Commentary on John
Introduction
The Gospel of John is believed to have been written by the Apostle, John, one of the twelve disciples who accompanied Jesus during his three years of ministry. John considered himself “the one whom Jesus loved” (John 20.2). Perhaps this means that Jesus was particularly close to John, or perhaps John is particularly attuned to the loving nature of Jesus, and that he experienced this love very personally.
Peter, James, and John were occasionally pulled apart from the other Apostles, giving the impression that they were Jesus’ “lieutenants”. For example, only the three accompanied Jesus to the transfiguration where Jesus spoke with Moses and Elijah. It’s also worth noting that when Jesus was on the cross he singled out John to care for his mother, Mary (John 19.26,27).
The book of John is one of four Gospels, but the other three are called, “synoptic,” meaning that the narratives of Matthew, Mark, and Luke were similar in format and subject material. John’s Gospel, while covering the same ministry of Jesus, is very different in style, and it focuses on different events and conversations than the other Gospels. It seems to be the most “personal” of the Gospels, which makes sense, given that it came from the pen of the one Jesus loved.
John 1.1,2: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
The Deity of Jesus
Matthew and Luke begin their Gospels by revealing the deity of Jesus via the virgin birth. Mark’s approach is to connect Jesus, through John the Baptist, to Old Testament prophesies of the coming Messiah. John is more direct on the question; he jumps into his narrative by identifying Jesus as the Creator. His first phrase, “In the beginning” is a clear reference to Genesis 1.1, the passage where God creates the world. John also, uniquely, introduces Jesus as “the Word”. Identifying Jesus as “the Word” is deeply significant in how John thinks about Jesus.
Before giving further thought to “the Word”, we should not lightly skip over John’s contention that “the Word was God”. The sense of this is not that the Word is no longer God but that the Word was God even at the beginning. John does not make it clear in this verse but Jesus did not come into being “at the beginning” like the rest of creation. In chapter 8, verse 58, John quotes Jesus’ astonishing remark to the religious leaders: “Before Abraham was, I am.” The point is that Jesus has always been God and he was, therefore, active in the creation of all that exists.
The idea of Jesus being God would have been received with a certain intellectual dissonance by Jewish listeners because, while they anticipated a Messiah, their expectation was someone more or less like King David who would restore Israel to its past glory and independence. The idea of a man being God would have been disturbing, even blasphemous. The central prayer of all good Israelites would have been, “Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one.” – Deuteronomy 6.4. When Jesus declared to the religious leaders, “Before Abraham was, I Am” (John 8.58) they began to gather stones in order to execute him. These were the very words God had used to introduce himself to Moses in Exodus 3.14. There was no doubt in the minds of the religious leaders that Jesus was possessed, or a very dangerous heretic.
Later on, the idea of Jesus being God gave offense to many Gentiles, as well. Not that they would have been bothered by a man being a god—the Gentiles collected gods like some people collect Hummel figurines, filling their shelves with every sort. But Jesus was a backwater peasant who ended up crucified. This was no way for any self-respecting god to behave!
But this is John’s primary declaration in the opening sentence of his Gospel. John gives readers no chance to fasten their seatbelts. “Jesus is God! Imagine it! Think about the implications for your life!” Of course, John doesn’t let the readers have a chance to think about it for themselves. He has much more explaining to do, and his hope is that his words will prove foundational to the thinking of those who come to know and trust in this God-man, Jesus.
Word as Power
So, why “the Word?” Look first for the answer in the Genesis account. God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters,” and it was so.
Scientists like to scoff at this sort of Christian language. They say, “Religious people have no clue as to how things happen in the universe, so when they are mystified, rather than do the research, they say, ‘God did it. It is a mystery.’”
Scoffing scientists miss the point, as do many Christians. The passage is not meant to be a scientific explanation. I don’t doubt that much of the creation process could be explained by science. God is the Creator of the material world, after all, and he has designed the functionality of all materials. Furthermore, He certainly has enabled us to understand much of the mechanics of his workmanship. I say, “much” because what we know is much more than what we knew 100 years ago, which is much more than we knew 500 years ago, etc. But I’m pretty sure the “much” we know now is a small fraction of what we will eventually understand and, (I’m going to take a big leap here) that there is a large body of knowledge that is simply beyond the human capacity to process.
But, as I said, the point of the Genesis phrasing is not a “religious way to get around the concerns of science”. What Genesis conveys is the connection between God’s expression and reality. When God “speaks” a concept it becomes reality. The description is an expression of his power. Did God say, “Let it be so,” and, poof, it appeared as if by magic, or did he make use of a lengthy process that humans might eventually be able to understand? It’s irrelevant. Scientists and Fundamentalists may want to climb into the ring and battle over the meaning of “day”, for example, but this is beyond silly. I doubt you could get a real Creation Manual into a thousand book series. The creation account in Genesis is two or three pages long. Some details have been left out. I have to laugh when I think about the Big Bang Theory put forward by materialistic scientists, though. Could it sound any more like a theologian trying to explain creation ex nihilo?
