purification rites removed this uncleanness thereby enabling an encounter with the divine through worship. Two events in Israelite history, in particular, form the conceptual background to the Jewish understanding of ritual purification with water as a means of preparation for an encounter with God—the Red Sea crossing (Exod. 14; cf. 1 Cor 10:1–2) and the Sinai theophany (Exod 19:1– 23:19).7 The Red Sea crossing marked Israel‘s decisive break from their syncretistic past in Egypt. The Israelites went from dwelling in a land full of idols to dwelling in the wilderness with YHWH, from enslavement and death in Egypt to newness of life in the kingdom of God. Moses led the Israelites into the wilderness of Sinai in order to worship YHWH who would appear to them. Through the Red Sea crossing, YHWH purified the Israelites from spiritual defilement contracted in Egypt so that they could, ―hold a feast to me in the wilderness‖ (Exod 5:1). Paul‘s reference to being baptized into Moses (1 Cor 10:2) is rooted in the Jewish self-understanding of their own deliverance and incorporation into Israel‘s collective history. The Sinai theophany marked the establishment of the covenant between YHWH and the Israelites codified in the Law of Moses. On the third day, YHWH would descend upon the mountain in the sight of all the people in order to establish his covenant with

7 Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity

26

them. YHWH instructed Moses, ―Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments and be ready for the third day‖ (Exod 19:6). Ritual purification was a necessary prerequisite for the Israelites to be in YHWH‘s visible presence. The Law of Moses includes numerous stipulations for distinguishing between the clean and the unclean, as well as rites prescribed for removing uncleanness, many of which include the application of water (Lev 14–15; Num 19; cf. Ps 51:7). YHWH‘s visible presence and rule among the Israelites according to the terms of the covenant required the observance of these purification rituals. Nothing unclean could enter or remain in the Israelite camp unless first purified. Jewish groups such as the Pharisees later incorporated these ritual washings, especially those associated specifically with the tabernacle and subsequently the Temple, into daily religious practice. John the Baptist‘s baptism invalidated these rituals as inadequate preparation for meeting the Lord in the wilderness beyond the Jordan in order to receive the new covenant of grace and truth. Day 2: The Baptism of Jesus (John 1:29–34) John the Baptist and Jesus are the only two characters in this narrative section. Whereas John 1:19–28 and John 1:35–42 present dialogues between characters, John 1:29–34 presents the singular voice of John the Baptist as he bears witness to the true Light. Embedded in John the Baptist‘s witness lays the Christological confession John seeks to elicit from his catechumens namely, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 1:33, 34; 20:31).

(Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 356–57.

27

The baptism of Jesus is recorded in all four Gospels (Matt 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–22; John 1:29–34). Matthew and John give the most detailed accounts. John‘s account of Jesus‘ baptism, though similar in essentials details, differs markedly from the Synoptics. According to Matthew, John the Baptist initially objects to baptizing Jesus citing his own need to be baptized by Jesus. Matthew emphasizes the preparatory purpose of John the Baptist‘s baptism as a means of ritual purification. Jesus must be baptized, ―in order to fulfill all righteousness‖ (Matt 3:15). In sharp contrast, John the Baptist offers no objections to baptizing Jesus according to John. Rather, John the Baptist understands his baptism of Jesus as the fulfillment of his divinely appointed role. John the Baptist was sent baptizing with water precisely in order to reveal to Israel the One who would baptize with the Holy Spirit (John 1:31). For John the primary purpose of baptism is revelation. Preparation is secondary. All four Gospels mention the Spirit‘s descent upon Jesus at his baptism by John the Baptist establishing baptism as the mode or medium for the Father‘s gift of the Spirit (Matt 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32; cf. Isa 11:1–5; 42:1; 61:1). In contrast to Old Testament kings, prophets, and even John the Baptist (Luke 1:15; cf. Luke 1:41, 44), Jesus is given the Spirit without measure (John 3:34). In Matthew and Mark, Jesus saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descend upon him. Luke simply mentions that the heaven opened.

28

In John, John the Baptist saw (η ε ζ έ α κ α η ) the Spirit descend (θ α η α β α ῖ ν ο ν ) like a dove from heaven upon Jesus, adding that the Spirit remained upon him (ἔ κεηλελ ἐ πʼ αὐ ηόλ).8 Brown notes that John characteristically uses κέ λεηλ ―to express the permanency of relationship between Father and Son and between Son and Christian.‖9 The Greek perfect η ε ζ έ α κ α η (―I have seen‖) underscores the permanency of this relationship (John 1:32).10 Baptism with water revealed Jesus to Israel as the Messiah (Isa 11:1–5; 42:1; 61:1; cf. John 1:41), the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:25–26), establishing a permanent relationship between the Spirit and the Lamb of God. The One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit and the One who takes away the sin of the world is the Lamb of God who is revealed in baptism with water. Jesus‘ baptism inextricably links the eschatological gift of the Spirit and his atoning death to baptism with water.11 All future references to the Spirit must be understood in connection to Jesus‘ death and baptism with water.

8 There is an interesting parallel between John 1:32 and John 1:51. Note the similar vocabulary. Jesus tells his disciples, ὄ ςε ζ ζ ε τ ὸ ν ο ὐ ρ α ν ὸ ν ἀ λ ε ῳγ ό η α κ α ὶ τ ο ὺ ς ἀ γ γ έ λ ο σ ς τ ο ῦ θ ε ο ῦ ἀ ν α β α ί ν ο ν τ α ς κ α ὶ κ α τ α β α ί ν ο ν τ α ς ἐ πὶ η ὸ λ π ἱ ὸ λ η ν ῦ ἀ λ ζ ξ ώπν π . 9 Brown, Gospel, 510. 10 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, Revised Edition, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995), 132. 11 ―If water baptism symbolizes salvific cleansing brought about by the eschatological Christ, this symbolism works in an eschatological framework, in which the symbol prepares or anticipates the symbolized. Just as John the Baptist prepared the way for the eschatological Christ (2:23), his baptism anticipates salvific cleansing of the eschatological kingdom. So water anticipates the eschatological means of purification, which the gospel eventually comes to reveal as the Holy Spirit (7:37–39). Thus the stage is set for the symbolic use of ―water‖ in the subsequent episodes.‖ Ng, Water Symbolism, 68. Jesus brings about the eschatological salvific cleansing through the Spirit by dying as the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world.

29

Matthew, Mark and Luke each record the voice of the Father identifying Jesus as his beloved Son (Matt 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). The only difference between them is in the addressee. In Matthew, the Father addresses the crowd, whereas in Mark and Luke the Father addresses Jesus. νὗ ηόο ἐ ζηηλ ὁ πἱ όο κνπ ὁ ἀ γαπεηόο, ἐ λ ᾧ εὐ δόθεζα (Matt 3:17) ζὺ εἶ ὁ πἱ όο κνπ ὁ ἀ γαπεηόο, ἐ λ ζνὶ εὐ δόθεζα (Mark 1:11) ζὺ εἶ ὁ πἱ όο κνπ ὁ ἀ γαπεηόο, ἐ λ ζνὶ εὐ δόθεζα (Luke 3:22) The Father‘s identification of Jesus as his beloved Son has a rich Old Testament background. The adjective ἀ γαπεηόο echoes God‘s command to Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. Καὶ εἶ πελ Λαβὲ ηὸ λ πἱ όλ ζνπ ηὸ λ ἀ γαπεηόλ, ὃ λ ἠ γάπεζαο, ηὸ λ Ιζααθ, θαὶ πνξεύζεηη εἰ ο ηὴ λ γῆ λ ηὴ λ ὑ ςειὴ λ θαὶ ἀ λέλεγθνλ αὐ ηὸ λ ἐ θεῖ εἰ ο ὁ ινθάξπσζηλ ἐ

ἓ λ ηῶλ ὀ ξέσλ, ὧλ ἄ λ ζνη εἴ πσ (Gen 22:2; cf. Gen 22:12, 16

LXX). The author of Hebrews translates the Hebrew adjective

literally as ηὸ λ

κνλνγελῆ (―the only-begotten‖) (Heb 11:17), as reflected by John who elsewhere refers to Jesus as the only-begotten (ηὸ λ κνλνγελῆ ) Son of God (John 1:18; 3:16). In the Old Testament, God anointed prophets (Num 11:17, 25; Deut 34:9; 1 Chr 16:22; Ps 105:15), priests (Exod 28:41; 29:7; Lev 4:3; 6:20), and kings (1 Sam 2:10; 9:16; 15:1; 2 Sam 23:1) with his Spirit to speak and act as mediators with humankind. Moses and Elijah were especially endowed with the Spirit of God. However, none were given the Spirit permanently or without measure (John 3:34). In contrast, the Spirit descends and remains upon Jesus in fulfillment of Old Testament messianic prophecies

30

(Isa 11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Jesus‘ baptism signals the Messiah‘s arrival and the dawn of the messianic age. As God‘s only-begotten Son who alone makes known the Father, Jesus fulfills each of these offices as God‘s ultimate mediator with humankind. John, however, makes no explicit reference to John the Baptist actually baptizing Jesus. This inference must be drawn from elements in common with the Synoptic accounts. This omission is not an oversight but a deliberate effort to emphasize the identity and baptismal ministry of Jesus over John the Baptist.12 In lieu of the baptismal act itself, John records John the Baptist‘s witness to Jesus. Whereas the Synoptic Evangelists focus on the preparatory purpose of John the Baptist‘s baptism, John focuses on its revelatory purpose.13 According to Matthew, Jesus compels a reluctant John the Baptist to baptize him in order ―to fulfill all righteousness‖ (Matt 3:15). According to John, however, God specifically sends John the Baptist to baptize in order to reveal the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit to Israel. In Matthew and Mark, Jesus sees the Spirit descend upon himself. In John, however, John the Baptist sees the Spirit descend and remain upon Jesus as the divinely appointed sign to which he was sent by God to bear witness, ―He on whom you see the Spirit descend . . . . ‖ (John 1:33). Matthew, Mark and Luke each record a voice from heaven declaring Jesus to be the Son of God. John substitutes the heavenly voice with the voice of John the Baptist ―. . . . this is the Son of God.‖ (John 1:34). John says

12 Jones, Symbol of Water, 47–48. 13 Jones, Symbol of Water, 49.

31

nothing in his Gospel about the effect of John the Baptist‘s baptism with water on those whom he baptized in sharp contrast to Matthew, Mark and Luke. Matthew captures the central theme of John the Baptist‘s preaching in the Synoptics. ―Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand‖ (Matt 3:2; cf. Matt 3:7–10; Luke 3:7–14). In Mark and Luke, John the Baptist preaches ―a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins‖ (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; cf. Matt 3:11). In Matthew and Mark, those who came to John the Baptist ―were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins‖ (Matt 3:6; Mark 1:5). John makes no explicit connection between John the Baptist‘s baptism and the forgiveness of sins.14 Rather than calling Israel to repentance, John the Baptist reveals the Lamb of God to Israel as the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. Jesus‘ baptism was a theophany revealing his Glory as the only-begotten Son of God, πι ή ξ ε ο ρ ά ξ η η ν ο θ α ὶ ἀ λ η θ ε ί α ρ (―full of grace and truth‖) (John 1:14; cf. 1:17).15 In the Old Testament, the Glory of the Lord often refers to God‘s visible presence.16 John equates the visible Glory of the only-begotten Son of God with the Logos become flesh and tabernacling among us in continuity with the Old Testament‘s use of anthropomorphic and angelomorphic language to describe theophanies of the Glory of the Lord (e.g., Exod 33:17–34:8; Isa 6:1–6; Ezek 1:26–28;

14 The dispute between some of John the Baptist‘s disciples and a Jew over purification may imply such a connection. 15 Evans, Word and Glory, 81. Evans links the visible Glory of the only-begotten Son in John 1:14 to God‘s self-revelation to Moses atop Sinai in Exodus 34:6, πι ή ξ ε ο ρ ά ξ η η ν ο θ α ὶ ἀ ι ε ζ ε ί α ο translating the Hebrew rather than following the LXX πν ι π έ ι ε ν ο θ αὶ ἀι εζη λ ὸο .

32

3:22–24; 8:2).17 In a stroke of irony, Jesus reveals his Glory as the only-begotten Son of God in death as the Lamb of God, establishing the new covenant of grace and truth by taking away the sin of the world (i.e., grace) and baptizing with the Holy Spirit (i.e., truth). John the Baptist identifies the man (ἀ λὴ ξ) Jesus as the Lamb of God upon seeing the Spirit descend and remain upon him.18 Apart from the Spirit‘s descent and session, even John the Baptist did not know him (νὐ θ ᾔ δεηλ αὐ ηόλ) (John 1:31, 33). John the Baptist‘s baptism with water, therefore, becomes the Spirit‘s vehicle whereby the Glory of the Lord is revealed as the Lamb of God. Given John the Baptist‘s self-identification as the voice (Isa 40:3), one expects him rather to declare, ―Behold, the Glory of the Lord!‖ in keeping with Isaiah 40:5. Καὶ ὀ θζήζεηαη ἡ δόμα θπξίνπ, θαὶ ὄ ςεηαη πᾶ ζα ζὰ ξμ ηὸ ζσηήξηνλ ηνῦ ζενῦ , ὅ ηη θύξηνο ἐ ιάιεζελ (Isa 40:5 LXX). John the Baptist identifies the Glory of the Lord, the visible presence of God, as an ἀ μ ν ὸ ρ (―a yearling lamb‖). As the Lamb of God, Jesus exegeted (ἐ μεγήζαην) the Father by taking away the sin of the world and baptizing with the Holy Spirit. John the Baptist uses the title, the

16 For a fuller treatment of the Glory of the Lord as a divine hypostasis and its contribution to early Christology, see Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology, 78–88. 17 Gieschen points out the human-like features and actions attributed to the Glory of the Lord in each of these texts. Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology, 80–84. 18 The phrase, ―the Lamb of God, the Savior of the world,‖ also appears in the Testament of Benjamin (T. Benj. 3:8), but is generally considered a later Christian interpolation influenced by the Gospel of John.

33

Lamb of God, exclusively when pointing his disciples to Jesus the following day. The title, the Lamb of God, embodies John the Baptist‘s Christology.19 It is generally accepted that the title, the Lamb of God, refers to the Servant of God (Isa 42:1; 49:1–7; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12). The Servant of God is anointed by the Spirit for the two-fold purpose of suffering vicariously for the people of God to atone for their sins and re-establishing the covenant relationship between God and his people. John the Baptist ascribes two actions to Jesus as the Lamb of God, bearing the sin of the world and baptizing with the Holy Spirit. Numerous attempts have been made to identify the precise referent of this Christological title. These identifications can be broadly categorized as expiatory sacrifice, substitute, innocent victim, and apocalyptic champion, allowing for some overlap between categories. John employs each of three Greek nouns for sheep in the Gospel: ἀ μ ν ὸ ρ , ἀ π ν ί ο ν , and πξ ό β α η ν λ . John uses ἀ κ λ ὸ ρ (―a yearling lamb‖) exclusively for Jesus (John 1:29, 36). John uses ἀ π ν ί ο ν (―sheep, lamb‖) only once as a symbol for the Christian church (John 21:15). Revelation uses ἀ π ν ί ο ν for Jesus in his state of exaltation.20 John uses πξ ό β α η ν λ (―sheep‖) both literally (2:14, 15; cf. Rev 18:13) and symbolically for the Christian church (John 10; 21:16, 17).

19 Charles A. Gieschen, ―The Death of Jesus in the Gospel of John: Atonement for Sin?‖ CTQ 72:3 (2008): 243–261, esp. 254–256. For a survey of scholarly interpretation, see Brown, Gospel, 58–63. 20 The second beast having two horns like a lamb (ὅ κ ν η α ἀ ξ λ ί ῳ) is contrasted with Jesus, the true Lamb (ἀ ξ λ ί ν λ ) (Rev 13:11; 14:1).

34

The Lamb of God immediately evokes images of sacrifice. The Law of Moses prescribed yearling lambs for several sacrifices. The daily offering specified the sacrifice of a male lamb a year old without blemish as a burnt offering every morning and evening when God would meet and speak with his people (Exod 29:38–46; Num 28:1–8).21 The lamb‘s flesh offered on the bronze altar established table fellowship between God and his people as ―a pleasing aroma, a food offering to the Lord‖ (Exod 29:41). The lamb‘s blood utilized in the daily rite of atonement sanctified the people providing ritual purification and access to God‘s gracious presence. Various burnt, guilt, and sin offerings also prescribed the sacrifice of unblemished male or female lambs in addition to bulls and goats to provide atonement and purification and, therefore, access to God‘s gracious presence. It would be difficult, however, to isolate a single referent to the Lamb of God among them. Lambs also served as substitutes, a concept distinct yet closely tied to expiatory sacrifice. God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac to prove his faithfulness and obedience (Gen 22). At the last minute, God stays Abraham‘s hand and provides a ram (θ ξ η ὸ ρ LXX) as a substitute for Isaac. As God‘s provision, the ram could be considered a type of the Lamb of God. Abraham‘s willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac typifies the Father‘s giving his only-begotten Son for the life of the world. Just as the ram died in the place of Abraham‘s son Isaac, Jesus will die in place of the sons of

21 C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentaries on the Old Testament: Pentateuch, II, trans. James Martin (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1951), 206–208; see also John Kleinig, Concordia Commentary: Leviticus (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2003), 64–65.

35

Abraham. God commanded the children of Israel to sacrifice a year old male lamb without blemish as the Lord‘s Passover. God accepted the lamb‘s life as an acceptable substitute for the life of the Israelites‘ first born. According to John, Jesus was crucified on the Day of Preparation when the Passover lambs were sacrificed (John 19:14, 31; Exod 12:6).22 On that day, God sacrificed his first and only Son (John 1:14). John records that Jesus‘ legs were not broken to fulfill the Scripture, ―Not one of his bones will be broken‖ (John 19:36; Exod 12:10 LXX, 46; Num 9:12; Ps 34:20).23 John, like Paul, clearly understood Jesus to be ―Christ, our Passover lamb‖ (1 Cor 5:7). One life was substituted for another. The scapegoat has also been suggested as a possible referent for the Lamb of God (Lev 16:7–10, 20–22). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest placed the sins of the people on the goat‘s head before sending it into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people. Although at times lambs could be taken either from the sheep or the goats as in the case of the Passover lamb (Exod 12:5), the scapegoat presents other difficulties ruling it out as a possible referent. Lambs serve as suitable metaphors for innocent victims in the prophetic literature. Jeremiah compares himself to ―a gentle lamb led to the slaughter‖ by his kinsmen who plotted to kill him (Jer 11:19). This fits well with John‘s theme of the Christ‘s rejection by his own, anticipating the plot by the Jewish authorities to kill Jesus. Jeremiah, along

22 On the dating of the crucifixion and the Passover, see Raymond Brown, Death of the Messiah, II (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 1350–1378.

36

with Elijah, was also among those identified as the Son of Man who was expected to herald the arrival of the Messianic Age (Dan 7:13; Ezek 1:6; cf. Matt 16:14).24 However, there is no connection between Jeremiah‘s ―gentle lamb‖ and the taking away of sins. Similarly, Isaiah compares the Servant of the Lord to ―a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent‖ (Isa 53:7). Assuming John the Baptist originally spoke these words in Aramaic, he may actually have explicitly identified Jesus as the Servant of the Lord.25 In contrast to the ―gentle lamb‖ of Jeremiah, the Servant of the Lord ―shall bear their iniquities‖ and ―bore the sin of many‖ (Isa 53:11, 12). A lamb can also symbolize God‘s champion who triumphs in the final eschatological battle in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature of the Second Temple Period. In 1 Enoch, for example, a horned ram symbolizes Judas Maccabeus (1 En. 90:9–12). In the Testament of Joseph, a ―spotless lamb‖ born of a virgin from Judah conquers ―all the wild animals‖ representing Israel‘s enemies (T. Jos. 19:8–9). In the Testament of Benjamin, ―the Lamb of God, the Savior of the world . . . . dies for the salvation of the gentiles and of Israel and the destruction of Beliar and his servants‖ (T. Benj. 3:8). Revelation depicts Jesus as a Lamb who was slain yet victorious. Although

23 For a brief discussion of this citation, see Douglas J. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2008), 314–16. 24 Keil-Delitzsch, Pentateuch, II, 206–208. See also Kleinig, Leviticus, 64–65. 25 J. Jeremias, ―ἀ κ λ ό ο , ἀ ξ ή λ , ἀ ξ λ ί ν λ ‖ TDNT 1:338–41.

37

Revelation uses ἀ π ν ί ο ν (―sheep, lamb‖) rather than ἀ μ ν ὸ ρ (―a yearling lamb‖), the terms are virtually synonymous. Lambs or sheep can also symbolize God‘s chosen people. In the Gospel of John, Jesus describes his disciples as ἀ π ν ί α (―sheep‖) (John 21:15) and πξ ό β α η ά (―lambs‖) (John 10; 21:16, 17). By identifying Jesus as the Lamb of God, John the Baptist alludes to his incarnation. By taking on human flesh, God‘s only-begotten Son becomes God‘s lamb. The Good Shepherd becomes the Lamb of God. Only by becoming a true man could God‘s pre-existent Son take away the sin of the world. A composite picture thus emerges from the multiple associations evoked by this Christological title. As the Lamb of God, Jesus takes away the sin of the world. Two questions arise. What is the sin of the world? What does it mean to take away (αἴ ξσλ) the sin of the world? John 1:29 is the first reference to sin in the Gospel of John. John‘s use of the singular (η ὴ ν ἁ μ α π η ί α ν ) indicates the universal human condition of original sin rather than an individual act or acts.26 Original sin is the cause of humankind‘s alienation from God and expulsion from his kingdom depriving him of God‘s Spirit, Light and eternal life (Gen 3). On account of original sin, all humankind is begotten of the devil (John 8:44), from below of this world (John 8:23), and in sin (John 1:13 cf. 9:34).

26 Charles A. Gieschen, ―Original Sin in the New Testament,‖ Concordia Journal 31 (2005): 359–75.

38

As a result, humankind is enslaved to sin (John 8:34), spiritually blind (John 9:41), and dead (John 8:21, 24). Humankind walks and dwells in darkness (John 8:12; 12:35, 46), preferring darkness to the Light (John 3:19) and consequently unable to see or enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:3, 5), worship the Father in Spirit and Truth (John 4:21–24), and live eternally. ―The sin of the world‖ is thus the world‘s universal unbelief and rejection of its creator who it refuses to acknowledge to which Jesus‘ crucifixion attests (John 1:10–11). The present participle αἴ ξσλ (―take away, bear‖) can be understood in terms of vicarious expiation and/or personal experience. On the cross, Jesus suffers not only the world‘s condemnation, but also his own creation‘s rejection. Interestingly, John does not record Jesus‘ cry of dereliction from Psalm 22. Rather John emphasizes Jesus‘ dereliction by his own. John‘s catechumens must recognize their complicity in the sin of the world and Jesus‘ unique role as the Lamb of God who takes away this sin in his death. John the Baptist witnessed the Spirit descend and remain upon Jesus at his baptism, identifying Jesus as the One who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.27 All future references to the Holy Spirit must be understood in light of Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit. The participial phrases, ―baptizes with the Holy Spirit‖ and ―takes away the sin of the world,‖ parallel one another. Jesus mediates the Father‘s work of redemption through bearing the sin of the world in his sacrificial death; He mediates the Father‘s work of new

27 John the Baptist never refers explicitly to Jesus as the Christ. The closest he comes is in John 3:28. Αὐ η ν ὶ ὑ κ ε ῖ ο κ ν η κ α ξ η π ξ ε ῖ η ε ὅ η η ε ἶ πν λ [ὅ η η ] ν ὐ θ ε ἰ κ ὶ ἐ γ ὼ ὁ ρ ξ η ζ η ό ο , ἀ ι ι ʼὅ η η ἀ πε ζ η α ι κ έ λ ν ο ε ἰ κ ὶ ἔ κ πξ ν ζ ζ ε λ ἐ θ ε ί λ ν π .

39

creation through his baptism with the Holy Spirit. Bearing the sin of the world and baptizing with the Holy Spirit are two sides of the same coin. God makes all things new by redeeming the old creation. The soteriological benefits Jesus achieved once for all through his death as the Lamb of God he continues imparting sacramentally by baptizing with the Holy Spirit. When will Jesus baptize with the Holy Spirit? God promised through the prophets to pour out his Spirit upon his people in the messianic age giving them new life lived in eternal communion with him (Isa 32:15; 44:3; 59:21; Ezek 36:25–26; 37:5–6; 39:29; Zech 13:1–13; Joel 2:28–29). In the Synoptic Gospels Jesus refers to his crucifixion as a baptism (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38–39; Luke 12:50). Jesus yields up the Spirit or spirit (ἀ θῆ θελ ηὸ πλεῦ κα) according to Matthew (Matt 27:50), commits his Spirit or spirit into his Father‘s hands citing Psalm 31:6 and expires (πάηεξ, εἰ ο ρεῖ ξάο ζνπ παξαηίζεκαη ηὸ πλεῦ κά κνπ. ηνῦ ην δὲ εἰ πὼλ ἐ μέπλεπζελ) according to Luke (Luke 23:46), and simply utters a loud cry and expires (ἀ θεὶ ο θσλὴ λ κεγάιελ ἐ μέπλεπζελ) according to Mark (Mark 15:37). In Acts, Jesus refers to the forthcoming Pentecost event as his baptism with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4–5; 2:1–41). In his Pentecost sermon, Peter connects this to the baptism administered by Jesus‘ disciples (Acts 2:38–39; Joel 2:28–32). John, however, omits both Jesus‘ ascension and the Pentecost event despite Jesus‘ promise to send the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth, after returning to the Father (John 14:15–31). Is John the Baptist, then, referring to an event that John does not record?

