What Do You Notice That Is Different From the Synoptics About the Way the Gospel of John Is Presented, Essay Example

John seemed to enjoy provoking contrast, so he might have found it amusing that his Gospel is the stylistic antithesis of the other Gospels. For example, the Gospel of John describes love, good, and evil through poetic imagery and symbolism. He writes about Jesus as the word and as another “I AM”. Linguistic differences aside, many of his examples were as appropriate for the common audience today as they were then.

However, with art comes artistic license. John certainly did not write humbly about the importance of the other disciples or about his individual contributions to early Christianity. As Brown (1997) states, it is possible that the Beloved Disciple that John describes may have been the author himself. It would certainly explain this unsupported inclusion. That being said, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke mostly told and retold the same stories. The Gospel of John is composed of ninety percent new Biblical information. Whether this is a pro or a con remains to be seen.

Lesson 3.1: A Break From Dry Synopsis

During the course of this paper, we will examine three elements of the Biblical books of John: Jesus’ “I AM” self-description, the disciple John’s use of the word Logos and its association with Jesus, and the Jerusalem appearances which Jesus made after he rose from the dead. All three elements were highly symbolic and created both parallels with and distinctions between other Christian beliefs, as we will discuss in greater detail later in the paper.

There are a select few people who can see the world as black and white. The apostle John was a dramatic, poetic, human instrument of God- with a particular eye for duality and contrast. His sharp wit helped him simplify the complexity of the human relationship with God and the crucial role of Jesus as an emissary between God and men. He conveyed an unparalleled ability to layer complex meanings in simple, accessible language. Brown calls John a Hellenistic Gospel. Ironically, this designation links the style of John’s writings with Greek monotheism and pagan mysticism. It is this distanced sense of awe and wonderment that facilitates presentation of the “I AM”, Logos, and resurrection elements.[1]

In Exodus, when God first spoke to Moses, He introduced himself, saying: “I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (Exodus 3:6). Still, Moses presses for some name to give pharaoh, to which God replied, “’I am he who is,” and, later, calls himself Yahweh (Exodus 3:14-15). Many of God’s early pre-Christian peoples believed that John the Baptist was the Messiah- despite his protestations. Many also believed in false prophets. The apostle John repeatedly uses both metaphors and the “I am” phrasing to strengthen the literary tie between God and Jesus and to reiterate their oneness. As is recorded in John 6: 31-35, Jesus spoke of the life-saving bread that the Israelites ate in the dessert exodus; he told the people “I am the bread of life”[2]. This simple incident and powerful imagery was not recorded in the synoptic Gospels, which were largely concerned with accuracy and scope. Nor were the other common Christian symbols, such as the sheep, the life, or the vine, linked to Jesus at that time[3].

In the Gospel of John, the word is treated with reverence as a part of God. Much as the Spirit was sent to inspire and move, the Word- in the form of Jesus- was sent to teach and to forgive. Since Jesus, as a part of the Holy Trinity, cannot die, the Word is everlasting. Establishing Jesus as the Messiah and living word- and not John- is the first order of business in the Gospel of John. In fact, the Gospel and other books of John all share a common thread which uses rhetoric and poetry to bridge the gap between Jesus’ divinity and his humanity- without diminishing any one role. In the first ten verses of John’s Gospel, he makes his purpose clear:

“In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things came into being, not one thing came into being except through him… A man came, sent by God. His name was John… He was not the light, he was to bear witness to the light. The word was the real light that gives light to everyone.”[4]

John may have been melodramatic in his self-description as a humble servant, so it is easy to overlook the importance of the distinction, for John openly declares that he is but the messenger and both the written and the Living word are God’s gifts to  those of his people who would believe.

This brings us to the resurrection, the Bible’s crowning moment. When Jesus was resurrected, the believers’ faith would be tested again. In the Gospel of John, it is described in much the same way as a Whodunnit novel. The chapter begins with Mary discovering that the body is missing and running to recruit help for the search. When all appears lost, she cries until she sees Jesus. When He at last does reveal himself to them all, the disciples stare in consternation and disbelief.

