In John’s
writings these same qualities characterize truth. Yeshua says to practice
the truth, “Whoever lives by the truth comes into the light…”
(John 3:21 NIV). The epistle of I John agrees: “If we claim
to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do
not live by the truth” (1:6). Also, in I John the disobedient,
unbelieving and unloving are called liars (2:4, 22; 4:20). These ideas
also appear in the Manual of Discipline quoted above. 4 There is no
evidence of a separate concept of Truth among the Pharisees of Yeshua’s
time and the rabbis who came after them. According to Neusner,
Pharisaic-rabbinic
traditions exhibit little interest in philosophical questions,
e.g. why is there sin and misery in the world? They present no comprehen-
sive historical vision and relate no divine plan for the world. They
tell
stories, but not history; provide moral sayings, but no set of moral
generalizations; offer descriptions of how things are done, but no
commands.5
Even so, the rabbis of Yeshua’s time looked for God to reveal
basic truths as they studied Torah. According to Kaplan,
…the
study of the Torah as advocated in rabbinic Judaism is based on the
assumption that man can never learn the most important truths by the
use of his own intellectual powers. Those truths God alone can make
known to him, and those truths have been revealed to him in the Torah.
6
Kaplan
sees this attitude taking shape about the beginning of the common
era.7
The search for truth had long challenged the philosophers of the nations.
Plato thought that truth existed apart from the worldly things that
we see around us. Truth is found in the world of ideas. It is hidden
from our senses, but we can comprehend truth by thinking. 8
Later the Hellenistic philosophers gave up the idea that we can know
truth through our own thought processes. They said we can only know
truth when it is divinely revealed, or when we transcend our human
limits and enter a state of ecstasy. 9
One may wonder where Pilate stood on this issue while he was questioning
Yeshua. If Pilate accepts the idea that we cannot know truth through
our own thought processes, then curiously Pilate and Yeshua might
agree on one point, that truth is, in fact, revealed by God. That
being so, what is the nature of this revelation?
There is uncertainty because of the different ways of describing truth.
The Greek word for truth used in the B’rit Hadasha is aletheia,
but a Jewish concept of truth is expressed by the Hebrew emet. The
Greek aletheia “has the basic meaning of non- concealment; it
describes what is unveiled.”10 Thus, truth is an intellectual
concept that describes that which is seen, the reality of the world
around us.
Emet can share that intellectual quality when it is used as a legal
term. Truth can mean facts that are confirmed by observation: “If
it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been
done….” (Deut 13:14 and 17:4). 11
However, emet stands out for its moral quality. Emet is the quality
that makes something trustworthy and reliable. Emet describes a thing’s
qualities of being firm and solid. “God is absolutely true in
this sense of being worthy of confidence and of being faithful to
His promises. Words are true if they are solidly founded. A man’s
life is true if it is faithful to God’s ways.” 12
Truth Expressed in Symbolism
Describing all the ways emet is used can be enlightening but complicated.
However, we are helped if we make it more than an intellectual study.
Scholars advise us to look at the images that arise with the idea
of truth. The symbolism and poetry of the word are inspiring. In the
Tanakh, “truth” can be a synonym of “wisdom.”
For example, in Proverbs 23:23 the command to buy truth is parallel
to the command to buy wisdom. The statement that Yeshua is the truth
(John 14:6) may refer to the theme that Yeshua is Wisdom incarnate.
13
However, Yeshua himself offers a different kind of imagery. In Yeshua’s
own teaching truth is intertwined with love. Truth is not just something
we believe, but truth is something we act out in deeds of love. Yeshua
spoke to Pilate shortly after saying his farewell to his disciples
at his last seder. At that time he said, “I am the truth.”
(John 14:6) He followed that with a teaching on love. He spoke of
how his disciples loved him, and how he loved them. There is no greater
love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John
15:13). He spoke of the love between himself and his Father; and he
called his disciples to dwell in his love and to love one another
(John 15:9, 12). 14
It can be said that Yeshua bears witness to the truth by making God’s
love visible and known to people. In fact, we can say that we know
Yeshua is the truth because we know his love. 15 When it comes to
describing the meaning of truth, Psalm 85 gives some eye-opening imagery:
Mercy and
truth have met together,
Righteousness and peace have kissed.
