- This topic is empty.
- Posts
kejonn….The possibilities are definitly there, it will be interesting how it all washes out some day. I personally don't believe John wrote it either…….interesting post….gene
The title lamb of God; inferring that he is a sacrifice given from God is
Brought forth into the generation of the children by one writer loading it on another’s lips, the one sent forth to pave the way; a major injunctionJhn 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Jhn 1:36
And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!This is why I find it offence
God did not give his Life to be taken; His life was to lead us and feed us;
His soul was made and offering to justify many; from which he would see his seedThe Son Of Man Has no Place to lay his head
Here first Meet the Son of MAN; and the power that is invested in him
And it is the son Of Man that we shall see coming on the clouds; men have greatly erred following after doctrines of demons? And his Funtions?
The Son of Man is the reedmner; Son of God is the judger with fire; that shall remove us out this place
Mat 8:20
And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air [have] nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay [his] head.
Mat 9:2
And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. (yet they still have put him to death save themselves and worship it year after year)
Mat 9:6
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.
Mat 10:23
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Mat 11:27
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]. (preserved and justified pre ordained to come without sin; from the faithfullness of his Father David mercy from God)
Mat 12:8
For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. (As the sabath draw near they fused to finish; for it is writen in their Law that a man put to death must be buried before the sun go down; yet God caught them with his body commanding the sun to go down at noon; a great fear came apon them)
Mat 12:32
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.
Mat 12:40
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Mat 13:37
He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; Mat 13:41
The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 16:27
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Mat 16:28
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Mat 17:9
And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.(Sure Mercy of David raised once; to destroy the power over the second death; only to rise again for was incorruptible)
Mat 17:12
But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. (For when he came into the world he said his fathers words.. Lo A new Body hast thou prepared for me; to do thy work)
Mat 17:22
And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: (They cut of Life that we have less leading from him)
Mat 18:11
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. (rise up the ruins of Many generations; the first born of the dead; risen from the grave of the womb)
Mat 19:28
And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. ( see My signture; David by ressuretion of Life; the father is in Him; Soul)
Mat 20:28
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Mat 24:27
For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Mat 24:30
And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Mat 24:37
But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (desolation of desert}For in the days following the sun going down at noon; and the cutting of his life; they made us to suffer a great tribulation;
Amo 8:9 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord GOD, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day:
10 And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of an only [son], and the end thereof as a bitter day. 11 ¶ Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD: 12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find [it]. 13 In that day shall the fair virgins and young men faint for thirst.
14 They that swear by the sin of Samaria, and say, Thy god, O Dan, liveth; and, The manner of Beersheba liveth; even they shall fall, and never rise up again.What sayest the men?
charity
The gospel of John using Jesus to tell; if you can’t understand right now my speech;…then you are of the father the devil; being the only gospel to say and acuse one of such a thing as not understanding? leaving some burdend thoughts of not being worthy of the manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: 2Th 1:5
Jhn 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word. 44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.Glory to God; narrowly we see thru a glass even now?
is not easy to see the way; if happly we might feel after him comforted?Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.Quote (kejonn @ Aug. 23 2007,18:48) Quote (michaels @ Aug. 21 2007,23:51) Quote (charity @ Aug. 23 2007,00:25) Michaels its only writen that peter was taken away hmmm? the problem is the things writen
Act 12:2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. Act 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
jonh21:18 but when thou shalt be old though shalt strech forth thy hands, and another shall gird the, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. why did jesus say this,hmmm me know what john thought this ment, but me think this was a warning,for us, for are we not tested that when we go threw the fire we should come out the other side shineing,me believe GOD, and the father spoke threw jesus.
