THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS1 IN

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN WITH SPECIAL

EMPHASIS ON THE CONFESSION OF
THOMAS (20:28)
Jan G. van der Watt

University of Pretoria

ABSTRACT

The early Christians interpreted the cross/resurrection-events in diffe

theological ways. The author of John argues that Jesus showed his p over life and death by laying down
his life and taking it up «again.
cross/resurrection-events link Jesus in a unique way to his Father
living God, who has power over life and death. By illustrating his a
to that power over life and death, Jesus convinced his disciples of divine identity. This conviction is
expressed in the climactic confe of Thomas in 20:28: 'My Lord and my God'.

1. Introduction

The cross/resurrection-events remain an intriguing aspect of early Christian experience. On the one
hand, it was a 4 skandalon ' for many that the Messiah should die on a cross.2 On the other hand,
exactly this ' skandalon ' became

1 For the author of this Gospel lhe cross, burial, resurrection, ascension, and even the
outpouring of the Spirit, are different facets of one important integrated event (which is
refer to in this article as the ''cross/ resurrection-event! s'). These events are treated in a
close relationship to each other, without collapsing the different events into an
undistinguishable whole. Wilckens (1998, 340-341) uses words like 'ineinsgesehen' and
'ineinsfallen' when he refers to the relation between the cross, resurrection and ascension
of Jesus. These words might perhaps be too strong. See also Brown (1966, 399). De Boer
(1996) separates the different events and divides them into levels of tradition. This leads to
underestimating the cohesion of the cross/resurrection-events in this Gospel.
2 See Paul's argument in 1 Cor 1:1 8ff. or John 6:61, Acts 17:32. See also Stibbe (1994, 64-
65) on the genre of tragedy in John's Gospel.
 1 28 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

the heart of the early Christian kerugma, the power of God to save the
world.3
John4 reflects on these 'cross/resurrection-events' in his own unique
way.5 For him the cross/resurrection-events are a revelatory sign (2:18ff.) of
the unique presence of God incarnate among his people. As such, it
functions as a central motif in the Gospel according to John,6 irrespective of
efforts in the past to devalue the role of the cross in this Gospel.7
The aim of this article is humble, as it should be, when a thoroughly
discussed topic like the cross/resurrection-events in this Gospel is
approached. Focus will fall on an aspect of the cross/resurrection-events,
which was not sufficiently emphasized in the past, namely the function of
the confession of Thomas in bringing the cross/resurrection-events into
perspective.8 The confession does not only form the climax of the Gospel

3 See. for instance, in Paul's case 1 Cor 2:1-5, and compare John 3:14-15.
4 'John* is used for convenience without implying anything about the origin or author of the
Gospel.
5 This does not imply that there are no parallels with the other documents of the NT - cf.
Bergmeier (1988, 283-286). Thüsing (1979, 334) calls John's approach a
'Neu interpretation des Grundkeiygmas von Tod und Auferstehung Jesu'. For a discussion
on the relationship between the passion narratives of the Synoptic Gospels and John, see Green (1988, 105ff.).

6 Several comprehensive studies have illustrated this point clearly. See Hahn (1970); De Boer (1996);
Knöppler (1994); Diebold-Scheu ermann (1996); Rahner (1998); Gniesmer (2000).

7 In the past the cross was often not regarded as a central theme in this Gospel, especially in
comparison to the Pauline 'theology of the cross', where the atoning and reconciliatory values of the cross are
emphasized. On this issue, cf. Van der Watt (1995, 142-158), with the conclusion that John does not have a
developed 'theology of the cross', as is the case
with Paul. Cf., for instance, Bultmann (1984, ad he) who integrates the cross/resuirection-
events into the incarnation event, Forstell (1974); Rahner (1998, 62). Käsemann (1968,
10), interprets the cross/resurrection-events simply as the 4 gate ' back to the glory from
where Jesus originally came. See also Bultmann (1984, 164, 387); Panackel (1988, 239-
240). See also Bergmeier (1988, 286).
8 John also reflects on aspects like the royal power of Jesus on the cross, his glorification, the cross as the
eschatological plan of God, the cross as service, etc. The cleansing of the
disciples, or the salvation from the power of evil and sin (1:29) are also some of the
relevant elements, as Morris (1976, 146fF.) indicates. Conzelmaim (1976, 328) argues that joy and peace
functions prominently. These aspects, which present a deeper theological
reflection on the cross, are not going to be discussed in detail here
1 30 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

These two perspectives will now receive attention.

