Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Heaven Has Opened Up: Finding an Intertextual Relationship between Zechariah LXX 3:1-10
and John 1:47-51
March 8, 2009
Warren Carter notes that the Evangelist in the Gospel of John utilizes a mosaic of
traditions from the Hebrew Bible, and in particular the traditions that highlight the limitations
and destruction of earthly kingdoms. Metonymic intertextuality, which Carter is referring to, is a
tactic in which the author of a text, who is specifically located in an oral culture, makes
“abbreviated references to larger well-known cultural codes, relying on the audience to supply
and elaborate the assumed cultural tradition as the work is performed.” 1 In other words, the
author, and her/his readers possess a common frame of reference and vocabulary in which only
they comprehend; usually, this may leave those outside of the community at a disadvantage
when they attempt to examine the writer‟s texts. A number of scholars 2, with Carter, Adele
Reinhartz, John Dominic Crossan, and John J. Collins among them, have noted the importance of
Zechariah‟s royal visions in chapters 9-14 and their influence on the Evangelist‟s telling of the
Passion narrative; however, a comparison between the divine council court scene in Zech LXX 3
and the final four passages in the first chapter of John has yet to be examined. In this work, I
hope to first, evaluate Nathanael‟s confession of Jesus in light of the meanings of the dual title of
Johannine Jesus‟s re-enactment of the conclusion of the oracle in Zech LXX 3:10; and lastly,
1
Warren Carter. John and Empire: Initial Explorations. New York: T & T Clark, 2008, 339.
2
See for instance, Dominic Crossan‟s God and Empire; Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan‟s The Last Week:
The Day-by-Day Account of Jesus‟s Final Week in Jerusalem.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
Messianic Names
“Now Listen! Joshua, the High Priest, you and your neighbors, the ones who are seated in front
of your face. These men will be signs of wonders. For, Behold! I bring my servant the Branch.”
(Zech LXX 3:8, author‟s translation)
Nathanael answered and says to him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; you are the King of
Israel.” (John 1:49, author‟s translation)
The story that we find in John 1 after the Prologue contains several witnesses who make
confessions either about themselves or concerning the identity of others, specifically Jesus of
Nazareth. When the two disciples that John commands to follow Jesus first address Jesus, they
refer to him as Rabbi, which the Evangelist goes on to explain means teacher (διδαζκαλε) in this
context (1:38). If we go further along in the text, we observe that Jesus of Nazareth meets a man
named Nathanael and calls him “a true Israelite” who does not have any treachery within him
(1:47). The Evangelist‟s record of Nathanael‟s final response to his encounter with Jesus
concludes with him telling John‟s audience that this Jesus is again, first, a Rabbi, and then the
Warren Carter contends that the Fourth Gospel was written sometime around the first
century in the city of Epheseus.3 If this is the case, it would not be a stretch to say that Israelites
like Nathanael, located within the Roman Empire, were familiar with the language used by
Hellenistic ruler cults. The act of attributing divinity to a military conqueror was normative
several centuries before the Common Era. For example, the Ptolemies‟ dynasty attempted to
synthesize the phaoronic and the Greco-Hellenistic traditions; Ptomely I was enshrined as Soter
3
Warren Carter. John and Empire: Initial Explorations. New York: T & T Clark, 2008. 15 &52
adoration for Augustus proves that there were at least some Judeans who viewed the
Starting with John‟s Prologue, Jesus the Messiah is described by the Evangelist as “That
Unique One, the one who was explained, existing in the Father‟s bosom” (1:18). There are two
things that I would like to note. First, God is referred to as Father here, implying a familial
relationship between Godself and Jesus the Messiah. Second, the God of Moses (1:17) is also
the same one who has a Son who exists close to God‟s heart; this may be the Evangelist‟s way of
reiterating her/his Jewish-Christian argument for the pre-existence of the Word (1:1-3) in
Hellenistic divine ruler cult terms. The Psalter LXX, in a much similar fashion, may express
messianic beliefs within the royal psalms. 6 Psalm 88:27 LXX reads, “I will make him firstborn,
highest among the kings of the earth.” The lexical version for the Greek word used for the
English verb make is , which means „I place or to set up‟ in both the active and passive
voices. However, when the verb is followed by at least two nouns in the accusative, it can mean
„making someone into something‟; in the case of Psalms LXX 88:27, God is making Israel‟s
Nathanael‟s confession in John 1:49 reveals the Evangelist‟s knowledge of the tradition
in which the king of Israel (βαζιλεὺς ηοῦ Ἰζραήλ) is begotten by God as God‟s child (ὁ σἱὸς ηοῦ
θεοῦ). Kingship within the context of this passage does not necessarily have to be associated
with a ruler in the line of David. Both of the disciples of John the Baptizer as well as Nathanael
identify Jesus the Messiah as Rabbi, or Teacher at first. The declaration made by Nathanael
4
Collins, Adela Yarbro, and John Joseph Collins. King and Messiah As Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblica
and Related Literature. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 2008. , 52-53.
