| Theology Annual <<MAIN>> | Savio HON Tai-fai << INDEX >> |

<<PREV NEXT>>

 

vol.09/10
Theology Annual
¡]1986¡^p41-52
 

ON THE JOHANNINE CHRIST IN THE TRIAL¡Ð

A THEOLOGICAL ESSAY ON JN 18:28¡Ð19:16C

 

 

PART THREE: SYNTHESIS

5. Christus, Rex Glorificatus Glorificansque

So far we have only presented the crude materials, still in some way dispersed. Now we shall try to synthesize all these elements in the key of "Glory" as an attempt to demonstrate a Johannine answer to our leading question: who is this "glorious" Christ condemned to be crucified in the Trial(42)?

If Pilate's question; "Are you the King of the Jews?" (18:33), is John's attempt to see the "Glory" of Christ in his Kingship, then we can pose at least three questions:

(1)What sort of Kingship did the Johannine Christ proclaim?

(2)How did he come to be proclaimed as King by others?

(3) What is the function of his Kingship?

The first two questions will be tackled in 5.1 Christus, Rex Glorificatus, and the third one in 5.2 Christus, Rex Glorlficans.

5.1 Christus, Rex Glorificatus

In the second episode (18:33-38b), there appears a very interesting dialogue between Jesus and Pilate. Laden with theological significance, it furnishes a very dense discourse about the Kingdom of Jesus.

5.1.1 The Kingship of the Johannine Christ

The question of Pilate (18:33) reveals, first of all, his political interest because he only wants to see if Jesus is an evildoer or, worse still, one of the Zealots jeopardising the Pax Romana. Jesus will not categorically refuse to be known as a King but he wants to avoid misunderstanding. As a matter of fact he corrects Pilate's questioning which is still earthbound(43). Although Pilate evades it, Jesus has already John's readers in an attitude of Faith to listen to his speech(44).

Jesus' answer is phrased in a solemn and poetic diction. In the five lines of v.38, the absolute statement of the first line "My Kingdom is not of the World" is rephrased and repeated in the last line, while the intermediary lines 2-4 offer an explanation(45). Now let us concentrate on some keywords.

5.1.1.1 My Kingdom and the Kingdom of God

Jesus speaks of "My Kingdom" here, whereas in the preceding case he speaks of "the Kingdom of God" (cf 3:3,5). Such a change is not insignificant. In the "hour" it is revealed that what belongs to God the Father belongs also to Jesus and vice versa (cf 17:10: all mine are thine, and thine are mine and I am glorified in them). This is the Glory that the Kingdom is given to him. This reminds us of the Son of Man described in Dan 7: 13-14 -an ancient mysterious figure,

5.1.1.2 Not of this World but from Above

During his ministry, Jesus has already made it clear about his origin:
You are from below, I am from above:
You are of this World, I am not of this World" (8:23)

Note that the parallel contrast between " You" and " I " , "of the World" and "Not of the World". "From Above" and "From Below" is very telling.

The "World" in John has several meanings, and it may mean two or three things at one time. It may refer to the world as created by God (1:10; 17:5, 24). It indicates the sinful situation (1:29; 12:31; 14:30; 16:11) from which men are to be liberated by the incarnated logos. Hence the World becomes also the object of love and Salvation for which the Son was given by the Father (3:16). The World, however, is sometimes identified with those (unbelievers) who have turned against Jesus, whose coming has become a Judgment for them (9:39; 12:31). Finally Jesus conquers the World in his "hour" (16:33). The working out of this Victory over the World must be continued after Jesus' departure. For this, he sends his followers into the World (17:18), and their faith in him, expressed by Agape, is to overcome the World (1 Jn 5:34f). Their aim is to make the World believe in Jesus and come to know that his mission is from, the Father (17:3, 21, 23)(46). In fact, this is the Kingdom that Jesus wants to establish. It is in the World, like his disciples, but not of the World (17:11; 18:36), and, as a pilgrim, the Kingdom has to pass from this World to another(47).

