The Joys of John

[Jaebius]

Which kind of makes sense when you look at how John portrays himself as the herald declaring Jesus' coming. I almost wonder if John would expect his followers to move to Jesus. We shall see tomorrow.

An interesting scripture to consider is John 3:30

 

[unsafe]

So we see it says the Next day John saw Jesus coming -----so this tells us that the baptism has already taken place --Matthew 3 -----so John is relaying now the Reason for the Baptism when Jesus shows up the next day -----

Notice John portrays Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the Sin of the World --he doesn't say that he is the great teacher ---or he came to show us a moral way to live ----he uses the word lamb which the Jewish people would have been very familiar with as a sacrifice to God to temporarily pardon their sins -----

So then John gives his testimony witnessing the Holy Spirit coming down upon Jesus ----


So Here is something to ponder ----

How did Jesus take the SIN of the World away ?-----

Jesus was pure --holy and sinless ---He was divine -----and he remained same-----there has been debates over this issue by theologians ---some say he actually took all sin upon Himself --Some say He couldn't have as that would make him a Sinner ----Some say He took our Sin Nature upon Himself ----others Disagree and say you can't be God and Have a Sin Nature -----

 

[Waterfall]

So we see it says the Next day John saw Jesus coming -----so this tells us that the baptism has already taken place --Matthew 3 -----so John is relaying now the Reason for the Baptism when Jesus shows up the next day -----

Notice John portrays Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the Sin of the World --he doesn't say that he is the great teacher ---or he came to show us a moral way to live ----he uses the word lamb which the Jewish people would have been very familiar with as a sacrifice to God to temporarily pardon their sins -----

So then John gives his testimony witnessing the Holy Spirit coming down upon Jesus ----


So Here is something to ponder ----

How did Jesus take the SIN of the World away ?-----

Jesus was pure --holy and sinless ---He was divine -----and he remained same-----there has been debates over this issue by theologians ---some say he actually took all sin upon Himself --Some say He couldn't have as that would make him a Sinner ----Some say He took our Sin Nature upon Himself ----others Disagree and say you can't be God and Have a Sin Nature -----

Can a lamb be sacrificed for other reasons other than to save us from sins!

 

[GordW]

Can a lamb be sacrificed for other reasons other than to save us from sins!

AS I recall there are a variety of types of sacrifice in Torah. And the PAssover LAmb (which John wants to portray Jesus as) is not a sin offering, though it really is not a sacrifice either, it is a lamb slaughtered to be roasted and eaten.

 

[Jaebius]

Can a lamb be sacrificed for other reasons other than to save us from sins!

They taste good grilled with a little mint sauce

 

[unsafe]

Can a lamb be sacrificed for other reasons other than to save us from sins!

I would imagine but you would have to really ask the Shepherds to get your question answered correctly----either way they would still be shedding Blood when they are slaughtered which is what covers Sin --- all life is in the Blood -------

 

[paradox3]

John 1:35-42

Bible Gateway passage: John 1:35-42 - New English Translation

Again the next day John was standing there with two of his disciples. Gazing at Jesus as he walked by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” When John’s two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. Jesus turned around and saw them following and said to them, “What do you want?” So they...

www.biblegateway.com

John the Baptist again refers to Jesus as the Lamb of God.

Two of his disciples are with him and they follow Jesus. Jesus questions them about what they want. They reply, "Rabbi, where are you staying?"

Jesus answers, "Come, and you will see."

One of these two disciples is Andrew. He finds his brother Simon and says, "We have found the Messiah!"

He brings Simon to Jesus. Jesus names him Cephas (translated Peter).

 

[paradox3]

In today's text we see the first two disciples initially questioned by Jesus. But they are quickly welcomed to see where He is staying.

Why would John tell the story this way? The synoptics don't give us any early reluctance by Jesus to accept disciples.

Was it being called "Rabbi" that changed Jesus's mind?

 

[Waterfall]

AS I recall there are a variety of types of sacrifice in Torah. And the PAssover LAmb (which John wants to portray Jesus as) is not a sin offering, though it really is not a sacrifice either, it is a lamb slaughtered to be roasted and eaten.

I was thinking of the blood of the Passover lamb as protection and liberation.

