On the 1st century Hebrew messianists' rift with mainstream Judaism.

 Find article here

 

If the trinity (or just the deity of Jesus) had really been taught (or believed) by the first Christians, the schism between the Jews (who considered such a teaching "an unpardonable offense") and Christians would have been immediate, irrevocable, and incredibly intense. But that is not what caused the greatest and final split between the sect of the first Christians and the Jews.


"The Jewish belief that the parting of the ways came not at Stephen's martyrdom but after Bar Kochba's war against Hadrian [132-135 A. D.] is now gaining ground. Previously there had been no event sufficiently striking to sever the ties. Christians frequented the synagogues: they were still a Jewish sect. [See the ISRAEL study] But Bar Kochba was hailed by Aqiba as the Messiah. This the Christians could not condone and they stood aside. .... The Jews regarded the Christians as renegades: the Christians would not fight for Aqiba's Messiah. The die had fallen and there was no recalling the past." - Encyclopedia Britannica, p. 167, Vol. 13, 14th ed.



Noted Christian Bible historian, Philip Schaff writes: " (A.D. 132-135). A pseudo-Messiah, Bar-Cochba (son of the stars, Num. 24:17), afterwards called Bar-Cosiba (son of falsehood), put himself at the head of the rebels, and caused all the Christians who would not join him to be most cruelly murdered." – p. 37, History of the Christian Church, Vol. II, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995 reprint.


- - - - - - - - - - - -

It was the generation following the destruction of the Temple which brought about a final rupture between Jews and Christians .... In the third rebellion against Rome [132-135 A.D.], when the Christians were unable to accept bar Kochba as their Messiah, they declared that their kingdom was of the other world, and withdrew themselves completely from Judaism and everything Jewish. The alienation process was completed. Judaism and Christianity became strangers to each other .... A wall of misunderstanding and hate was erected by the narrow zealotries of the two faiths. [pp. 152, 153, Jews, God and History, Max I. Dimont, A Signet Book, 1962.]


"Cochba [bar Kochba] ... tortured and killed the Christians who refused to aid him against the Roman army." - p. 42, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Robert M. Grant, The Westminster Press, 1988.


"Another Christian apologist, Justin [Martyr], tells how ... Bar Kochba, the leader of the insurrection, ordered Christians alone to be executed if they would not deny and curse Jesus the Messiah." - Ibid.


"After the war the Jerusalem church, once Jewish, consisted only of Gentiles." - Ibid.


...........................................................

Not everybody agreed to Aqiba's view that Simon [Bar Kochba] was the Messiah. The Jewish Christians refused to accept this claim; the Christian author Justin Martyr tells that Simon commanded Christians 'to be led away to terrible punishment,' unless they denied Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah and cursed the man from Nazareth (First Apology 31.6). - http://www.livius.org/ja-jn/jewish_wars/jwar07.html


.............................................................


L. Michael White


[Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin]:


The relationship between Judaism and Christianity after the turn of the second century would become more and more hostile as time went on partly because of other political forces that continued to develop. .... As a result within sixty years after the first revolt there would arise a new rebellion. We typically call this the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome or the Bar Kochba revolt. And it's named after a famous rebel leader who really becomes the central figure of this new political period. He's called Bar Kochba. .... His real name seems to have been Shimon Bar Kosova, and he probably was of a royal family of the Jewish tradition. But he takes to himself this messianic identity and claims that in the year 132 it is time for a new kingdom to be reestablished in Israel. Apparently he did take Jerusalem for some time. ...It's possible, although we're not absolutely sure, that he thought he could rebuild the temple too. But events would not let that happen.


The Romans very quickly began to put down the revolt and within three years all of those who had followed Bar Kochba were either killed or dispersed. ....
The one thing that does happen in the second revolt, though, is [that] the self-consciously apocalyptic and messianic identity of Bar Kochba forces the issue for the Christian tradition. It appears that some people in the second revolt tried to press other Jews, including Christians, into the revolt, saying, "Come join us to fight against the Romans. You believe God is going to restore the kingdom to Israel, don't you? Join us." But the Christians by this time are starting to say, "No, he can't be the messiah -- we already have one." And at that point we really see the full-fledged separation of Jewish tradition and Christian tradition becoming clear.


- http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=ancienthistory&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fwgbh%2Fpages%2Ffrontline%2Fshows%2Freligion%2Fportrait%2Fjews.html


..............................................


"Revolt


"The Jewish sage Rabbi Akiva convinced the Sanhedrin to support the impending revolt and regarded the chosen commander Simon Bar Kokhba the Jewish Messiah, according to the verse from Numbers 24:17: "There shall come a star out of Jacob" ("Bar Kokhba" means "son of a star" in Aramaic language).


