Direct Internal Quotation in the Gospel of John (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2.Reihe) 9783161559563, 9783161559570, 3161559568

Citation preview

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament · 2. Reihe Herausgeber / Editor Jörg Frey (Zürich)

Mitherausgeber/Associate Editors Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) · James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala) Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) · Janet Spittler (Charlottesville, VA) J. Ross Wagner (Durham, NC)

493

Jeffrey M. Tripp

Direct Internal Quotation in the Gospel of John

Mohr Siebeck

Jeffrey M. Tripp, born 1978; 2010 MA University of Georgia (Religion); 2016 PhD Loyola University Chicago (New Testament and Early Christianity); 2014 – 18 instructor of theology at Loyola University Chicago and instructor of religious studies at Saint Xavier University; currently instructor of religious studies at Rockford University.

ISBN 978-3-16-155956-3 / eISBN 978-3-16-155957-0 DOI 10.1628 / 978-3-16-155957-0 ISSN 0340-9570 / eISSN 2568-7484 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2. Reihe) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

© 2019 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Laupp & Göbel in Gomaringen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. Printed in Germany.

To Marian and Zoey

Acknowledgements The following study is a revision of my doctoral dissertation, submitted to the Department of Theology at Loyola University Chicago in 2016. My dissertation committee deserves special recognition. Dr. Thomas H. Tobin, SJ provided invaluable critiques of my argumentation and useful feedback on GrecoRoman texts. Dr. Robert A. Di Vito saved me by joining my committee after a member had to leave, and he provided valuable feedback on -RKQ¶V -HZLVK background. My sincerest thanks go to my dissertation director, Dr. Edmondo Lupieri. He was an incredibly generous and enthusiastic mentor since I arrived at Loyola, and he continues to be so to all his students, past and present. This project could not have been done without him. I had the idea for this study just as I began doctoral study. I am grateful to the faculty at Loyola for allowing me to pursue projects that eventually contributed to my understanding of the Greco-Roman background of New Testament texts. In this regard, Dr. Wendy J. Cotter, CSJ deserves my special gratitude, as she recognized the potential to develop this project into a dissertation when I mentioned it to her only in passing during my first year at Loyola. With regards to the publication of this book, I would like to thank Dr. Wayne Coppins (University of Georgia) for very generously reading through the manuscript and providing feedback, as well as for encouraging me to submit to Mohr Siebeck. I should also thank Dr. Jörg Frey for accepting my manuscript for publication, along with Henning Ziebritzki and the staff at Mohr Siebeck for guiding me through the process. A quick glance through my bibliography demonstrates how important works in this series have been to my research. I am humbled that my own work will appear alongside these. On a more personal level, I owe the utmost gratitude to my beloved wife, Marian. She put up with stacks of books taking over our small Chicago apartment with grace, encouraging me every step of the way ± or was that just to get PHWRILQLVKVRRQHUDQGUHWXUQDOOWKRVHERRNVWRWKHOLEUDU\",¶PVXUHWKHWZR DUHQ¶WUHODWHG,ORYH\RXP\GHDUHVW0DULDQDOVREURXJKWPH=RH\P\FRQ VWDQWFRPSDQLRQZKLOHZULWLQJWKLVERRN*UDQWHGVKHGLGQ¶WFRQWULEXWHPDWH riaOO\WRWKHUHVHDUFKRUWH[WEXW=RH\¶VDELOLW\WRJHWPHRXWRIWKHKRXVHDQG make me smile would at least get her a co-author credit if I were researching in the hard sciences. Rockford, 2019

Jeffrey M. Tripp

Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................... VII Chapter 1: Direct Internal Quotation .............................................. 1 1. A Definition of Direct Internal Quotation ................................................. 1 2. Previous Works on Direct Internal Quotation ........................................... 8 2.1 Direct Internal Quotation in Early Johannine Scholarship .................. 8 2.2 Direct Internal Quotation in Hebrew Bible Scholarship .................... 14 2.3 Direct Internal Quotation in Recent Johannine Scholarship .............. 18 3. The Present Plan of Study........................................................................ 21

&KDSWHU-RKQ¶V'LUHFW,QWHUQDO4XRWDWLRQVLQ7KHLU/LWHUDU\ Contexts ........................................................................................ 25 1. Direct Internal Quotation in the Context of Paraphrasis ........................ 25 2. Paraphrase in the Gospel of John ............................................................. 38 2.1 Transposition in Greco-Roman and Jewish Contexts ........................ 42 2.2 Transposition in the Gospel of John .................................................. 43 2.3 Addition in Greco-Roman and Jewish Contexts ............................... 51 2.4 Addition in the Gospel of John .......................................................... 53 2.5 Subtraction in Greco-Roman and Jewish Contexts ........................... 55 2.6 Subtraction in the Gospel of John ..................................................... 57 2.7 Substitution in Greco-Roman and Jewish Contexts .......................... 62 2.8 Substitution in the Gospel of John ..................................................... 66 3. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 73

X

Table of Contents

Chapter 3: The Roles of Direct Internal Quotation in John.......... 75 1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 75 2. Direct Internal Quotation and Functional Redundancy in John ............... 76 3. Direct Internal Quotation in Trial Contexts ............................................. 83 3.1 Direct Internal Quotation in Forensic Defenses ................................ 90 3.2 Direct Internal Quotation in Novelistic Trial Scenes......................... 93 3.3 Direct Internal Quotation as a Forensic Marker in the Old Testament ......................................................................................... 98 3.4 Direct Internal Quotation as a Forensic Marker in the New Testament ........................................................................................ 99 4. Direct Internal Quotation and the Trial Motif in John ........................... 111 5. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 118

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotations and Traditional Material ....................................................................................... 121 1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 121 2. Traditional Material in the Fourth Gospel ............................................. 128 2.1 The Testimony of John the Baptist .................................................. 128 2.2 You Blaspheme,$P*RG¶V6RQ-RKQ .............................. 140 ,$PWKH-HZV¶.LQJ-RKQ .................................................. 141 2.4 I am (John 18:5, 6, 8) ...................................................................... 142 2.5 It Is Better for One Person to Die for the People (John 11:50±52; 18:14) ......................................................................... 143 2.6 The Son of Man Must Be Lifted Up (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32±34) .. 145 2.7 A Slave Is not Greater than His Master (John 13:16; 15:20) ........... 147 2.8 Rise, Carry Your Bed and Walk (John 5:8, 11±12)......................... 151 ,ITXRWLQJ 24:7], or by expanding DYHUEDOFKDLQDVLQ*HQ´96 When quotations are used by one character against another, as is frequently the case, additions may serve to clarify the offense they have committed. Savran gives an example from Judges: Gideon asks the men of Succoth for food because his men are exhausted (ʭʩʴʩʲ) and they are in pursuit of the kings of Midian (8:5). The men of 6XFFRWK DVN ZKHWKHU *LGHRQ DOUHDG\ KDV WKHVH NLQJV LQ KLV KDQG ³WKDW ZH should give bread to your army´ 7KHMXGJHOHDYHV6XFFRWKDQGFDSWXUes the two kings without their help. When he returns, Gideon mockingly quotes WKHPDVGRXEWLQJWKDWKHKDG=HEDKDQG=DOPXQQDLQKLVKDQG³WKDWZHVKRXOG give bread to your exhausted (ʭʩʴʲʩʤ) men´ incorporating his own concerns and strengthening his accusation.97 Gideon then punishes them since they should have fed his tired soldiers. Some of the additions in the Hebrew Bible

 95 6HH+RFNDQG2¶1HLOProgymnasmata, 100±3. Theon gives another example in his disFXVVLRQRIDGGLWLRQKHFODLPVDOLQHLQ7KXF\GLGHV ³2SSRUWXQLWLHVIRUDFWLRQVGRQRW ZDLW´LVSDUDSKUDVHGE\'HPRVWKHQHV DV³2SSRUWXQLWLHVIRUDFWLRQVGRQRWZDLWfor our delays and procrastinations´ 7KHRQ¶V TXRWDWLRQ RI 7KXF\GLGHV LV QRW TXLWH DFFXUDWH ZKLFK UHDGVLQVWHDG³2SSRUWXQLWLHVIRUwar GRQRWZDLW´6LQFH7KHRQPDNHVDSRLQWRIVD\LQJWKDW in addition one does not substitute any of the given words, it is unclear whether the harmonization of Thucydides and Demosthenes occurred 1) in the text that Theon received, 2) in the WUDQVPLVVLRQWUDQVODWLRQRI7KHRQ¶VWH[WRUZKHWKHU 7KHRQIXGJHGWKHZRUGLQJDOLWWOHKLP self to provide a good example for his students. 96 Savran, Telling and Retelling, 32. In Gen 24:7, Abraham tells his servant that Yhwh ³ZLOOVHQGKLVDQJHObefore \RX´,Q*HQWKHVHUYDQWTXRWHVKLPDVVD\LQJWKDWFI @"´7KHQ WKH\ ZHUH VD\LQJ ³:KDW LVWKLV>WKDW KHVD\V@ WKH µlittle while ȝȚțȡȩȞ ¶":HGRQRWNQRZZKDWKHLVVD\LQJ´ Jesus knew what they wanted to ask him, and he said to WKHP³$UH\RXGLVFXVVLQJȗȘIJİ૙IJİ 22 ZLWKHDFKRWKHUEHFDXVH,VDLGµA little while ȝȚțȡȩȞ and you do not see me, and again a little while ȝȚțȡȩȞ and you will see me¶"´

Although the entire departure sequence confuses them, the disciples draw particulaUDWWHQWLRQWRWKH³OLWWOHZKLOH´WKHWHPSRUDOGLPHQVLRQZLWKLQWKLVEULHI interchange by forcing a sevenfold repetition of the word and by isolating this element of the quotation specifically for consideration. 23 The intense focus on ȝȚțȡȩȞKHOSVWRUHFDll the first time it appeared: John 7:33±6R-HVXVVDLG³,DPZLWK\RX\HWDOLWWOHWLPH਩IJȚȤȡȩȞȠȞȝȚțȡȩȞ DQG,JRWR the one who sent me. 24 You will seek me and you will not find [me], and where I am you FDQQRWFRPH´

As we have already seen, the Jews quote the second sentence in support of the interpretation that Jesus will go to teach in the Diaspora (7:35±36). A similar scene plays out in 8:21±ZKHQ-HVXVVD\VDJDLQʌȐȜȚȞ WKDWKHLVJRLQJDQG the Jews quote him (exactly if only partially) in support of a new interpretation: that he will kill himself. The language returns25 at the beginning of the farewell discourse when Jesus tells the GLVFLSOHV ³/LWWOHFKLOGUHQ,DPZLWK\RX\HWDOLWWOHZKLOH਩IJȚ

 21 2QO\WKHZRUGȝȚțȡȩȞDSSHars throughout in this scene; ਩IJȚȤȡȩȞȠȞȝȚțȡȩȞin full appears in John 7:33 and 12:35. 22 7KHXVHRIȗȘIJȑȦLQWKLVVHQVHLVXQLTXHLQ-RKQ%XOWPDQQJohn, 577 n. 7 and 177 n. 3) and George L. Parsenios (Rhetoric and Drama in the Johannine Lawsuit Motif [WUNT 258; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010], 50±51 n. 10), however, rightly recall the dispute ȗȒIJȘıȚȢ EHWZHHQWKH%DSWLVW¶VGLVFLSOHVDQGD-HZUHJDUGLQJSXULILFDWLRQEDSWLVP 23 Hartwig Thyen, Das Johannesevangelium (HNT 6; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 669±71. For more, see chapter 5 below. 24 In fact, the connections to 7:33±34 begin several verses earlier. In 7:33, Jesus says that after WKHOLWWOHZKLOH³,JRWRWKHRQHZKRVHQWPH´ਫ਼ʌȐȖȦʌȡઁȢIJઁȞʌȑȝȥĮȞIJȐȝİ ,Q he tells the GLVFLSOHV³Now ,JRWRWKHRQHZKRVHQWPH´Ȟ૨Ȟį੻ ਫ਼ʌȐȖȦʌȡઁȢIJઁȞʌȑȝȥĮȞIJȐ ȝİ $OWKRXJK-HVXV¶VFODLPWKDWKHgoes LVQRWUDUHQRUDUHUHIHUHQFHVWR*RGDV³WKHRQH ZKRVHQWPH´DQGPDUNWKHRQO\WZRtimes that they are used together. 25 ³cf. 7.7.5]. How then does he accuse Melite, whom he loved, of murder and now wishes to die for Leucippe, whom hHNLOOHG"´ 85

96

Chapter 3: The Roles of Direct Internal Quotation in John

hear what he has to say since he sets himself up as a god next to Artemis 88 by acting against what the council had previously decreed: What do you say, O most revered and moderate priest? In which sacred laws is it written to VHL]H IURP FRQYLFWLRQ țĮIJĮįȓțȘȢ  DQG WR ORRVH IURP ERQGV IJ૵Ȟ įİıȝ૵Ȟ ਕʌȠȜȪİȚȞ  WKRVH ZKRDUHFRQGHPQHGțĮIJİȖȞȦıȝȑȞȠȣȢ E\WKHFRXQFLODQGPDJLVWUDWHVWKRVHZKRDUH given over to death and bonds? (8.8.6)

He continues to focus on the conflict between the asylum given by the priest and the previous decision of the council and the magistrates. Later drawing a FRQWUDVW ZLWK $UWHPLV ZKR KDV QHYHU OHW ORRVH ȜȑȜȣțİȞ  QRU IUHHG (਱ȜİȣșȑȡȦıİ  IURP SXQLVKPHQW VRPHRQH DOUHDG\ JLYHQ RYHU WR GHDWK 7KHU sander claims: %XW\RXIUHHWKHERXQGIJȠઃȢįİșȑȞIJĮȢਥȜİȣșİȡȠ૙Ȣ DQG\RXOHWORRVHWKHFRQYLFWHGIJȠઃȢ țĮIJĮįȓțȠȣȢਕʌȠȜȪİȚȢ  (8.8.10)

Thersander maintains the image of Clitophon in chains while transitioning to the present tense and the plural to make it appear as if the priest disregards justice wantonly and often. When the priest quotes Thersander in his response, he will counter the implications that he frees anyone who enters the temple: he did let go (aorist verb) one condemned man (singular noun). The priest quotes the charges directly three times over the course of his response. First: Permit me to speak to you about whDW,KDYHEHHQFKDUJHGZLWK³You let loose (਩ȜȣıĮȢ ´ KHVD\V³WKHRQHFRQGHPQHGWRGHDWKIJઁȞșĮȞȐIJȠȣțĮIJİȖȞȦıȝȑȞȠȞ ´ (8.9.7)89

In the first case, Thersander complained that Clitophon should not be taken out of (ਥȟĮȚȡૌ) chains; in the second and third, he accused him of letting a condemned man loose from (ਕʌȠȜȪİȚȞ WKRVHFKDLQV7KHSULHVWPDNHVQRPHQWLRQ of chains, most likely to avoid the image of Clitophon in bonds, allowing him to adopt the verb that Thersander had previously used only in reference to ArWHPLV+HDFWLQJRQWKHJRGGHVV¶EHKDOIKDVVLPSO\IUHHGDFRQGHPQHGPDQ who, as the priest will argue, is innocent and who was principally condemned by Thersander, not the council (8.9.9±10). $QGQRZKHFULHVUHSHDWHGO\³You let loose a convicted man who was given over to death țĮIJȐįȚțȠȞ ਩ȜȣıĮȢ șĮȞȐIJ૳ ʌĮȡĮįȠșȑȞIJĮ ´ +RZ ³WR GHDWK șĮȞȐIJ૳ ´" ³&RQYLFWHG

 88 There are interesting echoes of John here²that Jesus makes himself (equal to) God (5:18; 10:33), and that the Jews neither honor him (5:23; 8:49) nor worship him as they should (4:21±24; 9:38). According to Thersander, the priest should go ahead and put himself entirely above humanity (੖ȜȦȢਙȞșȡȦʌȠȞıİĮȣIJઁȞਲȖȠ૨ DQGEHZRUVKLSSHGʌȡȠıțȣȞȠ૨) ZLWK$UWHPLVVLQFHKHLVVQDWFKLQJDZD\KHUKRQRUIJȚȝȒȞ  89 The priest also indirectly quotes here the charge that he acts as a tyrant (cf. 8.8.8).

