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

RE: [John_Lit] water to wine

Expand Messages
  • Lorna Wilson
    Bob, You mentioned something interesting in the relationship between the living water motif in the fourth gospel and the OT as you cited several references
    Message 1 of 28 , Jun 29, 2002
      Bob,

      You mentioned something interesting in the relationship between the 'living
      water' motif in the fourth gospel and the OT as you cited several references
      (Ge 26:19 Le 14:5 and Song 4:15). Now you have caught my attention because I
      wrote a paper last year on Psalms 42-43 and notes the metaphoric usage of
      God and water this psalm and the fourth gospel.

      Psalm 42:1-2b
      As a deer pants for streams of water, so my soul pants for you, O God.
      My soul thirsts for God, for the "living" God,...

      See also Michael Willett Newheart, Word and Soul, page 33 and Cullen I K
      Story, The Fourth Gospel, page 178 on intertextual relationship between
      Psalms 42 and Fourth Gospel.

      In addition, some other OT references for 'living water' include: Jeremiah
      2:3 and 17:13b (cf. Is. 55:1).

      My time is limited but I found your email interesting and wanted to take
      just a minute to respond. My paper goes into more detail and addresses the
      motif of 'living water' in Psalms 42 and the thread throughout the Bible
      including the fourth Gospel in particular.

      Just something to think about.

      Lorna Wilson

      >From: Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald@...>
      >Reply-To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
      >To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: RE: [John_Lit] water to wine
      >Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:37:41 -0700
      >
      >Bob Schacht pointed to the uniqueness of living water in John.
      >
      >Is this a purity issue, living rather than well water?
      >
      >I found an old commentary (McGarvey and Pendleton 1914): '"Living water"
      >would mean literally "running" or "spring water," as contrasted with still
      >or cistern water (Ge 26:19 Le 14:5)... continual, untold refreshing (Re
      >7:17). The reviving and regenerating effects of the Holy Spirit are
      >likewise
      >called living water (Joh 7:37-39).' Very traditional - already digested for
      >us!
      >
      >Perhaps Jesus had in mind Song 4:15: You are a garden spring, a well of
      >fresh water flowing down from Lebanon.
      >
      >Seems to me that the image of the waters flowing out of the temple (Zech
      >14:8 and Rev 22:2) might be connected also - Jesus did speak of the temple
      >of his body... the waters flowed from his side.
      >
      >What is the significance of belly? koilias in the Greek - Jonah's whale's
      >belly? A womb? (John 3:4) - it seems very gutsy language <g>!
      >
      >Bob
      >
      >mailto::BobMacDonald@...
      >+ + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +
      >
      >Catch the foxes for us,
      > the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
      >for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
      >http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
      >
      >
      >SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




      Lorna


      _________________________________________________________________
      MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
      http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
    • Thomas W Butler
      Dear Jeff, Mark, Bob, Bob, Jim, Eric, Frank and J-Lit Listers, I have made a study of Johannine signs, particularly as they relate to Mosaic oracles. My work
      Message 2 of 28 , Jun 29, 2002
        Dear Jeff, Mark, Bob, Bob, Jim, Eric, Frank and J-Lit Listers,

        I have made a study of Johannine signs, particularly as
        they relate to Mosaic oracles. My work also includes
        a consideration of the temporal markers in the Fourth
        Gospel. Some of my work may be of interest to you.

        The word "hour (ora)" appears 24 times, and is scattered
        throughout the gospel. I am writing a devotional guide to
        the gospel called A Day with Jesus in which I have used
        the word "hour" as an end marker within the text. Each
        portion of text that ends when the word "hour" is used,
        contains numerous signs that relate to Mosaic oracles.

        I believe that the gospel was intended to be used as a text
        book for the training of disciples in the discipline of
        theological reflection, using the method commonly used
        in rabbinic schools of that time: expounding upon the
        meaning of a text, by using the language of sacred scripture,
        especially the Torah.