40

Only John mentions that Jesus regularly baptized during his earthly ministry, indicated by the present and imperfect tenses (John 1:33; 3:22, 26; 4:1–2). This fact sheds new light on the more detailed narrations of Jesus‘ earthly ministry in the Synoptic Gospels. Nevertheless, those baptized during Jesus‘ earthly ministry did not immediately receive the Holy Spirit, ―for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified‖ (John 7:39). In John, Jesus‘ glorification refers primarily to his death. Accordingly, the only two places John refers to Jesus actually giving the Spirit are in his death and after his resurrection.28 Jesus bowed his head and handed over the Spirit (πα ξ έ δ σθ ε λ η ὸ πλ ε ῦ μ α ) after declaring, ―It is finished‖ (ηεηέιεζηαη) (John 19:30; cf. Luke 23:46). In the upper room, Jesus ―breathed‖ (ἐ ν ε θύ ζ η ζ ε ν ) the Spirit upon his disciples enabling them to give eternal life and salvation through the forgiveness of sins (John 20:22–23). Jesus sends his disciples to baptize with the Holy Spirit just as the Father sent him (John 1:33, 20:21; cf. Matt 28:19–20). The Spirit now descends and remains upon the disciples. The theological significance of Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit derives from the original creation. God created all things through his Logos and Spirit, distinct hypostases or Persons in the Godhead. The Logos is God‘s creative utterance, ―Let there be . . . .‖ The Spirit is God‘s life-giving breath that hovered over the face of the waters as God spoke all things into existence (Gen 1:2ff). God created humankind in his own

28 Throughout the Gospel, Jesus offers the gift of the Spirit (John 4:10; 7:39) or speaks of sending the Spirit (John 14:15–31).

41

image as the apex of his creation and breathed (ἐ ν ε θύ ζ η ζ ε ν LXX) into Adam the breath of life imparting his Spirit and eternal life (Gen 2:7; cf. John 20:21). Adam bore God‘s image and breathed God‘s breath as a sacramental incarnation of God on earth created for eternal life in communion with God (Gen 2:7). By breaking this communion, Adam lost the image and Spirit of God. Spiritual death is the absence of God‘s Spirit. Physical death is the absence of God‘s life-giving breath. Though physically alive, Adam was spiritually dead and subject to physical death—the natural condition of all humankind (cf. Gen 6:3 ―My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh.‖). God must restore his image and Spirit for humankind to live eternally in communion with him. Jesus is God‘s ontological incarnation on earth, ―The Word became flesh and tabernacled among us‖ (John 1:14), who bears God‘s image, ―Whoever has seen me has seen the Father‖ (John 14:9), and possesses the Spirit without measure (John 3:34). As the pre-existent Logos through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made that had been made, Jesus recreates humankind in God‘s image and imparts the Holy Spirit through his baptism. The Spirit of God hovers over the baptismal waters bringing forth life as the Logos speaks his new creation into existence. Jesus‘ baptism with the Spirit bridges the temporal gap between catechumen and crucifixion. The One who bears the sin of the world is the same One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit—the only two actions or works attributed to Jesus by John the Baptist. Jesus bore the sin of the world once for all on the cross, ―It is finished.‖ Jesus continually

42

baptizes with the Holy Spirit in the Christian congregation through the apostolic ministry. Jesus‘ death and his baptism with the Spirit are the principal ―works of God‖ by which he makes known the Father as the redeemer of the world and creator of the world to come. Jesus‘ final word from the cross, ―It is finished,‖ applies equally to redemption and new creation. By handing over the Spirit in death, Jesus baptizes the world with the Holy Spirit creating it anew—in systematic terms, objective justification. By breathing the Spirit on the disciples, Jesus sends them to baptize individuals with the Holy Spirit to redeem and create them anew—in systematic terms, subjective justification. ―The Light continually shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it‖ (John 1:5). John included this narrative to establish the priority of Jesus over John the Baptist. Despite his witness to the Light, not all of John the Baptist‘s disciples left their master to become disciples of Jesus. Initially, the baptismal ministries of John the Baptist and Jesus coincided (John 3:22–23). The disciples of John the Baptist remained a distinct group within Judaism in the earliest period of the Church. Some early Christian missionaries and converts, for example Apollos and the Ephesians, initially knew only the baptism of John the Baptist (Acts 19:1–7). John‘s tone is not polemical, however, as some have suggested. He portrays John the Baptist positively, maintaining the validity of his witness and baptism. Nevertheless, Jesus must increase and John the Baptist must decrease. John juxtaposes John the Baptist and Jesus, the witness to the Light and the true Light, drawing comparisons yet always maintaining a clear contrast. In this light, the

43

delegations—and perhaps some of John‘s catechumen‘s—misidentification of John the Baptist as the Christ is understandable. John the Baptist is introduced simply as ―a man, sent from God, named John‖ (John 1:6). Unlike the Synoptic evangelists, John omits additional background information about John the Baptist such as tribe, parentage, familial relationship to Jesus, or manner of dress. This paucity of biographical data sharpens the contrast between John the Baptist and Jesus introduced anonymously in the prologue as the pre-existing Logos. Like John the Baptist, Jesus is also a man sent from God—a recurring motif in the Gospel (John 3:17, 34; 5:36; cf. 9:7).29 John the Baptist‘s likeness and witness to Jesus extends beyond his preaching and baptism with water. John the Baptist‘s humility, ―he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie‖ (John 1:27), foreshadows Jesus‘ self-abasement when he washed the feet of his disciples (John 13:1–18). John the Baptist‘s imprisonment (John 3:24) and unjust death, alluded to but not narrated, foreshadow Jesus‘ imprisonment and unjust execution. Jesus would suffer the same fate as John the Baptist, but in a greater and more significant way.

29 On the sending motif in John, see K. H. Rengstorf, ―ἀ πν ζ η έ ι ι σ (πέ κ πσ), ἐ μ α πν ζ η έ ι ι σ, ἀ πό ζ η ν ι ν ο , Ψε π δ α πό ζ η ν ι ν ο , ἀ πν ζ η ν ι ή ‖ TDNT 1:398–447; cf. Calvin Mercer, ―Jesus the Apostle: ―Sending‖ and the Theology of John,‖ JETS 35:4 (D 1992): 457–462; Calvin Mercer, "APOSTELLEIN and PEMPEIN in John," NTS 36 (1990) 619–624; hl, Die Sendung Jesu und der Kirche nach dem Johannes-Evangelium (Studia Instituti Missiologici Societatis Verbi 11; St. Augustin: Steyler, 1967); E. Haenchen, "'Der Vater, der mich gesandt hat,'" NTS 9 (1962–63) 208–216, esp. 210–212; J. P. Miranda, Die Sendung Jesu im vierten Evangelium: Religions-und theologiegeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu den Sendungsformeln, SBS 87, eds. H. Haag, R. Kilian and W. Pesch (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977).

44

Throughout the narrative, John the Baptist decreases and Jesus increases. At the beginning of the third section (John 1:36), John the Baptist exits the stage. John the Baptist always identifies himself in a subordinate relation to Jesus, consistently pointing away from himself to the true Light. He is ―the voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‗Make straight the way of the Lord‘‖ (John 1:23; cf. Isa 40:3). He is not worthy to untie Jesus‘ sandal (John 1:27). Though Jesus comes after him, he ranks before him. He baptizes with water, whereas Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. Later, John the Baptist identifies himself as the friend of the bridegroom and Jesus as the bridegroom who has the bride. This subordination of John the Baptist to Jesus reinforces the distinction between their respective eschatological identities and baptisms while maintaining a positive correlation. Day 3: Jesus’ First Disciples (John 1:35–42) John illustrates the transition from discipleship of John the Baptist to Jesus with the calling of Jesus‘ first disciples from among the disciples of John the Baptist! A day has passed since John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend and remain upon Jesus at his baptism whereupon he declared, ―This is the Son of God!‖ John devotes the remainder of his Gospel to affirming John the Baptist‘s Christological witness to the Light. He intends his catechumens to make the same confession at their baptism namely, that ―Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God‖ (John 20:31). Once again, John the Baptist stands ready to bear witness to the Light declaring, ―Behold, the Lamb of God!‖ The Lamb of God encapsulates the essence of John the

45

Baptist‘s Christological witness. Jesus will suffer vicariously as a sacrificial victim to atone for the sin of the world in order to re-establish the covenantal relationship between God and humanity. John notes that on this day two of John the Baptist‘s disciples stood next to him. Their presence further substantiates the validity of John the Baptist‘s witness (Deut. 19:15; cf. Matt 18:15; John 8:7; 2 Cor 13:1). John the Baptist and his disciples stand (ε ἱ ζ η ή κ ε ι ) and look intently (ἐ μ β λ έ τα ρ ) as Jesus walks past them (πε ξ η πα η ν ῦ ν η ι ). These two disciples heard (ἤ κ ο ς ζ α ν ) John the Baptist‘s witness and followed (ἠ κ ο λ ο ύ θ η ζ α ν ) Jesus, leaving John the Baptist standing motionless. John the Baptist‘s motionlessness relative to Jesus conveys the impression that his ministry has culminated and Jesus‘ ministry has just begun and will continue. John the Baptist makes his final encore following Jesus‘ interview with Nicodemus, resolving a dispute over purification between some of his disciples and a certain Jew (John 3:23–36). With the arrival of Jesus, John the Baptist can only stand and point as he basks in the Light. John the Baptist came as a witness to the Light ―in order that all (πάληεο) will believe through him‖ (John 1:7). Hearing leads to following; faith leads to discipleship. The tragic theme of unbelief and rejection runs parallel to the theme of faith and acceptance. John wrote his Gospel, most likely read to his catechumens, to create faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God leading to a new and eternal life of discipleship that begins in baptism. Accordingly, the verb ἀ θνινύζεσ (―to follow‖) belongs to John‘s baptismal vocabulary. This pattern will be repeated throughout the Gospel and the

46

history of Christianity, although not all who hear will believe or continue walking in the Light. Τ ί δ ε η ε ῖ η ε ; (―What are your seeking?‖)30 Jesus confronts John the Baptist‘s two disciples, and all who would follow him, with this probing question. Discipleship is on Jesus‘ terms, not the disciples. In the short dialogue that follows, Jesus interviews these two prospective disciples questioning the sincerity and earnestness of their motives. As John demonstrates time and again, not everyone sought out Jesus for the right reasons.31 This dialogue may follow a standard form employed in the Jewish schools between teacher and student. Jesus‘ question, then, is formulaic. He knows they seek to attach themselves to him as his disciples. Jewish, and later Christian, proselytes were similarly examined with respect to their motives prior to baptism. Jesus‘ question may have been incorporated in the earliest pre-baptism examinations. Through narrative baptismal catechesis, John confronts his catechumens with this same question. ῥ α β β ί . . . . πν ῦ κ έ λ ε η ο ; (―Rabbi . . . . where are you staying?‖) The men respond in kind with a question of their own. They address Jesus as, ―Rabbi,‖ interpreted by John as, ―teacher‖—a far cry from John the Baptist‘s Christological confession. By calling Jesus, ―Rabbi,‖ the two men recognize Jesus as an authoritative teacher of Israel who would surround himself with students. Despite John the Baptist‘s witness, however,

30 Jesus‘ disciples refrain from posing the same question to Jesus (John 4:27). 31 The multitude from Capernaum sought Jesus because they ate and were satisfied (John 6:26), hoping to make him king; The Jews repeatedly seek to kill Jesus (John 5:15; 7:1, 19, 20, 25, 30; 8:37, 40; 11:18); Pilate seeks to release Jesus (John 19:12); The women seek to anoint Jesus‘ lifeless body (John 20:15).

47

these two disciples still see Jesus in human categories. They have yet to see his Glory (John 2:11). The men desire more than a brief audience with Jesus wherever he was lodging. Understood as a formulaic response, πν ῦ κ έ λ ε η ο ; (―Where are you staying?‖) could be interpreted as, ―Where do you teach?‖ or ―Where is your school?‖ κ έ λ ε η λ (―remain, stay‖) expresses a permanency of relationship.32 By this tête-àtête, John the Baptist‘s disciples express their desire to join Jesus‘ school of disciples. John‘s catechumens, a generation removed from Jesus‘ death and resurrection, likely asked this same question with an additional twist, ―Where is Jesus?‖ This question has confronted the Church‘s evangelism from its inception.33 ἔ ξ ρ ε ζ ζ ε θ α ὶ ὄ τε ζ θ ε (―Come and you will see‖). Jesus invites the men into the Light accepting their application for admission as his disciples. ―Come and you will see‖ is an invitation to baptism and discipleship. Submission to Jesus‘ baptism marks their transition from following John the Baptist to being disciples of Jesus. Philip, possibly the unnamed disciple in this narrative, will issue the same invitation to Nathanael (John 1:46). Already in John 2:2, John identifies the men introduced in John 1:35–51 as Jesus‘ disciples. We can draw the inference that they submitted to Jesus‘ baptism at some point before the wedding at Cana. After his audience with Jesus, Andrew first finds his brother to tell him, ―We have found the Messiah (which means Christ)!‖ (John 1:41). John emphasizes that Andrew

32 Brown, Gospel, 510.

48

heard John the Baptist and followed Jesus—the initial stage of discipleship. By identifying Andrew as the brother of Simon Peter, John acknowledges Peter‘s prominence in the early Church. Andrew, identified in the Synoptics as one of the Twelve, appears again in John 6:8 and John 12:12 alongside Philip, suggesting Philip to be the other unnamed disciple. Enlightened by the true Light as Jesus‘ baptized disciple, Andrew bears witness to the true Light. This is the first time in the Gospel that Jesus is explicitly called the Christ (cf. John 4:29). Andrew has found the One sought unsuccessfully by the Jerusalem delegation. Knowing the answer to his earlier question he now leads his brother to Jesus and his baptism by bearing witness to Jesus just as his former master John the Baptist. John‘s catechumens likely were brought into his catechumenate the same way. Those who heard (believe) the witness of Jesus‘ disciples and followed (became disciples through baptism) in turn bore witness to their close relatives and neighbors inviting them to ―Come and see.‖ This third narrative section climaxes with Peter‘s name change. Upon meeting Simon, Jesus changes his name to Cephas for which John provides the Greek equivalent ‗Peter.‘ This change in name signals a change in Simon‘s identity. Matthew connects Simon‘s name change with his confession, ―You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!‖ (Matt 16:16–18). This confession is nearly verbatim to the confession John seeks to elicit by his Gospel (John 20:31). John connects Simon‘s name change with his initial

33 In his farewell discourse, Jesus tells his disciples that they will see him after he returns to the Father but the world will not (John 16:16).

49

call. Name changes are relatively rare and highly significant in the Old Testament indicating a change in the person‘s character, status, or allegiance.34 Most significant are the instances where God changes the person‘s name indicating their role in salvation history. God changed the names of Abram and Sarai to Abraham and Sarah upon establishing his covenant of circumcision (Gen 17:5, 15). Their new names reflected their covenant relationship with God and their new status in the covenant. God changed Jacob‘s name to Israel after wrestling with and blessing him (Gen 32:28; 35:9ff.). Peter‘s new name reflected his new status as Jesus‘ disciple and indicated the future role he would play in the early Church. Given the timing according to John, Peter‘s new name may be associated with his baptism. In the early Church those baptized received new names in recognition of the new life into which they are begotten.35 John 1:43–51 repeats the same pattern as John 1:35–42. Jesus finds and calls Philip, ―Follow me‖ (John 1:43). Philip in turn finds Nathanael and witnesses to him, ―we have found the One of whom Moses and the Prophets wrote, Jesus the son of Joseph of Nazareth.‖ When Nathanael expresses reservations, Philip issues the invitation, ―Come and see‖ (John 1:46). In response to Jesus‘ impressive display of omniscience Nathanael confesses, ―You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!‖ One expects

34 Examples not mentioned above include the following: Ben-oni to Benjamin by Jacob (Gen 35:18); Joseph to Zaphenath-paneah by Pharaoh (Gen 41:45); Naomi to Mara by herself (Ruth 1:20); Eliakim to Johoiakim by Pharaoh Neco (2 Kings 23:34); Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshack, and Abednego by the chief of the eunuchs (Dan 1:6–7). 35 For evidence of this practice among early Christians, see Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2009), 235, 286, 585, 753.

50

Nathanael‘s climactic confession to bring this narrative section to its dramatic conclusion. Jesus, however, trumps Nathanael‘s confession with his first self-identification in the Gospel. ―Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man‖ (John 1:51). The successive identifications of Jesus crescendo over the course of John 1:35–51, beginning with John the Baptist‘s, ―Behold, the Lamb of God‖ and concluding with Jesus‘ ―Son of Man.‖ Character John the Baptist

Andrew Philip Nathanael Jesus

Title The Lamb of God Who takes away the sin of the world A Man who ranks higher . . . . Who baptizes with the Holy Spirit The Son of God The Messiah The One of whom Moses and the Prophets wrote The Son of God, the King of Israel The Son of Man

Figure 3. Christological Confessions Throughout the Gospel, John invites his catechumens and all who read his Gospel to ―Come and see‖ the Messiah in his signs that culminate in his death and resurrection and ―follow‖ Jesus in the new life of discipleship. Those who believe will receive Jesus‘ baptism and become his disciples. Conclusion As the sacramental fount issuing from the Lamb of God‘s pierced side, baptism with water is the archetypal water symbol from which subsequent Johannine water

51

symbols flow. Like their semantic source, Johannine water symbols are first and foremost Christological, bearing witness to Jesus‘ atoning and sanctifying death that inaugurated the new covenant of grace and truth. Johannine water symbolism must, therefore, be interpreted with reference to John the Baptist‘s witness and baptism through which the true Light continues shining into the darkness. Jesus‘ signs, several of which employ water symbolism, prefigure the ultimate theophany of Jesus‘ Glory in crucifixion and his ongoing theophany by the Holy Spirit among the baptized through baptism. Jesus takes away the sin of the world and baptizes with the Holy Spirit by his life-giving death as the Lamb of God, transforming symbol into sacrament whereby he continues to reveal his Glory as the Christ, the Son of God. Red Sea Crossing Egypt (Death) Pharaoh Idolatry Kingdom of Pharaoh Slaves Slavery City–dwellers Fruits of Egypt Jordan Crossing Sinai Wilderness (Death) Moses Idolatry (Golden Calf) Egyptian Generation Forty Year Judgment Nomadic Manna and Water

Red Sea

Sinai Wilderness (Life) The Lord Monotheism Kingdom of God Sons and daughters Freedom Nomadic Manna and Water

Jordan

Canaan (Life) Joshua Monotheism Wilderness Generation Grace City-dwellers Milk and Honey

Figure 4. The Red Sea and Jordan Crossings

52

53

CHAPTER THREE BAPTISM AS WEDDING Jesus initiates his disciples‘ catechesis by transforming water into the best wine at a wedding in Cana. As the first of his signs, Jesus‘ transformation of water into wine is programmatic for his earthly ministry as the incarnate Logos. Jesus transforms Jewish concepts and institutions codified in the Law of Moses, redefining the relationship between God and humanity under the new covenant of grace and truth enacted by his death and resurrection as the Lamb of God. At Sinai God wed the Israelites when he revealed his Glory and gave the Law through Moses. God subsequently divorced the Israelites for their spiritual adultery. At Golgotha the Son of God weds himself to humanity when he reveals his Glory and reestablishes the marital relationship under the new covenant of baptism foreshadowed by the transformation of water into the best wine. Water and its transformation are integral to the revelation of Jesus‘ Glory as the onlybegotten Son of God. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches his catechumens to see Jesus‘ Glory as the only-begotten Son of God in the baptismal waters transformed by his life-blood poured out on the cross. A Wedding on the Third Day John locates Jesus‘ first sign within the eschatological context of a wedding on the third day, skillfully interweaving new creation, exodus, covenant, and temple themes. John opens the narrative with the theologically freighted time reference, ―And the third

54

day‖ (Καὶ ηῇ ἡ κέξᾳ ηῇ ηξίηῃ ), placing Jesus‘ first sign in eschatological time. The third day immediately evokes Jesus‘ resurrection from the dead.1 By the time of the Gospel‘s composition the third day was firmly embedded in early Christian creedal vocabulary. Catechumens already familiar with the Synoptic Gospels or an early oral or written creedal formula would readily make the connection (Matt 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Luke 13:32; 18:33; 24:7, 46; Acts 10:40; 1 Cor 15:4). Jesus‘ signs, beginning with the transformation of water into wine, are interpretations of his death and resurrection. Jesus‘ resurrection on the third day is not incidental but consistent with Jewish eschatological expectations drawn from the Old Testament.2 The third day is often associated with divine deliverance from death. On the third day (ηῇ ἡ κέξᾳ ηῇ ηξίηῃ ) Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his beloved (ηὸ λ ἀ γαπεηόλ) son Isaac at the Lord‘s command (Gen 22:4 LXX). Referring to this event and likely drawing on Isaac typology, the author of Hebrews notes that Abraham figuratively (ἐ λ παξαβνιῇ ) received his only-begotten (ηὸ λ κνλνγελῆ ) son Isaac back from the dead (Heb 11:17–19) through faith (cf. John 1:14, 18). Such an allusion to Abraham‘s sacrifice of Isaac would also evoke the Abrahamic covenant with the promise of fertility to sterile Abraham and Sarah through Isaac. ―On the third day (ηῇ ἡ κέξᾳ ηῇ ηξίηῃ ),‖ the Lord promised King

1 Bruce G. Schuchard, ―The Wedding Feast at Cana and the Christological Monomania of St. John,‖ in All Theology is Christology: Essays in Honor of David P. Scaer, eds. Dean O. Wenthe, William C. Weinrich. Arthur A. Just, Daniel Gard, and Thomas L. Olson (Fort Wayne, IN: Concordia Theological Seminary Press, 2000), 105. 2 Gerhard Delling, ―ἡ κ έ ξ α ,‖ TDNT 2:943–953.

55

Hezekiah through the prophet Isaiah, ―you shall go up to the house of the Lord‖ and be healed of a terminal wound (2 Kgs 20:5). Most significant in this regard, though, is Hosea 6:2. Ὑγηάζεη ἡ κᾶ ο κεηὰ δύν ἡ κέξαο, ἐ λ ηῇ ἡ κέξᾳ ηῇ ηξίηῃ ἀ λαζηεζόκεζα θαὶ δεζόκεζα ἐ λώπηνλ αὐ ηνῦ (Hos 6:2 LXX). The prophet Hosea, whose marriage to Gomer at the Lord‘s command symbolized the marriage between God and the Israelites under the Law of Moses, appeals to faithless Ephraim and Judah to return to their spiritual husband YHWH. Hosea combines purification, covenant, marriage, and resurrection themes, as does John. Hosea 6:2 promises YHWH‘s restoration of the marital covenant relationship with his faithless people on a future third day after purifying them from their spiritual defilement (cf. Exod 19:16 LXX). Note especially the verbs Hosea employs. YHWH will heal (ὑ γηάζεη). We will be raised up (ἀ λαζηεζόκεζα) that is, resurrected, and will live (δεζόκεζα)— language reflected in the Gospel of John most noticeably in Jesus‘ self-disclosure at the raising of Lazarus, ―ἐ γώ εἰ κη ἡ ἀ λάζηαζηο θαὶ ἡ δσή·‖ (John 11:1–46). The Sinai theophany provided the typological model for the gift of the promised new covenant and temple on the third day. ἐ γέλεην δὲ ηῇ ἡ κέξᾳ ηῇ ηξίηῃ γελεζέληνο πξὸ ο ὄ ξζξνλ θαὶ ἐ γίλνλην θσλαὶ θαὶ ἀ ζηξαπαὶ θαὶ λεθέιε γλνθώδεο ἐ ὄ ξνπο Σηλα, θσλὴ ηῆ ο ζάιπηγγνο ἤ ρεη κέγα, θαὶ ἐ πηνήζε πᾶ ο ὁ ιαὸ ο ὁ ἐ λ ηῇ παξεκβνιῇ (Exod 19:16 LXX). On the third day the Glory of the Lord descended visibly upon Sinai, giving the Law along with instructions for the construction of the tabernacle in which he would dwell among the Israelites. At the Lord‘s command, the

56

Israelites sanctified themselves (ἅ γληζνλ αὐ ηνὺ ο) and washed their garments (πιπλάησζαλ ηὰ ἱ κάηηα) for two days in order to prepare for the Lord‘s theophany (Exod 19:10 LXX). First-century Jews combined creation and covenant themes liturgically in their celebration of Pentecost, adding four days of remote preparation for a total of six days.3 Later rabbinic writings reflect this conjunction of creation and covenant themes. Mekilta on Exodus 19:10 reads, ―That was the sixth day of the week on which the Torah was given.‖ Drawing on this liturgical tradition John places John 2:1– 11 within the broader six-day time frame that began with John the Baptist heralding the new exodus.4 The conjunction, θαὶ , connects the third day at Cana to the four preceding days (John 1:19–28; 1:29–34; 1:35–42; 1:43–51). Jesus performed his first sign as the incarnate Logos on the sixth day of the Gospel, signaling the dawn of the new creation on a future third day. During the exilic and post-exilic periods, the third day expressed the Jewish hope of restoration in the wake of the Glory of the Lord‘s departure from the First Temple and its destruction in 586 BCE. Ezekiel has a vision of a new Temple from which living water would flow into the barren Arabah as from the Garden of Eden bringing the Dead Sea to life (Ezek 40–47). According to II Esdras 6:15 LXX, the Second Temple was completed under the leadership of Zerubbabel and Jeshua in 516 BCE on the third day (ἕ σο ἡ κέξᾳ ο ηξίηῃ ο ) of the month Adar. However, there is no record of the Glory of

3 Moloney, Gospel of John, 50–57, 66–67. 4 Olsson, Structure and Meaning, 51, 102–106. Olsson sees a parallel between John 1:19–2:11 and Exodus 19–24.

