who Jesus is (according to John B)

John 1:29-37 ... We have seen that John  the Baptiser was very unselfish about his task.  He was clear that he was here to point to another person who would be much more important than him.  Note in this section we are talking most of the time about John as in John the one who Baptised, not John our writer.

Now for the first time in the introductory stories, Jesus appears.  In this incident, Jesus doesn't even say or do anything, it is all about John recognising Jesus for who he really is.

John tells the people around him how he knows who Jesus is.  First, he had known that he must look out for this person.  He had been given a way to recognise him: he would see a manifestation of the Holy Spirit come down on him.  He also knew that the whole point of his baptising people with water was to prepare people for this person who would invite people to be baptised with the Holy Spirit.  John clearly sees this as a big step up from what he is able to offer people.  In this passage (covering two days) John deliberately seems to invite people who are listening to him to go to Jesus instead, and even seems to hand over two of his own followers to become followers of Jesus.
Note: Baptising is a sort of ceremonial or ritual washing which is done as a symbol of something happening inside a person.

So on this day as Jesus comes towards him, John knows who he is.  He does what he has been saying he will do:  He tells everyone who is there that Jesus is the one he has been telling them to expect.  But he does more.  Before his whole explanation, he says:
"Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!"
This is a remarkable statement.  He uses it again the next day when he encourages two of his disciples to go with Jesus.  But what does it mean?

In helping people to understand sin and holiness God had given some instructions for how people could relate to him without forgetting his perfection and purity.  This always involved sacrificing a lamb; this was a sign that sin is such a serious matter with respect to God's holiness that only death can touch it.  For sacrifice the lamb chosen had to be perfect, the best.  A lamb was sacrificed when an individual committed some obvious sin.  But once a year, everyone came together and each family sacrificed a lamb.  Then, at another time in the year, the priests sacrificed a special lamb to take away the sin of the whole nation.

So, when John said that Jesus was the 'Lamb of God', people would have known that he was talking about sacrifice and sin and holiness.  But in designating this Lamb as 'taking away the sin of the world'. a big jump is being made indicating some kind of super-sacrifice.  Obviously the full meaning is hidden.  It is like a conundrum waiting to tease our minds, a puzzle inviting us to explore.

And now we come to John the writer and why he used this story.  But that needs another post!

aside: John's (the author) use of names

Excuse the digression into counting words and silly details

I find it fascinating, but feel free to miss this if you don't

I find it fascinating that John so seldom names any of the people in his record.
Here is a list:

• John (the Baptiser)  John's name is mentioned twice in the prologue, where the reference to a named individual grounds the otherwise cosmic outpouring of mystery.  His name then comes up in the introduction, repeatedly, which forms the link to the esoteric prologue.  John is again the named protagonist in a long discussion at the start of the second group of stories.  In all these events the issue is the identity of Jesus.  John is never named in this gospel again.  This is partly of course because he died fairly early during Jesus' ministry, but it is also because from now on it is Jesus himself who carries the question of his identity.  Twice after this John is mentioned by name: in the third section Jesus speaks of John's testimony to his identity, and in the sixth section the people in the crowd remember what he had said about Jesus. P + I + 2 + (3 + 6)
• Andrew                   Andrew is not really a key player in events, and yet John (our author) chooses to call him by name three times.  In every case he is associated with Philip.  The first time we encounter Andrew is in the introduction; the second time is in the fourth grouping of events, which is the centre of the first part of John's record; the third instance is in the incident which forms the hinge between the first and second halves of the text as a whole.  SO: structurally the occurrence of Andrew's name becomes a marker of how the story is unfolding.  I + 4 + H
• Simon (Peter)       Peter is the person mentioned most often by name in John's narrative, other than Jesus.  But nearly all the stories about him happen in the second part of the record, after the "hinge" stories, where he becomes the main carrier of the story.  However, we are introduced to him in the introduction (!) and see him again in one key sentence in the fourth collection of events.  I + 4 + 7 + inc + 7 + C + E
• Philip                    Philip is linked to Andrew in John's record, and their names are used together in the three places already mentioned.  Since in two of the events these two men are clearly close friends, and interact as part of what happens, this may have influenced John to use them both in the introductory narrative, where they are each an example of a person who introduces another to Jesus.  Philip, however, is mentioned a fourth time in the flow of the story ... this time during the long record of conversation between Jesus and his closest associates which forms a strange interlude in the narrative of Jesus' death (ie the seventh, and last, group of stories).  It would almost seem expected for another Philip story to appear in the conclusion, but John never does what we expect, and Philip disappears from view at this point.   I + 4 + H + inc
• Nathaniel             Nathaniel is the most enigmatic character in John.  No one else mentions him, and John only includes him twice.  Once, in a long incident in the introduction, he is a major character; the other time, among the concluding stories, Nathaniel is a name only.  Beginning and end, introduction and conclusion:  Nathaniel is like a bracket in John'e "life of Jesus"!  I + C