        The gospel is both an example of the product of such a
        method and a means of prompting the reader to engage
        in that method, first by discerning the signs that are being
        used that way (in each "hour") and then expounding upon
        the possible meanings of those signs.

        With regard to John 2: 1-11 (or 12), the first sign is the
        transformation of waters of purification into wine.

        This establishes a pattern in which the oracles used in the
        Mosaic texts with regard to the temple, the priesthood and
        the rituals of sacrifice are used within the context of the
        Jesus narrative in a way that suggests a new tradition is
        being established out of the building blocks of the old one.
        In this case, the stone jars used to contain the waters of
        purification are used to supply the jars which are used to
        poor the wine for the wedding feast.

        I agree with James Rudolf that the reader is expected to
        see this as a sacramental wine, even though the ritual of
        the Eucharist is not explicitly presented as a part of the
        narrative. (One could say that the entire gospel functions
        as a haggada for the Passover of the Followers of Jesus).
        In other words, the rhetorical transformation that takes
        place is the replacement of water for purification with
        (sacramental) wine for purification. The new tradition
        comes forth from the old tradition, but takes on a new
        form.

        In light of this approach, here are my responses to Jeff's
        interesting set of questions:

        > Jeff Staley writes:
        >
        > The "signs" in John are great places to explore, rhetorically.
        > I wrote briefly about the rhetorical significance of this sign
        > in my dissertation (published in 1988 by Scholars Press)
        > entitled "The Print's First Kiss."
        >
        > A number of things in this miracle story interest me from a
        > rheotrical standpoint:

        > 1) Exactly when does the miracle occur?

        The sign is delivered as Jesus issues two commands.
        1. Fill the jars with water.
        2. Draw some out, and take it to the chief steward.

        By filling the stone jars with water, especially as the reader is
        told that the jars are filled to the brim, the reader is expected
        to see that what is being transformed is the full tradition.

        By drawing water out of these jars, the reader is expected to
        see that what Jesus will offer comes out of the tradition. By
        directing that it be taken to the wine steward (the ruler of the
        feast), the quality of what is being offered is being submitted
        for examination and evaluation.

        The reader is allowed to see that the judge of this new tradition
        will recognize its quality without knowing from whence it has
        come or by whom. However, those who have obeyed the
        commands of Jesus DO know from whence it comes and by
        whom.

        The source of the language / symbols used as "signs" in the
        Fourth Gospel is the Pentateuch. (More specifically, the
        Septuagint version of the Pentateuch). The Fourth Gospel
        is a record of the theological transfer from the Mosaic
        tradition to the Jesus tradition of sacred language, images,
        names and symbols.

        > 2) When do we as readers know that a miracle has occurred?

        The readers know that a miracle has occurred when the narrator
        informs them that the water has become wine (vs. 9). That this
        transfer (transformation) is an improvement is affirmed in the
        response provided by the steward (vs. 10).

        > 3) Who, among the characters in the story, know/s that a
        > miracle has occurred?

        We are only told that the steward knew, and that the steward
        shared this knowledge with the bridegroom. This leads to a
        pair of questions: Who is the wine steward? Who is the bride-
        groom? In the Johannine community as now these questions
        no doubt prompted some wonderful discussions, not only
        because the possible answers are rich and varied, but because
        extensions of the questions themselves can be rich and varied.
        (Who is the judge of the tradition? Who is the bride?)

        > 4) At what point do we as readers suspect that something
        > more than purification is at issue here?

        When the mother of Jesus tells Jesus "They have no wine,"
        and Jesus replies, "Woman, what concern is that to you and
        to me? My hour is not yet come." Clearly there is a dis-
        agreement between Jesus and his mother as to the significance
        of the moment that is about to be described.

        I think it is significant that Jesus addresses his mother as
        "Woman." (Note that he does this again when hanging on the
        cross.) I have drawn a connection between these two
        passages and Genesis 3: 15, which would suggest that Mary
        KNOWS that Jesus is the offspring of Woman, who will
        strike the head of the serpent, while the serpent will strike
        against his heal. She is apparently ready to get on with the
        plot, while Jesus knows that some time will pass before the
        ancient divine prophesy is fulfilled. Still, at this moment in
        time, the fulfillment of that prophesy begins.

