Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Hoi Ioudaioi in the Gospel of John : an ethnic designation from an expelled community Dimmock, Paul Harold 2006

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2006-0435.pdf [ 5.23MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0092685.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0092685-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0092685-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0092685-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0092685-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0092685-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0092685-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0092685-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0092685.ris

Full Text

Hoi Ioudaioi in the Gospel of John A n Ethnic Designation from an Expelled Community by Paul Harold Dirnmock A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (RELIGIOUS STUDIES) UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 2006 © Paul Harold Dirnmock, 2006 A B S T R A C T This thesis focuses on what I believe is the correct translation and interpretation of the term hoi Ioudaioi used in the Gospel of John. While there have been many translations and interpretations of what this enigmatic term means in the past two thousand years, it is my contention that the authors of the Gospel of John viewed hoi Ioudaioi as referring to the ethnic group of the Jews. The Gospel of John is a document written from the perspective of a Community, called here the Johannine Community, which felt socially dislocated after they were expelled from the local Jewish synagogue through the use of a cherem, a synagogue ban. The reason for their expulsion was because of their views that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah. This action and the resulting alienation stemming from it caused a social identity crisis in the minds of the Johannine Community members, who no longer felt that they belonged to the Jewish ethnic group called, hoi Ioudaioi. To cope with this dilemma, the Gospel of John was created which attacks key elements of the identity markers of hoi Ioudaioi. These identity markers were then replaced with new non-ethnic identity markers based solely on the Community's interpretation of Jesus of Nazareth. iii T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Abstract i i Table of Contents iii-iv Acknowledgements v Dedication : vi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Terminology 2 1.2 Methodology 4 1.3 Outline 9 2Ethnicity •••10 2.1 Origins of the Term Ioudaios 10 2.2 Judaism Defined 14 2.3 Predominately Religious? 16 2.4 Ioudaios in Contemporary Literature: Regional and Religious 19 2.5 Conclusions 21 3 Ioudaioi in John 23 3.1 Ioudaios = Judean? 23 3.2 Judea versus Galilee and Samaria 26 3.3 Ioudaioi versus Galileans? 28 3.4 Hoi Ioudaioi as Authorities 30 3.5 Criticisms 32 3.6 Religious Usage 33 3.7 Conclusions 35 4 Fragmenting Identity 37 4.1 Location 37 4.2 Composition 39 4.3 Multi-Stage Hypothesis 40 4.4 Expulsion Theories 43 4.5 Synagogue Bans and Cherem 47 4.6 Yavneh and the Birkhat Ha-Minim 51 4.7 Conclusions 58 5 Expulsion Results in Social Identity 60 5.1 Imagery in John 61 5.2 Social Identity Formed Through Replacement 63 5.3 Four Pillars 66 5.4 Monotheism 67 5.5 Covenant and "Historical" Figures 68 5.6 Covenant Based on Torah .... 70 5.7 Markers of the Covenant Found within Torah 72 5.8 Covenant Based on the Temple 73 5.9 Conclusions 75 6 Conclusions 79 Bibliography 81 Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge the great debt to which I owe all those who have helped me through the pursuit of my Masters degree. First, acknowledgment must be made of the tireless efforts of my supervisor Dr. Neufeld who introduced me to the social-scientific study of the Christian Testament and has helped guide me through my thesis construction. To the other members of my thesis committee, Drs. Cousland and Arbel thanks also must be given, for providing me invaluable advice throughout my study at the University of British Columbia. Finally, to my friend and fellow scholar Stephanie Hamilton thank you so much for listening to my long tirades about the Gospel of John and for providing me useful insights. D e d i c a t e d T o M y P a r e n t s Who First Opened M y Eyes To the Amazing World of The Bible 1 1 INTRODUCTION This thesis seeks to explore the meaning of the term hoi Ioudaioi in the Gospel of John. The term occurs 67 times in this Gospel while the singular Ioudaios occurs 4 times. This Gospel with its viscous accusations that hoi Ioudaioi were opponents of Jesus because of their lineage from their father, the Devil (8.4), has been used to justify anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism throughout history.1 The question of who hoi Ioudaioi are in the Gospel of John (c. 80-110 C.E.) is one that has plagued commentators for centuries. While traditionally this term has been translated as 'the Jews,' many post-Holocaust approaches seek to mitigate this possible anti-Judaic translation. Therefore, despite that this term is best understood in an ethnic manner in contemporary Jewish and Gentile writings,2 one scholar, Robert Kysar says that "few, i f any, responsible scholars today would argue that the reference is to the entire Jewish people."3 To mitigate anti-Semitic accusations, limited translations have been proposed. Among those that I discuss in this thesis are the propositions that hoi Ioudaioi should be translated in a geographical manner; that this term refers to a certain class of 1 In John Chrysostom's (c. 347-407) "Discourses," 1.4.6; 2.3.4 he states that it is the Devil who attracts people to the synagogue, and in 8.4.6 he quotes John 8.44 stating that as the Devil was a murderer from the beginning, so too are his children, cited in R.L. Wilken, Judaism and the Early Christian Mind. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971), p. 19. Martin Luther's 1543 treatise "On the Jews and Their Lies," in which Luther states that Jews are of the Devil, synagogues are nothing but habitations of devils and he urges Christians to force Jews to become Christians through persecution, cited in Franklin Sherman (ed), Luther's Works, vol. 47. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971), pp. 141, 172, 268-272. 2 Peter J. Tomson, '"Jews' in the Gospel of John as Compared with the Palestinian Talmud, the Synoptics and Some New Testament Apocrypha," found in Reimund Bieringer, Didier Pollefeyt, and Frederique, Vandercasteele-Vanneuville (eds.). Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel: Papers of the Leuven Colloquim, 2000. (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2001), pp. p. 304. 3 Robert Kysar, "Anti-Semitism and the Gospel of John," cited in Craig A. Evans, Donald A. Hagner, Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity; Issues of Polemic and Faith. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), p. 118. 2 people, Jewish authorities; or that this term should be translated as pertaining to members of the Jewish religion. Essentially this thesis answers why the Johannine Community used the term hoi Ioudaioi to refer to those expressing hostility towards Jesus and his disciples in their document, the Gospel of John. This Community began as Jewish Christians in the synagogue of a single location.4 Around 80 C.E. these Christians were expelled from their synagogue due to their insistence that a crucified criminal, Jesus of Nazareth, was the Messiah. This painful break from the nurturing presence of the greater Jewish society caused the Community to reject the ethnic identity markers of their Judaism and to refer to the dominant community which expelled them by their ethnic name, hoi Ioudaioi. From this viewpoint, the Gospel of John is a document written from the perspective of this socially dislocated Community that is attempting to create its own markers of self-identification. The process, which is shown through the writings of their Gospel, shows the rejection of the ethnic markers of hoi Ioudaioi5 and their replacement of social identity markers based solely upon their conception of Jesus of Nazareth. 1.1 Terminology The problem of translating the term hoi Ioudaioi in a non-limiting manner does not exist in the Greek originals. As Wayne Meeks says, for ancient authors and their 4 Hence, I do not believe that this term should be viewed as anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic as referring to all Jews. 5 While it is widely recognized that "Christians" became viewed as a race or an ethnic group in the third century. This designation is not directly applied to the time period under discussion, Clement of Alexandria's "Preachings of Peter;" cited in Denise Kimber Buell, "Rethinking the Relevance of Race for Early Christian Self-Definition," Harvard Theological Review, 94, 2000, pp. 461-462. (444-476), although Buell does attempt to link the term ethne with Christians in such early works as the Shepherd of Herman, Denise Kimber Buell, "Race and Universalism in Early Christianity," Journal of Early Christian Studies, 10, 2002, pp. 429-468. 3 readers there would have been no difference between Judeans (geographical) and Jews (religious/cultural), both of these factors were part of the ancient Jewish ethnicity.6 The quandary of an adequate English translation for the term hoi Ioudaioi has come to the forefront of Johannine studies in recent years. Some scholars now write "the Jews," in quotation marks to show that there is this sense of unease over the proper translation of this term.7 • 9 Several social-scientific scholars among them John Pilch and Philip F. Esler argue - that the correct translation should be "Judean," without the limiting regional connotation.8 Esler argues that the translation of the term as "Jew" focuses only on the religious aspect and does not address the issues of regional disparity and the Temple cult. In his estimation, the ancient Mediterranean practice was to differentiate between ethnic groups based on their home territory.9 Therefore, he argues that while Ioudaioi were found throughout the Roman Empire, they and their customs were traced back to the land of Ioudaia, (Judea) where their Temple was.1 0 As Meeks states, the term hoi Ioudaioi "denotes the visible, recognizable group with their more or less well-known customs, 6 Wayne A. Meeks, "Am I a Jew? Johannine Christianity and Judaism" found in Jacob Neusner, (ed.). Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity. (Leiden, Brill, 1975), p. 182. 7 Adele Reinhartz, "The Gospel of John: How "the Jews" Became Part of the Plot," found in Paula Fredriksen & Adele Reinhartz (eds.), Jesus, Judaism & Christian Anti-Judaism: Reading the New Testament after the Holocaust. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002, pp. 99-116; also see Bieringer et als. 8 J.J. Pilch argues that the English word "Jew" did not exist in English until the Middle English period of the 16th century C.E., he fails however, to say when the English term Judean became known. "Jews and Christians. Anachronism in Bible Translations," Professional Approaches for Christian Educators [PACE], 25 (April, 1996), p. 20. 9 Esler mentions that of the forty ethnic groups mentioned in Josephus' "Against Apion," only one of these, the Hyskos is non-territorial, Philip F. Esler, Conflict and Identity in Romans: The Social Setting of Paul's Letter. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), pp. 63, 66. 1 0 Hecateus of Abdera cited by Diodorus Siculus "Bibliotheca Historica" 40.3, Clearchus of Soli cited in Josephus "Against Apion," 1.179, as found in Esler, "Conflict," p. 63. 4 who have their origin in Judea but preserve what we would call their "ethnic identity" in the Diaspora."11 For two reasons, I have continued to use the term 'Jew.' Firstly, although I agree with Esler that geographic identification was very important for the ancient understanding of ethnicity, so too was a group's customs including their religious identification.12 Secondly, Esler admits that a primary problem with his translation is that the term "Judean" already exists in a limited capacity, it refers to inhabitants of a geographical area, Judea.13 It is because of this limited meaning that I continue to translate this as "Jew," following Adele Reinhartz' understanding that a "Jew" in the ancient world would have been best understood as "a member of a national, religious, cultural and political group..."14 1.2 Methodology While there are many methodological criticisms that have been applied to Christian Testament scholarship, for the purposes of this thesis I have chosen to study the Gospel of John through a combination of the literary-historical and social-scientific methods.15 The literary-historical approach is two-fold; studying presumed literary texts as well as the historical milieu in which the Gospel was created. For instance, Rudolph Bultmann in his commentary suggested that there were three sources behind the Gospel 1 1 Meeks, "Am I a Jew?" p. 182. 1 2 Judith M. Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 241; Naomi Janowitz, "Re-thinking Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity," found in Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex, (eds.), Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity. (London: Duckworth: 2000), pp. 208-209. 1 3 Esler, "Conflict," p. 66. 1 4 Adele Reinhartz, '"Jews' and Jews in the Fourth Gospel," found in Bieringer et al, p. 349. 1 5 With insights from sociologists as well. For an excellent overview of the methodologies used and their criticisms see Urban C. von Wahlde, '"The Jews' in the Gospel of John. Fifteen Years of Research (1983-1998)," Ephmerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 76, 2000, pp. 30-55. 5 of John, a "passion narrative," a "discourse-source," and a "signs source." While the two first hypothesized 'sources' have not gained wide acceptance as single documents, the "signs source" hypothesis has.17 Although, some historical scholars such as Raymond Brown have expressed dissatisfaction with this hypothesis stating that dissection of the Gospel into different sources may only reconstruct the Gospel in the view of the interpreter. While the historical origins of the Gospel of John were not focussed on in Bultmann's commentary, another historical critic, J. L. Martyn concentrated on this area. While Martyn's conclusions based on the Birkhat Ha-minim have produced skepticism in more modern, the list of Johannine scholars who have accepted his hypothesis of the expulsion from the synagogues of the Johannine Community, based on the aposunagogos sayings of John 9.22; 12.42 and 16.2 is impressive.19 Martyn justly deserves the 1 6 Rudolph Bultmann, The Gospel of John, trans, and ed. G.R. Beasley-Mureray; trans R.W.N. Hoare, and J.K. Riches. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), pp. 6-7. 1 7 Most notably by R. T. Fortna, The Gospel of Signs: A Reconstruction of the Narrative Source Underlying the Fourth Gospel. (SNTSMS, 11. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); U.C. von Wahlde, The Earliest Version of John's Gospel. (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989); Gilbert Van Belle's, The Signs Source in the Fourth Gospel: Historical Survey and Critical Evaluation of the Semeia Hypothesis. (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1994). 1 8 Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, vol. 1. (New York: Doubleday, 1966), pp. xxxiv-xxxix, "Introduction," p. 63; other scholars who agree with this assessment are, M. de Jonge, Jesus: Stranger from Heaven and Son of God: Jesus Christ and the Christian in Johannine Perspective. (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977), p. 198; Martin Hengel, The Johannine Question, (London: SCM Press, 1989), pp. 89-92; Mark W. G. Stibbe, Jesus as Storyteller: Narrative Criticism and the Fourth Gospel, SNTSMS vol. 73. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 83f. 1 9 J.L. Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968). Those that follow this position in differing forms are Wayne Meeks; David E. Aune; M de Jonge; Raymond Brown; Rudolf Schnackenburg; Severino Pancaro; W. Nicol; Robert Kysar; G.L. Bartholomew: John Townsend; Jerome Neyrey; David Rensberger; John Painter; G.R. Beaseley-Murray; R. A. Culpepper; D. Moody Smith; Klaus Wengst; James D.G. Dunn; Walter Rebell; Wolfgang Wiefel; Feliks Gryglewicz; Sean Freyne; Takashi Onuki; John Koenig; Peter F. Ellis; R.T. Fortna; Rodney A. Whitacre; Ludger Schenke; Gale Yee; John Ashton; Mark W.G. Stibbe; Martin de Boer; and Helmut Koester, as cited in Motyer, p. 13, n. 21. Those that do not, include Margaret Davies who argues that the aposunagogos sayings of John are in fact creations by the Community to "prove" that the Community has nothing whatsoever to do with Judaism and that members attempting to rejoin the synagogues will be met with hostility. Margaret Davies, Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel. JSNT Sup., 69. (Sheffield: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Press, 1992), p. 299. Another scholar who has disputed the expulsion theory is Adele Reinhartz who questions how hoi Ioudaioi in chapter nine can have already decided to expel Messiah proclaimers 6 compliment given to his work by John Ashton as "probably the most important single work on the Gospel since Bultmann's commentary."20 A key hypothesis, which Martyn suggested, was the two-level reading strategy.21 [This] two-level reading strategy is used as a key to the history and life-situation of the Johannine community. This use depends upon the assertion that a particular, defined community produced and read the Fourth Gospel as its foundational text. The two-level reading strategy presumes that the community read the Gospel both as a story of Jesus and as its own story. In doing so, it views the particulars of the community's history, specifically its relationship with the Jewish community, as encoded in the Gospel narratives and hence transparent to its earliest readers."22 According to Stephen Motyer, Martyn's two-level reading strategy portrays Jesus as appearing in the Gospel as a Jewish Christian healer and revealer while being represented as the founder of the Johannine Community. The Council alluded to in chapter seven is actually the Gerousia, the local Jewish council of the area in which the Gospel was created. The Pharisees of the Gospel are members of the Yavneh Academy, while hoi Ioudaioi represent the 'rank and file' members of the local synagogue. Nicodemus represents "crypto-Christians," Jews who may believe in Jesus but refused to publicly declare this out of fear of expulsion. Finally the aposunagogos sayings do not represent Jewish actions to Christians in the time of Jesus but instead to the Community in c. 80 C.E. Here, hoi Ioudaioi and the Pharisees, acting on the instructions of Yavneh from their synagogues yet two chapters later comfort "known" Jesus followers (11.27). Reinhartz, . "Gospel" pp. I l l , 121, 125. Reinhartz' argument suffers from a misunderstanding of who hoi Ioudaioi are, how this term refers to Jewish people as an ethnic group and not as one select group within Palestine, such as the Jerusalem authorities. Furthermore, her suggestion that hoi Ioudaioi of 11.1 -44 knew that Mary and Martha were disciples of Jesus is unfounded. Finally Raymond Brown, who while one of the chief architects of the expulsion theory, has admitted recently that it is possible that from the perspective of the synagogue officials, the expulsion of the Johannine Christians may have been viewed as voluntary. But only in the sense that they willingly chose to follow a false Messiah and must therefore be punished for their actions. Brown, "Introduction," p. 172. 2 0 John Ashton, Understanding the Fourth Gospel. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), p. 107. 2 1 J.L. Martyn, Gospel of John in Christian History. (Toronto: Paulist Press, 1979), p. 30. 2 2 Reinhartz, "Johannine Community," p. 130. 7 and the introduction of the Birkhat Ha-minim, the 'curse of the heretics,' expelled those that believe Jesus to be the Messiah.2 3 While the Jews of John represent the historical people with whom the Community was in conflict,24 the individual figures and their actions in the Gospel should be interpreted as "representative people (disciples, ordinary people: the crowd, Jewish leaders, Samaritans) [who] express representative beliefs and raise representative objections."25 Therefore, it should be recognized that these representative "Jews" depict not what actual Jews thought or did to Jesus or even what they may have done to the Johannine Community, instead these Jews represent the perceptions of the Johannine Community.2 6 While Martyn used some sociological insight to reconstruct the situation that the Johannine Community emerges, the first scholar to consciously seek sociological solutions to the problem of Johannine studies was Wayne A. Meeks. Building on the earlier socio-historical approaches, the social-scientific study of the Gospel of John championed by such scholars as Bruce Malina and Richard L. Rorhbaugh27 seeks to understand the function of the Gospel within the experiences of the Johannine Stephen Motyer, Your Father the Devil: A New Approach to John and 'the Jews.' (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1997), pp. 13-14, Motyer criticizes Martyn for being rather selective about the history and texts of the first century C.E. studied in the creation of his theory. For instance, he only uses Josephus four times, Philo once, four Qumran documents and he does not focus on any of the contemporary apocalypses, Motyer, pp. 25-26. A summary of the Birkhat Ha-minim will be discussed below in chapter three. 2 4 Reinhartz, Gospel, p. 342.). 2 5 Marnius de Jonge, "Jewish Expectations about the 'Messiah' According to the Fourth Gospel," New Testament Studies, 19, 1972-73, p. 247. 2 6 While the hostility which is present in the text may have occurred, it is also quite likely more of a perception than a reality, de Jonge, "Jewish," p. 248; M.C. de Boer, claims that the Johannine perspective of the Jews should be viewed as 'vilification," "false accusations motivated by hatred." "The Depiction of 'the Jews' in John's Gospel: Matters of Behaviour and Identity," found in Bieringer et al, p. 266. 2 7 Bruce J. Malina, The Social World of Jesus and the Gospels. (London: Routledge, 1996); Bruce J. Malina, The New Testament World: Insight from Cultural Anthropology. Third edition. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001); Bruce J. Malina, Richard L. Rohrbaugh, Social Science Commentary of the Gospel of John. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998). 8 Community. In this manner of understanding, the history of the Johannine Community is imbedded in the text itself, and while historical criticism may provide confirmation of the Community, the primary evidence must come from the text itself. Raymond Brown, while a historical critic who was interested in the historical origins of the Johannine Community, also agreed with this statement stating that while he believed there to be both an evangelist (first author) and a later redactor; the duty of the commentator is not to decide what was composed by whom, or in what order it originally stood, nor whether these composers drew on a written source or an oral tradition. One should deal with the Gospel of John as it now stands, for that is the only form that we are certain has ever existed. What social-scientific criticism of John attempts, is to understand the social situation behind the writing of the Gospel and how this influences the way certain individuals and groups, among them hoi Ioudaioi, are viewed in this Gospel. In this manner, the Gospel of John functioned as "an etiology of the Johannine group [which] provided a symbolic universe which gave religious legitimacy, a theodicy, to the group's actual isolation from the larger society."30 Its carefully selected language promoted group solidarity.31 For this thesis, I have chosen to explore the situation in a socio-historical manner to explain how the term hoi Ioudaioi is used as an ethnic designation from whom the Community was separated. While I use Martyn's three stages of Gospel creation, I think 2 8 Martin de Boer, "Narrative Criticism: Historical Criticism, and the Gospel of John, Journal for the Study of the New Testament," 47, 1992, p. 43. 2 9 Raynond E. Brown, An Introduction to the Gospel of John. Edited by Francis J. Moloney. New York: Doubleday, 2003), p. 6. 3 0 W. A. Meeks, "The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism." Journal of Biblical Literature, 91, 1972, pp. 69-70. 3 1 Malina, Rohrbaugh, p. 11. 9 that Martyn goes outside of what the sources say, for instance his supposition of the Birkhat Ha-minim is not justified. 1.3 Outline This thesis is divided into six chapters including my conclusions. In my introduction, I have discussed the terminology and methodology, which are to be used in this thesis. I have also formulated my argument that the term in question, hoi Ioudaioi should best be understood as an ethnic designation, used by a group which has been expelled from the Jews and no longer identifies themselves as belonging to this ethnic group. In chapter two, I explain what theory of ethnicity I feel is the most justified and the contemporary understandings of the term hoi Ioudaioi used by both Jewish and Gentile sources as an ethnic designation. Chapter three focuses on how the term hoi Ioudaioi has been translated as pertaining to the Gospel of John, the three translations in which I discuss and disregard are regional/geographical, authoritative and ethnical from a solely religious viewpoint. In Chapter four, I discuss theories pertaining to the creation of the Gospel of John and the formation of the Johannine Community. While I discuss J.L. Martyn's theory that the Birkhat Ha-minim was used to expel the Johannine Christians from the synagogues, ultimately this theory is rejected, and the hypothesis of a cherem adopted. Chapter five concludes that for the Johannine Community, the expulsion from the synagogue was the reason for the formation of their social identity. With this event they no longer identified themselves as Ioudaioi but instead sought other identifying markers to form a social definition based on fictive kinship. 10 2 Ethnicity This chapter seeks to explore the term hoi Ioudaioi as an ethnic marker. What is ethnicity and how did this term apply to the Jews in the ancient world? What were their markers of self-identity and how did others identify them? How important were the religious customs and beliefs of the Jews to their ethnic identity? 