The Gospel According To John - Introduction and Outline.pdf

10 downloads 227 Views 159KB Size Report
appropriate that the study of this mystical re-telling of the works of Jesus the Christ follows the work that we have already completed on the gospels of Matthew, ...
An Introduction to the Gospel According to Saint John “The Gospel that is Different” (Bere’ sheit) - Hebrew ἐν ἀρχή (En archē ) - Greek “In the beginning...” – English

Here we have the first words of both the Torah and the Gospel of Saint John. It is highly unlikely that the author of this book did that by accident. As Genesis was the beginning of Judaism, John is the beginning of orthodox Christianity. It is the goal of this introduction to show that John of Patmos (or whoever the actual author was) was strongly influenced by ancient Jewish scripture. Even though this gospel is often considered the most “Christian” of the stories told about Jesus, it is nonetheless a Jewish ‘quasi-history’ dating to the end of the first century after Christ. Let us not forget that John was a Jew before becoming a follower of Jesus of Nazareth and eventually becoming the bishop of the nascent Christian church in Ephesus. More importantly, I hope to show that he was a Jewish mystic, steeped in the concepts of ancient Jewish Wisdom literature. That Wisdom literature was, according to some academics, developed as the result of the Babylonian exile when the voices of the Prophets fell silent.[1] In time, this led to the growth of Jewish mysticism. From my vantage point, this is a mystical story told by John and told for very specific purposes. John never intended that this be simply a travelogue listing the stops on the way of the ministry of Jesus. The author spends almost the entire gospel, beginning with the opening line, to promote the divinity of the Son of God; our Lord, Jesus of Nazareth. It is the purpose of this brief introduction to help you see a different side of this gospel than you may have seen in the past. If successful in its intent, it will help to prepare you to see ‘the other side’ of this story as we enter the mystical and definitely non-literal world of John in our Bible study program. “The Gospel that is different”; that is how the Rev. Dr. William Barclay describes the Gospel According to St. John. Barclay, one of the more estimable theologians of the 20th century, goes on to state that “For many Christian people the Gospel is the most precious book in the New Testament. It is the book on which above all they feed their minds and nourish their hearts, and in which they rest their souls.”

[2]

That may be – it certainly is the most poetic of the gospels and by far the one with the most

specificity in describing the events that took place during our Lord’s time on earth. If John differs from the synoptic gospels, it is not from lack of information concerning ancient Judea in 30 CE. The loaves that the young boy brought to Jesus were barley loaves (6:9). When Jesus came to the disciples as they crossed the lake in the storm they had rowed “three or three and a half miles” (6:19). There were

four soldiers gambling for the seamless undergarment at the crucifixion. (19:23) And, only John tells us exactly how much myrrh and aloes were used to anoint the Christ’s body as it lay in the tomb. (19:39) As to its ubiquitous position in our culture, look at the home field end zone at any Dallas Cowboy’s game and see that huge placard being held up stating, with no shame: JOHN 3:16. As we 1

approach our study of this fourth gospel, let us focus first on how different it really is compared to the other three – the Synoptics. We know that John differs from these three - but by how much? Let’s list some of the more substantive differences: 1. There is no birth narrative and, more importantly – no virgin birth account. 2. John the Baptist never baptizes Jesus nor is he referred to as the Baptizer. All he does is bear witness to Jesus. 3. There is no wilderness temptation story. 4. There is no account of the transfiguration story with Moses and Elijah. 5. Jesus does not speak in those widely known, pithy parables but in long, sometimes tedious and convoluted discourses that can stretch to a chapter or more in length. 6. There is no Sermon on the Mount or Sermon on the Plain. 7. The cleansing of the Temple takes place at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry rather than at the end as He prepares to accept His cross. 8. This gospel takes place mostly in Jerusalem while in the other three He goes to the city for the Passover only once. His ministry as we know from our study of Matthew was to be restricted to the Jews in the Galilee. “Leaving Nazareth, he went and lived in Capernaum... From that time on Jesus began to preach.” 9. In opposition to the synoptics, there is no Last Supper Passover meal. In John, Jesus washes the feet of his disciples at the banquet held in preparation for Passover. In effect, John has Jesus sacrificed on the Passover thus becoming the Paschal Lamb. 10. Miracles are no longer miracles but ‘signs’ and most of these do not correlate well with the wondrous miracles of the first three gospels. 11. There is no anguish in the Garden of Gethsemane and Jesus never asks to be spared His coming fate. Instead, Jesus rejects the synoptic style and says that He was born to be crucified to glorify God. 12. John introduces a new cast of characters: Andrew, the mother of Jesus, the brothers of Jesus, Philip and Thomas. Nathaniel is introduced in Chapter 1 and the “beloved disciple” is introduced during the Farewell Discourses. The actual person of this “beloved disciple” is open to differing interpretations which we can spend some time on. 13. There is no mention of Simon the Cyrene helping Jesus carry His cross. 14. And, finally, this is the gospel that places the mother of Jesus at the cross although that is also subject to some discussion. (You need only to read the passage to realize that it sounds a bit like a Bob Newhart episode where Larry introduces his brother Daryl and his other brother Daryl.)

