When Jesus Gave Birth (Part 4)

April 12, 2013 — Leave a comment

This is part four in the series “When Jesus Gave Birth.”  You can find the introduction to the series here and the second and third parts here and here. 

How can the piercing of Jesus side and the flow of blood and water (John 19:34) have anything to do with the creation of Eve (Genesis 2:21-22)?  Didn’t God use one of Adam’s rib to form Eve?  There’s no mention of a rib in John 19.  Is there?

The verbal and circumstantial parallels between the piercing of Christ side (John 19:34) and the creation of Eve (Genesis 2:21-22) boils down to these:

1. Death as sleep. The piercing and flow follow the death of Jesus.  Genesis tells us that prior to taking Adam’s side to form the woman he caused Adam to go into a deep sleep (tardema).  Deep sleep is commonly used of a night’s sleep as in Job 14:13; 33:15 and Proverbs 19:15.  But here in Genesis 2:21-22 it is the same special work of God as when Abraham slept before the covenant with God (Genesis 15:12).  Since Jesus rises again, His death is likewise comparable to sleep.  Jesus makes the comparison between sleep and death explicit in John 11:11 before the resurrection of Lazarus.

2. Opened side.  While “rib” is a good rendering of what God took from Adam in Genesis 2 it is unnecessarily restrictive.  The Hebrew may refer to a rib but it more broadly means side.  Besides it use in Genesis 2, it is used in the Old Testament for the sides of objects, buildings and hills. Side was also in the minds of the Greek LXX translators when they rendered the Hebrew as pleura. The substance God uses to form the woman is found in the man’s side. John 19:34 and Genesis 2 also share the unique fact that plerua is in both instances is singular when it normally occurs in the plural.  It is the side (pleura singular) of Christ where John locates the piercing.  Just as God takes from Adam’s side (pluera singular) so the solider pierces Christ’s.

3. The Substance.  In Genesis God takes a part of Adam to fashion a helper just like him.  In a similar fashion, what flows from Jesus side is a representations of his two natures.  The blood stands for his flesh or humanity while the water His spirit and divinity.  You can somewhat see this in the standard views on the flow of blood and water reviewed in the second part to this series.  But I would also like to turn you attention to this post where I quote a work that delves a little more deeply into this issue.

These verbal and circumstantial parallels are by no means definitive.  With just a few similarities it’s clear how Brown and Stibbe could have dismissed it.  While the church fathers may have believed in such a connection this in no way proves that John intended it.

But strengthening the connection are the multiple themes in the gospel which point to it.  The greatest support for the connection may not necessarily be the ‘textual’ similarities in 19:34 but rather how it corresponds so  neatly with John’s message and themes.  Volume, as we have already seen, is not the only way to judge an allusion.

We’ll begin to look at how this allusion fits John’s message in our next post.

In Bible, Gospels
permalink

Star Wars, Literary Parallels and the Bible

April 11, 2013 — 1 Comment

Have you noticed how the second Star Wars trilogy (episodes I-III) parallels the first (episodes IV-VI)? Here are a few examples.

A New Hope (IV) and the Phantom Menace (I)

  • Both Luke and Anakin Skywalker leave their family on Tatooine to be trained by Obi-wan as a Jedi.
  • Obi-wan is killed by a Sith lord in front of his apprentice Luke just as Qui Gon is killed by a Sith lord in front of his apprentice Obi-wan
  • Both films climax with Skywalkers (Luke and Anakin) in a space battle in which they blow up the enemy space-station
  • Full cast appears in triumphant award ceremony

The Empire Strikes Back (V) and Attack of the Clones (II)

  • Male leads are separated during “romantic” chapter of the film.
  • Both Boba and Jango Fett follow heros in Slave I through astroid field while heros hide behind an asteroid and escape with the garbage.
  • The first begins with a battle against giant robot walkers and the later ends with battle against giant robot walkers
  • C-3PO is dismantled in a droid factory
  • Both Luke and Anakin Skywalker lose an appendage and get a robotic replacement.

Return of the Jedi (VI) and Revenge of the Sith (III)

  • The original title of Return of the Jedi was Revege of the Jedi
  • The Emperor makes his first real appearance both these films
  • Both Luke and Anakin Skywalker wear a black glove to cover their robotic hands.
  • Luke battles Vader while Palpatine watches just as Anakin battles Dooku while Palpatine watches
  • Luke cuts off Vader’s robotic hand in light saber duel just as Obi wan cuts off Grevous’ robotic hand in the same way
  • Ewoks battle from tree homes on Endor just as Wookies battle from tree homes on Kashyyk
  • Vader unmasked in the former while Vader is masked in the later
  • Ends with funeral

The list of parallels goes on. You can find a more complete list here webpage.  It’s pretty clear that the two Star Wars trilogies were arranged in a parallel a-b-c-a’-b’-c’ pattern.