"At the time, Christianity was still a minor sect of Judaism and most historians believe that it was this messianic claim that alienated many Christians (who believed that the true messiah was Jesus) and sharply deepened the schism." - http://www.answers.com/topic/bar-kokhba-s-revolt?hl=simon&hl=bar&hl=kokhba


........................................


Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum asserts that the "rift caused by the destruction of Jerusalem [70 C.E.] proved to be a temporary one, and a partial reconciliation did come about despite Hebrew Christian opposition to the new Judaism of the rabbis." p. 41, HEBREW CHRISTIANITY, Its Theology, History and Philosophy.


He also says that 132-135 C.E. was a key period, the 2nd Jewish revolt against Rome under Bar Kochba. When the revolt broke out, the Jewish Believers joined the revolt with their rabbinic brothers. However, Rabbi Akiva made the sad error of declaring Bar Kochba to be the Jewish Messiah. This is where the real rift occured. If anyone can be accused of turning Christianity into a Gentile religion, it is not Paul, nor the church leaders in Asia Minor, but rather Bar Kochba, according to Fruchtenbaum. -

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/8701/religion/mjhist2.txt
..................................


[The] PBS "Frontline" program "From Jesus To Christ: The First Christians" is … steeped in Jewish history and Jewish concerns. The four-hour program [aired] Monday and Tuesday, April 6 and 7 [1998. Here are some of the issues covered on that program]:


".... The period after the First Revolt is dominated by an increasingly hostile relationship between Christians and Jews as the followers of Jesus move increasingly away from their Jewish roots. "Part 3: Let The Reader Understand" examines this period, the creation of the four Gospels and the Second Revolt, led by Bar Kochba.


After the Jews are crushed by the Roman army, Christianity begins to assert itself and accommodate the forces of the empire that killed its leader." - http://www.jewishsf.com/bk980320/etearly.htm


This is when a true split occurred, as Christians refused to join in the four-year struggle because Bar Kochba claimed he was the Messiah.

"Until the year 132, Christians considered themselves a sect of Judaism.
In that year, Simon bar Kochba (Simon son of the star), was confirmed by the great Rabbi Akiba as the Messiah. bar Kochba was a great leader and warrior, and led a revolt of tens of thousands of Jews against the Romans (similar to recent conflicts in Chechnya, or Grozny.) The Christians, who would have been eager to fight the Romans, couldn't, because they already had a Messiah. This was the final split, where Christianity stopped being Judaism. .... By the 390's A.D., Galastria, Bishop of Galatia counted 156 different sects of Christianity, all blending the Christian story with local and tribal concepts. There were cults that believed that Jesus was a God when born, those that believed that he became a God later. Some believed that Jesus did not have normal bodily excretions, and those who worshiped Satan because they believed that serpent had won in the Garden of Eden. The confused and varied notions of what Christianity meant were consolidated by the growing concentration of power and centralization in Rome, in various councils, beginning in Nicea, in 325 A.D." - http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/tzohr.htm..............................


[Quoted above in more detail under heading of 'L. Michael White']
"The one thing that does happen in the second revolt... is [that] the self-consciously apocalyptic and messianic identity of Bar Kochba forces the issue for the Christian tradition. It appears that some people in the second revolt tried to press other Jews, including Christians, into the revolt, saying, "Come join us to fight against the Romans. You believe God is going to restore the kingdom to Israel, don't you? Join us." But the Christians by this time are starting to say, "No, he can't be the Messiah -- we already have one." And at that point we really see the full-fledged separation of Jewish tradition and Christian tradition becoming clear." - L. Michael White: Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin.

Examining atheism's metaphysics

A force for truth II

Find article here.

Acts 5:3, 4 Lied to the Holy Spirit...lied to God?; Matthew 12:32 "whoever says something against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven"; 2 Cor. 3:17 "The Lord is the Spirit."