2

These are only some of the ways that this gospel is set apart from the others. It is appropriate that the study of this mystical re-telling of the works of Jesus the Christ follows the work that we have already completed on the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Those synoptic gospels (from the Greek meaning “seen together” since they share so many of the same stories, events and timelines) are almost universally thought to have been written in the mid to late first century with Mark coming first, followed by Matthew and finally by Luke/Acts, a two part gospel that goes beyond the teaching of Yeshua and introduces us to the founding of the church. The differences between those three and John are stark but they are there for some sound reasons. We should strive to understand how these words tell us what John is really saying to the followers of the Messiah at the end of the first century. That is the primary reason for this course of study. Let us now take a look at the message of John. By most accounts of the leading academics and theologians, John’s gospel was put to paper (or papyrus) sometime toward the end of the first century of the Common Era. If you take Clement of Alexandria’s text as truth, we know that John lived at least until the time of the emperor Trajan: “All the elders... testify that John taught them the truth, for he remained with them until the time of Trajan.”

[3]

We know that the Roman emperor Trajan ruled from 98 until

his death in 117 and that John put his stories in writing towards the end of his own days. ` Therefore, assuming a date of 100 to 105 CE seems not too much of a risk. It is interesting to note that as of 112 CE, Trajan put an end to the active persecution of Christians. The operative phrase there is “active persecution”. It was Pliny the Younger, governor of a Roman province at the time, who wrote to Trajan and asked for this wholesale slaughter to cease. In response, Trajan issued an edict that prohibited capital punishment unless they were ‘identified’ as Christians while committing a crime or worshipping in public.[4] This timing is critical to our understanding of John since we can be assured that the Christian movement was beginning to take serious hold in Asia Minor by this date. It had also gone through a number of changes since the time of Paul, the first chronicler of the Christ. The original followers of Christ (or Christians, if you please) were Jews attempting to place Jesus of Nazareth squarely in the position of the Savior or Messiah within the confines of the Jewish faith. That is, to make Jesus the Messiah that was prophesied in the ancient scripture of the Jews. It was Paul who hoped to open the belief structure to both Jew and Gentile alike. As more Gentiles became followers, the concepts of the new faith became more structured and the Jewish leaders became less and less willing to abide this type of heresy in the synagogue. By the late first century, many of these followers of Jesus had been subjected to the harshest punishment that a Jew could face – excommunication and expulsion from the synagogue. John was clarifying why that was an acceptable fate. Jesus was God. 3

There were other causative events taking place at the end of the first century that likely affected the way that this particular story is told. Therefore, the second action we should address is the rise of the heretics. Why, for instance, is John the Baptizer given such short shrift in John? As we know, John the Baptist had his own disciples and he was thought by many to be the last great Jewish prophet of the Roman era. Many perhaps believed that he was about to announce the end of the age. The Baptizer was no bit player but a mover and a shaker of that time. We know from scripture that there was an accepted sect of John the Baptizer within the Jewish faith. Read Acts 19:1-7 again and evaluate his position anew. This may well be the reason that John quietly, but effectively, relegates the Baptist to a secondary role which is deemed his proper place in the new faith – one who prepares the way for the Lord. The other issue that must be considered is the growth of Gnosticism in the first century. One of the primary beliefs of the Gnostics of that time was that of Docetism – the belief that held that Jesus only seemed to be human. It is beyond the scope of this brief introduction to give a full accounting of this first (and second) century heresy but I invite you to look more deeply into it. It is likely the reason, however, that we hear Jesus croak from the cross “I thirst” (19:28). This is a graphic reminder that our Lord – that poor Suffering Servant hanging from a tree – is human and His suffering is real. John was also battling heresies as well as Romans. By the time that John was approaching the end of his days on this earth, his disciples and attendants pushed him to put his own first-person memories of the ministry of Jesus into a single gospel account. With John’s non-literal (mystical) telling of the story, the break between Jew and Gentile Christian may have been completed. The followers of Jesus, now expelled from the synagogue, had to learn to live apart from Judaism. To John, this meant seeing the Christ as the Living God Incarnate – pre-existent with God from the beginning of time. That was more than some members of the Johannine community could tolerate and so they split off and returned to the synagogue.

