The Identity of Jesus

“Where from” and “where to”

The question about the identity of Jesus, which is explicitly questioned by Jews in 8,25 σὺ τίς εἶ; is
the central theme in chapters 7 and 8. At the beginning of the feast, even before Jesus could arrive
at the temple, there is a mixed opinion about Jesus among the gathered. In 7,15 the Jews are amazed
at Jesus’ teaching and indirectly question his authority. The question of authority here is an implied
question about the identity of Jesus. Jesus in response points to the one who sent him (7,16-17). In
7,25-26, after listening to Jesus τινες ἐκ τῶν Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν speculate Jesus to be the Messiah but
such claim is dismissed immediately citing the origins of Jesus. ἀλλὰ τοῦτον οἴδαμεν πόθεν ἐστίν· ὁ
δὲ χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται οὐδεὶς γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστίν (Jn 7,27). They claim to know his origins, and
that knowledge seem to be the hindrance to any such speculation about Jesus’ identity. In this case
the identity is linked to πόθεν or to the location. In an ironic response Jesus rebukes them saying,
κἀμὲ οἴδατε καὶ οἴδατε πόθεν εἰμί· (7,28) and again points to the one who sent him.
After another speculation about the arrival of the Messiah and his signs with reference to Jesus
(7,31), Jesus speaks about going away (7,33), pointing towards the one who sent him. ἔτι χρόνον
μικρὸν μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμι καὶ ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πέμψαντά με (7,33). Leading up to PA again in 7,52b
again the earthly location is cited as an identity marker as the Pharisees responding to Nicodemus
say, ἐραύνησον καὶ ἴδε ὅτι ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας προφήτης οὐκ ἐγείρεται. (7,52).
The question about the “where from” and the “where to”, in other words “the location” plays a vital
role in solving the puzzle surrounding the identity of Jesus in chapters 7 and 8. “The one who sent
Jesus” plays an important role in understanding the identity of Jesus.
Generally in materials, stories, taken from the oral tradition often the transitional details, connecting
material is the work of later redactor or an interpolator. This implies the interpolator or redactor
directs the reader to look at the story with a specific perspective. Towards which direction does the
transitional or introductory information in PA, orient the reader to? How does PA uncover the
identity of Jesus to the readers? What are the identity markers present in the text? This shifts the
focus towards 7,53-8,1.11.

The identity markers of Jesus in PA

In response to Jesus’ question in 8,10, γύναι, ποῦ εἰσιν; οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν; the woman responds
to Jesus saying, οὐδείς, κύριε (8,11). She does not call him διδάσκαλε (8,4) as the scribes and the
Pharisees did, rather calls him κύριε.
In visualizing the narrative scene in 8,1-2, there are two images, that include two locations where
Jesus is present.
1. Jesus is on Mount Olives
2. Jesus is in the temple : Jesus’ coming to the temple early morning is followed by the trial
scene, as the scribes and the Pharisees bring the woman before Jesus.
κύριος, τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν, παρεγένετο εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν need a closer look in examining the identity of
Jesus here.

1. The Mount Olives, τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν

Though the term mount Olives is found more than once in translations1 or there are more than one
allusions to the mount in OT (BHS and LXX), only in Zechariah 14,4 mentions the term, “the mount
Olives”, ‫ הר הזתים‬/ τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν literally (twice). The textual unit Zech 14,1-8 needs a closer
look.
Zech 14,1announces the coming of “the day of the Lord” (ἰδοὺ ἡμέραι ἔρχονται τοῦ κυρίου). The day
of the Lord points to the day of God’s judgement upon Israel and/or other nations. It points to the
divine intervention in human sphere. The phrase “the day of the Lord” sets the eschatological touch
to the final chapter of Zechariah.

14,2 shows the image of battle in and against the city of Jerusalem and hints to a possible division
where half the city shall go to exile and the rest of the people shall not be cut-off from the city
(14,2b). 14,3 has a military language with the presence of ‫ ויצא יהוה‬.