57

the Lord inhabiting the newly constructed Second Temple (cf. Exod 40:34–38; 1 Kings 8:10–11; Ezek 43:2). In light of the Glory of the Lord‘s absence from the Second Temple, the third day came to express Israel‘s eschatological hopes of the Glory of the Lord‘s visible return to re-inhabit the Second Temple. This hope, according John, was realized with the incarnation of the Logos who revealed his Glory by becoming flesh and tabernacling among us (John1:14). John frames the Cana narrative in which Jesus reveals his Glory by changing water into wine with two temple references reinforcing this connection and binding the narratives together in the minds of John‘s catechumens. In John 1:51, Jesus identifies himself as Bethel, the House of God, by alluding to Jacob‘s vision (Gen 28:12). In John 2:19, Jesus declares that he will raise (ἐ γ ε π ῶ) the temple destroyed by the Jews in three days (ἐ ν η ξ η ζ ὶ ν ἡ μ έ π α ι ρ ἐ γ ε π ῶ) (John 2:19; cf. 2:22). The close proximity of these temple references binds these three narratives together as interpretations of Jesus‘ death and resurrection. John further develops the eschatological context by staging the narrative at a wedding. Marriage is a common metaphor in the Old Testament for God‘s covenantal relationship with the Israelites (Ps 45; Song; Isa 50:1, 54:4–17, 62:5; Jer 3:1–5; Ezek 16, 23; Hos 1–3, esp. 2:18, 21).5 The Lord promised to establish a new everlasting covenant with the Israelites after divorcing them for their habitual spiritual infidelity. Wedding imagery consequently became associated with the dawn of the messianic age with the Christ‘s advent described as a royal bridegroom coming for his bride. A bride‘s eager

58

anticipation of her wedding day fittingly describes Jewish eschatological hopes. Israel‘s ultimate redemption and the commencement of eternal life in the kingdom of God would be celebrated as a great wedding banquet. Jesus draws upon this Old Testament background comparing the kingdom of heaven to a royal wedding feast given by a king for his son (Matt 22:1–14), to the latenight arrival of the bridegroom for the wedding feast (Matt 25:1–13), and a master returning home from a wedding feast (Luke 12:35–40). In each instance, the present time corresponds to the period of betrothal and the eschaton to the wedding feast that solemnizes and consummates the marriage. Early Christians understood the relationship between Jesus and the Church to be a marriage in continuity with the Old Testament and Jesus‘ own teaching. The new covenant of grace and truth inaugurated by Jesus replaced the Law given through Moses. Paul draws on the law of marriage to explain the Christian‘s release from the Law of Moses and union with Christ in the new covenant of baptism. A married woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If she joins herself to another man she is an adulteress. However, if her husband dies she is released from the marriage covenant and is allowed to remarry without being called an adulteress (Rom 7:1–6). Paul‘s language is even clearer in Ephesians 5. Οἱ ἄ λ δ ξ ε ο , ἀ γ α πᾶ η ε η ὰ ο γ π λ α ῖ θ α ο , θ α ζ ὼο θ α ὶ ὁ Χξ η ζ η ὸ ο ἠ γ ά πε ζ ε λ η ὴ λ ἐ θ θ ι ε ζ ί α λ θ α ὶ ἑ α π η ὸ λ πα ξ έ δ σθ ε λ ὑ πὲ ξ α ὐ η ῆ ο , ἵ λ α α ὐ η ὴ λ ἁ γ η ά ζ ῃ θ α ζ α ξ ί ζ α ο 5 In Song of Songs, Israel and Judah are referred to collectively as YHWH‘s bride. In Hosea and in Ezekiel 16 and 23, Israel (Ohalah) and Judah (Oholibah) are referred to individually as YHWH‘s bride.

59

η ῷ ι ν π η ξ ῷ η ν ῦ ὕ δ α η ν ο ἐ λ ῥ ή κ α η η , ἵ λ α πα ξ α ζ η ή ζ ῃ α ὐ η ὸ ο ἑ απ η ῷ ἔ λ δ ν μ ν λ η ὴ λ ἐ θ θ ι ε ζί αλ , κ ὴ ἔ ρ ν π ζαλ ζ πί ι ν λ ἢ ῥ π η ί δ α ἤ η η η ῶλ η ν η ν ύ η σλ , ἀ ι ι ʼἵ λ α ᾖ ἁ γ ί α θ α ὶ ἄ κ σκ ν ο . (Eph 5:25–27). Paul interprets Jesus‘ death combing baptismal and marital imagery. Jesus handed himself over into death on his bride‘s behalf in order to provide her the requisite nuptial bath as the supreme act of husbandly love. Paul uses similar language in 2 Corinthians, adopting the role of the friend of the bridegroom. Ζ ε ι ῶ γ ὰ ξ ὑ κ ᾶ ο ζ ε ν ῦ δ ή ι ῳ, ἡ ξ κ ν ζ ά κ ε λ γ ὰ ξ ὑ κ ᾶ ο ἑ λ ὶ ἀ λ δ ξ ὶ πα ξ ζ έ λ ν λ ἁ γ λ ὴ λ πα ξ α ζ η ῆ ζ α η η ῷ Χξ η ζ η ῷ (2 Cor 11:2). As the baptismal administrator, Paul betrothed (ἡ ξ κ ν ζ ά κ ε λ ) and presented (πα ξ α ζ η ῆ ζ α η ) the Corinthians to Christ as a chaste virgin. Early Christians anticipated celebrating the future consummation of the marriage at the marriage feast of the Lamb and his bride upon Jesus‘ glorious visible return (Rev 19:1–10). They Have No Wine Jewish wedding celebrations customarily lasted late into the night and were extended over several days, an entire week in the case of a virgin. Such lavish celebrations required provision of large quantities of food and wine for the celebrants.6 In their exuberance, the guests at Cana consumed the entire supply of wine threatening a premature end to the wedding celebration. The resulting tension propels the plot forward in search of resolution. The mother of Jesus takes charge of the situation informing Jesus,

6 Ethelbert Stauffer, ―Γ α κ έ σ, γ ά κ ν ς,‖ TDNT 1:648–657.

60

―They have no wine.‖ Jesus‘ curt response, ―Woman, my hour has not yet come,‖ reflects the narratives‘ broader eschatological context by alluding to the hour of his passion. For the first time, John‘s catechumens explicitly learn of Jesus‘ ―hour‖ (John 2:4; cf. 7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27; 13:1; 17:1).7 Jesus‘ ―hour‖ refers in particular to the hour of his glorification as the Son of Man through death. Broadly speaking, Jesus‘ ―hour‖ encompasses his passion, death, and resurrection. Jesus had recently told his first disciples they would see greater things. John‘s catechumen‘s would naturally wonder, ―Is now the time?‖ Jesus‘ repeated references to his hour build anticipation as his hour draws ever closer. Jesus‘ sign at Cana foreshadows the joyous consequence attending his momentous hour. The abundant provision of wine carried strong messianic connotations (Gen 49:8– 12; 2 Sam 7:12–16; Isa 25:6–7; Joel 3:12–13, 18; Amos 9:11–14; Hos 2:19–22). Jacob uses wine imagery when blessing his son Judah. He uses the festal image of the grape harvest as a metaphor for Israel‘s joy, peace, and prosperity under Judaic leadership, beginning with Judah and culminating with a future Judaic leader named Shiloh. Judah, you are he whom your brothers shall praise; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father‘s children shall bow down before you. Judah is a lion‘s welp; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He bows down, he lies down as a lion; And as a lion, who shall rouse him? The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh comes; And to Him shall be the obedience of the people. Binding his donkey to the vine and his donkey‘s colt to the choice vine, He washed his garments in wine and his clothes in the blood of grapes. His eyes are darker than wine, and his teeth whiter than milk (Gen 49:8–12).

7 See Brown, Gospel, 517–18.

61

Judaic hegemony would provide Israel political, social, and economic stability that the cultivation of grapes requires. 2 Samuel 7:12–16 legitimized the Davidic dynasty in conjunction with Genesis 49:8–12. When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you who will come from your body and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My Name and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his Father and he shall be My son… And your house and your kingdom shall be established forever before you. Your throne shall be established forever (2 Sam 7:12–16). Shiloh was identified as the promised son of David, the names Shiloh and Solomon both meaning peace. Under Solomon‘s reign Israel enjoyed unprecedented peace and prosperity. With the decline and eventual end of the Davidic dynastic the ancient Israelites increasingly longed for a return to the golden age of Solomon. Genesis 49:8–12 and 2 Samuel 7:12–16 became sedes doctrinae of Jewish messianic hopes. The Old Testament prophetic literature bears record to messianic wine symbolism founded upon Genesis 49:8–12 and 2 Samuel 7:12–16. Isaiah associates the abundance of wine with the Lord‘s victory over death on behalf of humankind. ―On this mountain the YHWH of Hosts will prepare a banquet of rich fare for all the peoples, a banquet of wines well matured and richest fare, well-matured wines strained clear. On this mountain YHWH will swallow up that veil that shrouds all the peoples, the pall thrown over all the nations; he will swallow up death forever‖ (Isa 25:6–7). Joel associates the abundance of wine with God‘s eschatological judgment on behalf of his people against their enemies. Let the nations be wakened and come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; for there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations. Put in the sickle for the harvest is ripe. Come, go down; for the winepress is full, the vats overflow—for their

62

wickedness is great . . . . When that day comes, the mountains shall run with fresh wine and the hills flow with milk. All the streams of Judah shall be full of water, and a fountain shall spring from YHWH‘s house and water the gorge of Shittim . . . . (Joel 3:12–13, 18). The Lord reveals himself to be Shiloh who will roar from Zion, re-inhabit Jerusalem, graciously acquit his people of their blood-guilt and bless the land with fertility. Echoing Joel 3:18, Amos associates the abundance of wine with the Lord‘s restoration of the Davidic kingdom and return of his people from their captivity. On that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David which has fallen down and repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the Gentiles who are called by My Name,‖ says YHWH who does this thing. ―Behold, the days are coming,‖ says YHWH, ―when the plowman shall overtake the reaper and the treader of grapes him who sows seed; The mountains shall drip with sweet wine and all the hills shall flow with it. I will bring back the captives of My people Israel; They shall build the waste cities and inhabit them; They shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them; They shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them (Amos 9:11–14). Hosea associates the abundant provision of new wine with the Lord‘s gracious betrothal to his adulterous bride Israel. ―I will betroth you to Me forever; Yes, I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and justice, in loving-kindness and mercy; I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness and you shall know YHWH. It shall come to pass in that day that I will answer,‖ says YHWH, ―and they shall answer the earth. The earth shall answer with grain, with new wine, and with oil; they shall answer Jezreel‖ (Hos 2:19–22). Jesus Changes Water into Wine Jesus‘ symbolic action follows John‘s baptismal template of water symbolism. The Lamb of God Takes away the Sin of the World Baptizes with the Holy Spirit Unclean Law of Moses

Six Stone Jars Jesus

63

Clean Grace & Truth

Water

Jesus

The Best Wine

Figure 5. Water into Wine The six stone jars were provided for the celebrants to purify themselves prior to participating in the wedding feast. Each jar held between 20 to 30 gallons making a total of 120 to 180 gallons, the amount of water held in a standard mikveh (―immersion pool‖).8 The six stone jars are pregnant with meaning holding water for the purification of the Jews as well as the best wine provided by Jesus. Purification is central to understanding water symbolism in this narrative.9 Water symbolizes the Jewish rites of purification stipulated under the written and oral Law of Moses. Drawing on the natural cleansing property of water, the Sinai Covenant stipulated various ritual washings with water to remove physical, moral and spiritual defilement simultaneously—body, heart and soul conceived as a conceptual unity. The Jewish community was to be holy as the Lord is holy. Unclean persons or objects were physically removed from the Jewish community to prevent further contamination. For persons, separation from the community was tantamount to death. Purification rites separated the defiled person or object from their uncleanness providing the means for

8 J. Duncan M. Derrett, ―The Samaritan Woman‘s Purity (John 4:4–52),‖ EvQ (O 1988): 294. Herman Ridderbos comments, ―If there is a clear hint anywhere for the understanding of the meaning of a miracle, then surely it is here, in the manner in which the Evangelist quantifies the capacity of the ―vessels of the law‖ in order to enable the reader to measure by that standard the abundance of what Jesus Christ provided.‖ Herman Ridderbos, The Gospel According to John: A Theological Commentary, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 107. 9 The generative idea that purification enables incorporation underlies each successive interpretation of John‘s water symbol in this narrative, further plumbing the depths of John‘s symbolism.

64

their reincorporation into the Jewish community. In this way, purification rites typified resurrection from death to renewed life in the community. The Sinai Covenant and Jewish purification rites anticipated a future purification from sin under a new covenant. The transformation of water into wine symbolizes the transition from the Law of Moses to the new covenant of grace and truth. Evoking Moses‘ transformation of water into blood (Exod 7:14–25), the nature of the sign indicates Jesus is the long promised prophet like, but decidedly different than, Moses (Deut 18:15–22; cf. John 1:21; 4:19?).10 Jesus instructs the servants to fill six stone jars to the top with water and then draw a sample for the chief steward. Jesus transforms the water—the same element employed by the Jews for purification and characteristic of John the Baptist‘s baptism— into an abundance of the best wine.11 In so doing, Jesus also transforms water‘s

This method of interpretation is analogous to Russian nesting dolls. The same doll motif repeats itself in successively smaller levels concealed within the preceding doll. 10 For the parallels between Moses and Jesus, see Wayne A. Meeks, The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology NTS 14 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967). 11 Craig Koester considers water‘s transformation, not the elements of water and wine, the primary symbol with the stone jars as supporting symbols. Jesus‘ action ―signals the beginning of a new order, which will transform and replace Jewish rituals.‖ Koester, Symbolism, 11. By ignoring the symbolic value of the elements, however, Koester overlooks the ritual and sacramental foundation of this new order in Jesus‘ baptism in the Holy Spirit. Wai–Yee Ng, on the other hand, classifies the Cana sign as an integrative symbol composed of a symbolic action and two symbolic objects. Signifying the old rites, water is juxtaposed with wine, signifying the eschatological blessing of the Christ anticipated by the old rites. Ng, Water Symbolism, 68. John Paul Jones, strictly adhering to his definition of water as an expanding core symbol, limits water‘s role to manifesting Jesus‘ glory and evoking the disciples‘ faith precluding any sacramental interpretation for the following reasons: First, what happened to the water, not water used in its natural state, prompted awareness of Jesus‘ identity. Second, the wine does not represent, before or after, the wine of the Eucharist. Third, the disciples do not partake of the water turned into wine. Finally, ―glory‖ in this narrative refers primarily to Jesus‘ power, not to his death. Jones concludes, ―The narrator, who has interest primarily in this manifestation of his glory, does nothing to help a non-Christian reader find sacramental meaning in this account.‖ Jones concludes that Christian readers who find the

65

symbolic meaning.12 The stone jars now hold an abundance of the best wine for the ongoing celebration of the wedding feast. Wine symbolism is another facet of water symbolism. As Jones points out, ―It [water] not only bears witness to another reality but also embodies something about that reality.‖13 After tasting the water become wine the chief steward cites a proverbial truth closing the final scene. ―Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the inferior wine (η ὸ λ ἐ ι ά ζ ζ σ). But you have kept the good wine until now‖ (John 2:10). This proverb reflects the relationship between John the Baptist and Jesus. The people drank freely of John the Baptist and his ministry mistaking him for the Christ. Only after tasting the water made wine does the chief steward realize the inferiority of the depleted wine (η ὸ λ ἐ ι ά ζ ζ σ) (John 3:30). Not knowing where the wine came from (πό ζ ε λ ἐ ζ η ί λ ) the chief steward unwittingly authenticates Jesus‘ sign. His ignorance of the wine‘s origin parallels the ignorance on the part of the world (John 1:10) and the Jews (John 1:11; cf. 7:27; 9:29, 30) of Jesus‘ origins (i.e., the sin of the world). Surprised by the wine‘s exceptional quality, the chief steward immediately calls the bridegroom. As host, the bridegroom

sacraments present do so as the result of past experiences leading them to see by inference what the text explicitly neither invites nor supports. Jones, Symbol of Water, 64–65, citing Dodd, Interpretation, 298. Jones overlooks the fact that John writes for Christians with such past experiences. 12 A similar transformation of symbolic meaning occurs when Moses‘ transforms the waters of the Nile into blood. The Nile, a symbol of fertility, life and favor from the gods of Egypt, became a symbol of judgment, death, and wrath from the God of the Hebrews. 13 Koester, Symbolism, 80–82. Wine was considered to be a gift from the gods in the GrecoRoman world, Dionysius in particular.

66

was responsible for providing sufficient wine for his guests. Jesus assumes this role by providing the best wine. John‘s Gentile catechumens would have understood the provision of wine as an indication of Jesus‘ divinity.14 By providing an abundance of wine for the wedding celebration, Jesus reveals his Glory as the eschatological bridegroom. His arrival anticipates the consummation of his union with the daughter of Zion and the procreation of children, ―begotten, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God‖ (John 1:12–13; cf. Isa 25:6–7; 54:5–17; 55:1–5). The Cana sign foreshadows Jesus‘ dialogues with Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and the Royal Official representing the diverse composition of John‘s catechumenate—Jew, Samaritan and Gentile. John reinforces this inter-relationship between narratives, inserting John the Baptist‘s testimony to Jesus as the bridegroom and himself as the friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him, rejoicing greatly at the sound of his voice (John 3:29). John‘s catechumen‘s would not miss the allusion back to the wedding at Cana. The Cana sign serves the same theophanic function as John the Baptist‘s baptism—revealing the Christ, the only-begotten Son of God to Israel. Water and its transformation by Jesus are integral to the revelation of his Glory. Glory expresses the visible presence of YHWH.15 Throughout the Old Testament, YHWH visibly manifested his Glory through signs demonstrating his majesty and power. The Glory of

14 Jones, Symbol of Water, 94. 15 Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology, 70–123, 273–76.

67

the Lord led the Israelites out of Egypt, through the Red Sea into the wilderness, and into the Promised Land in the pillar of cloud and fire (Exod 13:21). The Glory of the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (Exod 24:16), stood before the Tent of Meeting (Exod 33:9; cf. Lev 9:6, 23; Num 14:10; 16:19; 17:7; 20:6), spoke with Moses and the people, fed and watered the Israelites in the wilderness, filled the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34) and Temple (1 Kgs 8:10; 2 Chr 2:5; 5:14; 7:1–3) veiled in a cloud, and vacated the Temple prior to its destruction in 586 BCE. Ezekiel envisioned the Glory of the Lord‘s eventual return to inhabit the new Temple (Ezek 43:1–5). Despite the Temple‘s reconstruction initiated by Zerubabbel and completed in 515 BCE and its renovation and expansion under Herod the Great, the Glory of the Lord had not visibly taken up residence. The Cana sign reveals the man Jesus to be the Glory of the Lord tabernacling among us in human flesh (John 1:14; cf. 2:21). Conclusion The revelation of Jesus‘ Glory at Cana profoundly affected his disciples, eliciting faith in his Name.16 Jesus gave these first disciples the authority to become children of God by receiving his baptism (John 1:12). John‘s catechumens have now also seen Jesus‘ Glory through John‘s narration of this sign. Jesus‘ subsequent signs are further revelations of his Glory. John records these signs for his catechumens to see and believe

16 Jones writes, ―As water effects purification, so does the manifestation of Jesus it represents alter the state of the disciples.‖ Jones, Symbol of Water, 65.

68

that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31). With each sign, John invites his catechumens to receive Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit. Several elements connect this narrative with Jesus‘ death and resurrection.17 First, we have already mentioned the third day as an allusion to Jesus‘ resurrection. Second, the mother of Jesus is present at Cana and the crucifixion (John 19:27). According to Koester, ―The presence of Jesus‘ mother at Cana and the cross. . . . reinforces the idea that the glory manifested in the wine and in Jesus‘ death must be understood together.‖18 Third, Jesus refers to his impending ―hour‖ that comes with his arrest, crucifixion, and death. Fourth, the elements of water and wine correspond to the blood and water that flowed from Jesus‘ pierced side (John 19:34). Finally, Jesus reveals his Glory eliciting faith in his Name at Cana and Golgotha. Jesus‘ first sign demonstrates his creative power as the incarnate Logos. Just as Jesus changed water into wine, he can change natural man into the new man. The Cana sign reflects Jesus‘ two-fold redemptive work—taking away the sin of the world and baptizing with the Holy Spirit. John‘s catechumens are to have no doubts that Jesus will accomplish this transformation in their forthcoming baptism. Jesus transforms water used for the Jews purification and characteristic of John the Baptist‘s baptism into the best wine. Purification is no longer to be understood in terms of the Jewish rites or John

17 Jane Webster, Ingesting Jesus: Eating and Drinking in the Gospel of John, SBLABib 6 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 38–39. 18 Koester, Symbolism, 81–82.

