In the case of Jesus, this revelation lasted not just a few moments, but several years. Jesus himself paraphrased Exod 34:10 in his upper room discourse:<\/p>\n
Exod 34:10
\nJohn 15:24
\nBefore all your people I will do wonders which have not been done in all the earth, or among all the nations.
\nIf I had not done works among them which no other has done \u2026<\/p>\n
We will note, however, that along with this comprehensive continuity from OT to NT, there is change due to the incarnation (a change of works, not a change of person). We often see that in addition to the parallels between the words and deeds of Jesus in John and the words and deeds of God in the OT, there are also similarities to the words and deeds of various OT men of God. This dual parallelism comports with the NT\u2019s teaching that the divine Word has taken on human flesh, revealed to us as both God and human.
\nThere is another facet of Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 that interests us in connection with the revelation of the divine name. So far, we have focused on the \u201cI am he\u201d saying itself: \u201cI am he who is and was, and I am he who shall be.\u201d But in the Targum this saying has a future context. The full verse is given below, along with the MT and Tg. Neof. for comparison (Frg. Tg. V is substantially the same as Tg. Neof.):<\/p>\n
MT
\nTg. Ps.-J.
\nTg. Neof.
\nWhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed to redeem his people, he shall say to all the peoples,
\nSee now that I, I am he, and there is no God besides me.
\n\u201cSee now that I am he who is and was, and I am he who will be in the future, and there is no other God besides me.\u201d
\nSee now that I, I in my Word am he, and there is no other God besides me.
\nI put to death and bring to life;
\nI by my Word put to death and bring to life.
\nI am he who causes the living to die in this world and who brings to life the dead in the world to come.
\nI have wounded, and I will heal,
\nI struck the people of the house of Israel, and I will heal them at the end of days,
\nI am he who strikes and I am he who heals,
\nand there is no one who delivers from my hand.
\nand there is no one who delivers from my hand;
\nand there is no one who delivers from my hands.<\/p>\n
If we have understood the \u201cI am he\u201d saying of Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 correctly, it is an exposition of the divine name. This explanation is to take place \u201cWhen the Word of the LORD is revealed to redeem his people,\u201d which raises two questions: (1) What is meant by the targumist? (2) Could John have viewed this text, having identified Jesus as the divine Word, as being fulfilled by Jesus in a manner similar to the unwitting \u201cprophecy\u201d of Caiaphas, as discussed in ch. 1?
\nAs for what the targumist meant, we can be certain that for him the Word of the LORD is not the Messiah and that this is not meant to predict what the Messiah will do when he comes or \u201cis revealed.\u201d But what occasion might be anticipated in the statement, \u201cwhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed to redeem his people\u201d? In the next chapter we take note that MT language about God \u201ccoming down\u201d may be rendered in the Targums as \u201cthe Word of the LORD (or the glory of his Shekinah) was revealed\u201d and that God\u2019s \u201ccoming down\u201d may be associated with a revelation of the meaning of the divine name, such as at the burning bush to Moses or on Mt. Sinai (Exod 34, again to Moses). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Deut 32:39, therefore, looks forward to a new exodus (\u201cWhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed\u201d = MT \u201cWhen the LORD comes down\u201d) and a making known of God\u2019s name to the peoples. Such an event is prayed for in Isa 64:1\u20132: \u201cOh that you would rend the heavens and come down \u2026 to make your name known to your adversaries.\u201d Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Deut 32:39 looks toward its fulfillment.
\nAs for the second question, John does not record Jesus as saying \u201cI am he who is and was, and I am he who will be in the future,\u201d but, as we have already seen, the first \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 saying of Jesus in John (4:26) depends on the last \u201cI am he\u201d saying in Isaiah (52:6), which is in fact connected to a promise from God that his people will know his name. Jesus says \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 twenty-two times in John\u2019s Gospel, each of which might represent a spoken Aramaic \u05d0\u05e0\u05d0 \u05d4\u05d5\u05d0, which means that John quite possibly gives us twenty-two \u201cI am he\u201d sayings of Jesus. The number twenty-two could be of significance as the number of letters in the Hebrew and Aramaic alphabet. Recall that \u201cI am the first and the last\u201d occurs three times in Revelation, as in Isaiah, where it accompanies the \u201cI am he\u201d declarations. \u201cI am the Alpha and Omega\u201d is also found three times in Revelation. In 22:13, \u201cI am the first and the last\u201d is paralleled with \u201cI am the Alpha and Omega.\u201d In Rev 1:8, \u201cI am \u2026 the one who is and who was, and who is coming\u201d agrees with Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39. \u201cI am\u201d in Rev 1:8 is also \u1f18\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 as also in some MSS of 21:6. Thus John, by including twenty-two \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 sayings of Jesus, may be bringing out the idea of Rev 22:13, \u201cI am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last.\u201d
\nAs in Isaiah, most of the \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 sayings in John pertain to the present (4:26; 6:20, 35, 41, 48, 51; 8:12, 18, 24; 10:7, 9, 11, 14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5; 18:5, 8), but 8:28 and 13:19 pertain to the future and 8:58 pertains to the past. In fact, it is tempting to see the threefold \u201cI am he\u201d of John 8:24, 28, 58, spoken in the temple on the last day of the Feast of Booths (\u201cpre-eminently the Feast for foreign pilgrims\u201d), a feast for which \u201cI am he\u201d seems to have been used liturgically as a way of saying the divine name, as an indication that the promise of the divine Word making known the divine name to all the nations is being fulfilled:<\/p>\n
I am he who is (present)
\nUnless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sins. (v. 24)
\nand was (past)
\nBefore Abraham existed, I am he. (v. 58)
\nand I am he who will be (future)
\nWhen you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he. (v. 28)<\/p>\n
Or one could look first at John 8:24, 28 in comparison with Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 3:14 (\u201cI am he who is and who will be\u201d), and then at John 8:24, 28, 58 in comparison with Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39.
\nNot only is Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 of interest, the version in Frg. Tg. V and Tg. Neof. is of interest as well: \u201cI in my Word am he.\u201d Taken together, the twenty-two \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 sayings might be taken as a comprehensive exposition of the divine name which the Son bears, and whose meaning he reveals to the world as the Word who has become flesh. More on this in the following chapters, especially ch. 9, which looks at all twenty-two of these sayings.<\/p>\n
4<\/p>\n
The Son of Man Came Down from Heaven<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
In John 6:38, Jesus says, \u201cI have come down from heaven.\u201d Morris notes concerning John 6, \u201cThe thought of His coming down from heaven is repeated seven times in this chapter (vv. 33, 38, 41, 42, 50, 51, 58).\u201d In context the obvious OT background is the manna coming down in the wilderness. But Jesus also told Nicodemus that he had come down from heaven (John 3:13), where there is no mention of manna in the context (though there is a reference to the bronze serpent made by Moses as a remedy to the bite of the poisonous snakes sent to punish the Israelites who had complained about the manna; Num 21:4\u20139). He also speaks of ascending to heaven in these two contexts where he speaks of descending from heaven, something which obviously does not have anything to do with the manna.
\nThis raises the question, is there also another OT background to this language, namely, that the OT often refers to the LORD coming down for other purposes? This chapter answers that question in the affirmative. As we explore the theme of divine descents in the OT, we will again see that recognition of a targumic background to the Logos title helps us to make the proper OT connections, and thus interpretations, of the language of Jesus.<\/p>\n
THE DIVINE DESCENTS IN THE OT<\/p>\n
One of the ways used to speak of divine intervention in the OT is to say that the LORD came down, or will come down.<\/p>\n
\u2022 The first case is in connection with the Tower of Babel, where \u201cthe LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built\u201d (Gen 11:5), and then the LORD said (presumably to the angels), \u201cCome, let us go down and there confuse their language\u201d (v. 7). This intervention is clearly judgmental and intended to limit the humans\u2019 ability to carry out their rebellious intentions.
\n\u2022 A similar divine inspection and judgment is indicated in Gen 18:21, where the LORD said to Abraham, \u201cI will go down now (to Sodom and Gomorrah), and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry which has come to me; and if not, I will know.\u201d
\n\u2022 From the burning bush the LORD said to Moses, \u201cI have come down to deliver them from the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land\u201d (Exod 3:8). After this deliverance, the LORD came down on Mt. Sinai to speak the Ten Commandments to Israel (19:20) and to show his glory to Moses (34:5).
\n\u2022 Isaiah promises deliverance from the Assyrians during the reign of Hezekiah by saying, \u201cThe LORD of Hosts will come down and wage war on Mt. Zion\u201d (Isa 31:4). In ch. 5 we will see how this relates to the work of Jesus.
\n\u2022 One might petition for divine intervention by asking the LORD to part, or tear, the heavens and come down (Ps 144:5; Isa 64:1), as he had in the past (Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n
The LORD \u201ccomes down,\u201d that is, intervenes, to judge, to reveal (his law, his name, his glory), and to deliver his people, to dwell among them and be their God. Certainly the ultimate divine intervention was the incarnation, which Jesus describes with this same kind of language, \u201cI have come down from heaven,\u201d and which leads to the accomplishment of these same purposes seen in the OT.
\nWe note especially that in several of these passages that speak of the LORD coming down, revelation of the divine name is also involved. This observation provides the logical connection between the present and previous chapters. The scene of the burning bush contains a grammatical explanation of the divine name, as noted in ch. 3 (\u201cI will be who I have been\u201d). In Exod 34, Moses is given a moral description of the divine name\u2014the LORD is \u201cfull of grace and truth,\u201d etc. The meaning of the divine name is also revealed through God\u2019s works in history. Thus Isaiah\u2019s petition that the LORD would \u201crend the heavens and come down\u201d (Isa 64:1) is in order \u201cto make known your name to your adversaries, that the nations may tremble at your presence\u201d (v. 2). One might say that this is a petition for the LORD to bring about a new exodus\u2014to intervene, to come down, as he had done before (vv. 2, 3), to make his name known. In continuity with the OT pattern, then, John presents Jesus as coming down from heaven to make known the divine name.<\/p>\n
Targumic Language Used to Speak of the Divine Descents<\/p>\n
Generally, the Targums use the language of revelation (\u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea\u05b0\u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9; cf. Heb. \u05e0\u05b4\u05d2\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4) where the MT speaks of the LORD coming down. Isaiah 40:5 in the MT is typical of the change of language found in the Targums: \u201cThe glory of the LORD will be revealed\u201d (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e0\u05b4\u05d2\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4 \u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4; Tg.: \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b5\u05d9 \u05d9\u05b0\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d3\u05d9\u05d5\u05d9). As we have seen, revelation is one of the purposes for the LORD\u2019s coming down. The Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J. of Gen 11:5 say, \u201cThe LORD was revealed to punish,\u201d in place of MT \u201cThe LORD came down to see.\u201d Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 11:7 is surprisingly (and uniquely) literal (\u201cLet us go down\u201d), presumably because in this Targum the LORD is addressing \u201cthe seventy angels who stood before him.\u201d The Pal. Tgs. of the Pentateuch usually speak either of the glory of the LORD\u2019s Shekinah or of the Word of the LORD being revealed, as we saw already in ch. 2 (pp. 54\u201356, nos. 9, 17, 21), except that this is another case where Tg. Ps.-J. is often adapted in the direction of the language of Tg. Onq. Again we will note the readings for Exod 3:8 and 34:5, beginning with the former:<\/p>\n
MT
\nI have come down to deliver them.
\nTg. Onq.
\nI have been revealed to deliver them.
\nTg. Ps.-J.
\nI have been revealed to you today that by my Word they might be delivered.
\nTg. Neof.
\nI have been revealed in my Word to deliver them.<\/p>\n
We saw in ch. 3 that Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 (\u201cI am he who is and was, and I am he who will be\u201d) likely refers back to the scene of the burning bush, since Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 3:14 has a similar paraphrase of the divine name (\u201cI am he who is and who will be\u201d). One might expect, then, that the phrase \u201cwhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed to redeem his people\u201d (from Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39) should have its counterpart in Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 3:8 as \u201cMy Word has been revealed to you,\u201d or something like Tg. Neof. Presumably, the reason it does not is that Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 3:8 has been adapted towards the reading of Tg. Onq. In other words, Tg. Ps.-J. is inconsistent. A more consistent Pal. Tg. at Exod 3:8 would speak of the revelation of the Word of the LORD, or the glory of his Shekinah.
\nBelow are the readings for Exod 34:5:<\/p>\n
MT
\nThe LORD came down in the cloud.
\nTg. Onq.
\nThe LORD was revealed in the cloud.
\nTg. Ps.-J.
\nThe LORD was revealed in the clouds of the glory of his Shekinah.
\nTg. Neof.
\nThe glory of the Shekinah of the LORD was revealed in the cloud.
\nTg. Neof. [mg.]
\nThe Word of the LORD was revealed.<\/p>\n
With these Targum readings in mind, it is interesting to compare the words of Jesus, which agree with the MT language, with the words of John in John 1:14, that describes the same event using what sounds like the language of the targumic Word:<\/p>\n
John 6:38
\nI have come down from heaven (Jesus echoing the language of the MT).
\nJohn 1:14
\nThe Word became flesh (John adapting targumic language to describe the same event).<\/p>\n
The adaptation consists of changing the targumic \u201cwas revealed\u201d to \u201cbecame flesh,\u201d the exact parallel of which is obviously not to be found in the Targums, where Word is reasonably understood to be a way of avoiding anthropomorphic language. The idea that the Word could become flesh highlights the clear difference in John\u2019s use of the targumic Word. Yet elsewhere John does use the language of revelation: \u201cThe Son of God was revealed\u201d (1 John 3:8). But if John had said in his Prologue \u201cthe Word was revealed\u201d instead of \u201cthe Word became flesh,\u201d it would not be clear that he was speaking of the incarnation. The public revelation of Jesus as the divine Word was a progressive revelation, beginning with his baptism (see ch. 1 on John 1:32\u201333). The incarnation was when he \u201ccame down.\u201d
\nIn ch. 3 I suggested that Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 (\u201cWhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed to redeem his people \u2026\u201d) should be interpreted to mean that when the LORD brings about a new exodus (i.e., comes down to redeem), he will do what he did at the first exodus: he will make known his name as he did to Moses at the burning bush; he will reveal his glory as he did to Moses in Exod 34; he will make known his name to his adversaries, as petitioned in Isa 64:2. Recall that the holy of holies in the tabernacle served as a model of the heavenly throne room, with curtains serving as a wall separating this room from the rest of the tabernacle. From here, according to the Pal. Tgs. of the Pentateuch, the Word spoke to Moses. If we interpret the psalmist\u2019s petition to \u201cpart the heavens\u201d (144:5) according to this tabernacle symbolism, it is in effect a petition that the LORD would draw back the curtain of the holy of holies and intervene to save his servants. Or, speaking in terms of the Pal. Tgs. of the Pentateuch, it would be a petition that the Word who spoke from the holy of holies would be revealed in the world. John is telling us that this petition has been answered by the invisible Word, who spoke to Moses from between the cherubim, becoming a servant, \u201cthe Son of Man.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI Have Come Down from Heaven\u201d as Divine Language<\/p>\n
In the previous section, we saw the plausibility of relating John 6:38 to OT language which speaks of the LORD coming down to judge, save, reveal, etc. In this section, we see further evidence that this is the proper OT background to this language of Jesus.
\nIn connection with John 6:38, we can take note that the emphasis Jesus places on his having come down from heaven is mixed with other clearly divine language. While speaking of himself as the bread from heaven upon whom people must feed to have eternal life, Jesus makes multiple references to the idea of people coming to him (6:35, 37 [2x], 44, 45, 65). There are good reasons to relate this language to the divine invitation \u201ccome to me\u201d in Isa 55:3, and discuss this in more detail in ch. 8. For now we can note the evident dependence of John 5:40 and 7:37, which frame the instances of \u201ccome to me\u201d in ch. 6, on Isa 55:1\u20133:<\/p>\n
Isa 55:1\u20133
\nHo! Everyone who thirsts, come to the waters.\u2026 Incline your ear and come to me; listen, that your soul may live.
\nJohn 5:40
\nYou are unwilling to come to me, that you may have life.
\nJohn 7:37
\nIf any man is thirsty, let him come to me and drink.<\/p>\n
Along with the language of descent and coming to Jesus, the divine language in John 6 includes the fourfold \u201cI am he\u201d (\u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9) of vv. 35 (lit., \u201cI am he, the bread of life\u201d), 41 (\u201cI am he, the bread that came down from heaven\u201d), 48 (as v. 35), and 51 (\u201cI am he, the living bread that came down from heaven\u201d). We defer a discussion of these until ch. 9, when all twenty-two of them are discussed together. I will point out there that even though many \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 sayings do not seem to be divine sayings (e.g., \u201cI am he, the bread of life\u201d does not seem to be a divine saying), all of them occur in contexts of divine speech by Jesus. For now we can again note that the \u201cI am he\u201d language of Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 is expected to be used in conjunction with the revelation of the divine Word, and that the language \u201cWhen he is revealed\u201d is arguably based on MT language from elsewhere, namely, \u201cWhen he comes down.\u201d Those familiar with both the Hebrew and the Aramaic Scriptures could have put together \u201cI have come down from heaven\u201d (v. 38) with \u201cI am he\u201d (vv. 35, 41, 48, 51) as divine language, since \u201cWhen the Word of the LORD shall be revealed\u201d in Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 32:39 implies a Hebrew scriptural equivalent, \u201cWhen the LORD comes down,\u201d even though those words are not in the Hebrew of Deut 32:39.
\nFurther, the emphasis of these sayings on Jesus both as living and as source of life fits the theme of Deut 32:39 and its context in both the MT and Pal. Tgs. From the MT, we have the divine oath, \u201cas I live forever,\u201d in the next verse, which in Tg. Neof. is rendered, \u201cas I live and endure in my Word forever.\u201d The briefer \u201cAs I endure\u201d of Tg. Ps.-J. could be interpreted as being part of what is spoken by the divine Word (a continuation of v. 39, what the divine Word says when he is revealed). As for source of life, the MT of Deut 32:39 makes the point, \u201cI put to death, and I bring to life,\u201d which in Tg. Ps.-J. is \u201cBy my Word I put to death and bring to life,\u201d and in Tg. Neof. is \u201cI, in my Word, am he \u2026 who causes the living to die in this world, and brings to life the dead in the world to come\u201d (similarly Frg. Tg. V). This fits the context of John 6 where life beyond this present one is obviously in view.
\nFurther evidence that \u201cI have come down from heaven\u201d is divine speech comes from consideration of John 3:13: \u201cNo one has ascended into heaven, except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.\u201d The statement seems to imply that Jesus has already ascended into heaven. Scribes and translators who did not understand this as divine speech have resorted to various means to remove what seemed to them to be a problem: Jesus has not yet ascended to heaven; his only ascent was after the resurrection. The scribal addition to the verse, \u201cwho is in heaven,\u201d seems to be a device to alleviate the difficulty by making the whole verse a parenthetical remark by John made after the ascension of Jesus, rather than the words of Jesus. In other words, it is impossible to consider v. 13 as the words of Jesus if it reads as in KJV, \u201cNo one has ascended into heaven except \u2026 the Son of Man who is in heaven.\u201d A modern translator could reflect this solution By using parentheses (No one has ascended into heaven except \u2026 the Son of Man, who is in heaven).
\nAnother way of avoiding the difficulty is to interpret the ascent language spiritually rather than physically: \u201cNo one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven\u201d (NIV). The spiritual interpretation could also accommodate the scribal addition at the end of the verse. Godet comments: \u201cThe primary reference of the words may well be spiritual rather than physical. \u2018No one has entered into communion with God and possesses thereby an intuitive knowledge of divine things, in order to reveal them to others, except He to whom heaven was opened and who dwells there at this very moment.\u2019 \u201d
\nBut the spiritual interpretation does not actually resolve the problem. If one grants that Jesus could speak appropriately of his dwelling in heaven at the same time that he walks the earth, the fact remains that he said he has ascended there in the past, which is not the same as saying \u201cI always am in heaven.\u201d When did this ascent take place? If one ignores what John says about Jesus in his Prologue when interpreting the words of Jesus in John\u2019s Gospel, then one considers only the time between the birth of Jesus and the time he speaks to Nicodemus: \u201cJohn knows a tradition which claims that Jesus, in comparison with or contrast to Moses, has at some point in the course of his life ascended into heaven and returned.\u201d Yet what is \u201cin the course of his life\u201d supposed to mean with respect to the one who in the beginning was with God, through whom all things were made, in whom was life, and the life was the light of men?
\nHowever, if we take seriously what John says about Jesus in his Prologue, and understand the descent language as divine language, we have a ready solution to the problem. If the LORD \u201cdescended\u201d on many occasions in the OT, then it may be inferred that he also ascended, and in fact it is explicitly stated in the Targums on a number of occasions that the Word did so: \u201cAnd when he finished talking with him, God (Tgs. Ps.-J., Onq.: the glory of the LORD) went up from Abraham\u201d (Gen 17:22). As noted in ch. 2, Tg. Neof. says, \u201cthe glory of the Shekinah of the LORD went up from him,\u201d while the chapter begins, \u201cthe Word of the LORD was revealed to him,\u201d and v. 3 says, \u201cthe Word of the LORD spoke with him\u201d (also Tg. Neof. [mg.] 17:9, 15). Similarly, \u201cGod went up from (Jacob) in the place where he had spoken with him\u201d (Gen 35:13). Targum Neofiti here is as in Gen 17:22 (also Ps.-J.), and it follows the statement that \u201cthe Word of the LORD\u201d spoke to him, according to the marginal gloss of v. 11.
\nAn \u201cascent\u201d to heaven could also be interpreted as a reversal of the exodus \u201cdescent\u201d because of apostasy. Such an ascent could be inferred from Hos 5:6, 15: \u201cThey shall go to seek the LORD but will not find him; he has withdrawn [\u05d7\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05e5] from them.\u2026 \u2018I will go and return to my place.\u2019 \u201d In ch. 8 I connect this passage with John 7:34 (\u201cYou will seek me but you will not find me\u201d) and to the theme of the withdrawal of the Shekinah mentioned in some Targum passages, such as the Targum of the passage just quoted (cited also in ch. 2, p. 61, no. 50): \u201cHe has withdrawn his Shekinah from them; against the Word of the LORD they have dealt falsely.\u201d \u201cI will withdraw my Shekinah; I will return to my holy dwelling in heaven, until they acknowledge their sin.\u201d
\nWe could also take note that the angel of the LORD, when he had finished speaking to the parents of Samson in Judg 13, \u201cwent up in the flame of the altar\u201d (v. 20). This is the angel who said his name was \u201cWonderful\u201d and who announced the miraculous birth of Samson with wording similar to that used later for the miraculous birth of Immanuel (Judg 13:5, 7; Isa 7:14), Immanuel being traditionally identified with the child named \u201cWonderful\u201d (Isa 9:6), who would sit on David\u2019s throne forever.
\nIf the LORD \u201ccame down\u201d for the purpose of warfare in delivering his people, as in Exod 3:8, then it would also make sense to speak of his ascension as a consequence of victory. We see such language in Ps 47: \u201cHe subdues peoples under us, and nations under our feet\u201d (v. 3). \u201cGod has ascended with a shout; the LORD, with the sound of a trumpet\u201d (v. 5). \u201cGod reigns over the nations, God sits on his holy throne\u201d (v. 8). One can see this pattern repeated in the work of Jesus of Nazareth; he came down from heaven to defeat Satan (the subject of the next chapter), he ascended in victory, and he sits at the right hand of the Father. When, in the course of his discussion with Nicodemus, Jesus says that he has ascended into heaven, he is indicating that he is the one who has done it before, as described in passages like Ps 47.
\nPaul takes the same interpretation in Eph 4:8\u201310, where he quotes Ps 68:18, another passage speaking of God\u2019s ascent in victory in OT times, and applies it to Christ. From the ascent language, Paul infers a prior descent \u201cto the lower parts of the earth\u201d (v. 9). In Ps 139:15 a similar expression, \u201cthe depths of the earth,\u201d is a metaphor for the womb of David\u2019s mother. Thus Paul, too, may have interpreted Christ\u2019s entrance into the womb of a woman as a divine descent in continuity with the OT divine descents. At the same time, while Paul describes Christ\u2019s descent in continuity with the OT theme, he also expresses an expanded meaning: In OT times, the LORD came down on Mt. Sinai, at the burning bush, etc.; in the incarnation he came down as a human being, \u201cthe Son of Man.\u201d The meaning of this title will be discussed in the next section.
\nAs many commentators have noted, \u201cNo man has ascended into heaven\u201d could be considered a refutation of the view, of which Nicodemus was presumably aware, and may even have shared, that Moses had ascended into heaven. One place this view is found is in Tg. Ps. 68:18, where, contrary to Paul\u2019s interpretation, \u201cYou ascended on high\u201d is taken as Moses going up to the sky to receive the law. Of special interest is the view that Moses ascended into heaven because of the withdrawal of the Shekinah after the apostasy of the golden calf (Exod 32):<\/p>\n
The assembly of Israel said, \u201cMoses and Aaron and the Levites, who keep watch over the Word [Memra] of the LORD in the Tent of Meeting and who go around it, found me, and I asked them about the Shekinah glory of the LORD which had been removed from me. Moses, the great Scribe of Israel, answered and this is what he said, \u2018I will ascend to heaven on high and pray before the LORD. Perhaps he will forgive your sins and make his Shekinah dwell among you as before.\u2019 \u201d (Tg. Song 3:3)<\/p>\n
This is of special interest because it brings us again to the revelation of Exod 34 (the Targum interprets Moses\u2019 ascent up the mountain in Exod 34 as an ascent into heaven), of such obvious importance to John, and to the theme of the withdrawal of the Shekinah, which helps us understand John 7:34.
\nBesides the LORD \u201ccoming down\u201d to reveal his name and to wage war to redeem his people, he also came down to give the law. Exodus 19:11 says, \u201con the third day the LORD will come down on Mt. Sinai in the sight of all the people,\u201d and v. 20 says, \u201cthe LORD came down on Mt. Sinai, to the top of the mountain.\u201d Some of the Targum renderings of these verses were given in ch. 2 (pp. 54\u201355, nos. 15, 17). Targum Onqelos and Tg. Ps.-J. speak of the LORD being revealed (or revealing himself), while Tg. Neof. and the Frg. Tgs. speak of the revelation of the Word of the LORD or the revelation of the glory of his Shekinah. As we will discuss further in ch. 7, Jesus speaks as the divine lawgiver, with the upper room as a \u201cnew Sinai,\u201d so in the work of Jesus there is continuity with the LORD\u2019s descent on Mt. Sinai to give the law; or in targumic terms, continuity with the revelation of the Word on Mt. Sinai in the giving of the law.