 

[unsafe]

This part where Jesus appears with John in this chapter ----this is after Jesus has returned from the wilderness where He was tempted by Satan ------as His Baptism was in Matthew 3 and right after His Baptism the Holy Spirit led him to the wilderness Matthew 4:1 ----this is important because Jesus here with this return again to John starts His Ministry -----as the 2 disciples follow Him -----

We see Jesus comes back again and there are 2 Disciples with John and he states that this is the Lamb of God ---the disciples heard this and Followed Jesus --Jesus sees them following Him and says ---what do you want ------and they answer with Rabbi --Where are you staying ? --so they know He is a teacher --and-by asking this question ---they are showing they have a desire to learn from this Rabbi and spend time with Him -----and Jesus Invites them to come with Him -----and they go and stay with Him for a time and then Andrew invites his brother and says he has found the Messiah -----and His Ministry is underway ------

 

[paradox3]

@unsafe
Since John's Gospel doesn't give us the temptation in the wilderness story, you are pretty much piecing together a timeline here. I agree with you that John is talking in the past tense about the baptism of Jesus.

Why would John have omitted the story about Jesus being tempted in the wilderness? Did he feel it reflected poorly on Jesus? Does he have another literary goal in mind?

Or could it simply be that the story was already so well known that John saw no need to repeat it?

 

[unsafe]

Or could it simply be that the story was already so well known that John saw no need to repeat it?

John doesn't mention the Baptism directly but he does allude to it by this in verse 32

32 Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.

So not sure the audience John is speaking to here but the Jewish Nation would have known about the Baptism taking Place already for sure and they would have known that He was taken to the wilderness by the Holy Spirit ----so it was more Important for John to Identify Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the Sin of the world ----and identify Jesus as the Messiah than it was to talk about the baptism that already took place ------this Chapter is about Jesus starting His Ministry after His baptism -----

Just my view ----

 

[paradox3]

@unsafe
Yup. Two more disciples to be called and then Jesus gets busy with the Signs.

 

[GordW]

@unsafe
Since John's Gospel doesn't give us the temptation in the wilderness story, you are pretty much piecing together a timeline here. I agree with you that John is talking in the past tense about the baptism of Jesus.

Why would John have omitted the story about Jesus being tempted in the wilderness? Did he feel it reflected poorly on Jesus? Does he have another literary goal in mind?

Or could it simply be that the story was already so well known that John saw no need to repeat it?

OR John does not know that part of the tradition. OR John does not think it is a valid part of the tradition to have the pre-existent Word being tempted (this is my interpretation). There is ample reason to read John 1 and not think Jesus was baptised by John at all, or to believe he was -- the text is simply not explicit either way.

 

[paradox3]

OR John does not know that part of the tradition. OR John does not think it is a valid part of the tradition to have the pre-existent Word being tempted (this is my interpretation). There is ample reason to read John 1 and not think Jesus was baptised by John at all, or to believe he was -- the text is simply not explicit either way.

Bible study is so much fun when there are several plausible answers to a question.

 

[paradox3]

John 1:43-51

Bible Gateway passage: John 1:43-51 - New English Translation

The Calling of More Disciples - On the next day Jesus wanted to set out for Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.” (Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the town of Andrew and Peter.) Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the...

www.biblegateway.com

Before setting out for Galilee, Jesus gains two more disciples. First he finds Philip and says, "Follow me."

Philip finds Nathanael who is initially skeptical. But he realizes Jesus already knows him! He calls Jesus the Son of God and the King of Israel.

Jesus predicts that heaven will open and angels of God will ascend and descend on the Son of Man.

 

[paradox3]

There are four named disciples at this point: Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip and Nathanael.

One followed Jesus when John the Baptist recognized Him as the Lamb of God. One was found and called by Jesus directly. And two disciples found two others.

Before Jesus's ministry even starts, the early disciples are finding more!

 

[paradox3]

A study guide we used at church asked "Which of these four disciples do you identify with the most?" It's an interesting question to ponder.

 

[Mendalla]

Gotta love that line, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Even in the first century, people were judged by their place of origin.

The whole "under the fig tree" thing is a bit weird. I mean, the point of that story seems to be that Jesus knew Nathanael and his nature before they actually met, but the fig tree thing seems to come out of nowhere. A good editor would suggest to the author that there actually needs to be a scene of Nathanael under a fig tree doing or saying something that leads to Jesus' high opinion of him. Or is there some symbolic significance to the phrase?

 

[paradox3]

@Mendalla
Fig trees symbolize prosperity in the OT so sitting under one of them might carry a lot of symbolism. We don't know who owned the fig tree but perhaps Nathanael had to leave certain comforts behind when he followed Jesus.

Fig trees reappear in the synoptic gospels but I am not sure about John. Betcha @unsafe will know.