[5]

You will see that this is the gospel where Jesus, on a number of

occasions, utters the divine name “I AM” in reference to Himself. That is what God called Himself and to devout Jews this was anathema. It should be obvious that the Christian faith is now entering an entirely new schema and new ground is being broken. Christianity meets orthodoxy. This new mystical story that tells of Christ’s time on earth is the new orthodoxy and becomes the core of the faith of John’s church. He also did what was necessary to stem the rise of a John the Baptist church and the growth of Docetisim. This was a man on a mission. As we progress through this study you will be reminded that the terms “mystical” and “non-literal” are used in reference to this work with regularity. That is not to say that these stories are made up out of whole cloth - only that they are stories, not necessarily historical fact. For those of you who rely on the concept of inerrancy of the Biblical passages, I can only 4

apologize and quote Rev. J. Shelby Spong, a man who spent twenty-four years as Episcopal Bishop of Newark and is the author of some twenty best-selling books on scripture: “A preponderance of biblical scholarship now indicates that John the Baptist had no sense that he was the forerunner of Jesus; that no water was ever turned into wine in Cana of Galilee… that Jesus never had a conversation with a man named Nicodemus or with a Samaritan woman by the well… that he never said any of the “I AM” sayings… that he never raised from the dead a man named Lazarus… and that no tomb was supplied by a rich man from Arimathea. What we have been doing, when we assume that the things recorded above are actual events, is to confuse storytelling and parable with history.”

[6]

What Spong is saying is

that to do so, to believe every word as absolute truth, is to actually miss the truth. John’s gospel invites us to challenge literalism at every point of this wonderful book. My goodness, just read the Apocalypse of Saint John! If not written by John of Patmos, it was written by someone who served him in Ephesus. If that is not a non-literal text then what is? If that is part of our canon, why should not John’s gospel be so? This gospel should invite the reader, both serious student and casual observer, to walk through a doorway through which we can see a road to being more human by following Christ. To do this book any real service as we study, however, we must escape the prison of literalism. Just because it is a fantastical story, does not mean that it is a story to be discounted. Quite the contrary, this story is not about God becoming human so much as it is about the truly divine appearing in a human form. By doing so, God calls us to understand what divinity means. To quote Spong again: “It is about bringing God out of the sky and redefining God as the ultimate dimension of the human. It is about the spirit transcending the limits of the flesh…”

[7]

Allow me to end this introduction to John on a personal note. I have been taught that scholarly discussions have no place for personal explanations. Hopefully, in this case, I am writing to friends who know me and will allow it. It is no secret to those in our group that for most of my life I was not a fan of the Gospel of John. I continue to read scripture on a daily basis and yet I avoid John like the Black Death. Or I did until I read The Misunderstood Jew – The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus by Amy-Jill Levine. This is a wonderful little book and I highly recommend it. Whenever you can read a book by a devout Conservative Jew who teaches a class on the Gospel of Matthew at the Vanderbilt School of Divinity – buy it. In her chapter called “Stereotyping Judaism” she quotes another famous author (Philip Esler) and it opened my eyes to a new way to read the gospels: She quotes: “using ‘Jew’ or ‘Jewish’ [in the gospel of John most especially] encourages anti-Semitic notions of the ‘eternal Jew’ who, it is alleged, killed Christ and is still around, to be persecuted if at all possible… Therefore, these and other scholars suggest that in most, if not all New Testament uses, Ioudaios should be 5

translated using ‘Judean’ [not ‘Jew”] and the term should be understood as referring to the group rooted in Judea.”

