ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

[Johann]

ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

Opening Statement
 Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13; also note Phil. 2:12-13).

Key Text
 The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!

Eastern Literature
 Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths (see SPECIAL TOPIC: EASTERN LITERATURE). A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths:
predestination vs. human free will
security of the believers vs. the need for perseverance
original sin vs. volitional sin
sinlessness (perfectionism) vs. sinning less
initial instantaneous justification and sanctification vs. progressive sanctification
Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility
God's transcendence vs. God's immanence
God as ultimately unknowable vs. God as knowable in Scripture
the Kingdom of God as present vs. future consummation
repentance as a gift of God vs. repentance as a necessary human covenantal response
Jesus as divine vs. Jesus as human
Jesus as equal to the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father

Covenant
 The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from mankind (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21; see SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT). Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!

Exegetical Notes
 Titus 2:11 is a balance to other NT passages on election. I thought it might be theologically helpful to provide my commentary notes from Romans 8:29 and chapter 9, as well as Ephesians 1.
Romans 8:29 ‒ Paul uses "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before") twice, here and 11:2. In 11:2 it refers to God's covenant love for Israel before time began. Remember that the term "know" in Hebrew related to intimate, personal relationship, not to facts about someone (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5). Here it was included in a chain of eternal events (cf. Rom. 8:29-30). This term was linked with predestination. However, it must be stated that God's foreknowledge is not the basis of election because if that were so, then election would be based on fallen humanity's future response, which would be human performance. This term is also found in Acts 26:5; 1 Pet. 1:2,20 and 2 Pet. 3:17.
"foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before")
 The terms "foreknow" and "predestine" are both compounds with the PREPOSITION "before" and, therefore, should be translated "to know before," "to set bounds before," or "mark off before." The definitive passages on predestination in the NT are Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:13-14; and Romans 9. These texts obviously stress that God is sovereign. He is in total control of all things. There is a preset divine plan being worked out in time. However, this plan is not arbitrary or selective. It is based, not only on God's sovereignty and foreknowledge, but on His unchanging character of love, mercy, and undeserved grace. See SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH'S ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN.
 We must be careful of our western (American) individualism or our evangelical zeal coloring this wonderful truth. We must also guard against being polarized into the historical, theological conflicts between Augustine versus Pelegius or Calvinism versus Arminianism.
"predestined" (proorizō, "to set the bounds before")
 Predestination is not a doctrine meant to limit God's love, grace, and mercy nor to exclude some from the gospel. It is meant to strengthen believers by molding their worldview. God is for all mankind (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God is in control of all things. Who or what can separate us from Him (cf. Rom. 8:31-39)? God views all history as present; humans are time bound. Our perspective and mental abilities are limited. There is no contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will. It is a covenantal structure. This is another example of truth given in dialectical tension. Biblical doctrines are presented from different perspectives. They often appear paradoxical. The truth is a balance between the seemingly opposite pairs. We must not remove the tension by picking one of the truths. We must not isolate any biblical truth into a compartment by itself.
 It is also important to add that the goal of election is not only heaven when we die, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 2:10; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15). We were chosen to be "holy and blameless." God chooses to change us so that others may see the change and respond by faith to God in Christ. Predestination is not a personal privilege, but a covenantal responsibility. This is the major truth of the passage. This is the goal of Christianity. Holiness is God's will for every believer. God's election is to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a special standing. The image of God, which was given to man in creation (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6), is to be restored.
"conformed to the image of His Son" ‒ God's ultimate goal is the restoration of the image lost in the Fall. Believers are foreordained to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4).
Romans 9
Romans 9 is one of the strongest NT passages on God's sovereignty (the other being Eph. 1:3-14), while chapter 10 states humans' free will clearly and repeatedly (cf. "everyone" Rom. 9:4; "whosoever" 9:11,13; "all" 9:12 [twice]). Paul never tries to reconcile this theological tension. They are both true! Most Bible doctrines are presented in paradoxical or dialectical pairs. Most systems of theology are logical half-truths. Augustinianism and Calvinism versus semi-Pelegianism and Arminianism have elements of truth and error. Biblical tension between doctrines is preferable to a proof-texted, dogmatic, rational, theological system that forces the Bible onto a preconceived interpretive grid.
This same truth (found in Rom. 9:23) is stated in Rom. 8:29-30 and Eph. 1:4,11. This chapter is the strongest expression of God's sovereignty in the NT. There can be no dispute that God is in total charge of creation and redemption. This great truth should never be softened or diminished. However, it must be balanced with God's choice of covenant as a means of relating to human creation, made in His image. It is surely true that some OT covenants, like Genesis 15, are unconditional and do not relate at all to human response, but other covenants are conditioned on human response (e.g., Eden, Noah, Moses, David). God has a plan of redemption for His creation; no human can affect this plan. God has chosen to allow individuals to participate in His plans. This opportunity for participation is a theological tension between sovereignty (Romans 9) and human free will (Romans 10).
 It is not appropriate to select one biblical emphasis and ignore another. There is tension between doctrines because eastern people present truth in dialectical or tension-filled pairs. Doctrines must be held in relationship to other doctrines. Truth is a mosaic of truths.
Ephesians 1
Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the OT the term was used primarily for service; in the NT it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13).
 The key to this theological tension may be found in Eph. 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven only, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
 Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent; security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner, etc).
 

