john_jnintro – From Death Into Life

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

THE NATURE OF THE GOSPEL

The first three Gospels are called the Synoptics, which comes from two Greek words which means “to view or see together”; they present the same general view of the story of the life of Jesus Christ, and contain the same material although arranged differently. They were the earliest Gospels written within twenty-five or thirty years after His ascension, and were written to those recently converted who wanted to know more about Jesus Christ (Luke 1:1-4). The Gospel of John was written later near the end of the first century A.D. It contains material not found in the Synoptic Gospels and has a structure and style different from them. It contains no genealogies, no account of the birth of John the Baptist, or of the birth, youth, baptism, temptation, transfiguration, and ascension of Jesus. It contains no parables and only seven miracles, five of which are not recorded in the Synoptics. The discourses of Jesus contained in it are concerned mainly with the person of Jesus Christ rather than with the ethical teaching of the Kingdom of God. The personal relationship of Jesus to individuals is stressed more than His ministry to the general public; personal interviews with individuals, like Nicodemus and the Samaritan women, are recorded in it, and nowhere else. The Gospel also develops theological ideas, like the Word, life, and truth, and it deals particularly with the Person of Christ and with the meaning of faith in Him, according to its announce purpose (John 20:30-31). Christ is given many different titles, like, the Word, the Only Begotten, the Lamb of God, the Son of God, the True Bread, the Light, the good (true) Shepherd, the Door, the Way, the Truth, the Life, the Resurrection, and the Vine. Many of these titles are introduced with the phrase, “I am”. All these titles imply the deity of Christ; but there are other ways in which the deity of Christ is set forth. Jesus speaks of God as His Father and of Himself as the Son of God and as one with the Father. The Gospel of John is the only Gospel that reports the early Judean ministry. Without this record the ministry of Christ would seem to have lasted for one and one-third year; but since four Passovers are mentioned in the Gospel (2:13; 5:1, possibly; 6:4; 13:1; 18:28) we know that His ministry lasted for somewhat more than three years.

THE AUTHOR, OCCASION AND DATE OF THE GOSPEL

Traditionally it has been held that this Gospel was written by John, the son of Zebedee, the last surviving member of the original twelve Apostles, during the last years of his life at Ephesus. The Muratorian Canon says that John wrote at the urging of his fellow-disciples and bishops. Eusebius argues that John wrote to supply the deficiencies of the other three Gospels; but it is nearer the truth that he wrote it to supplement them. There is general agreement that the Gospel of John was written after the other three Gospels and very late in the first century. Irenaeus places it after Matthew, Mark, and Luke and Clement of Alexandria says that John wrote it “last of all.” Jerome says the same. Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John, declares that John wrote his Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia and that John lived until the time of the Roman Emperor Trajan, who began to reign in A.D. 98.

Some scholars in the past have insisted that this Gospel was not written until the middle of the second century. But the discovery of the Rylands Fragment of John have forced the abandonment of this view. This papyrus fragment that was found in Egypt dates from about A.D. 135 and indicates that the Gospel must have been written much earlier for it to be copied and circulated as far as the Egyptian hinterland, where the fragment of the copy of it was found. But in spite of this discovery some scholars are not convinced that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel; they believe that a disciple of the Apostle John, perhaps the Elder John mentioned by Papias, wrote it. Papias was Bishop of Hierapolis, which is near to Ephesus, and his dates are from about A.D. 70 to about A.D. 145 which made him a contemporary of the Apostle John. Papias, quoted by Eusebius, wrote,

“If, then, any one came who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders, — what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Ariston and the presbyter [elder] John, the disciple of the Lord, say.”

These scholars believe that the Elder John wrote the Gospel and later he was confused with the Apostle by the same name. But a closer examination of the Papias’ statement shows that Papias used the term “elder” in an apostolic sense as an equivalent for “apostle”, that is, as one who has authority. Papias calls the other Apostles, Andrew, Peter, etc., “elders” in this sense. In addition Papias clearly says the elder John is “the disciple of the Lord” in contrast to Ariston who is not called “elder” nor “the disciple of the Lord”. Papias mentioned John a second time because he is the only Apostle still alive and speaking. Eusebius interpreted Papias as referring to two different men named John and even claimed a tradition of two men named John as having different tombs in Ephesus. Eusebius wished to find away around the apostolic authorship of the Book of Revelation, which he did not like. Eusebius apparently conjured up a second John, the Elder, distinct from the Apostle John in order to attribute the Book of Revelation to the Elder John instead of to the Apostle John. Thus his rejection of Revelation would seem more plausible.

