The Gospel of John is unique among the other gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). The “synoptic” gospels each see things the same way as the other two. They are different in many ways but all follow the same path. They see the birth, life, work, death, and resurrection from about the same angle. John is presented in contrast to the first three gospels. There are a few reasons why this is true.

First, a bit about John the human author. John had a very close relationship with Jesus and is referred to in the gospel he wrote five times as “the disciple Jesus loved”. John, was the son of Zebedee, and a disciple and apostle of Jesus. (Most scholars agree that John was the youngest of the disciples.) John could write confidently as an “eyewitness” of the person and work of Jesus. For example, in 1 John which he also wrote he said this.

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life— ² the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us— ³ that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you… 1 John 1-3a

The apostle John had person knowledge of much of what he wrote, especially in John, and 1,2 and 3rd John. Of course, he as all other human writers of Scripture, were inspired by the God the Holy Spirit.

Not only was John a confidant and close associate, as well as an eyewitness to much he wrote about, he was the oldest of the gospel writers by far. Now old age can be both a blessing and a curse but most people agree that many years of observation and personal experience make one more knowledgeable and more wise. John was possibly 90 to 95 years old when he penned the gospel of John about 95 ad. For many years, perhaps as many as 30 years, John lived and labored in the city of Ephesus. John was an apostle and elder statesman in the Christian community in that great city of about 250,000 people.

In addition to having lived and worked in gospel ministry for perhaps 60 years since the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, John had almost certainly been able to read the other gospel writers, the epistles of Paul, Peter, and the writings of others. Of course we know that Paul was instrumental in planting the church in Ephesus. He along with Apollos, Priscilla and Aquila, and young Timothy and I assume many others unnamed had made a huge dent in the godless culture of this thriving Asian city. I am very convinced that John had read over and over again Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. So, John had years of doctrine and theology to think about and to study that the earlier gospel writers did not. Maybe this is at least part of the reason the gospel of John is often referred to as the “spiritual gospel”, or as I referred to it, “the gospel of grace”.

Matthew’s perspective of Jesus is mainly to the Jews and presents Jesus as Messiah, King of the Jews. His focus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies.
Mark’s picture of Jesus is that of the obedient Servant of God. His focus was on what Jesus did.
Dr. Luke gave yet another view of Jesus as Son of Man. Luke focused on the humanity of Jesus, what he felt.

King, Servant, Son of Man. Then comes the Gospel of John, Jesus Son of God. John emphasized the deity of Jesus and his focus was on the spiritual side of Jesus. From these four gospel writers we get a full view of the Christ who alone is the arbiter of eternal life and judgment.

One of the reasons I love the Gospel of John is that it is so packed with doctrine and theology. For some reason that escapes me, many preachers today turn up their noses at theology as if there is something inherently wrong about the discipline. The word is comprised of two words, “theo” (or “theos”) which means God in Greek and “ology” which means study. I don’t see any danger in studying about God. And, it is quite clear that followers of Jesus are to give attention to doctrine. I don’t hear many sermons on the great doctrines of the Bible these days but they would be helpful.

I’ll close this post with two observations from the text of John.

They key verse of the Gospel of John is chapter 1 verse 14.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

The purpose of the book is unambiguous and very clear and concise. In chapter 20 verse 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.

I love the book of John, I really love it! I can’t think of a better place to resurrect this blog than to study and then write my thoughts on this important gospel book. I hope I don’t get distracted. Two jobs and other things that compete for my time are obstacles that I must manage to get where I want to be.

Your comments, encouragement, and yes, even your correction will be graciously received.

Royce Ogle

The statement above was the frantic outcry of the Jewish opposition to Paul and Silas and their followers as they advised the Roman authorities of the danger these men posed who claimed that Jesus was indeed the Christ and King. The story is recorded in the early part of Acts 17.

Have you ever considered how so much was done with so little by so few in first century evangelistic work? Here are some of the things they did not have.

• Social media, a website, email, blog, etc…
• radio
• telephone
• printing press
• automobiles
• church buildings
• seminary/Bible school trained workers
• an intact Old Testament
• a New Testament.