14,4a reads καὶ στήσονται οἱ πόδες αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν, “and his feet
shall stand on that day on the mount Olives”. The subject of στήσονται is οἱ πόδες αὐτοῦ, where
αὐτός here refers to κύριος (14,3)/ ‫יהוה‬. It presents an anthropomorphic presence of ‫יהוה‬/ κύριος on
Mount Olives. “The corporeality of God is the manifestation of God’s presence”2. ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ
ἐκείνῃ here as in 14,1 refers to the day of the Lord which also points to the eschatological day of
judgement. The verb used in 14,4 στήσονται is in the future tense referring to the time of the action.
14,4b refers to the division that takes place (in the mountain) with the feet of the Lord standing on it
or by the presence of the Lord.

14,5b reads καὶ ἥξει κύριος ὁ θεός μου καὶ πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, “and the LORD my God shall
come, and all the holy ones with thee”. The coming of the Lord is followed by new creation
expressed in vv. 7-8. They refer to the cosmic changes appear on the day of the Lord or “on that day”
referring to the eschatological time.
In short, the term Mount Olives in Zech 14 is associated with
1. The day of the Lord: that refers to the eschatological times.
2. The judgement : the eschatological day of judgement, which is linked to the day of the Lord
and even Israel cannot escape this judgement.
3. There is a tone of battle, where the Lord himself goes forth to battle or YHWH is shown as a
warrior.
4. The κύριος himself stands on the Mount olives. It refers to the corporeal presence of κύριος/
YHWH in his creation.
5. The coming of YHWH is followed by new creation (light and living water).

II. Jesus’ coming to temple, followed by a trial scene

Jesus’ arrival at the temple early in the morning (Jn 8,2) is followed by a trial scene (8,3-11) as
elaborated earlier. Mal 3,1 (2,17-3,5) presents a similar scene where the coming of the Lord in to
the temple is followed by the foretelling of a trial.

1
In 2 Sam 15,30 the Mount of Olives (known as Jebel Tur in Arabic) is referred to as “the ascent of the olives”; it is the
place where David stood weeping at the time of Absalom’s rebellion, a place where God was worshiped (2 Sam
15,32). It is also apparently the mountain less specifically referred to in Ezek 11 ,23, where God’s “glory” rested east
of the city, and in 1 Kgs 11,7 (cf. 1 Kgs 22,43), where high places were built on a mountain east of the city. (C. L.
MEYERS-E.M.MEYERS, Zechariah 9-14: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (New Haven; London
2008) 420.
2
MEYERS-MEYERS, Zechariah 9-14, 419.
 In Mal 2,17 the prophet is opposing the unbelief of a class, who served God, kept his ordinance, and
walked mournfully before Him, but lost their faith in providence, when God delayed to punish the
wicked3. The term, “doers of evil” or “the wicked” in 17a does not refer to gentiles but those Jews
who go against the law of Moses and who ask as in 2,17b ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς τῆς δικαιοσύνης ‫איה אלהי‬
‫המׁשפט׃‬, where is the God of judgement?
Mal 3,1 reads
ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου καὶ ἐπιβλέψεται ὁδὸν πρὸ προσώπου μου καὶ ἐξαίφνης ἥξει
εἰς τὸν ναὸν ἑαυτοῦ κύριος ὃν ὑμεῖς ζητεῖτε καὶ ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς διαθήκης ὃν ὑμεῖς θέλετε ἰδοὺ
ἔρχεται λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ.
“Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will
suddenly come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is
coming, says the LORD of hosts”.
1. My messenger: My messenger in 3,1 refers to the one who prepares the way before the coming of
the Lord. It is his messenger and not a messenger (‫)מַ לְ אָ ִ֔כי‬. God will send his messenger, also implies
he himself does not appears openly. The one familiar to them from Isaiah’s prophecy (40,3) where
the Hebrew words, “to prepare the way”, are identical with those here. The crier of Isaiah is here
described as the Messenger of Jehovah. In both prophecies his office is the same. 4 The other two
figures are distinct from the first messenger or messenger of the Lord.
2. The Lord: The Lord whom they seek refers back to 2,17. The word, “Lord”, ‫אָ דֹון‬, with the article is
applied only to God or YHWH.5 ‫ אָ דֹון‬appears five times in Malachi, 1,6 (twice).12.14 and in 3,1. In
1,6.12.14 ‫ אָ דֹון‬is referred to YHWH and in 3,1 it is logical to assume that it refers to YHWH. The
presence of the Lord in the temple, the preferred place of God’s presence points also to theology of
God’s presence. As Kessler puts it, “Man kann in Mal 2,17-3,5 geradezu von einer Futurisierung der
Präsenztheologie als Antwort auf die Erfahrung der Abwesenheit Gottes sprechen.“6