5.1.1.3 Truth and Judgment

On one hand, Jesus has calmed down Pilate by showing that his Kingship will not endanger the Pax Romana, yet on the other he challenges Pilate to recognize the Truth. In 18:37 Jesus without denying his Kingship further clarifies that his birth into the World is to Testify the "Adyent" of the Truth -- the incarnated logos (cf 14:6) -- into the World. Thus the signs and words in his ministry constitute a testimony to the Truth and his testimony has a judgment function (cf 9:39). His judgment consists not in condemning the World but in man's decision "for" or "against" him. John has skillfully demonstrated this by using the genitive after the verb akouein in 18:37, which refers to a listening with understanding and acceptance(48). Everyone who belongs to the Truth, listens to Jesus. This recalls the theme of the Shepherd in 10:3ff, which has its background in the OT portrait of the King-Shepherd (cf Ez 34) (49). Thus those who belong to the Truth are the Sheep given to Jesus by the Father. But now, does Pilate want to belong to the Truth? This is the challenge Jesus made to him. At this moment Pilate knows, at least, one truth, that Jesus is not guilty of anything (18: 38) and that the Trial ought to cease. However, to this True King-Judge, Pilate does not want to submit himself. He retorts, "What is Truth?" (18:38). On a theological level, Jesus' silence to the question suggests that it is Pilate who is under trial and has to answer. For he is indecisive and wants to comply, in some way, with the Jews, so he resorts to the annual amnesty -- either Barabbas or the King of the Jews (18:39) -- as an evasion from the Truth. At this moment the Judgment extends also to the Jews, while they have to pass a judgment on the incarnated Truth by preferring Barabbas to the True King.

The Kingship of Jesus, thus, is related to his Mission of revealing the Truth, is such a way that men may come into his Sheepfold (the Kingdom of Truth) by listening to (believing in) his voice. The refusal or acceptance becomes the discriminating factor (Krisis, krima) of the citizenship of the Kingdom.

5.1.2 The Way of Proclaiming the Kinaship

We now come to the second question: How is Jesus proclaimed King? The setting of the drama is marvellous and perhaps much Telling than the dialogue itself (18:33-38b).

5.1.2.1 The Lamb and the Light

The verb ago recalls the Fourth Song of the Servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 53:7 (the same verb in LXX ago as in 18:28):

"Like the lamb that is led (echthe) to the slaughter"(50)

Throughout the "hour" of Christ, John continues to supply details to describe the great fulfillment (telos) of the Divine project. For instance, the present continous tense agousin in 18:28 is not only a historical present but a theological present as well.

It was early (en de proi). In Jn 13:30 after Judas had received the morsel and gone out, John points out that it was night (en de nux) With Jesus' permission to Judas (13:27) and the solemn entrance of Satan into the drama (13:27), the "hour" of darkness has come. However, it is Christ who Takes the initiative to go through the darkness.

" I have come as light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness" (12:46)

The night does not last long and soon will have its dawn: the outbreak of the Resurrection light(51) which comes true in the risen Christ who now is about to be crucified and glorified as the King. John is not concerned chiefly with chronology, but rather with the theological present: now it is at dawn. The King to be glorified is the true light that dissipates the darkness. The Light shines stronger and stronger until about the sixth hour (19:14)(52). It is, therefore, the noon of the Preparation Day of the Passover (19:14) when the Light is to shine in splendour and the slaughter of lambs is to take place in the temple. The crowd is in full excitement shouting and pressing Pilate hard, "Away with hiM (...) Crucify him" (19:15). Pilate hopelessly gives in. The Glorified King, thus, becomes the Light to dissipate the darkness, the Lamb to take away the sins of the World (12:46; 1:29).

5.1.2.2 The Rejection of the Jews

It is surely not difficult to notice that there is a crescendo of rejection on the part of the Jews. At first, they accuse Jesus of doing evii and demand his death. After the interrogation, Pilate makes a series of proclamations of truth (18:38, 39) but without taking sides. He thought he could have escaped the decision by way of the annual amnesty. It is of no avai1. The Jews reject their King bluntly by opting for Barabbas. Pilate is still indecisive and resorts to the absurd scourging (19:1-3). After Jesus had been scourged, crowned with thorns, dressed in purple, mocked as King, he was brought out again. "Behold, the Man" proclaimed Pilate - a pitiful scene appealing for mercy. It is of no avai1. The Jews reply violently, "Crucify him" (19:6). Pilate still insists that Jesus is innocent (cf I9:4,6). Finally the Jews reveal the ultimate reason of their rejection: he made himself the Son of God (cf 19:7).