Another bit of eclectic "evidence" some trinitarians resort to for the "personality" and "Godhood" of the spirit is found at Acts 5:3, 4. Here we find a baptized Christian, one who has, therefore, received holy spirit, selling his property and giving some of the money from that sale to the Apostles. Now this man was under no obligation to sell his land or give any of that money to the Apostles. That he did so would have been a fine thing. But this man, Ananias, wanted honor more than he wanted to give charity. So he gave only part of the money from his property to the Apostles. This, too, would have been a fine thing. but he lied to the Apostles, because he wanted even more recognition, and told them he had given them all the money from the sale of his property!
So Peter said,
"Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to [or 'cheat' - Mo (or 'to deceive' or 'to play false' - Thayer, #5574; cf. #5574, Strong's and Thayer, in Heb. 6:18 as rendered in RSV, NEB, CBW, and The Amplified Bible)] the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? .... How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to ['played false to' ('defrauded' - Mo)] men but to God." - RSV.
The "evidence" here is supposed to be that Peter first says that Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. Then he turns around and says that Ananias lied to God. The supposition being, evidently, that the one lie [or deception] could only be directed to one person. Therefore the Holy Spirit "must" be God!
This type of reasoning is painfully ridiculous at best! Ananias actually lied directly to the Apostles! So this type of "reasoning" applies even more strongly to the Apostles than it does to the Holy Spirit! By using this "evidence" we could say with equal credibility that Peter is saying the Apostles are God when he says "you have not lied to men but to God"!
We can see a similar idea at Mark 9:37 -
"Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me [so trinitarian-type 'evidence' proves this child is Jesus!]; and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me." - RSV.
So receiving the child is actually receiving the Son and the Father! The child, then, "must" be God Himself (by trinitarian standards of evidence)!
I'm sure the truth of this matter must be apparent to all objective persons. But, for good measure, you might examine such scriptures as Matt. 25:40 and Luke 10:16 and compare them with Acts 5:4. We can also see a similar usage in the rest of Acts 5:3, 4. In 5:3 we see that Satan filled Ananias' heart to lie. But in 5:4 we find that Ananias himself conceived this thing in his heart. So this trinitarian-type evidence "reveals" another essential "mystery": Satan is Ananias! Also analyze 1 Thess. 4:2, 6, 8; 1 Cor. 8:12; and James 4:11.
One of Christendom's favorite trinitarians (and one of the humblest men found in history), St. Francis of Assisi, made an interesting statement that should be compared with Peter's statement at Acts 5:3, 4. St. Francis said after receiving some clothing from a friend:
"Nothing could be better for me than these. I take them thankfully as your alms. You have given them to God." - p. 66, Richest of the Poor - The Life of St. Francis of Assisi, Theodore Maynard, 1949.
Isn't it obvious that, by willfully rebelling against the holy spirit (the motivating force sent by God) by lying to the Apostles, Ananias was also lying to God?
(Another similar statement of this concept is admitted even in the footnote for Acts 5:3 in a highly trinitarian publication of the RSV, the ecumenical study Bible, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 1977, Oxford University Press: "The apostles, or perhaps the church, represent the Holy Spirit."
Obviously, the Apostles receive their authority to represent God on earth through the power of the holy spirit ("in the name of the holy spirit"), so they "represent" not only that authorizing power but also God Himself. Therefore, the attempted deception of the Apostles by Ananias also equals an attempted deception of the Holy Spirit and an attempted deception of God.)
So, since the holy spirit (this impersonal power/force/direction) comes directly (and perfectly) from God himself, then, no matter what one does against that holy spirit, it is always equivalent to doing that very thing against God himself. For example, if I spit in disgust on the letter (the impersonal thing providing direction to me) from the king, it will always be understood as equivalent to my spitting on the king himself. If, on the other hand, I spit on a messenger from the king, it might not be considered such a serious offense if I were merely expressing a dislike for the person of the messenger himself, not his message from the king.
That is why Matthew 12:32 is so important to our understanding of God, Jesus, and the holy spirit. There Jesus says to his disciples, "Anyone who says something against the Son of Man [the heavenly, glorified Jesus] can be forgiven; but whoever says something against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven - now or ever." - Good News Bible (and TEV), cf. Living Bible; also see Luke 12:10. Now if the Son of Man were actually a person who is God himself, this scripture would make no sense. In fact, the highly-esteemed trinitarian reference work The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology admits: "The saying about blasphemy and the Son of man (Matt. 12:31 f.; Lk 12:10) is particularly difficult to understand." - p. 628, Vol. 3, Zondervan Publ., 1986. This is a powerful understatement!
Anything we spoke against the person of the Son of Man (if he were truly God as trinitarians insist) would have to be against the person of God himself and would have to be equivalent (at least) to speaking against the holy spirit! But if Jesus were not God himself but a different person, someone might speak against him (for something he said or did or the way he looks, etc.) as a person subordinate to God and not be speaking against God.