\nContinuity from OT to NT can also be observed in the Lord coming down (Tg. Neof., \u201cbeing revealed in his Word\u201d) to give the Holy Spirit. In place of \u201cI will come down \u2026 and take some of the Spirit who is upon you, and put [him] upon them (the seventy elders)\u201d (Num 11:17), Tg. Neof. says, \u201cI will be revealed in my Word \u2026 and increase some of the Holy Spirit who is upon you, and put [him] upon them.\u201d Similarly, when the Word of the Lord was revealed in the flesh, \u201che breathed on them and said to them, \u2018receive the Holy Spirit\u2019 \u201d (John 20:22). Instead of \u201cthe Lord came down in the cloud,\u201d Tg. Onq. Num 11:25 says \u201cthe Lord was revealed in the cloud;\u201d Tg. Ps.-J. says \u201cthe Lord was revealed in the cloud of glory of the Shekinah; Tg. Neof. says \u201cthe glory of the Shekinah of the Lord was revealed in the cloud.\u201d
\nThe obvious discontinuity from OT to NT is that when the Word becomes flesh, \u201che who descended from heaven [is] the Son of Man\u201d (John 3:13). In the incarnation, he comes down as a human, \u201cthe Son of Man.\u201d And he comes down as a servant: \u201cI have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me\u201d (John 6:38).<\/p>\n
WHY JESUS CALLED HIMSELF \u201cTHE SON OF MAN\u201d<\/p>\n
Issues Concerning the Son of Man Title<\/p>\n
In his historical survey and evaluation of the various issues involved in \u201cthe Son of Man debate,\u201d Burkett noted that at the end of the twentieth century these issues were still unresolved. Burkett listed about eight hundred bibliographic references, including sixty-four survey works. Although I cannot interact with all the scholarship on these issues, nonetheless, the solution I offer is, I think, fairly straightforward and convincing. I suggest that the Son of Man title used by Jesus is based on three interrelated OT texts: Ps 8:4; 80:17; and Dan 7:13. This solution is not a new one (Burkett traces it back at least to the seventeenth century), although some of the evidence presented for it here may be. There is no need to resort to extrabiblical texts, although some assistance is provided by the Targums.
\nAny plausible solution to the question of why Jesus called himself the Son of Man must account for at least the following factors:<\/p>\n
1. It seems that the Jews in general did not understand the title as messianic and were not even sure Jesus was talking about himself when he used it. For example, in John 12:34 the people tell Jesus that what he says about the Son of Man does not fit with what they have heard about the Messiah. This prompts them to ask, \u201cWho is this \u2018Son of Man\u2019?\u201d When asked by Jesus, \u201cWho do people say the Son of Man is\u201d (Matt 16:13), Peter answers with the term more familiar to Jews: \u201cYou are the Christ\u201d (i.e., the Messiah).<\/p>\n
2. There seems to be an obvious relationship between some of the sayings and Dan 7:13.<\/p>\n
3. Paul never uses the expression to speak of Jesus in all of his writings.<\/p>\n
4. Hebrews 2:6\u20139 applies Ps 8:4\u20136, which speaks of dominion given to man\/the son of man at creation, to Jesus. Does Ps 8 have anything to do with the Son of Man title? If so, there could be a link to the Son of Man title in Paul\u2019s understanding of Jesus as the \u201clast Adam\u201d (1 Cor 15:45; cf. Rom 5:14), which could be Paul\u2019s equivalent title for Jesus. But if the Son of Man title depends in part on Ps 8:4, why do the Gospels not bring that point out more clearly?<\/p>\n
Dependence of the Son of Man Title on Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 8:4<\/p>\n
The connection between the Son of Man title and Dan 7:13 is clear in the synoptic accounts of the Olivet discourse and the trial of Jesus:<\/p>\n
Dan 7:13
\nI kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven one like a Son of Man was coming.
\nMatt 24:30
\nAnd then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. (cf. Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27)
\nMatt 26:64
\nJesus said to him, \u201cYou have said so; however I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.\u201d (cf. Mark 14:62)<\/p>\n
One usage of the title in John could also depend on Dan 7:13: \u201cHe gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man\u201d (John 5:27). Revelation 1:7 (\u201cBehold, he is coming with the clouds\u201d) also applies Dan 7:13 to Jesus, but without using the Son of Man title. It would be tempting, then, to say that \u201cthe\u201d Son of Man is simply the one seen by Daniel in his vision, but that would leave some of the questions above unanswered. So, although \u201cperhaps the widest measure of agreement attaches to the view that the titular use of \u2018Son of Man\u2019 originated in a christological interpretation of Daniel 7:13,\u201d some important questions are left unanswered.<\/p>\n
Ps 8:4 and Matt 8:20\/Luke 9:58<\/p>\n
Speaking of suggestions that the title depends on Ps 8:4 and\/or Ps 80:17, Burkett notes that \u201cthe major critique of such theories has been that no allusion to Psalm 8:4 or 80:17 appears in the Son of Man sayings.\u201d Burkett seems to have overlooked that in one of the articles listed in his bibliography (the ABD article, \u201cSon of Man\u201d), a connection was indeed made between Ps 8:4 and the Son of Man title in the Gospels. Matthew 8:20 is the first place where this title occurs in the canonical order of the NT (the saying is also found at Luke 9:58), and its dependence on Ps 8:4 can be readily seen:<\/p>\n
Ps 8:4\u20138
\nWhat is man \u2026 or the son of man, that you care for him?\u2026 You have put all things under his feet (i.e., you gave him dominion over the whole creation, including) \u2026 the beasts of the field, the birds of the sky.
\nMatt 8:20\/Luke 9:58
\nThe foxes (beasts of the field) have holes, and the birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.<\/p>\n
George Nickelsburg explains, \u201cIronically, the son of man, who has been given glory and honor as well as dominion over the beasts of the field and the birds of the air, does not have the shelter they possess.\u201d A further irony is that Matt 8:20, whose dependence on Ps 8:4\u20138 does not seem evident, has been cited to argue against any connection between the Son of Man title and Ps 8:<\/p>\n
The predicates of sovereignty which Jesus adopts as the Son of Man are totally different than those which Ps 8 would have provided, as also the lowliness of man so highly honored according to the psalm can by no means be confused with the totally heterogeneous self-denial and humble renunciation of the Son of Man as it is expressed in the saying (Matt. 8:20).<\/p>\n
As we shall see, the difficulty felt in deriving the Son of Man title from Ps 8:4 is alleviated by the fact that the Psalm is adapted, not simply taken over, when applied to Jesus. Such adaptation is already indicated in Dan 7:13 itself, as shown below.
\nIn Matthew, then, the first use of the title is dependent on Ps 8:4, while the last is dependent on Dan 7:13, which is appropriate since Ps 8:4 looks back to creation, and Dan 7:13 looks forward to the end.<\/p>\n
Ps 8:4 and John 1:51<\/p>\n
Similarly, the first use of the Son of Man title in John can be related to Ps 8:4. The saying of Jesus in John 1:51 brings to mind a picture of the Son of Man as being \u201clower than the angels\u201d:<\/p>\n
John 1:51
\nYou shall see \u2026 the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.
\nPs 8:4\u20135
\nWhat is \u2026 the son of man, that you care for him? You have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings (MT: elohim; LXX, Tg. Ps.: angels).<\/p>\n
The Hebrew (and Greek and Aramaic) verb for \u201cmake lower\u201d in Ps 8:5 does not normally imply spatial movement; more broadly, the qal form of \u05d7\u05e1\u05e8 means \u201cto lack, be less than, or subside\u201d; the verb in Ps 8:5 is the piel: \u201cto make less than.\u201d In a suitable context, however, it can refer to something going lower spatially, as in the case of the level of the flood waters (Gen 8:3, 5). Likewise, in Ps 8:5 \u201clower\u201d can be inferred from the comparison between humans (on earth) and heavenly beings.
\nThe more obvious allusion of John 1:51 is to Jacob at Bethel, since there Jacob saw in a dream the angels of God ascending and descending (Gen 28:12). Interestingly, the Son of Man saying of Matt 8:20\/Luke 9:58 can also be related to this same context. Genesis 28:11 tells us that when Jacob arrived at Bethel, \u201che took one of the stones of the place and put it under his head, and lay down in that place.\u201d That is, like Jesus, Jacob on his journey in Gen 28 \u201chad nowhere to lay his head.\u201d
\nThus, the first occurrence of the title in both Matthew and John can be taken as an allusion to \u201cthe son of man\u201d of Ps 8:4 and its context is associated with Jacob in Gen 28. This raises the question as to whether that title itself has some specific connection with Jacob. As we shall see below, the OT development of the theme of the new Adam does in fact involve Jacob as one who seems to be spoken to by God as if he is a new Adam, an idea related to the Son of Man title.
\nWe may further note that John 3:13 (\u201cthe Son of Man has come down from heaven\u201d) combined with 6:62 (\u201cthe Son of Man will ascend to heaven\u201d) speak of the temporary descent (he has descended and is going to ascend) of the Son of Man to this position where he is \u201clower than the angels\u201d (1:51). The expression \u201ca little while longer, I am with you\u201d (7:33; cf. 12:35; 13:33; 14:19; 16:16 [2x], 17 [2x], 18, 19) could be seen as based in part on an adaptation of \u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d8 from Ps 8:5, \u201ca little lower in degree,\u201d to another meaning, \u201clower for a little while.\u201d The last three times \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d occurs in John (12:23, 34; 13:31) are in contexts where \u201ca little while\u201d is mentioned. Adam and Eve were created a little lower (in degree) than the angels; Jesus descended (in the incarnation) for a little while lower than the angels.<\/p>\n
The \u201cSon of Man\u201d in Psalm 8 and Daniel 7<\/p>\n
If some of the sayings in the Gospels where Jesus calls himself \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d can be related to Ps 8:4, while others are obviously derived from Dan 7:13, the question arises as to whether there is any connection between these two OT texts that could explain why both of them serve as background for the Son of Man title. Again, Nickelsburg suggested a possibility. The contrast between Jesus and the animals made in Matt 8:20\/Luke 9:58, though pointing to Ps 8, \u201ccould imply the contrast evident in Dan 7:3, 13 and, thus, also Jesus\u2019 future status as son of man.\u201d In both Ps 8 and Dan 7, the theme of dominion of a \u201cson of man\u201d over animals is in view. In Ps 8, it is the animal kingdom over which Adam and Eve were given dominion when they were created. In Dan 7, one like a son of man is given dominion over the kingdoms of men, which are portrayed as beings with an unnatural combination of animal characteristics. The kingdoms of men, over whom one like a son of man is given dominion, are portrayed as \u201cbeasts of the field\u201d and \u201cbirds of the air,\u201d to use the terminology of Ps 8. The first son of man has dominion over the literal animals at creation; the second son of man has dominion over opposing kingdoms at the end of their history, portrayed prophetically as animals. Perhaps Matthew has reflected this chronology with the first use of Son of Man alluding to Ps 8, which in turn looks back to creation, and the last use alluding to Dan 7:13, which points forward to the last things.
\nThe description in Dan 7 of the first of these \u201canimals\u201d is particularly noteworthy: \u201cThe first was like a lion but it had wings of an eagle. I kept watching until its wings were plucked off and it was lifted up from the ground and set upon its feet like a man, and the heart of a man was given to it\u201d (7:4). The transformation of the first beast is often related to the transformation of Nebuchadnezzar described in Dan 4. In Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream, he was a great tree (vv. 10, 22) under which the wild animals (the beasts of the field of Ps 8?) found shelter, and in whose branches the \u201cbirds of the sky\u201d nested (Dan 4:12). The king was then sentenced to have \u201cthe mind of an animal\u201d for seven \u201ctimes,\u201d until he recognizes that the Most High is ruler over the kingdom of men (vv. 16\u201317). When the sentence was executed, the king was given a combination of characteristics of \u201cbeasts of the field\u201d and \u201cbirds of the sky\u201d referred to in Ps 8:7\u20138; he ate grass like cattle, his hair grew like eagles\u2019 feathers, and his nails like birds\u2019 claws (Dan 4:33). But when he recognized the rule of God, he in effect became a \u201cman\u201d (v. 34).
\nThe first beast is the only one in Dan 7 which has such a transformation. The fourth beast \u201ctrampled the remainder with its feet\u201d (v. 7; cf. vv. 19, 23), whereas at creation, God \u201cput all things (including animals) under his (Adam\u2019s) feet\u201d (Ps 8:6).
\nThus more than just the phrase \u201cson of man\u201d binds these two texts; the son of man in Dan 7:13 can be viewed as an eschatologization of the first son of man mentioned in Ps 8:4. Likewise one can speak of these two sons of men as representative of their respective people. Few interpreters would think that in Ps 8 David is merely musing on the mandate given to Adam for its own sake, with only Adam in view, and not also on its application to his day as well. The phrase \u201cson of man\u201d in Ps 8:4 is \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df \u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd, \u201cson of Adam,\u201d which does not apply literally to Adam. Adam received dominion on behalf of the whole human race, and it could not be fulfilled apart from his offspring filling the earth to subdue it.
\nLikewise, the one like a son of man in Dan 7:13 receives dominion not merely for himself, but also for \u201cthe saints of the Most High\u201d who \u201ctake possession of the kingdom\u201d (v. 22). To be sure, many would like to say that because of v. 22 the one like a son of man in v. 13 is not an individual. This is hardly a necessary interpretation, however, any more than taking \u201cson of man\u201d in Ps 8:4 generically (because it applies to men generally) would mean that it did not apply first to Adam as an individual.
\nThe rule of the four beasts in Dan 7 portrays a situation where the purpose of creation as described in Ps 8 has not yet been fulfilled. Powerful and fearsome \u201canimals\u201d (unregenerate men) are ruling over the earth, including over the people of God (Daniel writes as a captive of the first beast). But with the coming of \u201cone like a son of man,\u201d the situation is restored to that envisioned at creation. With his coming (Dan 7:14, 18, 22, 27), God restores to the people of God the dominion, glory, and honor given to the first son of man before the fall into sin (Ps 8:5\u20136). Such a person could then naturally be referred to as the last Adam, but could also be referred to more cryptically as \u201cthe Son of Man.\u201d<\/p>\n
Psalm 8:6 and Psalm 110:1<\/p>\n
Matthew 26:64 (Mark 14:62) was cited above to show the dependence of the Son of Man title on Dan 7:13. This statement by Jesus at his trial also equates the Son of Man with David\u2019s Lord in Ps 110:1 (whom Jesus had earlier identified as the Messiah; Matt 22:42\u201344; Mark 12:35\u201336; Luke 20:41\u201343). Psalm 110:1 (\u201cSit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet\u201d) is much like Dan 7:13\u201314 in its promise of eschatological victory, and is sufficient to account for the Jesus\u2019 putting the two texts together. Yet Ps 110:1 is also like Dan 7:13 in that it can be viewed as an eschatologized version of Ps 8:6:<\/p>\n
Ps 8:6
\nYou have put all things under his feet.
\nPs 110:1
\nSit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.<\/p>\n
Paul brings these two texts together twice, citing Ps 110:1 first in both cases and applying both to Jesus (1 Cor 15:25, 27; Eph 1:20, 22). Similarly, before the discussion of Ps 8 in Heb 2, the author quotes Ps 110:1 in the previous chapter (Heb 1:13; also see v. 3). It is possible then that in this last Son of Man saying in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus brings together these two texts upon which the Son of Man title is based. That is, Jesus quotes from Dan 7:13 but also refers indirectly to Ps 8:6 because of its similarity to Ps 110:1, which he quotes along with Dan 7:13.
\nIs the order of quotation (Ps 110:1 followed by Ps 8:6 in three different passages) significant? I suggested above that there is significance in the fact that in Matthew the first Son of Man saying depends on Ps 8:4, which points back to creation, while the last saying depends on Dan 7:13, which points ahead to the eschaton. But Paul and the writer of Hebrews reverse the order (with Ps 110:1 substituting for Dan 7:13). This may be related to the order of fulfillment of these two Psalms. Yes, Ps 8 looks back to creation, but the entry of sin into the world affected how the glorious commission given to Adam and Eve would be fulfilled. To make this point clear, it will be helpful to relate Ps 8:6 and Ps 110:1 to two similar early texts in Genesis.<\/p>\n
Psalm 8:6 and Genesis 1:28; Psalm 110:1 and Genesis 3:15<\/p>\n
Genesis 1:26\u201328 tells us that Adam and Eve were created in the image of God and given a twofold mandate: (1) to be fruitful and multiply; (2) to exercise dominion over the earth and its creatures. Franz Delitzsch noted that Ps 8:6 alludes to the second part of this mandate. \u201cThe words \u2018put under his feet\u2019 sound like a paraphrase of the \u05e8\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4 in Gen 1:26, 28,\u201d since \u201crule\u201d (qal of \u05e8\u05d3\u05d4) as well as \u201csubdue\u201d (qal of \u05db\u05d1\u05e9\u05c1) have the literal meaning \u201cto step on, tread upon.\u201d This literal meaning of \u05db\u05d1\u05e9\u05c1 is possibly seen in Mic 7:19, as well as in the noun \u05db\u05b6\u05bc\u05ab\u05d1\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1, footstool (2 Chr 9:18). For \u05e8\u05d3\u05d4 as \u201ctread,\u201d see Joel 3:13.
\nThe last part of the curse on the serpent, \u201cHe shall strike you on the head; you shall strike him on the heel,\u201d brings to the reader\u2019s mind a picture of a person stepping on the head of a snake. This picture is similar to what would be evoked by Gen 1:28, because of the literal meaning of the verbs \u201crule\u201d and \u201csubdue\u201d mentioned above. Karl Friedrich Keil made a similar point when he wrote that since 1:28 already presumes the triumph of humans over the animals, 3:15 points to a higher, spiritual enemy; thus if a mere reptile were the object of the curse in Gen 3:15, it would be a repetition of Gen 1:28.
\nThat Gen 3:15 does not deal with a mere reptile is also evident from the following chapter, which records the murder of Abel by Cain. In this incident we find the first fulfillment of the enmity between the woman\u2019s seed and the serpent\u2019s seed that was predicted in the curse. In Gen 4, however, the two seeds are identified not literally as snakes and humans, but as the wicked and the righteous among humanity. Cain is appropriately called the offspring of the serpent since he is morally like him (a liar and a murderer; 4:8\u20139), and like him is cursed (4:11). Righteous Abel must then exemplify the offspring of the woman. Genesis 3:15 thus contains a promise of victory (the striking of the serpent\u2019s head) for the righteous over the wicked.
\nFurther, the fact that the outcome of the enmity in Gen 4 seems to be the opposite of what was predicted in the curse, since Abel is killed whereas Cain\u2019s life is protected, forces us to an eschatological interpretation of the curse and its cure. The victory promised must be something beyond our present earthly circumstances; otherwise the promise is without value, and the righteous like Abel are punished, not rewarded, for their righteousness, while the curse is to no effect, since the wicked, like Cain, are rewarded for their wickedness rather than being punished. There must be an eschatological, \u201ccrushing of the head\u201d victory of the righteous over the wicked.
\nThese considerations lead us to see an interesting correlation between the verses in Genesis and those in the Psalms: Gen 3:15 is related to Gen 1:28 as Ps 110:1 (like Dan 7:13) is related to Ps 8:6. Victory over human moral enemies is the theme of Gen 3:15 and Ps 110:1\u20132 (and Dan 7:13\u201314); dominion over the good creation is the theme of Gen 1:28 and Ps 8:6. These passages from Genesis and Psalms all express the idea of dominion or victory as putting under foot. Psalm 110:6 also uses the language of Gen 3:15 about crushing the head, although \u201chead\u201d is usually interpreted as \u201cleaders\u201d in Ps 110:6 (equivalent to the kings of v. 5).
\nGenesis 1:28, to which Ps 8:6 points, pertains to a world in which there are no moral enemies. Once sin enters the world, the only way the situation of Gen 1:28 can prevail is if those enemies are defeated. In other words, Gen 1:28 cannot be fulfilled until Gen 3:15 has been accomplished. I would suggest that this explains why when NT writers jointly quote Ps 8:6 and Ps 110:1, the latter is always put first: human enemies must be put under foot before the victorious righteous can have dominion over the creation.
\nThis sequence of events can be seen in the OT reigns of David and Solomon. David is the man of blood who carries out extensive warfare against surrounding enemies. Solomon uses language like Ps 110:1 to describe David\u2019s victories: \u201cYou know that David my father was unable to build a house for the name of the LORD his God because of the wars which surrounded him, until the LORD put them under the soles of his feet\u201d (1 Kgs 5:3). With victory over human moral enemies secured (albeit only temporarily), Solomon could express his dominion as Adam was commanded to do before the Fall (Gen 1:28)\u2014by exercising dominion over the creation: \u201cHe spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to the hyssop that grows on the wall; he spoke also of animals and birds and creeping things and fish\u201d (1 Kgs 4:33).<\/p>\n
THE CALL AND FALL OF THE NEW ADAM IN THE OT<\/p>\n
Noah, Abraham, and Jacob as \u201cnew Adam\u201d<\/p>\n
The reason for an eschatologization of Gen 1:28 (i.e., Gen 3:15) was that Adam and Eve sinned. Had they not fallen into sin, their offspring would have inherited their unfallen nature and Gen 1:28 would have been fulfilled naturally as inherently righteous humanity filled and subdued the earth. Adam and Eve would have brought \u201cmany sons to glory\u201d (Heb 2:10) naturally, through procreation. But since sin entered the world, when the earth was filled with people, it was also filled with corruption (Gen 6:5, 11\u201313). Adam cannot be seen as the progenitor of the righteous people of God, as he would have been if sin had not entered the world. But in the book of Genesis, a number of individuals seem to be presented to the reader as \u201cnew Adams\u201d in the sense that the two aspects of the original creation mandate of fruitfulness and dominion are given again to them as a blessing, in wording that is reminiscent of the mandate given to Adam and Eve:<\/p>\n
Noah
\n(Gen 9:1, 7)
\nAbraham
\n(Gen 17:2, 4, 5, 6)
\nJacob
\n(Gen 35:11)
\nAnd God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, \u201cBe fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.\u2026 7As for you, be fruitful and multiply; populate the earth abundantly and rule over it.\u201d
\nI will multiply you greatly.\u2026 You will be the father of many nations.\u2026 I will make you the father of many nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful. I will make you nations; kings shall come forth from you.
\nBe fruitful and multiply. A nation, and a company of nations, shall come from you; kings shall come forth from your loins.<\/p>\n
One might infer from Exod 6:3 that Isaac received a similar blessing, since there God says he appeared to all three patriarchs as El Shaddai, whereas Genesis records only the appearances to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17 and 35).<\/p>\n
The disqualification of the new Adam<\/p>\n
If God spoke to an individual as if he were a new Adam, one might expect that individual to be able to fulfill the purpose for which the first Adam was disqualified. One might expect to see him as completely blameless before God, unlike Adam. One might expect to see him as the progenitor only of the righteous seed, with no \u201cCain\u201d among his offspring. But reality does not meet up with these expectations. In reality, these various new Adam figures are much like the old Adam. Scripture does not simply show them as sinners, but it highlights their sin in such a way that we can see similarities to the first Adam\u2019s sin. Moreover, we see among their offspring not just righteous children, but the same two seeds at enmity that were evident in Adam\u2019s children. These two disqualifiers may be conveniently summarized as sins and sons.<\/p>\n
Noah\u2019s sins<\/p>\n
Noah\u2019s drunkenness, described in Gen 9:21, recalls the fall of Adam most obviously in the fact that Noah\u2019s nakedness was revealed, bringing shame. When Noah awoke (and thus opened his eyes), \u201che knew what his youngest son had done to him\u201d (v. 24); this can be compared to Gen 3:7, \u201cthe eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked.\u201d There may also be a reminder of the eating of the forbidden fruit in the overconsumption of the fruit of the vine.<\/p>\n
Noah\u2019s sons<\/p>\n
The two seeds among Noah\u2019s sons are manifested in this same incident. This is the second disqualifier mentioned above. Ham brings shame to his father, thus showing himself to be the offspring of the serpent who brought shame to Adam and Eve. He resembles the serpent morally, though he is physically the son of the (apparent) new Adam. Righteous Shem and Japheth, however, imitate God\u2019s action in Gen 3:21 of covering their father\u2019s shame.<\/p>\n
Abraham\u2019s sins<\/p>\n
Three incidents in Abraham\u2019s life may be analyzed similarly. In the two cases where he passed off his wife as his sister (Gen 12:10\u201320; 20:1\u201318), he violated an ordinance given in the garden of Eden, as Adam did (though not the same ordinance). The rebuke of the king in each of these incidents (12:18: \u201cWhat is this you have done to me?\u201d; 20:9: \u201cWhat have you done to us?\u201d) is reminiscent of the LORD\u2019s words to Eve, \u201cWhat is this you have done?\u201d (3:13). Abraham\u2019s sin in taking Hagar as a surrogate wife is also subtly similar to the sin of Adam, as a comparison of the language of Gen 3:6, 17 with 16:2\u20133 demonstrates:<\/p>\n
Gen 3:17, 6
\nGen 16:2\u20133
\n17 To Adam he said, \u201cBecause you listened to the voice of your wife \u2026\u201d 6 \u2026 And she took from its fruit and she ate, and she gave also to her husband, and he ate.
\n2 \u2026 Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 \u2026 Sarai the wife of Abram took Hagar the Egyptian servant girl and gave her to Abram her husband as his wife.<\/p>\n
Besides the verbal allusion, there is a thematic similarity to Gen 3 in this sin, in that it is motivated by dissatisfaction with God\u2019s providence\u2014the attitude that God is withholding something good from people, so they must take action on their own.<\/p>\n
Abraham\u2019s sons<\/p>\n
The two seeds at enmity appear among the children of Abraham, despite the fact that Abraham is portrayed as the new Adam in Gen 17. We see this in Ishmael\u2019s mocking of Isaac at the feast on the occasion of Isaac\u2019s weaning. The redundant manner in which Abraham is said to be Isaac\u2019s father in 21:2\u20137 (8 times in 6 verses, including 3 times in v. 3: \u201cAbraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore to him, Isaac\u201d may have been in response to an accusation of Isaac\u2019s illegitimacy, particularly in light of the fact that Sarah had just returned from spending some time in the house of Abimelech (Gen 20). The enmity culminates in Ishmael\u2019s expulsion (21:10\u201314). If Abraham\u2014the new Adam\u2014is the father of the righteous, how is it that not all of his children are righteous?<\/p>\n
Isaac and Jacob<\/p>\n
One sees the same two disqualifiers (sins and sons) in the next two generations of patriarchs as well. In Gen 26:1\u201311, Isaac lies about Rebekah being his wife, repeating the twice-committed sin of Abraham. Jacob takes two more wives because of a perceived lack of children, again as Abraham had done by taking a surrogate wife in Gen 16.