3. The Angel of Covenant ( ‫ מַ לְ ַַ֙אְך הַ ְב ִ֜רית‬or ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς διαθήκης) : There are various opinions with
regard to this figure. Some believe that this is an independent figure and not referring back to YHWH
himself and others believe they refer to one and the same person. It is noteworthy that “the angel of
the covenant” or ‫ מַ לְ ַַ֙אְך הַ ְב ִ֜רית‬is nowhere to be found in the OT.
Is the messenger of the covenant and the Lord - the same person? Or are they two different persons?
There are different opinions. Kessler’s point of view could be a help in understanding it.
JHWH und sein Bote sind zwar kategorial unterscheiden, aber sie fließen doch
immer wieder auch ineinander. Vielleicht kann man es noch genauer sagen: Der Bote
ist zwar nicht JHWH selbst, aber im Boten begegnet man JHWH7…zum „Engel“ in
ihm ist Jahwe selbst gegenwärtig, insofern Jahwe in seinem Boten selbst auf den
Plan tritt…Andererseits ist der Bote als Person deutlich von Jahwe unterscheiden8.
As Snyman puts it, “The coming of Yahweh in the form of his (covenant) angel (as discussed in
v.1b) would have the double aim, of restoring proper worship as a correction to what the priests are
unable to perform as well as acting as a judgement period to judge those who do evil. The initial
3
J. P. LANGE - P. SCHAFF – J. PACKARD, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures : Malachi (Bellingham, WA 2008) 19.
4
LANGE - SCHAFF – PACKARD, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures,19.
5
LANGE - SCHAFF – PACKARD, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures,19.
6
R. KESSLER, Maleachi (HThKAT; Freiburg 2011) 229.
7
A. S. VAN DER WOUDE, “Der Engel des Bundes. Bemerkungen zu Maleachi 3,1c und seinem Kontext”, Die Botschaft
und die Boten: Festschrift für Hans Walter Wolff zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. J. JEREMIAS – PERLITT) (Neukirchen 1981)
289-300, 296.
8
KESSLER, Maleachi, 231.
question of the people on whether Yahweh is still the God of justice, is answered: Yahweh will
come suddenly to his temple (3,1b) and He will approach the people in judgement (3,5)9”.

In short, Mal 2,17-3,5 is associated with

1. The day of the Lord
2. An Eschatological day of judgement
3. The judgement by the Lord begins with the religious leaders of Israel
4. The judgement aims at purification and not destruction
5. God is present in and through his messenger. The Lord and the messenger are identified
with one another and yet differentiated.

The intertextual links to Jn 8,1-2 clearly suggest that the person going up to Mount Olives and
coming to the Temple is Lord God himself. The setting of PA that with its OT background suggest
that in Jesus, God himself is present to the people. Jesus calls God as his Father, and evangelist
repeatedly presents him as the Son, whom the Father has sent into the world. He is “the Son of
God”. The further study of this term is necessary to understand their nuances in the gospel of John
and in PA.

The Son of God

Much of the opposition against Jesus and is the basis of the charge brought against him (5,25;
10,36; 19,7) in John is a direct result of Jesus’ identification with the title, “the Son of God”10. The
title “Son of God“ appears eight times11 in the gospel of John and Jesus himself uses it four times 12.
The purpose of the gospel, as stated in 20,31 includes believing in Jesus as the Son of God.

The Son
Though John uses the expression “the Son of God” eight times, he generally prefers to say simply
“Son” and the way he uses this expression shows that he means much the same as when he uses the
fuller “the Son of God”. The shorter version, “Son” shows the closeness that binds Christ and the
Father just as the longer version, “the Son of God”13.
Jn 3,35 portrays the closeness between the two. ὁ πατὴρ ἀγαπᾷ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ πάντα δέδωκεν ἐν τῇ
χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. The verb ἀγαπάω refers to the affection or love the Father has for the Son and this love
is expressed in sharing by the Father, all that he has, with the Son. 5,20 tells how Father shares his
knowledge with the Son; “For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing;
and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel (θαυμάζω)14”. The relationship
between the Father and the Son is best expressed in Jn 5,19-30, which is termed by C.H. Dodd and
P. Gaechter as a simple parable of apprenticeship, where the Son learns the trade from his Father,

