[Page 56]
CHAPTER FIVE
St. John’s Account
When one sets out to study the Gospels, one’s first reaction is: How
long ago it is since they were written! About nineteen hundred years! That is a long time. And during the passage of those years many very able writers and profound thinkers have expressed both theological and philosophical opinions concerning them. Numerous questions have been posed: When were they written? Who wrote them? To whom were they written? Is everything they relate factual? Is any part of the Gospel fancy? Are the sayings attributed to Jesus, literally correct? Did the writer paraphrase what he thought he remembered Jesus saying? . . We have become so familiar with the expression “the Gospels”, meaning, usually, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, that often we do not distinguish between the Synoptic Gospels and John: there is a very great difference between them. It becomes apparent that Matthew, Mark and Luke tell much the same story with only minor differences, e.g. Matthew tells us the Centurion came to Jesus asking Him to heal his servant; Luke says he made his request through Jewish friends. Matthew describes the miracle where Jesus healed two blind men, while ‘ Mark mentions only one man. But such differences are negligible in brief sketches dealing with the life-work of the same person. This would be especially so when the written record was not made until about 60-70 years after the event!
When we read John, we find at once an entirely different work; so different, it leaves us wondering if John was writing about the same person; and whether he was an actual companion of Jesus. However, a closer examination of the four Gospels by leading theologians has raised some interesting questions.
We know John was the younger brother of James, and both were sons of Zebedee a prosperous fisherman. It has been suggested that Salome, their mother, was a sister of the Virgin Mary, thus making James, John and Jesus cousins. And it is shown the verses in John 125—40 suggests that John of the Gospel had been an early follower of John the Baptist. And it is recorded that, later on, Jesus called the
56
[Page 57]
two brothers, while they were mending their nets, to become His
disciples. (Mark 1:19,20). That is a significant touch; that it should
be Mark who tells us of the call of John. In his own Gospel, John rarely,
if ever, mentions himself. But Mark, also, tells us that both James
and John were hot-headed and intolerant men. It was they who
wanted jesus to call down fire on a Samaritan village that would not
receive Jesus. On another occasion, John rebuked a man who did not
belong to their circle because he was casting out devils in Jesus’ name.
So ambitious and intolerant were they, that Jesus “nicknamed” them
'Boanerges meaning Sons of Thunder. Again, it is Mark who tells us
that they and their mother asked Jesus to ensure they be given the
chief places in the Kingdom. For all that, James and John, with Peter,
remained Jesus’ very special friends among the twelve. Jesus was
human enough to have His favourites. It was John who sat next to
Him at the Last Supper and leaned upon His breast. (John 1:25). Later
when Jesus hung upon the cross, it was to John that He committed
Mary to His care. (John 19:26) John and Peter were the first of the
twelve to hear of the Resurrection. (John 20:2)
Like the synoptics, doubts have arisen about the authorship of John. However, this is not the place to explore all the pros and cons of that question. Suffice it to say, that some early authorities remind us that living at Ephesus about 90-100 A.D. was anotherJohn, known as “the Presbyter”, or Elder who had been a disciple ofjesus. Perhaps in the writings the two Johns became mixed. But such a story is weakened when one recalls the intimate little details given by John, Whom I prefer to accept as the “beloved disciple.”
However, the Gospel of John is so different from the Synoptics that authorship and date of writing are valid queries: The Gospel was certainly written very late in the first century after Jesus’ death, and chapter 21:22-25, implies the writer was very old, so old we are told, that rumour had it he would not die until the Christ returned again. And John claims to have been an eye-witness of what he writes, asserting that he, himself, saw the blood and water issue from the side of Jesus: “And he that hath seen hath born witness.” (19:5). John’s Gospel is one of love, compassion and deep spiritual insight. It seems certain it was written in his old age, when the eager flames of young manhood had become no more than warm, glowing embers of memory.