        > 5) What is the significance of these?

        This story serves to announce the beginning of the mission of
        Jesus, which is the transformation of a system of worship that
        has become dysfunctional into one that can maintain a renewed
        and living covenant with God.

        Yours in Christ's service,
        Tom Butler

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bob MacDonald
        Thanks to all for the very interesting replies in this thread. Draw some out, and take it to the chief steward. I think we have drawn some out and I think I
        Message 3 of 28 , Jun 29, 2002
          Thanks to all for the very interesting replies in this thread.

          "Draw some out, and take it to the chief steward."

          I think we have drawn some out and I think I have tasted here some very good
          wine. Frank has pointed out before some of the literary affinity that Philo
          has with John. The depth of the flavour of the Tanach (Psalm 42, Song, and
          Moses)

          This being a literature dialogue - I have a trouble with scholarship and the
          use of imagery. There seems to be a severe tension here. Without some care,
          we might extend an image too far. With too much care, we might miss the
          point entirely.

          How does one know how far to stretch a metaphor?

          Bob

          mailto::BobMacDonald@...
          + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

          Catch the foxes for us,
          the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
          for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
          http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
        • Bob Schacht
          ... Only as far as the author intended! :-) Bob Schacht
          Message 4 of 28 , Jun 29, 2002
            At 08:19 PM 6/29/2002 -0700, Bob MacDonald wrote:
            >Thanks to all for the very interesting replies in this thread.
            >
            >"Draw some out, and take it to the chief steward."
            >
            >I think we have drawn some out and I think I have tasted here some very good
            >wine. Frank has pointed out before some of the literary affinity that Philo
            >has with John. The depth of the flavour of the Tanach (Psalm 42, Song, and
            >Moses)
            >
            >This being a literature dialogue - I have a trouble with scholarship and the
            >use of imagery. There seems to be a severe tension here. Without some care,
            >we might extend an image too far. With too much care, we might miss the
            >point entirely.
            >
            >How does one know how far to stretch a metaphor?

            Only as far as the author intended! :-)
            Bob Schacht
          • efholer
            James and others, I m partially through Jeff s dissertation, very stimulating. Perhaps now would be the time to see how many on the list are in the Seattle
            Message 5 of 28 , Jun 29, 2002
              James and others,

              I'm partially through Jeff's dissertation, very stimulating. Perhaps now
              would be the time to see how many on the list are in the Seattle area and
              would be interested in meeting for coffee (or whatever your cup of tea might
              be) and conversation. Anyone who is interested please email me with
              suggestions for a time and place.

              And yes, I am familiar with Culpepper's work. P. Duke and M. Stibbe have
              also been helpful to me for the literary approach.

              > As far as John 2:1-11, from a literary perspective, have you considered
              > what the miracle "does?" Why is this miracle here? What purpose does
              > it serve? No one is healed. The only people who benefit from this
              > miracle do so unwittingly. From all appearances, no "sign" is done to
              > point to Jesus as God in the flesh, or to show His power in some
              > extraordinary way.

              Your point on the ignorant beneficiaries is something I have been thinking
              about. All of the sign-miracles benefit someone, whether a healing or a
              feeding, etc., but at the wedding in Cana the met need seems somewhat
              superficial in comparison. In considering the honor/shame aspect of the
              culture, however, perhaps the sign is just as compassionate as healing and
              feeding. I'm curious how this aspect, that of always meeting a need, works
              for the author to develop Jesus, the God-man - perhaps to show additional
              motive characterization beyond his coming to do the Father's will.

              Also, taking the healing of the blind man as an example - Jesus meets his
              need both physically and spiritually, the healing directly corresponding to
              the need(s) of the man. However, I'm missing the same connection in 2:1-11.
              The need is more wine, and the sign itself seems to point to
              replacement/transformation of purification rites. I'm curious about the
              correspondence between the physical obvious need and the deeper spiritual
              need...