3. Direct Internal Quotation  e Cf 

97

țĮIJȐįȚțȠȞ ´ of what?90 7HOOPHWKHFDSLWDOFKDUJH³For murder he has been condemned (ਥʌ੿ ijȩȞ૳ țĮIJȑȖȞȦıIJĮȚ ´ he says. So he murdered? Tell me who it is? She whom he killed and whom you were saying was slain, 91 you see her living! And you would not dare to still accuse him of murder! (8.9.12±13)

The focus on speech is intense. The priest still avoids mention of the chains ± Clitophon is given over exclusively to death, one that comes rather from TherVDQGHU¶VPDOLFHWKDQWKHFRXQFLO$FFRUGLQJWR7LP:KLWPDUVKSUHYLRXVO\³LQ a Greek court, a man could be prosecuted for sycophantia µV\FRSKDQF\¶ LH bringing a suit against someone out of malicious intent rather than genuine JULHYDQFHRUSXEOLFLQWHUHVW´DQGWKHSULHVWGHIOHFWVWKHFKDUJHVDJDLQVWKLPVHOI by suggesting that Thersander is guilty of this crime.92 The priHVWWKHQIRFXVHVQHLWKHURQWKHSULVRQHU¶VEHLQJKDQGHGRYHUQRURQ his own liberation of the prisoner, but on the conviction to death by requoting these words directly. Only now is the actual charge against Clitophon reintroGXFHG³IRUPXUGHU´ HPSKDWLFDlly at the head of the statement which the priest credits to Thersander himself. In the present context, Thersander has consistently avoided the actual charges because they are demonstrably false, relying instead on the mere fact of conviction. But he was the one who originally called IRU&OLWRSKRQ¶VGHDWKRQFKDUJHVRIPXUGHU7KHSULHVWE\TXRWLQJ7KHUVDQGHU as saying that Clitophon has been condemned for murder ± and quoting him indirectly a moment later as saying that she (who is present) has been slain ± HPSKDVL]HVWKHFRQWUDGLFWLRQEHWZHHQWKHPDQ¶VDUJXPHQWDQGWKHWUXWK The defense of the priest of Artemis before the council has to do with acts rather than words or teaching, but the war of words over the charges at the beginning of the trial highlights how important it is to establish precisely what is at stake.93 The priest wants to clear himself of the charge that he lets any convict loose who enters the sanctuary, apparently of his own free will. He modifies the charges to reflect that he did let loose one convict condemned for

 90

Bers (Speech in Speech, 6) acknowledges that a short phrase or single word may reproGXFHHOHPHQWVRISUHYLRXVVSHHFK+HUHWKHUHWHQWLRQRIWKHLUFDVHVDUJXHVWKDW³WRGHDWK´ DQG³FRQYLFWHG´DUHTXRWHG 91 The quotation here is indirect: ਴ȞਕʌȑțIJİȚȞİțĮ੿ ਩ȜİȖİȢਕȞૉȡોıșĮȚ 92 Leucippe and Clitophon (Tim Whitmarsh, trans.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 160. Notice that when Thersander speaks, Clitophon is condemned by the council and magistrates, a fact that the priest avoids. Instead, he suggests that Thersander has assumed every role in the legal process, including that of the chief councilor (8.9.9±10). John uses a VLPLODU DOWKRXJK QDUUDWLYH  SOR\ DJDLQVW WKH -HZV LQ -HVXV¶ WULDO GHSLFWLQJ KLV FRnviction more as the will of his accusers at the earthly level and of his Father at the heavenly (cf.  WKDQWKHZLOORI-HVXV¶RVWHQVLEOHMXGJH3LODWH 93 For DIQ in other fictional trial scenes, see Leucippe and Clitophon 7.9.7; Callirhoe 5.7.4, 6±7; Daphnis and Chloe 2.16.3. The embedding of speech is deep in Aethiopica 1.15± 16 as the guilt of Demaeneta is revealed, where she is quoted by Thisbe, who is quoted by Charias, who is quoted by Cnemon. Thisbe, coming to Aristippus to accuse herself of fra ming his son, quotes herself in 1.16.2 (cf. 1.11.4).

98

Chapter 3: The Roles of Direct Internal Quotation in John

a crime that he quite obviously could not have committed. Yet the priest also turns the charges against Thersander so that he manipulates the council to act against the goddess (through her representative) and to kill a man who is innocent of the charges, out of personal malice. To make this case, the priest uses 7KHUVDQGHU¶VRZQDFFXVDWLRQVDVHYLGHQFHDJDLQVWKLP 3.3 Direct Internal Quotation as a Forensic Marker in the Old Testament Lincoln, in Truth on Trial, examines tKH)RXUWK*RVSHO¶VODZVXLWPRWLILQOLJKW of the Old Testament, or more specifically, the Septuagint. He views the conflict between Jesus and the Jews as an ongoing covenant lawsuit, particularly modeled on the language and themes of LXX Isaiah 40±55.94 In the trial scenes of deutero-Isaiah, God calls on the idols and the Israelites to speak/testify (41:1, 21±23; 43:9±10, 26; 44:7; 45:21) and it is asserted that God has proclaimed (43:12; 44:8; 45:19±21) while the idols have not proclaimed (41:26± 27), but unfortunately the content RI*RG¶VSDVWVSHHFKLVUDUHO\UHFRXQWHG 95 Prophetic messages fill the scenes, and in that sense portray Isaiah as quoting *RGEXWSDVWVSHHFKDFWVDUHHLWKHUSUHVXPHGRUDWEHVWLPSOLHGLQ*RG¶VODZ VXLWDJDLQVW,VUDHO/LQFROQ¶VDrgument for the influence of Isaiah on John is persuasive, but the covenant lawsuit as portrayed in Isaiah does not seem to SURYLGHDQDGHTXDWHOLWHUDU\PRGHOIRU-RKQ¶VXVHRI',4 Instead and perhaps more appropriately, it is in the narrative books where ZHILQGFORVHUFRPSDULVRQVWR-RKQ¶VIRUHQVLFXVHRI',4 96 In one case Solomon sentences Shimei to house arrest in Jerusalem. In particular, he says (3 .JGPV ³µ>LI@ \RXFURVVWKH ZLQWHU-flowing Kidron, you will know for certain that you will cHUWDLQO\GLHȖȚȞઆıțȦȞȖȞઆıૉ ੖IJȚșĮȞ੺IJ૳ ਕʌȠșĮȞૌ), your

 94

As Lincoln points out (Truth on Trial, 38±40 and throughout), these passages share the IROORZLQJ SUHRFFXSDWLRQV ZLWK -RKQ WHVWLPRQ\ MXGJPHQW WUXWK JORU\ DQG ³, DP´ VWDWH ments (41:10; 45:22; 46:9; 48:12 [2x], 17; 51:12), particularly unpredicated and absolute cases (43:10, 25 [2x]; 45:18; 46:4; 51:12). The first scriptural citation of the gospel is on the lips of a witness quoting Isa 40:3 (John 1:23). 95 Isa 44:26±KDV*RGGHFODUH³,DP«WKHRQH ZKRVD\VWR-HUXVDOHPµDMHDORXV@ *RG DQG WKHUH LV QR RWKHU EHVLGHV PH´ FI ([RG  'HXW ,VD EXWDOVR

128

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

We can now test the hypothesis that the practice began as early as the 1st cenWXU\LQWKH)RXUWK*RVSHO:HZLOOEHJLQZLWKWKH%DSWLVW¶VWHVWLPRQ\EHIRUH moving on to a more case-by-case format, ending with three sayings often tied in some way to the tradition found in Mark 9:1.

2. Traditional Material in the Fourth Gospel 2.1 The Testimony of John the Baptist In his two scenes in the Fourth Gospel, the Baptist gives three unverifiable quotations (John 1:33, 34; 3:28) and, as I will argue, three verifiable ones, although two quote the same speech act (3:28/1:20; 1:15, 30/1:27). All five of the statements that the Baptist quotes have parallels in the Synoptic tradition: Table 2: Statements Quoted by John the Baptist with Synoptic Parallels Quoted Statement in John

Synoptic Tradition Parallel

-RKQ³,DPQRWWKH&KULVW´FI

$FWV³,DPQRWKH´20

-RKQ³2QHLVFRPLQJDIWHUPHRI whom I am not worthy that I should ORRVHQWKHVWUDSRIKLVVDQGDO´FI 30)

0DUN³7KHRQHZKRLVstronger than me is coming after me, of whom I am not fit, having stooped down, to undo the VWUDSRIKLVVDQGDOV´

-RKQ³2QZKRPHYHU\RXsee the Spirit descending and remaining on him, this is the one who baptizes in Holy 6SLULW´

0DUN³+HZLOOEDSWL]H\RXZLWK WKH+RO\6SLULW´«KHVDZWKHKHDYHQV torn apart and the Spirit descending like a dove on him.

-RKQ³7KLVLVWKH6RQRI*RG´

Matt 3:1³7KLVLVP\6RQWKHEHORYHG ZLWKZKRP,DPZHOOSOHDVHG´

-RKQ³,DPVHQWDKHDGRIKLP´

/XNH³%HKROG,DPVHQGLQJP\ messenger before you, who will prepare \RXUZD\DKHDGRI\RX´

The identification of John 1:15, 30 as quotations of the logion in 1:27 is not entirely without controversy. The absolute preexistence of Jesus, supported by the quotations, is so overwhelming that it is difficult to see how they could

 47:8, 10), which is credited to Ialdabaoth/Samael in narration (Orig. World 103.11±12; Ap. John 11.19±22; Hyp. Arch. 94.21±22; 95.4±5; Treat. Seth 53.29±30; Gos. Truth 48.4±7) and in quotation (Orig. World 105.30±31; 112.28±29; Ap. John 13.8±9; Treat. Seth 64.18±26), and the DIQ from Genesis 2±3 regarding what Adam and Eve can and cannot eat (Orig. World 118.19±31; Gos. Phil. 73.10±12; Hyp. Arch. 88.27±32; 89.34±90.5; Gos. Truth 45.24± 32; 46.26). 20 7KH FORVHVW DQWHFHGHQW WLWOH LV ³VDYLRU RI ,VUDHO´ $FWV   QDPHO\ -HVXV ZKR LV then identified with the one who comes after John (13:25).

. e Mfe  f # e  f

129

originate in the somewhat prosaic statement about the relative social status of John and Jesus. It is the Fourth GRVSHO¶VXVHRI',4WKDWDOORZVLWWRPRYHWKH ORJLRQWRVXSSRUWWKHLPSRUWDQW-RKDQQLQHPRWLIRIWKH:RUG¶VSUHH[LVWHQFH while grounding it in recognizable tradition. Before we get to that argument, however, let us examine how the Fourth Gospel uses DIQ to endorse and repurpose traditional material in the other quotations from the Baptist. In the Synoptics, the contrast of baptisms is attached to the logion about the one coming after the Baptist: he baptizes in water, but the coming one will baptize in (Holy) Spirit (and fire) (Mark 1:8; Matt 3:11; Luke 3:16). The baptism of Jesus soon follows, in each text including the Spirit descending in manner like a dove (in Luke, in bodily form) onto Jesus (Mark 1:10; Matt 3:16; Luke 3:22). Unique to John, the Baptist reports a message he received from God prior to the revelation of Jesus: John 1:32±³,KDYHVHHQthe Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him$QG,GLGQ¶WNQRZKLPEXWWKHRQHZKRVHQWPHWR baptize in water, that one told PHµOn whomever you see the Spirit descending and remaining on him, this is the one who baptizes in Holy Spirit¶´21

Italicized words could be borrowed directly from the Synoptic accounts, and the rest of the scene is more or less recognizable from them. John evidently approved of the tradition, but by leaving the baptism implied, making the Baptist a direct eyewitness tRWKH6SLULW¶VGHVFHQWDQGWKHQWHVWLI\LQJWRWKHFRUUH ODWLRQRI*RG¶VZRUGDQGLWVIXOILOOPHQWWKH)RXUWK*RVSHOKHLJKWHQVWKH%DS WLVW¶VUROHDVDZLWQHVVWR&KULVWUDWKHUWKDQDEDSWL]HU 7KH %DSWLVW HQGV E\ FODLPLQJ WKDW KH KDV WHVWLILHG   ³7KLV LV *RG¶V 6RQ´Ƞ੤IJȩȢਥıIJȚȞ੒ ȣੂઁȢIJȠ૨ șİȠ૨ $W-HVXV¶EDSWLVPLQ0DUN DQG/XNH  DKHDYHQO\YRLFHVSHDNVGLUHFWO\WR-HVXVVD\LQJ³@ZKLFKLVin the world [9:5]) or confessional statements about him (1:30, 33, 34, 49; 3:2; 4:19, 42; 6:14, 69; 7:40±41; 9:17, 24; 11:27). 55 As late as John 17:24 Jesus wishes that the disciples may see șİȦȡ૵ıȚȞ KLVJORU\ 56 -RKQUHDGV³-HVXV«manifested his gloryDQGKLVGLVFLSOHVEHOLHYHGLQKLP´7KDW the disciples perceived his glory at the time is unlikely. 57 7KLVLVWKHUHVXOWRIWKHSURORJXHEHLQJGRPLQDWHGE\WKHQDUUDWRU¶VSRVW-resurrection perspective, evident elsewhere in the narrative asides in which the narrator can refer to the anointing (11:2), the resurrection (2:22), and the giving of the Spirit (7:39) as past events even though they have yet to happen in the story (Culpepper, Anatomy, 27±32). 58 A strongly attested variant of 1:15 (ʠa, B*, C*, Origen, and Cyril) replaces ੔ȞİੇʌȠȞ with ੒ İੁʌȫȞ-5DPVD\0LFKDHOV³2ULJHQDQGWKH7H[WRI-RKQ´LQ New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis [E.J. Epp and G.D. Fee, eds.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981], 87±104). The variant is troublesome grammatically, and has been treated DVDSDUHQWKHVLV³-RKQWHVWLILHVDERXWKLPDQGKDVFULHGRXWVD\LQJWKLVZDVKHZKRVDLG  µ7KHRQHFRPLQJDIWHUPH«¶´0LFKDHOVDUJXHVSHUVXDVLYHO\LQVWHDGWKDWZLWKWKHYDULDQW reading, the entire speech act of 1:15 should be taken as a parenthesis with the preceding ȜȑȖȦȞFRQQHFWLQJWRWKH੖IJȚLQ³-RKQWHVWLILHVDERXWKLPDQGKDVFULHGRXWVD\LQJKH LWZDVZKRVDLGµ7KHRQHFRPLQJDIWHUPHKDVWDNHQSUHFHGHQFHRYHUPHEHFDXVHKHH[LVWHG before me¶ µ2IKLVIXOOQHVVZHKDYHDOOUHFHLYHGDQGJUDFHIRUJUDFH¶´3DWULVWLFDWWHVWDWLRQV

