Sweet Sunday Sermon – Eternal Life Through Believing

Submitted by Dr. GP

In John’s gospel, everything subserves the developing of certain RECURRENT IDEAS. These recurrent ideas are assembled in the prologue, and the first chapter, and then developed right through to the end.  These recurrent ideas are not mere abstractions of John’s own producing, but are spiritual truths outgrowing from fertile facts.

From a large store of available data John selects just those which demonstrate and develop the central truths of his treatise; of which the central one is, ETERNAL LIFE BY BELIEVING ON JESUS AS SON OF GOD AND SAVIOUR OF MEN, (John 20:30-31).

Let us  trace John’s recurrent idea of life by  believing, because among the recurrent ideas which run through the book of John, this one carries John’s main purpose  as given in his practical purpose in 20:31.

“That ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that  believing ye might have life” (20:31).  

That word “believe” occurs in its several forms ninety-eight times; the words “life” (zoe) and “live (zao) fifty-five times.

When we pick out the principal references to eternal life (1:4, 3:14-16, 3:36, 4:10-14,  5:24-29, 6:35-55, 8:12, 10:28,29, 11:25,26, 17:3, etc.), we discover an unmistakable progress of doctrine, as each new reference reveals a further truth in such a way, that to transpose any would spoil the order.

Here we see the guidance of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostle John in the writing of this Gospel according to the principle found in Isaiah 28:10, that “precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little.

We start with chapter 1:4, 5, 9 –where the first thing that we learn is that eternal life is in the Son, who is also  the true Light of men which gives light to every man coming into the world. Jesus, the light
and that its first action upon the soul is to give light. This light which reveals spiritual realities, by “shining in the darkness,”to reveal human sin and Divine truth.  

Second, in chapter 3:14-16, we learn that eternal life is imparted to us through faith in the Calvary work of the  Savior-Son, and that it is eternal.

Next, in chapter 3:36, the  word “hath” leaps to the eye, telling us that eternal life is the  present possession of the believer. There is nothing doubtful; it does not say “may have.” Nor is it only future; for the word is “hath,” meaning here and now.

In chapter 4:14,we note that eternal life is not only a present possession but an inward satisfaction. We drink, and the life-giving drought becomes a very fountain within the soul, ever springing, ever satisfying.  

Chapter 5:24 reveals that the possession of eternal life through faith in the Savior gives exemption from  judgment.The word “condemnation” here is krisis (judgment) and refers to the final judgment of Mankind, as shown in verse 29..  

Possessors of eternal life is a pass-over from “death” in sin,  to “life” in Christ. Once for all, Jesus bore the penalty due to the believer’s sin; and once for all, therefore, eternal life in Him delivers from penal judgment.   

In His great discourse in chapter 6:35-55  we see that our Lord is the Bread of Life to the believer. He became thus by giving His flesh and blood (verses 51,53) on the cross. He also indicates that feeding upon Him is believing, and that the sustenance thereby derived is spiritual (verses 35,56,63), and on going. Furthermore, Jesus promised that he will raise such believers up at the last day” (verses 39,40,44,54).

Next, in chapter 8:12, we are taught that the Christian walk is to be a walk of confident assurance, because the believer has Jesus the “light of  life.”

Chapter 10:27-29  pictures the believer as being held secure in the  interlocked grasp of both the Son and the Father is the strongest possible assurance that eternal life means eternal preservation.

Then in chapter 11:25& 26 Jesus said “He that believeth in Me, though he may have died,  at “the last day” (i.e the rapture), yet shall he live [for I am the resurrection]; and whosoever is [then] living and believing in Me shall never die [for I am the life].” So all the possessors of eternal life in Christ are to share in the promised age-end transfiguration of Philippians 3.20-21 & I John 3:2 & 1 Thessalonians 4 and 1 Corinthians15.

 Finally, chapter 17: Verse 2 says that the Son imparts eternal life to “as many as” the Father has “given Him”, i.e those who through faith have responded to the Father’s gift of the Son. Note that in this chapter seven times Jesus speaks of those who the Father has “given Him.”

In verse 3, Jesus taught that life eternal, is to know the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom God sent.

He said in verse 8”  For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.” 

We know from John 6:37, that all who accept Christ are drawn to Him by the Father.

So the eternal life which believers possess through the Saviour is to be consummated in a heavenly glorification. Verse 24 says “ Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me”

Thus we see a progression of disclosure:

First we see that this life is in the Son, and is an exposure-light on sin and darkness.

Next we see that the life is received by faith on the Sin-bearer who died at Calvary. Then, successively, it is a present possession, an inward satisfaction, an exemption from judgment, an assurance and preservation, it awaits age-end transfiguration, and is to be consummated in heavenly glorification.

John has all this in mind when he writes at the end of his Gospel:

“These are written that ye night believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing  ye might have life through His Name.”

Oh, how simple is the way into eternal life.