As a matter of fact, the Jews would have no problem to have Jesus as their King, so much so that they did try once to force him to be King (cf 6:15: after the multiplication of bread), but only in the way they want Jesus to be - an earthly King. Jesus withdrew himself and refused such a Kingship, because his Kingship is not of this World. This is precisely what the Jews cannot tolerate- that Jesus be the Son of God.

Unfortunately this rejection increasingly widens. In reply to Pilate's solemn proclamation, " Here is Your King" (19 : 14), they shout again. "Crucify him " (19:15). The rejection becomes irremediable to the extent that they even reject their own Yahweh-King (cf Is 26: 13), "We have no King but Caesar" (19: 15). They have calumniated Jesus as blasphemer by becoming blasphemers themselves. Pilate hands over Jesus to the Jews (19:16). Now the Glorified King is to be "Lifted up".

5.1.2.3 The Rejection and Judgment

One may ask what the Jews' rejection has to do with Jesus' glorified Kingship. First of all we have to understand the technical use of the term "the Jews" in the Fourth Gospel. Sometimes it has a simple reference to the Jewish people, and so covers Jesus' enemies and his followers and even himself. Yet John creates a son of "theological anti-semitism" to describe those enemies of Truth, as persons devoid of spiritual insight and as spawn of the devil(53).John is not really anti-semitic, but is condemning the rejection of Jesus and those who desire to kill Jesus. The rejection represents subtly the Judgment of the World upon Jesus and that of Jesus upon the World at the same time. The two judgments are entirely different. Let us quickly go through the sense of Judgment in John. Jesus' claim to judge no one (8:15) is true for it is not the aim of his coming (3:17). However the role of Judge is entrusted to him (5:22, 27) in the sense that his judgment results from his presence, before which men have to decide (9:39). He in fact does not come to condemn (judge) the world (12:47), but he who refuses his revelation has already undergone the Judgment (3:24).

Throughout the Trial, Jesus is carefully described as the real Judge in an ironical form of being judged. In 18:31 Pilate told the Jews to judge Jesus but they said they could not do so according to the law. Pilate had found Jesus innocent (3 times: 18:38: 19:4, 6), and had consequently no right to judge Jesus on legal grounds. There is another telling detail in 19:13, ekathisen epi bematos, by which John leaves his readers to intuit that it is Jesus who sits upon the Tribunal and exercises, consequently, his supreme role of Judgments(54), at the moment when the Jews press hard to do away with Jesus. Not only him but also his Father (19: 15)! Pilate, failing to take up a position for the Truth, turns out to be the instrument of the World.

Once again we see here that the judgment of Jesus goes hand in hand with his revelation. The consequence of Jesus' revelation is the Judgment which no one can escape, not even the powerful Roman Prefect (19: 10). At the moment when the Jews think that they are passing judgment on Jesus, the Glorified King becomes the Universal Judges(55).

5.2 Christus, Rex Glorificans

We now comle to the third question : What is the function of Jesus' Kingship? For brevity's sake, let us resort to the messianic titles which appear in the Trial. As we know, these titles in John do not only indicate the person of Jesus but, above all, point out the specific aspects of his mission, and hence also the function of Christ(56). In our text, we find principally three titles: the King of the Jews, the Man and the Son of God.

5.2.1 The King of the Jews

Throughout the Fourth Gospel, Jesus is proclaimed King not a few times. First in the confession of Nathanael: the King of the Israel (1:49). John is careful to make the distinction between the "Jews" and "Israel". The latter is a favourable term describing the real succession to the OT heritage. This confession has laid the ground for the perception that Christ is the Messianic King pre-announced in the OT. However this confession is not sufficient, so Jesus turns Nathanael's attention towards the "greater things" about the Son the Man (1:50-51).

After the multiplication of bread the people want to take Jesus by force and make him King, but Jesus "stole away" (6:15). In this episode, Jesus was' being hailed as the Second Moses, the Prophet who would come to give the manna which would usher in the endtime(57). Yet it is clear that Jesus is not prepared to accept this identification, so he withdrew himself to the hills(58).

At the time of his solemn entry into Jerusalem, he is greeted as the Kina of Israel. John quotes Ps 117:26 (LXX) but elegantly adds this title:

Psl 17:26: Blessed be he who comes in the name of the Lord(59)

Jn 12:13: Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel.

