translation_id: net-engnet

book_id: JHN

label: NET study note

text: In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning , John 1:1 ) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in are also found in John’s prologue: “life” ( 1:4 ) “light” ( 1:4 ) and “darkness” ( 1:5 ). describes the first (physical) creation; describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in with the changing of water into wine, in with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)


text: The author now introduces what will become a major theme of John’s Gospel: the opposition of light and darkness . The antithesis is a natural one, widespread in antiquity. gives considerable emphasis to it in the account of the creation, and so do the writings of Qumran. It is the major theme of one of the most important extra-biblical documents found at Qumran, the so-called War Scroll, properly titled The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness . Connections between John and Qumran are still an area of scholarly debate and a consensus has not yet emerged. See T. A. Hoffman, “1 John and the Qumran Scrolls,” BTB 8 (1978): 117-25.


text: John refers to John the Baptist.


text: His own people did not receive him. There is a subtle irony here: When the λόγος ( logos ) came into the world, he came to his own ( τὰ ἴδια , ta idia , literally “his own things”) and his own people ( οἱ ἴδιοι , Joi idioi ), who should have known and received him, but they did not. This time John does not say that “his own” did not know him, but that they did not receive him ( παρέλαβον , parelabon ). The idea is one not of mere recognition, but of acceptance and welcome.


text: Has made God known. In this final verse of the prologue, the climactic and ultimate statement of the earthly career of the Logos , Jesus of Nazareth, is reached. The unique One ( John 1:14 ), the One who has taken on human form and nature by becoming incarnate ( became flesh , 1:14), who is himself fully God ( the Word was God , 1:1c) and is to be identified with the ever-living One of the Old Testament revelation ( Exod 3:14 ), who is in intimate relationship with the Father, this One and no other has fully revealed what God is like. As Jesus said to Philip in John 14:9 , “The one who has seen me has seen the Father.”


text: John’s refers to John the Baptist.


text: “ Who are you? ” No uniform Jewish expectation of a single eschatological figure existed in the 1st century. A majority expected the Messiah. But some pseudepigraphic books describe God’s intervention without mentioning the anointed Davidic king; in parts of 1 Enoch , for example, the figure of the Son of Man, not the Messiah, embodies the expectations of the author. Essenes at Qumran seem to have expected three figures: a prophet, a priestly messiah, and a royal messiah. In baptizing, John the Baptist was performing an eschatological action. It also seems to have been part of his proclamation ( John 1:23, 26-27 ). Crowds were beginning to follow him. He was operating in an area not too far from the Essene center on the Dead Sea. No wonder the authorities were curious about who he was.


text: According to the 1st century rabbinic interpretation of 2 Kgs 2:11 , Elijah was still alive. In Mal 4:5 it is said that Elijah would be the precursor of Messiah. How does one reconcile John the Baptist’s denial here ( “I am not” ) with Jesus’ statements in Matt 11:14 (see also Mark 9:13 and Matt 17:12 ) that John the Baptist was Elijah? Some have attempted to remove the difficulty by a reconstruction of the text in the Gospel of John which makes the Baptist say that he was Elijah. However, external support for such emendations is lacking. According to Gregory the Great, John was not Elijah, but exercised toward Jesus the function of Elijah by preparing his way. But this avoids the real difficulty, since in John’s Gospel the question of the Jewish authorities to the Baptist concerns precisely his function. It has also been suggested that the author of the Gospel here preserves a historically correct reminiscence – that John the Baptist did not think of himself as Elijah, although Jesus said otherwise. Mark 6:14-16 and Mark 8:28 indicate the people and Herod both distinguished between John and Elijah – probably because he did not see himself as Elijah. But Jesus’ remarks in Matt 11:14 , Mark 9:13 , and Matt 17:12 indicate that John did perform the function of Elijah – John did for Jesus what Elijah was to have done for the coming of the Lord. C. F. D. Moule pointed out that it is too simple to see a straight contradiction between John’s account and that of the synoptic gospels: “We have to ask by whom the identification is made, and by whom refused. The synoptic gospels represent Jesus as identifying, or comparing, the Baptist with Elijah, while John represents the Baptist as rejecting the identification when it is offered him by his interviewers. Now these two, so far from being incompatible, are psychologically complementary. The Baptist humbly rejects the exalted title, but Jesus, on the contrary, bestows it on him. Why should not the two both be correct?” ( The Phenomenon of the New Testament [SBT], 70).


text: The Prophet is a reference to the “prophet like Moses” of Deut 18:15 , by this time an eschatological figure in popular belief. Acts 3:22 identifies Jesus as this prophet.


text: This call to “make straight” is probably an allusion to preparation through repentance.


text: A quotation from Isa 40:3 .


text: Pharisees were members of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.


text: This is a parenthetical note by the author.


text: Gen 22:8 is an important passage in the background of the title Lamb of God as applied to Jesus. In Jewish thought this was held to be a supremely important sacrifice. G. Vermès stated: “For the Palestinian Jew, all lamb sacrifice, and especially the Passover lamb and the Tamid offering, was a memorial of the Akedah with its effects of deliverance, forgiveness of sin and messianic salvation” ( Scripture and Tradition in Judaism [StPB], 225).