Just “BELIEVE” in the INCARNATE WORD, and ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON.

24 comments

  • What is the purpose of these sermons? There is nothing in your behavior that would draw anyone to Christ.

    David could spare us the hypocrisy.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @TheOGazerts

    The logical thing to do is to scroll pass.

    Like

  • There is hypocrisy on every BU blog every day, BUT I dont complain about it.
    There is hypocrisy In every DAY BAJAN LIFE ,BUT I dont complain about it.
    The Lord knows who is his.

    The word “Hypocrisy” is derived from a Greek word that means having two faces.
    i refuse to be a hypocrite by saying what people on BU THINK THAT I SHOULD SAY.
    I THANK GOD THAT NONE OF YOU WILL BE MY JUDGE AT THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST.

    Isaiah 55:11 teaches “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”
    The problem is that all you with an opinion on every thing can not spout of on the Word of God, cause you do not KNOW IT OR LIVE IT OR LIVE BY IT.. I DONT JUST QUOTE SCRIPTURE…I LIVE BY IT

    I AM SURE THAT I LIVE A MORE GODLY LIFE THAN ALL OF YOU.
    IT IS BETTER TO SCROLL PASS THAN TO TALK RUBBISH OR POST SILLY INAPPROPRIATE MUSIC.
    Ecclesiastes 3:1 TEACHES To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:TEACHES TEACHES

    Like

  • God would be a better judge than I am, but your claim of a more Godly life is soundly refuted (everyday) by the scriptures.

    You are a modern day Pharisee.

    Do not confuse learning verses by rote as Godliness.

    Liked by 1 person

  • *the scriptures= your behavior.

    I will leave you now

    Liked by 1 person

  • At the crux of the matter is that as human beings nobody can determine the degree to which the Holy Spirit runs within us. We will individually have to answer to our God as believers when that day is upon us. Be responsible for YOU.

    Liked by 1 person

  • RE God would be a better judge than I am, FOR SURE. AND I THANK HIM FOR THAT

    RE for but your claim of a more Godly life is soundly refuted (everyday) by the scriptures.
    WHICH SCRIPTURES SIR? CITE THEM.
    LIST MY SINS AND UNGODLINESS, SIR.

    RE You are a modern day Pharisee. SUPPORT THIS BY SCRIPTURES SIR
    DEFINE PHARISEE AND COMPARE MY LIFE OF WHICH YOU KNOW NOTHING WITH IT.

    RE Do not confuse learning verses by rote as Godliness.
    HERE IS A BU BIBLE ILLITERATE COMING TO TEACH ME ABOUT GODLINESS
    DEFINE GODLINESS SIR

    RE At the crux of the matter is that as human beings nobody can determine the degree to which the Holy Spirit runs within us. We will individually have to answer to our God as believers when that day is upon us. Be responsible for YOU.
    SO WHY DO YOU JUDGE ME TALKING RUBBISH ABOUT FRUIT?

    YOU FELLOWS SEEK TO JUDGE ME BECAUSE YOU CANT JUDGE MY LIFE OR DISCUSS THE SCRIPTURES
    VERY ENTERTAINING

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU
    @ TheOGazerts
    Although I agree with most of what you both said, we must let GP expose his understanding of the book of John from his perspective. Most theologians will agree that it is a later inclusion than the Three Synoptic Gospels. It benefitted ,like Book of Revelation ,from the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE and the need for a new post Temple Jewish narrative.

    @ GP
    What can I say to a man who says he knows the Bible? Nothing. But I will not scroll on bye. I read.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    When did the blogmaster prevent GP from espousing his viewed? BU continues to host his submissions.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU at 9 :11 AM.

    Point understood. We must let the tares grow with the wheat.

    Like

  • I THANK GOD THAT NONE OF YOU WILL BE MY JUDGE AT THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST.
    I thank him also.

    LIST MY SINS AND UNGODLINESS, SIR.
    Ungodliness; An arrogant and boorish pig, full of false pride.
    Here is a verse for you, (study it, don’t just read it)
    “If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.”

    SUPPORT THIS BY SCRIPTURES SIR
    DEFINE PHARISEE AND COMPARE MY LIFE OF WHICH YOU KNOW NOTHING WITH IT.
    Go read Matthew 23:14-36. Try to understand the verses. I am beginning to doubt that you understand what you read or put in your ‘stellar PowerPoint”.

    I suspect that you drive more away than you lead towards Christ.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I broke a pledge I made to myself, and as advised, I will just scroll.
    Have a Good Day.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ TheOGazerts

    Love is the overwhelming theme in the books attributed to St. John. If we miss love we do not really understand the message/ Gospel.