Since the writer of the Gospel claims to be an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry (1:14; see 19:35; 21:24-25), who exhibits a Semitic style of writing (some scholars believe that the Gospel was first written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek) and an accurate knowledge of Jewish customs (the customs of water-pouring and illumination of candelabra in 7:37-39) and of Palestinian topography before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (the pool with five porches near the Sheep Gate [5:2] and the paved area outside the Praetorium [19:13]), the writer of the Gospel could not have been a second century person who would not have such knowledge.

Furthermore, the Gospel records little extra details that could be only known by one who was there. For example, the loaves that the lad brought to Jesus at the Feeding of Five Thousand were barley loaves (6:9); that the disciples had rowed three and four miles when Jesus came to them walking on the water in the storm (6:19); that there were six stone waterpots at Cana of Galilee (2:6); that four soldiers gambled for the seamless robe as Jesus died (19:23) and that aloes were used to anoint the dead body of Jesus (19:39); that the perfume of the ointment filled the house at the anointing at Bethany (12:3). These are such unimportant details that only a person who was there would have remembered them.

Internally, the author identifies himself as “the disciple that Jesus loved… who has written these things” (21:20, 24); this is not out egoism, but only indicates that the contents of the Gospel comes from one in whom Jesus had confided. He never refers to himself by name in the Gospel. The unnamed disciple, referred to in 13:23-24; 19:26-27; 20:2-10, is never identified by name. In every instance, except at the cross in 19:26, he is with Simon Peter, and he may be “the other disciple” who is with Peter when they went into the house of the high priest at the trial (18:15-16). The synoptists tell us that James and John, the sons of Zebedee, worked at fishing with Peter; and with him formed the inner circle of the Twelve. Since James had died earlier as a martyr (Acts 12:1-5) and since Peter is clearly distinguished from the beloved disciple (John 20:2-10), only John is left to be the beloved disciple and the author of the Fourth Gospel. Early Christian writers called the author of the Fourth Gospel “the beloved disciple” and identified him with the Apostle John, the son of Zebedee.

All the early church fathers from the time of Irenaeus held to the Johannine authorship of this Gospel. Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190), Origen (about A.D. 220), Hippolytus (about A.D. 225), Tertullian (about A.D. 200), and the Muratorian Fragment (about A.D. 170) agree in attributing the authorship of the Fourth Gospel to John, son of Zebedee. The earliest witness is that of Irenaeus who was bishop of Lyons about A.D. 177; he was himself a disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of the Apostle John. He writes,

“Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.”

Note that Irenaeus does not merely say that John wrote the Gospel; he says that John published (exedoke) in Ephesus. The Greek word that Irenaeus uses implies that the Gospel was not just a private writing of some personal memoir, but that it was a public publication like a official document. The next witness is that of Clement who was the head of the great Catechetical School at Alexandria about A.D. 190. He writes,

“Last of all, John, perceiving that what had reference to the bodily things of Jesus’s ministry had been sufficiently related, and encouraged by his friends, and inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote a spiritual gospel.”

Clement here meant that John was not so much interested in the mere facts of the ministry of Jesus as in the meaning of those facts. Clement saw that the difference between the Synoptic Gospels and the Fourth Gospel was the difference between a mere record of historical facts and an interpretation to bring out the meaning of those historical facts. According to Clement, John did not see the events of Jesus’ life simply as events in time, but he saw them as windows to look into eternity. Thus John aimed to determine the spiritual meaning of those events and to interpret those events in a way that other three gospels did not attempt. By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, John was enabled to write a spiritual gospel. Clearly Clement believed that the Apostle John wrote the Fourth Gospel.

