JOHN 10
The context of John 10 occurs during the Feast of the Dedication, Hanukkah, which isn't apparent to the reader until verse 22. The Gospel of John is unique in that every important event and every important message made about Jesus by Jesus occurs during a Jewish feast, in or near the Temple. Given this information one would have to assume that Jesus spent the majority of his ministry in Jerusalem, hanging around the Temple which is not supported by the synoptic gospels nor would it have been likely that Jesus would move around so many times during the time in which he lived. Some scholars suggest that this was done to illustrate Jesus as the fulfillment of all that the Jewish feasts represent, which is saying they point Jesus as the Passover, as the Atonement, as the ingatherer, as the inextinguishable light, and ultimately, as the Messiah.
Hanukkah calls to mind the rededication of the Temple following the Maccabean revolt that wrested Judea and Jerusalem from the Selucid Empire in the second century B.C.E. At the time of Jesus, Judea was in a quasi state of autonomy that largely afforded Judeans control of their Temple and religion. Rome had all the military and political power and kept a watchful eye on the Temple as a hotspot for sedition and rebellion, which it ultimately became and resulted in Rome destroying Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 C.E..
A TALE OF TWO STORIES
John uses an interesting approach leading to the question of whether Jesus is the Messiah by having Jesus deliver an explanation of the type of Messiah he is by referring to himself as the Good Shepherd. In my opinion, Jesus explanation of the Good Shepherd was originally meant to stand alone as a teaching about Jesus and may have been related, derived from, or was a commentary on one of Jesus's parable, such as, the parable of the Lost Sheep in Matthew 18. The Good Shepherd story seems to be a insert into the Gospel of John, and has no direct connection to the Messiah question other than its placement by the writer or editors of John. The connection that is made to any linear time-line is its brief reference to the story about the healing of the blind man in chapter 9.
That the Good Shepherd story appears to be an editorial decision as to its placement and used by John to explain the type of Messiah Jesus is may be a stretch as it seemingly fails to accomplish that goal. Jesus's use of metaphors, as in, sheep, shepherd, gates, gatekeeper, bandits, thieves, and hired hands contains all sort of cryptic meanings and coded messages - a trademark of the author or editor behind this story. In fact, there actually appears to be two different stories of the Good Shepherd in this one telling. There is the story depicting Jesus as the Good Shepherd, and the story of Jesus as the gate melded together by writers of John
The first story or first part of the story is presented as an allegory or a figure of speech, depending on the translation of the Greek word παροιμία. Some translators have used the word, parable to translate that word, but there is a word for parable in Greek and its is not used here. In fact, παροιμία is not used in the other gospels. It is only used in reference to stories told by Jesus in John. What I find interesting is the recognition of allegory, and in this case, an allegorical story that continues to defy explanation even when explained by John's Jesus.
The first part of the story is about a shepherd taking his flock safely in and out of a sheepfold or pen. In this story we hear about those who sneak into the sheepfold by means other than the gate. This story has a gatekeeper, but it is unclear as to who or what, if anything the gatekeeper is in reference to. The second story clearly places Jesus in the role of the gate (code for judge) who knows who should and should not enter into the sheepfold. Both of these stories could stand alone and possibly reflect parables of Jesus or teaching about Jesus from unknown sources Nevertheless, these two stories are melded into one story which Jesus declaring he is the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep.
SNEAKERS, BANDITS AND THIEVES... OH MY!
In the final analysis, John uses these stories to reference Jesus's death and resurrection with Jesus portrayed in the role of the Good Shepherd as both judge of the earth and ruler of his flock, the church. In all of this telling, however, the references to thieves, bandits and hired hands are not clearly explained. For instance, it would be nice to know who exactly is being referenced when Jesus is talking about thieves, bandits, and hired hands.
Who are the people who sneak in? What is that in reference to?
More importantly, what does Jesus mean when he says all who came before him are bandits and thieves?
Let me stop briefly to point out that earlier in John Jesus states that he existed before Abraham and Moses. So if he is referring to those who came before him, who would that be? Everyone?
This appears to demonstrates what I've been saying all along, John is a composite of stories about Jesus; written by more than one author and edited by more than one editor. The writer and editor of this section doesn't appear aware that another writer or editor had Jesus existing before any others, which makes this claim appear to be in conflict with that particular piece of theology.
Of course, the common interpretation would be that this is in reference to people before Jesus' earthly ministry as a human. Fair enough, but even then, the category of "all who came before him" would include everyone all the way back to Adam and Eve. Most every Christian who hears this story glosses over the bandit and thieves part as if they know that what Jesus is referring to are false teachers, prophets and/or false messiahs; however, Jesus is not clear as to what this means. Here's a good spot to remember that it's not Jesus who is really talking here. The real speaker is this particular writer in John and I suspect, as with most of the writing in John, there is an agenda in the vagueness this story presents.