There are other people mentioned by name - and we will look at how they fit into the structure in a later post, but here is a list so long:  Nicodemus, Mary, Martha, Lazarus, Thomas, Judas, (Annas, Caiaphas, Pilate), Mary (wife of Clopas), Mary (Magdalene), Joseph.
Notice how few there are, and be alert as we read through John for how many individuals are key players in the flow of the narrative while remaining anonymous; even Jesus' mother is not named!  There are at least seven main characters without names, not counting the rest of the closer band of followers.  

As one can see, a disproportionate number of the people who are mentioned by name in the text as a whole, are introduced in this relatively short section.  This shows us that the lack of names in the rest of the narrative is not an accident, and not because John was too old to remember who did what.  He chooses to use names sparingly as part of the way he tells his story.

John wants us to see Jesus and only Jesus, and so he leaves out the one thing that might tempt us to glorify other people, to use other people perhaps as intermediaries between us and Jesus: names.
But John uses names where he needs to, and the first thing he needs names to tell us is that this is a true story of events that really took place ... real people, from real places at particular times were involved in the incidents he records for us.
As we can see from the detailed analysis (see above, it might help to compare this with the "page" on structure) he also uses named characters as pointers to how he has organised the events to convey meaning, because the reappearance or introduction of a person by name can form a connection, or mark a new turn of the plot.
John also uses people, especially John at the beginning and Peter towards the end, to carry the main question (who is Jesus) when the events don't allow John to show us Jesus through his own eyes.

Who John B is

John 1:19-28 ... again
The author wants us to be clear here: John the Baptiser was important, but he was definitely not the person we were introduced to in the prologue.  
All very well, but in that case, who is he, and why is he in our story at all?

Fortunately the Jewish leaders who had been sent to ask him who he was didn't like a non-answer any more than we do.  In fact nobody is keen on uninformative replies.  So, they ask, and we get to hear John B's self-definition.

"I am the voice ..."
He uses a passage of the Bible (what we call the Old Testament, which was all there was at the time, since what we call the New Testament is all about Jesus) and continues his stand for humility.  He is just a voice; the only important thing is the message, the words that point to someone else.

Of course this does not satisfy the questioners.  John B is acting outside their paradigm; he is using a symbol (baptism) in a way that doesn't fit with their expectations.  They want to know how he dares to do this.  His answer is simple: Just wait till you see who's coming!

Right from the first of the events he records for us, our author is helping us to connect with the idea that Jesus is above and beyond what people were expecting.  They were waiting for God to send someone who would baptise.  So here comes a person doing just that ... but what they are hoping for is going to turn out to be more than they have bargained for.
"I baptise with water ..." yes, well that is what baptism is ... ceremonial washing.  Water.
'... but someone is coming after me who is much greater than I am.'  Someone is already here, but unrecognized by you.  I shouldn't even be allowed to serve him, he is so great.

This is an interesting slight on John's part.  These are important men in the social and religious life of the nation, but John refuses to give them a straight answer; more, what he does say implies that they have no understanding of what God is doing.

In telling us about this interaction, the writer does several things at once, and this is his usual style - multiple layers in every choice.  Most obviously, we are given information about Jesus and John - things we already know from the prologue, but placed here in their local context.  John is preparing the way for Jesus so that it will be easier for people to accept him.  Jesus is super-important in comparison to John.

But, we are also introduced to some important themes that will follow us as we read.  The leaders of the people are the very one who will misunderstand Jesus, who will be unable to let go of their preconceived ideas.  More than that, they are potentially hostile to God doing things outside their system; they want things nicely boxed.

It is rather intriguing to notice, before we leave off this part of the story, that John seems to purposefully refrain from telling these men anything useful.  " ... among you stands one you do not know."  It is only the next day that he identifies Jesus, and gives people any real information about him.  Any of yesterday's messengers who were genuinely interested might have stayed to hear, but the message to the leaders was enigmatic in the extreme!

It's like that for us readers too ... we have to come back for more, if we want it.

who John (the Baptiser) is not

The introduction section consists of four stories, and all of them revolve around two ideas: 

who is Jesus and how do various people respond to him.

