Gospel of John interpretation and summary

The Gospel of John
(Greek Κατὰ Ἰωάννην, Kata Iōannēn
(lit. “according to John”, “according to John”)
, lat.
Evangelium secundum Ioannem
) is the fourth book of the New Testament. According to Christian tradition, it is believed to have been written by the Apostle John, the “beloved disciple” of Jesus Christ, who was later called John the Evangelist.

Authorship and time of creation

See also: Bible Authorship

The text of the Gospel itself (John 21:20-24) says that the Gospel was written “by the disciple whom Jesus loved and who at the supper, bowing to His breast, said: Lord! who will betray you? However, according to most researchers, the Apostle John was not its author[1][2][3].

Merrill F. Unger[4] uses the method of elimination to prove that the “beloved disciple” is in fact the evangelist John. Unger writes:

[The identification of John and authorship]... may be inferred from the [following] facts. He indicates the exact hours when certain events took place (John 1:39; John 4:6,52; John 19:14). He quotes the exact words of the Apostle Philip (John 6:7; John 14:8), Thomas (John 11:16, John 14:5), Judas (not Iscariot) (John 14:22) and Andrew ( John 6:8-9). He clung to the breast of Jesus at the Supper on the night of his betrayal (John 13:23-25). And he was one of the three apostles of the “inner circle” - Peter, James and John. Moreover, Peter differs from this author by name (John 1:41-42; 13:6,8), and James suffered martyrdom very early, long before the Gospel was written (Acts 12:2). He has a special way of presenting himself (John 13:23; John 19:26; John 20:2; John 21:7,20). These facts taken together make it difficult to come to any conclusion other than that John was the author of the Gospel which bears his name.

There is a wide range of opinions on the question of the authorship of the Gospel; among the possible authors, in addition to the Apostle John himself, are John of Jerusalem, the presbyter (or elder) John and a group of disciples of the Apostle John[5].

William Barclay[6], having no doubt that the author of the last Gospel was John, nevertheless believed that it was not the apostle himself who wrote it down, but another John, a presbyter. Barkley writes:

We need to answer one more question.
We are confident that behind the fourth Gospel are the mind and memory of the Apostle John, but we saw that behind it there is also a witness who wrote it, that is, literally put it on paper. Can we find out who it was? From what early Christian writers have left us, we know that there were two Johns in Ephesus at that time: John the Apostle and John, known as John the Elder, John the Elder. Papias (70-145), Bishop of Hierapolis, who loved to collect everything related to the history of the New Testament and the life of Jesus, left us very interesting information. He was a contemporary of John. Papias writes about himself that he tried to find out “what Andrew said, or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, Thomas or James, or John, or Matthew or any of the disciples of the Lord, or what Aristion and Prester John the disciples said Gentlemen." In Ephesus there were the Apostle John and the Presbyter John; Moreover, Presbyter (Elder) John was so loved by everyone that he, in fact, was known under the name Presbyter Elder, it is quite obvious that he occupied a special place in the Church. Eusebius (263-340) and Dionysius the Great report that even in their time there were two famous graves in Ephesus: one of John the Apostle, the other of John the Presbyter. Now let us turn to two short epistles - the Second and Third Epistles of the Apostle John. These messages were written by the same hand as the Gospel, but how do they begin? The second letter begins with the words: “An old man to the chosen lady and to her children” (2 John 1). The third letter begins with the words: “The Elder to the beloved Gaius” (3 John 1). This is our decision. In fact, the messages were written by John the Presbyter; they reflected the thoughts and memory of the elderly Apostle John, whom John the Presbyter always characterizes with the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved.”

Most scholars consider the date of writing of the Gospel of John to be 80-95[7] or 90-110[5].

Content

The Gospel of John differs in content from the other three, the so-called. "synoptic" Gospels of the New Testament. According to legend, the disciples of John the Theologian asked their teacher to write about the life of Jesus what was not included in the Synoptic Gospels.