. e Mfe  f # e  f

139

the narrative presentation en scène.59 In 1:27, the one coming after the Baptist identifies one standing among them whom they do not know (1:26). 60 In 1:30, it is simply that a man approaches. But in the prologue, the Word provides the RQO\PDVFXOLQHDQWHFHGHQWEHVLGHV*RG W\LQJWKH%DSWLVW¶s statement directly to the opening verses which focus on the preexistence of the now incarnated Word in the strongest possible terms. 61 If the Messiah, Elijah, and the Prophet provide models of preexistence in the storyWKHSUROHSWLFTXRWDWLRQRI-RKQ¶V testimony in the prologue escalates the claim to one of the absolute preexistence of the Word, identified with Jesus (1:17), and so indicates his absolute preeminence over John the Baptist. ,Q WKH SURORJXH -RKQ FRQVWUXFWV D K\EULG IRUP RI WKH %DSWLVW¶V WHVWimony, WDNLQJ³WKHRQHFRPLQJDIWHUPH´IURPDQGWKHUHVWIURP 62 The ambiguity of the title allows identification with the preexistent Word, while the allowance of temporal priority amplifies the identification. The context of the prologue, incluGLQJ WKH %DSWLVW¶V WHVWLPRQ\ FRQGLWLRQV WKH DXGLHQFH WR LQIHU temporal priority in a way that the traditional logion simply could not. By contrast the Synoptic presentations of the Baptist, including their own versions of the saying, unpack the greater status of Jesus by comparing their baptisms, one with water and one with Holy Spirit. 63 By the time the Baptist testifies about the one coming after him, echoing the language of the first clause of 1:15 exactly, the audience already knows why the Baptist is unworthy to loosen his sandal. Such an audience is privileged over the priests and Levites who lack

 RIWKHYDULDQWRQO\RFFXULQDUJXPHQWVWKDW-RKQ¶VWHVWLPRQ\FRQWLQXHVDWOHDVWWKURXJKYHUVH 16. For our purposes, the variant formula continues to introduce who Jesus was and the speech act as something John said LQWKHDRULVWZKHWKHUİੇʌȠȞRUİੁʌȫȞ  59 6HH -|UJ )UH\ ³'LH *HJHQZDUW YRQ 9HUJDQJHQKHLW XQG =XNXQIW &KULVWL =XU µ9HUVFKPHO]XQJ¶GHU=HLWKRUL]RQWHLP-RKDQQHVHYDQJHOLXP´LQZeit (JBTh 28; M. Ebner et al., eds.; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Theologie, 2014), 129±58, here 137±38; Thyen, Johannesevangelium, 102. 60 The glut of roles that John might fulfill in 1:25 (Christ, Elijah, the Prophet) argues DJDLQVWLGHQWLI\LQJ³WKHFRPLQJRQH´QHDWO\ZLWKDQ\RQH of them, although cases could be made for each: Jesus is the Christ (1:41; 4:25±30; 11:27; 20:31), and the Baptist may think of Jesus as Elijah (Brown, John, 1:47±64); see Wayne A. Meeks, The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology (NovTSup 14; Boston: Brill, 1967) for ways that John presents Jesus as the Prophet like Moses. 61 On the chain of pronouns, see Kunath, Die Präexistenz Jesu, 49. ੒ ਥȡȤȩȝİȞȠȢLVPDV FXOLQHZKLOHij૵ȢWKDWZDVFRPLQJ਷ȞਥȡȤȩȝİȞȠȞLIQRPLQDWLYH LVQHXWHUHDUO\ source critLFDOVWXGLHVSRVLWHGWKDWWKH/LJKWVKRZQRQ³HYHU\PDQFRPLQJLQWRWKHZRUOG´FIਥȖȑȞİIJȠ ਙȞșȡȦʌȠȢLQDJDLQVWWKLVVHH3HGHU%RUJHQ³/RJRV:DVWKH7UXH/LJKW&RQWULEXWLRQV WRWKH,QWHUSUHWDWLRQRIWKH3URORJXHRI-RKQ´LQLogos Was the True Light and Other Essays on the Gospel of John [Relieff 9; Trondheim: Tapir, 1983], 95±110). 62 Haenchen, John, 1:120. See also chapter 2 n. 20 on this rarer type of paraphrase. Thyen (Johannesevangelium, 101) sees in the phrasing of 1:15 already the first case of an intertextual play on the Synoptic texts that is signaled more strongly in 1:27. 63 Keener, John, 1:456.

140

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

this information. When John returns to this testimony on the second day, now echoing the second and third clauses exactly, it is even easier for the audience WR KHDU D FRQIHVVLRQ RI -HVXV¶ SUHH[LVWHQFH 7KH VHULHV RI TXRWDWLRQV PDVNV -RKQ¶V LQWHUSUHWLYH UHGLUHFWLRQ IUDPLQJ D VWDWHPHQW DOPRVW FHUWDLQO\ WUDGL WLRQDO  DERXW -HVXV¶ VWDWXV VXSHULRU WR WKDW RI WKH %DSWLVW LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI &KULVW¶VDEVROXWHSUHH[istence ± a christological insight that only John among the gospels is so explicit in promoting. The Fourth Gospel places great emphasis on the testimony of the Baptist, DQGZKLOHVRPHRILWLVXQLTXHWR-RKQHJ³WKH/DPERI*RG´ HYHU\WKLQJ that the Baptist quotes or can be quoted as saying has ties to pre-Johannine tradition. The same cannot be said for the rest of the quotations in the gospel, but as we will see, many are grounded in tradition. From here until we get to those quotations tied to Mark 9:1, we will skip through the gospel to trace the WUDGLWLRQVEHKLQGPXFKRI-RKQ¶VTXRWHGPDWHULDO 2.2 You Blaspheme; I Am God’s Son (John 10:36) :HFDQEHJLQZLWK-HVXV¶GRXEOHFLWDWLRQRIKRVWLOH-HZV³6ROGLHUV@³+DLOWRWKH.LQJRIWKH-HZV´FI0DUN0DWW John 19:19: [the titulus@³-HVXVWKH1D]RUHDQWKH.LQJRIWKH-HZV´FI0DUN0DWW 27:37 // Luke 23:38)72

-RKQ¶VXQLTXHFRQWULEXWLRQLVWKHUHTXHVWWRFKDQJHWKHSKUDVLQJ -RKQ³'RQRWZULWHµ7KH.LQJRIWKH-HZV¶FI0DUN EXWµ+HVDLG³,DPWKH -HZV¶NLQJ´¶´

 70

For the view that John is dependent on Mark and other Synoptic tradition, see Barrett, John, 378±79 and Lincoln, John, 37. Luke and at least one of the other Synoptics would VHHPWREHQHFHVVDU\LIWKLVLVWKHFDVH)RU%URZQ¶VDUJXPHQWVHH³,QFLGHQWV´RUJohn, 1:405. Another possibility would be that John had aFFHVVWRRQHRIWKH6\QRSWLFWUDGLWLRQ¶V passion sources. 71 In the Gospel of Peter WKHLQVFULSWLRQUHDGVLQVWHDG³7KLVLVWKH.LQJRI,VUDHO´ 72 1RWLFHWKDW0DUNDSSHDUVWKURXJKRXWOHDGLQJ%DUUHWWWRFODLPWKDW-RKQ³IROORZV0DUN FORVHO\´ KHUH John, 536). The precise wording of the epigraph in the Synoptics varies. 0DUN¶VUHDGVRQO\³7KH.LQJRIWKH-HZV´/XNHDGGV³WKLVRQH´WRWKHHQGRI0DUN¶VSKUDVH ZKLOH0DWWKHZ¶VUHDGVPRUHIXOO\DQGFRQIHVVLRQDOO\³7KLVLV-HVXVWKH.LQJRIWKH-HZV´

142

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

The direct quote is in the mode of an imputed accusation, and there is additional Johannine resonance. So far the Jews have disputed with Jesus when he FODLPHG³,DPWKHEUHDG´± ³«WKHOLJKW´ ³«WKHJDWH´  ³«WKHJRRGVKHSKHUG´FI DQG³«*RG¶V6RQ´ $OW hough the reDFWLRQVWRKLVGHFODUDWLRQVRI³,DP´ZLWKRXWDSUHGLFDWHKDYHEHHQ mixed (see the reactions to 8:24 and 8:28), 73 the last of these inspired an atWHPSWHGO\QFKLQJ ³,DPWKH-HZV¶NLQJ´VRXQGVOLNHVRPHWKLQJ-HVXV would say, making the imputation morHEHOLHYDEOH7REHPRUHVSHFLILF³,DP WKH-HZV¶NLQJ´VRXQGVOLNHVRPHWKLQJ-HVXVZRXOGVD\in the Gospel of John. The original statements with this title are phrased in traditional language; the quotation is Johannine and serves to further characterize the Jews (through their chief priests) as those who attempt to bring evidence against Jesus. The Fourth Gospel is evidently keen to emphasize the title, King of the Jews, 74 and DIQ allows John to repeat it twice more while slipping in an additional (and irRQLFDOO\WUXH ³,DP´HYHQLI3LODWHZLOOQRWFRQFHGHWRPRGLI\WKHtitulus. 2.4 I Am (John 18:5, 6, 8) We may also take a brief moment on the double-TXRWDWLRQRI-HVXV¶VHHPLQJO\ EDQDOUHVSRQVHDWKLVDUUHVWDQXQSUHGLFDWHG³,DP´,WLVGDQJHURXVWRORad too much onto just two words that serve as a self-identification, yet there is tradition pre-dating John of having Jesus boldly declare who he is using these two words. The declaration appears in all accounts of Jesus walking on the water (Mark 6:50; Matt 14:27; John 6:20), where there are perhaps some echoes of WKHGLYLQHXVHRI³,DP´LQ([RGXVDQGGHXWHUR-Isaiah.75 An even more relevant FDVHLVIRXQGLQ0DUN¶VWULDOEHIRUH WKH6DQKHGULQZKHUHXQOLNHLQ0DWWKHZ and Luke, Jesus answers the question of whether he is the Messiah quite plainly  ³,DP´76 The cluster of Synoptic parallels in John 10 is connected to precisely this scene, so that John seems to be aware of either the Synoptic trial material or the traditions behind it. Like Mark, the Fourth Gospel has Jesus

 73 In chapter 8 alone Jesus makes six bold declarations using ਥȖઅ İੁȝȚ>[@ 28, 58) while under the watching eye of the chief priests (cf. 7:32, 45). 74 &KU\V&&DUDJRXQLV³7KH.LQJGRPRI*RG&RPPRQDQG'LVWLQFW(OHPHQWV%HWZHHQ John and the 6\QRSWLFV´LQJesus in Johannine Tradition [R.T. Fortna and T. Thatcher, eds.; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001], 125±34, here 125) points out that John presents -HVXVDV³NLQJ´WLPHVZKLOH0DWWKHZFRPHVFORVHVWWR-RKQZLWKHLJKW 75 7KHVHHFKRHVDUHSHUKDSVORXGHULQ0DUNZKHUH-HVXVLQWHQGVWR³SDVVWKHPE\´  DSRVVLEOHDOOXVLRQWR*RG¶VDFWLYLW\RQ6LQDL0RUQD'+RRNHUA Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark [BNTC 2; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991], 170). They are still heard LQ-RKQ¶VYHUVLRQKRZHYHU 76 Jesus does follow this up with a declaration about seeing the Son of Man. Luke has -HVXVDQVZHU³੒ ȃĮȗȦȡĮ૙ȠȢ@੔Ȟıઃ įȚȫțİȚȢ$FWV  80 (UHIHUVWRWKH³ILUVWHGLWLRQ´RI-RKQHWF 78

144

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

Dodd gives a form-critical argument that John presents an inherited pronouncement story, largely unchanged in 11:47±51.81 He points out that ȜȠȖȓȗȠȝĮȚ DQGʌȡȠijȘIJİȪȦDUHXQLTXHLQWKH-RKDQQLQHZULWLQJVDOWKRXJKQHL ther appears within the saying. 82 More convincing for Dodd is the transitional SKUDVH³QRWIRUWKHQDWLRQDORQH´ZKLFKIRUKLP³LVREYLRXVO\GHVLJQHGWRJLYH the desired turn ± a quite arbitrary turn ± to a maxim which is not itself conJHQLDOWRWKLVHYDQJHOLVW´ 83 +HFRQFOXGHVWKDW³WKH)RXUWK(YDQJHOLVWZDVLQD position to draw, directly or indirectly, upon a source of information deriving from a very early Jewish Christian circle still in close association with the synDJRJXH´84 a tradition that John then modified by paraphrasing the saying in line with its ideology. There also seems to be some dispute about what or whom Jesus dies for. A number of ਫ਼ʌȑȡ-sayings are applied to Jesus in tKH1HZ7HVWDPHQW,Q3DXO¶V early phrasing of the Eucharist tradition, a tradition he says he received (1 Cor  -HVXVUHIHUVWRWKHEUHDGDV³P\ERG\ZKLFKLVfor (ਫ਼ʌȑȡ \RX´&RU 11:24).85 Elsewhere Paul says that Christ died for our sins (Gal 1:4; 1 Cor 15:3, also received), for us (Rom 5:8; see Gal 3:13), or for all (2 Cor 5:14; cf. also Heb 2:9). In the Markan account of the institution of the Eucharist, Jesus refers WRWKHZLQHDV³P\EORRGRIWKHFRYHQDQWSRXUHGRXWfor PDQ\´0DUN 86 JoKQ¶VPRVW(XFKDULVWLFSDVVDJHLQFRUSRUDWHVWKLVODQJXDJHZKHQ-HVXVVD\VKH will give his flesh for the life of the world (6:51), suggesting that whoever composed this line was aware of the wider tradition. 87 So ਫ਼ʌȑȡ-sayings applied WR-HVXV¶GHDWKDUHZLGHspread in Pauline circles, where Paul marks some of

 81 &+ 'RGG ³7KH 3URSKHF\ RI &DLDSKDV -RKQ [L ±´ Ln More New Testament Studies (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1968), 58±68. The elements of the pronouncement story are (p. 59): a concise setting (11:47a), a brief dialogue (11:47±48) folORZHGE\D³SUHJQDQWVD\LQJ´ ZLWKDQLQWHUSUHWLYHFomment (11:52). 82 'RGG³3URSKHF\´ȈȣȝijȑȡȦDSSHDUVRQO\LQRXWVLGHRIWKHVD\LQJ DQG its later (and, against von Wahlde, possibly more primitive) quotation (18:14). Whereas Caiaphas argues that it is better for them that one man dies so that the Romans do not come and WDNHDZD\WKHLUSODFH-HVXVVD\VLQ³,WLVEHWWHUIRU\RXWKDW,JRDZD\ıȣȝijȑȡİȚਫ਼ȝ૙Ȟ ੆ȞĮਥȖઅ ਕʌȑȜșȦ IRULI,GRQRWJRDZD\WKH3DUDFOHWHZLOOQRWFRPHWR\RX´ 83 'RGG³3URSKHF\´ 84 'RGG³3URSKHF\´ 85 /XNH¶VSKUDVLQJ LV QHDUO\ LGHQWLFDO WR3DXO¶V ZLWKWKH DGGLWLRQ RI³JLYHQ´ FI /XNH  7KH&RSWLFDGGV³JLYHQ´WR&RULQWKHVDPHSRVLWLRQDV/XNH 86 0DWW  VXEVWLWXWHV ʌİȡ੿ ʌȠȜȜ૵Ȟ )RU D PRUH FRPSOHWH GLVFXVVLRQ VHH 5HLPXQG Bieringer, ³7UDGLWLRQVJHVFKLFKWOLFKHU8UVSUXQJXQGWKHRORJLVFKH%HGHXWXQJGHUhyper-AusVDJHQLP1HXHQ7HVWDPHQW´LQThe Four Gospels 1992: Festschrift Frans Neirynck (Frans van Segbroeck, Christopher M. Tuckett, Gilbert van Belle, and J. Verheyden, eds.; 3 vols.; Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1992), 1:219±48. 87 See also 10:11, 15; 13:37±ZKLFKVSHDNRIOD\LQJGRZQRQH¶VOLIHfor someRQH&IIXUWKHU)UH\³(GOHU7RG± wirksamer Tod ± stellvertretender Tod ± heilschaffender 7RG´LQHerrlichkeit, 555±84, esp. 567±72.

