Tag: New Testament

Posted in Exposition

INTRODUCTION TO ROMANS CHAPTERS 9-11

Posted on by writtenexposition



The Apostle Paul had an interest in the church at Rome even though he had not been its founder and did not usually preach the gospel where Christ was already named (15:20), nevertheless in Romans 1:8-13 and 15: 23 he expressed his wish to visit the believers there. Why did he write to them and why did he want to visit?

We cannot know for sure why Paul wrote his letter since it seems that there were no urgent doctrinal issues requiring correction. Romans 1:11-16 and 15:23-29, however, would suggest that Paul wrote mainly to inform the Roman Christians of, and involve them in, his future missionary plans. He wished to encourage them in the faith and, after finishing his work in Asia Minor and Greece, move farther west to evangelize Spain.

In the key verses of the letter (1:15-17) Paul expresses his eagerness to preach the gospel and states that it is ‘the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.’ The issue of the salvation of Israel is not addressed in the first eight chapters as Paul waited to deal with it later in the letter. He did so in Romans chapters 9-11, one of the most challenging sections in the Pauline writings.

Many of the major topics raised by chapters 9-11 are still subjects of theological debate. Not only are the contents of the unit 9-11 in dispute, there is also disagreement regarding the place of the chapters in the overall theme of the epistle. Some scholars argue that the section is a digression, an excursus unrelated to the theme of the letter (e.g. Dodd). Others view it as an integral part of Paul’s argument (e.g. Cranfield, Dunn, Morris, Moo, Schreiner, Stulmacher), perhaps even the climax of the Epistle (e.g Munck, Fitzmyer, Wright, Witherington).

Romans 9-11 is neither an excursus nor afterthought but to claim that it is the climax of the letter is an overstatement. It is an integral part of Romans as there are thematic links with chapters 1-8. It takes up the themes about God’s impartiality in chapters 1-3, Abraham in chapter 4, and predestination in chapter 8. The traditional view of Romans as a textbook of Christian theology takes Romans 9-11 as an appendix to the argument of chapters 1-8 and sees it as a new section of the letter dealing with a new theme; the place of Israel in salvation history.

A BRIEF OUTLINE OF ROMANS

1:1-17 The gospel reveals God’s righteousness through faith.

1:18-3:20 God’s righteousness is revealed in wrath against sinful humanity.

3:21-4:25 Justification is righteousness as a result of faith alone, not by the law.

5: -8:39 Justification liberates a person from the condemnation of the law to serve God.

9:1-11:36 The problem of Israel. The rejection of the Jews and the inclusion of the Gentiles.

12:1 – 15:13 The Christian life. The law is fulfilled through love.

15:14 – 16:23 Paul asks for help to extend his gospel ministry.

16:25-27 Concluding doxology. God wants all nations to obey the gospel.


A SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT OF ROMANS CHAPTERS 9-11


In Romans chapter eight Paul calls those who believe in Jesus Christ ‘saints’ v.27; ‘called’ v.28; and ‘chosen’ v.33. The Jews would traditionally have reserved these terms for themselves. That raises the question as to whether the privileges implied by these descriptions have now been transferred from Israel to the Christian church.


Paul had just expounded the benefits of the new Christian faith and now turns to address the embarrassing problem that the majority of Jews had
rejected Jesus as Messiah. Those to whom God had made the promises
were precisely those who were rejecting the gospel. This might raise doubts in the Christian believers about God’s trustworthiness and faithfulness. If God has not fulfilled promises made to Israel, then how could the church be confident that the promises will be fulfilled for them?


Paul addresses the integrity of God’s dealings with Israel and defends God’s righteousness. He insists that God has spared the nation in the past (chapter 9), has provided salvation for it in the present (chapter 10) and will work out his plans for it in the future (chapter 11).

Following an introduction in 9:1-5, Romans 9-11 has three discourses that deal with three main theses. The discourses are:

Discourse 1 9:6 – 9:29 This ends with an OT quotation.

Discourse 2 9:30 – 10:21 This ends with OT quotations.

Discourse 3 11:1-36 This ends with a doxology.


THESIS 1

It is not as though God’s word has failed. 9:6

What is the explanation for the rejection of the gospel by the majority of Jews? Has God’s word (his promises to Israel) failed? Paul struggles to explain why Israel has rejected the Messiah. Despite what might seem evidence to the contrary, Paul does not accept that God’s word has failed snd so he comes up with an ingenious solution. He redefines the true Israel as a sub-group within ethnic Israel (9:6).

He makes a distinction (9:8) between ‘the children of the flesh’ (Israelites by birth) and the ‘children of the promise’ (Israelites by God’s election) and interprets Old Testament verses to show that the fulfilment of the promises was not based on physical descent or merit gained by works. He maintains that God is not unrighteous because he shows mercy to whomever he wishes, and in his sovereignty, has extended his mercy to Gentiles. No-one can do anything to change this; God’s election is gratuitous.

THESIS 2

Some Gentiles received righteousness but some Jews did not. 9:30-31

Paul deals with the pursuit of a ‘law of righteousness’ by Jews who were not elect and their stumbling at the same time over the cornerstone laid in Zion (the Messiah). In 10:1 his prayer is that Jews might be saved. He says that they are currently pursuing righteousness but not according to knowledge which would have pointed them to Christ for righteousness (10:4).

Christ, whom they rejected, is the end of the Law for righteousness to whoever believes. Righteousness is not to be pursued but is by faith (‘confessed with the mouth and believed in the heart’ (10:9). In 10:16 Paul says that it is just like the time of Isaiah because the message of the gospel has been preached, but all have not obeyed. The section ends (10:17-21) with two rhetorical questions: ‘Has everyone heard?’ ‘Did Israel know?’ The answer to each must be ‘Yes!’ According to both Moses and Isaiah, Israel heard, but most did not accept the message.

THESIS 3

God has not rejected those whom he foreknew. 11:1-2

What does the future hold for Jews? Paul admits that Israel has stumbled but maintains that it is not beyond recovery. He offers his own testimony and the story of Elijah as evidence and then expands on the concept of a remnant.

He claims that just as God brought Gentiles to faith because of the transgression of Israel so he will use the Gentiles to draw Jews to himself. In 11:13-24, he uses metaphorical language (the olive tree) to address the Gentile members of the Roman church and warn them against pride in their current ‘grafted-in’ status since it is a work of God and does not depend on man.

Paul winds down the third discourse and the whole unit (chapters 9-11) in vv. 11:25-32. He declares that ‘all Israel will be saved’ and states that God pronounced all disobedient so that he could have mercy on all. The section ends with a doxology extolling God’s incomprehensible wisdom, knowledge, justice, and sovereignty in the working out salvation.

View my posts:

Romans 9:1-5 Paul’s Lament

Romans 9:6-29

Romans 9:30- 10:21

Romans 11:1-24

Romans 11:25-36

Romans 9-11 Bibliography

Posted in General

CASTING

Posted on by writtenexposition


‘Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.’ 1 Peter 5:7


It is interesting that the apostle Peter employed a term from his former occupation as a fisherman to advise Christians how to handle the cares and worries of daily life. What does ‘casting’ involve? It calls for ‘throwing away’ and ‘letting go.’

This verse falls naturally into two sections; each emphasizing a responsibility. Our part: ‘casting all your care upon him’ and God’s part: ‘he careth for you.’

As the ravages of Covid 19 intensify, ‘lockdown’ continues and anxieties increase let us follow Peter’s advice, bearing in mind those two parts. We do the casting, God does the caring.

Posted in Latin loanwords

MACELLUM

Posted on by writtenexposition



‘Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.’ 1 Corinthians 10:25-26


Greek: μάκελλον (mákellon)
Latin: macellum
English: food market (shambles)


The city of Corinth, strategically located near an isthmus that linked Northern Greece and the Peloponnese, was one of the most important cities in the ancient world. Situated at a ‘crossroads’ it grew wealthy and politically influential through trade and by taxing and imposing tolls on goods moving through the area. It controlled four harbours: Kenchreai, Lechaion, Schoenus and Poseidona. Kenchreai on the Saronic Gulf was convenient for ships from Asia and the Aegean Sea and Lechaion on the Gulf of Corinth for ships from Italy and the Adriatic Sea. Rather than risk treacherous Cape Malea at the southern tip of Greece merchant ships would sail into Schoenus or Poseidona to be dragged overland on wheeled oxcarts to the opposite coast via a paved trackway called the Diolkos. The city was overlooked by an elevated citadel known as the Acrocorinth which had its own water supply and could be defended if under attack.


From about 600 BCE Corinth was one of the wealthiest and most powerful of the independent Greek city-states. These states went to war with Philip II of Macedon (father of Alexander the Great), were defeated by him at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 and united into one kingdom called the League of Corinth or Hellenic League. Corinth later joined an anti-Macedonian Achaean League and, in 243, broke free from Macedonian authority.

From about 230 the Achaean League tried to counteract growing Roman influence on Greek political affairs until finally, in 147, the Romans sent a delegation to Corinth demanding the immediate disbandment of the League. The refusal to obey resulted in the Achaean War. In 146 the Roman forces, under Lucius Mummius, defeated the Corinthian army and dealt harshly with the losers. They destroyed the city; killing all the men and enslaving the women and children. This ended the period known as Greek Corinth.

The city lay almost deserted until, just before his assassination in 44 BCE, Julius Caesar issued a decree that Corinth be rebuilt as a Roman colony (Colonia Laus Iulia Corinthiensis). It was the largest city in Greece and, as capital of Achaea from 27 BCE, was the headquarters of the Roman administration. The population size is unknown but thought to have been about 80,000. Although a Greek city, Corinth was Roman in its urban design, legal system, culture and religion. Many gods were worshipped there but Corinth was famous in the ancient world as the ‘City of Aphrodite.’ Due, however, to its status as capital of the Roman province of Achaea, emperor worship was the most prominent cult of all, dominating every aspect of life.


The Romans repopulated the city with a mix of former prisoners, traders and retired army veterans but the bulk of the settlers were emancipated slaves (see 7:22 for the only NT use of the technical term ‘freedman’ – apeleutheros). Latin was the official language and Corinthian coins bore Latin inscriptions. Koine Greek, as in the rest of the empire, was the common language; that is why Paul’s letters to the assembly were written in Greek.

