By Norman H. Young
A Commentary on the Sabbath School Lesson for February 14–20, 2004, on John 7:1–10:21, "The Good Shepherd."
As is well known, Socrates constantly claimed not to know the answer to the propositions that his questioning of others probed. In his final defence before the Athenian citizens’ court he confessed his own ignorance and therefore reluctantly claimed to be wiser than a certain self-proclaimed wise man (an unnamed politician):
Well, I am certainly wiser than this man [that is, the wise politician]. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know."1
Knowing that we do not know is the prerequisite of searching for understanding, whereas knowing that we know may prevent us from seeking the truth. The two main verbs "to know" (oida and ginosko) occur 540 times in the New Testament. Of these, 141 (26 percent) are found in the fourth Gospel.2 These two verbs dominate in this week’s chapters of John’s Gospel. One-third (47) of John’s usage of these two verbs occur in chapters 7-10.3 To know the real identity of Jesus is the burden of John, especially in these four chapters.
Since the rulers acquiesced in Jesus’ public ministry, some in Jerusalem suggested that perhaps the Jewish leaders really knew that Jesus was the Messiah (7:26). Yet doubt persisted, for his earthly origins were known, whereas the Messiah, it was thought, would be a more mysterious figure (v. 27). Jesus was from Galilee, but the Messiah was to come from Bethlehem in Judea (vv. 41–42). The reader, of course, familiar with the Synoptic Gospels, knows that Jesus was indeed born in Bethlehem. However, that Jesus came from Bethlehem is really only relevant for those who think from below; for John, it is a trivial detail, since he knew that Jesus was from the Father who had sent him (v. 29).
Because the crowd did not know the law (v. 49), the Pharisees ignored their opinions.4 The implication is that the Pharisees, in comparison, knew the law. Yet if they knew the law they would know him of whom the law spoke (1:45; 5:46). Their proclaimed knowledge of the law caused them to dismiss Jesus as a sinner (9:16). They did not know God; Jesus knew God because he came from God (8:54–55). Jesus’ questioning produced the same hostile reaction (10:31) that Socrates had experienced centuries before.
The sequence in John 9 climaxes in the formerly blind man’s recognition of who Jesus is. At first, he knew only that "the man called Jesus" had restored his sight, but he did not know where he was (or from whence he came) (vv. 11–12). Later, when the Pharisees asked him his opinion of his healer, he asserted, "he’s a prophet" (v. 17). The parents knew the formerly blind man was their son, but they did not know who opened his eyes (vv. 20–21). Perhaps he was the Messiah, but they did not dare confess this for fear of expulsion from the synagogue (v. 22).
Next, against the Jews, the healed man argued that Jesus was "a man from God" (v. 33). Jesus then revealed himself to him as "the Son of Man" (v. 35). At first, the formerly blind man used kurios, with the meaning "sir," (v. 36), but with the revelation of Jesus as Son of Man he said, "’Lord (Kurios), I believe.’ And he worshiped him" (v. 38). For a Jew to address Jesus as "Lord" in the context of worship was to give him the status of God. We may depict the progress as follows: man–prophet–Messiah–Man from God–Son of Man–Lord.
The one thing the blind man knew with irrefutable certainty was that whereas he had been blind, now he could see (v. 25). The Jews, too, had their certain knowledge (v. 29), and consequently they refused instruction from the likes of an ignorant blind beggar (v. 34). The sequence of knowing and not knowing in John 9 is set out below:
He does not know where Jesus is (v. 12).
He does not know whether or not Jesus is a sinner (v. 25).
He does know that, though being blind, he now sees (v. 25).
He knows that God does not hear sinners (v. 31).
He does not know who the Son of Man is (v. 36).
They know it is their son, and that he was born blind (v. 20).
They do not know how he sees (v. 21).
They do not know who opened his eyes (v. 21).
They know that Jesus is a sinner (v. 24).
They know that God spoke to Moses (v. 29a).
They do not know where Jesus comes from (v. 29b, 30).
Knowing that Jesus was a sinner and certain that God spoke to Moses, but not knowing Jesus’ origin, the Jews queried Jesus, assured of his reply: "Surely we are not blind, are we?" The question expects the answer, "no you are not," and Jesus did not disappoint them. "No you are not blind," he said, "and because you are not, you are responsible for your own sin [that is, not knowing who Jesus is]" (vv. 40–41). Knowledge can easily become a block to further understanding, as Socrates long ago noted.5
From Jesus flows living water (7:38), he is the light of the world (8:12; 9:5), and he is the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep (10:11). Some of the Jewish leaders were behaving like rapacious robbers or hirelings (compare Ezekiel 34). Jesus profoundly differed from their ways. He does not desert the sheep like a hired hand (v. 12). He is not focused on his own interests like a thief. Five times he referred to laying down his life for the sheep (vv. 11, 15, 17, 18a, 18b).
My country (Australia) has many sheep. Without dogs and trail bikes it’s hard to see them following one of our pastoralists through any gate. The small Palestinian flocks give a picture of trust and intimacy quite foreign to Australia’s huge flocks. So we must try to enter the image of another time and culture; only then can we grasp the poignancy of a shepherd who leads (rather than "drives," as in Australia) his sheep and willingly dies while protecting them.
So John wants us to know Jesus as the man from God; as the fulfillment of the Law of Moses; as the source of living water (that is, eternal life); as the true light that gives sight to the blind (that is, understanding); and as the Good Shepherd who knows his sheep and dies for them (10:4–5; 14–15; 27). Such knowledge is life eternal (17:3).
1. Plato, Apology, 21D, Hugh Tredennick, trans., The Last Days of Socrates (new ed., Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1959), 50.
2. The second and third most frequent occurrences are Luke 53 times (10 percent) and Matthew 44 times (8 percent). The four chapters of 1 John use the verbs "to know" 40 times (7 percent).
3. Oida occurs 6 times in chapter 7, 9 times in chapter 8, 11 times in chapter 9, and twice in chapter 10. Ginosko occurs 5 times in chapter 7, 6 times in chapter 8, 0 times in chapter 9, and 8 times in chapter 10.
4. The terms Pharisee and Jew should not be construed as anti-Semitic. The reference is to "unbelief" and John is appealing to Torah-oriented Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah. See Stephen Motyer, Your Father the Devil? A New Approach to John and the Jews (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1997).
5. Compare Proverbs 26:12 "Do you see persons wise in their own eyes? There is more hope for fools than for them."
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE
|