5
Ibid, 54.
6
Ibid, 56.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
then, is not two fold, but actually threefold: Teacher, Son of God, and King of Israel. This
affirmation denotes not only that Jesus as a rabbi is the Messiah, but also that the Messiah has
come as a teacher, much like the priestly tradition we find in the Hebrew Bible. The major and
minor prophets do not share a monolithic understanding of God‟s chosen savior for Israel, but I
would like to focus on is the priestly vision of a messianic figure found in Zech LXX 3. Collins
observes that the Septuagint form of Jewish prophetic literature “construes a number of passages
Unfortunately, like many scholars, John Collins interprets ηὸν δοῦλόν μοσ Αναηολήν
“my servant, the Branch” in Zech LXX 3:8 as the governor Zerubbabel who we learn about in
the writings of the prophet Haggai and to whom we see Zechariah first discussing in chapter
four.8 Zerubbabel is not named in the Zech LXX 3 or the Masoteric Text, as John A. Davies
points out, so we must allow for both the literary context determine the identity of the Branch.9
Later in Zech LXX 6, the LORD promises that the Branch will be enthroned as a priest on his
throne; Zechariah compares the character of the Branch/Shoot with Joshua, son of Zephaniah,
the high priest who is being addressed by the angel of the LORD in the third chapter. Whether
pertinent; what matters is that the Zecharian understanding of ἀναηολὴ excludes any
7
Collins, Adela Yarbro, and John Joseph Collins. King and Messiah As Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical
and Related Literature. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 2008, 59.
8
For ex., see Ben C. Ollenburger‟s translation and commentary in the New Interpreter‟s Bibe, p. 765-766.
9
John A. Davies. A Royal Priesthood : Literary and Intertextual Perspectives on an Image of Israel in Exodus
19.6, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series. London ; New York: T & T Clark
International, 2004.
pre-existent Priest-King. Raymond Brown adds that some of the elements of the Johannine
community contained Samaritan elements where Moses piety was prevalent.10 The Taheb (the
Messiah in the Samaritan tradition), much like Moses, would function as a Revealer and
Restorer, who as the Samaritan woman tells Jesus, “will proclaim all things” to them (John 4:25).
Jesus confesses to her that he is the Taheb (4:26); this is the Evangelist‟s way of reaffirming the
instructing vocation of God‟s anointed one much like the messianic figures in the prophetic
Prophecy Performed
“In that day,” says the LORD Almighty, “Each will summon his neighbor under a vine and
under a fig tree.” (Zech LXX 3:10, author‟s translation)
Nathanael asks him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Phillip
summoned you, I saw you under the fig tree.” (John 1:48, author‟s translation)
I will now continue to presuppose that the Evangelist intentionally alludes to the imagery
described of Zechariah‟s fourth vision in John 1:47-51. We have very little evidence that a
redactor or an editor made additions to the last four verses of John; all we have is the text. The
Evangelists in all four gospels deliberately merge the drama of Jesus the Messiah with the
metaphors, similes, and stories from the Old Testament. According to Craig A. Evans, instances
such as Jesus quoting Psalms 22 while he is dying on the cross cannot be easily explained as
features of a hopeful Jewish eschatology or messianism. 11 Evans proposes that in light of the
religious context of the Second Temple period, Jesus patterned his actions and ministry after
10
Raymond Brown,. The Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist Press, 1979, 44.
11
Chilton, Bruce, and Craig A. Evans. Authenticating the Activities of Jesus. New Testament tools and studies, v. 28, 2. [L]eiden: Brill, 1999,
374.
passages as they were inspired by the hope of Israel‟s restoration. 12 While Evans‟s primary
focus is on the Passion Narrative and Jesus‟s triumphant entry into Jerusalem (by noting the
words in Zech 9:9 with the actions of Jesus found in John 12:15 and Matt 21:5), I will compare
the promise of the LORD Almighty in Zech LXX 3:10 with the words and deeds of Jesus in John
1:48.