John 1:19-28


The first story John (the writer) tells us is about John (the Baptiser).  This is one of his writing tricks, as he carries us forward into the story by catching onto something he has already put in our minds.  Here he is picking up the thread of the two ellipses in his cosmic prologue which were more down to earth.  So, we already know that a man called John was sent from God, and he showed people which person (Jesus) was the one from God.  Now we are going to hear actual records about events, days when he did these things.

People come to John here, specifically to ask who he is.  This clears out of the way any idea that perhaps John was the important one.  He is very clear, and a list emerges of who he is NOT.

• not the Messiah//  The Messiah basically means the one chosen by God.  Although "Messiah" is actually the Hebrew for "anointed one".  This translation still doesn't mean anything to most of us, so I may as well add that it means to have something (usually a fragrant oil) poured over one.  People were anointed when they were appointed to specific roles or tasks.  This was a physical ceremony (public or private) in appointing kings and priests, where oil was poured over the person's head.  It was full of symbolic meaning, and the idea of anointing came to carry a metaphorical meaning of being appointed by God.  The background idea of God's Spirit poured over the person (symbolised by the oil) carries the connotation both of authority and ability being conferred on the one appointed.  As God revealed that the appalling state of the world could only be dealt with by someone "super-special" sent direct from him, the word "Messiah" became associated with this person who was everyone's hope and prayer.
• not Elijah//  God had promised that a time would come when he would change everything.  People were expecting that God would send "Elijah" to prepare people for this time.   The original Elijah was a prophet, in other words, a person who gave messages from God to his people, especially the leaders.  Elijah was major character in the story of God's interaction with his people, and lived at a time when the other leaders were choosing to behave contrary to God's way, and even worshiped idols.  Elijah helped people see that God was real and the idols weren't.  (See 1Kings 18.)   Much later, during a time when people who said they belonged to God were living just like everyone else, God promised that he would send "Elijah" to turn people back to properly following him before he acted in a final cataclysm.  (See the last couple of verses of the Old Testament, Malachi 4:5-6.)   
• not the Prophet//  The Prophet was title for a person God was expected to send to finally sort out the world.  The phrase comes from where Moses was explaining to God's people that they were not allowed to use "magical" or "spiritual" practices to try to find things out.  He told them that God would send them 'a prophet like me', who would tell them anything God wanted them to know.  (See Deuteronomy 18:15.)  Later, at the end of Deuteronomy after the part Moses had had written down, a writer commented that 'since then no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses'.  This prophet was expected to 'show the mighty power' and 'perform awesome deeds' because God knows him 'face to face'.  (See Deuteronomy 34:10-12.)  Although in Moses was talking about 'ordinary' prophets who would help people to know how to follow God properly, the person who wrote the post-script was glorifying Moses as the super-prophet.  This combination of verses got people using the title "The Prophet" to mean the "super-special" person who God would send.

 John B is amazing here.  He has a huge following of people, and is so well known, and causing such a stir that the top leaders send people to try to find out 'who' he is.  Instead of using his fame to collect one of the titles currently up for grabs, he refuses any 'glory'.  It would have enhanced his standing enormously to claim just one of these titles for himself.  He could even have argued that it would do Jesus good if he claimed to be Elijah or the Prophet so that people would listen to him more when he told them about Jesus.

But he is so not into that.  He sees Jesus as in a completely different league, so he can't see himself as 'entitled'.  The role he has is enough, because Jesus is so beyond-words great to him ...

... but more of that next post!

local introduction

If the first section of John's record could be called "cosmic prologue", this second part can be aptly titiled "local introduction".

This Introduction is John 1:19-51.

It is a contrast to the prologue in almost every way.
Here John's writing is almost entirely narrative.  He introduces us by name to almost as many individuals than in as appear in the following 24 pages.  John is not big on introducing individuals because his focus is all on Jesus, and when he does, he seldom uses names.   It is a collection of vignettes, little stories which each encapsulate something which is important to John.  Everything is not only earth-bound (as opposed to the cosmic and esoteric feel of the prologue) but intensely geographically parochial.  It all happens in the same tiny area, much more confined than the narrative to follow.  In fact, the next time we will see this many names in so few verses will be at the very end of John's record.