[8]

(The bracketed comments are mine for clarification.) The point that

we need to consider, as stated earlier, is that John was written at a time when a final schism was taking place between the Jews and the new Christian church. But we need to go back further - back to Mark, Matthew and Luke and understand that Jesus was opposed not to the faith of the Jews (why would He be called ‘Rabbi’?) but to the actions and mismanagement of the faith by the Pharisees – the leaders of the Jewish Temple system in Jerusalem; that is, the Judeans. With the fall of the Temple at the destruction of Jerusalem in circa 70 CE, all bets were off. John was writing for a new age of both Christianity and Judaism. For more than forty-five years I have been terribly troubled by the depth of antiSemitism in our society throughout our history. It began in earnest in the late sixties when I had the chance to embark on my first visit to a Nazi death camp located just north of Munich. It was disarmingly quiet place called Dachau and it had an earth-shaking impact that changed me forever. I continue to blame much of what happened in the Middle Ages and during those horrible, almost unbelievable years when Hitler ruled Germany on the writings found in Matthew and John. (“Let his blood be on us and on our children!” Mt 27:25 and “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire.” Jn 8:44). After reading Levine’s book, I re-read John and replaced every mention of ‘the Jews’ with the term ‘the Judeans’ – it was a totally different experience. As we study this gospel, I invite you to do the same. As we approach our new course of study we should also remember why the Holy Roman Catholic Church leaders kept scripture out of the hands of the great unwashed for nearly fifteen-hundred years. Strangely, we have to thank none other than the notorious Henry VIII for having this great book translated into English so that the common man could have access to it. But once it was – we all had the opportunity to interpret scripture in our own way without the prejudices and dogmatic restrictions put upon it by the mother church. This is what we do when we meet in fellowship each week to discuss and discover scripture. This is both a great gift and a great burden. I asked that you look at John ‘from the other side’ in this particular study because I believe strongly in a line purportedly spoken by our Savior in chapter 14 – “In my Father’s house there are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you.” He also says “peace I leave with you; my peace I give you... Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.” Let us explore this magnificent gift of gospel – the Good News – together and let our hearts be untroubled as we do so. Bruno E. Iocona October 3, 2013

6

Notes on the Gospel of John Author: The Zondervain Study Bible that many of us use in class states unequivocally that John, the apostle of Christ, “the disciple whom Jesus loved” was the author of this book. Although I normally trust this source, in this case I would have to disagree. Like most books of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments, it is highly unlikely that a single author is behind this work. There are simply too many signposts that indicate otherwise. Yes, the Gospel of John has many personal touches that indicate that an eyewitness to the events wrote it (see Introduction) but there are other, sometimes glaring, contradictions in the body of the text to indicate that it has been modified over the ages. We can take, for example, chapters 4, 5 and 6. The geographical references in these chapters would make more sense if they were arranged in the 4, 6, 5 order – unless, that is, Jesus and his crew had the services of a tour bus in the year 30 CE. The geographical zigzagging simply does not make sense. That point pales by comparison to the story of the adulterous woman in chapters 7:53 to 8:11. (For the record: this is not Mary Magdalene that this author writes about. The demonization of that female disciple did not occur until the time of Gregory I (Gregory the Great) around the year 600 CE. It has slipped into our Christian mythology, however, and can now never be removed. I think that we all know why Gregory did this.) You will find that in most modern translations, (including Zondervain) this story has been printed with a footnote with explanations that it did not exist in the earliest manuscripts. In fact, it did not make its first appearance in the text until well into the Middle Age’s manuscripts.[9] The last point I will make is the inexplicable and mutually conflicting depictions of the last two chapters, the Resurrection narratives. In Mark, we have an unsatisfying conclusion at Mk 16:8 that must have been deemed inappropriate for a faith based on the resurrection of His body. Most biblical scholars agree that this resulted in later additions by unnamed scribes at a much later date. It would appear that the totally satisfying end depicted in John 20 was found wanting sometime during the second or third century. Since there is a straightforward ‘wrap-up’ at Jn 20:30 there seems no reason for chapter 21 except to expand on the miraculous deeds of the Christ after arising from the tomb. Date: Again, using Zondervain as a guide, those editors place the text at either the end of the first century (85 or later CE) or as early as the 50s and no later than the 70s CE. Based on the Ecclesiastical History supplied by Eusebius, it is my opinion that it could have been completed by John’s disciples and attendants as late as the time of Trajan’s rule in 105 CE. The point is: it may have been published in 105 CE but it wasn’t finished. Others added their hands and thoughts to this work over the next several centuries. 7

Recipients and Purpose: Much of this has already been stated in the Introduction but suffice it to say that this was a gospel for a developed church that was seeking it own orthodoxy. Mark was written primarily for Gentiles in Rome. Matthew was written for Greek speaking Jews in the Holy Land. They told a differing story and you can see the story become more fully developed and fleshed out with each iteration of the story released from Mark through Luke. John simply takes it to another level. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – 215 CE), the great church apologist, plainly states that “But, last of all, JOHN, perceiving that the external facts had been made plain in the Gospel, being urged by his friends, and inspired by the Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel." (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.14.5-7).