There are a few examples of prophets during the first century Common Era whose actions
ministries drew their inspiration from the biblical narrative. Josephus recorded a story about one
prophet who convinced a great crowd to join him at the Jordan River where he would part it and
they could escape to safe passage.13 He also tells us about another prophet from Egypt who
deceived around thirty-thousand people and leading them around a circular route until they came
to Mount of Olives in the hope that the walls of Jerusalem would fall. The false prophet escaped
from battle while a vast majority of his army was hunted by Felix and the Romans. Theudas, the
false prophet from the first story, was inspired by Deuteronomy 18 where Moses promises safe
passage into the promised land; the second prophet may have been motivated by Amos LXX
2:10 where God recalls that God led around the Israelites in the desert. 14
In a similar manner, the mission of the Johannine Jesus is informed by the prophet
Zechariah. After John the Baptizer is questioned by the Levites and priests, he sees Jesus
coming and introduces Jesus as the Messiah “who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).
Two days later, Phillip summons Nathanael, and Jesus spots him under a fig tree (John 1:48).
12
Ibid, 375.
13
Chilton, Bruce, and Craig A. Evans. Authenticating the Activities of Jesus. New Testament tools and studies, v. 28, 2. [L]eiden: Brill, 1999.
377.
14
Ibid, 379.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
The LORD promises the high priest Joshua through the prophet Zechariah that God will remove
wickedness ( from the land in a single day and then every person will be able to invite
her/his neighbor to sit under her/his own vine and fig tree (Zech 3:9-10). In both scenarios, the
promise of the LORD and the interaction between Jesus and Nathanael, sin is pronounced as
something that must be removed from the Earth/World (in Zech LXX 3:9 and
in John 1:29). Both nouns are in the genitive case which indicates possession in
John does not give a timeline for how many days it will take to do this, but Zechariah
tells Joshua the high priest that the process will only take one day. By renaming Nathanael as a
true Israelite in which there is no deceit, Jesus is inviting Nathanael in a new messianic age
reminiscent of Zechariah‟s dream of human beings enjoying each other‟s fellowship under their
own fig trees. The removal of sin from the world, the process of summoning neighbors, and the
establishment of communities are the common threads in Zech LXX 3:10 and John 1:48.
Walter Brueggeman contends that the oracle we see in Micah 4:1-5 “is a practice of
knowing, subversive political imagination” in which the logic of promise serves as a criticism of
the present.15 The promises of the LORD change religious symbols and offer different policy
options from the status quo. The prophets Micah and Zechariah draw upon a common tradition
of prosperity and peace represented by the idea of “every person under her/his own vine and
under her/his fig tree.” Therefore, the prophet provides a link between the hopes of a community
and its religious history. The phrase ἕκαζηος ὑποκάηω ἀμπέλοσ αὐηοῦ καὶ ἕκαζηος ὑποκάηω
ζσκῆς αὐηοῦ appears in Micah LXX 4:4 and Zech LXX 3:10. There is a slight differentiation in
the Zecharian text because not only will each person have her/his own fig tree, but also she/he
15
Walter Brueggeman, A Social Reading of the Old Testament: Prophetic Approaches to Israel‟s
Communal Life. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994, 97.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
will also invite her/his neighbors to share in this peace. Micah foresees in his oracle that no one
will be afraid. Zechariah and Micah are, in Brueggeman‟s words, “practicing bold imagination,
evoking an alternative community yet anticipated.”16 The Johannine Jesus participates in the
fulfillment Zechariah‟s fourth oracle by acting out the Scriptural patterns of the prophetic
vine/fig tree blessing tradition. Fast forward to the day Jesus of Nazareth finds Nathanael under
the fig tree and so begins his mission to transform his own community (John 1:10) into the true
Israel (1:47).
And the Angel of the LORD warned Joshua saying, “Thus says the LORD Almighty, „If you walk
in my ways and if you keep my commandments, then you will pass judgment on my house. And if
you will guard my court, then I will give you men who walk in the midst of these standing.”
(Zechariah LXX 3:6-7, author‟s translation)
And he [Jesus] says to him [Nathanael], “Truly, truly, I say to you (plural), you (plural) will see
heaven has opened up and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”
(John 1:51, author‟s translation)
The Evangelist‟s insistence on the pre-existence of the Logos signals to the reader to
know that Jesus the Messiah is a foreigner to this world. Robert Kysar interprets the two-story
cosmos he discovers in John‟s gospel as a metaphor for how us human beings must understand
ourselves either as beings self-reliant apart from God or as creatures dependent upon God.17 The
narratives in Zechariah 3 and John 1:51 depict a world in which the reign of God is placed in
stark contrast with the powers that only temporarily succeed in the here and now. For Jesus, the
age to come looks like heaven opening up, with celestial hosts of God going up and going down
upon the Son of Man. The general direction in which these angels are manifesting themselves
16 16
Walter Brueggeman, A Social Reading of the Old Testament: Prophetic Approaches to Israel‟s Communal Life.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press,, 103.
