The Joys of John

[paradox3]

Does it not suggest, God within(immanent) and God without
(transcendent).
Isn't this what Jews believe....

This sounds more contemporary to me than anything we might find in the Hebrew Scriptures. But I could be incorrect.

 

[Mendalla]

That statement is basically panentheism. However, that's not what Jesus says here. He says, "The Father and I are one" (checked both NET and NRSVUE) and that's not the same thing. It could mean that, but it could also mean things like the Father and Jesus are the same being or of the same substance. That gets us into the debates around the nature of the Trinity that led to some of the early controversies and divisions in the church.

 

[Waterfall]

That statement is basically panentheism. However, that's not what Jesus says here. He says, "The Father and I are one" (checked both NET and NRSVUE) and that's not the same thing. It could mean that, but it could also mean things like the Father and Jesus are the same being or of the same substance. That gets us into the debates around the nature of the Trinity that led to some of the early controversies and divisions in the church.

So Jesus was talking about the Trinitarian God in the first century?

 

[Mendalla]

So Jesus was talking about the Trinitarian God in the first century?

No, the people who wrote the Gospel of John were. Maybe. There's other ways to read that, too. Pantheism, for instance, but the only Jews I've ever heard express pantheist views have tended to be more secular ones. Einstein seemed to lean that way at times. And Spinoza. So I kind of doubt that Jesus would and also that it would be taken any more kindly than a Trinitarian view by the Pharisees and other leaders.

 

[Waterfall]

No, the people who wrote the Gospel of John were. Maybe. There's other ways to read that, too. Pantheism, for instance, but the only Jews I've ever heard express pantheist views have tended to be more secular ones. Einstein seemed to lean that way at times. And Spinoza. So I kind of doubt that Jesus would and also that it would be taken any more kindly than a Trinitarian view by the Pharisees and other leaders.

Then why such a debate about the Trinity between the 2nd and 4th century?

 

[unsafe]

When Jesus says," I am in the Father, and the Father in me."
Does it not suggest, God within(immanent) and God without
(transcendent).
Isn't this what Jews believe....it doesn't sound different to me. Should it?

Found this from
AI
The statement "Jews believe 'I and the Father are one' means God within and God without" is a misinterpretation of both Jewish beliefs and the biblical verse it references. While the concept of God's presence both within and beyond the physical world is central to Judaism, the statement, taken from the Gospel of John, refers to a specific Christian theological understanding of the relationship between Jesus and God, not a Jewish interpretation.

• Christian Interpretation:
  Many Christians interpret this statement to mean that Jesus and God the Father share the same essence or divine nature, a key tenet of the Trinity, which is not a doctrine found in Judaism.

 

[Mendalla]

Then why such a debate about the Trinity between the 2nd and 4th century?

Not sure what you're getting at here. There was a debate because many read John and related texts as meaning Jesus was God which in turn was expressed in the doctrine of the Trinity. But not everyone agreed. So there was a debate. There was also debate about the nature of the Trinity (the whole "Same substance" vs. "similar substance" thing).

 

[Waterfall]

Not sure what you're getting at here. There was a debate because many read John and related texts as meaning Jesus was God which in turn was expressed in the doctrine of the Trinity. But not everyone agreed. So there was a debate. There was also debate about the nature of the Trinity (the whole "Same substance" vs. "similar substance" thing).

Well my understanding is that there were many Christion sects in the centuries after Jesus but the Trinity believers prevailed?

 

[Mendalla]

Well my understanding is that there were many Christion sects in the centuries after Jesus but the Trinity believers prevailed?

They did indeed. And more than one of those sects believed Jesus was God, not just one. But the Trinitarian line did start fairly early and John's Gospel played a part in the debate. The Trinity became the dominant view of all branches of Christianity and John quoting Jesus as saying "I and my Father are one" summarized at least part of it (doesn't say anything about the Spirit, of course, but there's other passages for that).