“Both Mark and Luke had already given people their Gospels, but John, they say, preached orally all the time and only at the end took up writing for this reason. When the first three Gospels were distributed everywhere and reached him, he, they say, considered it his duty to testify to their truthfulness, but noticed that they lacked a story about the first acts of Christ, committed at the very beginning of His preaching. And that's true. /…/John, they say, therefore began to beg to tell in his Gospel about that time about which the first evangelists were silent, and about the deeds performed by the Savior then, namely, before the imprisonment of the Baptist.”

[8]

These records made up this Gospel. Despite the fact that, as a literary whole, the Gospel of John was, according to many researchers, compiled later than the Synoptic Gospels, “John’s tradition in some essential elements that make it up may be older than the Synoptic tradition”[9].

The text of the Gospel of John (containing 21 chapters) is conventionally divided by some experts into four parts:

• Prologue - a hymn about Christ as the eternal Word and God incarnate,
• Sermons and miracles of the earthly life of Jesus Christ,
• The Passion of Christ - the period from the Last Supper to the Resurrection,
• Epilogue - the appearance of the risen Christ to the disciples-apostles.

Compared to the Synoptic Gospels, the work of John the Evangelist represents the highest level of Christology, describing Jesus Christ as the eternal Logos (Word, Wisdom, Cause) who is at the origin and beginning of all phenomena, telling about his earthly life as the Savior of mankind and declaring him By God.

According to religious scholar K. Rudolph, the text of the Gospel contains clear parallels with Gnosticism: the opposition of God and the Devil (or the world, “cosmos”), light and darkness, the recognition of the world as the kingdom of the “evil one,” the division of people into those who come “from God” and “ from the world or the devil”, indicating that “the Jews do not know God”[10]. The Gnostics, in particular the Valentinians, used quotes from this Gospel, and Valentinus’ student, Heracleon, even composed a commentary on it[11], however, Irenaeus of Lyons testifies that the Gospel itself was written to refute the heresies of the Gnostic Cerinthos and the NicolaitansK: Wikipedia: Articles without sources (type: not specified)[ source not specified 1887 days

], and actively uses his material (especially the material of Chapter 1) for polemics with the basic provisions of Gnosticism and the interpretation of the above provisions in the Gnostic spirit[11].

Jesus subjugated the laws of nature

Jesus' ministry was accompanied by miracles that violated the laws of nature as we know them:

1. First of all, Jesus was born without the participation of a man.
2. He walked on water, and in a storm.
3. He stopped the storm with one word.
4. Jesus turned water into wine.
5. He supernaturally multiplied the amount of food.
6. Jesus gave sight to those who were blind from birth, and new legs to those who were lame.
7. Jesus healed the paralyzed and lepers with just words.
8. The Lord raised Lazarus, who had been in the grave for four days.

No laws can stop God's grace.

Notes

1. “To most modern scholars direct apostolic authorship has therefore seemed unlikely.” "John, Gospel of." Cross, F.L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
2. [www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/304610/Gospel-According-to-John Gospel According to John
   , Encyclopædia Britannica]
3. "John, Gospel of." Cross, F.L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
4. Merrill F. Unger, The New Unger's Bible Dictionary
   , Chicago: Moody, 1988; p. 701
5. ↑ 12
   [www.reformed.org.ua/2/183/8/Guthrie D. Guthrie. Introduction to the New Testament. Gospel of John]
6. [azbyka.ru/otechnik/?Biblia/kommentarii-k-novomu-zavetu=4#sel= William Barkley “Commentary on the New Testament”]
7. Bruce, F. F. The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable?
   p.7
8. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3
9. [www.bible-center.ru/book/interpretation/faith Bishop Kassian Bezobrazov, Interpretation of the Gospel of John]
10. K. Rudolph. Gnosis: the Nature and History of Gnosticism. Harper, San Francisco, 1987, p. 305.
11. ↑ 12
    [azbyka.ru/otechnik/Lopuhin/tolkovaja_biblija_54 Explanatory Bible A.P. Lopukhin and successors]

