Re: [John_Lit] Who crucified Jesus in Jn 19:16-18 - Revisited
- -----Original Message-----
From: Keith Yoder
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [John_Lit] Who crucified Jesus in Jn 19:16-18 - Revisited
Can you produce any evidence of Jewish authorities (Temple elite)
other Jews in the Roman Period? Crucifixion was a Roman punishment reserved
for sedition...Jesus was not killed by Jews. He was executed by Roman
biggest irony in history.
By no means am I saying that the Jews actually crucified Jesus, nor did
I mean to leave that impression. What I argued in my original post
#5582 in Jan 2008 is that the text of John 19:16-18 and the preceding
context of the trial before Pilate covertly leads the reader to draw
JK] Keep in mind that 4G was written in Asia Minor for Gentiles but it has
an interesting blend of original Aramaic material pre-dating Mark couched in
a late first century Gentile Church frame. As such it has decidedly
anti-Jewish flavors such as the "Ye are of your father the devil" when
talking about the Jews (visually depicted in that anti-Semitic moron, Mel
Gibson's silly movie by Satan carrying a hairy, ugly baby pass the cross).
Having said that, John 19 has original material and depicts Roman procedural
praxis such as the titulus and the quaternio playing the "King's game."
John includes the Markan fiction of Barabbas, an indication of departure
from the early source document, or more likely later interpolation. John is
the most heavily edited, redacted, reshuffled, glossed and interpolated book
of the New Testament.
In my new post two days ago wanted to follow up on #5582 with thoughts
about the textual development of John 19:16. My suggestion that John
drew from Matthew 27:26-27 when composing 19:16 would result in adding
support to my 2008 contention that the John is here trying to prompt his
audience to mentally connect the dots in their own minds to infer that
the Jews crucified Jesus - without him having to explicitly say that in
JK] I agree with you on the anti-Jewish intent and am presenting a more
historical aspect. Mel Gibson picked up on this as well, along with the
hallucinating schizophrenic 18th century nun who was his source. This is
why he depicts creepy looking, hook-nosed Shylock/Goebbels looking Temple
Historically, I agree it doesn't compute. But as part of a narrative
strategy to blame the Jews for Jesus' death, it does fit together.
JK] It appears we have been looking through separate windows (a good way to
conduct historical criticism) and have come together on this issue.
SUBSCRIBE: e-mail email@example.com
UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
PROBLEMS?: e-mail email@example.com
MESSAGE ARCHIVE: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/johannine_literature/messages
GROUP HOMEPAGE: http://johannine.org/YGroup_John_Lit.htmYahoo! Groups Links
- I agree with Jack. The Johannine account, in which the Jewish authorities investigate briefly to see whiether they have enough of a case to take to Pilate, decide they do, and take the case to him, is more historically plausible than the Synoptic accounts, which lay the emphasis on Jesus' appearance before the Sanhedrin rather than on his appearance before Pilate. But there is also some literary evidece which is worth loooking at.
1) John uses _speira_("detachment"), the usual Greek equivalent of the Latin _cohors_, in Jn. 18:3,12, and _chiliarchos_, the usual Greek equivalent of the Latin _tribunus militum_ in Jn. 18:12. These words are usually used of Roman soldiers and their commmander. This involves the Romans earlier in the narrative than the Synoptics do.
2) There are some verbal parallels which link the Romans with the unbelieving "Jews." First, in Jn. 18:37 Jesus tells Pilate, "Everyone who is of the truth _akouei mou tes phones_ ("hears my voice"). This is similar phrasing to 10:27, where Jesus, describing himself as the Good Shepherd, says that his sheep _tes phones mou akouei_ ("hear my voice"). In 18:37 Jesus implicitly invites Pilate to be one of those who are of the truth; Pilate declines the invitation, as do "the Jews." Second, in Jn. 19:3 the narrator ends the description of the Roman abuse and mockery of Jesus with _edidoun autw rapismata_ ("they gave him slaps"). In Jn 18:22 Jesus receives the same treatment from a temple policeman: _edoken rapisma tw Iesou_ ("he gave Jesus a slap"). while the Gospel of John does not have a pericope of Jewish mockery of Jesus, as the Synoptics do, the narrator here clearly intends to connect the treatment of Jesus by "the Jews" and the treatment he gets from the Romans. Third, in Jn. 19:9 Pilate asks Jesus, "Where are you from?". Jesus does not answer, because a complete answer to the questiojn is an answer that Pilate cannot understand. "The Jews" also reaise the question of where Jesus is from, in Jn. 7:41b-42 and in 9:29f. But a complete answer to the question eludes them as much as it eludes Pilate. These verbal parallels link the Romans and the unbelieving "Jews" as opponents of Jesus, part of "the world," which is blind to Jesus' revelation and unwilling to receive it. I suggest that such shared characterisation is part of John's way of expressing the shared responsibility of the Romans and "the Jews" in Jesus' death.
3) We may note that all the Romans are are involved in the mistreatment and execution of Jesus. Pilate orders the flogging and actual crucifixion, and the soldiers play the game of "mock king."
4) The Johannine Pilate is a weakling and a coward. He has the authority to drop the case, especially since the Jewish authorities are not exactly forthcoming with their evidence against Jesus, and when they do speak up, their charge against Jesus is one that is outside Pilate's jurisdiction (Jn. 19:7). But he is too afraid of the Jewish authorities to stand up to them. He vacillates (expressed by his running back and forth between outside and inside, between Jesus and "the Jews"), then gives in to them when they threaten to report him to Caesar (19:12).
All in all, I suggest that while John does not let "the Jews" off the hook with respect to responsibility for Jesus' death, he does not let the Romans off the hook either.
- My friends on the Johannine Literature List,
I have just completed ten lectures on the trilogy of stories in chapters 11, 12
and 13 (The Raising of Lazarus, The Anointing of the Feet of Jesus by Mary of
Bethany, and The Washing of the Feet of the Disciples by Jesus). These lectures
expand upon the work I published in 1998 in a book called Let Her Keep
It: Jesus' Ordination of Mary of Bethany - A New Approach to the Study of the
Gospel According to John through its use of Mosaic Oracles.
My method relies upon the discovery of Mosaic oracles woven into the text of
these three stories as signs. The specific links these signs make to the Torah
appear to me to be evidence of the use of the rabbinic midrash method of
instruction by the leaders of the Johannine community/school. I'm convinced
that this method has the potential to unlock a significant level of hidden
meaning throughout the Gospel narrative. It may also suggest how and why the
Gospel was written (ie: as a record of a growing body of midrash commentaries
developed by members of the community/school as part of the school's didactic
process.) As I understand it, midrash may have been a commonly used method for
training rabbis in Jewish schools in the first century. It's use in the
Johannine community's school may have been designed to teach new
Jewish-Christian leaders to think, lead and teach as disciples of Jesus.
Is anyone else working on or be familiar with previous work done on the use of
Mosaic oracles in the Fourth Gospel?
If so, would you be willing to engage in a dialogue with me on this list or if
you prefer in a private e-mail exchange? I am eager to test my theories and
my method by presenting them for scrutiny by the scholars on this list.
Yours in Christ's service,
Dr. Tom Butler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]