There are other striking difference between the Gospel account by John and that of Matthew, Mark and Luke. I have mentioned the
57
[Page 58]
Centurion and the one or two blind men healed by jesus, but in
general, the synoptics tell much the same story. However, when we
turn to John, the differences are most apparent.
If the Synoptics were all we had, it would seem as though the ministry of Jesus lasted only about a year, very little longer. Whereas, John’s references to Jewish feasts suggests it lasted for at least two and half years, perhaps three years. In the three Gospels the ministry seems to be confined to Galilee; John’s account is confined almost entirely to Jerusalem and Judea. But the Synoptics do show that Jesus often preached there, (Luke 4-144) and Jesus’ lament overjerusalem implies that He had often appealed to the inhabitants of that city. It is quite evident that Jesus’ ministry alternated between Judea and Galilee: the Synoptics treat of the Galilean portion of it.
One last point, before looking at John’s account of Jesus’ teaching. Already it has been pointed out that one finds John’s Gospel concentrating more onspiritual subjects, rather than on what one might term historic or temporal matters. Yet, strangely, he makes no reference to what one would have thought were very significant events in Jesus? life: he makes no reference to the Virgin Birth, the Baptism of Jesus, the Temptation, the Transfiguration, the Lord’s Supper, or the Agony in the Garden.
If we accept that John was probably an old man when he wrote, then Mark and Matthew, possibly Luke, would certainly have been written many years before. Hence, John could have felt there was no need for repeating those matters. What he most wanted to do was fillin what he believed was lacking in the other three. This is set forth clearly in John 1:1-34.
John’s record shows a marked difference in jesus’ teaching from that shown in the Synoptics. These give brief, concise, sometimes ‘chatty’ accounts and parables; John’s account is more profound. While the Synoptics are homely, John indulges in long, serious discussions using unusual words such as Life, Light, the Way, and so on. Also, if we consider only the Synoptics, the bulk of Jesus’s teaching was in talking to the common people. Whereas John shows Him spending much time in discussion with Jewish opponents and in training the Twelve.
Jesus’s approach to the people followed a method entirely different from that used by Bahá’u’lláh. Where Jesus spoke to the people, as to simple, homely folk, discussing His teachings more fully with His disciples preparing them to go out as Ministers of His Faith, Bahá’u’lláh addresses Himself to a people assumed to be mature. And He does
58
[Page 59]
not allow for any professional clergy. Instead, He directs us to seek
Truth for ourselves and, having found it, to offer it to others with love
and encouragement to make their own investigation into His
pronouncements for this Age.
If mankind is ever to live in loving harmony, it can be only by human beings knowing of their own knowledge that God is One, and Religion is One. Bahá’u’lláh reminds us: “For the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself. This is one of the verities that lie enshrined in My Revelation.”*
Human beings have a tendency to wish to make their own Rules. Therefore, they tend to interpret the sayings of those in authority in a way to accord with what they want to believe, rather than in accordance with what they should believe. Jesus found Himself up against the same thing with the theologians of His day. They propounded their interpretations of the Old Testament; and divisions had occurred in Judaism, even as we find today in Christianity. Perhaps the answer to this problem will be found when mankind realises it is entering a New Era—one of Justice.
“O Son of Spirit!” Bahá’u’lláh writes, “The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not throught the eyes of another, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of they neighbour. Ponder this in thine heart; how it behoveth thee to be. Verily Justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My lovingkindness. Set it then before thine eyes.”**
Coming back to our study of John’s Gospel: It is so different from the Synoptics, that we aught to consider further what were those differences.
The style ofJohn’s writings seems to be the same throughout; the words of Jesus, the arguments of His opponents, the comments of the writer, and the narrative of events are all in the same language. It has been suggested that we cannot even be sure whether the familiar words “For God so loved the World—etc,” were spoken by Jesus to Nicodemus, or whether they are a comment by John. (John 3:16)
This leads us to two aspects of the Gospel writings: (1)]esus spoke in Aramaic and His words would need to be translated into Greek
- Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh.
MArabic Hidden Words No.2
59
[Page 60]
before the Gospelsicould be written. Authorities assure us that in most
cases the writers of the Synoptics found the translations already done.