    Like

  • FIRST OF ALL

    WHEN I GAVE THIS SAME TALK ON BREAKING OF BREAD, THE NEXT SPEAKER WAS ABLE TO GO CORRECTLY STRAIGHT TO I JOHN 1, AND THE SPEAKER WHO FOLLOWED HIM WENT TO I PETER2:21-22
    ON BU FOLK CANT PLAY THE BALL SO THEY PLAY THE MAN

    re Most theologians will agree that it is a later inclusion than the Three Synoptic Gospels.

    WHICH THEOLOGIANS BOH?

    NOT EVEN THE GREAT ANGLICAN THEOLOGIANS LIKE STOTT OR , BARCLAY SPOUT SUCH RUBBISH

    Later, I will post something about John’s Gospel as compared with the Three Synoptic Gospels for your edification
    .
    But please kindly note for now that the purpose of each of the Gospels is different, as I will expound on ;later after the meetings today

    If you study John well, you will find that it revolves (after the prologue in chapter one) on five visits of Jesus to Jerusalem. It includes very little of the information in the Three Synoptic Gospels.

    re It benefitted ,like Book of Revelation ,from the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE and the need for a new post Temple Jewish narrative.

    THIS IS STRAIGHT FORWARD FICTION ……NOT FACT!

    NOTHING IN JOHN’S GOSPEL HAS TO DO WITH the destruction of Jerusalem in 70………JOHN’S GOSPEL DOES NOT EVEN MENTION The destruction of Jerusalem OR THE PROPHECY IN THE IMPORTANT OLIVET DISCOURSE

    ALSO THE like Book of Revelation SAYS NOTHING WHATS SOEVER ABOUT the destruction of Jerusalem in 70.

    RE Love is the overwhelming theme in the books attributed to St. John.

    AGAIN THIS IS NOT TRUE! JOHN’S FAVOURITE WORDS ARE LIGHT (55 TIMES) LIFE (55 TIMES) AND LOVE OF CHRIST
    BELIEVE IS USED 98 TIMES

    IN IST JOHN IT IS “KNOW” USED 60 TIMES

    IF YOU DOUBT ME CHECK THIS IN STRONG’S CONCORDANCE…….if you have one

    re If we miss love we do not really understand the message/ Gospel. WHO IS LOVING IN JOHN’S GOSPEL? GOD!

    NOW READ JOHN AND COUNT THE TIMES THE WORD LOVE APPEARS

    re What can I say to a man who ACTUALLY he knows the Bible? Nothing! BUT LISTEN AND LEARN BY ASKING PROPER SINCERE QUESTIONS..

    RE “If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.”
    ITS NICE THAT YOU REMEMBER THIS VERSE FROM YOUR LONG PAST SUNDAY SCHOOL DAYS

    HOW CAN YOU DETERMINE MY LACK OF LOVE?
    BY TELLING THE TRUTH ON BU IN PROPER LANGUAGE WITHOUT CURSING.
    IF YOU AREA BRIMBLER I WILL CALL YOU A BRIMBLER
    IF YOU ARE A MEDICAL ILLITERATE AND A BIBLE ILITERATE, I WILL CALL YOU ONE —AND DO SO TO YOUR FACE VERY LOVINGLY, AS I DO ON BU

    RE I am beginning to doubt that you understand what you read or put in your ‘stellar PowerPoint”.
    THAT IS WHY I DONT SHARE MY ‘stellar PowerPointS”. ON MEDICINE ANY LONGER

    RE I suspect that you drive more away than you lead towards Christ.
    I AM SORRY TO BURST YOUR BUBBLE SIR………BUT OVER 40 FAMILIES WILL BE ON THE ZOOM CALL THIS MORNING AT 11:15 WHEN I TEACH

    WHEN I GAVE THIS SAME TALK ON BREAKING OF BREAD, THE NEST SPEAKER WAS ABLE TO GO STRAIGHT TO I JOHN 1, AND THE SPEAKER WHO FOLLOWED HIM WENT TO I PETER2:21-22

    Like

  • WHEN DURING MY LIFE I HAVE SET AT THE FEET OF REAL THEOLOGIANS I LISTENED AND LEARNED.
    SO WHEN I HEAR A BIBLE ILLITERATE SPOUTING OFF ON BU TRYING TO CONTRADICT ME I CAN RECOGNIZE THEM VERY EASILY

    I DONT GET ANGRY I JUST PUT THEM IN THEIR PLACE
    HERE IS SOME REAL GOOD STUFF THAT I LEARNED ABOUT JOHNS GOSPEL IN 1999
    I HOPE IT WILL EDIFY THOSE WHO TAKE THE TIME TO READ IT ANYWHERE ANYTIME