. e Mfe  f # e  f

145

them as traditions that he himself received, and they are evident also in the Synoptic and Johannine traditions. While John keeps the ਫ਼ʌȑȡ  DFFXVDWLYH FRQVWUXFWLRQ WKURXJKRXW LW SDUD phrases the beneficiaries. Recall that, based on usage in the LXX and New 7HVWDPHQWȜĮȩȢFRQQRWDWLYHO\UHIHUVWRWKH-HZLVKSHRSOHDVWKHSHRSOHRI*RG while ਩șȞȠȢUHIHUVWRDQ\QDWLRQਫ਼ȥȦș੾ıİIJĮȚ@ DQGJORULILHG>įȠȟĮıș੾ıİIJĮȚ@ 97 while building a proper set of passion predictions off of a polyvalent term. Since Létourneau ignores the quotation in John 12:34, he misses that there PD\ DOVR EH VRPH OLJKW FULWLFLVP RI WKH 6\QRSWLF WUDGLWLRQ¶V IL[DWLRQ RQ WKH

 91 %DUQDEDV/LQGDUV³'LVFRXUVHDQG7UDGLWLRQ7KH8VHRIWKH6D\LQJVRI-HVXVLQWKH 'LVFRXUVHRIWKH)RXUWK*RVSHO´JSNT 13 (1981): 83±101, here 86±87. Pierre Létourneau ³/H4XDWULqPHeYDQJLOHHWOHVSUHGLFDWLRQVGHODSDVVLRQGDQVOHVeYDQJLOHV6\QRSWLTXHV´ in John and the Synoptics [BETL 101; A. Denaux, ed.; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1992], 579±86, here 581) traces the matter differently: the Synoptics focus on the subjective conditions of salvation, with each prediction leading into the suffering required also of disciples, while John focuses on the objective condition of salvation, i.e. the crucifixion and exaltation of Christ. Acts twice refers to the exaltation of Jesus using ਫ਼ȥȩȦ$FWV  but as distinct from the crucifixion (cf. 5 ³\RXNLOOHG>KLP@E\KDQJLQJ>KLP@RQDWUHH« God exalted (੢ȥȦıİȞ KLP´ 92 Brown (John, 1:146), based partially on the uses of ਫ਼ȥȩȦLQ$FWVLQFOXGHVWKHDVFHQ VLRQDVSDUWRI-HVXV¶³OLIWLQJXS´LQ-RKQ+HDOVRUHFRJQL]HVWKHsimilarities to Mark. 93 0DWWKHZ¶VILUVWSDVVLRQSUHGLFWLRQLQQDUUDWLRQ GRHVQRWPHQWLRQWKH6RQRI Man; instead he -HVXV PXVWVXIIHUHWF/LNHZLVHLQ-RKQ¶VWKLUG³OLIWHGXS´VD\LQJ-HVXV XVHV GLUHFW VSHHFK LQ WKH ILUVW SHUVRQ ³,I I am lifted XS´   EXW WKH FURZG TXLFNO\ µFRUUHFWV¶KLPZLWKDTXRWDWLRQLQYROYLQJWKH6RQRI0DQ ,Q-RKDQQLQHIDVKLRQWKH\ are ironically correct that Jesus, the Son of Man, and the Messiah can all be identified. 94 Futures appear in Mark 9:31 and 10:33; Matt 17:22±23 and 20:18±19; and Luke 18:31± /XNHVD\VWKDWWKH6RQRI0DQ³LVDERXWWREHKDQGHGRYHU´ȝȑȜȜİȚʌĮȡĮįȓįȠıșĮȚ  -RKQ¶V-HVXVFODLPVWKDW³then you will NQRZ´IJȩIJİȖȞȫıİıșİ DQGWKDW³,will draw (ਦȜțȪıȦ HYHU\RQH´  95 /pWRXUQHDX³/HVSUHGLFDWLRQV´ 96 Moses is not a type of Christ as much as the bronze serpent is (Meeks, Prophet-King, 292), but John is not so neat in his analogy and intends a comparison nonetheless. Instead of Moses lifting a bronze serpent up to save people temporarily, Jesus will allow (cause?) himVHOIWREHOLIWHGXSWRVDYHSHRSOHHWHUQDOO\VHH0DUGDJD³5HSHWLWLYH8VHRI ਫ਼ȥȩȦ´± 13). See Heb 9:1±14, where Jesus is both the sacrifice and the high priest. 97 See Frey, Herrlichkeit, 126±28, 650±51; Lincoln, John, 153.

. e Mfe  f # e  f

147

physical suffering of Jesus, which portrays the crucifixion much more as a humiliation that Christ endures than as his moment of exaltation where his glory is manifested, as John does.98 The crowd that quotes him (12:34) misunderVWDQGV-HVXVE\UHGXFLQJWKHPHDQLQJRI³OLIWHGXS´WRGHDWKDORQH7KLVVDPH crowd inexplicably (at the story level) quotes the prediction closest to the Synoptic tradition.99 -RKQPD\ZDQWQRWRQO\WRLPSRUWDVSHFWVRI-HVXV¶JORULILFD WLRQLQWRWKHFUXFLIL[LRQZKLOHGRZQSOD\LQJ&KULVW¶VVXIIHULQJLWPD\DOVRYLHZ the failure to do so as misleading in itself. 2.7 A Slave Is not Greater than His Master (John 13:16; 15:20) We can now leave the passion behind and look for other material that John has incorporated using DIQ. After the footwashing scene, Jesus begins a short discourse explaining what he has just done to the disciples. Jesus affirms the titles RI ³WHDFKHU´ DQG ³PDVWHU´ E\ ZKLFK WKH GLVFLSOHV DGGUHVV KLP   ³DQG \RXVSHDNULJKWO\IRU,DP´ 100 He then interprets the footwashing as a mimetic example for them to follow: if he has washed their feet, then they should wash RQHDQRWKHU¶V -HVXVKDVJLYHQWKHPDPRGHOਫ਼ʌȩįİȚȖȝĮ VRWKDW³MXVW DVțĮșȫȢ ,GLGWR\RX \RXVKRXOGDOVRGR´ 7KHVWULQJRI PLPHWLF material is concluded with a double amen: -RKQ  ³$PHQ DPHQ , VD\ WR \RX D VODYH LV QRW JUHDWHU WKDQ KLV PDVWHU Ƞ੝ț ਩ıIJȚȞ įȠ૨ȜȠȢȝİȓȗȦȞIJȠ૨ țȣȡȓȠȣĮ੝IJȠ૨), nor is one who is sent (ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢ JUHDWHUWKDQWKHRQH ZKRVHQWKLP´

Another double amen regarding the relationship between the sender and the VHQWDSSHDUVVRRQDIWHU³WKH one who receives the one I send receives me, and WKHRQHZKRUHFHLYHVPHUHFHLYHVWKHRQHZKRVHQWPH´ 

 98

Létourneau recognizes the elimination of kenotic elements in the Johannine passion SUHGLFWLRQVDQGDEO\GHVFULEHVKRZ-RKQ¶VFKULVWRORJLFDOIRFLEXWQRWLWVOLWHUDU\WHQGHQFLHV  lead to different predictions. He does not recoJQL]HKRZWKHFURZG¶VTXRWDWLRQUHIRFXVHVWKH FRPSOH[RQ-HVXV¶GHDWKDQGSUHVXPHGDEVHQFHWRWKHGHWULPHQWRIDOORWKHUDVSHFWVVXFKDV salvation (3:14), deeper Christological knowledge (8:28± DQG-HVXV¶DELOLW\WRGUDZSHR ple to himself (12:32). If -RKQ¶VSKUDVLQJDOORZVPRUHZHLJKWWRVKLIWWRWKHVHLVVXHVWKDWLV QRWWRVD\WKDW-HVXV¶VXIIHULQJDQGGHDWKGLVDSSHDUHQWLUHO\)UH\Herrlichkeit, 711±13). 99 -RKQ¶V VHFRQG DQG WKLUG SUHGLFWLRQV KDYH PRUH FRPSOH[ VWUXFWXUHV WKDQ WKRVH LQ WKH Synoptic tradition, where definite statements about what the Son of Man will suffer are JLYHQ+RZHYHUWKHZRUGVįİ૙ IJઁȞȣੂઁȞIJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡȫʌȠȣDSSHDULQWKHILUVWSUHGLFWLRQRf Mark, /XNHDQG-RKQDQGLQWKHFURZG¶VTXRWDWLRQ7KHLQILQLWLYHVLQWKH6\QRSWLFVIROORZWKHVH words since they give way to a list of things that will happen to the Son of Man. For more on the placement of the infinitive in John, see chapter 2 above. 100 The use of the nominative creates a sort of DIQ here: the disciples have addressed him DV³WHDFKHU´FIIRU³UDEEL´LQWHUSUHWHGDV³WHDFKHU´VHH  DQG³PDVWHU´FIDQG3HWHUKHUHWZLFH13:6, 9).

148

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

The slave/master saying seems to be traditional both in its formulation and in its parallel construction. A similar master-slave comparison appears in Matthew: Matt 10:24±³$VWXGHQWLVQRWDERYHWKHWHDFKHUQRULVDVODYHDERYHKLVPDVWHUȠ੝į੻ įȠ૨ȜȠȢਫ਼ʌ੻ȡIJઁȞțȪȡȚȠȞĮ੝IJȠ૨).101 It is sufficient that the student become like his teacher DQGWKHVODYHOLNHKLVPDVWHU´

To say the least there is evidence in Matthew that the master-slave comparison may pre-date John.102 The teacher-VWXGHQWFRPSDULVRQDOVRDSSHDUVLQ/XNH¶V sermon on the plain (6:40),103 ZKLOHWKHDGGLWLRQDOFRPSDULVRQ³LWLVVXIILFLHQW WKDWWKHVODYHEHFRPHOLNHKLVPDVWHU´ DSSHDUVLn several rabbinic passages. 104 Although these passages are late (7 th century or later), the rabbis, who treat the phrase as proverbial, probably did not adopt it from Matthew or Jesus (or some

 101 The phrase is absent in OL k DQG WKH 6LQDLWLF 6\ULDF ³D IRUPLGDEOH FRPELQDWLRQ´ according to Dodd (Tradition, 335). However, it is universally present in the Greek tradition. If there is harmonization, it would be simpler if the master-slave comparison was omitted in imitation of Luke (6:40) than that it was added to Matthew in imitation of John, but in reverse order and with modified, Synoptic phrasing. 102 ,I-RKQLVGLUHFWO\GHSHQGHQWRQ0DWWKHZLWUHSODFHV0DWWKHZ¶Vਫ਼ʌȑȡZLWKLWVSUHIHUUHG FRPSDUDWLYHȝİȓȗȦȞ-HVXVDQG-DFRE-HVXVDQG$EUDKDPWKH)DWKHUDQG-HVXV 14:28). See Lincoln, John, 36. 103 The occurrence of the teacher-student comparison in Matthew and Luke has led to its inclusion in the reconstructed Q, although without the master-slave parallel found in Matthew (Robinson, et al., Critical Edition of Q, 78). Gilbert van Belle and David R. M. *RGHFKDUOH³&+'RGGRQ-RKQDQG 6W-RKQ¶V.QRZOHGJHRI0DWWKHZ5H YLVLWHG´LQEngaging with C.H. Dodd on the Gospel of John: Sixty Years of Tradition and Interpretation [T. Thatcher and C.H. Williams, eds.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013], 86±KHUH XVHLWVDEVHQFHLQWKHUHFRQVWUXFWHG4WRVXSSRUW-RKQ¶VGLUHFW dependence on Matthew. Theobald (Herrenworte, 139±45) finds it more likely that the parallelism already appeared in Q and that Luke has omitted it (see also Edwin K. Broadhead, ³7KH)RXUWK*RVSHODQGWKH6\QRSWLF6D\LQJV6RXUFH7KH5HODWLRQVKLS5HFRQVLGHUHG´LQ Jesus in Johannine Tradition [R.T. Fortna and T. Thatcher, eds.; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001], 291±301). Either possibility supports the point being made: if the phrase, HPEHGGHGLQDSDUDOOHOLVPOLNH0DWWKHZ¶VDSSHDUHGLQDGRFXPHQWOLNH4HYHQSULRUWRWKH First Gospel, it only pushes back earlier the tradition that John may have relied upon. 104 See b. Ber. 58b; Sifre Lev. 25:23 (per. 3, behar 4); Exod. Rab. 42.5 (on Exod 32:7). Tanchuma 23.79, 80 have similar sayings, and Exod. Rab. 25.6 (on Exod 16:4; compare John 6:31) has a string of normal relationships that are inverted with God: typically the student carries the lantern for his teacher (see John 9:5), the slave washes his master (see 13:1±11), SXWV RQ KLV PDVWHU¶V VKRHVVHH DQG JXDUGV KLV PDVWHUVHH12). For the teacherVWXGHQWFRPSDULVRQZHPLJKWDOVRPHQWLRQ/;;3V³,XQGHUVWRRGDERYHਫ਼ʌȑȡ DOO WKRVHZKRWHDFKPHIJȠઃȢįȚį੺ıțȠȞIJ੺Ȣȝİ ´VXJJHVWHGE\:DOWHU6FKPLWKDOVDas Evangelium nach Lukas [Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1980], 87). Compare later, Dial. Sav. 139.11±³µ7KHGLVFLSOHUHVHPEOLQJKLVWHDFKHU¶7KLVZRUGVKH>0DU\@VSRNHDVDZRPDQ ZKR NQHZ WKH $OO´  /XNH KDV LQVWHDG ³HYHU\RQH ZKR LV IXOO\ WUDLQHG ZLOO EH OLNH KLV WHDFKHU´