I suspect the audience this writer had in mind when writing this piece would have known exactly what was meant by thieves and bandits and therefore did not feel a need to have Jesus fully explain these particular metaphors. The times in which this was written were a dark and uncertain time for Christians and I don't doubt that writers saw a need to be cryptic in what they wrote for fear of it being caught and prosecuted, if not persecuted; especially if the two original stories came from a period before the destruction of the Temple. I suspect that the when John has Jesus saying all who came before him are bandits and thieves, he is meaning just that; that even the patriarchs and prophets of Israel were, at best, hired men who at some point demonstrated they didn't really care as much Jesus cares about the sheep. I also suspect that thieves, bandits, and those who sneak in by another way refers to elements who have infiltrated the Johannine Christian community, suggesting a different theology other than theirs or, more likely, who were trying to maintain ties with Judaism. The Gospel of John repeatedly places Jesus far beyond the reach of anyone who came before him; that at best, they could only point to him.
Needless to say, not everyone is part of Jesus's flock, but this writer opens the door, just a bit, to include that Jesus has sheep, followers who are not of this fold, who are not Jews or that there are Christians who are not in full step with the Johannine theological perspective. There is a missionary motif in this story about the shepherd leading the sheep out - to be sheep in the world, grazing about as it were. The sheepfold where they return to is the realm of God and Jesus is not only the Gate, but also the Gatekeeper. Again, the only good news here is if you're one of the sheep in the Johannine fold; one who believes that Jesus is God's only begotten Son, which brings us back to Hanukkah.
HANUKKAH
At the end of Jesus's Good Shepherd soliloquy, we find Jesus in the Temple during Hanukkah being pressed to answer the "Jew's" burning question as to whether he is the Messiah. This setting of Hanukah is during the darkest period of the year in the Northern Hemisphere. The world is cold and dark and itself becomes a metaphor for the conditions in which the young Church found itself in. Questions abounded about Jesus, about who he was and who he is. John addresses these contemporary questions at the time of writing by placing them in Jesus's day to have Jesus answer. Most importantly, for John, the setting of Hanukkah is about shedding light in a dark time and keeping it alive. As I have noted in other posts on John, not only was Judaism at risk of being annihilated after the destruction of the Temple, but Christianity was at risk by its association with Judaism. So to lend authority to the answer to the contemporary questions, Christians were likely to have about Jesus, John has the Jews of Jesus's day ask the burning questions of his day.
THE SNARKINESS OF JESUS
The way John presents their question contains the sense of urgency and earnestness that these early Christians had about Jesus in the "Jews" in the Temple to know who Jesus is. - "Don't keep us wondering. Tell us in plain language who you are?"
True to the Johannine way of portraying Jesus, Jesus doesn't answer their direct questions with a direct answer. As usual in John, Jesus violates almost every modern day rule regarding how to avoid conflict by avoid being vague and conflictual. He gives a rather snarky response (and here I'll paraphrase), "I've told you. I've shown you, but you don't believe and therefore you can't get it and are not part of my flock. If you were, you'd have figured this out."
To make matters worse, Jesus takes his lead from Jacob's second youngest son Joseph and begins talking about his heavenly Father and how his sheep will follow him and never leave; they will have eternal life. What his heavenly Father has given him is better than anyone else and it can't be taken away because he and his Father are one and it's clear that Jews in the Temple who are trying to figure him out are not part of his flock.
It's no wonder that the "Jews" started picking up stones. But wait - Jesus gets even more snarky (my paraphrase), "For what miracle are you going to stone me for (you ingrates). To which they reply (my paraphrase), "It's not because of them, you idiot, its because you're being such a blasphemer (you narcissistic ass)."
Jesus seems back off a bit after that and says (my paraphrase), "Well if you can't believe in who I am at least believe in the works I do. From there you might be able to figure this out." Then the Jews try to arrest Jesus. One more time he escapes because, it's not his time and he head to the Jordan river were people affirm him, as John the Baptist did and believed.
* * * * * * * * * *
What this writer in John is affirming is that those connected to the Temple (the synagogue by extension), the Judaizers in their midst, refuse to believe and those outside of this formal, traditional religion are much more receptive. I realize that I have spent little time on what Christians get from this story; that Jesus, as the Good Shepherd, lays down his life for his sheep. That is the essential message Christians hear and take heart in, but I feel it is important to know the context this essential message is couched in which, to my twenty-first century ears, sounds less heartening.
What John 10 reveals is the struggle the early church found itself in trying to maintain its identity as a community of believers. Unlike Paul, the question for the Johannine community was not a matter of faith, but rather what to believe in by which faith could be invested? As such, knowing what and who to believe became more important than expressing faith in terms of doing in spite of not fully knowing, as Paul taught. The result of this need to know and to know who to trust and who not to trust resulted in producing the work we are currently looking at, the Gospel of John.
Until next time, stay faithful.
No comments:
Post a Comment