John's gospel
Yes - all of it!
Looking at today's lectionary reading (Jesus & Nicodemus - John ch 3) in context yesterday I realised something about the 'shape' of John's gospel that I don't think had hit me before.
i knew about John's use of the symbolism of water.
I knew about the 'signs' that John draws attention to - the wedding at Cana, the healing of the man born blind, raising of Lazarus, etc (7 of them, if I remember correctly).
But what I don't think I'd noticed before was the recurring conflict:
John begins by setting his stall out in the prologue - he is clear about who Jesus is: and equally clear that John the Baptist in NOT the Messiah. Then comes the first 'sign' (wedding at Cana) followed immediately by Jesus overturning the tables; the conversation with Nicodemus, followed by an argument about baptism; the woman at the well, the second sign (healing of official's son) & third (healing of the man at the pool of Bethzatha), followed by an argument about healing on the sabbath & statements about Jesus' authority; the fourth sign (feeding 5000) & fifth (walking on the water), followed by 'grumbles' about Jesus saying he is the bread of life & a real weird interlude about Jesus' brothers trying to force him into the open at the festival of shelters (ch 7) & Jesus' teaching there, followed by the much better known story of the woman caught in adultery & more conflict, concluding with people picking up stones to kill Jesus (end of ch 8); the sixth sign is the healing of the man born blind (again, on a sabbath), followed by the Pharisees investigating the event, Jesus teaching about 'the good shepherd' & the rejection on Jesus & more threats of stoning; the seventh sign is the raising of Lazarus, followed by more talk of 'the plot to kill Jesus', the annointing at Bethany, a plot to kill Lazarus, & then the triumphal entry into Jerusalem & the last week of Jesus' life.
It seems to me there is a constant ebb & flow of signs of Jesus' identity & people 'believing in him' with the opposition to Jesus. Given that John himself says (20: 30) that the purpose of the gospel is that people will put their faith in Jesus as Messiah & have eternal life, perhaps it is not surprising that John won't let us sit on the fence about Jesus, but forces a choice - Jesus is the son of God to believe in, or Jesus is a heretic to be eliminated.
One of next weeks services is an all-age service, and I'd really like to get people thinking about these different 'episodes' and how John tells the story and forces us to choose.
Looking at today's lectionary reading (Jesus & Nicodemus - John ch 3) in context yesterday I realised something about the 'shape' of John's gospel that I don't think had hit me before.
i knew about John's use of the symbolism of water.
I knew about the 'signs' that John draws attention to - the wedding at Cana, the healing of the man born blind, raising of Lazarus, etc (7 of them, if I remember correctly).
But what I don't think I'd noticed before was the recurring conflict:
John begins by setting his stall out in the prologue - he is clear about who Jesus is: and equally clear that John the Baptist in NOT the Messiah. Then comes the first 'sign' (wedding at Cana) followed immediately by Jesus overturning the tables; the conversation with Nicodemus, followed by an argument about baptism; the woman at the well, the second sign (healing of official's son) & third (healing of the man at the pool of Bethzatha), followed by an argument about healing on the sabbath & statements about Jesus' authority; the fourth sign (feeding 5000) & fifth (walking on the water), followed by 'grumbles' about Jesus saying he is the bread of life & a real weird interlude about Jesus' brothers trying to force him into the open at the festival of shelters (ch 7) & Jesus' teaching there, followed by the much better known story of the woman caught in adultery & more conflict, concluding with people picking up stones to kill Jesus (end of ch 8); the sixth sign is the healing of the man born blind (again, on a sabbath), followed by the Pharisees investigating the event, Jesus teaching about 'the good shepherd' & the rejection on Jesus & more threats of stoning; the seventh sign is the raising of Lazarus, followed by more talk of 'the plot to kill Jesus', the annointing at Bethany, a plot to kill Lazarus, & then the triumphal entry into Jerusalem & the last week of Jesus' life.
It seems to me there is a constant ebb & flow of signs of Jesus' identity & people 'believing in him' with the opposition to Jesus. Given that John himself says (20: 30) that the purpose of the gospel is that people will put their faith in Jesus as Messiah & have eternal life, perhaps it is not surprising that John won't let us sit on the fence about Jesus, but forces a choice - Jesus is the son of God to believe in, or Jesus is a heretic to be eliminated.
One of next weeks services is an all-age service, and I'd really like to get people thinking about these different 'episodes' and how John tells the story and forces us to choose.
Comments