Therefore, this scripture (and Luke 12:10) shows Jesus is not equal to God and explains that the Father alone (who produces or sends the non-personal force/communication/motivation: holy spirit) is the God we dare not blaspheme. If this were not the proper interpretation, not only would the statement about blasphemies against Christ (equally "God") being forgiven be nonsensical but the Most High and Only True God, the Father, would be completely ignored and the worst blasphemy would be only that against "God, the Holy Spirit"! This would be completely inconsistent with Jesus' continual glorification of the Father alone!
One thing we agree with Trinitarians about: The Father is not the Son. The Son is not the Father. They are different persons. Now if the Holy Spirit is a person, as they say, then the HS is not the Father, and the HS is not the Son!
Nevertheless, occasionally we find 2 Cor. 3:17 used as evidence that the Holy Spirit is a person who is God: "The Lord is the Spirit."
Now it is provable that the Lord Jehovah is the Father, and it is provable that the Lord Jesus is the Son. Therefore, IF the HS is a person, "he" cannot be either Jehovah or Jesus! That is why the noted trinitarian scholar E. F. Scott (in his The Spirit in the N.T.) can understand
"Kurios ["Lord"] here [in 2 Cor. 3:17] to be Christ and interpret Paul as denying the personality of the Holy Spirit." - Word Pictures in the New Testament, A. T. Robertson, Vol. IV, p. 223.
Also the trinitarian The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan Publishing, 1986, tells us:
"It is important to realize that for Paul too the Spirit is a divine power whose impact upon or entrance into a life is discernible by its effects." and, "It is important for Paul that the Spirit is a shared gift; it is a centripedal force [not a person!] drawing believers together into the one body of Christ. .... They are constituted the one body of Christ by their common participation in the one Spirit." - Vol. 3, pp. 701, 702.
Therefore to be 'one' with the Spirit results in being one with the Lord (whether it refers to Jehovah here, as I believe, or to Jesus as in most trinitarian interpretations. Having the active force of God, the Spirit, figuratively means having the Lord. Or as CBW, AT, and Moffatt translate 2 Cor. 3:17 "The Lord means the Spirit." Or, as the extremely trinitarian The New American Bible, St. Joseph ed. tells us in a footnote for 2 Cor. 3:13-18 -
"The apostle knows that his work is to result in the permanent presence of Christ among men through the power of the Holy Spirit."
And Thayer, also tells us:
"But in the truest and highest sense it is said ['the Lord is the spirit'], he in whom the entire fulness of the Spirit dwells, and from whom that fulness is diffused through the body of Christian believers, 2 Co. iii. 17.... to be filled with the same spirit as Christ and by the bond of that spirit to be intimately united to Christ, 1 Co. vi. 17...." - pp. 522, 523, Baker Book House, 1984 printing.
So we can see that even many trinitarians believe this particular scripture is saying that Jesus is figuratively the Spirit because union with that Spirit means union with Jesus.
Another possibility is shown by this trinitarian translation:
"the Lord [whether Jehovah or Jesus] no doubt is a spirit .... but we ... are changed unto the same similitude, from glory to glory, even of the spirit of the Lord [or 'just as the spirit comes from the Lord' - Lamsa]." - 2 Cor. 3:17, 18, Tyndale's New Testament, 1989, Yale University Press.
Not only do we never find anything approaching a clear statement of the trinity in the entire Bible, but in all the dreams, visions, etc. where we "see" God we never see a three-in-one God represented in any manner, nor do we ever see the "person" of the holy spirit (even though we often see the real spirit persons, the angels and Jesus, in association with that one true God). We nearly always "see" the heavenly spirit persons (God, Christ, angels) represented in human-like form. (E.g., Ezek. 1:5, 26; Acts 7:55.)
"The name ['angel'] does not denote their nature, but their office as messengers" - p. 38. "As to their nature, they are spirits.... whenever angels appeared to man it was always in a human form." - p. 39. And, "In...2 Cor. 3:17; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 Pet. 3:18, it ['spirit'] designates the divine nature." - p. 593, Today's Dictionary of the Bible, 1982, Bethany House Publ., written by mainstream trinitarian scholars.
So we see God (who is a spirit person) always represented in human form and always as a single person, e.g., Ezek. 1:26 (Ezekiel could have easily represented him as three persons or even one person with three faces-compare Ezek. 1:10 -- but no Bible writer ever does such a thing! (Compare Dan. 7:9, 13) We nearly always see the spirit person of the resurrected Jesus in human form and always as a single person. We always see the individual spirit persons who are messengers (angels) of God as individual persons (and, incidentally, always with masculine, not neuter or feminine, personal names). But we never see the holy spirit as a person (and it is frequently represented as something that can be dealt out in multiple portions) - Acts 2:3, 4.
It is more than just odd that we "see" God (the Father only, Jehovah), we see Christ (the Son only, Jesus) with God, sent from God praying to God, etc., but we never see the neuter "person" of the nameless holy spirit in heaven with God or with the Son!
This could not be if the trinity doctrine were true. The inspired Bible writers simply could not so completely ignore as they have in the Holy Scriptures a person who is God!
There is no proper evidence (let alone proof) for the concept of the holy spirit being a person who is God!
This certainly should come as no surprise when we understand that the Bible writers all considered the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force sent by God - (see pp. 1-4). When a person rejects that force which God himself has produced and sent, then, of course, he is also rejecting the Most High God. This is why Jesus can equate the Holy Spirit with God and, at the same time (since Jesus is not God), show the superiority of God to himself:
"whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven" - Matt. 12:32, RSV.

