the quotation at john xii 34

The Quotation at John XII 34Author(s): Brian McNeilSource: Novum Testamentum, Vol. 19, Fasc. 1 (Jan., 1977), pp. 22-33Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560801 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 00:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Novum Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.38 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 00:06:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560801?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Novum Testamentum, Vol. XIX, fasc. I

THE QUOTATION AT JOHN XII 34 BY

BRIAN MCNEIL Cambridge, England

I The fourth evangelist portrays at Jn. xii 31-34 a clash in Jerusa-

lem over Jesus' claims about himself. Jesus is endorsed by the voice of the Father from heaven (xii 28), and proclaims: 'Now is the judgment of this world, now shall the ruler of this world be cast out; and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself'. The crowd check this assertion against their own messianic expectations, and object: 'We have heard from the law that the Christ remains for ever. How can you say that the Son of man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of man?'

According to A. J. WENSINCK, the word &xo6iLV as used here corresponds to 'the Talmudic nw, "to receive a 11Yb)t, opinion, tradition, from", and hence "to receive (traditional) teaching from", especially on a point of halacha; and so simply "to be taught", "to learn from" ' 1). The Jews, then, are claiming that Jesus does not match up to the authoritative teaching that 6 XPLCTGio ?Le 4e 7iqV TOVaL6OC.

The scriptural passage which the fourth evangelist had in mind here is singularly elusive. There are certainly passages which were interpreted as predictions of the eternal reign of God's Messiah, and such New Testament passages as the prophecy of the angel Gabriel at Lk. i 32 f. indicate that this idea was alive in the first century A.D.:

'He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end'.

(The only new feature of this prophecy is its application to Jesus.) There seems, however, even given a fairly wide interpretation of v6p.oq, to be no passage which claims explicitly that the Messiah will remain for ever. F.-M. BRAUN suggests that 'une fois admis

1) Matthew BLACK, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Ap- pendix C: 'The Unpublished Work of the Late A. J. Wensinck of Leiden'), Oxford 31967, p. 300.



THE QUOTATION AT JOHN XII 34 23

que le Messie serait charge d'instaurer un royaume perp6tuel, il 6tait logique de penser qu'il demeurerait toujours' 2).

It is, however, worth asking whether there is not an Old Testa- ment passage which would directly explain Jn. xii 34. W. C. VAN UNNIK 3) lists the passages most commonly offered as solutions to this question: Ps. cx 4; Is. ix 6 4); Ezek. xxxvii 25; Dan. vii 4 LXX; and in the pseudepigrapha, I Enoch. xlix I; Pss. Sol. xvii 4; Orac. Sib. III 49 f., 767 f. His own solution, undoubtedly the best if we assume that Jn. xii 34 refers to a Septuagintal text, is Ps. lxxxix 37, '6 oxtpoa oC5o Es v oevo isvE' 5).

I should like to offer the suggestion that when the crowd say that the Messiah remains for ever, the evangelist has in mind Is. ix 5-not in the Greek, 6trL 7wL&OV eVV vv0 v, u6q xOCt 'For to us a child is born, and to

604 ~jtyv, o0i ' &xp ye v46I 'xL us a son is given, on whose roi '.pLOu aUzoT, xa xOCrLhCLa 7b shoulder is the government, and 6vo ! ,o- Mlyi~cXS pouXqS "y- his name is called Angel of great yeXoq. &yb y&p & co e1p1vyv nte counsel; for I shall bring peace ,o~s MpXov~7a, eq ~vYv xai L yLEOV upon the rulers, peace and

aocZo health to him'

nor in the Hebrew, n~r

ia'-r" 11 1--T'J 1.-,1

'For to us a child is born, to us b Inv mulp

11 - ivu-,vn

a son is given; and the govern-

"t" ~

"u TSin 11 1N : '7T' ment will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called, "Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" ' (R.S.V.)

but in a version close to that of the Targum ), t xV 'n ti 'In@ n'T in'" 'The prophet saith to the house

2) Jean le The'ologien II: les grandes traditions d'Isra'l et l'accord des acritures selon le quatridme Evangile, Paris 1964, p. 104.

3) "The Quotation from the Old Testament in John xii 34", Nov. Test. 3 (1959), PP. 174-79-

4) In the MT, LXX, and Targum this verse is numbered ix 5, and this is the numeration I follow hereafter.