2.1 Origins of the Term Ioudaios Ioudaios (plural = Ioudaioi) is derived from the geographical area of Judea (Ioudaia). This area is in turn derived from the earlier geographical region Judah, (Ioudas) which had received its name from the Jewish patriarch, Judah. Judea became the Roman province in which the narrative of the Gospel of John takes place.32 The term Ioudaios is applied to the ethnic group whose origins were in Judea and who followed the traditional customs of those who formed their cultural and religious nexus around the Temple in Jerusalem.33 Josephus states that the term was not used to describe the people until after their return from the Babylonian exile (Ant. 11.173). The English term "ethnic" derives from the Greek ethnos, which broadly defines groups sharing similar characteristics. In the time of Homer it was used to designate Graham Harvey, The True Israel: Uses of the Names Jew, Hebrew and Israel in Ancient Jewish and Early Christian Literature. (New York: E.J. Brill, 1996), p. 11; Judea can refer in a limited sense only to the region of Judea, "Ant". 11.4; "Against Apion" 1.90 or to the procurate of Pontius Pilate which included Judea, Idumea and Samaria or to the entire land of Israel as ruled by the Hasmoneans and Herod the Great; Galilee, Samaria, Judea, Idumea and Perea, "Ant." 14.120; "J.W." 2.252, Malcolm Lowe, "Who Were the IOUDAIOI?," Novum Testamentum, 18, 1976, p. 103 (101-130); Harvey, p. 51. 3 3 Harvey, p. 11. 11 hosts of men or flocks of animals,34 while after Homer the term usually denotes nations or people. It is used this way in the Christian Testament.35 While there are many different theories of ethnicity, I feel that "the term 'ethnicity' [best] denotes both the self-consciousness of belonging to an ethnic group (ethnic identity) and the dynamic process that structures, and is structured by, ethnic groups in social interaction with one another."36 This identity is both "socially constructed and subjectively perceived."37 Ethnic groups choose the criteria they feel characterizes "them," in relation to others.38 There are two main understandings of ethnicity: "primordialism" and "instrumentalism." Primordialists consider that ethnicity (religion, territorial association, and genealogy) is a natural evolution from such structures as kinship and social identity.39 Ethnicity naturally develops from a group who shares similar traits such as religion, language, and race 4 0 The primordialist viewpoint is how ethnic groups often view 3 4 Esler, "Conflict," p. 54; H.G. Liddell, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Seventh edition. (Oxford: Clarendon Press), p. 226. 3 5 William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 217. 3 6 Jonathan M. Hall, Hellenicity: Between Ethnicity and Culture. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), p. 9; Joshua A. Fishman, Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Perspective. (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd., 1989), p. 24. While not necessarily linked to ethnic identity the parameters of social identity are also attached to the membership that one has in a group, Tajfel, 1982, p. 2 as cited in Jonathan M. Hall, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 30. 3 7 G. A. De Vos, L. Romanucci-Ross, "Ethnic Identity: A Psychocultural Perspective," in L. Romanucci-Ross, G. De Vos (eds), Ethnic Identity: Creation, Conflict and Accommodation, p. 350. 3 8 Fishman, pp. 5-6; John Shea, "Reflections on Ethnic Consciousness and Religious Language," found in Andrew M. Greeley, Gregory Baum, Ethnicity. Concilium, 101. (New York: Crossroads Press, 1977), p. 86. 3 9 Jonathan Hall, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), p. 17. 4 0 Clifford Geertz, "The Integrative Revolution: Primordial Sentiments and Civil Politics in the New States," 1963, pp. 105-107, cited in Esler, "Conflict," p. 45. 12 themselves, especially under threat. In this way, social cohesion is formed differentiating themselves from 'the other.'41 The instrumentalist viewpoint is one that views the ethnic group from an outsider's perspective. This understanding sees ethnic groups as exploiting their shared characteristics to pursue political, religious and/or economic interests.42 In this manner, ethnic identity is subjective and can be viewed as fluid, changing under pressure. While people are born into an ethnic group ultimately their continued membership in that group is fully subjective.43 While identifying markers can and will change depending on which ethnic group is being discussed,44 two social anthropologists have identified six characteristics from which most ethnic groups choose to distinguish themselves from other ethnicities. • A common proper name to identify the group • A myth of common ancestor ("myth" is significant, in that it indicates the genealogical accuracy of the claimed descent is immaterial). • A shared history or shared memories of a common past, that embraces heroes, events and their commemoration. • A common culture, covering customs, language, religion and so on. • A link with a homeland, either through actual occupation or by symbolic attachment to the ancestral land, as with diaspora peoples • A sense of communal solidarity.45 4 1 Esler, "Conflict," pp. 45-46; Philip F. Esler, "Palestinian Judaism in the First Century," found in Dan Cohn-Sherbok, John M. Court, (eds.), Religious Diversity in the Graeco-Roman World: A Survey or Recent Scholarship. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), pp. 26-27 (21-46); Hall, "Ethnic," p. 18; an example of this is Herodotus' definition of barbarians were that they were not Greek, Janowitz, p. 214. 4 2 Hall, "Ethnic," pp. 17, 28; Esler, "Palestinian," p. 27. 4 3 Hall, "Ethnic," p. 28, Fishman, pp. 35-41, Buell, "Rethinking," pp. 466-472. In ancient literature there are several examples of people changing their ethnic identity. For instance, in the opening stanzas of a fifth century B.C.E. lost play by Euripides named the "Phrixus," a character named Cadmus, son of Agenor, is said to have been born a Phonician but when he left Sidon and emigrated to Thebes he changed his genos to Greek. Euripides, fr. 819, cited in Gideon Bobak, "Ethnic Continuity in the Jewish Diaspora in Antiquity," found in John R. Bartlett, (ed.), Jews in the Hellenistic and Roman Cities. (London: Routledge, 2002), p. 177. Another example comes from the second-third century C.E. author Heliodorus in his romance "Aethiopica." A Tyrian merchant became smitten by a young Egyptian girl, named Charicleia. When her father refused his offer of marriage because he was of a different ethnicity from them, the Tyrian replied that he would forego his own ethnos and accept theirs as long as he could marry her, Heliodorus, 13 Jonathan M . Hall says that of these six identifying features, the two most important for the definition of an ethnic group are the common myth of descent and the association with a specific territory.46 While certain features such as language or religion or other cultural traits may be the most visible markers of identification of certain ethnic groups, these traits do not ultimately define an ethnic group.47 While Philip F. Esler says that it "is unhelpful to exaggerate the importance" of religion in identifying ethnic groups in the ancient wor ld 4 8 ultimately this thesis is focussed on how the Johannine Community was expelled from the ethnic group of hoi Ioudaioi, because of how their religious ideas contrasted with the local synagogue.49 While Esler is correct not to limit the understanding of ethnicity to religious ideas as Shaye Cohen, for instance, does (as will be discussed below), ultimately religious identification markers may define membership in ethnic groups.5 0 Marinus de Jonge asks did people in authority consider it possible for Ioudaioi to go beyond what was acceptable and to not longer be considered Jews?5 1 He answers this by saying that the divisive issue between hoi Ioudaioi and the Johannine Community was "Aethiopica," 5.19, cited in Bobak, p. 177. A Hebrew example would be Ruth the Moabitess who renounced her ethnic identity to stay with her Israelite mother in law, Ruth 1.8-17, especially verses 16-17. 4 4 Hall, "Ethnic," pp. 20-21. 4 5 John Hutchinson, Anthony D. Smith, "Introduction" John Hutchinson and Smith (eds.), Ethnicity. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 6-7, cited in Esler, "Conflict,"pp. 43-44. It should be noted that non-ethnic groups could use these identifying markers or similar ones to create a social identity for themselves, Hall, "Ethnic," p. 25. 4 6 Hall, "Ethnic," p. 25. Other scholars who note that perceived genealogical descent was of great importance to the self-definition of ethnic groups are B.F. Williams, "A Class Act: Anthropology and the Race to Nation across Ethnic Terrain," Annual Review of Anthropology, 1989, 18, pp. 401-444; Max Weber "Ethnic Groups," found in Guenther Roth, Claus Wittich, (eds), Economy and Society, vol 1. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978 [1922]), pp. 385-395, Esler, "Conflict," p. 44. 4 7 Hall, "Hellenicity," p. 9. 4 8 Esler, "Conflict," p. 44. 4 9 Hall states that religion can be more important to certain ethnic groups than to others, "Hellenicity," p. 13. 5 0 Hall, "Hellenicity," p. 9; for the ethnic group of the Diaspora, this was very true, Philo, "On the Embassy to Gaius." 214-216, cited in D.K. Buell, "Rethinking" p. 459. 5 1 Marinus de Jonge, "Conflict" p. 343. 14 the status of Jesus of Nazareth. Was he the Messiah? Was the interpretation of the Community of Jesus' authority based on the "correct" interpretation of scripture and his relationship with God the Father?52 Through their understanding the only path to understanding the Father was through Jesus (14.6). In Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, Justin states that certain groups of Jews were not considered to be "real Jews" because of their religious beliefs, which differed from a key tenet of accepted Judaism of the time. Among these groups were the Sadducees, the Genistae, Meristae, Galileans, Hellenians and the Baptist Pharisees. 2.2 Judaism Defined While "Judaism" can not be wholly defined in the first century C.E. as many different groups with many different concerns could be classified in this manner, in the time period being discussed (80-110 C.E.) many of the groups, such as Herodians or, Essenes had by and large disappeared. In the aftermath of the First Jewish revolt, the one group that typifies "normative," Judaism was the Pharisaic movement. A study of what they considered "orthodox" may shed light upon the conception of the social identity of the Johannine Community. , One can define the ethnic group of hoi Ioudaioi according to all of the features that Hutchinson and Smith suggested. A collective name, a myth of descent, a shared history, a common culture including religion, a link with a homeland and a sense of communal solidarity. For the Jews identified themselves by name, in two ways, either as 5 2 De Jonge, "Conflict,"p. 344. 5 3 Justin Martyr, "The Dialogue With Trypho," 80, found in Thomas B. Falls, Writings of Saint Justin Martyr. The Fathers of the Church Series. (New York: Christian Heritage, Inc., 1948), p. 276; another example of a similar situation is found in Revelation 2.9 which reports that there are people who falsely claim to be Jews yet are really members of the synagogue/community of Satan. So too in "Ant." 11.340-341, Josephus comments that here some Samaritans tried to claim that they were Jewish to gain special 15 Jews or as Israel. Israel was more of a self-definition especially in Palestine while Ioudaioi was used more in mixed Jewish-Gentile circumstances, and by Gentiles to refer to the Jews. 5 4 A common myth of descent (with the structure of kinship5 5) also defined the Jews through their belief that they were children of Abraham. Abraham, according to Genesis chapters 15-17 was the progenitor of the Jewish race. This was a well-attested theme in the Hebrew Bible (Isaiah 41.8; 51.2; Psalm 105.6) and in first-century texts Jews could claim honour through their association with this figure (Matthew 1.2, 17; 3.9, Luke 3.8).56 Through this lineage the Jews would be directly connected to the covenant made between Yahweh and Abraham (Psalms of Solomon 9.8-9; Sirach 44.19-21).57 Hoi Ioudaioi shared a unique history, shown through key figures in the Hebrew Scriptures both those now considered canonical or apocryphal. Distinctively shared cultural traits included religious ideas.58 They were also linked to the land of Israel,59 the favour with Alexander the Great. Josephus however, considers Samaritans to be 'apostates from the Jewish nation.' Ashton, "Identity," p. 73. 5 4 W. Gutbrod, "Ioudaios,, Israel, Hebrew in Greek Hellenistic Literature," found in Gerhard Kittel, (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 3, eighth edition. (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978), pp.369-371, thus gentiles may praise the morals of the Jews or the God of the Jews, Peter J. Tomson 'If this be from Heaven...': Jesus and the New Testament Authors in their Relationship to Judaism. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), p. I l l ; Lowe mentions that the term Israel is used in the Mishnah c. 200 C.E. almost exclusively as a self-identification marker, p. 104. Lieu, p. 247, other texts from the inter-testamental era which show a preference for the term Israel as the covenantal title are Ecclesiasticus 17.17; "Jubilees" 33.20; O.S. Wintermute, (trans.), found in James H. Charlesworth, (ed). The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2. (New York: Doubleday, 1985), p. 120 and the "Psalms of Solomon" 14.5, R. B. Wright, (trans.), found in Charlesworth, (ed.), vol. 2, p. 663. 5 5 Fishman, pp. 24-25; Hall, "Hellenicity," p. 10. 5 6 Eliot R. Smith and Michael A. Zarate, "Exemplar and Prototype Use in Social Categorization," Social Cognition 8, 1990, p. 246 of 243-262, found in Esler, "Conflict," p. 172. 5 7 Examples found in Esler, "Conflict," pp. 178-179. 5 8 In this category belongs the four pillars of Judaism that James D.G. Dunn identifies with. These are the notion that 1/ God is one as the Shema (Deut. 6.4) states, 21 The election of Israel is bound through the covenant between His people and Yahweh . 3/ This covenant is focussed on the Torah and 4/ the Land of Israel focussed around the nexus or the Temple in Jerusalem, James D.G. Dunn, The Parting of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and their Significance for the Character of Christianity. (London: SCM Press, 1991), pp. 19-36. 5 9 Also known as Judea, but this term like its derivative Jew, is used more as an outsider or mixed designation. 16 land of the covenant between themselves and their God, Yahweh. Through their customs and beliefs of their covenant with Yahweh they shared a sense of solidarity. "... [F]fundamental to Israel's self-understanding was its conviction that it had been specially chosen by Yahweh, that the one God had bound himself to Israel and Israel to himself by a special contract, or covenant."60 2.3 Jews = Predominately Religious? Shaye Cohen, in his work on the boundaries of Judaism states that the term Ioudaios should always be translated as Judean in an ethnic-geographical manner prior to the Hasmonean dynasty and thus was parallel to other ethnic-geographical designations such as Roman or Thracian 6 1 In the Roman Republic the usual designation for the Jews was politeuma, laos, or ethnos. This changed, however, in the time of the Roman Empire, when the usual designation was sunagoge, "community," or "congregation." According to Cohen this shows a transition in how the Gentiles viewed the Jewish Diaspora communities. They became understood less as ethnic groups and more as religious communities. Cohen feels that the Judeans of Judea also began to redefine themselves less in an ethnic-geographical manner and more in a religious manner, however, in the Diaspora they kept the same name for themselves, Ioudaioi. Cohen's argument for the Jewish self-definition is based on four Greek texts found within the Septuagint (second half of the 2 n d century C.E) written within a 6 U Dunn, "Parting," p. 21. 6 1 Shaye J.D. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), pp. 14, 82. 6 2 Schurer, History 3.91 cited in Cohen, p. 80. 6 3 Cohen, "Beginnings," pp. 80-81. 17 generation of each other.64 These are two additions to the Book of Daniel; "Susanna" and "Bel and the Dragon" as well as the books of I and II Maccabees, In the first three books mentioned, he maintains that all of the uses of the term Ioudaioi (or Ioudaios) should be translated as referring to regional/geographic designations, while in II Maccabees there is a blending of the ethnic-geographic designations with that of religion.6 5 For instance in "Susanna," she is referred to as a loudaia which could be translated as Jewess. Cohen maintains that this should instead be translated in a regional manner, as a Judean for later in the story as a daughter of Judah she is contrasted with two lustful elders of Israel. 6 6 In "Bel and the Dragon," the Persian king, Cyrus, allows Daniel to kill a great dragon or serpent that the Babylonians worshipped as a god. After this event the people cried out that their king had become a Ioudaios61 Cohen argues that in the context of Daniel a more correct translation is "Judean." The reason for this is that in other verses of Daniel such as 1.6, Daniel and his associates are mentioned as children from Judah, a geographical reference.68 Cohen states that the Babylonian complaint is that their King is not acting as a Babylonian and revering their gods, but instead is acting as a Judean and denigrating them.6 9 6 4 Carey A Moore, Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah, (New York; Anchor Books, 1977), pp. 28-29, 77-92, cited in Cohen, p. 85, Allen C. Myers, (ed), The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987), pp. 924, 997. 6 5 Susanna v. 22 found in Alfred Rahlfs, Septuaginta. Second edition. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1975), the Theodotion text as well as Brenton's translation of the Septuagint instead merely refer to Susanna by her name, Cohen, p. 85, Sir Lancelot C L . Brenton, The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. Tenth edition. (Peabody. Hendrikson Publishing, 2003). "Susanna," vs. 56-57; Cohen, pp. 85-86. 6 7 "Bel and the Dragon," 23-28. 6 8 Cohen, pp. 86-87. 6 9 While Cohen does admit that in this instance, the meaning of the term Ioudaios is beginning to show glimmers of the later meaning of religious distinction and would fit the later rabbinic saying of "anyone who denies idolatry is a Jew," b. Megillah 13a, cited in Cohen, p. 86-87. 18 Cohen's argument here is not particularly convincing, as "Bel and the Dragon" was written after the completion of the Book of Daniel and its use of terms may vary from this work. 7 0 Secondly, and more convincingly is the concept that the Babylonians reacted in this manner because their King appeared to be turning his back on Babylonian gods. This appears to me to be a religious understanding and thus would contrast with Cohen's claims that in the late second century B.C.E the term Ioudaios should be translated purely in a geographical manner. I Maccabees contains a history of the Hasmonean dynasty and was written during the reign of John Hyrcanus or shortly thereafter (135-104 B.C.E). In this work, the plural term Ioudaioi is used frequently, usually in the context of the "people", "crowd" or 71 "nation." In all of these contexts the meaning is "Judeans" in an ethnic-geographical 79 sense. The singular, Ioudaios is used once in 2.23 where it states that an aner Ioudaios came forward in the sight of all men to sacrifice to the foreign gods. Cohen says that this should best be translated as a "man of Judah" or a "Judean man." Despite this being in a religious context, Cohen argues that this term should not be translated as Jew or a "Jewish man," because the plural form of this term in this text never refers to "Jew." Cohen further states that in II Maccabees, Ioudaioi is used to refer to both Judeans in Judea and those throughout the ancient world. 7 4 He also states however, that in 6.6 a reference is made to a decree by Antiochus Epiphanes to the people of Judea that they were not allowed to keep the Sabbath, celebrate the traditional feasts or even admit to 7 0 Myers, p. 258. 7 1 I Maccabees 8.20, 23, 27, 29, 31; 10.23, 25, 29, 33, 34, 36; 11.30, 33; 12.3, 6, 21; 13.36, 42; 14.20, 22; 15.1,2,17. 7 2 Cohen, p. 87. 7 3 Cohen, p. 88. 19 being a Ioudaios. Cohen grants that this verse clearly anticipates the meaning of the term Jew in a religious sense. For why would Antiochus care i f the people identified themselves as Judeans?75 Cohen perhaps simplifies the understanding of these terms a bit much. He attempts to show that there is a clear evolution in which the term Ioudaios is first understood in an ethnic-geographical manner and then later transforms to refer only to the religious customs of the Jews. In this understanding he is unsuccessful and this can be shown through the use of an example from a third century C.E. Roman historian, Cassius Dio. He still felt compelled to clarify that the Jews were an ethnic group known both for their geographical territory and their customs.76 Cohen fails to fully understand that both geography and religion are simply markers of a wider ethnic understanding. 2.4 Ioudaioi in Contemporary Literature: Regional and Religious Hoi Ioudaioi was used by both Philo (c. 20 B.C.E.-50 C.E.) and Josephus (c. 37-100 C.E.) to refer to the ethnic group of the Jews, contrasting with other ethnic groups such as the Greeks and Romans (Philo, Embassy 281; Against Flaccus 43; Josephus, Antiquities. 1.4; 20.157,259, 262). Josephus uses this term to refer to hoi Ioudaioi as both those from Judea the region as well as those who follow the customs, which originated in this locale (Josephus, Jewish War 2.43). Among Greek and Roman writers ' 4 In Judean Maccabees 3.32; 4.11, 35; 5.23, 25; 6.1; 8.10-11, 32, 34, 36; 9.4, 7, 15, 17-18; 10.12, 14-15, 24, 29; 11.2, 15-16; 12.1, 3-4, 8, 34, 40; 13.9, 18-19, 23; 14.5, 6, 14, 37, 39; 15.2, 12. "Judeans" outside of Judea 12.17; 12.30, found in Cohen, p. 89, n. 66. 7 5 Cohen, pp. 90-91. 7 6 Cassius Dio "Roman History," 66.1, found in T.E. Page, W.H.D. Rouse, (ed), Dio's Roman History, vol. 4. The Loeb Classical Library. New York: Macmillan Co., 1914. 20 a Ioudaios was a Jew, a member of the ethnic group living in Ioudaia, Judea,77 whose cult center was Jerusalem.78 One of the marks of identity for the Jewish population was the practice of circumcision. For pious Jews of the Maccabean era, this practice became extremely important as a self-identification marker. Josephus in several places in his works mentions that circumcision was a mark of self-identification for the Jewish people, but also admits that circumcision was also a marker shared by other Semitic ethnic groups, such as the Egyptians (Ant. 1.214; Against Apion 1.169-171; 2.137-143). Josephus however, is not consistent in his mention of circumcision as a Jewish self-identification marker. Instead he focuses on Jewish laws such as those related to Sabbath observance and dietary laws (Ant. 14.202,206, 213,256-261; 16.163).80 Circumcision is not mentioned in Latin literature until the first century B . C . E . 8 1 but this identifying marker was used by Latin writers from this time period through until the second century C . E . 8 2 to refer exclusively to the Jews. This sole identification is odd as in the mid 5 t h century B.C.E. , Herodotus identified the Colchians, Egyptians and the Ethiopians as groups who had always practiced circumcision while stating both the Elias Joseph Bickerman, The Jews in the Greek Age. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), p. 124. 7 8 Polybius (c. 200-118 B.C.E.) cited in M. Stern, (ed.), Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. (Jerusalem : Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1976), no. 32, also paralleled in Antiquities 12.135-136. 7 9 However, for many Jews this marker was more of an inconvenience than a matter or pride, for that reason they tried to hide this marker through the process of epispasm, stretching their remaining foreskin over the head of the penis in an attempt to look uncircumcised, Cohen, pp. 39-40. 8 0 Quite likely the reason why Josephus shies away from identifying the Jews as distinctive based on circumcision is likely due to the revulsion, which his Graeco-Roman audience felt for this practice. 8 1 Horace "Curtis Iudaeis," from "Satires" 1.9.69-70, cited in Stern, no. 129. 8 2 Persius, Petronius, Martial, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Juvenal found in Cohen, p. 40. 21 Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine (later interpreted to be the Judeans) learned it from the Egyptians.83 Greeks and Romans viewed Jews everywhere as belonging to the same ethnic group,84 despite encountering many who no longer lived in the geographical boundary of Judea.85 Because many of the Jewish-Gentile encounters did occur in the Diaspora, often the cultural beliefs and practices were noted to be the identifying marks of this group, including Gentiles who converted to this way of life.8 6 2.5 Conclusion While ethnicity can be defined as "ultimately a matter of group self-recognition and self-identity,"87 this is only one half of the correct meaning of ethnicity. The other half is how an outside group perceives these ethnic markers.88 This understanding will become more pertinent when we discuss the construction of the social identity of the Johannine Community in chapter four. Of the six identifying markers of ethnic identity, proposed by Hutchinson and Smith, the three most important markers from a Gentile perspective are the name 8 3 Herodotus 2.104.2-3, cited in Stern, no. 1, Diodorus Sicilus 1.28.2-3 cited in Stern no. 55 and Josephus "Antiquities" 8.262 all argue that the Syrians of Palestine means the Judeans. 8 4 Strabo (c. 64 BCE-24 CE) "Geography," Stern, no. 105, also Josephus "Antiquities" 14.115; "Letter of Aristeas" 38. 8 5 Cohen, p. 74; Ross Kraemer warns that it is often difficult for scholars to differentiate between geographical or religious references, she even states that Ioudaia may have been used as a name, Ross S. Kraemer, "On the Meaning of the Term "Jew" in Greco-Roman Inscriptions," Harvard Theological Review, 82, no. 1, 1989, pp. 35-63. 8 6 Cohen, p. 79. Many of the Gentile works, which portray Jewish customs, are not particularly helpful in their descriptions of Jewish customs due to their polemical nature. For instance, common charges against the Jews were cannibalism found in Josephus, "Against Apion," 2. 89-96; Damocritus, "On Jews," cited in Louis H. Feldman and Meyer Reinhold, Jewish life and thought among Greeks and Romans : Primary Readings. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), p. 387. Another charge was of lechery or unusual sexual practices ironically coming from Roman sources; Martial, "Epigrams" 7.30, Walter C A . Ker, (trans.), Martial. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961); Tacitus, "Histories" 5.5.2, found in Feldman, Reinhold, p. 387. 8 7 Hall, "Hellenicity," p. 11. 8 8 De vos, p. 350. 22 Ioudaios, their religious-cultural traditions including circumcision and their land of origin, Judea. From a Jewish perspective, all six of the markers identified by Hutchinson and Smith could apply, but it appears that the most important ones were their name, their traditions and the land of their covenant, Israel. In an important work by James D.G. Dunn, he concludes that the self-identification of hoi Ioudaioi in the Second Temple j period can be viewed as four major points, or "pillars" as he refers to them. These pillars of faith are; monotheism, covenant based on the land of Israel, covenant interpreted through Torah and the Promised Land focussed on the nexus, and the Temple. While Shaye Cohen is ultimately wrong in limiting the ethnic designation of hoi Ioudaioi solely to their customs in the first century C.E. he is correct that this is a very important aspect of their self-definition. These customs and beliefs would also be extremely important to the social definition of the Johannine Community, which viewed itself as having been expelled from the ethnic group of the Jews because of religious differences and for this reason replaces these ethnic designation markers with its own markers of identity. In the next chapter, I discuss how the term hoi Ioudaioi has often been translated in John and how the usage should actually be translated as representing an ethnic designation. Dunn, "Parting," pp. 19-36, these pillars will be discussed in chapter five. 23 3 Ioudaioi in John As we saw from the last chapter, the term in question in both Gentile and Jewish writings portrayed a Ioudaios as a member of an ethnic group that followed unique and traditional customs and who traced their origins to the land of Judea. Frequently, however, when scholars view how the term Ioudaioi (and less commonly its singular Ioudaios) has been used in the Gospel of John, for the most part, this ethnical usage is viewed as irresponsible. In a bid to not sound racist, especially in this post-holocaust world, the term Ioudaioi has been translated and interpreted in many ways but three are the most popular. Members of the Ioudaioi have been interpreted in a regional manner. Another interpretation is to view the Ioudaioi as referring to members of the Jewish/Judeans authorities centered in Jerusalem. Finally, some scholars suggest that a proper understanding of Ioudaioi are that they are members of the Jewish religion that differ from the self-identification of the Community who is responsible for the creation of the Gospel. 3.1 Ioudaios = Judean? Malcolm Lowe is most well known for his conclusion that hoi Ioudaioi should best be translated as Judean in a regional geographical manner.90 Lowe argues that in his 9 0 Lowe, pp. 101-130. In differing ways this translation has been adopted by other scholars, among these are Malian and Rohrbaugh, pp. 44-46; Wayne A. Meeks, "Galilee and Judea in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 85, 1966, pp. 159-169; R.T. Fortna, "Theological Use of Locale in the Fourth Gospel, Anglican Theological Review. Supplementary Series 3: Gospel Studies in Honor of Sherman Elbridge Johnson, 1974, pp. 58-95; and Jouette M. Bassler, "the Galileans: A Neglected Factor in Johannine Community Research," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43, 1981, pp. 243-257. John Ashton, however, maintains that this translation has not been widely accepted by the majority of Johannine scholars, John Ashton, "The Identity and Function of the IOUDAIOI in the Fourth Gospel," Novum Testamentum, 28, 1, 1985, p. 41. 24 work Against Apion, Josephus took pains to refute charges that hoi Ioudaioi were of Egyptian descent who had been expelled from this country and had settled in Judea, thus taking their name from that country (2.8).91 From this he concludes that hoi Ioudaioi were known in the ancient world as Judeans associated with the region of Judea." He further argues that in all of the five instances in the Gospel where 'feasts' or 'Passover of hoi Ioudaioi' are mentioned (2.13; 5.1; 6.4; 7.1; 9.55), these should be interpreted as 'feasts or Passover of the Judeans' for two reasons. The first is that the feasts and Passover were celebrated in the region of Judea, while the second is a way of distinguishing between similar festivals that other groups, among them Samaritans, celebrated.93 Some of Lowe's arguments are persuasive because there are times in the Gospel when the term hoi Ioudaioi is used in a context where presumably only Judeans would be present, for instance, the hoi Ioudaioi who comfort Mary and Martha in Bethany (11.19, 31, 33,36,45). Other examples are when Jesus visits the Temple in Jerusalem during the festival of the Dedication, as this festival does not occur at a time of pilgrimage (9.19, 24, 31, 33) , 9 4 or the hoi Ioudaioi who are mentioned are clearly people from or of Jerusalem (1.19; 7.11, 13, 15, 35). 9 5 Lowe' overall arguments however, are not particularly persuasive because of their limitation. As has already been discussed, geographical ties to a homeland are an important part of ethnical self-identification, but they are only part of this definition. 9 1 This theory appears in several ancient sources for instance Josephus remarks that Aristotle himself thought this according to his pupil Clearchus, cited in "Against Apion" 1.179. Another source is Strabo' "Geography" 16.2.34-36; 9 2 Lowe, p. 106. 9 3 Lowe, p. 117. 9 4 Myers, p. 834. 9 5 Lowe, pp. 121-122. 25 While many of the verses which mention hoi Ioudaioi in John probably are talking about inhabitants of the region Judea, who can be called Judeans, ultimately a wholly geographical translation of this term fails to adequately account for certain uses. Among the criticisms of Lowe's argument is that the festivals of Judaism were not defined by location, that is they are not defined as feasts/Passover of Judea, but instead they are defined by their celebrants which would include Diasporan Jews.9 6 Other criticisms include when Jesus is recorded to have asked hoi Ioudaioi in 10.34 "is it not written in your Law.. ." The Torah of hoi Ioudaioi was not limited to the region of Judea. Also in John 18.20 Jesus states that he taught openly in the synagogues and the Temple where all hoi Ioudaioi came together. The purification customs mentioned in John 2.6 are obviously not limited to Judea as the setting in which this pericopae is mentioned is in Galilee, nor are the burial customs of hoi Ioudaioi mentioned in 19.40 limited to Judea.97 Another notable criticism is why would the parents of the blind man of John 9.22 be afraid of "the Judeans" as according to this understanding, they too would be Judeans? Finally a major criticism of Lowe's paper is that he neglects to study the location of the Johannine Community. If as Brown and others maintain, the Gospel was written in the Diaspora, why would the author wish to portray a group with which his audience would have little or no contact?98 Reinhartz, '"The Jews,'" p. 347; "Jewish War," 2.43. So too the burial customs of 19.40 were also not limited to Judeans, Reinhartz, '"The Jews,'" p. 348. 26 3.2 Judea versus Galilee and Samaria Several scholars attempting to explain the perceived geographical symbolism in the Gospel have expanded Lowe's regional argument. Wayne Meeks has noted that "the geographical symbolism... is shaped by the apparently deliberate dialectic between Jerusalem, the place of judgement and rejection, and Galilee and Samaria, the places of acceptance and discipleship."99 R.T. Fortna has also concurred stating that Judea is often contrasted with the other areas of Palestine namely Galilee, Samaria and Perea, the Transjordan. In this understanding, Fortna believes that John's use of topography indicates how entire regional groups of people viewed Jesus of Nazareth. While he admits that some Judeans did believe in Jesus (2.23; 7.31; 8.30, 31: 11.42,45; 12.11) he views these conversions as ambiguous at best.100 Wayne Meeks states that unlike the Synoptics, Judea was Jesus' patris, "home-place" (Matthew 13.57; Mark 6.4; Luke 4.24; John 4.44).1 0 1 This is despite John' silence on the issue of Jesus' birth at Bethlehem, which is alluded to but never fully, explained (7.42). Instead, the only time that Jesus' earthly paternity is discussed is by Ioudaioi in Galilee who maintain that they know his presumably Galilean mother and father (6.42). In John, unlike in the Synoptics, Jesus is able to perform signs and he is welcomed wholeheartedly in Galilee in John chapter four (4.45) although often in Judea, Jesus is not welcomed. Meeks notes that in the Prologue to John, the Logos, identified as 9 8 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 162-163, although Brown does accept that certain verses such as 7.1; 11.8, 54 may refer primarily to Judeans, as there does seem to be some contrast between areas of safety (outside of Judea) and people inside of Judea who wished Jesus harm, ibid. 9 9 Meeks, "Galilee" p. 169; Wayne A. Meeks, "Breaking Away: Three New Testament Pictures of Christianity's Separation from the Jewish Communities," found in Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frereichs, (eds.). "To See Ourselves As Others See Us:" Christians, Jews, "Others " in Late Antiquity. (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985), pp. 96-97, Judea is also noted as a place of rejection in other Christian texts from the first century, I Thessalonians 2.14-16 for instance, Harvey, p. 64. 1 0 0 Fortna, "Theological" pp. 92-93, 27 Jesus, 'came to his own, yet his own people did not accept him (1.11).' It is further stated that 'for those who did accept him, the logos gave power to become children of God (1.12). In Meeks opinion then, Jesus brings the word of God to his own people, the Judeans, who reject while the Galileans who accept him are welcomed into the Johannine Community. 1 0 2 While I agree with Meeks that the author of John is connecting the rejection and acceptance of the Logos with the rejection and acceptance of Jesus in chapters 1 and 4, however, the acceptance mentioned in chapter one and the subsequent reward is not limited to Galileans. Instead it is broadened to all those who accept Jesus (through the lens of the Johannine Community). A primary concern with Meeks' theory is that there is plenty of evidence in the Gospel of John of Ioudaioi believing in Jesus (2.23; 7.31; 8.30, 31: 11.42, 45; 12.11) or at least sympathetic to him (3.22,26; 4.1; 7.3). What is more the acceptance and rejection of Jesus is linked specifically to the term Ioudaios, which can not refer exclusively to "Judean." Several of Jesus' disciples are Judeans. Among these are Mary, Martha and Lazarus from Bethany (11.1). 1 0 3 Also, the identification of people as hoi Ioudaioi can change, i f belief that Jesus is the Messiah is fostered. In the raising of Lazarus there are 1 0 1 Meeks, "Galilee," p. 164. 1 0 2 Meeks, "Galilee," pp. 164-165. Raymond Brown disagrees with this theory and suggests that the Galileans faith was based on signs and thus was weak as based on John 2.23, Raymond Brown, "Gospel of John," vol. 1, pp. 186-189. Jouette M. Bassler, disagrees with Brown. She states that Brown's interpretation is awkward because the comment in John 2.23 was made in a Jerusalem setting. The healing that occurs after the welcome in Galilee appears to be positive, Bassler, pp. 248-249. 1 0 3 Bethany is a village approximately three kilometers east of the Mount of Olives, Myers, p. 139. While the status of Joseph of Arimathea is still to be determined, he too, is likely a Judean. The location of Arimathea is debated, it either refers to the town of Rahamin which Demetrius II added to Judea from Samaria in the second century BCE (I Maccabees 11.34), or it may be the town of Ramathaim-zophim, also known as Raman, the home of Samuel (I Samuel 1.1; 19.19). Both of these are in Judea, Myers, p. 83. 28 people identified as Ioudaioi, who are likely Judean Jews in a regional and ethnic sense, and who show sympathy to Mary and Martha (11.19,45). After the resurrection of Lazarus, many of these Ioudaioi believe in Jesus (11.45). In chapter twelve, Jesus is welcomed into Jerusalem by a crowd of people who believe that he is "the king of Israel" (12.13). Some of these people are identified as 'the crowd who were with Jesus when Lazarus was raised.' In this instance, the negative label Ioudaioi has been changed to the neutral ochlos, crowd (12.17).104 In Judea, Galilee and Samaria, there are displays of acceptance and rejection of the belief that Jesus is the Messiah. While two of the four Christological confessions in the Gospel of John occur in Samaria (4.42) and Galilee (6.69); the other two occur in Judea (11.27; 20.28).1 0 5 In John 6.41, 52, Jesus is accosted by Ioudaioi while he is in Galilee. There have been various ways to explain the presence of Ioudaioi in Galilee. One theory is that these opponents are men sent by the authorities of Jerusalem.106 Urban von Wahlde and Malcolm Lowe, however, argue that this usage should be interpreted as the work of a later redactor.107 3.3 Ioudaioi versus Galileans? Bassler, after reviewing the evidence discussed above, argues that while Judea and Galilee do not represent contrasting places of rejection and acceptance, the term 1 U 4 Another possible example of this is Nicodemus. When he is introduced in John 3.1 he is announced as a Pharisee and a leader of the Jews. In the two other mentions of him in the Gospel, he is referred to as 'the one who came to Jesus earlier' (7.50) and 'the one who had first come to Jesus at night (19.39). Nicodemus' status in the Gospel of John is somewhat ambiguous however. 1 0 5 One could argue that the Christological confession of 6.69 is made by the Galilean disciple Peter, yet as for the regional identity of Thomas, nothing is definitively known, Myers, p. 1000. 1 0 6 R. H. Lighfoot, Locality and Doctrine in the Gospels. (London : Harper and Brothers, 1938), p. 150 argues that there are parallels of this happening in Mark 6 and 8, cited in Bassler, p. 251. Lightfoot seems to have not noticed that his does occur in John 1.19, yet in this instance those sent are clearly identified as priests and Levites. 1 0 7 von Wahlde, "Johannine Jews," pp. 42-44; Lowe, pp. 120-121. 29 Ioudaioi should be interpreted as those who reject Jesus, while Galilean is used for those who accept Jesus. In this manner, she argues that the designation "Galilean" is synonymous with being a follower of Jesus in Peter's denial in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 14.70; Luke 22.59).1 0 8 Therefore, in 6.41, 52, Galileans become Ioudaioi as soon as they start to doubt.109 This attempt, while interesting and would solve the problem of the identity of hoi Ioudaioi in John chapter six, ultimately fails due to the scarcity of usage of the term Galilean in John. The term only appears once (4.43) and is not used in Peter's denial to showthat he was a Galilean (18.17,25-26).110 The question of whom are hoi Ioudaioi in the Galilean setting of John 6.41, 52 is easily answered from a proper understanding of ethnicity. Several scholars, primarily through a careful study of Josephus have noted the existence of what is known as 'dual ethnicity' in the ancient world. Essentially what this refers to is a person who identifies himself/herself with two different ethnic groups. 1 1 1 In this understanding then, the Galileans who oppose Jesus should not be viewed as "becoming Ioudaioi" because they I U S Bassler, p. 255. 1 0 9 Bassler, p. 254. 1 1 0 The term Galilean never occurs in this manner in the Johannine epistles either. 1 1 1 Dunn, "Parting," p. 144; Esler, "Conflict, p. 67; Cohen; "Beginnings," p. 81; Jonathan L. Reed, Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus: A Re-examination of the Evidence. (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000), p. 24. Roman Jews are mentioned in Josephus "Jewish War" 2.80-81 is contrasted with Antiquities 15.14-15, Jews of Ecbatana contrasted with Jews of Caesarea are noted in "Life" 54-55. In his "Antiquities" 13.249-259, Josephus recounts the Hasmonean conquering and forceful conversion of the Idumeans to Judaism, and states that from this time on they were regarded as Jews. Although in another portion of this work, Josephus only counts Herod as a 'half-Jew' because of his Idumean ethnicity, "Antiquities." 14.403. In the "Jewish War" 2.43, Josephus mentions all the Jews come together to celebrate Pentecost in the Temple at Jerusalem, Jews from Galilee, Idumea, Jericho and Perea.. In "Antiquities" 20.142, Josephus talks about a man named Atomos, a Ioudaios who was a Cyprian by birth, while Cohen mentions that it is possible that Ioudaios here is used as a geographical marker, he states that this is quite unlikely, p. 79. Cassius Dio in his Roman History, writes that Gentiles who 'live by the laws of the Jews' are known asloudaioi despite being of different ethnicity, Cassius Dio, 37.16-17," 30 oppose Jesus as Bassler maintains, but they should be viewed as Galilean Jews who are identified in this manner because of both their regional and religious affiliations. Ultimately, the conception that hoi Ioudaioi is best translated as Judean, members of a regional dispute between other areas of Palestine, should be disregarded. While the author of John seems to know Palestinian geography quite well, he does not appear to have used it to portray a deeper "spiritual" significance.112 As John Ashton has questioned if there is such a big dichotomy between the areas of Judea, Galilee and Samaria, why is this not more evident in the Gospel?113 3.4 Hoi Ioudaioi as Authorities In the Synoptic gospels, the opponents of Jesus cart belong to many groups within Judaism. For instance, Herodians, elders, Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, as well as the chief priests, in John this has changed with the opponents for the most part all lumped under the term hoi Ioudaioi. The only two other specifically named groups in the Gospel are the chief Temple priests and the Pharisees. Possibly the priests are mentioned because they were too important to the Passion story to be excluded, while the Pharisees are important because this sect so heavily influenced Rabbinic Judaism.114 While all Pharisees v& Ioudaioi, (1.19,24; 8.13, 22; 9.13-23,40; 18.3,12; contrast John 5.10 with 5.15-18 and 11.46-52 with 18.14) not all Ioudaioi are Pharisees. Pharisees are, however, the archetypal Ioudaioi, the opponents of Jesus.115 That this term is used to denote hostility towards Jesus is universally accepted, but who are the people who are hostile to Jesus? The strongest proponent for the translation 1 1 2 Charles H.H. Scobie, "Johannine Geography," Studies in Religion, 11, no. 1, 1982, pp. 80-81. 1 1 3 Ashton, "Understanding," p. 134. 1 1 4 Brown, "Introduction," p. 164. 1 1 5 Harvey, pp. 88-89. 31 in certain cases of hoi Ioudaioi as referring exclusively to 'the authorities' is Urban C. von Wahlde. 1 1 6 He concludes that the term Ioudaioi has three meanings in the Gospel, "1/ a national meaning;117 21 a regional meaning;1 1 8 and 3/ a meaning without parallel in the ancient world which he termed the "Johannine usage."119 Of these three usages, von Wahlde limited the first two meanings by referring to them as "neutral usages" and he concentrated solely on the last meaning when the term Ioudaioi is used to denote hostility towards Jesus. The conclusions of his 1982 article were that while there are nine unanimous agreements by scholars on hoi Ioudaioi referring to authorities (1.19; 2.18, 20; 9.18, 22 (twice); 18.12,14; 20.19),1 2 0 in only two verses, 6.41, 52, is there unanimous agreement that these are referring to common people.1 2 1 There are certainly instances in the Gospel of John where interpreting hoi Ioudaioi as authorities makes sense. For instance, John 11.54 states that 'because of hoi Ioudaioi plans to kill Jesus, he no longer went about openly among them but left and went to the town of Ephraim, staying there with his disciples.' James H. Charlesworth argues that i f hoi Ioudaioi refers to "Jewish people," Jesus could not leave them behind Hoi Ioudaioi as authorities is attractive to those who believe that the Gospel of John is a reaction to the Academy of Yavneh, see Motyer, "Father," p. 52. 1 1 7 This usage covers national/religious customs (2.6; 19.40, 42), feasts (2.13; 5.1; 6.4; 7.2; 11.55) Jewish religious officials (3.1; 18.20); references to "Jews" as a different ethnos from others among them Samaritans and Romans (4.9a, 9b, 22; 18.35), "The Johannine 'Jews': a Critical Survey. New Testament Studies, 28, 1982, p. 46. 1 1 8 John 3.22, Johannine'Jews'p. 46. 1 1 9 U.C. von Wahlde, "The Jews"p. 43. He also does not discuss the references where the Jews are not overtly hostile to Jesus, (11.19, 31, 33, 36, 45-46, 54; 12.9, 11, 19-20), he states that these should perhaps be translated as Judean in a regional sense, "The Johannine 'Jews'" p. 46. 1 2 0 There are also four other verses; 5.10, 15, 16, 18 in which R. Fuller remarks that hoi Ioudaioi should be translated as both authorities and people, von Wahlde, "Johannine" pp. 39-40. 1 2 1 von Wahlde concludes that because 6.41, 52 do not fit his usage they should be regarded as being the work of a redactor, "Johannine 'Jews'" p. 43. In his later article from 2000, he argues that from his conception of this meaning, the majority of scholars have now concluded that he is correct, p. 44. 32 by visiting a town that was wholly Jewish. 1 2 2 In his opinion then, the two places are contrasted by Jesus leaving a place where hoi Ioudaioi, Jewish authorities are, and went to another place where they were not found.1 2 3 Other examples of hoi Ioudaioi as authoritative figures are found in 9.22; 19.38; 20.19. In these instances, those who are afraid of hoi Ioudaioi are Jewish in racial terms, yet are said to be scared of repercussions.124 Marinus De Jonge agrees that in light of the level of fear that is felt by the disciples and those sympathetic to Jesus in the text, hoi Ioudaioi should be viewed for the most part as people of authority. 3.5 Criticisms Some scholars, notably Stephen Motyer and James Dunn, have criticized von Wahlde's method of studying less than half of the 71 occurrences of the term Ioudaioi (Ioudaios) in John. Their criticism is focussed on von Wahlde's method of limiting his study of hoi Ioudaioi to only those passages, which he feels portray hostility towards Jesus (and the Community). In their opinion von Whalde's limited study is bound to arrive at the conclusion that John's 'special usage' of hoi Ioudaioi should be translated as authorities.126 Motyer continues his criticism by saying that many of the instances of the term, which von Wahlde dismisses as 'neutral,' refer instead to positive mentions of the Jews. This would seem to cast doubt on 'the Johannine usage' as referring to only U i James H. Charlesworth, "The Gospel of John: Exclusivism Caused by a Social Setting Different from that of Jesus (John 11.54 and 14.6),"found in Bieringer et al, p. 484, Myers, p. 343. 1 2 3 Charlesworth, "Exclusivism," p. 485, Charlesworth admits that in many ancient manuscripts the dichotomy between the two places is not as evident for often the term ekeithen "from there" is missing, P45 D I, Syrus Sinaiticus, Latin Vulgate and other Latin texts, ibid. 1 2 4 So summarizes Reinhartz, 'The Jews,"' p. 346. 1 2 5 Marinus De Jonge, "The Conflict Between Jesus and the Jews and the Radical Christology of the Fourth Gospel," Perspectives in Religious Studies, 20, Wint., 1993, p. 347. 1 2 6 Motyer, p. 52; James D. G. Dunn, "The Question of Anti-Semitism in the New Testament," found in James D.G. Dunn, (ed.), Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992), p. 197. 33 negative uses.127 Brown as well, concludes that in many uses of the term in the Gospel, the term hoi Ioudaioi appears to be distinct from the authorities and should be interpreted as individuals of ethnic Jewish descent (6.41, 52; 7.15, 32; 8.22, 31,48, 52, 57; 10.19, 24, 33; 11.8, 54; 13.33; 18.20).128 As chapter one discussed, the term hoi Ioudaioi is usually used to refer to the ethnic group of the Jews. James Charlesworth mentions that it is unfortunate that the J authors of John used the term hoi Ioudaioi to denote both Jews and the hostile authorities of Judea.1 2 9 While von Wahlde among others have championed the translation of this term as "authorities," Raymond Brown wonders why the author would use the ethnic term hoi Ioudaioi to refer to Jewish authorities? Nothing in the term itself found in contemporary literature would suggest this translation to the audience. If the authors of John wished to portray the authorities in this manner, why would they not have used the term archontes, or "authorities" more often?130 3.6 Religious Usage Dunn views the Gospel of John as written around two particular themes, krisis, "separation," (3.19; 5.22, 24,27,29, 30; 7.24; 8.16; 12.31) andschisma, "division" (7.43; 131 9.16; 10.19). Dunn does not merely translate the term Ioudaioi as having only one meaning, instead he views the different uses of hoi Ioudaioi to refer to Jews = authorities and Jews = the ambivalent crowd of Jewish people. The Gospel, he states was written 1 2 7 References in chapter eleven, as well as 8.31, Motyer, "Father," p. 52. Personally I would disagree stating that while hoi Ioudaioi are sympathetic to Mary and Martha in chapter eleven, this sympathy does not extend to Jesus for many of them. For that reason, many of them inform of his actions to the Pharisees (11.46), those that ultimately do believe because of this miracle are when referred to in the next chapter, no longer called Ioudaioi (12.17). 1 2 8 Brown, "Introduction," p. 165. 1 2 9 Charlesworth, "Exclusivism," p. 489. 1 3 0 This term is used four times in the Gospel, 3.1; 7.26, 48; 12.42, Brown, "Introduction," p. 164. 1 3 1 Dunn, ""Parting,"p. 157; "Question," p. 198,1 would agree with him but for wholly different reasons. 