. e Mfe  f # e  f

149

later Christian reworking of the motif) ± although it is possible. Instead, if the phrase was already proverbial at the time of the evangelists (not to mention Jesus), then it may have given rise to the corollary that the slave is not above/greater than the master. Furthermore, there are other traditional elements in the construction of the double amen in 13:16. First, similar comparisons of the sender and the sent appear even more often in the Talmud and as early as the Mishnah. 105 Again they are not ascribed to a particular rabbi, but presented as a proverbial truth. Second, we can see from Matthew that a parallel construction has already been used with this sort of comparison, whether John borrows directly from MatWKHZRUQRW,QIDFWDQXQUHODWHGEXWVLPLODUFRQVWUXFWLRQDSSHDUVLQ$UULDQ¶V Discourses of Epictetus in the first decade of the 2nd century: ³7KHQZKDWLI«LWis possible for that which serves to be superior to what it serves IJઁ įȚĮțȠȞȠ૨Ȟțȡİ૙ııȠȞİੇȞĮȚਥțİȓȞȠȣમ įȚĮțȠȞİ૙): the horse to the rider, or the dog to the hunter, or the instrument to the player, or the attendants (ਫ਼ʌȘȡȑIJĮȚ  WR WKH NLQJ ȕĮıȚȜȑȦȢ "´106

These ideas are presented as absurd. Epictetus gives a set of comparisons in parallel construction to make an ethical point (here that we are servants of purpose), just as JohQ¶V-HVXVGRHV,WLVQRWWKDW-RKQLVIDPLOLDUZLWK$UULDQRQO\ that we have three similar expressions of a general principle in variant language within a few decades of each other, with at least one case apparently independent of the others. So not only are the individual comparisons likely to pre-date John, but it may have inherited the construction of the saying in parallel form from its tradition, oral or otherwise. 7KHUHDUHDOVRVLJQVRIWUDGLWLRQLQWKHGLVFRXUVHVVHUYHGE\-RKQ¶VXVHRI the saying. H.F.D. Sparks tabulated several points of similarity between John and Matthew, e.g. that John uses the noun apostle only here and Matthew uses it only in 10:2;107 that Jesus talks about sending the disciples in Matt 10:16; that John follows the quotation with a logion about the persecution of the

 105 Here the comparison is that the one who is sent is like/equal to (and therefore not above/greater than) the one who sent him; see m. Berakoth 5.5; B.Me‫܈‬Õࡐ a 96a; Hag. 10b; Mena‫ۊ‬. 93b; and Naz. 12b. 106 My translation; Greek taken from the LCL. 107 Graydon F. Snyder argues unconvincingly that the term ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢLVXVHGKHUHDVSDUW RIDODUJHUFULWLFLVPRI3HWHU³-RKQDQGWKH$QWL-Petrinism of the Johannine TradiWLRQ´BR 16 [1971]: 5±15). His argument rests too strongly on the questionable assumption that the death and resurrection of Jesus is unimportant in John, and it ignores the appearances of the risen Lord to the Beloved Disciple, which are not devalued but instead used to put him on equal footing with Peter and the Twelve. Luise Abramowski argues somewhat more convincingly that the term would contribute to a criticism of Paul ³'HU$SRVWHOYRQ-RKDQQHV ´ZNW 99/1 [2008]: 116± DOWKRXJKLWZRXOGEHTXLWHVXEWOHDQGGHSHQGVRQ-RKQ¶V knowledge of traditions stemming from the Paul¶VOHWWHUVZKHUH³VODYH´DQG³DSRVWOH´DUH used abundantly in reference to Paul).

150

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

disciples (John 15:21), whereas Matthew precedes its version with a saying on WKHVDPHWRSLF0DWW DQGWKDW0DWWKHZ¶V-HVXVFRQFOXGHVZLWKDORJLRQ about the one who receives the disciples receiving also Jesus (Matt 10:40), while John follows the first recitation with a similar statement (John 13:20). 108 Gardner-6PLWKVRRQFRXQWHUHGDGGUHVVLQJ6SDUNV¶SRLQWVRQHE\RQH 109 e.g. WKDW 0DWWKHZ¶V WHUPV ILW PRUH QHDWO\ -RKQ¶V ILUVW GLVFRXUVH ZKHUH -HVXV KDV referred to himself already as teacher and master, 110 yet John inexplicably substitutes a different comparison (sender and sent); the vocabulary differs in almost every other parallel, with similarities resting on synonymous words and phrases;111 and the hatred and persecution of the disciples is not in view in John 13, although they are in the later discourse. Sparks has perhaps pushed the parallels with Matthew alone beyond their capacity. As even Gardner-Smith admits, the use that Jesus makes of the master-slave comparison in John 15:20 is quite similar to the use made of it in Matt 10:24. Jesus predicts his physical absence from the disciples, in John because he is about to die and return to the Father, in Matthew because he is sending them out on a mission that foreshadows their roles after his death. 112 In Matthew the disciples will be persecuted and will have the Spirit of their Father to defend them when they are put on trial in councils and synagogues (Matt 10:17±20); in John the Advocate or Spirit of Truth, who comes from the Father, ZLOO WHVWLI\ RQ -HVXV¶ EHKDOI -RKQ   ZKHQ WKH GLVFLSOHV DUH FDVW RXW RI synagogues and killed (16:2). 113 Jesus was persecuted, hated, and killed because he came from the Father and testified, and the disciples, who are not greater than he is, can expect the same. Matthew gives evidence that likely predates John for using the logion to support a connection between the suffering of the earthly Jesus and of the later disciples.

 108 ³6W-RKQ¶V.QRZOHGJHRI0DWWKHZ7KH(YLGHQFHRI-RKQDQG´JTS 3/1 (1952): 58±UHFHQWO\GHIHQGHGE\YDQ%HOOHDQG*RGHFKDUOH³&+'RGGRQ-RKQ´ 109 ³6W-RKQ¶V.QRZOHGJHRI0DWWKHZ´JTS 4/1 (1953): 31±35; Dodd, Tradition, 335± 38. 110 'RGG DGGV WKDW ³GLVFLSOH´ IRXQG LQ 0DWWKHZ¶V SDUDOOHO LV RQH RI -RKQ¶V IDYRULWH ZRUGVVR WKHVZLWFKWR³DSRVWOH´LV KLJKO\ XQFKDUDFWHULVWLF RI -RKQDQG XQOLNHO\ WR RFF ur only because Matthew uses the term once 23 verses prior (Tradition, 337). 111 Matthew uses ਕʌȠıIJȑȜȜȦ   DQG įȑȤȠȝĮȚ   -RKQ XVHV ʌȑȝʌȦ   DQGȜĮȝȕȐȞȦ -RKQPD\KDYHVXEVWLWXWHGSUHIHUUHGV\QRQ\PVRUWKHGLIIHU ences could reflect different translations or traditions that developed in similar but variant ways. Dodd (Tradition, 336) points out that each of the comparative constructions in John 13:16 and Matt 10:24 translate ʯʮʬʥʣʢ in the Septuagint (see LXX Gen 48:19 for ȝİȓȗȦȞ gen. and 2 Kgdms 13:15 for ਫ਼ʌȑȡDFF DOORZLQJVHSDUDWH*UHHNWUDQVODWLRQVRID6HPLWLF original. 112 Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 312±13. 113 Keener (John, 2:1022) connects 15:26 to Mark 13:9±11, adapted in Matt 10:19±20.

. e Mfe  f # e  f

151

0HDQZKLOH/XNH¶VFRQWH[WLVYHU\GLIIHUHQW 114 Here the teacher-student logion is used as one of a series of mimetic charges to the apostles: 115 ³-XVW DV țĮșȫȢ \RXZLVKSHRSOHWRGRIRU\RXGRIRUWKHPOLNHZLVH´੒ȝȠȓȦȢ/XNH  7KHDXGLHQFHVKRXOGQRWGRWKHVDPHIJઁ Į੝IJȩ DVVLQQHUVZKRORYHRQO\ those who love them (6:32±34). If they love their enemies, do good, and lend expecting no return they will be sons of the Most High, who is also kind (6:35); LHWKH\ZLOOEHOLNHWKHLU)DWKHU³%HPHUFLIXOMXVWDVțĮșȫȢ \RXU)DWKHULV PHUFLIXO´ They must be good teachers, since those who are trained will be like (੪Ȣ WKHLUWHDFKHUV 116 They must be humble, acknowledging the ORJLQWKHLURZQH\HVEHIRUHWKHVSHFNLQVRPHRQHHOVH¶V±42). In other words, Luke uses the logion as a call to ethical action based on mimetic prinFLSOHVDQGWKHWHDFKLQJVRI-HVXVZKRVHZRUGVLIWKH\FDOOKLP³/RUG´WKH\ should follow (6:46). John likewise uses the logion in the service of ethical teaching based on mimetic principles the first time it appears. 117 Luke shows that comparative statements like those found in John 13:16 were already used by Christ-followers in such a didactic setting. John appropriates and endorses both applications of the saying: the call to ethical behavior through imitation of Jesus, and the call to endure persecution. It is not clear that John used or knew of Matthew and Luke directly, although there are ambiguous signs of this in the relevant passages. It is more certain WKDW-RKQ¶VGXDOXVHVRIWKHVD\LQJLQFRUSRUDWHWZR PRGHVRIDpplication already evident in the tradition, and that John uses DIQ to repeat the saying and effectively to endorse both. 2.8 Rise, Carry Your Bed and Walk (John 5:8, 11–12) 7KHDFWWKDWOHDGVGLUHFWO\WRWKHEHJLQQLQJRI-HVXV¶SHUVHFXWLRQLVWKHKHDOLQJ of a sick man in Jerusalem on a Sabbath. Like each of the healings in John, Jesus enacts the miracle with a command:

 114 $OWKRXJKWKHVHUPRQFRQWDLQVWKHVD\LQJ³%OHVVHGDUH\RXZKHQSHRSOHKDWH\RXDQG H[FOXGH\RXLQVXOW\RXDQGFDVWRXW\RXUQDPHDVHYLORQDFFRXQWRIWKH6RQRI0DQ´  the persecution of the disciples is not its main focus. 115 6SDUNVQRWHVWKDW0DWWKHZXVHVWKHWHUP³DSRVWOH´RQO\LQEHOLHYLQJWKLVWRPDNH DVWURQJHUFDVHIRU-RKQ¶VIDPLOLDULW\ZLWK0DWWKHZ+RZHYHU/XNHXVHVWKHWHUP³DSRVWOH´ of those Jesus has chosen (ਥțȜİȟȐȝİȞȠȢ VKRUWO\EHIRUHDVLPLODUORJLRn (6:13; cf. John 13:18, ³,NQRZZKRP,KDYHFKRVHQ>ਥȟİȜİȟȐȝȘȞ@´ DQGILYHRWKHUWLPHVEHVLGHV 22:14; 24:10), making it more likely that, if it were dependent on the Synoptic gospels, John would be dependent on Luke for the term than Matthew. 116 2I0DWWKHZ/XNHDQG-RKQ-HVXVLVDGGUHVVHGDV³WHDFKHU´PRVWRIWHQLQ/XNHDQG at least occasionally by people who are not his enemies (cf. Luke 7:40; 8:49; 9:38; 12:13; 21:7). That is, when the disciples are fully trained they will be like Jesus. 117 6HH%HQQHPD³0LPHVLVLQ-RKQ´(DFKJRVSHODOVRPHQWLRQVWLWOHV-HVXVLVFDOOHG -RKQ³WHDFKHU´DQG³ORUG´/XNH³ORUG´DQG0DWWKHZ³%HHO]HEXO´E\KLVHQHPLHV

152

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

-RKQ-HVXVVDLGWRKLP³5LVHFDUU\\RXUEHGDQGZDON਩ȖİȚȡİਛȡȠȞIJઁȞțȡȐȕĮIJIJȩȞıȠȣ țĮ੿ ʌİȡȚʌȐIJİȚ ´

The command is repeated twice more through the testimony of the healed man. Jesus heals a paralytic with a similar command in Mark 2:1±12, a story picked up by Matthew (9:1±8) and Luke (5:17± 0DUN¶VLQLWLDOK\SRWKHWLFDOFLWD WLRQRIWKHFRPPDQGFRPHVWKHFORVHVWWR-RKQ¶VDFWXDORQH: 0DUN³:KLFKLVHDVLHUWRVD\WRWKHSDUDO\WLFµșĮȞȐIJȠȣ@Ƞ੝ ȝ੽ ȖİȪıȘIJĮȚ ´184

The prologue marks the words of the gospel as past speech acts. That the phrasing in Thomas UHVRQDWHVVRSUHFLVHO\ZLWK-RKQ¶VFDQPHDQHLWKHUWKDWThomas records an independent version of the tradition in John 8:51±52,185 in which case the tradition would pre-date John, or that Thomas is influenced by John, 186 in which case we cannot be sure. P.Oxy. 654 dates within a few decades of the earliest manuscripts containing John 8:51±52. However, I am still hesitant to consider Thomas as strong evidence for a pre-Johannine tradition in these verses. It seems more likely that Thomas KDVWDNHQ-RKQ¶VORJLRQZKLFKVSHDNV RIPHUHO\NHHSLQJ-HVXV¶ZRUGDQGDPSOLILHGLWDVWKHRSHQLQJRID*QRVWLFRU proto-Gnostic sayings text to claim that one must not only keep the words but also interpret them correctly. The earlier case DSSHDUV LQ0DUN  ³WKHUH DUH VRPH VWDQGLQJ KHUH ZKR ZLOOQRWWDVWHGHDWK«´ DQGLVDGDSWHGLQERWK0DWWDQG/XNH0XFK of what is going on in Mark has been subject to scrutiny: who will see the

 183

See Barrett, John  ³µ.LQJGRP RI *RG¶ FDOOV WR PLQG WKDW DSRFDO\SWLF -XGDLVP ZKLFK-RKQVHHPVIRUWKHPRVWSDUWWRDYRLG«>@LVFULWLFLVPRIWKDW-XGDLVPZKLFKZDV content to await the miraculous vindication of Israel in the kingdom of God and to ignore the necessit\IRULQZDUGFRQYHUVLRQRUUHELUWK´$OWKRXJK%DUUHWWPLJKWQRWDJUHHVRPHRI the Judaisms that John is critical of here may also be of the Christ-following sort. 184 For other references to not tasting death, see Gos. Thom. 18±19; 85. 185 Nicholas Perrin anG &KULVWRSKHU: 6NLQQHU ³5HFHQW 7UHQGV LQ Gospel of Thomas Research (1989± 3DUW,,*HQUH7KHRORJ\DQG5HODWLRQVKLSWRWKH*RVSHORI-RKQ´ CBR 11/1 [2012]: 65±86, here 78±81) track scholars who advocate for shared sources, shared community, or that John was dependent on, or at least familiar with, some form of Thomas. 186 An under-explored option with weak counter-arguments (e.g. that Thomas never cites -RKQGLUHFWO\ 6HH3HUULQDQG6NLQQHU³5HFHQW7UHQGV´IRUWKHPLQRULW\RIVFKRODUVZKR view Thomas as reacting to John.