Parallel Patterns in the Old Testament

I bring this up because I think it’s interesting that at least some people still recognize and value such implicit parallels. For the ancient writer and reader it was no different. These parallels in Star Wars are great illustration of the way the biblical writers structured some of their writings.  Here’s what David Dorsey says in his extremely helpful book the Literary Structure of the Old Testament.

Parallel arrangements are relatively common in the Hebrew Bible. They generally feature two sets (or panels) of units, in which the units of the first set are matched in the same order by those of the first set (a-b-c II a’-b’-c’ or variations).  When a parallel scheme has an odd number of units, the unmatched unit can be placed at the end (a-b-c II a’-b’-c’ II d), center (a-b-c-d-a’-b’-c’), or (more rarely) beginning (a-b-c-d II b’-c’-d’).

Parallelism frequently occurs in Hebrew poetry.  Note for example, the a-b-c II a’-b’-c’ pattern in Psalm 19:1-2 {19:2-3}:

a the heavens

b tell of

c God’s glory

a’ the sky

b’ proclaims

c’ his handiwork

a day by day

b they pour forth

c speech

a’ night by night

b’ they declare

c’ knowledge

The pattern can also be found in larger unites.  For example, the creation story in Genesis 1:1-2:4, although primarily linear (first day, second day, etc.), exhibits a secondary parallel pattern (a-b-c II a’-c’c’ II d):

a light

b sea and sky

c dry land

a’ lights

b’ fish and birds

c’ land animals and humans

d Sabbath

Whole books may likewise be arranged in this way.  The seven parts of Jonah are primarily linear in arrangement (following a chronological order), but also exhibit a secondary parallel pattern (a-b-c II a’-b’-c’ II d):

a Jonah’s commissioning and disobedience (1:1-3)

b Jonah and pagan sailors: Yahweh is merciful (1:4-16)

c Jonah’s response to Yahweh’s mercy: praise (1:17-2:10 {2:1-11})

a’ Jonah’s recommissioning and obedience (3:1-3a)

b’ Jonah and pagan Ninevites: Yahweh is merciful (3:3b-10)

c’ Jonah’s response to Yahweh’s mercy: resentment (4:1-4)

d Yahweh’s lesson (4:5-11)

Parallel Patterns in the New Testament

But its not just in the Old Testament.  I’m fascinated by the way the Gospel writers conveyed meaning through the arrangement of there parts.  Here’s one very significant example.

We all know that Luke begins his story with two annunciation scenes.  But did you know that Luke uses parallels to arrange them in a meaningful structure.  Look at this:

a Description of Zacharias and his situation (1:5-10)

b Angel’s message to Zacharias (1:11-22)

c Zacharias returns home and Elizabeth reacts to the news (1:23-25)

a’ Description of Mary and her situation (1:26-27)

b’ The Angel’s message to Mary (1:28-38)

c’ Mary goes to Zacharias’ home and Elizabeth reacts to the news (1:39-

d Mary’s sings a song

When we miss the pattern we miss some of the message that Luke’s attempting to convey.  And the same goes for other patterns in the New Testament.  For more on how Luke uses this parallel pattern to convey meaning check out these two posts: What Happens When You’re Filled with the Spirit and Why God Shut Zachariah’s Mouth.

In Bible, Culture, Film, Gospels
permalink

4 Things I Aim To Do With Every Post

April 9, 2013 — 3 Comments

I have a critic named Larry who comments on this blog from time to time.  I don’t know Larry personally but from his comments I believe he’s a good guy.  He loves Jesus and he truly wants to correct people who he sees as teaching something wrong.  I see a lot of myself in Larry.  Although he’d probably deny that.

Larry first challenged me on Will Some Who Have Never Known Jesus Enter His Kingdom.  And in doing so he helped me wrestle more fully with Scripture. So even though we still differ I’m truly thankful for him.  And by the way its still the most engaging exchange on this blog.

Larry then returned on How Do We Witness to a Culture That No Longer Feels Guilty and sarcastically used my words in the previous post against me.

No need to share Jesus. Didn’t you know that there will be some in heaven who have never known Jesus? How is that possible you ask? According to Matthew 25:31-46, non-Christians are blessed for serving needy Christians. Such a message should comfort all those who have not explicitly acknowledged Jesus.

And then again on 4 Reasons Lazarus, Not John, May be the Author of the Fourth Gospel.

In Jesus’ own words, we are short of ‘workers’ and you are spending your time arguing that Lazarus wrote the Gospel of John. Priorities!

And finally, Is Sex Essential to Jesus’ Encounter with the Woman by the Well.