\nLikewise, the enmity between the two seeds is seen among the sons of Isaac (Esau towards Jacob) and of Jacob (Jacob\u2019s ten oldest sons against Joseph). In both cases, this enmity is much like that of Cain towards Abel, though it did not result in actual murder. In the case of Jacob\u2019s sons, there is also a surprising outcome of reconciliation rather than disinheritance and exclusion from the covenant as in the previous two generations.<\/p>\n
David as new Adam<\/p>\n
Although the language is not so close to Gen 1:26\u201328 as we saw in the case of Noah and the patriarchs, the two aspects of the creation mandate (fruitfulness and dominion) are discernable in Nathan\u2019s oracle given to David (2 Sam 7; 1 Chr 17). The LORD promises David that he will build him a house, a perpetual dynasty: \u201cYour house and your kingdom will endure forever before me\u201d (2 Sam 7:16). Since the dominion aspect of the neo-Adamic commission to the patriarchs was expressed as a promise of kings, and since David\u2019s dynasty was to be perpetual, it seems apparent that he has now become heir of the promise of the new Adam given to the patriarchs. One can read 2 Sam 7:19 (and 1 Chr 17:17) as David\u2019s recognition of this fact, as he exclaims, \u201cand this is the law of mankind, O LORD God\u201d (with \u05ea\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8\u05b7\u05ea\u05be\u05d4\u05b8\u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd referring to the creation mandate of Gen 1:28).
\nDavid\u2019s meditation on the creation mandate in Ps 8 could have been inspired by Nathan\u2019s oracle, which involves David in the fulfillment of that mandate. Conversely, David\u2019s prior meditation on the creation mandate as expressed in Ps 8 could have been the basis for his quick recognition of the significance of Nathan\u2019s oracle concerning that mandate when Nathan issued it. In any case, one can see a number of connections between these two passages:<\/p>\n
1. David\u2019s response in marveling at the LORD\u2019s promise parallels his marvel at the commission given to the first Adam:<\/p>\n
Who am I, O Lord GOD, and what is my house, that you have brought me thus far? (2 Sam 7:18\/\/1 Chr 17:16)<\/p>\n
What is man, that you are mindful of him; the son of man, that you care for him? (Ps 8:4)<\/p>\n
2. The \u201cglorification\u201d of David can be compared to the glorification of the first Adam:<\/p>\n
What more can David add (i.e., say) to you for honoring [\u05dc\u05b0\u05db\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3 should possibly be read as \u05dc\u05b0\u05db\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3; see BHS] your servant? (1 Chr 17:18)<\/p>\n
With glory [\u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3] and honor you crowned him. (Ps 8:5)<\/p>\n
3. Finally, David speaks of the LORD\u2019s great name in both Ps 8:1, 9 and 2 Sam 7:22\u201323\/\/1 Chr 17:20\u201324.<\/p>\n
We also observe that David makes a statement about himself in Ps 21:5 that is very similar to what he said about Adam in Ps 8:5:<\/p>\n
Ps 21:3, 5
\nPs 8:5
\nYou set a crown of fine gold upon his head
\n[\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05ea \u05dc\u05b0\u05e8\u05b9\u05d0\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05b9 \u05e2\u05b2\u05d8\u05b6\u05ab\u05e8\u05b6\u05ea \u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d6].\u2026 Splendor and honor you bestow upon him [\u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3 \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05e8 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e9\u05b7\u05c1\u05d5\u05b6\u05bc\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b8\u05dc\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5].
\nWith glory and honor you crowned him
\n[\u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3 \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05e8 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d8\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05b5\u05ab\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc].<\/p>\n
The son of man in Ps 80:17 and John 15<\/p>\n
Israel is personified as a vine in Ps 80:8, 14, referred to as \u201croot and son\u201d in v. 15. Verse 17 contains the petition, \u201cLet your hand rest on the man of your right hand, the son of man whom you strengthened for yourself.\u201d Interpreters differ as to whether Israel is still being personified here, or if the psalmist has moved from petitioning for the nation to petitioning for the current Davidic king. The latter seems preferable, since \u201cman\u201d\/\u201cson of man\u201d applied to Israel would be unique, while a reference to David as being at or benefitting from the LORD\u2019s \u201cright hand\u201d is common (Ps 16:11; 18:35; 20:6; 63:8; 138:7; 139:10; cf. Ps 110:1). If this is the case, \u201cwhom you strengthened for yourself\u201d could refer back to Nathan\u2019s oracle establishing the Davidic dynasty, and the \u201cman\u201d\/\u201cson of man\u201d parallel used here could depend on the connection we have suggested above between Ps 8 and Nathan\u2019s oracle. That is, Ps 80:17 could be evidence that David was regarded, on the basis of Nathan\u2019s oracle, to be heir to the creation mandate given to the first Adam as described in Ps 8.
\nIf \u201cman of your right hand\u201d and \u201cthe son of man whom you have strengthened for yourself\u201d are understood as referring to the Davidic king, then this designation is especially applicable to Jesus. Commentators often place Ps 80 first in their lists of OT passages that supply a background to the vine and branches discourse of John 15. As in John 15, Tg. Ps. also interprets the branches as disciples (v. 11), spreading out from the academies of Jerusalem. Besides the vine\/branches connection, with the image of burning branches as judgment, both passages address the issue of unanswered prayer (Ps 80:4, 18; John 15:7), and Jesus speaks so that the disciples\u2019 joy might be full, that is, so that they do not have to lament over unanswered prayer as in Ps 80.
\nWhile Jesus claims to be the true vine (or the true \u201cson of man\u201d of Ps 80:17) in comparison to Israel, the \u201cvine\u201d that was brought out of Egypt (Ps 80:8), the antitype of what Jesus represents appears in another passage. The Davidic king Zedekiah is compared to a false vine in a parable of Ezek 17. Zedekiah violates his oath before God given to Nebuchadnezzar, breaks his covenant, sends out branches (envoys) to Egypt, and receives God\u2019s judgement as a result. The fate of Zedekiah, then, is an example of a judgment similar to what Ps 80 is lamenting. The true son of man of Ps 80:17 remedies the false vine, Zedekiah. In an indirect way, then, by claiming to be the true vine in light of Ps 80 and Ezek 17, Jesus is claiming to be the true man\/son of man, the true Davidic king, even though the Son of Man title is not used in John 15.<\/p>\n
The disqualification of David<\/p>\n
Examining David\u2019s sins and sons yields results very similar to those we saw from Genesis. His great sin with Bathsheba is an aggravated version of Abraham\u2019s sin in Gen 20. There Abraham was the foreigner who feared that someone might kill him in order to take Sarah from him (20:11). A pagan king took Sarah in the integrity of his heart and innocence of his hands (20:5). In contrast, in 2 Sam 11 we see that David took Bathsheba, knowing that she was married, and killed the foreigner Uriah, so that what happened to Uriah at the hand of David is what Abraham feared for himself in a land in which he thought, \u201cthere is no fear of God in this place\u201d (Gen 20:11).
\nWe also see the two seeds of Gen 3:15 among David\u2019s descendants. David\u2019s firstborn son Amnon comes across as worse than the Canaanite Shechem (comparing Gen 34 with 2 Sam 13, and particularly Gen 34:7 with 2 Sam 13:12). Absalom is next in line to the throne, and he dishonored his father in a far worse way than Ham did Noah (2 Sam 15\u201317). Adonijah exalted himself to the throne in opposition to his brother Solomon and David\u2019s, disregarding the LORD\u2019s decree that Solomon would become king.
\nThus if Noah and the patriarchs are disqualified from being the new Adam, surely David is as well, and more so! \u201cDavid\u201d is one of the many names given to the Messiah before he comes into the world (Isa 55:3; Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:23\u201324; 37:25). In view of the first David\u2019s disqualifications, the name \u201cDavid\u201d given to the Messiah may suggest that he is the \u201ctrue David,\u201d which in turn, because of David\u2019s connection to the idea of the new Adam (via Nathan\u2019s oracle), could be taken to indicate that the Messiah is the true eschatological Adam, the true son of man.<\/p>\n
JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE SON OF MAN<\/p>\n
Jesus as the True Adam<\/p>\n
Here we analyze the person and works of Jesus of Nazareth in light of the two disqualifying factors of the various putative new Adams in the OT. First, with respect to \u201csins,\u201d we note that Jesus was tempted in every way as believers are, yet without sin (Heb 4:15). Specifically, Paul\u2019s description of the self-humiliation of Jesus (Phil 2:5\u20138) appears to be worded to bring out the contrast between the attitude of Jesus and the attitude urged upon Eve by the tempter (Gen 3:5). The tempter promised Eve that she and Adam could become like God (or, as gods); the tempter urged Eve to seize this equality with God for herself, thereby expressing discontent with the high status in which the first pair was created (\u201ca little lower than the angels\u201d). In contrast, Jesus gave up equality with God in order to become not just a man like Adam, put in charge of creation, but a servant, for the purpose of enabling his followers to truly gain the godlikeness lost in Adam.
\nThe sin of Abraham and Isaac in passing off their wives as their sisters in order to save their own lives forms an apt contrast to the work of Jesus, once we recognize that the church is his bride (cf. ch. 6 below). Isaac lied about his wife, subjecting her to potential defilement, \u201cbecause I thought, \u2018lest I die on account of her\u2019 \u201d (Gen 26:9). Jesus, in sharp contrast, gave up his life for his bride to make her holy (Eph 5:25\u201326).
\nWith respect to \u201csons,\u201d we may note first the indications in messianic prophecy that the Messiah has \u201coffspring,\u201d though not in the ordinary way. One of his titles is \u201cEverlasting Father\u201d (Isa 9:6). Isaiah 53:10 notes that after suffering to the point of death, he will see offspring and prolong his days. In Isa 52:14, he is said not even to look human as a result of his suffering; his form is marred \u201cmore than the sons of man,\u201d contrasting with the son of man that Daniel saw in Dan 7:13. One of the Son of Man sayings in the Gospels indicates that, unlike the OT new Adams, the Messiah does not have both types of seeds among his offspring: \u201cHe who sows the good seed is the Son of Man,\u201d and the good seed represents \u201cthe children of the kingdom,\u201d whereas the tares are \u201cthe sons of the evil one\u201d (Matt 13:37\u201338). Unlike the new Adams of the OT, all his children are righteous, because he is the true progenitor of the righteous seed.
\nFinally, we can see the appropriateness of Jesus\u2019 alluding to Jacob\u2019s dream of a ladder (Gen 28) in the Son of Man sayings in Matt 8:20\/\/Luke 9:58 and John 1:51, particularly if that title depends on the OT development of the idea of the new Adam, since Jacob is one of the OT putative \u201cnew Adams\u201d or \u201csons of man.\u201d Further, though we cannot find any analogy in the OT for a human coming down from heaven, the twofold mission on which Jacob went in Gen 28 can be seen as a paradigm for the mission of Jesus when he came down from heaven. Jacob left his father\u2019s house (1) to save his life from Esau and (2) to find a wife and then return to his father. Jesus left his Father\u2019s house (1) to give his life, or, put another way, to save Jacob\u2019s life (and ours), eternally, and (2) to gain his bride, the church, and then return to his Father. In the case of Jesus, this twofold mission is actually one since saving the (eternal) life of Jacob (who stands for the people of God) is the same as gaining his bride, the church.<\/p>\n
Adam in the Targums<\/p>\n
In addition to the Hebrew OT background to the Son of Man title and the idea of the Messiah as the new, true Adam, it is potentially relevant that Tg. Neof. on a number of occasions refers to Adam as \u201cthe son of man\u201d (\u05d1\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0 Tg. Neof. Gen 1:27; 2:18, 23; 9:6 [mg.]; and possibly Exod 4:11). \u05d1\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0 (or \u05d1\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d4) is also used for Hebrew \u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd when used for humankind or generically of humans (Tg. Neof. Gen 6:7; 8:21 [mg.]; 9:5; 40:23; 49:22; Lev 18:5; Deut 8:3). In Tg. Neof. Exod 4:11 (\u201cWho gave the son of man a mouth\u201d), \u201cson of man\u201d might be used generically, but since Tg. Ps.-J. at that verse employs another expression for Adam (which we discuss below), \u201cson of man\u201d may in fact refer to Adam. Targum Neofiti Gen 1:27 forms an interesting comparison to John 1:14, especially if we understand John\u2019s \u201cWord\u201d from a Targum background:<\/p>\n
Tg. Neof. Gen 1:27
\nJohn 1:14
\nThe Word of the LORD created the son of man in his likeness.
\nThe Word became flesh (i.e., the Son of Man, that we might become the children of God, that his likeness might be created in us).<\/p>\n
If \u201cthe son of man\u201d was a contemporary Targum rendering of \u201cAdam,\u201d then Jesus could also call himself \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d from a Targum background with the same implication that this title had from the Hebrew OT; namely, that he is the true Adam.
\n\u201cThe Son of Man,\u201d then, is the promised Messiah. The term Messiah (\u201cAnointed One\u201d) is not used frequently in the OT itself to refer to the one who was to come. But during the intertestamental period it seems to have become a catchall term to refer to the promised person who would come to save his people. Thus in the Targums, \u201cMessiah\u201d is used frequently, appearing for other messianic titles such as Branch (Tg. Isa. 11:1; Tg. Jer. 23:5, etc.) or even when no title is used at all. \u201cMessiah means \u201canointed one,\u201d and this reminds us of David, \u201cthe anointed of the God of Jacob\u201d (2 Sam 23:1); indeed, the Messiah is explicitly called \u201cDavid\u201d (e.g., Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:23, 24; 37:24; Hos 3:5). There is no Targum of Daniel, even of the Hebrew portions, and Dan 7:13 is in Aramaic. But if Daniel were entirely in Hebrew, a Targum might have substituted the title \u201cthe Messiah\u201d for \u201cone like a son of man\u201d in Dan 7:13, just as it was substituted for \u201cBranch,\u201d etc.
\nThe Jews could have selected a different catchall term, such as \u201cthe Son of Man,\u201d to refer to the one who would come. As we have seen, \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d would remind the biblically literate of David as well as Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Jacob, and was used (without the article) of the coming one in Dan 7:13. It points to the important OT theme of the new Adam, which harks back to creation, unlike the title Messiah, which harks back only to the Davidic monarchy.
\nThe simple solution to the question of the meaning of \u201cSon of Man,\u201d then, is that Jesus took the title the Son of Man as a catchall term in the same way that the Jews had taken Messiah. \u201cThe title thus appears to function as a general title for Jesus as the Christian Messiah.\u201d It was a way for Jesus to identify himself as the Messiah without using that term. Thus it served to obscure his public claim to be the Messiah, as we see he was concerned to do from passages such as Matt 16:20: \u201cHe warned his disciples that they should tell no one that he was the Christ.\u201d \u201cJesus might have deliberately chosen a title which was little known and vaguely understood.\u201d \u201cNo term was more fitted both to conceal, yet at the same time to reveal to those who had ears to hear, the Son of Man\u2019s real identity.\u201d It should be obvious from the obscurity of the title that the early church would have no reason for inventing a mysterious title equivalent to \u201cChrist\u201d and applying it to Jesus in place of the well-understood title used in the epistles.<\/p>\n
The Son of Man and the Last Adam in Paul<\/p>\n
The reason that Paul does not call Jesus \u201cthe Son of Man,\u201d then, becomes obvious: the claim that Jesus is the Messiah is no longer to be obscured. Paul does, however, teach that Jesus is the new Adam, which is what the title \u201cSon of Man\u201d was meant to point to. As in the Gospels, he uses Ps 8 to do so, but instead of pairing Ps 8:4\u20138 with Dan 7:13 as in the Gospels, he pairs Ps 8:6 with Ps 110:1, as noted above.
\nPaul\u2019s primary exposition of Jesus as the new Adam (or as he puts it, the last Adam) is in 1 Cor 15:21\u201349, in the course of which he says, \u201cHe must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet\u201d (v. 25, from Ps 110:1), and \u201cHe has put all things in subjection under his feet\u201d (v. 27, from Ps 8:6). Chrys C. Caragounis deduces from Paul\u2019s use of Ps 8:6 here and elsewhere that Paul \u201cwas clearly acquainted with the [Son of Man] title but refrained from using it.\u201d
\nIn 1 Cor 15:45, Paul quotes Gen 2:7 in making an analogy between Adam and Jesus: \u201cThe first man, Adam, became a living soul. The last Adam, a life-giving spirit.\u201d Clearly, Paul\u2019s understanding of Jesus as the last Adam in the sense that he is the one who gives life to his people agrees with what I suggested above as the significance of the theme of the new Adam as it is developed in the book of Genesis itself.
\nPaul\u2019s expression, \u201cthe first man, Adam,\u201d may be influenced by how the Targums describe Adam. In English this expression looks like a conflation of two different ways that translators of The Aramaic Bible series render the Aramaic expression \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05e7\u05d3\u05de\u05d9\u05d0, used for Adam. In favor of the translation \u201cfirst Adam,\u201d it may be argued that \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd in Aramaic is the proper name Adam, not a common noun for a human or humankind in general. In favor of \u201cthe first man,\u201d it may be argued that at least some Aramaic speakers who knew some Hebrew might know that in Hebrew the word can mean \u201chuman.\u201d Paul\u2019s expression, \u201cthe first man, Adam,\u201d gives both translation possibilities at the same time. Such double translation is, in fact, typical of the Targums themselves.
\n\u05d1\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0 (the son of man) is used for Adam only in Tg. Neof., while \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05e7\u05d3\u05de\u05d9\u05d0 (the first man\/Adam) is used for Adam in Tg. Neof. and a number of other Targums, as noted above. Targum Neofiti in fact calls Adam \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05e7\u05d3\u05de\u05d9\u05d0 in the verse following the one quoted by Paul (\u201cthere he put the first man\/Adam whom he had created\u201d). A first-century Pal. Tg. might have used that term at Gen 2:7.
\nSo, while it is true that Paul does not call Jesus \u201cthe Son of Man,\u201d and that this is understandable because the messiahship of Jesus is no longer to be obscured, Paul does apply to Jesus the title \u201cthe last Adam,\u201d which can be viewed as an adaptation of a targumic term \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05e7\u05d3\u05de\u05d9\u05d0 (\u201cfirst man\/Adam\u201d), which (in Tg. Neof. at least) is the targumic equivalent of \u201cthe son of man.\u201d It is also a term that reveals the meaning (especially for non-Aramaic speakers) of the title \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d with which the Corinthians would presumably be familiar through the apostolic teaching, even if none of the Synoptics had yet been written. Paul is in effect telling the Corinthians the meaning of the title \u201cthe Son of Man.\u201d
\nFrederick Houk Borsch endorses the view that Paul uses \u201cthe second Man\u201d and \u201cthe last Adam\u201d as phrases equivalent to \u201cthe Son of Man,\u201d and he argues that Paul does this because \u201cthe phrase \u2018the Son of Man\u2019 was as much a barbarism in Greek as it is in English. Taken out of its Semitic context it would cease to have the same meaning.\u201d This explanation overlooks the fact that this \u201cbarbarism\u201d (without the definite article) was already present in the LXX at Ps 8:4 (quoted in Heb 2:6), 80:17, and Dan 7:13. \u201cSon of Man\u201d may not represent smooth Greek or English, but without a literal translation it is impossible to understand the significance of the title used by Jesus.
\nBorsch quotes others in support of the view that Paul is explaining the Son of Man title. On the citation of Ps 8:6 in 1 Cor 15:27, Borsch writes, \u201cWilliam Manson contended that \u2018If the Apostle was not thinking of Christ as the Son of Man, it would not have occurred to him to base Christ\u2019s universal sovereignty on this text.\u2019 \u2018The title Son of Man trembles on Paul\u2019s lips,\u2019 writes A. M. Hunter.\u201d<\/p>\n
Galatians 3:16 and the two seeds of Genesis 3:15<\/p>\n
The idea of Jesus as the new Adam, the progenitor of the righteous seed, as it is developed from Genesis, may also be the key to explaining Paul\u2019s often misunderstood statement in Gal 3:16:<\/p>\n
The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say \u201cand to seeds,\u201d meaning many people, but \u201cand to your seed,\u201d meaning one person, who is Christ. (NIV)<\/p>\n
The NIV, adopting the standard interpretation of Paul\u2019s words, takes Paul to mean that the promises to Abraham\u2019s \u201cseed\u201d are given to only one individual (Christ), implying that if the promises were meant for \u201cmany people,\u201d God would have said to Abraham, \u201cand to your seeds.\u201d Advocates of the standard interpretation explain that Paul is here engaging in rabbinical midrash\u2014that he is unpacking the meaning of \u201cseed\u201d in the patriarchal promises.
\nThere are, however, several reasons for doubting this standard interpretation: (1) Jewish interpretations that focus on whether a word in Scripture is singular or plural deal with words that sometimes are found in the singular, sometimes in the plural. The word \u201cseed,\u201d however, when used to refer to a descendent or descendant(s), is always singular; (2) rabbinical tradition consistently takes \u201cto their seed\u201d to mean \u201cto their sons\u201d; and (3) it is doubtful that one can find any Jewish rabbi or other practitioner of midrash in history who had anything but scorn for Paul\u2019s assumed reasoning, which makes it highly unlikely that he is emulating rabbinic interpretation.
\nFollowing, however, from the fact that Paul recognizes Jesus as the last Adam, the progenitor of the righteous seed, we would expect him to be arguing not that the seed is Christ, but that the seed is Christ\u2019s. And, actually, that is what he seems to say just a few verses later: \u201cIf you are Christ\u2019s, then you are \u2018Abraham\u2019s seed,\u2019 heirs according to promise\u201d (v. 29). In other words, if Gentiles with no relationship to Abraham believe in Christ, they are counted as \u201cAbraham\u2019s seed\u201d because it is actually Christ\u2019s seed.
\nCan Gal 3:16 be understood in this way? Yes it can. Consider first the Greek text:<\/p>\n
\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f08\u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u1f70\u03bc \u1f10\u03c1\u03c1\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6. \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9, \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u02bc \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c6\u02bc \u1f11\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f45\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.<\/p>\n
I propose that: (1) \u201cmany\u201d in \u201cas of many\u201d (\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd) does not refer to \u201cmany people,\u201d but \u201cmany seeds,\u201d where \u201cmany\u201d has the grammatical meaning of \u201cplural,\u201d as it does in Semitic languages like Akkadian and modern Hebrew. (2) Paul is referring to what I have described above as the second disqualifying factor that shows that Abraham cannot be the true new Adam, though he seems to be spoken to as if he is in Gen 17 (one of three places where the precise words quoted by Paul occur in LXX). \u201cIt does not say \u2018and to seeds.\u2019 \u201d What is the point? The point is a significant historical observation, not a bizarre grammatical one: Abraham had more than one seed, namely, both righteous and wicked offspring (Isaac and Ishmael), and the promise applies to only one of these seeds.
\nJustin Martyr made the same point in his Dialogue with Trypho (135). In the LXX of Isa 65:9, God says, \u201cI will lead forth offspring (\u201cseed\u201d) from Jacob and Judah.\u201d Justin says, \u201cit is necessary for us here to observe that there are two seeds of Judah, and two races, as there are two houses of Jacob: the one begotten by blood and flesh, the other by faith and the Spirit.\u201d Justin says Jesus Christ is the \u201cIsrael\u201d and \u201cJacob,\u201d just as I am suggesting here that Paul is saying in Gal 3 that Jesus Christ is the \u201cAbraham\u201d\u2014the true, spiritual progenitor. \u201cSo we,\u201d Justin continues, \u201cwho have been quarried out from the bowels of Christ, are the true Israelite race.\u201d
\nIt is this historical fact of Abraham\u2019s \u201cseeds\u201d that disqualifies him from the position of new Adam and points towards the one who truly is the new Adam, the progenitor of the righteous seed.
\n(3) The antecedent of \u1f45\u03c2 (\u201cwhich\u201d) is not \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af (\u201cseed\u201d) but \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 (\u201cyou\u201d). Following the word order of the Greek (which uses the pronoun \u201cyou\u201d in the genitive to indicate possession instead of an adjective like English \u201cyour\u201d), it reads \u201c \u2018and to the seed of you,\u2019 who is Christ.\u201d That is, when the LORD said to Abraham, \u201cyour seed,\u201d it referred only to the righteous seed, which is in reality the seed of the true Adam, the Son of Man, Jesus Christ. Ishmael is Abraham\u2019s (other) seed, but he is not Christ\u2019s seed, and thus he is not an heir of the promise. Paul\u2019s point is that Jewish unbelievers are like Ishmael, of the seed of Abraham but not of the seed of promise, while Jewish and Gentile believers are like Isaac, of the seed of promise because they are Christ\u2019s (seed) (Gal 3:29). Abraham is a figurehead for the true progenitor of the righteous seed (Christ), as the snake in Gen 3:15 is a figurehead for Satan, the progenitor of the unrighteous seed. If Justin Martyr were as laconic as Paul, he might have said that Isa 65:9 \u201cdoes not say \u2018seeds,\u2019 in the plural, but in the singular, \u2018seed from Jacob,\u2019 who is in reality Christ\u201d (i.e., \u201cJacob\u201d in the text is really \u201cChrist\u201d). That is, Christ is not the singular seed, he is the progenitor of that seed; agreeing with Isa 53:10, not to mention Gal 3:29, that seed is his seed.
\nGrammatically, there can be no objection to the foregoing. \u03a3\u03bf\u03c5 is a pronoun, which, by definition, stands in place of a noun, and thus can serve as antecedent to \u1f45\u03c2. The reason this solution has not been proposed in the past (by the Greek fathers, for example) is not because of ignorance of Greek grammar, but because the church lost sight of the significance of the idea of Christ as the true Adam, the obvious evidence for this being that the significance of the Son of Man title, just as the significance of the Logos title, was quickly forgotten in the process of the hellenization of the early church.