Passage describing the Gospel of John

The next day, Prince Andrei went on visits to some houses where he had not yet been, including the Rostovs, with whom he renewed his acquaintance at the last ball. In addition to the laws of courtesy, according to which he needed to be with the Rostovs, Prince Andrei wanted to see at home this special, lively girl, who left him with a pleasant memory. Natasha was one of the first to meet him. She was wearing a blue home dress, in which she seemed even better to Prince Andrei than in the ball gown. She and the entire Rostov family received Prince Andrei as an old friend, simply and cordially. The entire family, which Prince Andrei had previously judged strictly, now seemed to him to be made up of wonderful, simple and kind people. The hospitality and good nature of the old count, which was especially striking in St. Petersburg, was such that Prince Andrei could not refuse dinner. “Yes, these are kind, nice people,” thought Bolkonsky, who, of course, don’t understand one bit the treasure they have in Natasha; but good people who make up the best background for this especially poetic, full of life, lovely girl to stand out against!” Prince Andrei felt in Natasha the presence of a completely alien to him, special world, filled with some unknown joys, that alien world that even then, in the Otradnensky alley and on the window, on a moonlit night, teased him so much. Now this world no longer teased him, it was no longer an alien world; but he himself, having entered it, found in it a new pleasure for himself. After dinner, Natasha, at the request of Prince Andrei, went to the clavichord and began to sing. Prince Andrei stood at the window, talking with the ladies, and listened to her. In the middle of the sentence, Prince Andrei fell silent and suddenly felt tears coming to his throat, the possibility of which he did not know was within himself. He looked at Natasha singing, and something new and happy happened in his soul. He was happy and at the same time he was sad. He had absolutely nothing to cry about, but he was ready to cry. About what? About former love? About the little princess? About your disappointments?... About your hopes for the future?... Yes and no. The main thing that he wanted to cry about was the terrible opposition he suddenly vividly realized between something infinitely great and indefinable that was in him, and something narrow and corporeal that he himself was and even she was. This opposite tormented and delighted him while she sang. As soon as Natasha finished singing, she came up to him and asked him how he liked her voice? She asked this and became embarrassed after she said it, realizing that she should not have asked this. He smiled looking at her and said that he liked her singing as much as anything she did. Prince Andrei left the Rostovs late in the evening. He went to bed out of habit, but soon saw that he could not sleep. He lit a candle and sat in bed, then got up, then lay down again, not at all burdened by insomnia: his soul was so joyful and new, as if he had stepped out of a stuffy room into the free light of God. It never occurred to him that he was in love with Rostova; he didn't think about her; he only imagined her, and as a result his whole life seemed to him in a new light. “What am I fighting for, why am I fussing in this narrow, closed frame, when life, all life with all its joys, is open to me?” he said to himself. And for the first time after a long time, he began to make happy plans for the future. He decided on his own that he needed to start raising his son, finding him a teacher and entrusting him with it; then you have to retire and go abroad, see England, Switzerland, Italy. “I need to use my freedom while I feel so much strength and youth in myself,” he said to himself. Pierre was right when he said that you have to believe in the possibility of happiness in order to be happy, and now I believe in him. Let’s leave the dead to bury the dead, but while you’re alive, you must live and be happy,” he thought. One morning, Colonel Adolf Berg, whom Pierre knew, as he knew everyone in Moscow and St. Petersburg, in a spick-and-span uniform, with his temples smeared in front, as Emperor Alexander Pavlovich wore, came to see him. “I was just now with the Countess, your wife, and was so unhappy that my request could not be fulfilled; I hope that with you, Count, I will be happier,” he said, smiling. -What do you want, Colonel? I am at your service. “Now, Count, I’m completely settled in my new apartment,” Berg said, obviously knowing that it could not but be pleasant to hear this; - and that’s why I wanted to do this, a little evening for my friends and my wife’s acquaintances. (He smiled even more pleasantly.) I wanted to ask the Countess and you to do me the honor of inviting us for a cup of tea and... dinner. “Only Countess Elena Vasilievna, considering the company of some Bergs humiliating for herself, could have the cruelty to refuse such an invitation. - Berg explained so clearly why he wants to gather a small and good society, and why it will be pleasant for him, and why he spares money for cards and for something bad, but for a good