In article , lsenders{at}hotmail.com
says...
>

[snip]

>Nor does he primarily record what Jesus did during His three
>years of active ministry, but rather seeks to lead the reader into
>recognizing Christ's unique character as He interacted with others.

As you say, the difference between John and the synoptics is immediately
noticeable. And the Tradition has a one-word title for this Evangelist that
summarizes the difference most brilliantly: he is called "John the
Theologian".

For his Gospel alone of all the four is so deeply Theological.

>John 1:1a
>
>Immediately, in the reading of verse 1, the reader recognizes John's
>introduction being parallel to Genesis 1.  "In the beginning" of Jn 1:1
>directly corresponds to "In the beginning" in Gen 1:1.  John's point?
>That the "logos" (Word) was already in existence "in the
beginning."
>In the Greek, John chose to write this verse in the imperfect tense
>which infers the idea of prior existence, or  "In the beginning was
>[already] the Word."
>
>John uniquely referred to the Word, who was in existence already at the
>time of Creation, that is, when all that came to be outside of God
>Himself.  He did not refer to Him as the "Messiah" (Christ) nor the
>"Son of Man" or even the "Son of God."  He referred
to Him as the
>"Logos," which most translations render "Word." 
"Word" is an
>inadequate rendering of "Logos." or as FF Bruce put it,
"It would be
>difficult to find one less inadequate." (Gospel of John. p. 29)
>Phillips paraphrased 1:1a to read, "At the beginning God expressed
>Himself," seeking himself to express what "Logos" means.
 Certainly,
>all of John's 1st century readership did not understand the depth of
>the Greek philosophical usage of this term (any more than today's
>reader does),

And that is a good hint that _despite_ what has prevailed in Western theological
circles since the Germans of the 19th century, perhaps we should _not_ assume
that John got this sense of 'Word' from the Greeks; perhaps he got it from the
Aramaic 'memra' in the inter-testamental writings, as Khrapovitsky suggested in
the 19th century.

> yet that stated, they were certainly acquainted with the
>term.

I have yet to understand _why_ people are so certain of this...

>For John to begin his gospel using this term most certainly had
>to have captivated the interest of his audience.  We could spend the
>all of our time laboring this point but I would like to curtail that
>tangent by reminding the reader that John's intro is related to Genesis
>1 and Greek philosophy is not to be found in Gen 1:1.

Good idea!

[snip]

>[In the intertestamental period, such personifications (or
>hypostatization's) are even more detailed as in the Book of Wisdom
>18:15.  The death angel who visited the last plague on Egypt is called
>"Thy [God's] all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal
>throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed."]

Another reason to consider the idea that John really had in mind Memra and not
the Hellenistic Logos!

[snip]

>I would like to briefly summarize four reasons that James Boice gives
>as to why it matters that Jesus Christ is, indeed, God.

But why would we care what reasons this Boice gives? And why bother with it,
when we know what reasons the Apostles give? Why, you even gave that below, in
the words of one Apostle, saying:

[snip]

> Eph. 3:18, 19 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is
>the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of
>Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the
>fulness of God.

Now perhaps this is still unclear to some. But how could we be "filed up to all
the fulness of God" unless Christ _is_ God? And for that matter, how could we be
so filled up unless the Holy Spirit is _also_ God?

So this is why the heirs to the Apostles have repeated clearly throughout the
centuries: unless Christ is both fully God and fully Man, then all that He did,
even the Cross and Resurrection, have no power to save us, and do not even
_concern_ us. THAT is why it is so important that we understand that Christ is
God.


-- 
---------------------------
Subudcat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 1/9/05 10:39:23 AM