Concordia Theological Quarterly Volume 77:1 ²2 January/April 2013 Table of Contents In Memoriam: Harold H. Zietlow (1926 ²2011) ............................................. 3 Epistles before Gospels: An Axiom of New Testament Studies David P. Scaer ....................................................................................... 5 Moses in the Gospel of John Christopher A. Maronde ................................................................... 23 Rectify or Justify? $ 5 H V S R Q V H W R - / R X L V 0 D U W \ Q · V , Q W H U S U H W D W L R Q of 3 D X O · V 5 L J K W H R X V Q H V V / D Q J X D J H Mark P. Surburg ................................................................................. 45 The Eucharistic Prayer and Justification Roland F. Ziegler ................................................................................. 79 The Reception R I : D O W K H U · V 7 K H R O R J \ L Q W K H : L V F R Q V L Q 6 \ Q R G Mark E. Braun .................................................................................... 101 Righteousness, Mystical Union, and Moral Formation in Christian Worship Gifford A. Grobien ............................................................................ 141 Theological Observer ..................................................................................... 165 * R G · V : R U G 7 K U H H 9 L H Z V 2 Q H % L E O H The Mission of the Church in an Age of Zombies One Nation under God: Thoughts R H J D U G L Q J ´ 3 D W U L R W L F 6 H U Y L F H V µ Book Reviews .................................................................................................. 184 Books Received ............................................................................................... 191 24 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) ultimately and most importantly brings him to the fore as the instrument Yahweh uses to give Israel salvation, one who points to the Christ through his actions. Moses is used in John in a variety of ways, but ultimately in a positive sense in order to testify to Christ. I. Old Testament Figures in the Gospel of John While no other Old Testament figure receives as much prominence as Moses in the Gospel of John, Jacob, David, and Abraham also appear in the narrative. A study of Moses in John is not complete until these other fig-ures are first considered. The first appears in John 4, when Jesus stops for a rest at a well in Samaria. John is quite specific with the details he provides, telling us that the name of the town is Sychar, and then further informing us that this town was part of a property that Jacob had given to Joseph. Significantly - H V X V L V D F W X D O O \ U H V W L Q J X S R Q - D F R E · V Z H O O - R K Q ²6a). Finally, the woman whom Jesus encounters there brings Jacob into the G L V F X V V L R Q W R F R X Q W H U - H V X V · F O D L P W R J L Y H O L Y L Q J Z D W H U ´ $ U H \ R X J U H D W H U ( ö ïÀ þ ÷) than our father Jacob, who gave for us to drink and he drank from L W D Q G K L V V R Q V D Q G K L V O L Y H V W R F N " µ - R K Q In response, Jesus points to the fact that the well only supplies temporal thirst, whereas the water he gives has an eternal quality in that it truly conquers death. Jesus uses the well provided by Jacob to point for-ward to the greater gift that he brings. He does not dispute the gift of the well, but puts it in proper perspective as a temporal gift that does not pro-vide what the woman ultimately needs, namely, eternal life. David appears in John 7, where Jesus engages his opponents in sharp verbal combat. He disrupts the Feast of Booths in Jerusalem with bold declarations concerning his identity, to which the crowd responds with varying degrees of rejection and acceptance of his testimony. When he departs the feast, he leaves confusion and turmoil in his wake. Some believe, while many continue to have questions. One of these questions F R Q F H U Q V W K H J H R J U D S K L F R U L J L Q R I W K H 0 H V V L D K 2 Q H S H U V R Q D V N V ´ ' R H V W K H Christ come from Galilee? µ 7 K L V D Q R Q \ P R X V S H U V R Q F R Q W L Q X H V E \ F L W L Q J W K H S U R S K H F \ ´ ' L G Q R W W K H 6 F U L S W X U H V V D \ W K D W W K H & K U L V W F R P H V I U R P W K H V H H G R I ' D Y L G D Q G I U R P % H W K O H K H P W K H Y L O O D J H Z K H U H ' D Y L G Z D V " µ - R K Q The questioner calls upon David to testify against Jesus. If Jesus did not come from the line of David or from Bethlehem, he cannot be the Messiah. Interestingly, John (unlike Matthew) does not answer these specific F K D U J H V G L U H F W O \ D G G U H V V L Q J - H V X V · R U L J L Q L Q R W K H U Z D \ V 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 25 The culmination of these texts appears in John 8 with the appeal to Abraham 2 Q F H D J D L Q - H V X V · L G H Q W L W \ L V L Q T X H V W L R Q + L V R S S R Q H Q W V S U R X G-ly claim Abraham as their father (8:39). They assert that they have been faithful to their father for they have been faithful to God (8:41). But Jesus turns Abraham against them, declaring that if they were the true spiritual offspring of Abraham, then they would not seek to kill him. Instead, they would do as Abraham G L G D Q G ´ U H M R L F H µ W R V H H W K H G D \ R I & K U L V W Their rejection of Jesus demonstrates that they cannot trace their spiritual lineage to Abraham but to Satan. If they followed Abraham, they would I R O O R Z - H V X V 7 K L V E U L Q J V W K H P W R W K H F U X [ R I W K H D U J X P H Q W - H V X V · L G H Q W L W \ ´Are you greater ( ö ïÀ þ ÷) than our father Abraham, who died? . . . What do y R X P D N H R I \ R X U V H O I " µ - R K Q - H V X V X O W L P D W H O \ U H V S R Q G V with a powerful affirmation of h L V G L Y L Q H R U L J L Q ´ 7 U X O \ W U X O \ , V D \ W R \ R X E H I R U H Abraham became, I AM ( ñà ïk öÀ) µ - R K Q 2 This narrative concludes with many of the people rejecting Jesus, condemning him with the sentence of death as they unsuccessfully attempt to stone him. From this brief comparative study, we can draw several conclusions. First, we observe that Jesus must compete for prominence with the figures of the Old Testament, each of whom is presented by the speaker as more important than him. Jacob, David, and Abraham are all produced to testify as witnesses against Jesus. Second, the identity of Jesus is on trial, and these Old Testament figures are adduced as expert witnesses. Jesus coun-ters these claims by demonstrating not only that he is greater than the patriarchs, but also that these Old Testament figures actually point to him. They bear witness, but only to Jesus as Lord and God. Each of these ele-ments will become much P R U H H [ S O L F L W Z K H Q H [ D P L Q L Q J - R K Q · V X V H R I Moses. II. Moses and = ÷Á ö ø Ï - R K Q · V S U R O R J X H K D V L Q W U L J X H G V F K R O D U V D Q G O D \ S H R S O H D O L N H W K U R X J K R X W the centuries for its beautiful language and deep theology. Here, John lays the foundation for the rest of his Gospel, describing the incarnationFthat great act of God becoming human flesh to deliver his sinful peopleFin language and themes that will occur again and again. Within this text, we encounter Û þ û& Ï I R U W K H I L U V W W L P H ´ 7 K H O D Z (= ÷Á ö ø Ï) was given 2 For a discussion of this text in the wider context of the Johannine ñà ïk öÀ state-ments, see Richard Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple: Narrative, History, and Theology in the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 243 ²250. Bauckham concerns himself mainly with the seven absolute ñà ïk öÀ statements found in 4:26; 6:20; 8:24; 8:28; 8:58; 13:19; 18:5, 6, 8 (the last three are taken as one occurrence). 