This time Jesus does not flee from their acclamations, as he did in 6:15 but enters on an ass. Now he faces acclamations, but sets about correcting them in the light of the text from Zech 9:9: the humility of the King. The "hour" has come for Jesus to affirm his Kingly role (12:23). He will determine the nature of his Kingship, it will not be in the way expected by the crowds and by his disciples (12:16). The Kingship of Jesus is tor worked out through his elevation and glorification upon the cross (12:16); now he is going to face this moment(60).

Then finally in the passion account, Jesus is presented as the King of the Jews (18:33, 39; 19:3: the King of the Jews; 19:14, 15; your King; 19 : 19, 21; the notice on the cross). The change from "King of Israel" to "King of the Jews" is by no means casual, though they both denote the same King of the same people. ¡§Israel¡¨ is a favourable term, whereas "Jews¡¨ is not. The Jews have brought Jesus before Pilate as an evildoer; Pilate, instead, presents him as the King of the Jews (18:33, 39) and they opt for Barabbas. Then in the scourging, Jesus was crowned with thorns, dressed in purple, mocked as the King of the Jews and struck with hands (19:1-3). The scene (and the use of of rapismata) recalls the third song of the Servant of Yahweh in LXX Is 50:6:

" I gave my back to the smiters, then my cheek to the slaps (rapismata)" (61)

The mockers speak the truth though unbeknown to themselves. The same thing happens to Pilate when he proclaims the title (19:14, 15). It is interesting to note that the Jews do not want to accept this title(19:19-21), but Pilate forces them to confront it. Let us not forget the setting: the Light, the slaughter of lambs, the seating during the Trial and so on.

In John's mind, Jesus is identified with the King of those who act against him and his Father. Such Kingship was inconceivable in the current messianic hope and it was extremely difficult to express this mystery in terms of the Hellenistic categories available to John. However, John narrates the fact by supplying many details (sometimes not very explicit) that continuously point to the kingly function of Jesus: He is the obedient Servant of Yahweh who carries out his will through suffering. Precisely the greatest suffering is to be the King of those who reject, who kill and who even betray his own beloved Father. The narrative is full of contrast, and human logic is of no avail here, for at this moment it is the Mystery of Love that prevails. It is the "hour" to win over the World and the way of doing it is Agape, for which the Father gives up his Son (3:16) and the Son lays down his Life to impart the forgiveness of sins and to bring about the conversion of the World.

5.2.2 Behold, the Man (19:5)

The term itself has no special significance. It may have the same meaning as 18:29: "what charge do you bring against this man? " However the context in which the term is used makes a great difference

In John, the Trial is a vehicle that "develops the motif of Jesus' Kingship. Acknowledged by Pilate as the King of the Jews", though not in a political sense (18:39), Jesus is refused by the Jews as they opt for Barabbas (1 8:40). Then Jesus undergoes the ironic investiture and coronation, where he is hailed the King of the Jews by the Roman Soldiers (19:1-3). Now he is brought out "royally bedecked and empurpled, to be presented to his people for acclamation. In John's eyes Israel's long wait for its messianic King thus comes to ironic fulfilment. (...) (However) we may wonder whether the evangelist's creative sense has not been controlled by some details that he found in his tradition. If he were inventing with complete freedom, this would have been the perfect moment to have had Pilate say, 'Behold the King!' (as in 19:14). Instead we find the enigmatic (proclamation) 'Behold the Man!' (19:5)"(62).

The term "Man" in such a solemn context must have had a particular significance. As a matter of fact, the acclamation creates in the Jews a violet reaction: "Crucify him, crucify him!" (19:6). We can duduce that this acclamation is a title of honour which the Jews could never tolerate.

Not a few scholars think that the use of ho anthropos is a reference to the Son of Man(63). The Hebrew ben 'adam or the Armaic barnasha behind the Greek term could have two meanings, as many other semitic expressions, namely, "Man" or the "Son of Man"(64).The argument does not appear very convincing, but if we turn to the use of the term "Son of Man" in the rest of the Gospel, some striking similarities appear between them . We may notice that the last appearance of the term "the Son of Man" is in 13:31, when the hour of darkness (13:30) has arrived. In 13:31, Jesus says "NOW is the Son of Man glorified (aor.)". The word " NOW" is related to the "hour" which 'was not yet at hand' (2:,4; 4:6; 8:20) but NOW has arrived (12:23; 13:1). The aorist passive of "glorified" indicates an inception of state, namely, the glorification of Christ has been set in motion. Again John has no interest in the chronology of time, namely, the exact moment in which the glorification takes place, whether it be the Last Supper, the sixth hour on the cross, or the Resurrection. For him, there is only one theological present in the paschal Mystery.