Election/Predestination and the Need for a Theological Balance

Election & Predestination -- Special Topic by Dr. Bob Utley, professor of hermeneutics (retired).

www.freebiblecommentary.org

 

[Johann]

ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

Opening Statement
 Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13; also note Phil. 2:12-13).

Key Text
 The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!

Eastern Literature
 Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths (see SPECIAL TOPIC: EASTERN LITERATURE). A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths:
predestination vs. human free will
security of the believers vs. the need for perseverance
original sin vs. volitional sin
sinlessness (perfectionism) vs. sinning less
initial instantaneous justification and sanctification vs. progressive sanctification
Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility
God's transcendence vs. God's immanence
God as ultimately unknowable vs. God as knowable in Scripture
the Kingdom of God as present vs. future consummation
repentance as a gift of God vs. repentance as a necessary human covenantal response
Jesus as divine vs. Jesus as human
Jesus as equal to the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father

Covenant
 The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from mankind (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21; see SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT). Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!

Exegetical Notes
 Titus 2:11 is a balance to other NT passages on election. I thought it might be theologically helpful to provide my commentary notes from Romans 8:29 and chapter 9, as well as Ephesians 1.
Romans 8:29 ‒ Paul uses "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before") twice, here and 11:2. In 11:2 it refers to God's covenant love for Israel before time began. Remember that the term "know" in Hebrew related to intimate, personal relationship, not to facts about someone (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5). Here it was included in a chain of eternal events (cf. Rom. 8:29-30). This term was linked with predestination. However, it must be stated that God's foreknowledge is not the basis of election because if that were so, then election would be based on fallen humanity's future response, which would be human performance. This term is also found in Acts 26:5; 1 Pet. 1:2,20 and 2 Pet. 3:17.
"foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before")
 The terms "foreknow" and "predestine" are both compounds with the PREPOSITION "before" and, therefore, should be translated "to know before," "to set bounds before," or "mark off before." The definitive passages on predestination in the NT are Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:13-14; and Romans 9. These texts obviously stress that God is sovereign. He is in total control of all things. There is a preset divine plan being worked out in time. However, this plan is not arbitrary or selective. It is based, not only on God's sovereignty and foreknowledge, but on His unchanging character of love, mercy, and undeserved grace. See SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH'S ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN.
 We must be careful of our western (American) individualism or our evangelical zeal coloring this wonderful truth. We must also guard against being polarized into the historical, theological conflicts between Augustine versus Pelegius or Calvinism versus Arminianism.
"predestined" (proorizō, "to set the bounds before")
 Predestination is not a doctrine meant to limit God's love, grace, and mercy nor to exclude some from the gospel. It is meant to strengthen believers by molding their worldview. God is for all mankind (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God is in control of all things. Who or what can separate us from Him (cf. Rom. 8:31-39)? God views all history as present; humans are time bound. Our perspective and mental abilities are limited. There is no contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will. It is a covenantal structure. This is another example of truth given in dialectical tension. Biblical doctrines are presented from different perspectives. They often appear paradoxical. The truth is a balance between the seemingly opposite pairs. We must not remove the tension by picking one of the truths. We must not isolate any biblical truth into a compartment by itself.
 It is also important to add that the goal of election is not only heaven when we die, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 2:10; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15). We were chosen to be "holy and blameless." God chooses to change us so that others may see the change and respond by faith to God in Christ. Predestination is not a personal privilege, but a covenantal responsibility. This is the major truth of the passage. This is the goal of Christianity. Holiness is God's will for every believer. God's election is to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a special standing. The image of God, which was given to man in creation (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6), is to be restored.
"conformed to the image of His Son" ‒ God's ultimate goal is the restoration of the image lost in the Fall. Believers are foreordained to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4).
Romans 9
Romans 9 is one of the strongest NT passages on God's sovereignty (the other being Eph. 1:3-14), while chapter 10 states humans' free will clearly and repeatedly (cf. "everyone" Rom. 9:4; "whosoever" 9:11,13; "all" 9:12 [twice]). Paul never tries to reconcile this theological tension. They are both true! Most Bible doctrines are presented in paradoxical or dialectical pairs. Most systems of theology are logical half-truths. Augustinianism and Calvinism versus semi-Pelegianism and Arminianism have elements of truth and error. Biblical tension between doctrines is preferable to a proof-texted, dogmatic, rational, theological system that forces the Bible onto a preconceived interpretive grid.
This same truth (found in Rom. 9:23) is stated in Rom. 8:29-30 and Eph. 1:4,11. This chapter is the strongest expression of God's sovereignty in the NT. There can be no dispute that God is in total charge of creation and redemption. This great truth should never be softened or diminished. However, it must be balanced with God's choice of covenant as a means of relating to human creation, made in His image. It is surely true that some OT covenants, like Genesis 15, are unconditional and do not relate at all to human response, but other covenants are conditioned on human response (e.g., Eden, Noah, Moses, David). God has a plan of redemption for His creation; no human can affect this plan. God has chosen to allow individuals to participate in His plans. This opportunity for participation is a theological tension between sovereignty (Romans 9) and human free will (Romans 10).
 It is not appropriate to select one biblical emphasis and ignore another. There is tension between doctrines because eastern people present truth in dialectical or tension-filled pairs. Doctrines must be held in relationship to other doctrines. Truth is a mosaic of truths.
Ephesians 1
Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the OT the term was used primarily for service; in the NT it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13).
 The key to this theological tension may be found in Eph. 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven only, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
 Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent; security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner, etc).
 