It is suggested this could be the reason for the difference between the
language of their discourses and that of their narrative. But in the case
of John, he had to do his own translation into Greek. One would expect
him to use words that came most naturally to him, whether he was
writing narrative or translating the teaching. (2) The writer was an
old man. For many years he must have been meditating on the
teachings of Jesus; therefore, it would not be surprising if the line
between Jesus’ actual words and John’s meditation on them became
a little confused.
There are differences, too, in the portraits of Jesus as painted by the Synoptics and that by John. The Synoptics show Him as the Son of Man and the Friend of Sinners. His Messiahship and Divinity are low key, almost kept in the background. He silenced devils when they testify to Him(M‘ark 1:4) and He will not allow his disciples to tell anyone that He is the Son of God. (Mark 9:9) But in John we find His Messiahship and Divinity are prominent from the beginning: the Baptist described Him as the Son of God (John 1:4) He acknowledges to Nicodemus, He is Messiah (John 3:13). Later, He makes the startling claims, “Before Abraham was, I am” (8:58) “I and the Father are one,” (10:30) “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” (14:6).
To this writer that all adds up to definite proof of the fact of Progressive Revelation—something which is understood by the Manifestations. of God: that They each, in turn, are from the One Divine Source; are of the same Original Essence; that they are the same Spirit in different bodies. This knowledge is revealed and made understandable to us by Bahá’u’lláh. In one of His writings He records: “0 Jews! If ye be intent on crucifying once again Jesus the Spirit of God, put me to death, for He hath once more, in My person, been made manifest unto you . . .” Again, in the same paragraph, He writes, “Followers of the Gospel!” (The Christians) “If ye cherish the desire to slay Muhammad, the Apostle of God, seize Me and put an end to My Life, for I am He, and My Self is His Self . . .” And again, recalling the Báb, Who was His Forerunner, and Whose written record is known as the Bayan, Bahá’u’lláh calls on the Muslims: “Followers of Muhammad! If it be your wish to riddle with your shafts the breast of Him Who hath caused His Book the Bayan to be sent down unto you, lay hands on Me and persecute Me, for I am His Well-Beloved,
60
[Page 61]
the revelation of His Own Self, though My Name be not His Name
”3|:
However, though the Synoptics appear to be more concerned with
the human Jesus, there are in them references to the Divine Christ. John the Baptist said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire (Luke 3:16). Such a claim is as amazing as John sayingjesus was the Lamb of God. The Temptation, with its repeated “If thou be the Son of God,” appears' only in Matthew and Luke, and shows that they knew thatjesus was conscious of His Divinity when He began His Ministry.
But while John concentrates more on the Divinity of Jesus, he does show His real humanity when he says “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14). “Jesus therefore being wearz'ea’ with His journey” (4:6) and “ esus wept,” (11:5). The differences between the four Gospels are not sufficient to cause any real doubt that John, even if a very old man, did write the Gospel named after him. It could be said that the Synoptics relatejesus’ public work, whileJohn shows His private life, as seen by a very dear friend. John’s is the most intimate Gospel. It is a Gospel permeated with love. Christendom owes much to John for his teaching about Jesus as the Comforter, the Bread of Life and the Vine. He makes more realistic how humanity can live and enjoy communion with the Unseen Father. For this reason John’s is the most spiritual of the Gospels.
So far as being able to understand what was Jesus’ station as the Gospel depicts it, Matthew presents Jesus as the Messiah, Mark as the Son of Man, Luke as the Saviour of the World. It remained for John to see Him as the Eternal Son of God; the only begotten Son of God. But that raises a profound question: John commences his Gospel by using the term “Logos” or “the Word”. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the Beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.”