However John is not discarding history. He makes it clear that the glorification does have its historical ground, namely, the cross; and in 3:14; 8:28; 12:32, 34 the Son of Man is said to be lifted up. This obviously refers to the event of the Cross: the word "crucify" appears only in the passion account and for the first time in 19:6 after the solemn proclamation of " Behold the Man!" (19:5). There is a parallel between "the Son of Man" and "the Man", "lifted up" and "crucified". This parallel is by no means casual. Before the "hour", namely, in the Book of Signs (chs 2-1 2), Jesus was foretelling the event of the Cross in terms of elevation and the Son of Man the ancient figure in Dan 7:13-14, who is supposed to be the eschatological protagonist that rings forth the accomplishment of the Kingdom of God. As a matter of fact the promise of the "greater things to be seen" is made by Jesus in reference to the son of Man (1:50-51). However in the passion account, John speaks of crucifixion - a term that gives a sense of historical happening. John, thus, did not do away with history for the sake of theology, though it is theology that determines the significance of history. In fact, right in the prologue, John has already prepared his readers for a theological understanding of the narrative of Jesus' life. In this way, the significance of "the Man" in 19:5 is to be linked with the use of "the Son of Man" in the rest of the Gospel, or, at least, it is implicitly a messianic title that indicates something about Jesus' Kingship. One of the reasons why Pilate does not proclaim straight away the Son of Man may arise from John's respect for the title which was traditionally reserved for Jesus to speak about himself (65).

If "the Man " (19:5) is a messianic title and is used after the scourging scene (19:1-3) where Jesus was mockingly crowned and dressed as a King, then we have at once an evident title about the function of Jesus' Kingship. The Messiah-King is the long-waited celestial being (cf Dan 7:12-14) who is to come for the establishment of the Kingdom. His establishment consists in being lifted up so as to be seen and to be of God' Love to men. His kingly glorification, though taking on the form of scandalous humiliation, has reached its high point insofar as God's Love is fully manifested in his humanity and thus men¡¦s salvation is safeguarded. Now the King is not only glorified but is also glorifying insofar as he is to win over the sinful world with Divine Love (16:33).

5.2.3 God¡¦s Son (19:7)

In 19:6 the Jews refuse Pilate's acclamation, "Behold the Man" by shouting "Crucify him". Pilate reacts at once and for the third time he says. "I find no crime in him". Then in 19:7 the Jews reveal their ultimate reason why Jesus should die, because he has made himself God's Son.

One may notice that the expression "God's Son" is without the article. This usually means one of two things, either one wants to refer to something indefinite, or one wants to call attention (66) to something. The absence of the article in this case is surely meant to draw attention and to give reinforcement to the title. There are three reasons for saying this:

First, in all three synoptic accounts of the Trial before the Sanhedrin , the accused blasphemy is always expressed with the article :

Mk 14:61: ho huios tou eulogetou

Mt 26:63: ho huios tou Theou

Lk 22:67: ho huios tou Theou

Instead John's expression has no article and it must have some particular significance.

Secondly, in John's eyes, the Jews would not have condemned Jesus to death if he had only claimed to be one of the sons of God in a general sense, namely one of the pious Jews loved by God. Definitely not. The Jews refuse categorically that Jesus is God and that he belongs to the sphere of Divinity as described in the prologue.

Thirdly, the anarthrous title has at once its effect on the powerful Roman Prefect; when Pilate hears these words, he becomes more afraid (19:8); he enters the praetorium again and says to Jesus, "Where are you from?" (19:9). Pilate must have known that Jesus is from Nazareth. He is asking of Jesus' Divine Origin.

As a matter of fact, the uses of "the Son", "the Son of God" or "God's Son" have a lot of similarities. They certainly constitute the most outstanding characteristic of the Fourth Gospel (67). If we go quickly through the use of these terms, we find that these sayings nearly express a direct relationship between God and Jesus. Note that John does not intend to talk speculatively about this relationship in terms of the Divine Nature as such, for John has never doubted the Origin and Nature of Jesus (1:1-18); rather he now wants to point to something beyond, namely, the heavenly Father who is unceasingly at work in the human existence of the incarnated logos.