\nIf we begin with the proposition, \u201cthe church is the offspring of Christ,\u201d which is consistent with Gal 3:29 and the idea of Jesus as the true Adam, then it is interesting that in Aramaic, \u201cthe offspring of Christ\u201d could be expressed \u05d6\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05e2\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05bc \u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05d7\u05b8\u05d0 which, translated literally, is \u201cthe offspring of him who [is] the Christ.\u201d This is quite similar to what we have at the end of Gal 3:16, except that there we have a shift from second person (\u201cthe seed of you,\u201d when Genesis is being quoted) to third person (for Paul\u2019s comment on it, \u201cwho is Christ\u201d). Interestingly, in Gal 4:27 Paul quotes Isa 54:1, which in the Hebrew shifts from second person to third person within direct address: \u201cRejoice, O barren one\u2014she has not borne, break forth with a shout and cry out\u2014she has not labored.\u201d
\nThis interpretation has the advantage that it views Gal 3:16 not only as the product of a sane mind and rational thought, but also as consistent with what Paul says elsewhere, not only in Gal 3:29, but also in Rom 9:6\u201313. \u201cNor are they all children (of the promise, or of God) because they are Abraham\u2019s seed\u201d (v. 7). Here Paul clearly takes \u201cseed\u201d (singular) as \u201cmany people.\u201d He goes on, \u201cbut, \u2018Through Isaac seed will be called yours.\u2019 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of promise.\u201d Obviously, Paul takes the singular seed as a collective, just as everyone else does, as referring to \u201cmany people,\u201d the children of promise, who are children of God. The only difference between this passage and Gal 3:16 is that in the latter, Paul more specifically identifies the divine progenitor as the Messiah, who is both a man, like the figurehead Abraham, and God.
\nAgainst all of the above one might insist from Gal 3:19 that Paul is thinking at least in that passage of Christ as the singular seed who was to come: the law was ordained \u201cuntil the seed should come to whom the promise was given.\u201d This seed is future in relation to OT times and thus cannot mean believers in general because there was such a seed in OT times. But the context actually supports the view that this seed to come is the church. Paul says that the law \u201cshut up all men to sin\u201d (v. 22), and \u201cbefore faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed \u2026 but now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus\u201d (vv. 23\u201326). Yes, there was a believing seed prior to the coming of Christ, just as there was faith prior to the coming of Christ. Yet Paul speaks of both faith and the seed as things that were to come, with the coming of Christ; they were both \u201cfundamentally alike in kind\u201d with the OT faith and seed, yet \u201cspecifically different.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hebrews 2:5\u201310<\/p>\n
Hebrews 2:5\u201310 shows us how the words of David about the first Adam in Ps 8 may be adapted to speak of the last Adam. When David says in Ps 8:5, \u201cYou made him a little lower than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor,\u201d both clauses refer to the high status which our first parents were given when they were created. In Heb 2, these clauses are adapted to refer to two different events with respect to Jesus. As we saw above in relation to John 1:51; 3:13; 6:62, the first clause applies to the incarnation and temporary humiliation of the Son of Man, made \u201cfor a little while lower than the angels.\u201d While Heb 2:7 retains the LXX word \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03cd, which can mean either \u201ca little bit\u201d or \u201ca little while,\u201d the \u201clittle while\u201d sayings in John are unambiguous.
\nThe author of Hebrews adapted the second clause of Ps 8:5 to refer to the glorification of Jesus in his suffering. This is not clear in the NIV rendering of Heb 2:9, which changes the order of glorification and suffering to the point of death; the Greek is quite clear that Jesus is glorified in order that he might taste death for every person (\u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u2026 \u03b3\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5). We will also see this viewpoint confirmed in the Son of Man sayings in John.
\nHebrews 2:8 notes that we do not presently see all things under his (Adam\u2019s) feet. Indeed, the author of Hebrews writes under the conditions described in Dan 7:7, when \u201call things\u201d were trampled under the feet of Rome, a condition which will be remedied by the coming of the heavenly Son of Man of Dan 7:13. For the present, however, \u201cwe do see Jesus,\u201d who, after being made for a little while lower than the angels, has been glorified in his suffering (Heb 2:9).
\nFurther, the work of the new Adam is to be the progenitor of the righteous seed, which the author describes as \u201cbringing many sons to glory\u201d (Heb 2:10). If Adam and Eve had not sinned, they would themselves have brought many sons to glory (children born in an uncorrupted image of God) naturally through procreation. The last Adam, the firstborn over creation and true image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), makes people children of God by his own glorification in suffering.<\/p>\n
The Son of Man in the Gospel of John<\/p>\n
There are twelve \u201cSon of Man\u201d sayings by Jesus in John, all of which can be related to Ps 8 as it seems to be adapted to Jesus in Heb 2. Even a thirteenth, the crowd\u2019s question, \u201cWho is this \u2018Son of Man\u2019 \u201d (John 12:34), can be related to Ps 8 in one of the ways that John gives us the answer.
\nWe have already noted that John 1:51, 3:13, and 6:62 together speak of the temporary descent of the Son of Man, or in the words of the psalm, \u201ca little while lower than the angels.\u201d Five more sayings speak of the Son of Man being \u201cglorified\u201d or \u201clifted up,\u201d clearly referring to the crucifixion or his suffering in general (3:14; 8:28; 12:23, 34; 13:31). The \u201clifted up\u201d language clearly alludes to Isa 52:13. \u201cGlorified\u201d could also refer to that verse if it interprets \u201clifted up\u201d or alludes to the LXX of that verse, which uses \u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9 as in John. Yet it could also be a way of tying the Suffering Servant of Isa 53 to the figure of the new Adam. As we have already seen, Isa 53:10 speaks of the Servant\u2019s offspring. The first Adam was \u201ccrowned with glory and honor\u201d at his creation, the last Adam is crowned when he is \u201clifted up and glorified\u201d (52:13) in his suffering.
\nThree more Son of Man sayings in John can be related to the idea of \u201cbringing many sons to glory.\u201d In John 9:35, the Son of Man is the proper object of the believer\u2019s faith, which John tells us in 1:12 results in the believer becoming a child of God. In 6:27 and 53, the Son of Man gives himself as food that leads to eternal life for those who believe; again, as 1:12 indicates, this means that they become children of God. The first Adam brought forth children to corruption, the last Adam brings forth children to glory.
\nOne last saying is John 5:27: \u201cHe gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.\u201d Here, \u201cthe Son of Man\u201d lacks the definite article, either simply because it precedes the verb (in which case it can be translated with the definite article),\u201d or because it is saying that Jesus is given authority because he is (i.e., became) a human being, in which case this is not necessarily a \u201cSon of Man\u201d saying. We noted above that this saying could be related to Dan 7:13, where it also lacks the definite article (i.e., it is not in the emphatic state); it lacks the definite article in Ps 8:4 as well, but this is probably because it is poetry, in which the definite article may be omitted.
\nFor our purposes, we will simply note that if it is used as a title here, it can be related to Ps 8:6, because it expresses the idea of authority being given to the Son of Man. One might prefer to make the primary reference to Dan 7:13, since the authority Jesus speaks of goes beyond that of which Ps 8 speaks.
\nFinally, the crowd asks, \u201cWho is this \u2018Son of Man\u2019?\u201d (John 12:34), a question which Jesus does not answer directly. However, we can see the irony of God himself answering the crowd\u2019s question through the mouth of Pontius Pilate as he brings Jesus out to the crowd, \u201ccrowned with glory and honor,\u201d and says \u201cBehold the man!\u201d Thus between the question in 12:34 (\u201cWho is this \u2018Son of Man\u2019?\u201d) and the answer in 19:5 (\u201cBehold the man!\u201d) we see the man\/son of man parallelism of Ps 8:4. \u201cBehold the man\u201d is also commonly related to Zech 6:12, spoken to Joshua the high priest, who has been given an ornate crown: \u201cBehold a man whose name is Branch\u201d (in Tg. Zech. it is, \u201cBehold the man whose name is Messiah\u201d). We discuss this passage in more detail in ch. 5.<\/p>\n
SUMMARY<\/p>\n
In this chapter, I have begun to expound the theme of \u201cthe Word became flesh\u201d as an understanding that in the theology of John\u2019s Gospel, what God did in OT times from heaven, the Son now does as a person, in submission to the Father. We looked specifically at the \u201cdescent\u201d language of Jesus in John 3:13; 6:38, 42, arguing that it expresses a continuation of the OT idea that God \u201ccomes down,\u201d that is, intervenes in human affairs, to judge, to redeem, to reveal his name and his will, and ultimately, to dwell among his people and be their God. The Targums almost always avoid the anthropomorphic language of God coming down and instead speak of the Word of the LORD being revealed or the glory of his Shekinah being revealed. While Jesus uses the language found in the MT (comparing, e.g., John 6:38, \u201cI have come down from heaven,\u201d to Exod 3:8, \u201cI have come down to deliver them\u201d), John uses language adapted from the Targums to describe the descent of Jesus: \u201cThe Word became flesh.\u201d
\nAt the same time, John\u2019s adaptation highlights a change from OT times. Jesus has come down as the Son of Man, the last Adam, a real person, the head of a new redeemed race. I have attempted to confirm one particular understanding of the question of why Jesus called himself the Son of Man, explaining the title as a catchall term substituted for the currently prevalent catchall term \u201cMessiah\u201d and dependent on the phrase \u201cson of man\u201d used in Ps 8:4; 80:17; and Dan 7:13. Jesus used this title as a way of obscuring his messianic claim, and his usage has confounded Bible scholars of all subsequent generations. In his reported usage of the title, John seems particularly concerned to bring out its dependence on Ps 8, since all of its uses in this gospel can be related to the type of adaptation of Ps 8 found in Heb 2:5\u201310.
\nIn subsequent chapters, we will see that as Jesus fulfills various OT divine roles (warrior, bridegroom, lawgiver), there are both human and divine precedents or paradigms in the OT for what Jesus does, in keeping with the idea that he is both divine and human, that is, that the Word has become flesh. Furthermore, we will see how the language of the Targums sheds light on how these themes are reflected in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
Jesus of Nazareth, Man of War<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
In the last chapter, we saw that Jesus\u2019 claim to have come down from heaven was to be understood in continuity with OT texts that say that the LORD came down or will come down. The incarnation is the ultimate coming down. But what did the Lord come down to do? He came down for several reasons, but the most immediate purpose was to wage war. We see this in the scene of the burning bush: \u201cI have come down to deliver them from the hand of the Egyptians\u201d (Exod 3:8). Similarly, in predicting the defeat of Sennacherib, Isaiah says, \u201cthe LORD of Hosts [\u05e6\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea] will come down to wage war [\u05dc\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05d1\u05b9\u05bc\u05d0] on Mt. Zion\u201d (Isa 31:4). Likewise, Jesus came down from heaven to wage war, to defeat Satan, to save his people in a way he could not save them without the incarnation\u2014to save them eternally.
\nAfter crossing through the Red Sea and seeing the Egyptian army that pursued them destroyed by the outstretched hand of the LORD, the Israelites praised him as a warrior: \u201cThe LORD is a man of war; the LORD is his name\u201d (Exod 15:3). If the mission of Jesus was to make that name known not just by describing God, as a prophet would do, but by his own works, then we might expect to see Jesus engaged in warfare against the enemies of his people, which are also his enemies. In the book God Is a Warrior, Daniel G. Reid showed how the Synoptic Gospels portray Jesus as the divine warrior. The present chapter explores the targumic background for this theme as it is reflected in the Gospel of John.
\nThe LORD showed himself as warrior not only in the events of the exodus, but also in the conquest and at various other times in Israel\u2019s history, such as the deliverance of Jerusalem from Sennacherib and the Assyrians in the time of Hezekiah. Scripture also speaks of \u201chis strange work, his unusual task\u201d (Isa 28:21)\u2014his rising up in battle against his own people who have not obeyed him. Frequently the Targums employ the divine title, \u201cthe Word of the LORD,\u201d in describing his victorious warfare.
\nIn John we see Jesus the Word as the victorious divine warrior over the ultimate enemy, Satan, and Jesus wins his victory at the cross. As comparison of his words to certain OT texts will make clear, when Jesus speaks of going to the cross, he speaks as YHWH the divine warrior. Or, to use targumic terms, he speaks as the Word of the LORD. Christ\u2019s victory on the first night of the Passover feast can be seen as analogous to the defeat of Sennacherib, which at some point in Jewish tradition was also thought to have taken place at Passover (Tg. 2 Chr. 32:21). The basis for such a tradition may be the LORD\u2019s promise to deliver and \u201cpass over\u201d (\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05e1\u05b9\u05d7\u05b7) Jerusalem (Isa 31:5), a choice of words that seems to invite comparison between the impending deliverance from Sennacherib and the first Passover in Egypt, when the firstborn among the Egyptians also perished by \u201ca sword not of man\u201d (Isa 31:8). Fragmentary Targum P Exod 12:2 seems to anticipate a future repetition of such a deliverance, saying through Moses that Nisan would be the first month of the year \u201cbecause in it the LORD redeemed his people, the sons of Israel, and in it he will eventually redeem them.\u201d
\nThe LORD also went before his people as a warrior when the Israelites left Mt. Sinai on their way to the promised land, as seen in Moses\u2019 prayer, \u201cRise up, O LORD, and let your enemies be scattered, and let those who hate you flee before you\u201d (Num 10:35). We will see that Jesus spoke as the one who is going to answer this petition, as the one who would rise and defeat the great enemy of his people, the devil himself.
\nIn addition to following an OT model for divine warfare, Jesus also follows a human OT model, in keeping with the idea that the Word has become flesh. As we will see, Jesus follows in the footsteps of the great OT human warriors Joshua (at the beginning of his ministry) and David (at the end of his ministry).<\/p>\n
SOME GENERAL STATEMENTS OF WARFARE AND VICTORY<\/p>\n
John 5:43<\/p>\n
In John 5:43, Jesus says, \u201cI have come in my Father\u2019s name, and you do not receive me.\u201d We noted in ch. 3 that this echoes two verses from Ps 118: \u201cI have come in my Father\u2019s name\u201d relates to v. 26, \u201cBlessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD,\u201d recited in John 12:13. \u201cYou do not receive me\u201d relates to Ps 118:22, \u201cThe stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.\u201d
\nAlthough this psalm has no superscription indicating the author, and few interpreters think of it as Davidic, the situation described in the psalm fits David\u2019s life well. To begin with, David was like a stone that was rejected by builders, for he was rejected not only by Saul and his servants, but also by the Ziphites, the people of Keilah, and Nabal (all of Judah), who would not risk helping David while Saul was king. The interpretation of the stone as David is found in the Tg. Ps. of this verse, where a play on the word \u201cstone\u201d (Heb. \u02beeben) as \u201cson (Heb. ben) of Jesse\u201d is made.
\nFurther, \u201cBlessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD\u201d calls to mind the words of David when he came to fight Goliath: \u201cYou come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the LORD of Hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have reproached\u201d (1 Sam 17:25).
\nFinally, Ps 118:10\u201314 makes better sense as referring to the conquests of David over the surrounding nations than it does connected to any other period of Israel\u2019s history: \u201cAll nations surrounded me; in the name of the LORD I will surely cut them off,\u201d etc. One could conclude, then, that Jesus\u2019 statement, \u201cI have come in my Father\u2019s name,\u201d suggests, given the background to that claim in Ps 118 and 1 Sam 17, that Jesus has come to wage war.<\/p>\n
John 16:33<\/p>\n
In the upper room, before going to the cross, Jesus says to the disciples, \u201cIn the world you have tribulation, but take courage, I have conquered the world.\u201d In this statement, Jesus indicates that what looks to all the world like a climactic, humiliating defeat\u2014death by crucifixion\u2014is in fact the greatest of victories.<\/p>\n
JESUS IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF JOSHUA AND DAVID<\/p>\n
John 1:35\u201342 and Joshua 3\u20134<\/p>\n
It is clear by comparison with the Synoptic Gospels that Jesus\u2019 calling of the twelve disciples took place before the baptism of Jesus and his return to the Jordan following his forty-day temptation in the wilderness. These disciples have been followers of John the Baptist and they leave John to follow Jesus to the place where he is going to stay that night. Simon, one of the disciples, comes the next day and Jesus names him Kephas, an Aramaic word meaning \u201crock\u201d (from which comes \u201cPeter\u201d in Greek). We can compare these events to Josh 3 and 4, where Israel crosses the Jordan under Joshua\u2019s leadership.
\nIn broader terms, when John 1:35\u201342 is viewed together with material in the Synoptics, we can see how the history of Israel is being recapitulated in the steps of Jesus.<\/p>\n
Israel in the OT
\nJesus
\nIsrael crossed through the Red Sea.
\nJesus was baptized in the Jordan.
\nIsrael was tested for forty years in the wilderness.
\nJesus was tested for forty days in the wilderness.
\nIsrael came to the Jordan under Joshua, and crossed into the promised land.
\nJesus returned to the Jordan, then crossed into the promised land.<\/p>\n
The crossing of the Jordan is similar enough to the crossing of the Red Sea that the Jordan serves to recapitulate the crossing of the Red Sea. Indeed, the two events are explicitly compared in Josh 4:23 as similar miracles, with dry ground being brought out of the water in both cases. The word \u201cheap\u201d (\u05e0\u05b5\u05d3), used in Exod 15:8 and Ps 78:13 to describe the piling up of the waters of the Red Sea, is used also for the backing up of the Jordan\u2019s waters (Josh 3:13, 16).
\nJohn 1:28 tells us that the place Jesus came to when he returned to the Jordan was \u201cBethany beyond the Jordan,\u201d that is, on the east side of the Jordan. A good case has recently been made that this place was across from Jericho and therefore was likely very close to the place where Israel crossed the Jordan after camping there following Moses\u2019 death (Num 22:1; Josh 3:16). By coming to this place, Jesus may be intentionally following in the footsteps of his namesake Joshua, who led Israel across the Jordan. As Reid noted, John did not go to Jerusalem to baptize, but rather to the Jordan, because of its historical importance. \u201cA prophetic figure [John] readies God\u2019s people for the approach of the divine warrior by immersing the faithful penitents in the very waters that parted for Israel\u2019s original entry into the land.\u201d
\nSeveral details of the events of John 1:35\u201342 can also be seen as recapitulating the actions of Joshua when he crossed the river. Notice the following:
\n(1) The LORD told Joshua to take twelve stones from the river, carried by twelve men, a man from each tribe, and to set them up as a monument, as a witness to the mighty deeds that the LORD had done (Josh 4:1\u20138; 20\u201324). Likewise, Jesus begins at the Jordan River to gather twelve disciples as witnesses of the great deeds that the LORD is going to accomplish. Rather than twelve men carrying stones, the disciples are the stones themselves, i.e., witnesses.
\n(2) The twelve stones were taken from the Jordan River. These disciples (though not yet numbering twelve), being John\u2019s disciples, would also have been taken from the Jordan River, where they had been baptized. Jesus even names one of them, who is going to be their leader, \u201cRock.\u201d
\nWhile this understanding of the significance of Peter\u2019s name is chronologically earlier than Matt 16:18, it is consistent with it, since there Simon is called Peter because of his witness, \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d Someone might object that if Jesus names Peter after the stones of the monument that Joshua erected, Peter should be called \u201cstone,\u201d not \u201crock,\u201d since the Targum uses Aramaic \u05d0\u05b6\u05ab\u05d1\u05b6\u05df (not \u05db\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05e3) for Hebrew \u05d0\u05b6\u05ab\u05d1\u05b6\u05df in translating Josh 4. However, in Aramaic, just as in English, one could easily use the word \u201crock\u201d in making a play on the use of the word \u201cstone.\u201d Furthermore, in the Syriac translation of Josh 4 (Syriac being an Aramaic dialect), the word \u05db\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05e3 is in fact used to translate the Hebrew word for stone. The disciples may have been familiar with such a translation, and indeed, a first-century Targum may have read differently than Tg. Josh. We might add that if one does not accept this typological association between John 1:35\u201342 and Josh 4, then there is no explanation in the context for why Simon is now named Kephas (Peter) at the Jordan. Finally, since on this analogy all the disciples, not just Peter, are \u201cstones,\u201d witnesses to the works of the LORD, \u201crock\u201d could be used to indicate that Peter was going to be the leader of the other witnesses.
\n(3) Just as Joshua set up a monument at the place where he was going to stay that night (Gilgal), so the disciples follow Jesus to the place where he is staying.
\nSo a number of parallels indicate that Jesus at the beginning of his ministry may be been consciously following in the footsteps of Joshua, that great OT warrior. Although neither the events of Joshua or John seem particularly warlike, we should take note of the fact that Gilgal was Joshua\u2019s war camp, where he prepared for war and to which he returned after battle. Likewise, Jesus is preparing for ministry in the promised land. As Reid has shown, the Synoptics contain a number of other parallels with events in Joshua, such as the \u201cdriving out\u201d of demons, where the evangelists use the same Greek word that the LXX uses to translate the Hebrew word for \u201cdriving out\u201d the Canaanites.<\/p>\n
John 18:1 and 2 Samuel 15<\/p>\n
This verse says that after leaving the upper room, Jesus crossed over the Kidron to a garden, where he was later arrested by those led by his betrayer, Judas. The Synoptics say that he went to the Mount of Olives (Matt 26:30; Mark 14:26; Luke 22:39), which would also tell the reader familiar with the geography of Jerusalem that he must have crossed the Kidron valley.
\nJesus had predicted his betrayal by saying that what happened to David was going to happen to him (John 13:18, quoting Ps 41:9). At this place the prediction comes true. The most memorable betrayal experienced by David was that of his son Absalom and his trusted counselor Ahithophel, recorded in 2 Sam 15. Although the betrayal spoken of in Ps 41 does not seem to be that of 2 Sam 15 (Ps 41:3 implies David is vulnerable due to some sickness), the words of Ps 41:9 were appropriate to the situation in the upper room: \u201cHe who eats my bread has lifted up his heel against me.\u201d
\nThe path that Jesus takes after his betrayal parallels that taken by David when he fled Jerusalem before his son Absalom. Second Samuel 15:13 says that a messenger told David, \u201cthe hearts of the men of Israel are with Absalom.\u201d Unlike Jesus, who predicted his betrayal, David was taken by surprise and fled. Verse 23 tells us that the king passed over the brook Kidron, as did Jesus (John 18:1), and v. 30 says that David went up the ascent of the Mount of Olives, as did Jesus (Matt 26:30; Mark 14:26; Luke 22:39).
\nIt appears, then, that Jesus followed in the footsteps of Joshua in the beginning of his ministry, and Jesus followed in the footsteps of another great OT warrior, David, at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n
Israel from the Time of Joshua, to David, to Jesus<\/p>\n
The book of Joshua represents the high point in the obedience of Israel during OT times; never again did the nation so consistently follow the law of Moses and submit to their God-appointed leader. Although Israel reached a relatively high point of obedience during the reign of David, the man after the LORD\u2019s own heart, the rebellion of Absalom points to a downward trajectory. Absalom\u2019 rebellion took place as a judgment of God upon David\u2019s sin.
\nPerhaps symbolic of this downward trajectory, the rebellion of Absalom caused David and those faithful to him (and to the LORD) to flee across the Jordan River to the east, the opposite direction to Israel\u2019s crossing under Joshua. After the rebellion was put down, David then crossed back, now in the same direction as did Joshua years before. Yet David\u2019s crossing, stands in stark contrast to that of Joshua. Under Joshua, Israel was completely united, with no tribal rivalry, and a death sentence was pronounced upon any who would not obey Joshua (Josh 1:18). But when David crosses the Jordan, a foolish argument develops between the tribe of Judah (which had been in the forefront of the treachery against David) and the other tribes about who should have the honor of bringing David back. Another brief civil war breaks out as a result (2 Sam 19:41\u201320:22).
\nThe downward trajectory continues into the NT. Jesus is attested as the LORD\u2019s leader, appointed as such in his baptism at the Jordan, just as the LORD began to magnify Joshua at the crossing of the Jordan (Josh 3:7; 4:14). Unlike in the case of David, there was no sin in Jesus that could serve as a pretext for rebellion against him. When David fled, at least the high priest Zadok and the Levites were loyal to him (and to the LORD) and came with him (2 Sam 15:24). But in the arrest, trial, and execution of Jesus, the high priest Caiaphas, a Sadducee (a party name derived from the name Zadok), and the Pharisees, who were teachers of the Law (as the Levites were supposed to be according to Deut 33:9\u201310), were the instigators and perpetrators.
\nMy examination of John 1 and 18 in light of Josh 4 and 2 Sam 15 has intentionally left out the most important similarity. In this chapter, I am presenting to the reader material in the order in which I have discovered it myself in studying and teaching over a number of years. It is a good example of how it is easy to see the humanity of Jesus, and to see OT human \u201ctypes\u201d of Jesus, but to overlook the more important \u201cdivine typology,\u201d which does not involve a mere similarity of persons, but rather a similarity of deeds done by the same divine person. My meaning should become clear in the remaining sections of this chapter.<\/p>\n
JESUS OF NAZARETH, DIVINE MAN OF WAR<\/p>\n
John 12:31\u201332; the Defeat of Sennacherib and the Defeat of Satan<\/p>\n
Jerusalem\u2019s Deliverance from Sennacherib<\/p>\n
One of the greatest examples of divine warfare and victory in the OT is the LORD\u2019s defeat of Sennacherib in the time of Hezekiah. The historical accounts appear in 2 Kgs 18:13\u201319:37 (largely reproduced in Isa 36\u201337) and 2 Chr 32:1\u201323. Other material from Isaiah is helpful, as we shall see.
\nIsrael was strategically located between Egypt and Mesopotamia, which gave it an opportunity to be a blessing to all the nations around. More often, however, Israel disobeyed and was an example of God\u2019s judgment. Assyria was the dominant superpower in the time of Hezekiah, who would have been alive when the Assyrians conquered Samaria and made Israel an Assyrian province. The Assyrian king was a \u201cgreat king\u201d (Isa 36:4, 13), that is, a suzerain who has other kings (vassals) under his authority. In his apostasy, Hezekiah\u2019s father Ahaz made himself a vassal of the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III with the words, \u201cI am your servant and your son\u201d (2 Kgs 16:7). Yet he was supposed to be servant and son to the LORD (2 Sam 7:5, 8, 14, 20, 26).
\nJudah was still a vassal to the Assyrians when Hezekiah became king. Sennacherib became king of Assyria in about 704 B.C.E., and often when a new king came to the throne, his inexperience and the fact that he may have to deal with domestic rivals, made successful rebellion by the vassal states more likely than at other times. Under Hezekiah, Judah joined a coalition of vassal states (including Babylon) in rebelling against Sennacherib. Egypt encouraged the rebellion, no doubt desirous of regaining the glory days when that nation was the dominant power in the region.
\nSecond Kings 18:7 says that the LORD was with Hezekiah, and he rebelled against the king of Assyria. Did he do so in faith? The context would seem to suggest that he did, as his rebellion is listed among his successful works of reformation. Such faith would have been grounded in predictions of divine deliverance from the Assyrians, made through Isaiah since the time of Ahaz. Subsequent events, however, were to show the limitations of his faith.
\nSennacherib set out to deal with the rebels, and they were, one by one, beginning with Babylon, forced to submit. Hezekiah held out as he saw his allies successively defeated, and as the help of Egypt against Assyria proved useless. As Sennacherib turned his armies towards Judah, Hezekiah had to decide whether to continue what looked by now like a hopeless cause or to quit and try to come to the best possible terms with Sennacherib. He continued to hold out, and Sennacherib conquered \u201call the fortified cities of Judah\u201d (2 Kgs 18:13; the number of fortified cities was forty-six according to the Assyrian annals), with Jerusalem alone left.