    Major Differences Between John and the Synoptic Gospels

    Introduction: The Relationship of John’s Gospel to the Synoptics.
    Two basic positions on the relationship of John’s Gospel to the Synoptics are possible:
    o If John knew of the synoptics, then he wrote to supplement them. (To say John knew of one or more of the synoptics is not to say, however, that he wrote his gospel with copies of Matthew, Mark, and/or Luke in front of him. John may have been aware of the existence of other written accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry without actually having seen them.)
    o If John’s Gospel is totally independent from the synoptics, he had enough material to choose from that much of it does not overlap with the synoptics (cf. Jn 20:30 and 21:25). This point is strengthened considerably if one accepts the Fourth Gospel’s claim to reflect eyewitness testimony about the life and ministry of Jesus (John 21:23-24).
    Major Differences:

    OMISSION BY JOHN OF MATERIAL FOUND IN THE SYNOPTICS.
    John’s Gospel omits a large amount of material found in the synoptic Gospels, including some surprisingly important episodes: the temptation of Jesus, Jesus’ transfiguration, and the institution of the Lord’s supper are not mentioned by John. John mentions no examples of Jesus casting out demons. The sermon on the mount and the Lord’s prayer are not found in the Fourth Gospel. There are no narrative parables in John’s Gospel (most scholars do not regard John 15:1-8 [“the Vine and the Branches”] as a parable in the strict sense).
    INCLUSION BY JOHN OF MATERIAL NOT FOUND IN THE SYNOPTICS.
    John also includes a considerable amount of material not found in the synoptics. All the material in John 2—4, Jesus’ early Galilean ministry, is not found in the synoptics. Prior visits of Jesus to Jerusalem before the passion week are mentioned in John but not found in the synoptics. The seventh sign-miracle, the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11) is not mentioned in the synoptics. The extended Farewell Discourse (John 13—17) is not found in the synoptic Gospels.
    DIFFERENT LENGTH OF JESUS’ PUBLIC MINISTRY.
    According to John, Jesus’ public ministry extended over a period of at least three and possibly four years. During this time Jesus goes several times from Galilee to Jerusalem. The synoptics appear to describe only one journey of Jesus to Jerusalem (the final one), with most of Jesus’ ministry taking place within one year.
    ‘HIGH’ CHRISTOLOGY AS OPPOSED TO THE SYNOPTICS.
    The Prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) presents Jesus as the Lovgo” become flesh (1:14). John begins his Gospel with an affirmation of Jesus’ preexistence and full deity, which climaxes in John 20:28 with Thomas’ confession “My Lord and my God!” The non-predicated ejgw eijmi sayings in the Fourth Gospel as allusions to Exod 3:14 also point to Jesus’ deity (John 8:24, 28, 58). Compare Mark who begins his Gospel with Jesus’ baptism and Matthew and Luke who begin theirs with Jesus’ birth. John begins with eternity past (“In the beginning the Word already was…”).
    LITERARY POINT OF VIEW: JOHN VERSUS THE SYNOPTICS.
    The synoptics are written from a third person point of view, describing the events as if the authors had personally observed all of them and were reporting what they saw at the time. Thus they are basically descriptive in their approach. John’s Gospel, on the other hand, although also written from a third person point of view, is more reflective, clearly later than the events he describes. The author of the Fourth Gospel very carefully separates himself from the events he describes (cf. the role of the Beloved Disciple in the Fourth Gospel). However clear it is that he was an eyewitness of the life of Jesus, it is no less clear that he looks back upon it from a temporal distance. While we see the events through his eyes, we are carefully guided to see the events of Jesus’ life not as John saw them when they happened but as he now sees them. We understand more of the significance of the events described from the position the writer now holds than an eyewitness could have understood at the time the events took place. In this sense John’s Gospel is much more reflective.
    There are numerous passages in John’s Gospel which could serve as an example of this later perspective. Four will serve as examples:
    (a) John 2:17—…
    (b) John 2:22—
    (c) John 12:16—
    (d) John 20:9—
    In each of these passages it may be easily seen that John has adopted the “post-resurrection” point of view. He looks back on the events and emphasizes the inability of the apostles to understand the things that were happening in their true perspective at the time they occurred. It is only possible for us to understand these things when we consider the resurrection of Jesus and its significance in God’s plan.
    EXTENDED DIALOGUES OR DISCOURSES RATHER THAN PROVERBIAL SAYINGS.
    John presents his material in the form of extended dialogues or discourses rather than the ‘proverbial’ or ‘pithy’ sayings found often in the synoptics: John 3 (with Nicodemus); John 4 (with the Samaritan woman); John 6 (the Bread of Life Discourse); John 13—17 (the Farewell Discourse with the disciples). As L. Goppelt observed:
    The Gospel of John passed on the words of Jesus predominantly in another genre than the synoptics; it did not do so in sayings, parables, and controversy dialogues, but in connected or dialogical discourses.25
    USE OF SYMBOLISM AND DOUBLE MEANING.
    John makes more frequent use of these literary techniques than the synoptics. Examples: John 2:25 (temple/body); John 7:37-38 (water/Spirit); John 12:32 (lifted up/exalted).