Again John is subtle in expressing this. Pilate in this augmented fear before the silent Jesus (19:8-9), begins to bluster about his authority. Jesus, then, corrects him, "you would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above" (19:10-11). Here we should understand the statement in the light of 10:17-18 where Jesus says, "I lay down my life that I may take again (...) I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father". The power "from above" thus designates clearly a Divine initiative on the handing-over of the Son to the hands of the Roman Prefect. In fact it is by the Father's will that the Son has come into the World (6:38). The raison d'etre of the Son's earthly existence depends entirely on the Father'sWi11 (5:30).

"The Father stands behind the whole of the work and revelatory function of Jesus (12:29); 14:1 9-11) and as such, faith and attachment to Jesus mean 'belonging' to the Father (14:21, 23; 16:28-27). As in the Son of God sayings, we are told that Jesus went out from the Father who sent him and that he returns to the Father (13:1; 14:12, 28; 16:10, 27, 28; 17:11, 13; 20:17) leading the faithful to the place which he has prepared for them (14:2-3; 17:24). (...)

It can be seen that the soterioloaical function which flows from the unique union between the Father and the Son is continued a n d developed" (68).

In this sense, he who delivered Jesus to Pilate has the greater sin (19:11 ) for he who refuses Jesus as God's Son, refuses, also the Father This is exactly what the Jews were doing (19:7, 15).

The title "God's Son" indicates an eternal union between Jesus and the Father, not attained in time, nor ceasing with this life or with the history of the World. This union is made known, above all, propter nostram salutem. John has early scored an excellent insight about this salvific union in his beautiful prologue, 1:1:

"In the beginning was the Word,

and the Word was turned in loving union towards God.

What God was, the Word was" (69).

Now this "movement of the loving union towards God has involved also the entire humanity. Men are to be brought to the Father and, hence, to be glorified in the union between the Father and the Son. Let us borrow the words of C.H. Dodd to express the same idea:

¡§The human career of Jesus is, as it were, a projection of this eternal relation (which is the divine agape) upon the field of time. It is such, not as a mere reflection, or representation, of the reality, but in the sense that the love which the Father bore the Son ¡¥before the foundation of the world' and which he perpetually returns, is actively at work in the whole historical life of Jesus. That life displays the unity of Father and Son, in ways which may be described as 'knowledge' or 'indwelling', but are such, not in the sense of withdrawn contemplation like that recommended by 'Hellenistic mysticism', but in the sense that the love of God in Christ creates and conditions an active ministry (...) which is an aggressive conflict with the powers hostile to life, and ends in a victory of life over death through death. The love of God, thus released in history, brings men into the same unity of which the relation of Father and Son is the eternal archetype" (70).

In conclusion, in this chapter we have seen the Kingship of the Rex Glorificatus and in what way he is King. We, then, further demonstrated that his Kingship has a salvation. He thus is the Rex Glorificans, namely, his Glory started a New Glorification of all men.

 

 

 

(42) See J. Kurichianil, The Glory and the Cross. Jesus' Passion and Death in the Gospel of St. John. in Indian Theological Studies 20 (1 983) 5-15.

(43) Note that the accused asks the Roman Prefect questions (18:34) as if he were the "judge". In a subtle way John shows that it is Pilate who is on trial. See R. E. Brown, op. cit., 868.

(44) Jesus always helps people to integrate their real search for Truth and provokes 'faith when one falls short of it (cf Jn 2:23ff; 3:2ff; 4:43-48).

(45) See R.E. Brown, op. cit., 868.

(46) See R.E. Brown, op. cit., Appendix I: 7, world, 508-509.

(47) See St. Augustine, Tractus CXV in Joannis Evangelium : ¡§Nunc autem regnum meum non est hinc', hic est enim regnum eiusque in finem saeculi, habens inter se commixta zizania usque ad messem; messis enim finis est saeculi (...) quod utique non fieret, si regnum eius non esset hic, sed tamen non est hinc; quia peregrinatur in undo : regno suo quippe dicit, 'De mundo non estis, sed ego vos elegi de mundo' (Jn 15:19)". The quotation is taken from PL 35:1939.

(48) See M. Zerwick, op. cit., 869.

(49) See R.E. Brown, op. cit., 854.

(50) A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta (Stuttgart 1935).

(51) It is not by chance that in the postresurrection appearance John uses the same word early (proi) in 20:1 when Mary Magdalene came to the tomb.