. e Mfe  f # e  f

167

kingdom coming with power, friends or foes? 187 Is it an early reference to the parousia, as it seems, one perhaps not yet contradicted by the eventual death of everyone imagined to be standing by Jesus in the 20±30s, or does Mark discursively attempt to reapply eschatological language to something else like the crucifixion or, more likely, the transfiguration (Mark 9:2±8)?188 The eschatological problem may be felt by John, whether with the saying itself or with its use in Mark. The context of John 8:51±52 deals with precisely WKLVLVVXHGR-HVXV¶SUHGLFWLRns about eternal life indicate that believers will never physically die? It is a problem dealt with elsewhere by Paul, 189 and, as we will see, by the followers of the Beloved Disciple (John 21:22±23). It is notable that the quotation by the Jews is closer to the Synoptic tradition than -HVXV¶VWDWHPHQW)RUWKLVUHDVRQ/LQGDUVDUJXLQJWKDW-RKQLVGHSHQGHQWRQD tradition close to Mark (if not Mark itself), connects the quotation to tradition rather than the statement that is directly attributed to Jesus. 190 Still marked as an amen-saying in 8:51, John also eliminates the temporal reference by changing the condition:191 QRW H[SHULHQFLQJ GHDWK LV GHSHQGHQW RQ NHHSLQJ -HVXV¶ word rather than seeing the kingdom. 192 Chrys C. Caragounis traces a similar movement in John ZKHUH³µVHHLQJ¶LVQRWFRQGLWLRQHGE\DWHPSRUDOIDFWRU the when of the [Kingdom of God], but by the basic prerequisites for catching a glimpse of it, that is, the conditions IRUVHHLQJWKH.LQJGRPDWDOO´193 Only true disciples (cf. 8:31±32) will not see death. Only those born from above, of

 187 %\³IULHQGV´FRXOGEHPHDQWHLWKHUWKHGLVFLSOHVRUWKHPHPEHUVRI0DUN¶VFRPPXQLW\ VHHWKHOLWHUDWXUHFLWHGE\7KRPDV5+DWLQD³:KR:LOO6HHµ7KH.LQJGRPRI*RG&RPLQJ ZLWK3RZHU¶LQ0DUN²Protagonists or Antagonists"´Bib 86/1 [2005]: 20±34, here 20 nn. 1± +DWLQDLQVWHDGWDNHVWKHSRVLWLRQWKDWWKHNLQJGRPZLOOEHVHHQE\³WKLVVLQIXODQG DGXOWHURXVJHQHUDWLRQ´0DUN  188 (QULTXH1DUGRQL³$5HGDFWLRQDO,QWHUSUHWDWLRQRI0DUN´CBQ 43/3 [1981]: 365± 84) argues convincingly that Mark takes a saying about the parousia from the tradition and reapplies it to the transfiguration. If Nardoni is correct, the eschatological problem is still DSSDUHQWO\IHOWLQ/XNHZKLFKHOLPLQDWHV³KDYLQJFRPH´DQG³LQSRZHU´WRPake the saying less definite and less time-dependent; so Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke (G. Buswell, trans.; London: Faber and Faber, 1960), 104. For an attempt (not entirely successful) to interpret the prediction as applied to the cross, see MLFKDHO)%LUG³7KH&UXFLIL[LRQ RI-HVXVDVWKH)XOILOOPHQWRI0DUN´TrinJ 24/1 (2003): 23±36. 189 See for example 1 Thess 4:13±5:11 (esp. 4:15) and 1 Corinthians 15 (esp. 15:36, 51). 190 Lindars, John, 332±33. 191 Lincoln, John, 275. 192 Compare Luke 2:26, where the conditional is time dependent: Simeon is told by the +RO\ 6SLULW WKDW KH ZLOO QRW VHH GHDWK ȝ੽ ੁįİ૙Ȟ șȐȞĮIJȠȞ  EHIRUH KH VHHV ੅įૉ  WKH /RUG¶V 0HVVLDK*LYHQWKHHVFKDWRORJLFDOLVVXHVLQ-RKQ¶VVD\LQJZHPLJKWDOVRFRQVLGHU5HY ³$QG,VDZİੇįȠȞ DQGEHKROGੁįȠઃ) a green horse, and he who was sitting on it, his name ZDV'HDWK´ 193 ³.LQJGRPRI*RG´HPSKDVLVRULJLQDO 

168

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

water and of the Spirit, will see the kingdom of God (3:3). Neither of these UHDOLWLHVZKDWHYHULVPHDQWE\WKHPZLOOEHH[SHULHQFHGE\-HVXV¶HQHPLHV The logion, as it is phrased in Mark, is likely evidence that some early Christians, if not Jesus himself, expected a realization of future eschatological hopes in the lifetime of some of those who knew Jesus. According to such a belief, some of these people would never physically die; they would have life into the aiǀn. John presents this as a profound misunderstanding by voicing it through hostile (if formerly believing) Jews. They interpret Jesus to mean that those who keep his word will never physically die, when even Abraham and the prophets died (8:52±53). Placing the logion with more traditional phrasing in WKHPRXWKVRI-HVXV¶HQHPLHVGXULQJRQHRIWKHPRVWKRVWLOHVFHQHVLQWKHJRV pel, distances Jesus from temporal claims about the end and criticizes any believers in Christ who would make them. The fit EHWZHHQ-RKQDQG0DUNKHUHLVQRWH[DFW-RKQ¶V-HVXVPDNHVDVWDWH PHQWDERXWDQ\RQHIJȚȢ ZKRNHHSVKLVZRUGZKLOH0DUN¶V-HVXVLQFOXGHVRQO\ VRPHIJȚȞİȢ RIWKRVHVWDQGLQJE\KLPDVLIWRVD\WKDWWKHDGYHQWZLOOEHZLWKLQ the lifespan of only certain people. John provides a response to such a specific claim in the final case of DIQ in the gospel. 2.15 If I Want Him to Remain until I Come… (John 21:22–23) $OWKRXJK WKHUH LV YHU\ OLWWOH OH[LFDO VLPLODULW\ EHWZHHQ 0DUN  DQG -HVXV¶ final saying in John, a connection has nonetheless been perceived in the trouble they may have caused.194 Peter is told about his death and commanded by Jesus to follow him (21:18±19). He notices the Beloved Disciple already following them both and asks about him (21:20±21). Jesus responds: -RKQ³,I,ZDQWKLPWRUHPDLQXQWLO,FRPHZKDWLVWKDWWR\RX"RUZKLFKLV@D\RXQJIRDO´EHFRPHV³IRDORIDGRQNH\´ DQGPXFKRI the rest is streamlined by omissions (von Wahlde [John, 3:307] agrees with Freed that John ³LQFOXGHGRQO\WKHHVVHQWLDOV´  234 A notable one occurring in the first citation in John 1:23, of Isa 40:3, which adds ਥȖȫ WRLGHQWLI\WKH%DSWLVWZLWKWKH9RLFHWKDWFULHVRXW2QWKHVXEVWLWXWLRQRI³VWUDLJKWHQ´IRU ³SUHSDUH´ODWHULQWKHFLWDWLRQVHH6FKXFKDUGScripture within Scripture, 11±15. 235 There are several transpositions in John 12:40± IURP ,VD  ERWK PLQRU IJȠઃȢ ੑijșĮȜȝȠઃȢĮ੝IJ૵ȞEHFRPHVĮ੝IJ૵ȞIJȠઃȢੑijșĮȜȝȠȪȢ DQGPDMRUWKHUHIHUHQFHVWRH\HVDQG KHDUWDUHPRGLILHGDQGLQYHUWHGFUHDWLQJDQHDWHUSDUDOOHOLVPDIWHU-RKQ¶VRPLVVLRQVEUHak up an original chiasm (Schuchard, Scripture within Scripture ³+H EOLQGHGWKHLU H\HV DQGKDUGHQHGWKHLUKHDUWVRWKDWWKHLUH\HVPD\QRWVHHDQGWKHLUKHDUWPD\QRWXQGHUVWDQG´ 236 1RWDEOHFDVHVLQFOXGH³WKH0HVVLDK´-RKQ IRU³KLV>'DYLG¶V@ VHHG´/;;3V  IJȡȫȖȦ-RKQ IRUਥıșȓȦ/;;3V DQGDVKLIWIURPDRULVW³FRQVXPHG´ /;; 3V   WR IXWXUH ³]HDO IRU \RXU KRXVH will consume PH´ -RKQ   WR DOORZ D UHIHUHQFH WR -HVXV¶ VWLOO IXWXUH H[HFXWLRQ %DWHV Apostolic Proclamation, 245±46) briefly H[DPLQHV -RKQ¶V FLWDWLRQ RI /;; 3V  DV DQ H[DPSOH RI ³SURVRSRORJLFDO H[HJHVLV´ ZKHUHWKHDPELJXRXVVSHDNHURIWKHSVDOPLVDVVLJQHGDVXLWDEOHSHUVRQDKHUH³PH´IURP the psalm becomes Jesus during the temple incident. Often within this type of exegesis past tense (aorist or perfect) verbs can be read as referring to a future moment, for example when Hebrews 1:9 applies LXX Ps 44:7±³*RGanointed \RX´ WR-HVXV¶OLIHFHQWXULHVDIWHUWKH psalm was written. However at the presumed historical moment that John applies the psalm to Jesus, he has yet to be consumed and so John can change the tense of the verb to fit the assumed point in time (outside of such a narrative context, the aorist could normally apply to Jesus even though the events occurred long after the psalm was composed). 237 ,WLVXQFOHDUZKHWKHUDVHFRQG³PH´VKRXOGEHLQFOXGHGLQ6RPHPDQXVFULSWV include it in both places (P 75, B, T, and 0105) while a larger number omit it (P 66, ʠ, D, K, L, W, the Koine and the Latin traditions). If included, the quotation is 14 words long. Either way, ignoring subtractions the quotation is exact until the 9 th century (N, 565, and the Syriac). 238 Another five of them (3:28a; 4:17; 5:12; 12:34; 13:11) introduce no new words or grammatical forms, although they omit and rearrange words from the original statement.

179

". C 

SDUDSKUDVHV VLPLODU WR WKRVHRI -HVXV ZLWKLQ WKH )RXUWK *RVSHO 6LQFH-HVXV¶ word is given similar weight to scripture and yet John paraphrases Jesus often, it also paraphrases scripture as needed. Table 4: 7KH([WHQWRI-RKQ¶V3DUDSKUDVHZLWK6FULSWXUHDQGLQ',4 Scripture

John

Shortest citation (number of words)

3

1

Longest citation (number of words)

23

14

Average citation (number of words)

8.82

5.73

Average exact ratio

58%

73%

Along similar lines to Theobald, Peder Borgen has compared how John paraphrases scripture and itself, in order to elaborate in a Johannine context. He compares how John develops a scriptural citation in John 6:31 with how it develops the logion in John 3:3 through a question and answer format used also by Philo (see Mut. 1.142b±44 on Gen 17:16) and later in the Mekilta on Exod 12:2.239 $ORJLRQLVEURXJKWLQDQGH[SRXQGHGLQRQHFDVH³8QOHVVVRPHRQH LVERUQIURPDERYHV KHFDQQRWVHHWKHNLQJGRPRI*RG´ and in the other, ³+HJDYHWKHPEUHDGIURPKHDYHQWRHDW´ZKHUH-HVXVLGHQWLILHVKLPVHOIZLWK the bread (6:35; cf. 6:33, 38) and then the bread with his flesh (6:51). 240 Each SRVLWLRQUDLVHVDQREMHFWLRQWKDWDGDSWV-HVXV¶ODQJXDJHE\SDUDSKUDVLQJZKDW Jesus has said: -RKQ³,VWKLVQRW-HVXVWKHVRQRI-RVHSKZKRVHIDWKHUDQGPRWKHUZHNQRZ"+RZ ʌ૵Ȣ GRHVKHQRZVD\µI have descended from heaven¶"´ -RKQ³+RZFDQʌ૵ȢįȪȞĮIJĮȚ WKLVRQHgive us flesh to eat"´ -RKQ ³+RZFDQ ʌ૵ȢįȪȞĮIJĮȚ D SHUVRQEHLQJ ROG be born? He cannot ȝ੽ įȪȞĮIJĮȚ  HQWHULQWRKLVPRWKHU¶VEHOO\a second time and be bornFDQKH"´

In response, Jesus elaborates through paraphrase: -RKQ³I am the living bread that descended from heaven. If someone eats of this bread, he will live eternally; and the bread that I give IRUWKHOLIHRIWKHZRUOGLVP\IOHVK´

 239

³7KH,QGHSHQGHQFHRIWKH*RVSHORI-RKQ6RPH2EVHUYDWLRQV´LQThe Four Gospels 1992: Festschrift Frans Neirynck. (BETL 100; Frans van Segbroeck, Christopher M. Tuckett, Gilbert van Belle, and J. Verheyden, eds.; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1992), 1815±33, here 1824±7KHIROORZLQJEXLOGVRQDQGH[SDQGV%RUJHQ¶VDUJXPHQW 240 Borgen views the discourse as a unified homily through to 6:58, so skips over t he LGHQWLILFDWLRQRI-HVXVZLWKWKHEUHDGWRIRFXVRQWKHSUREOHPFDXVHGE\-HVXV¶FDQQLEDOLVWLF language in 6:51±)RUWKHSHRSOHRI&DSHUQDXP-HVXV¶FODLPVWREHIURPKHDYHQDUHDV problematic as the cannibalistic (or Eucharistic) language is for Jesus¶GLVFLSOHV±66). There are two expositions dealing with two different problems, but following similar formats.