Yet it is still definitely introductory, not yet part of the main text, but leading into it and preparing us for what follows.
We start with John the Baptiser, whom we have already met (see previous posts), and though we don't know this, we will not encounter him again in John our Writer's story.  Through him we are introduced to two people who will be important in the stories to come, and through them to yet others who will be encountered later.  These people each give us some metaphor as a way of seeing who Jesus is.   Each of these pictures is revisited more or less explicitly in the last of John's main narrative sections (the seventh) as he tells the story of Jesus' trial and crucifixion.

Next up, a look at each of the events which John uses to introduce us to the story to follow:

unique glory (John)

Like the second part of the prologue, this part includes John the Baptiser and has a report of something he said about Jesus which illustrates the main point.  There we were told that he (John the Baptiser) came in order to testify to who Jesus was; here we are told a snippet of what he told people.

This sentence tells us that John the Baptiser started talking about Jesus before Jesus actually arrived on the scene.  Then, when Jesus was there, he pointed him out as the one he had been telling them about.  It is helpful that Jesus didn't simply come "out of the blue" and proclaim himself someone special.  There was someone else who knew something of what was happening, and could say that Jesus was from God.

John the Baptiser told people that there was another person coming who was more important than he was.  He hinted that this person would be greater because he existed before John himself did.  The phrase "he was before me"  is a very short statement, and on its own would be rather enigmatic.  But here it serves as a brief pointer that what John our Writer is telling us (Jesus is unique, was there is the beginning, came from God and so on) is not merely his own assessment, but links back to what God had John the Baptiser say in advance about Jesus.

John the Writer calls this "testifying", or giving evidence.  John the Baptiser was kind of like an expert witness in a court; he had information which other people needed if they were to make a correct assessment of Jesus.

So who is this person?

So, onward with John's poetic prologue.  We move to the next paragraph John 1:14-17 which matches the paragraph about life and light in several ways.  The most obvious is that each has a  parenthesis about John (the Baptiser) and his witness to Jesus.  The initial sentence in this paragraph is about 'coming among us' and in the earlier paragraph the last sentence is about 'coming into the world'.  This doesn't mean that there is no resonance with the other paragraphs though!

One of the important things that happens in this paragraph is that John clearly identifies who he is writing about.  He starts by referring to the person he is speaking about as 'the Word' (this is the only time after the first verse); he ends by refering to Jesus Christ.  In between, he introduces the term 'the one and only' which he will use in the next paragraph.  So now we have the name of this person.  This is important for connecting us with the historical narrative which follows.  We know that this first bit is not random, but inviting us into the story of Jesus.

We are given more understanding of what John is asking us to be open to.  Up to now he has just said that the one he is talking about 'came' into the world.  This could mean some other sort of esoteric 'appearing'.  But here we are told that he 'became flesh', or became body.  If we have been reading closely up to now, this should astonish us.  We have been told that this being is cosmic in power and universal in significance; now we are told that he became animal, in the sense of consisting of muscle and bone.  That is hugely difficult to get our minds around, but John doesn't labour the point here. 

He is going to give us the rest of the story to come to terms with what he has said and some of what it might mean. Right now what he is doing is planting the thought in our minds so that the story is able to ask us the questions as we go along.

light and life (part two)

Most languages and cultures use the image of light in metaphors built into the language, and most philosophies (whether religion or ideology) use it too.  In English we use "enlightenment", in both technical and non-technical senses, when we are referring to a movement from superstition to actual understanding, or for new attitudes emerging from recognition of new information.  The same word is used in Buddhism and many new age religions to describe the major spiritual change offered to the diligent disciple.  More mundane examples: it dawned on me = I realised, we often cartoon a idea as a light bulb.


So John now puts the light in a context: darkness, of course.  The whole point of light is that it shines in the darkness and stops it being dark.
John never tells us what the light means, and there are all sorts of pronouncements as to what precisely he intends.  But, if someone uses an image it is usually because the idea is too rich for more precise ways of describing it.  We are not meant to define the light; at this point we are meant to get a picture inside us that will keep popping up to make us wonder about this person who will be the subject of the narrative.  In a sense, the more the image bounces around in our heads creating resonances, the better for John's purpose.  This is poetry, not systematic analysis.

But, that doesn't mean that John doesn't tell us anything about the light.  It doesn't mean that I can take the image and turn it to my own purposes. 