Paul arrived at Corinth in the year 50 CE and began to preach the gospel in this ‘boom town’ devoted to pleasure, sport (every two years the Isthmian games took place at the temple of Poseidon), idolatry and commerce. According to Luke’s account in Acts 18:1-17 Paul began his evangelistic work among the Jews but, after some initial success, encountered strong opposition from that quarter. During his eighteen-month stay (Acts 18:11), he also preached to Gentiles (1 Cor 6:9-11; 12:2) and subsequently gathered converted Jews and Gentiles together to form ‘the assembly (ekklēsia) of God at Corinth’ (1 Cor1:2), and another one at nearby Kenchreai (Acts 18:18; Rom 16:1).


After moving on from Corinth Paul maintained an interest in the spiritual progress of the new Christians, but eventually some serious issues did arise in the assembly. These he tried to handle by a combination of letters and visits; 1 and 2 Corinthians mention several other letters (1 Cor 5:9; 2 Cor 2:3-9; 7:8-12; 10:10) and possible visits (1 Cor 4:19-21; 11:34; 16:5-7; 2 Cor 1:15 – 2:1; 12:21; 13:1-2) by the apostle Paul. The epistle we know as 1 Corinthians addresses various difficulties, about which the assembly had sent representatives to Paul (1 Cor 16:17) and had written asking for his advice (1
Cor 7:1). Matters had also been reported to Paul by concerned individuals (1 Cor 1:11). The major problems were:


• An emphasis on eloquence and philosophy which elevated human reasoning above Paul’s teaching.


• Factions and divisions in the assembly.


• Christians suing one another in the civil law-courts.


• Relationship issues: virginity, marriage, divorce, fornication and gross sexual immorality.


• Wrong attitudes to money.


• Disorder in the assembly.


• Misunderstandings about spiritual gifts.


• Beliefs about (the) resurrection.


• The consumption of idol food.


We hear little about the latter problem in western churches today, probably because it is not relevant to our everyday social situation. In our secular society, polytheistic religion, although present, does not impinge upon the lives of most people. Such was not the case in first-century Corinth where idolatry was visible everywhere: in temples, statues, images, inscriptions, coins, etc. Paul understood, as in fact he told the believers in 5:10, that there was no way the Corinthian Christians could avoid contact with idolaters.


Artisans and traders in Corinth were members of craft or merchant guilds. These associations held social gatherings in pagan temples and hosted communal meals in the attached dining halls (1 Cor 8:10). Temple facilities would also have been used for family get-togethers such as parties and funerals and inevitably an animal that had been sacrificed for the event would feature on the menu. In chapter 8 Paul opposes the idea of a Christian attending celebrations in a temple precinct and knowingly eating idol food. In 10:20 he again opposes eating such food, maintaining that in sacrificing to idols the Gentiles worship demonic spirits. However, in the short section 10:25-29, Paul takes a more pragmatic and open-minded approach.


Our interest lies in 10:25-26 in which he addresses the problem of goods sold in the food market (shambles). This reference is probably to meat rather than other types of food and relevant to the less well-off members of the assembly whose daily diet, on account of poverty, would have been pescatarian. Meat was expensive at that time, but they may occasionally have been able to afford small portions of salted hams, donkey meat, sausages, blood puddings or tripe. An opportunity to purchase quality cuts (at bargain prices) from animals approved for sacrifice would have been attractive.

The believers would not have known the source of the food; as not everything that was for sale in the macellum would have been offered to idols. In light of that, Paul told the Corinthian believers not to question the food’s provenance for the sake of conscience but to go ahead and eat it: ‘Whatsoever is sold in the shambles (mákellon), that eat, asking no question for conscience sake.’ What was a mákellon?


From earliest times, along with other types of goods, foodstuffs were bought and sold in wooden huts in open spaces or along busy streets near the centre of Mediterranean towns. This was haphazard, unhygienic and difficult to control. During the Late Classical (400-300 BCE) and Hellenistic (323-30 BCE) periods commercial activity moved to large indoor markets situated near the public square (Greek agora or Roman forum), which was the centre of civic life. During the second century BCE (200-101), however, references to a structure called a ‘macellum’ occur in Latin literature. The Romans began to build one in new towns, and the trend caught on in Greece also, where it was called a ‘mákellon.’ This was a building designed specifically for the sale of food. All of them had a similar basic layout consisting of a large open courtyard (usually rectangular or circular) surrounded by columns (peristyle) and having two entrances. Each macellum housed a series of shops and sometimes had a second floor. As a specialized food market, hygiene was paramount, so it had a water supply and paved floors for ease of cleaning. There were grooves or pipes for drainage. The macellum also housed the offices of magistrates (aediles) who enforced trading standards such as weights and measures.


Some of the macellae, including the one excavated at the site of ancient Corinth, have foundations for a circular room. Some think that this was a facility for cleaning and selling fish, others that it was a small temple. No-one knows if the macellum at Corinth served any religious function; it is only from Paul’s instruction to Christians in 1 Corinthians 10:25 that we are even aware that sacrificial meat was sold in the food market.


In verse 26 Paul backed up his advice to the believers by directing them to the Old Testament scriptures (Psa 24:1; 50:12; 89:11). He reminded them that everything on earth belongs to the Lord; therefore, it was permissible to eat the meat sold in the macellum, even if previously offered to an idol.

Posted in Exposition

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition



REJECTION 

Verse five hints at rejection: ‘The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood  it’ but verses nine to eleven again take up the idea of Jesus as light and forecast his rejection, a major theme of the gospel. The world is generally indifferent to him (1:10) but ‘He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him’ (1:11) emphasizes the hostile response of Israel.  The term ‘The Jews’, although not in the Prologue, is used sixty-nine times in the Gospel and, in the opinion of Lincoln (p.71), ‘frequently serves a representative function’. Their response ‘indicates different types of belief and unbelief’. The irony in the Gospel is that although Jesus was brought up in a Jewish home his own people wanted nothing to do with him. As the Gospel progresses ‘His own’ describes a new group consisting of those who accept him and heed his message (10:34; 13:1).

BELIEVE AND RECEIVE

In contrast to his rejection by the world (1:10) and Israel (1:11) there were those who ‘received’ him. These were given authority to belong to God as children (1:12). This birth into the family of God was totally an act of God and not dependent upon race or any human act. That it has nothing to do with ordinary human birth is stressed three times in 1:13: ‘not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will.’ The theme of the ‘new birth’  is taken up in chapter 3.  This description of believers as God’s children occurs again in 11:52, with the diminutive ‘little children’ occurring also in 13:33. While all men may become sons (tekna) of God the Prologue emphasises that Jesus was in a unique sense the son (huios) of God.


INCARNATION

In verses 14-18 the author explicitly identifies the Logos as Jesus. He is said (1:14) to have ‘become flesh, and made his dwelling among us’. The Greek ‘skenoo’ for ‘made his dwelling’ literally means “to pitch one’s tent”, a term which, according to Kostenberger (2004, p.41),

‘suggests that in Jesus, God has come to take up residence among his people once again, in a way even more intimate than when he dwelt in the midst of wilderness Israel in the tabernacle (Exod. 40:34-35).’ 

This statement that the Word became human is the highest point of the Prologue. God himself entered humanity and made it possible for human beings to enter the family of God. In Jesus as the Logos incarnate there was no more need for a tabernacle or temple. God’s shekinah glory was in the world and thus the author adds (1:14): ‘We have seen his glory’.


GLORY

Lincoln (2005, p.105) interprets this ‘seeing’ not in a physical sense but as ‘the perception of faith’ that ‘finds in Jesus the glory of the divine presence’. This mention of ‘glory’ in verse fourteen introduces a significant theme in the Fourth Gospel. ‘Glory’ occurs nineteen times and ‘to glorify’ twenty-three times. ‘We have seen his glory’ would have been encouraging for early Christians facing hostility from Judaism. The Jews would have seen no glory in the life and death of the crucified Jesus but the John’s Gospel insists that for those with faith to see it, there was glory throughout his life, even at what would seem to be the time of his greatest humiliation, the crucifixion.

Kostenberger (2004, p.42) draws attention to the fact that:


‘As the obedient, dependent Son, Jesus brings glory to God the Father throughout his entire ministry, but he does so supremely by submitting to the cross, which for John is the place of God’s – and Jesus’- ultimate glorification (cf. 12:23-33; 13:31-32; 14:13; 17:1, 4-5). In the Fourth Gospel the glory of Jesus is linked with the end of his life on earth rather than the beginning. At the time of triumphal entry he has not yet been glorified (12:16) and at the last supper his hour has come but he has not yet been glorified (12:23; 17:1). In 17:1-5 he asks the Father to glorify him and that the disciples may see his glory (17:24). He assures his disciples that it will happen soon (13:32). His request for glory was based on the work that he had accomplished on earth (17:4) and, as in the Prologue; it involved his revelation of God his Father (17:6).’

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted in Roman names

SILVANUS

Posted on by writtenexposition

Roman name: Silvanus

Greek form of a Jewish name: Silas

‘And some of them [Thessalonian Jews] were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.’ Acts 17:4 ESV

‘Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ…’. 1Thess 1:1 ESV

Silvanus/Silas was one of the most influential figures in the early Christian church and yet he seems to have maintained a low profile; perhaps preferring to work quietly and effectively without drawing undue attention to himself. The Bible gives few personal details; only that he was a leading member of the Jerusalem assembly (Acts 15:22), that he was a prophet (Acts 15:32), and that he had Roman citizenship (Acts 16:37–38). His name occurs 17 times. He is called Silas in the Acts of the Apostles (15:22, 27, 32, 34, 40; 16:19, 25, 29; 17:4, 10, 14, 15; 18:5) and in the Epistles he is referred to by his Roman name Silvanus ( 2 Cor 1:19; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; 1 Pet 5:12).