Another early witness is the document known as the Muratorian Canon. It is so called after the scholar Muratori who discovered it. It is the earliest list of New Testament books issued by the church and was compiled in Rome about A.D. 170. It gives short accounts of the origin, nature and contents of each of them. It says about the Gospel of John,

“At the request of his fellow disciples and of his bishops, John, one of the disciples, said, ‘Fast with me for three days from this time and whatsoever shall be revealed to each of us, whether it be favourable to my writing or not, let us relate it to one another.’ On the same night it was revealed to Andrew that John should relate all things, aided by the revision of all.”

This an account of the way the Fourth Gospel came to be written but it cannot be accepted fully, because it is not possible that Apostle Andrew was in Ephesus in A.D. 100, unless it was written earlier when the other disciples were still alive. However, it is clear evidence that the Fourth Gospel was written by the Apostle John with the cooperation of his fellow disciples and bishops. This account may be an attempt to explain how the Holy Spirit would bring all these events and sayings to his remembrance:

“But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (14:26).

The Synoptic Gospels tell us that the Apostle John, his father Zebedee, and his brother James were fishermen on the Sea of Galilee (Mk. 1:19-20), and partners of Simon Peter (Lk. 5:10). The two brothers were called “Boanerges”, that is, “Sons of Thunder”, by Jesus (Mk. 3:17). Their mother was probably Salome (see Mk. 15:40 and Mt. 27:56). James and John were the two disciples Jesus sent in advance into Jerusalem to prepare for the Passover meal (Lk. 22:8). Peter, James, and John were the only disciples to accompany Jesus at the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mk. 5:37-40), to the Mount of Transfiguration (Mk. 9:2), and into the Garden of Gethsemane (Mk. 14:33). The three were joined by Andrew when Jesus delivered His discourse on last things on the Mount of Olivet (Mk. 13:3). John and his brother James asked Jesus for the places of honor in Christ’s glory (Mk. 10:35-45), and suggested that fire descended from heaven upon the inhospitable Samaritans (Lk. 9:54).

After Pentecost, John is with Peter in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1-4:22) and accompanied him on the Samaritan mission (Acts 8:14-25). Paul tells us that John along with Peter and James were called the three “pillars” of the church whom Paul saw on his early visit to Jerusalem seventeen years after his conversion (Gal. 1:18; 2:1, 9-10); he along with James and Peter is presented as giving his approval to Paul’s mission to the Gentiles.

THE PURPOSE AND CONTENT OF THE GOSPEL

John tells us clearly the purpose of his writing of his Gospel.

“^20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; ^20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.”

The Gospel of John is first of all a narrative of the signs that Jesus had done and that were seen by His disciples; it was written in order that its readers might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and believing in Him they may have life. The purpose for writing is clearly evangelistic, to preach the evangel, the Good News, and to win his readers to faith in Christ as the Son of God and that believing they might have life in his name. The first half of this Gospel, of this Good News, is a record of the Signs that Jesus had done. In this Gospel there are seven Signs of Jesus Christ recorded, which reveals the person and work of Christ:

1. the turning the water into wine (2:1-11);

2. the healing the nobleman’s son (4:46-54);

3. the cure of the paralytic (5:1-18);

4. the feeding of the five thousand (6:6-13);

5. walking on the water (6:16-21);

6. giving sight to the blind man (9:1-7);

7. the raising of Lazarus (11:1-45).

The effect of these signs on His Jewish hearers is explained in John 12:37-43: because their eyes are blinded, they will not believe. The purpose of these signs was to show that Jesus is the Son of God and in His discourses Jesus explain who He is and His relationship as the Son of God to God as His Father. It is in these discourses that John records Jesus’ theological explanation of the signs. Throughout the Gospel many theological themes are introduced, like faith and life. Interestingly the Greek noun translated “faith” never appears in the Gospel; faith is always appears as some form of the verb “to believe”. Ninety-eight times the writer uses this verb to show what his readers response should be to Jesus. They are to “believe in his name” (1:12); they are to “believe in him” (3:16); they are to “believe on him that sent” Jesus (5:24). A number of synonyms are used by the writer of the Gospel for the word “to believe”, such as. “receive” (1:12), “drink” (4:14), “eat” (6:51), “come” (6:37), and “enter” (10:9). In his narrative the writer illustrates what it is to believe. Some people come to Jesus, some accept Him and follow Him; others turn away, rejecting Him. Those who accept Him are “born again”, receives “eternal life”, “are not condemned”, “have abundant life”. Those who reject Him are “condemned”, “shall perish”, “remain in darkness.” This life is not just physical life, but spiritual life, eternal life; Jesus prayed,