Election/Predestination and the Need for a Theological Balance

Election & Predestination -- Special Topic by Dr. Bob Utley, professor of hermeneutics (retired).

www.freebiblecommentary.org

 

[Johann]

Bible study on John with Bob Utley.
CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS TO VERSES 1-18

Theological outline of the poem/hymn/creed
eternal, divine, creator Christ, John 1:1-3 (Jesus as Word)
prophetic witness to Christ, John 1:4-5, 7-9, 15, 19 (Jesus as Life and Light)
incarnate Christ reveals God, John 1:10-18 (Jesus as Son)
He must be received, John 1:12; 3:16,36; 6:40; 11:25-26

Theological highlights of John 1:1-18 and recurrent themes
Jesus was pre-existent with God the Father (John 1:1a)
Jesus was/is in intimate fellowship with God the Father (John 1:1b, 2, 18c)
Jesus shares God the Father's very essence (John 1:1c, 18b)
God the Father's means of redemption and adoption (John 1:12-13)
incarnation, deity becomes a man (John 1:9, 14)
revelation, deity fully revealed and understood (John 1:18d)

Hebrew and Greek background of logos (word)
Hebrew background
the power of the spoken word (Isa. 55:11; Ps. 33:6; 107:20; 147:15,18), as in Creation (Gen. 1:3,6,9,11,14,20,24, 26,29) and the Patriarchal blessing (Gen. 27:1ff; 49:1)
Proverbs 8:12-23 personifies "Wisdom" as God's first creation and agent of all creation (cf. Ps. 33:6 and the non-canonical Wisdom of Solomon, 9:9)
the Targums (Aramaic translations and commentaries) substitute the phrase "Word of God" for logos because of their discomfort with anthropomorphic terms

Greek background
Heracleitus ‒ the world was in flux; the impersonal divine and unchanging logos held it together and guided the changing process

Plato ‒ the impersonal and unchanging logos kept the planets on course and determined the seasons

Stoics ‒ the logos was the "world reason" or manager, but was semi-personal

Philo ‒ he personified the concept of logos as "High Priest that set the soul of man before God," or "the bridge between man and God," or "the tiller by which the Pilot of the universe steers all things" (kosmocrater)

Elements of the developed Gnostic theological/philosophical systems of the second century A.D.
An ontological (eternal) antagonistic dualism between Spirit and matter
Matter is evil and obstinate; Spirit is good

The Gnostic system posits a series of angelic levels (aeons) between a high, good god and a lesser god who was able to form matter. Some even asserted that this lesser god was YHWH of the OT (like Marcion)

Salvation came by
secret knowledge or passwords which allowed a person to pass through these angelic levels on their way to union with God
a divine spark in all humans, which they are not aware of until they receive secret knowledge
a special personal agent of revelation that gives this secret knowledge to mankind (the Spirit of Christ)^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This system of thought asserted Jesus' deity, but denied His real and permanent incarnation and central redemptive place!

The historical setting
John 1:1-18 is an attempt to relate to both Hebrew and Greek minds by use of the term logos.
The heresy of Gnosticism is the philosophical background to this highly structured introduction to the Gospel of John. 1 John may have been the cover letter to the Gospel. The theological system of thought called "Gnosticism" is unknown in writing until the second century, but incipient Gnostic themes are found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in Philo.
The Synoptic Gospels (especially Mark) veil Jesus' deity (the Messianic secret) until after Calvary, but John, writing much later, develops the crucial themes of Jesus as fully God and fully man (Son of Man, cf Ezek. 2:1 and Dan. 7:13) in chapter one.

See SPECIAL TOPIC: John 1 Compared to 1 John 1.

John 1

 

[Johann]

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: JOHN 1:1-5
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

1:1 "In the beginning" This reflects Genesis 1:1 and is also used in 1 John 1:1 as a reference to the incarnation. It is possible that 1 John was a cover letter to the Gospel. Both deal with Gnosticism. John 1:1-5 is an affirmation of Jesus Christ's divine pre-existence before creation (cf. John 1:15,30; 8:56-59; 16:28; 17:5,24; Phil. 2:6-7; Col. 1:17).

In the NT Jesus is described as

a new creation, not marred by the Fall (i.e., Gen. 3:15 fulfilled for mankind)
a new conquest (Promised Land)
a new exodus (fulfilled prophecy)
a new Moses (law giver)
a new Joshua (cf. Heb. 4:8)
a new water miracle (cf. Hebrews 3-4)
new manna (cf. John 6)
new temple
new priest
and so many more, especially in Hebrews.

SPECIAL TOPIC: ARCHĒ

"was" (thrice) This is an IMPERFECT TENSE (cf. John 1:1,2,4,10) which focuses on continual existence in past time. This TENSE is used to show the Logos' pre-existence (cf. John 8:57-58; 17:5,24; Col. 1:17). It is contrasted with the AORIST TENSES of John 1:3 (i.e., creation), 6 (i.e., John the Baptist, and 14 (i.e., the incarnation).