text: John the Baptist, who has been so reluctant to elaborate his own role, now more than willingly gives his testimony about Jesus. For the author, the emphasis is totally on John the Baptist as a witness to Jesus. No attention is given to the Baptist’s call to national repentance and very little to his baptizing. Everything is focused on what he has to say about Jesus: so that he could be revealed to Israel .


text: The phrase like a dove is a descriptive comparison. The Spirit is not a dove, but descended like one in some sort of bodily representation.


text: John says the Spirit remained on Jesus. The Greek verb μένω ( menw ) is a favorite Johannine word, used 40 times in the Gospel and 27 times in the Epistles (67 together) against 118 times total in the NT. The general significance of the verb μένω for John is to express the permanency of relationship between Father and Son and Son and believer. Here the use of the word implies that Jesus permanently possesses the Holy Spirit, and because he does, he will dispense the Holy Spirit to others in baptism. Other notes on the dispensation of the Spirit occur at John 3:5 and following (at least implied by the wordplay), John 3:34, 7:38-39 , numerous passages in John 14-16 (the Paraclete passages) and John 20:22 . Note also the allusion to Isa 42:1 – “Behold my servant…my chosen one in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit on him.”


text: This section ( 1:35-51 ) is joined to the preceding by the literary expedient of repeating the Baptist’s testimony about Jesus being the Lamb of God ( 1:36 , cf. 1:29 ). This repeated testimony ( 1:36 ) no longer has revelatory value in itself, since it has been given before; its purpose, instead, is to institute a chain reaction which will bring John the Baptist’s disciples to Jesus and make them Jesus’ own disciples.


text: The expression followed Jesus pictures discipleship, which means that to learn from Jesus is to follow him as the guiding priority of one’s life.


text: Naturally part of Andrew’s concept of the Messiah would have been learned from John the Baptist (v. 40 ). However, there were a number of different messianic expectations in 1st century Palestine (see the note on “Who are you?” in v. 19 ), and it would be wrong to assume that what Andrew meant here is the same thing the author means in the purpose statement at the end of the Fourth Gospel, 20:31 . The issue here is not whether the disciples’ initial faith in Jesus as Messiah was genuine or not, but whether their concept of who Jesus was grew and developed progressively as they spent time following him, until finally after his resurrection it is affirmed in the climactic statement of John’s Gospel, the affirmation of Thomas in 20:28 .


text: This is a parenthetical note by the author. The change of name from Simon to Cephas is indicative of the future role he will play. Only John among the gospel writers gives the Greek transliteration ( Κηφᾶς , Khfas ) of Simon’s new name, Qéphâ (which is Galilean Aramaic). Neither Πέτρος ( Petros ) in Greek nor Qéphâ in Aramaic is a normal proper name; it is more like a nickname.


text: No explanation is given for why Jesus wanted to set out for Galilee , but probably he wanted to go to the wedding at Cana (about a two day trip).


text: Although the author thought of the town as in Galilee ( 12:21 ), Bethsaida technically was in Gaulanitis (Philip the Tetrarch’s territory) across from Herod’s Galilee. There may have been two places called Bethsaida, or this may merely reflect popular imprecision – locally it was considered part of Galilee, even though it was just east of the Jordan river. This territory was heavily Gentile (which may explain why Andrew and Philip both have Gentile names).


text: Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew (although John never describes him as such). He appears here after Philip , while in all lists of the twelve except in Acts 1:13 , Bartholomew follows Philip. Also, the Aramaic Bar-tolmai means “son of Tolmai,” the surname; the man almost certainly had another name.


text: Can anything good come out of Nazareth? may be a local proverb expressing jealousy among the towns. map For location see Map1-D3 ; Map2-C2 ; Map3-D5 ; Map4-C1 ; Map5-G3 .


text: Many have speculated about what Nathanael was doing under the fig tree . Meditating on the Messiah who was to come? A good possibility, since the fig tree was used as shade for teaching or studying by the later rabbis ( Ecclesiastes Rabbah 5:11). Also, the fig tree was symbolic for messianic peace and plenty ( Mic 4:4 , Zech 3:10 .)


text: Nathanael’s confession – You are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel – is best understood as a confession of Jesus’ messiahship. It has strong allusions to Ps 2:6-7 , a well-known messianic psalm. What Nathanael’s exact understanding was at this point is hard to determine, but “son of God” was a designation for the Davidic king in the OT, and Nathanael parallels it with King of Israel here.


text: What are the greater things Jesus had in mind? In the narrative this forms an excellent foreshadowing of the miraculous signs which began at Cana of Galilee.


text: The title Son of Man appears 13 times in John’s Gospel. It is associated especially with the themes of crucifixion ( 3:14; 8:28 ), revelation ( 6:27; 6:53 ), and eschatological authority ( 5:27; 9:35 ). The title as used in John’s Gospel has for its background the son of man figure who appears in Dan 7:13-14 and is granted universal regal authority. Thus for the author, the emphasis in this title is not on Jesus’ humanity, but on his heavenly origin and divine authority.