    Much of this symbolism takes the form of dualistic antitheses: light/darkness (1:4; 3:19; 8:12; 11:9; 12:35, 46); truth/falsehood (8:44); life/death (5:24; 11:25); above/below (8:23); freedom/slavery (8:33, 36). Much of this antithetical dualism is also found in the Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls) texts. See J. H. Charlesworth, “A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in 1QS 3:13-4:26 and the ‘Dualism’ Contained in the Gospel of John”, in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Crossroad, 1990).

    USE OF THE “MISUNDERSTOOD STATEMENT.”
    John makes frequent use of the “misunderstood statement” as a literary technique. Jesus says something to someone which is misunderstood, thus giving Jesus a further opportunity to clarify what he really meant. Examples: John 3 (Nicodemus’ misunderstanding of the new birth as a second physical birth; John 4 (the Samaritan woman’s misunderstanding of the living water as drinkable water).
    IPSISSIMA VERBA VERSUS IPSISSIMA VOX.
    The long discourses in John’s Gospel do not necessarily represent Jesus’ exact words (ipsissima verba) as long as they give a faithful summary and interpretive paraphrase (ipsissima vox) of what he actually said. Jesus’ teaching in the Fourth Gospel may be couched in distinctively Johannine style. On the other hand, some of John’s style may have been either directly or indirectly inspired by Jesus’ own manner of speaking: in Mt 11:25-27 + Lk 10:21-22 Jesus uses language almost identical to that which characterizes his speeches in John’s Gospel— “all things have been given to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, nor the Father except the Son and the one to whom the Son wishes to reveal him.”
    “KINGDOM OF GOD” VERSUS “ETERNAL LIFE.”
    The emphasis on the Kingdom of God found in the synoptics is largely missing in John (the phrase basileiva tou’ qeou’ occurs only twice in John’s Gospel (3:3, 5) and the noun basileiva only three times (all in 18:36). Instead we find John’s emphasis on ‘eternal life’ as a present reality (John 5:24 etc.). The emphasis on ‘eternal life’ in John’s Gospel is closer to the letters of Paul than to the synoptic gospels, as the following chart shows:
    REALIZED ESCHATOLOGY IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN.
    The problem of so-called ‘realized’ eschatology in the Gospel of John (the term was popularized by C. H. Dodd) can be seen in microcosm in John 5:20b-30. On the one hand there are statements that speak of the parousia (second advent) as a future event in the traditional sense: “…for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good to a resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to a resurrection of judgment” (John 5:28-29 NASB). Alongside these on the other hand are statements that seem to speak of the full realization for believers of salvation in the present (5:20-27): “Truly, truly, I say to you he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life” (John 5:24 NASB). There is an obvious tension between these statements that must be reconciled; judgment cannot be both present and future at the same time. Related to John’s emphasis on ‘eternal life’ as a present reality is the stress on judgment as realized in a person’s response to Jesus (John 3:19). In addition John’s Gospel does not emphasize the second advent of Christ as a future eschatological event (John 14:3 is about the only clear reference).
    DIFFERENCES IN GRAMMATICAL STYLE FROM THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS.
    The Gospel of John is written in a style of Greek quite different from the synoptics. The range of vocabulary is smaller. There is frequent parataxis (use of coordinate clauses rather than subordinate clauses). Asyndeton frequently occurs. Related to paragraph (7) above, there is little difference between the words that are ascribed to Jesus and the words of the Evangelist. Example: try to determine in John 3:1-21 where the words of Jesus to Nicodemus end and the interpretive comments of the Evangelist begin.

    Like

  • If GP met Jesus he would not recognise Christ, the Son of Man, Son of God

    I would know him

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ GP June 7, 2020 11:11 AM
    “AGAIN THIS IS NOT TRUE! JOHN’S FAVOURITE WORDS ARE LIGHT (55 TIMES) LIFE (55 TIMES) AND LOVE OF CHRIST
    BELIEVE IS USED 98 TIMES”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Why don’t you explain to the BU Bible illiterates and numskulls what the person who authored the Gospel of John meant when he wrote that “God is LIGHT”?

    And would you consider yourself to be a child of the Light when you hate every single bone in the poor ex-president Obama?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ GP

    I have read .

    Like

  • GOOD VINCENT
    LATER I WILL POST SOMETHING ELSE FOR YOU TO READ

    Like

  • Now Vincent, one thing you will learn as your read widely about the Bible is BIBLIOLOGY!

    ONE simple bu profound author is J Venmon McGee. When he is ready he goes into the Hebrew and Greek like everyone else; but no one outlines a chapter like he does.
    .
    Three good commenters, now online, that I have read is GUZICK………ROBERT DEFFINBAUGH AND RAY STEDMAN. CONSTABLE FROM DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IS VERY HELPFUL.
    AS YOU READ PROPER AUTHORS YOU WILL FIND THE NAMES OF OTHER STALWARTS OF THE FAITH.