One thing you might want to consider: Since most scholars feel GoJ was written around 90-95 CE, Peter would have already been dead. Just think on that and why you don't see this event in Mark's Gospel if it was Peter's memories…
God is the God of the liveing not the dead,if peter was dead how can we believe the writeings you say he dident write,that you say john mark had to have writen.john mark is also dead,should not we look to the liveing rather than the dead?john is yet alive today,and will never see death.hmmm me have yet to see any sound evidence that john wasent writen first.There is no “sound” evidence of the date of authorship of any of the books of the NT. However, the date of 90-100 is generally accepted by most scholars. As far as the writer being alive still, reread the verse that pertains to this thought:
Joh 21:23 Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”
Do you believe in a saying, while discounting what is highlighted above? I would think that if the writer of John were around still today, he'd (or she'd) at least anonymously help us understand the book that was written. But just like Elvis, the writer of GoJ is long since dead.
michaels All that came from Adam and all Mankind will die, and did, but all will be made alive in Christ Jesus, at His coming.
Good to hear from you , we were wondering already what happened to you.Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote (kejonn @ Sep. 03 2007,12:59) There is no “sound” evidence of the date of authorship of any of the books of the NT. However, the date of 90-100 is generally accepted by most scholars. As far as the writer being alive still, reread the verse that pertains to this thought: Joh 21:23 Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”
Do you believe in a saying, while discounting what is highlighted above? I would think that if the writer of John were around still today, he'd (or she'd) at least anonymously help us understand the book that was written. But just like Elvis, the writer of GoJ is long since dead.
me dont believe him dead,is enoch dead,or alijah.he may not be here phicyical to open the eyes of the blind,yet if he was who would believe his report,hmmm none for the dead dont believe in life but death.did they believe jesus,hmmm when it was time john walked rite up with the father,for who would want to stay here,instead of being with God,in God with JESUS.did elvis know God and keep all he asked in obediance,hmmm.is elvis jesus or was he one of jesus diciples.how can this even be thought as a compairison.is satan God,dont you believe in the promises God has for us,all you have to do is believe,and you too will never see death.maybe you can find a musterd seed around somewhere.me dont worry about phisycal death,yet me dont see a reason for it,but if its Gods will then me would die to be obediant,yet thanks to jesus even if me died physicly,God has given me the life eternal.so praise God he is one.Here is something related to a study I am doing on John 1. From Wikipedia
Cerinthus (c 100) was an early Christian originator of a heretical sect,[neutrality disputed] a “heresiarch” in the view of the Church Fathers. Contrary to proto-orthodox Christianity, Cerinthus's school followed the Jewish law, denied that the Supreme God had made the physical world, and denied the divinity of Jesus. In Cerinthus' interpretation, the Christ came to Jesus at baptism, guided him in his ministry, but left him at the crucifixion.
Like many early Christians, he taught that Jesus would establish a thousand-year reign after the Second Coming but before the General Resurrection, a view that was defined as heretical at the Council of Nicea. Cerinthus used a version of the gospel of Matthew as scripture.
Cerinthus taught at a time when Christianity's relation to Judaism and to Greek philosophy had not yet been clearly defined. In his association with the Jewish law and his modest assessment of Jesus, he was similar to the Ebionites and to other Jewish Christians. In defining the world's creator as the demiurge, he matched Greek philosophy and anticipated the Gnostics. His description of Christ as a bodiless spirit that dwelled temporarily in the man Jesus matches the Gnosticism of Valentius.
Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who wrote the Gospel of John against him. All we know about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents.
Cerinthus distinguished between the man Jesus and the Christ. He denied the supernatural birth of Jesus, making him the son of Joseph and Mary, and distinguishing him from Christ, who descended upon him at baptism and left him again at his crucifixion. Cerinthus is also said to have taught that Jesus will be raised from the dead at the Last Day, when all men will rise with Him
The last part matches
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Note how the writer of the Epistle specifically says “Jesus Christ” and not just “Jesus” or “Christ” alone. He combines both (as should be!) to show they are one in the same.
Another interesting passage from John that was written directly in opposition to the Gnostics:
Joh 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;
Joh 20:31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.The Gnostics (at least some of them) were saying that Jesus was a man, not born of the virgin Mary, and that Christ ascended on him at the baptism. The Christ then fled at the cross. But it appears that the Gospel of John was written in many instances to disprove their teachings, and that may be why it IS so different than the Synoptics.
