18:5 This is interesting. In John's account, Judas' kiss does not occur. Surely John was there to see, and is a rather more reliable source than Mark or Luke, at least. . .
18:10 How did John know the slave's name? Did he become a believer later? Or did John do some research?
18:13 Always interesting to wonder how the office of High Priest, originally a lifetime appointment, became a n annual office.
18:17 I wonder a bout the inclusion of this moment. Was John taking a dig at Peter? How reliable a narrator is he, considering that he himself is a character--assuming his authorship, of course, which is contested.
18:23 Furthermore, Annas is not even high priest at this point, is he? So why address him thusly?
18:26 Again, Malchus has an unusually prominent role in this gospel. What was John's connection to him?
18:39 In my opinion, Pilate behaved reasonably throughout this. Not only his politic approach to the problem (giving them a way out with their pride intact), but his philosophy. To a dogmatic person, the best answer is always, "What is truth?"
19:8 As well he should be, after the way he allowed him to be treated.
19:11 Waitaminnit. These two statements are clear enough separately, but together open up to an interesting interpretation. In the first part, the one above who granted Pilate power is clearly God, but in the second part the one who gives the power is held at fault by Jesus. Is he blaming God? Or is it a trick of proximity?
19:13 A real dilemma. Clearly to Pilate, Jesus is something divine. At the same time, the Jews have a point. In the right context, his claim is a threat to the Emperor and that divinity.
19:16 What else could he do at this point?
19:22 Other than take a cheap dig, that is.
19:24 This is not the first time that John seems to be playing Matthew's game of reverse prophecy. One wonders where JEsus got such a garment.
19:28 By the same token, Jesus seems to be playing the game here as well. The parenthetical could be taken to mean that Jesus was acting consciously in behalf of prophecy.
19:35 This might be a response to my reaction. John sees that his account might seem revisionist, and he offers himself up to questioning. This is rather a forceful, if not soundproof, argument for his authorship.
20:2 Who is they? Who would benefit from taking him? The Romans? The Sanhedrin? His own disciples?
20:14 This opens one of the most fascinating theological disputes in the Bible. Why did she not recognize him? Was he obscured, did her grief blind her, or was he resurrected in some unrecognizable form?
20:16 Perhaps her back was to him, and that is why she had to turn around to greet him.
20:17 Why not hold on to him? Is he incorporeal?
20:24 How convenient that the one who looked most like him was not there when he appeared. A clever trick?
21:4 This interesting question rears its head again. Perhaps the confusion about his identity is here attributable to his distance on the shore.
21:19 John here reveals a touching affection for Simon Peter, perhaps a wistful reflection of events that had happened long before their writing, and of a man now dead. Fitting, then, that he end with a reflection on his own death.
No comments:
Post a Comment