The Good and Evil Serpent (94 page)

The narrator indicates what is lifted up (active verb for serpent and passive verb for Son of Man). One should not exclude what is lifted up: Moses’ serpent and the Son of Man, Jesus. As Bernard stated: “Those who looked up in faith
upon the brazen serpent
uplifted before them were delivered from death by poison; those who look
upon the Crucified
, lifted up on the cross, shall be delivered from the death of sin.”
¹⁰¹
Neither the author of Numbers 21 nor the Fourth Evangelist expected the reader to look only at the verb; such a possibility seems quite unlikely. Yet contemporary Johannine experts conclude, en masse, despite the brilliant insights of earlier commentators and the vast weight of serpent symbolism, that the emphasis is only on the verb “lifting up.”

While the eyes of the Hebrews who trust God’s promise look up at the copper serpent and the gaze of Johannine Jews is on Jesus, the Son of Man and Son of God, there is a difference. In the Septuagint of Numbers 21:8, the stake on which the copper serpent is raised is called a “sign” (probably of God’s healing power).
¹⁰²
The “signs” in the Fourth Gospel, Jesus’ mighty works (Jn 5:31–47), correspond to the miracles of the Synoptics. These signs (td anLieia [Jn 2:23]) witness to Jesus who is not a sign but the One to whom the signs point, according to God’s plan (Jn 2:11, 23; 3:2; etc.). In light of this insight and recognizing the stress on Jesus’ incarnation and physical nature (only in John does Jesus collapse from exhaustion and thirst and cry), it seems difficult to comprehend how Johannine experts can miss the narrative force of John 3:13–16; the Fourth Evangelist is not interested only in drawing attention to the verb “lifting up.” He is focusing the readers’ mind on things above (Jn 3:12) and proclaiming that Jesus’ crucifixion was not a failure but his hour of triumph. While Luke trifurcates the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, the Fourth Evangelist stresses, against polemical Jewish groups (some of whom control the local synagogue), that Jesus’ crucifixion was his exaltation (resurrection and ascension tend to be refocused on Jesus’ lifting up on the cross; he will return to his Father finally, according to Jn 20).

As we intimated and is well known, the Fourth Evangelist stresses more than the Synoptics that Jesus is God’s Son (cf. esp. Jn 3:13–16). More in the Fourth Gospel than elsewhere in the New Testament Jesus is portrayed as talking about God as Father (cf. esp. Jn 5:19–47). To comprehend that for the Fourth Evangelist Jesus is God’s Son brings us back into first-century serpent symbolism. As we have seen, Caesar Augustus was portrayed as a god’s son because a serpent impregnated his mother.

Theological aspects of the grammar
. The simile includes a necessity: it is necessary (
) for the Son of Man to be lifted up. The implied author appeals to the divine plan of salvation and employs the word “necessary,” which is used in apocalyptic literature to stress that certain events must take place before the End, when all normal time will cease. The reader already knows, or will learn from the narrative, that Jesus will die outside the walls of the Holy City, Jerusalem.

Again, commentators have assumed or argued that the very use of the word “necessary” (
) makes it obvious that 3:14 must refer only to Jesus’ crucifixion. They point to the use of “necessary” in 3:13 and 12:34. The use of “necessary” (
) in the Fourth Gospel may prove them wrong. According to the Fourth Evangelist, the Scriptures prove that “it is necessary [
] for him [Jesus] to rise from the dead.” (20:9)

J. Frey rightly points out that Jesus goes willingly to his death, according to the Fourth Evangelist. Jesus’ death is unlike the concept of the hero who dies as an example, and it is not grounded in the evils of men. Jesus’ crucifixion is a necessity; it is according to Scripture and according to God’s will and love.
¹⁰³

What is parallel to “in the wilderness”? This dative phrase is followed by the dative phrase in the result clause: “in him.” Hence, the theological thought develops out of the grammar: As the believers who looked up at the serpent lived in the wilderness, so all believers who look up to the exalted (upraised) Christ will live eternally “in him” (
). Grammar indicates a connection between serpent in the wilderness and the Son of Man, Jesus.

More may be learned by the implied author’s use of “must” or “it is necessary” (
). The Fourth Evangelist did not write: “[A]s Moses lifted up, so the Son of Man is lifted up.” The implied author draws attention to the connection between the serpent and the Son of Man. According to the author of Numbers 21, it is neither Moses’ act of lifting up that saves the people nor the serpent on the pole. What saves the people in Numbers and the Fourth Gospel is God, and this saving power is available because of the commitment of the people who follow God’s directive to look to the serpent.

The Fourth Evangelist does clarify the importance of believing (a fundamental word emphasized by him), but the concept is not entirely new in the typology; it seems implied in Numbers 21. What is crucial in Numbers is the commitment or belief of the people that God will save them when they look up to the serpent as a sign of God’s power to save. In the Fourth Gospel, the Son of Man, Jesus, tends to take on the role of God. That is, it can be argued that Jesus is the one who saves through his incarnation and crucifixion. Note John 3:16, which follows 3:14–15: “For God so [
] loved the world that he gave his only son, that all who are believing in him may not perish but have eternal life.” This verse (16) begins with “so;” thus, the parallel thought continues in Greek. Note the following constructions:

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness,
So it is necessary for the Son of Man to be lifted up,
In order that all who are believing in him may have eternal life;
So did God love the world that he gave his unique son

In order that all who are believing in him may not perish but may have eternal life. [3:14–16}

By seeing the serpent as representing the Son of Man, one comprehends the intention of the Fourth Evangelist. No New Testament author, except perhaps Paul, puts Jesus in such a central focus. The Evangelist’s theology is focused to serve his Christology.

It seems difficult to agree that the one who wrote “and the Word became flesh and tented among us” (Jn 1:14) would have intended to stress only the verb and not the verb and the noun; that is, only the lifting up and not the lifting up of the Son of Man. In the Fourth Evangelist’s time and culture (whether he wrote in Jerusalem, Alexandria, or Ephesus), the serpent symbolized precisely what the Son symbolizes in the Fourth Gospel: life (Pos. 20) and eternal life (Pos. 27). Hence, perceiving this point, one begins to see that the intention of the Evangelist is most likely to draw a parallel between the serpent and the Son of Man, Jesus.

The “lifting up” is crucial and should not be minimized. The Fourth Evangelist’s own Christology does become apparent when he stresses that the Son of Man must be lifted up (exalted) on the cross. The full meaning must not be lost by looking only at the verb and not the person. The Fourth Gospel is “good news” about a person. That means the image of Christ or Son of Man in Numbers, God’s foreshadowing of Christ according to the Fourth Evangelist, is the serpent that symbolizes God’s salvation.
¹⁰⁴
As Saint Augustine (354–430) stated, in his homilies on the Fourth Gospel: “Just as those who looked on that serpent perished not by the serpent’s bites, so they who
look in faith on Christ’s death
are healed from the bites of sin.” One cannot look at a verb; one looks up at the serpent or up at the Son of Man.
¹⁰⁵