26 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) ( ÷ îÁ ù ò) through Moses ( î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï), grace and truth ( í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë) E H F D P H W K U R X J K - H V X V & K U L V W µ - R K Q , W L V K D U G O \ V X U S U L V L Q J W R V H H 0 R V H V P H Q W L R Q H G L Q - R K Q · V S Uologue, for as the French exegete M.E. Boismard has convincingly argued, many of the W K H P H V G H Y H O R S H G L Q W K H S U R O R J X H D U H D O V R I R X Q G L Q < D K Z H K · V U H P D U N D E Oe revelation to Moses in Exodus 33 ²34, connections to which we shall return shortly.3 In 1:17 John gives an obvious contrast between Moses and Jesus. However, he does not necessarily contrast ÷Á ö ø Ï as a negative with í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë as positives. Instead, the gift î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï has an intimate F R Q Q H F W L R Q Z L W K W K H J L I W V R I & K U L V W D F R Q Q H F W L R Q W K D W W K H U H V W R I - R K Q · V narrative will explore. Stefan Schapdick concludes that, for John, ´faith in the christologically shaped divine revelation is no contradiction to the - H Z L V K U H O L J L R X V W U D G L W L R Q D W D O O E X W W K H R Q O \ Z D \ W R N H H S L W µ4 John does draw a contrast between the figures of Moses and Jesus, though once again this does not imply a negative view of Moses or of the ÷Á ö ø Ï properly interpreted. The divine passive ÷ îÁ ù ò indicates that the Law did not originate within Moses, but instead came to the people of Israel ´through µ ( î ó) him. John introduces Moses into his narrative as an instrument of God, one through whom God chose to give the gift of the ÷Á ö ø Ï.5 In a subtle way, this introduces a polemic, developed throughout the Gospel, against exalted views of Moses. He deserves respect, but only W K H U H V S H F W E H I L W W L Q J D K X P D Q L Q V W U X P H Q W R I * R G · V Z R U N % R L V P D U G E U L Q J V out t K L V G L V W L Q F W L R Q ´ 0 R V H V R Q O \ W U D Q V P L W W H G W R P H Q Z K D W * R G V S R N H W R him. Jesus is God h L P V H O I V S H D N L Q J W R P H Q µ6 Finally, this verse identifies Moses with Sinai, as John links Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï together. When you mention one, the other immediately comes to mind. Further-more, Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï have some kind of relationship with the í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë, which are associated with Jesus. But the connection drawn between the two will be quite different depending on who is speaking, and there we find the key to under- V W D Q G L Q J - R K Q · V X V H R I ÷Á ö ø Ï. Severino Pancaro, in a comprehensive study of the ÷Á ö ø Ï L Q - R K Q S R V L W V W K L V G L V W L Q F W L R Q L Q - R K Q · V Q D U U D W L Y H ÷Á ö ø Ï has 3 M.E. Boismard, Moses or Jesus: An Essay in Johannine Christology, trans. B.T. Viviano (Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1993), 93 ²98. 4 6 W H I D Q 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H-Evaluated: The Character of Moses in W K H ) R X U W K * R V S H O µ L Q Moses in Biblical and Extra-Biblical Traditions, ed. Axel Graupner and Michael Wolter (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), 188 ²189. 5 Wayne A. Meeks, The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967), 287. 6 Boismard, Moses or Jesus, 98. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 27 two separate meanings, one when used by the Jews and one when used by - H V X V + H Z U L W H V ´ : K Dt opposes Jesus . . . to the Jews is a different under-standing of the Law; the difference is determined by whether one believes L Q - H V X V R U Q R W 7 K H X Q G H U V W D Q G L Q J R I W K H ¶ - H Z V · L V W K D W R I ¶ Q R U P D W L Y H · Judaism; the understanding of John is that of Christian V µ7 The Jews who were opposed to Jesus held to the ÷Á ö ø Ï as interpreted by oral tradition. On the basis of this interpretation of the ÷Á ö ø Ï they make a fourfold accusation against Jesus: his violation of the Sabbath (John 5 and 9), blasphemy (John 5:17 ²18; 8:58; 10:24 ²28), false teaching (John 7:14 ²18, 18:19 ²24), and opposition to the nation (John 11:47 ²53).8 This perspective on the ÷Á ö ø Ï obviously receives a negative portrayal throughout the Gospel. Jesus distances himself from the ÷Á ö ø Ï in these contexts, calling it ´ \ R X U O D Z µ9 On the other hand, John operates with a definition of the ÷Á ö ø Ï as viewed through the lens of Christ. Jesus is not opposed to the ÷Á ö ø Ï R Q O \ W R K L V R S S R Q H Q W · V V W X E E R U Q L Q W H U S U H W D W L R Q R I L W , Q I D F W D V Z H will see in the texts discussed below, the only way to follow the ÷Á ö ø Ï prop H U O \ L V W R E H O L H Y H L Q - H V X V ´ : K D W L V D W W D F N H G D Q G F R Q G H P Q H G E \ - R K Q is a false understanding of the Law which would oppose the Law and - H V X V R E V H U Y D Q F H R I W K H / D Z D Q G I D L W K L Q - H V X V µ10 Therefore, ÷Á ö ø Ï in John does not have a primarily ethical definition, as the Greek word ÷Á ö ø Ï or our English term ´law µ would imply.11 In - R K Q · V Q D U U D W L Y H ÷Á ö ø Ï has a much more comprehensive meaning, one very much in accord with the concept of Torah (+-) in rabbinical Judaism. Therefore, it can refer either to the Mosaic Law in the strictest sense, referring specifically to the body of legislation found in the Pentateuch (7:51; 18:31), to the entirety of the Pentateuch (1:45), or to the entire Old Testament (7:19, 7:49, 12:34).12 Only the first sense could be considered strictly ethical, while the other two imply the record of all of 7 Severino Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1975), 525. 8 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 7. 9 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 517. Jesus uses the terminology = ÷Á ö ø Ï w öF ÷ (8:17), w ö ï ü½ ú ø Ï (10:34), or ë{ üF ÷ (15:25). 10 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 527. 11 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 2. Pancaro believes that Paul, for the most part, uses the term ÷Á ö ø Ï ethically. The ÷Á ö ø Ï has a regulatory function, governing P D Q · V F R Q G X F W D Q G G H P R Q V W U D W L Q J P D Q · V X W W H U G H S U D Y L W \ E H I R U H * R G : K H Q G L V F X V V H G under the heading of justification, the works of the ÷Á ö ø Ï are opposed to faith. Paul V H H N V W R D Q V Z H U W K H T X H V W L R Q ´ : K D W P X V W R Q H G R W R E H V D Y H G " µ L Q W K H K H D W Rf battle against the Judaizers (528). 12 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 514. The references cited are not intended to be comprehensive. 28 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) * R G · V L Q W H U D F W L R Q V Z L W K K L V F K R V H Q S H R S O H 7 K H O D W W H U X V H V D U H S U L Q F L S D O O \ U H Y H O D W R U \ Z K L F K L V W K H I R F X V R I - R K Q · V X V H R I ÷Á ö ø Ï throughout his narrative. The Gospel of John is concerned with the identity of Jesus, and the ÷Á ö ø Ï serves that emphasis by testifying primarily to Christ.13 - R K Q · V use of ÷Á ö ø Ï is broad and comprehensive, but he specifically and intentionally ties it to Moses in 1:17. If the concept of ÷Á ö ø Ï can encompass all of the Old Testament, why does John identify it with Moses? First of all, as noted in the introduction, such identification emphasizes the foun-dational nature of Moses. As Pancaro summarizes, ´ (ven when John refers to a particular aspect or text of the Law, it is always the Law as a whole, as the body of divine revelation given to Moses, passed on from generation to generation and constituting the foundation of Judaism, which lurks in the backgro X Q G µ14 - X V W D V ´ 7 R U D K µ F D Q V W D Q G I R U D O O 6 F U L S W X U H V R ´ 0 R V H V µ F D Q stand as the representative of all through whom revelation was given by Yahweh. But perhaps the connection is tied up in the very structure of - R K Q · V S U R O R J X H M.E. Boismard persuasively ar J X H V W K D W Z H V K R X O G V H H L Q - R K Q · V S U R-logue an echo of Exodus 33 ²34. In that remarkable section, Moses advo-cates for the people in the aftermath of their worship of the golden calf. Though God promises his presence, Moses asks for a sign; he wants a theop K D Q \ K H Z D Q W V W R V H H * R G 0 R U H V S H F L I L F D O O \ K H D V N V ´ 6 K R Z P H your glory (33:18). µ * R G R Q O \ V K R Z V Kis backside as Moses hides in the cleft R I W K H U R F N 7 K L V K D V D V W U