What they did have was:

• The knowledge of Jesus who was God, who had died for their sins and been raised from the dead and promised to raise them too at his return to earth.
• The power and presence of the Holy Spirit
• The invitation to pray for what they needed.

After the events of Pentecost it would be almost 20 years before the first book of the New Testament (James) would be written. And the first of the Apostle Paul’s letters would be a bit over 20 years later as well, and the Acts would be 30 years later.

In the time of Jesus only the very affluent,  and/or the well educated would have had any written parts of what we call the Old Testament. There were copies held by the Scribes, Teachers of the Law, and other Jewish officials, but most of what the working class Jews knew about the scriptures they had received orally, not from the written page. It was about 1400 years later that the first printing press was invented.

Peter, empowered by the Holy Spirit, preached Christ to a great crowd in Jerusalem and over 3, 000 people became followers of Jesus. These new Christians were from all around the ancient world and spoke many different languages. Not one seminary degree, not one semester in a Bible college, not one copy of the Bible or a gospel tract, but this group of new believers, along with the Apostles, “Turned the world upside down” in short order.

When you compare those brothers and sisters to us, and our evangelistic efforts…it looks pretty bad for us. With all the advantages we have today that they did not have… and yet, we seem to be losing ground in our own cities and country.

Maybe we should get back to basics. Maybe we should stick to the good news about what Jesus has done for sinners. Maybe we should tell the story in the power of the Holy Spirit without fear. And maybe we should rely on God alone for results by praying like our early brothers and sisters prayed.

People are waiting to hear the good news. Captives are waiting to be rescued.

“Lord help me be a disciple you can be pleased with for the glory of your name”.

Royce

Largely because we humans are creatures of habit, we really value what we regularly do. And, that is even more evident regarding what we do on Sunday morning at church and how we do it. It is a curious thing to me that many people will vigorously defend a particular way of doing something on Sunday morning in church with much greater energy than they will defend the resurrection of Jesus. I remember well when the largest church of Christ in America, The Hills Church, in North Richland Hills, Texas, announced their intention to add a second service on Sunday morning where musical instruments would be employed. The level of condemnation by other churches and “brothers” was at a high pitch.

Here are some of my observations.

First, the Bible says very little about our gatherings. We meet on the first day of the week, Sunday, because that is when certain groups of believers met in the first century. The Bible doesn’t say we must meet then, or Sunday night, or Wednesday night. It just does not address meeting times for Christian assemblies. It is clear in the Bible that we are to meet together but there are few details. There is nothing that clearly addresses precisely what we must do when we meet together. So, we try to do what we think the early church did. And, we can soon learn from observation that opinions about what the early church did is very subjective. There is no “pattern” for a “worship service”. No such thing exists in your Bible.

Should we have a morning prayer? How many songs should we sing? Should we use instruments or not? Should we have a song leader or more than one song leader. Should we have soloists? Should we have a choir? Should we have communion every week? Should we have it first or near the end of our time together? Who can pass out the trays of bread and juice? Should the preacher wear a tie or dress more casual? All of these questions are really up to individual congregations. The Bible doesn’t mandate any of these things or how we do them.

Here is the danger. If we get so caught up in doing things a certain way so that “method” has as much weight in our church as Biblical truth we can get in very serious trouble.

A church that over values “method” will evolve into a church who’s message becomes “method” rather than the gospel. It has happened to many churches, many church of Christ churches. We must never allow “method” to become our “message”.

Our Christ given “mission” demands an unfettered “message” about the saving life and work of Jesus Christ for sinners. Our “message” should never be about us or what we do as assembled believers. We must keep the main thing the main thing!

Times change and time changes us. This is not 1957. Think of all the technology that is now being used to further the gospel than in the 50’s. Most of it was not even a dream then. We dress differently, our buildings are different, we worship differently, and that’s OK. But, our biblical message to ourselves and to the world has not changed one tiny bit. Jesus saves, Jesus saves. We tell the story of Jesus near and far, we hold Him alone as our only hope for this life and after.

I suppose we are far more concerned about our methodology in our Sunday gatherings than God is. We have said far more about it than He has. Take a deep breath and relax. Love God, love one another, and be nice. “Different” is not a dirty word.