2. 1 Perspective one: The cross/resurrection-events through the limited human perspective of

unbelief.
The conflict between Jesus and his unbelieving opponents develops mainly along three lines in this
Gospel:
(i) The behavior of Jesus towards the religious practices of his Jewish
opponents forms the first line. According to his Jewish opponents, Jesus did
not show the respect towards Jewish cultic practices that were expected from a law-abiding Jew.
He, for instance, healed people on the Sabbath (5:18; 7:23; see the irony in 7:19), which annoyed
the Jewish leaders (5:18) and disrupted the cultic practices at the temple (2: 13-22).

(ii) The second line relates to blasphemy. The opponents of Jesus maintain that He
is an ordinary human (10:33) who made blasphemous
statements (5:17-18; 8:37,40; 19:7) by pretending to be a messianic agent of God, God's Son, or
even that He made himself equal with God (5:18 - 'foov
èauxòv îiotôv tip 0£<S). However, according to them his origin does not correspond to their
prophesies in Scripture, since he does not come from Bethlehem as descendent of David (7:41-
42).13 He is but the son of Joseph and Maiy from Nazareth in the more obscure Galilee (1:46;
6:42; 7:52). His
own brothers were also skeptical about their older brother's actions and see
his behavior only as an effort to catch the public eye (7:4-5). Actually, according to some of
them, Jesus was a bit disturbed or even mad, as his
opponents tiy to point out in 8:48 or 10:20. This line of argumentation also
supplies the direct 'historical reason' for Jesus' crucifixion and motivates
these opponents' initial decision to kill Jesus, as early as 5: 18.

(iii) A third line starts to unfold with the increased public attention Jesus received after the raising
of Lazarus. This added a political dimension to the situation and inspired the Jewish authorities even
more to get rid of Jesus (1 1 :47ff; cf. also 8:37,40; 18:3 1). One man should die for the people so that

the whole nation should not perish, Caiaphas claimed (11:50). They
consequently beseeched Pilate to crucify Jesus (18: Iff). This political
dimension also provided the reason why the cross was the chosen modus of death. It was a usual way
in which the Roman state got rid of political rebels

1 3 John does not develop the Bethlehem tradition (7 :42).

 who had committed serious cri ironically put their demand to

acknowledgement of Caesar as the

context.15
If one would, therefore, ask the opponents of Jesus why a man called
Jesus was crucified on that particular Friday, they would have answered that
Jesus was, to them, a pretentious blasphemer who tried to disrupt the
orderly religious life of their day and thus endangered their religious and
political safety.™ Human eyes cannot see more than that. What is born from
flesh is indeed just flesh.17

2.2 Perspective two: The 'spiritual perspective ' of the cross through the
eyes of faith
On the other hand, what is born of Spirit is spirit (3:6). Birth of the Spirit
ensures a spiritual sensitivity for and understanding of the
cross/resurrection-events. It will now be illustrated from the Gospel how the
unique relationship between the Father and Son results in the power of Jesus over life and
death. This divine identity of Jesus is acknowledged through the confession of Thomas, which
was only possible because of Jesus laying
down his life and taking it again (i.e. the cross/resurrection-events).

