John- An Introduction

 Sorry for not getting this out Sunday. Sunday was so busy! Church- followed by tailgate party in the parking lot- then Castle Gardens worship, then walk with Sherri and dog and then Sunday family dinner- then, of course, the Bills game!!

The Gospel of John is definitely "different" than the other Gospels we have read. The first three: Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic" ("syn-" same or similar; "-optic" eyes-- so literally, as seen through the same eyes) Gospels. They share many of the same stories with a slightly different viewpoint (depending on who the audience was primarily). John is often called the "Messianic Gospel" with the words all pointing to Jesus as the Messiah. 

• Clement of Alexandria (2nd C) called John "a spiritual Gospel" while the other Gospels set forth "physical things"
• Origen (3rd C) called the Gospels the "firstfruits of all scripture" while John was the "firstfruits of the Gospels"
• Augustine (4th C) said the synoptics were "Gospels of the flesh" while John was "the Gospel of the Spirit"
• Martin Luther (16th C) said John's Gospel is preferred over the other three because "it will show you Christ and teach you everything you need to know." 

John is probably best known for its poetic introduction, "In the beginning..." As we read, notice that it seems to be divided into two "sections". Chapters 1 through 12 called "The Book of Signs" gives us story after story  of amazing things (signs) that Jesus did (the word "sign" is used at least 16 times in these chapters and then not again until 20:30!) Chapters 13 through 20 called "The Book of Glory"  deals with the last week of Jesus' life. 

The author is anonymous, but at the end the words "the beloved disciple offered testimony to these things" (21:24). Church tradition has usually associated John with the beloved disciple. Interestingly, the "beloved disciple" isn't mentioned until 13:23, at the meal Jesus is sharing with the disciples. After that, the "beloved disciple" is mentioned several times- often being compared to Peter. Why was "the beloved disciple" not talked about during the first half of the book? As  you can guess- controversy about authorship is abundant! This text was composed probably in the 90s. In contrast, the synoptics were 60s and 70s; the Pauline letters in the 50s. The church in the 90s was under intense persecution and Rome was a dominant force, political and social tensions were high. We will notice that in the writing the author gives us.

We will also see that there is so much "new" information. Approximately 90% of the material in John is not found in any of the other Gospels. The text of John keeps Jesus in and around Jerusalem and extends his ministry to three years. The other Gospels  condense this time period and focus on Galilee. Jesus' words in John are long and philosophical; in the syoptics, Jesus is more abbreviated and concise. John is also uses symbols more than the synoptics. 

It is interesting what is not in John:

• no birth narrative
• no baptism
• no temptation story
• no transfiguration
• no parables 
• no exorcisms
• no call for people to repent
• no predictions of Jerusalem's downfall

This will be a very interesting read for us!

Peace+
Pastor Paul