It also differs in the message from the other three gospels as we have stated previously. Again, relying on Eusebius’ Church History you will find: “John therefore records the deeds of Christ which were performed before the Baptist was cast into prison, but the other three evangelists mention the events which happened after that time… The Gospel according to John contains the first acts of Christ, while the others give an account of the latter part of his life.” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5:24) As stated at the offset – this is a gospel that is different. Much different.

8

References: [1] Spong, John Shelby. “The Fourth Gospel: Tales of a Jewish Mystic”. Harper Collins Publishers, © 2013 First Edition, New York. Page 55 [2] Barclay, Wm. “The Gospel of John, Vol. 1”. Westminster John Knox Press; © 1975, Rev. Edition 2001. Philadelphia, PA. Page 1 [3] Against Heresies 2.33 - Cement of Alexandria. excerpted from “Eusebius, The Church History”. Editor Paul L. Meier. Kregel Publications, © 1999, Grand Rapids, MI. Page 110 [4} Ibid: Page 121 [5} Spong, page 18 [6] Ibid, page 64-65 [7] Ibid, page 68 [8] Levine, Amy-Jill. “The Misunderstood Jew – The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus”. Harper Collins Publishers, © 2006, New York. Page 160 [9] and throughout the end-notes: “Introduction to the Gospel of John. Zondervain NIV Study Bible (Fully Revised). Zondervain, © 1985, 1995, 2002 Grand Rapids, MI.

9

OUTLINE FOR GROUP STUDY 1 - Prologue (Logos Hymn); The Witness of John (the Baptizer); The First Disciples of Jesus

2 - The Wedding Feast at Cana; Jesus' First Passover in Jerusalem: The Cleansing of the Temple 3 - Jesus' Conversation with Nicodemus; John (Baptist)'s testimony 4 - The Samaritan Woman at the Well; Healing of a Royal Official's Son 5 - The Sabbath Healing of a Sick Man at the Bethzatha Pool in Jerusalem; Ensuing Controversy 6 - The Second Passover in Galilee: Feeding of 5000; Walking on Water; Bread of Life Discourse 7 - The Feast of Tabernacles - Jerusalem; Jesus in the Temple; Diverse Reactions to Jesus 8 - [Adulterous Woman 7:53—8:11]; Jesus as "Light of the World"; Origin & Identity of Jesus 9 - The Sabbath Healing of a Man Born Blind near the Pool of Siloam; Ensuing Controversy 10 - The Good Shepherd Discourse; Feast of Dedication; Jesus Retreats across the Jordan 11 - The Raising of Lazarus at Bethany; Final Plot against Jesus; Jesus Retreats to Ephraim 12 - The Third Passover in Judea; Anointing at Bethany; Final Entry into Jerusalem; "the Hour" 13 - The Last Supper: Washing of Disciples' Feet; Foretelling of Judas' Betrayal & Peter's Denial 14 - The Farewell Discourse (Part I), incl. Fear Not, Paraclete, Peace 15 - The Farewell Discourse (Part II), incl. Vine & Branches, Love & Hate, Paraclete 16 - The Farewell Discourse (Part II - cont.), incl. Persecutions, Paraclete, Joy, Prayer, etc. 17 - The Great Prayer of Jesus 18 - The Passion Narrative: incl. Arrest in Garden, Peter's Denial, Jesus' Trial before Pilate 19 - The Passion Narrative (cont.): Trial continues, Crucifixion, Death, Burial 20 - The Empty Tomb; the Risen Lord appears to Mary Magdalene, to the Disciples, to Thomas;

First Conclusion (20:30-31) 21 - Epilogue: Breakfast Appearance by Sea of Tiberias; Peter's Love & the Beloved Disciple;

Second Conclusion (21:24-25)

10