The Watchtower Society's commentary on Luke's gospel

A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

 

 

LUKE, GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO

 

 

An account primarily relating the events of Jesus’ earthly ministry. Its purpose was to present an accurate record in logical order, verifying the certainty of what Theophilus had been taught orally. (Lu 1:3, 4) As suggested by its having a place in the Bible canon, this record was also to benefit many other persons, both Jews and non-Jews. Whereas topical arrangement appears to predominate at times, this Gospel follows a chronological order in general outline.

Writer and Time Written. Although not named therein, the physician Luke (Col 4:14) has generally been credited with the writership of this account. There is written evidence to this effect from as early as the second century C.E., the Gospel being attributed to Luke in the Muratorian Fragment (c. 170 C.E.). Certain aspects of this Gospel may also be viewed as pointing to a well-educated physician as its writer. The vocabulary found therein is more extensive than that of the other three Gospels combined. At times the descriptions of afflictions healed by Jesus are more specific than in the other accounts.—Compare Mt 8:14; Mr 1:30; Lu 4:38; Mt 8:2; Mr 1:40; Lu 5:12.

It was evidently before writing the book of Acts that Luke completed his Gospel. (Ac 1:1, 2) Since he had accompanied Paul to Jerusalem at the end of the apostle’s third missionary journey (Ac 21:15-17), he would have been in a good position to trace accurately the things pertaining to Jesus Christ in the very land where the Son of God had carried out his activity. Following Paul’s arrest at Jerusalem and during Paul’s later imprisonment in Caesarea, Luke would have had many opportunities to interview eyewitnesses and to consult written records. So it is reasonable to conclude that the Gospel may have been written at Caesarea sometime during Paul’s confinement there for about two years (c. 56-58 C.E.).—Ac 21:30-33; 23:26-35; 24:27.

Points of Uniqueness. As in the case of the three other Gospels, Luke’s account provides abundant evidence that Jesus is indeed the Christ, the Son of God. It reveals Jesus to have been a man of prayer, one who relied fully on his heavenly Father. (Lu 3:21; 6:12-16; 11:1; 23:46) It contains numerous supplementary details, which, when combined with what is found in the three other Gospels, furnish a more complete picture of the events associated with Christ Jesus. Almost all of chapters 1 and 2 are without parallel in the other Gospels. At least six specific miracles and more than twice that number of illustrations are unique to the book. The miracles are: Jesus’ causing some of his disciples to have a miraculous catch of fish (5:1-6), his raising a widow’s son at Nain (7:11-15), as well as his healing a woman bent double (13:11-13), a man afflicted with dropsy (14:1-4), ten lepers (17:12-14), and the ear of the high priest’s slave (22:50, 51). Among the illustrations are: the two debtors (7:41-47), the neighborly Samaritan (10:30-35), the barren fig tree (13:6-9), the grand evening meal (14:16-24), the lost drachma coin (15:8, 9), the prodigal son (15:11-32), the unrighteous steward (16:1-8), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the widow and the unrighteous judge (18:1-8).

Chronological material appearing in this Gospel aids in determining when John the Baptizer and Jesus were born and when they began their respective ministries.—Lu 1:24-27; 2:1-7; 3:1, 2, 23; see REGISTRATION.

Authenticity. Indicative of the authenticity of Luke’s Gospel and the harmony between it and other Bible books are the numerous Hebrew Scripture references it contains and the quotations made therein from the Hebrew Scriptures. (Compare Lu 2:22-24; Ex 13:2; Le 12:8; Lu 3:3-6; Isa 40:3-5; Lu 7:27; Mal 3:1; Lu 4:4, 8, 12; De 8:3; 6:13, 16; Lu 4:18, 19; Isa 61:1, 2.) Further testifying to the book’s authenticity is the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple.—Lu 19:41-44; 21:5, 6.

[Box on page 283]

HIGHLIGHTS OF LUKE

Luke’s account of the life of Jesus, written to confirm the certainty of events surrounding the life of Christ and in a manner that would appeal to people of all nations

The second Gospel written; it was likely recorded between 56 and 58 C.E.

Events preceding Jesus’ public ministry (1:1–4:13)

Gabriel announces in advance to Mary that she is to bear the Son of God; at Jesus’ birth angels identify him as “Christ the Lord”

At 12 years of age, Jesus questions the teachers at the temple

At his baptism by John, holy spirit comes upon Jesus and a voice from heaven identifies Jesus as God’s Son

Satan fails in repeated efforts to tempt Jesus

Jesus’ early ministry, largely in Galilee (4:14–9:62)

In a synagogue in Nazareth, Jesus reads his commission from the scroll of Isaiah; hearers attempt to kill him

He teaches in a synagogue in Capernaum, expels a demon, and cures many who are sick

He is challenged on issues such as the forgiveness of sins and healing on the Sabbath

After praying all night, Jesus chooses his 12 apostles

He delivers the Sermon on the Mount

He heals an army officer’s slave and resurrects a widow’s son

Jesus tells the parables of the two debtors and the sower; he performs more miracles, including the resurrection of Jairus’ daughter

The apostles are sent out to preach the Kingdom of God

Peter identifies Jesus as the Christ; soon after, he and two other apostles witness the transfiguration

