Discussion of John

[Administrator]

The Gospel According to
JOHN

Author: The Apostle John
Date: About A.D. 85
Theme: Knowing God by Believing in Jesus Christ
Key Words: Believe, Bear Witness, Life

Author. Early church tradition attributes the Fourth Gospel to John “the beloved disciple” (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20), who belonged to the “inner circle” of Jesus’ followers (see Matt. 17:1; Mark 13:3). According to Christian writers of the second century, John moved to Ephesus, probably during the Jewish War of A.D. 66–70, where he continued his ministry. For instance, Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons in the latter part of the second century, stated that “John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence in Ephesus in Asia” (Against Heresies 3.1.1).
Some scholars suggest that John 19:35 and 21:24 may reflect another author who faithfully collected the apostle’s eyewitness account and testimonials. However, the bulk of the evidence, both internal and external, supports John the apostle as the author.

Date. The same tradition that locates John in Ephesus suggests that he wrote his Gospel in the latter part of the first century. In the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, most scholars accept this tradition.

Purpose. In a broad sense, John wrote to provide the Christians of the province of Asia (now in Asia Minor) with a fuller understanding of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. More specifically, he wrote to lead his readers to a settled faith on the basis of the words and works of Jesus, with the result that they “may have life in His name” (20:31).

John and the Synoptic Gospels. While John most likely knew of the other three Gospel accounts, he chose not to follow their chronological sequence of events as much as a topical order. In this case they may have used common oral and/or literary traditions. The broad outline is the same, and some particular events in Jesus’ ministry are common to all four books. Some of the distinctive differences are: 1) Instead of the familiar parables, John has lengthy discourses; 2) In place of the many miracles and healings in the Synoptics, John uses seven carefully picked miracles, which serve as “signs”; 3) The ministry of Jesus revolves around three Passover Feasts, instead of the one cited in the Synoptics; 4) The “I am” sayings are uniquely Johannine.

Content. John divides the ministry of Jesus into two distinct parts: chapters 2–12 give insight into His public ministry, while chapters 3–21 relate His private ministry to His disciples. In 1:1–18, called the “Prologue,” John deals with the theological implications of the first coming of Jesus. He shows Jesus’ preexistent state with God, His deity and essence, as well as His incarnation.

Christ Revealed. The book presents Jesus as the only begotten Son of God who became flesh. For John, Jesus’ humanity meant essentially a twofold mission: 1) As the “Lamb of God” (1:29), He procured the redemption of mankind; 2) Through His life and ministry He revealed the Father. Christ consistently pointed beyond Himself to the Father who had sent Him and whom He sought to glorify. In fact, the very miracles Jesus performed, which John characterized as “signs,” bore testimony to the divine mission of the Son of God. As the Son glorified the Father in ministry and passion, so the Father glorified the Son. But, as John shows, the Son’s glorification came at the Crucifixion (12:32, 33), not only in the postresurrection exaltation. By believing that Jesus is the Christ, the readers of John’s Gospel become participants in the life Jesus brought out of death (20:31).

The Holy Spirit at Work. Unique to John is the designation of the Holy Spirit as “Comforter” or “Helper” (14:16), literally “one called alongside.” He is “another Helper,” namely, one of the same kind as Jesus, thereby extending the ministry of Jesus to the end of this age. It would be a grave error, however, to understand the Spirit’s purpose merely in terms of one needed in predicaments. On the contrary, John demonstrates that the Spirit’s role encompasses every facet of life. In regard to the world outside of Christ, He works as the agent who convicts of sin, righteousness, and judgment (16:8–11). The experience of being “born of the Spirit” is descriptive of New Birth (3:6). Because God in essence is Spirit, those who worship Him must do so spiritually, that is, as directed and motivated by the Holy Spirit (4:24). Further, in anticipation of Pentecost, the Spirit becomes the divine enabler for authoritative ministry (20:21–23).

The Holy Spirit also fulfills a definite function in relation to Christ. While the Father sent the Spirit in the name of Christ, the Spirit never draws attention to Himself, nor does He speak in His own authority. Instead, His mission is to glorify Jesus and to declare Christ’s teaching to the disciples (16:14).

John reveals the function of the Holy Spirit in continuing the work of Jesus, leading believers into an understanding of the meanings, implications, and imperatives of the gospel, and enabling them to do “greater works” than those done by Jesus (14:12). Present-day believers in Christ may thus view Him as their contemporary, not merely as a figure from the distant past.

Personal Application. In seeking to fulfill his purpose as stated in 20:20, 31, John confronts his readers with claims of Jesus that demand a personal response. A positive response of faith in “Jesus . . . the Christ, the Son of God” results in “life in His name.” John records the assertion of Jesus that He came “that they might have life and that they might have it more abundantly” (10:10), and he makes it clear that life is not an independent quality unrelated to God or to Christ. The knowledge of “the only true God and Jesus Christ” (17:3), which implies fellowship as well as intellectual understanding, is the key to the meaning of eternal life.


