conflict (from the book)

“the contrast between jesus as light and his enemies - who are also the enemies of god - as darkness, is sustained throughout the gospel, particularly in the debates between jesus and the jews.” - smalley

the author seems to suggest that the primary responsibility for jesus’ death law with the jewish leaders. they acted as they did, not because they were evil, but in a real sense, because from their limited perspective, jesus had committed blasphemy. he had ridden triumphantly into jerusalem and his presence could have caused civil unrest during the passover. he could not simply have been imprisoned, since his followers would have rioted. execution therefore seemed a prudent option. according to marsh, the crucifixion was the result of the fact that ‘...good men are driven to evil sometimes by the very soundness of their good intentions’. the evangelist makes heavy use of irony in his presentation of the conflict between jesus and his opponents. they, of all people, should have been able to perceive the truth of jesus’ identity, and yet they conspicuously failed to do so.

alan culpepper writes : “their inability to comprehend jesus’ glory sets up most of the irony, since the reader is able to see both their blindness and jesus’ glory through the eyes of the evangelist… although they do not recognise who jesus is, there is willfulness in their blindness. they love darkness rather than light… as a result, they do not recognise the higher plane of their own words.”

the passion narrative has brought to a climax the theme of conflict which has run throughout the gospel from the telling prediction in the prologue that jesus would not be received by ‘his own’ (1:11). in developing a systematic replacement theology, it is inevitable that the evangelist has written polemically of judaism and in chapters 7-9 we see some of the most anti-semitic statements in the new testament. the jews respond to jesus in kind with accusations of illegitimacy (john 8:41), false prophecy and sorcery (john 7:12, john 7:47) and demonic possession (john 7:20, john 8:48). jesus’ confrontation with the jews in chapter eight leads him to say that their true father is satan (john 8:44), the harshest accusation he could bring against god’s covenant people. the fourth gospel includes 70 references to ‘the jews’, a general term sometimes without particular significance, but in most cases, strongly negative.

it usually refers to the jewish authorities which oppose jesus and which were clearly in conflict with the evangelist’s community, as the telling incident with the blind man’s parents reveals (john 9:1-41). most broadly, ‘the jews’ are those who belong to the world and reject jesus. to a considerable extent they are destined to to do so because they fail to understand his teaching, especially about his own person (john 8:21). yet some respond more positively, and there is always divided opinion about jesus (john 10:19). nicodemus becomes a representative of the jews who do not remain overly hostile, but who are not prepared to make a full commitment to jesus ‘lest they be put out of the synagogue’ (12:42). it seems likely that he remains ambivalent, despite burying jesus, though brown argues that nicodemus’ actions at the end of chapter nineteen are effectively a public testimony of discipleship.

the language of the gospel emphasises the line that has been firmly drawn between the johannine community and the synagogue by the end of the first century. jesus speaks of ‘your law’ (john 10:34) when addressing the jew, and the evangelist specifies that feasts are ‘of the jews’ as if to stress they are not festivals observed by his community. in jesus’ dialogue with nicodemus, the acrimonious split between church and synagogue is plain. the dialogue shifts from being between two individuals to being between two communities, johannine and jewish; ‘we speak of what we know and you do not receive our testimony’ (john 3:11). jesus addresses nicodemus as representative of all jews, telling him that ‘you [plural] must be born again’ (john 3:7). although he holds out a promise of new birth, he also conveys a sharp criticism: if judaism needs to be revived, it is because it is dead.

the fourth gospel presents a picture of the johannine community as being closed and protective. the members of the community are called to love one another, but not to love the world; they must be apart from it. life as a johannine christian cannot include compromise with, or assimilation into the world. persecution is inevitable, but is to be welcomed as part of the community’s ministry. those within it have made the right decision, as far as the evangelist is concerned, but it is not an easy one to make. the conflicts between jesus and the jews show why that separation has become inevitable, as persecution grows to become life threatening. those who have committed their lives to jesus are, however, granted divine protection, and the unity of the community will be the basis for their enduring witness, despite continued hostility : ‘i have said all this to keep you from falling away. they will put you out of the synagogues; indeed the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to god. and they will do this because they have not known the father, or me. but i have said this that when their hour comes you may remember i told you of them.’ (john 16:1-4)

	Created by izzy smith about 7 years ago

what a textbook said about conflict in john's gospel.