THE EARLY SPREAD OF THE GOSPEL: A SURVEY

The first half of the Acts of the Apostles details the gradual spread of Christianity from Jerusalem. Acts 2:1-8:3 records phenomenal growth accompanied by persecution, mainly from the Jews as they did not regard Jesus as the Messiah and were angry that the Christians were undermining their beliefs. Luke viewed the stoning of Stephen in chapter 7 as a catalyst for the widespread ill-treatment of Christians. As a result, they dispersed throughout the empire, which, ironically, helped accelerate the spread of the gospel (Acts 8:3-4,11:19). Herod Agrippa 1 (King of Judea 41-44 CE) co-operated with the Jewish authorities in persecuting the early believers (Acts 12:1-2) and had John’s brother James put to death. He also made a failed attempt to execute Peter (Acts 12:1-19). Acts 8:4-13 tells of a successful preaching campaign by Philip in Samaria and a visit there by Peter and John also (8:14-25). Philip continued to Gaza (8:26) and from there to the seaside town of Azotus (8:40). After leaving Azotus he preached in various locations as he travelled 60 miles up the coast to Caesarea Maritima (8:40), the provincial capital of Roman Palestine. 

In chapter 9 we learn that Paul preached to the Jews at Damascus shortly after his conversion, but having met with antagonism, left for Jerusalem where he joined the church. He preached to Grecians (Greek-speaking Jews) but, after again experiencing opposition, left and returned to his home town of Tarsus in Asia Minor. By that time, according to a summary by Luke (Acts 9:31), there were Christian churches throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria. Meanwhile, Peter was busy evangelizing away from Jerusalem. He travelled to the coastal area where he healed Aeneas at Lydda, and then to Joppa to raise Dorcas from the dead before proceeding to Caesarea where he met the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 9:32-11:18) who, along with other Gentiles, believed and was ‘baptized in the name of the Lord’ (10:47-48). 

Acts chapters 11:19 – 15:35 focus on Antioch, where believers were first nicknamed ‘Christians’ (11:26). Luke is careful to emphasize the strong connection between the Gentile church at Antioch and the older Jewish church at Jerusalem. People from Cyprus and Cyrene left Jerusalem as a result of the persecution following Stephen’s death and brought Christianity to Antioch (11:19-20). The Jerusalem church, receiving news of this outreach to Gentiles in Antioch, sent Barnabas to support and encourage the believers. He then brought Paul to Antioch to spend a year helping him teach the Christians (Acts 11:19-26). Later the assembly at Antioch commended Barnabas and Paul to missionary service (Acts 13:1-5; 14:26) and sent them to Cyprus, Lycaonia and Pamphylia (Acts 13–14) on what is traditionally called Paul’s ‘First Missionary Journey.’ 

THE JERUSALEM COUNCIL

Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch and remained there ‘a long time’ (Acts 14:28) until, about 49 CE, a problem arose when ‘certain men… came down from Judea’ teaching that: ‘Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved’ (Acts 15:1). These men thought that the promises of salvation were to the Jews as a nation. Just as Judaism allowed for a few individual exceptions (proselytes) so too, they must have thought, did the Christian faith (e.g. Gentiles like the Ethiopian Eunuch and Cornelius). It would not have occurred to them that the gospel could be for the Gentiles as a group. They, therefore, considered it necessary that the few believers from a pagan background observe the Mosaic law, including the rite of circumcision. 

One can imagine that this teaching must have caused uncertainty in the minds of Christians of non-Jewish origin. Paul and Barnabas, however, who had already preached in Gentile areas without imposing Jewish rites upon the believers, would have none of it. They realized that the very essence of Christianity was at stake. The gospel was not just for Jews but was a universal message of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, without additional demands. They had presented this same message to Jew and Gentile alike. After much discussion, the assembly at Antioch decided to send Paul, Barnabas and a few others to Jerusalem to meet the elders and apostles and seek a resolution of the problem. The issue boiled down to this: ‘Is anything more needed for salvation than faith in Jesus Christ?’

At the meeting, presided over (15:13) by James the Lord’s brother (Gal 1:19), Peter described how converted Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit just as Jewish Christians had (Acts 15:9-11). Paul and Barnabas also reported (15:12) the signs and wonders that God had performed through them among the Gentiles. James made the concluding speech (15:13-21).

Realizing that the issue was highly significant, the apostles and elders decided to write not only to the church at Antioch but also to the Gentile churches in Syria and Cilicia, which had been established by missionaries (Paul and Barnabas) sent out from Antioch. The striking thing in the letter is that the Jewish leadership of the Jerusalem church officially addressed the Gentile converts as ‘brothers:’

‘The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.’ Acts 15:23

For Jews to call Gentiles ‘brethren,’ not because of blood relationship but because they shared the same faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, was hugely significant. The Jerusalem Council did not require Gentile believers to observe the rituals of the Mosaic law but requested that they avoid idolatry, unchastity and murder. The ‘brothers’ were not only to believe but also expected to behave.

The content of the letter was so weighty that oral confirmation was thought necessary. Two ‘chosen men’ (15:25) accompanied Paul and Barnabas to explain the conclusions reached by the Jerusalem Council and handle questions from the Gentiles. One of these delegates was Judas Barsabas. The other was Silas. 

SILVANUS/SILAS

Silas appears on the scene at this crucial stage in the history of the church. He and Judas Barsabas seem to have been involved in the composition of the letter (15:23), which they then delivered to Antioch and taught the believers there. Silas ‘exhorted the brethren with many words and confirmed (strengthened) them’ (15:32). This approach contrasts sharply with the harmful legacy of the legalists who had ‘troubled [the believers] with words, unsettling [their] minds’ (15:24 ESV). People like Silas, who can preach Jesus Christ clearly (2 Cor 1:19), teach believers to distinguish truth from error and encourage them in their faith, are much needed in today’s church.

After a while, Judas returned to Jerusalem while Silas stayed on at Antioch, teaching alongside Paul and Barnabas. Paul suggested to Barnabas that they ought to go and visit the assemblies in Syria and Cilicia which also were addressees of the Jerusalem letter. Unfortunately, Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement that resulted in each going his separate way. Paul then chose Silas to accompany him on the proposed trip.

SILVANUS THE MISSIONARY

Silas was a suitable choice because he was equally at ease with the Jewish and the Gentile wings of the church. He was a Jew with impeccable credentials as a leader (15:22) of the Jewish church at Jerusalem which had sent him as one of two trusted delegates to Gentile believers following the Jerusalem Council. On the other hand, he was a Roman citizen (16:37), had a Roman name (Silvanus) and spoke fluent Greek. He functioned well in Gentile churches (15:32-35), with his ministry among them much appreciated. Although Jewish, he welcomed the idea of missionary activity in pagan areas and was willing to endure persecution and hardship for the sake of the gospel (16:22-23). Together with Paul, he visited the assemblies in Syria and Cilicia (15:41), thus completing the instructions of the Jerusalem Council. Again, Silas produced good results as ‘the churches [were] established in the faith and increased in number daily’ (Acts 16:5).

This tour of Syria and Cilicia turned out to be just the initial stage of what we usually refer to as ‘Paul’s Second Missionary Journey.’ Paul, Silas and Timothy (16:1-3) then began to receive divine route guidance (16:6, 7, 9-10) which directed them away from Asia and caused them to take the Christian message to Europe. 

They set sail from Troas and landed in Macedonia where they preached the gospel in the cities of Philippi, Thessalonica and Beroea. Silas and Timothy remained at Beroea while Paul continued to Athens, from where he sent for them to join him (17:14-15). Timothy arrived at Athens with news of persecution in Thessalonica, so Paul sent him back there with a message of encouragement (1 Thess 3:1-6). Paul then left Athens and went to Corinth (18:1). Silas must also have gone back, perhaps to Philippi, for he and Timothy met up in Macedonia before re-joining Paul in Corinth (18:5). The three missionaries preached the gospel in Corinth (2 Cor 1:19), from where they jointly wrote two letters to the assembly at Thessalonica (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1).

Paul eventually left Corinth and sailed to Ephesus, then on to Syria (probably landing at Tyre) before taking a short voyage down the coast to Caesarea. He went up from there and ‘greeted the church’ (at Jerusalem?) before returning to his base at Antioch (Acts 18:18-22). We do not know at what point Silas left Paul. 

SILVANUS AND PETER

We do know that Silas/Silvanus continued to work for the Lord because there is a reference to him in 1 Peter, a book written about ten or twelve years after the end of the Second Missionary Journey:

‘By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.’ 1 Pet 1:5

After leaving Paul’s mission team, Silas must have joined forces with the apostle Peter, eventually working with him in Rome (1 Pet 5:13 – if ‘Babylon’ is a code word for ‘Rome’). Peter held him in high regard and accounted him ‘a faithful brother’, considering Silas/Silvanus qualified to write on his behalf. That Peter wrote ‘by Silvanus’ could mean several things: 

a) That Silvanus was responsible for drafting the letter on Peter’s behalf. Peter would have told him what he wanted to say, and Silvanus would have set out Peter’s thoughts and ideas in writing.

b) Silvanus was the amanuensis who wrote down what Peter dictated.

c) Silvanus was the person who would act as the bearer of the letter.

A) is the most likely meaning because of the literary nature of the Greek of 1 Peter. Some scholars consider it too refined to have been written by a Galilean fisherman who had not had a formal education. Silvanus may have managed Peter’s correspondence, presenting Peter’s spoken Greek in a more polished and technically correct written form. Peter was writing this letter to Christians in Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1) whom he had not met. Silvanus would therefore have been an ideal helper as he had been to that area (Acts 15:41; 18:5) and had previously co-written two apostolic letters (1 & 2 Thessalonians).