    BACK TO JOHN, SEE IF THE BELOW MAKES SENSE TO YOU IF YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN JOJH

    JOHN’S GOSPEL A COMPLETIVE NECESSITY

    Here we want to consider the relationship of the Gospel of John to the synoptic Gospels. The similarity of the synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, accentuates the dissimilarity of this fourth Gospel.

    This fourth Gospel completes the picture of Jesus which we have viewed in the other three Gospels. Thus it is a completive necessity. In the other three we have accompanied Jesus, learning what He said, what He did, what He felt. We have noted those seven peak-events: his supernatural birth, His baptism, temptation, transfiguration, crucifixion, resurrection, and His ascension.
    We have heard Peter’s announcement, avowal: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Thus we have learned what He was rather than who He is.

     First of all, The Gospel of John, is a completive necessity in that it completes the others. 
          The earlier three are a presentation of Jesus; this fourth is an interpretation. 
          The other three show us Jesus outwardly; this fourth interprets Him inwardly 
          The other three emphasize the human aspects; this fourth unveils the Divine. 
          The other three correspond respectively with the lion and the ox and the man in Ezekiel's vision; this fourth parallels with the eagle. 
          The other three concern themselves mainly with our Lord's public discourses; this fourth gives larger place to His  private conversations, His verbal conflicts with the Jews, and His closer teachings in seclusion to His inner disciples. 
          The other three are mainly occupied with His Galilean ministry; this fourth is almost wholly devoted to His Judean  ministry. 
          The other three are purely factual; John is also doctrinal. 
          The other three begin with a human genealogy and a fulfillment of Jewish prophecy; John begins with a direct Divine  revelation of that which was altogether pre-mundane (earthly) and eternal. 
          All these features accord with John's interpretative purpose, which purpose is found in John 20:31. "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his  name." 
    
     Secondly, The Gospel of John, is a completive necessity in that it sheds light on areas in the other three that may be the source of questioning and confusion. Thus John throws a flood light on the other three. 
                    Again in the other three Gospels you could get the impression that from the minute Jesus began His public ministry,  "began to preach" (Matthew 4:17) He had vast crowds and wide spread fame and then wonder how could this be? But, here in John, we find that before He ever started His ministry in Galilee [which is the starting place of the other  three Gospels] , that He had worked miracles in Jerusalem (2:23), which had become big news in Galilee. 
    
          "Then when he was come into Galilee, the Galileans received him, having seen all the things  that he did at Jerusalem at the feast: for they also went unto the feast" (John 4:45).  There had also been the turning of the water into wine at Cana in Galilee, where He thus manifested forth His  glory, and the disciples believed on Him" (2:11). We know for a certainty that. all these things happened  before our Lord commenced His preaching circuit of Galilee, because "John (the Baptist) was not yet cast  into prison" (3:24) - and it was not until after John was imprisoned that Jesus began in Galilee (Matthew  4:12).          Furthermore, a noting of John's dates and places corrects certain misimpressions as to our Lord's  movements. Not only do we learn that after His Baptism our Lord was five or six months in Jerusalem and Judea, with goings to and fro between there and Galilee, before His main Galilean ministry began, But we find that there was also another time break between the end of His Galilean ministry, and His triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Were we to go only by the  synoptics we might assume that Jesus went from Galilee to His triumphal entry into Jerusalem without any  interruption of His Galilean ministry. 
    

    Perhaps, this is the point for a bit of Bible marking. Turning to Matthew 4:11,12, it might be useful to insert between verses 11 and 12 : THE FIRST FIVE CHAPTERS OF JOHN ALL FIT IN HERE. (The same between Mark 1:13 and 14 also, between Luke 4:13 and 14.)

    Similarly, in John, it might be well to write between chapters 5 and 6: MOST OF GALILEE MINISTRY FITS FROM HERE UP TO 7:1. Next, in John 10, between verses 21 and 22, write; THREE MONTHS BREAK HERE JESUS BACK TO GALILEE, WHICH HE NOW FINALLY LEAVES AS PER MATTHEW 19:1 AND MARK 10:1.

    Also, you may note between Matthew 26:20 and 21: JOHN 13:2-30 FIT HERE; and between Matthew 26:30 and 31 that: JOHN 15,16,17 GO HERE.
    .

    Like

  • VINCENT IF YOU CAN GRASP THE BELOW YOU WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD A LOT ABOUT JOHN
    CONTENT OF THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

    Let us now examine the contents of John’s Gospel! and learn its main Message. At once we are struck by the different way of saying and seeing things from that of Matthew, Mark, or Luke. In Matthew we have impressionistic groupings; in Mark a rapid succession of camera-shots; in Luke a beautifully unfolding story. In John, everything subserves the developing of certain RECURRENT IDEAS. These recurrent ideas are assembled in the prologue, and then developed right through to the end. Not that these ideas are mere abstractions of John’s own producing; they are spiritual truths outgrowing from fertile facts. From a large store of available data John selects just those which demonstrate and develop these central truths of his treatise. Of which the central one is, ETERNAL LIFE BY BELIEVING ON JESUS AS SON OF GOD AND SAVIOR OF MEN, (John 20:30-31).