Jesus’ later ministry, largely in Judea and Perea (10:1–19:27)

Jesus sends out the 70 to preach

He tells the parable of the neighborly Samaritan

He teaches his disciples how to pray, then refutes the charge that he expels demons by means of Beelzebub

Jesus warns against materialism and urges disciples to seek God’s Kingdom; he speaks of the little flock and the faithful steward

He heals a woman who is bent double and answers objections because this is done on the Sabbath

He shows that those who would be disciples must face up to what it involves

He relates parables, including the ones about the prodigal son and the rich man and Lazarus

Jesus warns his disciples about stumbling others; he illustrates the need for humility

He heals ten lepers, but only one, a Samaritan, returns to thank him

Jesus compares “the days of the Son of man” to the days of Noah and of Lot

He again stresses the need for humility—especially for the rich—then travels to Jericho, where Zacchaeus is converted

Using the parable of the minas, he shows that the Kingdom is not going to come at that time

Jesus’ final public ministry, in and around Jerusalem (19:28–24:53)

Jesus rides into Jerusalem and is hailed by the people, but he weeps over the city and foretells its desolation

He ejects the money changers from the temple; then he is confronted with tricky questions about taxes and the resurrection

Foretelling the destruction of the temple and the fall of Jerusalem, Jesus speaks also of the end of the appointed times of the nations

He institutes the Memorial of his death, and afterward he is betrayed; when Peter strikes off the ear of the high priest’s slave, Jesus heals the man

Arrested, Jesus is led to the house of the high priest, to the Sanhedrin, and to Pilate; then he is sent to Herod and finally returned to Pilate

Jesus is impaled; on the stake he speaks about Paradise to an evildoer hung with him; as he dies, darkness falls over the earth and the curtain of the sanctuary is rent down the middle

His body is buried, but within three days the resurrected Jesus appears to his followers

Finally, Jesus starts his ascent to heaven before their eyes

The Watchtower Society's Commentary on John's Gospel.

Areproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

 

 

JOHN, GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO

 

 

An account of Jesus Christ’s earthly life and ministry, the last of the four to be written.

Writership. Though the book does not name its writer, it has been almost universally acknowledged that it was written by the hand of the apostle John. From the beginning, his writership was not challenged, except by a small group in the second century who objected on the ground that they considered the book’s teachings unorthodox, but not because of any evidence concerning writership. Only since the advent of modern “critical” scholarship has John’s writership been challenged anew.

The internal evidence that the apostle John, the son of Zebedee, was indeed the writer consists of such an abundance of proofs from various viewpoints that it overwhelms any arguments to the contrary. Only a very limited number of points are mentioned here, but the alert reader, with these in mind, will find a great many more. A few are:

(1) The writer of the book was evidently a Jew, as is indicated by his familiarity with Jewish opinions.—Joh 1:21; 6:14; 7:40; 12:34.

(2) He was a native dweller in the land of Palestine, as is indicated by his thorough acquaintance with the country. The details mentioned concerning places named indicate personal knowledge of them. He referred to “Bethany across the Jordan” (Joh 1:28) and ‘Bethany near Jerusalem.’ (11:18) He wrote that there was a garden at the place where Christ was impaled and a new memorial tomb in it (19:41), that Jesus “spoke in the treasury as he was teaching in the temple” (8:20), and that “it was wintertime, and Jesus was walking in the temple in the colonnade of Solomon” (10:22, 23).

(3) The writer’s own testimony and the factual evidence show that he was an eyewitness. He names individuals who said or did certain things (Joh 1:40; 6:5, 7; 12:21; 14:5, 8, 22; 18:10); he is detailed about the times of events (4:6, 52; 6:16; 13:30; 18:28; 19:14; 20:1; 21:4); he factually designates numbers in his descriptions, doing so unostentatiously.—1:35; 2:6; 4:18; 5:5; 6:9, 19; 19:23; 21:8, 11.

(4) The writer was an apostle. No one but an apostle could have been eyewitness to so many events associated with Jesus’ ministry; also his intimate knowledge of Jesus’ mind, feelings, and reasons for certain actions reveals that he was one of the party of 12 who accompanied Jesus throughout his ministry. For example, he tells us that Jesus asked Philip a question to test him, “for he himself knew what he was about to do.” (Joh 6:5, 6) Jesus knew “in himself that his disciples were murmuring.” (6:61) He knew “all the things coming upon him.” (18:4) He “groaned in the spirit and became troubled.” (11:33; compare 13:21; 2:24; 4:1, 2; 6:15; 7:1.) The writer was also familiar with the apostles’ thoughts and impressions, some of which were wrong and were corrected later.—2:21, 22; 11:13; 12:16; 13:28; 20:9; 21:4.