Truth shall spring out of the earth,
And righteousness shall look down from heaven. (Ps. 85:10,11 NKJV)
The NIV
Bible uses “love and faithfulness” for “mercy and
truth.” in verse 10. Certainly emet involves both faithfulness
and truth. Love and mercy (Hebrew chesed ) are also related. “The
passage states that God’s will shall be manifested everywhere
without meeting opposition, just as a plant grows up naturally.”
16 In fact, God’s manifesting of His will works into rabbinic
teaching as a testimony of His love. A story from Genesis Rabbah,
a commentary dated 400 C.E., makes the point (verses are numbered
according to the Jewish method):
Said R.
Simon, “When the Holy One, blessed be he, came to create the
first
man, the ministering angels formed parties and sects. Some of them
said, ‘Let
him not be created.’ That is in line with the following verse
of Scripture: ‘Mercy
and truth fought [sic] together, righteousness and peace warred with
each other’
(Ps. 85:11). Mercy said, ‘Let him be created, for he will perform
acts of mercy.’ Truth said, ‘Let him not be created, for
he is a complete fake.’ Righteousness said
‘Let him be created, for he will perform acts of righteousness.’
Peace said, ‘Let him not be created, for he is one mass of contention.’
What then did the Holy One, blessed be he, do? He took truth and threw
it to the ground. The ministering angels then said before the Holy
One, blessed be he, ‘Master of the ages, how can you disgrace
your seal [which is truth]? Let truth be raised up from the ground!’
That is in line with the following verse of Scripture: ‘Let
truth spring up from the earth’ (Ps. 85:12)
. . . . . . . . .
R. Huna the elder of Sepphoris said, ‘While the ministering
angels were engaged in contentious arguments with one another, keeping
one another preoccupied, the Holy One, blessed be he, created him.’
He then said to them, ‘What good are you doing [with your contentions]?
Man has already been made!’ 17
The meaning of this passage, according to Neusner, is that “in
creating man, God expressed his special love for him.”18 In
another place, Neusner repeats that “God’s act of creation”
shows his “merciful and loving character.”19
In the context of John’s gospel the rabbinic teaching means
this and more. Yeshua is bearing witness to this truth, that God so
loved the world that He sent the truth, Messiah Yeshua, to earth to
be buried and to rise from the earth.
Reinterpretation
of Tradition
Here John seems to be offering his own interpretation of tradition.20
Reinterp-
retation is acceptable, as Yeshua shows when the rabbis confront him.
In John 8 Yeshua claims to be the light of the world, and the Pharisees
call him a false witness (v. 13). Scripture requires at least two
witnesses in a capital case (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15).21
Smith explains,
…the
Mishnah apparently becomes more rigorous: “None may testify
against himself’ (Ketub 2.9; cf. m. Rosh HaSh. 3.1). The Mishnaic
formulation, or something like it, seems to underlie the Pharisees’
rejection of Jesus. Thus, the Pharisees’ response to Jesus rejects
his “I am” saying on legal grounds as illegitimate testimony
on his behalf.” 22
Yeshua
counters that he does not judge, except in solidarity with the Father
who sent him (v. 16). Thus, there are two witnesses, Yeshua and the
Father. Yeshua shows that he knows the law, but he complies with it
in a different way. At the same time, John affirms that Yeshua knows
something about himself--that he has been sent by the Father. This
is the basis for a new interpretation of tradition. 23
It becomes evident that when John tells his story of Yeshua he recognizes
and appreciates rabbinic teaching, not denying it, but showing how
Yeshua brings out its full meaning. 24 He shows that Yeshua has a
more complete interpretation of the laws, and the laws have their
full meaning in him. John’s gospel shows itself as a pro-Jewish
writing. There are other examples to help make this point.
The previous image of Yeshua as truth, the seal of God, can be compared
to the rabbis’ teaching. “God’s seal is truth. What
does truth mean? That He, God, lives, and is an everlasting King”
(Sanhedrin, 18a).25 The word emet is formed from the first letters
of elohim melech tamid, (God the king eternal).26
John conveys Yeshua’s everlasting authority when he reports
Yeshua’s prayer to the Father, “you granted (your Son)
authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those
you have given him” (17:2); also, “No one can come to
me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up
at the last day….If anyone eats of this bread, he will live
forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of
the world.” (6:44,51)
At last, truth is the testimony that God is king and judge of the
universe, and He is the one, eternal God. According the Midrash Rabbah
(on Song of Songs 1:9):
…He signs alone the verdict on all living and no creature signs
with Him.
What is the signature of the Holy One, blessed be He? R. Bibi said
in the
Name of R. Reuben: Emeth (truth)…. Resh Lakish said: Why is
the
signature emeth (truth)? Because this word consists of alef, the beginning
of the alphabet, mem the middle letter, and taw the last letter, as
much as
to say, I am the first and I am the last, and beside Me there is no
God
(Isa. xliv, 6). ‘I am the first,’ having received my kingdom
from no other;
‘I am the last,’ as I transmit it to no other, since there
is no other; ‘and beside
Me there is no God’: there being no second to Me.27
The similarity
to John is striking. In the book of Revelation God speaks these same
pronouncements: “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the
Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”
(1:8 NIV). Again in 21:6, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the
Beginning and the End.” However in 22:13, these words apply
to the Messiah who is coming soon, “I am the Alpha and the Omega,
the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”
Notably
this midrash passage groups together the qualities of judgment, truth
and sovereignty. Brown sees these qualities interrelated in John.
While Yeshua said he came into the world to testify to the truth (18:37),
he also said, “I came into the world for judgment.” (9:39)
“Since the revelation of truth has the effect of judgment,”
Yeshua’s two stated purposes do not contradict each other.28
Brown continues,
Jesus can
testify to the truth because he belongs to what is above (viii 23)
and is the only one who has come down from heaven (iii 13); thus he
has seen what the Father does (v 19) and has heard what the Father
has said (viii 26). Indeed he is the embodiment of truth (xiv 6),
so that the deeds and words of his ministry constitute testimony to
the truth.29
That is
why Yeshua was handed over to Pilate, because his witness to the truth
expressed judgment. “The world…hates me because of the
evidence I bring against it” (John 7: 7).30 If God alone is
king, how can Yeshua say he is a king? The Midrash Rabbah passage
above says God shares His kingship with nobody, yet Yeshua says God
has shared it with him. Brown refers to “the Jewish concept
that the one who is sent [shaliach] is completely the representative
of the one who sends him.”31 He points to the legal principle,
“an agent is like the one who sends him,” or “he
ranks as his [master’s] own person.”32 John points out
not only a legal relationship, but a likeness of nature between Father
and Son.33 To top it off Yeshua declares, “I and the Father
are one” (10:30). Now he is leaving the world to be again fully
united with his Father (16:28). 34
Yeshua bears witness to the truth by the fact that, while God was
in the beginning, the Word, Messiah Yeshua, was in the beginning with
God (John 1:1,2). “And we have seen his glory, the glory of
the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth”
(1:14). Later Yeshua looks forward to continuing glory with the God
who is the first and the last: “And now, Father, glorify me
in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began”
(17:5).
Summation
What does Yeshua mean when he says, “…for this reason
I came into the world, to testify to the truth?” Judging by
John, Yeshua’s meaning comes clear in traditional Jewish teachings.
That is, in John’s interpretation rabbinic teachings about God
confirm John’s teachings about Yeshua in his role as Messiah
and King.
It appears that John and the rabbis shared together an idea about
the meaning of truth. Truth (emet) is God’s faithfulness, reliability,
and trustworthiness. Truth is also the attitude that gives rise to
acts of love. God sent the truth to earth as an act of love. Yeshua
witnessed to the truth by acts of love. Yeshua is all this combined
in the flesh, a physical manifestation of God’s faithfulness
and love. As such, Yeshua has authority to be king eternal.
Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” is an issue
throughout John’s writings. John describes truth in imagery
that expresses God’s love and sovereignty. This love and sovereignty
are both made visible and concrete in Messiah Yeshua. It has been
observed that truth was standing right in front of Pilate, but Messiah
Yeshua has continued to make his truth known even in Jewish writings
and the lives of the faithful.
===================
1 John M. Allegro, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of Christianity
(New York: Criterion Books, 1956), 124.
2 Ibid., 124.
3 Ibid., 125.
4 Millar Burrows, More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Viking
Press, 1958), 124.
5 Jacob Neusner, The Pharisees: Rabbinic Perspectives, (Hoboken: Ktav
Publishing House, 1973), 164.
6 Mordecai M. Kaplan, Judaism as a Civilization: Toward a Reconstruction
of American-Jewish Life, (New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1934), 378.
7 Ibid., 368. This time is the beginning of what Kaplan calls the
third stage in the shaping of the Jewish religion.
8 Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Geoffrey
W. Bromley, trans., (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 239.
9 Ibid., 240.
10 Raymond Brown, The Gospel According to John I, (i-xii), Anchor
Bible, vol. 29 ( New York: Doubleday, 1966), 499.
11 Kittel, 233.
12 Brown, I (i-xii), 499.
13 Ibid., p. 500.
14 Andrew Shanks, What is Truth?: Towards a Theological Poetics (London:
Routledge, 2001), 3-4.
15 Ibid., 4.
16 O. A. Piper, “Truth,” The Interpreter’s Dictionary
of the Bible, vol. 4, (New York: Abingdon, 1962), 714.
17 Jacob Neusner, Genesis Rabbah: The Judaic Commentary to the Book
of Genesis, A New American Translation, vol. I (Atlanta: Brown University,
1985), 78-79.
18 Ibid.. 79.
19 Ibid., 78.
20 Alternatively, the reinterpretation might have come to John from
another source. John might be relating a traditional oral narrative
that was circulating among the populace. See Joanna Dewey, “The
Gospel of John in Its Oral-Written Media World,” in Robert T.
Fortna and Tom Thatcher, eds., Jesus in the Johannine Tradition (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 239-252. Dewey finds it probable
that “there were two different comprehensive oral narratives
in existence,” (ibid., 248), one narrative underlying John,
possibly originating in Jerusalem, and another underlying Mark and
the other Synoptics, possibly originating in Galilee.
21 D. Moody Smith, Jr., John, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries
(Nashville: Abingdon, 1999), 181.
22 Ibid., 181-182.
23 Ibid., 182.
24 It may be understandable that John has ideas in common with the
rabbis. See Stephen J. Patterson., “The Prologue to the Fourth
Gospel and the World of Speculative Jewish Theology,” in Robert
T. Fortna and Tom Thatcher, eds., Jesus in the Johannine Tradition
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 323-332. Patterson
points out that John operated in the same religious and cultural milieu
as other Jewish theologians. He states that different communities
shared traditions in common and used shared material in their discourses.
For example, the Mandaeans (First Cent. C.E.) said that wicked people
attacked the savior for speaking a word of truth. The Sethians (possibly
First Cent. B. C.E. through Third Cent. C.E.) wrote of a savior who
brings truth, life and salvation. (Ibid., 327-329).
25 Kittel, 237. Kittel quotes the Jerusalem Talmud. The Babylonian
Talmud agrees, “…the seal of the Holy One, blessed be
He, is emeth” (Sanhedrin, 64a; Shabbath, 55a) in The Babylonian
Talmud, I. Epstein, trans., (London: Soncino, 1935).
26 Ibid., 237.
27 Midrash Rabbah, vol. 9, Song of Songs, Maurice Simon, trans., (London:
Soncino, 1983), 67.
28 Raymond Brown, The Gospel According to John II, (xiii-xxi), Anchor
Bible, vol. 29A ( New York: Doubleday, 1970), 854.
29 Ibid., 854.
30 Ibid., 869.
31 Ibid., 632.
32 Ibid., 632, explaining ideas from P. Borgen, “God’s
Agent in the Fourth Gospel,” in Religions in Antiquity, Goodenough
Vol. ( Leiden: Brill, 1968), 137-148.
33 Ibid.,. 632.
34 Ibid., 735.