Do not those words remind us of Jesus’ words: “Before Abraham was,» I am?” If God is the Source of Life, the origin of all life, would it not be more correct to speak of jesus as the Son of the only-begotten Father? Are we not all children of the only begotten Father'.p
John’s is certainly the profoundest and most theological of the
- Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp 100-101
61
[Page 62]
Gospels. He recordsjesus saying “the Comforter shall come,” and “He
shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I
said unto you.” (John 14:26). Bahá’u’lláh confirms that the Comforter
has come. And in John’s words, “He came unto His own and His own
received Him not.” (1:11)
Abdu’l-Bahá gives us a beautifully clear explanation of the pre-existance of the Spirit of a Manifestation within God, before its appearance in bodily form upon the earth. He quotes John 17:5, where Jesus says: “And now, 0 Father, glorify Thou me with Thine own Self, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was.”
Abdu’l-Bahá explains those words, thus: “There are two kinds of priorities: one is essential and is not preceded by a cause, but its existence is in itself, as, for example, the sun has light in itself, for its shining is not dependent on the light of other stars. This is called an essential light. But the light of the moon is received from the sun, for the mOOn is dependent on the sun for its light; therefore, the sun, with regard to light, is the cause, and the moon becomes the effect. The former is the ancient, the precedent, the antecedent, while the latter 1s the preceded and the last
“The second sort of pre- existence is the pre- -existence of time, and that has no beginning. The Word of God Is sanctified from time. The past, the present, the future, all, in relation to God, are equal. Yesterday, today, tomorrow do not exist in the sun.
“In the same way there is a priority with regard to glory—that is to say, the most glorious precedes the glorious. Therefore, the Reality of Christ, Who is the Word of God, with regard to essence, attributes and glory, certainly precedes the creatures. Before appearing in the human form, the Word of God was in the utmost sanctity and glory, existing in perfect beauty and splendor in the height of its magnificence. When through the wisdom of God the Most High it shone from the heights of glory in the World of the body, the Word of God, through this body, became oppressed, so that it fell into the hands of thejews, and became the captive of the tyrannical and ignorant, and at last was crucified. That is why He addressed God, saying: ‘Free Me from the bonds of the world of the body, and liberate Me from this cage, so that I may ascend to the heights of honor and glory, and attain into the former grandeur and might which existed before the bodily world, that I may rejoice in the eternal world and may ascend to the original abode, the placeless world, the invisible kingdom.’
“It is thus that you see even in‘ the kingdom of this world—that is
62
[Page 63]
to say, in the realm of souls and countries— that the glory and grandeur
of Christ appeared in this earth after His ascension. When in the world
of the body He was subject to the contempt and jeers of the weakest
nation of the world, the Jews, who thought it fitting to set a crown of
thorns upon His sacred head. But after His ascension the bejewelled
crowns of all the kings were humbled and bowed before the crown
of thorns
“Behold the glory that the Word of God attained even in this world!”
Bahá’u’lláh arouses us: “Shake off, 0 heedless one the slumber of negligence, that ye may behold the radiance which His glory hath spread through the world. How foolish are those who murmur against , the premature birth of His light. O ye who are inly blind! Whether too soon or too late, the evidences of His effulgent glory are now actually manifest. It behoveth you to ascertain whether or not such a light hath appeared. It is neither within your power nor mine to set the time at which it should be made manifest. God’s inscrutable Wisdom hath fixed its hour beforehand. Be content, O People, with that which God hath desired for you and predestined unto you . . . Whenever I chose to hold My peace and be still, 10, the voice of the Holy Ghost, standing on my right hand aroused Me, and the Supreme Spirit appeared before my face, and Gabriel overshadowed Me, and the Spirit of Glory stirred within my bosom, bidding me arise and break my silence . . . This He hath accomplished through the agency of but one Letter of His Word, revealed by His Pen, a Pen moved by His directing Finger— His Finger itself sustained by the Power of God’s Truth.”**
To sum up: John is a Gospel of love and compassion: it is a Gospel of profound spiritual comprehension; it is a Gospel that spells out from the first word that God is Spirit which manifests itself from time to time in human form, “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” (John 1:14)
- Some Answered Questions, pp 132-3
- Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh.