"the Word" The Greek term logos referred to a message, not just a single word. In this context it is a title which the Greeks used to describe "world reason" and the Hebrews as analogus with "Wisdom." John chose this term to assert that God's Word is both a person and a message. See Contextual Insights, C.

"with God" "With" could be paraphrased "face to face." It depicts intimate fellowship. It also points toward the concept of one divine essence and three personal eternal manifestations. The NT asserts the paradox that Jesus is separate from the Father, but also that He is one with the Father.



"the Word was God" This VERB is IMPERFECT TENSE as in John 1:1a. There is no ARTICLE (which identifies the SUBJECT, see F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, p. 66) with Theos, but Theos is placed first in the Greek phrase for emphasis. This verse and John 1:18 are strong statements of the full deity of the pre-existent Logos (cf. John 5:18; 8:58; 10:30; 14:9; 17:11; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1). Jesus is fully divine as well as fully human (cf. 1 John 4:1-3). He is not the same as God the Father, but He is the very same divine essence as the Father.

SPECIAL TOPIC: MONOTHEISM

SPECIAL TOPIC: DEITY OF CHRIST FROM THE OT

The NT asserts the full deity of Jesus of Nazareth, but protects the distinct personhood of the Father. The one divine essence is emphasized in John 1:1; 5:18; 10:30,34-38; 14:9-10; and 20:28, while their distinct persons are emphasized in John 1:2,14,18; 5:19-23; 8:28; 10:25,29; 14:11,12,13,16.

SPECIAL TOPIC: FATHERHOOD OF GOD

SPECIAL TOPIC: FATHER

1:2 This is parallel to John 1:1 and emphasizes again the shocking truth in light of monotheism (cf. Deut. 6:4-6) that Jesus, who was born around 6-5 B.C., has always been with the Father and, therefore, is Deity.

1:3 "All things came into being through Him" The Logos was the Father's agent of creation of both the visible and the invisible (cf. John 1:10; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2). This is similar to the role wisdom plays in Ps. 104:24 and Prov. 3:19; 8:12-23 (in Hebrews "wisdom" is a FEMININE GENDER NOUN).

"apart from Him nothing came into being" This is a refutation of the Gnostic false teaching of angelic aeons between the high, good god and a lesser spiritual being that formed, pre-existent matter (see Contextual Insights, D).

1:4 "in Him was life" This phrase is emphasizing that "life" itself comes from the Son, the Word. John uses the term, zoē, to refer to resurrection life, eternal life, God's life (cf. John 1:4; 3:15,36; 4:14,36; 5:24,26,29,39,40; 6:27,33,35,40,47,48,51,53, 54,63,65, etc). The other Greek term for "life," bios, was used for earthly, biological life (cf. 1 John 2:16).

"the life was the Light of men" Light is common imagery John uses for the truth and knowledge of God (cf. John 3:19; 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). Notice the life was for all humans (possible allusion to Ps. 36:5-9)! Light and darkness were also common themes in the Dead Sea Scrolls. John often expresses himself in dualistic (contrasting) terms and categories.

SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH'S ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN

1:5 "the Light shines" This is PERFECT TENSE, which means continuous action. Jesus has always existed, but now He is clearly manifested to the world (cf. John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). In the OT the physical or human manifestation of God was often identified with the angel of the Lord (cf. Gen. 16:7-13; 22:11-15; 31:11,13; 48:15-16; Exod. 3:2,4; 13:21; 14:19; Jdgs. 2:1; 6:22-23; 13:3-22; Zech. 3:1-2). Some assert that this was the pre-incarnate Logos.

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE ANGEL OF THE LORD

SPECIAL TOPIC: LAMPSTAND

John 1

 

[Johann]

NASB, NKJV   "the darkness did not comprehend it"
NRSV, Peshitta   "the darkness did not overcome it"
TEV   "the darkness has never put it out"
NJB   "and darkness could not overpower it"
REB   "the darkness has never mastered it"
The root meaning of this term (katalambanō) is "to grasp." Therefore, it can mean either

to grasp so as to overpower (cf. Matt. 16:18)
to grasp so as to comprehend or understand
John may have used this ambiguity to suggest both. John's Gospel is characterized by double entendres (e.g., "born again and/or "born from above," 3:3 and "wind" and/or "spirit," 3:8).

The VERB (katalambanō) occurs only twice in John's writings (the occurrence in John 8:3,4 is not original). In John 1:5 darkness cannot understand/overcome and in 12:35 darkness that rejects the light (Jesus/gospel) will be overtaken. Rejection results in confusion; reception results in worship!

Manfred T. Brauch, Abusing Scripture, p. 35, characterizes the human condition.

lostness, Luke 15
darkness, John 1:5
enmity, Rom. 5:10
separation, Eph. 2:15-17
ungodliness, Rom. 1:18
alienation from the life of God, Eph. 4:17-18
the best summary of human sin is found in Rom. 1:18-3:23
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: JOHN 1:6-8
6There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.

1:6-8 Verses 6-8 and John 1:15 (a parenthetical flash back) record the witness of John the Baptist to Jesus. He was the last OT prophet. It is difficult to put these verses in poetic form. There is much debate among scholars as to whether the prologue is poetry or prose.