R Q J H F K R L Q - R K Q ´ : H K D Y H V H H Q K L V J O R U \ µ John declares that in Christ we now see the glory of God, the visible manifestation of his presence. In addition, as Boismard notes, Exodus 33 ² L V I R F X V H G D U R X Q G W K H S U R P L V H R I * R G · V S U H V H Q F H D P R Q J K L V S H R S O H specifically his presence at the tent of meeting (Exod 33:7 ²10) and the anticipation of his presence in the tabernacle. There is then no mistake that D O V R L Q Y H U V H R I W K H S U R O R J X H - R K Q G H F O D U H V ´ 7 K H : R U G became flesh and tented ( û ô¿ ÷ þ û ï ÷) D P R Q J X V µ ) L Q D O O \, and most importantly, the connection between ÷Á ö ø Ï and í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë, found in John 1:17, is paralleled in the name that Yahweh gives h L P V H O I L Q ( [ R G X V ´ 7 K H Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abound-ing in steadfast love ($) and faithfulness (!) µ % R L V P D U G D U J X H V W K D W W K H proper Greek translation for ! and $ is í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë.15 Following this great statement of Yahweh, Moses is sent back down the mountain 13 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 530 ²531. 14 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 517. 15 Boismard, Moses or Jesus, 96. The LXX has õ ï ø Ï instead of í¼ ú ó Ï, but Boismard argues that í¼ ú ó Ï is the more appropriate Greek equivalent for $. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 29 bearing new tablets of the law (Exod 34:10 ²29). God gave the ÷Á ö ø Ï through ( î ó) Moses again in Exodus 34, and John declares that the greater gift of í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë alluded to by Yahweh himself in that text has now come in the person of Jesus Christ.16 * R G · V I D L W K I X O Q H V V W R his people, declared and demonstrated to Moses in Exodus 33 ²34, is fulfilled in Jesus. Therefore, Exodus 33 ²34 is a key text for understanding John 1:17. There the ÷Á ö ø Ï and Moses are connected with one another, and together they are associated with í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë. The two sides of 1:17 are not opposed to one another, but instead it is Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï that point to í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë $ S R O H P L F L V D O V R L P S O L H G K H U H - H V X V · R S S R Q H Q W V D W-tempt to find í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë in the ÷Á ö ø Ï, but to no avail. The ÷Á ö ø Ï does not have í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë in itself, but instead it testifies to the one who is í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë incarnate, Jesus Christ.17 If the prologue lays the foundation for the rest of the Gospel, then it would follow that this identification of Moses with the ÷Á ö ø Ï would persist throughout the narrative. Indeed, it does stand in the background of every other appearance of Û þ û& Ï in John. In chapter seven, this identification comes to the fore during a dispute between Jesus and ´the Jews µ over his authority to teach. Here Jesus brings Moses into the argu- P H Q W L Q Z L W K D T X H V W L R Q W K D W S D U D O O H O V W K H V W D W H P H Q W L Q ´ + D V Q R W Moses given ( î½ î þ ô ï ÷) to you the law ( ü< ÷ ÷Á ö ø ÷) " µ 7 K H S U H S R V L W L R Q î ó does not appear as we would expect, emphasizing Moses as an instrument of God. Instead, in verse 22 Jesus declares the same teaching through a different means. Here he describes Moses not only as the law-giver, but P R U H V S H F L I L F D O O \ D V W K H J L Y H U R I F L U F X P F L V L R Q D Q G W K H Q D G G V D F D Y H D W ´ 1 R W that it is from Moses (! ô ü øv Û þ û½ þ Ï) but from the fathers (! ô üF ÷ ë ü½ ú þ ÷) µ 7 K L V I X O I L O O V W K H V D P H I X Q F W L R Q D V D î ó clause, indicating that the ÷Á ö ø Ï did not originate with Moses, but that Yahweh used Moses as his instrument to give the ÷Á ö ø Ï to Israel. As in 1:17, Moses appears here in identification with the ÷Á ö ø Ï, which Yahweh gave ( î½ î þ ô ï ÷) through ( î ó) him. Jesus emphasizes this identification in the next verse by using the formulaic phrase = ÷Á ö ø Ï Û þ û½ þ Ï. In a similar way, the scribes and the Pharisees identify Moses simply as the giver of the ÷Á ö ø Ï in 8:5. The theme of identification runs underneath and forms the foundation of all other occurrences of Û þ û& Ï, but as the prologue foreshadowed, other themes have a greater emphasis throughout the Gospel. 16 Boismard, Moses or Jesus, 93 ²98. 17 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 539 ²540. 30 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) III. Moses as Accuser In the texts examined above, Moses appeared in testimony to the ÷Á ö ø Ï, equated with the revelation given by Yahweh to his people throughout the Old Testament. He is a static character, inanimate, a stone statue bearing mute testimony to what God gave through him. But in 5:45 ² 0 R V H V E H F R P H V D F W L Y H D Q G I R U - H V X V · listeners the results are shocking, to say the least. The implied polemic observed in the prologue now comes completely to the surface. As he will in John 7, Jesus himself brings Moses into the discussion. After healing an invalid on the SabbathF D Q D F W L R Q W K D W caused the Jews to grumble against h L PFJesus replies in John 5: ´ 0 \ ) D W K H U X Q W L O Q R Z L V Z R U N L Q J D Q G , D P Z R U N L Q J µ + H W K H Q O D X Q F K H V L Q W R D discussion of the authority of the Son, culminating with an appeal to three witnesses: John the Baptist, the Father, and finally Moses. The entire text has the appearance of a courtroom scene as Jesus defends his divine Sonship, leaving his most devastating witness for the end:18 ´Do not think that I accuse ( ô ë ü ò ñ ø ú¿ û þ) you to the Father. Your accuser ( ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷) is Moses, in whom you have hoped. For if you believe Moses, you would E H O L H Y H L Q P H ) R U D E R X W P H W K D W R Q H Z U R W H µ - R K Q ²46). Shapdick emphasizes how shocking this statement was to the religious leadership: 0 R V H V · ´classical role as intermediary between God and Israel Z K R D O Z D \ V L Q W H U F H G H V I R U W K H , V U D H O L W H V L V W X U Q H G L Q W R L W V G L U H F W R S S R V L W H µ19 The Jews have set their hope (' õ À ô ë ü ï) on him, not only in general but also quite specifically in this situation, as they accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath commandment. However, in a stunning reversal, Moses is their accuser ( ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷). Moses here acts not only as witness but also as S U R V H F X W R U 7 K H Y H U E - H V X V X V H V K H U H F D Q V L P S O \ P H D Q ´ W R V S H D N D J D L Q V W µ but it most often acts as technical legal terminology for bringing charges in a courtroom setting.20 Pancaro helpfully notes that while in Jewish legal S D U O D Q F H W K H U H Z D V Q R ´ S X E O L F S U R V H F X W R U µ D V V X F K W K H U H Z H U H ´ Z L W Q H V V H V D J D L Q V W µ W K H G H I H Q G D Q W Z K R D F W H G D V S U R V H F X W R U V ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷), as well as third persons who could speak against the defendant.21 Moses makes his accusation on the basis of what he wrote (! ñ ú ë ï ÷), for he wrote about the Christ. If the Jews claim to adhere to Moses, then they would believe in the 18 Stan Harstine, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel: A Study of Ancient Reading Techniques (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 57. 19 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 20 Frederick William Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 533. 21 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 254 ²255. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 31 Christ. In this text, Jesus establishes Moses not only as a witness ( ö¼ ú ü ý Ï) but also as an accuser ( ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷). The Trial Motif These dual designations are not only paradigmic for several other texts in which Moses is mentioned, but they also place Moses firmly into the ) R X U W K * R V S H O · V ´ W U L D O P R W L I µ In a monograph on the subject, A.T. Lincoln P D N H V W K H F R Q Y L Q F L Q J D U J X P H Q W W K D W W K H U H D G H U V R I - R K Q · V * R V S H O D U H W R V H H the entire narrative as a trial or lawsuit. This judicial motif has a rich Old Testament lineage. Lincoln specifically points to Isaiah 40 ²55 as influential R Q - R K Q · V Q D U U D W L Y H E X W H [ D P S O H V R I W K L V P R W L I D E R X Q G L Q 6 F U L S W X U H especially in the prophets.22 ´ 7 K L V Q D U U D W L Y H X Q O L N H W K D W R I W K H 6 \ Q R S W L F V has no account of a Jewish trial before the Sanhedrin. Instead, throughout his public ministry, Jesus can be viewed as on trial before Israel and its O H D G H U V µ23 The religious leaders, in a variety of encounters with Jesus, at-tempt to demonstrate that he is a false prophet by bringing against him the four charges described above: his violation of the Sabbath, blasphemy, false teaching, and opposition to the nation.24 Jesus, on the other hand, seeks to confirm his divine identity and Messianic mission. Here Moses finds his place in the motif. As we will see in the following texts, both Jesus and his opponents appeal to the authority of Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï to make their case. He functions as a witness ( ö¼ ú ü ý Ï) claimed by both sides, a witness absolutely vital to the trial. We noted that Jesus appeals to three such witnesses in chapter five, punctuated by Moses, the advocate turned accuser. On the basis of the first part of the trial scene, it could be alleged that Jesus was appearing as the sole witness in his own defense. In terms of Jewish legal conventions, this would make his testimony invalid (5:31) . . . . Deuteronomy 19:15 holds that three, or at least two, witnesses are needed for valid testimony. So in John 5:32 ²40 Jesus appeals to a series of further witnesses.25 The people must determine on the basis of the case presented throughout the narrative whether Jesus is the Messiah or a false prophet. Considering the prominence of Moses within this motif, the people must essentially decide whether Moses testifies on behalf of or against Jesus. 22 Andrew T. Lincoln, Truth on Trial: The Lawsuit Motif in the Fourth Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000), 37. 23 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 23. 24 Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 7. 25 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 77. 32 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) , U R Q L F D O O \ - R K Q · V D X G L H Q F H V H H V D Q R W K H U O D Zsuit or trial in progress. The religious leaders think that they have placed Jesus on trial, but instead it is Yahweh who has placed them on trial. He will judge them on the basis of whether they believe or reject the one whom he has sent (John 3:17 ²18). They choose a bandit rather than the good shepherd and thereby V K R Z W K D W W K H \ G R Q R W E H O R Q J W R W K H I O R F N W K D W K H D U V W K H V K H S K H U G · V voice . . . . 7 K H I X O O L P S O L F D W L R Q V R I W K H Q D U U D W L Y H · V W U L D O (therefore) become apparent. In rejecting Jesus, the religious leaders reject their God. They, not Jesus, are the ones who are judged and condemned.26 In a further irony, Jesus brings forth the ultimate verdict of life and V D O Y D W L R Q R Q O \ W K U R X J K V X F K U H M H F W L R Q D Q G F R Q G H P Q D W L R Q , Q & K U L V W · V atoning death on the cross, the judge undergoes the verdict of death that humanity deserved, and instead delivers life.27 Ultimately, as Jesus clearly states in 5:45 ²46, those who reject the testimony of Moses about the Christ have rejected his destruction of the verdict of death. Moses therefore becomes not their advocate but their accuser. To which text does Jesus refer? Where does Moses act as an ´expert witness µ in defense of Christ? These questions naturally send scholars to the Torah ( ÷Á ö ø Ï) in an attempt to find Messianic prophecies, or perhaps typological parallels. Deuteronomy 18:18 most commonly comes up in W K H V H G L V F X V V L R Q V ´ , Z L O O U D L V H X S I R U W K H P D S U R S K H W O L N H \ R X I U R P D P R Q J their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to W K H P D O O W K D W , F R P P D Q G K L P µ , Q G H H G W K L V W H [ W K D V J U H D W L P S R U W D Q F H L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O Z L W K Q X P H U R X V U H I H U H Q F H V W R ´ W K H 3 U R S K H W µ D V D P H V V L D Q L F figure.28 However, within the context of the Gospel as a whole and chapter five in particular, this seems incomplete. Jesus does not argue in John 5 that the Scriptures speak about him in specific places; he confesses that fact in other texts. No doubt, direct prophecies and typological parallels are very sig- Q L I L F D Q W I R U & K U L V W · V W H D F K L Q J D Eout himself. John does employ specific Old Testament citations in a similar way to the other evangelists, demon-strating that he sees many direct prophecies fulfilled in Christ.29 But instead of referring to direct prophecy, in John 5 Jesus strongly declares his unity with the Father, making four bold claims: first, that he works on the Sabbath (17); s H F R Q G W K D W K H ´ J L Y H V O L I H µ O ø ø ó ïf; D Q G L Q G H H G ´ K D V 26 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 26. 27 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 206. 28 See Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 212 ²225. 29 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 54. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 33 O L I H L Q K L P V H O I µ ! í ï ó þ% ÷ ÷ ë{ üO; 26); third, that God has J L Y H Q ´ D O O M X G J P H Q W W R W K H 6 R Q µ (22); fourth W K D W D O O V K R X O G ´ K R Q R U W K H 6 Rn just as they honor the Father µ (23). Richard Bauckham notes that with each claim, Jesus has laid hold of ´divine prerogatives, µ functions that belong intrin-sically to the divinity as such. God is the only living One, that is, the only One to whom life belongs eternally and intrinsically. All other life derives from him, is given by him and taken back by him $ Q R W K H U N H \ D V S H F W R I * R G · V V R O H V R Y-ereignty over creation was his prerogative of judgment: his rule is just, implementing justice, and therefore judging nations and individuals. Such divine prerogatives have to be understood, not as mere functions that God may delegate to others, but as intrinsic to the divine identity. 5 X O L Q J R Y H U D O O J L Y L Q J O L I H W R D O O H [ H U F L V L Q J M X G J P H Q W R Q D O OF W K H V H belong integrally to the Jewish understanding of who God is.30 Jesus takes on these divine prerogatives, but not in such a way as to set himself up as a rival of the Father. Instead, he is wholly dependent on the Father, even while he exercises these prerogatives. He therefore shares the G L Y L Q H L G H Q W L W \ L Q X Q L W \ Z L W K W K H ) D W K H U D V ´ W K H R Q O \ O L Y L Q J R Q H the only J L Y H U R I O L I H W K H R Q O \ M X G J H R I D O O µ31 The claims Jesus makes in John 5 F R Q F X U Z L W K E R W K - R K Q · V W H V W L P R Q \ D Q G K L V R Z Q W K U R X J K R X W W K H * R V S H O The prologue makes it clear that the Word, while distinguished from the Father, is yet included within the unique divine identity proclaimed in the Old Testament.32 Charles Gieschen notes that Jesus portrays himself W K U R X J K R X W - R K Q · V * R V S H O X V L Q J W K H O D Q J X D J H R I W K H V X I I H U L Q J V H Uvant of Isaiah 53, identifying himself as the visible image of Yahweh come to suffer in atonement for sin. The close connection between the language of being lifted up (w Á þ) and being glorified ( î ø í¼ þ) indicates that Christ will show himself as the visible image of Yahweh principally on the cross.33 The fourteen famous ñà ïk öÀ statements (seven absolute, seven predicate) found throughout the Gospel are all instances of Jesus identifying himself with the one God of Israel.34 In 8:28, ñà ïk öÀ is linked with w Á þ F R Q Q H F W L Q J R Q F H D J D L Q W K H X O W L P D W H G L V F O R V X U H R I & K U L V W · V divine identity with the cross.35 Finally, in 10:30 Jesus includes himself in 30 Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 242. 