(52) Instead of "about the third hour" an obvious attempt to harmonize the chronology with that of Mk 15:25. However it seems that John is more interested in the theological setting than in the chronological. See B.M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London 1 975) 252-254.

(53) See R. E. Brown, op. cit., LXX- LXXIII; J. E. Leibig, John and in Journal of Ecumenical Studies 20 (1 983) 209-234.

(54) See R.E. Brown, op. cit., 880; I. De La Potterie, Jesus, Roi et Juge d¡¦apres Jn 19:13: ekathisen epi bematos, in Biblica 41 (1960) 217-247. The Greek verb kathizein is sometimes transitive (cause. someone to sit down) and sometimes intransitive. There are not a few difficulties if we try to interpret it a in transitive sense. First of all we would expect it to be followed by a pronomial object if it meant "sat him down". De La Potterie in his article cited above 223-225, counters this objection by insisting that the noun "Jesus" which comes between two verbs "brought out" and "sat down" is the object of both. The second difficulty is that the intransitive use of kathizein with "judge's bench, tribunal" is well attested. For instance, the same expression that appears in John (aorist active of kathizein with epi bematos) is used in Josephus' description of Pilate where it clearly means that Pilate sat down on the Tribunal, see Brown, 880. After all, the real difficulty lies in the historical context: it would be difficult to perceive how the Roman Prefect could put a prisoner on the Judge's bench. However, de La Potterie also gives a very eloquent argument for the transitive use of the verb starting with John's theology: the real judge is Christ. There is also some ancient support for this, e.g., in the Gospel of Peter 7, and in Justin's Apology I, XXXV, 6, where the Jews (not Pilate)sat Jesus upon a judgment seat and mocked him. De La Potterie suggests that the anarthrous use of bema is not the judgment bench but another seat on the magistrate's platform and it was not necessary for the Roman Prefect to sit on the Judge's bench. He further argues that the preposition eis always has the sense of motion in John. Therefore eis is congruent with the transitive use of kathizein . Hence the whole phrase ekathisen epi bematos "eis" topon legomenon runs perfectly coherently with the transitive use of the verb.

(55) See. C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge 1953) 211; R. Bultmann, The Gospel of John. A Commentary (Oxford 1971 ) 350.

(56) See G. Segalla, op. cit., 85-93; Of course, in the Trial, proclamations like ¡§the King¡¨, "God's Son", "the Man" are used to mock Jesus and to show the disbelief of the actors there, but on a deeper level these linguistic expressions reveal the common conviction of John's readers that faith is the only possibility for the correct perception of Jesus; see H. E. Lona, Glaube und Sprache des Glaubens im Johannesevangelium, in Biblische Zeitschrift 28 (1984) 168-184.

(57) See II Baruch 29:8; Mekilta on Exodus 16:25i Eccles. R. I, 9.

(58) See F. J. Moloney, The Johannine Son of Man 108.

(59) For the Greek text, cf A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta.

(60) See F. J. Moloney, The Johannine Son of Man, 172.

(61) A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta.

(62) In this paragraph, words in quotation marks are from R. E. Brown, op. cit. 890. (Scriptural references adjusted).

(63) See F. J. Moloney, The Johannine Son of Man, 202.

(64) See ibid, 205.

(65) The Son of Man sayings appear about 86 times in the NT. Only a few of them are not used by Jesus himself: once in Acts 7: 5e (Stephen's death acclamation); once in Heb 2:6 which quotes Ps 8:5 (LXX); twice in Rev 14:14; 1:13 derived from Dan 7:14; once in Jn 12:34 where people repeated the words of Jesus. See J. D'Arc, Morden Concordance to the New Testament, ed. revis. tr. by M. Oanon (London 1976).

(66) See M. Zerwick, op. cit., #179.

(67) See R. Schnackenburg, The Gospel according St. John, vol 2 (N.Y., Seabury, 1980), in which there is a very good Excursus. "The Son" as Jesus' self-designation in the Gospel of John; see also vol 3 on Jn 18:28-19:16.

(68) F. J. Moloney. The Johannine Son of God, in Salesianum 38 (1976) 71-86, here 85.

(69) Idem. The Word became Flesh = Theology Today Series 14 (Dublin 1979) 40.

(70) C. H. Dodd. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge 1953) 262.


 

 
| Theology Annual <<MAIN>> | Savio HON Tai-fai << INDEX >> |

<<PREV NEXT>>