17
Robert Kyser. John, the Maverick Gospel. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976, 76-77.
the way up there in heaven while we, the world Jesus has come to save, are all down here. There
are other dualisms, such as the darkness versus the light, the true Israel versus the Jews, truth as
These dualisms, however, point to the importance of Jesus the Messiah as God‟s
revelation and our dependence on God‟s manifestation in order to understand who we really
are.19 A possible Johannine view of salvation could be the passive reception of knowledge that
God gives directly through God‟s own self-disclosure; just as Nathanael accepts Jesus as Rabbi,
Son of God, and King of Israel without any signs or evidence that Jesus of Nazareth is God‟s
chosen one, so must we just receive the knowledge of God the Evangelist witnessed in the life of
Jesus. The one cosmic dualism in Zechariah LXX 3 is the dichotomy that the angel of the
LORD creates between Joshua‟s filthy clothes (which are mentioned twice in v. 3 and 4) in
contrast with the clean turban the high priest receives (clean turban appears twice in v. 5) along
with the rich garment he is given (v.6). The maintenance of the separation between the clean and
the unclean as important for the priest‟s vocation as texts such as Leviticus chapters 11-14
demonstrate. The removal of Joshua‟s filthy clothing was to represent God removing his sin in
order that Joshua could serve in the temple. Joshua the high priest is in complete need of God‟s
The final passage in the first chapter of John‟s gospel introduces us to the Evangelist‟s
unique angelology. Jesus‟ prediction that the heavens would open up and God‟ angels would
descend and ascend upon the Son of Man was one of the few times the Evangelist mentions
Jesus‟ concept of angels. Some traditions about John 5 point to a tradition in which angels were
18
Robert Kysar. John, the Maverick Gospel. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976, 74.
19
Ibid, 79.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
able to touch one of the pools in the temple and heal the blind, deaf, and paralyzed. Two angels
appear after the resurrection to tell Mary Magdalene that her Rabboni (Aramaic form of Rabbi,
or teacher) is risen (20:12). For John, angels have the capacity to communicate with human
beings and they may have the power to heal humanity‟s medical ailments. Correspondingly, the
angel of the LORD in Zechariah LXX 3 commands the other angels to remove Joshua‟s filthy
clothes, speaks for God to human beings, and is not identified as the LORD. 20 Angels, then,
represent God‟s Wholly Otherness where God is so Holy that God has to use mediators in order
to talk to us sinful humans or to heal us from our diseases. God‟s transcendence is underscored
Lastly, I would like to make a few comments on John‟s and Zechariah‟s idea of the devil.
The Greek term is used in both the Gospel of John and Zech LXX 3. The devil in
Zechariah is only able to stand at Joshua‟s right hand side and accuse him. The devil is actually
one of the attendees in the LORD‟s court. In stark contrast, the devil in John‟s Gospel is free
agent working in this world, functioning as the father of all lies (8:44), and who is able to place
wicked notions into the hearts of human beings. The devil is also seen by the Johannine Jesus to
be the ruler of this present as the personification of evil. 21 John‟s Gospel transforms the
conception of the Accuser in Zechariah to a celestial being accomplished enough to rule the
20
Peter R Carrell. Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1997, 25.
21
Robert Kysar. John, the Maverick Gospel. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976, , 79.
Copyright. Rodney A. Thomas Jr., 2009
Works Cited
Brown, Raymond Edward. The Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist Press,
1979.
Brueggeman, Walter. A Social Reading of the Old Testament: Prophetic Approaches to Israel‟s
Communal Life. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.
Carrell, Peter R. Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of
John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Carter, Warren. John and Empire: Initial Explorations. New York: T & T Clark, 2008.
Chilton, Bruce, and Craig A. Evans. Authenticating the Activities of Jesus. New Testament tools
and studies, v. 28, 2. [L]eiden: Brill, 1999.
Collins, Adela Yarbro, and John Joseph Collins. King and Messiah As Son of God: Divine,
Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature. Grand Rapids,
Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 2008.
Kysar, Robert. John, the Maverick Gospel. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976.