14 Cf. Brown (1994, 945). In this connection, Cicero (In Verrem 1.5.66) refers to crucifixion
as the 'servile supplicum', or the punishment of the slaves. In the Roman provinces
crucifixion was one of the most important ways of maintaining law and order. Non* Romans who rebelled
against Rome were often executed in this way (cf. Schneider 1973,
37-41). In the Jewish world, stoning was the prescribed method of execution for
blasphemers and idolaters. After this, they had to be hung on a tree as a sign of the fact
that they have been cursed by Yahweh (Deut 2 1 : 2 2-23).
15 Hahn (1970, 51) correctly states that by choosing Caesar as their king (19:15) they have
actually abandoned their messianic hope, in any case as it is presented in Jesus.
16 Stibbe (1994, 47-48) calls this the 'counter-ploť.
17 The author comments from his ideological point of view, on the 'real reasons' why the authorities crucified
Jesus. Their false intentioas and eventually their murderous actions
show that they are children of Satan, the ruler of this world, who is the lather of lies and
murder (8:37,44). The Jewish authorities consequently hated Jesus (15:18,20) since he
made them aware of their sinliil state (7:7; 15:1 8,20; 1 7: 1
1 32 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

2.2. i The cross as revelation of the unique relationship between the

Father and his Son

Although Jesus frequently reflects on his own death,18 a brief discussion of

his words in 8:28-29 will suffice to illustrate the link between the unique
and close relation between Father and Son and the cross/resurrection-events:

4 Jesus therefore said, "When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know
that I am (tote yvcoaeaöe on éyco eiļu) and I do nothing on My own
initiative, but I speak these things as the Father taught Me. And He who sent
Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone (otjk àcpfjKev |i£ jióvov), for I
always do the things that are pleasing to Him.'"

For our purposes, two aspects are noteworthy.

(i) The cross/resurrection-events, or (symbolically19) being lifted up, are directly linked to the
revelation of the identity of Jesus 0 - 'When you lift up the Son, you will know who I am '
The ambiguous èycû eiļii indicates that the (divine)21 identity of Jesus will be revealed
through the cross/resurrection-events to those who believe, as the Thomas episode
indicates.22 The cross forms the locus for the revelation of the identity of Jesus. However,
what does this identity of Jesus entail?

(ii) In 8:28-29, it is stated that the obedience of Jesus as Agent of God, performing his
duties on behalf of his Father in order to please Him, will reveal that the Father has not
left Jesus alone (oi>k àcpfjKev 'xz nóvov), especially not on the cross. The unique
relationship between the Father

18 See, for instance, 3:14-15; 8:28-29; 10:17-18; 12:23-26, 31-33; 14:30-31; 16:31-33; etc.
Bergmeier (1988, 282-290) argues that the Jewish authorities are on the foreground when
it comes to the crucifixion of Jesus (5:16,18; 7:1,19,25,30; 8:28,37,40; 11:50,53; 18:30,35; 19:11); the
devil is in the background (8:38,44), but in true reality it is Jesus who lays
down his life himself (10: 17-1 8).
19 Barrett (1978, 214, 343) refers to the double meaning of this verb.
20 Cf. Carson (1991, 345). See also Neyrey (1996, 1 19-120) on the i am' sayings and honor.
Kelber (1996, 137).
21 Brown (1972, 348).
22 See Wengst (2000, 324-325).
1 34 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

power over life and death.29 This is what He claims He saw the Father doing and what the Father has given
Him (5 : 19-2 1).30 This power over life and death would indeed show that God is not only with Him, but is
working in
and through Him (14:10).
In this respect, two events are of major importance in this Gospel,
namely, the Lazarus-event and the death and resurrection of Jesus.
(i) Let us first consider the raising of Lazarus. The raising of Lazarus by Jesus serves as arļ[xstov or sign
(12:18) that Jesus has the power of life over
death. Jesus explains this in 1 1:25-26, where He says: i am die resurrection and the life. He who believes
in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die'. Jesus first makes a
basic
statement about himself, namely that He is the resurrection and life, and then
interprets this statement with two rather interesting remarks.
The first remark contains an apparent incongruity: 'He who believes in me will live , even
though he dies ' (k<xv a7io0dvrļ trļaeiai). It is indeed only an apparent incongruity, since the life
referred to here is eternal life,31 which
will last even after physical death. Physical death is thus relativized in die light of the
eschatological life that is already present in Jesus. This is
substantiated and expanded by the second remark in 11:26, namely, that
whoever lives and believes in Jesus will never die. This is also a remark about the eternal life
Jesus gives, which cannot be terminated by death. ~
Although Lazarus was raised only to physical life,33 what happened is a ot|H£U)v (sign) of the
ability of Jesus to raise somebody to life, hi light of 5:19-21, where Jesus claims that the Father has
given Him the ability to give
life, because the Father loves Him, the Lazarus episode serves as further
active proof of Jesus' unique relationship with the Father.34