John the Baptist was the last OT prophet (in the sense of his message and perspective). He was the forerunner predicted in Mal. 3:1 and 4:5 (cf. John 1:20-25). John the Apostle may have inserted John 1:6-8 because of the early misunderstandings which developed around John the Baptist (cf. Luke 3:15; Acts 18:25; 19:3). John, writing later than the other Gospel writers, saw the development of this problem.

It is interesting to note that Christ is described in IMPERFECT TENSE (pre-existence) VERBS, while John is described in AORIST (manifested in time) and PERFECT TENSE (a historical event with lasting results) VERBS (cf. John 1:6). Jesus has always existed.

SPECIAL TOPIC: WITNESSES TO JESUS IN JOHN

1:7 "that all might believe through him" John the Bpaitst was one of many witnesses to Jesus as the Messiah. This is a purpose clause. John's Gospel, like all the Gospels ( a uniquely Christian genre), is an evangelistic tract. This is the wonderful offer of salvation to all who exercise faith in Christ, who is the light of the world (cf. John 1:12; John 3:16; 4:42; 20:31; 1 Tim. 2:4; Titus 2:11; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:1-2; 4:14). Notice the offer is universal but not all will believe!

SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH'S ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN

1:7, 12 "believe" This VERB is used 78 times in the Gospel of John, 24 times in John's letters. It is interesting that John's Gospel never uses the NOUN form, only the VERB.

Belief is not primarily an intellectual or emotional response, but basically a volitional response. This Greek term is translated by three English terms: believe, trust, and faith. Salvation is free in the grace of God and the finished work of Christ, but it must be received. Salvation is a covenant relationship with privileges and responsibilities.

SPECIAL TOPIC: FAITH, BELIEVE, OR TRUST

1:8 It is possible that John the Apostle, writing much later than the other Gospel writers, recognized the problem which developed among John the Baptist's followers who had not heard or accepted Jesus (cf. Acts 18:25-19:7).

John 1

 

[Johann]

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: JOHN 1:9-13
9There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

1:9 "the true Light" This is "true" in the sense of genuine or real, not just the opposite of falsehood. This may relate to all the false Christologies of the first century. This is a common ADJECTIVE in John's writings (cf. John 4:23,37; 6:32; 7:28; 15:1; 17:3; 19:35 and 1 John 2:8; 5:20 and ten times in the Revelation).

Jesus is the light of the world (cf. John 3:19; 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; 1 John 1:5,7; 2:8,9,10). Believers are to reflect His light (cf. Phil. 2:15). This is in sharp contrast with the real darkness which is in the created order because of the rebellion of

humans
angels
"coming into the world" John often uses this phrase to refer to Jesus leaving heaven, the spiritual realm, and entering the physical realm of time and space (cf. John 6:14; 9:39; 11:27; 12:46; 16:28). In this verse it seems to refer to Jesus' incarnation. This is one of the common dualisms of Johanine literature (i.e., above vs. below).

SPECIAL TOPIC: EASTERN LITERATURE

NASB   "enlightens every man"
NKJV   "gives light to every man"
NRSV, Peshitta   "enlightens everyone"
TEV   "shines on all people"
NJB, REB   "that gives light to everyone"
This phrase can be understood in two ways.

First, by supposing a Greek cultural setting, it refers to an inner light of revelation in every man, the divine spark. This is the way the Quakers interpret this verse. However, such a concept never appears in John. For John, "light" reveals mankind's evil (cf. John 3:19-21).
Second, it can refer
not to natural revelation (that is God known through nature [cf. Ps. 19:1-5; Rom. 1:19-20] )
nor to an inner moral sense (cf. Rom. 2:14-15)
but rather to God's offer of enlightenment to all (cf. Ps. 36:5-9) and salvation through Jesus, the only true light (i.e., potential salvation, like Rom. 5:18).
1:10 "the world" John uses the term kosmos in three distinct ways.

the physical universe (John 1:10,11; 11:9; 16:21; 17:5,24; 21:25)
all mankind (John 1:10,29; 3:16,17; 4:42; 6:33; 12:19,46-47; 18:20)
fallen human society organized and functioning apart from God (John 7:7; 15:18-19; 1 John 2:15; 3:1,13)
In this context #2 is applicable.

SPECIAL TOPIC: PAUL'S USE OF KOSMOS (world)

"the world did not know Him" Neither the fallen Gentile nations nor the elect Jewish nation recognized Jesus as the promised Messiah (v. 11). The term "know" reflects a Hebrew idiom of intimate relationship more than intellectual assent to facts (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5).

SPECIAL TOPIC: KNOW

1:11 "He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him" "His own" is used twice in John 1:11.

The first grammatical form is NEUTER PLURAL and refers to
all creation
geographically to Judea or Jerusalem
The second is MASCULINE PLURAL and refers to the Jewish people.
1:12 "But as many as received Him" This shows humanity's part in salvation (cf. John 1:16). Humans must respond to God's offer of grace in Christ (cf. John 3:16; Rom. 10:9-13). God is certainly sovereign, yet in His sovereignty He has initiated a conditional covenant relationship with fallen humanity. Fallen mankind must repent, believe, obey, and persevere in faith.