“And this is eternal life that they should know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (17:3)

This is not just knowledge about God and about Christ but knowledge of God that is a personal relationship to God, fellowship with God. This life is received by the person who places his trust in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and in the true God, His Father, who sent Him to die and who raised Him from the dead. To receive Jesus is to receive life, for He is the life (11:25; 14:6). The Greek word zoe translated “life” occurs thirty-six times in the Gospel.

John in his Gospel expounds these theological themes by skillfully weaving narrative and discourse, so that Jesus’ words bring out the inner meaning of His works. These are summarized in the seven great “I am” sayings:

1. “I am the bread of life”
(6:35, 48; see verses 41 and 51);

2. “I am the light of the world” (8:12);

3. “I am the door of the sheep” (10:7, 9);

4. “I am the good shepherd” (10:11, 14);

5. “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25);

6. “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (14:6);

7. “I am the true vine” (15:1, 5).

In addition to these sayings, there are the “I am” sayings that are not followed by a predicate. In these statements Jesus claims to be I AM-YAHWEH of the Old Testament (8:24, 28, 58; see also 4:25-26; 6:20; 7:34, 36; 13:19; 14:3; 17:24; Exod. 3:13-14). This clearly fits into the purpose of the Gospel to show that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

There are other purposes that were to be accomplished by the writer although not explicitly stated by the writer. One of these is to provide a polemic against those groups that directly opposed the message of the Gospel. Three such groups have been identified.

1. A cult had grown up in the seventy years since Jesus’ crucifixion around the figure of John the Baptist. Acts 19:1-7 shows that there were followers of John the Baptist in Ephesus during the time of Paul. And Ephesus, according to an early tradition, is the place where John wrote his Gospel. In the opening chapters of his Gospel, its writer makes a great effort to show that Jesus is superior to the Baptist and that Jesus had a witness even greater than what the Baptist gave Him (1:15-37; 3:25-30; 4:1-2; 5:33-40). The writer of the Gospel clearly wants to subordinate John the Baptist to Jesus in opposition to the sect that was founded by those who were convinced that the Baptist was superior to Jesus. There is no criticism of John the Baptist in the Fourth Gospel, but there is a implied rebuke to those who would give the Baptist a place which ought to belong to Jesus and to Jesus alone.

2. During the last half of the first century, the Jews incorporated into their liturgy of their synagogue services a Benediction Against Heretics to exclude all Jewish Christians who might participate in their services. Some have thought that this benediction provided the occasion for the Fourth Gospel to encourage Jewish Christian to endure the ostracism from the synagogue and not to give up their Christian profession. The references in 9:22 and 16:2 to the putting of Jesus’ disciples out of the synagogues seems to be part of that encouragement. The writer of this Gospel seems to be opposed to this synagogue Judaism, which by the end of the first century was in open conflict with the Christian movement. But earlier in the first century during Paul’s missionary journeys this open conflict did not seem to exist. And in contrast to the Fourth Gospel, the Gospel of Matthew and books of James and Hebrews do not give the impression of such a open conflict. But in John’s Gospel the Jewish enemies of Jesus have become simply “the Jews”, reflecting the later conflict and not the actual condition in the time of Jesus when the opposition came only from certain Jews, the Pharisees and Jewish leaders, and not “the Jews” in general, many of whom were enthusiastic followers of Jesus.