69

the Baptist‘s baptism with water. Following the hour of his glorification, purification is understood in terms of Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit.19

19 Koester, Symbolism, 162.

70

CHAPTER FOUR BAPTISM AS BEGETTING FROM ABOVE Many believed in Jesus‘ Name—John‘s ultimate goal (John 20:31)—having seen the signs Jesus performed in Jerusalem during the Passover. These received ―authority to become children of God. . . . begotten of God‖ (John 1:12–13). John introduces one representative man named Nicodemus who comes to Jesus at night. The noun ἄ λζξσπνο ties John 3:1–21 to John 2:23–25, which serves as a bridge that unites John the Baptist‘s response to the priests and Levites (John 2:14–22) with Jesus‘ response to the Pharisees who sent them represented by Nicodemus (John 3:1–21). Nicodemus‘ appearance in three pivotal scenes underscores the importance of his character (John 3:1–21; 7:45–53; 19:38–42). These three scenes depicting Nicodemus‘ conversion from Pharisaism to Christianity correspond to John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism. The catechetical question, ―Who are the true children of God?‖ underlies Jesus‘ dialogue with Nicodemus and the Gospel of John as a whole. This fundamental question lay at the heart of the debate between early Christians and the Jews following the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. John teaches his catechumens that the true children of God are those who are begotten from above of water and the Spirit. Only those who believe in Jesus‘ Name and receive his baptism see and enter the kingdom of God manifest in the Christian congregation. Through Nicodemus, John appeals to his Jewish

71

contemporaries to undergo the same conversion and be baptized. John, therefore, interprets Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit as the spiritual regeneration of humankind. John introduced the theme of spiritual regeneration in the prologue linking faith in the Name of the Logos with the procreation of the children of God. ὅ ζ ν η δ ὲ ἔ λ α β ο ν α ὐ η ό ν , ἔ δ υκ ε λ α ὐ η ο ῖ ρ ἐ ξ ο ς ζ ί α ν η έ θ λ α ζ ε ν ῦ γ ε λ έ ζ ζ α η , η ν ῖ ρ πη ζ η ε ύ ν π ζ η λ ε ἰ ρ η ὸ ὄ ν ο μ α α ὐ η ο ῦ , ν ἳ ν ὐ κ ἐ ξ α ἱ μ ά η υν ν ὐ δ ὲ ἐ κ ζ ε ι ή κ α η ν ο ζ α ξ θ ὸ ρ ν ὐ δ ὲ ἐ κ ζ ε ι ή κ α η ν ο ἀ ν δ π ὸ ρ ἀ λ λ ʼἐ κ ζ ε ν ῦ ἐ γ ε ν ν ή θ η ζ α ν (John 1:12–13). John picks up this theme in Jesus‘ dialogue with Nicodemus, one of his own who does not yet receive him. Through baptism Jesus incorporates humankind into his filial relationship with the Father defined as eternal life in the kingdom of God. As the tangible element of baptism, water plays an essential role in establishing this filial relationship between the Father and his children. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches his catechumens the filial character of discipleship in the kingdom of God. A Man of the Pharisees Nicodemus comes to Jesus at night during the Passover festival in Jerusalem under cover of darkness. Echoes of the Exodus, the defining narrative of Israel‘s national history, reverberate in the background as John the Baptist‘s cry, ―Behold, the Lamb of God,‖ still rings in the ears of John‘s catechumens. Nicodemus meets with Jesus in an undisclosed location in Jerusalem, either the house in which Jesus was staying or possibly the Temple precincts. As noted earlier, Jerusalem had become Egypt in the

72

eschatological exodus announced by John the Baptist. Passover inaugurated God‘s deliverance of his son, Israel, from slavery and death in Egypt to freedom and new life in the kingdom of God (Hos 11:1; Matt 2:15). As the tenth and final plague, God would avenge himself upon all the gods of Egypt by slaughtering every first-born male of man and beast in the land on the night of the 14th of Nisan. God instructed the Israelites to slaughter a yearling male lamb or goat (πξόβαηνλ ηέιεηνλ ἄ ξζελ ἐ ληαύζηνλ), apply the animal‘s blood to the doorframes of their houses, and consume the animal‘s roasted flesh in haste with unleavened bread and bitter herbs (Exod 12:5 LXX). The animal served as an acceptable substitute for the first-born Israelite male. The animal‘s blood served as a sign upon the Israelite‘s house (ἔ ζηαη ηὸ αἷ κα ὑ κῖ λ ἐ λ ζεκείῳ ἐ πὶ ηῶλ νἰ θηῶλ) separating the children of God from the Egyptians (Exod 12:13 LXX). God would cover (ζθεπάζσ) those in the house sparing them from the plague when he saw the animal‘s blood (Exod 12:13 LXX). Morning‘s light at which the Israelites left Egypt followed Passover‘s dark night. Consequently, the passage from night to day, from darkness to light, became a powerful Passover symbol of God‘s judgment and deliverance. The Passover context foreshadows a future Passover in Jerusalem (John 13:1–19:42) during which Nicodemus will once again encounter Jesus, the Son of Man, lifted up by Moses on the cross. John introduces Nicodemus as a man (ἄ λζξσπνο), a Pharisee, and a ruler of the Jews (ἄ ξρσλ ηῶλ Ἰ νπδαίσλ). Jesus also calls Nicodemus, ―the Teacher of Israel,‖ in the course of their dialogue. What inferences could John‘s catechumens draw about

73

Nicodemus? Given John‘s characterization of Nicodemus, what are the implications of Jesus‘ initial statement, ―Unless one is begotten again from above he cannot see the kingdom of God‖? Nicodemus belonged to the highly educated and influential upper class of Jewish society.1 As a Jew, he was one of Jesus‘ own people (John 1:11). Nicodemus considered himself to be a son of the patriarchs (John 8:33, 39, 56), a son of Abraham (John 8:33) and a son of God (John 8:41; Deut 32:6; Isa 63:16; 64:8; Ps 2:7; Hos 2:4, 11:1). As a Pharisee, Nicodemus belonged to the ―strictest sect‖ within first-century Judaism (cf. Acts 26:5). The Pharisees emerged as a lay movement following the Maccabean Revolt from the ecclesiological vacuum created by the destruction of the First Temple.2 Pharisees considered themselves disciples of Moses (John 9:28), stressing strict adherence to the oral and written Torah (John 1:17). More than merely regulating daily life, the Torah defined one‘s relationship to God and eventually replaced the Temple as the locus of God‘s immanent presence. Pharisees (lit. ―separate‖) separated themselves from the rest of Jewish society by extending observance of the purity laws beyond the Levitical priesthood and Temple precincts to everyday life. The generative idea behind maintaining a perpetual state of ritual purity was access to God‘s immanent presence. In the absence of the Temple, this was achieved through the study and application of Torah. Pharisees believed the reward for faithful Torah observance was

1 Richard Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 132–37.

74

eternal life and participation in the eschatological kingdom of God. John the Baptist and Jesus‘ respective baptisms directly challenged Nicodemus‘ presuppositions as a Pharisee. As a ruler of the Jews, Nicodemus occupied a seat in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish administrative body governing the earthly kingdom of God. Nicodemus was among those who sent the delegation of priests and Levites to question John the Baptist. Nicodemus was no doubt familiar with John the Baptist‘s witness to Jesus as the Lamb of God. His audience with Jesus parallels the Jewish officials‘ audience with John the Baptist. Christological speculation fueled by their respective preaching and baptismal activity prompted both investigations. As the Teacher of Israel—possibly a title—Nicodemus was not only a student of the Torah but an authority on its interpretation with a following of disciples. As an acknowledged Torah expert, he could render an informed and authoritative judgment of Jesus and his teaching. In their ensuing dialogue, John juxtaposes ―the Teacher of Israel‖ and his disciples with Jesus and his disciples along with their respective teachings concerning the kingdom of God. Nicodemus‘ impeccable pedigree and impressive credentials heighten the expectations of John‘s catechumens that he would believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. However, Nicodemus is first and foremost a man (ἄ λζξσπνο). Koester notes that the noun ἄ λζξσπνο expands Nicodemus‘ representative role to encompass all

2 ―Pharisee‖ in Jacob Neusner and William Scott Green, eds., Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period: 450 B.C.E to 600 C.E. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 478–479.

75

humanity estranged from God on account of sin.3 Jesus‘ concluding judgment, that men (νἱ ἄ λζξσπνη) loved the darkness more than the Light (John 3:19), confirms John‘s editorial comment about humankind‘s untrustworthiness. Jesus confronts Nicodemus immediately on this fundamental level irrespective of his ethnic, religious, and political status. Despite his impressive Jewish pedigree, Nicodemus displays the sin of the world that is humankind‘s innate inability to believe in Jesus. By the narrative‘s conclusion in John 3:15, Nicodemus neither sees nor enters into the kingdom of God. In the presence of the true Light, he remains in the dark—the hostile realm of Satan (John 1:5; 3:19; 8:12; 9:4: 11:10; 12:35, 46; 13:30; 19:39; 20:1; 21:3; cf. 1 John 1:5; 2:8, 9, 11). Nicodemus represents each of these larger groups—Pharisees, the Sanhedrin, the teacher‘s of Israel, and humankind—on both the historical and contemporary levels, questioning Jesus on their behalf. Many prominent Jews like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea followed Jesus secretly, unwilling to break ties with the Jewish establishment by receiving Jesus‘ baptism and becoming one of his disciples. Similarly, many of John‘s Jewish catechumens were reluctant to break formal ties with the synagogue by receiving baptism and publicly joining the followers of Jesus. Jesus addresses these secret disciples directly, confronting Nicodemus and John‘s catechumens with the necessity of spiritual regeneration for eternal life and participation in the kingdom of God. ἀ κ ὴ ν ἀ μ ὴ ν ι έ γ σ ζ ν η , ἐ ὰ ν κ ή η η ο γ ε λ λ ε ζ ῇ ἄ ν υθ ε ν , ν ὐ δ ύ λ α η α η ἰ δ ε ῖ ν η ὴ ν β α ζ η ι ε ί α λ η ν ῦ ζ ε ν ῦ (John 3:3, 7). With one

3 Koester, Symbolism, 45–48.

76

sentence Jesus delegitimizes Nicodemus‘ status as a child of God and his way of life as a Torah-observant Pharisee. Baptism as Regeneration From Above The concept of regeneration is deeply rooted in Jewish eschatology. The messianic age was understood to be a new genesis. The Lord would make ―new heavens and a new earth‖ (Isa 65:17; 66:22; cf. 2 Pet 3:13; Rev 21:7). The pinnacle of God‘s new creation would be the regeneration of humankind in his image and the restoration of his Spirit. The messianic age was also understood to be a new exodus. In the original exodus, the Red Sea crossing marked the birth of the Israelite nation. The Israelites died to their former life as slaves in Egypt and were begotten as the children of God whose new lives were to be governed by the Torah. Apart from this birth experience, the children of Israel could not see or enter the Promised Land. Jews of subsequent generations experienced this new birth in circumcision. Paul‘s reference to the Israelites being baptized (begotten) into Moses (Torah) in the cloud (God) and in the Sea (Water) reflects this Jewish self-understanding of circumcision as their own separation from the world, deliverance and incorporation into Israel (1 Cor 10:1–2). By the first century CE, the Exodus served in large part as the theological foundation and justification for the practice of Jewish proselyte baptism.4 Gentile converts experienced this new birth in

4 b. Yebam. 48b; 98a; cf. Oskar Skarsaune, Shadow, 353, 356–57. Whether or not Jewish proselyte baptism underlies John and Jesus‘ baptisms cannot be determined definitively. The earliest evidence for Jewish proselyte baptism dates to the middle of the first century C.E. Scholars have generally considered Jewish proselyte baptism as a precursor of Christian baptism. Recently, however, some

77

proselyte baptism. According to Rabbi Jose (circa 150 C.E.), ―The proselyte is like a new-born child.‖5 Cleansed by baptism from the uncleanness of his pagan past, the proselyte can see and enter the Temple and the immanent presence of God having crossed from death in the world to a new life in the kingdom of God governed by the Torah.6 Christians understood baptism as this promised spiritual regeneration, a concept well established in Christian circles by the writing of John‘s Gospel. Paul refers to baptism as a ―washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit‖ (ι ν π η ξ ν ῦ πα ι η γ γ ε λ ε ζ ί α ο θ α ὶ ἀ λ α θ α η λ ώζ ε σο πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο ἁ γ ί ν π ) (Titus 3:5). Peter calls baptism a re-begetting (ἀ λ α γ ε λ λ ή ζ α ο ; ἀ λ α γ ε γ ε λ λ ε κ έ λ ν η ) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead and the living and abiding Word of God (δ η ὰ ι ό γ ν π δ ῶλ η ν ο ζ ε ν ῦ θ α ὶ κ έ λ ν λ η ν ο ) (1 Pet 1:3, 23). John also makes several references in his first epistle to those begotten of God (ἐ θ ζ ε ν ῦ ) (1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18). Jesus draws an analogy between human and spiritual generation, modifying the verb γ ε λ λ ά σ with three adverbial expressions collectively describing the children of God . . . . begotten of God (η έ θ λ α ζ ε ν ῦ . . . . ἐ κ ζ ε ν ῦ ἐ γ ε ν ν ή θ η ζ α ν ) (John 1:13): ἄ ν υθ ε ν , ἐ ξ ὕ δ α η ο ρ θ α ὶ πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο , ἐ κ η ν ῦ scholars have suggested that Jewish proselyte baptism may have arisen in reaction to the success of Christian proselytizing efforts. 5 b. Yebam. 48b. Rabbi Jose (circa 150 C.E.) 6 Carmichael, ―Marriage,‖ 333. See also Skarsaune, Shadow, 356–57, footnote 6.

78

πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο . Jesus employs double entendre.7 The adverb ἄ ν υθ ε ν can be translated temporally (again, anew) or locally (from above). Both senses have their proponents and are reflected in modern translations.8 The adverb ἄ ν υθ ε ν refers to the habitation of God (η ὰ ἐ πν π ξ ά λ η α ) distinct from the earth (η ὰ ἐ πί γ ε η α ; ὁ θ ό ζ κ ν ο ) as the proper habitation of humankind. Jesus comes from above as the Logos and Son of Man. John the Baptist identifies Jesus as, Ὁ ἄ ν υθ ε ν ἐ π σ ό μ ε ν ο ρ ἐ πά λ σ πά λ η σλ ἐ ζ η ί ν (John 3:31). Jesus distinguishes himself from his Jewish antagonists with respect to origins, identity, and relationship to God. ὑ κ ε ῖ ρ ἐ κ η ῶν θ ά η σ ἐ ζ η έ , ἐ γ ὼ ἐ κ η ῶν ἄ ν υ ε ἰ μ ί · ὑ μ ε ῖ ρ ἐ κ η ν ύ η ν π η ν ῦ θ ό ζκ ν π ἐ ζη έ , ἐ γ ὼ ν ὐ κ ε ἰ μ ὶ ἐ κ η ν ῦ θ ό ζκ ν π η ν ύ η ν π (John 8:23). Nicodemus understands ἄ ν υθ ε ν only according to its basic temporal meaning failing to grasp the deeper local meaning. ―How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother‘s womb and be born?‖ (John 3:4). John leaves room for some ambiguity in interpreting Nicodemus‘ attitude toward Jesus at this early stage. John‘s Jewish catechumens may have echoed Nicodemus‘ well-reasoned objection. Regeneration originates from above as a divine begetting rooted in Christology. The procreation of the children of God mirrors the eternal begetting of the Son of God.

7 See Oscar Cullmann, ―Der johanneische Gebrauch der doppeltdeutiger Ausdrücke als Schlüssel zum Verständnis des vierten Evangeliums,‖ TZ 4 (1948): 360–71.

79

Jesus‘ disciples are no longer of this world, but from above. Jesus presses Nicodemus, ἀ κ ὴ ν ἀ μ ὴ ν ι έ γ σ ζν η , ἐ ὰ ν κ ή η η ο γ ε λ λ ε ζ ῇ ἐ ξ ὕ δ α η ο ρ θ α ὶ πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο , ν ὐ δ ύ λ α η α η ε ἰ ζ ε λ θ ε ῖ ν ε ἰ ρ η ὴ ν β α ζ η ι ε ί α λ η ν ῦ ζ ε ν ῦ (John 3:5). The close association between the Spirit and water in the bestowal of life has a rich Old Testament background. The Spirit of God hovered over the face of the primordial waters out of which God created all things (Gen 1:2).9 For John‘s catechumens ―of water and Spirit‖ evokes the prologue‘s echo of the creation narrative. Old Testament references to the eschatological gift of the Spirit being poured out or sprinkled build upon this close identification of water with the Spirit in the creation narrative (Isa 32:15; Joel 2:28–29; Ezek 36:25–26). In Jesus‘ baptism, water and Spirit become a conceptual unity later expressed as ―living water‖ (John 4:10, 11; cf. 7:37). Water is instrumental in the Spirit‘s procreation of the children of God. Attempts to omit, minimize, or explain away the actual presence and utilization of water must be rejected.10 Water has been interpreted variously as amniotic fluid, human semen, spiritual seed or semen, Torah, Jewish ritual washings, John the Baptist‘s baptism, and

8 KJV, NKJV, NIV, NLT, NCV, ESV ―again‖; ASV, RSV ―anew‖; NEB ―born over again‖; NRSV ―born from above.‖ 9 Evans, Word and Glory, 77–79. 10 Bultmann, Gospel of John, 138–139. Bultmann dismissed ὕ δ α η ν ο θ α ὶ in John 3:5 as a later ecclesiastical redaction because of its obvious reference to baptism. Jones, Symbol of Water, 69. Jones argues that although water functions as the agent of the new birth and participates in the arrival of this new reality, the manner of this new birth is left unexplained. D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), 196. D. A. Carson minimizes the importance of the ritual enactment of the new birth, noting that only the new birth itself is essential.

80

Christian baptism among others.11 ―Of water and Spirit‖ most likely refers to the respective baptisms of John the Baptist and Jesus. John has prepared his catechumens to associate water with John the Baptist‘s baptism. Water is characteristic of John the Baptist‘s baptism, a point John the Baptist repeats emphatically to distinguish himself from the Coming One who will baptize with the Holy Spirit (John 1:26, 31, 33 cf. 3:23). John established the connection between water and the Spirit at Jesus‘ baptism. Jesus extends this Christological connection between water and the Spirit to his disciples by appropriating John the Baptist‘s baptism with water into his baptism with the Holy Spirit. Water is the medium through which the Son of Man will dispense the Father‘s gift of the Spirit upon his glorification. Through water the Spirit begets children of God (John 3:3; cf. 1:13). Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit fulfills the eschatological blessings John the Baptist‘s baptism anticipated (John 3:22, 26; 4:1).12 Flesh begets flesh. All humankind descended from Adam and Eve is begotten of the flesh. The flesh belongs to the old created order. The Lord begot Adam (and Eve) in his image to embody his Spirit. Like father, like son. Adam could rightly be called the

11 Carson, Gospel According to John, 190–96. Carson isolates three essential factors to interpreting this verse. First, ἐ μ ὕ δ α η ν ο θ α ὶ πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο parallels ἄ λ σζ ε λ and refers to the same birth. Second, ―water‖ and ―the Spirit‖ are a conceptual unity, both nouns governed by the preposition ἐ μ . Third, Jesus clearly expects Nicodemus as the Teacher of Israel to understand him. Carson summarizes and critiques the most significant positions according to these three factors. Carson‘s conclusion, however, betrays a modern bias against understanding ritual as performative action. Cf. Ng, Water Symbolism, 70. 12 Ng writes, ―Along this line we may say that the juxtaposition of ―water‖ and ―spirit‖ in 3:5 is governed by an eschatological relationship. ―Water‖ in 3:5 refers to the ritualistic cleansing with water, or water baptism, the symbolic expression of repentance, the anticipatory rite. ―The ―spirit‖ refers to the eschatological fulfillment, the coming of the Spirit, the new heart as an eschatological gift. Both are

81

son of God (cf. Luke 3:38). A filial relationship existed between God and Adam. As the Lord‘s created son, Adam served as his vice-regent over the earth (Gen 2:28). Adam‘s rebellion resulted in his deposition and banishment from the kingdom of God localized in the Garden of Eden. The Father-son relationship between God and humankind was severed. Adam lost God‘s image and Spirit, status as son of God and eternal life subjecting humankind to Satan‘s realm of darkness, sin, ignorance, falsehood, and death and was prohibited from seeing or entering the Garden of Eden (Gen 2:17; 3:22–24). ―Begotten of the flesh‖ may also echo Jewish attitudes towards Gentiles (cf. Rom 8:5–9). Jews regarded Gentiles as begotten of the flesh because they lacked circumcision.13 Jews believed the removal of the flesh of the foreskin perfected the body. Circumcision, therefore, separated Jews from their Gentile neighbors signifying the Jewish male‘s redemption and admission into covenantal relationship with God codified in the Torah.14 Consequently, Gentiles could not see or enter the Temple or the congregation of Israel, the earthly manifestation of the kingdom of God, unless first regenerated through conversion, circumcision and proselyte baptism. Gentile males were circumcised and both males and females underwent proselyte baptism. The proselyte emerged from the baptismal waters an entirely new person, dead to his or her Gentile past and begotten to a new life as a Jew incorporated into the covenants of Abraham and

instrumental to the new birth. One anticipates and the other fulfills. In post-Easter times the fulfillment has come and the two may become one.‖ Ng, Water Symbolism, 75. 13 m. Ned. 3:11; See also ―Circumcision‖ in Jacob Neusner and William Scott Green, eds., Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period: 450 B.C.E to 600 C.E. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 121.

82

Moses and the congregation of Israel.15 Baptism ritually purified the proselyte of his or her former Gentile defilement including his or her sins and past existence. Former familial relations were also annulled. This included parents and children born prior to conversion, unless they also converted.16 Jesus overturns the false trichotomy between Jew, Samaritan and Gentile. Physical descent from Abraham and circumcision are insufficient preconditions for seeing and entering the kingdom of God. Many Jews like Nicodemus were unwilling to break publicly with the synagogue and Judaism by receiving Jesus‘ baptism. Jesus addresses these secret followers directly, ―Unless one is begotten of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God‖ (John 3:6). Despite his impressive pedigree as a Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, and the Teacher of Israel, Nicodemus is still ―begotten of the flesh‖ and in need of Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit begets Spirit. All who believe in Jesus‘ Name and receive his baptism are begotten of the Spirit as children of God. Jesus‘ analogy in John 3:6 breaks down if ―spirit‖ is substituted for ―Spirit.‖17 Christians participate in the divine nature sacramentally (cf. 2 Pet 1:4). God‘s Spirit graciously dwells within and animates them with the life of the only Son of God. By virtue of this sacramental incorporation, they are properly called ―Spirit‖ not ―spirit.‖ Jesus cites a proverbial expression about the wind to

14 Rudolph Meyer, ―peritevmnw, peritomhv, perivtmhto~” TDNT 6:72–84. 15 Flemington, New Testament Doctrine, 3–11. 16 Skarsaune, Shadow, 356. 17 Contra Carson, Gospel According to John, 195.

83

indicate the imperceptible origin and actions of those begotten of the Spirit. Μὴ ζ α π κ ά ζ ῃ ρ ὅ η ι ε ἶ πό λ ζ ν η · δ ε ῖ ὑ μ ᾶ ρ γ ε λ λ ε ζ ῆ ν α ι ἄ ν υθ ε ν . η ὸ πλ ε ῦ μ α ὅ πν π ζ έ ι ε η πλ ε ῖ θ α ὶ η ὴ ν θ σλ ὴ ν α ὐ η ο ῦ ἀ κ ο ύ ε ι ρ , ἀ λ λ ʼν ὐ κ ν ἶ δ α ρ πό ζ ε λ ἔ π σ ε η α ι θ α ὶ πν ῦ ὑ πά γ ε η · ν ὕ η υρ ἐ ζ η ὶ ν πᾶ ρ ὁ γ ε γ ε λ λ ε κ έ λ ν ο ἐ κ η ν ῦ πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο (John 3:7–8). Πλ ε ῦ μ ά in verse 8 is best translated ‗Spirit‘ not ‗wind.‘ Although verse 8 may reproduce a proverbial expression about the wind, on a deeper level it refers to the origin and redemptive mission of the Christ upon whom the Spirit descended and remains and, by extension, the origin and actions of the children of God. The Spirit‘s life-giving work is just as inexplicable as the Spirit himself. The translation of πλ ε ῦ μ ά as ―wind‖ fails to recognize Jesus‘ characteristic use of double entendre, as found especially in John.18 Jesus distinguishes the children of God begotten of the Spirit from the rest of humankind begotten of the flesh. Τ ὸ γ ε γ ε λ λ ε κ έ λ ν λ ἐ κ η ῆ ρ ζ α ξ θ ὸ ρ ζ ά ξ μ ἐ ζ η ι ν , θ α ὶ η ὸ γ ε γ ε λ λ ε κ έ λ ν λ ἐ κ η ν ῦ πλ ε ύ κ α η ν ο πλ ε ῦ μ ά ἐ ζ η ι ν (John 3:6). A comparison of the prologue and John 3 illustrates the distinction between those begotten of the flesh and those begotten of the Spirit. Terms in the vertical columns are synonymous; terms in horizontal rows are antonymous. John 1 ejk qeou` ejgennhvqhsan aiJmavtwn

ejx ejk qelhvmato" sarko;"

18 Cullmann, ―Der johanneische Gebrauch,‖ 360–71.

84

ejk qelhvmato" ajndro;" o{soi de; e[labon aujtovn ejxousivan tevkna qeou` genevsqai toi`" pisteuvousin eij" to; o[noma aujtou` John 3 gennhqh`/ a[nwqen gennhqh`/ ejx u{dato" kai; pneuvmato" to; gegennhmevnon ejk tou` pneuvmato" to; gegennhmevnon ejk pneu`ma ejstin th`" sarko;" savrx ejstin ta; ejpouravnia ta; ejpivgeia Figure 6. John 1 and John 3 Spiritual regeneration and human generation are mutually exclusive, the separation bridged only by the Logos who descended from above to become flesh. By his incarnation, the Logos joined heaven and earth, Creator and creature, divinity and humanity in an indissoluble personal union. The Son subsequently returns to the Father to receive the eternal kingdom and pour out the Holy Spirit who unites the baptized with him in his death and resurrection to eternal life (cf. Rom 6:3–4; Titus 3:5–6; Col 2:12). Those who believe in his Name and receive his baptism with the Holy Spirit see and enter the kingdom of God manifested in the Christian congregation. The Filial Character of Discipleship Sonship is the principal Christological and ecclesiological theme of John‘s Gospel centered around two interrelated questions, ―Is Jesus the Christ, the Son of God?‖ and ―Who are the true children of God?‖ The answer to the first determines the second. Christology defines ecclesiology. These two questions lie at the heart of Jesus‘ dialogue

85

with Nicodemus. John‘s Gospel records the debate within Judaism over these two questions. John‘s overarching thesis is that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that the true children of God are those who believe in Jesus‘ Name and receive his baptism with the Spirit. John presents eyewitness testimony to substantiate Jesus‘ claim to be the Son of God. This testimony also serves as catechetical instruction on the filial character of discipleship. The baptized learn sonship from the Son of God as they embark on a new life of discipleship as children of God. A filial relationship exists between God and disciple patterned after the filial relationship between the Father and the Son. The relationship between the Father and Son is so intimate as to make them indistinguishable. Like Father, like Son. Jesus bears the Father‘s image such that whoever sees Jesus has seen the Father (John 14:8; cf. 20:29). Jesus glorifies the Father by doing the Father‘s will (John 17:1). He speaks only what he hears from the Father (John 8:38). He does the works he sees the Father doing— raising the dead, giving life, and executing judgment (John 5:19–29). He bears the Father‘s image (John 14:9; cf. 1:18; 12:45) and Name (John 5:43; 10:25; 12:13, 28; 17:6, 11, 12, 26). Whoever honors the Son honors the Father; whoever dishonors the Son dishonors the Father who sent him (John 5:23). Whoever hates the Son hates the Father (John 15:24–25). Whoever knows Jesus Christ whom the Father has sent knows the Father and has eternal life (John 17:3; cf. 20:31). Having come ἄ ν υθ ε ν , Jesus utters the words of God bearing witness to what he has seen and heard above from the Father.