31 Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 243. 32 Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 240. 33 & K D U O H V $ * L H V F K H Q ´ 7 K H ' H D W K R I - H V X V L Q W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q $ W R Q H P H Q W I R U 6 L Q " µ CTQ 72:3 (2008): 250 ²254. 34 Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 247. 35 * L H V F K H Q ´ 7 K H ' H D W K R I - H V X V µ 34 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) the great confession of Israel, the Shema ' H X W Z L W K W K H D V V H U W L R Q ´ , D Q G W K H ) D W K H U D U H 2 Q H µ36 7 K H U H I R U H W K U R X J K R X W - R K Q · V * R V S H O D Q G H V S H F L D O O \ L Q F K D S W H U I L Y H Christ identifies himself as Yahweh in the flesh come to give life. He there-fore establishes a hermeneutic for interpreting the books of Moses. When Moses wrote about the words and acts of Yahweh, he wrote about Jesus. This includes every Messianic prophecy, but is not limited to them. If all of 0 R V H V · Z U L W L Q J V V S H D N R I & K U L V W W K H Q R Q H F D Q R Q O \ I X O O \ X Q G H U V W D Q G W Kem through faith in him. Those who reject Christ cannot properly interpret 6 F U L S W X U H I R U W K H \ G R Q R W Y L H Z W K H P L Q ´ W K H O L J K W R I * R G · V Q H Z U H Y H O D W L R Q L Q W K H L Q F D U Q D W H : R U G µ37 : H F D Q W K H U H I R U H V X U P L V H W K D W 3 K L O L S · V F R Q I H V V L R Q L Q W K D W - H V X V L V ´ W K H R Q H (about) Z K R P 0 R V H V Z U R W H L Q W K H O D Z µ expresses the same view of the Torah. In the context of John 1, where John confesses the preexistence and divinity of Christ, the evangelist would not want us to see that confession in any other way. In John 5, Jesus takes Moses and establishes him as ö¼ ú ü ý Ï to himself. Moses wrote about Christ, therefore any who claim to embrace Moses should follow Christ. To those who do not see Christ as the one spoken of by Moses, namely Yahweh in the flesh, Moses becomes the ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷, the R Q H Z K R D F F X V H V D Q G F R Q G H P Q V W K H P ´ * R L Q J D J D L Q V W W K L V L Q W H U S U H W D W L R Q V W D Q G D U G P D N H V K L P W K H S U R V H F X W R U R I V X F K D P L V J X L G H G U H D G L Q J µ38 There- I R U H - H V X V K H U H L Q W U R G X F H V D V W U R Q J S R O H P L F + H D W W D F N V K L V R S S R Q H Q W · V misinterpretation and misappropriation of the ÷Á ö ø Ï and Moses. The Jewish leaders want to force the people to make a decision between Jesus D Q G 0 R V H V E H W Z H H Q W K L V Z D Q G H U L Q J U D E E L D Q G , V U D H O · V P R V W V L J Q L I L F D Q W figure. But in 5:45 ² - H V X V U H M H F W V W K L V Q R W L R Q ´ ) R U W K D W R Q H Z U R W H (! ñ ú ë ï ÷) D E R X W P H µ 6 W D Q + D U V W L Q H V X P P D U L ] H V ´ , W L V Q R W D G H F L V L R Q between Moses and Jesus. Rejecting Jesus equates to unfaithfulness to 0 R V H V µ39 Forcing such a decision means holding to a false dichotomy, for one can only truly follow Moses by believing in Jesus as Yahweh in the flesh. Philip understood this already in 1:45, where he accurately inter-preted the ÷Á ö ø Ï as speaking of the eternal Son of God who would become the incarnate Jesus Christ.40 36 Bauckham, The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple, 250. 37 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 55. 38 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 39 Harstine, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel, 60. 40 6 K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 35 - R K Q · V 3 R O H P L F Jesus can only combat the false dichotomy of his opponents by introducing a second part to his polemic. He must assault the exalted views of Moses in his day. As noted above, the Gospel of John emphasizes Moses as an instrument of God. Jesus adds the designations ö¼ ú ü ý Ï and ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷, but these remain the roles of an instrument of God, inextricably tied with the ÷Á ö ø Ï delivered through him. But in the Jewish mystical literature current in the first century, Moses has a much larger role, for he is depicted as actually ascending to heaven several times during his life, most importantly to receive the ÷Á ö ø Ï when he went up to Mount Sinai.41 Wayne Meeks notes that first-century Jewish writer Philo of Alexandria considered the incident at the burning bush, the incident at Mount 6 L Q D L D Q G 0 R V H V · G H D W K D O O D V H [ D P S O H V R I P \ V W L F D O H [ S H U L H Q F H V Every mystic longed for a vision of God, and Philo believed that Moses came nearer to that goal than any other human. In fact, he held Moses in V X F K K L J K H V W H H P W K D W K H V H H V W K H D V F H Q W V R I 0 R V H V D V ´ Y L U W X D O O \ D G H L I L F D W L R Q µ42 Philo Z U L W H V ´ 7 K L V (Exodus 24:12a) signifies that a holy soul is divinized by ascending not to the air or to the ether or to heaven (which is) higher than all but to (a region) above the heavens. And beyond the Z R U O G W K H U H L V Q R S O D F H E X W * R G µ43 For Philo, both at Sinai and at his death Moses leaves the bodily realm W R H Q W H U W K H ´ L Q F R U S R U H D O D Q G L Q W H O O L J L E O H µ + L V G H D W K L V D Q D V F H Q W W R K H D Y H Q after the pattern of the ascent of Sinai, but this ascent has a slightly dif-ferent character, as Meeks explains: ´ 7 K H P \ V W L F D V F H Q W (Sinai) is a kind of ¶ U H D O L ] H G H V F K D W R O R J \ ·; the final ascension is a projection and fulfillment of W K H J R D O R I W K H P \ V W L F D V F H Q W µ44 Other sources follow Philo in seeing Moses on Mount Sinai as an example of mystic ascent, including the Apocalypse of Ezra: I (Yahweh) told him (Moses) many wondrous things, showed him the secrets of the times, declared to him the end of the seasons: Then I commanded him saying: These words shalt thou publish openly, but these keep secret. And now I do say to thee: The signs which I have shewed thee, the dreams which thou hast seen, and the interpretations Z K L F K W K R X K D V K H D U GF O D \ W K H P X S L Q W K \ K H D U W ) R U W K R X V K D O W E H 41 Other Old Testament figures, including Abraham and Jacob, are also associated with this mystical tradition. 42 Meeks, The Prophet-King, 123. 43 Quoted in Meeks, The Prophet-King, 124. 44 Meeks, The Prophet-King, 125. 36 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) taken up from (among) men, and henceforth thou shalt remain with my Son, and with such as are like thee, until the times be ended.45 Moses therefore became a paradigm for other mystics to follow, as he P R G H O H G I R U W K H P W K H P \ V W L F D V F H Q W % X W W K H W U D G L W L R Q R I 0 R V H V · D V F H Q W Q R W only makes him a mystic example, it also makes him the originator of S U R S K H F \ D Q G W K H L G H D O N L Q J ´(In heaven) he received the Torah, was crowned king of Israel and thus G R G · V Y L F H-regent, and learned the secrets Z K L F K P D G H K L P W H D F K H U R I D O O S U R S K H W V µ46 We find an example of this X Q G H U V W D Q G L Q J L Q R Q H R I W K H H D U O L H V W D F F R X Q W V R I 0 R V H V · ascent, a document called Exagoge from the second century BC: 2 Q 6 L Q D L · V S H D N , V D Z Z K D W seemed a throne so great in size it touched the clouds of heaven. Upon it sat a man of noble mien, becrowned, and with a scepter in one hand while with the other he did beckon me. , P D G H D S S U R D F K D Q G V W R R G E H I R U H W K H W K U R Q H + H K D Q G H G R · H U W K H scepter and he bade me mount the throne, and gave to me the crown; then he himself withdrew from off the throne. I gazed upon the whole earth round about; things under it, and high above the skies. Then at my feet a multitude of stars fell down, and I their number reckoned up. They passed by me like armed ranks of men. Then I in terror wakened from the dream.47 In addition to the subtle polemic already noted, Jesus directly and explicitly combats the mystical ascent tradition in 3:13, where he declares: ´ 1 R R Q H K D V D V F Hnded into heaven except he who descended from heaven, W K H 6 R Q R I 0 D Q µ Scholars understand this polemic in different ways. Jey Kanagaraj considers the Gospel of - R K Q D ´ P \ V W L F D O µ G R F X P H Q W Z U L W W H Q L Q S D U W W R S U R-claim Christ to those enamored with the mystic tradition. According to this view, John wrote under the framework of mysticism, and therefore tried to understand Jesus within that context.48 Mystical communion with God is R Q O \ S R V V L E O H W K U R X J K & K U L V W . D Q D J D U D M V X P P D U L ] H V ´ % \ P H D Q V R I W K H ascent-motif John polemizes, proclaims, and persuades the people of his day by reinterpreting the contemporary mystical belief in terms of the S H U V R Q D Q G I X Q F W L R Q R I - H V X V µ49 Meeks comes to a similar conclusion, 45 Quoted in Meeks, The Prophet-King, 157. 