This concept of "receiving" is theologically parallel to "believing" and "confessing" (see SPECIAL TOPIC: CONFESSION/PROFESSION), which denoted a public profession of faith in Jesus as the Christ (cf. Matt. 10:32; Luke 12:8; John 9:22; 12:42; 1 Tim. 6:12; 1 John 2:23; 4:15). Salvation is a gift that must be received and acknowledged.

Those who "receive" Jesus (John 1:12) receive the Father who sent Him (cf. John 13:20; Matt. 10:40). Salvation is a personal relationship with the Triune God!

SPECIAL TOPIC: WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO "RECEIVE," "BELIEVE," "CONFESS/PROFESS," and "CALL UPON?"

SPECIAL TOPIC: RECEIVE

"He gave the right" This Greek term (i.e., exousia) can mean

legal authority
right or privilege (cf. John 5:27; 17:2; 19:10,11)
Through Jesus' sonship and divine mission, fallen mankind can now know God and acknowledge Him as God and Father.

SPECIAL TOPIC: AUTHORITY (exousia)

"to become the children of God" The NT writers constantly use familial imagery to describe Christianity:

father
son
children
born again
adoption
Christianity is analogous to a family, not a product (ticket to heaven, fire insurance policy). Believers in Christ have become the new eschatological "people of God." As children we should reflect the Father's character, as did the "unique" (cf. John 1:14; 3:16) Son (cf. Eph. 5:1; 1 John 2:29; 3:3). What a shocking title for sinners (cf. John 11:52; Rom. 8:14,16,21; 9:8; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1,2,10; 5:2; Hosea 1:10 quoted in Rom. 9:26; and 2 Cor. 6:18).

It is also interesting that of the two Greek terms for children, one is always used of Jesus (huios), while the other (teknon, tekna) is used for believers. Christians are children of God, but they are not in the same category as the Son of God, Jesus. His relationship is unique, but analogous.

The word "church" (ekklēsia) does not appear in Mark, Luke, or John. They use family imagery for the new dynamic individual and corporate fellowship of the Spirit.

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE CHILDREN OF GOD

SPECIAL TOPIC: CHURCH (ekklēsia)

"those who believe" This is a PRESENT ACTIVE PARTICIPLE meaning "those who continue to believe." The etymological background of this term helps establish the contemporary meaning. Remember, NT authors were Hebrew thinkers writing in Koine Greek. In Hebrew it originally referred to a person in a stable stance. It came to be used as imagery for someone who was dependable, loyal, or trustworthy. The Greek equivalent is translated into English by the terms ("faith," "believe," and "trust"). Biblical faith or trust is not primarily something we do, but someone in whom we put our trust. It is God's trustworthiness, not ours, which is the focus. Fallen mankind trusts God's trustworthiness, faiths His faithfulness, believes in His Beloved. The focus is not on the abundance or intensity of human faith, but the object of that faith.

SPECIAL TOPIC: FAITH, BELIEVE, OR TRUST

SPECIAL TOPIC: JOHN'S USE OF "BELIEVE"

"in His name" In the OT the name of a person was very important. It was a hopeful/potential prophecy about their character or a description of their character. To believe in the name is to believe and receive the person (cf. John 2:23; 3:18; 20:31; 1 John 5:13).

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE NAME OF THE LORD

John 1

 

[Johann]

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: JOHN 1:14-18
14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15John testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'" 16For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

1:14 "the Word became flesh" John is attacking the false doctrine of the Gnostics, who were attempting to merge Christianity with Greek pagan thought. Jesus was truly human and truly God (cf. 1 John 4:1-3) in fulfillment of the promise of Immanuel (cf. Isa. 7:14). God took up residence as a man among fallen mankind (literally, "pitched His tent"). The term "flesh" in John never refers to the sin nature as in Paul's writings.

SPECIAL TOPIC: HEBREW AND GREEK BACKGROUND OF logos

SPECIAL TOPIC: FLESH (sarx)

"dwelt among us" Literally, this is "took up residence." It had a Jewish background from the wilderness wandering period and the Tabernacle (cf. Rev. 7:15; 21:3). The Jews later called this wilderness experience the "honeymoon period" between YHWH and Israel. God was never closer to Israel than during this period. The Jewish term for the special divine cloud that guided Israel during this period was "the Shekinah," the Hebrew term "to dwell with."

"we saw His glory" The OT kabod (glory) has now been personified, incarnated. This refers to

something in Jesus' life such as the transfiguration or the ascension (i.e., apostolic testimony, cf. 2 Pet. 1:16-17)
the concept that the invisible YHWH is now visible and fully known
This is the same emphasis as 1 John 1:1-4, which is also an emphasis on the humanity of Jesus in opposition to the false Gnostic emphasis on the antagonistic relationship between spirit and matter.
In the OT the most common Hebrew word for "glory" (kabod, BDB 458 ) was originally a commercial term (which referred to a pair of scales), literally, "to be heavy." That which was heavy was valuable or had intrinsic worth. Often the concept of brightness was added to the word to express God's majesty (i.e., first on Mr. Sinai, the Shekinah cloud of glory, eschatological light, cf. Exod. 13:21-22; 24:17; Isa. 4:5; 60:1-2). He alone is worthy and honorable. He is too brilliant for fallen mankind to behold (cf. Exod. 33:17-23; Isa. 6:5). God can only be truly known through Christ (cf. John 1:14,18; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3).