(5) Additionally, the writer is spoken of as “the disciple whom Jesus used to love.” (Joh 21:20, 24) He was evidently one of the three most intimate apostles that Jesus kept nearest to him on several occasions, such as the transfiguration (Mr 9:2) and the time of his anguish in the garden of Gethsemane. (Mt 26:36, 37) Of these three apostles, James is eliminated as the writer because of his being put to death about 44 C.E. by Herod Agrippa I. There is no evidence whatsoever for such an early date for the writing of this Gospel. Peter is ruled out by having his name mentioned alongside “the disciple whom Jesus used to love.”—Joh 21:20, 21.

Authenticity. The Gospel of John was accepted as canonical by the early Christian congregation. It appears in nearly all the ancient catalogs, being there accepted without query as authentic. The epistles of Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 C.E.) contain clear traces of his use of John’s Gospel, as do also the writings of Justin Martyr a generation later. It is found in all the most important codices of the Christian Greek Scriptures— the Sinaitic, Vatican, Alexandrine, Ephraemi, Bezae, Washington I, and Koridethi codices—as well as in all the early versions. A fragment of this Gospel containing part of John chapter 18 is contained in the John Rylands Papyrus 457 (P⁵²), of the first half of the second century. Also parts of chapters 10 and 11 are found in the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 1 (P⁴⁵), and a large part of the whole book is found in the Bodmer Papyrus No. 2 (P⁶⁶) of the early third century.

When and Where Written. It is generally thought that John had been released from exile on the island of Patmos and was in or near Ephesus, about 100 km (60 mi) from Patmos, at the time he wrote his Gospel, about 98 C.E. Roman Emperor Nerva (96-98 C.E.) recalled many who had been exiled at the close of the reign of his predecessor Domitian. John may have been among these. In the Revelation that John received on Patmos, Ephesus was one of the congregations to which he was commanded to write.

John had reached a very old age, being probably about 90 or 100 when he wrote his Gospel. He was undoubtedly familiar with the other three accounts of Jesus’ earthly life and ministry, also the Acts of Apostles and the letters written by Paul, Peter, James, and Jude. He had had opportunity to see Christian doctrine fully revealed and had seen the effects of its preaching to all nations. He also had seen the beginning of “the man of lawlessness.” (2Th 2:3) He had witnessed many of Jesus’ prophecies already fulfilled, notably the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of that Jewish system of things.

Purpose of John’s Gospel. John, inspired by holy spirit, was selective in the events he chose to chronicle, because, as he says: “To be sure, Jesus performed many other signs also before the disciples, which are not written down in this scroll,” and, “There are, in fact, many other things also which Jesus did, which, if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose, the world itself could not contain the scrolls written.”—Joh 20:30; 21:25.

With these things in mind, John states his purpose for writing the account he was led by inspiration to write, in which he repeated little that had been written before: “But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name.”—Joh 20:31.

John emphasized the fact that what he wrote was real and true and that it had actually taken place. (Joh 1:14; 21:24) His Gospel is a valuable addition to the Bible canon as the actual eyewitness evidence from the last living apostle of Jesus Christ.

Widely Published. The Good News According to John has been the most widely published of any part of the Bible. Thousands of copies of the Gospel of John have been separately printed and distributed, apart from its being included in copies of the complete Bible.

Value. In harmony with the Revelation, in which Jesus Christ states that he is “the beginning of the creation by God” (Re 3:14), John points out that this One was with God “in the beginning” and that “all things came into existence through him.” (Joh 1:1-3) Throughout the Gospel he stresses the intimacy of this only-begotten Son of God with his Father, and he quotes many of Jesus’ statements revealing that intimacy. Throughout the book we are kept aware of the Father-Son relationship, the subjection of the Son, and the worship of Jehovah as God by his Son. (Joh 20:17) This closeness qualified the Son to reveal the Father as no one else could and as God’s servants of ages past never realized. And John highlights the affectionate love of the Father for the Son and for those who become God’s sons by exercising faith in the Son.

Jesus Christ is presented as God’s channel of blessing to mankind and the only way of approach to God. He is revealed as the One through whom undeserved kindness and truth come (Joh 1:17), also as “the Lamb of God” (1:29), “the only-begotten Son of God” (3:18), “the bridegroom” (3:29), “the true bread from heaven” (6:32), “the bread of God” (6:33), “the bread of life” (6:35), “living bread” (6:51), “the light of the world” (8:12), “the Son of man” (9:35), “the door” of the sheepfold (10:9), “the fine shepherd” (10:11), “the resurrection and the life” (11:25), “the way and the truth and the life” (14:6), and “the true vine” (15:1).