3. There was in the later first century a widely spread movement that has been called by the general name of Gnosticism. Gnosticism taught a radical dualism of spirit and matter, light and darkness, good and evil. The basic teaching of Gnosticism was that matter is essentially evil and that spirit is essentially good.

a. On the basis of this dualism the Gnostics concluded that God could not touch matter and thus could not have created the world. According to Gnosticism, God is absolutely transcendent. He (or It) is utterly alien in nature to the world, which he neither created nor governs (absolutely no immanence). God is the complete antithesis to the world as light is the opposite of darkness. This absolutely transcendent God is totally hidden from all creatures and is unknowable by natural concepts. Knowledge of God requires supernatural illumination, and even then can hardly be expressed except in negative terms.

b. The world, according to Gnosticism, is the work of lowly powers who do not know the utterly transcendent God and who obstruct the knowledge of Him (or It) in the cosmos over which they rule. Cerinthus, one of the leaders of the Gnostics, said that,

“the world was created, not by God, but by a certain power far separate from him, and far distance from that Power who is over the universe, and ignorant of the God who is over all.”

The Gnostic conception of the universe is roughly what we might call Ptolemaic or geocentric. Around and above the earth are the cosmic spheres (most often seven, but sometimes multiplied to vast numbers) arrange like concentric enclosing spheres. The significance of this cosmic architecture is that everything which intervenes between here and the beyond serves to separate man from God. The celestial spheres are the seats of the Archons (rulers), especially the seven planetary gods borrowed from Babylonian astrology. The Archons collectively rule over the world and each individually in his own sphere is like a warder of a prison, and each celestial sphere is like a ward of the prison, and the earth is like the inner-most ward or dungeon. This dungeon is ruled by an archon whose tyrannical world-rule, called Destiny or Fate, is physically the laws of nature and morally the law of “justice”. The later Gnostic Marcion taught that this law of justice was imperfectly exemplified in the Mosaic law which issued from the “world-creating angels” (Jehovah) for the enslavement of man. As guardian of his sphere, each Archon bars the passage to the souls who seek to ascend after death in order to prevent their escape from the world. The Archons are sometimes presented as the creators of the world although more often under the influence of Platonic philosophy (especially that of Plato’s Timaeus from which is borrowed the doctrine of the Demiurge) the archon is an artificer or craftsman that is responsible for the making of the world from pre-existent matter.

c. Man, according to Gnosticism, is composed of body, soul and spirit. The body and soul are the product of the cosmic powers, which shaped the body in imitation of the divine Primal Man and animated it with their own psychical forces: these together make up the astral soul of man, his psyche. Through his body and soul, man is a part of the world and is subject to Destiny. Enclosed in the body and soul is the spirit, or pneuma, a portion of the divine substance which has fallen into the world. In its cosmic exile, thus imprisoned in the soul and body, the “inner man”, as an alien element, is unconscious of itself, stupefied, asleep or intoxicated by the poison of the world; in brief, it is “ignorant” of its origin.

d. The spirit of man, imprisoned in the soul and body, and ignorant from whence it came, finds salvation from this condition in two stages. In this present life salvation is an awakening which is affected through “knowledge.” Salvation is by knowledge and hence the name of this movement — Gnosticism — which is derived from the Greek word gnostikos, one who has gnosis, “knowledge.” This knowledge is not ordinary or scientific knowledge but a special and higher kind of knowledge about the transmundane God and about man himself. This knowledge has been withheld from him by his very situation, since “ignorance” is the essence of mundane existence. Hence the necessity for divine illumination or revelation. The bearer of this divine revelation is a messenger from the world of light who penetrates the barrier of the spheres, outwits the Archons, awakens the spirit from its earthly slumber, and imparts to it the saving knowledge “from without.” (In the Christian Gnosticism this savior-messenger is identified with the Christ.) Equipped with this saving gnosis the “inner man” or the spirit of man is prepared for the second stage of its salvation, the liberation from the bonds of the world at death and the return to its own native realm of light. The gnosis is the potent formula for overcoming the “gate-keepers” who would hinder the soul after death on its journey to the realm of light. As it travels upward the spirit leaves behind at each sphere the psychical “vestment” contributed by its Archon on the spirit’s downward flight at birth: thus the spirit is stripped of all foreign accretions such as individual personal identity until it reaches God beyond the world and becomes reunited with and absorbed into the divine substance.

e. In this life, the general principle of Gnostic conduct is hostility toward the world. The world, matter and the body are evil and the source of the ignorance and the cause of the slumber of the soul. From this principle two contrary ways of ethical conduct could and have been drawn: the ascetic and the libertine. The ascetic way deduces from the possession of the gnosis the obligation to avoid further contamination by the world and therefore tries to reduce its use and contact to a minimum. The libertine way derives from the same possession of the gnosis the privilege of the absolute freedom: to the spiritual all things are permitted, since the law as representing the will of the Demiurge does not obligate the spirit, which is “saved in its nature” by the possession of saving knowledge and can neither be soiled by its conduct nor frightened by the threat of archontic retribution.