    However, before we consider these progressive themes in this forth Gospel we ought to glance at John’s own basic arrangement of his material as it really is:

     There is a prologue (1:1-18) 
     and an epilogue (chapter 21). 
    

    The intervening body of chapters fall as follows:

    1.The public ministry of Jesus to the Jews (1:19-chapter 12).
    2.The private ministry of Jesus to “His own” (chapters 13 – 17).
    3.The paschal climax of tragedy and triumph (chapters 18 – 20).

    The first of these chapter-groups is occupied with the miraculous “signs” which our Lord gave, of which John here records seven, culminating with the raising of Lazarus from death. Note how the early contacts quickly develop into later conflicts, and then issue in utter cleavage.

    The second group mainly concerns our Lord’s wonderful new disclosures about the coming Paraclete.

    The final chapters are the awful yet glorious outcome of the whole.

    A more detailed analysis of the arrangement of John’s material is not necessary for our present purpose. You would do well to fix in your mind the three main divisions and then continue with the content.

    As we stated the structural characteristic of this fourth Gospel is that of recurrent ideas, which are assembled in the prologue, and developed right through to the end.

    In the prologue there are four designations of our Lord

          the WORD, 
          the LIFE, 
          the LIGHT, 
          the SON. 
    

    Two of these declare His relationship to God the Father. The other two indicate function towards us human creatures.

     In relation to God, even the Father, He is the WORD and the SON. These terms are so vastly meaningful that human  thought cannot sound their depths. Yet they are illuminatingly significant as well as impenetrably mysterious. They are meant  to tell us something - and they do. 
    
          Our Lord is the WORD, i.e. the expression of God, not only towards man, not only from pre-earthly (mundane)  antiquity, but before all the creation (1:2, 3), fundamentally, eternally, indivisibly. He was not merely from the beginning; He already was,"in the beginning"(verse 1). He was not only "with God"; He "was God" (verse 1). No exegetical juggling can really hide the force of the Greek here, especially when it is read honestly with its context.
          The Greek word Logos, here translated as "Word," is fuller than our English representative, yet even our noun "Word" is richly useful here. As a word may be distinguished from the thought which it expresses (for the two are not identical), so can the Second Person of the Godhead be distinguished from the First. Yet as there simply cannot  be a word apart from the thought behind it, so also "God" and the "Word" cannot be conceived of as ever having  existed without each other. They are distinguishable but inseparable. 
    
          Our Lord is also the SON. The concept of Logos in relation to Theos is warmed (made more personal) into that of  the Son in relation to the Father. At best human comparisons must fall short of the realities they seek to make humanly intelligible; yet even so, they are revealing. The Logos is simply "with" the God (verse 1), but the Son is "in  the bosom" of the Father (verse 18). There is a reciprocal fellowship of love inherent in the Deity; and it is one of the  ultimates, eternal as God, for there cannot be eternal fatherhood without eternal sonship. 
     Thus these two metaphors, the "Word" and the "Son," supplement and protect each other. Taken separately they might lead divergent thinkers to widely different and equally erroneous conceptions of our Lord; but when taken together, each  corrects the possible misuse of the other. 
    
     To think of our Lord only as the eternal "Word" might suggest merely an impersonal quality or faculty in God. To think of  Him only as the "Son" might falsely limit us to the concept of a personal yet created being. But the two terms combined  ensure both aspects of the truth to us, and at the same time guard us from error. Our Lord and Savior, the second Member  of the Trinity, is both eternal and personal. 
          Next, in relation to us human beings, He is the LIFE and the LIGHT. From Him all created beings derive life, physical and psychic (immaterial! moral, or spiritual). From Him comes all true illumination, both spiritual and intellectual (verses 4,9).The two terms are as equally suggestive of our Lord's deity as are the figures "Word" and  "Son."  Indeed, these two designations the "Life" and the "Light" correspond with the "Word" and the "Son." 
                    As the Word He is the expresser, the revealer, the illuminator, the Light. 
                    As the Son He is the personal executive, quickener, imparter, the Life. 
    

    And again, paralleling with these, there are the two words, “grace” and “truth,” – full of “grace” to redeem man, and full of “truth” to reveal God. He is the God-Man Revealer-Redeemer.

     Oh, this all-transcendent Savior of ours! "His name shall be called WONDERFUL!" In this first chapter alone there are no less than eight titles given Him. Eight titles which belong absolutely and exclusively to Him: 
          the WORD (verse 1), 
          the LIFE (verse 4), 
          the LIGHT (verse 7), 
          the SON (verse 18), 
          the LAMB (verse 29), 
          the MESSIAH (verse 41), 
          the KING (verse 49), 
          and the SON OF MAN (verse 51). 
    