Jesus Christ’s position as King is stressed (Joh 1:49; 12:13; 18:33), also his authority as Judge (5:27) and the power of resurrection granted him by his Father. (5:28, 29; 11:25) John reveals Christ’s role in sending the holy spirit as a “helper,” to act in the capacities of remembrancer or reminder, witness bearer for Him, and teacher. (14:26; 15:26; 16:14, 15) But John does not allow the reader to lose sight of the fact that it is actually God’s spirit, emanating from God and sent by His authority. Jesus made it clear that the holy spirit could not come in such capacity unless he went to the Father, who is greater than he is. (16:7; 14:28) Then his disciples would do even greater works, for the reason that Christ would again be with his Father and would answer requests asked in his own name, all for the purpose of bringing glory to the Father.—14:12-14.

John reveals Jesus Christ also as the sacrificial ransom for mankind. (Joh 3:16; 15:13) His title “Son of man” reminds us of his being most closely related to man by becoming flesh, being man’s kinsman, and by reason of this, as foreshadowed in the Law, the repurchaser and avenger of blood. (Le 25:25; Nu 35:19) Christ told his disciples that the ruler of this world had no hold on him but that he had conquered the world and, as a result, the world was judged and its ruler was to be cast out. (Joh 12:31; 14:30) Jesus’ followers are encouraged to conquer the world by keeping loyalty and integrity to God as Jesus did. (Joh 16:33) This harmonizes with the Revelation that John had received, in which Christ repeats the need to conquer and promises rich heavenly rewards alongside him to those in union with him.—Re 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21.

The Spurious Passage at John 7:53–8:11. These 12 verses have obviously been added to the original text of John’s Gospel. They are not found in the Sinaitic Manuscript or the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, though they do appear in the sixth-century Codex Bezae and later Greek manuscripts. They are omitted, however, by most of the early versions. It is evident that they are not part of John’s Gospel. One group of Greek manuscripts places this passage at the end of John’s Gospel; another group puts it after Luke 21:38, supporting the conclusion that it is a spurious and uninspired text.

[Box on page 92]

HIGHLIGHTS OF JOHN

The apostle John’s account of the life of Jesus, highlighting the theme that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, by means of whom eternal life is possible

Written about 98 C.E., more than 30 years after the last of the other three Gospels and 65 years after the death of Jesus

The Word becomes flesh and is identified as the Lamb of God, God’s Son, and the Christ (1:1-51)

The Word, who was in the beginning with God, resides among men but is rejected by his people; those who accept him are given authority to become God’s children

John the Baptizer testifies that Jesus is God’s Son and the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world

Andrew and then others become convinced that Jesus is the Christ

Jesus’ miracles and preaching demonstrate that he is the Christ, through whom eternal life is attainable (2:1–6:71)

Jesus turns water into wine in Cana

He tells Nicodemus that God sent His only-begotten Son so that faithful ones may have everlasting life

He speaks to a Samaritan woman about the spiritual water that imparts everlasting life, and he identifies himself as the Christ

Jesus performs healing miracles; the Jews object when a healing takes place on the Sabbath, and they want to kill him

Proclaiming that those who believe him have everlasting life, Jesus foretells the resurrection of all in the memorial tombs

He miraculously feeds about 5,000 men; when the crowd wants to make him king, he withdraws; when the people keep following him, he identifies himself as the bread that came down from heaven and tells them they will have to eat his flesh and drink his blood if they want everlasting life

Hostility to the Son of God intensifies (7:1–12:50)

Jesus boldly preaches in temple area although the chief priests and the Pharisees are seeking to seize him

Jesus announces that he is the light of the world and that the truth can make his listeners free, but they try to stone him

On the Sabbath, Jesus heals a man who was born blind; the Pharisees are furious

Jesus identifies himself as the fine shepherd, explaining that his sheep listen to his voice; the Jews again try to stone him

The resurrection of Lazarus fills the Jewish religious leaders with fear; they determine that both Jesus and Lazarus must die

Jesus rides into Jerusalem and is hailed as King by the crowd but not by the Pharisees

At the final Passover, Jesus gives parting counsel to his followers (13:1–17:26)

He washes their feet to teach humility and gives “a new commandment,” that they should love one another as he loved them

He identifies himself as the way, the truth, and the life; he promises to send the holy spirit to his disciples after his departure

To bear fruit, his followers must remain at one with him, the true vine; but they will be persecuted

Jesus prays for his followers and reports to his Father that he has finished the work assigned to him, making His name manifest

Jesus is arrested, rejected by Jewish nation, and impaled (18:1–19:42)

In Gethsemane, Jesus is arrested; he is led before Annas, Caiaphas, and then Pilate

He tells Pilate that His kingdom is no part of this world

When Pilate’s efforts to release him are frustrated, Jesus is impaled and dies

Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus care for his burial

Evidence of resurrection of Jesus concludes John’s proof that this one really is the Christ (20:1–21:25)

Jesus is seen by Mary Magdalene, then by the rest of the disciples, including Thomas

In Galilee, he performs one final miracle, providing a miraculous catch of fish, and then he gives the commission: “Feed my little sheep”