Unitarian Christianity never completely died out, though, just became a minor heresy that popped up from time to time. John Sigismund, ruler of Hungary and Translyvania in the 1560s and 70s was Unitarian for the last part of his reign and declared an end to religious persecution in his realm. Michael Servetus was burned at the stake partly for advocating a Unitarian theology (he was also an early Baptist, which played a part as well). So it was there, but remained largely underground until fairly recently (18th-19th century America, for instance, when the line that led to the modern UUA started).

 

[Waterfall]

They did indeed. And more than one of those sects believed Jesus was God, not just one. But the Trinitarian line did start fairly early and John's Gospel played a part in the debate. The Trinity became the dominant view of all branches of Christianity and John quoting Jesus as saying "I and my Father are one" summarized at least part of it (doesn't say anything about the Spirit, of course, but there's other passages for that).

Unitarian Christianity never completely died out, though, just became a minor heresy that popped up from time to time. John Sigismund, ruler of Hungary and Translyvania in the 1560s and 70s was Unitarian for the last part of his reign and declared an end to religious persecution in his realm. Michael Servetus was burned at the stake partly for advocating a Unitarian theology (he was also an early Baptist, which played a part as well). So it was there, but remained largely underground until fairly recently (18th-19th century America, for instance, when the line that led to the modern UUA started).

I was thinking more along the lines of the Adoptionists (; adopted by God at his baptism), Ebionites(believed Jesus was a divinely inspired human prophet and not the pre existent son of God), Arianism(Jesus was created by God, not co-eternal with the Father), etc....
Some scholars suggest that the Trinity was chosen because it aligned with the gentiles and Hellenistic way of thinking to deify their heroes, which was somewhat commonplace back then ( and now) .

 

[paradox3]

John 11:1-44

Bible Gateway passage: John 11:1-44 - New English Translation

The Death of Lazarus - Now a certain man named Lazarus was sick. He was from Bethany, the village where Mary and her sister Martha lived. (Now it was Mary who anointed the Lord with perfumed oil and wiped his feet dry with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.) So the sisters sent a message...

www.biblegateway.com

Today we come to the death of Lazarus. As we all know, Jesus raises him from the dead! This is the last of the signs John gives us in his Gospel.

Jesus calls Lazarus out of the tomb and he emerges, still with strips of cloth binding his feet, hands and face. "Unwrap him and let him go" says Jesus.

Two noteworthy verses in the narrative:

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in me will never die." (v.25)

Jesus wept. (v.35, the shortest verse in the Bible)

John stresses the supernatural powers possessed by Jesus. He also emphasizes the promise of eternal life. If one believes correctly, of course.

But we also have a very human Jesus, weeping at the loss of his friend. As a child in Sunday school, I always wondered why He wept if he knew He could bring the guy back to life.

Is John presenting the dual nature of Jesus in this story?

 

[Mendalla]

It's interesting what a cultural touchstone this story is. I can think of three references just offhand.

Robert Heinlein had a recurring immortal (or longlived?) character named Lazarus Long.

The British musician Steven Wilson wrote a song called "Lazarus" for his band Porcupine Tree (great song, have never parsed the lyrics to see how it relates to the story)

In biology, a species or genus that is rediscovered after being believed extinct is called a "Lazarus taxon". The most famous one is probably the coelacanth, a fish that lives in the Indian Ocean in spite of originally being believed to be extinct millions of years ago.

 

[paradox3]

True, the Lazarus story has its place in broader culture.

Ditto for Jesus turning the water into wine at the wedding.

Both are unique to John stories

 

[unsafe]

Chapter 11 brings us to the Miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead ------

Jesus was close with this family and when He finds out that Lazarus is sick ---He says to the Sisters ---
in verse 4 AMPC

This sickness is not to end in death; but [on the contrary] it is to honor God and to promote His glory, that the Son of God may be glorified through (by) it

Jesus saying this to the Sisters must have been a perplexing statement to them---I would think ---as their brother does die ----unless they already figured that Jesus would raise him up ---

I say ----So for me what this is implying is that Jesus knew that in his sickness he would die but that would not be the final result for him ---

Jesus waits 2 days before going to Lazarus -----Why ?