So in this last passage of John 20, the writer tells them Jesus IS the Christ, the Son of God. And it basically said that all that was recorded was to show this very fact. It started back in John 1:1.
Hi Kejonn
Which waysss…up…. is it seek what’s written in the heart first, what is my spirit saying; and then let it be confirmed within the scriptures?
Or let the scriptures of another hearts perception sow our being? and its Okay if they are first fruits that won’t lead us wrong; it’s really pleasing to see the way you are willing to search out a matter of genuineness within handwritings,
I”m thinking before long it shall be to hard for the deceptions as wool to be pulled over your eyes
Such a heart after the truth, blessed are they that hold a love of the truth, thy path will be on Straight Street.Keeping on the journey to eternity
charity
Hi,
Does it matter who penned the words of John or Peter or Paul?
What we must know is that these are anointed words and can be relied on
more than our natural instincts.Quote Does it matter who penned the words of John or Peter or Paul? It matters in that if some are trying to tear apart the Bible, they can make all kind of claims that the Bible is a lie, or in this case, that those who penned it weren't who they claimed to be.
Looking at the book of John: 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.
So the evidence for John as the writer is strong. As is the 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.
Quote (kejonn @ Aug. 17 2007,03:32) Many scholars believed that Peter did not write the epistles that were attributed to him, but that they were written by Mark as a type of “secretary”. This is because the believe through various clues in scripture that Peter was a fisherman by trade, and most fisherman in that time were mostly illiterate. However, the words of Peter's epistles were thought to be his even if Mark actually wrote them. But what about the Gospel of John? The consensus among scholars is that the Apostle John wrote it, but there are some who say it could have been another John. I stumbled across a verse that would question the Apostle John as the author because the GoJ appears to be quite Hellenistic and fairly well written. The opening chapter of John is also fairly philosophical. Here is the verse:
Act 4:13 Now as they observed the confidence of Peter and John and understood that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus.
The KJV uses “unlearned”. The Vine's entry for this is:
Unlearned:
lit., “unlettered” (grammata, “letters:” grapho, “to write”), Act 4:13, is explained by Grimm-Thayer as meaning “unversed in the learning of the Jewish schools;” in the papyri, however, it occurs very frequently in a formula used by one who signs for another who cannot write, which suggests that the rulers, elders and scribes regarded the Apostles as “unlettered” (Moulton and Milligan).
Also, it is well known that like Peter and Andrew, John was a fisherman. Fisherman of that time period did not typically have the time or monetary means to become literate, nor was it deemed as necessary in that day and age.
Another clue that leads me to believe that the Apostle John was not the writer of GoJ was the scene during the transfiguration of Yahshua.
Mat 17:1 Six days later Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up on a high mountain by themselves.
Mat 17:2 And He was transfigured before them; and His face shone like the sun, and His garments became as white as light.
Mat 17:3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.
Mat 17:4 Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, I will make three tabernacles here, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah.”
Mat 17:5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!”
Mat 17:6 When the disciples heard this, they fell face down to the ground and were terrified.
Mat 17:7 And Jesus came to them and touched them and said, “Get up, and do not be afraid.”
Mat 17:8 And lifting up their eyes, they saw no one except Jesus Himself alone.
Mat 17:9 As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.”This is a very important event in the mission of Yahshua yet GoJ makes no mention of it. It was mentioned in Mark 9 (it is believed that Mark was written using Peter as the eye-witness to the life of Yahshua) and Luke 9, but not in John at all. Perhaps the writer of GoJ thought it would be redundant since it was in the other 3, but who knows?
Of course this has nothing to do with the message of GoJ, but I find it interesting that these two items seem to lead away from the Apostle John being the writer of GoJ. Any thoughts?
