----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sue Bolton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "aleggett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: The Bible.


Hi Allan,

Thank you for your reply.
I read the attachment you sent on John 14:6, and wish to ask you some
question and make a few comments:

When you say that "Most Biblical scholars today will argue that it is
unlikely that any of the words in John's gospel that are supposedly
said by Jesus are unlikely to have come from his mouth", could you
qualify that? By "most scholars" do you mean most members of the Jesus
Seminar, or...?
Certainly the members of the Jesus Seminar are united on this point, but it
is not new and Catholic Scholars going back to the early 20th century raised
doubts about the authenticity of the Jesus sayings in John's Gospel. Rudolf
Schnackenburg in his 1965 3 Volume commentary on John's gospel certainly
supports it as does, I believe, (although I can't be certain of it,) Raymond
Brown.

There are at least 2 very stong arguements for this. The first one is that
the words of Jesus in this Gospel are always of the same literary type as
the auther himself. The second is that the Jesus of John's gospel stands in
stark contrast to the Jesus of the synoptics. In the synoptics, the central
proclomation of Jesus is the Kingdom of God. John only refers to this once
in 3:3,5. In John, the central proclomation of Jesus is himself. (I am.....)
As our lecturer put it at college, in the synoptics, there is a sort of
messanic secret that is not openly revealed until the crucifixion (in Mark's
Gospel at least) whereas in John's Gospel J seems to be running around
everywhere proclaiming himself as the incarnation of God. Either the
synoptics have managed to capture the essence of Jesus sayings or John has
but it is difficult to claim that both of them have unless Jesus had a split
personality. The scholars are pretty well united that it is John's gospel
that has missed the mark.


Although you've said elsewhere that we cannot pick and choose what
parts of the Bible we take seriously, you don't recognise the
integrity of John's gospel. Eg John 20: 30-31 says:

"Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his
disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written
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 Greek word translated here as 'believe' apparently occurs 98 times
in this gospel. You say, "Jesus is seen as *an* expression of God's
love", whereas the author of this gospel clearly believes that he is
*the* expression of God's love. I don't need to remind you of John 3:
16!

You say, "The way of love is universal. It is not restricted to any
belief structure or religion........ The way of love is advocated by
other religions also as being the way to complete fulness of life."

I agree that the capacity to love and be loved is universal, part of
our humanity, but Christianity is the only world religon that makes
love the #1 priority and teaches that it is initiated by God. Only
Sufis, Bahais, and certain nineteenth century forms of Hinduism come
anywhere near that, and they have all been influenced by Christianity
to a greater or lesser extent.

I don't entirely disagree with you here although I don't know enough about
other religions and their teachings to go to far into it. I have, however,
found a number of teachings and sayings that have come from different
traditions that speak loudly of the importance of love. I'm also unsure of
your statement about the influence from Christianity. It is really only in
later times that I can see a strong reference to the centrality of
unconditional and sacrificial love being proclaimed generally in Christian
teaching. Our history books tell us that fear has been a more central theme
and certainly the actions of such things as the crusades, inquisisition,
burning of witches, torturing people into conversion etc hardy speak of a
religion that was motivated by love.

What's more, it is only Christ who taught that we have to love our
enemy and gives us the capacity to do so. [There's a Buddhist teaching
about love appeasing hatred, but is that possible through meditation
alone?]

Please understand, in saying that "Christ is the Way...", I'm not
saying I believe only "Christians" are "saved". "No one comes to the
Father except by Me" is a mystery I leave to God and Eternity!

Grace & Peace
Allan

------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe 
insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to