29 The power over death is often formulated in this Gospel in terms of judgment - see. for instance, 5:22, 27;
8:16.
30 As Thompson (2001, 54), puts it: if there is any "bridge" between divine and human
identity or fonction, the bridge must be built and authorized by God' 3 1 Záco is always
used for eternal lite in this Gospel.
32 Stibbe (1994, 93) has correctly noted the chiasmus between physical and spiritual life and
death in 11:25-26.

33 This can be seen from the remark in 12:10 that Jewish opponents wanted to kill Lazarus
afterwards.

34 The phrase icrov éamòv tioicdv xcõ Oeô (5:18) may be interpreted as indicating a special
relationship between the Father and Son. Thompson (2001. 98
 (ii) The unique relationship betwe through a more intense event Jes

physical human life ('|A)xn) and and also has become the source o gift of his Father. In the words
loves me is that I lay down my lif from me, but I lay it down of my and authority to take it up again. T

According to this remark, Jes active in his own resurrection, cross/resurrection-events.35 The c

good shepherd who lays down hi

the good shepherd, it might be as sheep? The remark in 10:17-18 rei

down his life for his sheep in the l

true Shepherd, Jesus. The chiastic
attention:

a) The central remark in the chiasm (C - 18a-b) is that nobody takes away Jesus'
life, but that He lays down his life of his own accord. The kingly power Jesus illustrates in
the presence of the cross becomes a leading

35 Cf. Bergmeier (1988, 287).

1 36 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

theme in the Johannine passion narrative in Chapters 18-20.36 Jesus is not

killed against his will,37 but willingly lays down his life. For this Jesus came
(12:27; see the motivation in 12:24).
b) As part of the chiastic pattern, marked B (17b-c and 18c-d), laying down and taking up of life
are referred to (xí0t| jxi and Xa^ißdvco of lif corresponds). In the first part of the chiasm (B - 17b-c) it is
stated that Jesus
lays down his life iva ('that/ so that...) He can take it up again (7td&iv). The semantic nuance introduced by
using iva náXiv implies that the death of
Jesus had the purpose of staging the opportunity for him to take his life back again. The purpose or goal of
laying down his life was to take it up again. In this sense, the cross was necessaiy so that the resurrection
could take place.
In the second part of this chiasm (B - 18c-d) the idea of laying down life
and taking it up again is rephrased from another perspective, namely from the perspective of the power or
éÇouoía Jesus possesses to act. 'Ečouoía may inter alia be used for the power, authority or right a person
has to do something.38 Jesus has the right and is in a position of power to act within

36 Without discussing the motives in Chapters 18-20 in detail, the control of Jesus over his own destiny may be seen in
events like his anest, where He gives himself up (18:4-5. 7-
8); the discussion about his Kingship (18:36-37); his awareness of the task which He
should perform on behalf of the Father, referring to the cup He must drink (18:1 1). the use
of 'it is finished' (xsxáXEOiai - 19:30), when speaking of his own death; and especially
19:9-1 1, where Jesus points out that the real power (éÇoiwyía) to crucify Him does not lie
with Pilate, but with the power given by God. Cf. Diebold-Scheuermann (1996. 290-294);
Gniesmer (2000, 239ff., 374ff.).
37 The Jews were not allowed to take things into their own hands. They could only act as tar as God allowed them to. This can best be
seen from the efforts they made to arrest Jesus
(7:30,44). They were not allowed to lay hands on him. because it did not fit into the plan
of God (the hour of Jesus had not come yet). From the implicit authors ideological
perspective, the Jewish authorities were only instruments in the hands of God in unfolding his eschato logical plan.

