Having heard the theological breakdowns of John's gospel, I am acknowledging that these portrayals are most assuredly there. However, all those word pictures seem to do little for me as I am always taken back by the power and depth of this introduction
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Sadly, most of us do not grasp what is being said here; it is a point that goes on for several verses and magnifies the concept that “NOTHING” was made without Him.
My fiance (at the time) had a run-in with a lady who was an adamant defender of Replacement Theology. (I mentioned this to my men's group, and a retired teacher was in that group. Immediately, the teacher responded, “This is what Hitler was teaching in Germany as he rose to power. ") The woman espousing Replacement Theology threw her hand up in my fiance's face several times. It's the gesture some use when they refuse to leave room for communication. I am unsure how effective it is, but they are telling you, “Talk to the hand,” because I am not listening. As my fiancee tried to enlighten her through simple, apologetic defenses, she included the fact that the Bible is a Jewish book written to the early church, which primarily consisted of Jewish converts. My fiancee made me proud by asserting that we need to come into line with the concept if we want to understand so many of those things we consistently miss - like the entire Book of Revelation. Thankfully, the Pastor came into view and reiterated those same ideas to this lady without full knowledge of what had been said. (It is nice to know you are on the right track, or at least in line with your pastor's theological position, something we were unaware of previously.)
Why was any of that necessary?
Because reading for understanding will help to quell the false teachings, like Replacement Theology.
Reading for depth is precisely what I want to do with John's gospel.
Having done this once before in a group setting, I can tell you it is lengthy. Before you berate me for not being concise, I must inform you that I stumbled upon a commentary by Arthur Pink; his commentary is exclusively focused on the Gospel of John and is as thick as my Four Translation Comparative Bible, and I value the insights I find there.
Why did John write this Gospel?
First, let me comment on the timing.
We understand that John wrote this gospel about A.D. 90. As a comparison, John wrote the Revelation on the Isle of Patmos about A.D. 96.
Luke wrote his gospel about A.D. 56-63
Mark, it appears, was writing on behalf of Peter and wrote between A.D. 57-63
Matthew, one of the disciples, and like John - a first-hand witness, wrote, according to tradition, A.D. 37. An interesting point here is that Dr. Gary Habermas brought out in an apologetics seminar that I attended pointed out how early eyewitness accounts are the most valid piece of evidence we have of an event; Jesus' life and death are that event. This is important because Jesus was crucified and rose again in A.D. 36. Matthew gave us a first-hand account within one year of Jesus' death. Contrast this information with someone like Buddha, who had nothing written about him until 600 to 800 years later.
Secondly, as we come to understand from the reading of Paul's missionary journeys, John was ministering exclusively to the Jewish community.
It is possible that having heard Jesus say, “I have come for the lost sheep of Israel,” John also took this to heart.
John also witnessed the impact of the Holy Spirit, not only on the life of Peter on the Day of Pentecost but on the number of Jews (over 3000) who came to an understanding that Jesus was the Messiah they longed for.
Suddenly, there was a great need for a Pastor.
What would that need have looked like to the young disciple John, considering that all they knew about leading people came out of the synagogues, and, even though we do not see this spelled out in scripture, what Jesus might have been teaching them.
The third point I want to consider is that John wrote, almost exclusively, to a Jewish audience.
One piece of evidence for this comes from Revelation, which was written sometime later.
Revelation 1:11 KJV Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What you see, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
Church. This is the Greek word ekklesia - a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564 - and means a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (a Jewish synagogue or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.
We can also see from Vine's Expository of New Testament Words that the word ekklēsia can be interpreted as Assembly.
1. ekklesia (G1577), from ek, "out of," and klesis, "a calling" (kaleo, "to call"), was used among the Greeks of a body of citizens "gathered" to discuss the affairs of state, Acts 19:39. In the Septuagint. It is used to designate the "gathering" of Israel, summoned for any definite purpose, or a "gathering" regarded as representative of the whole nation. In Acts 7:38, it is used for Israel; in Acts 19:32 and Acts 19:41, for a riotous mob. It has two applications to companies of Christians, (a) to the whole company of the redeemed throughout the present era, the company of which Christ said, "I will build My Church," Matthew 16:18, and which is further described as "the Church which is His Body," Ephesians 1:22; Ephesians 5:23, (b) in the singular number (e.g., Matthew 18:17, RV marg., "congregation"), to a company consisting of professed believers, e.g., Acts 20:28; 1Corinthians 1:2.
Because some will not buy into this idea of John writing to a Jewish community based upon one witness, allow me to give you another.
Revelation 2:9 KJV I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not but are the synagogue of Satan.
Things to make note of here. Satan does not have a synagogue, but Jews do.
However, John was not writing to Jews in general; he was specifically writing to Jewish converts, many of whom were still meeting in their synagogues.
Verse 9 above says, “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not but of the synagogue of Satan.”
This tells me that they did not have to give up their traditions - feasts of the Jews – holy days, nor abandon being a part of the life found in the synagogues. For those who wish to espouse the false teaching of Replacement Theology, it does not take much to see that God, even in this example, had not ordered them out of the synagogues but merely desired to become the center of their focus as the living Messiah, the primary person that they, as Jews, were looking for.
The word synagogue appears in several NT books and is not exclusive to John's writings.
Assuming that John's most significant impact would be on the Jewish community that is now a believer, why did he think he needed to emphasize, in the most substantial way, that Jesus was God?
Perhaps the answer lies in Revelation 2:9, which says,
“and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.”
Christians are notorious for asking, how can I know if I committed the unpardonable sin of blasphemy? The mere fact that you are concerned demonstrates that you have not. So, we ask this question because we do not know what the word blasphemy means or what it applies to.
Jesus answered this question in Matthew 12:32 when He said,
“Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.”
Another translation may be more precise.
"Anyone who speaks against the Son of Man can be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come." Matthew 12:32 NLT
Go back to Matthew 12 and see what the context is.
The Pharisees had attributed the things He had done to Satan/Beelzebub. So, the relevance comes into play in Revelation 2:9 because this body, considered to be believers, had attributed God's works to Satan.
If I had understood that this was your frailty, I would have wanted to bring you back to the center, and it would probably sound like this: “The Word was God Himself.”
