This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday.  The significance of the ascension of the Son of Man is elaborated through an OT example (Num 21:8-9). The key to interpreting this analogy between Moses’ lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness and the ascension of the Son of Man is the verb (hypsoō), meaning both “lift up” and “exalt.” (The Hebrew verb nāsā’ has a similar double meaning; see the pun based on this verb in Gen 40:9-23.) Once again the Fourth Evangelist asks the reader to hold two meanings together simultaneously. As the serpent was lifted up in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up on the cross. The double meaning of hypsoō implies, however, that the physical act of lifting up is also a moment of exaltation. That is, it is in the crucifixion that Jesus is exalted. John 3:14 is one of three statements about the “lifting up” of the Son of Man in John (see also 8:28; 12:32-34). These three sayings are the Johannine analogue to the three passion predictions in the synoptic Gospels (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33.34; and parallels). Continue reading →

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. At v. 11, the text shifts from a dialogue to a monologue. The dialogue between Jesus and Nicodemus alternated between Jesus’ offer of new birth (vv. 3, 5-8) and Nicodemus’s resistance (vv. 4, 9). The shift to the monologue allows Jesus’ voice to silence the voice of resistance. Jesus’ discourse runs through v. 21 and divides into two parts. Verses 11-15 interpret Jesus’ offer of new birth through his death, resurrection, and ascension, and vv. 16-21 focus on the theme of judgment. Continue reading →

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. Nicodemus is oblivious to the two levels of meaning (John 3). He focuses on one meaning of “born anōthen” (“again”) and protests that what Jesus calls for is physiologically impossible (3:4). As in v. 2, Nicodemus’s categories of what is possible intrude into the conversation. On the level that Nicodemus understands Jesus’ words, Nicodemus’s protest is correct. It is impossible for a grown man to reenter his mother’s womb and be born a second time. Nicodemus’s protest is ironic, however, because his words are correct and incontestable on one level, but that level stands in conflict and tension with what Jesus intends by the expression “to be born anōthen.” Jesus’ words speak of a radical new birth, generated from above, but Nicodemus’s language and imagination do not stretch enough to include that offer. Continue reading →

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. While in the earlier post we dedicated some time to “anōthen,” what about the significance of being “born,” whether it be again or from above. Every reference to gennao (“give birth”) in John 3 are passive (vv. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).  A good grammatical question to ask here is “who is the one who gives birth?”  Mary gave birth to Jesus – clearly here, Mary is the “actor.”  But in v.3 there is no clearly stated actor because the verbs are passively stated. The word gennao is used in John 1:12-13 where the “actor” is clearly defined: “But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in his name, who were born not by natural generation nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision but of God.” The “actor” is God. Continue reading →

This coming Sunday is Holy Trinity Sunday. Jesus’ response to Nicodemus’ opening greeting is bold, challenging and begins with the solemn “Amen, Amen…” 

3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born gennēthē anōthen .” 

The expression gennēthē anōthen can be translated as “born again” or “born from above.”  Some bibles opt for the “again” (TLW), some opt for “again” with a footnote to explain there is an alternative (RSV, NIV, TEV, NASB, ESV, KJV).  Others opt for “from above” without explanation (NAB, NJB) or with explanation as to the alternative (NSRV, CEV). Continue reading →