society he is ready to incur expenses that Pierre could not refuse and promised to be. - But it’s not too late, Count, if I dare to ask, then at 10 minutes to eight, I dare to ask. We will form a party, our general will be. He is very kind to me. Let's have dinner, Count. So do me a favor. Contrary to his habit of being late, Pierre that day, instead of eight minutes to ten minutes, arrived at the Bergs at eight minutes to a quarter. The Bergs, having stocked up what they needed for the evening, were already ready to receive guests. In a new, clean, bright office, decorated with busts and pictures and new furniture, Berg sat with his wife. Berg, in a brand new, buttoned uniform, sat next to his wife, explaining to her that it is always possible and should have acquaintances with people who are higher than oneself, because only then can there be a pleasure from making acquaintances. - “If you take something, you can ask for something. Look how I lived from the first ranks (Berg considered his life not as years, but as the highest awards). My comrades are now nothing yet, and I am in the vacancy of a regimental commander, I have the happiness of being your husband (he stood up and kissed Vera’s hand, but on the way to her he turned back the corner of the rolled-up carpet). And how did I acquire all this? The main thing is the ability to choose your acquaintances. It goes without saying that one must be virtuous and careful.” Berg smiled with the consciousness of his superiority over a weak woman and fell silent, thinking that after all this sweet wife of his was a weak woman who could not comprehend everything that constitutes the dignity of a man - ein Mann zu sein [to be a man]. Vera at the same time also smiled with the consciousness of her superiority over a virtuous, good husband, but who still erroneously, like all men, according to Vera’s concept, understood life. Berg, judging by his wife, considered all women weak and stupid. Vera, judging by her husband alone and spreading this remark, believed that all men attribute intelligence only to themselves, and at the same time they do not understand anything, are proud and selfish. Berg stood up and, hugging his wife carefully so as not to wrinkle the lace cape for which he had paid dearly, kissed her in the middle of her lips. “The only thing is that we don’t have children so soon,” he said, out of an unconscious filiation of ideas. “Yes,” Vera answered, “I don’t want that at all.” We must live for society. “This is exactly what Princess Yusupova was wearing,” said Berg, with a happy and kind smile, pointing to the cape. At this time, the arrival of Count Bezukhy was reported. Both spouses looked at each other with a smug smile, each taking credit for the honor of this visit. “This is what it means to be able to make acquaintances,” thought Berg, this is what it means to be able to hold oneself! “Just please, when I am entertaining guests,” said Vera, “don’t interrupt me, because I know what to do with everyone, and in what society what should be said.” Berg smiled too. “You can’t: sometimes you have to have a man’s conversation with men,” he said. Pierre was received in a brand new living room, in which it was impossible to sit anywhere without violating the symmetry, cleanliness and order, and therefore it was quite understandable and not strange that Berg generously offered to destroy the symmetry of an armchair or sofa for a dear guest, and apparently being in In this regard, in painful indecision, he proposed a solution to this issue to the choice of the guest. Pierre upset the symmetry by pulling up a chair for himself, and immediately Berg and Vera began the evening, interrupting each other and keeping the guest busy.

Grace is superior to the law!

Therefore, you yourself choose: to live according to the rules within the law or by faith by grace.

Given the eternal divine nature of Jesus, we can conclude that both grace and truth have always existed. Grace and truth came before the law of Moses. The Law became God’s forced response to the sinful corruption of this world. Although, even after the Law of Moses given by God, in which all punishments for disobedience are written down, the grace of God continued to operate for Israel.

This grace was manifested over the lid of the Ark of the Covenant when the high priest sprinkled the blood of the sin offerings: “Above the ark there were images of cherubim - a symbol of glory, they stretched out their wings over the lid, called the “place of atonement.” But now we will not talk about this in detail.” (Hebrews 9:5, NIV)

In this annual cleansing of sin and undeserved forgiveness of Israel, there was a symbolic reference to the future sacrifice in the blood of Jesus Christ. And if God had not shown His grace to them in this way, then, according to the law, the people of Israel would have perished long ago for their disobedience.

And third, from the fullness of Jesus Christ we have received ever-renewing grace.

The fullness of Jesus means the fullness of God in His Human body: “for in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Col 2:9)

And renewed grace comes precisely from the Divine nature of Christ.