9
S.D. SNYMAN, “Once Again: Investigating the identity of the three figures mentioned in Malachi 3,1”, Verbum et
Ecclesia 27(3) 2006, 1031-1044, 1043.
10
D. MYERS, “Jesus the Son of God in John’s Gospel : The Life-Making Logos”, Portraits of Jesus in the Gospel of
John : A Christological Spectrum (ed. C. KOESTER) (London 2018) 141-155.
11
cf. 1,49;3,18;5,25;10,36;11,4.27;19,7;20,31
12
cf.3,18;5,25;10,36;11,4
13
MORRIS, Jesus is the Christ, 98-99.
14
The same verb is used in the scene of Jews marvelling at the teaching and deeds of Jesus. 5,20 already hints that he
has been shown, given everything by his Father, God himself.
the only person fully competent to invest him with all his own professional expertise15. John further
states that the life of the Father and the Son are closely knit to one another in 10,30, “ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ
πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, “I and the Father are one16”. Kysar makes an important distinction between the
Father and the Son, that the Son is one with the Father but not identical17. Their identities flow into
one another.

Sending Motif
The concept of Jesus “being sent” is very frequent in John. The phrases, “the Father who sent me”
(5,37; 6,44; 8,16 etc) or “he who sent me” (6,38; 7,16; 12,44, etc.) appear several times in the
gospel. John uses the verbs πέμπω and ἀποστέλλ-ω without much difference18. Two points to be
noted here are
1. Jesus has not come on his own, but he is sent (8,42b)19.
2. The one who sent him is the Father, whom they (his adversaries as well) call God (8,54).
M. de Jonge summarizing this relationship says, “Jesus, as the true sent one is conscious of being
one with his sender; he is guided by what the sender, his Father, has taught him as Son, and he
continues to live in and by the Father’s nearness. There is a unity of willing, speaking, and acting
between the Son and the Father.”20

The mission of the Son/Son of God

5,19-30 plays an important role in understanding the mission of the Son and his authority. His
authority stems from his divine identity, and his function is to offer “life” and “judgement”.

Function of “giving life”

v.21 speaks about the Son giving life just as the Father does. Giving life, making alive in the OT is
a function attached to God21. Giving life was the important purpose behind “sending” and the
function of the Son. The aspect of giving life is closely linked to the function of “saving” or
“salvation” as stated in Jn 3,17 reads, οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἵνα κρίνῃ
τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι᾽ αὐτοῦ, “for God did not send the Son in order to condemn
it but in order that through him the world may be saved”. According to Allison22, ζωὴ (αἰὡνος) acts
as the comprehensive term for salvation in John just as the terms “the kingdom of God” or “the
kingdom of heaven” in Synoptics. This means “being saved” in 3,17 implies “receiving life from
the Son” in 5,21. As Boice puts it, throughout the Old Testament it is the same. The giving of life—

15
ASHTON, Understanding the Fourth Gospel, 227. It is worth noting that in the Jewish and oriental understanding of
the son-Father relationship is the legal position. The natural son too has to be assigned to his position, as is by the law
of first-born. Consequently the term taken as a functional concept may also include the idea of natural sonship
(ASHTON, Understanding the Fourth Gospel, 226).
16
Here the adjective ἕν is neuter and not masculine. It means “one thing” and not “one person” (MORRIS, Jesus is the
Christ, 99).
17
R. KYSAR, John:The Maverick Gospel (Louisville, KY 32007) 54-55.
18
John uses ἀποστέλλ-ω 28 times (next is Luke with 25 times) and πέμπω 32 times (Luke has it 10 times). He employs
the former verb for the Father’s sending of the Son 17 times out of 28, and the latter 24 times out of 32 (MORRIS,
Jesus is the Christ, 103).
19
Though John does not explicitly say that Jesus is sent from heaven, but does say „sent“ and he does say that Jesus
came from heaven (3,13.31; 6,33etc) (MORRIS, Jesus is the Christ, 103).
20
M. DE JONGE, Jesus: Stranger from Heaven and Son of God (Missoula, Mont 1977) 144.
21
“I put to death and I bring to life ” (Deut 32,29b); “The LORD brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the
grave and raises up.” (1 Sam 2,6)
22
D. C. ALLISON, Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History (Grand Rapids, Mich. Reprint2013) 190.
whether life in physical birth, spiritual life, or the life of the resurrection—is God’s prerogative.
Consequently, when Jesus claimed to be able to give life he was also clearly claiming to be God. 23