34 from the position of Jewish Christian dialogue with the sense that while the authorities were persecutors of the Community, the crowds, including Jews, were possible converts. He maintains that the chapters, that show this, are seven through twelve. Throughout chapter seven to ten the crowd debates back and forth about whether or not Jesus is indeed the Christ, with the end result that while many respond in a positive manner others do not (7.31, 40, 43-44; (8.31; 8.48; 9.16; 10.19-21, 31-39, 41-42). In 12.31-43 these events reach their climax with the conclusion that many Jews do not admit to being followers of Jesus because of their fear of being put out of the synagogue.133 Brown maintains that the most plausible explanation for the majority of the uses of hoi Ioudaioi is a religious one. Hoi Ioudaioi were viewed by the Johannine Community as those who rejected Jesus as the Messiah (9.22) and the son of God in a religious manner.134 He further states that, "by translating some uses of Ioudaioi as 'Jewish authorities' and others as 'the Jewish people or the crowd' we do a disservice to the text which seems to have deliberately left the meaning of hoi Ioudaioi vague and general. John's use of hoi Ioudaioi without limiting its meaning to Judean in a regional sense or an authoritative or non-authoritative translation also captures the authors meaning far better, for in the Diaspora, 'Jewish Temple authorities,' 'the crowds 1 3 2 De Boer, "Matters," also agrees with this point, arguing that the Gospel of John must be viewed as inter-Jewish dialogue, p. 270. The idea that the Gospel of John is used as a conversion tool has been criticized. For instance, Marinus de Jonge, states that "it would be strange indeed to attempt to convert people by stories in which the persons with whom they are bound to identify persistently refuse to believe," "Conflict" p. 353. 1 3 3 Dunn, "Question," pp. 198-199. 1 3 4 Brown, "Introduction," p. 166, so too he notes that J.J. Cook, "The Gospel of John and the Jews," Review and Expositor, 84, 1987, pp. 257-271; R.A. Culpepper, "The Gospel of John and the Jews," Review and Expositor, 84, 1987, pp. 273-288, both recognize that the Jewish rejection of Jesus is based on Christology, ibid, n. 42. 1 3 5 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 165-166. 35 of Jerusalem' would have little meaning. The audience of John would hear the text and identify hoi Ioudaioi as referring to the Jews who they were familiar with. 1 3 6 3.7 Conclusions As this chapter has discussed, the translations of hoi Ioudaioi as either Judean, in a regional sense or as authorities are not particularly compelling and can be quite limited. While von Wahlde does admit that this translation should not be applied to all of the uses of hoi Ioudaioi in John, his other translations of regional or national are not any more convincing. While many of the references can denote Jews from Judea, the perceived dichotomy between the geographical areas of Judea and Galilee (and to a lesser extent Samaria) is simply not justified. While many of the references can be translated as authority figures so too many of them simply refer to common people who also belong to this ethnic group. Dunn and Brown appear to be correct in suggesting that the term hoi Ioudaioi should be translated as 'the Jews' and understood to refer to the Jewish people as a whole. Ultimately though both of their arguments, like Shaye Cohen's, are limited in their understanding of the term ethnicity. Dunn for instance asks the question "does 'Jew' denote ethnic (by this he means geographical) or religious identity?' 1 3 7 He answers saying that it means both. 1 3 8 In his understanding then religious identity is not part of Jewish ethnicity. Brown on the other hand, believes that the authors of the Gospel to differentiate the Jews from other ethnic groups use the term hoi Ioudaioi in the Gospel, 1 3 9 unlike Dunn 1 3 6 Brown, "Introduction," p. 167; also see de Jonge, "Conflict," p. 352 who states that "the Jews" of John represent those who in the Johannine experience observe Jewish customs and respond negatively to the Community, 1 3 7 Dunn, "Parting," p. 143. 36 he does not view the understanding of ethnicity to be geographical. 1 4 0 Instead, like Cohen, he understands the meaning of ethnicity as referring to the unique customs of the Jews. 1 4 1 A s we have discussed in these first two chapters, a proper understanding of ethnicity notes that geographical and religious identity markers are both parts of the Jewish ethnic identity. So i f hoi Ioudaioi should be seen as an ethnic group with which the Community of John no longer identifies, what happened? What caused the split? 1 3 8 Dunn, "Parting," p. 144. 1 3 9 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 158-159. 1 4 0 Brown, "Introduction," p. 159. 37 4 Fragmenting Identity This chapter explores scholarly opinions of the origins of the Johannine Community, the creators of the Gospel of John. It is the apparent schism that is of primary interest to this thesis, for what happened to the Community that so changed its self-identity? While most scholars agree that the date of the composition of the Gospel of John was between 80-110 C . E , 1 4 2 the authorship and location still remains speculative because the first half of the second century is curiously silent on the authorship of the Fourth Gospel. While there may be allusions to it in certain works of Justin Martyr (d. 160) these are not entirely clear. 1 4 3 In the latter half of the second century however, the Gospel became better known both in both Gnostic and proto-orthodox circles. 1 4 4 4.1 Location The location of the origins of the Gospel is a topic that has been debated for centuries. Among the top contenders are Ephesus,1 4 5 Alexandria, 1 4 6 Antioch or another location in Syria, 1 4 7 the Northern Transjordan,148 or somewhere else in Palestine.149 His examples of these include the burial rites of hoi Ioudaioi, 19.40, Brown, "Introduction," pp. 161-162. 1 4 2 A list of scholars who date it to this period are C.K. Barrett, R E . Brown, W. Kummel, R. Kysar, N. Perrin, D. Duling, and R. Schanckenburg as cited in Claudia J. Setzer, Jewish Responses to Early Christians: History and Polemics, 30-150 C.E. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), p. 204. 110 C.E. is the latest acceptable plausible date, Brown, "Introduction," p. 207. 1 4 3 R. Alan, Culperpper, John, the son ofZebedee: the life of a legend. (Columbia : University of South Carolina Press, 1994), pp. 112-113. 1 4 4 Firstly, Ptolemy a disciple of Valentinus wrote a commentary on the Gospel of John, his death may be c. 152 although this has been questioned. Heracleon, another Valentinian composed the first commentary on the Gospel around the year 170 C.E. although the surviving fragments of this commentary do not comment on who composed this Gospel or its original location, Culpepper, "John," pp. 116-117. 1 4 5 Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-200 C.E.) was the first writer to locate the origin of the work in Ephesus by the apostle John in his second century C.E. work Against the Heresies 3.1-2, although the credibility of his 38 Brown states that Ephesus is still the primary contender as it is almost unanimous in the ancient sources. He also maintains that the location of the Gospel is not particularly important, what is important is the message of the Gospel. 1 5 0 testimony has been questioned however as to its accuracy most notably by Setzer, p. 82 and Culpepper, "John," p. 123. In other parts of the Christian Testament Jewish hostility against Jesus followers is reported to have occurred at Ephesus, Revelation 2.9; 3.9; Acts 18.24-28; 19.8-20, it is odd that Christians such as Justin Martyr who had lived and studied in Ephesus did not allude to or quote from the Gospel more. 1 4 6 This hypothesis is based primarily on this being the location of the discovery of P52, the earliest known fragment of the Christian Testament corpus. This fragment has been generally dated to c. 125 C.E (although there is a twenty-five year leeway on either side). This Gospel was also popular in Egypt at an early period in both proto-orthodox and the Gnostic circle of the Valentinians. However, there is little direct evidence linking its origins to here. Scholars who hold this position are W.H. Brownlee and J.N. Sanders, Brown, "Introduction," p. 202. 1 4 7 Ignatius of Antioch may use the Fourth Gospel in his thinking although this has been debated. According to fourth and fifth century C.E. writers, Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John and parallels have been drawn between the ethical teaching of I John and the Gospel of Matthew, believed by many to have been written in Syria. Other parallels are between the Fourth Gospel and the Odes of Solomon, another Syrian work. Like Ephesus, Antioch is mentioned in early Christian writings with anti-synagogal polemics, Matthew 6.2; 10.17; 23.34. Raymond Brown however argues that the questionable parallels may in fact show similar thinking or the spread of Johannine ideas. Proponents of this theory are W. Bauer and H. Koester found in Brown, "Introduction," pp. 203, 205. 1 4 8 Reasons for this hypothesis are that the author of John uses Aramaisms and translates some of these into Greek, for instance 1.38 or 1.41. While the areas of Gaulanitis, Batanea and Trachonitis were ruled by the Jewish King Agrippa II until c. 100 C.E. the area was populated by a mixture of Jews and Gentiles according to Josephus (Jewish War 3.56-57). As Gaulantis is close to the Jordan River, it is possible that John the Baptist still had disciples there at the time of composition. Proponents of this theory include Oscar Cullmann; G. Reim; Klaus Wengst; W. Meeks; Brown, "Introduction," p. 203. Klaus Wengst argues that there was a connection between the Jews of Yavneh and those at Bathyra in the Transjordan, thus stating that the Birkhat Ha-minim could have thus been used to remove the Johannine Christians from the synagogues, K. Wengst, Bedrangte, 77-96. Although as will be discussed later, it is most likely that the Birkhat Ha-minim was in fact not an issue in the decision by the local synagogue to expel the Johannine Christians in its midst. 1 4 9 Wayne Meeks argues that, that it seems most likely that the place of origin for the Gospel and the Community was a small polis in Palestine there is no evidence in the Gospel of a dominant pagan society. "The world" of John is one dominated only by the Judeans, a factor which is not the case in the cities of Alexandria, Sardis, Antioch and others according to evidence collected by A.T. Kraabel, "Paganism and Judaism: The Sardis Evidence," in Andre Benoit et al., eds., Pagaisme, Judaisme, Christianisme... Melanges offerts a Marcel Simon. (Paris: Boccard, 1978, pp. 13-33; "The Diaspora Synagogue: Archaeological and Epigraphic Evidences since Sukenik," Aufstieg und Nidergang der romishcen Welt, II. 19.1, 1979, pp. 477-510; "Social Systems of Six Diaspora Synagogues," in Joseph Gutmann, ed., Ancient Synagogues: The State of Research, Brown Judaisc Studies 22. (Chico: Scholars Press, 1981, pp. 79-91, found in Meeks, "Breaking Away," p. 101, n. 20. Charles Scobie maintains that "The geographical knowledge [in John of Judea, Galilee and Samaria] is remarkably accurate," which he feels suggests that the Johannine Community was located in Judea, Scobie, p. 77. Although, I wonder how accurate John's geography was as he locates Bethsaida in Galilee in John 12.21 while this city was actually located in Gaulantia, Myers, p. 144. Even if the Gospel author was familiar with the geography this hardly means that he was writing in this area, he may have lived there at some time or had visited the area. 1 5 0 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 204-206. Linguistically speaking, as the term Ioudaioi was used primarily in the Diaspora to designate the ethnic group of the Jews, this may in fact point to its origin. In "I Maccabees" (1st century BCE Palestinian origin) members of the covenant are identified with the label Israel 39 4.2 Composition The composition of John's Gospel is a mismatch of stories and narratives that have been clumsily patched together. There have been several theories proposed for the reason of why this has occurred, although there has been no scholarly consensus on the "correct hypothesis."151 Among the proposed hypotheses are the displacement, the multi-source and the multi-stage theory. The strongest theory and the one adopted in this thesis is the multi-stage theory. This theory, proposed by scholars such as J. L. Martyn, Urban C. von Wahlde, Raymond E. Brown and John Ashton, suggests that the Gospel was written over many years and shows different stages and interests. It can be combined with the Grundschrift theory (a variant of the multiple source theory), which states that the Gospel started as a 119 rather simple document and was revised when new challenges arose. Of the adherents of the multi-stage hypothesis, I wish to discuss two theories, those suggested by Raymond Brown and J.L. Martyn. Raymond Brown's first commentary on the Gospel of John, proposed five stages of composition. In his latest in all religious-national contexts, in "II Maccabees" (1st century BCE, Alexandrian origin) the term used is Ioudaioi, Lowe, p. 104, n. 11. 1 5 1 John Ashton, "Understanding," p. 160. The three most popular are the displacement, the multiple source and the multi-stage theory of which this thesis adopts as correct. The displacement theory suggests that a single author composed the entire gospel but for reasons unknown the order of the events has shifted. Criticism of this theory has suggested that those who attempt to reconstruct the Gospel to its "original" form will merely construct what they believe it to have been, Brown, "Gospel,"p. xxvi, Ashton, "Understanding," pp. 160-161. While it has often been noted that the transitions between segments are rough, they do make sense and this has been used to criticize this theory, followers of this theory are C.K. Barrett and Dodd, see Brown, "Gospel," vol. 1, p. xxvii.. Finally, no adequate explanation has been given for how this displacement would have occurred, if the Gospel was originally written on a scroll or even in a codex, even if these came apart, matching the sheets up once again would have been relatively easy, Brown, "Gospel," vol. 1, p. xxvii. The multiple source theory has had many adherents, among them are Rudolf Bultmann, "Gospel of John," and his student R.T. Fortna, "Gospel of Signs." This theory, postulates that the Gospel was composed from multiple sources among which are the Signs Source (or Gospel) usually described as a modified version of chapters three to twelve. Other sources are the Offenbarungsreden, "Revelatory Discourse Source," which consist of the spoken discourses of Jesus the 40 commentary, however, he pared these down to two stages. The reason for this is, in his own words, that"... many reviewers found counting up to five very difficult and [thus] complained about the complexity of my approach... [I hope] that this will be less difficult for the arithmetically challenged."154 4.3 Multi-Stage Hypothesis For Brown, the first stage of the composition was focused on the oral traditions surrounding the public ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. Much of this material compliments the Synoptic traditions, however it is quite selective because it represents the interests of former disciples of John the Baptist, among them the one known as the Beloved Disciple.1 5 5 In this stage, Brown hypothesizes that Samaritans and other 'anti-Temple' groups joined the Community and this helped to heighten hostility between the synagogue officials of the Jewish community wherever the Gospel was written.156 The second stage was characterized by the formation of the written Gospel after the Community's expulsion from the synagogues. This loss of social identity led to the creation of a higher Christology culminating in the use of the ego eimi predicate and the claim that Jesus was pre-existent as God's Logos. Brown states that with the introduction of Samaritans into their midst and the expulsion from the synagogue, it is quite possible that the Community stopped viewing itself as ethnically Jewish. This is shown in its revealer in the Gospel. Another possible source consists of passion and resurrection stories, Brown, Gospel," pp. xxviii-xxx, Ashton, "Understanding," p. 161. 1 5 2 Ashton, "Understanding," p. 161. 1 5 3 He actually shows three stages of composition but the last stage deals with the epistles of John, Brown, "Introduction," p. 75. 1 5 4 Brown, "Introduction," p. 64. 1 5 5 Brown, "Introduction," p. 65. 1 5 6 Brown suggests that this is why the Gospel of John rejects Davidic notions of the Messiah while emphasizing the Mosaic characteristics, "Introduction," pp. 67-68, 74. 41 language of hoi Ioudaioi = 'the other' as well as the expressions 'feasts of the Jews (eg. 5.1; 6.4) and 'their Law' (15.25).157 J.L. Martyn postulates three different stages of composition: early, middle and late. His conclusions are similar to Brown's, yet; they differ at some key areas. In the early stage, which may have occurred before the Jewish war, 1 5 8 Jesus was viewed as the fulfillment of every Messianic prophecy and title, "the Mosaic prophet, the eschatological Elijah, and the expected Messiah." 1 5 9 Jesus followers were still in the synagogue and still identified themselves as ethnically Jewish. Like other Jewish-Christian groups of the first century, they were still Torah observant. It is important to note that the expulsion from the Synagogues was not based on the breaking of Jewish laws, but instead on messianic concerns.160 During this stage, Martyn says proselytizing only occurred among other Jews; Gentiles and Samaritans were not sought out as converts.161 1 5 7 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 67-69, 74-75. It is in this stage that Brown believes the distinction of 'crypto-Christians' was thought to have taken place. This group of people were those who believed or sympathized with the idea that Jesus was the Messiah yet were too afraid to openly admit this (7.13; 9.22; 11,7f; 19.38; 20.19). Among the members of this group were the parents of the blind man of chapter nine as well as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. Brown believes that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea could be viewed by Jewish-Christians as shining examples of crypto-Christians. For they emerged from anonymity to publicly honour Jesus through a burial, E. L. Allen, "The Jewish Christian Church in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 74, 1955, pp. 88-92, cited in Brown, "Introduction," p. 174. Sean Freyne however, disagrees stating that Nicodemus is ".. .a representative of a law-focused understanding of the Jewish tradition," and as such, this type of person could never fully understand Jesus and through him, the Father. This required a spirit-based understanding, Sean Freyne, "Vilifying the Other and Defining the Self: Matthew's and John's Anti-Jewish Polemic in Focus," found in Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frereichs, (eds.) "To See Ourselves As Others See Us:" Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity. (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985), p. 127. I would agree with Freyne in this case, I think that the whole notion of belief is central to the Gospel of John. 1 5 8 D. Moody Smith, "Johannine Christianity: Some Reflections on Its Character and Delineation," New Testament Studies, 21, 1974-1975, p. 246, found in J. Louis Martyn, The Gospel of John in Christian History: Essays for Interpreters. (New York: Paulist Press, 1978), p. 99. Although Urban c. von Wahlde dates this stage to c. 80 C.E., Urban C. von Wahlde, "Community in Conflict: The History and Social Context of the Johannine community," Interpretation, 49, no. 4, Oct., 1995, pp. 380-381. 1 5 9 Martyn, "Gospel," p. 96. 1 6 0 Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 99-101. 1 6 1 Martyn, "Gospel," p. 101, von Wahlde believes that Samaritans may have belonged to this early group and that this may have prompted expulsion, p. 380, this theory is unlikely as from everything we know Samaritans considered themselves to be of a different ethnicity from Jews, U.C. von Wahlde, "The Terms 42 The middle period was characterized by persecution of the Community by local synagogue officials. Martyn suggests that this can be further broken down into two separate events. First those who confessed Jesus as the Messiah were expelled from the synagogue through the reworded Birkath Ha-minim (9.22,34). l o z It is in this stage that Martyn believes that the use of the term "Johannine Community" becomes relevant. With this forced expulsion, their status changes from a Messianic Jewish community within the synagogue to a non-Jewish community cut off from "their social and theological womb... [their]nurture and security, was not only removed, but even became the enemy who persecutes." The second event in this stage is that of persecution until death.164 Martyn suggests that while the expulsion of Christ confessing Jews from the synagogue was helpful in stemming the flow of converts, it did not dam the spill completely. For this reason, the officials tried and executed Christ confessors as blasphemers for suggesting that Christ was a second God. 1 6 5 Martyn states that it is in this stage that the Johannine Community reinforced its social identity through the replacement of key Jewish ethnic identifying markers. In this stage, the prologue of John was formulated, for "he came to his own and his own people did not accept him" (1.11). For this reason, the Community, rejected the defining characteristics of the Jewish ethnicity, they became people still in this world but not of for Religious Authorities in the Fourth Gospel: A Key to Literary Strata?" Journal of Biblical Literature, 98, 1979, pp. 231-253 cited in Ashton, "Understanding," p. 168. 1 6 2 Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 103-104. 1 6 3 Martyn, "Gospel," p. 104. 1 6 4 The evidence for the persecution and martyrdom of Johannine Christians is fairly slim, while one could argue that Jesus' execution could be viewed as a two-level reading template for the execution of Johannine Christians, the only direct evidence of this persecution is a prophesied saying of Jesus in 16.2 stating that in the future the disciples may find themselves executed. 1 6 5 Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 104-105. 43 this world (15.19), children of God (1.13) born of the spirit not of human nature, desire or will (1.13; 3.5-6).166 No longer were the Christ confessors to be considered as disciples of Moses, they instead became disciples of Christ. It appears that in this stage according to the synagogue officials, it became an either/or dilemma. 1 5 7 It is in this middle period that the term hoi Ioudaioi emerged to refer to "the other."168 While the primary membership of the new Johannine Community remained formerly Jewish, Samaritans were welcomed, and possibly Gentiles as wel l . 1 6 9 It is at this time that mentions of "your fathers" (6.49) and "your law" (8.17) emerged in the written Gospel. 1 7 0 The third and final stage is characterized by polemics against Jewish Christians who remained in the synagogue and against other Christian groups. This argument is not particularly relevant to the present discussion.171 Ultimately I think that Martyn's theory is more likely, although Martyn's insistence on the inclusion of the Birkhat Ha-minim discussed in the next section, I think is unjustified. 4.4 Expulsion Theories James Dunn suggests that the Gospel of John must be recognized as a historical document by exploring the historical and social situation of the Community who wrote Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 106-107, other scholars who agree with this hypothesis are von Wahlde, "Community," pp. 386; Scobie, p. 81. 1 6 7 Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 108-109. 1 6 8 Several scholars state that in the earliest stage the term most commonly used to refer to its opponents is "the Pharisees," U.C. von Wahlde, "The Terms" pp. 231-253; J. Ashton, "The Identity and Function," pp. 60-62. 1 6 9 J. Louis Martyn, "A Gentile Mission that Replaced an Earlier Jewish Mission?" found in R. Alan Culpepper, C. Clifton Black, Exploring the Gospel of John: In Honor ofD. Moody Smith. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), pp. 124-144. 1 7 0 Von Wahlde, "Community," pp. 381-382. 1 7 1 See Martyn, "Gospel," pp. 107-121. 44 this work, in. This is not to suggest that the Gospel is itself an absolute truthful recollection of what occurred, but that it is a Community reaction to historical events, which prompted its creation. While D . M Smith does not deny that Christians were expelled, he does state that given the evidence available, scholars can not know with any great degree of certainty what exactly transpired between the Johannine Christians and the Ioudaioi of the Synagogue.173 Whatever theory one hypothesizes remains at the end simply a theory. Regardless, "George Smiga, speaking for many others, declares, 'We will be standing within a strong scholarly consensus when we presume that part of the history of the Johannine Community included an expulsion from the synagogue.'"174 An expulsion theory explains some peculiar characteristics of the Gospel. 1 7 5 It places a social framework around the Gospel and helps to explain both the antagonism between Jesus (and his followers) and the Ioudaioi, and the high Christology which is shown in the Gospel. 1 7 6 According to Wayne Meeks, the separation of the Community from the Ioudaioi was integral for the Community's self-definition.177 Essentially, it shows that i f one believes Jesus to be the Messiah, this belief is incompatible with staying among the Jews 1 7 2 James D.G. Dunn, "The Embarrassment of History: Reflections on the Problem of'Anti-Judaism' in the Fourth Gospel," found in Bieringer, p. 48 (47-67). 1 7 3 D. Moody Smith, "Judaism and the Gospel of John," found in James.H. Charlesworth, (ed.), Jews and Christians: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future. (New York: Crossroad, 1990), p. 87. 1 7 4 G.M. Smiga, Pain and Polemic: Anti Judaism in the Gospels. (New York: Paulist Press, 1992), p. 137, cited in Adele Reinhartz, "The Johannine Community and its Jewish Neighbors: A Reappraisal," found in Fernando F. Sergovia, (ed), "What is John? " Volume II, Literary and Social Readings of the Fourth Gospel. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, 7. (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998), p. 111. 1 7 5 Reinhartz, "Johannine Community," p. 112. 1 7 6 D. Rensberger, "The Politics of John: The Trial of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 103, 1984, pp. 395-396; R. Kysar, "The Promises and Perils of Preaching on the Gospel of John," Dialog, 19, 1980; p. 219, R E . Brown, The Death of the Messiah. 2 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1994), I., p. 759. 1 7 7 Wayne A. Meeks, "Am I a Jew?" p. 182. 