              Are any of you familiar with Koester's work, 'Symbolism in the Fourth
              Gospel'? I think he has a great introduction on the role of the signs in the
              FG, but I was dissapointed in the commentary on the wedding pericope. I'll
              review my notes on the book and see if there something beneficial for our
              discussion.

              Your other comments were helpful. I'm curious about the connection/inclusio
              formed by the use of 'mother of Jesus' and 'wine' in both the wedding
              pericope and the crucifixion scene. Has anyone looked thoroughly at that?

              Cut and pasted from Jeff Staley:

              What I am saying, is that in my reading, this is perhaps the most
              rhetorically open
              miracle in the FG--perhaps in all of the NT--perhaps in the ancient world.
              It is purposefully difficult to pin down.

              Eric responds:

              No good author gives the prize away so soon =) The difficulty for me is
              having read the gospel so many times that I lose the feeling of suspense
              during a first reading. I agree, the diffululty of this scene is purposeful,
              incites/invites the reader to reread and move forward - indeed, I don't know
              anyone who is not driven to reread the whole once he or she has come to the
              end.

              Lastly, I was intrigued by Frank's use of Philo for understanding aspects of
              the FG. Given the contemporaneity of the two authors and obvious parallels
              between their work (some stronger than others), how does one make the jump
              from observing similarity in the texts to comparison for the sake of better
              understanding them both? This is more a question concerning hermeneutics
              than one concerning the FG, but I'd be grateful for any thoughts on this
              issue. Also, I'm not familiar with Philo's works - if there's anyone on the
              list who disagrees with Frank's use of Philo, I'd like to hear from them.

              To all - thanks for the great thoughts - I didn't expect my introduction to
              start a dialogue - so if my posts are infrequent, it's just that I'm more
              comfortable listening than 'speaking' - I'm still a child in the world of
              Johannine scholarship.

              Eric Fholer
              Northwest Theological Seminary
              Lynnwood Wa
            • Jack C Pilato
              Just a thought and perhaps in left field. But here goes. Christ came to fulfill the law to perfection. When his mother asked him to do something to help, he
              Message 6 of 28 , Jun 30, 2002
                Just a thought and perhaps in left field. But here goes.

                Christ came to fulfill the law to perfection. When his mother asked him
                to do something to help, he did what was required by the law to honor
                his mother. The further meaning then is that God hears all our requests
                no matter how mundane or trivial in the eyes of others. If the request
                is important to us it is important to Him and He will honor them if they
                are within his permissive will.

                Jack
              • Bob MacDonald
                It seems to me that the rhetorical analysis is a synonym for metaphor stretching - and Bob Schacht has pointed to the author as authority for the limits on
                Message 7 of 28 , Jun 30, 2002
                  It seems to me that the rhetorical analysis is a synonym for metaphor
                  stretching - and Bob Schacht has pointed to the author as authority for the
                  limits on stretching. (Lots of scope for stretching with John).

                  Yesterday I was at a wedding and a little boy stretched his balloon too far
                  with predictable results - a loud bang and tears of shock. But if he had
                  not stretched it at all, authority of the material aside, he would not have
                  learned as much about balloons.

                  This is the second wedding in two days, the earlier one very traditional
                  Cranmer prayer book service (with reference to Cana of course and Ephesians
                  5 and so on), the second otherwise. The second conflicted with a funeral -
                  my wife and I attended both, singing at one and eating at the other. How far
                  can I stretch the wedding metaphor in John? What was really going on in
                  Cana? Did the 16th century interpretation of the lawfulness of marriage have
                  anything to do with it? Or was that a 16th century binding only. Each of
                  these words requires a book.

                  The issue of metaphor and usage is very dear to me and my understanding of
                  the Bible. Many have stretched the metaphors in ways that clearly need
                  correction; yet many have not stretched sufficiently and end up with an
                  impoverished tradition. We are bound (religio) by the stretching we
                  achieve. And as Jesus says - what we bind here is bound in heaven; what we
                  loose here is loosed in heaven.