Personal view on this ----
God has a time for everything -
And
I think He waited this time so people would know for sure that he laid in the tomb for days and was actually dead so there would be no suspicion that he wasn't really dead when Jesus raises him up ---

I say that because ---here Jesus says this and the Disciples take it as though he is just naturally asleep and not dead -----verses 11-13

11 He said these things, and then added, Our friend Lazarus is at rest and sleeping; but I am going there that I may awaken him out of his sleep.

12 The disciples answered, Lord, if he is sleeping, he will recover.

13 However, Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He referred to falling into a refreshing and natural sleep.

----Jesus tells the Disciples that he is dead and that He is glad that He wasn't there for now the Disciples will believe in and Trust in Him ------

Jesus and the Disciples arrive at the family's home ---so now it is 4 days he lay in the tomb --

Many Jewish people had come to see the family ----Martha says that God will give Jesus whatever He asks for and that she knows He will be raised up on the last day ----

Jesus says ------Just going to quote the Scripture here as it says what it says ----we have free choice to believe it or reject it --------

AMPC
25 Jesus said to her, I am [Myself] the Resurrection and the Life. Whoever believes in (adheres to, trusts in, and relies on) Me, although he may die, yet he shall live;

26 And whoever continues to live and believes in (has faith in, cleaves to, and relies on) Me shall never [actually] die at all

I say ------Martha says she believes Jesus is the Messiah --He is the Christ they have been waiting for ----

Jesus saw Mary weeping and He wept ------He tells Martha to roll away the stone and He calls Lazarus to come out and he does -----Lazarus LIVES ---

I am sure that the many who witnessed this event some would have come to believe in who Jesus was -----

Is John presenting the dual nature of Jesus in this story?

I think he is ---Jesus weeping for his friend is a human thing to do ------

 

[paradox3]

The disciples of Jesus initially misunderstood what He was saying. Jesus is causing division among the Jewish people and his closest associates don't fully get him.

This is an interesting aspect of the story.

Yesterday @Mendalla and @Waterfall were discussing the theology of the Trinity. John stresses correct belief throughout his gospel but he doesn't completely define it anywhere I can see.

Throughout the ages the church has made several attempts to nail it down through various creeds. These creeds have tended to get longer as the right words prove elusive. I give you our very own Song of Faith and rest my case.

 

[Waterfall]

There have been ten people brought back to life within the OT and NT, why would this stand out to make people believe Jesus was God? Even Paul is said to have raise the dead.

 

[paradox3]

There have been ten people brought back to life within the OT and NT, why would this stand out to make people believe Jesus was God? Even Paul is said to have raise the dead.

The story stands out but I am not sure of the reason. I think a lot of its appeal lies in the personal friendship between Jesus and the 3 siblings.

Maybe we also like Lazarus getting called out of the tomb, bindings and all. It sure works as a metaphor if we want to go there.

 

[Mendalla]

That's actually a good question. Others who raised the dead generally are portrayed as agents of God, not as God. But Jesus leads with his "I am the Resurrection and the Life" speech, which seems to be saying he is more than that. And Martha, at least, buys it. So John pushing his high Christology again?

Then again, here is the actual description of Lazarus' resurrection and Jesus prays to the Father so one could argue that he is, once again, an agent of God here, not the source of the miracle but the channel.

Jesus looked upward[cc] and said, “Father, I thank you that you have listened to me.[cd] 42 I knew that you always listen to me,[ce] but I said this[cf] for the sake of the crowd standing around here, that they may believe that you sent me.” 43 When[cg] he had said this, he shouted in a loud voice,[ch] “Lazarus, come out!”

 

[GordW]

Within the narrative arc of John the LAzarus event is significant. IT leads more people to come to JEsus and is a key reason the leadership starts to feel threatened by Jesus' popularity. This leads tothe decision that Jesus must die

 

[paradox3]

Within the narrative arc of John the LAzarus event is significant. IT leads more people to come to JEsus and is a key reason the leadership starts to feel threatened by Jesus' popularity. This leads tothe decision that Jesus must die

Kind of the straw that broke the camel's back then?