Posts Tagged ‘John’s Gospel’

Being one with God

May 31, 2025

Easter 7 – 2025

John 17:20-26

Marian Free

In the name of God in whom we live and breathe and have our being. Amen.

I love learning new words, so you can imagine how excited I was when, doing some reading to try to make sense of today’s gospel, I came across not one, but three new words! Sadly, unlike vituperative or egregious or vertiginous I’m unlikely to use these words in any other context. 

You will remember that three weeks ago I explained that John’s gospel is circular, layered, and repetitive. I failed to mention that the author of the fourth gospel is also very sparing with his vocabulary. John only needs 1011 words to tell the story of Jesus’ life. These words are repeated over and again (making it one of the easiest gospels to read in the original Greek). John’s limited vocabulary is deceiving. Many of the words have double meanings and where John uses different Greek words (for love and sheep in chapter 21) there is no intended difference in meaning. (Jesus wants to know that Peter loves him and will feed his sheep.)

The repetition of key words and themes makes the message of John relatively easy to understand. Jesus is light and life and his desire is to draw people to the light and give them life. That Jesus is one with God is made clear from the beginning and is emphasised in statements like “The Father and are one,” and “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.” This relationship is also referred to as “abiding in” – a phrase that is repeated 40 times and is used not only for the Father and the Son,  but is extended to the disciples.

My new words for whom I thank Chelsea Harmon and Bruce Malina are “antilanguage”, “relexicalization” and “overlexicalization.”[1] Whether they were created to describe the phenomena found in John or whether they preexisted the literary study of same I did not try to find out, but they do help us to understand John’s use of language.

“Antilanguage” is an expression to describe the “in-language” of a particular group. This is language that is employed to make it clear that the group in question is distinct from the culture in which it finds itself. It serves the purpose of creating a sense of cohesion within the group and of keeping outsiders (among whom we belong out.

“Relexicalization” and “overlexicalization” are techniques used in antilanguage, understanding provides a key to understanding the code. 

“Relexicalization” (as the word implies) refers to using familiar words in a new way – giving them a meaning that is unique to the group. Perhaps the most obvious word in this category is the word “or glory. John uses  “δοξα” to mean the glory that is associated with God, and which therefore is present in Jesus and but also, paradoxically, uses it to refer to Jesus’ crucifixion – Jesus ‘victory over the devil. The Johannine Jesus also gives new meaning (spiritualises if you will) words like water, bread, light and life.

The concept of oneness as used by John is expressed in a variety of ways. In order to categorise this we need the expression: “overlexicalisation” – that is the use of a cluster or words or phrases to express the same concept. “Being one” is also expressed by “believing in/into” Jesus, “following Jesus”, “abiding in” him, “loving him”, “keeping his word”, “receiving’ him, “having” him or “seeing him”.  

Where does this academic approach to the gospel leave us? It is a reminder that not only are we separated by centuries from the origins of the gospel and of the community that it represents, but we are reassured that those aspects of the gospel that puzzle us, were intended to puzzle us. Those for whom the gospel was written, believed that they had special and unique insight into the teachings of Jesus and that those who didn’t share those insights – Jew or Christian – were destined to remain outsiders. If some things about the gospel are opaque to us, the gospel has succeeded. To that community we are the outsiders, those without the insights unique to the community. 

That said, these concepts of “antilanguage”, “relexicalisatiton” and “overlexicalisation” provide us with tools for understanding, give us a window into the gospel and help us to break down the barriers that were created to protect its and its community’s sense of uniqueness. 

Today’s gospel expresses Jesus’ hope that the disciples may have the same relationship with God that he has. This relationship revealed in glory and demonstrated in love and unity will convince the world that the believers are in God, and God is in them. John’s concept of a privileged and exclusive relationship is not one that we would want to adapt but this gospel informs us that Jesus reveals the union with God which is the purpose and privilege of all human existence. The oneness, the glory and the love that Jesus shares with the Father is freely given to each of us. 

The goal of faith as taught by the writer of John’s gospel is that we are to allow ourselves to be so subsumed by the presence of God within us and caught up in the unity of the Godhead that people who see us see God. If we are truly united to God the glory of God will shine through us and the love God has for us will be the love we have for one another.

In the words of Athanasius: God became human so that humans might become God. 

What do we have to relinquish in order that God’s glory and love might be known through us?

[1] https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/seventh-sunday-of-easter-3/commentary-on-john-1720-26-6

Tags:, , ,
Posted in John's Gospel | Comments Off on Being one with God

Divisive Shepherd

May 13, 2025

Easter 4 – 2025

John 10:22-30

Marian Free

In the name of God, mysterious, unknowable, unreachable and yet revealed in Jesus. Amen.

Our post Easter season is typically divided into two parts, post resurrection accounts of meetings with Jesus and the promise of the spirit. In the middle, on the fourth Sunday of Easter we mark Good Shepherd Sunday. Over the course of three years, we cover most of John chapter 10 in which Jesus spells out what it means to be shepherd and sheep. The imagery is deceptively simple and heart-warming. I suspect that most of us have been brought up with lovely stories of 1st century Middle Eastern shepherds often accompanied by illustrations of Jesus carrying a white fluffy lamb over his shoulder. 