SUMMATION 

i. Silvanus was well-known and respected as a leader in the early church (Acts 15:22). He was not only highly esteemed by the assembly at Jerusalem but also by those in Antioch, Philippi, Thessalonica, Beroea and Corinth. Perhaps he was known to Christians in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1) as well.

ii. As evidenced by his performance as a delegate of the Jerusalem church after the Jerusalem Council and in his later service as a missionary, Silvanus was a level-headed person and endowed with wisdom and tact. He was able to fit in with Christians of different backgrounds and outlooks yet had strong convictions and the ability to preach and explain the doctrines of the gospel to others.

iii. Although he was recognized as a leading brother in the Jerusalem church, we do not read that Silvanus forced his ideas upon the Jerusalem Council. Once it made its decision and appointed him as a delegate, Silas simply got on with the job. Later, when Paul ‘chose’ him as his missionary companion Silvanus was willing to ‘play second fiddle’ to Paul for the sake of the gospel. He was, therefore, a humble-minded Christian who was happy to work alongside and serve others in the Lord’s work.

iv. Silvanus was willing to endure hardship for the sake of the gospel. Along with Paul, he was brutally (1 Thess 2:2) and illegally (Acts 16:38) treated at Philippi. Despite the insults and injuries received, he was able to pray and sing praises to God in the gaol and willing to point the prison officer to Christ.

We must not forget that, despite his humble attitude, Silvanus was an important man in his own right. As a NT prophet, he was with the apostles in the front ranks of importance in the church (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 2:20; 3:5; 4:11) and, exercising his gift, spoke words of exhortation and encouragement from God before the completion of the New Testament scriptures. Silvanus, in fact, was co-author of at least three (1 & 2 Thessalonians; 1 Peter) of the inspired books in that collection. We can never match his achievements for the Lord, but it would be worthwhile to emulate his humble attitude, his flexibility towards other Christians with a different theological outlook and his dedication to the gospel ministry.

Posted in Roman names

GALLIO

Posted on by writtenexposition

‘And when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat.’ Acts 18:12

Name: Gallio

Full Roman Name: Lucius Iunius Gallio Annaeus

Position: Proconsul of the senatorial Province of Achaea

The casual reader of the Book of Acts might view Paul’s appearance before Gallio, the Roman governor of Achaea, as just another interesting detail that Luke has included about the apostle’s stay in Corinth. It is, however, one of the major incidents recorded in the New Testament and the most significant as regards the early history and expansion of Christianity. The historical details given in Acts 18, along with external sources, provide us with a fixed date in the career of the apostle Paul and shed light on Jewish hostility and Roman indifference (as exemplified by Gallio) towards the increasingly popular new religious movement.

In 50 CE Paul arrived in Corinth and began his evangelistic activity in the Jewish synagogue, aiming to convince Jews that Jesus was the promised Messiah (Acts 18:4). This must have continued for several months (‘every sabbath’ 18:4) but, following heated discussions, disagreements, and rejection of his message by the Jews, Paul turned his attention towards the local Gentiles and moved his operational base to a building next door to the synagogue. Its owner was Justus (some manuscripts say Titius Justus) who in 18:7 is termed a ‘God-fearer’ (a Gentile believer in God who had not (yet) fully converted to Judaism).

Relations between the two groups of next-door neighbours got worse. Tension must have increased greatly when the president of the synagogue, Crispus, ‘believed on the Lord’ and, as it were, moved to the other side of the fence. Also, the Jews cannot have been happy with the ongoing success of Paul’s mission because ‘many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized’ (18:8). Eventually,the Jewish leaders brought Paul before Gallio; the proconsul of the Roman province of Achaea.

Gallio was born about 5 BCE at Cordua in Spain, into a high-ranking Roman family which had close ties with the imperial household. His father was Seneca the Elder (Lucius Annaeus Seneca), a well-known writer, historian, and rhetorician who, with his wife Helvia, had three sons; of whom Gallio was the eldest. Another son was Seneca the Younger, a Stoic philosopher and writer who was tutor to the future emperor Nero. The third was Marcus Annaeus Mela, father of the poet Lucan. During his reign Nero suspected Gallio and his brothers of involvement in various plots against him and eventually, at different times and probably on Nero’s orders, all three ended their lives by suicide.

Gallio’s name from birth was Lucius Annaeus Novatus but, when he was a young adult, a wealthy family that did not have a male heir adopted him; as was customary among Roman aristocrats. He took the name of his adoptive father, senator Lucius Iunius Gallio, and became known as Lucius Iunius Gallio Annaeus. Gallio became an expert on Roman law, and had a reputation for hard work, fairness, and a polite but no-nonsense approach in court. He became a senator in 37 CE and was later appointed proconsul of Achaea by the emperor Claudius.

One can deduce the date of his term of office in Achaea from what is usually called the Gallio (or Delphic) Inscription. In 1905 four fragments of this inscription were found in temple ruins at Delphi in Greece. In 1910 three more were found and a further two in 1967. The following is reconstructed from these nine fragments:

‘Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, 12th year of tribunician power, acclaimed emperor for the 26th time, father of the country, sends greetings to… For long have I been well-disposed to the city of Delphi and solicitous for its prosperity, and I have always observed the cult of the Pythian Apollo. Now since it is said to be destitute of citizens, as my friend and pro consul L. Iunius Gallio recently reported to me, and desiring that Delphi should regain its former splendour, I command you to invite well-born people also from other cities to come to Delphi as new inhabitants, and to accord them and their children all the privileges of the Delphians as being citizens on like and equal terms…’

This is a copy of a letter from the emperor Claudius in which he refers to a report from ‘my friend and proconsul L. Iunius Gallio’ about depopulation in Delphi and recommends future resettlement of the city. In the letter Claudius says that he has been ‘acclaimed emperor for the 26th time’ which dates the letter to between 25th January and 1st August 52. Claudius had recently received the report; therefore Gallio’s appointment to Achaea was probably from 01 July 51 until 30 June 52.

Unlike Claudius, who was an admirer of everything Greek, Gallio disliked Greece and did not serve out his full term of office; possibly leaving before shipping finished for the winter months at the end of October 51 CE. His brother Seneca wrote:

‘When in Achaia, he [Gallio] began to feel feverish, he immediately took ship, claiming that it was not a malady of the body but of the place’ (Seneca, Epistle 1 04.1)

Under Nero, Gallio was appointed a ‘consul suffectus’ (a replacement who took over when a consul died, resigned or was removed from office) in 56 CE and later served as the emperor’s herald.

As an eminent legal expert, a man of integrity who enjoyed the confidence of two Roman emperors, and someone who reached the highest levels of office in the Roman empire, Gallio was no fool. The Jews at Corinth were to discover this fact when he immediately saw through the deception that was behind the charge that they tried to level against the apostle Paul.

The Jewish leaders brought Paul before the Corinthian tribunal over which Gallio, as proconsul, was presiding. The Greek word for tribunal is bema. The name comes from the raised platform (bema) which stood in the main square of a Greek or Roman city and from which orators addressed the public at civic ceremonies.

The Bema (KJV ‘judgement seat’) was also used for legal purposes; the supreme authority of the presiding judge was signified by his elevated position while seated on it. The word bema could refer to any elevated platform, a step or even the length of a footstep (Acts 7:5) but the Bema in Corinth was not a simple rostrum. It was an impressive building built of marble, decorated with intricate carvings, and prominently situated in the city forum. A site guide to ancient Corinth published in 2018 by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens describes the architecture of the Bema as follows:


‘The Bema was a complex marble structure dating from the middle of the 1st century A.D. that dominated this part of the Forum at Corinth. It took the form of an open propylon with a Π-shaped ground plan, which stood on a rectangular podium measuring 15.6 × 7.2 m. This podium had a krepidoma with two steps and it projected 3 m above the level of the Forum to the north. Its superstructure consisted of eight pillars, three at each corner linked by walls lined with benches, and two across the front. The podium was flanked at a lower level by two unroofed exedras with benches on two of their three sides. Beside each exedra was a marble staircase leading up to the terrace to the south. Parts of the Bema’s walls and steps, as well as the floors of the exedras, have been restored.’


The grandeur of the physical Bema in Corinth and his appearance before Gallio seems to have impressed Paul so much that he used the word bema figuratively in a letter to the Corinthians (2 Cor 5:10) to describe a future tribunal, with Christ presiding, at which the life and service of every Christian will be reviewed (see also Rom 14:10).


We read in Acts 18:4 that Paul ‘persuaded’ (peíthō) Jews and the Greeks in the synagogue every sabbath.’ According to Acts 18:13, the Jews attempted to have Paul tried on the following charge: ‘this man persuades (anapeíthō) the men to worship God contrary to the law.’ In verse 13, however, ‘persuade’ means ‘persuade earnestly’ and has the idea of ‘seduce’ or ‘incite.’ The Jews accused Paul of misleading ‘the men.’ This term may indicate just the Jews and Greeks of verse 4 but is more likely a general reference to all the residents of Corinth. Paul, according to the Jews, was dishonestly encouraging men to ‘worship God contrary to the law.’ They did not specify whether they meant Jewish or Roman law. Gallio was astute enough to realize that their charge was deliberately ambiguous.

The relevant Roman law would have been that which governed the meetings of associations (collegium or sodalitates). The Romans were always wary of the possibility of sedition in conquered territories so they ensured that religious cults, political societies, and trade guilds were licensed by the state and allowed to meet no more than once a month. However, since they had great respect for ancestral religions, they granted Jewish synagogue meetings exemption from this restriction. The Jews were therefore maintaining, although both groups were studying the same scriptures, that the gathering in the house of Justus next door to them was not a Jewish synagogue meeting and ought to be regarded as an illegal and unlicensed religious cult led by Paul.

Gallio saw that their accusation was not essentially religious but that they were playing politics. He ruled (Acts 18:14-15) that if the Jews could back up their charge that Paul was guilty of a ‘criminal act’ or a ‘wicked plot’ he would proceed with a trial, but, in his opinion, the matter had to do with (1) ‘words’ (debate), (2) names (disputes over the meaning of words or terms), and (3) ‘your own (i.e. Jewish) law’.

Gallio thus dismissed the charge (under Roman law) that Paul was involved in political disturbance, and he also refused to judge Paul on matters relating to Jewish law. He had no interest in these. As Luke comments in verse 17: ‘Gallio cared for none of those things’.