The apostle John may also have alluded to the transfiguration at John 1:14.JOHN 1:14
“So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth.”They definitely did have a view of his glory during the transfiguration.
John states that he didn't record everything:
JOHN 21:25
“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.”As you say: “Perhaps the writer of GoJ thought it would be redundant since it was in the other 3, but who knows?”
Yes, “who knows.” Not you, nor I.
****
And about John being called “unlettered and ordinary”: Yes, as you stated, this is referring to being untrained in the rabbinical schools of thought. You weren't considered of much importance by the pharisees if you weren't taught by them. This does not have to mean that they can't read or write.
As your source says it primarily means “”unversed in the learning of the Jewish schools;” AND THAT THEY WERE.
Yet, the outspokenness of them! They were speaking as ones who knew something.
MATTHEW 11:25
“At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes.”1 CORINTHIANS 1:27
“but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put the wise men to shame; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put the strong things to shame;”To the world, to the religious leaders of that time, Jesus' disciples were foolish, babes, yet this is what God chose, the apparent foolish things of the world, to put the wise men to shame.
david
david……..> i would have to bothe agree and disagree with you, I would agree that the author of John is not that important, but the author of the gospel does not seem to be John. I believe it might have been Lazarus because He was refured to as the deciple whom Jesus loved. The spritual value is still there no matter who wrote it.
peace to you and yours……..gene
Ok, it seems to me that John when writing of himself, has a tendancy to humbly omitt himself.
JOHN 21:20
“Upon turning about Peter saw the disciple whom Jesus used to love following, the one who at the evening meal had also leaned back upon his breast and said: “Lord, who is the one betraying you?””
JOHN 21:24
“This is the disciple that bears witness about these things and that wrote these things, and we know that the witness he gives is true.”
(So it's “the disciple [follower] whom Jesus used to love” who “bears witness about these things and that wrote these things.”
SO WHO IS THIS ONE?)
We know that it is not Peter, for in this very verse, Peter saw the one who is in question. Peter didn't see himself.JOHN 13:23,24
“There was reclining in front of Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, and Jesus loved him. Therefore Simon Peter nodded to this one and said to him: “Tell who it is about whom he is saying [it].” ”
(No lazarus here and it's definitely not Peter, for peter nodded to this one. How do we know it's not Lazarus that is spoken of as being the on “Jesus loved” here? He wasn't there:
MATTHEW 26:20
“When, now, it had become evening, he was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples.”
MARK 14:17
“After evening had fallen he came with the twelve.”
LUKE 22:14
“At length when the hour came, he reclined at the table, and the apostles with him.”)JOHN 20:1-4
“On the first day of the week Mary Mag′da·lene came to the memorial tomb early, while there was still darkness, and she beheld the stone already taken away from the memorial tomb. Therefore she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple, for whom Jesus had affection, and she said to them: “They have taken away the Lord out of the memorial tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” Then Peter and the other disciple went out and started for the memorial tomb. Yes, the two together began to run; but the other disciple ran ahead of Peter with greater speed and reached the memorial tomb first.”
(Why wouldn't John just name this other one? I think it's because it's him. JOHN, who was much younger than the others, and the last to write his books, and apparently the last to die, was much younger than the other runner and so could outrun him. Of course, John humbly left his name out. Again, we know it's not Peter, for he's named as the other runner.)JOHN 19:26
“Therefore Jesus, seeing his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing by, said to his mother: “Woman, see! Your son!””
(Again, John has the tendancy to leave the name out of this one whom he loved, for some reason.)JOHN 21:20
“Upon turning about Peter saw the disciple whom Jesus used to love following, the one who at the evening meal had also leaned back upon his breast and said: “Lord, who is the one betraying you?””
(Yes, Jesus loved Peter, Lazarus, martha, etc, but here, we know it's not talking about Peter or Lazarus. So who is it talking about?JOHN 21:20
“Upon turning about Peter saw the disciple whom Jesus used to love following, the one who at the evening meal had also leaned back upon his breast and said: “Lord, who is the one betraying you?””