I say deceptively simple because this chapter, like the rest of John’s gospel, is complex and multi-layered. It is filled with themes and illusions that permeate the gospel and has hidden depths which are easy to overlook if we focus on the superficial imagery of the shepherd. 

John’s gospel stands alone in style and content.  It seems to stir within us something deep and mysterious. It is filled with images that are not always fully spelled out, it demands a knowledge of Judaism that can no longer be taken for granted, it is repetitive and circular as if wanting to be sure that the reader really understands, and yet at the same time it speaks in riddles as if to cloud the meaning from all but a few.

Chapter 10 and the verses we have read this morning serve as a case in point. The content is repetitive, and indirect and it repeats and reinforces themes already referenced in the gospel. The author also assumes a knowledge of Jewish festivals and an insight into his purpose in referencing them.  

The repetitive and circular nature of the gospel is evident in the ways in which the central theme of shepherd is drawn out. The shepherd is compared variously to a thief, a stranger of a hired hand, those who came before him, and even a gate. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, who lays down his life for the sheep and who will ensure that they have abundant life. Other themes such as life, doing the works of the Father and being one with the Father are peppered throughout the gospel and the theme of Jesus’ voice recurs in Magdalene’s recognition of Jesus’ in the garden.

“At that time the festival of the Dedication took place in Jerusalem”.  What appears to us to be a reference to a time and place has a much deeper significance for the author of this gospel. From this and other references to the Temple and Jewish festivals, we can discern that indirectly John is making the claim that in the person of Jesus all the Jewish Festivals have Jewish festivals have come to their full end – their purposes have been fulfilled. Jesus has made them redundant. 

As the Bread from heaven Jesus replaces the manna in the wilderness, as the light of the world and the living water, Jesus takes the place of the symbols of the Feast of Tabernacles. [That Jesus is crucified on the eve of Passover, suggests that he has replaced the Passover Lamb. Even the Sabbath is replaced as Jesus’ heals on the Sabbath and thus redefines its meaning and purpose.] The Festival of Dedication celebrated the rededication of the Temple. John’s reference here is less a reference to the season and more an indication that Jesus has replaced the Temple. In all these not-so-subtle ways, John is making it clear that worship of the one God can continue without Temple and the Temple rituals – that faith in and worship of Jesus has taken their place.

John’s Jesus can be obtuse and frustrating. His answers to direct questions are often riddles, designed to make one think if not to confuse. Think of his response to Nicodemus – “you must be born from above” and today, when his questioners ask him to tell them plainly, he irritatingly replies: “I have told you and you do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.” Hardly a helpful response from people who seem to genuinely want to know who he is. It is as if he wants to push them away not draw them in.

The question of Jesus’ identity is another key theme in John’s gospel. While on the one hand John’s Jesus refuses to be specific about his identity, on the other, the author  makes it very clear to the readers who he is. “The Father and I are one,” Jesus says. Over and over again, the fourth gospel makes this same claim. “If you have seen me you have seen the Father.” “I and the Father are one.” [With one exception in Matthew, nowhere else are the Father and Son presented as a unity.]

The Shepherding imagery is an extension of Jesus’ identification with God. The imagery of God as shepherd has its roots n the Old Testament – especially in the Psalms and Ezekiel 34.

Another theme, introduced here and developed in the imagery of the vine is that of belonging. Those who know Jesus’ voice will follow him. (10:4), those who belong to the fold will listen to Jesus’ voice (10:16) and “his sheep know his voice” (10:27). John’s gospel can be read as divisive and exclusive. The dualism expressed therein – light/dark, life/perishing, flesh/spirit, above/below those who know/do not know my voice – can be read in the sense that despite the claim that God loves the world, God seems to want to separate those who are in from those who are out, worse, that we can establish boundaries to determine whom to include and whom to exclude. The opposite in fact is true. While John’s gospel does make a clear distinction between those who follow Jesus and those who do not, it also makes it clear that those who do not belong are those who choose not to belong those who self-select to be outside the fold, those whose reaction to Jesus reveals something of their true nature, those who cannot bear to be exposed to the light (3:21).

All of this is a stark reminder that we should not be content with the comforting, the heart-warming, superficial shepherding Jesus, nor should we be complacent about John’s divisive, exclusionary language. John’s gospel reveals that there is time and space before Jesus and a time and space after Jesus. There is a plain-speaking Jesus who is comforting and inclusive and an indirect Jesus who will not give us easy answers to those too lazy to see what is in front of them. There is the divisive Jesus in whose presence we see who we are and are forced to make the decision as to whether or not we belong and whether or not we want to belong. 

Our reaction to Jesus determines whether or not we belong.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Good shepherd, John's Gospel | Comments Off on Divisive Shepherd

Not seeing the wood for the trees – John 3

March 4, 2023

Lent 2 – 2023
John 3:1-17
Marian Free

In the name of God who cannot be confined or contained by our limited imaginations. Amen.