Jack W. Hayford, Spirit Filled Life Study Bible

 

[mikesw]

I have been sharing with unitarians about John 1. They have been a great help to hone on John's approach, with an emphasis on John 1:1. I think this will explain it – but still might seem abstract. I have gathered several separate posts together to present the ideas about John 1:1 in better continuity. Maybe someone can explain these details in a clearer way.

= = =

amazinggrace said:

So, are you saying that 'word', 'logos' is used as a substitute for 'God' in the OT which would have been the Hebrew equivalent 'dabar'?

I'm sorry you get more confused about this. Not so much a substitute for God overall. Logos works as a representation by virtue of logos as the role in creation of the unnamed One of the Godhead.

It is helpful that you have indicated metonymy is not the best description of the figure of speech here. Instead John has used metalepsis -- where attributes of logos reflect who Jesus is in pre-existence since the incarnation is the only time we get a name ascribed to this One of the Godhead. It does act as a substitute for this One who is shown as being with God being and being God. Of course, as we have figured out earlier, the concept of God applies both to unity and completeness but also to individuality within the Godhead. That is what trips up people who fall for unitarianism.

= = = =

I wanted to describe the concept of metalepsis.
Metalepsis takes a word (or expression) that has meaning one context so that attributes of its context are carried into a description of something else.

If we say that a certain woman is a walking encyclopedia, this carries the sense of encyclopedias that contain wide knowledge on many topics. The woman is not a physical book and would not normally be thought to be so. She instead has knowledge of many facts and details in the way encyclopedias contain broad knowledge.

A situation of metalepsis could carry forth one prominent idea or many details of the original word or expression. Of course, the use of encyclopedia has been of common usage in the past that people still recognize its use when speaking of such a woman here. The useless details, such as paper, books, color picture and other features do not carry forth to attributes of that woman.

Scholars sometimes use this concept where a NT writer quotes an OT text. So the idea behind Rom 9:27-29 with a quote of Isa 10:20-22 can be the transfer of the broader text of Isaiah 10 into Romans. But, it may be simpler to say that Paul has shown the fulfillment of Isaiah 10 happening in that era. Perhaps some people would instead say that Rom 9:27-29 is not fulfillment but carries for the same type of warning and events found in Isaiah 10--which then could be described as metalepsis.

Note from the study of the Triune God that metalepsis can be a crucial concept to keep in mind when reading scripture. If it is not understood technically, it still might be recognized intuitively.

= = =

Here is more detail to present the likely progression from Prov 8 into John 1.

The logos refers to a message and also to wisdom and to its creative role via Prov 8.(The use in Prov 8 may first function as instruction in wisdom. But this develops further with Philo.) And Christians should best be aware of that chapter of Proverbs and how Philo developed it further so as to bring the concept of logos and wisdom to mind in the first century. John then uses these features inherent to logos to show thatthe logos-identified One , as pre-existing the incarnation of Jesus fits those qualities. Creation was done through him in a very critical role.

So logos contains all the aspects of the preexisting One in creation. Those actions under the metaleptic use of logos are what was done by the one who is incarnated per John 1.The recognition of the figure of speech gives a technical sense that has been understood instinctively by Christian readers.

It is interesting what we have discovered about John 1 and Proverbs 8. I owe some credit to one unitarian for asking a good question to help reveal this. You are right that I had not fleshed out the way metalepsis works in this passage.

 

[mikesw]

Great. Another question arose and led to more insight into the divinity of Christ. The concept of Philo and the use of logos metaleptically remained unclear. I share this.

To see the connection with John 1, you can first read this #logos-from-philo-of-alexandria-to-st-john-the-apostle-concept-of-logos. I skimmed through it and the article before it on the website. Some ideas have recently been forming in my mind but I think it is close to what the article relates.

As I understand it, Philo merged Jewish concepts with Greek concepts to present the logos as a bridge to the Greek language world. Underlying this bridge and discussion of logos is the role of wisdom in Proverb 8. So Philo provided the logos as a concept of a created one {perhaps that we can see has Jesus eternally a Son of God but the same God too} and as creator of all things that came into being.
That article shows "The logos then becomes a manifestation of God’s thinking-acting. For Philo, then, the eternal Logos is one and the same with God’s Word." The designation of logos encompasses this divine operation and interaction with God built upon much congruence with Greek thought, but not subservient to Greek philosophy. This concept of Philo builds upon Proverbs 8, which God appears to have planned for the purpose of Philo's work and then of John 1.

This logos that was abstract and not identified with any clear divinity or aid to God is taken up John. The term logos carries with it the significance of creation and divinity yet without an actor in mind to do this. It is not yet equated to a person. So John begins to take the abstract concepts of logos and show the pre-existence (or eternal existence) of the One whom the attribute of logos applies metalyptically. We see that the One who was with God became flesh among humanity that John shows is Jesus.

So Philo represented the wisdom of Proverbs 8 as strong basis for the logos concept that was not quite identified as a divine actor in the Godhead. John took this abstract logos and its qualities metalyptically -- what the logos represents is then assigned to a person, but only after providing details of the logos where it can only involve One who was with God and was God. This abstract concept of logos then gets assigned to Jesus, as the incarnate and identifiable logos.