'Spirit and Truth' Gnosticism
John 4:23-27
In response to her reply, Jesus immediately seized the opportunity and declared (lit.), “I am [egō eimi; 4:26], the one speaking to you.” In John the use of egō eimi is an important theological theme that is used in the mouth of Jesus as a self-identifying vehicle for announcing some important theological idea concerning him. Normally the expression is accompanied by some thematic description such as “bread of life” (6:35), “light of the world” (8:12), “door of the sheep” (10:7), “good shepherd” (10:14), or “resurrection and life” (11:25). But in a few places like the present one egō eimi is used without such an accompanying description (cf. also 6:20; 8:58; 18:5). In these texts the shocking reality of a confession of the divine-human presence is being highlighted, and there is no need for discussion with Jesus about who he is. Elsewhere the egō eimi statement by itself is used to emphasize that Jesus is the startling presence of the divine, and in one case it highlights the fact that resistance to him is impossible (18:5). The particular force of the statement here needs to be noted. The conversation is finished!
4:27–30 The return of the disciples constitutes an interruption that in effect sets up a striking contrast between the woman, who is an outsider, and the disciples, who are insiders. The contrast is a study in reversal because the insiders who ought to know Jesus’ perspective wrestle with unspoken questions that reveal their lack of understanding, whereas the outsider posits an important question that moves her in the direction of being an insider. The words in these verses are therefore exceedingly important.
The disciples were astonished that Jesus was “talking with a woman” (4:27). Many commentators following Billerbeck have noted the impropriety of Jewish men talking with a woman in a public place like a street. This opinion included the questionable nature of speaking with one’s own wife in public (ʾAbot 1:4–5). Indeed, the rabbis frowned on discussing any theological issues with women, likening the process of such intellectual discussion to liberating them or opening them to a life of immorality (m. Sota 3, 4 and t. ʿErub. 53). The disciples were thus men of their times, probably more concerned that Jesus was “talking with a woman” than that she was a Samaritan. She really had three strikes against her: (1) she was a woman, (2) she was a Samaritan, and (3) she had a questionable reputation. Yet Jesus did not seem to be bothered by such customary patterns of restrictive conversation. His message was for everyone, those of every culture and standing in society. He was truly cross-cultural in his perspective and concern for others.
The text of 4:27 here indicates that although the disciples had many questions about this so-called “improper” type of conversation, they apparently did not challenge Jesus. Unfortunately we are not told why the disciples were unwilling to confront Jesus, but it is not difficult to surmise. The disciples probably guessed that they would be censured for their Jewish male biases.
Borchert, Gerald L. John 1–11. Vol. 25A. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996. Print. The New American Commentary.
Comments