The creation account goes on to speak of how God created humans “in his image”. Here’s a critical concept. The most important question all humans must ask is, “Who is God?” There are many different answers among humans, sadly, since this necessarily means most of the answers are wrong. The most common incorrect answer in today’s world is, “Me”. Of all answers, this is the one that most evidently not true. So much for the human ability to process evidence. The second most important question is, “Who am I?” Understanding that I am not God but I am created in God’s image, to be like him and to represent him on the earth—this answer is the frame on which flourishing lives are built.
So when we see that God’s words have creative power, it’s important for us to consider the power he has entrusted in us, as well, through our use of words. First of all, the ability to form language is unique to human beings. It’s not that other creatures do not make sounds and do not communicate in various ways. They do. But their languages are extremely limited and simple. Humans speak many different languages but humans, no matter what language they are born into, are capable of absorbing language and making use of it at 2 and 3 years old, and then adding vocabulary and knowledge continually until old age.
I love the way G.K. Chesterton talks about this. “If you leave off looking at books about beasts and men, if you begin to look at beasts and men then (if you have any humor or imagination, any sense of the frantic or the farcical) you will observe that the startling thing is not how like man is to the brutes, but how unlike he is. It is the monstrous scale of his divergence that requires explanation. That man and brute are like is, in a sense, a truism; but that being so like they should then be so insanely unlike, that is the shock and the enigma. That an ape has hands is far less interesting to the philosopher than the fact that having hands he does next to nothing with them; does not play knuckle-bones or the violin; does not carve marble or mutton. People talk about barbaric architecture and debased art. But elephants do not build colossal temples of ivory even in a rococo style; camels do not paint even bad pictures, though equipped with the material of many camel’s-hair brushes…We talk of wild animals; but man is the only wild animal. It is man that has broken out. All other animals are tame animals; following the rugged respectability of their tribe or type. All other animals are domestic animals; man alone is ever undomestic, either as a profligate or a monk.”
Humans can speak truth or can speak lies. Humans can explore, as the scientists do, and discover. “We thought it worked that way but now we’re pretty sure it works this way, and we’re calling this newly discovered phenomenon, ‘orklonsanthiumation’. Humans can take the materials of the earth and make them into something new, such as inventors or artists do. All these inventions come along with their new identifying terms. And people can redefine reality through their speech. “I have to say this out loud: I love you.” Or as C.S. Lewis put it regarding his faith, “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it but because by it I see everything else.”
The relationship between reality and language is both powerful and mysterious. Understanding is transformational. Words provide new specificities for our minds. Words provide categories and structures we use to analyze new data and store that data. Words transform relationships, bringing commitments forth from complete strangers, and estranging those who’ve long known one another. I believe this was part of John’s intent when he chose to identify Jesus as “the Word”.
Word as Integrity
Another reason for identifying Jesus as “the Word” has to do with integrity. Most of us are familiar with the phrase, “You have my word”. This once was in common usage in America, but not so much today. Is it because people don’t think others will take them at their word? Is it because people are more humble today and realize that they are weak and may fail to keep their word? Is it because they have no intention of keeping their word? Well, look at the bright side: at least people are honest about the fact that they are liars.
When Jesus says something he means exactly what he says. There is no guile in him, no dishonesty, no hidden motives. John will elaborate considerably throughout his Gospel about the truthfulness of Jesus. We will see a couple examples of this later in the first chapter: And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth (v.14). For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (v.17).
Returning to the image of God concept, the truthfulness of Christ has critical implications for all who would call themselves Christians. If Jesus is honest, we, too, must be honest. Being honest does not mean that we must divulge all knowledge. Some of what we know is properly kept hidden. Some of what we know is about the sins of others that should not be shared with unconcerned parties. Some of what we know is about our own sin and the same is true, this information should not be shared with unconcerned parties. Perhaps we are privy to business secrets that rightfully should remain secret.
Honesty is about saying the truth when we do speak. Honesty is about speaking up and not remaining silent when we know the truth, and justice calls on us to be forthcoming. Honesty is more than the actual words we say; it is the meaning we convey. Honesty means we should not mislead with our words. “I didn’t eat a cookie, Mom.” “Bobby, I know you ate two cookies.” “Well, I didn’t lie. I didn’t eat a cookie.” We can use intonation, facial expressions, body language, etc., to technically speak truth while misleading our hearers. In this sense, “word” is more metaphorical than literal. “Word” signifies honesty in communication.
Are there ever times when it is appropriate to lie? The classic example is the response to the Nazi, standing at the door, asking, “Are you harboring Jews in this house?” We all must wrestle with our consciences when we are faced with moral dilemmas. In this case most of us would agree that lying for the sake of saving someone’s life is a permissible breach of the important principle of being honest.
A much more common challenge regarding honesty has to do with self protection. Most of the time being honest is fairly easy, but sometimes it can become very uncomfortable. Sometimes we have done something quite wrong and we are confronted with the wrongdoing. It’s always easier to deny and hide the wrongdoing than it is to confess and face the consequences. Confessing has this very annoying connection to repentance, besides. We may want to continue to do something wrong, say, gambling via a State-sponsored lottery, but admitting to it adds real pressure to actually stop gambling.