                  Now to answer the rhetorical questions as Tom Butler did but with variation.

                  1) Exactly when does the miracle occur?

                  When we begin to hear the story not just as consecrating a wedding but as
                  foreshadowing Jesus' death. It is good that the process of marrying and
                  being given in marriage can continue (though some would forbid it) - but the
                  real marriage is otherwise - all whom the Father gives me shall come to me.
                  (6:37) This is our 'bridegroom of blood' (Exodus 4).

                  2) When do we as readers know that a miracle has occurred?

                  When the disciples believe. - These are the same disciples as the synoptic
                  gospels! They have hard hearts and get it all wrong. So it is with us.
                  John is not writing about those same quarrelsome disciples.

                  3) Who, among the characters in the story, know/s that a miracle has
                  occurred?

                  The Father (the steward) and the Son (the bridegroom) know when we (the
                  bride) are ready. The bride (Mary, us, the reader) know also. But the mass
                  of the tradition does not.

                  4) At what point do we as readers suspect that something more than
                  purification is at issue here?

                  When we are born. The morality of our traditions is not adequate to the
                  variety of our conditions.

                  5) What is the significance of these?

                  The potential for life is here in abundance. The work of obedience to Jesus'
                  commands still needs to be done. The wine of God's wrath needs to be drunk.
                  The wine is the blood of the Eucharist by which our death is included in his
                  death, so that his life might be known in our life.

                  I think all these points could be supported by John's gospel - but whether
                  the balloon will break - ... maybe I have only just begun to blow it up -
                  tough material at first - hurts the cheeks.

                  abundant blessings of stretched metaphor to you all

                  Bob

                  mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                  + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                  Catch the foxes for us,
                  the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                  for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                  http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                • Elizabeth Danna
                  The recent discussion of water in the wedding narrative has sparked some thoughts which I would like to share, if somewhat belatedly. Briefly, what is the
                  Message 8 of 28 , Aug 18, 2002
                    The recent discussion of water in the wedding narrative has sparked
                    some thoughts which I would like to share, if somewhat belatedly.

                    Briefly, what is the connection between 2:1-11 and 7:37c-39? For
                    reasons which will become clear I had better offer a translation of the
                    latter passage: "If anyone is thirsty let them come to me, and let the
                    one who believes in me drink. As the Scripture says, 'Out of his
                    insides will flow rivers of living water.' He said this about the
                    Spirit, which those who believed in him would receive; for the Spirit
                    had not yet been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified."

                    There are several links between these two passages. The most
                    obvious is the water symbolism in each. In both passages Jesus is the
                    source of drink. At 2:7 the servants, at Jesus' instruction, fill the
                    water jars to the brim, which suggests abundance. And there is
                    something about the idea of "rivers of water flowing out" which also
                    suggests an abundance of what is supplied. Both passages also mention
                    believers in Jesus, and Jesus' glory (having read 2:21f, the implied
                    reader is able to guess that the glorification of Jesus mentioned at
                    7:39 refers to his death). I suggest that AUTOU at 7:38 refers to
                    Jesus, not the believer. Do these connections suggest that my
                    interpretation of 7:38 is correct?

                    Elizabeth Danna
                  • kymhsm
                    Dear Elizabeth, It appears to me that in Jn 7:38 the subject, from whose heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is the He who believes in me , not
                    Message 9 of 28 , Aug 18, 2002
                      Dear Elizabeth,

                      It appears to me that in Jn 7:38 the subject, from whose
                      heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is the 'He who believes
                      in me', not Jesus. If you throw into the equation 4:14, '...the water
                      I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up
                      to eternal life' I think the meaning is clear.

                      This is not to deny that Jesus, with the Father, is the ultimate
                      source of the living water/Spirit.