86

John employs Father-Son language in the prologue to describe the relationship that exists between the Logos and God. The Logos is the ―only-begotten Son alongside the Father‖ (κ ν λ ν γ ε λ ν ῦ ρ πα ξ ὰ πα η ξ ό ο ) (John 1:14) and ―the only God‖ or ―the only Son‖ who exists in the bosom of the Father‖ (κ ν λ ν γ ε λ ὴ ρ ζ ε ὸ ρ ὁ ὢν ε ἰ ρ η ὸ ν θ ό ι πν λ η ν ῦ πα η ξ ὸ ρ ) (John 1:18).19 Like the Father, the Logos is pre-existing (John 1:1), uncreated (John 1:3), eternal (John 1:4 cf. 5:26, 11:25), full of grace and truth (John 1:14, 17), having visible Glory (John 1:14). The Logos, thus, enjoys a unique, eternal, communal, ontological relationship with God (i.e., Father-Son). By identifying the man Jesus as the Son of God, John the Baptist affirms that ―the Logos became flesh and tabernacled among us‖ (John 1:14). John records the debate between Jesus and the Jews over competing claims to divine sonship. Jesus confronts Nicodemus and the Pharisees with the radical requirement of spiritual regeneration, challenging their presuppositions regarding participation in the kingdom of God. Jesus thereby repudiates the Pharisees‘ claims to divine sonship. Despite authenticating signs, Jesus‘ own do not receive him as the only Son of God. Initial speculation expressed by Nicodemus quickly escalates into open hostility resulting in outright rejection by his own people. The Jews repeatedly dispute Jesus‘ claim to divine Sonship. Jesus counters by repudiating and rejecting as illegitimate the Jews‘ claims to God as their Father because they reject him as the Son sent by the Father. Whoever rejects the Son rejects the Father who sent him.

19 Several manuscripts substitute ζ ε ὸ ο with ὁ π ἱ ὸ ο .

87

Jesus‘ dialogue with Nicodemus is a narrative exposition of the rejection theme introduced in the prologue (John 1:11). Nicodemus and those whom he represents do not, at least at present, receive Jesus‘ revelation of the Father as the Son—but should have!20 The Jews attempted to resolve the debate by condemning Jesus to death, ―because he has made himself the Son of God‖ (John 19:7). Nevertheless, debate within Judaism continued during the early Jewish-Christian period of the Christian Church (i.e., the first century). The debate over Jesus‘ divine Sonship extends to his disciples and John‘s catechumens. Jesus‘ disciples are more than students or metaphorical ―sons‖ of their rabbi. Having received Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit, Jesus‘ disciples are the children of God begotten from above of water and the Spirit. Echoes of the dialogue between Jesus and Nicodemus could be heard in the debate between the Johannine congregations and the synagogue. Jesus and Nicodemus are recognized teachers of Israel representing two competing schools of discipleship. John invites his catechumens to eavesdrop on their dialogue. By juxtaposing Jesus and Nicodemus, John juxtaposes their respective schools of discipleship. This includes their respective teachings regarding purification required for admission to the immanent presence of YHWH. Pharisee ritual purification is juxtaposed with Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit. The dialogue between the synagogue and the Johannine congregations, the disciples of Moses and the disciples of Jesus, echoes the dialogue between Nicodemus and Jesus.

20 Robert V. McCabe, ―The Meaning of ―Born of Water and the Spirit‖ in John 3:5,‖ Detroit

88

The synagogue taught that discipleship of Moses (the Law) leads to eternal life and participation in the eschatological kingdom of God. The Johannine congregations taught that discipleship of Jesus (grace and truth) lead to eternal life and participation in the kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God Biblical history in general and Israelite history in particular recounts God‘s gracious reestablishment of his kingdom on earth as a present sacramental reality in anticipation of the future eschatological reality of the kingdom of God in the Messianic age. Inclusion in the present sacramental reality anticipated inclusion in the future eschatological reality. The Israelite encampment and later the Davidic kingdom were understood to be the earthly manifestation of the kingdom of God. God established the nation of Israel as a theocracy, ―a kingdom of priests and a holy nation‖ (Exod 5:1; 19:6).21 The Tabernacle, and later the Temple, served as God‘s royal residence among his people, the locus of his immanent presence (cf. John 1:14; 2:19). The Israelites collectively and individually considered God their King and Father. The Torah stipulated the terms and conditions for admission to and ongoing participation in this earthly kingdom of God. Since the Torah is the expression of God‘s will, Torah observance in worship and daily

Baptist Seminary Journal 4 (Fall 1999): 86. See also Carson, Gospel According to John, 198. 21 ―The Old Testament religion rested on the idea of a ―Covenant‖ between God and Israel. When Israel kept the Law, he was righteous and enjoyed ―salvation‖ . . . . Thus according to the thought of the New Testament the Kingdom of God is not another name for the sum and culmination of human

89

life expressed volitional unity with God. Gentiles, uncircumcised and therefore not party to the covenants of Abraham and Moses, could not see or enter the present sacramental reality of the kingdom of God. By desiring a king, the children of Israel rejected God as their King (1 Sam 8:4– 9). Beginning with Saul, the kings of Israel served as God‘s vice-regents. During the Davidic dynasty, ―the Son of God‖ became an honorific title for the kings of Israel with Christological significance in light of God‘s promise of an everlasting Davidic kingdom (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7; cf. John 1:49). The destruction of the Temple, the end of the Davidic dynasty, and exile in Babylon parallel Adam‘s deposition and banishment from Eden. Humankind once again severed the Father-Son relationship with God and the nation of Israel‘s claim as the earthly manifestation of kingdom of God was threatened. In the exilic and post-exilic periods, the present sacramental reality of the kingdom of God increasingly became associated with the broader Jewish community including the Diaspora centered around the synagogue. The Torah and the messianic hope of a future Davidic king who would restore the kingdom to Israel filled the void created by the absence of the Temple and the Davidic kingdom. Despite the Temple‘s reconstruction and subsequent expansion under Herod the Great, the Second Temple lacked the presence of the Glory of the Lord.22 progress. The Kingdom of God is the divine order, the ―rule of God‖ which is to supervene upon the present world-order.‖ Flemington, New Testament Doctrine, 17–18. 22 There is no record of ―the Glory of YHWH‖ filling the reconstructed Temple. This crucial fact could not be overlooked, despite the resumption of the Temple cultus. Ezekiel‘s Temple vision, the proliferation of interest in apocalyptic visionary literature during the Second Temple Period, and the establishment of the Qumran community attest to the lack of confidence in the Second Temple‘s legitimacy.

90

―The kingdom of God‖ occurs only twice in the Gospel of John, both times in this narrative (John 3:3, 5), and is more characteristic of Mark and Luke. Matthew favors the alternate phrase ―the kingdom of the heavens.‖ ―Kingdom‖ occurs only once and on the lips of Jesus under interrogation by Pilate. Jesus confirms his kingship noting, however, that his kingdom is not of this world (ν ὐ κ ἔ ζ η ι ν ἐ κ η ν ῦ θ ό ζ κ ν π η ν ύ η ν π ·) (John 18:36; cf. 19:11). Elsewhere in the Gospel, Jesus is repeatedly (mis)identified as a king. Nathaniel confesses, ―You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!‖ treating these two titles synonymously (John 1:49). The multitudes fed in the wilderness seek to take Jesus by force and make him a king (John 6:15). The festal crowd hails Jesus as ―the King of Israel!‖ as he enters Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover cited by John as the fulfillment of Zechariah‘s messianic prophecy (John 12:13, 15; Zech 9:9). Jesus‘ trial and conviction centers around the question of his status as a king. Pilate focuses his interrogation on Jesus‘ identity as a king (John 18:33, 37). Concluding that Jesus poses no political threat Pilate seeks unsuccessfully to release ―the King of the Jews‖ (John 18:39). The roman soldiers crown Jesus with thorns, dress him in a purple robe, and hail him as ―king of the Jews‖ in a mock display echoing Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem (John 19:3). Pilate once again presents Jesus to the Jews as ―your King‖ (John 19:14). The chief priests not only renounce Jesus as ―the King of the Jews‖ but pledge their allegiance to Caesar as their only king (John 19:15). Ultimately, Jesus is crucified as ―the King of the Jews‖—an appellation to which the chief priests object (John 19:19–22).

91

Other references and allusions to Jesus‘ royal status and his kingdom include the titles the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of Man, the Son of God and relationships such as the Good Shepherd and the sheep and the true Vine and the branches. Jesus incarnates the kingdom of God. As the incarnate Logos, Jesus is the perfect expression of the Father‘s will. His body is YHWH‘s temple. Jesus‘ mission as the Son of Man is to reestablish the broken relationship between the Father and humankind by his incarnation, earthly life, death, resurrection and baptism with the Spirit. The eternal Father-Son relationship forms the basis for the Father‘s relationship to the disciple. Jesus later defines eternal life as knowing the Father and the One whom he sent. Jesus reincorporates those who believe in his Name into the eternal Father-Son relationship through his baptism with the Holy Spirit. Just as Jesus came into the world, but was not of the world (ἄ ν υθ ε ν ); so his disciples are in the world, but no longer of the world (ἄ ν υθ ε ν ) by virtue of their baptism (John 17:1–26). Jesus equates the eternal Father-Son relationship with eternal life and the kingdom of God. Eternal life is to know the Father and the Son whom the Father has sent. Eternal life is the eternal Father-Son relationship characterized by mutual knowledge (John 1:18; 8:55) and indwelling (John 10:30, 38; 14:10), personified by the Spirit. Only God can bestow eternal life to humankind that is subjected to death. The verb δ σν πν η έ σ (―make alive‖) occurs only three times in the Gospel with ―the Father‖ (John 5:21), ―the Son‖ (John 5:21) and ―the Spirit‖ (John 6:63) in turn as subject. The Father‘s will is for the Son to give humankind eternal life (John 3:16; 6:40, 10:10,

92

28; 17:2–3) by baptizing with the Holy Spirit. The Son must establish this relationship with the Father on humankind‘s behalf by becoming flesh, receiving the Spirit in baptism, handing over the Spirit in death, and rising again to eternal life. The Son bridges the relational gap between the Father and humankind by his incarnation, death and resurrection. By baptizing with the Holy Spirit who creates faith, Jesus incorporates humankind into the eternal Father-Son relationship as children of God who are begotten from above. Eternal life is not only a future eschatological hope realized in the resurrection, it is also a present sacramental reality conceived in faith, begotten in baptism, and lived in discipleship of Jesus. John‘s chief purpose for writing his Gospel was to conceive faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God leading his catechumens to baptism and the new life of discipleship as children of God (John 20:31). ―See‖ and ―enter‖ belong to John‘s baptismal vocabulary. Seeing the kingdom of God is synonymous with faith, apprehending the kingdom of God revealed in the king‘s sacrifice.23 John illustrates the necessity of faith in several ways. For example, seeing the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man (John 1:51) whose crucified body is the true Bethel, the house of God. Jesus‘ reference to the Son of Man being lifted up like the bronze serpent also illustrates the necessity of faith in the crucified Son of Man.24

23 On John‘s use of sight, see Brown, Gospel, 501–503. 24 Jones writes, ―He [sic Nicodemus] failed to perceive that Jesus solicited faith, not ability. Jesus then introduced a second necessity, the necessity of the ‗lifting up‘ of the Son of Man. By declaring birth of water requisite for accepting this ultimate act of his ministry, Jesus pronounced it an essential act of participation in what God sought to accomplish in and through him.‖ Jones, Symbol of Water, 75.

93

Entering the kingdom of God is synonymous with discipleship. ―See‖ and ―enter‖ evoke the universal image of natural human birth. Baptism is a liminal event, a transition between two mutually exclusive states of being. The birth process from conception to delivery is an apt metaphor for this transition. The moment of delivery marks the child‘s physical transition from life in the womb to life in the cosmos. The child emerges from the womb‘s dark confines to see the light of day for the first time and enter life in the cosmos outside the womb. Baptism marks a corresponding spiritual transition from death to eternal life. Through the water of baptism, the Spirit separates John‘s catechumens from the cosmos and reincorporates them into the kingdom of God. The baptized ―see‖ Jesus as the True Light and ―enter‖ the kingdom of God manifest in the Christian congregation living in discipleship of Jesus. ―See‖ and ―enter‖ also evoke multiple Old Testament images. ―See‖ and ―enter‖ evoke re-entry into Eden and the re-establishment of humankind‘s broken relationship with God. Humankind can no longer ―see‖ or ―enter‖ the kingdom of God signified by Eden to experience eternal life and communion with God on account of original sin. God, however, establishes his kingdom on earth as a present sacramental reality in anticipation of the future eschatological Eden into which humankind can ―see‖ and ―enter.‖ ―See‖ and ―enter‖ also evoke the Red Sea and Jordan crossings—both definitive moments of transition in the history of Israel associated with water. Upon crossing the Red Sea the children of Israel saw the Glory of YHWH on Mt. Sinai and entered the kingdom of God governed by the covenant of Moses. The Israelites lived their new life

94

in anticipation of seeing and entering the future kingdom of God in the Promised Land. The description of the Promised Land in Edenic terms strengthens this association between the creation narrative and the exodus deliverance. Nevertheless, neither Moses nor those ―baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the Sea‖ were allowed to ―see‖ or ―enter‖ the Promised Land (1 Cor 10:2; Num 20:12; 27:12–14; Deut 1:37; 3:23–29; 32:48–52). A new generation was needed. The children begotten in the wilderness did ―see‖ and ―enter‖ the Promised Land after crossing the Jordan led by Joshua ( Ἰ η ζ ο ῦ ρ LXX). John alludes to this in the Prologue, ―For the Law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ‖ (John 1:17). The Israelites could not see or enter into the Promised Land without passing through the Jordan, a baptism into Joshua. Finally, ―see‖ and ―enter‖ evoke images of the Tabernacle and Temple. Prior immersion in living water was required for access to the Tabernacle and Temple precincts. In addition, various washings were prescribed to remove uncleanness from the midst of the encampment by virtue of God‘s holiness. Gentiles, uncircumcised and therefore outside the covenants of Abraham and Moses, were excluded from seeing or entering the Israelite encampment or Temple precincts. The entrance to the Holy of Holies was guarded by two cherubim perched atop the Ark of the Covenant, reminiscent of the cherubim who guarded the entrance to the Garden of Eden preventing access to the Tree of (Eternal) Life (Gen 3:24). By entering the Holy of Holies with blood on Yom Kippur, the High Priest was allowed to pass the cherubim guards unharmed to see and enter the kingdom of God, experiencing the closest possible communion with God.

95

John illustrates Jesus‘ dictum to Nicodemus by narrating two healings centered around water—the paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5) and the man born blind at the Pool of Siloam (John 9)—utilizing the familiar catechetical motif of the two ways. Conclusion Jesus chided Nicodemus, ―the Teacher of Israel,‖ for his spiritual ineptitude.25 Nicodemus is a tragic character whose dim spiritual perception has a three-fold effect on John‘s catechumens. First, Nicodemus‘ failure to meet their expectations heightens their sense of tragedy at Jesus‘ rejection by his own people. Second, Nicodemus‘ failure to understand Jesus undermines their confidence in the competing claims of contemporary Jewish teachers to possess accurate knowledge of the kingdom of God. John‘s point is clear. If Nicodemus, the Teacher of Israel, cannot be trusted to teach about the kingdom of God, how can the Jewish teachers in the synagogues. Third, John‘s catechumens learn that the kingdom of God cannot be seen or entered by Torah observance. Nicodemus‘ life as a Pharisee was insufficient for participation in the present sacramental reality and future eschatological hope of the kingdom of God. The Torah was given through Moses, grace and truth came to be through Jesus Christ. In John 4, John contrasts Nicodemus with the Samaritan woman, a native born son of Israel with an illegitimate child. Whereas Nicodemus remains for the present in the dark, the Samaritan woman gradually emerges from the dark to see the true Light.

25 ―The Teacher of Israel‖ may be a title conferred on Nicodemus in recognition of his great learning.

96

Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit enables John‘s catechumens to see and enter the kingdom of God manifest in the Christian congregation (cf. Jesus as the Temple). The water and the Spirit of which they are begotten issued from Jesus‘ pierced side and expired from Jesus‘ body as he died. Paradise is opened once again as God imparts Himself (the Holy Spirit) and tabernacles among the baptized (John 14:17; 23). Jesus continues his baptismal ministry through his disciples by breathing the Spirit upon them and sending them as the Father sent him (John 20:22–23).

97

CHAPTER FIVE THE MESSIANIC BRIDEGROOM AND HIS BRIDE Where is God the Father legitimately worshiped, Mt. Zion or Mt. Gerizim? In other words, where does the Father make himself known and accessible to humankind? This question lay at the heart of the debate between Jews and Samaritans in the first century C.E. The Jews worshipped at the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The Samaritans, rejected by the Jews as ethnically illegitimate and religiously idolatrous, in turn rejected the Jerusalem Temple and its cult constructing an alternate temple on Mt. Gerizim later destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 128 B.C.E. Rejecting both claims, Jesus confronted Jews and Samaritans alike with a radical third alternative—himself. As the incarnate Logos, Jesus‘ body is the new eschatological Temple (John 2:20–21) from which living water flows (John 7:38). Early Christians understood themselves, collectively and individually, as members of the Body of Christ and temples of the Holy Spirit by virtue of their betrothal to Jesus in baptism. Although early Jewish-Christians continued worshipping at the Second Temple until its destruction in 70 CE, Christians nevertheless survived the Second Temple‘s destruction along with the Pharisees, the Samaritans, and the debate over the legitimate locus of worship. John engages this debate by narrating an encounter between Jesus and a Samaritan Woman centered around Jacob‘s Well. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches that baptism flows as living water from the temple of Jesus‘

98

body imparting God‘s gift of the Holy Spirit. In this chapter we will trace John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism by following the conversion of a woman of Samaria into a child of God through her encounter with Jesus. Baptism as Betrothal The early success of Jesus‘ baptismal ministry in Judea relative to John the Baptist‘s prompted his premature departure for Galilee by way of Samaria. Jesus must increase; John the Baptist must decrease. Jesus is the Bridegroom who has the bride; John the Baptist is only the friend of the Bridegroom. With the Bridegroom‘s arrival, John the Baptist exits the stage and fades into the background. The Pharisees, in particular, noted that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John the Baptist. This likely prompted Nicodemus‘ nighttime encounter with Jesus. Jesus continues making and baptizing disciples as he withdraws from his own country and people (η ὰ ἴ δ ι α . . . . ν ἱ ἴ δ ι ο ι α ὐ η ὸ ν ) (John 1:11) centered in Jerusalem around the Temple toward the broader pagan Greco-Roman world. Samaria occupied a midpoint along this geo-theological spectrum. Changes in geography often carry theological implications. Jesus‘ dialogues with Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and the Royal Official form a narrative commentary on John 1:11–13, each representing the principal religious groups of the Greco-Roman world from the Jewish perspective: Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles. The relative length of their dialogues and respective responses to Jesus reflect this theological movement from unbelief to faith. Whereas many of Jesus‘ own people did not receive him, increasingly many Samaritans and

99

Gentiles did. Jesus‘ baptism negates the religious and ethnic barriers separating Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles. John addresses the unique challenges posed by mission among the Samaritans by narrating Jesus‘ encounter with a woman of Samaria at Jacob‘s Well and the subsequent conversion of many Samaritans who confess Jesus to be the Savior of the World (John 4:42). Wearied from his journey, Jesus stops to rest at Jacob‘s Well located approximately one half mile south of the Samaritan village of Sychar. Mt. Gerizim, the locus of Samaritan worship, looms high in the background. Jesus dispatches his disciples to buy food in the town for their journey leaving him all alone. Seated upon Jacob‘s Well, Jesus is approached by a lone figure coming to draw water. Jesus‘ inaugural sign at a wedding in Cana, his dialogue with Nicodemus on spiritual regeneration, and his identification as the messianic bridegroom anticipate the eschatological consummation and procreation of the children of God. At Jacob‘s Well, bridegroom and bride meet.1 Jesus‘ encounter with the Samaritan woman at Jacob‘s Well parallels several Old Testament betrothal narratives further developing the baptismal theme of betrothal and eternal life as marital union with God. Abraham‘s servant met Isaac‘s future wife Rebecca at a well (Gen 24:11ff), Jacob met his wife Rachel at a well (Gen 29:1ff), and Moses met his wife Zipporah at a well (Exod 2:15ff). Robert Alter has identified five

1 Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1981), 51–52; cf. Derrett, ―Samaritan Woman‘s Purity,‖ 291–298; Carmichael, ―Marriage,‖ 332–346; Lyle Eslinger, ―The Wooing of the Woman at the Well,‖ Literature and Theology 1:2 (1987): 167–183.

100

elements characteristic of Old Testament betrothal narratives.2 The Johannine narrative follows this general pattern, but with significant variations as indicated. Travel to a foreign land

Jesus travels with His disciples through Samaria. Although part of the Promised Land, the Jews considered Samaria foreign soil on account of its Samaritan inhabitants.

An encounter at a well

Jesus encounters the Samaritan woman at Jacob‘s Well after sending His disciples to purchase bread.

One of the characters draws water

Jesus requests a drink of water from the Samaritan woman initiating the dialogue on living water.

The woman goes home to tell her family

The Samaritan woman returns to the town to tell the townspeople about the man she met, the Christ.

The man is invited into a family meal

Jesus invites his disciples (and the Samaritans) to a meal (4:31–35, 39–42).

Figure 7. Betrothal Narrative Pattern Samaritans considered Jacob‘s Well a sacred place due to its connection to the patriarchs Jacob and Joseph (Gen 33:18–20). Following his encounters with the Angel of the YHWH and his brother Esau, Jacob purchased property in Canaan from the sons of Hamor outside the environs of Shechem on which he erected an altar that he called ElElohe-Israel (Gen 33:18–20). Jacob later bequeathed this land to his son Joseph

2 Alter, Art of Biblical Narrative, 51–52.

101

(Gen 48:22). Jacob‘s Well took on greater cultic significance following the destruction of the Samaritan temple. Mary Coloe argues that Jesus presents himself as an alternative sacred place that supplants Jacob‘s Well continuing the new temple motif. She writes, ―The intimate union of Father and Son, in the person of Jesus, creates a new sacred place that does away with the regional sanctuaries, and provides a new mode of worship of the Father in spirit and in truth.‖3 Jacob‘s Well has served as a reliable source of fresh drinking water for millennia. John draws upon the life-sustaining property of water as a metaphor for the Spirit through whom God gives and sustains life. The process of drawing water from Jacob‘s Well conforms to John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism. Those who came to Jacob‘s Well with empty jars left with jars full of fresh, potable, life-sustaining water. The Lamb of God Takes away the Sin of the World Baptizes in the Holy Spirit The Water Jar Empty

The Woman A Samaritan

The Baptized Worships ἐ λ Jerusalem or Mt. Gerizim

Jacob‘s Well (Well Water)

Full

Jesus (Living Water)

A Child of God

Baptism (Living Water)

Worships ἐ λ Spirit & Truth

Figure 8. Jesus and Jacob‘s Well 3 Mary L. Coloe, God Dwells with Us: Temple Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2001), 86.

102

An Empty Vessel The Samaritan Woman came to Jacob‘s Well with her empty jar to draw water. Instead, she encounters Jesus who offers her God‘s gift of living water. Augustine understood Jesus‘ request as catechetical. He asks to drink, and promises to give drink. He longs as one about to receive; He abounds as one about to satisfy. ―If thou knewest,‖ saith He, ―the gift of God.‖ The gift of God is the Holy Spirit. But as yet He speaks to the woman guardedly, and enters into her heart by degrees. It may be He is now teaching her. For what can be sweeter and kinder than that exhortation? ―If thou knewest the gift of God.‖4 In sharp contrast to Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman progresses in her understanding of Jesus and his true identity. She first recognizes Jesus as a Jew (John 4:9), questions whether he is greater than Jacob (John 4:12), acknowledges that he is a prophet (John 4:19), and possibly the Christ (John 4:29; cf. 4:25). Ultimately, Jesus reveals his divine Glory to her by using the absolute ἐ γώ εἰ κη (John 4:26).5 Through this progressive self-revelation, Jesus converts her from worshipping the Father on Mt. Gerizim as a Samaritan to worshipping the Father in Spirit and Truth as a child of God. Jesus‘ gift of living water becomes a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life within her. She leaves her water jar behind, bearing within herself Jesus‘ gift of living water to her fellow Samaritans. These other Samaritans are offspring—begotten not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but begotten of God from above of water

4 Augustine, Augustine: Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliliquies, ed. Philip Schaff, NPNF First Series 7 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1995), 102. 5 E. D. Freed, ―Ego eimi in John 1:20 and 4:25,‖ Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41 (1979): 288–91. For a concise treatment of Johannine usage of the absolute Ego eimi, see Brown, Gospel, 533–38.