Sometimes the challenge to be honest is coupled with financial consequences. What if you are under pressure at work to participate in a corporate lie about the quality of a product, or about the last quarter’s profitability? You may have noticed that, in the business world, honest people are not trusted. The truth about this is a bit more nuanced. Employers love employees who are honest. Honest employees don’t steal product and they don’t steal work time. But honest employees are not likely to rise high in the ranks because those in the higher ranks are often cutting corners, skimming profits, and testing the limits of laws in order to line their own pockets. What they say in public is that “Honesty is the best policy”; what they say in private is, “The appearance of honesty is the best policy”. An honest person, in many work situations, will be treated as a pariah.
There are real costs in this world associated with being honest. So honesty will sometimes be a crucial exercise of faith. “Faith” is not what people usually think it means. Faith is not a strong belief in something in spite of the evidence. Faith is actions taken consistent with belief when those actions are inconvenient or dangerous. So, for example, if you know you can get a promotion if you are willing to participate in an ongoing corporate lie, you have to ask yourself, “Is God for real? Is honesty important to the health of my soul? Is honesty important to my relationship with him? Will he take care of me? Or is the status and the money associated with this promotion too important to pass up? (What if I put 10% of my raise in the offering plate at church?)
The hardest part of honesty, I believe, is being honest with one’s self. Self-delusion is easy because it helps us to remain comfortable in our own skins. It also helps us to continue acting in questionable ways. Honesty requires us to face the fact that, no matter who we are, our knowledge is limited. We are always short on knowledge that would be useful or even critical for actions we are about to take. We must be willing to listen. In fact, we must be active learners, seeking understanding from helpful sources, seeking input not only from those we like and admire but from those we disagree with and are angry with. All people act on the basis of reasons they believe are good. They may well be deluded. (I may well be deluded.) But how will we know unless we genuinely seek to understand?
Honesty also requires us to face the fact of our own sin. Sin is like looking at the world through frosted glass. You can see the light but everything out there is blurry and indistinct. Sin is like garlic in the chocolate chip cookie dough. You may love chocolate chip cookies (or even prefer the dough) but garlic makes it inedible. We have to recognize that our sin puts us into grave danger because it clouds our judgement and it spoils our actions, no matter how well intended. This should not paralyze us, but it should give us pause and fill us with humility.
In practical terms this leads us back to Jesus. Jesus is truth. There are times when I disagree with what Jesus tells me to do. But Jesus says, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” – John 14.15. Well, that seems rather selfish of him. Why, if he wants our love, doesn’t he say, “Because I love you I will prove it by keeping your commandments…or by doing what you would have me to do,”? The reason is that Jesus is truth, while we are short on understanding, and much confused, and much twisted in all of our understanding. He is trustworthy; we are not. He is all-knowing; we know a little bit. Because of this, obedience to him is not only how we show love to him, it is also how we love one another and love ourselves. Obedience to Jesus is always the healthiest choice we can make (even when it results in us being martyrs in the coliseum).
Empathy / Condescension
Truthfulness also demands something in terms of consideration for one’s hearers. Technical jargon is for specialists. Few five-year-olds would have much idea of what this essay is saying. This is not to say that five-year-olds are not smart. Robert Fulghum said, “All I really need to know I learned in kindergarten”. Essentially, I think he is right. At five we have a solid framework for understanding, as well as a moral grid through which to relate with others. The rest is detail and nuance. Which is not to say we might not take a radical turn in world-view down the road…but I digress. The point is that honest speech tries to know its audience and makes the effort to convey ideas.
This, too, says something about God’s character. God has gone to great lengths to help people understand who he is and what he is about. He wants us to understand our relationship with him, and to understand how we fit into, as the Bible puts it, his Kingdom. He saw to it the Bible was written and, apparently, to some good effect. The Bible has been the number one seller in the world for the past sixteen or seventeen hundred years.
To understand the Bible one must recognize that it is a progressive revelation. In one sense the Old Testament is the development of concepts and language, while the New Testament uses that language to express more mature concepts. Jesus, as “the Word” is the clearest conveyance by God to humans about who He is. Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. – John 14.9. John’s reference to Jesus as “the Word” is most fundamentally a statement that Jesus is the embodiment and clear revelation of who God is. Calling Jesus “the Word” implies that God is really trying to get through to us.
If you pay any attention, at all, to the culture wars, you probably shake your head on a daily basis about how thick-headed humans can be. It doesn’t matter whether your vantage point is the left, the right, or the middle, human thick-headedness is there to be seen every day. God used to call the Israelites a “stiff-necked people”. It’s a sad by-product of sin and, unfortunately, that means, as one of my favorite philosophers, Pogo, put it, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” We are all stiff-necked people.
But God did not give up on us. He sent Jesus. This is the point. God sent he beloved Son in an extreme effort to get through to us. Jesus is the Word of God.
Recent Comments