                      Kym Smith
                      Adelide
                      South Australia
                      khs@...
                    • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                      ... whose heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is the He who believes in me , not Jesus. If you throw into the equation 4:14, ...the water I shall
                      Message 10 of 28 , Aug 18, 2002
                        Kym Smith responded to Elizabeth:

                        >>It appears to me that in Jn 7:38 the subject, from
                        whose heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is
                        the 'He who believes in me', not Jesus. If you throw
                        into the equation 4:14, '...the water I shall give him
                        will become in him a spring of water welling up to
                        eternal life' I think the meaning is clear.<<

                        I've often wondered if Jn. 7:38 is intentionally
                        ambiguous and thereby intended to refer to both Jesus
                        and the believer.

                        Has anyone suggested this or a category of ambiguity
                        in John? -- call it Johannine ambiguity, by analogy to
                        Johannine irony.

                        Jeffery Hodges

                        =====
                        Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                        Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                        447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                        Yangsandong 411
                        South Korea

                        __________________________________________________
                        Do You Yahoo!?
                        HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
                        http://www.hotjobs.com
                      • Bob Schacht
                        ... Is the Greek sufficiently precise to distinguish whether the He who... or Jesus is merely the *conduit,* or the *source*? Bob Robert M. Schacht
                        Message 11 of 28 , Aug 18, 2002
                          At 01:00 AM 8/19/2002 +0000, you wrote:
                          >Dear Elizabeth,
                          >
                          >It appears to me that in Jn 7:38 the subject, from whose
                          >heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is the 'He who believes
                          >in me', not Jesus. If you throw into the equation 4:14, '...the water
                          >I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up
                          >to eternal life' I think the meaning is clear.
                          >
                          >This is not to deny that Jesus, with the Father, is the ultimate
                          >source of the living water/Spirit.

                          Is the Greek sufficiently precise to distinguish whether the "He who..." or
                          Jesus is merely the *conduit,* or the *source*?
                          Bob


                          Robert M. Schacht
                          Flagstaff, AZ
                          If I were a Rich Man...I'd discuss the holy books with the learned men,
                          several hours every day. That would be the sweetest thing of all.
                          Fiddler on the Roof

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • kymhsm
                          Dear Bob, My post was,
                          Message 12 of 28 , Aug 19, 2002
                            Dear Bob,

                            <<< Is the Greek sufficiently precise to distinguish whether the
                            "He who..." or Jesus is merely the *conduit,* or the *source*?>>>

                            My post was, admittedly, only from looking at the English text. I
                            am no Greek expert. For me it is out with the exicons etc. But
                            from the brief look I have had I think the Greek is quite
                            unambiguous. Someone else may correct me but that is my
                            reading of it. Though the source must and can only be Christ, it
                            is the believer out of whom the living waters flow.

                            Sincerely,

                            Kym Smith
                            Adelaide
                            South Australia
                            khs@...



                            --- In johannine_literature@y..., Bob Schacht <r_schacht@y...>
                            wrote:
                            > At 01:00 AM 8/19/2002 +0000, you wrote:
                            > >Dear Elizabeth,
                            > >
                            > >It appears to me that in Jn 7:38 the subject, from whose
                            > >heart/belly will flow rivers of living water, is the 'He who
                            believes
                            > >in me', not Jesus. If you throw into the equation 4:14, '...the
                            water
                            > >I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling
                            up
                            > >to eternal life' I think the meaning is clear.
                            > >
                            > >This is not to deny that Jesus, with the Father, is the ultimate
                            > >source of the living water/Spirit.
                            >
                            > Is the Greek sufficiently precise to distinguish whether the "He
                            who..." or
                            > Jesus is merely the *conduit,* or the *source*?
                            > Bob
                            >
                            >
                            > Robert M. Schacht
                            > Flagstaff, AZ
                            > If I were a Rich Man...I'd discuss the holy books with the
                            learned men,
                            > several hours every day. That would be the sweetest thing of
                            all.
                            > Fiddler on the Roof
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Mary Coloe
                            I read 7:37 with 7:39 which speaks about a later time when the Spirit will be given, compared with the now time. In this context in the present time Jesus is
                            Message 13 of 28 , Aug 20, 2002
                              I read 7:37 with 7:39 which speaks about a later time when the Spirit will
                              be given, compared with the now time.
                              In this context in the present time Jesus is the source of living water as
                              he promised the Samaritan woman.
                              But there will be a time in the future when the historical Jesus will no
                              longer be present and in that future time he promises that
                              believers, because of the gift of the SPirit, will become sources of living
                              water. Behind both statementsI have argued lies the image of the Temple.
                              Jesus as the new Temple (2:21) is able to provide waters (Ez 49), but as he
                              promises when this temple of his body is destroyed he will raise a Temple
                              in its plcae (2:19).
                              This Temple is the Temple of the believing community, transformed through
                              the 'Hour' into the new house(hold) of God.