John elaborates by extending the image:  "The light shines in the darkness ..."  It is obvious in a silly way, but this is important.  Light is not darkness, it dissapates darkness.  This goes further in that the darkness has not overcome/understood the light.  In most translations one of these two words occurs in the text, and the other in a footnote, because the Greek word is ambiguous; it means both. We shouldn't try to work out which is the meaning here, but should discover the vitality of both meanings held together.  (We have two English words that give a similar feel: comprehend - to understand or to surround and limit; grasp - to understand or to hold onto and not let go.)  Darkness is helpless with respect to light.  It has no hold on light, it can't limit light, it can't stop light, it can't even 'understand' light.  John shows us that we are not talking about two equal entities or qualities, a sort of ying and yang that are both necessary and must be balanced, held together, and even mixed.  Darkness is not light, and ultimately cannot co-exist with it. 

Now we have this explosive graphic idea in our minds, John breaks off for his little piece of story ...

light and life (part one)

In this next part of John's prologue (before-word) we get introduced to more of his abstract style, his unique words and his creative imagery.

John 1:4-9
John loves to use convolution in the way he organises the material he is presenting.  Not for him the linear logical progression or the chronological narative movement.  Here we see this in the way he uses an elipsis of thought; that is, the main thing he is telling us is interupted by an aside which complements it.
The main part is abstract cosmic/global imagery which tells us more about the One he is introducing. (verses 4,5&9)  The secondary part introduces us to John (the Baptiser) and is almost narrative.  (verses 6-8)
We will see this technique again in the fourth section of the prologue, and then several times as we explore the main narative flow of John.

As John continues his masterful manipulation of words (see previous post) here, we are introduced also to another of his quirks.  There are a number of words which are unevenly but repeatedly sprinkled though his story; these words partly work as connectors to carry us through the narative.  However they also serve to carry meaning from one section to another gradually interlinking disparate events to create, possibly without his readers even realising it, the abstract picture he wishes to leave us with.

The Life, The Light
The two words which John uses here are "life" and "light", ad we will encounter both of these again in key moments in John's record.  He is still telling us about "the Word", but he never uses that appelation again, except for once in the fourth section of the prologue.  From now on, until we are well into the introductory stories, this person is mainly refered to by pronouns.

"In him was life..." John has already told us that nothing was created without him, but now he gets more intense; not only did he make all 'stuff', but life (so much more than mere matter, as we all experience, even as we try to make it in the laboratory) was in him.  He didn't just make it, that was 'all things'; he has life or perhaps in a manner of speaking is life (as he himself will say later).  However it is phrased, John is clear that life is initimately connected with this person.  Later, as he repeatedly uses the word, we will discover his plan to invest this idea with a deeper and richer meaning than we normally afford it.  But even here, in identifying 'that life' as 'the light of all people', John gives us a clue that there is more involved than we might expect.  For anyone familiar with Genesis, already recalled by the first phrase of John's writing, there could be a connection set up with Genesis 2 which refers to God beathing the 'breath of life' into the nostrils of the person he had formed.

Now we are introduced (this is after all the prologue, and it is so carefully crafted that every sentence has something new in it) to yet another word: "light".  This word will resonate though the rest of John's work (and his other works as well) as much or more than the word "life".  Light is metaphorical and is identified with 'that life'.
Of course, for readers familiar with the Jewish Scriptures and the words 'in the beginning' still in their minds, the light recalls the first recorded command of God in Genesis 1:  "Let there be light."  In identifying light with life John moves into the symbolic world. And now for the first time he introduces people because this life, his life, is the light of all people (see next post).  So now we know that we are talking in philosophical pictures.

 ... to be continued

 

cosmic prologue

Before he even gets to the introduction, John gives us a startling glance at the cosmic origins and implications of the narrative which we are about to read.    

John 1:1-18
He starts with pre-space and non-time; he uses multidimensional images; he moves through the enitire world of being human; and he imagines seeing God.  But in this telescopic whirlwind of transcendence, John places two small ellipses (like this, in brackets, only Greek doesn't have brackets) which prepare us as readers for the sudden entry into tangible history which will happen in the next sentence.

It really is a glance - less than half a page when the rest of his account is 25 pages.  At the end of his account, there is a corresponding epilogue after the conclusion.  It is even more brief, at only one sentence!

It is almost as if John wants us to be ready to assess his narrative in the cosmic context, but he wants Jesus' life to speak for him.  So he primes us, but then never comes back to force the issue.

There are five short sub-paragraphs:
1:1-3      The Word
1:4-9      The Light (ellipsis 1:6-8 John the Witness)
1:10-13  Receiving
1:14-17  Grace and Truth (ellipsis 1:15 The Witness of John)
1:18       Revealing God

So this poetic prologue is gigantic in scope, and quite monstrous in significance.  We'll take a look at it section by section before we allow John to gently place us into less bewildering surroundings, into the world of everyday people.