45 of the synagogues, either literally or figuratively. Hence, this explains why Jesus and his disciples are not called Ioudaioi and why Jesus refers to the Torah as "your Torah" (10.34). There is a formal separation between the Johannine and the Jewish communities before the Gospel is written, and hoi Ioudaioi are no longer expected to convert (12.42).180 The expulsion theory rests heavily on three verses found in the Gospel of John. These verses, 9.22, 12.42, and 16.2 contain the only known usage of the term aposunagogos in any Greek writing. This word is a compound of the preposition apo 1 o 1 "away from" and the noun sunagoge "synagogue/community. In itself the word does not necessarily have the meaning of expelled from the synagogue but in the contexts in which it is used it certainly does.182 The verses are: [The blind man's parents denied culpability] out of fear of hoi Ioudaioi, who had already agreed to ban from the synagogue anyone who should acknowledge Jesus as the Christ (9.22). There were many who did believe in [Jesus], even among the leading men, but they did not admit it, because of the Pharisees and for fear of being banned from the synagogue" (12.42). [Your opponents] will expel you from the synagogues..." (16.2). 1 7 8 Except for John 4.9, however, this designation will be explained in chapter five. 1 7 9 Although Jesus' comment on "your Torah" is not consistent, see R.A. Culpepper, "Anatomy," pp. 219-222. 1 8 0 Wayne A. Meeks, "Am I a Jew?" p. 182. 1 8 1 What the "synagogue" represented in a first century C.E. Palestinian context and what being put out of it also meant is hard to delineate. Lee I. Levine suggests that the synagogue could host "political meetings, social gatherings, courts, schools, hostels, charity activities, slave manumission, meals (sacred or otherwise), and of course, religious-liturgical functions." "The Nature and Origin of the Palestinian Synagogue Reconsidered," Journal of Biblical Literature, 115, 1996, pp. 430-431, also see Howard Clark Kee, "The Transformation of the Synagogue After 70 C.E.: Its Import for Early Christianity," New Testament Studies, 36, 1990, pp. 1-24. 1 8 2 J. Louis Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. Revised edition. QNashville: Abingdon, 1979(1968), pp. 42-43. 46 What exactly would exclusion from the synagogue mean? Severino Pancaro suggests four possibilities: • Exclusion from the synagogue building itself. • N o participation in synagogal gatherings. • Exclusion from the local Jewish community. • Exclusion from the national-religious Jewish community of al l Jews. While no scholars believe that the first possibility is an option there are proponents for each of the three suggestions left. Wi l l i am Horbury believes that the second option is correct, as the public proclamation of Jesus as the Messiah would negate one's synagogal membership. 1 8 4 More scholars think that the third option is the most likely. Among this membership are R. Alan Culpepper and Dwight Moody Smith. Smith notes that given the lack of evidence in either Jewish or Christian texts for the term aposunagogos, l ikely this ban was local and was probably temporary. The majority of Johannine scholars however, support Pancaro's fourth suggestion. 1 8 6 According to Raymond Brown, the Johannine Christians, once expelled from the synagogue, began to think of themselves as other than Jewish, despite many of 1 on them being racially Jewish. Other parts of the Christian Testament, most notably the Book o f Acts but also in the writings of Paul, discuss conflicts between the emerging Christ-confessing movement and local synagogues. What is consistent in the derivations and punishments discussed, however, is that expulsion from the synagogue is not mentioned. Instead, these Christ 1 8 3 Severino Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel. (Leiden: Brill, 1975), pp. 247-248. 1 8 4 W. Horbury, "The Benediction of the Minim and Early Jewish-Christian Controversy," Journal of Theological Studies, 38, 1982, pp. 52-53. 1 8 5 D M . Smith, "Judaism and the Gospel of John," p. 85; scholars who agree are Brown, "Introduction," p. 167; Culpepper,' "Gospel," p. 283; Setzer, p. 93, even Martyn admits this may be a possible explanation, "History," p. 55, n. 69. 1 8 6 Which is also the suggestion that Pancaro adopts, p. 248. 1 8 7 Brown, "Community," p. 41. 47 followers are punished in the synagogues as if they continued to belong to the Jewish 188 community. So what do the aposunagogos sayings refer to? According to Adele Reinhartz these passages highlight two points which the author wished to express. One is that the expulsion from the synagogue was an action that was dreaded and which curbed potential Jesus adherents from publicly acclaiming their support (9.22; 12.42). Second, hoi Ioudaioi (9.22) and/or a group among them (Pharisees 12.42) stated this decree. 4.5 Synagogue Bans and Cherem Some Jewish groups did employ expulsion as a form of punishment, among them the group responsible for 1QS, 1 9 0 however, this text certainly does not mention synagogues. Certain rabbinic texts do mention synagogue bans, both temporary, n 'zifah and nidui or permanent, cherem.191 Is it possible that these bans apply to the context? For instance, according to Acts 9.1-2 and 22.5 Saul was given letters of authority by Jewish authorities to arrest and bring back to Jerusalem, followers of the Way, for punishment not expulsion. After his conversion, Paul, according to his own statement was no stranger to punishment from the synagogues and the Jews. According to II Corinthians 11.24-25 he was whipped thirty-nine lashes on five occasions by "Jews," three times beaten by sticks, and once he was stoned. These punishments, drastic and dreadful as they would have been to endure, are a long way from being expelled from the synagogue or from the community. Paul and Barnabas, according to Acts 13.50, were expelled from the district of Pisidian Antioch after preaching words that "the Jews" were not happy to hear. While it is possible that the term aposunagogos could mean expulsion from the Jewish community, Pancaro, pp. 247-248, the word used in Acts chapter thirteen to proclaim the action of expulsion was exebalon, "to throw out." Also, the ones who actually did the "throwing out" were leading men and devout women of the city not "Pharisees," or "Jews," Acts 13.50. On two occasions in the Book of Acts, Paul voluntarily leaves a synagogue after a poor reception from local Jews but there is no reason to think that he is formally excommunicated. In Corinth, when Paul was preaching that Jesus was the Christ, some 'Jews" disagreed with him and began to insult him. For this reason Paul withdrew and set up a house church next door (18.1, 4-7). A similar situation occurred in Ephesus, again his preaching of Jesus the messiah was met with resistance and public insults^  He and his disciples withdrew and formed their own community, 19:8-9. Later however, he arrives in Jerusalem and is warmly welcomed, an event that is unlikely if he had been expelled from other synagogues, Acts 21.20ff, Martyn, "History," p. 49. 1 8 9 Reinhartz, "Jews," p. 1 9 0 1QS 6.24-27; 25 refers to exclusion for members from the communal meals while 1QS 7.17; 8.16ff, 22f refers to permanent excommunication for a person who professes views deemed heretical or for transgressions of the Torah, Pancaro, p. 248. Judith Lieu remarks that this ban was to be both physical and symbolic, p. 113. 1 9 1 Setzer, p. 92. 48 The first, the n 'zifah, literally "rebuke," was an excommunication from the synagogue and was only needed to be declared by one person. The second, the nidui, "rejection," usually required three people for declaration and lasted thirty days. During this time, no one was allowed to get within six feet of the wrongdoer. The third type of expulsion, the cherem, could be maintained indefinitely and the person who was under this ban was to be cut off from the community and treated as i f they did not exist . 1 9 2 Essentially the meaning o f this term is "a banned thing" or "a thing devoted." 1 9 3 This noun is derived from the verb charam, which can either have the positive meaning "to dedicate [to God]" or the negative meaning "to destroy [by God/Divine command]." 1 9 4 In its positive and negative meanings it is viewed as referring to something unspeakably holy or unspeakably unclean. 1 9 5 These last two bans were viewed in early twentieth century publications as likely candidates for an explanation for the aposunagogos sayings of John . 1 9 6 Some scholars such as David Stern still maintain this possibili ty. 1 9 7 J. L . Martyn however, disagrees, stating that the niddui appears to have only been used to enforce purity laws and that the purpose of the ban was not to exclude straying members o f the synagogue but instead it David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1992), p. 184. 1 9 3 The Ban in the Old Testament and at Man," Biblical Archaeologist, 47, June, 1984, p. 103. 1 9 4 Stephen D. Renn, (ed.), Expository Dictionary of Bible Words. (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005), p. 276, in this manner it is used to justify the genocide of the Canaanites in Deuteronomy 7.1-6; 20.15-18, Yair Hoffman, "The Deuteronomistic Concept of the Herem," Zeitschrift Fure Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 111, no. 2, pp. 196-210. Similar smiting also uses this term in Joshua 6.17a, 18-19, 21, Frederic Gangloff, "Joshua 6: Holy War or Extermination by Divine Command," Theological Review, 25, no. 1, 2004, pp. 3-23. 1 9 5 "The Ban," p. 103. 1 9 6 See the list in Emil Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B. C. -A.D. 135). Vol. II. (Edinburgh : T & T Clark, 1979), pp. 60 ff. 1 9 7 Stern, p. 184. was used as an inner-synagogue form of discipline. While the permanent synagogue ban, the cherem, does appear to have been a better understanding for the expulsion verses of John, Martyn and Pancaro believe that this can not be definitely proven as there is no reference to this term meaning "to excommunicate" until at least the third century C . E . 1 9 9 Nancy Pardee who believes that she has found evidence in the Didache of this curse, has recently challenged this interpretation. The verse in question reads "Then the creation of humanity will come into the fiery testing and many will stumble and perish, but those having endured in their faith will be saved by the Curse (the Accursed) itself (Didache 16.5).200 The Greek word, which she has translated as "the Curse", is katathema and has traditionally been interpreted as referring to Christ. 2 0 1 This verb according to Pardee is rare, occurring only four times in either Jewish or Christian writings and seems to have been created in the Graeco-Roman period, although it is derived from the much more ancient word anathema. Hermann Leberecht Strack, Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. (Munich : C H Beck, 1961), vol. IV, pp. 329f, cited in Martyn, "History," p. 44, Pancaro also agrees with Strack, p. 248 1 9 9 C.H. Hunzinger, Die judische Bannpraxis im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter. (Diss: Gottingen, 1954), pp. 65ff cited in Martyn, "History," p. 44 and Pancaro, p. 248. 2 0 0 Nancy Pardee's translation, "The Curse That Saves (Didache 16.5)," found in Clayton N. Jefford, (ed.), The Didache In Context: Essay on Its Text, History and Transmission. Supplements to Novum Testamentum, vol. 77. (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), p. 155 (155-176). 2 0 1 In the understanding that a man who was hanged (crucified) was cursed, "Deut." 21.23, B.C. Butler, "The Literary Relations of Didache, Ch. XVI," Journal of Theological Studies, 11, 1960, pp. 275-276; C C . Richardson, Early Christian Fathers. (New York, 1970), p. 179, n. 78; K. Wengst, Didache (Apostellehre)—Barnabasbrief Zweiter Klemensbrief—Schrift an Diognet. (Munchen, 1984), p. 99, n. 137 cited in Pardee, p. 157, n. 3. 2 0 2 Pardee, p. 158. 50 In Greek writings this term often portrays the meaning of something dedicated to a god . 2 0 3 Katathema is not attested to in the Septuagint, instead anathema is used when translating the Hebrew term cherem, which can mean either dedication to God or banned from G o d . 2 0 4 In the inter-testamental period, the term anathema only occurs once and refers to an offering, 2 0 5 while the verbal form anathematizo is used to "pronounce a ban . ' 2 0 6 In Jewish and Christian writings, the term is interpreted to refer to the more negative meaning, "to curse." 2 0 7 Both of these meanings are extremely close to the meanings o f cherem as a synagogue ban. The term katathema occurs only twice in the Christian Testament. In Matthew 26.74 Peter uses the verbal form, katathematizein to "curse" and swear that he does not know Jesus. In the Markan parallel 14.71, which Matthew is based upon, the term used for "curse" is anathematizein. In Revelation 22.3 the substantative term, katathema is used but this passage is dependent upon the Septuagint text of Zechariah 14.11, which uses anathema.209 Anathema is the more usual term for "curse" in the Christian Testament and appears this way in I Corinthians 12.3; 16.22 and Galatians 1.8-9. 2 1 0 In the Patristic literature from the fourth century onwards this term is used frequently to refer to 2 0 3 Thucydides "History" 1.132.3.3 refers to a tripod that was consecrated to a military victory; Aristotle "Athenian Constitution" 7.4.6 refers to a statue. Euripedes in his Ion 310 refers to a person who was dedicated to a temple as anathema, cited in Pardee, p. 159. 2 0 4 Although as Pardee notes, anathema is not the only Greek word used for the translation of cherem, p. 162. 2 0 5 II Maccabees 2.13, cited in Pardee, p. 163. 2 0 6 I Maccabees 5.5, cited in Pardee, p. 163. 2 0 7 In this way it is used in Jewish and Christian magical texts, Pardee, pp. 159-161. 2 0 8 As cited in Pardee, p. 170. 2 0 9 Pardee argues that the term in Revelation probably should be translated as "accursed thing" rather than "ban" as in Zechariah, ibid, pp. 169-170. 2 1 0 Pardee links I Corinthians 12.3 with other expulsion bans among them John"9.22 and Ezra 10.8, ibid, p. 170. 51 "cursing," yet in the early Patristic literature of second century, the term most used in katathematizo to refer to those who are accursed. -A s Pardee has shown, the Hebrew term cherem, which could mean "curse" or "ban", was translated in Septuagint Greek as anathema, from this the term katathema was derived which always means to curse or ban. While the Hebrew term cherem is not definitively used as a synagogal ban until the Palestinian Ta lmud, 2 1 2 its cognates, katathema and anathema are used in this manner in Christian writings o f the first century C . E . In this understanding it is entirely possible that the aposunagogos sayings of John do in fact refer to a cherem like ban. 4.6 Yavneh and the Birkhat Ha-minim J.L. Martyn believes that the expulsion of Christ-confessors from the synagogues was a direct result of the actions of the Council o f Yavneh . 2 1 3 During the last quarter of the first century C .E . many Jews convened at Yavneh, under the leadership of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai and Rabbi Gamaliel. Here, it is thought that they attempted to define the limits of Judaism and to define "orthodox" thought. Stephen Katz says that it is not unreasonable to assume that here they took measures to dissuade those who had adopted various forms of Jewish Christianity. What measures exactly they took are debatable, as is their influence. 2 1 4 Peter Schafer remarks that "Jabneh's importance after 70 C E as the geographical and spiritual centre of rabbinic Judaism was so great that one may justifiably refer to the period from the destruction of the Temple to the Bar Kochba uprising as the Jabneh 2 1 1 F o u n d i n Jus t in , Irenaeus a n d O r i g e n , P a r d e e , p. 171. 2 1 2 P a r d e e , p. 171. 2 1 3 A l s o re f erred to as J a b n e h o r J a m n i a b y s o m e scho lars . 2 1 4 K a t z , "Issues," p. 44. 52 period. " ' Z 1 : > Martyn himself admits that Yavneh was not the only centre of rabbinical learning during this period and that it was quite possible that many local synagogues would not have followed the decrees of Yavneh, instead listening only to their own local officials . 2 1 6 What Martyn finds especially interesting is the claim from the Babylonian Talmud (b. Berkoth 28b-29a [6 t h -7 t h century C.E.]) that at Yavneh, a composition or adaptation by Samuel the Small of the Birkhat Ha-minim was formed. 2 1 7 This "benediction" is the twelfth of eighteen synagogue prayers that were revised at the Academy of Yavneh between the years of 85-95 C . E under the leadership of Rabbi Gamaliel, the successor to Rabbi Yohanan ben Z a k k a i . 2 1 8 These prayers were to be said three times daily and would help form the self-identification of who belonged to hoi Ioudaioi2™ Martyn's hypothesis that this curse was used to remove Jewish Christians from the synagogue has been met with mixed reviews. Many scholars have admitted the 2 1 5 Peter Schafer, The History of the Jews in the Greco-Roman World, (London: Routledge, 1983), p. 139. 2 1 6 Martyn, "History," p. 53, n. 68. 2 1 7 J.L Martyn says that it is likely that the first three lines along with line six predate the addition that Samuel the Small created at Yavneh. These additions he says are only lines four and five. The "apostates" he states were likely Hellenized Jews. The "arrogant government" could mean Rome as some scholars such as Schafer (p. 140) have claimed, but Martyn says this term is also used to describe the Seleucid government in the Maccabean literature, although he fails to give examples of these. He also mentions that Psalms of Solomon (1st century B.C.E.) chapter seventeen which, according to him, reiterate the first three lines of this prayer, Martyn, "History," p. 58; ); Reuven Kimelman states that some scholars feel that the term "arrogant government may in fact be referring to Jews who collaborated with the Romans in an earlier denunciation, J. Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns, 1977, p. 225, cited in Reuven Kimelman, "Birkat Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity," found in E.P. Sanders, (ed.), Jewish and Christian Self-Definition, vol. II. (Philadelphia. Fortress, 1981), p. 227. 2 1 8 Kimelman, p. 226. 2 1 9 Ibid, Martyn, "History," pp. 38-62, many other scholars have accepted Martyn' theories, among these are C.K. Barrett, Barnabas Lindars, Schnackenburg, and Peter Townsend. WD. Davies in his The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount. (Cambridge: University Press, 1966, pp. 275-278, discusses the theory that the Birkhat Ha-minim was an anti-Christian measure but maintains that there is little proof to link it to the relevant sayings in John. This argument first appeared in the late nineteenth century, S. Krauss, "The Jews in the Works of the Church Fathers," Jewish Quarterly Review, 5, 1892-1893, pp. 130-132. 53 possibil i ty. 2 2 0 For instance, John Painter states that while one can not be sure of the exact reasons for the exclusion, the Birkhat ha-minim is the only situation that we know of that pertains to the information given in the Gospel of John. In the past twenty-five years however, this hypothesis has been justly criticized. A copy of the Birkhat Ha-minim that was found at Cairo Geniza in 1896 and published in 1925 reads: 1/ For the apostates let there be no hope. 21 A n d let the arrogant government 3/ be speedily uprooted in our days. 4/ Let the nosrim [Nazarenes] and the minim [heretics] be destroyed in a moment. 5/ A n d let them be blotted out of the Book of Life and not be inscribed together with the righteous. 61 Blessed are thou, O Lord, who humblest the arrogant. 2 2 2 Scholars are unsure o f when exactly this copy was created, and who exactly the wrongdoers are mentioned in this curse, nor is it known to what extent this version was used. While the prayer is attributed to Samuel the Small at Yavneh, this does not mean that he created it; rabbinic attributions are not always reliable and we have no writings of 99^ Samuel with which to compare this. Martyn suggests that the task o f Samuel the Small at Yavneh was to take an existing prayer and to make it relevant to the current situation. Jewish Christians and other heretics would then be forced to pray that they themselves should be destroyed. i l u Martyn, "History" pp. 50-62; John Painter, "John 9 and the interpretation of the Fourth Gospel," Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 28 O 1986, p. 39; S. Smalley, John: Evangelist and Interpreter. (Greenwood, S.C: Attic Press, 1978, p. 143, C.K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John. Second edition. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978, p. 361, Rudolf. Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to St. John, vol. 2 of 3 vols. (New York: Crossroad Press, 1982), p. 239, Culpepper suggests that it was not the Birkhat Ha-minim which was used to expel the Johannine Christians from the synagogue but instead a prototype of this curse, "Gospel," p. 281. 2 2 1 John Painter "John 9" p. 38. 2 2 2 Cited in Setzer, p. 89. 2 2 3 Setzer, p. 90. 54 Therefore, he concludes that through this prayer, Jewish Christians would leave the synagogues for two reasons. 2 2 4 First, i f the minim faltered while repeating the prayer they would place themselves under suspicion and would be forced out. Second, Martyn suggests that the heretics would not wish to hear anyone else cursing them in the synagogues and would leave the synagogue voluntar i ly . 2 2 5 Martyn's theory hinges on some rather dubious suppositions. One o f these is that the terms nosrim and minim refer to Jewish Christians and two, that the Jewish Christians would identify themselves in this manner. Some scholars, have suggested that nosrim must refer to Christians because there is evidence in patristic sources that Jews regularly cursed Christians in their 226 synagogues. Other scholars have argued circularly that because minim may be an ambiguous term, nosrim must refer to Nazarenes, which in turn are Christians. 2 2 7 There are significant problems with the hypothesis that the term nosrim refers to Jewish Christians and the minim to all other forms of heresy because in this understanding the text would read "Let the Nazarenes (Christians) and other heretics be destroyed." 2 2 8 But the text that we have does not include the word "other." 2 2 9 Another stylistic concern is that the prayer is known as the Birkhat Ha-minim, not the Birkhat Ha-nosrim. Furthermore, the term nosrim never appears in tannaitic literature (1st century Martyn, "History," p. 58. 2 2 5 Martyn, "History," pp. 59-61. 2 2 6 While Krauss, pp. 130ff may have been the first to make this suggestion, many other scholars have also suggested this. Among these are J.L. Martyn, "History," p. 58, n. 78; W.D. Davies, pp. 278f; J.T. Townsend, The Gospel of John and the Jews: The Story of a Religious Divorce, in Alan T. Davies, (ed.), Antisemitism and the Foundations of Christianity. (New York: Paulist Press, 1979, pp. 72-97, esp. 86), cited in Kimelman, p. 394, n. 39. 2 2 7 J.T. Townsend, "Gospel of John," found in Kimelman, p. 232. 2 2 8 Marcel Simon, Verus Israel: A Study of the Relations Between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire (135-425). (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986) p. 236; Martyn, "History," p. 85; cited in Kimelman, p. 233. 2 2 9 Kimelman, p. 233. 55 C.E.) and only appears once in a passage by R. Johanan (c. 200-279 C.E.) . A s Kimmelmann points out, i f this term was used in liturgy from the first century onwards, one would expect it to become more prominent in other works . 2 3 0 In the Babylonian Talmud (b. Sanhedrin 103a, b. Berakoth 17b) Jesus is referred to as Yeshua ha-nosri. Interestingly, some of the references in the Babylonian Talmud that refer to Jesus in this manner parallel stories in the Palestinian Talmud where Jesus is referred to as Yeshua ben Pantera (r. Hull 2.24 with bAZ 16b-17a). 2 3 1 In conclusion, nosrim may mean Nazarenes but this interpretation does not occur until the 6 century C .E . , much later than is needed to convincingly argue its inclusion here. 2 3 2 The idea that the term minim may refer to Jewish Christians is also not justified. Different scholars have debated what the term minim refers to but without reaching a consensus. 2 3 3 According to one scholar, Naomi Janowitz, the meaning of the term min is "a kind or type," 2 3 4 while the root of the word mn means "separation." 2 3 5 The term min or its plural minim is not specific in Tannaitic literature. In both the Mishnah and the Tosefta (c. 200 C.E.) minim refers to deviant Jews (Megillah 4.8; tBaba 2 3 U Kimelmann, p. 233. 2 3 1 Kimelman, pp. 234, 395, n. 46, Yet this is a late interpretation, and furthermore if the minim here is used to refer to Jewish Christians, why would the term nosrim also be used? Setzer, p. 90. 2 3 2 Therefore, de Boer's idea that the Community called itself Nazoreans until its expulsion from the synagogues is unjustified, "Depiction," p. 280, n. 64. 2 3 Janowitz suggests that the term can refer to non-rabbinic Jews, because of the use of the expression, There are no minim among the nations, b. Hullin 13b,' found in Janowitz, p. 211. Other suggestions are: heretical rabbis as Alan F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism. (Leiden: Brill, 1977) connects the minim with proto-Merkavah mystics. R. Travers Herford, suggests that the term could be used to refer to both Gentile and Jewish Christians, Christianity in Talmud andMidrash. (London; Oxford Publishing Company, 1903), pp. 97-341. Other scholars think that the term refers primarily to Gnostics, Moritz Friedlander, Der vorchristliche judische gnostizismus. (Gottingen, 1898), cited in Setzer, p. 90. In the Palestinian Talmud a statement is made that further confuses the consensus. It states that at the time of the destruction of the Temple, there were twenty-four kinds of minim, t. Sanh. 10.6, 29c. 2 3 4 Janowitz, p. 210. 2 3 5 F. Brown, S. Driver, C. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. "Peabody: Hendrikson Publishing, 2004), p. 577. 56 Mesia 2.33), 2 3 6 and may refer to Jesus (t. Hul 2.22, 24; Qoh. Rab 7.26). 2 3 7 In the later amoraic literature of Palestine (c. 230-c. 375 C.E.) including the Palestinian Talmud, Genesis Rabbah and Leviticus Rabbah the term minim again refers to deviant Jews although there is never a very specific way to describe these heretics. 2 3 8 In rabbinic terms, a min was essentially a Jew who refused to admit the authority of the rabbinic authorities. From the rabbinical understanding these apostates would be excluded from the covenant of Israel and expelled from the synagogue. 2 3 9 Supporters o f this theory often suggest that about the turn of the first century C . E . an irreparable rift occurred between Judaism and Christianity. 2 4 0 From all the evidence, it appears most likely that the term minim merely refers to groups of people that certain Jewish authorities claimed were heretical. 2 4 1 In Second Temple Judaism, Jewish "orthodoxy" is a loose term as Jewish identities were based on widely different interpreted texts of Hebrew Scripture. In the time period and the texts that are being discussed, the Jewish authorities are the early rabbinical movement, which had one of its headquarters at the Academy o f Yavneh. Martyn's assumption that the nosrim and minim would be unable to say the Birkhat Ha-minim and would then "be presumably drummed out of the synagogue 2 3 6 Kimelman, p. 229-231. 