                              If you would like to see more detailed arguments and references to the
                              above lines of thought may I suggest my book, God Dwells with us - Temple
                              Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel - Loturgical Press, 2001.
                              In emails its just not possible to give the details of the exegesis.
                              Best wishes.

                              Dr. Mary Coloe pbvm
                              Australian Catholic University Limited
                              (ABN 15050 192660)

                              Locked Bag 4115
                              Fitzroy. VIC 3065 AUSTRALIA

                              ph (61 + 3) 99533137 Fax (61 + 3) 99533245
                              M.Coloe@...
                            • Elizabeth Danna
                              ... But even in this verse it is said, twice, that it is Jesus who gives the water. Elizabeth Danna
                              Message 14 of 28 , Aug 20, 2002
                                kymhsm wrote:

                                > If you throw into the equation 4:14, '...the water
                                > I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up
                                > to eternal life' I think the meaning is clear.

                                But even in this verse it is said, twice, that it is Jesus who gives the
                                water.

                                Elizabeth Danna
                              • fmmccoy
                                ... From: Elizabeth Danna To: Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 1:05 PM Subject: Re: [John_Lit]
                                Message 15 of 28 , Aug 20, 2002
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: "Elizabeth Danna" <ejdanna@...>
                                  To: <johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 1:05 PM
                                  Subject: Re: [John_Lit] water to wine


                                  > The recent discussion of water in the wedding narrative has sparked
                                  > some thoughts which I would like to share, if somewhat belatedly.
                                  >
                                  > Briefly, what is the connection between 2:1-11 and 7:37c-39? For
                                  > reasons which will become clear I had better offer a translation of the
                                  > latter passage: "If anyone is thirsty let them come to me, and let the
                                  > one who believes in me drink. As the Scripture says, 'Out of his
                                  > insides will flow rivers of living water.' He said this about the
                                  > Spirit, which those who believed in him would receive; for the Spirit
                                  > had not yet been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified."
                                  >
                                  > There are several links between these two passages. The most
                                  > obvious is the water symbolism in each. In both passages Jesus is the
                                  > source of drink. At 2:7 the servants, at Jesus' instruction, fill the
                                  > water jars to the brim, which suggests abundance. And there is
                                  > something about the idea of "rivers of water flowing out" which also
                                  > suggests an abundance of what is supplied. Both passages also mention
                                  > believers in Jesus, and Jesus' glory (having read 2:21f, the implied
                                  > reader is able to guess that the glorification of Jesus mentioned at
                                  > 7:39 refers to his death). I suggest that AUTOU at 7:38 refers to
                                  > Jesus, not the believer. Do these connections suggest that my
                                  > interpretation of 7:38 is correct?
                                  >

                                  Dear Elizabeth Danna:

                                  That there are connections between 2:1-11 and 7:37c-39 is undeniable.

                                  2:1-11, though, ISTM, gives us a mixed message as respects the question of
                                  whether the AUTOU of 7:38 refers to Jesus or to a believer.

                                  In 2:1-11, it is the servants who pour the water into the stone water jars
                                  and who take this water become wine to the master of the feast.

                                  To the extent that 2:1-11 and 7:37c-39 are connected, this suggests that the
                                  AUTOU refers to a believer: for if a number of people are involved in the
                                  giving of the water in 2:1-11, then this should be the case in 7:37c-39--and
                                  there are many who are believers, but only one Jesus.