The Gnostics believed that God had nothing to do with creating the world. And this why John begins his Gospel with the statement,

“All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that was made.” (John 1:3)

And the Gnostics believed that God in his absolute transcendence had no relationship to the world. Thus John writes, “God so loved the world” (John 3:16). It is in the face of the Gnostics’ view of God as a being who could not possibly have anything to do with the world that John presents the Christian doctrine of God as He who created the world and has a personal relationship to it. These beliefs of the Gnostics affected their view of Jesus.

a. Some Gnostics held that Jesus was one of the Archons that had preceded from God. They held that Jesus was not in a real sense divine; that he was only a kind of demi-god who is more or less distant from the transcendent God; that he was only one in a chain of lesser beings between God and the world. They would deny that “the Word is God” (1:1).

b. Some of the Gnostics held that Jesus did not have real body. Since a body is matter and God could not touch matter, then Jesus was some kind of phantom without a body of flesh and blood. They held, for instance, that when Jesus stepped on the ground he left no footprint, for his body had neither weight or substance. They would deny that “the Word became flesh” (1:14). This particular heresy is known as Docetism, which word comes from the Greek word dokein which means “to seem”; this heresy is so called because it holds that Jesus only seemed to be a man.

c. Some Gnostics held a variation of this heresy; they held that Jesus was a man into whom the Spirit of God came at his baptism; and that Spirit remained upon him throughout his life until he was crucified. Since the Spirit could not suffer or die, it left him when he was crucified. They interpreted Jesus’ cry on the cross as: “My power, my power, why hast thou forsaken me?” This particular heresy is known as Adoptionism; which is so called because it held that Jesus was a man adopted by God as His Son.

So the Gnostic teachings lead either to one of two heresies: they believed either that Jesus was not really divine but one of a series of Archons between God and the world, or that he was in no sense human but a kind of phantom in the shape of a man. The Gnostic beliefs at one and the same time destroyed both the real godhood and the real manhood of Jesus.

John in his Gospel set out to correct both of these heresies. This leads to a curious paradoxical double emphasis in his Gospel. On the one hand, there is an uncompromising stress on the humanity of Jesus. Jesus is angry with those who bought and sold in the Temple courtyard (2:15); he is physically tired as he set by the well which was near Sychar in Samaria (4:6); his disciples gave him food in the way in which they would offer to any man who is hungry (4:31); he had sympathy with those who were hungry and who were afraid (6:5, 20); he knew grief and he wept tears as a mourner might do (11:33, 35, 38); he was in agony on the cross and cried “I thirst” (19:28); and when one of the soldier pierced his side with a spear, there came out blood and water (19:34). The Fourth Gospel does not show us a Jesus who has shadowy, docetic appearance, but one who knew the weariness of a tired body and the psychological distress of mind and heart. The Fourth Gospel sets before us a truly human Jesus. On the other hand, the Gospel sets before us one who is deity.

a. The Gospel emphasizes the pre-existence of the Jesus. The Gospel begins with the statement, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God” (1:1). Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I am” (8:58). And He speaks of the glory which he had with God the Father before the world was made (17:5). Again and again he speaks of his coming down from heaven (6:33-38). John sees Jesus as the one who had always existed, even before the world began.

b. The Fourth Gospel emphasizes the omniscience of Jesus. Jesus knew the past history of the woman of Samaria (4:16-17); apparently without anyone telling him, he knew how long the man beside the healing pool had been ill (5:6); before he asked it, he knew the answer to the question he put to Philip (6:6); he knew of the death of Lazarus before anyone told him of it (11:14). This miraculous knowledge independent of anything that any man might tell him shows the deity of Jesus.

c. The Fourth Gospel emphasizes that Jesus always acted entirely on his own initiative and independently of anyone else. It was not his mother’s request which made him do the miracle at Cana of Galilee; it was his own personal decision (2:3-5); his brother urging had nothing to do with his decision to visit Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles (7:10); and no man took his life from him, but he had laid it down purely willing (10:18; 19:11). As John saw it, Jesus acted with a divine independence from all human influence; He was self-determined and not determined by human events.