JOHN 21:24
“This is the disciple that bears witness about these things and that wrote these things, and we know that the witness he gives is true.”It is not written as if it was Lazarus. When speaking of Lazarus (himself in your view) he writes as though it isn't him, and he tells of the account of his resurrection as though it's not him writing. If it is Lazarus, then Lazarus is purposely being deceptive in his speech.
I know a lot of people would like it to be lazarus, because then we could say that Lazarus wasn't really resurrected, but that he was in on it with Jesus, but nowhere are we given any indication of this, in the slightest.
If going only by the fact that it was the one whom Jesus loved, more evidence points away from lazarus then toward him. (not that Jesus didn't love him and others. But look at the scriptures above.)The name John (other than John the baptist, or John the father of Peter) doesn't seem to be named at all in this gospel. Whereas lazarus is mentioned about 12 times if I remember. And he's always mentioned in the third person (if that's what it's called.).
“the DISCIPLE whom Jesus used to love.” (Joh 21:20, 24)
Not sure if lazarus is anywhere called a “disciple” (follower) of Jesus.
After being introduced to Jesus as the Christ in the fall of 29 C.E., John undoubtedly followed Jesus into Galilee and was an eyewitness to His first miracle at Cana. (Joh 2:1-11) He may have accompanied Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem, and again on his return through Samaria to Galilee, for the vividness of his account seems to stamp it as that of an eyewitness to the events described. However, the record does not so state. (Joh 2-5)
Lazarus was a friend of Jesus, but wasn’t really following him around like John. A disciple is a follower. Jesus had to travel to Lazarus when lazarus died.
“So they [INCLUDING JOHN] brought the boats back to land, and abandoned everything and followed him.” (Mt 4:18-22; Lu 5:10, 11; Mr 1:19, 20)
Lazarus, is considered their friend, and it is Jesus and the disciples (Jesus followers) who are going to him.
JOHN 11:5-12
“Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Laźa·rus. However, when he heard that he was sick, then he actually remained two days in the place where he was. Then after this he said to the DISCIPLES: “Let us go into Ju·déa again.” The DISCIPLES said to him: “Rabbi, just lately the Ju·déans were seeking to stone you, and are you going there again?” Jesus answered: “There are twelve hours of daylight, are there not? If anyone walks in daylight he does not bump against anything, because he sees the light of this world. But if anyone walks in the night, he bumps against something, because the light is not in him.” He said these things, and after this he said to them: “LAZARUS OUR FRIEND has gone to rest, but I am journeying there to awaken him from sleep.” Therefore THE DISCIPLES said to him: “Lord, if he has gone to rest, he will get well.””As well, the very intimacy of the account indicates that he was not only an apostle but one of the inner circle of three—Peter, James, and John—who accompanied Jesus on special occasions. (Matt. 17:1; Mark 5:37; 14:33) Lazarus was someone Jesus had to go to, not someone who was with Jesus, if we remember.
John was one of the three most intimately associated with Jesus. Peter, James, and John were taken to the mountain of transfiguration. (Mt 17:1, 2; Mr 9:2; Lu 9:28, 29) They only of the apostles were allowed to enter the house of Jairus with Jesus. (Mr 5:37; Lu 8:51) They were privileged to be the ones taken by Jesus farther than the others into the garden of Gethsemane on the night of his betrayal, although at that time even they did not realize the full significance of the occasion, falling asleep three times and being awakened by Jesus. (Mt 26:37, 40-45; Mr 14:33, 37-41)
Quote I believe it might have been Lazarus because He was refured to as the deciple whom Jesus loved. –Gene.
As we can see, many times someone [who cannot be lazarus] is referred to as the one Jesus loved. Lazarus was not the one in the bosom position of Jesus at the lord's evening meal, whom Jesus loved. Not sure where Lazarus is referred to as the “disciple” that Jesus loved, but in many places, someone who is not lazarus is referred to as such.
DAVID
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