2 3 7 Setzer, p. 90. 2 3 8 In many rabbinic tales, minim appear. Sometimes they use magic on rabbis, at other times they debate the meaning of biblical passages. In retaliation, the rabbis announce that their children should be accounted as bastards and their works are unholy (/. Hullin 2.20), Kimelman, p. 229-231. 2 3 9 G. Alon, Mehqarim be-Toledto Yisra 'el I, 1957, p. 192, cited in Kimelman, p. 227; Philip S. Alexander, '"The Parting of the Ways,'" found in Dunn, "Jews and Christians," p. 9. 2 4 0 S.W. Baron, A Social and Religious History ofthe Jews, vol. II, 1952, p. 135; W.H.C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 1965, p. 179, cited in Kimelman, p. 227. 2 4 1 Simon, pp. 181-182. 57 fel lowship" 7 4 2 is without basis for several reasons. It is extremely unlikely that Jewish Christians who still worshipped at the synagogue would identify themselves as heretics. The term "heretic" is not a label, which one applies to oneself, but is instead applied by outsiders. 2 4 3 While the Cairo Geniza Birkhat Ha-minim curses the heretics and wishes for their destruction, there is no mention of expulsion from the synagogues or the community. Even the rabbinic "commentary" on this prayer only mentions that faltering while saying it would earn the saliah sibur, "agent of the congregation" to be removed from his post of 244 praying. While a common assumption is that the Yavnean rabbis were anxious to define Judaism in narrow terms, Shaye Cohen disagrees stating that in some ways they were very accepting. This is evident from the contrasting positions of differing rabbis in the rabbinic literature starting from that period. 2 4 5 Cohen also maintains that our knowledge of Yavneh is very limited, the earliest sources are from the Mishnah written c. 100 years later. 2 4 6 The authority and the influence of the Yavnean rabbis has also been questioned, with some scholars believing that only some Diaspora Jewish communities would have Martyn, "History," p. 60, Norman Perrin.agrees with Martyn, stating that heretics would be forced out of the synagogue through this prayer. N. Perrin, The New Testament: An Introduction, 1974, p. 230, cited in Kimelman, p. 391, n. 6. 2 4 3 Setzer, p. 90, Stephen Katz also argues that the inclusion of the term minim would not affect Christians in the synagogue as they would not identify with this term, Stephen T. Katz, "Issues in the Separation of Judaism and Christianity after 70 C.E: A Reconsideration," Journal of Biblical Literature, 103, 1984, p. 74. 2 4 4 Claudia Setzer asks who would read the Birkhat Ha-minim as not all Jews would be called to be an agent of the congregation. Later rabbinic commands would limit this to only free men, and it is quite possible that these structures were in place during the first century C.E. in Palestine. This would then only refer to less than half of the congregation, Setzer, p. 91. If Setzer is correct and the majority of these would not recognize themselves as minim or nosrim anyway this curse would lose its effect. Even more so if they were merely removed from the prayer post, if there was no expulsion then it is extremely unlikely that the Birkhat Ha-minim would be referred to in the three passages in the Gospel of John. 2 4 5 S.J.D. Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis and the End of Jewish Sectarianism," Hebrew Union College Annual, 55, 1984, 27-53. 2 4 6 Cohen, "Significance," p. 29. 58 taken into account their decrees. J. Heinemann states that for those communities, which did follow the decrees of Yavneh, individual communities were allowed to choose the secondary subject matter. 2 4 8 Therefore, while it is possible that the Birkhat Ha-minim, i f it existed in the Cairo Genizah version in the first century C . E . , may have been interpreted by a local synagogue to refer to Christians there would have been no empire-wide persecution of Jewish Christians based on this legislation. 2 4 9 4.7 Conclusions While the relative date for the composition of the Gospel of John can be determined, not much else historically can be concluded with any real degree of certainty. For this reason, Raymond Brown states that the importance of the Gospel is not to be found in the location of the composition but what is found within the text itself. O f the many theories concerning the composition of the Gospel, Martyn's theory is the most convincing, although his reliance on the Birkhat Ha-minim hypothesis is not compelling. A s Wayne Meeks states: It is time to recognize that the birkat ha-minim has been a red herring in Johannine research. Not only do questions remain about its date and the earliest form o f its wording—not to mention questions o f where and when it would have been effective after it was promulgated—the more fundamental issue for interpreting John 16.2 and John 9's depiction of the healed blind man's expulsion is whether these scenes have anything to do with the way the birkat ha-minim would have worked in practice. John does not speaLof people who do not go to synagogue services because they cannot conscientiously say the prayers. It speaks of being put out o f the synagogue. A l l we have to assume is that the archontes o f the Jewish community in John's location had simply made up their minds to get rid of these troublemaking followers of a false Mess iah . 2 5 0 Setzer, p. 91. J. Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977), p. 225. Setzer, p. 91. Meeks, "Breaking Away," pp. 102-103, also see Kimelman, pp. 226-244. 59 According to the Gospel of John, an expulsion from the synagogue did occur, but it was centered on the messianic identity of Jesus. 2 5 1 The Community's identification of Jesus as the Messiah forced certain Jewish authorities to expel the Community from the Jewish ethnic group. 2 5 2 A claim that a crucified man was the messiah would have been considered repulsive to the Jewish eli te; 2 5 3 hence they repulsed those who claimed this. The most likely expulsion theory that explains the aposumagogos sayings refer to a local Christological ban along the lines of a cherem. The next chapter discusses how the expulsion o f the Community by hoi Ioudaioi formed the social identity of the Johannine Community and how this social identity is expressed in the writing of the Gospel. Raymond F. Collins, "Speaking of the Jews: 'Jews' in the Discourse Material of the Fourth Gospel," found in Bierenger et al, p. 282 (281-300). Messianology differs from Christology as many Jews had messianic beliefs in differing messiahs. Of the diverse individuals and groups which penned the texts of the "Manual of Discipline," 9.11; "The War Scroll," 17.6; "Psalms of Solomon," 17.21-25; "I Enoch," 48.8-10; Babylonian Talmud, "Sanhedrin," 98a-99a; Philo, "On Rewards and Punishments," 28.164-29.165, cited in Louis H. Feldman, Meyer Reinhold, (eds), Jewish Life and Thought among Greeks and Romans: Primary Readings. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), pp. 219-222. Christology is connected directly to Jesus called the Christ, Charlesworth, "Exclusivism," found in Bieringer, et al., p. 501. 2 5 2 Harvey, p. 93. 60 5 Expulsion Results in Formation of Social Identity A s the last chapter focussed on the origins of the Gospel of John and the traumatic experience suffered by the Community, this chapter focuses on how this trauma was expressed in the actual text itself. There are differing opinions as to how an expulsion from the synagogue would have affected Jews. Sean Freyne argues that expulsion from the synagogue would separate someone not only from the Jewish Community but also from social and legal status in the Roman Empire, for both the individual and for the Johannine Community of which they were a part. 2 5 4 A little more germane to my thesis is the opinion of C . K . Barrett who believed that by becoming aposunagogoi, the Community would have been considered to have renounced the Jewish rel igion. 2 5 5 What exactly would this expulsion mean for the Community and how would they express it? Phil ip Esler has stated: One of the primary functions of the [Gospel of John]... must have been to provide a reinforcement for the community's social identity, which appears to have been largely negative. It provided a symbolic universe, which gave religious legitimacy, a theodicy, to the group's actual isolation from the larger society [by] "demolishing the logic of the [outside] world, particularly the world of Judaism... ." 2 5 6 In the period of the formation of the Gospel , 2 5 7 as discussed in the last chapter, decisions were made both Christological and social. Hence, the high Christology of John was formed due to the pressures of the Jewish persecution of the Community. In this Charlesworth, "Exclusivism," found in Bieringer ? p. 502. 2 5 4 Sean Freyne, "Vilifying the Other," p. 129. 2 5 5 Barrett, "Gospel," p. 362. 2 5 6 Philip F. Esler, The First Christians in Their Social Worlds: Social-Scientific Approaches to New Testament Interpretation. New York: Routledge, 1994), pp. 70-71. 2 5 7 The second period of both Brown and Martyn's expulsion theories. 2 5 8 W. Meeks, "Man From Heaven," p. 71; Rensberger, "Johannine Faith," p. 28; Brown, "Introduction," pp. 67-69, 74-75; Martyn "Gospel," pp: 104-105. Graham Harvey disagrees stating that the high Christology of the Community was the reason that Judaism is by Christian self-definition the enemy. The 61 period the concept of 'ultimate truth' was revealed as only being relevant to those who are outside of the ethnic group labeled as hoi Ioudaioi.259 For this reason it is only after the blind man has been expelled from the synagogue that he "learns the true depth of Jesus' identity... " 2 6 0 Other examples are that al l of the Christological confessions in the Gospel take place in the absence of hoi Ioudaioi (1.49; 6.69; 11.27; 20.28). Also in this period, crypto-Christians, who refuse to publicly admit their belief in Jesus' messianic status, are considered to be judged guilty already (12.42-43,48). 5.1 Imagery i n J o h n The imagery in the Gospel of John is based on dualism between those that believe (the Community) and those that do not identified for the most part as hoi Ioudaioi. This dualism is seen in the symbolism of the Gospel with such contrasting images as light/darkness, life/death that which is from above/that, which is from below, and finally love/hatred. Fundamental to Johannine Christology is that Jesus was the light of this world (1.4; 8.12), who enters into the world to save the believers. In this capacity he challenges the darkness, which symbolizes the unbelievers (3.20; 12.46). Nicodemus, a Jew who tried to understand but ultimately can not is portrayed in this manner when he visits Jesus by night (3.2). 2 6 2 So too, the ultimate rejection of hoi Ioudaioi and their consequent Ioudaioi rejected Jesus therefore the Community rejected hoi Ioudaioi, Harvey, p. 93. I disagree with this because I follow Brown and Martyn's beliefs that the high Christology was formed due to persecution, I feel this applies better to the evidence in the Gospel. 2 5 9 Brown, "Introduction," pp. 164-165, n. 38, p. 166, n. 42; Cook, "Gospel" and Culpepper, "Gospel," De Jonge, "Conflict, p. 353 2 6 0 Rensberger, "Sectarianism," p. 148. 2 6 1 Rosemary Radford Ruether, Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism. (New York: Crossroads, 1974), p. 111. 2 6 2 Some scholars state that the reason for Nicodemus' visit at night may have been purely expediential because of his fear of his fellow Judeans or it is possible that nighttime was when rabbis taught Torah, Brown, "Gospel," p. 130, Malina and Rohrbaugh, p. 81, however, the term night (nux) is used six times in 62 blindness is reported in chapter twelve (12.37-40). This blindness is contrasted with the healing of the blind man's vision who with his new vision, sees the son of man (9.6-7, 37) . 2 6 3 A s the Jews are in darkness, they are viewed as blind and therefore unable to see the truth. Jesus states that 'he came into the world (of Judaism) so that those who do not see, would be able to see and those who see might become bl ind ' (9.39). When some Pharisees overhear this they became angry and accuse Jesus of calling them blind. He is reported to reply that ' i f they were blind they would not be guilty, but as they claim to be able to see (regardless of the truth-from the Johannine perspective-that they are blind) they are then guilty of sin. From the perspective of the Community, the Pharisees claim that they can see is discarded on the basis that they reject the light of God, because they can not perceive who he i s . 2 6 4 While Jesus is portrayed as light, he is also life (1.3; 8.12). Those who believe that Jesus is the life are granted eternal life (3.16; 3.36; 10.28), in contrast to those who do not believe and w i l l face God's retribution (3.36) and w i l l die in their sins (8.12). Those that w i l l die are likened to their ancestors who ate manna and died in the wilderness (6.49, 58), unlike those who partake of the flesh of Jesus, the bread of life (6.27,51,53). Ignorance is often attributed to the Johannine opponents because they are 'born from below in the womb, not above from the spirit' (3.3; 6.63). While they believe that they know Jesus' family (6.42-43), they are ignorant o f his true origins (3.19; 6.62; 8.42). this Gospel, (3.2; 9.4; 11.10; 13.30; 19.39; 21.3) and with the exception of 21.3 it may be used metaphorically each time. As Jesus was the light, the darkness of the night is that which was opposed to him (9.4). 2 6 3 Reinhartz "The Jews" p. 344. 63 Because of this limitation, those from below can not understand (3.12) and would be unwilling regardless (8.43; 12.42-43). According to Fernando F. Segovia, belief and unbelief are all a measure of love, or lack thereof, for Jesus, who portrays G o d . 2 6 5 Acceptance of Jesus shows love (15.12-17) while rejection of Jesus by the Jews is shown as hatred towards Jesus and therefore towards God (8.42; 15.23-24). 2 6 6 Love/belief results in believers being expelled from the synagogue while those that hate/disbelieve plot to k i l l Jesus, and harm members of the Community (16.2). 2 6 7 This contrasting parallelism between the inhabitants of the two spheres is carefully orchestrated by John to give his own group a greater assurance in its stance outside the synagogue. The [Johannine] Christians need not fear that their perception of the truth is any less secure because of what has happened to them, since those who represent the synagogue have rendered themselves incapable of understanding and are not any longer even the objects of the Revealer's or his Father's concern. Here vilification serves not so much to define but to confirm the self that finds itself cut off from its natural matr ix . . . 2 6 8 5.2 Social Identity Formed Through Replacement Certain scholars have noted that the Johannine movement was a "de-ethnicizing movement," which rejects the identity markers o f its parent community (Judaism but also Samaritan to a degree) and chooses other identity markers, which may resemble the ethnic markers of the ancient Mediterranean. 2 6 9 2 6 4 Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 135, so too after Jesus has left, his disciples will see him again but the Jews (or the world) will not, they are blind, (7.33-36; 14.19). 2 6 5 Fernando F. Sergovia, "The Love and Hatred of Jesus and Johannine Sectarianism," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43, 1981, p. 268. Reinhartz "The Jews" p. 345, John 15.25 cites Psalm 69.4 "they hated me without reason." 2 6 7 Sergovia, pp. 270-271. 2 6 8 Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 139. 2 6 9 Fishman, pp. 9-65; G. Stroumsa, "Philosophy of the Barbarians: On Early Christian Ethnological Representations," in H. Cancik, H. Lichtenverger, P. Shafer (eds J, Geschichte, Tradition, Reflection: Festschrift fur Marting Hengel zum 70 Geburstag, 3 vol. (Tubingen: Mohr, 1996), vol. 2, pp. 339-368; 64 The origins of the creation of a de-ethnicized movement can be linked to Plato in his work, The Republic. In this work, he outlines that only a group that is not concerned with "differentiating inter-generational biological continuities" 2 7 0 can devote itself to fully serving the publ ic . 2 7 1 The Johannine Community, formed through the acceptance and belief that Jesus was the Messiah, transcends ethnic designations, welcoming all who believe this, even former Samaritans and Gentiles. Together they can all become children not of an earthly womb, but of God (1.12-13; 3.5-7). 2 7 2 A s outlined in chapter one, ethnic groups can be defined through self-identification markers. For the purposes o f this thesis I chose to use the six features of ethnicity which Hutchinson and Smith have suggested. These are 'a formal name; a common myth of descent; a shared history including revered figures; an association with a specific territory; a distinctive shared culture including religious customs; and a sense of communal solidarity. ' 2 7 3 For the Johannine Community however, the only one that applies is a sense of communal solidarity, a marker that could be used to define other types of groups, among them fictive k i n . 2 7 4 D.M. Olster, "Classical Ethnography and Early Christianity," in K.B. Free (ed), The Formulation of Christianity by Conflict through the Ages. (Lewiston: Edward Mellen Press, 1995), pp. 9-31; D.K. Buell, "Rethinking the Relevance of Race for Early Christian Self-Definition," Harvard Theological Review, 94, 2001, pp. 449-476; D.K. Buell, "Race and Universalism in Early Christianity," Journal of Early Christian Studies, 10, 2002, pp. 429-468. 2 7 0 Fishman, p. 12. 2 7 1 Ibid. 2 7 2 A similar idea can be outlined from Paul's letter to the Galatians 3.28. 2 7 3 Hutchinson, Smith, "Introduction" John Hutchinson and Smith (eds.), "Ethnicity," pp. 6-7, cited in Esler, "Conflict," pp. 43-44 2 7 4 Fishman, p. 6, Hall, "Hellenicity," p. 16.1 maintain that the Johannine Community was a fictive kinship group, whose members voluntarily joined believing that only they understood the correct way to worship Yahweh. Stephen C. Barton, "The Relativisation of Family Ties in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman Traditions," in Moxnes, p. 86; Malina, "New Testament, p. 46; Bruce J. Malina, "Early Christian Groups: Using Small Group Formation Theory to Explain Christian Organizations," found in Philip F. Esler, (ed), Modelling Early Christianity: Social-Scientific Studies of the New Testament in its Context. (London: Routledge, 1995), pp. 108-109, hence Terutllian's famous quote "Christians are made; not bora" "Apology." 18.4, cited in Lieu, p. 298. 65 The Community does not identify itself with any particular formal name 2 7 5 A s viewed in chapter one, the two most important features of ethnic groups are the myth of common descent and geographical ties to an ancestral homeland. The biological kinship group and lineage were extremely important in the ancient Jewish understanding of identity as social scientists have proven. 2 7 6 Yet the Gospel of John barely recognizes Jesus' earthly paternity unlike the Gospels of Matthew (1.1-17) and Luke (3.23-38). 2 7 7 Instead, the notion of Jesus' heavenly paternity is emphasized (3.16-18, 35; 5.19-23, 25; 11.4,27; 14.13; 19.7; 20.31) and the acceptance of the Community into this 'family of God'(1.12-13; 3.5-6; 17.21). 2 7 8 Finally, the issue of a link with an ancestral homeland is also strangely absent in John. Arguments have been made to link Jesus' patris with the region of Judea, and the place o f acceptance as Galilee. A s has been shown however, there is no real evidence to support that one area of the land o f Israel was more significant than any other area. In Although a case can be made for the identification of the Johannine Community with the covenantal term Israel as this remains a positive term in the Gospel. John the Baptist first mentions that his purpose was to reveal the Chosen one of Israel, 1.31; Nathaniel the 'disciple in whom there is no deception,' is mentioned as 'a true Israelite' in 1.47; Nathaniel responds by proclaiming that Jesus is the king of Israel, 1.49. Jesus ironically calls Nicodemus a Pharisee and an archon of hoi Ioudaioi a teacher of Israel while mocking his lack of knowledge, 3.10, and finally in John 12 13 Jesus is welcomed into Jerusalem by a crowd of people welcoming the 'king of Israel.' John 15.1-17 with its statement that Jesus and his disciples represent the true vine is also often taken as an allusion to Israel as interpreted through the light of Isaiah 5.1-7. Brown, "Gospel," vol. 2, p. 676; Schnackenburg, vol. 3., p. 103; Malina and Rohrbaugh, p. 233. However, the term "Israel" is never definitively accepted as a formal title for the Community, and never appears this way in the Johannine epistles. 2 See Havlor Moxnes, "What is Family? Problems in Constructing Early Christian Families," found in Moxnes, pp. 15-41; Carolyn Osiek and David L. Balch, Families in the New Testament World: Households and House Churches. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997; Malina, "Social" Bruce J. Malina, Windows on the World of Jesus: Time Travel to Ancient Judea. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993; Malina, "New Testament" 2 7 7 In John, Jesus' earthly parentage is mentioned in a rather offhanded manner by Jewish Galileans who comment that Jesus was the son of Joseph, 6.42. 2 7 8 Manuscripts such as P66, and Sinaiticus (4th century) instead read that the Logos as not born of human stock, desire or will but from God himself. Very different interpretation, however, because of the nature of the Johannine Community and its structure which is evidently a fictive kinship group which is focussed on themselves as Israel, the child of God, probably the majority of the texts are correct in this reading. Lieu, p. 41. 66 both Galilee and Judea, Jesus is accepted and rejected as the Messiah. Jesus affirms that worship of the Father should not occur in any particular geographical area, either on Mt . Gerizem or in Jerusalem, but that true believers worship God in spirit and truth (4.23-24). This further proves the irrelevancy of geographical origins for the Johannine • 279 Community. Cultural traits including religious identity are important in this replacement motif for the Johannine Gospel. For this portion of the thesis, I should like to discuss James Dunn's four pillars of Judaism, mentioned in chapter one, and how the Community through their work, replaces each motif to refer strictly to Jesus as the revelation of God. 5.3 Four Pillars James Dunn admits that there were many forms of Second Temple Judaism and thus finding criteria to fit every sect is difficult, although in the time period of which this thesis is limited to, the criteria is considerably narrowed. The markers which Dunn identified as common throughout the different types of Judaism and which helped to formulate the religious self-identity o f the Jewish ethnic are: * God is one. • The election o f Israel is bound through the covenant between His people and Yahweh, shown through veneration of certain customs and figures. * This covenant is focussed on the Torah. • The covenantal Land o f Israel is focussed around the nexus of the Temple in Jerusalem. 2 8 0 ™ Lieu, p. 129. 2 8 0 Dunn, "Parting", pp. 19-36, W.D. Davies also agrees, "Aspects of the Jewish Background of the Gospel of John," found in R. Alan Culpepper, C. Clifton Black, (eds.), Exploring the Gospel of John. In Honor of D. Moody Smith, p. 46. 67 5.4 Monotheism According to James Dunn, "monotheism was absolutely fundamental for the Jew of Jesus' day." 2 8 1 The Shema (Deut. 6.4) was to be repeated daily, and this idea is affirmed in repeated Jewish writ ings. 2 8 2 Yet in the Gospel of John, one of the strongest attacks upon Jesus is that he 'made himself equal with God (5.18)' thus committing the sin of blasphemy and for that he deserved death from the Jewish perspective (10.36; 19.7; Lev. 24.16). That Jesus is viewed as divine or semi-divine, shows the schism between the Jewish Johannine communities, for the Johannine Jesus does not attempt to modify his answers to be more pleasing to the implied Jewish audience. Instead, he boldly states that he is the one whom God has chosen to work through, even though it is this charge that according to John 19.7 is the reason he is put to death. 2 8 3 In the Gospel, Jesus uses the term ego eimi "I am" to refer to himself and this is viewed by hoi Ioudaioi to profess the equation of Jesus and Yahweh as seen in Exodus (6.35; 8.12,24, 28, 58; 9.5; 10.7, 9, 11, 14; 11.25; 13.19; 14.6; 15.1, 5). This claim and the Jewish response of not asking for a clear explanation, shows, according to John Ashton, that the Community has gone beyond the acceptable schismatic nature of the Judaisms of the time. They had crossed into the unacceptable chasm of blasphemy and the rift between the two communities was unable to be mended. 2 8 4 2 8 1 L E . Goodman,Monotheism, (London. Osmun& Co., 1981), p. 113; E.E. Urbach, "Self-Isolation or Self-Affirmation in Judaism in the First Three Centuries: Theory and Practice," JCSD, vol. 2, p. 273, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 19. 2 8 2 Josephus "Antiquities" 5.1, 27, 112; Philo, "Decal" 65; "Sibylline Oracle" 3.629. 2 8 3 Ashton, "Understanding," p. 140; Dunn, "Parting," p. 176. 2 8 4 Ashton, "Understanding," pp. 139-141. 68 Is the Johannine Community elevating Jesus to a position of divinity, superseding Yahweh? Certain scholars would disagree, saying that Jesus is in fact viewed in this Gospel as an intermediary figure between humans and God. While he is viewed by the Community in certain verses as equal to God (5.19-30; 10.30), this is based on the notion that God had granted him full knowledge of creation (1.1; 5.20) and the power to judge in His name (5.22, 2 7 ) . 2 8 5 Also on two occasions Jesus mentions that 'the Father is greater than I,' (14.28), and that Yahweh is the only true God (17.3). The idea that a human could be raised up to this level however, is not unique in Second Temple Judaism or even beyond, such examples can be found as Melchizedek (11Q13), Enoch (I, II Enoch) and Enoch-Metatron (III Enoch). 5.5 Covenant and "Historical" Figures Fundamental to the Jewish self-identity was the concept that their one God had bound himself into an obligation with them. 2 8 6 For this covenant, two figures are extremely important. One is Moses, the Lawgiver, and the second is Abraham the patriarch of the Jewish people. Unlike Matthew, John does not view Jesus as a second Moses but instead as a figure superseding him (1.17-18; 6.48-58). 2 8 7 Likewise Jesus is not a fulfillment of the L a w or prophets but instead these scriptures have witnessed about him (5.46). 