Thomas had not been with Mary to find the tomb empty, had not been there for any of the unfolding drama of Jesus’ sudden reappearance. For Thomas, the story had ended with Jesus’ crucifixion. There were undoubtedly many rumors circulating after Jesus was entombed. Thomas might have attributed the other disciples’ tales of Jesus to wishful thinking, posttraumatic stress, or mass hysteria. It was an emotional time. Is it surprising, then, that he did not understand and so did not believe? He had been so headstrong when he told the other disciples that “ ‘Unless I can see the holes that the nails made in his hands and can put my finger into the holes they made, and unless I can put my hand into his side, I refuse to believe’”.[5] Yes, it may have been sinful, but it is human nature. We are born into sin and continue to demonstrate the weakness of our humanity.

Despite his harsh rendition of the reunion between Thomas and Jesus, John wrote ironically and with gaps. In Chapter 20 alone, he writes in a vague, ironic manner about “the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved”. Brown picks up on this mystery as well and theorizes that it must be a) the son of Zebedee, b) an ideal, or c) a person whose importance to Christianity was not realized until after the resurrection. Brown (1997) also writes that this son of Zebedee, John, was most likely the author.[6] Thus it is entirely possible that the author is this beloved disciple. Other mysteries, such as John’s reference to other, unstated miracles performed by Jesus (post-resurrection), were intentionally left out of the account- with no clues as to what these miracles were or why they were left out.

In short, the writing of John demands both faith in the Holy Trinity and faith in his integrity, because his affectations are particularly difficult to understand and, therefore, to credit. If he was, indeed, writing of himself as the Beloved Disciple, then the human impact on the divine, written word can be seen more clearly, and the importance of the Living Word, Jesus, is all the more apparent.

Bibliography

Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, viewed 30 October 2010, <http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=48&bible_chapter=16>.

Lesson 3.1, Question 2

•    When was this Gospel written?

According to Brown (1997), the original body of text was written circa 90 AD, and the additions were made during the first decade of the new century.

•    Why was this Gospel written?

The Gospel of John “is a hymn that encapsulates John’s view of Christ” (Brown, 1997, 337). It also clarifies that John the Baptist is not the Savior.

•    To whom was this Gospel written?

The Gospel of John is written to the emerging body of believers- as both a history and a sort of education in Christian philosophy. Although there has been much debate about the Gospel’s authorship and the amount of writing that was added by the redactor, John clearly associates the New Testament with the Old Testament and connects Jesus with God.

•    Name one faction to whom this Gospel was directed.

Because the Gospel of John both implicitly and explicitly stated that Jesus was God’s son and was both man and God, it is safe to assume that the writings were influenced by the Orthodox Jews’ skepticism. Namely, many still believe that Jesus was a great prophet- but was not the Messiah.

•     How does John use the word Logosin this Gospel?

In the Gospel of John, the word is treated with reverence as a part of God. Much as the Spirit was sent to inspire and move, the Word- in the form of Jesus- was sent to teach and to forgive. Since Jesus, as a part of the Holy Trinity, cannot die, the Word is everlasting.[7]

•     When Jesus says, “I AM” what is his meaning?

In Exodus, when God first spoke to Moses, He introduced himself, saying: “I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (Exodus 3:6). As is recorded in John 6: 31-35, Jesus spoke of the life-saving bread that the Israelites ate in the dessert exodus; he told the people “I am the bread of life”.

•    Who was the first to see the risen Jesus in John’s Gospel?

Although Mary of Magdala was the first to realize that Jesus’ body was not in the tomb on Resurrection Day, she spread the news before she met Jesus and the angels.[8]

Lesson 3.2:

The Author, Purpose, and Continuing Relevance of the Letters of John

•     Who was the author of the Letters of John? (4 paragraphs)

Traditional theology has held that the same John, son of Zebedee, probably wrote both the Gospels and the Epistles, and it is apparent that there are many stylistic similarities. However, there are some subtle differences of opinion between the Gospels and the Epistles. During the time that the Epistles were compiled, at least twenty years had passed, and a large rift had appeared between Jesus as the incarnate word and Jesus’ word of life. Deciding the author of the Letters is a difficult task, because it must first be decided whether the change can be attributed to a change in personal doctrine and spiritual beliefs or to two competing schools of theological thought.