38 The semantic role of éÇouaía must be determined carefully. Lexicographicàlly it i predominantly used for the
following meanings: 1. power or authority or ability ,
capability, might, power to do a thing. 2. The freedom of choice , right to act or decide. 3. Absolute power, authority, might, warrant
as opposed to right with the derivatives like an
office, magistracy, government, ruling or official powers or authorities. Cf. Bauer, et al (1979, ad loc.) and Liddell and
Scott (1992, ad loc.) for this information. In the Gospel the
following occurrences of ¿Çovoía is found: 1:12; 5:27; 10:18; 17:2; 19:10-11. In all the
cases it is associatively linked to themes related to the power of God over life or death, salvation or condemnation. In
1:12 the capability, power or authority to be children of God is given to believers. In 5:27 Jesus receives the power or
authority to judge. Jesus
also received the power or might from the Father over flesh (17:2) in order to give them

the sphere of life and death in an a

not eliminate his ability to act in th
The point Jesus makes is tha
resurrection. Naturally, this is inco
that person act by taking his life raising himself reveals that He is Even though he might be physic
person will live, even though he di resurrection, Jesus proves this. To

and even if He dies physically, He

so that He can take his life up agai

(iii) The chiasm starts and ends wi and 1 8e). Although Jesus acts on o intimately involved in
these action charge/command (èvioArj - 18e) to in the sphere of God's love (17a - indeed an illustration
of 'power a corresponds with the remarks of cross/resurrection-events. The Fath actively involved in his
own resurr charge of his Father.
1 38 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS EN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

This, indeed, leads to a paradox in John's plot. Stibbe4" has pointed out that the devil wants to
take Jesus' life away, but ironically gives Jesus a
chance to do what his Father commanded Him to do (10:17-18).
In short: Jesus dies, but illustrates his authority and power by raising
himself to life again (1 0:1 7-1 8).43 This power to raise himself comes from God and serves as proof
of the divine origin and identity of Jesus. Through the cross/resurrection-events people will learn who
He is (éyco siļu) and will
not doubt that He is not alone, but that the Father is with Him.44

2.2.3 The cross/resurrection-events lead to the confession that Jesus

is 'Lord and God'.

In and through the cross/resurrection-events Jesus is discovered as 'Lord and

God', as Thomas confesses. The initial reaction of Thomas to the news of
the appearances of Jesus was negative - he refused to believe (20:24-25). However, when
Thomas was confronted with the physical, risen Jesus, he
recognized his Lord and God in the resurrected Jesus standing in front of
him, 5 for how else could the living presence of (the previously crucified)
Jesus be explained? The signs of the cross on his hands and side were proof
that the same Jesus, who died on the cross, was standing alive in front of
him.46 The unbelieving Thomas then believed (20:29).
In the narratological development of this Gospel the confession of Thomas forms the
culmination,47 as well as the hermeneutic key for

immediate preceding few verses (verses 19 and 20) Jesus uses the active form of èyeípo) to refer to his resurrection. The
passive use in 2:22 hints that the life and resurrection has it
origin in the first place in God, the Father, as is suggested in 10:17-18 too. However, the
power over lite and death is given to Jesus (5:21). who will raise himself.
42 Stibbe (1994, 46).
43 O'Day (1996, 201).
44 Wilckens (1998, 339) summarizes the unity between the Father and the Son, which is
expressed in the death on the cross in the following way: "... 17,20ft. und 17:24řf. spricht
von der innigsten Gemeinschaft zwischen Vater und Sohn... So interpretiert der
Joh.evangelist die christliche Grundaussage vom Tode Christi tur uns, indem er sie mit
seiner Christologie der Einheit zwischen Jesus und Gott verbindet und durchdringt.'
45 The text does not state that Thomas actually touched Jesus although it seems to imply it
(Dodd 1960, 443).
46 Klauck (1991, 61-62) has pointed out that hearing was the less convincing way of getting
information; seeing was better and touching the best.
47 Brown (1972, 1047); Schenke (1998, ad loc.); Stibbe (1994, 36).
 understanding the life of Jesus, i The following needs to be noted.