2 8 8 Malina and Rohrbaugh, p. 266 argues that Jesus should be viewed as a power broker between the patron God and his clients, the Johannine Community. 2 8 6 Two texts, which state this explicitly, are Jubilees 15.31-32 and Psalms of Solomon 9.8-9, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 22. 287 M E . Boismard, Moses or Jesus: An Essay in Johannine Christology. OMinneapolis: Fortress, 1993); p. Dietmar Neufeld, '"And When that One Cometh": Aspects of Johannine Messianism," found in Craig A. Evans, Peter W. Flint, (eds). Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), p. 128. 2 8 8 Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 125. 69 After the expulsion from their synagogue, the authors of John recognize two communities: the disciples of Moses and the disciples of Jesus (9.28). The designation of Jews as disciples of Moses is paralleled in b. Yoma 4a, which refers to Pharisees as distinct from Sadducees as 'disciples of M o s e s . ' 2 8 9 While other exact references are scarce, Martyn states that "Moses is the normatively authorized figure of Judaism... " 2 9 ° The Gospel here proclaims that one can no longer be part of both communities as they are distinctly different. 2 9 1 In John, Jesus is identified as 'the Prophet like Moses ' who was to come into the world (6.14; 7.40; possibly 9.17; Deuteronomy 18.15,18). The feeding of the five thousand and the bread of life discourse in chapter six also likely refer to this identification of Jesus as a figure like Moses but superseding h i m . 2 9 2 A s mentioned in chapter one, Abraham was considered to be the father of the Jewish race (Genesis 15-17; Isaiah 41.8; 51.2; Psalm 105.6). In Jewish-Christians communities such as Matthew's people could claim honour through their association with this figure (Matthew 1.2,17; 3.9) as through this lineage, Jews would be directly connected to the covenant made between Yahweh and Abraham (Psalms of Solomon 9.8-9; Sirach 44.19-21). 2 9 3 In the Gospel of John, Abraham is only mentioned in one passage, in a debate between hoi Ioudaioi and Jesus. Here the Jews claim lineage from Abraham but are 2 8 9 Cited in de Boer, "Depiction," p. 272. 2 9 0 Martyn, "History," p. 103. 2 9 1 De Jonge, "Christology," p. 352, so de Boer states: "Discipleship to Jesus and discipleship to Moses are presented as distinguishable, comparable, and incompatible modes of being Jewish," "Depiction," p. 276. However, I would disagree with de Boer's use of the term 'Jewish' to also refer to the Johannine Community. 2 9 2 Maarten J.J. Menken, "Scriptural Dispute Between Jews and Christians in John: Literary Fiction or Historical Reality? John 9.13-17, 24-34 as a Test Case," found in Bieringer, pp. 452-453. 2 9 3 Examples found in Esler, "Conflict," pp. 178-179. 70 rebuked by Jesus (8.39-41a). Jesus then claims that Abraham rejoiced at the sight of him (8.56) and that "before Abraham ever was, I am" (8.58), placing himself above their claims to Abraham. 2 9 4 5.6 Covenant Based on Torah Central to the rabbinic movement of first century Judaism was the Torah and to a lesser extent, the other Jewish Scriptures. "Torah as given to Israel as part of God's covenant with Israel, obedience to the law of Moses as Israel's response to God's choice of Israel to be his people... as the way of l iving within the covenant maintaining and manifesting status as the people of Yahweh ." 2 9 5 The Torah of the Jews, according to Dunn, functioned as an identity marker, distinguishing hoi Ioudaioi from other ethnic groups. 2 9 6 With the publication o f Severino Pancaro's epic work in 1975, the importance of the Torah in the Gospel of John has been fully recognized. The Torah and the rest of the Jewish scriptures are used primarily in an apologetic manner to legitimize the following of Jesus as the Chris t . 2 9 8 In this way, This claim is most likely connected with The "Apocalypse of Abraham," chapters 29-31. Apocalypse of Abraham," R. Rubinkiewicz, (trans.), found in James H. Charlesworth, (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1. (New York: Doubleday, 1983), pp. 689-693. Lieu remarks that in certain of the Dead Sea Scrolls, kinship identity has been changed, hence there is no longer any interest in Abraham, "Christian Identity," p. 114. 2 9 5 E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, pp. 75, 180, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 24. 2 9 6 W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), p. 97 cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 26. 2 9 7 Severino Pancaro. The Law in the Fourth Gospel. Leiden: Brill, 1975. 2 9 8 Pancaro, p. 501, several of the most important uses are focussed on the rejecting the 'false prophet motif of Deuteronomy 13 and 18, Motyer, "Father," p. 42; Menken, "Scriptural," pp. 449-452. The status of the Law of Moses and the prophetic writings found in certain Jewish scriptures is viewed often in an odd light in this Gospel. Part of this may be explained through the multi-stage hypothesis. For instance, in one verse of John, 1.17 the Law is not given by Moses, but through Moses, although in 7.19 it is stated that Moses did give the Law. John says that the Law foretold the coming of the Messiah (1.45) in this way it is positive but then hoi Ioudaioi also invoke the Law as a reason that Jesus must die (19.7). The Torah was still very important to the community in stage one, when they were still a part of the Synagogues. In stage two however, after they had been expelled from the synagogues they responded with their replacement motif. While in 9.28, the disciples of Jesus are contrasted with the disciples of Moses, what this refers to though is John's disdain for the notion of the centrality of the Law. The Law belongs to hoi Ioudaioi (8.17; 10.34; 15.25) but it has been superseded by the coming of Jesus Christ (1.17). 71 the Torah is interpreted in a manner that supports the claims of the Johannine Community. This is similar to the famous line of Matthew 5.17; "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete them." 2 9 9 The conflicts in the Gospel are often focussed on what is the "correct" way to interpret the Jewish Scriptures. 3 0 0 What is very interesting is that some of the Johannine Jesus' claims challenged certain Jewish interpretations of Scripture. Jesus states in 1.18 and 5.37 that the Jews have never heard the voice of God nor seen his shape which challenges the Jewish claims of Moses and Enoch (Exodus 33.23; Genesis 5.22, 24; Sirach 17.13-14; I Enoch 46.1). Hoi Ioudaioi are viewed as those who are so ignorant of their own scriptures that they can not understand the Sinai revelation (5.37), and can not keep their own Law (7.19). The authority of Moses and Abraham is belittled; they are shown, as inferior to Jesus, like their Law. This denigration suggests that anyone who continues to follow this path after the coming of Jesus is blind and therefore can not adequately ever see the truth. It is only through belief in Jesus as the Messiah (which a Ioudaios w i l l not do) that a Ioudaios w i l l be able to perceive the 'true' meaning of the Scriptures, as outlined by the Johannine Community. 3 0 2 John's Jesus quotes scripture in his arguments with the Jews (6.45; 7.38; 8.17; 10.34), he defends himself by alluding to L a w (7.22-23). Contrasting with Jesus' use of Scripture, hoi Ioudaioi, also made use of these texts, quoting it in 6.31 and alluding to it 2 9 9 Smith, "Judaism," p. 77. 3 0 0 Menken, p. 445-446. 3 0 1 Freyne, "Vilifying," pp. 125-126. 3 0 2 Lieu, p. 42. 72 in 7.42 and 12.34 to "prove" that Jesus can not be who he says he was. Because o f Jesus' claims to be the son of God the Jews sought to k i l l him through an interpretation of their L a w (19.38, possibly using Lev. 24.16). 3 0 3 While the Torah, including the prophets of hoi Ioudaioi is often used in this Gospel to 'prove' that the interpretation by the Johannine Community is 'the truth,' the Torah is often viewed as being superceded by Jesus. Both the Community and hoi Ioudaioi revered the Jewish scriptures but they differed significantly on the interpretation and belief of who Jesus was and whom he represented. 3 0 4 5.7 Markers of the Covenant Found within Torah Both Jewish and Gentile sources discuss religious customs of hoi Ioudaioi as a form of social identification. Among the customs discussed are circumcision, 3 0 5 dietary laws and Sabbath observance. In the Gospel o f John these are not viewed as important. Circumcision is mentioned only once, in 7.22-23 as something that hoi Ioudaioi do, which seems to suggest that the Community no longer practiced this. Dietary laws are not alluded to at all and while Sabbath observance (maybe non-observance would be a better term) is mentioned, this practice is not integral to the argument that Jesus had deified himself (6.1 Of; 9.14; 7.19ff). 3 0 8 According to Dunn, by the time of the completion of the Gospel, the Community had turned away from a central tenet of Judaism. Instead of viewing the Torah as the path to understanding God and remaining in covenant with him, they instead viewed 3 0 3 Menken, p. 446. 3 0 4 Brown, "Introduction," p. 169. 3 0 5 Genesis 17.9-14; Petronius, "Satyricon" 102.14; Fragmenta 37; Tacitus, "History." 5.5.2; Juvenal, "Satire" 14.99, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 29. 3 0 6 Lev. 11.1-23; Deut. 14.3-21:1 Maccabees 1.62-63; Plutarch "Quaest. Conviv" 4.5, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 30. 73 Jesus as the revelation of God (6.39; 10.29; 15.19; 17.6, 8, 9, 12, 24; 18.9), for whoever sees Jesus, sees God (12.45; 14.9). 3 0 9 Charlesworth states that the Johannine claim that there is only one way to God but instead of through Torah, it is through belief that a convicted and executed criminal was the chosen one of God, would be considered anathema by many first century Jews. For this belief would imply that God had broken the covenant with them. 3 1 0 Unlike a Jewish Christian community such as the one that penned Matthew, the Community of John does not suggest itself as an alternative branch of Judaism, that is to say a Judaism that followed the Messiah Jesus. Instead, a primary motive for the writing of the Gospel of John is to portray this alternative reading of Scripture as the correct way. From the viewpoint of the local synagogue officials, the Community's rejection of the 311 centrality of Torah, cuts itself off from the proper understanding o f the Law. 5.8 Covenant based on the Temple In the pre-70 C . E . period, the Temple of Judea was a religious, political and economic nexus. But overshadowing these last two meanings, and continuing its importance even after its destruction, was its religious connotations (I Kings 8.48; 9.3; Psalm 76.1-2; 87.1-3; Isaiah 49.14-16; Ezekiel 43.6-7; Sirach 36.18-19). 3 1 2 "The Torah made [the] Temple, the pivot and focus... The life of Israel flowed from the altar; what made Israel was the center, the altar." 3 0 7 Exodus 31.16-14; Deuteronomy 5.15; Josephus "Against Apion" 2.282, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 30. 3 0 8 Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 123. 3 0 9 Dunn, "Embarrasment," found in Bieringer, et al, p. 55. 3 1 0 Charlesworth, "Exclusivism," p. 508, also see P.O'Hare, The Enduring Covenant. (Valley Forge: 1997). 3 1 1 Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 124. 3 1 2 Dunn, "Parting," pp. 32-33. 3 1 3 Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green, Ernest S. Frerichs, (eds.), Judaisms and their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 74, cited in Dunn, 74 In John, Dunn maintains that Jesus has a positive attitude towards the Temple as both the Temple and its subsequent feasts and festivals are mentioned repeatedly as he went there on pilgrimages. 3 1 4 Motyer disagrees, stating that in the Fourth Gospel, the cleansing of the Temple episode occurs at the beginning of the Gospel, not at its end. The reason for this is so that the readers can understand that the true significance o f both the Temple and the festivals is in Jesus, not in the Temple. 3 1 5 While the Gospel of John does state that Jesus went to the Temple and attended the festivals of the Jews, Raymond Brown believes that the "Temple' should be viewed in a two-level reading to refer to the synagogue from which the Johannine Community was expelled f rom. 3 1 6 In this way, for the aposunagogoi neither the "Temple" (synagogue) nor its feasts and festivals are relevant for the Community. For in the post-Temple period, the Community believed that they received guidance from the Spirit "Parting," p. 34. Was the Temple central to all forms of Judaism in the Second Temple period? Groups such as the Essenes withdrew from the influence of the Temple cult. Although Geza Vermes maintains that the Essenes fundamental argument was less with the Temple itself, but was concentrated more on their understanding that the Temple had become defiled through the false priesthood of the Hasmoneans, G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective. (London: Collins, 1977), pp. 181-182; The Dead Sea Scrolls in English. (London: Penguin, 1987), pp. 50-51, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34. While Josephus may refer to the Temple in Jerusalem as 'one Temple for the one God' "Against Apion 2.193 other Temples did exist, most notably at Elephantine and Leontopolis in Egypt (Jewish War 7.420-36; Ant. 13.62-73. Dunn maintains that the temple in Leontopolis was formed from the same schism of which the Essenes withdrew, C.T.R. Hayward, "The Jewish Temple at Leontopolis: A Reconsideration," Journal of Jewish Studies, 33, 1982, pp. 429-443, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34. 3 1 4 Dunn, "Parting," p. 37. 3 1 5 Following Jesus' identification with the Temple (2.19) Jesus is viewed as the 'true' meaning of the "Sabbath (chapter 5) the Passover (chapter 6) Tabernacles (chapters 7-10) and the feast of Dedication (chapters 10-12)." Stephen Motyer, "The Fourth Gospel and the Salvation of Israel: An Appeal for a New Start," found in Bieringer, p. 98. 92-110 3 1 6 Brown, "Gospel," l.lxx-lxxv, Motyer disagrees with this statement saying that most historical and social-science commentators often disregard the importance of the Temple in the Johannine self-identity, Jerome Neyrey's An Ideology of Revolt: John's Christology in Social-Science Perspective. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), D. Bruce Woll, Johannine Christianity in Conflict: Authority, Rank and Succession in the First Farewell Discourse. SBLDS, 60. (Chico: Scholars, 1981), Rodney A. Whitacre, Johannine Polemic. The Role of Tradition and Theology. SBLDS 67. (Chico: Scholars, 1982), Raymond Brown, "Gospel, 1, p. lxxiv barely discusses this theme as cited in Motyer, "Father," p. 37. Malina and Rohrbaugh in their commentary also do not comment on the situations in any great length. Motyer disagrees with the assessment that the "temple" refers to the synagogue of the Johannine Community and argues that the Temple refers to the Temple, Motyer, p. 38. 75 (14.16-17) and that their worship was to be in spirit and truth (4.24). In this way, John's Jesus was symbolically shown to be "the light, the bread, the lamb, the way, the source o f l iving water, [in this way] the fulfillment not merely of the temple but of the feasts associated with it." In this manner, the replacement o f the Temple and the festivals with Jesus was a defensive self-assertion 3 1 8 for those Christians who left the synagogue to join the Community . 3 1 9 5.9 Conclusions There is scholarly consensus that an expulsion from the sunagoge in the first century C .E . would have a profound impact on the members of the Community's personal identity as well as their social identity. 3 2 0 From the perspective o f the Community, they were cut away from the embracing arms o f their mother community and thus reacted in a way that legitimated their own separate existence. Therefore, their self-identity was formed through the negative portrayal of those who had expelled them. 3 2 1 These measures can be explained as the reason why in the Gospel there is so much dualistic imagery used, with the positive sign associated with the Community and the negative with hoi Ioudaioi 3 2 2 The high Christology of Jesus which was created in 3 1 7 John. 6 = Passover; 7-8= Tabernacles; 10.22-39 = Dedication, .Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 23. 3 1 8 Gale Yee, Jewish Feasts and the Gospel of John. (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989), p. 25f, cited in Motyer, p. 37. 3 1 9 Brown, "Gospel," p. lxxv. 3 2 0 A personal identity is "a function of genetically transmitted and familially conditioned variations that distinguish one individual from another," [whereas a social identity is] the knowledge of one's membership in a social group, together with the value and significance that is attached to this membership, Hall, "Ethnic," p. 30; also see Philip F. Esler, "Jesus and the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict," found in Wolfgang Stegemann, Bruce J. Malina, Gerd Theissen, (eds.), The Social Setting of Jesus and the Gospels. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002), p. 186; Malina, "New Testament," p. 62 3 2 1 Reinhartz, "'The Jews'" p. 355. 3 2 2 And to a lesser extent to the kosmos, the social world where the ethnic groups competed for honour, Freyne, "Villifying," p. 118. 76 this period was one facet of the denigration and replacement of the ethnic markers of the Jews, among these are 'the four pillars of Judaism' as outlined by James Dunn. I maintain that from the viewpoint of the Community, they were cut off from 'Judaism,' expelled from their local synagogue and they responded by severing the ties to this ethnicity as viewed through their work, the Gospel of John. However, certain scholars disagree with this assessment because of two verses in chapter four o f this Gospel, these verses I believe interpreted correctly conclusively prove that the Community viewed itself as a group outside of the ethnic group of hoi Ioudaioi. In the Gospel of John, the first person who is specifically identified as a Ioudaios is Jesus (4.9). This is the only time in the Gospel when Jesus or one of his disciples is labeled in such a manner. 3 2 3 What is more, later in this chapter, Jesus, while in conversation with a Samaritan woman says to her che soteria ek ton loudaiov estin,' which has usually been translated as 'salvation is of/from the Jews . ' 3 2 4 This translation has been interpreted traditionally in wholly positive terms. Peter Tomson states that "Jesus emphatically welcomes this appellation (4.9)." 3 2 5 While David Rensberger and Sean Freyne accept that with this statement, Jesus (and by extension the Malina, Rohrbaugh, p. 99. 3 2 4 John 4.22 New Jerusalem Bible, New Revised Standard Version, Society of Biblical Literature. (London: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1989); "King James Version," found in Edward E. Hindson, Woodrow Michael Kroll, (eds.). The KJVParallel Bible Commentary. (London: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1994); Lowe, pp. 124-125. 3 2 5 Peter J. Tomson, "The names Israel and Jew in Ancient Judaism and in the New Testament,"Bijdragen, 47 no 3 1986, p. 281, found in Harvey, p. 89. While Rudolf Bultmann interpreted this verse as an editorial gloss, "Gospefp. 189, other commentators disagree among them Brown, "Gospel," I, p. 172 and Schnackenburg, "John,' I, p. 436. Robert Kysar maintains that both John 4.9 and 4.22 were written when the Community was still part of the synagogue, although he admits that this interpretation has gained little support, Kysar, "Anti-Semitism," p. 123, ibid n. 28. 77 Community) is affirming his self-identity from within Judaism, despite that this 327 interpretation is at odds with the message of the rest of the Gospel. Other scholars have correctly identified that the traditional translation has been a misnomer. First, the designation of Jesus as a Ioudaios comes from a Samaritan woman from whom Jesus asks for a drink of water. From her perspective the term Ioudaios would have carried derogatory implications, as these two ethnic groups did not traditionally m i x . 3 2 8 Jesus does not explicitly state that he is not a Ioudaios but his actions speak for this as he does associate with her. Furthermore, Jesus identifies himself as representing a separate group from the ethnic groups of the Samaritans and the Jews. This is shown in a passage that I have translated in what I believe was the intention of the authors of John. The woman says: Our (Samaritans) fathers worshipped on this mountain,329 though you (Ioudaioi) say that Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship. Jesus said, believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you (Sarnaritans/Toudb/oi) will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You (Samaritans//o«<3l3/o/) worship what you do not know; we (Johannine Community) worship what we do know; for salvation has left the Ioudaioi (4.20- 22). The correct understanding of this verse hinges on the interpretation of preposition ek. The primary translation of this preposition is "out of, motion away from," 3 3 0 and in this translation occurs in 30% of its uses in the Gospel of John. 3 3 1 While it can have other meanings such as " o f meaning "inclusion in , " the translation of this preposition in any David Rensberger, "Anti-Judaism and the Gospel of John," found in William R. Farmer, Anti-Judaism • and the Gospels. OTarrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999), p. 127 (120-157); Freyne, "Vilifying," p. 128, see also Motyer, ""Fourth," p. 105. 3 2 7 Especially 8.44 where the Johannine Jesus calls hoi Ioudaioi 'sons of the Devil.' Like myself Graham Harvey feels that the positive affirmation of this verse is based on faulty translation. 3 2 8 They did not associate publicly with one another if it could be helped and it was considered a transgression of Jewish purity laws to share utensils or in this case a water jug, Arndt, Gingrich, p. 783, Malina, Rohrbaugh, p. 99. 3 2 9 The Samaritan Temple was on Mt. Gerizem, Myers, p. 412. 3 3 0 Liddell, p. 234, Arndt, Gingrich, 23 3. 78 manner other than "out of, motion away from" conflicts with the understanding of Ioudaioiinthis Gospel. Both the Samaritan woman's question and Jesus' answer use the second person plural. This mention of "you" in the plural who w i l l not worship in Jerusalem can hardly be connected with the singular Samaritan. Instead this sentence must be directed towards a plural perceived audience, which I have interpreted as both Samaritan and Jewish. A s ignorance is attributed to the Jews in other places in the Gospel (3.10; 12.35, etc), this interpretation should not be surprising. This explanation can also be viewed as valid because of Jesus' words that "the hour is coming-indeed is already here-when true worshippers w i l l worship the Father in spirit and truth" (4.22-23). 3 3 2 This again indicates that neither the Samaritans nor the Judeans were worshiping the Father in the manner chosen as 'correct' by the Johannine Community. 3 3 1 Thirty-six out of one hundred and twenty uses of this preposition, not counting when it is used in conjunction with other words. John 1.32; 2.22; 3.13, 14, 27; 4.12, 22, 39; 5.24, 27; 6.31, 32, 33, 41, 42, 50, 51, 53, 58, 62; 64, 65; 7.17, 22; 8.28, 42, 59; 11.19; 12.2, 28, 32; 13.21,31; 17.6; 20.9; 21.14. 3 3 2 This verse may be alluding to John 1.13 and 3.5 which discuss the creation of the'children of God' asa designation for the Community. Collins states that in the Prologue of John, the Logos is stated to have walked among "us." He believes that this first person plural is referring to the Johannine Community and can be linked with the first person plural of 4.22, Collins, "Speaking," found in Bieringer, p. 287. 79 6 Conclusions This thesis has sought to understand the correct translation of the term hoi Ioudaioi as it is used in the Gospel of John through a historical and social-science interpretation. The traditional translation of "the Jews" has been criticized in recent years for several reasons. One is that this term has been used by anti-Semites to promote hatred of this ethnic group, culminating in the Holocaust. Others believe that the translation "the Jews" is limiting as this refers primarily to the religion of this group. I disagree with this and conclude that the understanding of the term hoi Ioudaioi is best understood as those members of the local ethnic group of the Jews who were hostile to the conception of Jesus as the Messiah from the perspective of the aposunagogoi, the Johannine Community. These expelled members (as well as Samaritans and Gentiles who joined them later) formed their own social identity through the replacement of the ethnic identity markers of the Jews. In chapter two, I discussed the proper understanding o f the term "ethnicity" and how this affects one's understanding of the term Ioudaios in the ancient world. M y studies concentrated on the understanding of the term hoi Ioudaioi in the contemporary literature leading up to and including the first century C . E . M y conclusions to this chapter are that both religious customs and geographical origins should not be considered as defining aspects of ethnicity, however, "proper" religious thought can portray membership within an ethnic group. In chapter three, I discussed the three main translations of the term hoi Ioudaioi in current scholarship. I concluded that translating 'the Jews' as regional, authorities or as 8 0 members of the religion of Judaism is limited. These translations suffer from a proper comprehension of ethnicity. While Brown and Dunn's belief that the term should be viewed as religio-ethnic comes closest to the truth, ultimately it too is limited in its understanding. Chapter four focussed upon the theories of the composition of the Gospel of John and the formation of the Community that penned it through expulsion from the local synagogue. According to the Gospel itself, something drastic happened between the local communities, although the exact details are not forthcoming. J.L. Martyn's theory that it was the Birkhat Ha-minin I feel must be rejected, however, I do think that the expulsion of the Community from the synagogue is connected to a local synagogue 'ban' a cherem. Chapter five states that whatever form the expulsion did occur in, this shattered the social reality of the Johannine Community and in their search for self-identification they attacked their former ethnic markers. With the rejection of hoi Ioudaioi, and with the understanding that 'salvation has left the Jews,' the new Community formed its own social-identity based on non-ethnic identification markers. 