Brown (1997) believes that there are influences from both Johannine schools: the evangelistic and epistolary writers, who emphasize that Jesus is God’s son and that eternal life is solely in His name and those who emphasize that belief and action together determine spirituality, respectively. Noticeably, the symbolism, the irony, the abruptness, and the rhetoric of the Gospel and Epistles of John are dissimilar.

The evidence is in the duality of the letters. The second part of John I preaches love, whereas the first part describes a world of light and dark- of tough love. In John II, features many statements which balance the general good will of the presbyters with the stern moral sanctions of the Epistles.

Brown (1997) also mentions a number of tie-ins to other sections of Scripture. For example, the peace of the traditional Christian transition, “grace, mercy, and peace” was drawn from the books of Timothy (396). John II insists on a strict separation of the accepted doctrines of presbyter beliefs and the “antichrist deceivers” (397). This fits with the historical accounts of the time, which already record instances of Johannine Christians being dispelled from the Jewish Church.

References

Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

•     What is the primary issue addressed in each letter? (4 paragraphs)

It may first be stated that the First Epistle of John does not demonstrate the tenseness of the two which followed. Unlike the others and unlike the Gospel of John, it reconciled and merged traditional Jewish doctrine with the New Testament events. Both the evangelist and epistolary writers left clear impressions, but they produced one collection which did not condemn each other.

The Second John sees the coming of the new age of Johannine religious teachings. Near the heart of the Christian movement, widespread secession and expulsion has already divided God’s people into several factions. Acting preemptively, this Letter seeks to reiterate the central concepts before the religious panic and confusion hits these outlying areas that were likely not privy to much direct theological education or debate. As such, they would have been particularly vulnerable to foreign emissaries of the church (Brown, 1997).

The Third John gives an example of the nature of the division and what it meant for the people. The letter is to an influential Christian supporter by the name of Gaius and pleads for help for those under the authority of a new leader, Diotrephes. It illuminates the seriousness of the conflict and its effects upon all levels of society.

The Letters of John together make one bold statement about the progression of the conflict of the church from both within and without. While the Orthodox Jews and the Johannine Christians grew apart, so did the epistolary and evangelical Johannine Christians. In the early years, there was no unity.

References

Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

•     Do you see comparisons to similar situations in the Church today?  What are they? (4 paragraphs).

There has always been and will always be division among the religious factions. At least until the end of days, that is. During the reign of King Henry VIII, the Catholic Church underwent its own divisions as well. Both the Church of England and the Lutheran/Protestant denominations were formed. It must be reiterated that, unlike the dispute between the Jews and the Johannine presbyters, the separation of the Church during these later centuries still maintained that Jesus was and is the Messiah.

These separations may or may not be justified, but inevitably grow from differences of opinion. No single interpretation of the Bible can be deemed as “right” unless we presume to know the mind of God and of the author whom the Holy Spirit inspired. If the estimated timelines were correct, then the authors of the books must have been very old given the time in which they lived. If they were even physically present themselves, it is debatable whether the unaided eye could see straight.

Does God need the eye to bear witness? I think not. It was in the Gospel of John where he blessed the believers who had faith without proof. Needing order and needing evidence are strictly human characteristics. Unnerving though it may be, we place our faith in the Holy Catholic Church to expertly examine what theology has to say about the world around us; we rely on the Church to be our moral compass.

Misunderstandings happen. People often blame God for crimes committed on His behalf. It would have been easy for Gaius to blame God for the trouble. Most people would have assumed Job had done something horrible to deserve the misfortunes he suffered. It is easy for modern Christians to blame God for the actions of His earthly representatives who have fallen into sin. Regardless, there is a difference of opinion between God and man- and a presumption of man to “know” the mind of God- that leads away from the heart of faith: Jesus.

Discussion Question: 

“What is your reaction to Brown’s conclusion that the author of Revelation is not the Apostle John.  Do you agree or disagree with Brown? Why?” 

I believe it to be entirely possible. With the flow of the Epistles building to some dramatic apex, the letters to Gaius certainly left me wondering if there was a sequel that I was not familiar with. If Revelation was not written by the same person or group that was responsible for the editing, copying, and publishing of John’s letters, then it is hard to imagine that The Letters of John III was the big finish. Persecution was nothing new to the Christians; this was not the climax of the Christian struggle to reach faith. Revelation was.