I find that you take a text and sensationalize it to try and generate reader interest. Your blog seems to be patterned after the National Enquirer with a Bible verse or two thrown in to pique the interest of ‘Christians.’

Why do you feel the need to dramatize the scriptures? We are to sow the seed (the unadulterated, Word of God without embellishments and exaggerations), another waters but God causes the increase.

My overall take on this series: That sound you hear is me rending my clothes.

Larry’s main issue with me is that I’m teaching something false.  I disagree with that but I’ll let you read and decide.

But Larry also believes that I’m sensationalistic and deviate from the core truths of the scripture.  And on this point I would have to agree.

While I don’t think I sensationalize Scripture, I do post on the sensational in Scripture.  And sometimes these sensational topics are outside the top priorities of Scripture.  But then again, “all Scripture is God breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16) so I don’t necessarily think my noting that sex is deeply imbedded in John’s depiction of Jesus encounter with the woman by the well is altogether unimportant.  In fact its connected with a larger theme of John’s Gospel and the Bible.

But Larry does have this right about my blog: I do focus on the sensational. Here are four previously unstated things I aim to do with every post.  Here’s the method to my madness.

1. Surprise

We cease to be aware of things familiar to us.  Routine, or what Samuel Coleridge called the “The film of familiarity,” constantly closes our eyes to things around us.  Continued exposure to the same truths break down our senses to them.  While we may know something in a cognitive sense we cease to be fully aware of it.  Kind of like a routine drive to work.  But surprise frees our senses from the power of routine and causes to once again look with fresh eyes at what we previously took for granted.  Jesus understood this.  Note for instance how he masterfully twists his audiences cliched stereotypes in the story of the Good Samaritan.  Surprise is a true delight and I delight in offering true surprise.

2. Incite

Surprise is also essential to jokes.  We laugh when we discover a twist from our expectation.  “I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.. Not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.”  Ba dum chhhh.  I love to laugh but the surprise I’m aiming for has a much higher purpose than laughter.  It’s designed, like Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan, to incite you to further reflection.  Is it true?  And if it is true what does it mean for me and what I believe?

3. Inform

I’m a busy person so I like blogs that have factual content and get right to the point.  I love listening to stories but I don’t particularly enjoy reading them and so I typically don’t offer personal stories without a point.  This story is of course a rare exception.  I aim to offer overlooked information you can use in you’re study of God’s word and in you’re conversations with others.

4. Inspire

Bottom line: I want you to be inspired and motivated to study the Bible more deeply and pursue God more passionately.  If I’ve turned you off to either one of these things I am truly sorry.  For some my spice is too hot but for others its too mild.  I want you to know that my deepest desire is to see you more fully equipped and delighting in the God who both created and saved us.

 

 

In Culture, Writing
permalink

When Jesus Gave Birth (Part 3)

March 25, 2013 — Leave a comment

This is part three in the series “When Jesus Gave Birth.”  You can find the introduction to the series here and the second part here.

How can we deterimne with relative certainity that John wanted us to see in the piercing of Christ side and the flow of blood and water (John 19:34) as an allusion to the creation of Eve (Genesis 2:21-22)?

Richard Hays book Scriptural Echoes in the Letters of Paul offers what has become the standard for evaluating the likelihood of a biblical allusion.  These seven criteria cause us to look outside our own biases to meet a level of objectivity that others can appreciate.

Here the seven criteria applied to our proposed allusion.

    1. Availability: was Genesis and specifically the creation account available to the author of John
    2. Volume: to what degree do “words, syntactical patterns, structure, and number of elements” correspond between Genesis 2:21-22 and John 19:34?
    3. Recurrence:  To what extent is Genesis and more specifically the creation account used elsewhere in John?
    4. Thematic Coherence: Does the proposed reference to Genesis 2:21-22 enhance the themes developed in John?
    5. Historical Plausibility: Is it likely that John intended the reference and that his audience would have recognized it.
    6. History of Interpretation: Have other readers, both critical and pre-critical, recognized it?
    7. Satisfaction: does it make sense?

For this series I’m going to limit our discussion to two: Volume and Thematic Coherence.  The fact that Genesis was available to John is beyond question and will be well established before this series is concluded.

As to why I’m not going to focus on the other criteria, seven may make Hay’s list feel complete but his inventory really boils down to Availability, Volume and Thematic Coherence.  All the rest are really just degrees of these.  For instance, examining recurrence (3), to what extent the creation account is used elsewhere in John, is just another way of demonstrating that Genesis was in the mind of John (1) and  it was essential to his books thematic coherence (4).  Exploring the allusion in the history interpretation (6) is just another way of showing how others saw the same verbal parallels (3) and matching of themes (4).