To oppose the Gnostic beliefs about Jesus, the writer of the Fourth Gospel presents us with a Jesus who was undeniably human and who yet was undeniably divine. And to oppose the Gnostic belief about salvation as by knowledge the writer of this Fourth Gospel presents salvation as by faith. And this faith is not just believing some doctrines or knowledge about God but is an act of trust in a person, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and His Father who sent Him. As we observed earlier, the Greek noun translated “faith” never appears in the Gospel; faith always appears as some form of the verb “to believe”. Ninety-eight times the writer uses this verb to show what his readers response should be to Jesus. They are to “believe in his name” (1:12); they are to “believe in him” (3:16); they are to “believe on him that sent” Jesus (5:24). A number of synonyms are used by the writer of the Gospel for the word “to believe”, such as, “receive” (1:12), “drink” (4:14), “eat” (6:51), “come” (6:37), and “enter” (10:9). The personal character of faith could not be stated more clearly. Those who believe in Him are “born again”, receive “eternal life”, “have abundant life”, and “are not condemned”. Those who reject Him are “condemned”, “shall perish”, “remain in darkness.” This life is not just physical life, but is spiritual life, eternal life; Jesus defined this eternal life when He prayed,

“And this is eternal life that they should know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (17:3)

This knowledge is not just knowledge about God and about Jesus but is a knowledge of God that is a personal relationship to God, fellowship with God. This life is received by the person who places his trust in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and in the true God, His Father, who sent Him to die and who raised Him from the dead. To receive Jesus is to receive life, for He is the life (11:25; 14:6). Life is a person, Jesus Christ, and anyone receives that life when they receive and puts their faith and trust in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God. John wrote his Gospel about Jesus so that they might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing they may have eternal life in His name (20:30-31).

Thus there are two themes that runs through the whole Gospel. The writer of this Fourth Gospel wants to present (a) Jesus as the Son of God, and (b) eternal life as a gift that may be had by faith in Him. The writer states these themes in the passage at the end of his book (20:30-31) where he states the purpose for writing the book.

a. The first theme, that Jesus is the Son of God and knew Himself to be the Son of God from the very beginning, sets the Fourth Gospel apart from the three Synoptic Gospels. This is what makes the Johannine Jesus seem so different from the Jesus that is presented in the Synoptics. In the prologue (John 1:1-18), Jesus is not presented as a babe in manager, but as the incarnate Word (Logos) of God, who is in the beginning with God, and with God and is God. He created all things and He is the life which is the light of man. He became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. Later in the Gospel, Jesus expresses his own awareness of Who He is and His unique relationship to the true God; God is His Father and He is the Son of God; He was sent by His Father and He has come to do the will of His Father. He does not present Himself as the “Son of Man” as in the Synoptics. He tells His disciples that He and the Father “are one”, indicating that He is God. Out of this consciousness of Jesus as the Son of God sent by God His Father, the writer of this Fourth Gospel develops Jesus’ awareness of His mission and message.

“I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (10:10)

b. Thus the second theme, that eternal life is gift that may be had by faith in Him, develops out of the first theme. The first theme presents the person of Christ and the second theme presents the work of Christ. In the Synoptics the message of Jesus is the Kingdom (Reign) of God and in the Fourth Gospel, it becomes “eternal life”. One must be born again in order to have eternal life and that is to enter into the Kingdom (Reign) of God. Jesus said to Nicodemus,

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (3:3)

and again,

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (3:5)

This eternal life is not just a future state, but is a present personal relationship to God.

“This is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent” (17:3)

As we already observed, this life is not just an intellectual knowing about God, but is the knowledge that involves a personal relationship to God, where God reveals His love and man receives the gift of His love through faith. Thus eternal life is a present reality and is not just a future state and condition. By faith in Christ man enters into to this personal relationship to God; he submits to the Reign of God. As Thomas confessed and said to the risen Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (20:28).