SPECIAL TOPIC: GLORY (OT)

SPECIAL TOPIC: GLORY (NT)

NASB, NKJV  "glory as of the only begotten from the father"
NRSV  "the glory as of a father's only son"
TEv  "The glory which he received as the Father's only Son"
NJB  "the glory that is his as the only Son of the Father"
Peshitta  "a glory like that of the firstobrn of the Father"
This term "only" (monogenēs) means "unique," "one of a kind" (cf. John 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9, see F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, pp. 24-25). The Vulgate translated it "only begotten" and, unfortunately, the older English translations followed this (cf. Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; Heb. 11:17). The focus is on singularity and uniqueness, not sexual generation.

"Father" The OT introduces the intimate familial imagery of God as Father.

the nation of Israel is often described as YHWH's "son" (cf. Hosea 11:1; Mal. 3:17)
even earlier in Deuteronomy the analogy of God as father is used (Deut. 1:31)
in Deuteronomy 32 Israel is called "his children" and God called "your Father"
this analogy is stated in Ps. 103:13 and developed in Ps. 68:5 (the father of orphans)
it was common in the prophets (cf. Isa. 1:2; 63:8; Israel as son, God as Father, 63:16; 64:8; Jer. 3:4,19; 31:9)
Jesus takes this analogy and deepens it into full family fellowship, especially in John 1:14,18; 2:16; 3:35; 4:21,23; 5:17,18,19,20,21,22,23,26,36,37,43,45; 6:27,32,37,44,45,46,57; 8:16,19,27,28,38,42,49,54; 10:15,17,18,25,29,30,32,3637,38; 11:41;12:26,27,28,49,50; 13:1; 14:2,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,20,21,23,24,26,28,31; 15:1,8,9,10,15,16,23,24,26; 16:3,10,15,17 ,23,25,26,27,28,32; &nbsol17:1,5,11,21,24,25; 18:11; 20:17,21!

SPECIAL TOPIC: FATHERHOOD OF GOD

"full of grace and truth" This coupling follows the OT terms hesed (covenant love and loyalty) and emeth (trustworthiness) which are used and expanded in Exod. 34:6; Neh. 9:17; Ps. 103:8, both words occur together in Prov. 16:6. This describes Jesus' character (cf. John 1:17) in OT covenantal terms.

SPECIAL TOPIC: TRUTH (the concept) IN JOHN'S WRITINGS

SPECIAL TOPIC: LOVINGKINDNESS (hesed)

SPECIAL TOPIC: BELIEVE, TRUST, FAITH AND FAITHFULNESDS IN THE OT

1:15 "for He existed before me" Verse 15, like vv. 6-8, is a theological historical flashback. This is John the Baptist's doctrine of strong affirmation of Jesus' pre-existence (cf. John 1:1; 8:56-59; 16:28; 17:5; 2 Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:6-7; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3; 10:5-8). The doctrines of pre-existence and predictive prophecy affirm that there is a God above and beyond history, yet who works within history. It is an integral part of a Christian/biblical world view.

This verse is awkward and many scribal changes were made in an attempt to clarify and simplify the text. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 197-198.

It is also a good example on how the Greek VERB TENSES cannot be standardized. This is a past act recorded in the PRESENT TENSE.

SPECIAL TOPIC: GREEK GRAMMATICAL TERMS

1:16-18 One wonders how much of vv. 16-18 is John the Baptist or John the Apostle. One of the characteristics of John's Gospel is how the author breaks into the historical event, dialogue, or teaching session with his own comments. Often it is impossible to differentiate between Jesus', other persons', and John's words.

Most scholars assert that John 1:16-19 are John the author's comments (cf. John 3:14-21).

1:16 "fullness" This is the Greek term pleroma. The Gnostic false teachers used it to describe the angelic aeons between the high god and lesser spiritual beings. Jesus is the only mediator (i.e., the true and only fullness) between God and man (cf. Col. 1:19; 2:9; Eph. 1:23; 4:13). Here again it seems John the Apostle is attacking an early Gnostic view of reality.

SPECIAL TOPIC: GNOSTICISM

NASB, NRSV  "and grace upon grace"
NKJV, Peshitta  "and grace for grace"
TEV  "giving us one blessing after another"
NJB  "one gift replacing another"
The interpretive question is how to understand "grace." Is it

God's mercy in Christ unto salvation
God's mercy for the Christian life
God's mercy in the new covenant through Christ (cf. v. 17)
The key thought is "grace" (cf. Eph. 2:8-9); God's grace has been wondrously given in the incarnation of Jesus. Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind (cf. 2 Cor. 1:20).

1:17 "the Law" The Mosaic Law was not bad, but was preparatory and incomplete as far as providing a complete salvation (cf. John 5:39-47; Gal. 3:23-29; Romans 4). Hebrews also contrasts and compares the work/revelation/covenants of Moses and Jesus.

SPECIAL TOPIC: PAUL'S VIEWS OF THE MOSAIC LAW

"grace" This refers to God's undeserved, unmerited love for fallen mankind (cf. Eph. 2:8). This term grace (charis), so important in Paul's writings, is used only in this paragraph in John's Gospel (cf. John 1:14,16,17). New Testament writers, under inspiration, were free to use their own vocabularies, analogies, and metaphors.