The function of “Judging”

5,22 expresses the second function linked to the Son of God, the judgement. 5,22 reads, “The Father
judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son,”. Jews knew that the final judgement was the
prerogative of God. Deut 1,7 declares that “judgment belongs to God.” So when Jesus claimed to
be the one who would actually carry out the judgment of the Father, he was claiming (no less
certainly than in his other statements) that he was God.24 5,27 states the authority to judge is given
to Jesus by the Father , “καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ κρίσιν ποιεῖν, ὅτι υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἐστίν. V.27 b
attaches the image of the Son of Man with the figure of the Son, a figure associated with
final/eschatological judgement. V. 30 having stated again that this authority comes from the one
who sent him, adds further that his judgement is just, “I can do nothing on my own authority; as I
hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent
me”. In 7,24 Jesus again reiterates the same in other words saying, μὴ κρίνετε κατ᾽ ὄψιν, ἀλλὰ τὴν
δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνετε, “do not judge by appearances but judge with right appearances”. In his
attack on his adversaries in 8,15 Jesus blames them of judging according to flesh. He further
clarifies why his judgement is true, but in his judgement there is the Father who judges as in 8,16
“Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and the Father,
who sent me. In claiming this Jesus remains faithful to Deut 1,7. As Dodd puts it, in the act of
judgement it is not only Christ who is at work but the Father and the Son in unity - ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ
πέμψας με. In the whole work of Christ who is at work there is a twofold agency. It is the work of
the Son; it is equally, and indistinguishably, the work of the Father”25.
In 8,15b the subtle nuance attached with the aspect of judgement within John. It reads, ἐγὼ οὐ
κρίνω οὐδένα, “I judge no one”. In 12,47b further says the purpose of his coming, was not to judge,
but to save, that reiterates the thought of 3,17. God sent his son not to judge but to save and give
life, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not
perish but have eternal life.”
The judgement in John is automatic. It is his words, his teaching that judge. 12,48 reads, “He who
rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his
judge on the last day”. To reject him, implies not to believe in him, in his words (3,16a). In the
words of Dodd, “The judgement is passed, as we have seen, in a sense automatically, through the
reaction of men to the revelation of the light of Christ”26.

The title “the Son of God” has messianic connotation. Is the title, “the Son of God” in the gospel of
John associated with the expected Messiah?

Messiah of the gospel of John

The noun Μεσσίας appears twice in the gospel of John, once in 1,41 used by Andrew, the disciple
and in 4,25 by the Samaritan woman. In both cases it is translated as Χριστός27. The title Χριστός

23
BOICE, The Gospel of John, 389.
24
BOICE, The Gospel of John, 389.
25
C. H. DODD, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge 1 paperback1968), 257.
26
DODD, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 256.
27
F. W. DANKER – W. BAUER – W. ARNDT, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature (Chicago 32000) 635.
appears19 times in the gospel of John, and 15 times with the definite article (except in 1,17.41; 4,25
and 17,3). Jesus never used this title for himself.