5) Cf. also Giinther REIM, Studien zum Alttestamentlichen Hintergrund des Johannesevangeliums (S.N.T.S. Monographs 22), Cambridge 1974, PP. 32-34.

6) Text in Alexander SPERBER, The Bible in Aramaic III: the Latter Prophets according to Targum Jonathan, Leiden 1962; and in J. F. STENNING, The Targum of Isaiah, Oxford 1949 (from whose translation I quote; italics mine).



24 BRIAN MCNEIL

'mt rn~IxI a p1 ' xi

r nx n l 9' of David, A child has been born z jp In ftz nit pnm1 nmiair to us, a son has been given to

Kn,1 K'V P OA p n x nt K Y us; and he has taken the law

11 Mnz N ,O'~ 0't~t upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old, Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, He who lives for ever, the Anointed one (or, Mes- siah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us'.

Here is an explicit statement in a scriptural text that the Messiah lives for ever, and I suggest that this passage from the Targum is the key to understanding Jn. xii 34.

This suggestion has the obvious demerit of appearing to be 'too good to be true'. I shall attempt to substantiate it by examining, first, whether Is. ix 5 was understood of the Messiah or of Jesus at a sufficiently early date to be a possible influence on the fourth gospel; and second, whether the Targum can be dated sufficiently early to be a possible influence on the fourth gospel.

II The one passage certainly antecedent to the fourth gospel which

appears to understand Is. ix 5 in a messianic sense is I QH. iii 6-18, where the community speaks of its distress by means of three metaphors, the third of which is extensively developed:

'They caused [me] to be like a ship on the deeps of the [sea],

and like a fortified city before [the aggressor],

[and] like a woman in travail with her first-born child,

upon whose belly pangs have come and grievous pains,

filling with anguish her child-bearing crucible'.

'For the children have come to the throes of Death, and she labours in her pains who bears the Man.

For amid the throes of Death she shall bring forth a man-child,

and amid the pains of Hell




there shall spring from her child-bearing crucible a Marvellous Mighty Counsellor;

and the Man shall be delivered from out of the throes'.

'When he is conceived all wombs shall quicken,

and the time of their delivery shall be in grievous pains;

they shall be appalled who are with child.

And when he is brought forth every pang shall come upon the child-bearing

crucible .. .' 7).

This hymn has been the subject of much discussion. Its messianic character has been asserted, e.g., by William H. BROWNLEE 8) and M. DELCOR 9), and denied, e.g., by A. S. VAN DER WOUDE 10) and O. BETZ 11). Others take up a middle position, e.g., A. DUPONT- SOMMER, who writes that in this hymn 'se trouve decrite la naissance du Messie, en meme temps que la fin du monde present' 12). Glenn HINSON suggests that the quotation from Is. ix 5 is simply 'an expression of wonderment at the child's birth. The psalmist echoes, as it were, the mother's own feeling, "a mighty man is he" '; but he admits that, given 'the ambiguity of terminology, [... ] which may have led to dual interpretations', it is possible 'that certain portions of the psalm would be understood in that way [i.e., "messianically"], both by the writer and the readers' 13).

While it is undoubtedly true that the image of the woman in travail came to be often merely a cliche to depict the distress of Israel 14) (and of individuals: cf. Jn. xvi 21 f.; Gal. iv 19), it did

7) E.T. by Geza VERMES, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, Harmonds- worth, revised edn., 1968, p. 157 (italics mine).

8) "Messianic Motifs of Qumran and the New Testament", part I, N.T.S. 3 (1956-57), pp. 12-30.

9) Les Hymnes de Qumrdn (Hodayot), Paris 1962, pp. 109-24. 10) Die Messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qumrdn (Studia

Semitica Neerlandica 3), Assen 1957, PP. 144-56. 11) "Die Geburt der Gemeinde durch den Lehrer", N.T.S. 3 (1956-57),

pp. 314-26. 12) "La mebre du Messie et la mere de l'Aspic dans un hymne de Qoumran",

Rev. Hist. Rel. 147 (1955), PP. 174-88. 13) "Hodayoth, III, 6-18: in what sense Messianic ?", Rev. de Qumrdn 2

(1959-60), pp. 183-204, at p. 203 (italics original). 14) Cf. the list of passages in HINSON, Op. cit., p. 184.