\nIf Hezekiah had rebelled in faith, trusting in the LORD for his salvation, he should have continued in faith after his little human allies were defeated. Eventually, Hezekiah capitulated, saying to Sennacherib, \u201cI have sinned; whatever penalty you impose on me I will bear\u201d (2 Kgs 18:14). He paid Sennacherib thirty talents of gold and three hundred talents of silver in order to get Sennacherib to leave him alone.
\nBecause 2 Kgs goes on to describe Sennacherib attacking Jerusalem instead of withdrawing as he agreed to do, some have supposed that there were actually two invasions of Judah by Sennacherib and that 2 Kgs 18:17 describes a second invasion some years later. A more plausible explanation is indicated in Isa 33, the sixth and last woe of Isa 28\u201335. The first five woes are pronounced against Israel and Judah, but the sixth is pronounced on \u201cyou destroyer, who was not destroyed; he who dealt treacherously, though others did not deal treacherously against him\u201d (33:1). This treacherous destroyer is Sennacherib. His treachery is that he agreed to withdraw from Judah for the price Hezekiah paid, but after getting the money, he went on to demand the unconditional surrender of Jerusalem, after which he would take the rebels into exile (Isa 36:17; 2 Kgs 18:32) and probably tear down the walls of Jerusalem in order to prevent future rebellions. Thus Isa 33:8 says, \u201che [Sennacherib] has broken the agreement\u201d\u2014that is, the agreement to leave Jerusalem alone and Hezekiah\u2019s kingdom standing.
\nAt this point, Hezekiah apparently realizes that his wavering and attempt at appeasement have made things worse. No doubt the same advisers who were so insistent that their hope of salvation lay in Egypt turned and told him he had no choice but to pay off Sennacherib; it was the only way to ensure \u201cpeace for our time.\u201d When appeasement failed, Hezekiah reverted to trusting in the promise of the LORD through Isaiah that Judah would be delivered from the Assyrians, and thus refused the demand of unconditional surrender.
\nIt is ironic that Sennacherib\u2019s \u201cprophet\u201d Rabshakeh called on Hezekiah to surrender from the same spot that the LORD\u2019s prophet Isaiah had called upon Hezekiah\u2019s father Ahaz to surrender to the LORD some thirty years earlier (Isa 7:3; 36:2; 2 Kgs 18:17). Isaiah\u2019s message to Ahaz at that time was that he must not turn to Assyria for help against his enemies Aram and Israel. He should instead trust in the LORD.
\nFor those without faith, the situation was hopeless: \u201cTheir brave men cry in the streets; the envoys of peace weep bitterly\u201d (Isa 33:7). The \u201cbrave men\u201d would be those charged with fighting the undefeated and exceptionally cruel Assyrians. The \u201cenvoys of peace\u201d were no doubt those who trusted that their appeasement of Sennacherib would succeed. Jerusalem\u2019s best human hope now would be that their walls would hold and their water supply would not fail, so that after a while they would die of starvation! \u201cBoth \u2018hawks\u2019 \u2026 and \u2018doves\u2019 \u2026 were equally at their wits end.\u201d
\nIn the midst of this hopeless situation the LORD says that the long-promised deliverance will be accomplished:<\/p>\n
Now I will arise, says the LORD, now I will be exalted, now I will be lifted up. (Isa 33:10)<\/p>\n
This threefold \u201cnow\u201d comes about thirty years after Isaiah began predicting deliverance from the Assyrians. Isaiah 8 predicts that Assyria will sweep through Immanuel\u2019s land like a flood, reaching the neck, but the Assyrians will then be shattered, because \u201cGod is with us\u201d (Heb.: Immanu El). Thirty years later that point was reached; Jerusalem was the head out of water, the body submerged in the military \u201cdeluge\u201d from Assyria. But with your head out of water, you will survive the flood. In Isa 10:24\u201325, the LORD says, \u201cMy people who live in Zion, do not be afraid of the Assyrians who strike you with the rod.\u2026 In a very short time my indignation against you will end, and my anger will be to their destruction.\u201d
\nIsaiah 18 contains a remarkable message to some ambassadors from Cush, \u201ca nation tall and smooth, a people feared far and wide.\u201d No doubt they came to Jerusalem to discuss the great issue of the day, \u201cAre we strong enough together to rebel against Assyria?\u201d The LORD\u2019s message to them through Isaiah, using the analogy of a farmer waiting for the proper time to harvest, is that the LORD is watching and waiting until the right time, and then he will \u201charvest\u201d the Assyrian army and leave them for vultures and wild animals (vv. 4\u20136). \u201cAt that time a gift of homage will be brought to the LORD of Hosts from a people tall and smooth, from a people feared far and wide, a powerful and oppressive nation, whose land the rivers divide, to the place of the name of the LORD of Hosts, Mt. Zion\u201d (v. 7). The \u201cnow\u201d in Isa 33:10 means the time of harvest has come.
\nLikewise victory over the Assyrians is predicted in the verse cited in the introduction to this chapter, \u201cThe LORD will come down and wage war on Mt. Zion\u201d (Isa 31:4), and \u201cThe Assyrian will fall by a sword that is not of man\u201d (v. 8; similarly Hos 1:7). The \u201cnow \u2026 now \u2026 now\u201d of Isa 33:10 means this long awaited time has come.
\nAdditionally, the point is not just that this deliverance was predicted a long time previously, so that when it happened, Judah could recognize it as a fulfillment of prophecy. \u201cNow\u201d also means that Judah has come to the point where it is completely helpless, and the situation is completely hopeless. Sennacherib had destroyed the great powers of the day, and he had almost completely overrun Judah. His taunting boasts were quite accurate. Hezekiah\u2019s allies have been defeated, and all his treasures are gone in a vain bid to send Sennacherib away. All human wisdom and human means have failed. They can go through the motions of preparation in fortifying the walls of Jerusalem and securing a reliable water supply. Indeed, \u201cHezekiah\u2019s Tunnel\u201d was a remarkable engineering achievement to bring in such a supply from outside the walls. But again, such efforts only secured an eventual death by starvation. Thus \u201cnow\u201d means that in such a situation, all will recognize that this salvation is a work of God, not of a human.
\nIn Isa 33:10, the LORD says, \u201cI will arise.\u201d The idea of the LORD arising goes back to Num 10, when Israel departed from Mt. Sinai after receiving the law and building the tabernacle. The Israelites began their journey to the promised land with the ark of the LORD\u2019s covenant going before them. Numbers 10:35\u201336 declares:<\/p>\n
When the ark set out, Moses said, \u201cArise O LORD! Let your enemies be scattered, and let those who hate you flee from before you.\u201d And when it came to rest, he said, \u201cReturn, O LORD, to the myriad thousands of Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Similar petitions for God to arise are found in the Psalms. Psalm 68:1 says, \u201cLet God arise, and let his enemies be scattered.\u201d Psalm 7:6 uses two of the verbs used in Isa 33:10, \u201cArise O LORD in your anger. Lift yourself up against the rage of my enemies.\u201d It is easy to see Isa 33:10 as a response to such petitions.
\nThe result of the LORD rising up in this situation is described very briefly. \u201cThe angel of the LORD went forth and struck down 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians\u201d (Isa 37:36; 2 Kgs 19:35). Second Chronicles 32:21 says that the angel destroyed every mighty warrior, commander, and officer.
\nIn Isa 33:13, the LORD calls on those near (Jerusalem) and far away (nations such as Cush, to which this victory was prophesied years earlier by Isaiah) to take notice of his power and what he has done. Isaiah\u2019s prophecy came true as \u201cmany were bringing gifts to the LORD at Jerusalem, and choice presents to Hezekiah king of Judah, so that he was exalted in the sight of all the nations thereafter\u201d (2 Chr 32:23).
\nIsaiah 33:14 says that \u201cthe sinners in Zion are terrified; trembling seizes the godless.\u201d Why were they terrified after such great deliverance? No doubt because all the time Isaiah has been predicting deliverance they have been mocking him. Further, they recognize that not only has Sennacherib put himself in disfavor with God, but they have as well. Isaiah 33 is the sixth woe of this section of Isaiah (chs. 28\u201335), but the first five have been pronounced against them. What had been their response to Isaiah? \u201cGet out of the way, turn aside from the path. Stop confronting us with \u2018the Holy One of Israel\u2019 \u201d (30:11). Now they know that what Isaiah has been saying is true, and that they face the same judgment as Sennacherib\u2019s horde. Isaiah goes on to tell them the terms for living in security with the LORD on Mt. Zion (vv. 14b\u201316).
\nOf the three verbs used of the LORD\u2019s attack against Sennacherib, two have been used together of the LORD previously in Isaiah, and they are found together two more times in the rest of the book as well. In Isaiah\u2019s prophetic call, he says he \u201csaw the Lord, seated on a throne, high and lifted up\u201d (6:1). \u201cLifted up\u201d is the niphal participle of \u05e0\u05e9\u05c2\u05d0 corresponding to \u201cI will be lifted up\u201d of 33:10, the niphal imperfect of the same root. \u201cHigh\u201d in 6:1 is the qal participle of \u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd corresponding to the second verb of 33:10, the hithpolel imperfect of the same root. In these two passages, the use of the \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d language with reference to the LORD contrasts with the negative use of these two verbs in describing idolatrous and proud men in Isa 2: Isaiah 2:12 announces the day of the LORD against everyone who is high and lifted up; v. 13 condemns men using the figure of cedars of Lebanon that are high and lifted up; v. 14 speaks of the mountains that are high and lifted up. Finally, vv. 17\u201318 conclude: \u201cThe pride of men will be brought low, and the loftiness of men will be abased, and the LORD alone will be exalted in that day, and the idols will completely vanish.\u201d
\nIn light of the fact that this \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d language used about men implies that they are proud and idolatrous, and in light of the LORD\u2019s determination that he alone should be exalted, it is most instructive that the next time this word pair occurs, it is used in a very positive sense to describe the Servant of the LORD in Isa 52:13: \u201cBehold my servant will act wisely; he will be high [qal imperfect of \u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd], he will be lifted up [niphal waw consecutive imperfect of \u05e0\u05e9\u05c2\u05d0], he will be greatly exalted.\u201d In this context, the servant is shown to be a victorious warrior: \u201cTherefore I will allot him a portion with the great; he will divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death\u201d (53:12).<\/p>\n
The Defeat of Sennacherib as a Picture of Christ\u2019s Victory<\/p>\n
Given the parallels we have just noted, it would not be surprising if the LORD\u2019s defeat of Sennacherib were taken up by NT writers as a picture of salvation through Christ in the gospel. The \u201cnear and far\u201d language of Isa 33:13 is used again in 57:19, which Paul quotes in Eph 2:17, applying it to the invitation to the gospel to both Jew and Gentile, just as both Jew and Gentile were invited to see what the LORD had done in defeating Sennacherib. Paul also described the deliverance brought about through Christ in terms that closely parallel the situation in Jerusalem around 700 B.C.E.: \u201cWhile we were still helpless, at the right time, Christ died for the ungodly\u201d (Rom 5:6). Jerusalem at the time of Isa 33 was completely helpless; all human means had failed (Hezekiah\u2019s allies, his army, his treasure). In the same way, all human means of eternal salvation and all human-devised religion has failed. As in the deliverance of Jerusalem in the time of Hezekiah, \u201cat the right time,\u201d that is, at the last possible moment, God provides salvation.
\nFor these reasons, in the course of teaching the book of Isaiah, I taught for several years that the deliverance of Jerusalem from Sennacherib was a picture of the gospel, but all the while I was unaware that Jesus himself pointed in this direction. The relevant text is John 12:31\u201332:<\/p>\n
Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world shall be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.<\/p>\n
\u201cNow \u2026 now\u201d can be related to the threefold \u201cnow\u201d of Isa 33:10. Isaiah, who predicted deliverance from the Assyrians for some thirty years, also predicted the lifting up of the Servant of the LORD seven hundred years before it came to pass. A third \u201cnow\u201d occurs in John 13:31: \u201cNow is the Son of Man glorified.\u201d \u201cGlorified\u201d and \u201clifted up\u201d occur together in the LXX of Isa 33:10, where the two Greek verbs (\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9 and \u1f51\u03c8\u03cc\u03c9) translate verbs from the roots \u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd and \u05e0\u05e9\u05c2\u05d0. They also occur together in Isa 52:13, where they translate the three Hebrew verbs \u201che will be high, he will be lifted up, he will be greatly exalted.\u201d
\nIn John\u2019s Gospel, \u201cthe ruler of this world\u201d is Satan, not Sennacherib, but we should note how suitable a picture Sennacherib was of the devil, or the antichrist. As a mere person, he presumed to make the same promises for submission, and threats for rebellion, that the LORD himself made to his people in the Law and the Prophets. Sennacherib threatened famine in siege for those who would not surrender (Isa 36:12; cf. Deut 28:53). He promised that if Jerusalem submitted, he would take them away to a fair land (as the LORD promised Israel when they were in Egypt), where each would sit under his own vine and fig tree (which is what the LORD promised his people through Micah and Zechariah; Isa 36:16; Mic 4:4; Zech 3:10).
\nThe phrase, \u201cI will draw all men to myself\u201d in John 12:32 parallels the invitation to those near and far in Isaiah\u2019s day to \u201csee what I have done\u201d (Isa 33:13). The context mentions Greeks who wish to see Jesus (John 12:20\u201321).
\nThe words, \u201cIf I be lifted up,\u201d refer to the crucifixion. However, when seen in light of the background of Isa 33:10, they imply that Jesus is going into battle; he is going to wage war against the devil. His going to the cross is an act of war. The via dolorosa, the way of sorrow, the way to the cross, is the divine warpath, and the victory Christ won there was a far greater deliverance than the striking down of 185,000 soldiers of the Assyrian army, which merely prolonged the earthly life of the people of Judah.
\nA chronological note is relevant here. As noted, Isa 33:10 is part of the sixth woe of this section of Isaiah (28\u201335), the first five being pronounced against the LORD\u2019s people, especially the leaders of Israel (before its demise) and Judah. In Matt 23:13\u201336, Jesus repeats this pattern during the passion week by pronouncing seven woes against the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees, drawing on terminology from the first five woes pronounced by Isaiah. Generally, he condemns their blindness (vv. 16, 17, 19, 24, 26), as in Isa 29:9 (cf. 29:18; 32:3; 35:5). Jesus\u2019 description of the whitewashed tombs of Matt 23:27 is similar to the first woe, which begins with a condemnation of the outward beauty of Samaria (Isa 28:1, 4). Isa 28:1, which speaks of \u201cthe proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim,\u201d compares with Matt 23:11\u201312 (the greatest shall be servant, he who humbles himself shall be exalted). More specifically, Jesus speaks of \u201cdill and cumin\u201d (v. 23), which is used in a parable in Isa 28:23\u201329. Jesus then completes the series of parallels in John 12:31\u201332 by announcing, in effect, the sixth woe, not against Sennacherib, but against \u201cthe ruler of this world,\u201d the devil himself.<\/p>\n
\u201cHigh and Lifted Up\u201d in Isaiah and \u201cLifted Up\u201d in John<\/p>\n
To confirm that Jesus\u2019 statement, \u201cIf I be lifted up,\u201d should be understood in light of Isa 33:10, we can note that there are a number of connections between the various \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d passages in Isaiah and the various passages in John where Jesus speaks of himself being lifted up. We have already seen that this language is used in Isa 6:1; 33:10; and 52:13. A fourth occasion is 57:15: \u201cThus says the one who is high and lifted up, who dwells forever, whose name is holy; \u2018I dwell in a high and holy place, yet also with him who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite.\u2019 \u201d In four places in John\u2019s Gospel, Jesus speaks of his being \u201clifted up.\u201d Since each of these refers to the same event, the crucifixion, one might conclude that each of them is based on the \u201clifted up\u201d of Isa 52:13. The fact is, however, that each of the four \u201clifted up\u201d passages of John can be related to a different \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d passage in Isaiah with which it shares verbal and contextual associations.<\/p>\n
John 3:14 and Isa 52:13<\/p>\n
The first \u201clifted up\u201d passage in John is 3:14, where Jesus says to Nicodemus, \u201cAs Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up.\u201d This statement can most obviously be related to Isa 52:13, since the fourth Servant Song portrays the servant in several ways as one who is suffering under the curse of God, like the serpent (Gen 3:15).
\nIsa 53:5 says he was \u201cpierced through for our transgressions.\u201d \u201cPierced through\u201d is a poal participle from \u05d7\u05dc\u05dc. We find a poel participle of the same root used in Isa 51:9, \u201cAwake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in days of old. Was it not you who cut Rahab in pieces, who pierced the dragon?\u201d The next verse makes it clear that the crossing of the Red Sea is in view: \u201cWas it not you who dried up the sea, the waters of the great deep; who made the depths of the sea a pathway for the redeemed to cross over?\u201d
\n\u201cRahab\u201d can be a nickname for Egypt (e.g., Isa 30:7) but is also a name of the devil. This is clearest in Job 26:12\u201313: \u201cBy his power he stilled the sea, and by his understanding he shattered Rahab. By his breath the heavens were cleared; his hand pierced the evil serpent.\u201d \u201cPierced\u201d is again from the root \u05d7\u05dc\u05dc (here a poel perfect verb). The adjective \u201cevil\u201d does not appear in any translation of which I am aware, but this meaning, suggested first by Cyrus Gordon, was confirmed more than twenty years ago in the ancient Eblaite language, and a Janus parallelism was noticed that uses a verb from the same root (\u05d1\u05e8\u05d7) in Job 9:25. A Janus parallelism exists when a word has two meanings and a parallel is drawn to each of them. The two meanings of the verb evident in Job 9:25 are \u201cflee\u201d (the well-known meaning) and \u201cto be evil\u201d: \u201cMy days are swifter than a runner. They flee away\/they are evil; they see no good.\u201d The meaning \u201cflee\u201d points back to \u201cswifter,\u201d while the meaning \u201care evil\u201d points forward to \u201cthey see no good.\u201d
\nWhat Isa 51:9 refers to, then, is the defeat of Satan, which is involved in the defeat of his spiritual offspring (cf. Gen 3:15), the Egyptians, at the Red Sea. This was an example of the \u201carm of the LORD\u201d in action. But now the arm of the LORD (Isa 53:1) is directed at piercing his servant, who is thus treated like the devil, under the curse of God.
\nSimilarly, Isa 53:5 says the servant was \u201ccrushed\u201d for our iniquities, and v. 10 says it pleased the LORD to crush him (using the same Hebrew word). This verb (piel\/pual of \u05d3\u05db\u05d0) is also used for what the LORD did to Satan at the Red Sea: \u201cYou yourself crushed Rahab like one slain; with your strong arm you scattered your enemies\u201d (Ps 89:10). Tg. Ps. 89:10 uses the Aramaic verb \u05e9\u05c1\u05e4\u05d9, which Marcus Jastrow related to the rare Hebrew verb used in Gen 3:15 (\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05e3), \u201cHe will strike you on the head, and you will strike him on the heel.\u201d
\nAnother way in which the servant is shown to be suffering as one cursed is in Isa 52:14, \u201cJust as many were astonished at you (Israel), so his appearance was marred more than any man.\u201d That the nations would be astonished at the LORD\u2019s judgment on Israel (i.e., exile and all that went with it) was predicted in the covenant curses (Lev 26:32), and here we read that people are likewise astonished at what happens to Isaiah\u2019s servant; he appears to be suffering under the same kind of judgment.<\/p>\n
John 8:28 and Isa 6:1<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he\u201d (John 8:28). Again, since Jesus is referring to his crucifixion, there is an obvious connection to Isa 52:13 here. In addition, however, we can relate this saying specifically to Isa 6:1. There Isaiah says, \u201cI saw the Lord, sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, with the train of his robe filling the temple.\u201d John 8:28 is also spoken in the temple, where Jesus is identifying himself as the LORD with his multiple \u201cI am he\u201d sayings. We have already examined these sayings (ch. 3), and we explore them in more detail in ch. 9, where it is confirmed that \u201cthe style of the sentence is that of Divine proclamations.\u201d
\nWe can also see a contextual similarity between the two texts. Isaiah is commissioned in ch. 6 to a ministry met primarily with unbelief and apostasy. In John 8:28, Jesus is likewise predicting an act of apostasy\u2014\u201cwhen you lift up the Son of Man.\u201d<\/p>\n
John 12:32 and Isa 33:10<\/p>\n
The connections between these two texts have been noted above.<\/p>\n
John 12:34 and Isa 57:15<\/p>\n
The crowd then answered him, \u201cWe have heard out of the Law that the Christ is to remain forever; and how can you say, \u2018The Son of Man must be lifted up\u2019? Who is this \u2018Son of Man\u2019?\u201d (John 12:34). Possibly they were thinking of Isa 9:6\u20137, which speaks of one who will sit on the throne of David forever. One of his names is \u201cEternal Father\u201d (\u05d0\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d3). However, a fourth \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d text in Isaiah also speaks of one who \u201cremains forever\u201d: \u201cThus says the one who is high and lifted up, who dwells forever, whose name is Holy, \u2018I dwell on a high and holy place, yet also with the contrite and lowly of spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite\u201d (Isa 57:15). The phrase, \u201cdwells forever,\u201d is from the Hebrew \u05e9\u05b9\u05c1\u05db\u05b5\u05df \u05e2\u05b7\u05d3, which can be compared to \u201cEternal Father\u201d of Isa 9:6. \u201cHigh and lifted up\u201d in 57:15 is identical to the phrase in 6:1, and \u201cwhose name is Holy\u201d seems to be a clear reference to 6:3.
\nIn this case, it is not only the words of Jesus themselves that point to the relevant text in Isaiah, since the words quoted by the crowd are virtually identical to those of John 3:14, but rather the context of the crowd\u2019s question as well. The answer to the question comes from Isa 57:15, which says that the one who is \u201clifted up\u201d also \u201cdwells forever\u201d; there is no contradiction between the two ideas.
\nNot only are two of the four \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d texts of Isaiah alluded to in the space of a few verses in John 12, but John goes on to refer to the context of the other two \u201chigh and lifted up\u201d passages, which he ties together by another common theme, that of unbelief. In the first (12:38), John quotes Isa 53:1 (\u201cLord, who has believed our report?\u201d) to show that the majority\u2019s unbelief in Jesus, far from being an indication that Jesus is not the real Christ, is a fulfillment of prophecy. Isaiah 53:1, of course, is just three verses after \u201cMy servant will prosper; he will be high and lifted up, and greatly exalted.\u201d John then goes on to explain the unbelief of the majority on the basis of Isa 6:10, spoken to Isaiah when he saw the Lord high and lifted up in the temple. John comments that Isaiah said these things \u201cbecause he saw his (Christ\u2019s) glory,\u201d confirming that the one seen by Isaiah high and lifted up in the temple is the one seen by the Jews in the temple and predicting that he would be lifted up (John 8:28).
\nSeen against these parallels in Isaiah, we are warranted in understanding John 12:31\u201332 as the divine warrior\u2019s announcement that he is again going to war on behalf of his people, not to deliver them from a temporal foe like Sennacherib or to secure a temporal salvation, but to deliver them eternally from the power of the devil. John shows Jesus\u2019 followers that in the work of Christ there is a deeper fulfillment of Isa 31:4, \u201cThe LORD of Hosts will come down and wage war on Mt. Zion.\u201d He \u201ccame down\u201d in the incarnation (John 6:38), and waged war as a servant, in his suffering.<\/p>\n
The Word of the LORD and the Defeat of Sennacherib<\/p>\n
Though John\u2019s dependence on warrior themes in Isaiah is clear enough in its own right, the Targum of Isaiah makes these parallels even more explicit by attributing the actions of the divine warrior to the Word of the Lord. Targum Isaiah 33:11 ascribes the victory to the Word of the LORD: \u201cBecause of your evil deeds, my Word, as the whirlwind the chaff, will destroy you\u201d (MT: \u201cYour breath, a fire will consume you\u201d). It is not evident in the Targum that this chapter is directed against the Assyrians, however (\u201cyou\u201d in v. 11 refers to the Gentiles).
\nTargum Isaiah 33:10 does not speak of the Word of the LORD arising, being lifted up, etc. It is not hard to imagine a \u201cPalestinian\u201d Targum of Isa 33:10 that might have said something like \u201cNow I, in my Word, shall arise; now I, in my Word, will be exalted; now I, in my Word, will be lifted up,\u201d though one would not need such a Targum to relate John 12:31\u201332 to Isa 33:10, as the link is clear enough in a literal translation of the two passages. We will see in the next section that another saying of Jesus can be related to the first biblical text that speaks of the LORD arising (Num 10:35, mentioned above), and some Pal. Tgs. do indeed speak of the Word of the LORD arising (or being revealed). One could also imagine a \u201cPalestinian\u201d version of Isa 31:4 reading, \u201cSo will the Word of the LORD of Hosts be revealed, and he will wage war on Mt. Zion.\u201d Elsewhere John uses similar language: \u201cThe Son of God was revealed, \u2026 to destroy the works of the devil\u201d (1 John 3:8). Our extant Tg. Isa. 31:4 says \u201cthe kingdom of the LORD will be revealed to settle upon Mt. Zion and upon its hill.\u201d
\nIn other Targum passages, the defeat of Sennacherib or the Assyrians is ascribed to the divine Word. Targum Isaiah 10:17, speaking of the defeat of the king of Assyria (mentioned in v. 16), says, \u201cThe master of the light of Israel and his Holy One, his Word, will be strong as the fire, and his words as the flame, and he will kill and destroy his rulers and his tyrants in one day\u201d (MT: \u201cThe light of Israel will become a fire, and his Holy One a flame, and it will burn and devour his thorns and his briars in a single day\u201d). Targum Isaiah 30:31 says, \u201cAt the voice of the Word of the LORD (MT: \u201cAt the voice of the LORD\u201d) the Assyrian will be broken.\u201d In Tg. Isa. 36:7, Rabshakeh says, \u201cIf you say to me, \u2018We trust in the Word of the LORD our God (for protection from the Assyrians)\u201d; v. 15 and Tg. 2 Kgs. 18:22, 30 are similar.
\nTargum Second Kings 18:5 says that Hezekiah trusted in the Word of the LORD; this was the reason for his success and his motivation for rebelling against Assyria. In Tg. 2 Kgs. 19:28, the LORD\u2019s message to Sennacherib is that \u201cyou have provoked my Word,\u201d and he therefore will be turned back. In v. 31, the promise of recovery from the Assyrian campaign is to be accomplished \u201cby the Word of the LORD of Hosts\u201d (MT: \u201cthe zeal of the LORD of Hosts\u201d).