Various Messianic Expectations in John

John often accompanies the title ὁ χριστός with other titles pointing to the various expectations
about the coming Messiah. On the one hand, observes Matthew Nevenson, that John preserves
Judean, Galilean and even Samaritan Messiah traditions, on the other hand there is authors own
Christology that is a world away from these Messiah traditions28. Jn 7 records three of the
Messianic expectations found among the groups in Jerusalem.
1. ὁ δὲ χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται οὐδεὶς γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστίν (7,27). This points to a belief, that the
origins or the whereabouts of the Messiah are unknown.
2. ὁ χριστὸς ὅταν ἔλθῃ μὴ πλείονα σημεῖα ποιήσει ὧν οὗτος ἐποίησεν (7,31), though this could be
interpreted differently, basically this statement links Messiah with σημεῖα or “performing signs”.
Interrogative particle μή suggests that Messiah cannot perform more signs than these29.
3. The third statement/s suggest the location/s linked to the Messianic figure. μὴ γὰρ ἐκ τῆς
Γαλιλαίας ὁ χριστὸς ἔρχεται; μή suggest that the question here expects a negative answer,
meaning, the Christ does not come from Galilee. 7,42 carries forward the same thread. It reads
οὐχ ἡ γραφὴ εἶπεν ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ καὶ ἀπὸ Βηθλέεμ τῆς κώμης ὅπου ἦν Δαυὶδ
ἔρχεται ὁ χριστός; This reflects a Davidic Messiah coming from Bethlehem.
When confronted with the question directly in 10,24c, εἰ σὺ εἶ ὁ χριστός, εἰπὲ ἡμῖν παρρησίᾳ, “if
you are the Christ, tell us boldly”, Jesus does not deny the claim but responds saying τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ
ποιῶ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός μου ταῦτα μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ (10,25b), “The works that I do in my
Father's name, they bear witness to me”. His works stand as a witness to his identity, the works, that
he does in his Fathers’ name. “In Jewish thought the name of a person can represent that person and
his authority”30. Among the works mentioned in 10,25 the foremost is the healing of the blind man,
which the Jews themselves mentioned in 10,21. In 10,30 Jesus says, ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν, “I
and the Father are one”. In other words, answering the question, if he is the Christ, the Messiah,
Jesus refers to his works (τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ (10,25)) and to his relationship with his Father. In
short, the works of the Father that he does give witness to his identity.
The works of Jesus (τὰ ἔργα) refer primarily to his miracles. They are not merely his works but
works of God himself. There is a complete continuity between the activity of Jesus and the activity
of the Father (5,36; 9,3; 10,32.37f; 14,10). The works bring to light the character and the power of
God and at the same time that in Christ he is active in a unique way31. The works in John, the
miracles in John, are also described as “signs”32, σημεῖα.
Having been asked to speak plainly about his identity as the Messiah, Jesus’ response highlights
one aspect clearly, that is the divinity of Jesus, revealed especially through 10,30. As Beutler states,
“it has to be understood as a statement about the unity of the Father and the Son in their being. The

28
M. V. NOVENSON, “Jesus the Messiah : Conservatism and Radicalism in Johannine Christology”, Portraits of Jesus in
the Gospel of John : A Christological Spectrum (ed. C. KOESTER – C. KEITH) (The Library of New Testament Studies;
London 2019) 109-124, 109.
29
D. P. BÉCHARD, Syntax of New Testament Greek : A Student’s Manual (SB 49; Rome 2018) 70.
30
B. M. NEWMAN – E. A. NIDA, A Translators Handbook on the Gospel of John (New York 1980), 339.
31
C. K. BARRETT, The Gospel according to St. John : An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text
(Philadelphia 21978) 75.
32
BOICE, The Gospel of John, 774.
Father and the Son are not one person but nonetheless one in being.”33 His signs reveal, what kind
of Messiah he is. He is the divine Messiah, the Son of God. “Jesus understands his identity as
Messiah in the sense of divine sonship. This sonship is exhibited in his union with the Father in
word and work.”34
Royal - kingly Messiah
Among the diverse in expectations of the Messiah found in the Old Testament, the image of a
kingly messiah finds the prime place. This image of the Messiah is often associated with David and
the restorative monarchism35.
“Son of God language has potential links to messianic depictions associated with Davidic kingship.
Frequently these “Son of God” texts are linked to the promise of an everlasting kingdom and at
times this is explicitly linked to David’s seed.”36 As Ashton observes, that the title, “Son of God”
originally indicated messiahship than divinity37. Citing Hengel38, Ashton writes, that there is more
than enough evidence to suggest that the term “‘Son of God’ was at least in the early Christian
usage, a messianic title. Does Johannine Messiah figure show Davidic-political Messiah
characteristics who would destroy his earthly enemies? Does he show nationalistic features?
In 1,49 Nathanael calls Jesus, σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, σὺ βασιλεὺς εἶ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. This seem to
suggest a political Messiah. Does John promote this image? In 6,15 when Jesus perceived that they
would seize him to make him king, he fled or withdrew. They saw in Jesus an earthly king who
would rule over them, an earthly political Messiah. Jesus’ walking away, fleeing from their midst is
an indication, this is not the kind of kingship Jesus portrays. Standing before Pilate Jesus
emphasizes the unpolitical character of his kingdom before Pilate in 18,36, “My kingship is not of
this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed
over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world.”
The gospel of John does show traces of Davidic Messianic expectation among the crowd (7,42). It
is noteworthy that the title, “the Son of David”, so prominent in the gospel of Matthew never finds a
mention in John. The question in 10,24, if he is the Messiah is placed in the context of the imagery
of Shepherd, where Jesus speaks about himself figuratively as the “shepherd”. In the OT shepherd
was frequent symbol of Davidic king (Ezek 34,23), so that the messianic implications of Jesus’
claim to be the shepherd were apparent to the Jewish authorities. It is clear from Jn 10,25-30 that
Jesus does not encourage nationalistic or political understanding with regard to the question of
Messiah. Jesus in his response changes the very content of the messianic concept. “Perhaps the best
commentary on Jesus’ attitude toward the question of whether or not he is the Messiah is found in
10,30 where his answer is epitomized in the statement: ‘I and the Father are one’, an answer is
affirmative in tone but not phrased in traditional terminology.”39
Son of Man – Son of God