26 BRIAN MCNEIL

not lose altogether its power to describe the difficult circumstances attending a birth which was significant in God's plan for his people- as a comparison with Rev. xii demonstrates. The metaphor never became wholly attenuated. The woman in this hymn (here re- presenting the community of Qumran) gives birth in the midst of terrible woes to a child who will decisively alter the situation, a child who is inii av r r~ sb. These words are quoted in order to evoke for the users of the psalm the whole passage Is. ix 5 f.-from them will be born the child who is to be Messiah and establish God's kingdom and peace for ever. The psalmist does not play down the terrors of the times, but his psalm is a song of hope: messianic hope 15).

There is, then, a Jewish text which applies Is. ix 5 to the expected Messiah. More importantly for this inquiry, did Christians in the first century A.D. understand Is. ix 5 messianically? Several second-century writers apply this passage to Jesus: Justin (I Apol. 35; Dial. 76, 126), the Valentinians (apud Clement of Alexandria, Exc. Theod. xliii 2), and Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. III xvi 3, xix 2, IV xxxiii II; Dem. Ap. Pr. 40, 54, 55, 56) 16). But in the first century, although Mt. iv 15 f. quotes Is. viii 23-ix I when intro- ducing Jesus' Galilean ministry, there is no quotation of Is. ix 5. I suggest that this is because of the unfortunate christological implications of the LXX text.

One of the solutions proposed in the early church to the basic christological problem of how we may assess and describe the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth in his relation to God and to man was an 'angel-christology' 17). Jesus is an angel (indeed, the

16) Cf. the apocalyptic passages in the synoptic gospels, where the horrors are not underestimated, but the metaphor of birth-pangs is used (Mk. xiii 8; Mt. xxiv 8), and the disciples are told to 'look up and raise your heads, because your redemption is near' (Lk. xxii 28).

16) On the text of Is. ix 5 used by Irenaeus, cf. the note in L. M. FROIDE- VAUX's translation of Dem. Ap. Pr., Ddmonstration de la Prddication Apostoli- que, (Sources Chr6tiennes 62), Paris 1959, pp. 116-17.

17) On angel-christology, cf. the following studies: Adolphine BAKKER, "Christ an Angel? A study of early Christian docetism", Z.N.T.W. 32 (1933), PP. 255-65; Joseph BARBEL, Christos Angelos (Theophaneia 3), Bonn 1941; Martin WERNER, Die Entstehung des christlichen Dogmas, Bern and Tiibingen 1941, pp. 321-49 (E.T. by S. G. F. BRANDON of revised and abridged edn., The Formation of Christian Dogma, London 1957, PP. 131-41); Wilhelm MICHAELIS, Zur Engelchristologie im Urchristentum, Basel 1942; Jean DANIE- LOU, The Theology of Jewish Christianity, London 1964 (E.T. by J. A. BAKER of revised edn. of Thdologie du juddo-christianisme, Tournai I958), pp. I117-46.




supreme angel) sent forth by the Father to accomplish the work of the salvation of mankind by fighting the decisive battle against the demonic powers of darkness which hold this world in thrall: he then returns to heaven where he intercedes for men before the throne of God. Such a solution was facilitated by angelological developments within Judaism, and if a soteriology was to be constructed on the gnostic model of an Illuminator who brings salvific knowledge to ignorant men, then this was a readily acceptable theory. It had the merit of neatly forestalling the awkward sorts of ontological ques- tions that began to be asked about Jesus by Christians in the course of the first century-if Jesus is an angelic being, always subordinate to the Father (and not because of filial piety, but because of the necessary inferiority of his angelic nature), there is no risk to Jewish monotheistic sensibilities. This was an attractive christological solution, but not one that conduced to clarity of thought or expression: we see the considerable confusion it caused in the Shepherd of Hermas, where it is by no means plain in what category of being we are to understand the Son, now how he is related to Michael 18).

There were more serious objections to angel-christology. It is impossible to make any sense of the cross of Jesus, both on the soteriological level, and on the level of straightforward historical fact, if he is an angel: it would be meaningless to claim that men are saved by the death of an angel, for angels do not die. The second great objection was that angel-christology made nonsense of the messianic expectations of the Jewish people and of the Christian preaching about Jesus by denying the humanity of the Saviour.

The vehemence of the polemic in the Epistle to the Hebrews shows how serious a threat angel-christology was thought to be 19).