180

Chapter 4: Direct Internal Quotation and Traditional Material

-RKQ³$PHQDPHQ,VD\WR\RXXQOHVV\RXeat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves´241 John 3:5±³$men, amen I say to you, unless someone is born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of spirit LVVSLULW'RQRWEHDPD]HGWKDW,WROG\RXµDQG@ ZLWKLQ WKH FXOWLF DVVHPEO\ RI WKH -RKDQQLQH FRPmunity, the SURSKHWLF SKHQRPHQRQ ZDV DFFRPSDQLHG E\ ERWK YLVLRQV DQG DXGLWLRQV´ 16 $XQHSRLQWVHVSHFLDOO\WRWKHSURPLVHWR1DWKDQDHOLQ-RKQ³\RXZLOOVHH heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of 0DQ´DV³WKHNLQGRf event which the Johannine community experienced pneuPDWLFDOO\ ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH FRPPXQLW\ DW ZRUVKLS´ 17 Such visions ZRXOGFRQILUP&KULVW¶VUHDOSUHVHQFHZLWKLQWKHFKXUFKHYHQLIWKH\ZHUHQRW experienced by everyone:

 15 $V'%UXFH:ROOFRPPHQWV³7KH'HSDUWXUHRIµ7KH:D\¶7KH)LUVW)DUHZHOO'LV FRXUVHLQWKH*RVSHORI-RKQ´JBL 99/2 [1980]: 225±39KHUH ³WKHIDUHZHOOGLVFRXUVH form as such gives formal expression to a basic distinction in time. The use of the farewell discourse form in contrast to the apocalyptic discourse found in Mark and Matthew, for example, is significant because of the emphasis which is placed, by this very choice, upon the fact of the departure RI-HVXV 7KH GHSDUWXUH HQDFWVD GLYLVLRQ EHWZHHQ SDVWDQGIXWXUH« 7KLVGLYLVLRQRUGLVFRQWLQXLW\RUVHSDUDWLRQLVQRWPHUHO\DWKHPHIRXQGLQRQHµWH[W¶>LH John 14:2±3] takHQIURPWKHWUDGLWLRQ´:HQG\(61RUWKDUJXHVWKDWDVLPLODUDVVXUDQFHRI presence in absence is given through the narrative construction of healing miracle scenes, all RIZKLFKLQYROYH-HVXV¶DEVHQFH³µ/RUG,IFIDid. 11:11] are hedged around with prohibitions and protections because they are dangerous to the prophet and to the community as well. Ordinary members of the community would not see or hear Jesus except through faith and through the words of the prophet uttered in [altered states of consciousness]. Nevertheless, the community can know that one who has seen Jesus has seen the Father [John 14:9], and that the disciples will do greater works than Jesus because he goes to the Father and whatever they ask in his Name Jesus will do (14:12± ´'UDSHU³7KHDWUH´ 'UDSHU LQWHUSUHWV-RKQ³%OHVVHG DUHWKRVHZKRKDYHQRWVHHQ\HWEHOLHYHG´ DVDQHIIRUWWR maintain full inclusion of non-visionary members of the group. If it is correct to infer visionary activity among Johannine groups, those visions are clearly contingent on belief (e.g. 11:40, see below), placing Thomas in a unique position to believe because he has seen. See additionally below on 14:18±22. Destro and Pesce (Come nasce, 137±39) argue for rather more universal visionary experiences as the mark of inclusion in the group (John 4:20±24), DOWKRXJKWKLVPD\RQO\LQGLFDWHLQLWLDWLRQWRDFHUWDLQµUDQN¶ 28 'UDSHU ³7KHDWUH RI 3HUIRUPDQFH´ ±34; the protections are based on exegesis of Deuteronomy 18, as are similar prophetic safeguards discussed in m. Sanh. 11.5 (b. Sanh. 89a). 29 Also 1 John 2:18±25. Compare the testing language regarding false prophets in Matt 7:15±20, while 2 Peter 2:1±3 describes false prophets/teachers as those who deny the master. -XVWDV-HVXVLVVXHVHQLJPDWLF³,DP´VWDWHPHQWVDQGSURPLVHVWKHGLVFLSOHVWKDWWKH\Zill do greater works than he (John 14:12), in other texts he predicts that false prophets will also GHFODUH³,DP´DQGSHUIRUPVLJQVFI0DUNDQGSDUV5HY  30 See John 8:51; 14:15, 21, 23±24; 15:10, 20; 16:14±15; 17:6. 6HH  ³6FULSWXre FDQQRWEHEURNHQ´

. f C%f  f f , de ':  fe

193

WKHDXWKRULW\RI-HVXV¶ZRUGVLVDFNQRZOHGJHGDQGRQHPD\RQO\SXVKWKHPDV far as their intrinsic pol\YDOHQF\KHQFH-RKQ¶VDIIHFWLRQIRUGRXEOH-entendre) or an appropriate paraphrase will allow. Such a prophetic model of DIQ helps to account for the inclusive hermeneutic that we have detected on other JURXQGV LI WKH µRULJLQDO¶ VWDWHPHQW LV JLYHQ -HVXV¶ authority (however it is phrased, and more importantly, however it is understood), it is difficult to supersede through paraphrase without undermining his authority, although one might add to its range of meanings within the linguistic bounds established b y the group. In only a few cases does John try to limit the interpretation of what Jesus has said.31 The literary understanding of DIQ that I have presented so far is not exclusive to an understanding within the context of early Johannine mysticism that I will occasionally advocate for in this chapter, due both to the form and especially to the content of the sayings being elaborated by John. A visionary group can still use the appropriate literary tools to convey meaning through a text. So while the bulk of the analysis will be of a literary nature, tracing how John introduces and reexamines similar themes in new contexts, with new audiences, and with modified wording, the visionary hypothesis is meant to enrich our understanding not only of the concerns of the Johannine group, but most likely its cultural and religious context as well.

2. Jesus Comes and Jesus Goes, Part I: Outsiders )URPKHUHRQZHZLOOH[DPLQHKRZ-RKQGHYHORSVVD\LQJVDERXW-HVXV¶FRVPLF movements into and out of the world, in some cases using a disjointed threepart interpretive pattern, but spread out over multiple scenes and addressed to distinct audiences. Under the influence of scriptural sayings about the coming of the Lord, the Messiah, or other figures, some statements about Jesus coming into the world have been applied to the beginning of his public ministry or to the incarnation. 32 ,QWKHIRUPHUFDWHJRU\DUHWKHYDULDQWVRIWKH%DSWLVW¶VVWDWH ments about the one coming after him (1:15, 27, 30). In the latter category are the particularly Johannine sayings about Jesus as the bread of life that descended from heaven (6:33, 38, 41±42). Yet after chapter 6, John ceases to TXRWHFODLPVDERXW-HVXV¶FRVPLFPRYHPHQWVinto the world and instead begins

 31 In those few cases where John wishes to eliminate an interpretation, it either voices it WKURXJK-HVXV¶RSSRQHQWVRUSRUWUD\VLWDVDQLQDSSURSULDWHSDUDSKUDVH1RWDEO\WKHFRQWHQW often has to do with death and absence, whether JeVXV¶GHSDUWXUH±36; 8:22; 12:34) or the death of believers (8:52; 21:23). 32 Statements using ਩ȡȤȠȝĮȚLQFOXGH-RKQWKH/LJKWDOVR"  6:14 (the Prophet); 7:28 (the Messiah), 42; 9:39 (the Son of Man); 12:47; 13:3; 18:37 (t he King).

194

Chapter 5: Direct Internal Quotation and the Cosmic Movements of Jesus

to focus on his various departures from the world and returns to it. In fact, the discussion of what it means for Jesus to go begins in the dispute at Tabernacles in chapter 7. Here Jesus twice introduces the theme of his departure and it is twice objected to by a hostile audience, but in neither case does Jesus elaborate or clarify his meaning. Instead, he waits until he is alone with the loyal disciples (cf. 13:33) to endorse any interpretations of his message. The declaration about where Jesus goes (7:33±34) does not arrive precisely out of nowhere, but it is quite loosely connected to the material surrounding it. 7KHEORFNRIPDWHULDOSUHFHGLQJLWGHDOVPDLQO\ZLWK-HVXV¶RULJLQV±31) ± where he is from, not where he is going. A narrative break intervenes in which we learn that officers have been sent to arrest him (7:32), at which point Jesus makes a bold statement that seems to combine four strands of tradition: 33 John 7:33±34: a) Yet a little time I am with you, b) and I go to the one who sent me. c) You will seek me and you will not find [me], and d) where I am, you cannot come.

Only c) and d) are quoted by the Jews, now or later, but b) influences the development of this material in the next chapter. The first statement will not be developed until Jesus is alone with his disciples. Before tracing this development, the pre-Johannine evidence for the material placed on the lips of Jesus in this scene should be traced. 2.1 Yet a Little Time I Am with You Jesus introduces immediately the temporal and social themes that will dominate this material as it is developed. Two strands of tradition are alluded to by ³\HWDOLWWOHWLPH´ ਩IJȚȤȡȩȞȠȞȝȚțȡઁȞ  The first refers to the shortness of life, as for example Job 24:24, ³They are exalted a little while (ʨʲʮ) and are gone,´ or Ps 37:10, ³Yet a little while (ʨʲʮʣʥʲʥ) and the wicked man is no more.´34 The second strand refers to a major and imminent action to be taken by God: 35 ,VD)RU\HWDOLWWOHZKLOH/;;਩IJȚȝȚțȡઁȞ DQGWKHLQGLJQDWLRQZLOOHQGEXWP\DQJHU will be on thHLU>WKH$VV\ULDQV¶@FRXQFLO

 33 See Ridderbos, John RQ -RKQ ³7KHVH ZRUGV RI-HVXVWKDW QRZ IROORZDUH FOHDUO\LQWHQGHGQRWDVDUHDFWLRQWRYVEXWWRYV´ 34 The Greek of Job 24:24 is quite different from the MT, with no temporal reference, but LXX Ps 36:10 has ਩IJȚ ੑȜ઀ȖȠȞ 7KH OLQH FRQWLQXHV ³\RX ZLOO VHHN KLV SODFH ȗȘIJ੾ıİȚȢ IJઁȞ IJંʌȠȞĮ੝IJȠ૨ DQG\RXZLOOQRWILQGȠ੝ ȝ੽ İ੢ȡૉȢ ´Second Baruch uses the phrase to refer SURYHUELDOO\WRWKHVKRUWQHVVRIOLIHLQJHQHUDO³)RUZHDUHERUQLQDVKRUWWLPH and LQDVKRUWWLPHZHUHWXUQ´VHHDOVR  35 ,QDGGLWLRQVHH,VD³:LOO/HEDQRQQRWLQDOLWWOHZKLOH>Ƞ੝ț੼IJȚȝȚțȡઁȞ@EHWXUQHG LQWRDIUXLWIXOILHOG´ -HU³/;;਩IJȚȝȚțȡઁȞ@DQGWKHWLPHRI her [BabyloQ¶V@KDUYHVWZLOOFRPH´ +RV³਩IJȚȝȚțȡઁȞ@DQG,ZLOODYHQJH WKHEORRGRI-H]UHHORQWKHKRXVHRI-XGDK´ 6HHDOVR,VD>FI+HE@>ȤȡંȞȠȞ ȝȚțȡઁȞ@5HY 

. f C%f  f f , de ':  fe

195

Hag 2:4±$FWEHFDXVH,DPZLWK\RX/;;ȝİș¶ਫ਼ȝ૵ȞਥȖઆİੁȝȚ VD\VWKH/RUG$OPLJKW\« Yet it is one small moment 36 and I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the desert; and I will shake all the nations, so that the treasure of all the nations will come and I will fill this house with glory. 37

As it moves from prophetic texts into apocalyptic ones, the note of imminence turns into urgency. The above text from Haggai is adapted into the 1st century Hebrew apocalypse, Hazon Gabriel (24±25), calling for the Jerusalem temple to be divinely rebuilt soon.38 Second Baruch uses the phrase in much the same way of Zion. 39 In John, Jesus has already compared his death to the destruction of the temple (John 2:19±22), and here he appropriates from the temple the source of living water (7:37±39) and light (8:12) in the Tabernacles ceremony.40 ,IWKHVHLQWHUWH[WXDOFOXHVZHUHKHDUGLQWKHVKRUWSKUDVHWKHQ-HVXV¶ audience might expect that his life will be short, but that a divine act is also imminent that will renew the center of worship and punish the unrighteous rulers of JerusalHP³,PPLQHQW´KRZHYHUVKRXOGEHWDNHQZLWKDJUDLQRIVDOW,I the eschatological predictions of Haggai ± yet to be fulfilled a number of centuries later ± ZHUHDQWLFLSDWHG³LQDOLWWOHZKLOH´WKHQZHVKRXOGQRWQHFHVVDULO\ limit the loose timestamp to the hours (as in 12:35; 13:33) or months (in 7:33) until the crucifixion. What Jesus points to is a temporal distinction between the situation now and some future circumstance that approaches. Here the threat is that Jesus will be with them ȝİș¶ਫ਼ȝ૵ȞİੁȝȚ only a little time. Given the high christology of the gospel, assertions of Jesus being with EHOLHYHUVSUREDEO\JDLQDGGHGGHSWKIURPVLPLODUDVVHUWLRQVRI*RG¶VSUHVHQFH with his people. In the Hebrew Bible, this almost always has the additional senVH WKDW *RG LV RQ ,VUDHO¶V VLGH 41 Such language continues in the early

 36

The phrasing here is awkward in the MT, which has ʠʩʤʨʲʮʺʧʠʣʥʲ. When the line is drafted nearly verbatim into Hazon Gabriel, it is simplified to ʨʲʮ ʣʥʲ. The LXX has ਩IJȚ ਚʌĮȟ:KDWHYHUWKHSUHFLVHVHQVH³WKHSKUDVHGHQRWHVLPPLQHQFH´-RKQ$.HVVOHU³7KH 6KDNLQJ RI WKH 1DWLRQV $Q (VFKDWRORJLFDO 9LHZ´ JETS 30/2 [1987]: 159±66, here 163) even if it was later understood as eschatological. 37 See also the allusion to Hag 2:7 in Rev 21:24. 38 )RU PRUH GHWDLO VHH -HIIUH\ 0 7ULSS ³$ 5HYHODWLRQ IURP *DEULHO WR 1DWKDQ" 7KH Herodian Temple and the Ideology of the Davidic Covenant in the Hazon Gabriel´ ASE 31/1 (2014): 7±27. Hazon Gabriel also anticipates a sign (ʺʥʠʤ) in three days (HG 80), probably tied to the temple; compare John 2:19±23. 39 See 2 Bar³)RUDIWHUDVKRUWWLPHWKHEXLOGLQJRI=LRQZLOOEHVKDNHQLQRUGHU WKDWLWZLOOEHUHEXLOW´ DQG³DIWHUDVKRUWWLPH=LRQZLOOEHUHEXLOWDJDLQ´  40 Moloney, John, 252±53; Barrett, John, 328. 41 )RURWKHUH[DPSOHVRI*RGWKH/RUG³ZLWK´,VUDHOJHQHUDOO\VHH1XP'HXW Joshua 1:9; Judges 6:12±&KURQ³ਥțȗȘIJોıĮȚ@WKH/RUGDQGZLOOQRWILQGKLP´ DQG$PRV³WKH\ will run around seeking the word of WKH/RUGDQGWKH\ZLOOQRWILQG´  59 &RPSDUH-RKQ³FI@FK>[@>FI@DQG>FI@ DQG³3KDULVHHV´ 30 times, with 13 (~43%) associated with direct quotation (cf. 3:7 [cf. 3:9, hypothetical]; 5:20; 15:1; 16:1 [cf. 16:2±3]; ch. 23 [8x]; 27:62 [cf. 27:63]). The two are paired in nine of WKHVH 2Q WKH IUHTXHQW SDLULQJ 5REHUW + *XQGU\ QRWHV ³1RW DOO VFULEHV EHORQJHG WR WKH 3KDULVDLFDOVHFWDQGQRWDOO3KDULVHHVWRRNWKHVFULEDOUROHRIWHDFKLQJWKHODZ´Matthew: A Commentary on his Literary and Theological Art [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982], 82). 17 It is only suggestive, but the scribes appear once in Coptic Gospel of Thomas, logion 39. Jesus claims that the disciples have desired to hear his words many times, but have no one else to hear them from; the Pharisees and scribes have hidden the keys of knowledge. Is WKLVDFULWLFLVPRIVFULEDOFODLPVWREHWKHNHHSHUVRI-HVXV¶ZRUGV" Gosp. Thom. 40 speaks of an uprooted grapevine and logion 45 returns to the image by observing that grapes are not harvested from thorns, leading to the only self-citation in Thomas (46). Evidently the disciSOHVFDQKHDUWKHVHVD\LQJVLITXRWHGE\WKHOLYLQJ-HVXVEXWQRWIURPWKH³VFULEHV´

246

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Paths for Future Research

documentary evidence for earlier texts is firmer, and where the relative dates are more secure, earlier narratives should not be excluded. Scholars on the prophets have already begun the critical search for pre-textual traditions reflected in direct quotations given in narrative settings (e.g. Gordis and Crenshaw), but we should also examine the second temple literature, the early apocalypses, and the Qumran literature. Although direct internal quotations may not be as prevalent as in John, there may nonetheless be useful data for confirming that DIQ could be used to incorporate traditional material, and to understand the trajectory of this use. A particularly fruitful corpus for researching the later development of DIQ may be the Nag Hammadi and Gnostic texts. Like John, the Gnostic texts have a tendency to be repetitious with variation. Works by Vernon K. Robbins and Jón Ma. Èsgeirsson have emphasized the rhetorical nature of Thomas¶variations in light of paraphrase and elaboration exercises. 18 If the authors had been trained in paraphrase, then the mere presence of variation is not enough to argue for multiple sources. Such an argument would carry with it the necessary assumption that maintaining the precise wording of the source text was important enough to the authors not to alter the sayings, perhaps even to harmonize them, as they were incorporated into their own texts. This is not necessarily the case. Paraphrase is sufficient to explain variant wording, especially if the changes align with the arguments that the sayings support. A literaryrhetorical context in which paraphrase is not only practiced but valued and instilled in students suggests that we should examine the rhetorical impact of variations first while maintaining a multi-dimensional and rigorous standard for detecting sources. The present study contributes to this push to recognize the importance of paraphrase in understanding the oddities and idiosyncrasies of ancient religious texts. Like John, if not to the same extent, there are a number of direct quotations in Gnostic literature. The quoted sayings are earlier than the Gnostic texts on a number of occasions, suggesting they used DIQ to incorporate traditional material (and to paraphrase it), at least on occasion. Further exploration of the internal (if often unverifiable) quotations in the Gnostic literature may have the potential to tell us more about the lines of influence between 1st century Christianities and these later groups.