33
J. H. BEUTLER, A Commentary on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids (Mich.) 2017) 286.
34
BEUTLER, A Commentary on the Gospel of John, 285.
35
J. BECKER, Messianic Expectation in the Old Testament (Edinburgh 1980) 63.
36
B. M. STOVELL, “Son of God’s Anointed One? Johannine Davidic Christology and Second Temple Messianism”,
Reading the Gospel of John’s Christology as Jewish Messianism: Royal, Prophetic and Divine Messiahs (ed. B. E.
REYNOLDS – G. BOCCACCINI) (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity; Leiden 2018) CVI, 151-177, 165-166.
37
J. ASHTON, Understanding the Fourth Gospel (New York 22007) 164.
38
M. HENGEL, The Son of God : The Origin of Christology and the History of Jewish Hellenistic Religion (Eugene,
Oregon 2007) 45.
39
BROWN, The Gospel according to John, 406.
Kysar seem to suggest that the title “Son” in the gospel of John implies the “Son of God”. The
sending motif plays a major role in the gospel of John and is closely connected with the use of the
term “Son of God” and particularly with “the Son”. The titles, “Son of God” and “Son of Man” in
the gospel of John are closely associated and both point to the protagonist Jesus. The Johannine
narrative is grounded on the Father-Son relationship, that involves the use of the familial language
within the gospel. “The Son of God is the apocalyptic Son of Man” 40, who belongs to the world
above, who has come into the world, is sent by the Father and would go back to him, heaven is the
home of this divine being, who offers life to those who believe in him and whom the authority to
judge is given.

The identity of Jesus in Jn 7-8

The identity of Jesus is the major question in chapters 7 and 8. The life of Jesus, the protagonist is
in danger (7,1), his authority is in question (7,15) which the implied/real reader knows comes from
his Father (5,19-30), people are unaware of his origins (7,28-29), but the reader knows he is the
enfleshed λογος. He is sent by his Father, and he would go back to the one who sent him (7,33-34),
to heaven, for he is from above unlike them (8,23) who are from below. He was before Abraham as
in 8,58, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί. He represents the nearness of God (7,38, “living water”
and 8,12 “light of the world”) and his Father is the very one whom they claim for their God (8,56).
He is the very same person he claims to be and for which his adversaries want to eliminate him,
“the Son of God”. It is in the Son, that the world experiences the Father. God is encountered in the
person of Jesus, “the Son of God”. “In his unity (10,30) with the Father, the Son is himself ‘God’”41

Is he the Messiah?
People constantly question in chapter 7 if Jesus is the prophet or the Messiah or speculate he may
be the one (7,26.31,40-41). Is he a Messiah whose origins are known (7,27b) or the Davidic
Messiah from Bethlehem (7,42)42, a political Messiah who would focus on restoration of Israel? In
chapters 7-8 as in the rest of the gospel, Jesus is the Messiah, who has a claim to divinity, for he is
the Son of God. His messiahship is though hidden to an unbelieving world, is accessible to the one
who believes. He is not the adopted Son but the eternal word, who was with God even before the
creation of the world (1,1), whose real origins are neither in Bethlehem nor in Galilee but in heaven,
in the world above. The Son of God is not an honorary title but ontological. It is through Messiah,
the Son of God, the Father, whom the world knows as “God”, accomplishes his work. The mission
of the Messiah is not to restore the earthly political kingdom, but he is “concerned with alienation
from God, with the salvation of people from their sinful lives”43. Important aspect of this mission is
“to save”, “to give life” and “to judge”.
Jesus, the Son of God, whose purpose is to take away the sin of the world, invites people to walk in
the light, who himself is the light of the world (8,12a). Said differently, Jesus came into the world
for judgement (8,12; 3,19; 12,46). To walk in light will lead the believer to life (8,12b).
Soteriological activity was indeed the purpose for which the Son entered the world (3,17; 8,42).

40
C. FLETCHER-LOUIS, “John 5,19-30: The Son of God is the Apocalyptic Son of Man”, Reading the Gospel of John’s
Christology as Jewish Messianism : Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs (ed. B. E. REYNOLDS – G. BOCCACCINI)
(Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 106; Leiden 2018) 411.
41
FREY, Theology and history in the Fourth Gospel, 37.
42
The Son of God language has potential links Messianic depictions associated with Davidic kingship (STOVELL, “Son
of God’s Anointed One?”, 165).
43
MORRIS, Jesus is the Christ, 84.
Judgement and light are closely linked44. Those who refused to walk in light are already
judged/condemned. Jesus antagonists, who stand in trial before Jesus are representatives of an
unbelieving world, who hate Jesus, the Son of God, because he brings evidence against it, because it
does evil (7,7).
Jesus’ claim to have been sent by his Father, belonging to world above do suggest that the narrative
in chapters 7-8 (as well as in the rest of the gospel) goes beyond the temporal and geographical
boundaries mentioned in the gospel. On a deeper level it is a cosmic battle between God who is
present in the form of Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God and the evil one (7,7) or devil (8,44), the
antagonists of Jesus are mere representatives of this ruler of the world who are called as “children
of devil” (8,44), who will be judged (16,11). As Reinhartz45 puts it, Johannine (cosmic) tale has
cosmos as its setting and eternity as its time frame. The heavenly Messiah makes sense as he needs
to fight not only against this world but also against Satan/devil.
The need for a heavenly Messiah (or more divine) was born from this need to fight
not only against the rulers of this world but also against Satan and his heavenly hosts,
who are the lords and the lords of the lords of this world. Since the bearers of evil on
earth come from heaven, and no mortal could ever object to them, it follows that the
Messiah also should come from heaven, to be stronger than his opponents46.
The identity of Jesus in PA
The setting of PA includes Jesus going up to mount Olives and coming down to the temple,
followed by a trial scene. The intertextual links to Zech 14 and Mal 3 suggest the one on the Mount
Olives and one coming to the temple is God himself. In Malachi 3, God is present in and through
his messenger. God in the gospel of John is encountered in the person of Jesus, the Son of God.
The allusions to Zech 14 and Mal 3 bring along a sense of judgement with their context of the day
of the Lord. The ones who stand in trial include Israel in Zachariah and the judgement, which is also
an act of purification begins from Israel’s religious leaders in Malachi. The eschatological tone
from Malachi and Zechariah connect the “Son of Man” of John, for the apocalyptic Son of Man in
John is the Son of God himself.
The warrior kind of an image from Zech 14 and the image of purifying, flow with the image of the
divine Messiah, who is in a cosmic battle not only with the leaders of Israel but with the devil.
Those who choose to believe, those who walk in light, implying those who receive him are saved,
receive life or in the language of Prologue, Jesus, the Son of God gives them the power to become
τέκνα θεοῦ (1,12). God of the OT who stands on Mount Olives and who comes into the temple is
addressed as κύριος. The woman caught in adultery addresses him with the same noun, implicitly in
the context recognises him (8,11) as God himself, unlike the Jewish leadership who address him as
διδάσκαλος (8,4). In short, the identity of Jesus in PA is – Messiah, Son of God, which was
explicitly proclaimed by Martha in 11,27 and in the purpose behind writing this gospel, 20,31. As
Novenson puts it, “Son of God” stands in restrictive apposition to “Messiah”, saying what kind of a
messiah the author means”47.

44
A. REINHARTZ, The Word in the World: The Cosmological Tale in the Fourth Gospel (Society of Biblical Literature.
Monograph series 045; Atlanta (GA) 1992) 21.
45
REINHARTZ, The Word in the World, 4.
46
G. BOCCACCINI, “From Jewish Prophet to Jewish God : How John Made the Divine Jesus Uncreated”, Reading the
Gospel of John’s Christology as Jewish Messianism : Royal, Prophetic, and Divine Messiahs (ed. B. E. REYNOLDS –
G. BOCCACCINI) (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 106; Leiden 2018) 335-357, 344-345.
47
NOVENSON, “Jesus the Messiah”, 118.