\nTargum Second Chronicles 32:1 says that the LORD decided in (or through) his Word to bring Sennacherib to Israel so that he might destroy him. In Tg. 2 Chr. 32:8, Hezekiah encourages his people by saying that Sennacherib has the support only of the strength of flesh, \u201cbut for our help is the Word of the LORD, to help us and to wage our wars.\u201d In Tg. 2 Chr. 32:16, Sennacherib\u2019s servants \u201cspoke rebellion against the Word of the LORD God\u201d (MT: \u201cspoke against the LORD God\u201d). Verse 21 says that the Word of the LORD sent Gabriel on Passover night to destroy the Assyrians. So it is possible that many of the Jews listening to Jesus in John 12, having come to Jerusalem for the Passover, were also remembering and speaking about what the LORD did in defeating Sennacherib, which was believed to have happened at Passover. As mentioned above, Hos 1:7 promises deliverance for Judah in terms similar to Isa 31:8, not by human means of warfare, \u201cbut by the LORD their God,\u201d or, in the Targum, \u201cby the Word of the LORD their God.\u201d For John, when the Word became flesh, he promised an even greater deliverance.
\nI mentioned above the promise of deliverance from Assyria in Isa 8:8\u201310. According to Isaiah, Assyria will sweep like a flood into Immanuel\u2019s land (v. 8), but they will be shattered \u201cbecause God is with us\u201d (v. 10). Those who lived at that time might have expected that this Immanuel would have something to do with the deliverance of Jerusalem. We can see from Mic 5:2 that they would be correct. This passage promises a future savior who will come forth from Bethlehem, but \u201cwhose goings forth are from of old, from ancient times\u201d (or, \u201cfrom days of eternity\u201d).
\nSome modern translations render the word \u201cgoings forth\u201d as \u201corigins,\u201d so that the verse is not speaking of the preexistence of the Messiah, but of his genealogical origins in David and Bethlehem. Of course, to state that someone\u2019s genealogical origins were ancient would merely state the obvious. Such is true of all people, and Israelites kept track of their ancient origins. Even to say that one\u2019s origins go back to David would be saying very little; after two hundred years of royal polygamy it is likely that many people in Judah could trace some branch of their ancestry back to David. In terms of qualifications, it would be much more significant to trace one\u2019s ancestry to the current reigning Davidic king.
\nThe word in question (\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05e6\u05b8\u05d0\u05b8\u05d4) occurs only here in the OT, so its meaning cannot be firmly established. It is of interest, however, that the LXX translates it with the word \u201cexodus,\u201d \u201cgoing forth,\u201d which is used for the LORD going forth to war in Judg 5:4. This meaning fits well with what we see in John 12:31\u201332, where Jesus speaks as one who has done it before. In fact, this may be the meaning of John 12:28, where Jesus says, \u201cFather, glorify your name,\u201d and a voice from heaven answers, \u201cI both have glorified it (e.g., in the deliverance of Hezekiah) and will glorify it again (in Jesus\u2019 going to the cross).\u201d Hezekiah was delivered, in targumic terms, by the Word of the LORD, in a temporal salvation. Now the Word of the LORD has become flesh, for the believer\u2019s (and Hezekiah\u2019s) eternal salvation.<\/p>\n
John 14:2\u20133; Jesus Prepares a Place for His People<\/p>\n
In John 14:2\u20133, Jesus says to the disciples, \u201cI go to prepare a place for you,\u201d and promises that he will return. As in the case of John 12:31\u201332, the military nature of this statement is not obvious unless we see the connection to the relevant OT passage, which is Num 10:35\u201336. We get to this passage via Deut 1:32\u201333, which shares with John 14 the theme of faith and the idea of preparing a place:<\/p>\n
John 14:1\u20133, 6
\nBelieve in God, believe also in me.\u2026 I go to prepare a place for you.\u2026 I am the way.
\nDeut 1:32\u201333
\nYou did not believe in the LORD your God, who goes before you on your way, to search out a place for you to camp.
\nTg. Neof. Deut 1:32\u201333
\nYou did not believe in the name of the Word of the LORD your God, who led before you in the way to prepare for you a place for your encampment. (Tgs. Ps.-J. and Onq. read similarly, except that they omit \u201cthe name of.\u201d)<\/p>\n
The change of \u201cto search out a place for you\u201d to \u201cto prepare for you a place\u201d is in keeping with the slightly different situation in which Jesus is making the promise. But it also agrees with the change made by the targumists in Deut 1:33, presumably to avoid the anthropomorphism of God searching. As is often the case, the targumic substitute is not chosen arbitrarily but is taken from elsewhere in Scripture, in this case most likely from Exod 23:20: \u201cI am sending my angel before you to guard you along the way, and to bring you into the place which I have prepared\u201d (Heb.: \u05d4\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b4\u05d9\u05df; LXX: \u1f11\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9, as in John 14:2). None of the Targums of Exod 23:20 involve the divine Word in preparing the promised land for God\u2019s people, but Deut 11:12 expresses a similar idea as Exod 23:20, describing the promised land as \u201ca land which the LORD your God inquires after,\u201d to which Tg. Ps.-J. adds, \u201cby his Word.\u201d
\nMoses is speaking in Deut 1:32\u201333 of the rebellion of Num 14, but the language about the LORD going before the Israelites to search out a place for them goes back to Israel\u2019s original departure from Mt. Sinai. Numbers 10:33 says that they set out from the mountain of the LORD on a three days\u2019 journey, with the ark of the covenant going before them to search out a resting place for them. All the Targums change \u201csearch out\u201d to \u201cprepare.\u201d
\nVerses 35\u201336 record Moses\u2019 petitions whenever the ark set out and came to rest, and it is instructive to compare these petitions, especially as rendered in the Pal. Tgs., with the situation in John 14.<\/p>\n
MT: 35When the ark set out, Moses said, \u201cRise up, O LORD, and let your enemies be scattered. Let those who hate you flee before you.\u201d 36And when it came to rest, he would say, \u201cReturn, O LORD, to the myriad thousands of Israel\u201d (Num 10:35\u201336).<\/p>\n
Tg. Neof.: 35When the ark set out, Moses spoke and prayed, and he said, \u201cArise please, O LORD, and let your enemies be scattered, and let those who hate you flee from before you.\u201d 36And when it came to rest, Moses would pray, saying, \u201cTurn, please, O LORD, from the might of your anger, and return to us in your good mercies, and make the glory of your Shekinah dwell in the midst of the thousands and myriads, and bless the thousands of the sons of Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Tg. Neof. [mg.]: 35When the ark used to set out, Moses would raise his hands in prayer, and say, \u201cArise please, his Word, in the strength of your might.\u201d<\/p>\n
Tg. Ps.-J.: 35When the ark desired to set out \u2026 he (Moses) said, \u201cLet the Word of the LORD be now revealed in the power of your anger, and let the enemies of your people be scattered, and let those who hate them not have a foot to stand before you.\u201d 36And when the ark desired to rest, \u2026 he said, \u201cReturn now, O Word of the LORD, in your good mercy, and lead the people of Israel, and let the Glory of your Shekinah dwell among them, and have compassion on [or love \u05d5\u05e8\u05d7\u05d9\u05dd] the myriads of the house of Jacob, the multitudes of the thousands of Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Frg. Tg. V: 35And when the ark would set out, Moses would raise his hands in prayer and say, \u201cArise, please, O Word of the LORD, in your mighty strength, and let the enemies of your people be scattered, and let those who hate you flee from before you.\u201d 36And when the ark would rest, Moses would raise his hands in prayer and say, \u201cTurn, please, O Word of the LORD, from your mighty wrath, and return to us in your good mercies, and bless the myriads, and multiply the thousands of the Israelites.\u201d (Frg. Tg. P only has v. 36, which is similar to Frg. Tg. V but has \u201cLORD\u201d instead of \u201cWord of the LORD.\u201d)<\/p>\n
People commonly take Jesus\u2019 promise, \u201cI will come again,\u201d in John 14:3 as referring to the second coming, but commentators generally recognize that a more immediate coming is in view. In v. 19, for example, Jesus tells the disciples they will see him again. In v. 23 he promises that he and the Father will come to the one who keeps his word and dwell with that person. Jesus is promising to return to them on the third day.
\nAs in the initial departure from Mt. Sinai, the divine Word is going on a three-day journey, going ahead of his disciples to prepare a place for his people, answering the plea of Moses in Num 10:35\u201336 and even the synagogue embellishments of that prayer, by scattering his enemies and those of his people, and he will return and bless and dwell among and love his people. Again we see that the via dolorosa is the divine warpath, from which Jesus will return victorious in three days, having prepared a place for his people. The way to the cross is not simply an ordeal or even a sacrifice, but also an offensive action carried to the enemy\u2019s camp, like Israel\u2019s assault on Jericho during the Passover season.
\nThe connection between this passage and Num 10:33\u201336 may also help explain why Jesus says to the disciples, \u201cYou know the way where I am going\u201d (John 14:4), whereas they claim that they do not know it (v. 5). Which is it? The way Jesus is going is a way he has traveled before, as \u201cthe Word of the LORD,\u201d about which they have heard descriptions in the synagogue from childhood. They know this way, but they may not yet have equated it with the way of which Jesus is speaking.
\nIn John\u2019s account of Jesus\u2019 adaptation of the three-day journey from Sinai to his impending work in going to the cross, there are some differences that emerge. Israel followed the (Word of the) LORD during those three days, whereas Jesus\u2019 disciples cannot now follow him on this journey: \u201cWhere I go, you cannot follow me now; but you will follow later\u201d (13:36). In the context of Num 10:33\u201336, the warfare carried out by the LORD is against human enemies (as in the case of Sennacherib discussed above): \u201cLet your enemies be scattered, let those who hate you flee before you.\u201d By contrast, while Jesus does speak in the upper room of those who hate him (John 15:18, 23), his divine warfare will ultimately be against Satan himself and is to be accomplished by allowing those who hate him to put him to death. The adaptation from \u201cyour enemies\u201d (Num 10:35) to \u201cthe ruler of the world\u201d (John 14:30) is facilitated by a play on words in the Aramaic between \u201cyour enemies\u201d in Tg. Neof. Num 10:35, \u05d1\u05e2\u05dc\u05d9 \u05d3\u05d1\u05d1\u05da (lit.: \u201cmasters of your enmity,\u201d idiomatic for \u201cyour enemies\u201d) and the name Beelzebub.
\nThe double interpretation (a typical practice of the Targums) of the Heb \u05e9\u05c1\u05ab\u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b8\u05d4 from the MT of Num 10:36 given in Tg. Neof. and Frg. Tgs. is also worthy of note. \u201cReturn\u201d is translated both as \u201cturn from your wrath\u201d and \u201creturn to us,\u201d which fits perfectly the mission of Christ going to the cross to turn away the wrath of God from sinners and then returning to his disciples to bless, love, and dwell among them.
\nThere is an evident connection between the Pal. Tg. renderings of Num 10:35\u201336 and John 14, portraying Jesus as the divine Word who is the divine Warrior. Once we see this, the appropriateness of the name \u201cthe Word of God\u201d given to the returning, war-waging Christ in Rev 19:13 becomes clear. The connection is further strengthened when we remember that the visible symbol of the LORD going before his people in the wilderness as to war was the pillar of fire and cloud, in which the Word of the LORD shone upon his people according to Tg. Neof. and Frg. Tg. P Exod 13:21\u201322. In chapter one, we saw how this forms the conceptual background for John 1:4\u20135 (light of the Word shining and in conflict with darkness). In the next chapter, we will see that the portrayal of Jesus as warrior in Rev 19:13 grows out of the depiction of the divine warrior in Isa 59 and 63, where the Targum employs the concept of the divine Word.<\/p>\n
ANOTHER LOOK AT JOSHUA 4 AND 2 SAMUEL 15<\/p>\n
I mentioned above that in drawing out the parallels between the path of Jesus at the beginning and end of his ministry and the paths of Joshua at the Jordan and David at the Kidron, I left out the most important part. Perhaps after reading the section above, the reader can figure what was left out.
\nWe saw that Jesus was at the same place as Joshua, and doing the same kind of things, and we saw how this fit in with and supplemented the synoptic material in recapitulating Israel\u2019s history at the Red Sea, the wilderness, and the Jordan. Of course, the crossing of the Jordan is not primarily about Joshua. We read in Josh 3:1\u201311 about the ark of the covenant going on ahead of the Israelites to the Jordan. It is when the feet of the priests carrying the ark touch the water that the water is cut off. \u201cThe (Red) Sea saw, and fled; the Jordan turned back\u201d (Ps 114:3), not at the presence of Joshua, but of the LORD. The ark represented the presence of God among his people, and the ark going before them, as we saw above, represents the divine warrior going at the head of his army to defeat his foes. In the language of the Targums, the Shekinah dwelt, and the Word spoke, from between the cherubim, above the mercy seat of the ark. The parallels between the baptism of Jesus and Tg. Ps.-J. Num 7:89, which describes the Spirit descending over the ark to the place between the cherubim, and the Word speaking to Moses from there (see ch. 1 on John 1:32\u201333), confirm that this is the Word of whom John speaks in his Prologue.
\nThe point is simply that in his return to the Jordan, Jesus is not just following the ancient path of his human namesake Joshua, but his own ancient path; the path of the pre-incarnate Word who has now become flesh, a man like Joshua. Joshua and Israel crossed the Jordan, but the ark of the covenant (thus also the divine Word in Targum thought) stayed in the Jordan while Israel crossed.
\nSimilarly, in 2 Sam 15, where we saw that Jesus follows the same path as David, crossing the Kidron and going up the Mount of Olives, David and Jesus both being objects of betrayal. Again, however, we see that the path of David and Jesus was also the path of the ark. Second Samuel 15:24 relates how Zadok the high priest met David after crossing the Kidron, along with \u201call the Levites with him carrying the ark.\u201d Thus in leaving Jerusalem to the east and crossing the Kidron to the Mount of Olives, Jesus is retracing the path of the invisible Word of one thousand years before. But now the Word has become flesh, a person subject to betrayal and persecution, as was David.
\nThere is, however, a difference between Josh 3\u20134 and 2 Sam 15. The paths of Joshua and the ark of the LORD may have been identical, but the path of David coincided with that of the ark only to a point, and that point is the Mount of Olives. There David sends Zadok with the ark back to Jerusalem (2 Sam 15:25\u201326). David recognizes this is not about him:<\/p>\n
Return the ark of God to the city. If I find favor in the sight of the LORD, then he will bring me back again, and show me both it and his dwelling place. But if he should say thus, \u201cI have no delight in you,\u201d behold, here I am. Let him do to me as seems good in his sight.<\/p>\n
If David dies, the LORD still reigns from Jerusalem. The LORD can bring David safely back to Jerusalem whether the ark is with him or not; the ark is for the nation, not just him.
\nHereafter the paths of David and Jesus diverge. David is fleeing, and continues to flee, past the Mount of Olives, across the Jordan, then north, while the ark is taken back to Jerusalem. While Jesus had been following the path of both David and the ark when going to the Mount of Olives, now he follows the path of the ark (again, his own path as the targumic Word of one thousand years before), returning to Jerusalem. This time it is not the loyal high priest and Levites escorting him to his place of enthronement, however, but rather \u201cofficers from the chief priests and the Pharisees\u201d (John 18:3) who have come to arrest him and have him put to death, as Absalom desired to do to David.
\nWhy did David flee across the Jordan? To save his life. Why did Jesus not flee, but willingly return to Jerusalem? To give his life. Or to put it another way, for the very reason David fled, Jesus returned to Jerusalem to save David\u2019s life, and ours, eternally. David says, \u201cIf I find favor in the sight of the LORD, he will bring me back again and show me \u2026 his dwelling place.\u201d But how can David find favor in the sight of the LORD? By Jesus returning to Jerusalem \u201cto give his life as a ransom for many\u201d (Mark 10:45).
\nAs noted previously, David had to flee for his life because he had been betrayed and his life was in danger. But an even more significant reason is that David was experiencing the judgment of God because of his sin against Uriah: \u201cThe sword shall not depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife\u201d (2 Sam 12:10). Jesus returned to Jerusalem to pay for such sins of those who believe in him, so that they might find favor in the sight of the LORD, and he might show them his eternal dwelling place.
\nWhen considering these OT texts about Joshua and David in light of their similarities to John\u2019s Gospel, I left out the most important part for propaedeutic reasons. I wanted to show how easy it is to see only a small part of the picture. The typical evangelical treatment of the subject of \u201cChrist in the Old Testament\u201d is confined to, or at least majors on, messianic prophecy and human typology. That is, the emphasis (often exclusive) is on the one who is to come, with little or no notice given to the fact that the one who is coming is one \u201cwhose goings forth are from of old, even from days of eternity.\u201d<\/p>\n
JOHN 18:2\u20139; THE DISCIPLES SAVED BY THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD<\/p>\n
When the officers come to arrest Jesus he asks them, \u201cWhom do you seek?\u201d and they say, \u201cJesus the Nazarene\u201d (John 18:4\u20135). When he answers, \u201cI am he,\u201d John says, \u201cthey drew back and fell to the ground.\u201d The sequence of actions of the enemies of Jesus parallels that of David\u2019s enemies in Ps 9:3: \u201cWhen my enemies turn back, they stumble, and perish at your presence.\u201d In this case, the divine presence is indicated by \u201cI am he,\u201d which on the one hand appears to be simply an identification as Jesus the Nazarene, but on the other hand must be related to the \u201cI am he\u201d of John 13:19, the prediction of that which is now taking place, and which sounds so much like the divine \u201cI am he\u201d of Isa 43:10.
\nOne might object that the third action in the psalm, \u201cthey perish,\u201d does not apply to Jesus\u2019 enemies. In fact, they have come to make him perish and they seem to succeed. Of course, if they had perished then and there in the garden, we would perish too, since there would be no gospel. Judas did perish shortly afterward, and the fact that the officers drew back and fell to the ground was a sign that they also were in danger of perishing eternally. If the wording of Tg. Ps.-J. Num 10:35 noted above was found in first-century Targums, witnesses of their falling to the ground may have also remembered that passage: \u201cLet the Word of the LORD be revealed \u2026 and let those who hate them (i.e., the LORD\u2019s people) not have a foot to stand before you.\u201d
\nWe can also see parallels between David\u2019s experience in Ps 9 and the experience of the disciples. John takes note of the fact that Jesus saved their lives (John 18:8\u20139). That is, the disciples are saved by the presence of the LORD, as David spoke of his own experience. David went on to say that his deliverance was a result of the LORD vindicating him, sitting on his throne, judging righteously (Ps 9:4). In other words, Ps 9:4, as experienced by the disciples, can be interpreted sequentially: \u201cYou have accomplished my right and my cause (that is, by Jesus giving himself over to the will of his enemies, instead of making them perish right then and there, since there was a greater enemy that needed to be defeated first); you sat down on the throne, judging righteously\u201d (at the ascension to the Father\u2019s right hand). The officers came to Gethsemane to make Jesus, the Word of the Lord, perish, but, as some MSS of Tg. Ps. 9:7 say, \u201cAs for the Word of the LORD, his seat is in the highest heaven forever.\u201d
\nThe situation in Gethsemane can be compared to the capture of the ark by the Philistines in 1 Sam 4. The Philistines interpreted this as a defeat for the God of Israel (vv. 8\u20139), but the broader narrative clarifies that it was the sins of the Israelites that led to the ark being captured. Likewise, our sins necessitated Jesus\u2019 being taken captive at this point. Both situations seem to represent a significant defeat, yet in both there are signs of military triumph. In 1 Sam 5, the LORD\u2019s triumph is indicated by what happens to the Philistine cities where the ark is taken, and by the fate of the idol of Dagon, which fell on its face and lost its hands and head due to the presence of the ark. The Egyptians cut off the hands of those they defeated in battle, to count those slain. The Assyrians cut off their heads. Both acts are done to Dagon.
\nLikewise, in John 18 Jesus appears to be defeated, but the actions of those who came to arrest him, and his saving the lives of his disciples, show that the reality is far different. In fact, one could say that these events at the Mount of Olives presage future events in which \u201cThe LORD will go forth (Tg.: \u201cbe revealed\u201d; cf. John 18:4: \u201cJesus went forth\u201d) and fight against these nations, as he fights on a day of battle. On that day, his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives\u201d (Zech 14:3\u20134).<\/p>\n
JOHN 19; THE WARRIOR PRIEST-KING IS ANOINTED AND DOES BATTLE<\/p>\n
The Anointing of Jesus as Priest-King<\/p>\n
The contrast between reality and appearances continues into John 19. The first five verses describe how Pilate allowed Jesus to be scourged, dressed mockingly as a king in a royal (purple) robe and a crown of thorns, hailed mockingly as king, struck on the face, and finally presented as innocent before the people. As Jesus appears, Pilate says, \u201cBehold the man.\u201d
\nThe soldiers\u2019 intention was to mock Jesus and perhaps to take out on him their hatred of the Jews in general, inspired by previous rebellions and murders of Roman soldiers. Pilate\u2019s purpose was to appease the crowd, since he did not want to put Jesus to death. He was essentially asking them, \u201cHave I not punished him enough already?\u201d But what is God\u2019s purpose?
\nJohn, drawing from themes in targumic interpretation, may have been using irony to prefigure in this incident the anointing of Jesus as king and priest according to the order of Melchizedek. Just as Caiaphas \u201cprophesied\u201d that Jesus would die for the nation, Pilate\u2019s words may contain a deeper meaning.
\n\u201cBehold the man\u201d has been related by some to Zech 6:12, \u201cBehold a man whose name is Branch; for he will branch out from where he is, and he will build the temple of the LORD.\u201d In this setting, the high priest Joshua is being addressed, and he has a crown of silver and gold on his head and is presumably wearing his priestly garments. The oracle goes on to say, \u201cYes, it is he who will build the temple of the LORD, and he who will bear the honor, and sit and rule on his throne. Thus he will be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two of them.\u201d
\nSome translations (e.g., ESV) avoid the idea that Joshua represents the Messiah who is both priest and king. The title \u201cBranch\u201d for the Messiah was previously used in Isa 4:2; Jer 23:5; 33:15; and Zech 3:8. In the latter, it is clear that Joshua is not the Branch, but a symbol of \u201cmy servant the Branch\u201d who is to come. Yet it is hard to avoid seeing the connections between this passage and Ps 110. Joshua the high priest has a royal crown (not the priestly turban) on his head. Likewise David\u2019s Lord in Ps 110 sits at the right hand of God as king, yet is also called a priest according to the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek was the king-priest who brought out bread and wine to Abraham after his defeat of the coalition of kings who took Lot captive (Gen 14:18).
\nIt was not unusual in those days for a pagan king to also be priest, but it was strictly forbidden for the king of Israel to be a priest to the LORD, as the examples of Saul and Uzziah show. Consequently, Psalm 110 must have seemed quite mysterious in OT times. What were the priestly activities of David\u2019s Lord? Nothing seems to be said of them in the psalm itself, which otherwise is all about his victory over his enemies. Zechariah 6 does not seem to answer this question, but the allusions to Ps 110 are hard to miss. The Messiah not only is a priest, but also will \u201csit and rule\u201d (Zech 6:13), as the LORD says to David\u2019s Lord, \u201cSit at my right hand \u2026 rule in the midst of your enemies\u201d (Ps 110:1\u20132). He can be both priest and king because in him there is no conflict between the two offices: \u201cHe will be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two (offices)\u201d (Zech 6:13). \u201cPeace\u201d in this context would also remind us of Solomon (whose name means \u201chis peace\u201d), who built the first temple after the victories of David, and of Melchizedek, king of Salem (Salem is similar to the Hebrew word for \u201cpeace\u201d) and of the messianic name \u201cPrince of Peace\u201d (Isa 9:6).
\nZechariah 3:8 calls him \u201cmy servant the Branch,\u201d which may be a combination of the \u201cBranch\u201d title of Isa 4:2 and \u201cmy Servant\u201d of the Servant Songs of Isaiah. Isaiah 52:13\u201353:12 is complementary to Ps 110 in that while Ps 110 has just one verse mentioning him as a priest, the rest describing him as a victorious warrior, Isa 52:13\u201353:12 has just one verse describing him as victorious warrior (53:12), the rest describing his priestly activity of bearing our sins as a guilt offering, pouring out his life to death. The two passages taken together make it clear that the Messiah\u2019s priestly activities are not separate from, but part of, his victorious warfare.
\nWe can also see this combination of priestly and kingly activity if we look at four \u201cbehold\u201d declarations about Jesus in John\u2019s Gospel, two by John the Baptist at the beginning of Jesus\u2019 ministry, and two by Pilate at the end:<\/p>\n
1:29: Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!<\/p>\n
1:36: Behold the Lamb of God!<\/p>\n
19:5: Behold the man!<\/p>\n
19:14: Behold your king!<\/p>\n
Pilate\u2019s declarations describe Jesus as the messianic priest-king by (unwitting) reference to Zech 6:12, while John\u2019s declarations describe his priestly activities.
\nAlthough some have said that John the Baptist\u2019s comments were not referring to substitutionary atonement, yet the clear connections of his words to OT texts make such a conclusion seem unavoidable. First, we recall Isaac\u2019s question to Abraham, \u201cBehold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?\u201d (Gen 22:7), and Abraham\u2019s prophetic answer, \u201cGod will provide for himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son\u201d (v. 8). God did provide a ram as an immediate substitute for Isaac, but there is a greater answer to Isaac\u2019s question, \u201cWhere is the lamb?\u201d John gives that answer in his declaration, \u201cBehold the Lamb of God.\u201d
\nFurther, the phrase \u201ctakes away the sin of the world\u201d points to Isa 53:4 (\u201cSurely our griefs he himself bore\u201d) and 12 (\u201cHe bore the sin of many\u201d). Isaiah\u2019s servant is likened to \u201ca lamb led to the slaughter\u201d (v. 7) who makes himself a guilt offering, which in the Law could be a lamb (v. 10; cf. Lev 5:6\u20137; 16). The Hebrew verb for \u201cbore\u201d in Isa 53:4, 12 is \u05e0\u05e9\u05c2\u05d0, used commonly in the Law of one who must bear his own guilt for some offense. It is also used in Lev 10:17 of the sin offering, which is \u201cto bear away the guilt of the congregation, to make atonement for them,\u201d and for the scapegoat bearing away the sins of the congregation into the wilderness (16:22).