Some (mis)apply this comment by Luke and suggest that Gallio was indifferent to the preaching of the gospel and the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. This, of course, is not what Luke is saying. In fact, it is unlikely that Gallio ever heard the gospel because in verse 14 Luke emphasizes the fact that Paul did not get a chance to open his mouth. The plural ‘those things’ refers to the three points in Gallio’s ruling(v.15). He refused to pronounce judgement upon what he regarded as internal differences of opinion within the Jewish religion. Gallio was an honest and upright Roman official who did not give in to and conspire with the Jews; unlike Pilate and Felix.


Governors and judges in other locations throughout the empire would have looked to this ruling by such a distinguished jurist and have likewise adopted a tolerant attitude towards Christianity. Thus, having the luxury of minimal interference from the Roman government, the new religion spread swiftly throughout the empire. Thanks to Gallio’s assessment of Christianity as just a sect within Judaism, Christians could legally meet weekly for worship and to celebrate the Lord’s supper. For the early church the positive effects of Gallio’s ruling lasted more than a decade.

Even at the end of Acts, while Paul awaited trial for two years at Rome, the authorities did not curtail his religious activities. Luke could therefore bring the book of Acts to a close by observing (Acts 28:30-31 ESV) that, right in the very capital of the empire, Christian work was permitted to continue ‘without hindrance.’

Posted in Latin loanwords

LINTEUM

Posted on by writtenexposition

‘He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.’ John 13:4-5


Greek – λέντιον (lention)

Latin – linteum

English – towel


Although the writer’s name is not given, authorship of the Fourth Gospel is usually attributed to the Apostle John. We learn from the book itself that the writer was a disciple (21:24) and that he had seen the glory of the Lord (1:14). This gospel records details of the life, teachings and miracles of Jesus Christ with the stated purpose of convincing its readers of the deity of Christ; so that by believing in him they can have eternal life (20:31). John’s Gospel falls into two main parts, conveniently labelled by scholars the Book of Signs (chapters 1-12) and the Book of Glory (chapters 13 -21). The first twelve chapters include a Prologue/introduction (1:1-18) and seven main miracle stories (2:1-11, 4:43-54; 5:1-18; 6:1-14; 6:15-21; 9:1-41; 11:1-45). The word for miracle (sémeion) means ‘sign’.


The final nine chapters contain a long farewell discourse by Jesus to his disciples (chps. 13-16), his ‘high-priestly’ prayer to the Father in chapter 17, followed by an account of his arrest, trials, crucifixion and resurrection. The book ends with an Epilogue/conclusion (21:1-25). Thus chapters 1-12 concentrate on the Lord’s ministry and chapters 13-21 on his departure. Chapters 1-12 focus on some three years of Christ’s ministry, chapters 13-17 concentrate on about three hours at a meal.


The first division of the gospel ends with Jesus bringing his public ministry to a close (12:36) and the second commences with him spending private time with ‘his own’ (13:1). Towards the end of the first division Mary anoints the Lord’s feet with ointment and wipes them with her hair (12:3), at the start of the second division the Lord washes his disciples’ feet and wipes them with a towel (13:1-17). In this passage the word ‘lention’ for towel occurs twice (13:4-5).


This account of Jesus washing his disciples’ feet is recorded only in the gospel of John and falls naturally into two parts. In 13:1-4 the author gives the time-frame, says that what takes place occurs after the supper (modern versions say ‘during’) and informs us that Jesus knew that his mission had reached its climax. In 13:5-17 Jesus washes their feet and tells his disciples how they are to behave once he has gone.


THE SETTING

The opening verses of chapter 13 set the scene for the entire farewell discourse (chapters 13-17) as well as the foot-washing demonstration. John says nothing about the location but tells us that there was a supper (13:2) which was held before the Passover (13:1). This information, it must be acknowledged, throws up a problem that has been debated for centuries but has never been satisfactorily resolved. It relates to the nature and timing of the Last Supper.


Was the Last Supper a Passover meal? Mark 14:12 places the Last Supper and the Passover meal on the same day. Luke, in 22:15, 54, clearly states that it was a Passover meal and that Jesus had already eaten it with his disciples before his arrest and trials. John, on the other hand, informs us that the meal was eaten ‘before the feast of the Passover’ (13:1) and that after Jesus’ arrest and trials the Jews were still waiting to eat the Passover (18:28).


Over the centuries several solutions have been proposed in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting statements. The most plausible, but not entirely satisfactory, is that John was using a different method of reckoning time to that used by Matthew, Mark and Luke. It has been suggested that John used the official Jewish lunar calendar and that possibly the other evangelists went by a solar calendar; such as that used by the Qumran community and described in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The timing of the Last Supper is an ongoing matter of debate so perhaps we should concentrate instead on the Lord’s act of service and his advice to his disciples.


Jesus had gathered in a borrowed room (Mt 26:17-19; Mk 14:12-16; Lk 22:7-13) with his disciples; a band of men who had been with him since the wedding at Cana in Galilee (2:2). They had listened to his teaching and had seen his miracles during his public ministry but still had a limited grasp of who he was and what he was about. It was therefore necessary for him to spend time (chapters 13-17) preparing ‘his own’ for the shock and grief they would experience as a result of his violent death and subsequent absence.


THE SAVIOUR

‘His own’


The disciples referred to here are not the ‘his own’ of chapter 1. That reference is to the Jewish people, emphasizing their rejection of Jesus Christ. In chapter one we learn that the world in general was indifferent to him (1:10) but ‘his own received him not’ (1:11). That is: Jesus was brought up in a Jewish home but his own people wanted nothing to do with him. From then on John’s gospel uses the expression ‘The Jews’ (e.g. 1:19; 5:16; 19:7) as a representative term for Israel.


‘His own’ here in 13:1 describes a new category made up of those who accept him and receive his teaching (see also 10:3). In the last half of the gospel several expressions are used to refer to this group of believers:


‘his own’ (13:1)

‘children’ (13:33)

‘friends’ (15:15)

‘those whom you gave me’ (17:6)

‘my brethren’ (20:17)

‘little children’ (21:5)


Jesus knew that in a few hours and days many of the disciples would forsake him. He knew that Thomas would doubt him, Peter deny him and Judas Iscariot betray him. In spite of their failings, Jesus, aware that he would soon be leaving, had a special love for them. Chapter 13:1 says that ‘having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end’. This expression ‘unto the end’ could mean either ‘to the end’ or ‘to the utmost’; either ‘love up to the end of his life’ or ‘love to the uttermost’. The reference is either to time or intensity.


‘His hour’


According to 13:1 ‘Jesus knew that his hour was come.’ The ‘hour’ is a motif in John’s gospel (2:4; 7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27; 16:32; 17:1). This verse confirms that the Lord Jesus was working to a specific divine timetable. ‘He knew’ that ‘his hour’, of suffering and humiliation, had come.


Here (13:2) the previously predicted (6:70-71) betrayal is mentioned; bringing out the contrast in vv. 1-2 between love and hate, between the Saviour and Satan, between ‘his own’ and Judas. There is a further contrast in vv. 3-4 between the evil of Judas and the nobility of the Son of God. Even though Jesus was fully aware of his divinity (13:3) he behaved with humility and love in the foot-washing that followed, and it would seem that he even washed the traitor’s feet (v.12).


THE SERVANT

Given the unpaved and dusty condition of most roads, washing one’s feet was a significant aspect of daily hygiene in that part of the world (2 Sam 11:8). For centuries foot-washing had also been a feature of hospitality (Gen 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; Judg 19:21; 1 Sam 25:41;1 Tim 5:10) and failure to offer this courtesy to guests was regarded as bad manners (Lk 7:44). A good host would have extended this courtesy to a welcome guest, but he would not have washed the visitor’s feet himself. Such a menial job belonged to the lowest ranking person in the home; often a woman (1 Tim 5:10). In a wealthier household it would have been performed by a slave. None of the disciples present volunteered to wash the feet of their colleagues and thus have the lowest status. In fact, according to Luke 22:24, that same evening they argued about ‘which of them was considered to be greatest.’ Feet were normally washed before a meal began but that evening the disciples reclined to eat with their feet still unwashed. Either during (‘ended’ can have the sense of prepared and set out) or after the meal Jesus himself undertook the task of washing their feet.


Verses 4-5 give a vivid description of the event. John builds the drama by use of the historical present tense i.e. he uses verbs in the present tense to highlight actions that happened in the past. In everyday English:


‘He is going back to God’ (v.3)

‘He gets up from supper’ (v.4)

‘He lays aside (takes off) his garments’ (v.4)

‘Taking a towel he wrapped himself’ (v.4)

‘He pours water into a basin’ (v.5)

‘He began to wash his disciples’ feet…’ (v.5)

‘And Peter says to him’ (v. 6)


Note the exceptions, which I have aligned to the right of the page! Here the aorist tense (which is used to denote an action in the past) is employed at the two points in the description where Jesus’ actions are characteristic of a slave. That, it would seem, is the point that John seeks to emphasize.


There must have been a stunned silence and great embarrassment when Jesus rose from the table and stripped down to his inner tunic. A rabbi undressing in the presence of his disciples would have been unheard of and this action would have seemed very strange. Several garments were worn by males of the time. A ‘chiton’ (Mk 6:9) was an undergarment or inner tunic worn next to the skin. It was usually knee-length and gathered in by a girdle (belt) around the waist. Over that a rich man might wear a long ‘stola’ (Mk 12:38) or robe. The outer garment was a ‘himation’ (12:38; Mk 6:56); a poncho-like mantle that could also be used as a blanket. According to v. 12 this was the garment that Jesus removed and later put on again: ‘…and had taken his garments (himation).’ Wearing only his inner tunic (chiton) and having a towel wrapped around his waist like an apron, Jesus would have looked exactly like a slave.


This was a deliberate act; undertaken only by himself without the involvement or help of others. It brings to mind the famous passage in Philippians 2:5-8 which contains the words: ‘But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant.’ In this connection some commentators, seeing an allusion to Jesus’ death and resurrection, point out that the verbs ‘lay aside’ (v.4) and ‘take’ (v.12) only occur together elsewhere in John’s Gospel in chapter 10:17-18:

‘Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again…’


Having undressed to his basic garment Jesus wrapped a towel around his waist. John calls it a ‘lention’, which is from the Latin ‘linteum’. This was the word for an awning, a sail or a towel. The large linen cloth may have been there so that they could all wipe their hands after eating but, by tying it around his waist like a belt, Jesus left his hands free and the long ends of the towel at either side available for drying the disciples’ feet.


