The
theological importance of oneness in the Old Testament relates primarily to the
one God of Israel (cf. Deut. 6.4). The only true God is Yahweh, and he is one.
It is interesting to note that the Hebrew for one used where is א͏חד, as this
term has a plural form as well. ‘It stresses unity while recognizing diversity
within oneness’ (Harris 1980: I, 60). This diversity in unity is seen in the
tabernacle whose curtains are joined into one (Exod. 26.6, 11; 36.13), and in
the union between Adam and Eve as ‘one flesh’ (Gen. 2.124). Also in Gen. 34.16
the men of Shechem want to marry Jacob’s children in order to become ‘one
people’ (Harris 1980: I, 30). Another tradition that may serve to clarify the
Johannine motif of unity is contained within the Old Testament prophecies
concerning the gathering of the scattered Israel again into one people (cf.
Ezek. 34.17, 22; Hos. 1.11; Amos 3.3; Mic. 2.12). In John 10.16 the Johannine
Jesus must bring other sheep also, so that there may be one flock and one
shepherd. And in Jn 11.52 the High Priest prophesies that Jesus is going to die
for the nation, and gather into one the dispersed children of God.
In
the Dead Sea Scrolls, ‘unity’ (יחד) is a technical term for the community
(Reicke 1992: 149). In 1QS 5.2 the members of the Qumran community shall
constitute a unity; in 1QS 8.4-10 we read of a community of unitedness; and,
likewise, in 1QS 9.5 we read of a house of unitedness for Israel. Moreover, the
Qumran community places a central part in God’s plan for his people. The Qumran
community is seen as a divine planting, and the community is the bearer and
guarantor of salvation for all Israel. As such, the knowledge of the eternal
truth is achieved only within the community (cf. 1QH 6.25 and 1QS 9.3). The
community stays together, eats together, studies together and prays together
(cf. 1QS 6.11, 12). Nevertheless, only those born of Israel can join the
congregation after an examination (cf. 1QS 7.10). Lastly, the community of
Qumran provides defence against enemies (cf. 1QH 6.25-27). Maier understands יחד
as a synonym for the Qumran congregation or community (1960: 149). In most cases
it occurs as a terminus technicus (1960: 148). Maier further suggests
that יחד is used exclusively in the serve of the symbolism of the Temple, and consequently
signifies the practical representation of the true temple-sanctuary through the
community (1960: 166 178, 181).
Though
the Old Testament and the Dead Sea Scroll usage of the term אחד and יחד may
help to clarify the Johannine motif of unity, neither adequately explains the
Johannine usage. These are some of the traditions that flow into the Johannine theological
prism, yet the centre of the Johannine oneness motif is not to be found in any
of these traditions. An adequate understanding of the Johannine motif has to
start with the statement in Jn 10.30, εγω και ο πετηρ εν εσμεν.
The Son and the father are one. It is important to note that the word for ‘one’
(εν) here is in the neuter case and not in the
masculine. In other words, the Son and the father are not on person, but a
unity. Moreover, from the context of the previous verses the Son and the Father
are equally active and concerned about the safe keeping of the sheep.
Therefore, from the context the unity in mind here is above all a unity in
action or function. The work of the Son is equivalent to that of the father.
There is the closest possible analogy between what the father does and what the
Son does. In fact, the work of the Son is identical to that of the Father (cf.
Jn 5.17, 19, 30; 6.38; 8.16, 26, 28).
Therefore,
I want to conclude by saying that unity in John means the solidarity of two
parties in one action or function. There is an absolute unity between the
Father and the Son in action. The Son only does what he has seen from the
father. It is not a unity in essence but a unity in function, though the
addition of the prologue goes in the direction of a unity in essence (Jn 1.1).
In John 17 Jesus’ prayer for both the present community and the future believers
is that they may be one (εν) (Jn 17.11, 21). Indeed, the central thrust of the
prayer for the community is that they may be one. This unity of believers is a
reflection of the solidarity between the Father and the Son in sending. Therefore,
the unity of believers does not consist so much of a unity in confession,
though it is of necessity included, but consists primarily of a unity in
sending.
Similarly, Theron (1987)
highlighted two aspects of ‘oneness’ in John. First, the oneness and solidarity
of the Father and the Son, and secondly, dependent on this divine oneness, the
solidarity of the Christian community. ‘As to content, this prayer is not for
unity per se, but for that specific unity that grows from a dynamic, confessional
solidarity with the salvific mission of the Son of God’ (1987: 93).
We see here, therefore,
that the Johannine concept of unity is different from that of Paul. In Pauline
ecclesiology Jews and Gentiles are joined into one body, or church of Christ
(cf. 1 Cor. 12.1-14; Gal. 3.28; Rom. 12.5; Gal. 6.2; and Phil. 1.27; etc.).
Oneness in John, however, refers to the Johannine community’s unity in their
being sent into the world. (Johan
Ferreira, Johannine Ecclesiology [Journal for the Study of the New
Testament Supplement Series 160; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998], 132-34)
