Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [John_Lit] The Johannine Jews

Expand Messages
  • jestaton@zoom.co.uk
    The scattered children of God (v.52) are a separate group to the nation (v.51). This is a not only...but also construction. Both groups are different
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 5, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      The "scattered children of God"(v.52) are a separate group to
      the "nation"(v.51). This is a "not only...but also" construction.
      Both groups are different entities, but both are saved, and
      eventually gathered into one. Pancaro argued that "nation" in this
      passge referred to the Jewish nation, whereas "people" or "children
      of God" refers to those who are of the believing community. Of
      course, the believing community would include people who were
      ethnically Jewish, but John's Gospel refers to such people as "true
      Israelites" or some such thing. The word "Jew" is normally reserved
      for Jesus' Jewish opponents.

      Hope this helps

      JOHN E STATON
      jestaton@...
      www.jestaton.org
      --- In johannine_literature@y..., ProfRam@a... wrote:
      > Hi everyone,
      >
      > One question, in light of Frank's research into Israel, people,
      nation, etc.
      > In 11:50 Caiaphas says it is expedient for one man to die for the
      people. We
      > all know that this was not a statement about redemption thru the
      cross but
      > purely a political strategy.
      >
      > But when the author repeats it in v 51 (using 'nation' instead
      of 'people'),
      > is it still just political or is it now a statement about the
      atonement. I
      > have assumed it to be the latter because it appeals to Caiaphas
      being a
      > prophet and therefore speaking more wisely than he knows.
      >
      > My question is, Does this mean that in John's Gospel, Jesus died
      for the
      > nation of Israel? Is this the same as saying that he died for "the
      Jews"? Or
      > does "the nation" now mean Christians (on the basis of some sort of
      > supersessionism). I would think it still means the Jewish people
      because in v
      > 52 it goes on to add the Gentiles. Supersession doesn't seem to
      work here.
      >
      > If in chapter 10 he dies for his own sheep (10:11, 15), and in
      chapter 11 he
      > dies for the Jewish nation, then are the Jews still his sheep?
      Obviously the
      > Jews addressed in 10:26 are not, but 10:19-21 suggests that "there
      are Jews
      > and then there are Jews." They are not a monolithic group but are
      torn by a
      > schism (see also 7:43, 9:16).
      >
      > If indeed Jesus died for (some of) the Jews, then are they "the
      children of
      > God who are *not* scattered abroad," in contrast to those who are
      (v 52)? If
      > they are children of God, then I guess they are not children of the
      devil.
      > Are we generalizing too much about the Jews in John's Gospel.
      >
      > Ramsey Michaels
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.