                                  On the other hand, in 2:1-11, the bridegroom is praised for saving the good
                                  wine till the end--which suggests that he alone is the source for the water
                                  become wine.

                                  To the extent that 7:37c-39 are connected, this suggests that the AUTOU
                                  refers to a single individual, i.e., Jesus.

                                  So, ISTM, on one level of 2:1-11, there are a number of people responsible
                                  for the giving of the water become wine while, on another level of 2:1-11,
                                  only the bridegroom is responsible for the giving of the water become wine.
                                  The first level of meaning lends support to the idea that the AUTOU of 7:38
                                  is a believer, while the second level of meaning lends support to the idea
                                  that the AUTOU of 7:38 is Jesus.

                                  If you could establish that (1) the second level of meaning to 2:1-11 is the
                                  only true level of meaning, so that, in it, it is *only* the bridegroom who
                                  is truly responsible for the water become wine and that (2) on this second
                                  level of meaning the bridegroom is the Bridegroom of 3:29 (i.e., Jesus) and
                                  that (3) on this second level of meaning the water become wine is the
                                  Spirit, then, ISTM, you could use the connections betwen 2:1-11 and 7:37c-39
                                  as supporting evidence for your suggestion that the AUTOU of 7:38 is Jesus.

                                  Just a thought--hopefully a helpful one.

                                  Frank McCoy
                                  1809 N. English Apt. 17
                                  Maplewood, MN 55109
                                • kymhsm
                                  Dear Elizabeth, You wrote: I am sorry if I am missing
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Aug 20, 2002
                                    Dear Elizabeth,

                                    You wrote:

                                    <<<But even in this verse (i.e. Jn 4:14) it is said, twice, that it is
                                    Jesus who gives the water.>>>

                                    I am sorry if I am missing something, but I am not sure what the
                                    need for your comment is. I have responded twice, both posts
                                    are very short, and in both posts I have insisted that God/the
                                    Father/Jesus is/are the source of the living water.

                                    A number of OT references such as Jer 2:13; 17:13; Ezek 47
                                    also make it clear that God is the source of the living water.

                                    The issue is that we are not given the Spirit to keep to ourselves.
                                    Jesus' promise of the Spirit / living water in the passages under
                                    discussion indicates that the life he gives us is to be lived out.
                                    Through us that life, the life of the Spirit, is to flow out into the
                                    world in which we live. We are never the source of that life / Spirit,
                                    but we are called to be healthy springs issuing forth that which
                                    God, the 'fountain of living waters' (Jer 2:13), has given to us.

                                    Sincerely,

                                    Kym Smith
                                    Adelaide
                                    South Australia
                                    khs@...
                                  • Elizabeth Danna
                                    ... You have, and I should have made a note of that in my own post - my apologies. My point is that while you stress one aspect of 4:14, I stress another.
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Aug 21, 2002
                                      kymhsm wrote:

                                      > Dear Elizabeth,
                                      >
                                      > You wrote:
                                      >
                                      > <<<But even in this verse (i.e. Jn 4:14) it is said, twice, that it is
                                      > Jesus who gives the water.>>>
                                      >
                                      > I am sorry if I am missing something, but I am not sure what the
                                      > need for your comment is. I have responded twice, both posts
                                      > are very short, and in both posts I have insisted that God/the
                                      > Father/Jesus is/are the source of the living water.

                                      You have, and I should have made a note of that in my own post - my
                                      apologies. My point is that while you stress one aspect of 4:14, I stress
                                      another.

                                      Elizabeth Danna
                                    • Elizabeth Danna
                                      fmmccoy wrote: [interesting post snipped for space reasons] ... Helpful indeed - thank you, Frank. Elizabeth Danna
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Aug 21, 2002
                                        fmmccoy wrote:
                                        [interesting post snipped for space reasons]

                                        > Just a thought--hopefully a helpful one.

                                        Helpful indeed - thank you, Frank.

                                        Elizabeth Danna
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.