\nThe Greek verb translated \u201ctakes away\u201d (\u03b1\u1f34\u03c1\u03c9) in John the Baptist\u2019s declaration in John 1:29 is not the same as the ones that the LXX uses in Isa 53:4 and 12 (\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9) or in the passages in the Law that speak of bearing guilt. This might seem to weaken the case for connecting John 1:29, 36 to Isa 53. However, the majority of times in which \u03b1\u1f34\u03c1\u03c9 appears in the LXX, it is translating \u05e0\u05e9\u05c2\u05d0. Recall that it is the niphal of this root that appears in the \u201clifted up\u201d passages of Isaiah that we looked at above.
\nFinally, \u201cthe Lamb of God\u201d points to Jesus as the Passover lamb. This connection is evident from John 19:36, \u201cNot a bone of it shall be broken,\u201d which quotes the regulation of the Passover lamb from Exod 12:46 and Num 9:12. While it is true that the legislation concerning the Passover lamb does not describe it as taking away sin, the original Passover lambs were slain as substitutes for the Israelite firstborn. Further, the Passover meal served as a model for the communion ordinance that remembers Christ\u2019s sacrificial death. Finally, the fact that the OT Passover lamb was not explicitly described as a sacrifice for sin did not keep Paul from saying, \u201cChrist our Passover lamb has been sacrificed\u201d (1 Cor 5:7). Such a statement is completely reasonable given his understanding that Jesus is \u201cthe Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world,\u201d based on Gen 22 (Isaac as a model of the lamb), Isa 53, and the Passover lamb.
\nThe connection between Zechariah\u2019s statement and John\u2019s Gospel is made even more explicit when the former is viewed in light of the Targums. Targum Zechariah 6:12 says, \u201cBehold the man whose name is Messiah. He will be revealed, and he shall be anointed.\u201d Perhaps some of those who heard Pilate, who believed that Jesus was the Messiah, thought of this passage as they heard Pilate\u2019s declaration. We can see some similarities between the anointing of OT kings and priests and the things done to Jesus in John 19:1\u20135. Second Kings 11:12 (= 2 Chr 23:11) mentions putting a crown on the head of a king when he is anointed. We also find the following pious sentiment expressed in Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 15:18 (for MT: \u201cThe LORD will reign forever and ever\u201d):<\/p>\n
When the people of the sons of Israel saw the miracles and wonders (at the Red Sea) \u2026 they spoke up and were saying to one another, \u201cCome, let us place a crown of anointing upon the head of our Redeemer, who makes things pass away, but does not himself pass away; who makes things change, but is not changed; who is king of kings in this world, and the crown of kingship is also his for the world to come, and it is his forever and ever.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fragmentary Targum V Exodus 15:18 reads similarly. Fragmentary Targum P contains a reading schedule according to which Exod 13:19\u201315:26 was to be read on the seventh day of Passover. Such a practice may have been in place in the first century. If so, perhaps some may have thought about the recent coronation of Jesus by Pilate, especially if the \u201cgood confession\u201d of Jesus before Pilate (1 Tim 6:13) had been made known, when Jesus spoke with him about his kingdom which is not of this world (John 18:36) and then came out before the people with \u201cthe crown of his kingship\u201d on his head. Ironically, the crown was put there not by his people anxious to \u201cplace a crown of anointing upon the head of our Redeemer,\u201d but by Roman soldiers in mocking cruelty, after he was delivered over to them by his people. When Jesus appeared before the people after being brought out by Pilate, and when he hung on the cross, onlookers steeped in targumic interpretation might have concurred with the sentiment expressed in Tg. Neof. Exod 15:18: \u201cHow the crown of kingship becomes you, O LORD!\u201d<\/p>\n
The Crucifixion as Victory<\/p>\n
Finally, in the crucifixion itself\u2014an agonizing and shameful death, a public exhibition and warning to potential criminals and revolutionaries\u2014things are not as they appear. The crucifixion appears to be a total and final defeat, yet the reality is quite the opposite. The first promise of salvation in the Bible is the Lord\u2019s statement to the serpent: \u201cHe shall strike you on the head\u201d (Gen 3:15). In several places in the OT, we see what could be called \u201cliteralistic\u201d fulfillments of this ancient promise, as one of the \u201coffspring of the serpent\u201d meets his end in such a way as to remind us of this promise (though the promise itself is not to be fulfilled in literal terms). For example, Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, drove a tent peg through the skull of Sisera (Judg 4\u20135). David defeated Goliath with a blow to the head (1 Sam 17). As we saw above, Jesus came in the name of the LORD as David did against Goliath (1 Sam 17:45; Ps 118:26; John 5:43; 12:13). All four Gospels tell us that Jesus was crucified at \u201cthe place of a skull\u201d (Matt 27:33; Mark 15:22; Luke 23:33; John 19:17), and here again we can see a literalistic fulfillment of Gen 3:15, with the cross of Jesus driven into this \u201cskull.\u201d In the midst of apparent defeat, we see what is actually a sign of victory over the world and the devil, the crushing of the serpent\u2019s head, as the feet of the Son of God are pierced.<\/p>\n
CONCLUSIONS<\/p>\n
John\u2019s conscious use of OT allusions and typology show Jesus to be a \u201cman of war\u201d on both a human level (Jesus is like Joshua and David) and divine level (as in Exod 15:3, YHWH is a man of war), thus supporting the interpretation of John 1:14 as \u201cYHWH became flesh.\u201d We saw that John 12:31\u201332 alludes to the LORD\u2019s deliverance of Jerusalem from Sennacherib, and that John 14:1\u20134 alludes to the initial departure of the LORD\u2019s people from Mt. Sinai on a three-day journey, in which the LORD was petitioned to scatter his enemies and return to his people. John views both of these events as prefigurements of Christ\u2019s defeat of the devil on the cross. In various Targum passages describing these divine victories, the figure of the divine Word is used, thus supporting the view that John\u2019s Logos title grew out of his understanding of the Targums and and that the Targums are essential in helping us understand a major theme in John\u2019s Gospel\u2014Jesus as a victorious warrior. The idea that the death of Jesus is a sign of weakness and defeat is countered with an understanding of the crucifixion and resurrection as the greatest of all victories, over death and the devil, by which Christ\u2019s followers are freed from slavery to sin and death.<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
Jesus the Bridegroom of His People<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
In his first miracle, turning water into wine at a wedding (John 2:1\u201311), Jesus performed the duty of the bridegroom when the bridegroom fell short. We know that it was the bridegroom\u2019s duty to provide the wine because he was the one who got credit for the fine wine that Jesus provided (vv. 9\u201310). Later, in John 3:29 John the Baptist refers to Jesus as the bridegroom. Likewise in some parables in the Synoptics Jesus is the bridegroom (Matt 22:2\u201314; 25:1\u201313; Luke 12:36), and he referred to himself as a bridegroom in answering the question about fasting (Matt 9:15; Mark 2:19\u201320; Luke 5:34\u201335). In what sense is Jesus a bridegroom?
\nInterpreters at least since Origen have noted that in John 4, where Jesus meets the Samaritan woman at a well, there is a potential connection to several OT accounts of a man meeting a woman at a well, whereupon the woman (Rebekah, Rachel, Zipporah) goes on to become the bride of a man of God. In this chapter, we explore the development of the theme of the divine bridegroom in both the OT and the Targums and show its relationship to the corresponding theme of Israel as the bride of the LORD, and how both the human and the divine aspects of this theme have parallels in John 4. It is another example of what it means that the Word (interpreted as a divine title) has become flesh.<\/p>\n
CONNECTION TO THE THEME OF JESUS AS WARRIOR<\/p>\n
The themes of God as warrior and as the bridegroom of his people are found side by side in Isa 59:15b to 63:6, which has the following well-recognized chiastic structure:<\/p>\n
59:15b\u201321
\nA The Divine Warrior
\n60:1\u201322
\nB The Glory of Zion
\n61:1\u201311
\nC The LORD\u2019s Anointed
\n62:1\u201312
\nB\u2032 The Glory of Zion
\n63:1\u20136
\nA\u2032 The Divine Warrior<\/p>\n
In section B\u2032 (62:4\u20135), we see the LORD as bridegroom and redeemed Israel as bride:<\/p>\n
4You will no longer be called Azubah [Forsaken],
\nAnd your land will no longer be called Shemamah [Desolate].
\nFor you will be named Hephzibah [My Delight is in Her],
\nAnd your land, Beulah [Married].
\nFor the LORD delights in you,
\nAnd your land will be married.
\n5For as a young man marries a virgin,
\nSo your Builder will marry you.
\nAnd as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride,
\nSo your God will rejoice over you.<\/p>\n
In place of MT \u201cyour sons\u201d in v. 5 (which does not fit the context), we read \u201cYour Builder,\u201d as suggested by BHS, and which points to Ps 147:2, \u201cthe LORD is the builder of Jerusalem.\u201d Hephzibah was the name of the mother of king Manasseh; thus she was a royal bride (of Hezekiah). Shemamah is what the LORD called Judah in Isa 1:7. Zion was called Azubah in Isa 60:15. Azubah was also the name of a royal bride, the mother of Jehoshaphat, therefore wife of Asa (1 Kgs 22:42; 2 Chr 20:31).
\nThe sequence B\u2032\/A\u2032 is essentially repeated in Rev 19. Verses 7\u20139 speak of the wedding supper of the Lamb (agreeing with B\u2032 above), while vv. 11\u201316 portray Jesus as the divine warrior with imagery drawn from Isa 63:1\u20136 (A\u2032 above):<\/p>\n
2Why is your apparel red,
\nAnd your garments like the one who treads in the wine press?
\n3\u201cI have trodden the wine trough alone,
\nAnd from the peoples there was no man with me.
\nI also trod them in my anger
\nAnd trampled them in my wrath;
\nAnd their lifeblood is sprinkled on my garments,
\nAnd I stained all my clothing.\u201d (Isa 63:2\u20133)<\/p>\n
13He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood,
\nand his name is called The Word of God.\u2026
\n15and he treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. (Rev 19:13, 15)<\/p>\n
As Alec Motyer observed, \u201cWe rightly see the New Testament counterpart to this [passage in Isa 63] in the wrath of the Lamb (Rev. 6:15ff.) and the treading of the winepress of the wrath of God (Rev 14:17\u201320; 19:15).\u201d
\nA targumic interpretation of the warrior\u2019s name \u201cthe Word of God\u201d (v. 13) is consistent with Tg. Isa. 63:5, where God\u2019s wrath in this warfare is rendered as \u201cthe Word of my pleasure.\u201d This expression is also found in Tg. Isa. 59:16 (from section A above) for MT \u201chis own righteousness.\u201d The next verse says he will save and avenge by his Word, and v. 19 says \u201cby the Word of the LORD they shall be plundered\u201d (the MT refers to the breath of the LORD).
\nSections A\/A\u2032 and B\/B\u2032 represent the two alternatives open to humankind, for which one could adapt the motto of the U.S. I Marine Expeditionary Force: \u201cno better friend [section B\/B\u2032, he glorifies his people with righteousness and salvation], no worse enemy [section A\/A\u2032, he tramples his enemy underfoot].\u201d
\nOn a human level the two themes go together as well. We read, for example, that Caleb gave his daughter Achsah in marriage to Othniel as a reward for conquering Kiriath-Sepher (Josh 15:16\u201317; Judg 1:12\u201313). Likewise Saul promised his daughter Merab to the one who killed Goliath (1 Sam 17:25), then later gave Michal to David for slaying two hundred Philistines (1 Sam 18:27).
\nWe saw in the last chapter that the Gospel of John shows Jesus to be a warrior, based on both human and divine analogies to the OT, particularly as they are read in light of the Targums. If the bride is the warrior\u2019s prize, and if Jesus is the greatest warrior, defeating Satan on the cross, what is Jesus\u2019 prize? The answer, of course, is the church.<\/p>\n
THE WOMAN AT THE WELL IN THE OT<\/p>\n
In three different OT incidents (Gen 24, Gen 29, and Exod 2), a man meets a woman at a well, and she goes on to become the bride of a man of God. We are interested in these passages because in John 4 Jesus meets a Samaritan woman at a well, and this encounter involves a number of parallels to each of the OT incidents, not only in the Bible itself but also as these accounts are embellished in Jewish tradition. But before looking at these parallels, we want to see how the OT incidents themselves point to the bridegroom\/bride relationship between the LORD and Israel.
\nIn Gen 24, by far the longest of these accounts (sixty-seven verses), Abraham sends his servant back to his homeland in upper Mesopotamia to get a wife for Isaac, because Isaac must not marry a Canaanite woman (the promises to Abraham were conditional on a godly offspring following the ways of the LORD according to Gen 18:19). Stopping at a well outside the city of Nahor, Abraham\u2019s servant devises a test of character for the prospective bride and prays for success. Immediately Rebekah comes by and passes the test, volunteering to draw water for the servant\u2019s ten camels. The servant introduces himself to Rebekah, and she runs home and tells her family. After Laban comes to meet him at the well and invites him to stay, the servant secures their permission for Isaac to marry Rebekah.
\nAll of this takes place for the benefit of Isaac who is the bridegroom, but very little notice is taken of him in this account, which focuses rather on Rebekah and the servant, both of whom are shown to be of exceptional character. Abraham\u2019s servant is the model servant who relies upon God and is concerned with only one thing, namely, doing his master\u2019s will. Rebekah is likewise the model bride, a woman of virtuous character\u2014hard working, respectful, virginal, beautiful, and even willing to go and live in another land.
\nIn the other two accounts, by contrast, the focus is on the bridegroom and the deeds that he does at the well for his prospective bride. In Gen 29, Jacob has left home on his twofold mission of saving his life and getting a wife. After stopping at a well near Haran, he sees Rachel coming, and being informed that she is Laban\u2019s daughter, he rolls away a large stone at the mouth of the well by himself and waters Rachel\u2019s flock (v. 10). Little attention is paid to the future bride here, but rather the focus is on Jacob and what he does for her, performing by himself what was normally done by a group of men.
\nIn Exod 2, Moses is fleeing for his life, in the course of which he meets his future wife Zipporah and her sisters at a well. Again, the focus is not on the prospective bride, but on the bridegroom and the deeds that he does on her behalf. He waters her flock, as Jacob did Rachel\u2019s, but first delivered the sisters from shepherds who come to harass them. Verse 17 says that he saves them (\u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05e2); v. 19 says he delivered them (\u05d4\u05b4\u05e6\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dc). Both verbs are commonly used of the LORD\u2019s salvation of Israel from Egypt.
\nThe accounts can be considered as consisting of two types, as noted above, but they also have other common elements: a stranger (in danger in two of the accounts) goes to a foreign land and meets a woman at a well; a betrothal takes place; and the woman goes on to become the bride of a man of God.
\nThere is a fourth case that should probably be understood in light of these other three. In Exod 17:1\u20136, the LORD miraculously brings forth water out of the rock for Israel, after he had brought them out of Egypt. In v. 6, the LORD says, \u201cI will stand before you there on the rock,\u201d which may suggest a visible manifestation of the LORD, which, according to John 1:18 (\u201cno man has seen God at any time\u201d), would have been a manifestation of the Son. Here Israel (represented by its elders; v. 5) \u201cmeets\u201d the LORD at this miraculous well. If a marriage ceremony is truly in view, this would be the earliest canonical reference in which the LORD refers to the relationship between himself and his people in terms of a marriage relationship. This is indicated not by any use of marriage terminology, but by analogy to the previous accounts of a man meeting a woman at a well. In fact, we can see a merging of the two narrative types mentioned above, since we have at this miraculous well both the bride (Israel) and the bridegroom (as in Gen 29 and Exod 2), along with his servant.
\nThe bridegroom is the LORD, who has \u201csaved\u201d and \u201cdelivered\u201d his people from the Egyptians, as Moses did for Zipporah in Midian. As Jacob and Moses drew water for their prospective brides, the LORD draws water for his people, his flock, which is also to become his bride. The servant is now Moses, who, like Abraham\u2019s servant, is concerned only with doing his master\u2019s will: \u201cMoses did so\u201d (v. 6). But what shall we say about the bride? We saw that Rebekah acted the model bride\u2014she was tested by the servant to see what sort of character she had, and she passed the test. Here Israel is tested by thirst, and they respond by testing the LORD, grumbling and complaining, regretting their redemption (vv. 2\u20134)\u2014and they are ready to kill Moses (v. 4)!
\nThis incident took place at Horeb (v. 6; Horeb = Sinai), where shortly afterward the LORD made the following \u201cproposal\u201d to Israel:<\/p>\n
You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, how I bore you on eagles\u2019 wings, and brought you to myself. Now then, if you will indeed listen to my voice and keep my covenant, then you shall be my special treasure among all the peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. (Exod 19:4\u20136)<\/p>\n
If Exod 17:1\u20136 can be interpreted in marital terms, then this proposal can be interpreted in part along the same lines: It is a betrothal proposal delivered through the servant of the LORD, much as Abraham\u2019s servant made the betrothal proposal concerning Rebekah.
\nIsrael accepts the proposal, volunteering, \u201cAll that the LORD has spoken we will do\u201d (v. 8, and again in 24:3, 7). For our purposes, we note that in targumic terms, Israel\u2019s accepting of this proposal involves a promise to receive the Word of the LORD, since the proposal is worded \u201cif you indeed receive my Word\u201d (Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J. Exod 19:5), and in Tg. Neof. [mg.] and Frg. Tgs. P, V Exod 19:8, the people answer, \u201cAll that the Word of the LORD has spoken we will do\u201d (similarly for Tg. Neof. [mg.] Exod 24:3, 7), adding, \u201cWe will listen\u201d in Exod 24:7, which is \u201cWe will receive\u201d in Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J.
\nA few weeks later, Israel makes the golden calf, showing how different she is from Rebekah, who not only promised, but fulfilled her promise to do a good deed for Abraham\u2019s servant. Israel\u2019s refusal to enter the promised land is referred to as \u201cfornication\u201d (\u05d6\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd; related to \u05d6\u05d5\u05b9\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4, \u201cprostitute\u201d) in Num 14:33. In fact, Josh 2 shows that Israel compares unfavorably to Rahab the Canaanite prostitute with respect to her works, her faith, and her reward. Her works involved hiding the two spies and helping them escape. In this she is like the mother of Moses who hid him to save his life, and she is like the midwives who lied to Pharaoh in order to save the lives of the male Israelite children. In her works, she contrasts with the wilderness generation who wanted to stone to death the two spies who urged obedience to the LORD (Num 14:10). Rahab\u2019s faith also stands in contrast to the unbelief of the wilderness generation: \u201cHow long will they not believe in me?\u201d (Num 14:11). Rahab, in contrast, unwittingly quotes Moses, whom she never heard or read: \u201cThe LORD your God, he is God in heaven above, and on the earth below\u201d (Josh 2:11; cf. Deut 4:39).
\nAs a result of her true faith and good works, Rahab the Canaanite prostitute receives the reward that the wilderness generation forfeited through unbelief and evil works, as she received an inheritance in Israel (Josh 6:22\u201325). According to Matt 1:5, Salmon, son of Nahshon, was the father of Boaz by Rahab. Nahshon was the leader of the tribe of Judah at the exodus (Num 1:7; 2:3), and thus would have been among those who died in the wilderness for their unbelief, while his son Salmon grew up in the wilderness and entered the land with Joshua and was allotted a portion of land in Judah. His (presumed) wife Rahab thus would have received the inheritance that her own father-in-law lost when he died in the wilderness.
\nSubsequent to the death of Joshua and the elders of his generation, Israel was characterized much more frequently as an unfaithful bride than as a faithful one. Ezekiel 16:33 says that Judah is even beyond prostitution, paying her lovers rather than being paid by them. The eventual result is exile, \u201cdivorce\u201d in terms of the marriage analogy (Isa 50:1), and the promise of return from exile is given in terms of a restoration of the marriage covenant (e.g., Isa 54:4\u20138).
\nIn light of this OT background and of the disasters that the Jews experienced in C.E. 70, it would have been reasonable for John\u2019s audience to conclude from historical events that the LORD\u2019s people had been unfaithful to the covenant, that they have not fulfilled the promise of Exod 19:8; 24:3, 7. In short, their calamities must have come because (in targumic terms) they have not received the Word of the LORD.<\/p>\n
HOW THE OT BACKGROUND ILLUMINES JOHN 4<\/p>\n
We will now look at each of the OT well scenes discussed above in relation to John 4, and see that the three stories of a man meeting a woman at a well sheds light on how Jesus, in his own encounter at a well, serves both as a servant and a bridegroom. Comparison with the account of Israel \u201cmeeting\u201d the LORD at a well shows Jesus as the divine bridegroom.<\/p>\n
Genesis 24<\/p>\n
There are numerous parallels between the words and deeds of Abraham\u2019s servant in Gen 24 and the words and deeds of Jesus in John 4. Genesis 24 focused on the servant, not the bridegroom, and the parallels between the two chapters highlight Jesus as Servant. First we can compare the larger theme of both chapters. The theme of Gen 24 is that a father (Abraham) is seeking a virtuous bride for his son Isaac, and sends his servant to another land to attain that goal. Jesus says in John 4:23 that the Father seeks those who worship him in spirit and in truth. To attain that goal, he has sent his Son as servant (v. 34). He has come not just to a foreign land (John 4 does take place outside of Judea), but from his Father\u2019s house in heaven to earth. There are similarities of detail as well:
\n(1) Jesus begins his conversation with the Samaritan woman by asking her for a drink (v. 7), just as Abraham\u2019s servant did with Rebekah (Gen 24:17).
\n(2) Jesus speaks of gifts that he has to give her that she does not know about (v. 10). Likewise Abraham\u2019s servant brought out gifts for Rebekah when she had passed his test of character (Gen 24:22).
\n(3) After meeting the remarkable stranger at a well, the Samaritan woman goes into her city and invites the men of the city to come and meet this man; they then invite him to stay with them (vv. 28\u201329, 40). This parallels Rebekah\u2019s actions in telling her family about the servant of Abraham, and Laban coming to the well to meet him and invite him to stay with them (Gen 24:28\u201331).
\n(4) In both cases, the stranger refuses to eat when food is offered to him (vv. 32\u201334; Gen 24:33).
\n(5) In both cases, the stranger stays for two days (vv. 40, 43; Gen 24:54). Even though it seems that the visit of Abraham\u2019s servant was less than 24 hours, in the biblical way of counting this would be two days (the day he arrived and the day he left).
\nJohn 4 is missing some of the elements of Gen 24. There is no test of the woman\u2019s character; instead we see that Jesus already knows about her life and her character (vv. 17\u201318), about which we will say more later. Secondly, there is no betrothal as there is in the Genesis account. Instead, we read that the Samaritans believed in Jesus (vv. 39\u201342). Again, this is something about which we will say more later.<\/p>\n
Genesis 29<\/p>\n
Jacob, like Abraham\u2019s servant, travels to a foreign land on his mission. As noted in ch. 4, Jacob\u2019s twofold mission on this journey from his father\u2019s house (to save his life, to get a wife) can be compared with that of Jesus, who left his Father\u2019s house in order to give his life and to gain the church. Thus, in the case of Jesus, the two missions are one, and we might also note that his mission involved saving Jacob\u2019s (eternal) life (and ours) and that the Messiah\u2019s name is \u201cIsrael\u201d (the true Jacob) in Isa 49:3. While his overall mission was to give his life, John 4:1\u20134 may imply that Jesus entered Samaria in order to avoid hostility with the Pharisees. If so, on his mission to give his life he is temporarily avoiding danger to his life, like Jacob.
\nJohn notes in v. 6 that this well is \u201cJacob\u2019s well,\u201d which would not be the well of Gen 29, of course, but would still bring to mind the figure of Jacob at a well. In Gen 29:10, Jacob waters the flock for Rachel, and in John 4:10\u201314 Jesus offers living water to the Samaritan woman\u2014water that springs up to eternal life. As mentioned in ch. 1, the Pal. Tgs. preserve a legend about a miracle associated with Jacob at the well near Haran. According to Tgs. Neof. and Ps.-J., and Frg. Tgs. P, V Gen 28:10, when Jacob removed the stone from the mouth of the well, the water surged up and overflowed all the time that Jacob was in Haran (thus twenty years). The various accounts mention \u201cJacob our father\u201d or \u201cour father Jacob\u201d six to seven times (except that Tg. Ps.-J.\u2019s account does not use this phrase), so the Lord\u2019s description of his own water as \u201ca spring of water welling up to eternal life\u201d would have been an apt answer to the Samaritan woman\u2019s question, \u201cYou are not greater than our father Jacob, are you?\u201d (v. 12). Perhaps this tradition was known among the Samaritans as well as the Jews. Of course, she also comes to see that Jesus is greater than Jacob, because as she herself says, he \u201ctold me all the things that I have done\u201d (v. 29).<\/p>\n
Exodus 2<\/p>\n
Moses, like Jacob, draws water for the flock of his prospective bride; the accounts in Exod 2 and Gen 29 share this similarity to John 4, although Jesus does not draw water but in v. 10 offers better water. Moses also \u201csaves\u201d and \u201cdelivers\u201d Zipporah, which we pointed to as analogous to the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and which is also obviously analogous to the work of Christ in obtaining his bride.
\nA unique similarity between John 4 and Exod 2 is that the man in both accounts is sitting by the well (John 4:6; Exod 2:15). Abraham\u2019s servant is standing at the well (Gen 24:13) as Jacob seems to be (Gen 29:1\u201310). Here again, Jewish tradition adds to the similarity between the two accounts. Josephus relates information about Moses in Midian that also appears in John 4:6, namely, that Moses sat down at the well at midday to rest after his journey.
\nTo summarize, the OT parallels discussed so far bring together in the person of Jesus, as seen in John 4, both the ideal servant (by comparison to Gen 24) and the man of God as bridegroom (by comparison to Gen 29 and Exod 2). We might add that the bridegrooms in question were also servants in that they were servants of God (Gen 24:14; 32:10; Exod 4:10). John 4 shows Jesus as the servant-bridegroom.<\/p>\n
Exodus 17<\/p>\n
While the parallels between John 4 and Gen 24, Gen 29, and Exod 2 reveal Jesus as a human servant-bridegroom, the parallels to Exod 17 show him to be the divine-human servant-bridegroom. The deity of Christ is shown in several ways in this account.