Commenting on the passage the medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274 CE) observed the following things about a slave/servant:


– he must notice if anything is lacking in the service so he needs to be standing. Therefore, Christ rose from supper.


– he must be unencumbered and ready to serve. So Christ laid aside his garments.


– he should have everything he needs at hand. So, Christ wrapped a towel around himself and, having poured water into a basin, began not only to wash but also to dry the feet of his disciples.


As in the other gospels Peter is prominent in John (e.g.1:42; 6:68; 13:6; 18:10, 16; 20:2, 6; 21:3, 7, 11, 15), and often acts as spokesperson. Here John refers to him by the double name ‘Simon Peter’ (see also 6:68; 13:6, 9, 24, 36; 18:10, 15, 25; 20:2,6; 21:3). The wording of v.6 would suggest that Jesus had already washed the feet of a few disciples who had not protested but when Jesus reached Peter, he refused to have his feet washed. ‘Lord, are you washing my feet?’ There is a strong contrast between ‘you’ and ‘my’ and between ‘Lord’ and ‘feet’. Peter had a very high opinion of the Lord Jesus and did not wish to see him acting as a slave. Since it was the role of a less important person to wash the feet of someone greater, and not vice versa, Peter deemed it inappropriate for his Lord to wash his feet.


Without explaining his behaviour, Jesus matched Peter’s ‘you’ and ‘my’ in verse 6 with the words ‘I’ and ‘you’ in verse 7: ‘What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter’. ‘Hereafter’ is a translation of two Greek words meaning ‘after these things’. The word for ‘these things’ (tauta) occurs again in 13:17 which would suggest that the specific reference is to the foot-washing. Some, however, relate ‘hereafter’ (i.e. ‘later’) to the period after Jesus’ death, resurrection, ascension and the advent of the Holy Spirit (2:22; 12:16; 20:9) rather than to the time of explanation just after the foot-washing.


Although Jesus had told him that his understanding was incomplete Peter still strongly resisted, saying: ‘thou shalt never wash my feet.’ ‘Never’ is literally ‘not in/until all eternity.’ Once more Jesus picked up on the ‘you’ and ‘my’ (v.6) and ‘I’ and ‘you’ (v.7) and talked to Peter about ‘you’ and ‘me’ (v.8): ‘If I do not wash you, you have no part with me.’ i.e. no share in fellowship with me. Note that there is an interesting use of this expression in 2 Samuel 20:1 that helps clarify the meaning: ‘…Sheba, the son of Bichri, a Benjamite: … blew a trumpet, and said, We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse…’


It seems that here Jesus spoke of washing in symbolic rather than literal terms (see also 15:3) and was saying that in order to have a portion or part with him in eternal life one must be clean. He thus meant that it is necessary to accept, not the literal washing, but what it signified. If, however, Jesus was referring to the literal action of washing his disciples’ feet the lesson for us today is that we ought to obey him without question and not have an à la carte approach to his lordship. We cannot just pick and choose those areas of our lives over which we are willing to allow him control.


As a loyal follower of Christ, Peter wanted a share with him in the future and, willing to do whatever was necessary to secure this, he immediately moved from one extreme to the other, saying: ‘Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head’ (v.9). Displaying a continued lack of understanding Peter changed the symbol from foot-washing to a full wash, shifting the focus from daily cleansing for service to salvation/regeneration/justification. Peter asked for a fuller cleansing than that which he had already received. That, of course, was impossible as he had already been cleansed, and it is a once for all act.


In v. 10 Jesus responded to the idea of an all-over wash that Peter had raised and contrasted a complete bath with daily foot-washing: ‘he that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.’ This conversation was taking place at Passover season when Jews were scrupulous about personal hygiene and ritual cleanliness. Those invited to a Passover meal would bathe before leaving home, on arrival at the venue they did not need to do that again but just had to have their feet washed. ‘Washing’ is often used in the New Testament (Acts 22:16; 1 Cor 6:11; Eph 5:26; Titus 3:5; Heb 10:22) as a metaphor for salvation. The point for Peter and the other disciples to grasp was that they had been washed all over. That did not have to be repeated; they needed just their feet cleaned. Judas was the exception; he had not been washed. He was the only one there who lacked the spiritual equivalent of a complete bath. As believers we have experienced the once for all act of salvation (forgiveness of sin) but must now allow Jesus to serve us by cleansing us from daily sins: ‘If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness’ (1 Jn 1:9).


Having carried out the foot-washing (dramatizing what Luke 22:25-30 tells us he taught that same evening), Jesus put on his outer garment (himation) again and returned to his seat at the table. Once more assuming the posture of a rabbi (they sat to teach) he began to explain the significance of what he had just done. He opened the follow-up session with a question (‘know ye what I have done to you?’), and gave the answer in verse 15.


THE SOVEREIGN

Jesus declared that he ranked superior to the disciples: ‘Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am’ (see 4:31; 6:68). The contrast this time is between ‘you’ and ‘me’ (‘you call me…so I am’). He reminded them that as their Lord and Teacher his status was greater than theirs. The reason he washed their feet was not because he was of lower status, and he did not lose status as a result of washing their feet. He was stressing that even while he washed their feet he remained the pre-eminent person. By doing for them what was not normally expected of someone more important he was demonstrating the extent of his love and giving them an example of humble service. As their Lord and master, he ought to have been receiving service from them but instead he served them.


THE STANDARD

‘If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.’


As those who were less important the disciples ought to have been prepared to wash feet. He therefore instructed them to wash one another’s feet. There was to be no inequality, it was a reciprocal action; every one of them was to wash everyone else’s feet.


There has always been some debate as to whether the command to practise foot-washing is to be taken literally or symbolically. Did the Lord introduce an ordinance of foot-washing? The prevailing view has been that foot-washing is symbolic of an attitude that Christians ought to display towards one another (Gal 5:13; 6:2; Phil 2:3-4; 1 Tim 5:10), rather than a literal physical ceremony to be enacted. The command is to do ‘as’ Christ did, not ‘what’ he did. The word ‘example’ or ‘pattern’ (hupodeigma), occurs also in Heb 4:11; 8:5; 9:23; Jas 5:10 and 2 Pet 2:6. The command to model Christ’s attitude in dealings with others was taken up and encouraged by the apostles in their writings:


Paul: ‘Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.’ 1 Cor 11:1


Peter: ‘For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:’ 1 Pet 2:21


John: ‘He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.’ 1 Jn 2:6


The section ends at v. 17 with the first of two beatitudes in John’s Gospel (see also 20:29): ‘If ye know (understand) these things, happy (blessed) are ye if ye do them.’


SUMMATION

This passage emphasizes that the One who knew who he was, who knew what would happen, who knew where he was going and had all things under his feet, was willing to strip down to his inner tunic and wrap a towel around his waist. Taking the humble position of a slave he washed and dried the feet of his disciples as an expression of his love for them. This foreshadowed a greater demonstration of his love at the cross for later, in the same discourse, he reminded these disciples that ‘greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends’ (15:13). As his friends (15:14-15) let us also love him, keep his commands, and serve one another (13:34; 14:15, 21; 15:10, 12)!


‘And whosoever of you will be the chiefest shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.’ Mk 10: 44-45



Posted in General, Latin loanwords, Roman names

INTRODUCING ROMAN NAMES AND LATIN LOANWORDS IN THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Posted on by writtenexposition

Palestine during the lifetime of Jesus Christ was controlled by the Romans. They were the latest in a series of world powers (Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome) to invade and conquer that area over many centuries. Each occupation of the land had a major impact on the spoken language of the people and this was especially true of the rule of the First Persian or Achaemenid Empire (c. 559 -330 BCE). The language of international trade and diplomacy during this period was Aramaic and as the dominant language it, rather than Hebrew, became widely spoken by the Jews throughout this empire. In the Province of Yehud (formerly Judah) Hebrew continued as the language of the Jewish religion.In 333 Alexander the Great (356-323) of Macedon conquered the Achaemenid Empire under Darius III at the Battle of Issus and ushered in the Hellenistic Age during which Greek culture and language were promoted throughout the empire for about three hundred years. His Argead dynasty was succeeded by others such as the Ptolemies and Seleucids and under them a common language, Koine Greek, developed and became the trade language of the empire.

In 63 BCE the Romans took over the East, later appointing Herod the Great as a client king (37-4 BCE). In 6 CE the Romans annexed Palestine; creating the Roman province of Iudaea with Caesarea as its capital. The new rulers brought with them their Latin language.As a result of Persian, Greek and more recent Roman influence the Province of Iudaea was multi-lingual at the time of Christ, with the majority of its population able to speak at least two of four languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin. The native language was Aramaic, with the more conservative Jews also speaking Hebrew. The official language of the ruling power was Latin but Koine Greek remained the trade language. Latin was mainly spoken only by the Romans to one another; they communicated with subject peoples in Koine Greek.

As the language of the Roman administration, Latin did inevitably impact Greek literature of that time, and its influence on the Koine Greek of the New Testament took several forms; which we call ‘Latinisms’. These include:

1) Translations of Latin phrases or grammatical constructions into Greek. They occur mainly in the Gospel of Mark and Luke-Acts. We shall not be considering them.

2) Adjectives that have been formed by adding a Latin-style ending (suffix) to the Greek word e.g. Herodians (Mt 22:16; Mk 3:6,12:13 Herodianoi). We shall not be considering these.

3) Latin words that have been transcribed into Greek, i.e. Latin words in Greek characters. These nouns mostly relate to government, the military, the judiciary, trade, or to everyday items in the home. There are about thirty of these loanwords in the New Testament and most of my studies will centre on passages in which one of these words occurs.

4) Roman names. There are approximately forty Roman names in the New Testament; some place names but most are the names of people. I hope to include a short character study featuring one of the New Testament Christians, or non-Christians, who bore a Latin/Roman name.