81 Bibliography Allen, E. L. "The Jewish Christian Church in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 74, 1955, pp. 88-92, cited in Brown, "Introduction," p. 174. Alexander, Philip S. '"The Parting of the Ways,'" found in Dunn, "Jews and Christians," pp. 1-17. Alon, G. Mehqarim be-Toledto Yisra'ell, 1957, p. 192, cited in Kimelman, p. 227. Arndt, William F., F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957. Ashton, John. "The Identity and Function of the IOUDAIOI in the Fourth Gospel," Novum Testamentum, 28, 1, 1985, pp. 40-75. Ashton, John. Understanding the Fourth Gospel. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. "The Ban in the Old Testament and at Mari," Biblical Archaeologist, 47, June, 1984, p. 103. Baron, S.W. A Social and Religious History of the Jews, vol. II, 1952, p. 135, cited in Kimelman, p. 252. Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to St. John. Second edition. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978. Bartlett, John R. (ed.). Jews in the Hellenistic and Roman Cities. London: Routledge, 2002. Barton, Stephen C. "The Relativisation of Family Ties in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman Traditions," in Havlor Moxnes, Constructing Early Christian Families: Family as Social Reality and Metaphor. London Routledge, 1997, pp. 81-100. Bassler, Jouette M. "The Galileans: A Neglected Factor in Johannine Community Research, " Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43, 1981, pp. 243-257. Bickerman, Elias Joseph. The Jews in the Greek Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988, Bieringer, Reimund Didier Pollefeyt, Frederique, Vandercasteele-Vanneuville (eds.). Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel: Papers of the Leuven Colloquim, 2000. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2001. Bobak, Gideon. "Ethnic Continuity in the Jewish Diaspora in Antiquity," found in John R. Bartlett, (ed.), Jews in the Hellenistic and Roman Cities. London: Routledge, 2002, pp. 175-192. Boismard, M.E. Moses or Jesus: An Essay in Johannine Christology. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. Borgen, P. Breadfrom Heaven: An Exegetical Study of the Concept of Manna in the Gospel of John. Leiden. Brill, 1997. Brenton, Sir Lancelot C.L. The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. Tenth edition. Peabody: Hendrikson Publishing, 2003. Brown, F., S. Driver, C. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. "Peabody: Hendrikson Publishing, 2004. Brown, R E . The Death of the Messiah. 2 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1994. Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John, vol. 1. New York: Doubleday, 1966. 82 . An Introduction to the Gospel of John. Edited by Francis J. Moloney. New York: Doubleday, 2003. Buell, Denise Kimber. "Race and Universalism in Early Christianity," Journal of Early Christian Studies, 10, 2002, pp. 429-468. Buell, Denise Kimber. "Rethinking the Relevance of Race for Early Christian Self-Definition," Harvard Theological Review, 94, 2000, pp. 444-476. Bultmann, R. The Gospel of John. G.R. Beasley-Mureray (trans., ed.) R.W.N. Hoare, J.K. Riches (trans). Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971. Butler, B.C. "The Literary Relations of Didache, Ch. XVI," Journal of Theological Studies, 11, 1960, pp. 275-276, cited in Pardee, p. 157, n. 3. Cassius Dio "Roman History," 66.1, found in T.E. Page, W.H.D. Rouse, (ed.), Dio's Roman History, vol. 4. The Loeb Classical Library. New York: Macmillan Co., 1914. Charlesworth, James H. "The Gospel of John: Exclusivism Caused by a Social Setting Different from that of Jesus (John 11.54 and 14.6),"found inBieringer et al, pp. 479-513. . (ed.), Jews and Christians: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future. New York: Crossroad, 1990. . (ed). The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vols. 1-2. New York: Doubleday, 1983, 1985. Chrysostom John. "Discourses" 1.4.6; 2.3.4, cited in R.L. Wilken, Judaism and the Early Christian Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971, p. 19. Cohen, S.J.D. "The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis and the End of Jewish Sectarianism," Hebrew Union College Annual, 55, 1984, 27-53. Cohen, Shaye J.D. The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Collins, Raymond F. "Speaking of the Jews: 'Jews' in the Discourse Material of the Fourth Gospel," found in Bierenger et al, pp. 281-300. Cook, "J.J. The Gospel of John and the Jews," Review and Expositor, 84, 1987, pp. 257-271. Culpepper, R.A. "The Gospel of John and the Jews," Review and Expositor, 84, 1987, pp. 273-288. Culpepper, R. Alan. Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983. . John, the Son of Zebedee: The Life of a Legend. (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994. Culpepper, R. Alan, Clifton Black, (eds.), Exploring the Gospel of John. In Honor of D. Moody Smith. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. Davies, Alan T. (ed.). Antisemitism and the Foundations of Christianity. New York: Paulist Press, 1979, 83 cited in Kimelman, p. 397, n. 39. Davies, Margaret. Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel. JSNT Sup., 69. Sheffield: Journaffor the . Study of the Old Testament Press, 1992. Davies W.D. "Aspects of the Jewish Background of the Gospel of John," found in R. Alan Culpepper, C. Clifton Black, (eds.), Exploring the Gospel of John. In Honor of D. Moody Smith. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996, p. 43-64. Davies W.D. The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount. Cambridge: University Press, 1966. de Boer, M.C. "The Depiction of'the Jews' in John's Gospel: Matters of Behaviour and Identity," found in Bieringer et al, pp. 260-280. de Boer, Martin. "Narrative Criticism: Historical Criticism, and the Gospel of John, Journal for the Study of the New Testament," 47, 1992, pp. 25-48. de Jonge, M. Jesus: Stranger from Heaven and Son of God: Jesus Christ and the Christian in Johannine Perspective. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977. de Jonge, Marinus. "The Conflict Between Jesus and the Jews and the Radical Christology of the Fourth Gospel," Perspectives in Religious Studies, 20, Wint, 1993, pp. 341-355. . "Jewish Expectations about the 'Messiah' According to the Fourth Gospel," New TestamentStudies,\9, 1972-73, pp. 246-270. de vos, G. A., L. Romanucci-Ross, "Ethnic Identity: A Psychocultural Perspective," in L. Romanucci-Ross, G. De Vos (eds), Ethnic Identity: Creation, Conflict and Accommodation, pp. 349-379. Dunn, James D.G. "The Embarrassment of History: Reflections on the Problem of 'Anti-Judaism' in the Fourth Gospel," found in Bieringer, pp. 47-67. . The Parting of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and their Significance for the Character of Christianity. London: SCM Press, 1991. . "The Question of Anti-Semitism in the New Testament," found in James D.G. Dunn, (ed.), Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992. Esler Philip F. Conflict and Identity in Romans: The Social Setting of Paul's Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003. . The First Christians in Their Social Worlds: Social-Scientific Approaches to New Testament Interpretation. New York: Routledge, 1994. . "Jesus and the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict," found in Wolfgang Stegemann, Bruce J. Malina, Gerd Theissen, (eds.), The Social Setting of Jesus and the Gospels. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002, pp. 185-205 . "Palestinian Judaism in the First Century," found in Dan Cohn-Sherbok, John M. Court, (eds.), Religious Diversity in the Graeco-Roman World: A Survey or Recent Scholarship. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001, pp. 21-46. Evans, Craig A., Peter W. Flint, (eds). Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997. 84 Feldman Louis H., Meyer Reinhold, Jewish life and thought among Greeks and Romans: Primary Readings. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. Fishman, Joshua A. Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd., 1989. Fortna, R. T. The Gospel of Signs: A Reconstruction of the Narrative Source Underlying the Fourth Gospel. (SNTSMS, 11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Fortna, R.T. "Theological Use of Locale in the Fourth Gospel, Anglican Theological Review. Supplementary Series 3: Gospel Studies in Honor of Sherman Elbridge Johnson, 1974, pp. 58-95. Free, K.B. (ed). The Formulation of Christianity by Conflict through the Ages. Lewiston. Edward Mellen Press, 1995. Frend, W.H.C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 1965, p. 179, cited in Kimelman, p. 227. Freyne, Sean. "Vilifying the Other and Defining the Self: Matthew's and John's Anti-Jewish Polemic in Focus," found in Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frereichs, (eds). "To See Ourselves As Others See Us:" Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity. Chico. Scholars Press, 1985, pp. 117-143. Friedlander, Moritz. Der vorchristliche judische gnostizismus. Gottingen, 1898, cited in Setzer, p. 90. Gangloff, Frederic. "Joshua 6: Holy War or Extermination by Divine Command," Theological Review, 25, no. 1, 2004, pp. 3-23. Geertz, Clifford. "The Integrative Revolution: Primordial Sentiments and Civil Politics in the New States," 1963, pp. 105-107, cited in Esler, "Conflict," p. 45. Goodman, L.E. Monotheism. London: Osmun & Co., 1981. Gutbrod, W. "Ioudaios, Israel, Hebrew in Greek Hellenistic Literature," found in Gerhard Kittel, (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 3, eighth edition. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978, pp.369-371. Hall, Jonathan M. Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. . Hellenicity: Between Ethnicity and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Harvey, Graham. The True Israel: Uses of the Names Jew, Hebrew and Israel in Ancient Jewish and Early Christian Literature. New York: E.J. Brill, 1996. Hayward, C.T.R. "The Jewish Temple at Leontopolis: A Reconsideration," Journal of Jewish Studies, 33, 1982, pp. 429-443, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34. Heinemann, J. Prayer in the Talmud. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977. Hengel, Martin. The Johannine Question, London: SCM Press, 1989. Herford, R. Travers. Christianity in Talmud andMidrash. London; Oxford Publishing Company, 1903. Hoffman, Yair. "The Deuteronomistic Concept of the Herem," Zeitschrift Fure Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 111, no. 2, pp. 196-210. Horbury, W. "The Benediction of the Minim and Early Jewish-Christian Controversy," Journal of 85 Theological Studies, 3 8, 1982, pp. 19-61. Hunzinger, C.H. Die judische Bannpraxis im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter. Diss: Gottingen, 1954, pp. 65ff cited in Martyn, "History," p. 44. Hutchinson, John, Anthony D. Smith, "Introduction" John Hutchinson and Smith (eds.), Ethnicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 6-7, cited in Esler, "Conflict,"pp. 43-44. Janowitz, Naomi. "Re-thinking Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity," found in Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex, (eds.), Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity. London: Duckworth: 2000, pp. 205-219. Justin Martyr, "The Dialogue With Trypho," 80, found in Thomas B. Falls, (trans), Writings of Saint Justin Martyr. The Fathers of the Church Series. New York: Christian Heritage, Inc., 1948. Katz, Stephen T. "Issues in the Separation of Judaism and Christianity after 70 C.E: A Reconsideration," Journal of Biblical Literature, 103, 1984, pp. 43-76. Kee, Howard Clark. "The Transformation of the Synagogue After 70 C.E.: Its Import for Early Christianity," New Testament Studies, 36, 1990, pp. 1-24. Ker, Walter C. A. (trans.), Martial. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961. Kimelman, Reuven. "Birkat Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity," found in E.P. Sanders, (ed), Jewish and Christian Self-Definition, vol. II. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981, pp. 226-244. "King James Version," found in Edward E. Hindson, Woodrow Michael Kroll, (eds.). The KJVParallel Bible Commentary. London: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1994. Kraabel, A.T. "Paganism and Judaism: The Sardis Evidence," in Andre Benoit et al., eds., Pagaisme, Judaisme, Christianisme ...Melanges ojferts a Marcel Simon. Paris: Boccard, 1978, pp. 13-33. Kraemer, Ross S. "On the Meaning of the Term "Jew" in Greco-Roman Inscriptions," Harvard Theological Review, 82, no. 1, 1989, pp. 35-63: Krauss, S. "The Jews in the Works of the Church Fathers," Jewish Quarterly Review, 5, 1892-93, pp. 130ff Kuhn, K.G. Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 1950, pp. 18ff, cited in Kimelman, p. 232. Kysar, R. "The Promises and Perils of Preaching on the Gospel of John," Dialog, 19, 1980, pp. 214-220. Kysar, Robert. "Anti-Semitism and the Gospel of John," cited in Craig A. Evans, Donald A. Hagner, Anti-Semitism andEarly Christianity; Issues of Polemic and Faith. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993, pp. 113-127. Leberecht Strack Hermann, Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud undMidrasch. Munich : C H Beck, 1961, vol. IV, pp. 329f, cited in Martyn, "History," p. 44. Levine, Lee I. "The Nature and Origin of the Palestinian Synagogue Reconsidered," Journal of Biblical Literatur, 115, 1996, pp. 425-448. Liddell, H.G. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Seventh edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Lieu, Judith M. Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 86 Lighfoot, R. H. Locality and Doctrine in the Gospels. London : Harper and Brothers, 1938. Lowe, Malcolm. "Who Were the IOUDAIOI?," Novum Testamentum, 18, 1976, pp. 101-130. Luther, Martin. "On the Jews and Their Lies," cited in Franklin Sherman (ed.), Luther's Works, vol. 47. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971, pp. 141, 172, 268-272. Malina, Bruce J. "Early Christian Groups: Using Small Group Formation Theory to Explain Christian Organizations," found in Philip F. Esler, (ed.), Modelling Early Christianity: Social-Scientific Studies of the New Testament in its Context. London: Routledge, 1995. . The New Testament World: Insight from Cultural Anthropology. Third edition. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. . The Palestinian Manna Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 1968. . The Social World of Jesus and the Gospels. London: Routledge, 1996. . Windows on the World of Jesus: Time Travel to Ancient Judea. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993. Malina, Bruce J. Richard L. Rohrbaugh. Social Science Commentary of the Gospel of John. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998. Martyn, J.L. Gospel of John in Christian History. Toronto: Paulist Press, 1979. . History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. Nashville: Abingdon, 1968. Martyn, J. Louis "A Gentile Mission that Replaced an Earlier Jewish Mission?" found in R. Alan Culpepper, C. Clifton Black, Exploring the Gospel of John: In Honor of D. Moody Smith. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996, pp. 124-144. Martyn, J. Louis. History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel. Revised edition. Nashville: Abingdon, 1979 (1968). Meeks, W. A. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983, p. 97 cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 26. . "The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism." Journal of Biblical Literature, 91, 1972, pp. 44-72. Meeks, Wayne A. "Am I a Jew? Johannine Christianity and Judaism" found in Jacob Neusner, (ed.). Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity. Leiden, Brill, 1975, pp. 163-185. . "Breaking Away: Three New Testament Pictures of Christianity's Separation from the Jewish Communities," found in Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frereichs, (eds). "To See Ourselves As Others See Us:" Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity. Chico: Scholars Press, 1985, pp. 93-115. ' . "Galilee and Judea in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 85, 1966, pp. 159-169 Menken, Maarten J.J. "Scriptural Dispute Between Jews and Christians in John: Literary Fiction or Historical Reality? John 9.13-17, 24-34 as a Test Case," found in Bieringer, pp. 445-460. 87 Moore, Carey A. Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah. New York; Anchor Books, 1977, pp. 28-29, 77-92, cited in Cohen, "Beginnings," p. 85 Motyer, Stephen. Your Father the Devil: A New Approach to John and 'the Jews.' Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1997. . "The Fourth Gospel and the Salvation of Israel: An Appeal for a New Start," found in Bieringer, pp. 92-110 Moxnes, Havlor. "What is Family? Problems in Constructing Early Christian Families," found in Havlor Moxnes, (ed.). Constructing Early Christian Families: Family as Social Reality and Metaphor. New York: Routledge, 1997, pp. 15-41. Neufeld, Dietmar. '"And When that One Cometh": Aspects of Johannine Messianism," found in Craig A. Evans, Peter W. Flint, (eds.). Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997, pp. 120-140. Neusner, Jacob, Ernest S. Frereichs, (eds). "To See Ourselves As Others See Us:" Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity. Chico: Scholars Press, 1985. Neusner, Jacob, William Scott Green, Ernest S. Frerichs, (eds.j, Judaisms and their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987, p. 74, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34 New Jerusalem Bible. Toronto: Doubleday, 1999. New Revised Standard Version. Society of Biblical Literature. London: HarperCollinsPublishers, 1989. Neyrey Jerome. An Ideology of Revolt: John's Christology in Social-Science Perspective. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988, cited in Motyer, "Father," p. 37. O'Hare, P. The Enduring Covenant Valley Forge: 1997. Olster, D.M.. "Classical Ethnography and Early Christianity," in K.B. Free (ed.), The Formulation of Christianity by Conflict through the Ages. Lewiston, Edward Mellen Press, 1995, pp. 9-31 Osiek Carolyn, David L. Balch, Families in the New Testament World: Households and House Churches. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997. Pancaro, Severino. The Law in the Fourth Gospel. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Painter, John. "John 9 and the interpretation of the Fourth Gospel," Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 28, O, 1986. Pardee, Nancy. "The Curse That Saves (Didache 16.5)," found in Clayton N. Jefford, (ed.), The Didache In Context: Essay on Its Text, History and Transmission. Supplements to Novum Testamentum, vol. 77. New York: E.J. Brill, 1995, pp. 155-176 Perrin, N. The New Testament: An Introduction, 1974, p. 230, cited in Kimelman, p. 391, n. 6. Pilch, John J. "Jews and Christians. Anachronisms in Bible Translations," in Professional Approaches for Christian Educators [PACE], 25, April, 1996, pp. 18-25. Rahlfs, Alfred. Septuaginta. Second edition. Stuttgart. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1975. Reed, Jonathan L. Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus: A Re-examination of the Evidence. Harrisburg: 88 Trinity Press International, 2000. Reinhartz, Adele. "The Johannine Community and its Jewish Neighbors: A Reappraisal," found in Fernando F. Segovia, (ed), "What is John? " Volume II, Literary and Social Readings of the Fourth Gospel. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, 7. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998. . "The Gospel of John: How "the Jews" Became Part of the Plot," found in Paula Fredriksen & Adele Reinhatz (eds.), Jesus, Judaism & Christian Anti-Judaism: Reading the New Testament after the Holocaust. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002, pp. 99-116. . '"Jews' and Jews in the Fourth Gospel," found in Bieringer et al, pp. 341-356. Renn, Stephen D. (ed), Expository Dictionary of Bible Words. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005. Rensberger, D. "The Politics of John: The Trial of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature, 103, 1984, pp. 395-411. Rensberger, David. "Anti-Judaism and the Gospel of John," found in William R. Farmer, Anti-Judaism and the Gospels. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999, pp. 120-157. Richardson, C C . Early Christian Fathers. New York, 1970), p. 179, n. 78, cited in Pardee, p. 157, n. 3. Rubinkiewicz, R. (trans.), found in James H. Charlesworth, (ed.). The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1. New York: Doubleday, 1983, pp. 689-693. Ruether, Rosemary Radford. Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism. New York: Crossroads, 1974. Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism, pp. 75, 180, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 24. Schafer, Peter. The History of the Jews in the Greco-Roman World, London: Routledge, 1983. Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Gospel According to St. John, vols. 1-3. New York: Crossroad Press, 1982. Schurer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135). Vol. II. Edinburgh : T & T Clark, 1979. Scobie, Charles H.H. "Johannine Geography," Studies in Religion, 11, no. 1, 1982, 77-84. Segal, Alan F. Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Sergovia, Fernando F. "The Love and Hatred of Jesus and Johannine Sectarianism," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43, 1981, pp. 258-272. . (ed.), "What is John? " Volume II, Literary and Social Readings of the Fourth Gospel. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, 7. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998. Setzer, Claudia J. Jewish Responses to Early Christians: History and Polemics, 30-150 C.E. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994. Shea, John. "Reflections on Ethnic Consciousness and Religious Language," found in Andrew M. Greeley, Gregory Baum, Ethnicity. Concilium, 101. New York: Crossroads Press, 1977), pp. 85-90. Simon, Marcel. Verus Israel: A Study of the Relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire 89 (135-425). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Smalley, S. John: Evangelist and Interpreter. Greenwood, S.C: Attic Press, 1978. Smiga, G.M. "Pain and Polemic: Anti Judaism in the Gospels." New York: Paulist Press, 1992, p. 137, cited in Reinhartz, "Community," p. 116. Smith, "D. Moody. "Johannine Christianity: Some Reflections on Its Character and Delineation," NTS, 21, 1974-1975, p. 246 (222-248), found in J. Louis Martyn, The Gospel of John in Christian History: Essays for Interpreters. New York: Paulist Press, 1978, pp. 222-248. Smith, D. Moody. "Judaism and the Gospel of John," found in J.H. Charlesworth, (ed.), Jews and Christians: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future. New York. Crossroad, 1990, pp. 76-97. Smith, Eliot R. Michael A. Zarate, "Exemplar and Prototype Use in Social Categorization," Social Cognition 8, 1990, p. 246 of 243-262, found in Esler, "Conflict," p. 172. Stern, David H. Jewish New Testament Commentary. Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1992. Stern, M. (ed.), Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1976. Stibbe, Mark W. G. Jesus as Storyteller: Narrative Criticism and the Fourth Gospel, SNTSMS vol. 73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Stroumsa, G. "Philosophy of the Barbarians: On Early Christian Ethnological Representations," in H. Cancik, H. Lichtenverger, P. Shafer (eds)., Geschichte, Tradition, Reflection: Festschrift fur Marting Hengel zum 70 Geburstag, 3 vol. Tubingen: Mohr, 1996, vol. 2, pp. 339-368. Tomson Teter J. If this be from Heaven...': Jesus and the New Testament Authors in their Relationship to Judaism. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. . '"Jews' in the Gospel of John as Compared with the Palestinian Talmud, the Synoptics and Some New Testament Apocrypha," found in Bieringer, et al., pp.301-340. . "The Names Israel and Jew in Ancient Judaism and in the New Testament," Bijdragen, 47 no 3 1986, p. 281, found in Harvey, p. 89. Townsend, J.T. "The Gospel of John and the Jews: The Story of a Religious Divorce," in Alan T. Davies, (ed.), Antisemitism and the Foundations of Christianity. New York: Paulist Press, 1979, pp. 72-97, cited in Kimelman, p. 394, n. 39. Urbach, E.E. "Self-Isolation or Self-Affirmation in Judaism in the First Three Centuries: Theory and Practice," JCSD, vol. 2, pp. 269-298, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 19. Van Belle's, Gilbert. The Signs Source in the Fourth Gospel: Historical Survey and Critical Evaluation of the Semeia Hypothesis. Leuven. Leuven University Press, 1994. Vermes, G. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Qumran in Perspective. London: Collins, 1977, pp. 181-182, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34. Vermes, Geza. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English. (London: Penguin, 1987), pp. 50-51, cited in Dunn, "Parting," p. 34. von Wahlde, U.C. The Earliest Version of John's Gospel. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989. 90 . "The Terms for Religious Authorities in the Fourth Gospel: A Key to Literary Strata?" JBL 98, 1979, pp. 231-253 cited in Ashton, "Understanding," p. 168. von Wahlde, Urban C. "Community in Conflict: The History and Social Context of the Johannine Community," Interpretation, 49, no. 4, Oct., 1995, pp. 379-389. . '"The Jews' in the Gospel of John. Fifteen Years of Research (1983-1998)," Ephmerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 76, 2000, pp. 30-55. . "The Johannine 'Jews': a Critical Survey. New Testament Studies, 28, 1982, pp. 33-60. Weber, Max. "Ethnic Groups," found in Guenther Roth, Claus Wittich, (eds.), Economy and Society, vol. 1. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978 [1922]), pp. 385-395. Wengst, K. Didache (ApostellehreJ—Barnabasbrief Zweiter Klemensbrief—Schrift an Diognet. Munchen, 1984, p. 99, n. 137 cited in Pardee, p. 157, n. 3. Whitacre, Rodney A. Johannine Polemic. The Role of Tradition and Theology. SBLDS 67. Chico: Scholars, 1982, cited in Motyer, p. 37. Wilken, R.L. Judaism and the Early Christian Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971. Williams, B.F. "A Class Act: Anthropology and the Race to Nation across Ethnic Terrain," Annual Review of Anthropology, 1989, 18, pp. 401-444. Wintermute, OS. (trans.), "Jubilees," 33.20 found in James H. Charlesworth, (ed.). The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2. New York: Doubleday, 1985, pp. 120. ( Woll, D. Bruce. Johannine Christianity in Conflict: Authority, Rank and Succession in the First Farewell Discourse. SBLDS, 60. Chico: Scholars, 1981, cited in Motyer, "Father," p. 37. Wright, R.B. (trans.), "Psalms of Solomon" 14.5, found in Charlesworth, (ed.), vol. 2, p. 663. Yee, Gale. Jewish Feasts and the Gospel of John. (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989), p. 25f, cited in Motyer, p. 37. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0092685/manifest

Comment

Related Items