 18

)RU 5REELQV VHH ³5KHWRULFDO &RPSRVLWLRQ DQG 6RXUFHV LQ WKH Gospel of Thomas´ SBLSP 36 (1997): 86±114. For Èsgeirsson, see ³Arguments and Audience(s) in the Gospel of Thomas´ SBLSP 36 (1997): 47±85 and SBLSP 37 (1998): 325±42, and Doublets and Strata: Towards a Rhetorical Approach to the Gospel of Thomas (Ph.D. diss.; Claremont Graduate University, 1998).

. d e #  ef f fe

247

2.4 Direct Internal Quotation as a Spiritual Marker The narrator of the Gospel of Mark re-quotes the scribes in one case, claiming WKDW-HVXVFRQGHPQHGEODVSKHPLQJWKH+RO\6SLULWEHFDXVHWKH\VDLG³+HKDV DQXQFOHDQVSLULW´ 7KHUHLVDIRUHQVLFGLPHQVLRQVLQFHWKHQDUUDWRUSUH sents evidence of the charge of blasphemy, but there is also a spiritual dimension since the narrator defends Jesus against the charge that the spirit he has is unclean, rather than holy. The quoted phrase does not present a test of spirits as we see in 1 John and the Didache, but rather the (incorrect) verdict of such a test: he has Beelzebul, an unclean, lying or false spirit. Didache 11:7 (for every sin will be forgiven, but this sin will not be forgiven) makes the connection when it invokes (but does not cite), within the discussion of testing prophets, a Jesus-saying also reflected in Mark 3:28±³DOOWKLQJVZLOOEHIRUJLYHQ to the sons of men, sins and blasphemies, as many as they may have blasphemed, but whoever should blaspheme the Holy Spirit, he never has forgiveness EXWLVJXLOW\RIHWHUQDOVLQ´cf. Luke 12:10; Matt 12:31). If DIQ may have played a role in marking and controlling prophetic, spiritual communicaWLRQV LQ -RKQ¶V JURXS GR 0DUN DQG Didache provide some small amount of corroborating evidence for such a use? /XNH¶VFKRLFHWRTXRWHWKHPHVVDJHIURPWKH%DSWLVWWR-HVXV³$UH\RXWKH FRPLQJRQHRUGRZHORRNIRUDQRWKHU"´ DVNHGE\DSURSKHWWR&KULVW reads more significantly in the context of prophetic testing to determine whether the living Christ hDV YLVLWHG WKH SURSKHW :KLOH PRVW RI 0DWWKHZ¶V internal quotations are forensic, the First Gospel uses two cases of forensic ',4WRGHOLYHUWKHPHVVDJHVIURP-HVXV³,DP*RG¶V6RQ´ DQG³,ULVH DIWHUWKUHHGD\V´ (OVHZKHUHLWKDVEHHQVDLG about him that he is the Son of God by others, and that he has predicted (in the third person) that the Son of Man will rise. 19 Only in quotation do the claims take on an oracular first-person phrasing. Meanwhile the quotations in Acts are strongly connected to visionary, spiritual practices. The inaugural quotation has Jesus predicting that his disciples will be baptized in Holy Spirit (1:4±5), and many of the quotations that follow cite spiritual auditions (see Table 2).20

 19 *RG VD\V³WKLVLV P\ EHORYHG 6RQ´    DQGDFHQWXULRQ VD\V³WKLV LVWUXO\ *RG¶V6RQ´ -HVXVLVDGGUHVVHGDV6RQRI*RGE\WKH'HYLOVHHWKHVLPLODU phrasing of the passers-by in 27:40), demons (8:29), and Peter (14:33; 16:16), and asked whether he is the Son of God by Caiaphas (26:63), although he does not answer. The narrator relates the first passion indirectly in the third person (16:21), and the subsequent predictions are phrased in the third person regarding the Son of Man (17:22±23; 20:18±19). 20 The false quotation of Stephen in Acts 6:14 is purely forensic, but leads into a sermon that ends with a vision of Christ (7:55±56). Acts 11:16; 13:25; and 20:35 may relay preresurrection teachings, although it is unclear how Paul heard the last of these words. He may KDYHKHDUGWKHPLQDYLVLRQHVSHFLDOO\ZLWKWKHHPSKDVLVWKDW³KHKLPVHOIVDLG´Į੝IJઁȢİੇʌİȞ  them.

248

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Paths for Future Research

We may also point to the direct quotations in the Gospel of Thomas. The emphasis on the words of the living (post-resurrection?) Jesus appears from the RXWVHW:KHQDVNHGE\WKHGLVFLSOHV³:KRDUH\RXWRVD\WKLVWRXV"´  Jesus replies by invoking the word that whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him (44). Soon Jesus provides them with a question and response (50): ³,IWKH\VD\WR\RXµ:KHUHGR\RXFRPHIURP"¶ VD\WRWKHPµ,WLVIURPWKHOLJKWWKDWZe have come ± from the place where light,of its own accord alone, came into existence and [stood at rest]. And it has been shown forth [or: appeared] in their image¶,IWKH\VD\WR\Ru, µ,VLW\RX"¶VD\µ:HDUHLWVRIIVSULQJ, and we are the chosen of the living father¶,IWKH\DVN \RXµ:KDWLVWKHVLJQRI\RXUIather within [or: among] you"¶VD\WRWKHPµ,WLVPRYHPHQW DQGUHSRVH¶´21

Later Jesus quotes what the disciples should say when angels and prophets come to them (88), and near the conclusion of Thomas Jesus promises the heavens and earth will be rolled up in their presence (see the visions in Isa 34:4; Rev 6:14) and the one who lives by WKHOLYLQJRQHZLOOQRWVHHGHDWK³'RHV -HVXVQRWVD\µ:KRHYHUILQGVKLPVHOILVVXSHULRUWRWKHZRUOG¶"´ 7KHUH is little internal quotation in Thomas, and the other clear case (46) does not seem to be directly related to visionary activity. Still the embedded direct speech in Thomas tends to veer toward oracular themes and forms. $OWKRXJKPDQ\RI-RKQ¶VGLUHFWTXRWDWLRQVFDQEHUHDG\FRKHUHQWO\LQWKH context of visionary experiences, greater attention to the ways that direct quotations are used similarly in contemporary literature would lend more weight to this coherence. More work needs to be done before such practices may become a proven dimension of ancient Johannine experience. For this reason, I have attempted not to force a visionary model onto the data, acknowledging figurative or philosophical readings of sight and hearing language. Nevertheless, the close association of direct internal quotation and visionary motifs in the Gospel of John is suggestive and noticeable only by attending to direct internal quotation as a literary device. It is my hope that future research focused on direct internal quotation will be equally fruitful.

 21

Translation from Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 389 (emphasis added).

Appendix ³$PHQDPHQ,VD\WR\RXLIDQ\RQHNHHSVP\ZRUGKHZLOOQRWVHHGHDWKIRUHYHU´7KHQ WKH-HZVVDLG³1RZZHNQRZWKDW\RXKDYHDGHPRQ$EUDKDPGLHGDQGWKHSURSKHWVDQG \RXVD\µ,IDQ\RQHNHHSVP\ZRUGKHZLOOQHYHUWDVWHGHDWK¶´ John 8:51±52 ³:KRHYHUHDWVRIWKLVEUHDGZLOOOLYHIRUHYHU´6XUHO\WKHUHKHFDOOVWKHVDYLQJGRFWULQHVDQG IDLWKLQKLPµEUHDG¶RUKLVRZQERG\)RUERWKHQHUYDWHWKHVRXO$QGLQGHHGHOVHZKHUHKH VDLG³,IDQ\RQHKHDUVP\ZRUGKHZLOOQRWWDVWHGHDWK´DQd they were offended. 1 John Chrysostom, Hom. In Io. 46

1. General Grammatical Considerations The list of cases of DIQ in this study is longer than in the previous studies. This is partly GXHWRDFRQVFLRXVHIIRUWQRWWROLPLWXQQHFHVVDULO\WKHVWXG\¶VVFRSH in order to be as comprehensive as possible. It is also due to the inclusion of cases that many might consider indirect quotations, and which are in fact punctuated as such in various critical editions and translations. Because I wish to consider only direct quotations, the ambiguity in -RKQ¶VFRQVWUXFWLRQRIVRPH of these cases deserves attention. John is averse to accusative and infinitive constructions that clearly mark indirect quotations in other literature, as we saw above (chapter 4), for example, in Acts of Pilate OLWHUDOO\³+HVD\VKLPVHOIWREH*RG¶V6RQ´ȜȑȖİȚ ਦĮȣIJzȞ İੇȞĮȚ ȣੂzȞ șİȠ૨).2 Instead, John uses nominative indicative constructions, sometimes with the particle ੖IJȚVRPHWLPHVZLWKRXW7ZHQW\-three cases lack ੖IJȚLQ7DEOHSOXVWKHVHFRQGTXRWDWLRQLQ DVLQ-RKQʌ૵Ȣ ıઃ ȜȑȖİȚȢįİ૙ȟȠȞਲȝ૙ȞIJઁȞʌĮIJȑȡĮ³+RZGR\RXVD\µ6KRZXVWKH)DWKHU¶"´  Such constructions in John, when they contain a quotation at all, are universally translated as direct quotes.3 At other times John introduces the particle ੖IJȚ

 

My translation; see PG 59:251 col. 259 for the Greek, and above (chapter 6). $OWKRXJKVHH-RKQZLWKDQDFFXVDWLYHFRQVWUXFWLRQ³,QRORQJHUFDOO\RXVODYHV´ Ƞ੝țȑIJȚ ȜȑȖȦ ਫ਼ȝ઼Ȣ įȠȪȜȠȣȢ), rather than a nominative one DV LQ  ³੉ȦȐȞȞȠȣ@VHUYLQJDVDYRFDWLYH is eliminated), but elsewhere it is kept with both citations lacking the particle (21:20/13:25).  /HYLQVRKQ³੖IJȚRecitativum´±7.)RURWKHUH[DPSOHVRIFDXVDO ੖IJȚ, see John 8:22; 10:36c; 16:19; 21:17. Elsewhere ੖IJȚPD\VHUYHRWKHUIXQFWLRQVDVLQ³'RQRWEHDPD]HG that [or: because] ,VDLG«´ RU³(XJHQH3LFN ZLFN@ SRLQWVRXWWKDWWKHUHDUHDURXQGFDVHVLQWKH17ZKHUH੖IJȚLQWURGXFHV GLUHFWVSHHFKDQGLWLVDOVRFRPPRQLQWKHDiscoursesof Epictetus  1RDFNTraditionVXJJHVWVWKDWWKH੖IJȚFDQEHWDNHQDVFDXVDO³Vo] because ,DP>LQIDFW@.LQJ´7KLVLVQRWYHU\OLNHO\DQGLWPD\EHIRUFHGE\1RDFN¶VFRQYLF WLRQWKDWȜȑȖİȚȞ੖IJȚUDUHO\LQWURGXFHVLQGLUHFWGLVFRXUVH6HHDOVR/HYLQVRKQ³੖IJȚRecitativum´QQRQWKHFKDQJHRISHUVRQ  7KHUHLVVRPHGLVFXVVLRQZKHWKHU3LODWH¶VVWDWHPHQWVKRXOGEHSXQFWXDWHGDVDTXHVWLRQ RUDVDQH[FODPDWLRQLQUHVSRQVHWR-HVXV¶LPPHGLDWHO\SUHFHGLQJVWDWHPHQWDERXWKLVNLQJ GRP ³6RWKHQ\RXareDNLQJ´7KHSDUDOOHOLVPLVDXJPHQWHGLQ$DQGODWHUXQFLDOV with the addition of an extraਥȖȫDWWKHHQGRIWKHVHQWHQFHLQWKLVFDVHȕĮıȚȜİઃȢİੇ ıȪis PDWFKHGE\ȕĮıȚȜİȪȢİੁȝȚਥȖȫ . Conversely, since the next sentence begins with ਥȖȫVRWKDW the two identical pronouns would sit side by side), the wording may have been refined to eliminate the duplication, or the second ਥȖȫPD\KDYHGURSSHGRXWLQWUDQVPLVVLRQ$OWHUQD tively still, by merely shifting the stop after ਥȖȫ, the parallelism is maintained without breaking the syntax of the following sentence: ıઃ ȜȑȖİȚȢ ੖IJȚ ȕĮıȚȜİȪȢ İੁȝȚ ਥȖȫ İੁȢ IJȠ૨IJȠ ȖİȖȑȞȞȘȝĮȚ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠ૨IJȠ ਥȜȒȜȣșĮ İੁȢ IJઁȞ țȩıȝȠȞ. For a fuller discussion of WKLVYHUEDQGDGHIHQVHRIWKLVODVWSXQFWXDWLRQVHH-DQH+HDWK³µSO@VD\that \RX>VLQJ@EODVSKHPH´PDNHVOLWWOHVHQVH 16 Notice also that while John uses ੖IJȚ in the first quotation, it fails to in the second quotation probably due to the causal ੖IJȚWKDWOLQNVWKHFODXVHV$GLUHFWTXRWDWLRQZLWKWKH particle sits side by side with one that lacks it for reasons having nothing to do with direct and indirect speech.17 Using the particle in a causal sense introduces ambiguity into two quotations from chapter 16, since it is unclear whether the ੖IJȚLVSDUWRIWKHTXRWDWLRQRU merely introduces it. The ੖IJȚLQ-RKQLVRIWHQWDNHQDVSDUWRIWKHTXRWD WLRQ³because [੖IJȚ@,JRWRWKH)DWKHU´FI  18 in part because two quotations are depicted here and the first is introduced without the particle. As 10:36 (and possibly 3:28) illustrates, this is not necessarily the case (since the second quote could be marked by ੖IJȚWRUHFDOOWKHVSHDNLQJYHUE 19 but it is likely. Shortly before this, though, in 16:15 Jesus quotes what he just said in 16:14. In the first statement the ੖IJȚLVFDXVDO³7KDWRQHZLOOJORULI\PHbecause he will receive from me and announce to you.´