Posted in Exposition

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, P. N. 2006, The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus: Modern Foundations Reconsidered, Continuum International

Ashton, J. 1991, Understanding the Fourth Gospel, Oxford University Press, Oxford

Barrett, C. K. 1978, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction With Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky

Bauckham, R. 2007, The Gospel of John and Christian Theology, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids

Beck, D. R. 1997, The Discipleship Paradigm: Readers and Anonymous Characters in the Fourth Gospel, BRILL, Leiden

Bennema, C. 2002, The Power of Saving Wisdom: An Investigation of Spirit and Wisdom in Relation to the Soteriology of the Fourth Gospel, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Brown, R.E. 1966, The Gospel According to John I-XII in Anchor Bible, Doubleday, New York

Bruce, F. F. 1983, The Gospel of John, Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids

Carson, D. A. 1991, The Gospel according to John, Inter-Varsity Press, Nottingham

Endo, M. 2002, Creation and Christology: A Study on the Johannine Prologue in the Light of Early Jewish Creation Accounts, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Evans, C. A. 1993, Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue, Continuum International, London

Evans, C. A. 1997, Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations and Proposals, Continuum International, London

Gieschen, C. A. 1998, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence, BRILL, Leiden

Hallett, G. 2005, Identity and Mystery in Themes of Christian Faith: Late-Wittgensteinian Perspectives, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., Farnham

Hamid-Khani, S. 2000, Revelation and Concealment of Christ: A Theological Inquiry into the Elusive Language of the Fourth Gospel, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Harris, E. 2004, Prologue and Gospel: The Theology of the Fourth Evangelist, Continuum International, London

Harstine, S, 2002, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel: A Study of Ancient Reading Techniques, Continuum International, London

Hurtado, L. W. 2003, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids

Jasper, A. E. 1998, The Shining Garment of the Text: Gendered Readings of John’s Prologue, Continuum International, London

Keener, C.S. 2003, The Gospel of John, A Commentary, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts

Köstenberger, A. J. 2004, John in Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Baker Academic, Ada, Michigan

Kysar, R. 1993, John, the Maverick Gospel, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky

Kysar, R. 2006, Voyages with John: Charting the Fourth Gospel, Baylor University Press, Waco, Texas

Lindars B. 1972, The Gospel of John, Oliphants, London

Lincoln, A. T. 2005, The Gospel According to Saint John in Black’s New Testament Commentary series, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts

Longenecker, R. N. 2005, Contours of Christology in the New Testament, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids

McGrath, J. F. 2001, John’s Apologetic Christology: Legitimation and Development in Johannine Christology, Cambridge University Press

Miller, E. L. 1989, Salvation-history in the Prologue of John: the Significance of John 1:3-4, Brill Archive, Leiden

Ngewa, S. M. 2003, The Gospel of John, Evangel Publishing House, Nairobi

Neyrey, J. H. 2007, The Gospel of John, Cambridge University Press

Phillips, P. M. 2006, The Prologue of the Fourth Gospel: A Sequential Reading, Continuum International, London

Pink, A. W. 1968, Exposition of the Gospel of John, Zondervan, Grand Rapids

Ratzinger, J, Pope Benedict XVI, 2007, Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, Doubleday, New York

Resseguie, J. L. 2001, The Strange Gospel: Narrative Design and Point of View in John, BRILL, Leiden

Ridderbos, H. N. 1997, The Gospel according to John: A Theological Commentary, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids

Sadananda, D. R. 2004, The Johannine Exegesis of God: An Exploration into the Johannine Understanding of God, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin

Schnackenburg, R. 1980, The Gospel According to St. John, Seabury Press, New York

Thompson, M. M. 2001, The God of the Gospel of John, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids

Trites, A. A. 2004, The New Testament Concept of Witness, Cambridge University Press

Voorwinde, S, 2005, Jesus’ Emotions in the Fourth Gospel: Human Or Divine?, Continuum International, London

Wallace, R. S. 2004, The Gospel of John: Pastoral and Theological Studies, Rutherford House, Edinburgh

Westermann, C. 1998, The Gospel of John in the Light of the Old Testament, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts

Willoughby, W. R. 1999, John: Believing on the Son, Christian Publications, Pennsylvania

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Barton, G. A. 1902, ‘On the Jewish-Christian Doctrine of the Pre-Existence of the Messiah’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 78-91

Borgen, P. 1972, ‘Logos was the True Light: Contributions to the Interpretation of the Prologue of John’ Novum Testamentum, Vol. 14, Fasc. 2, pp. 115-130

Bowen, C. R. 1924, ‘Notes on the Fourth Gospel’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 43, No. 1/2, pp. 22-27

Boyarin, D. 2001, ‘The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John’, The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 94, No. 3, pp. 243-284

Boyle, M. O. 1977, ‘Sermo: Reopening the Conversation on Translating JN 1,1’, Vigiliae Christianae, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 161-168

Bruce, A. B. 1896, ‘Four Types of Christian Thought. IV. The Fourth Gospel’, The Biblical World, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 168-179

Burrows, M. 1926, ‘The Johannine Prologue as Aramaic Verse’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 45, No. 1/2, pp. 57-69

Coloe, M. 1997, ‘The Structure of the Johannine Prologue and Genesis 1’, Australian Biblical Review, Vol. 45, pp 40-55

Cowan, C. 2006, ‘The Father and Son in the Fourth Gospel: Johannine Subordination revisited’, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Vol. 49. No. 1, pp 115-135

Giblin, C.H. 1985, ‘Two Complementary Literary Structures in John 1:1-18’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 104, No. 1, pp. 87-103

Glasswell, M. E. 1985, ‘The Relationship between John and Mark’, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Vol. 23, F 1985, pp 99-115

Kraaling, C.H. 1930, ‘The Fourth Gospel and Contemporary Religious Thought’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 140-149

MacLeod, D. J. 2003, ‘The Reaction of the World to the Word: John 1:10-13’, Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. 160, No 640, pp 398-413

MacLeod, D. J. 2003, ‘The Witness of John the Baptist to the Word: John 1:6-9’, Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. 160, No. 639, pp 305-320

Matera, F. J. 2006, ‘Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: a Study in the Diverse Unity of New Testament Theology’ Theological Studies Vol. 67, No. 2, pp 237-256

Meagher, J. 1969, ‘John 1:14 and the New Temple’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 88, No. 1, pp. 57-68

Middleton, R. D. 1938, ‘Logos and Shekinah in the Fourth Gospel’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 101-133

Miller, E. L. 1993, ‘The Johannine Origins of the Johannine Logos’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 112, No. 3, pp. 445-457

Pagels, E. 1999, ‘Exegesis of Genesis 1 in the Gospels of Thomas and John’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 118, No. 3, pp. 477-496

Price, J. L. 1967, ‘The Search for the Theology of the Fourth Evangelist’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 3-15

Pryor, J. W. 1985, ‘Of the Virgin Birth or the Birth of Christians? The Text of John 1:13 Once More’, Novum Testamentum, Vol. 27, Fasc. 4, pp. 296-318

Pryor, J. W. 1990, ‘Jesus and Israel in the Fourth Gospel: John 1:11’, Novum Testamentum, Vol. 32, Fasc. 3, pp. 201-218

Ridderbos, H. 1966, ‘The Structure and Scope of the Prologue to the Gospel of John’, Novum Testamentum, Vol. 8, Fasc. 2/4, pp. 180-201

Rishell C. W. 1901, ‘Baldensperger’s Theory of the Origin of the Fourth Gospel,’ Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 38-49

Schnelle, U. 2001, ‘Recent Views of John’s Gospel’, Word & World Vol.21 No. 4, pp 352359

Seitz, O.J.F. 1964, ‘Gospel Prologues: A Common Pattern?’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 262-268

Staten, H. 1993, ‘How the Spirit (Almost) Became Flesh: Gospel of John’, Representations, No. 41, pp. 34-57

Strachan, R. H. 1914, ‘The Idea of Pre-Existence in the Fourth Gospel’, The American Journal of Theology, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 81-105

Voorwinde, S. 2002, ‘John’s Prologue: beyond some Impasses of Twentieth-century scholarship’, Westminster Theological Journal, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp 15-44

Wordsworth, W.A. 1957,‘The Bodmer Papyrus and the Prologue of St. John’s Gospel’, Novum Testamentum, Vol. 2, Fasc. 1, pp. 1-7

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted in Exposition

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition



FATHER AND SON

In 1:14 the glory of Jesus is described as ‘the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father.’ The major claim in this Gospel is that that Jesus came from and returned to God.
This claim is so important that those who reject the son do not honour and obey the Father who sent him. Those who believe in Jesus believe in the one who sent him (12:44). On this theme the Prologue makes a fundamental statement (1:18);


‘No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.’


The ‘only-begotten son’ (KJV) has seen God since only he was pre-existent with the Father before the creation of the world. This experience of seeing the Father only belongs to the One who has come from God – the incarnate Logos (3:11; 3:32; 5:37; 7:29; 8:42; 16:28).


The relationship between the Father and the Son is characterized by love (3:35; 5:20; 15:9; 17:24) and the intimacy is such that the Father continues to be present with the Son while he is on earth (8:29; 16:32). The pre-existent relationship is so close that it is described as a dwelling of one within the other (10:38; 14:10; 17:21) but the subordination of the son to the Father is emphasized. The son is viewed as having been sent on a mission initiated by the Father, and is therefore accountable to him (3:17; 4:34; 5:23; 6:38; 7:28; 8:29, 12:44, 14:24). He is dependent on and obedient to the Father who gives him things (3:34; 5:22, 26, 27, 36; 17:24; 12:49; 17:8; 18:11), and people (6:37, 17:6). The son says that he can do nothing on his own initiative but only as instructed by his Father. (5:19, 30; 8:28). Lincoln (2005, p.65) comments:

‘However, the language of dependency of the Son on the Father- ‘the Son can do nothing on his own’- stresses not so much the subordination of the former to the latter as the total alignment of the wills and activities of the two (cf. 5:19,30; 8:28; 12:59-50).’