Jesus brought into reality the "new covenant" of Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:22-36. The New Age of the Spirit has come.

"truth" This is used in the sense of

faithfulness
truth vs. falsehood (cf. John 1:14; 8:32; 14:6)
Notice both grace and truth came through Jesus (cf. John 1:14).

SPECIAL TOPIC: "TRUE" (the term) IN JOHN'S WRITINGS

"Jesus" This is the first use of the human name (Aramaic form of Hebrew "Joshua") of Mary's son in the Prologue. The pre-existent Son now becomes the Incarnate Son!

John 1

 

[Johann]

1:18 "No one has seen God at any time" Some say that this contradicts Exod. 33:20-23 (see note on Exodus online). However, the Hebrew term in the Exodus passage refers to "afterglow," not the physical sight of God Himself. The thrust of this passage is that only Jesus fully reveals God (cf. John 14:8ff). No sinful human has seen God (cf. John 6:46; 1 Tim. 6:16; 1 John 4:12,20).

This verse emphasizes the unique revelation of God in Jesus of Nazareth. He is the full and only divine self-disclosure. To know Jesus is to know God. Jesus is the Father's ultimate revelation of Himself. There is no clear understanding of deity apart from Him (cf. Col. 1:15-19; Heb. 1:2-3). Jesus "sees" the Father and believers "see" the Father through Him (His life, words, and acts). He is the full and complete revelation of the invisible God (cf. Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3).

NASB  "the only begotten God"
NKJV  "the only begotten Son"
NRSV  "It is God's only Son"
TEV  "The only Son"
NJB  "It is the only Son"
Peshitta  "the first-born of God"
See note on monogenēs at John 1:14. Jesus is fully God and man (cf. 1 John 4:1-30). See full notes at John 1:1.

There is a Greek manuscript variation here. Theos/God is in the early Greek manuscripts P66, P75, B, and C (NASB), while "Son" is substituted for "God" only in MSS A and C3 (NKJV, NRSV). The UBS4 gives "God" a "B" rating (almost certain). The term "Son" possibly comes from scribes remembering "only begotten Son" in John 3:16,18 and in 1 John 4:9 (cf. Bruce M. Metzger's A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament p. 198). This is a strong affirmation of the full and complete deity of Jesus!

It is possible that this verse has three titles for Jesus:

only begotten
God
who is in the bosom of the Father
SPECIAL TOPIC: TEXTUAL CRITICISM

"who is in the bosom of the Father" This is very similar in meaning to the phrase "with God" in John 1:1 and 2. It speaks of intimate fellowship. It could refer to

His pre-existent fellowship
His restored fellowship (i.e., the Ascension)
SPECIAL TOPIC: FATHER

NASB  "He has explained Him"
NKJV, Peshitta  "He has declared Him"
NRSV, NJB  "who has made him known"
TEV, REB  "he has made him known"
We get the English term "exegesis" (lit. "to lead out," AORIST MIDDLE [deponent] INDICATIVE) from this Greek word used in John 1:18, which implies a full and complete revelation. One of Jesus' main tasks was to reveal the Father (cf. John 14:7-10; Heb. 1:2-3). To see and know Jesus is to see and know the Father (loving sinners, helping the sick and weak, accepting the outcast, receiving children and women)!

The term in Greek was used of those who explain or interpret a message, dream, or document. Here again John may be using a word that had specific meaning to both Jews and Gentiles (like Logos of John 1:1). John is attempting to relate to both Jew and Greek with his prologue. The word could mean

to the Jews one who explains or interprets the Law
to the Greeks one who explains or interprets the gods
In Jesus, and Jesus alone, humans fully see and understand the Father (John 14)!

CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS TO VERSES 19-51

This passage concerning John the Baptist deals with two early church misunderstandings:
that which developed around the person of John the Baptist and is disputed in John 1:6-9, 20,21,25; and 3:22-36
that which involved the person of Christ and is dealt with in John 1:32-34. This same heresy of Gnosticism is similarly attacked in 1 John 1. 1 John may have been the cover letter to the Gospel of John.

The Gospel of John is silent about the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist. The ordinances of the church, baptism and the Eucharist, are noticeably absent in John's account of the life of Christ. There are at least two possible reasons for this omission:
the rise of sacramentalism in the early church caused John to de-emphasize this aspect of Christianity. His Gospel focuses on relationship, not ritual. He does not discuss or record the two sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper at all. The absence of something so expected would draw attention to it.
John, writing later than the other Gospel writers, used his account of the life of Christ to supplement the others. Since all of the Synoptics cover these ordinances, John only supplied additional information about the surrounding events. An example would be the dialog and events which occurred in the upper room (John 13-17) but not the actual supper itself.

The emphasis of this account is on John the Baptist's testimony concerning the person of Jesus. John makes the following Christological statement:
Jesus is the Lamb of God, (John 1:29) a title for Jesus used only here and in Revelation
Jesus is pre-existent (John 1:30)
Jesus is the receiver and giver of the Holy Spirit (John 1:33)
Jesus is the Son of God (John 1:34)

The truths about the person and work of Jesus are developed by the personal testimony of
John the Baptist
Andrew and Simon
Philip and Nathanael
This becomes a common literary technique throughout the Gospel. It contains twenty-seven of these dialogues or testimonies about Jesus or with Jesus.

John 1