18) Cf. Lage PERNVEDEN, The Concept of the Church in the Shepherd of Hermas (Studia Theologica Lundensia 27), Lund 1966, pp. 58-64.

19) It has been suggested that the author of Heb. is opposing an early Christian testimony book which applied Exod. xxiii 20, understanding

NXBn/yyAXoq as 'angel', to Christ: cf. D. PLOOIJ, Studies in the Testimony

Book (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam 32:2), Amsterdam 1932, PP. 9-10o, 46-47. James Rendel HARRIS has suggested, after EISLER, that the words, 'I will not call him an angel', in the Old Slavonic version of the Testimonium Flavianum are a genuine part of Josephus' text, and that he wrote these words in direct and explicit conflict with a Christian testimony book which called Jesus an angel ("Jose- phus and his Testimony", Evergreen Essays 2, Cambridge 1931). As it is exceedingly unlikely that these words were written by Josephus, HARRIS'

theory is precarious in the extreme.



28 BRIAN MCNEIL

The author emphasises the reality of the temptations and sufferings of Jesus (iv 15 - v io; xiii 12), and stresses, not merely his superiority to the angels (i 4), but the fact that he did not share their nature but took the nature of his brethren (ii 14): had he not partaken of this human nature, he could not have been 'a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make expiation for the sins of the people' (ii 17) 20). The seeming tension in Heb. between the extreme exaltation of Jesus and the reality of his human suffering is the answer to angel-christology. The author underlines that it is to Jesus the man that the messianic words of God in the scriptures are addressed: 'For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son" ?' (i 5) ... 'But to what angel has he ever said, "Sit at my right hand, till I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet"? Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?' (i 13 f.). The covenant given through angels was great (ii 2), but how much more so the new covenant given through him who is the Son, whom the angels worship (i 6)-for all things will be put in subjection to Jesus (ii 5-9) 21).

Eric Francis OSBORN has argued that when Justin calls Jesus an 'angel' (cf. Dial. 75), he 'does not imply that the logos is merely an angel or a celestial messenger sent to earth. [... ] Justin is concerned to show how it is possible for the logos to be numerically distinct from the father. He points to the way in which God appeared as an angel in the Old Testament. On these occasions it was not God the Father but the logos who appeared' 22). If this

20) Cf. Ep. Diogn. vii 2, where the author writes that it was no angel, 'as one might have supposed', whom God sent to accomplish the work of redemption, but aoc6v v v'Xvrel'v

xat 8i)L4Loupyb6v 'v v 6Xov. 21) I believe that there is polemic against angel-christology in the Gospel

of Peter also. In its resurrection scene (X 39-40), the centurion and the soldiers see 'three men coming forth from the tomb, the two supporting the one, and a cross following them; and of the two the head reached heaven, but of the one who was led by them [the head] overpassed the heavens'. The two are obviously angels (cf. Test. Reuben v 7, where the heads of the Watchers seem to the women to reach heaven), and as in the canonical gospels the post- resurrectional appearances make some theological point, whether that Christ is risen or concerning some aspect of the church's life such as mission (cf. Mt. xxviii 19 f.) or the eucharist (cf. Lk. xxiv 13 ff.), so here the point is made that the risen Christ is far superior to the angels.

22) Justin Martyr (Beitrdige zur Historischen Theologie 47), Tiibingen 1973, p. 34-




distinction is made between the nature and the work of an angel, language which might suggest an angel-christology can be used by 'orthodox' Christian writers to speak of the work of Christ: OSBORN quotes TERTULLIAN, officii, non naturae, vocabulo (De carne Christi 14).

The reason, then, why Is. ix 5 is used so sparingly in the extant Christian literature of the first two centuries is because of the peculiar wording of the LXX, xceeXeZ-tc L ob 6vo c ro o o Mey&a, pouX- qiyyeXoq. This positively lent itself to proponents of angel- christology, and so inhibited those who rejected this christology from using the passage. Hence we never find it quoted, even in the one place where we might perhaps have expected it, the infancy narratives of Mt. Before Is. ix 5 LXX could be 'baptised' into the repertoire of Christian proof-texts of the incarnation, angel- christology had to be fought and routed.