103

and Spirit (John 1:12–13; 3:3,5). John‘s catechumens will experience a similar conversion when they encounter Jesus and receive God‘s gift of living water in baptism. John‘s characterization of the woman reflects first-century Jewish anti-Samaritan prejudices. With a few salient details John artfully sketches a very unflattering portrait of the woman. She is a woman from Samaria (ἐ θ ηῆ ο Σακαξείαο), has been married and either widowed or divorced five times, and is currently living with a man who is not her husband. Women in general had lower social status with fewer religious, legal, political, and social rights and privileges than men. The woman‘s marital history and current status further diminished her standing among women. Samaritan women, in particular, suffered religious and ethnic stereotyping by the Jews. The Jews considered Samaritans to be the descendants of foreigners resettled in the northern kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians in the 8th century B.C.E. and instructed in the religious laws of Israel (2 Kgs 17:30; Neh 13:28; cf. Josephus, Ant. 11.302). Jews deemed Samaritan claims to be children of the patriarchs illegitimate and their worship of God syncretistic and idolatrous.6 As sexual fidelity is a common biblical metaphor for religious fidelity, the Jews projected their religious prejudices against Samaritanism upon Samaritan women regarding them to be unclean and/or sterile (Lev 15:19).7 A Jewish council in 65–66 CE

6 In Luke 17:18 Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as a foreigner. In John 8:48 Jesus‘ Jewish opponents associate being a Samaritan with demon possession in their slanderous accusation. 7 Derrett, ―Samaritan Woman‘s Purity,‖ 295. Derrett cites m. Nid. 4:1; t. Nid. 5:1.

104

codified Jewish prejudices against Samaritan women ruling that Samaritan women were ―menstruants from the cradle.‖ 8 Some scholars consider the woman‘s marital history to be symbolic, the five husbands symbolizing the five foreign nationalities resettled by the Assyrians and her current paramour the God of Israel as worshipped by the Samaritans on Mt. Gerizim. Although probable, a symbolic interpretation of the woman‘s sexual history is not necessary to convey her dubious character. She is Nicodemus‘ inferior in every way occupying one of the lowest positions in society from the Jewish perspective. She is hardly a bride fit for the messianic bridegroom. John‘s time reference reinforces his negative characterization of the woman, highlighting her social and spiritual isolation. Typically, women performed this vital daily chore as a group in the cool of the morning. Drawing water provided women the daily opportunity for socialization. This woman, however, came to Jacob‘s Well by herself at the hottest time of the day. Even among her fellow Samaritan women she is an outcast. The woman initially sees Jesus as no more than a stereotypical Jewish male (Ἰ νπδαῖ νο) not unlike other Jewish men she may have encountered in the past. Her natural expectation is to be ignored, shunned, or possibly disparaged by him as a woman of Samaria (ἐ θ ηῆ ο Σακαξείαο). She approaches Jesus with guarded suspicion as she would any other Jewish male. She cannot avoid the encounter. Her jar is empty and it is

8 m. Nid. 4:1; b. abb. 16b; y. abb. 3c

105

already midday. Her access to the well is also blocked as the man is sitting upon the well (ἐ πὶ ηῇ πεγῇ ). The atmosphere of mutual hostility and animosity between Jews and Samaritans creates tension in the narrative from the very beginning. Give Me a Drink Breaking cultural, social and religious taboos Jesus initiates a dialogue with the woman asking, δόο κνη πεῖ λ.‖9 The significance of Jesus‘ request cannot be overstated. His request distinguished him from the stereotypical Jewish male who would have considered water that had come into contact with a Samaritan, especially a Samaritan woman, to be contaminated and undrinkable (Lev 15:19–30).10 By requesting a drink, Jesus demonstrates his willingness to take away her uncleanness by becoming unclean himself. Taken aback, the woman questions Jesus‘ motives for transgressing the traditional boundaries separating male from female and Jew from Samaritan. Awareness of the betrothal type-scene would heighten her incredulity. Πῶο ζὺ Ἰ νπδαῖ νο ὢλ παξʼ ἐ κνῦ πεῖ λ αἰ ηεῖ ο γπλαηθὸ ο Σακαξίηηδνο νὔ ζεο; (John 4:9). The woman maintains her distance by objectifying Jesus. John interrupts the dialogue explaining that, ―Jews and Samaritans do not use [vessels for food and drink] together‖ (ν ὐ γ ὰ ξ ζ π γ ρ ξ ῶλ η α η Ἰ ν π δ α ῖ ν η Σ α κ α ξ ί η α η ο ) (John 4:9). The key verb here is ζ π γ ρ ξ ά ν κ α η (―to associate, to be in the company of, to be involved with,

9 On Jewish-Samaritan relations, see Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch 6 Vols (München: Beck, 1922–61), 2:438.

106

associate‖).11 As elsewhere, John employs double entendre drawing upon the verb‘s literal and figurative meanings.12 A woman‘s womb is sometimes referred to in the Old Testament as a fountain or well (Lev 12:7; 20:8; Ps 68:26; Prov 5:15; Isa 26:16).13 The woman knows that the typical Jewish male would not drink water from the same water jar as a Samaritan woman, considered sexually immoral and ceremonially unclean. She also knows that the typical Jewish male would not have sexual relations with a woman of Samaria, especially one who had been married five times and currently lived with a man out of wedlock.14 The woman‘s objection accurately reflects Jewish social and sexual prejudices against Samaritan women. Given the frequent use of sexual imagery in religious contexts, her objection also reflects Jewish prejudices against Samaritan worship of YHWH. Jewish prejudices threaten the anticipated betrothal of the messianic bridegroom and his bride. Jewish prejudices also threatened the inclusion of Samaritans and Gentiles into the early Church. John‘s catechumens—Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles alike—would together use the common vessel (ζ π γ ρ ξ ά ν κ α η ) of Jesus‘ body, most apparent in the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. Jewish, Samaritan, and Gentile catechumens would be baptized in the same

10 Derrett, ―Samaritan Woman‘s Purity.‖ 291–298. 11 ―Σ π γ ρ ξ ά ν κ α η ‖ L&N 1:445; cf. D. Daube, ―Jesus and the Samaritan Woman,‖ JBL 69 (1950): 137–147. 12 According to Eslinger, ―The reader‘s recognition of the double entendres, all of which have sexual overtones, leads to the belief that both characters are engaging in a bit of covert verbal coquetry.‖ Eslinger, ―Wooing,‖ 167–183. 13 Derrett, ―Samaritan Woman‘s Purity,‖ 295–296. 14 Eslinger, ―Wooing,‖ 167–183.

107

ritual bath and eat and drink from the same Eucharistic plate and cup. Upon this initial encounter, the woman knows Jesus simply as a Jew, a stereotype based upon the conventional relationship between Jews and Samaritans. Only Jesus‘ audacity to request a drink differentiated him from other Jewish males she may have encountered. Baptism as Living Water Jesus challenges the woman‘s Samaritan presuppositions by offering her living water. Εἰ ᾔ δεηο ηὴ λ δσξεὰ λ ηνῦ ζενῦ θαὶ ηίο ἐ ζηηλ ὁ ιέγσλ ζνη· δόο κνη πεῖ λ, ζὺ ἂ λ ᾔ ηεζαο αὐ ηὸ λ θαὶ ἔ δσθελ ἄ λ ζνη ὕ δσξ δῶλ. ―Had you known [which, as a Samaritan, you in fact do not] the gift of God and who is speaking to you, you would have asked and he would have given you living water.‖ Jesus contrasts the natural water drawn from Jacob‘s Well with the living water drawn from his body for his baptism, offering several points of comparison. The fresh drinking water drawn from Jacob‘s Well was a gift from the patriarch Jacob. The living water Jesus gives is the gift of God. Whoever drinks the water drawn from Jacob‘s Well will thirst again as it only sustains life temporally. Whoever drinks the living water Jesus gives will never thirst to eternity (εἰ ο ηὸ λ αἰ ῶλα) as it sustains life eternally by becoming a well that springs up to eternal life (πεγὴ ὕ δαηνο ἁ ιινκέλνπ εἰ ο δσὴ λ αἰ ώληνλ) within the one who drinks it. Jesus‘ contrary to fact conditional sentence highlights the two principal shortcomings of Samaritanism, ignorance of the gift of God and the true identity of the Christ, the Savior of the world, as from the Jews. Samaritans and Jews alike considered the Torah to be the

108

supreme gift of God.15 Samaritans, however, rejected the later prophetic writings in which God promised the gift of his indwelling and life-giving Spirit through the Christ, the Son of David. John the Baptist identified Jesus as the One by whom the Spirit would be given. ―He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit‖ (John 1:33).16 The gift of God is the Spirit whom Jesus gives through his baptism. Jesus makes the same offer of living water to the Jewish pilgrims during Tabernacles (John 7:37–38). John explicitly equates the living water that would flow from Jesus‘ belly with the Spirit given upon Jesus‘ glorification in death (John 7:39; cf. 19:34). Jesus‘ dialogue with the Samaritan woman progresses from a discussion about living water to true worship of the Father, the verb πξ ν ζ θ π λ έ σ (―to worship‖) occurring ten times in John 4:20–24. The Samaritan Woman correctly notes that their fathers worshipped God on Mt. Gerizim, but that the Jews insisted that God be worshipped at the Temple in Jerusalem. Living water and worship are interrelated concepts. Craig Koester notes, ―Significantly, the Scriptures used by both groups said that ―living water‖ was to be used when purifying people from defilement incurred by skin diseases, touching a

15 Gen. Rab. 6:7 reads, ―R. Yohanan said, ―Three things were given to the world as a gift, and they are these: Torah, the Lights, and the Rain,‖ cited by Hugo Odeberg, The Fourth Gospel Interpreted in Its Relation to Contemporaneous Religious Currents in Palestine and the Hellenistic-Oriental World (Uppsala: Almqvist, 1929; Chicago: Argonaut, 1968), 150; cf. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (London: S. P. C. K., 1960), 195. 16 Early Christians identified the Holy Spirit as the gift of God (Acts 2:38; 8:20; 10:45; 11:17; Heb 6:4)

109

corpse, and bodily discharges like menstruation.‖17 Only the ceremonial clean could enter either temple‘s precincts, requiring prior immersion in living water. Again, Koester notes, ―In the context of acknowledged national differences, the living water imagery helps convey the idea that Jesus offered a gift that would remove the taint from the Samaritans and lead to their inclusion in the worshipping community.‖18 Jesus offers the Samaritan woman access to orthodox worship of the Father in the temple of his body by receiving God‘s gift of living water in his baptism. Through his baptism, Jesus opens the way for worshipping the Father in Spirit and Truth. Conclusion Neither the Temple in Jerusalem (Nicodemus) nor Mt. Gerizim (the Samaritan woman) is a legitimate center of worship in light of the incarnation. No one can come to the Father except by Jesus, the incarnate Logos upon whom the Spirit descended and remains. Jesus is the true temple and locus of worship. Only Jesus can reveal the Father because only Jesus has seen the Father (John 1:18). Jesus‘ baptism negates the racial distinction between the Jews and Samaritans. Those who receive Jesus‘ baptism are no longer begotten of the flesh—distinctions based upon physical birth—but rather children of God begotten of water and the Spirit. Jesus‘ baptism also negates the religious distinction separating Jews and Samaritans. Jesus points to a new place and manner of worship. Physical generation does not form the basis for true worship of the Father. The

17 Koester, Symbolism, 168. 18 Koester, Symbolism, 168.

110

Father seeks those who worship Him in Spirit and Truth. Worshipping in Spirit and Truth means worshipping the Father made known by His only-begotten Son Jesus, the embodiment of Truth whom the Spirit reveals in the Christian Church through preaching and the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist.

111

CHAPTER SIX THE WAY OF DEATH: ABANDONING THE LIFE OF DISCIPLESHIP Jesus‘ dramatic debut at the Temple in Jerusalem drew popular praise and official scrutiny. Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John the Baptist as many who saw his signs believed in his Name. As a result, the Pharisees shifted their attention away from John the Baptist to Jesus prompting Jesus to leave Judea and return to Galilee by way of Samaria. As Jesus travelled through Samaria and Galilee, he continued making and baptizing disciples. Not all of Jesus‘ disciples continued following him, though. As persecution increased, more and more of Jesus‘ disciples abandoned him and the life of discipleship for fear of the Jews. Post-baptismal apostasy posed a real threat to the early Church and her leaders as well. John‘s Jewish catechumens in particular faced intense pressure from the Jewish authorities to abandon the baptismal life of discipleship. Some betrayed church leaders and fellow disciples into the hands of the Jewish authorities. Others failed to complete the transition from Judaism and the Law of Moses to Christianity and the new covenant of grace and truth. When last in Jerusalem, Jesus confronted Nicodemus with the necessity of his baptism for entering the kingdom of God. Upon his return for another Jewish feast, Jesus encounters a paralytic who is unable to enter the Pool of Bethesda and a new lease on life. Jesus demonstrates his authority as the Son of God to raise the dead and make alive

112

by healing the paralytic on the Sabbath. The paralytic‘s healing follows John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism prefiguring Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit whereby Jesus raises the spiritually dead and makes them alive through faith in his Name. The paralytic‘s physical conversion from infirmity to health parallels the spiritual conversion from unbelief to faith. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches his catechumens the necessity of faith for the baptismal life of discipleship. By recounting the paralytic's post-healing experience, John warns against post-baptismal apostasy in the face of persecution as the way of death. The Pool of Bethesda The setting shifts abruptly from Cana to Jerusalem—territory increasingly hostile to Jesus and his disciples following his dramatic Passover appearance. Deaf to John the Baptist‘s prophetic voice, the Jewish authorities were unprepared for the messianic bridegroom‘s arrival. Tension builds as Jesus returns to Jerusalem for another feast of the Jews.1 The scene opens near the Sheep Gate beside a pool with five porticoes called Bethesda.2 Multitudes of invalids—blind, lame, paralyzed—gathered in the surrounding

1 Moloney, The Gospel of John, 164–74. Scholars‘ efforts to identify this feast have proven inconclusive. Moloney argues that the identification of the Jewish feast is irrelevant. 2 See Joachim Jeremias, Die Wiederentdeckung von Bethesda (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). The text is ambiguous whether Bethesda refers to the pool or the region in which the pool was located. Sheep destined for the Temple were brought into the city through the Sheep Gate (Neh 3:1, 32). A pool matching John's description was discovered in the latter part of the 19th Century and further excavated in the middle of the 20th Century. Bethesda would have been located outside the city walls just north of the Temple during the first century CE. The pool was trapezoidal, surrounded by colonnades on all four sides. A central colonnade divided the pool into an upper and lower basin.

113

porticoes awaiting the movement of the water in hopes of healing. Against this backdrop of broken humanity, Jesus reveals his Glory as the only Son of God by healing a paralytic on the Sabbath. John employs the Pool of Bethesda as a foil, drawing clear parallels to Jesus and Christian baptism. First, Bethesda and Jesus are sources of living water, the preferred medium for purification. The Pool of Bethesda was fed by a natural water source, either underground drainage or an intermittent spring. Water filled the upper basin and overflowed into the lower basin. The principle articulated in the Mishnah (c. 200 CE), that clean water purified contaminated water, may explain the pool's two-tiered construction.3 Fresh water from the upper pool purified the water in the lower pool contaminated by animal or human uncleanness. John depicts Jesus as a source of living water in multiple ways. Jesus is the Lamb of God, from whose pierced side living water will flow transforming John the Baptist‘s baptism with water into his baptism with the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the eschatological Temple, from whose body living water will flow bringing forth life and healing reminiscent of Eden (John 2:13–22; Ezekiel 47). Jesus is the Christ, who offers the Samaritan woman and the crowd gathered in Jerusalem for Tabernacles living water, interpreted as the Holy Spirit whom those who believe in Jesus will receive upon his glorification in death (John 7:37–39). Living water, therefore, refers to Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit.

3 Miqw. 6:7–9

114

Second, Bethesda and Jesus are sources of healing. Multitudes of invalids (ἀ ζ θ ε ν ο ύ ν η υν ) suffering a variety of physical afflictions flocked to Bethesda drawn by the implicit promise of healing from above (John 5:4). John mentions three groups—blind (η π θ ι ῶν ) lame, (ρ σι ῶν ) and paralyzed (μ ε ξ ῶν ). Multitudes of invalids also flocked to Jesus throughout his earthly ministry drawn by the signs he performed. Jesus‘ signs elicited faith in his power to heal and give life as the Christ. Though less prevalent in John than in the Synoptic gospels, healing characterized much of Jesus' earthly ministry demonstrating the advent of the kingdom of God. John records four healing signs typical of Jesus' overall ministry that serve his catechetical purpose: the royal official‘s son (ἠ ζ θ έ ν ε ι ; ὁ ππ ξ ε η ό ο ), the paralytic (ὁ ἀ ζ θ ε ν ῶν ), the man born blind (η π θ ι ὸ ρ ἐ γ ε ν ν ή θ η ), and Lazarus (ἀ ζ θ ε ν ῶν )—each prefiguring Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit.4 Following the paralytic‘s healing, John notes that a large crowd followed Jesus because they saw the many signs he performed on the invalids (ἀ ζ θ ε ν ο ύ ν η υν ). Third, Bethesda and Jesus are enabled to heal by a divine emissary who descends upon them from above. John 5:4, a textual gloss likely reflecting popular tradition, attributes Bethesda‘s healing power to an angel of the Lord who descended periodically

4 All four Gospels record the incident in which a disciple of Jesus cuts off the ear of the high priest‘s servant (Matt 26:51–56; Mark 14:47–50; Luke 22:49–51; John 18:10–11). Only Luke adds that Jesus healed the servant‘s ear. John alone identifies Simon and Malchus by name. Healing was characteristic of Jesus‘ earthly ministry. John selects four healings representative of Jesus‘ healing ministry as a whole in service to his ultimate purpose (John 20:31).

115

in (ἐ ν ) the pool and agitated the water.5 The first person to enter the pool after the angel of the Lord agitated the water became healthy (ὑ γ ι ὴ ρ ἐ γ έ ν ε η ο ) (John 5:4, 7). The angel of the Lord‘s descent evokes creation and covenant themes. The Spirit of God hovered over the face of the primordial waters at the creation bringing forth life. Jewish tradition also held that Moses received the Law through the mediation of an angel or angels, lending support to the interpretation of Bethesda as a symbol of the Law (Deut 33:2; Ps 68:17; Gal 3:19).6 The water of Bethesda had no intrinsic healing properties, though. Whether or not one accepts John 5:4 or the tradition it preserves, the water was powerless to heal apart from the water‘s agitation. John contrasts the Spirit‘s singular descent upon Jesus with the angel of the Lord‘s periodic descent in the pool of Bethesda. John the Baptist witnessed the Holy Spirit descend (θ α η α β α ῖ ν ο ν ) like a dove and remain (ἔ μ ε ι ν ε ν ) upon (ἐ πʼ) Jesus, identifying Jesus as the Lamb of God who will baptize with the Holy Spirit. Jesus‘ healing ministry anticipates his baptism with the Holy Spirit. John draws on new creation, covenant and temple themes. Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit inaugurates the new creation governed by the new covenant of grace and truth enacted by Jesus‘ death as the Lamb of God. Jesus also told his disciples that they, ―will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending (ἀ ν α β α ί ν ν λ η α ο θ α ὶ

5 For a discussion of the textual evidence, see Brown, Gospel, 207. 6 Cf. Jub. 1:5, 2:27 ―angel of presence‖

116

θ α η α β α ί λ ν λ η α ο ἐ πὶ ) upon the Son of Man‖ (John 1:51), identifying himself as Beth-El, the house of God and the gate of heaven (John 1:51; Gen 28:12). Fourth, Bethesda and Jesus are both agitated (η α ξ α ρ ζ ῇ ). Bethesda‘s water was agitated (η α ξ α ρ ζ ῇ ) periodically, signaling that the pool was operative to heal (John 5:4, 7). There are three possible causes for this phenomenon: natural, human, or supernatural. The pool's unregulated water supply, a mechanical device specifically designed by the pool's architect, or a divine agent are all plausible causes. John describes Jesus three times employing the same Greek verb. Jesus was deeply moved by the Spirit and agitated within (ἐ ν ε β π ι μ ή ζ α η ο η ῷ πλ ε ύ κ α η η θ α ὶ ἐ η ά π α ξ ε ν ἑ α ς η ὸ ν ) when he saw Mary and the Jews with her weeping over Lazarus‘ death (John 11:33). Jesus‘ agitation is followed by Lazarus‘ resurrection from the dead prefiguring the eschatological resurrection. Jesus declares, ―Now, my soul is agitated (η ε η ά ξ α θ η α ι ),‖ when the appointed hour of his glorification as the Son of Man arrives (John 12:27; cf. 13:21). The source of Jesus‘ agitation is the Father‘s wrath over the sin of the world that he is bearing. Quoting Psalm 6:4, Jesus changes the verb tense from aorist to perfect. Jesus‘ soul is and remains agitated as a result of his glorification. In other words, Jesus‘ power to heal and give eternal life through his baptism with the Holy Spirit is the enduring result of his death as the Lamb of God, because the now (λ ῦ ν ) of Jesus‘ hour coincides with the judgment of the world and the exile of the prince of this world.

117

Finally, Bethesda and Jesus healed on the Sabbath. The gathering of invalids at Bethesda on the Sabbath implies the expectation that the water might be agitated and at least one person would be healed that day. This expectation lends additional support to the tradition preserved in John 5:4 given the Jewish understanding that God alone had the authority to work on the Sabbath. John records two Sabbath healings by Jesus, the healing of the paralytic and the blind man. The Sabbath healings attest to the validity of Jesus‘ claim to have been sent by the Father to establish the new covenant of grace and truth. Bethesda offered a type of resurrection to a new life free from physical infirmity, a tragic consequence of the sin of the world. The healing process associated with the Pool of Bethesda follows John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism, bridging the mutually exclusive physical states of infirmity and health. The Lamb of God Takes away the Sin of the World Baptizes with the Holy Spirit ὁ ἀ ζ θ ε ν ῶν ; ἡ ἀ ζ θ έ ν ε ι α Bethesda ἰ αθε ὶ ρ ; ἐ γ έ ν ε η ο ὑγ ι ὴρ

ὁ

Figure 9. The Healing at the Pool of Bethesda The healing process associated with Bethesda bears striking parallels to early Christian baptismal practice. Living water was the preferred medium.7 The catechumen descended spiritually infirm into living water accompanied by the baptizer and possibly a

7 Did. 7

118

sponsor. The Holy Spirit descended upon the water from above at the invocation of the divine name. The catechumen, now baptized, ascended from the living water spiritually healthy. Jesus Heals a Paralytic Among the multitude of invalids gathered around the pool laid a man who has suffered from an incurable medical condition for thirty-eight years.8 John uses paralysis as a metaphor for humanity‘s spiritual infirmity resulting from original sin. All who are begotten of the flesh—whether Jew, Samaritan or Gentile—cannot enter the kingdom of God unless begotten from above of water and Spirit. In this respect, the paralytic‘s example has universal application. The paralytic represents Jesus‘ own, the Jews, who do not receive him. In the broad context of the Gospel, the paralytic represents the Jewish nation as a whole during the Second Temple Period. John draws upon the Exodus narrative once again, casting the paralytic in the role of the ancient Israelites. The paralytic was punished with infirmity for thirty-eight years just as the ancient Israelites were punished for rejecting the Promised Land (Deut 2:14). The paralytic‘s inability to enter the pool unassisted parallels the Israelites‘ inability to enter the Jordan. The first generation of Israelites could not cross the Jordan

8 John does not specify the man‘s affliction as paralysis. This inference is drawn from linguistic parallels with Synoptic accounts of a similar healing (Matt 9:6, 7; Mark 2:9, 11, 12; Luke 5:24, 25).