Also, John was a peppy writer. That is, he wrote moving verse about abstract concepts and the duality of the world in which we live. It was a splendid mix of the redemption and “fire and brimstone” views of the New Testament. Revelation is all ominous warnings and darkness- very atypical of John.

Lesson 3.3: The Genre of Apocalypticism

During the course of this paper, we will summarize and analyze Revelations 17:1-19:21 and exploring its importance as an apocalyptic text. In this selection, John describes his communication with an angel who explains to him the importance of the prostitute Babylon riding the beast. Brown (1997) writes that preachers have used the examples of Hitler, Stalin, Hussein, and the Pope to illustrate the coming of the end of days, to strike fear into the heart of the congregants. Other Christian followers have used Revelations as a map to predicting the second coming. Ancient citizens pointed to the line of Kings and Queens which descended from the ranks of Alexander the Great. It is noteworthy to observe that the infamous, seductive Queen Cleopatra (as a part of the Ptolemaic lineage) was among these royal offspring of Alexander’s most respected general.[9]

As John is discussing the meaning of all that they had seen, another angel comes and states that the events are coming to pass. Babylon is a seducer and is really a city of wide influence and corruption. It is the city of the damned. All of her former allies, all of her followers, will “keep at a safe distance through fear of her anguish”. [10]

It is a chilling warning. Babylon is a city as the center of the fallen world. With the current rise of globalization and subsequent merging of cultures, such a city may not be far away. And, although it is intended to keep the peace, even organizations such as the United Nations may pose a threat. The global authority is centralized around one group which collectively determines the appropriate ethical action without regard to specific religious beliefs.

In verses twenty-one to twenty-three, the city of Babylon is described as seemingly utopian- with harpists, music, craftsmen, traders, and newlyweds. This is deceptive. The angel condemns Babylon, saying “all the nations were led astray by your sorcery”.[11] Regardless, the angel with John during the city’s downfall hurls a giant rock into the sea. As it sank with a great splash, the angel told John that the city would disappear in much the same way. After which, John heard the choirs of angel singing in celebration of Babylon’s downfall. The sham marriages of her people are replaced by joyous proclamations about the marriage of the Lamb and the burning of Babylon’s flesh.

Unlike the exultant tone of the hymn “Crown Him with Many Crowns”, the Jesus that is described in Revelations is still crowned- but is also in possession of fire-red eyes and is garbed with a robe of blood. Jesus is again identified as “the Word”, and the author writes that “from his mouth came a sharp sword with which to strike the unbelievers”.[12] Also like the letters of John, Revelation is presented as a series of letters credited to John, son of Zebedee. Like the book of Revelation itself, its authorship and purpose are mysterious.  Paul had vaguely mentioned the end of days, Jesus’ role in the apocalypse, and an anti-Christ in I Corinthians and II Thessalonians, but it only We do know that it begat a new genre, which accepted the worst-case scenario as an ever-looming threat and motivator and that seven, as a recurring holy number, is a noticeable theme. Still, it is impossible for us to know when the end of days is coming. The clues are often interpreted far too literally. Then again, if a seven-headed dog-beast makes the news, the people might sleep in fear and in the way of the Lord. Either way, Revelation cannot be written off as unimportant.

Bibliography

Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, Revelations, viewed 30 October 2010, <http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=73&bible_chapter=18>.

[1] Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

[2] Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, viewed 30 October 2010, <http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=48&bible_chapter=16>.

[3] Ibid. John 10:1-15:20

[4] Ibid. John 1:1-9

[5] Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, John 20:25, viewed 30 October 2010, < http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=2&bible_chapter=3>.

[6] Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

[7] Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, John 1:1-9, viewed 30 October 2010, <http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=48&bible_chapter=16>.

[8] Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, viewed 30 October 2010, < http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=2&bible_chapter=3>.

[9] Brown, R 1997, An Introduction to the New Testament, USA: Doubleday.

[10] Catholic Online 2010, The New Jerusalem Bible, Revelations 18:10, 15, 17, viewed 30 October 2010, <http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=48&bible_chapter=16>.

[11] Ibid. Rev. 18:23

[12] Ibid. Rev. 19:15