46 Meeks, The Prophet-King, 215. 47 Jey J. Kanagaraj, ¶ 0 \ V W L F L V P · L Q W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q $ Q , Q T X L U \ L Q W R Its Background (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 112. The Greek text is provided by Meeks, The Prophet-King, 148. 48 Kanagaraj, ¶ 0 \ V W L F L V P · L Q W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q, 317. 49 Kanagaraj, ¶ 0 \ V W L F L V P · L Q W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q, 213. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 37 S R V L W L Q J W K D W W K H S R U W U D \ D O R I - H V X V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O Rwes much to the mystical traditions surrounding the early Christians. In the opinion of both scholars, the polemic exists not against mystic traditions as such, but against the superior view of Moses in those traditions. Jesus fulfills the functions earlier attributed to Moses, and he does so in a far superior way.50 Such approaches do not appreciate the depth of the polemic we find in the Gospel of John. Jesus does not simply replace Moses or others as the greatest mystic or as the fulfillment of mystical yearnings. He rejects these mystic traditions outright as a false way to understand God. Despite what the mystics taught, Moses did not ascend to heaven, nor should others attempt to commune with God in this way. Instead, Yahweh has come down to his people throughout history and climactically in the person of Jesus Christ.51 Christ is the only one who ascends and descends, and he does so not as the greatest mystic, but in order to be lifted up on the cross, ´ W K D W Z K R H Y H U E H O L H Y H V L Q K L P P D \ K D Y H H W H U Q D O O L I H µ 7 K H P \ V W L F D O ascent tradition by no means characterizes the view of all first-century Jews, but in the context of this tradition, we can see why Jesus needed to put Moses into his proper place as the instrument of God through whom he gave the ÷Á ö ø Ï, thereby making Moses the one who wrote about Jesus. Under the framework established in 5:45 ²47 and in the preceding G L V F X V V L R Q Z H F D Q Q R Z U H H [ D P L Q H - H V X V · X V H R I 0 R V H V L Q F K D S W H U V H Y H Q We already noted that Jesus emphasizes Moses as an instrument of Yahweh, not through a î ó clause as in the prologue, but instead through W K H S K U D V H ´ 1 R W W K D W L W L V I U R P 0 R V H V E X W I U R P W K H I D W K H U V µ 1 R Z Z H F D Q see the polemical rationale for this phrase. As he brings Moses into the discussion, Jesus seemingly gives him high status as the giver of the ÷Á ö ø Ï, using the active verb î½ î þ ô ï ÷ rather than ÷ îÁ ù ò coupled with î ó, as in the prologue. The phrase in 7:22 therefore functions to combat such a mis-interpretation. Moses does not give anything of his own accord, but instead Yahweh uses him, as he did the ë ü½ ú þ ÷, to give his ÷Á ö ø Ï. The rabbinical teachings based on the ÷Á ö ø Ï Û þ û½ þ Ï (7:23) passed through human hands, while Jesus received his teaching directly from the Father.52 As 3:13 emphasizes, Moses did not ascend to heaven to partake of the 50 Meeks, The Prophet-King, 319. 51 & K D U O H V $ * L H V F K H Q ´ 0 H U N D Y D K 0 \ V W L F L V P D Q G W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q µ (unpublished paper, Jerome Exegetical Seminar, Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, IN, October 28, 2009), 10 ²11. 52 Harstine, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel, 66. 38 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) mysteries of God. Instead, Jesus, who descended, teaches with the authority given to him by the one who sent him (7:16 ²18). But this does not mean that Jesus has no use for Moses in this text. Even though he puts Moses in his proper place, Jesus still calls on him as the ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷ 0 R V H V D F F X V H V - H V X V · R S S R Q H Q W V R I Q R W N H H S L Q J W K H ÷Á ö ø Ï: ´ ' L G Q · W 0 R V H V J L Y H W R \ R X W K H O D Z ( ü< ÷ ÷Á ö ø ÷)? And none from among you does ( ø ó ïf) the law ( ü< ÷ ÷Á ö ø ÷) : K \ G R \ R X V H H N W R N L O O P H " µ - R K Q 7:19). This accusation is once again especially surprising in a context where the Jews oppose Jesus for breaking the Sabbath law (the same incident that prompted the discourse in chapter five!). Jesus here teaches that doing ( ø ó ïf) the ÷Á ö ø Ï Û þ û½ þ Ï involves much more than following the ´ U X O H V µ , Q V W H Dd, as Jesus explicitly teaches in John 5, it involves a recog-nition that Moses wrote about Jesus throughout the ÷Á ö ø Ï. It requires the assertion that Jesus is Yahweh come in the flesh. Jesus therefore once again rejects the false dichotomy between Moses and himself. One who follows the ÷Á ö ø Ï and Moses would not seek to kill Jesus, but instead would embrace him. As noted above, Jesus will use a similar argument when the people call Abraham as a witness against him in chapter eight. All of the themes noted in 5:45 ²47 come together dramatically in John 9. Here the Pharisees attempt to claim Moses for themselves. Jesus begins the narrative with yet another healing on the Sabbath. He moves on, but W K H K H D O H G P D Q · V I U L H Q G V D Q G I D P L O \ E U L Q J K L P E H I R U H W K H 3 K D U L V H Hs. There they interrogate him, and the healed man asks the provocative question in Y H U V H ´ ' R \ R X D O V R Z D Q W W R E H F R P H h L V G L V F L S O H V " µ 7 K H 3 K D U L V H H V V H L ] H on this opportunity to bring forth Moses as the ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷. They will judge - H V X V · D F W L R Q V R Q W K H E D V L V R I W K H ÷Á ö ø Ï Û þ û½ þ Ï, for they consider themselves disciples of Moses, unlike the healed man, whom they describe as disciples R I ´ W K D W R Q H µ ô ïÀ ÷ ø ý). Why do they hold so firmly to Moses? ´ % H F D X V H * R G K D V V S R N H Q W R 0 R V H V µ 7 K L V F R X O G V L P S O \ U H I H U W R W K H intimate relationship between Yahweh and Moses described in the Pentateuch.53 However, in light of the ongoing polemic described above, we could perhaps also detect a reference to the ascent tradition, that God spoke to Moses when he ascended into heaven to receive the ÷Á ö ø Ï. Regardless, the Pharisees will stake their claim on Moses, for they do not know the origins of Jesus. The healed man knows that Jesus came ´from * R G µ Philip declared much the same in 1:45, correctly identifying Jesus as the one about whom Moses wrote. The irony runs deep in this text. The Pharisees attempt to claim Moses as the ô ë ü ò ñ ø úF ÷, but instead 53 See especially Exodus 33:11. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 39 W K H K H D O H G P D Q D F F X V H V W K H P R I U H I X V L Q J W R U H F R J Q L ] H - H V X V · G L Y L Q H R U L J L Q V The healed man exposes their false use of Moses, just as Jesus did in John 5 and 7. As Jesus said in chapter five, if they claim to believe in Moses, then they would believe in him.54 With the conclusion of this incident, Moses disappears from the narra-tive. The polemic has found its final conclusion, as the religious leaders fully embrace the false dichotomy and follow Moses rather than the one to whom he pointed.55 And in doing so, they will put to death the one whom Moses proclaimed, losing both Moses and the Messiah. IV. Moses as Instrument of Salvation In the prologue, - R K Q V W D W H V W K D W ´ W K H O D Z (= ÷Á ö ø Ï) was given ( ÷ îÁ ù ò) through Moses ( î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï) µ 7 K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q G H P R Q V W U D W H V W K D W God gave many gifts to his people î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï. As discussed extensively above, the gift of the ÷Á ö ø Ï through Moses is ultimately the gift of reve-lation pointing to Christ. However, other gifts were given î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï, and the provision of food and healing in the desert also are brought to the fore in the ongoing trial of Jesus. Following the miraculous feeding in John 6, the people deman G \ H W D Q R W K H U V L J Q ´ 2 X U I D W K H U V D W H W K H P D Q Q D L Q W K H Z L O G H U Q H V V D V L W L V Z U L W W H Q ¶He gave (! ÷ î þ ô ï ÷) them bread from heaven to H D W · µ 7 K H S H R S O H K H D U N H Q E D F N W R * R G · V J U D F L R X V S U R Y L V L R Q L Q W K H desert, or do they? The quotation that the people give (presumably from Nehemiah 9:15) does not mention who actually gave the bread.56 The verb ! ÷ î þ ô ï ÷ could refer to either Yahweh or Moses.57 Jesus obviously thought that the Jews confronting him regarded Moses as the giver, for he launched into the kind of polemic we encountered in other texts. Moses retains his importance as the one through whom the gift was given, but the manna R U L J L Q D W H G I U R P ´ P \ ) D W K H U ( ë ü¿ ú ö ø ý) µ 7 K H S H R S O H Z D Q W H G W R I R U F H D F K R L F H E H W Z H H Q 0 R V H V D Q G - H V X V E H W Z H H Q 0 R V H V · S U R Y L V L R Q R I P D Qna for I R U W \ \ H D U V L Q W K H G H V H U W D Q G - H V X V · I H H G L Q J R I W K H I L Y H W K R X V D Q G R Q R Q H afternoon. When viewed in those terms, as simply a competition between Moses and Jesus, Moses obviously had the greater miracle. In response, Jesus does not deny the earlier gi I W ´ W K U R X J K 0 R V H V µ î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï), but L Q V W H D G U H M H F W V W K H L U F R Q F H S W L R Q R I 0 R V H V · U R O H L Q J L Y L Q J W K D W J L I W 7 K H \ K D Y H the wrong grammar, for Moses cannot be the subject of the verbs when 54 Lincoln, Truth on Trial, 103. 55 Boismard, Moses or Jesus, 22 ²23. 56 Nehemiah 9:15 does specify who gave the manna, using the second person verb in prayer to Yahweh. 57 6 K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 40 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) G L V F X V V L Q J < D K Z H K · V J L I W V - H V X V S U R Y L G H V D F R U U H F W L Y H L P S O L F L W O \ D I I L U P L Q J the importanc H R I * R G · V J L I W R I P D Q Q D W K U R X J K 0 R V H V 58 Next, Jesus contrasts the gifts themselves. God did provide for his people in the desert î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï, continuing the mighty acts of salvation he wrought î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï to bring the people out from bondage in Egypt. However, this manna could not give eternal life. And so the same God who gave the gift of manna î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï now gives to the world a much greater gift, for Jesus points to himself as W K H ´ W U X H E U H D G I U R P K H D Y H Q ü< ÷ ú ü ø ÷ ô ü øv ø{ ú ë ÷ øv ü< ÷ õ ò ù ó ÷Á ÷; 6:32). µ God used Moses as his chosen instrument of temporal salvation for the people of Israel, but did not give to Moses the task of accomplishing eternal salvation. That role belongs V R O H O \ D Q G F R P S O H W H O \ W R - H V X V D V K H G H F O D U H V K L P V H O I W R E H W K H R Q H ´ J L Y L Q J life (O ø ø ó ïf) to the world µ . Not only does this bread give eternal life, but Jesus also describes this bread as the one who comes down ( ô ë ü ë ì ëÀ ÷ þ ÷) from heaven, once again a polemic against the mystic ascent tradition. Moses did not ascend to heaven to receive the mysteries of God, but instead the same God who worked through ( î ó) him now brings ulti-mate and eternal salvation through the one coming down from heaven, Yahweh in human flesh. Moses appears in a similar role in John 3. God gave the ÷Á ö ø Ï through Moses, he gave the manna through Moses, and in this text Jesus calls to mind the fact that God gave deliverance from serpents in the desert î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï. Jesus had spoken of birth from above and being born of the Spirit, but those actions needed an anc K R U L Q * R G · V Z R U N R I V D O Y D W L R Q + H S U R Y L G H V W K D W D Q F K R U E \ F R Q Q H F W L Q J * R G · V Z R U N R I U H E L U W K Z L W K K L V R Z Q death and resurrection. To do this, Jesus brings Moses to center stage: ´ $ Q G M X V W D V 0 R Ves lifted up (x þ û ï ÷) the snake in the desert, thus it is necessary for the Son of man to be lifted up (w þ ù& ÷ ë ó), in order that all who believe in h L P K D Y H H W H U Q D O O L I H µ - R K Q ²15). Jesus presents the incident in Numbers 21:4 ²9 as pointing directly to his death, specifically to his manner of dying. As per usual i Q - R K Q · V Gospel, this statement does not stand alone without a polemic. Jesus implies the same facts that he emphasized in John 6, that all those de-livered î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï still died. Jesus, however, gives eternal life ( þ% ÷ ëkà ÷ ó ø ÷).59 Ultimate salvation only comes through the work of Christ, and K H Z L O O D F F R P S O L V K V D O Y D W L R Q W K U R X J K D Q ´ D V F H Q W µ R I V R U W V though a 58 6 K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 59 6 K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ ²193. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 41 paradoxical one, as he is lifted up and glorified only upon the cross.60 John 3:13, which sets the stage for this mention of Moses, provides the definitive counter to the ascent tradition. The Son of Man, the one who came down from heaven, provides eternal life to all who believe, even as God pro- Y L G H G O L I H Z L W K 0 R V H V · O L I W L Q J X S of W K H V H U S H Q W & K U L V W · V ´ascent µ on the cross brings ultimate and eternal life to all, as the Christ takes on the verdict of death declared by God on his sinful creation. In both texts, Jesus places Moses into his most important role in the Gospel of John W K D W R I ´ L Q V W U X P H Q W R I V D O Y D W L R Q µ 7 K L V W L W O H K D V E H H Q F R L Q H G by the author of this study, though the concept is not without precedence. Harstine, in a similar investigation, identifies five different roles for Moses L Q - R K Q · V Q D U U D W L Y H L Q F O X G L Q J ´ R Q H Z K R D F W V L Q W K H salvific D U H Q D µ61 Stefan Schapdick in a more grudging way assigns to Moses a soteriological role: [ - R K Q · V * R V S H O] also picks up certain events from [ 0 R V H V ·] life as they are described in the biblical traditions (cf. John 3:14; 6:31 ²33). The interest especially focuses on the life-saving or life-preserving role of Moses . . . . The Fourth Gospel refers to these specific traditions by emphasizing the true originator of all these life-preserving acts, God himself (cf. esp. John 6:32) . . . . Moses is depicted as the mediator of his divine will. Thus, the focus is primarily on God as the one who gives and preserves life.62 Schapdick is therefore willing to assign Moses a salvific role, but only if we keep firmly in mind the polemic expressed throughout the Gospel. Moses does not provide eternal life, and therefore no one should exalt him too highly, especially at the expense of Jesus. However, he pushes the polemic W R R I D U D Q G S H U K D S V L Q W K H Z U R Q J G L U H F W L R Q ´ $ O O ( 0 R V H V ·) efforts described L Q W K H E L E O L F D O W U D G L W L R Q V Z K L F K K H S H U I R U P H G R Q E H K D O I R I * R G · V Z L O O D U H nothing E X W D Q D U U D W L Y H ¶ I R L O · R Q Z K L F K W K H R Y H U D O O V R W H U L R O R J L F D O T X D O L W \ R I - H V X V · G L Y L Q H U H Y H O D W L R Q F D Q E H G H P R Q V W U D W H G µ63 Shapdick incorrectly fo-cuses the polemic on the person of Moses himself, not on the false con- F H S W L R Q V R I 0 R V H V F X U U H Q W D W - H V X V · W L P H Zhich we have investigated above. Shapdick is no doubt correct that in John 3 and 6 Jesus wants to contrast the gift of life through Moses with that given by himself. He gives 60 Meeks, The Prophet-King 6 H H D O V R * L H V F K H Q ´ 7 K H ' H D W K R I - H V X V µ 61 Harstine, Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel, 72. 