119

to enter the Promised Land. Jesus‘ Jewish contemporaries risked the same fate as their forefathers. Thirty-eight years also symbolizes the period between the destruction of the First Temple in 586 BCE and the destruction of the Temple of Jesus‘ body. Since then, the Jews have waited for the Christ‘s descent from above to restore the kingdom of God among the Jews by pouring out God‘s Spirit upon his people. Tension underlies the Gospel as John recounts Jesus‘ many miraculous redemptive signs, including this sign, for his catechumens. Will the Jew‘s respond like their forefathers? Will they reject Jesus and his promise of eternal life in the kingdom of God? The ruins of the Second Temple and Jerusalem destroyed roughly thirty-eight years after Jesus‘ crucifixion and resurrection bore solemn witness to John‘s catechumens of the Jew‘s reply. Within the narrower context of this narrative, the paralytic serves as a foil for Jesus‘ Jewish antagonists. Collectively, the paralytic represents post-Second Temple Judaism centered around the synagogue. John casts the paralytic in the role of the generation of Jews following the events narrated in the Gospel who initially rejected Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God and the kingdom he proclaimed. The man‘s paralysis reflects the spiritual paralysis of Judaism during this interim period. John‘s Jewish contemporaries still awaited the Coming One from above, but sought him in the wrong place. Thirty-eight years also evokes the span of time between Jesus‘ death and resurrection (32/33 CE) and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple (70 CE), roughly thirty-eight years. Through the publication of John‘s Gospel, Jesus comes

120

to his own once again offering healing and eternal life through his baptism with the Holy Spirit. Individually, the paralytic represents John‘s Jewish catechumens drawn from the synagogue. The traumatic events of 70 CE were palpably fresh in the minds of John‘s Jewish catechumens. Paralysis reflects their pre-baptism spiritual condition. Confronted with this characterization of the paralytic, John‘s Jewish contemporaries and catechumens must ask themselves, ―Are we also paralyzed?‖ Baptism as Rising to Walk in Discipleship Jesus presents himself to the paralytic as a viable alternative to Bethesda. Aware of the man‘s plight, Jesus asks, ζ έ ι ε η ο ὑ γ ι ὴ ρ γ ε λ έ ζ ζ α η ; (―Do you want to become healthy?‖). Physical health serves as a metaphor for eternal life whereas physical infirmity serves as a metaphor for spiritual death. For John‘s catechumens, sickness and health correspond to their pre- and post-baptism spiritual condition. Jesus presents himself as a viable alternative to Bethesda, bridging the gap between sickness and health, death and life, the old and new creation. Jesus‘ invitation to the paralytic parallels his offer of living water to the Samaritan woman. Jesus posed essentially the same question on a deeper, soteriological level to the Jews. His signs confirmed John the Baptist‘s testimony that he was the Christ who would baptize with the Holy Spirit, begging the question, ―Do you want to become healthy?‖ In the broader context of the Gospel, Jesus‘ question can be understood as a call to baptism and discipleship. M. Balagué suggests Jesus‘ question reflects the early Christian practice of questioning a candidate‘s motives

121

prior to baptism.9 John very well may have echoed Jesus‘ question prior to baptizing his catechumens. Doing so would evoke this narrative and the lesson it imparts. Misunderstanding Jesus‘ gracious invitation, the paralytic explains his sad predicament. He fails repeatedly to enter the pool first when the water stirs because he lacks someone to assist him into the pool. As a result, another person always descends (θ α η α β α ί λ ε η ) into the pool before him. Could this stranger standing before him be just such a person? Will he assist him into the pool when the water stirs or should he wait for another? Jesus commands the paralytic, ἔ γ ε ι π ε ἆ π ο ν η ὸ ν θ ξ ά β α η η ό λ ζ ν π θ α ὶ πε ξ η πά η ε η (―Rise, carry your pallet and walk‖). Baptismal vocabulary lies embedded in Jesus‘ command. The Greek verb ἐ γ ε ί π υ (―to wake, rise, raise,‖) elsewhere refers explicitly to raising the dead, giving Jesus‘ command an eschatological ring. John‘s catechumens have already heard Jesus allude to his own resurrection using this verb, ―Destroy this Temple and I will raise (ἐ γ ε π ῶ) it in three days‖ (John 2:19). By speaking in the first person, Jesus claims divine authority to raise the dead. Jesus will employ the paralytic‘s healing as a living parable comparable to the work of his Father who raises the dead and makes alive (ἐ γ ε ί π ε ι η ν ὺ ρ λ ε θ ξ ν ὺ ρ θ α ὶ δ ῳο πν η ε ῖ ) (John 5:21). Jesus then declares the hour will come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and live, alluding to the raising of Lazarus (John 11). The paralytic‘s healing is a type of resurrection. He is raised from sickness to health,

9 M. Balagué, ―El Bautismo como resurrección del pecado,‖ CB 18 (1961): 103–110, cited by

122

from death to life. A corresponding spiritual regeneration should parallel the paralytic‘s physical regeneration. The Greek verb πε ξ η πα η έ σ (―to walk around, go about, conduct oneself‖) elsewhere refers to walking in discipleship.10 Following Jesus‘ controversial Bread of Life discourse, John remarks that, ―After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him‖ (ν ὐ κ έ η ι κ ε η ʼα ὐ η ο ῦ πε ξ η ε πά η ν π λ ) (John 6:66). That is, they ceased being his disciples. Jesus later declares that those who follow him as disciples, ―will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life‖ (ν ὐ κ ὴ πε ξ η πα η ή ζ ῃ ἐ ν η ῇ ζ θ ν η ί ᾳ , ἀ λ λ ʼἕ ξ ε ι η ὸ θ ῶρ η ῆ ρ δ σῆ ρ ), because he is the Light of the world (John 8:12). Jesus reiterates this thought in John 9:4; 11:9, 10 and 12:35. Discipleship of Jesus leads ultimately to the cross. Jesus tells Peter, ―Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk (πε ξ η ε πά η ε η ο ) wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go‖ (John 21:18). Jesus‘ reference to Peter being dressed by another may allude to the early Christian practice of dressing the newly baptized in white robes (Rom 13:12–14; Gal 3:27; Eph 4:24–25; Rev 3:5, 18; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9; 19:14). Discipleship flows from baptism as the means by which one is made a disciple (John 4:1). Jesus enables those who receive his baptism with the Holy Spirit to walk in the path of discipleship.

Brown, Gospel, 211. 10 John also employs πε ξ η πα η έ σ with this sense of discipleship in each of his epistles (1 John 1:6, 7; 2:6, 11; 2 John 4, 6; 3 John 3, 4). This use is also reflected in Revelations (Rev. 3:4; 16:15; 21:24).

123

The opening scene concludes as the man exits the stage carrying his mat, leaving Jesus, the Pool of Bethesda, and his thirty-eight years of paralysis behind. No sooner has Jesus enabled the man to walk than the Jews stop him in his tracks. They confront him for carrying his mat in violation of the Sabbath (Jer 17:21).11 Obedience to Jesus‘ command has brought him into direct conflict with the Jewish authorities. Under interrogation, the man diverts attention away from himself to his benefactor. ―The man who healed me, that man said to me, ‗Take up your bed and walk‘‖ (John 5:11). Facing official charges and a subsequent trial, the man has a difficult choice. Does he betray his benefactor to the Jewish authorities? Ironically, he does not know who healed him. Conflict over proper Sabbath observance attended much of Jesus‘ ministry. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus routinely runs afoul of the Jewish authorities for violating the Sabbath. Conflict over Sabbath observance continued during the early years of Christianity while the majority of Christians were Jewish and the line between synagogue and Church was still being drawn. The Sabbath context for many of Jesus‘ healing miracle raises the intriguing possibility that early Christians baptized on the Sabbath. This would bring them into direct conflict with the Jewish authorities. Still under the official jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin, Jewish Christians could be charged and tried for violating Jewish law. Arrest and trial by the Jewish authorities posed a genuine threat to John‘s catechumens. How would they respond under similar circumstances?

11 Cf. m. abb. 7:2; 10:5.

124

Jesus finds the man in the Temple following his brush with the Jews. The shift in physical location from Bethesda to the Temple not only reflects the change in the man‘s physical condition, but also reflects an apparent change in the man‘s spiritual condition. Presumably, the man went to the Temple to be inspected by a priest and offer the prescribed sacrifice for his healing. Alternatively, he may have appeared to answer charges of breaking the Sabbath. The change is location reinforces the deeper, soteriological significance of the man‘s healing. In addition to his body, Jesus healed the man‘s broken relationship with God ending his thirty-eight year exclusion from the Temple. The man‘s presence in the Temple indicates the restoration of his relationship with God and full reincorporation into the community of Israel. Entering the Temple, God‘s royal residence, was tantamount to entering the Kingdom of God. The man‘s healing and entrance into the Temple parallel the new generation of Israelites‘ Jordan crossing and entrance into the Promised Land. His presence in the Temple is fraught with irony, though. Healed and forgiven by Jesus, he nevertheless goes to the wrong place. Jesus‘ body is now the Temple (John 2:19). The man, however, does not realize this despite his miraculous healing by Jesus.12 Many of Jesus‘ disciples ultimately made the same mistake, clinging to Judaism centered around the man-made

12 At the very least, the man should have recognized divine agency if not divine presence in Jesus by virtue of his power to heal. John attributes the curative powers of the pool to an angel of the Lord, a divine agent, who stirred the waters of the pool. Had the man successfully entered the pool first after the stirring of the waters, he would have attributed his healing to the angel of the Lord sent from God. In his encounter with Jesus, Nicodemus acknowledged Jesus to be, ―a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him‖ John 3:2. At Cana, Jesus manifested his glory (i.e., his identity as ―the Glory of YHWH‖), by turning water into wine. Jesus‘ miracles function as Christological revelations of his identity as the incarnate Logos.

125

Temple where the Glory no longer dwells. John‘s catechumen‘s faced the same risk if they failed to abandon Judaism and the synagogue completely and embrace Christianity centered around the incarnate Temple of Jesus‘ body present sacramentally in the church. Only by receiving Jesus through his baptism with the Holy Spirit does one truly enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus warns the man, ―See, you are healthy! Sin no more, that nothing worse happens to you.‖ Jesus‘ warning indicates an additional soteriological dimension to the man‘s healing.13 Jesus will issue the same injunction to the woman caught in adultery (John 8:11). For thirty-eight years, the man bore the physical consequences of his sin. This reinforces the man‘s typological identification with the ancient Israelites, who bore the physical consequences of their sinful rebellion for thirty-eight years until the first generation died.14 The man‘s healing was also an absolution. Healing the man‘s paralysis indicates the removal of its underlying spiritual cause. Jesus‘ healing of the paralytic confirms John the Baptist‘s identification of Jesus as the Lamb of God who bears the sin of the world. Jesus healing miracles therefore foreshadow the soteriological

13 The connection between healing and forgiveness is common in the Synoptic Gospels, although John is not consistent in this regard. However, when asked by his disciples, ―Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?‖ Jesus rejects the thesis that the man‘s blindness is attributable to sin (John 9:1–3). Matthew recounts a similar healing of a paralytic in Matthew 9:1–7 (cf. Mark 2:1–12; Luke 5:17–26) in which Jesus employs essentially the same command as in John 5, ἐ γ ε π θ ε ὶ ρ ἆ π ό ν ζ ν π η ὴ ν θ ι ί λ ε λ θ α ὶ ὕ πα γ ε ε ἰ ρ η ὸ ν ν ἶ κ ό ν ζ ν π e. In Matthew‘s account, Jesus demonstrates his authority as the Son of Man to forgive sins by physically healing the paralytic—an example of arguing from the lesser to the greater, from physical healing to spiritual healing. 14 Brown, Gospel, 207. Brown dismisses attributing symbolic value to the number of the man‘s affliction as ―unnecessary.‖

126

benefits of his life-giving death and resurrection eliciting faith in him as the Christ who would baptize with the Holy Spirit. What sin is Jesus‘ warning the man against? What could possibly be worse than thirty-eight years of paralysis? Drawing upon the man‘s typological association with the ancient Israelites, Jesus warns against future apostasy. Upon crossing the Jordan and entering the Promised Land, the Israelites were to abandon their idolatrous and rebellious past once and for all. Failure to do so would result in loss of the kingdom of God and exile from the Promised Land (Deut 28; cf. Josh 8:30–35). Jesus‘ warning may have influenced early Christian baptismal practice. Following baptism, the newly baptized were warned against apostasy and returning to their former lives of sin. Jesus‘ warning would ring in the ears of John‘s catechumens. Soon, they would hear Jesus‘ command, ―Rise and walk!‖ as they ascended from the living water. They too must, ―Sin no more!‖ or risk forfeiting eternal life. Through this narrative, John warns his catechumens against abandoning the baptismal life of discipleship by returning to their former life under Judaism due to the threat of persecution. Jesus‘ warning prepares the paralytic and John‘s catechumens for a second interrogation by the Jewish authorities. Despite Jesus‘ explicit warning, the man purposely seeks out the Jews upon learning the identity of his benefactor. The Jewish authorities likely dropped the charges against the man for his cooperation, a standard practice by prosecutors for extracting information from low level offenders.

127

Conclusion Paralyzed by fear of the Jews, the man abandons the life of discipleship by betraying Jesus to the Jewish authorities rather than face excommunication. His apostasy leads to increased efforts on the part of the Jews to level official charges against Jesus for violating the Sabbath. As a result, something worse happens to the man. He forfeits eternal life in the kingdom of God. A tragic figure, the paralytic illustrates the way of death followed by those who abandon the baptismal life of discipleship. Spiritual paralysis induced by fear of persecution prevented the man from entering the kingdom of God.

128

CHAPTER SEVEN THE WAY OF LIFE: THE CRUCIFORM CHARACTER OF DISCIPLESHIP IN JOHN 9 The Gospel of John interprets Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit as the spiritual enlightenment of humanity from the blindness of unbelief to the enlightenment of faith, because Jesus reveals his identity and demonstrates his power as the Light of the World to give eternal life by restoring sight to a man born blind on the Sabbath during Tabernacles. John structures the account of the blind man‘s healing according to his baptismal template of water symbolism, whereby the physical enlightenment of the blind man from blindness to sight parallels the spiritual enlightenment of the baptized from unbelief to faith. The blind man‘s post-healing experience at the hands of the Jewish authorities parallels Jesus‘ passion. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches his catechumens the cruciform character of discipleship as a life that demands far more than mere ethical or moral emulation. The blind man functions as a representative catechumen with whom John‘s catechumens are to identify and draw parallels to their own post–baptismal experience. John encourages his catechumens to faithfulness in the face of persecution as the way of life by recounting the blind man‘s post-healing experience. By examining the parallels between the blind man and Jesus, we will trace the cruciform pattern of the baptismal life of discipleship giving insights into John‘s use of narrative baptismal catechesis and its applicability today.

129

Jesus Heals a Man Born Blind Jesus heals the blind man following a heated exchange with the Pharisees in the Temple on the Sabbath during the Jewish feast of Tabernacles. Jesus‘ provocative claim, ―I am the Light of the world. He who follows me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life,‖ sparked this debate (John 8:12). The Pharisees challenge the validity of Jesus‘ claim because he bore witness about himself. Central to this dispute is the question of identity in relation to God. Both Jesus and his Jewish opponents claim God as their Father. The Jews considered themselves not only the physical descendants or sons of the patriarch Abraham but also the spiritual descendents or sons of God. Jesus challenges the Jews‘ identity both as sons of Abraham and sons of God because they do not receive him or his testimony. Jesus concludes the dispute with the audacious claim, ―Amen, amen I say unto you, before Abraham was begotten, I AM.‖ Jesus reiterates this claim immediately before healing the blind man: ―As long as I am in the world, I am the Light of the world‖ (John 9:5). The healing miracle is the final and definitive proof of Jesus‘ claim. The question of Jesus‘ origins and identity in relation to God carries over into the blind man‘s subsequent trials before the Pharisees. For John‘s catechumens, the temporal and spatial contexts evoke the paralytic‘s healing by the Pool of Bethesda on another festival Sabbath. This prior Sabbath infraction provoked fierce opposition to Jesus by the Jews. In the end, the paralytic betrayed Jesus to the Jews. Tension builds for John‘s catechumens. Will this miraculous

130

Sabbath healing also result in increased hostility towards Jesus? Will the blind man also crumble under pressure from the Jews and betray Jesus? John introduces the man as blind from birth. His congenital blindness prompts Jesus‘ disciples to ask, ―Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was begotten blind?‖ Jesus rejects the thesis that the man‘s blindness was the direct result of a particular sin on the part of the man or his parents.1 Rather, the man‘s blindness occasions the manifestation of the works of God (η ὰ ἔ π γ α η ν ῦ ζ ε ν ῦ ), among which is opening the eyes of the blind (Ps 146:8; Isa 29:18; 32:3; 35:5; 42:7; 61:1; cf. John 9:32–33). As the Light of the world, Jesus will open the eyes of the blind man physically at the Pool of Siloam and spiritually at their second encounter. Hearing Jesus‘ command, ―Go to Siloam and wash,‖ and believing Jesus‘ implicit promise of restored sight, the man goes to the Pool of Siloam, washes, and leaves physically enlightened. The Pool of Siloam marks the man‘s transition from physical blindness to sight resulting in a corresponding change in his identity. He is the same man who sat outside the Temple begging, but he is no longer the same (John 9:8–12). He has had a life changing encounter the man called Jesus. In the first century CE, a person‘s identity was understood in collective rather than individual terms. Social, familial, and

1 In the healing of the paralytic (John 5), Jesus attributes the paralytic‘s 38-year malady to a particular sin or ongoing state of sin on the man‘s part. The paralytic and blind man function as representative characters. The paralytic represents unfaithful Israel, the duration of his paralysis corresponding to the duration of Israel‘s punishment for rebellion and rejection of the Promised Land during which they were unable to enter the Promised Land (Deut 2:14; cf. John 3:5). Ultimately, the paralytic betrays Jesus to the Jewish authorities, refusing to enter the kingdom of God manifest in Jesus and his school of disciples.

131

religious relationships defined a person‘s identity.2 Imminent changes in the man‘s social, familial, and religious relationships will reflect his newly bestowed identity as the man dies to each of these relationships and rises to a new set of relationships that redefine his identity as a disciple of Jesus. The man also returns from the Pool of Siloam seeing Jesus in a new light. His physical enlightenment at the Pool of Siloam is followed by a gradual spiritual enlightenment during his subsequent ordeal that culminates in a second encounter with Jesus. As the narrative progresses, so does the man‘s nascent faith conceived by Jesus‘ words, ―Go to Siloam and wash.‖ Echoes of John the Baptist‘s interrogation sound in the background as the man bears witness to the Light. Like the Samaritan Woman, the man comes to a full recognition of Jesus‘ identity in stages. The Cruciform Character of Discipleship The man‘s healing leads to a dispute over his identity resulting ultimately in his excommunication from the synagogue. According to Martyn, the ensuing drama (John 9:8-41) belongs to the contemporary level of the Evangelist, not the einmalig level of the historical Jesus.3 Though based upon a traditional miracle story (John 9:1–7), the man‘s post-healing experience according to Martyn reflects the increasing pressures faced by Jewish Christians within the synagogue following the Jamnia Council. In other words,

2 Arthur A. Just, ―Does Our Baptismal Identity Change Our Personality? The Apostle Paul before and after Damascus,‖ (Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Symposium on Exegetical Theology at Concordia Theological Seminary on January 16, 2006), 4–5. Just cites B. Malina and J. Neyrey, ―First Century Personality: Dyadic, not Individual,‖ in The Social World of Luke–Acts, ed. Jerome H. Neyrey (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991), 72–73. 3 J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, 3rd edition (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2003), 40-66.

132

the Evangelist casts a contemporary drama he composed on the increasingly strained relationship between synagogue and church with historical characters. Though Martyn unnecessarily rejects the man‘s post-healing experience as historical on the einmalig level, his two-level drama theory is nevertheless helpful for understanding John‘s narrative approach to baptismal catechesis. John selected this historical narrative (John 9:1-41) precisely because of the contemporary applicability of the man‘s post-healing experience to his catechumens. The man first encounters his neighbors and those who knew him formerly as a blind beggar following his return from Siloam. Some recognized him, while others did not. The man bears witness to himself, ―ἐ γ ώ ε ἰ μ ι (―I am he‖)‖ echoing Jesus‘ earlier self-witness (John 9:9; cf. 8:13, 58).4 When asked how his eyes were opened, he briefly recounts the details of his healing (John 9:11; cf. 9:15; 9:27). In sharp contrast to the paralytic, he knows that the man called Jesus restored his sight (John 9:11; cf. 5:13) though at this point he does not know where Jesus is (John 9:12). Initial curiosity quickly turns to antagonism. Unable to resolve their dispute over his identity, his neighbors and acquaintances hand him over to the Pharisees. John adds the editorial comment, ―It was the Sabbath . . . . ‖ (John 9:14), explaining their action and foreshadowing the man‘s hostile reception by the Pharisees.

4 Moloney notes, ―Some commentators regard the man‘s answer as the first sign of his representing Jesus. He uses the ego eimi and he creates schism around himself.‖ Moloney, Gospel of John, 297 (emphasis original).

133

John juxtaposes the man whose sight Jesus restored with the Pharisees in order to highlight the Pharisees‘ spiritual blindness. The Pharisees‘ hostility towards the man increases in direct proportion to the man‘s progressing faith.5 Asked for the second time how his eyes were opened, the man once again briefly recounts the salient details of his healing (John 9:15). The focus quickly shifts away from the manner and timing of the man‘s healing to the question of Jesus‘ identity in relation to God. The Sabbath context of the man‘s healing led to a schism among the Pharisees over Jesus‘ relationship to God. Some argued that Jesus was not from God since his actions violated the Sabbath‘s prohibition of work (ν ὐ κ ἔ ζ η ι ν ν ὗ η ο ρ πα ξ ὰ ζ ε ν ῦ ὁ ἄ ν θ π υπν ο , ὅ η ι η ὸ ζ ά β β α η ν λ ν ὐ η ε ξ ε ῖ ) (John 9:16). Others countered that Jesus could not be a ―sinner‖ (i.e., not from God) by virtue of his signs (John 9:16; cf. John 3:2).6 As in chapter 5, proper Sabbath observance became the determining factor. Which side of the debate will the man whose eyes Jesus opened take? Questioned by the Pharisees about his benefactor, the man acknowledges Jesus to be a prophet (John 9:17; cf. 1:21; 4:19). Doubting (Οὐ κ ἐ πί ζ η ε π ζ α λ ) the man‘s miraculous healing, the Pharisees summon his parents to corroborate his testimony before proceeding with legal action against Jesus (John 9:18). The man‘s parents attest that he is their son and that he has been blind since birth. However, the man‘s parents disavow any knowledge of the manner of his healing

5 Martyn, History and Theology, 42 footnote 32. Martyn classifies this as a progression from identification to confrontation rather than a progression in the identification of Jesus. It is both.

134

or his benefactor and dissociate themselves from their son for fear of the Jews. John adds the editorial comment, ἤ δ η γ ὰ π ζ π λ ε η έ ζ ε η λ η ν ν ἱ Ἰ ο ς δ α ῖ ο ι ἵ ν α ἐ ά ν η η ο α ὐ η ὸ ν ὁ μ ο λ ο γ ή ζ ῃ ρ ξ η ζ η ό λ , ἀ πν ζ π λ ά γ σγ ν ο γ έ λ ε η α η (John 9:22). Martyn attributes this formal declaration to the Sitz im Leben of the Evangelist reflecting the Birkath ha-Minim or the Twelfth Benediction of the Jamnia Academy circa 85–115 C.E. However, in light of Jesus‘ crucifixion and the experiences of the earliest Christians at the hands of the Jewish authorities, attributing this formal declaration to a time outside Jesus‘ earthly ministry is unnecessary.7 Having died to his former society of neighbors and acquaintances, he now dies to his family. During his second trial, the Pharisees charge, ―Give glory to God!‖ The Pharisees‘ initial debate over Jesus‘ identity gives way to the consensus, ―We know that this man is a sinner‖ (John 9:24), the same conclusion they will eventually draw about the man (John 9:34). Ironically, by condemning Jesus as a sinner the Pharisees refuse to give glory to God. Blind to the works of God performed by Jesus on the man standing before their eyes, they reject Jesus and the Father whom Jesus makes known (cf. John 1:18; 14:8–11). In contrast, the man obediently testifies to the works of God performed by Jesus, ―I was blind but now I see‖ (John 9:25). Not intimidated by the threat of excommunication, he refuses to affirm their negative judgment regarding Jesus‘ relationship to God. Asked a third time how his eyes were opened, the man rebukes the Pharisees for not listening (ν ὐ κ ἠ κ ο ύ ζ α η ε ) and proceeds to question their

6 John identifies John the Baptist as a man sent πα ξ ὰ ζ ε ν ῦ (―from God‖) (John 1:6).

135

underlying motive, ―Do you also want to become his disciples?‖ By expressing his desire to become Jesus‘ disciple (John 9:27; cf. 9:22), the man implicitly confesses Jesus as the Christ at the risk of excommunication. The Pharisees revile the man as though already a disciple of Jesus, setting up a mutually exclusive contrast between Jesus and Moses. At first not knowing (ν ὐ κ ν ἶ δ α ) where Jesus was (πν ῦ ἐ ζ η ι ν ἐ κ ε ῖ ν ο ρ ;) (John 9:12), the man now chastises the Pharisees who know that God had spoken to Moses (ν ἴ δ α μ ε ν ὅ η ι Μσϋ ζ ε ῖ ι ε ι ά ι ε θ ε λ ὁ ζ ε ό ο ) for not knowing from where Jesus was (ν ὐ κ ν ἴ δ α η ε πό ζ ε λ ἐ ζ η ί ν ) (John 9:29–30) in light of Jesus opening his blinded eyes (John 9:30). He further disproves the Pharisees assertion that Jesus is a sinner on the mutually acknowledged premise (ν ἴ δ α μ ε ν ) that God does not listen to sinners, but to those who are God-fearing and do his will (η η ο ζ ε ν ζ ε β ὴ ρ ᾖ θ α ὶ η ὸ ζ έ ι ε κ α α ὐ η ο ῦ πν η ῇ η ν ύ η ν π ) (John 9:31). He draws the conclusion, ε ἰ κ ὴ ἦ ν ν ὗ η ο ρ πα ξ ὰ ζ ε ν ῦ , ν ὐ κ ἠ δ ύ ν α η ο πν η ε ῖ ν ν ὐ δ έ ν (John 9:33; cf. John 1: 6; 3:2). Infuriated, the Pharisees disparage the man as completely begotten in sin (ἐ ν ἁ μ α π η ί α ι ρ ζ ὺ ἐ γ ε ν ν ή θ η ρ ὅ λ ο ρ ) (John 9:34) contradicting Jesus‘ judgment regarding the cause of the man‘s blindness and identifying the man with Jesus whom they know to be a sinner. The man‘s defense of Jesus and self-identification as a disciple of Jesus results in his expulsion and excommunication from the synagogue and Judaism (cf. John 9:22).