\nAs mentioned in ch. 3, John 4:26 is the first of the \u201cI am he\u201d (\u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9) sayings in John, and a few interpreters have pointed to its similarity to the last of the divine \u201cI am he\u201d (\u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\u05d0) sayings in Isaiah:<\/p>\n
Therefore my people shall know my name; therefore in that day (they shall know) that I am he, the one who is speaking, here I am. (Isa 52:6)
\nI am he, the one who is speaking to you. (John 4:26)<\/p>\n
Of course, the Samaritan woman would take \u201cI am he\u201d to mean only \u201cI am the Messiah\u201d (v. 25), but the similarity to Isa 52:6 is most suggestive. The promise involves God\u2019s people knowing his name. We noted earlier that the mission of Jesus was to reveal the Father\u2019s name (John 17:6, 26), that the Father\u2019s name is also given to the Son (John 17:11, 12), and that \u201cI am he\u201d was a way of evoking the divine name after it was no longer pronounced. As we see below, the Samaritan woman symbolically represents the people of God, so that John 4 contains a fulfillment of Isa 52:6, a revelation of the divine name to God\u2019s people. Further, Isa 52:6 can be read in its context as a promise of a revelation of the divine name that goes beyond what took place in OT times; God is going to speak in a way that he has not done before. \u201cHere I am\u201d (Isa 52:6) is also what Isaiah said when he volunteered to be sent by God as a prophet to his people (6:8). \u201cNow the LORD God has sent me\u201d (Isa 48:16) also indicates a new way of God speaking to his people, as the servant comes into the world.
\nRecall that Tg. Neof. Deut 32:39 reads \u201cI, I in my Word, am he.\u201d It is possible, though speculative, that in the lost Pal. Targ. of the Prophets, such a paraphrase existed of the \u201cI am he\u201d sayings in Isaiah as well: \u201cI, in my Word, am he, the one who is speaking to you.\u201d In any case, in light of this \u201cI am he\u201d saying by Jesus, we can look again at Exod 17:1\u20136 and see Jesus not as a mere human bridegroom who provides water to benefit an individual human bride, but as the divine bridegroom of his people. There we saw the divine bridegroom with his servant Moses miraculously bring forth water from the rock for his people (who are also his flock). In John 4, we see at the well the divine bridegroom who has become a servant, like Moses, a real man who grows weary and thirsty, yet who provides better water than could the patriarchs.
\nThis interpretation receives added confirmation when we consider the title \u201cWord\u201d in light of Tg. Neof. Exod 17:6, where the LORD says to Moses, \u201cBehold, my Word shall stand in readiness on the rock at Horeb.\u201d So whereas in this Pal. Tg. rendering of Exod 17, the divine Word and the servant Moses are at the miraculous well with Israel, in John 4 the Word who has become flesh is at the well with the Samaritan woman who represents his people, and he speaks of water that springs up to eternal life. Even without the rendering in Tg. Neof., John 1:18 would indicate that it is the Son, the visible manifestation of God, whom Israel \u201cmet\u201d at the well. We might add that in the Gospel Jesus is also seen as analogous to the rock, since he is the one who is struck, and he is the source of the life-giving water.
\nAnother feature that suggests that Jesus is the divine bridegroom in John 4 is the fact that in place of a betrothal, the Samaritans believed in Jesus. We noted above that this was also true of God\u2019s relationship with Israel. His proposal from Mt. Sinai was, \u201cIf you indeed listen to my voice,\u201d or in the targumic rendering, \u201cIf you indeed receive my Word.\u201d As noted in ch. 1, John 1:11\u201312 equates receiving the Word with believing in his name. The Samaritans, therefore, met the divine betrothal requirement by believing in Jesus.<\/p>\n
THE SAMARITAN WOMAN AS SYMBOLIC OF THE BRIDE OF CHRIST<\/p>\n
Probably most Christians have read John 4 with the thought, \u201cthis shows us that the worst of sinners can be saved.\u201d If, however, John 4 presents the woman at the well as a bride in keeping with the OT well encounters, she represents not the worst of sinners, but the bride of Christ, the people of God, the church as a whole. As such, she is not a very flattering picture!
\nIn comparing the Samaritan woman to Rebekah, the ideal bride of Gen 24, we note that the reason for sending the servant to Abraham\u2019s homeland was that Isaac must not marry a Canaanite woman, because of the depravity of Canaanite culture, as the Canaanites were without knowledge of the true God. But in the minds of Jesus\u2019 countrymen and many of John\u2019s readers, the Samaritans were the equivalent of the Canaanites. As Jesus himself said to the woman, \u201cYou (Samaritans) worship what you do not know\u201d (v. 22), and as the woman or the gospel writer note, \u201cJews have no dealings with Samaritans\u201d (v. 9). Samaritans were off limits to observant Jews, just as the Canaanites were in the OT.
\nBeyond matters of race and culture, Rebekah was a chaste virgin, a woman of good character, while the Samaritan woman had had five husbands and was at that time living with a man to whom she was not married (vv. 17\u201318). Clearly, if Rebekah is the ideal bride, the Samaritan woman is the very opposite, the model of the undesirable bride. And in these very undesirable features, we can see how she is a fitting symbol for the church of Jesus Christ. The Samaritan woman is from the \u201cwrong\u201d family and cultural background. But the same is true about all the members of Adam\u2019s race. God looked upon that race before the flood and saw only corruption, and that race is the same today, because of the sin that entered the world through Adam.
\nThe Samaritan woman had had one husband after another, and was now living with someone who was not her husband\u2014an unmarried man or maybe someone else\u2019s husband. When we examined the OT metaphor of God\u2019s marriage to his people we saw that idolatry, in God\u2019s sight, is tantamount to spiritual immorality, adultery, fornication, and prostitution. Since in this sense those who come to faith have all had many gods before coming to know the one true God, they come to him on the spiritual level like the Samaritan woman did on the physical level. In John\u2019s narrative, the immorality of the Samaritan woman symbolizes our idolatrous nature. Outwardly, one might be like Rebekah, highly regarded in society, good by human standards, but God sees the heart and knows that in the past each has had many gods before him. We are the undesirable Samaritan woman.<\/p>\n
PAUL\u2019S GREAT MYSTERY<\/p>\n
In Eph 5:22\u201333, Paul expounds on the duties of Christian husbands and wives based on the analogy of the relationship between Christ and the church. Like John, Paul envisions Christ as divine bridegroom in continuity with the OT portrayal of the God of Israel as the nation\u2019s bridegroom. And as in Rev 19, this theme is closely associated with the theme of Christ as divine warrior. This may be inferred from the fact that just as in Isa 59:15\u201363:6 these two themes are put side by side, so also in his letter to the Ephesians, Paul flows from a discussion of Christian marriage relationships as analogous to the relationship between Christ and the church to a discussion of Christian warfare (Eph 6:10\u201317) that draws on terminology from the first of these two divine warrior sections in Isaiah (Isa 59:17; cf. Eph 6:14, 17).
\nIn the course of his exposition on marriage relationships, Paul says \u201cThis mystery is great\u201d (Eph 5:32), perhaps implying that there is much more to be said about Christ as bridegroom that the believer may investigate further, both from the OT portrayal of the divine bridegroom and from the NT work of Christ. John, writing later than Paul, may be seen as building on Paul\u2019s portrayal of Christ as bridegroom (this is not to suggest that Paul himself in his teaching ministry would not have said much more on this subject than we have record of in his writings). When Paul says that Jesus gave himself up for the church to make her holy (Eph 5:25\u201326), he may well be contrasting Christ to the patriarchs who did the opposite: Abraham and Isaac gave up their brides to potential defilement in order to save their own lives (Gen 12:11\u201315; 20:2; 26:7). As we saw in ch. 4, these episodes may be considered \u201cfall narratives\u201d that show the patriarchs to be unworthy to fulfill the role of \u201cnew Adam.\u201d Isaac\u2019s excuse is especially worth noting by way of contrast to the motivation of Jesus in fulfilling the role of divine bridegroom: Isaac lied about Rebekah, \u201cbecause I thought, \u2018Lest I die on account of her\u2019 \u201d (Gen 26:9). When John 4 presents the narrative of the immoral Samaritan woman (who is in effect an anti-Rebekah) as a model of the church, the contrast in the respective actions of the bridegrooms becomes much sharper. Jesus came to \u201cdie on account of her,\u201d yet not because of her worthiness, but in spite of her lack of it.
\nOn the other hand, Jesus gave his life for her \u201cto make her holy.\u201d That is, he died that she not remain in the spiritual condition of the Samaritan woman, but that she be transformed into a Rebekah, so to speak: \u201cthat he might present to himself a glorious church, having no stain or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that she should be holy and blameless\u201d (Eph 5:27). We saw at the beginning of this chapter that the bride is the warrior\u2019s prize; therefore the church is the reward for the Son of God who won such a great victory over the devil on the cross. But if the church is represented by the Samaritan woman, she does not seem to be much of a prize! Who would risk his life for such a reward? Paul says to the Corinthians, whose cultural background had so much in common with that of the Samaritan woman, \u201cI am jealous for you with a godly jealousy, for I betrothed you to one husband, so as to present you as a pure virgin to Christ\u201d (2 Cor 11:2). In the physical realm, virginity is not something that can be gained once lost, but in the spiritual realm, it seems that Paul anticipates just such a thing. By this miracle of grace, the church can thus be in reality a prize worthy of the greatest of champions, the Son of God, as she is changed from a Samaritan woman to a Rebekah. Paul\u2019s words imply that it is the goal of the Christian ministry to prepare the church to become this glorious prize. This observation is a fitting introduction to the next chapter, where we see Jesus as the divine lawgiver, instructing his people how to live.<\/p>\n
THE UPPER ROOM DISCOURSE IN LIGHT OF JESUS BEING THE BRIDEGROOM<\/p>\n
While there is no overt marriage terminology in the upper room discourse of Jesus, the same may be said of the giving of the law from Mt. Sinai. Yet we have seen that the Sinai covenant is analogous to the marriage covenant, and in the next chapter we will see that in several ways the upper room is a \u201cnew Sinai.\u201d I close this chapter by mentioning several features of the upper room discourse that can be better understood with the idea of Jesus as the bridegroom as background.
\nIn John 14:1, Jesus says to the disciples, \u201cBelieve in God; believe also in me.\u201d We saw in the previous chapter that there is good reason to believe that in John 4, trusting in Jesus takes the place of the betrothal found in the OT accounts of a man meeting a woman at a well. This observation raises the question of the role of faith in this divine-human marital relationship. The marriage supper of the Lamb is in the future, when the Lord returns. How do Christ\u2019s followers behave between now and then? The answer is that they get ready, in faith. By faith they pursue righteousness and holiness, believing that he is coming again.
\nA related matter is that of consecration. The section in the Talmud dealing with betrothal and marriage is called Qiddushin, \u201choly things\u201d or \u201cconsecration\/sanctification.\u201d When a man and woman are engaged to be married, they consecrate themselves to one another. During the time of engagement, they remain faithful and will not consider any rivals. Jesus speaks of consecration in John 17:17, 19, where we learn that Jesus consecrates himself for the sake of his people, in order that his people might be consecrated (or, sanctified, v. 19). In v. 17, he asks the Father to consecrate the disciples in the Father\u2019s truth, his word. It is clear from this that believers are not able to consecrate themselves, and this is in keeping with what we have already seen concerning our undesirable origins. In Tg. Neof. [mg.] Lev 22:32, the LORD says he is the one \u201cwho sanctified you in my Word.\u201d
\nCustomarily, a prospective bridegroom gives a ring to his beloved as a token of the seriousness of his promise. Before a ring became standard, he could give anything of value, including money. This engagement gift reminds the beloved of their commitment and should keep her from being tempted by any rival lover. In the upper room, Jesus also gives a gift of great value, in context also mentioning a great rival for the believer\u2019s affections: \u201cPeace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives, do I give to you\u201d (John 14:27). The world can dazzle Christ\u2019s followers with enticing offers, but they are nothing like what Christ gives them\u2014his peace. This peace is a token of his consecration for their sake. It is the gift of great value that he leaves his people as a sign that he will come again for them. Of course, the world is not just a rival, and it is not a legitimate rival, another who loves the followers of Christ. The world is an evil seducer who puts on a pretty face to entice them, to lure them away, to defile them and bring them misery and death. This desire may not be conscious on the part of the world, but it is Satan\u2019s desire, and he uses the world to speak to believers, to seduce them, that they might \u201cbe led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ\u201d (2 Cor 11:3).<\/p>\n
CONCLUSIONS<\/p>\n
By considering the theme of Jesus as bridegroom of his people in light of its OT background, with its typological analogies, both human and divine, we have seen yet another way in which the Gospel of John develops the theme, \u201cthe Word became flesh.\u201d As the divine Word met Israel at the well in Tg. Neof. Exod 17, as Jacob and Moses met their future brides at a well, and as Abraham\u2019s servant met Rebekah at a well, Jesus meets the Samaritan woman, symbolic of his bride, the church. In John\u2019s presentation, Jesus is the divine-human servant-bridegroom who saves and delivers his bride by his waging of war against the devil, and he consecrates himself so that she might be holy, faithful to him as she waits for his return.<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
Jesus the Lawgiver of His People<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
God is the lawgiver of his people throughout the OT. He gave Adam and Eve, Noah, the patriarchs, and then Israel commandments to keep. Most prominently, God gave Israel his law on Mt. Sinai, but he gave his people laws at other times as well, such as the Sabbath commandment at the giving of the manna in Exod 16, the laws of Deuteronomy before they entered the land, and other laws at later times through other prophets.
\nIn this chapter, we look at the words of Jesus in John in light of this OT background as another example of \u201cthe Word became flesh.\u201d As interpreted in the Pal. Tgs. of the Pentateuch, Israel heard the voice of the Word from Mt. Sinai, and Moses gave the law as a result of the Word commanding him what to say to Israel. In the ministry of Jesus, his people again heard the voice of the Word, the divine lawgiver, though speaking as a man like Moses.
\nAgain we will see that there is not only continuity from OT to NT on this theme, but change as well, due to the Word (understood as God the Son) becoming flesh. Jesus speaks not only as lawgiver, but also as one who is sent by the Father. He is thus also the human lawgiver, as was Moses. Finally, we see that Jesus, as one who was born under the law, is also the law keeper; he kept the same law God gave to Israel through him. His perfect obedience to that law sent him to the cross and secured the salvation of those who believe in him.<\/p>\n
CONNECTION TO THE THEME OF JESUS AS BRIDEGROOM<\/p>\n
Why do we consider the theme of Jesus as lawgiver after considering the theme of Jesus as bridegroom? We have already seen that the Sinai covenant is analogous to the human marriage covenant. This idea is well attested in the Prophets (most obviously Hosea) and in Judaism. In the Tg. Song, the whole Song of Solomon is allegorized as a history of God\u2019s dealings with his people. We will see in the next chapter that \u201cYou will seek me but will not find me\u201d (John 7:34) could relate to the theme of the withdrawal of the Shekinah as experienced by Israel as a result of the golden calf incident, which is the Targum\u2019s interpretation of Song 3:2, \u201cI sought him, but did not find him.\u201d We can contrast this view of God as bridegroom of his people with that of polytheistic religions in which the gods literally had wives (goddesses) and produced children (other gods) by them.
\nIf God\u2019s relationship to Israel is analogous to the marriage relationship, then God\u2019s law, as given through Moses, governs that relationship. We may think not only of a marriage contract, but also of the marriage vows. In the traditional marriage vows of English-speaking Christians, husband and wife in large part promise the same things, but there are also differences. The husband promises to cherish his wife, and the wife promises to obey her husband. This difference is also brought out in Exod 19:5\u20136, which, as has been mentioned before, can be viewed as God\u2019s \u201cproposal\u201d to Israel. For his part, the LORD promises to regard Israel as his special treasure, chosen from among all the nations, just as a man should set his affection on one woman and forsake all others. The condition for this special affection from God is that Israel obey him. In v. 8, Israel accepts the proposal: \u201cAll that the LORD has spoken, we will do.\u201d
\nIs this idea applicable in the NT? Peter quotes Exod 19:5, referring to Christians as \u201ca people for God\u2019s own possession\u201d who have been called out of darkness into light (1 Pet 2:9), just as Israel was called out of Egypt to the promised land to keep God\u2019s law. We are called to be a holy people, just as Israel was, and this holiness is defined as keeping his law.
\nWe have also seen how John 1:11\u201312 can be related to Exod 19:5, in which the proposal \u201cif you will indeed listen to my voice\u201d is rendered \u201cif you will indeed receive my Word\u201d in Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J. (\u201clisten to the voice of my Word\u201d in Tg. Neof.). This means that the idea of receiving Christ the Word necessarily implies obedience, not merely receiving a gift with no conditions. Saving faith is necessarily accompanied by obedience, as we can see for example from John 17:6 (\u201cthey have kept your word\u201d) and 17:8 (the disciples received the words of the Father which Jesus gave to them, and they believed that he was sent by the Father).<\/p>\n
THE OT LAW WAS GIVEN THROUGH THE SON<\/p>\n
The Voice of the Word from Sinai<\/p>\n
One way that John shows Jesus as the divine lawgiver is by calling him the Word. One major application of Word in the Targums is to the giving of the law, and we see in the words of Jesus numerous echoes of the targumic Word, that is, the divine Word, as lawgiver.
\nFor example, according to Tg. Neof., CTg. F, and Frg. Tgs. P, V Exod 19:3, God\u2019s \u201cproposal\u201d to Israel in Exod 19:5\u20136 was spoken by the Word (Dibbera) of the LORD. The people answered in v. 8 (Tg. Neof. [mg.], C. Tg. F, Frg. Tgs. P, V), \u201call that the Word of the LORD has spoken we will do.\u201d A similar response follows the giving of the law: \u201cAll that the LORD has spoken, we will do, and we will listen\u201d (Exod 24:7). None of the Targums read \u201cthe Word of the LORD\u201d here, but this verse is quoted in Tg. Neof. and Frg. Tgs. P, V Deut 33:2 as follows: \u201cAll that the Word of the LORD has spoken, we will do, and we will listen\u201d (\u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05e2; Tg. Neof., Frg. Tg. V); \u201cwe will receive\u201d (\u05e7\u05d1\u05dc; Frg. Tg. P). In addition, dozens of times where the MT reads \u201cthe LORD said\u201d in connection with the giving of the law, Tg. Neof. [mg.] indicates \u201cthe Word of the LORD said.\u201d
\nIn connection with the giving of the Ten Commandments, God says in Exod 19:9, \u201cI am going to come to you.\u201d Here Tg. Neof. and Frg. Tgs. P, V read, \u201cMy Word will be revealed to you\u201d (similarly Tg. Neof. [mg.] and Frg. Tgs. P, V 19:11, for MT \u201cthe LORD will come down\u201d). Targum Neofiti 19:20 says \u201cthe glory of the Shekinah of the LORD\u201d (mg. and Frg. Tgs. P, V: \u201cthe Word of the LORD\u201d) was revealed on Mt. Sinai, where the Word of the LORD summoned Moses. The Ten Commandments are introduced by \u201cthe Word of the LORD spoke all these words\u201d (Tg. Neof. [mg.]; Frg. Tgs. P, V Exod 20:1; P uses Dibbera).
\nLooking back at the giving of the Ten Commandments, Moses says in Deut 4:12, (1) \u201cthe LORD spoke to you from the midst of the fire\u201d; (2) \u201cyou heard the sound of words, but you saw no form\u201d\u2014(3) \u201conly a voice.\u201d For (1) Tg. Neof. [mg.] has \u201cthe Word of the LORD spoke to you.\u201d For (2) Tg. Ps.-J. has \u201cyou heard the voice of the Word\u201d [Dibbura]. For (3) Tg. Neof. has, \u201conly the voice of his Word.\u201d
\nSimilarly, in Deut 4:36 Moses says, \u201cFrom heaven he let you hear his voice \u2026 and you heard his words from the midst of the fire.\u201d The Tgs. Onq., Ps.-J., and Neof. say \u201che let you hear the voice of his Word\u201d from the fire. For \u201chis words,\u201d Tgs. Onq. and Ps.-J. use \u05e4\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05d2\u05b8\u05bc\u05dd (pithgam), the usual translation of \u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05d1\u05b8\u05e8 (dabar), but Tg. Neof. uses the plural of \u05d3\u05d1\u05d9\u05e8 (dibber), to indicate the Ten Commandments. In Tgs. Onq., Ps.-J., and Neof. Deut 5:5, Moses says that at Mt. Sinai \u201cI stood between the Word of the LORD and you.\u201d
\nMoses recounts the response of the people to the Sinai revelation as follows in Tg. Neof. Deut 5:23\u201328:<\/p>\n
23When you heard the voice of his Word from the midst of the darkness \u2026 you came near to me \u2026 24and you said, \u201cBehold, the Word of the LORD our God has shown us his glory and his power, and we have heard the voice of his Word from the midst of the flames of fire. This day we have seen that the Word of the LORD can speak with a son of man and he can live. 25And now, why should we die? For this great fire will consume us; if we hear any more the voice of the Word of the LORD our God, we shall die. 26For who is there of all flesh who has heard the voice of the Word of the living God speaking from the midst of the flames of fire, like us, and lived? 27You go near and hear all that the LORD our God will say, and you shall speak with us all that the LORD your God will speak with you, and we will hear and do it.\u201d 28And the Word of the LORD heard the voice of your words at that time.<\/p>\n
This passage, or its first-century predecessor, might illumine two passages from John 5. Firstly, in 5:25 Jesus says \u201can hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear shall live.\u201d Taking the targumic \u201cvoice of the Word of the LORD\u201d as \u201cthe voice of the Son of God,\u201d we can see a development from Deut 5:25\u201326 to John 5:25. On Mt. Sinai, the living heard the voice of the Son of God and continued to live (physically, but later died in their sin in the wilderness). They feared that if they heard the voice of the Son of God again they would die (physically). But Jesus says, \u201can hour is coming, and now is, when the (physically) dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear shall live.\u201d
\nSecondly, in John 5:38\u201339 Jesus tells the Jews (1) they have never heard the Father\u2019s voice; (2) nor seen his form; (3) the Father\u2019s word is not abiding in them, (4) for they do not believe in the one the Father sent. Clearly (3) and (4) are a sharp critique. But (2) is merely a statement of fact, not a criticism, since no one (except the Son), good or evil, has seen the Father. Is (1) part of the critique? Should they have heard the Father\u2019s voice, or is this also just a statement of fact\u2014that no one except the Son, good or evil, has heard the Father\u2019s voice, just as they have not seen his form?
\nIf we take \u201cnever\u201d to mean that Jesus is speaking to the Jews collectively throughout history, the meaning would be that Israel never heard the Father\u2019s voice\u2014not even from Mt. Sinai. The point could be that they heard the voice of the Son from Sinai. As noted above, they asked that they not hear his voice anymore, lest they die. They promised that if Moses would be God\u2019s representative, they would obey in everything. This ancient promise became an obligation for every generation; whenever that promise was read in the synagogue, an Israelite would say \u201camen\u201d to it. Jesus is telling them in v. 38, \u201cYou have not kept that ancient promise.\u201d They did not believe God\u2019s representative, whether Moses (v. 46\u201347), John (v.33), or the Word himself who has become flesh and speaks as a human sent by God.
\nThe context of this passage confirms that Jesus is saying not that he is just another in the line of those sent by God, but that he is the one who spoke to Israel from Mt. Sinai. If one is not careful, one might think that John 5:36\u201346 portrays Jesus as merely a spokesperson for God like Moses. In accordance with the people\u2019s request, Moses was God\u2019s representative. In Deut 18:18\u201319, the LORD promised that there will be future prophets like Moses to fulfill the same role. Jesus is saying that he is one such, sent by the Father, authenticated by him, and that the Jews should therefore believe him (John 5:36\u201338). Jesus does a prophet\u2019s job of reproving the LORD\u2019s people: \u201cYou do not have his word abiding in you\u201d (v. 38), \u201cyou do not have the love of God in yourselves\u201d v. 42). That is, they have not kept the great commandment of Deut 6:5\u201310, in which Moses commands Israel to love God with a whole heart and to keep the words Moses is commanding them on their hearts (i.e., that his word should abide in them). Further, they are commanded to listen to God\u2019s prophet (Deut 18:18\u201319), and they have not kept that. Jesus says he has come in his Father\u2019s name, which we related to Ps 118:26 (ch. 5), but which can also be related to Deut 18:19, which promises to send Israel prophets who will speak in God\u2019s name. In v. 46, Jesus says to \u201cthe Jews,\u201d \u201cIf you believed Moses (which they claim to do) you would believe me, for he wrote about me.\u201d That is, if they believed one genuine spokesperson for God, they should believe another, whom Moses wrote about in Deut 18:18\u201319. Likewise in v. 47, Jesus implies that his words are like the writings of Moses, the word of God delivered through a person.
\nBut the passage goes farther; it shows Jesus as the God of Moses. Reflecting the word order of the Greek, v. 46 reads, \u201cIf you believed Moses, you would believe me, for it was about me that he wrote.\u201d What is the law of Moses all about? The law of Moses is about the LORD, and what he did to save his people, and what he will do for them, and how he requires them to live so that the promises will be fulfilled for them. There is very little written in the law of Moses about a man who was to come in the future that would justify the statement, \u201cit was about me that he wrote.\u201d Moses wrote about the LORD, full of grace and truth (Exod 34:6), which is how John describes Jesus (John 1:14). Moses wrote about the LORD who revealed the meaning of his name to him, and through him, to Israel (Exod 3:14; 34:5\u20137), as did Jesus to the disciples, and through them, to believers today (John 17:6, 26). Moses wrote about the LORD who came down from heaven (Exod 3:8; 34:5), as John did about Jesus (John 6:38). Moses wrote about the LORD who as warrior fights for his people (Exod 34:11, etc.), as John did of Jesus (John 12:31\u201332, etc.). Moses wrote about the LORD as the bridegroom of his people (Exod 34:14\u201316, etc.), as is Jesus (John 4), and as the lawgiver of his people (Exod 34:7, etc.), as is Jesus.
\nThus John 5:46 can be interpreted along human lines, as noted above: if the Jews believed one genuine spokesperson for God they should believe another. But more significantly, it could be interpreted along divine lines: \u201cIf you believed Moses, you would believe me, for as my prophet, it was about me that he wrote.\u201d The Jews had a saying about Exod 14:31 that is similar to John 5:46 and tends to confirm this understanding of it (see Mekilta Exod 14:31 below). This is further confirmed by how Exod 14:31 is rendered in the Targums, keeping in mind that John has called Jesus the Word:<\/p>\n
Exod 14:31
\nThey believed in the LORD and in his servant Moses.
\nTgs. Neof., Ps.-J., Frg. Tg. P, C. Tg. J
\nThey believed in the name of the Word of the LORD (cf. John 1:12) and in the prophecy of his servant Moses.
\nTg. Onq.
\nThey believed in the Word of the LORD and in the prophecy of his servant Moses.
\nMekilta Exod 14:31
\nIf they believed Moses, how much more did they believe the LORD.
\nJohn 5:46
\nIf you believed Moses, you would believe me, for it was about me that he wrote.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In the case of Jesus, this revelation lasted not just a few moments, but several years. Jesus himself paraphrased Exod 34:10 in his upper room discourse: Exod 34:10 John 15:24 Before all your people I will do wonders which have not been done in all the earth, or among all the nations. If I had … <\/p>\n