It is not necessary to point out that the Christian literature which has survived from this period reflects only a part of the entire spectrum of thinking and preaching and praying and writing that went on at the beginnings of Christianity. While we have no first- century text which applies Is. ix 5 LXX to Jesus, for the reason I have outlined, this certainly does not rule out the possibility that Greek-speaking groups within the church (especially those receptive to angel-christology) did apply this passage to Jesus; nor the possibility that Palestinian Christians applied to Jesus Is. ix 5 in the Hebrew and the Aramaic versions with which they were fami- liar. There is no evidence here which would tend either to confirm or to refute my hypothesis about the source of the quotation at Jn. xii 34.

III Is it possible to think that the Targum of Isaiah contains material

early enough to have influenced the fourth evangelist? As we have it, the Targum of Isaiah is a Babylonian redaction which cannot be dated earlier than the third century and is probably later 23); but Pierre GRELOT has argued that 'Le Targum de Jonathan, bien que tardif, renferme seirement des materiaux anciens d'origine palesti-

23) Cf. J. F. STENNING, op. cit., p. vii; Martin MCNAMARA, Targum and Testament, Grand Rapids 1972, pp. 206-8.



30 BRIAN MCNEIL

nienne' 24). In this it resembles the other targums 25). Because of the difficulties of dating targumic material with any precision, the possibility of influence on the fourth gospel from targums remains an open question; it has, for example, been claimed that a targumic text provides the clue to the identity of the 'scripture' which Jesus quotes at Jn. vii 38, 'Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water' 26).

In the present case, the verbal parallels between Jn. xii 34 and the Targum to Is. ix 5 are so striking that it is an obvious conclusion that the evangelist has before him the version known to the targumist. We may, however, reinforce the probability of this inference by briefly considering the other addition which the targumist makes to the Isaianic text: 'and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it'.

Given the centrality of Torah to Judaism, the question of how it was related to the Messiah and to the messianic age was extremely important. W. D. DAVIES concludes that, while there are some indications of a belief that in the messianic age there would be a new Torah, the general expectation was 'that the Torah in its existing form would persist into the Messianic Age when its ob- scurities would be made plain, and when there would be certain natural adaptations and changes and, according to some, the inclusion of the Gentiles among those who accepted the yoke of the Torah' 27). Later rabbinic authorities link Torah and the Mes- siah by saying that 'If the Israelites would only keep two Sabbaths strictly according to the Law they would be redeemed' (R. SIMEON

24) "L'Ex6gese Messianique d'Isale, LXIII, 1-6", Rev. Bib. 70 (1963), pp. 371-80, at p. 379.

25) Cf., e.g., J. W. BOWKER, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature, Cam- bridge 1969, pp. 14-15.

28) Proposed by M.-E. BOISMARD, "De Son Ventre Couleront des Fleuves d'Eau (Jo., VII, 38)", Rev. Bib. 65 (1958), pp. 523-46. This suggestion is rejected by GRELOT in Pierre GRELOT, M.-E. BOISMARD and Jean-Paul AUDET, "De Son Ventre Couleront des Fleuves d'Eau", Rev. Bib. 66 (1959), pp. 369-86; and in two subsequent articles by GRELOT, "A Propos de Jean VII, 38", Rev. Bib. 67 (1960), pp. 224-25, and "Jean, VII, 38: Eau du Rocher ou Source du Temple ?", Rev. Bib. 70 (1963), pp. 43-51. Cf. also the discussion in Raymond E. BROWN, The Gospel According to John (Anchor Bible), part I, London 1971, pp. 320-24.

27) Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come (J.B.L. Monographs 7), Philadelphia 1952, p. 84. DAVIES would translate Gal. vi 2, r6v v6tLov oi3

Xptoaro, as 'the law of the Messiah' (ibid., p. 92). There seems to be no passage relevant in date which applies Ps. i 1-3 to the Messiah, as in later Christian writings it is applied to Jesus (e.g., Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos, ad loc.).