During the last week, Bishop Jeremy posted the following on Facebook: “How would the Church deal with the phrase ‘the cat sat on the mat’ if it appeared in the Bible?
The liberal theologians would point out that such a passage did not of course mean that the cat literally sat on the mat. Also, cat and mat had different meanings in those days from today, and anyway, the text should be interpreted according to the customs and practices of the period.
This would lead to an immediate backlash from the more fundamental wing. They would make an essential condition of faith that a real physical, living cat, being a domestic pet of the Felix Domesticus species, and having a whiskered head and furry body, four legs and a tail, did physically place its whole body on a floor covering, designed for that purpose, and which is on the floor but not of the floor. The expression “on the floor but not off the floor” would be explained in a leaflet.” (Methodically Reordered) It continued with suggestions for the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church and for the C of E.

That would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic. Whenever there is debate within or between churches, there is a tendency to fall into the trap of focussing on a single detail, rather than exploring the broader picture.

This is particularly true when it comes to our reading of John’s gospel and chapter three, which we have just heard, is a good example of the temptation to focus on a single point instead of trying to discover how this chapter, (how Nicodemus) fits into the gospel as a whole. Like much of John’s gospel, chapter three is dense and includes many different points of interest – being born again, snakes on poles, our most loved scriptural quote and commentary on the contrast between those who choose the light and those who choose the dark. It is easy for a preacher (or reader) to focus on one small sub-theme, rather than to look at the chapter in its entirety, let alone to examine its relationship to the gospel as a whole. (Many of us are very familiar with the imagery of being born again, but know less about the rest of the chapter.)

John is unique among the gospels. Not only is the content very different from the Synoptic gospels but so too is the way in which the gospel is written. The author of the fourth gospel is very explicit as to his purpose: “these [things] are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the anointed, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20 31). In order to achieve this goal, the author of John’s gospel employs a number of literary techniques that are intended to draw the readers into a deeper relationship with Jesus.

Among the strategies that John uses are the following. Symbolism. Many of the words and phrases in the gospel have more than one meaning – bread of life, light of the world and so on. Dualism or contrasts. The author of the gospel presents two different forms of existence between which listeners must choose – light/dark, life/death, spirit/flesh, above/below. Dialogue and discourse. In the Synoptic gospels, Jesus’ teaching is presented as sayings or parables. In the fourth gospel, teaching occurs through discussion or through a speech. That is, Jesus draws another person into conversation – which causes bewilderment, but which through the course of the conversation may lead to deeper understanding on the part of the conversation partner. (Think for example of his. conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well – chapter 4.) At other times, a question might lead to a longer discourse such as we see after the feeding of the five thousand when Jesus launches into a dissertation on the meaning of bread (chapter 6).

Repetition of issues, themes and even characters. This has the effect of keeping certain ideas in front of the reader or enabling the elaboration of a theme over the course of the gospel. (When a character reappears, his or her role in the overall story is what is important, not who they are as a person.) In the case of the Beloved Disciple his repeated appearances reveal his similarity to Jesus, and mean that we are not at all surprised when he is asked to take Jesus’ place as Mary’s son.

Coming to faith. Whether it is through discussion with or exposure to Jesus, whether it is immediate or gradual, the various characters in the gospel move from bewilderment to understanding, from inquisitiveness to faith OR from scepticism to unbelief.

Jesus’ encounter with Nicodemus provides an illustration of these techniques. This is why it is important to see the chapter as a whole and not to be distracted by detail (to be worried about what sort of cat is sitting on what sort of mat).

In this chapter, we see that Nicodemus coming to Jesus at night – the darkness symbolising ignorance and revealing Nicodemus’ fear of discovery. Nicodemus’ confusion begins a dialogue with Jesus and also provides a teaching opportunity for Jesus – primarily about the distinctions between flesh and spirit, light and dark and above and below. Nicodemus aopears twice more. In chapter 7 his role is to illustrate the division between the Jews (and to let us think that he is on Jesus’ side – he has moved towards belief. His third and last appearance is at the tomb where he provides 100 pounds of ointments to prepare Jesus’ body for burial and at the same time fulfills a legal need for there to be two witnesses to the fact that Jesus was buried. Overall then, Nicodemus provides an illustration of a person who moves from indifference and confusion, through neutrality, to commitment and understanding.

In this and every gospel, the detail is important, but so too is the overarching theme, the broad sweep of the story, a story that is intended to bring the readers to faith in Jesus and through faith to life in Jesus’ name. In the end, we don’t want to be guilty of not seeing the wood for the trees, of allowing the detail to obscure the complete picture.

Instead of nit-picking about the details (arguing about the cat on the mat, about gay marriage, about candles and robes, about prayer books. and hymnals), we as Christians, as church, should try to focus on the big picture – God’s love for us and God’s saving action through Jesus. When we grasp this, everything else will fall into place.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in John's Gospel, Lent | 2 Comments »