7 Martyn, History and Theology, 46–66.

136

The man came to his own—his neighbors and acquaintances—and they did not know or receive him (cf. John 1:11). His parents, caving in under threat of excommunication, abandoned him. The Pharisees strike the final blow by expelling him from the synagogue, the center of Jewish religious life. Excommunication was tantamount to a death sentence whereby one was cast out of the kingdom of God and cut off from God‘s chosen people and, as a result, considered as though dead to Jewish community. The man dies to his former identity and life engendered by his parents, centered around Temple and synagogue, and under the tutelage of Moses. As a disciple of Jesus, he must leave his former society, family, Moses, Temple, and synagogue buried in the past—willingly or not. Moses (Torah) is no longer to be regarded as the source of light and life.8 Temple and synagogue no longer constitute the earthly manifestation of the kingdom of God. Social, familial, and religious ties are no longer binding. As a disciple of Jesus, the man now walks out of the synagogue and into the true Light. Jesus finds the man having heard of his excommunication. Though cast out of the synagogue and consequently barred from the Temple, the man is nevertheless found in the true Temple (John 2:19–22).9 Jesus elicits the man‘s final confession asking, ―Do you believe in the Son of Man?‖ (cf. Dan 7:12–14; Ezek 1:26). This question may have been incorporated into the earliest baptismal liturgies of John‘s congregations. Since his eyes were first opened, the man has grown increasingly accustomed to the Light. He

8 Skarsaune, Shadow, 358. Gentile proselytes to Judaism were considered enlightened by the Torah (i.e., become disciples of Moses) after being baptized.

137

responds by asking Jesus to identify this Christological figure so that he may believe in him (cf. John 20:31). Echoing his self-disclosure to the Samaritan Woman, Jesus tells the man, ―You have both seen him and it is he who is talking with you‖ (John 9:37). In sharp contrast to his parents and the Pharisees, the man confesses Jesus to be the Son of Man and worships at his feet (John 9:35–38). John‘s overall purpose for writing is accomplished in this man as he receives Jesus and believes in his Name. Baptism as Enlightenment John uses blindness and sight as metaphors for unbelief and faith, the symbol of water dividing the contrasting symbols of darkness and light. More than the literal absence of light, darkness is a hostile force opposed to Jesus, the Light of the world (John 1:5; 3:19; 12:36; 12:46). There are no shades of grey. Jesus is the Light that continues shining in the darkness, which the darkness did not overcome. Jesus pronounces judgment upon those who refuse to believe despite seeing the works of God. ―For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind‖ (John 9:39). Whereas Jesus rejected a particular sin as the cause of the man‘s physical blindness, he attributes the Jew‘s spiritual blindness to the sin of the world, namely unbelief. The man‘s physical enlightenment at the Pool of Siloam follows John‘s baptismal template for water symbolism serving as a type of spiritual enlightenment. The Lamb of God 9 In contrast, Jesus finds the paralytic (John 5) in the Temple. Ironically, the man remains outside the true Temple manifested in Jesus, the incarnate Logos, and fails to enter the kingdom of God.

138

Takes away the Sin of the World Darkness Physical Blindness Unbelief

Water Siloam Baptism

Baptizes with the Holy Spirit Light Physical Sight Faith

Figure 10. The Healing at the Pool of Siloam Jesus‘ baptism delivers the baptized from the spiritual realm of darkness to the realm of the Light, the kingdom of God. In his dialogue with Nicodemus, Jesus evoked the Israelites‘ exodus with the phrases ―see‖ and ―enter the kingdom of God.‖ The first generation of Israelites was not allowed to see or enter the Promised Land as a result of their sinful rebellion. Moses was only allowed to see the Promised Land from a distance but was not allowed to enter. God raised up a second generation of Israelites led by Joshua that did ―see‖ and ―enter‖ the Promised Land. Enabled by the Spirit, the baptized see Jesus as the Son of Man (John 9:35–38) and his school of disciples as the kingdom of God. John employs the blind man as a representative character whose post–healing experience typifies the cruciform character of the baptismal life of discipleship. The man‘s rejection by his own, trial before the Pharisees, and expulsion from the synagogue anticipates Jesus‘ forthcoming rejection, trial and crucifixion. Both the man and Jesus are tried and condemned for bearing witness to the works of God. Just as Jesus makes the Father known through his testimony, the man whom Jesus healed makes Jesus known through his testimony. John‘s catechumen‘s post-baptismal experience will parallel that of Jesus and the man.

139

Conclusion The blind man illustrates the necessity of Christian baptism for Jews and Gentiles alike, regardless of one‘s natural birth. Jew, Samaritan, and Gentile alike require regeneration and enlightenment from above. His congenital blindness symbolizes the underlying spiritual blindness of unbelief inherent in all who are begotten of the flesh. John needed to emphasize this point with his Jewish-Christian catechumens in particular. Some, possibly Pharisees concluding proselyte baptism was only necessary for Gentile converts, may have objected, ―Are we also blind?‖ (cf. John 9:40). Jewish paternity did not exempt them from Christian baptism and the cross of discipleship that would ultimately lead to expulsion from the synagogue. The man‘s mixed reception by his neighbors and acquaintances parallels the mixed reception Jesus receives by the world that does not know him. During the man‘s subsequent trial, both his and Jesus‘ identity in relation to God are questioned. This question extends to John‘s catechumens whose baptismal identity as children of God will likewise be disputed. Whether Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile, they will come to their own and their own will not receive them. They would also face social, familial, and religious rejection. John‘s Jewish-Christian catechumen‘s in particular would likely face trial before the Jewish authorities and excommunication from the synagogue and Judaism. How will they respond to rejection by their own, abandonment and denial by family, and Jewish persecution within the synagogue? Will they be willing to die to their former societal, familial, and religious relationships in order to live out the cruciform life of

140

Christian discipleship? Will they make Jesus known, such that those who see them see Jesus living in them? Through narrative baptismal catechesis, John prepares his catechumens for the cruciform life of discipleship. The question of Jesus‘ identity in relation to God and that of his disciples persists to this day. Who are the true children of God? Converts to Christianity face social discrimination, familial alienation, and prosecution by religious authorities. As a representative convert, the man born blind serves as an example of faithful discipleship under the cross.

141

142

CHAPTER EIGHT CONCLUSION The piercing of Jesus‘ side plays an important role in John‘s presentation of Jesus‘ death and resurrection. John recounts the flow of blood and water from Jesus‘ pierced side (John 19:34) and two post-resurrection appearances by Jesus to his disciples at which Jesus‘ pierced side attests to his physical resurrection (John 20:19–23; 20:26– 29). It is likely—at least among the Johannine congregations—that Jesus‘ pierced side became an important element in their witness to Jesus‘ physical resurrection. As Douglas J. Moo writes, ―The use of Zech. 12:10 in Rev. 1:7 and Mt. 24:30 is reason to believe that the verse was a recognized testimonium in the early church.‖ 1 The blood and water that flowed from Jesus‘ pierced side, however, bears witness to more than the physical nature of Jesus‘ death, bearing witness to the physical nature of Jesus‘ resurrection particularly through the sacrament of baptism whereby the baptized are united with, and receive the benefits of, Jesus‘ death and resurrection. John‘s theology of baptism is predicated upon Jesus‘ death and resurrection to which the flow of blood and water from his pierced side attests. Johannine water symbols are, first and foremost, Christological in that they symbolize Jesus‘ death and resurrection as the Lamb of God. As such, the flow of blood and water from Jesus‘ side is the interpretive key to Johannine water symbolism.

1 Moo, Old Testament, 211 (emphasis original).

143

Blood and Water Flow from Jesus’ Pierce Side Only Luke and John record Jesus‘ post-resurrection upper room appearance(s) to his disciples—once in Luke (Luke 24:36–43) and twice in John (John 20:19–23; 20:24– 29). This incident serves the same general purpose for both Luke and John—proof that Jesus‘ resurrection was physical and spiritual (i.e., body and soul). In Luke, Jesus appears to his disciples in the upper room following the Emmaus disciples‘ resurrection report. Luke does not mention the disciples‘ fear of the Jews and the closed door. Rather, the disciples respond with surprise and fear to Jesus‘ sudden appearance and greeting, supposing that ―they saw a spirit‖ (Luke 24:37). Jesus dispels this notion by showing them his hands and his feet as proof of his physical resurrection and asking for something to eat. In John‘s parallel account, Jesus shows His disciples—Thomas being absent—his hands and side (John 20:20). John does not record the disciples‘ reaction of surprise and fear to Jesus‘ appearance and greeting. Instead, he notes that the disciples were gathered in the upper room ―for fear of the Jews‖ (John 20:19). Whereas in Luke the disciples‘ surprise and fear prompt Jesus to show them his hands and his feet, in John Jesus shows them his hands and his side without prompting. Assuming John knew Luke‘s Gospel, this seemingly minor variation becomes even more significant. Thomas‘ absence during Jesus‘ first appearance necessitates his second appearance eight days later. As one of the Eleven, Thomas needed to be among the eyewitnesses who would bear testimony to Jesus‘ resurrection to those ―who have not seen‖ (John 20:29). Thomas insists, ―unless I

144

see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger in to the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe‖ (John 20:25). Eight days later, Jesus appeared to his disciples a second time—Thomas being present. Jesus shows Thomas the nail marks in His hands and His wounded side. Thomas responds by confessing, ―My Lord and my God!‖ (John 20:28). In this way, Thomas serves as a narrative foil for John‘s implied reader. John leaves no doubt that blood and water literally flowed from Jesus‘ side as it was pierced by the Roman soldier‘s lance. First, John presents his own emphatic threefold eyewitness statement (John 19:35). θ α ὶ ὁ ἑ υπ α κ ὼρ κ ε κ α ξ η ύ ξ ε θ ε λ θ αὶ ἀλ ηθη λ ὴ αὐη οῦ ἐ ζη ι ν ἡ καξη πξί α θ αὶ ἐ κ ε ῖ ν ορ νἶ δε ν ὅη ι ἀλ ηθῆ ι έ γ ε η , ἵ ν α θ αὶ ὑμε ῖ ρ πη ζ η ε ύ [ο ]ε η ε . Scholars and physicians have questioned whether or not both blood and water could, in fact, flow from Jesus‘ dead body. That is, whether this eyewitness detail supplied by John is medically possible and thus historically accurate or whether John fabricated this detail for symbolic or apologetic purposes.2 John Wilkinson provides an excellent analysis and critique of the principle theories that have been advanced. He concludes, Both these theories [Haughton‘s and Barbet‘s] are medically possible and if we have to choose between them the significant factor is the order in which the blood and water emerged from the wound. The most natural interpretation of the observation is that blood came out first, followed by water. This means that we 2 John Wilkinson writes in his introduction, ―The purpose of this article is to show that the incident is medically possible even though the exact medical diagnosis must remain in doubt because of the lack of precise medical information.‖ John Wilkinson, ―The Incident of the Blood and Water in John 19.34,‖ SJT 4 (1975): 149–72.

145

must prefer Haughton‘s theory to Barbet‘s. Consequently the most probable explanation of the incident recorded in John 19:34 is that as the soldier thrust his spear deeply and widely into our Lord‘s side it first penetrated the lung and cut across some of the larger blood vessels there from which blood flowed into the wound and appeared on the surface of the body. The spear then passed on through the lung and penetrated the pericardial sac which contained a quantity of fluid which also was released into the wound and appeared on the body surface as water. It is probable that a greater quantity of water emerged than blood since in this way the two fluids would remain more recognizably distinct.3 Second, John cites the fulfillment of two Old Testament Scriptures. ἐ γ έ λ ε η ν γ ὰ π η α ῦ η α ἵ ν α ἡ γ ξ α θ ὴ πι ε ξ σζ ῇ · ὀ ζ η ο ῦ ν ν ὐ ζ π λ η ξ η β ή ζ ε η α η α ὐ η ο ῦ . θ α ὶ πά ι η λ ἑ η έ π α γ ξ α θ ὴ ι έ γ ε η · ὄ το ν η α ι ε ἰ ρ ὃ ν ἐ ξ ε κ έ ν η η ζ α ν (John 19:36–37). John alone identifies specific details of Jesus‘ crucifixion and death as fulfillment of Old Testament Scripture by employing fulfillment formulae and explicit quotations. John‘s first citation cannot be determined with exact precision. Three possibilities exist: Exodus 12:10, 46 LXX; Numbers 9:12; and Psalm 34:20. John‘s second citation is from Zechariah 12:10. The piercing of Jesus‘ side and the consequent flow of blood and water, therefore, is not solely a physiological detail of Jesus‘ crucifixion and death attested to by an eyewitness. It is also the fulfillment of divinely inspired typological and prophetic Scripture. According to John Wilkinson, citing F. C. Burkitt, John 19:35–37 ―amounts to a legal affidavit attesting to its truth, which has been called ‗the most solemn protestation of accuracy to be found in the whole work.‘‖4 Although Wilkinson has established that the flow of blood and water

3 Wilkinson, ―Incident,‖ 168–69. 4 F. C. Burkitt, The Gospel History and its Transmission (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1911), 233, cited by Wilkinson, ―Incident,‖ 149.

146

is medically possible, scholars are still divided as to whether or not John intended this event to be understood literally, symbolically, or both. After assessing the various symbolic interpretations advanced for the flow of blood and water Wilkinson concludes, Although symbolical meaning has been found in this incident by writers and preachers throughout the Christian centuries, it is clear that John intended a literal meaning to be given to his record. This record has never been satisfactorily explained except as the record of an event which actually happened and which vividly demonstrated the reality of the physical body of the Word made flesh.5 The flow of blood and water still bears witness to the physical body of the Word made flesh tabernacling among us still. The Interpretive Key Johannine water symbols flow semantically as living water from the pierced side of Jesus‘ body. Each water symbol conveys the tenor of Jesus‘ sacrificial death as the Lamb of God establishing the new covenant of grace and truth. John the Baptist baptized with water in order to reveal the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit to Israel. His baptism of Jesus revealed the Christ, the Son of God to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. Baptism, therefore, reveals the Christ, the Son of God to be the Lamb of God giving eternal life to those who believe in Jesus‘ name by taking away sin and imparting the Holy Spirit. The Johannine signs serve the same theophanic purpose as Jesus‘ baptism—revealing his covenantal Glory as the Only Son of God. As the beginning of his signs, Jesus changed water into wine at a wedding in Cana signifying

5 Wilkinson, ―Incident,‖ 171.

147

the transformation of the covenantal relationship between God and humanity from the Law given through Moses to grace and truth accomplished by the Son of God‘s sacrificial death as the Lamb of God. Jesus told Nicodemus that only those begotten from above of water and Spirit could see and enter the kingdom of God. The Son of Man, who received dominion and glory and a kingdom from the Ancient of Days (Dan 7:13–14), has descended from above in order to be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness (Num 21:5–9). Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus at night, sees and enters the kingdom of God when he looks upon the uplifted Son of Man who handed over the Spirit in death and from whose side blood and water flowed, honoring him with a royal burial. Jesus offers living water to a Samaritan Woman (cf. John 7:37–39) in place of water drawn from Jacob‘s Well. The Fountain of Living Water (Jer 2:13; cf. Zech 13:1; 14:8) does not flow from Gerizim or from the Temple in Jerusalem, but from the temple of Jesus‘ body where those worshippers whom the Father seeks worship him in Spirit and Truth. As the Son of God who raises the dead and makes alive, Jesus gives new life to a paralytic who laid waiting beside the Pool of Bethesda telling him, ―Rise, . . . . ‖ Conclusion John wrote his Gospel in order to prepare his original readers/hearers to receive Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit, eliciting faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, by selectively narrating events from Jesus‘ earthly ministry. Through narrative catechesis, John teaches a highly developed theology of baptism. In particular, narratives centered around water—the tangible element of baptism—are deep semantic reservoirs of

148

Johannine baptismal theology. In an effort to plumb these depths, this study has focused upon Johannine water symbolism as a narrative device designed to evoke baptismal allusions. Our study of Johannine water symbolism began with John the Baptist‘s baptism with water. As a symbol, John the Baptist‘s baptism with water conveyed the tenor of his witness to the Light, the Glory of the only Son of God. Jesus‘ baptism transformed symbol into a theophany revealing the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit to be the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. John forged a baptismal template for water symbolism patterned after this two-fold work of the Lamb of God. In a series of narrative encounters with Jesus employing water symbolism, John illustrates how Jesus takes away the sin of the world and baptizes with the Holy Spirit. John constructs a baptismal motif by this repeated use of water symbolism. Outlining this template enabled us to discern the recurring baptismal pattern of water symbolism within each narrative and trace the development of John‘s baptismal motif over the course of the Gospel. Now, as then, the Church‘s catechetical task is to prepare catechumens to receive Jesus‘ baptism with the Holy Spirit by eliciting faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God. John‘s narrative approach to baptismal catechesis holds great promise for the Church confronted by the challenges posed by postmodernism at the dawn of the 21st Century. It is hoped that this study will challenge pastors and teachers to reassess their own approach to baptismal catechesis.

149

WORKS CITED Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1981. Anderson, Bernard W. ―Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah.‖ In Israel’s Prophetic Heritage: Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg, edited by Bernard W. Anderson and Walter J. Harrelson, 177–195. New York: Harper & Bros., 1962. Augustine, Saint. Augustine: Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliliquies. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series Volume 7. Edited by Philip Schaff. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 1995. Badke, William B. ―Was Jesus a disciple of John?‖ EvQ 62 (Jl 1990): 195–204. Barrett, C. K. The Gospel According to John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text. London: S.P.C.K., 1960. Bauckham, Richard. The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple: Narrative, History, and Theology in the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. Balagué, M. ―El Bautismo como resurrección del pecado.‖ CB 18 (1961): 103–110. Brown, Edward K. Rhythm in the Novel. The Alexander Lectures, 1949–50. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1950. Brown, Raymond. The Gospel According to John I–XII. AB 29. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987. ––––––––––. The Gospel According to John XIII–XXI. AB 29A. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987. ––––––––––. Death of the Messiah, II. New York: Doubleday, 1994. Bultmann, Rudolph. The Gospel of John. Translated by G.R. Beasley-Murray, R. W. N. Hoare, and J. K. Riches. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971. Burkitt, F. C. The Gospel History and its Transmission. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1911.

150

Carmichael, Calum M. ―Marriage and the Samaritan Woman.‖ NTS 26 (1980): 332–346. Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991. Coloe, Mary L. God Dwells With Us: Temple Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2001. Cullmann, Oscar. Early Christian Worship. Bristol: Wyndham Hall Press, 1953. ––––––––––. ―Der johanneische Gebrauch der doppeltdeutiger Ausdrücke als Schlüssel zum Verständnis des vierten Evangeliums.‖ TZ 4 (1948): 360–71. Daube, David. ―Jesus and the Samaritan Woman.‖ JBL 69 (1950): 137–147. Delling, G. ―ἡ μ έ π α .‖ TDNT 2: 943–53. Derrett, J. Duncan M. ―The Samaritan woman's purity (John 4:4–52).‖ EvQ 60 (1988): 291–298. Dodd, C. H. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Evans, Craig A. Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue. JSNTSup 89. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993. Ferguson, Everett. Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2009. Flemington, W. F. The New Testament Doctrine of Baptism. London: SPCK, 1964. Freed, E. D. ―Ego eimi in John 1:20 and 4:25.‖ CBQ 41 (1979): 288–91. Freedman, William. ―The Literary Motif: A Definition and Evaluation.‖ Novel 4 (1971): 123–31. Gieschen, Charles A. Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents & Early Evidence. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 42. Boston, MA: Brill, 1998. ––––––––––. ―The Death of Jesus in the Gospel of John: Atonement for Sin?‖ CTQ 72:3 (2008): 243–261. ––––––––––. ―Original Sin in the New Testament.‖ Concordia Journal 31 (2005): 359– 75.

151

Haenchen, Ernst. ―‗Der Vater, der mich gesandt hat.‘‖ NTS 9 (1962–63): 208–216. Jeremias, Joachim. Die Wiederentdeckung von Bethesda. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. ––––––––––. ―ἀ μ ν ό ρ , ἀ π ή ν , ἀ π ν ί ο ν .‖ TDNT 1: 338–41. Jones, Larry Paul. The Symbol of Water in the Gospel of John. JSNTSup 145. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Just, Arthur A. ―Does Our Baptismal Identity Change Our Personality? The Apostle Paul before and after Damascus.‖ Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Symposium on Exegetical Theology at Concordia Theological Seminary on January 16, 2006. Roberts, Alexander and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1885; reprints. Keil, C. F. and F. Delitzsch. Commentaries on the Old Testament: Pentateuch, II. Translated by James Martin. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1951. Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. 10 Vols. Electronic Edition. Grand Rapids: William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company 2000, c1964. Kleinig, John. Concordia Commentary: Leviticus. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2003. Koester, Craig R. Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995. hl, J. Die Sendung Jesu und der Kirche nach dem Johannes-Evangelium. Studia Instituti Missiologici Societatis Verbi 11; St. Augustin: Steyler, 1967. Louw, Johannes P. and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, Electronic Edition of the 2nd edition. New York: United Bible Societies, 1996, c1989. Luther, Martin. Luther’s Small Catechism with Explanation. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005. Martyn, J. Louis. History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. 3rd ed. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2003.

152

Malina, B. and J. Neyrey. ―First Century Personality: Dyadic, not Individual.‖ In The Social World of Luke-Acts, edited by Jerome H. Neyrey, 67–96. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991. McCabe, Robert V. ―The Meaning of ―Born of Water and the Spirit‖ in John 3:5.‖ Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 4 (Fall 1999): 85–107. Meeks, Wayne A. The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology SupNovT 14. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Mercer, Calvin. ―Jesus the Apostle: ―Sending‖ and the Theology of John.‖ JETS 35:4 (D 1992): 457–462. ––––––––––. "APOSTELLEIN and PEMPEIN in John." NTS 36 (1990): 619–624. Meyer, Rudolph. ―peritevmnw, peritomhv, perivtmhto~.‖ TDNT 6:72–84. Miranda, J. P. Die Sendung Jesu im vierten Evangelium: Religions–und theologiegeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu den Sendungsformeln. SBS 87. Edited by H. Haag, R. Kilian and W. Pesch. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977. Moloney, Francis J. The Gospel of John. SP 4. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1998. ––––––––––. ―When is John talking about sacraments?‖ ABR 30 (1982): 10–33. Moo, Douglas J. The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2008. Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to John: Revised Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995. Nestle, Erwin, and Kurt Aland, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. Neusner, Jacob and William Scott Green, eds. Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period: 450 B.C.E to 600 C.E. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999. Jerome H. Neyrey, ed. The Social World of Luke-Acts. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991. Ng, Wai-yee. Water Symbolism in John: An Eschatological Interpretation. Studies in Biblical Literature 15. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 2001.

153

Odeberg, Hugo. The Fourth Gospel Interpreted in Its Relation to Contemporaneous Religious Currents in Palestine and the Hellenistic-Oriental World. Uppsala: Almqvist, 1929; Chicago: Argonaut, 1968. Rengstorf, K. H. ―ἀ πνζηέιισ (πέκπσ), ἐ μαπνζηέιισ, ἀ πόζηνινο, Ψεπδαπόζηνινο, ἀ πνζηνιή.‖ TDNT 1: 398–447. Ridderbos, Hermann. The Gospel According to John: A Theological Commentary. Translated by John Vriend. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997. Schuchard, Bruce G. ―The Wedding Feast at Cana and the Christological Monomania of St. John‖. In All Theology is Christology: Essays in Honor of David P. Scaer, edited by Dean O. Wenthe, William C. Weinrich, Arthur A. Just Jr., Daniel Gard, and Thomas L. Olson, 101–116. Fort Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary Press, 2000. Skarsaune, Oskar. In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2002. Stauffer, Ethelbert. ―Γ α κ έ σ, γ ά κ ν ο .‖ TDNT 1: 648–657. Strack, H and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch Six volumes. München: C. H. Beck‘sche, 1922. Veith, Jr., Gene E. Postmodern Times: A Christian Guide to Contemporary Thought and Culture. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1994. Webster, Jane. Ingesting Jesus: Eating and Drinking in the Gospel of John. SBLABib 6. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Wilkinson, John. ―The Incident of the Blood and Water in John 19.34.‖ SJT 4 (1975): 149–172.

154