62 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 63 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ : K L O H Q R W D V H [ S O L F L W + D U V W L Q H F R P H V W R D V L P L O D U F R Q F O X V L R Q G H F O D U L Q J ´ 7 K R V H Z K R Z D Q W Z K D W L V true will not find it in Moses. µ + D U V W L Q H Moses as a Character in the Fourth Gospel, 64. 42 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) eternal life, while all those saved by Moses still died. But Jesus does not on that account discard the salvific works î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï as described in Scripture, instead giving them proper perspective as acts that point forward to, and are encompassed by, the ultimate deliverance he gives. Moses is clearly described as an instrument of Yahweh, but that does not entail a polemic against the Moses of Scripture, but only the Moses claimed E \ - H V X V · R S S R Q H Q W V 7 K H L U F R Q F H S W L R Q R I 0 R V H V D V G H P R Q V W U D W H G D E R Y H has perhaps been influenced by the ascent tradition, giving a view of , V U D H O · V J U H D W Hst leader that needed to be combated, but not at the expense R I W K H W U X H 0 R V H V 7 K H W H U P L Q R O R J \ ´ L Q V W U X P H Q W R I V D O Y D W L R Q µ D W W H P S W V W R preserve this proper balance. It endeavors to express the meaning of the î ó clause found in John 1:17 by putting Moses in his proper place as an instrument, perhaps the most important instrument in the Old Testament, E X W D Q L Q V W U X P H Q W Q R Q H W K H O H V V R I * R G · V V D Y L Q J Z R U N 7 K L V V D Y L Q J Z R U N both pointed forward to the cross and occurred only because of the cross. God showed his love through Moses for the sake of Christ. God delivered his people î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï O R R N L Q J I R U Z D U G W R & K U L V W · V X O W L P D W H U H G H P S W L R Q Though the courtroom scene found in other texts is not explicit in John 3 and 6, the salvific role of Moses is intimately tied to his judicial roles. The acts of salvation î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï point to Jesus; they witness to him just as in W K H W U L D O 0 R U H R Y H U - H V X V F O H D U O \ G H P R Q V W U D W H V W K D W F O L Q J L Q J W R < D K Z H K · V acts î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï without believing in the Christ is of no avail. Moses testifies to Christ and accuses his opponents in these texts through his ac-tions as he mediates the gifts of Yahweh. In the prologue, John declares that Yahweh gave the gift of the ÷Á ö ø Ï through Moses. In John 3 and 6, Jesus notes that God used Moses as his instrument to bring Israel bread from heaven to sustain them in their journey, and as the one who held up W K H V W D Q G D U G R I V D O Y D W L R Q I R U D O O W R V H H D Q G O L Y H ´ $ V L Q J O H K L V W R U L F D O H Y H Q W R I a divine act of life-saving presents Moses as its mediator. He has a kind of V R W H U L R O R J L F D O I X Q F W L R Q W K H Q µ64 Jesus presents his own mission as in many Z D \ V S D U D O O H O W R * R G · V V D O Y D W L R Q î ó Û þ û½ þ Ï, with one important dif- I H U H Q F H D V 0 H H N V H P S K D V L ] H V ´ : K D W W D N H V S O D F H V W K U R X J K - H V X V L V . . . far V X S H U L R U W R W K D W Z K L F K Z D V H Q D F W H G E \ 0 R V H V µ65 God worked through Moses to preserve temporal life in bringing his people from bondage and preserving them in the desert. Jesus comes to bring eternal life, which he will give by being lifted up for the sins of the world. Humanity does not have to choose between Moses and Jesus, for Moses pointed to Jesus, both 64 6 F K D S G L F N ´ 5 H O L J L R X V $ X W K R U L W \ 5 H- ( Y D O X D W H G µ 65 Meeks, The Prophet-King, 292. 0 D U R Q G H 0 R V H V L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O 43 through his words and the manner in which God gave his gifts through him. Conclusion The figure of Moses in the fourth Gospel cannot be understood prop-erly without considering together three elements of Johannine scholarship: - R K Q · V X Q G H U V W D Q G L Q J R I W K H ÷Á ö ø Ï, the trial motif, and the polemic against the mystical ascent tradition. At issue in the Gospel according to John is the identity of Jesus, and this debate characterizes every encounter be-tween Jesus and his foes, especially when Moses is involved. In these texts, Jesus operates with a two-sided polemic. The first is against the exalted views of Moses current in mystical circles. Without a proper under- V W D Q G L Q J R I W K H - R K Q · V S R O H P L F D J D L Q V W W K H D V F H Q W W U D G L W L R Q R Q H U X Q V W K H danger of completely misu Q G H U V W D Q G L Q J 0 R V H V · U R O H L Q - R K Q · V * R V S H O , I this polemic is not taken far enough, John appears simply to be replacing Moses with Jesus as the greatest mystic. If it is taken too far, then the per-son of Moses is pitted against Jesus, which is exactly wha W - H V X V · R S S R-nents want to do. Second, regardless of how highly one views Moses, Jesus declares that they have interpreted him incorrectly. Not only is Moses not greater than Jesus, in fact Moses subordinates himself under Jesus by testi-fying to him. Jesus builds the case for his divine origin by claiming Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï for himself. They are not to be discarded, but properly interpreted. This proper interpretation only comes through the lens of Christ, the incarnation of Yahweh in the flesh come to deliver eternal salvation to all people The Gospel of John indicates that the Jews wanted to drive a wedge between Moses and Jesus, pitting one against the other. Modern readers of John are tempted to do the same, but as this study demonstrates, John writes specifically to counter such an approach. Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï are not the enemies of Jesus; in fact, when used properly, they both point to Christ. Moses did not ascend into heaven, but Jesus Christ has come down from heaven to deliver his people from their bondage to sin by ascending upon the cross.66 Instead of presenti Q J D W L U D G H D J D L Q V W 0 R V H V - R K Q · V Gospel puts him in his proper, important place. God selected Moses as his chosen ´instrument of salvation, µ the one who would interact with < D K Z H K ´ I D F H W R I D F H µ and who would testify to the mighty acts of a God who would one day take on flesh and deliver Moses and all humanity from sin. In every way, Moses and the ÷Á ö ø Ï testify to Jesus as the one he 66 * L H V F K H Q ´ 0 H U N D Y D K 0 \ V W L F L V P D Q G W K H * R V S H O R I - R K Q µ ²11. 44 Concordia Theological Quarterly 77 (2013) claims to be: the Son of God, Yahweh in the flesh. Moses wrote about Jesus on every page of the Torah, for he wrote about Yahweh and his great deeds among the people of Israel. Next to the testimony of the Father K L P V H O I 0 R V H V L V W K H U H I R U H - H V X V · J U H D W H V W D G Y R F D W H Z K L F K P D N H V K L P W K H D F F X V H U R I - H V X V · R S S R Q H Q W V 5 H Mecting Jesus means the rejection of Moses and indeed Yahweh himself, for as Moses declared, Jesus is the visible image of Yahweh. In the words he wrote, in the actions that Yahweh did W K U R X J K K L P 0 R V H V F R Q V W D Q W O \ D Q G F R Q V L V W H Q W O \ S R L Q W V W R - H V X V - R K Q · V argument is encapsulated in his prologue: the ÷Á ö ø Ï came through Moses, and it testifies to í¼ ú ó Ï ô ëe õ¿ ù ï ó ë, found only in Jesus.