But John’s generic difference from Paul, the later of which Hays is specifically addressing, also requires us to make a slight extension to the list.  The letters of Paul and the Gospel of John are clearly different in that Paul writes letters and John writes a story.  John, therefore, is not limited in his allusions the way that Paul is limited to precise verbal similarities.  Narrative allows the “evocation of other details – such as plot, characters and setting – by means of circumstantial correspondence.”  Due to the availability and potential use of these other elements, allusions in narrative do not simply arise from the parallel use of exact words.

For instance, Jesus’ act of breathing on the disciples to receive the holy Spirit in John 20:22 is a well attested allusion to Genesis 2:7 – the creation of Adam.  Jesus’ “breathing on” or “into” the disciples is clearly unique.  The fact that Greek word is the exact one found in the LXX translation of Genesis is suggestive.  But the allusion also coheres in that Jesus stands in place of God and the Holy Spirit the breath of life – characterization which are well established in the Gospel of John.

In my next post we’ll look at the verbal and circumstantial correspondence between John 19:34 and Genesis 2:21-22.

In Uncategorized
permalink

When Jesus Gave Birth (Part 2)

March 19, 2013 — Leave a comment

This is part 2 in the series “When Jesus Gave Birth.” You can find the introduction here.  

Both the piercing of Christ side and the flow of blood and water (John 19:34) are unique to John’s gospel and it’s clear from the testimony which follows it (19:35) he sees in them great significance.

Three times he swears to these events. (1) “He who has seen has borne witness” (2) “and his witness is true” (3) “and he knows that he is telling the truth…”

His summary, “so that you also may believe,” foreshadows the very purpose of his gospel, as summarized in John 20:31. “But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ…”

So striking is this testimony it has been called, “the most solemn protestation of accuracy to be found in the whole work.” No where does John make a more passionate and personal claim.

The piercing and flow are important to John.  EXCEPTIONALLY IMPORTANT.

But Why?

What significance does the witness perceive?

No shortage of valuable incites have been offered but the following three views are most popular today.

1. Real Human Death.

John says the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side because when they came to hasten his death by breaking his legs they unexpectedly found him already dead.  The piercing is thus the soilders way of answering the question, “Has Jesus truly died?”

But for John the question of Jesus real death was just as important.  It appears John is actively countering a claim made by false teachers that Jesus only appeared to have a body (1 John 4:2, 2 John 7) and/or to have died.  And indeed some studies have shown a natural explanation for the release of blood and water.

As to a further meaning, John cites two scriptural fulfillments of this scene (19:36-37).  The first of which says not a bone of his will be broken and alludes to the Passover lamb (Exodus 12:46; Num. 9:12; Psalm 34:20).  The actual piercing and flow, however, are not specially related to this allusion.  Instead it’s the unfulfilled intention to break Jesus’ legs which is its referent.

2. Release of the Spirit.

Water is an essential core symbol of the Gospel of John.  We find it connected with baptism (1:26, 31, 33, 3:23), purification (2:6), tradition (4, cultic healing (5:7) and cleansing (13:5).  John contrasts these earthly waters of purification with Christ’s offer of “living water” which he explicitly connects with the Holy Spirit (7:37-39).

And the flow in John 19:34 is specifically the fulfillment of Jesus cry in 7:37 that ‘rivers of living water would flow from within.’ There, Jesus alludes to the water from the rock in the Exodus account (Exodus 17:1-7). Here in 19:34 the flow alludes in like manner to the later day fountain for “sin and uncleanness” in Zachariah and Ezekiel flowing from Jerusalem and the temple.  John’s second scriptural citation “they shall look on the one they have pierced” in Zachariah 12:10 fully supports this conclusion.

3. Symbols of the Sacraments.

To a lesser extent, interpreters continue to debate the merits of a sacramental symbolism, particularly the Eucharist/Communion and baptism, in the flow of blood and water.   Water has indeed been associated with baptism in the Gospel of John (John 1:33,35) and blood with consuming Jesus’ body (John 6:53-56).

What confuses those who argue for a sacramental symbolism is the order in which the elements appear.  They neither match the historical occurrence of baptism and death in the life of Jesus or correspond to the spiritual practice in life of a believer.  Most scholars conclude that if John is making a reference to the sacraments it secondary at best and thus not the author’s primary objective.

As great as these interpretations may be they do not exclude the possibility that an allusion to the creation of Eve is also at work.  This allusion, if present, would not replace or even overshadow these well attested meanings.  But like the allusion to the Exodus (17:1-7), which scholars by and large recognize, it brings them into greater focus.

In my next post I’ll offer some criteria by which we can objectively deterimine if John 19:34 is indeed and allusion to the creation of Eve (Genesis 2:21-22).

In Easter, Gospels
permalink