The paradox that is developed throughout John’s Gospel is that while the Son is subordinate to the Father, it is this that makes him equal with the Father, not just equal but truly one with the Father. Jesus applies two interesting titles to himself in the Gospel. The first is ‘Son of Man’ (1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 12:23; 13:31), the second is the ‘Son’ or ‘Son of God’ (1:14, 34, 49; 3:16-18; 5:19-26; 8:36; 9:35; 10:36; 11:27; 17:1; 19:7; 20:31). The title “Son of God” connected Jesus with the being of God himself. He is God and he is with God. He is equal to God but also dependent on God. As son he does only what the Father wants him to do and only speaks what he hears from the Father. As Logos he is the expression of God but he does not point to himself, only to his Father. As Son he reveals God and enables human beings to have a relationship with God.

THE SUPERIORITY OF THE REVELATION IN CHRIST TO THAT ON WHICH JUDAISM IS BASED

The Gospel of John is firmly grounded on the Old Testament. The connection between Moses and Jesus is stated towards the end of the Prologue (1:16-18):

‘From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.’

Lincoln (2005, p.75) aptly sums up the implications of these verses:

‘In the prologue not only is the grace and truth previously associated with the glory of Yahweh in the covenant with Moses (cf. Exod. 34.6) now associated with the glory of the incarnate Logos (1.14), but a contrast can also be made between the two – ‘the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came into being through Jesus Christ’ (1.17). This is not a denial that before the coming of the Logos the law was previously an expression of Yahweh’s grace and truth. It is rather an assertion on the part of believers in Jesus that now they have seen the fullness of grace and truth in the Logos’s glory, these qualities need no longer be sought in the law.’

The Prologue thus ends as it began; with a statement of the deity of Christ. Verses 1 and 18 mirror one another as in each the Son is called ‘God’, is viewed as the expression (logos) or revealer of God and is described as being intimate with God (‘with God’ and ‘at the Father’s side’).

CONCLUSION

Most of these main themes and leading ideas in the Prologue continue throughout the Fourth Gospel but ‘Logos’, the key term in the Prologue, does not appear (as a Christological title). The Prologue contains the substance of the Gospel, which explains the religious significance of Jesus. He is the pre-existent Logos, the source of existence, life and light, who became a human being and lived on earth. He was witnessed to by John the Baptist, was generally rejected by his own people but was received by some, to whom he gave authority to become God’s children. God previously revealed himself in a limited way in the law, but the Logos, Jesus Christ, was the ultimate self-expression of God.

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted in Exposition

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition



‘the fact that the light has never been quenched is proved by the witness of the prophets, above all by the witness of John the Baptist, the last of the prophets and the herald of Christ. But his function as a witness has to be clearly distinguished from that to which witness is given – the light, which became flesh in Jesus Christ.’

The Fourth Gospel identifies the purpose of John the Baptist’s appearance and ministry as that of ‘witness’. In the Prologue the two mentions of John as witness are inserted at strategic points, reinforcing what has been said. Verse seven (‘to bear witness of the light’) harks back to what is said in verse five about the coming of the light and verse fifteen to what is said in verse fourteen about what Ridderbos (1997, p.42) calls ‘Jesus’ antecedent transcendent glory.’


Trites (2004, p.78ff.) argues convincingly that the Fourth Gospel ‘presents a sustained use of juridical metaphor’. She maintains that ‘in the Fourth Gospel God Incarnate has a lawsuit with the world’ (p.79). She indicates that in the first twelve chapters, which deal mainly with the conflict between Jesus and “the Jews”, John is stating a case, advancing his arguments, challenging his opponents and presenting his witnesses. She understands the idea of witness in John’s gospel in terms of Old Testament legal language and points out that other juridical words such as judge, judgement, cause, accuse and convince are also used in a context of debate or hostility.


Her assessment of John the Baptist as witness (p.91) is insightful:


‘John is the first and one of the most important witnesses to Jesus and his testimony is a threefold one, as the Prologue makes clear: (1) He is not the Light. (2) He is sent to bear witness to the Light. (3) The purpose of his witness-bearing is that all may believe in Christ (1:6-8). This pattern is followed in subsequent sections dealing with the Baptist. John is mentioned at the beginning of the Fourth Gospel , for he is the first to point his fellow men to Jesus, and in that sense all believers have been brought to Christ through him (1:7b). While there had been other men sent from God, John’s task was unique. He bore witness to the incarnate Word, to his superiority to himself, and to his prior existence.’


Others said to be witnesses in the Fourth Gospel include: Jesus Himself (3:11; 5:31; 8:13-14; 18:37), the Samaritan woman (4:39), God the Father (5:32,34,37; 8:18; I John 5:9), Scripture (John 5:39), the works of Christ (5:36), the crowd at the raising of Lazarus (John 12:17), the Spirit (15:26-27; I John 5:10,11), the disciples (John 15:27; 19:35; I John 1:2; 4:14), and the author himself (John 21:24).

Although John the Baptist was sent from God as a witness to the Light he is portrayed as insignificant in comparison with the Light itself. Jesus called him a ‘lamp’ (5:35) but he was certainly not the Light. The writer of the Gospel asserts John’s subordination to Jesus (1:20, 27, 29, 33, 36) and strongly denies that John the Baptist is the Messiah. According to Luke 3:15 some people thought that John the Baptist might be the Messiah’. In the Prologue John gives no information on John the Baptist but concentrates only on his function as a witness to the Light.



‘It is employed with two different nuances in this verse. In the first two instances the reference is to the created world, the world that constitutes humanity’s environment and that includes humanity itself. In the third instance – the world did not know him- the reference is to the world of humanity that by its response reveals its devastating plight of having become alienated from and hostile to the Word/Light that sustains it. It is this second negative connotation of ‘world’ that will become dominant in the Fourth Gospel.’

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted in Exposition

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition


Ngewa (2003, p.10) says of the background to Logos:

‘If Semitic, then the main idea is that God communicated himself through Jesus Christ. If the background is Greek, the central idea is that Jesus holds things together. Neither of these ideas is excluded in what John says about Jesus in this passage. ‘

In the Prologue the author presents three views of the Logos:

1) In verse one he presents the Logos as being with God and within this expresses three important ideas.


– The eternal existence of the Logos (‘In the beginning was the word’).


– The eternal relationship of the Logos (‘with God’).


– The eternal status of the Logos (‘was God’).


The Logos exists before creation, enjoys a special, intimate relationship with God and in his very nature is God. The writer is thus claiming that Jesus who lived on earth was in fact the eternal Word, God himself. The idea is repeated in verse two, emphasizing the point.

2) In verse three he talks about the Logos and Creation and emphasises the divinity of the Word by stating that he was God’s agent in creation . This is put both positively (‘Through him all things were made’) and negatively (‘without him nothing was made that has been made.’). 

3) In verses ten to fourteen he speaks of the Logos in the world and deals with the rejection of the Logos (1:10-11), the new birth of those who accept him (1:12-13) and with the Incarnation (1:14). 

The word ‘logos’ (word) is employed thirty-nine times in John’s Gospel but it is only in the Prologue, where it occurs four times, that ‘logos’ is used as a Christological title. The term ‘Logos’ is never again applied to Jesus in John’s Gospel. Jesus later identifies himself as ‘Light’ (Jn 8:12; 9:5), as ‘Son’ (Jn 5:19-24), and as ‘Life’ (Jn 11:25) etc. but never says ‘I am the Word.”


This is because from chapter 1:14 on, he is no longer called ‘the logos’ but ‘Jesus’  Jesus and ‘the logos’ are one and the same; ‘the logos’ is the pre-existent Christ.

Christ’s pre-existence is not only mentioned in the Prologue but also on several occasions throughout the Gospel of John there are references to his life before Creation. He speaks of himself as having ‘come down from heaven’ (3:13; 3:31; 6:33; 6:38; 6:62). He says: ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ in 8:58 and, in the prayer of chapter seventeen, ‘And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began’ and ‘you loved me before the creation of the world.’ (17:5, 24). 


Kysar (1993, p.31) maintains that the affirmation that Jesus existed from the beginning is ‘one of the highest claims that the Christian has made for Christ’.  He observes:


‘The pre-existence of the Logos affirms not only that he existed before creation itself, but that he existed ‘before all things began’. His existence goes back into that mysterious time before time – into the realm of temporality that eludes human conceptuality. While we cannot fathom what it would mean to exist before all else, we can try to fathom what the author is trying to affirm by saying this. Christ is so important that he could not simply have come into being like any other person or object. Christ is made to transcend beings and things by the assertion of his pretemporal existence….Christ is no created being. He is before creation.’

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted in Exposition

(1) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Posted on by writtenexposition



INTRODUCTION


More than two thousand years ago a carpenter from Nazareth in Palestine emerged from obscurity. His influence was to divide his own nation, transform the lives of his disciples and impact the world. Who was Jesus? Where did he come from? What did he do and teach? How did people respond to his claims? What was his destiny? John, the author of the Fourth Gospel, seeks to address questions like these. He sums up his purpose in a statement in chapter 20:30-31:


‘Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.’


The author thus encourages the reader to consider Jesus Christ, whom he presents as the worthy object of faith.

THE PROLOGUE

Unlike the Synoptic Gospels ( Matthew, Mark, Luke) which all introduce Jesus by locating his ministry in a historical setting, John’s prologue presents Jesus as the Word (Logos) in eternity. According to Lindars (1972, p.77);


‘The prologue is a work of immense assurance and literary power. It moves with measured steps from the Creation to the climactic moment of the Incarnation (verse 14), and then indicates the fulness of the revelation which results from it – like the dawn gradually illuminating the sky until the sun suddenly bursts above the skyline and sends its rays horizontally across the earth.’


Carson (1991, p.111) comments; ‘The Prologue is a foyer to the rest of the Fourth Gospel (as John’s Gospel is often called), simultaneously drawing the reader in and introducing the major themes’.

It is my intention to identify and comment briefly upon the major themes in the Prologue to the Fourth Gospel.

(2) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(3) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(4) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(5) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(6) THEMES IN THE PROLOGUE TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL.