8

In John 10:30, Jesus states, "I and the Father are one."

The Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 says "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

At least on the surface both look somewhat similar. Are there reasons to think that the statement in John 10:30 is intended to evoke the phrase in Deuteronomy 6:4?

4
  • It seems to follow the same pattern as Genesis 2:24, repeated several times throughout the New Testament.
    – Lucian
    Jun 14 '20 at 21:51
  • It is not entirely clear why some consider it reasonable, or think it permissible, to impose ideas onto scriptural statements that are not directly presented or necessarily implied; in this case, reading a very specific concept into words that they do not carry in and of themselves.
    – user35499
    Jul 15 '20 at 8:33
  • Are any of these answers of any value?
    – Dottard
    Sep 14 '20 at 4:16
  • @Dottard Admittedly an allusion or echo is something difficult to prove or disprove, but most of the answers seem to focus on the meaning of "one" (whether identity or substance or purpose) rather than attempting to draw any parallels between the passages. In fact, yours is the only answer to even mention Deuteronomy, which would seem necessary for any substantive answer.
    – Soldarnal
    Sep 14 '20 at 14:26
2

As is well understood, John's Gospel is not so much about the story of Jesus but the theology of Jesus; hence the ancient epithet, "John the Theologian" on hagiography.

John 10 refers to John 9 and the very significant miracle of restoring the sight of a man born blind (John 10:21). Further, the statement of John 10:30 about being one with the Father follows on the heels of John 10:1-16 about Jesus claiming to be the "Good Shepherd", another direct allusion to the claims of YHWH God in the OT: Ps 23, Eze 34:11-24 and Jer 31:9, 10 (more on this last reference shortly).

As if to reinforce this point, Jesus then makes the statement (v17, 18):

The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.

This, in effect, repeats Jesus' claim in John 2:19, Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up again.” Note His claim to raise Himself.

Shortly afterward at "the feast of dedication" (John 10:22), the same themes are taken up again about Jesus being the Good shepherd and being the sources of eternal life (v28). [This is a regular theme of John: "I am the bread of life" John 6:35-51; "I am the resurrection and the life", John 11:25; "I am the way the truth and the life", John 14:6, "I am the vine", John 15:1-5; see also 1 John 5:10-12.]

As part of this discussion with the Jews, Jesus then claims (v30):

I and the Father are one.

In the above context, the Jews understood Jesus explosive claims and immediately accused Him of blasphemy (v33), “We are not stoning You for any good work,” said the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because You, who are a man, declare Yourself to be God.”

Was Jesus alluding to the Shema in Deut 6:4? Yes and No. "Yes" because the idea is certainly superficially similar but there are important differences:

  • Jesus changes the wording from "LORD" (YHWH) in the Shema to "Father"; However, in the NT this is understandable because Jer 31:9 combines the allusion of YHWH as both Shepherd and Father of Israel. The Jews were well aware of this because they understood their God, YHWH, as both "Shepherd" and "Father".
  • the word for "one" is changed from εἷς (masc, LXX) to ἕν (neut). The effect of this is to affirm Jesus' unity of essence with the Father. See below.

Therefore, if Jesus is alluding to the Shema, He is probably combining those ideas with the constant and strident monotheism of the OT as well:

  • Deut 4:35, You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD is God; besides him there is no other.
  • Deut 32:39, See now that I myself am he! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, …
  • Isa 44:6, Thus says the LORD, the King and Redeemer of Israel, the LORD of Hosts: “I am the first and I am the last, and there is no God but Me."
  • Is 45:5, 6, I am the LORD, and there is no other; there is no God but Me … so that all may know, from where the sun rises to where it sets, that there is none but Me; I am the LORD, and there is no other.

[In the LXX, Deut 32:39 contains the unpredicated phrase, ἐγώ εἰμι (I am!). This title of YHWH is repeated in the LXX in other places such as Isa 41:4, 43:10, 13, 25, 45:19, 46:4, 48:12, 51:12, 52:6]

Thus, Jesus both affirms the theology of a single God and simultaneously claims His unity of being with the Father. No wonder Jesus was accused of blasphemy by claiming to be God (John 10:33).

CONCLUSION

I suggest that Jesus was alluding to the Shema but much more than the Shema.

APPENDIX - comments by others about the neuter form Jesus used in saying "I and the Father are one (neuter)".

Ellicott:

I and my Father are one.—The last clause of John 10:29 is identical with the last clause of John 10:28 if we identify “Father’s” with “My.” This our Lord now formally does. The last verses have told of power greater than all, and these words are an assertion that in the infinity of All-mighty Power the Son is one with the Father. They are more than this, for the Greek word for “one” is neuter, and the thought is not, therefore, of unity of person, but is of unity of essence. “The Son is of one substance with the Father.” In the plural “are” there is the assertion of distinctness as against Sabellianism, and in the “one” there is the assertion of co-ordination as against Arianism. At recurring periods in the history of exegesis men have tried to establish that these words do not imply more than unity of will between the Father and the Son. We have seen above that they assert both oneness of power and oneness of nature; but the best answer to all attempts to attach any meaning lower than that of the divinity of our Lord to these His words is found here, as in the parallel instance in John 8:58-59, in the conduct of the Jews themselves. To them the words conveyed but one meaning, and they sought to punish by stoning what seemed to them to be blasphemy. Their reason is here given in express words, “because that Thou, being a man, makest thyself God” (John 10:33).

Barnes:

I and my Father are one - The word translated "one" is not in the masculine, but in the neuter gender. It expresses union, but not the precise nature of the union. It may express any union, and the particular kind intended is to be inferred from the connection. In the previous verse he had said that he and his Father were united in the same object that is, in redeeming and preserving his people. It was this that gave occasion for this remark. Many interpreters have understood this as referring to union of design and of plan. The words may bear this construction. In this way they were understood by Erasmus, Calvin, Bucer, and others. Most of the Christian fathers understood them, however, as referring to the oneness or unity of nature between the Father and the Son; and that this was the design of Christ appears probable from the following considerations:

  1. The question in debate was (not about his being united with the Father in plan and counsel, but in power. He affirmed that he was able to rescue and keep his people from all enemies, or that he had power superior to men and devils that is, that he had supreme power over all creation. He affirmed the same of his Father. In this, therefore, they were united. But this was an attribute only of God, and they thus understood him as claiming equality to God in regard to omnipotence.

  2. The Jews understood him as affirming his equality with God, for they took up stones to punish him for blasphemy John 10:31, John 10:33, and they said to him that they understood him as affirming that he was God, John 10:33.

  3. Jesus did not deny that it was his intention to be so understood. See the notes at John 10:34-37.

  4. He immediately made another declaration implying the same thing, leaving the same impression, and which they attempted to punish in the same manner, John 10:37-39. If Jesus had not intended so to be understood, it cannot be easily reconciled with moral honesty that he did not distinctly disavow that such was his intention. The Jews were well acquainted with their own language. They understood him in this manner, and he left this impression on their minds.

0

Since no one knows the operation of one's mind it's hard to knows exactly what their thinking may be from John 10:30.

For instance, from the context one can conclude that God the Father and the Son are one in purpose. That is to say that the sheep are equally safe in the Sons hand as well as in the Father's hand. The power of the Son is equal to that of the Father.

I'm convinced that John 10:30 is teaching that the Father and the Son are one in nature. Jesus is asserting the essential unity of the Father and the Son in the word "one" (hen). It is a neuter number to indicate equality of essence, attributes, design, will and work. "One" (meaning "one thing)"

Jesus distinguishes the "I" from the "Father" and uses the plural verb "are" denoting "we are." These words separate the persons within the Godhead, but "one" asserts their unity of essence or nature AS IDENTICAL.

The Jews understood Jesus correctly. There could be no mistake about His meaning. John 10:31, "The Jews took up stones AGAIN to stone Him." I believe the "AGAIN" refers back to John 8:58-59, where the Jews accused Him of blasphemy for saying He existed before Abraham was born or "sprang into existence."

Here at John 10:33, "The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out God." So to answer your question, I believe it's possible to think about the "Shema."

1
  • If the Jews understood Jesus correctly, why did they not become his followers? why did they kill him? (John 8:40) if they correctly understood him to be God, do the Jews also believe that they can kill God? If Jesus is the only true God, and the Father is also the only true God, can both statements be true?.The Father begot Jesus, but the same cannot be said about the Father. Jesus never claimed to be equal to the Father, his God, John 17:3, John 14:28. He is not the Creator for he himself plainly and unequivocally credited God as the Creator, Matthew 19:4.
    – user35499
    Jul 15 '20 at 13:59
0

I would argue no. Jesus' point in context is that He and the Father are not separate deities. Why did He say this? He was claiming divine prerogatives, and so needed to stress that He was not a rogue deity, which the Jews thought He was implying (if He's not the Father, and doesn't claim to be, how can He claim these prerogatives of God alone?). This climaxes when He claims to be exempt from keeping the Sabbath due to His being equal with the Father:

John 5:16-18 Therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, because he did these things on the sabbath. 17 But Jesus answered them: My Father worketh until now; and I work. 18 Hereupon therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he did not only break the sabbath, but also said God was his Father, making himself equal to God.

Clearly the way Jesus spoke of His Sonship was not the same as 'I'm a child of God,' nor is 'My Father works [on the Sabbath] and I too work' a valid response to 'You aren't allowed to work on the Sabbath.' The Jews understood He was claiming to be the offspring of God, and thus to be saying He is equal to God. Which He is. This is how He can be both God, and distinct from the Father, because He is the eternal Son of the Father. His Wisdom. His Word.

When Moses said, "the Lord is our God; the Lord is one," this was a statement about monotheism, not unitarianism vs. binitarianism vs. trinitarianism. In Hebrew, when the category of noun is right, such as here, to say that a noun is "one," means that it alone exhausts that category of thing.

A perfect example is Zechariah 14:9:

And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day there shall be one Lord, and his name shall be one.

Here this is rightly translated "there shall be one Lord [acknowledged only]." And yet the Hebrew is "the Lord shall be one." The same for "and his name one" - this means He will be called upon universally by one name (namely, the whole world will recognize Yahweh, He who is, as the true in that age).

0

Yes. There is a reason that John 10:30 is intended to evoke the Shema. The reason is found in the context of John 10:30 and in John 10:30 itself being the focal point of the chiastic structure of the Gospel of John evoking the Shema all throughout it.

Jesus Christ is the Lord (YHWH) and God of the Shema in the Gospel of John:

John presented it in the way of a Chiasmus (A-A-B-B-C-A-B-A). The crux of the chiasmus is the oneness of the Father and the Son as Lord and God (10:30).

John 1:1 θεος (GOD)

John 1:18 θεος (GOD)

John 1:18 ο ων (YHWH)

John 8:58 εγο ειμι (YHWH)

John 10:30 εσμεν εν (ONE).

John 10:33 θεος (GOD).

John 20:28 ο κυριοσ μου (YHWH) and ο θεος μου (GOD)

Jesus Christ is identified as Lord and God in the beginning (1:1, 1:18), middle (5:58, 10:30-33) and ending (20:28) of the gospel of John.

Jesus Christ is the only God Eternal or the only God YHWH (μονοηενης θεος ο ων) in John 1:18.

Regarding ο ων in John 1:18, Vincent's Word Studies Commentary says:

The expression ὁ ὢν, who is, or the one being, is explained in two ways: 1. As a timeless present, expressing the inherent and eternal relation of the Son to the Father.

In John 1:18, 5:58 (εγο ειμι ο ων, The Eternal One), the very designation of God in Exodus 3:14 was being fully applied to Jesus Christ. The identification of Jesus Christ as YHWH does not mean that he is the Father. Rather, Jesus Christ and the Father are equal in possessing the same divine identity as Lord and God (εσμεν έν).

The context of John 10:30

Jesus was claiming to be έν (one) with the Father in John 10:30. On the other hand, the Shema says that God is εις (οne) Lord. The authors used different words that convey different sense of being one. The Shema speaks of God being "one Lord" (εις εστιν κυριος) whilst John 10:30 speaks of Jesus and the Father being one i.e. united (alike/equal).

The context of John 10:30 reveals what exactly is the equality between Jesus and the Father:

Jesus said: My Father is greater than all. I and my Father are one. (John 10:29-30) You (Jesus) make yourself God. (John 10:33)

That is, Jesus and the Father are equally greater than all. That is, they are co-equal as God.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.