a) The confession of Thomas expla events within die life of Jesus, t that Jesus claimed to stand in a giving
Father, that He can spend laying down his life and by taki rejected by the unbelieving oppon unbelieving
Thomas too (20:25). 4 to divine identity as blasphemy (

life again, a concrete proof was Thomas acknowledges tliis in his

Gospel, this confession of divine

without the cross/resurrection-ev

b) In 5 : 1 8ff. the link between th identity of Jesus was already ma

Gospel. 51 Exactly because of the of Jesus is confirmed and expres KÓptoç |X0D Kai ó 0£Óç jiioi) ('M
was dead and now lives, indeed r identity of Jesus as God , explain put it a different way: the cross/

50 Stibbe (1994, 69) also points out that the resurrection plays a central part in the plot of John
- the plot does not end in tragedy, but in 'comedy' or the springtime season of rebirth'. It started in this way and it
ends there again.
51 Three of the ego eimi - sayings explicitly metaphorize Jesus in terms of life (6:35, 51;
11:25; 14:6), while a lürther two do so in their immediate context (8:12 and 10:7, 9). Only
the *the vine* and 'good shepherd' do not contain direct references to life. In these
descriptions of identification or recognition, Jesus is strongly linked to the theme of life,
which is of course in line with the purpose of the Gospel (20:31), where faith in Jesus
leads to life. See also passages like 6:27ff.; 7:38; 10:17-18, 28; 12:25, 50; 14:19; 17:2-3;
See also Williams (2000, 303); Scholtissek, (2000); Wilckens, (1998, 336-337); Frey
(2000, 445-448) on the éyco etyu-expressions. See Brown (1972 1047) for the use of these
words elsewhere in ancient literature.
1 40 THE CROSS/RESURRECTION-EVENTS IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

necessary to reveal the divine identity of Jesus.52 If He did not die, He

would not have been in a position to illustrate his ability to take up the life he laid down - the action which
underlined his divine nature. In this
sense, the death of Jesus is also his triumph. This is the irony of the
cross.

Although this is not the place to address the issue of 4 Jesus as G brief remark about the nature of the
term 'God' in this confession is
necessary.54 The author has a refined view of Jesus as God , which should
not be confused with later formulations in the church tradition. The
complicated relations between Father and Son are evident when the
Evangelist maintains that Jesus is God (1:1,18; 20:28), but also stresses that the Son can and will
never be God, the Father, although the two are one, but
the Father is greater than the Son (10:28-30 and 14:28 respectively). As
Carson puts it: Jesus is 'identified with God yet distinguishable from him'.55 Thompson, however,
shows that even Jewish writers used the term God in a
variety of meanings.56 The term was inter alia used to indicate a close
relationship of somebody, even a human, with God, the Father. This is what
Jesus also argues in 10:33-38. He is called God because of his close relation
with the Father.57 This interpretation is also in line with the arguments above
about God, the Father, being with Jesus, the Son even through the

52 Bultmann (1984) and Forestell (1974) both see the central meaning of the death of Jesus as
revelatory.
53 See Thompson (2001, 17-56, 227-240) for a detailed discussion, as well as Theobald
(1992). For further recent literature, see Kammler (2000, 232).
54 Brown (1972, 1047), as well as Theobald (1992, 41-87, 55-56) emphasize that the
reference to Jesus as God occurs in a confession. It is a doxology expressed by Thomas
on behalf of the Christian community. It should not be seen as a dogmatic formulation, but
interpreted in a liturgical and cultic framework. 4 It is a response of praise to the God who
has revealed Himself in Jesus.' Brown (1972, 1047). The distinction between dogmatic
and liturgical/cultic is problematic, since it presupposes a specific definition of liturgy and suggest
that if something is liturgical it cannot be dogmatic. I do, however, agree with the
idea which Brown and Theobald seem to express, namely that this confession does not
make the Son the Father as if they are identical. The distinction between the Father and the
Son should be maintained.

55 Carson (1991, 96).

56 Thompson (2001, 17-42) discusses different examples from the LXX, Philo, Jubilees,
Qumran literature, etc. See also Loader (1989, 156-161); Neyrey (1988, 25-29).
57 See Moloney (1993, 28-29).