     In addition to the four designations of our Lord in the prologue, The WORD, the LIFE, the LIGHT, and the SON, we  find, in the prologue, six additional emphases which are to be developed in the chapters to follow. These six additional  aspects, emphases are: 
          "darkness" (verse 5), 
          "witness" (verses 7,8, 15), 
          "believe" verse 7, 
          "power to become" (verse 12), 
          "born of God" (verse 13), 
          "fulness" (verse 14,16). 
    
     These ten emphases go right through the book, in five associated pairs and then give us the recurrent ideas around which the Gospel According To John is structured. They are: 
    
             1.The Word - becoming flesh as the incarnate truth (1:1, 14, 17, 8:40, 14:6, Verily, Verily," etc.). 
             2.The Light - shining in the darkness; "the darkness comprehended it not"; "His own received Him not" (3:19,12:46, etc). 
             3.The Life - imparting new birth and "power to become" (1:12, 13, 3:8, 15, 10:10, etc.). 
             4.The Son - coming forth "full of grace" and sharing His "fulness" (1:14, 16, 33, 4:10, 14:27, 15:11, etc.). 
             5.Witness - that all "might believe" (1:7, with frequent recurrence) and "have life." 
    

    SOME BIBLE ILLITERATE WILL NOW CALL THIS MY PERSPECTIVE……….IN OTHER WORDS IT IS NOT TRUE

    I REALLY REALLY MISS ZOE A K A CARLOS

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ GP
    Perspective is an understanding based on one’s personal experience(s) It is one’s reality. As David BU would say reality through one’s personal lens. Nothing wrong with that ,is there? Except when very few buy into it.
    Again ,I have read. It is a very interesting approach to understanding the context of and the audience to which John’s Gospel is addressed.
    As for me,I hear it differently” in my own language”.

    Like

  • re I hear it differently” in my own language”.
    What is your language?

    Like

  • Here is some more perspective
    Twenty-three times we find our Lord’s meaningful “I am” (4:26, 6:20, 35, 41, 48, 51, 8:12, 18, 24,28, 58, 10:7, 9, 11, 14, 11:25, 13:19, 14:6, 15:1,5, 18:5, 6, 8).

     From these we pick out those in which He successively couples His "I am" with seven tremendous metaphors expressive of  His saving relationship toward mankind: 
    
               "I AM the Bread of life" (6:35,41,48,51). 
    
                              "I AM the Resurrection and the Life" (11:25). 
               "I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (14:6). 
     Fundamentally, the message Jesus brought, was Himself. 
    

    He did not come merely to preach a Gospel; He Himself is the Gospel.
    He did not come merely to give bread; He said: “I am the bread.” “I AM the Bread of life” (6:35,41,48,51).

    He did not come merely to shed light; He said: “I am the light.” “I AM the light of the world” (8:12).

    He did not come merely to show the door; He said: “I am the door.” “I AM the door of the sheep” (10:7,9).

    He did not come merely to name a shepherd; He said: “I am the shepherd.” “I AM the Good Shepherd” (10:11,14).

    He did not come merely to point the way; He said: “I am the way, the truth, the life.”
    He did not come merely to plant a vine; He said: “I am the vine.” “I AM the true vine” (15:1,5).

    Our Lord’s other utterances of “I am,” also, seem to carry a profound implication, though latently rather than apparently. In the Greek “I am” is ego eimi. Both ego and eimi mean “I am”; but the former emphasizes “I,” and the latter “am.” Thus, ego elmi expresses personal being in the strongest possible way. It is the Greek expression for the Divine name “I AM.”
    Here are the references again: 4:26, 6:20, 8:18,24,28,58, 13,19, 18:5,6,8.

     Lets take the first of them (4:26). Literally, what our Lord says to the Sychar women is not "I that speak to thee am He" (i.e. the Messiah) as translated in both Authorised and Revised Versions; but "I AM who am speaking to thee." In  some of these verses our translators have apparently felt difficulty in knowing whether to insert the "He" or not, so they give  it in italics only. We would not unduly press, yet it certainly does seem as though in some of these utterances our Lord uses  that EGO EIMI with maximum implication. 
    
     All this, of course, is given support by our Lord's claims and assumptions which find expression right through this Gospel. 
    
     Look, once, again at John 1:18. The Greek verb-form here translated as "declared" is exegesato, from which comes our  English word exegesis. It means that in the visible Jesus the invisible God is brought forth to view. The incomprehensible  concept, "God" is objectively illuminated before us. The very heart of the Eternal is livingly "exegeted," for the only begotten  Son comes even from "the bosom of the Father." 
    

    NOW IF YOU WANT MORE PERSPECTIVE LOOK UP ARTHUR PINK’S NOTES ON JOHN FOR SERIOUS SOUND TEACHING ON JOHN

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s