b. YOHAI, Sabb. II8b), 'If Israel should keep only a single sabbath as it is prescribed, at once the Messiah would come' (R. LEVI, Jer. Ta'anit 64a). This idea of the necessary connection between Torah and the Messiah underlies the Matthean portrait of Jesus as a lawgiver who is baptised 'to fulfil all righteousness' (iii 15), who proclaims that 'till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished' (v 17), who invites men to take his yoke upon them (xi 29), who deeply scorns the scribes and Pharisees but warns that they 'sit on Moses' seat; so practise and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do' (xxiii 2 f.), and who distinguishes between the commandments of the law but enjoins that all must be observed (xxiii 23). We can find a trace of the Torah-Messiah nexus in Justin's claim that the preaching of the gospel from Jerusalem to the world by the apostles is the fulfilment of Mic. iv 2, 'For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem' (Dial. Iog-IIo). Jesus is called the 'new Lawgiver' (Dial. 18); and indeed several texts from the middle of the second century display what might be called a 'nomos-christology': cf. Justin, Dial. 11, 43; Melito of Sardis, Hornm. 4-9; Acts of John 112 (a prayer addressed to Jesus); and the Kerygma Petrou (apud Clement of Alexandria, Strom. I 29) 28). We can, then, find evidence that a close connection between Torah and the Messiah was made within Judaism during the first century A.D., and accordingly this part of the targumist's expan- sion of Is. ix 5 would not be out of place if assigned to that date.

A further point may be made, to answer the suggestion that Jn. xii 34 refers not to a scriptural text but to some lost apocryphal work. At Jn. vii 40-43, we have a dispute over Jesus' credentials for messiahship similar to that at xii 31-34 except that it takes place in his absence. Some say, 'This is really the prophet', others, 'This is the Christ'. But they are opposed by people who point out that the Messiah is to come from Bethlehem, David's town (cf. Mic. v 2; Mt. ii 5 f.). The interesting point about this discussion is that it is never answered in the gospel itself by what would be

28) W. D. DAVIES has suggested that already in the first century there is a transference to Jesus of Torah language (Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, London 1948, ch. 7); but since such language as wisdom-imagery and pre- existence were not applied exclusively to Torah within Judaism, the fact of their application in the New Testament to Jesus does not imply the necessary conclusion that a nomos-christology was already in existence in that period.



32 BRIAN MCNEIL

telling proof that Jesus was the Messiah, namely by the statement that he was born at Bethlehem-but this information was current in the Christian communities, as we see from the infancy narratives of Mt. and Lk., which agree on scarcely anything apart from the virginal conception of Jesus and his birthplace in Bethlehem. Here, then, we have a messianic text which the crowds in the gospel story assert cannot be applied to Jesus, but which Christian readers know and believe is fulfilled in him-the Johannine irony is at work. Now we find precisely the same pattern at Jn. xii 31-34: the crowd, on the basis of their knowledge of Jesus (in this context, their knowledge of his claim that he must be lifted up), deny that a messianic text, 'the Messiah remains for ever', can be applied to him. They are never refuted in the gospel itself: their refutation comes from the personal Christian experience of the readers of the fourth gospel, who know that in the life of the community Jesus does indeed remain for ever. The formal similarity between the two passages, vii 40-43 and xii 31-34, is so close that it is not an improper inference to conclude that xii 31-34 is dealing with the question of whether or not a messianic text at least as important as Mic. v 2 is fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth 29). We need not invoke an hypothetical lost apocryphon to identify this text unless the search for a scriptural passage is hopeless: and I suggest that this is not the case. Jn. xii 31-34 concerns a crucial messianic prediction from the Old Testament, and in a gospel which reflects to some extent first-century Palestinian debates between believers in Jesus and other Jews whom they wished to convince, it is not out of place that this messianic prediction should be quoted in the Targum text.

I conclude, therefore, that it can be shown that Is. ix 5 was understood messianically at the relevant date; that the other significant

29) It should be noted that this argument from form cannot be applied to the messianic dispute about Jesus at Jn. vii 26 ff., where the crowd ask, 'Can it be that the authorities really know that this is the Christ? Yet we know where this man comes from; and when the Christ appears, no one will know where he comes from'. This is immediately answered in the gospel narrative by Jesus himself, who replies that the crowd do not in fact know where he comes from; and later the Jews contemptuously say, 'As for this man, we do not know where he comes from' (ix 29). We are, therefore, told explicitly in the gospel that Jesus fulfils the expectation of a hidden Messiah, just as we are told explicitly that he fulfils the expectation of a Messiah who will tell all things (iv 25 f.), and in neither case need we postulate the authority of a particular scriptural text.




addition made by the targumist to the Hebrew text of Is. ix 5 is not in any way anachronistic if we date it to the first century A.D.; and that the formal similarities to the messianic dispute at Jn. vii 40-43 make it highly probable that the debate here concerns an Old Testament text speaking of the Messiah. I offer Is. ix 5 in the Targum as the scriptural passage in question.

3



the quotation at john xii 34

Documents