Category: Carson-1991 - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

Epilogue to John's Gospel

7/13/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
7/13/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“V. Epilogue (21:1-25)” pp. 665-686.

Carson considers views which have taken John 21 as an epilogue either composed at the time of the rest of the Gospel or at a later time, possibly by another individual. Chapter 21 does bring closure by stating how Christ’s kingdom will continue to spread (Carson 1991, 666). Carson lists a number of other features of the chapter (Carson 1991, 667) and, finally, observes that we do not have any manuscripts which omit chapter 21.

In verses 1-14 Jesus appears by the Sea of Galilee. He is seen there by his disciples (Carson 1991, 668). They have begun fishing. Carson notes that the last instruction they received from Jesus was to return to Galilee. They may well be simply filling their time and providing for their needs (Carson 1991, 669). The count of 153 large fish is interpreted in various ways. Carson considers various suggestions. He leaves the question open for debate (Carson 1991, 673).

In verses 15-24 Jesus restores Peter. He does it in a public setting, since Peter’s denial was in public. He does it three times, corresponding to the three denials. The words used for “love” in the restoration are not significant. They are frequently used as exact synonyms (Carson 1991, 676). Carson does not find Pter exalted as a ruler in the Church at this point. He sees him as a servant leader, like the other apostles (Carson 1991, 678). Responding to Pter’s question about the “beloved disciple” and his long life, Jesus says that is a matter Peter is unrelated to (Carson 1991, 681). The text then claims the authority of an eyewitness as an author. In the final verse, the author states that all the deeds of Jesus would be a great number. The Gospel closes in this way.

Jesus Doesn't Stay Dead!

7/6/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
7/6/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “F. The Resurrection of Jesus (20:1-31)” pp. 631-663.

Carson notes that the end of the crucifixion account does not end the Gospel. The reality of the resurrection is necessary to the message (Carson 1991, 631). The Christian faith depends on a factual resurrection. Carson takes a brief detour to defend eyewitness authorship, almost certainly by the apostle John (Carson 1991, 634). This points to a reliable account which was open to critical analysis by other witnesss. The resurrection narratives are not as consistent as those of the crucifixion. However, the selection of events is not as important from a sequential point of view.

In 20:1, the inspection of the tomb was clearly early in the morning of the first day of the week (Carson 1991, 636). The grave clothes show signs of Jesus’ departure through the cloth (Carson 1991, 637). The sight creates belief, noted in verse 8 (Carson 1991, 638). Verses 10-18 see Jesus’ appearance to Mary (Carson 1991, 639). For some unspecified reason, Mary returns to the tomb. Now she looks in and sees angelic messengers (Carson 1991, 64). After being told by the angel of Jesus’ resurrection, Mary leaves the tomb. She does not recognize Jesus, who appears to her in the garden. Carson notes that Jesus seems difficult to recognize after the resurrection (Carson 1991, 641). Once she recognizes Jesus he urges her to release him, a statement which is cryptic at best (Carson 1991, 642). Mary does take Jesus’ message to his disciples, to whom Jesus appears in verses 19-23 (Carson 1991, 646). Carson notes Jesus’ ability to come to the disciples despite the doors they had locked against the Jewish leaders. Jesus is able to come to his disciples when and where he wishes (Carson 1991, 646). He greets the disciples with his peace and sends them to complete their mission. Carson discusses the modern debate about the scope of the Church’s mission briefly (Carson 1991, 648). He concludes that the work of the Church includes proclamation of the Gospel as well as social care. Jesus’ appearance to his disciples and his breathing on them signifies an empowerment by the Holy Spirit (Carson 1991, 650). Carson does, however, note that the empowerment prior to Pentecost does not seem altogether absolute. This happens later (Carson 1991, 653). Carson discusses the tendency of texts to speak slightly indirectly of events which are widely known and accepted, suchas Pentecost. In verses 24-29 Jesus appears again to his disciples, this time including Thomas (Carson 1991, 656). By his words and actions Jesus shows that he knows what the disciples have discussed. He also shows that he is present physically (Carson 1991, 657). Carson sees Thomas’ confession as an accurate and honest statement of surprised realization. Jesus really is the Lord (Carson 1991, 659). The message of Jesus as Lord is the purpose of the Fourth Gospel. This is found in 20_30-31. The Gospel is written to encourage belief (Carson 1991, 661).

Trial and Execution, Regardless of Innocence

6/29/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
6/29/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “E. The Trial and Passion of Jesus (18:1-19:42)” pp. 571-631.

Carson notes that all the Gospels push directly to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Scholars debate a relationship between John’s account and that of the Synoptics. Carson assumes that John was familiar with at least one of the Synoptics. However, he was not directly dependent on it (Carson 1991, 571). Though the differences are significant there is no reason to find them as contradictory. Carson discusses several areas in which commentators have attempted to create insurmountable challenges.

In John 18:1-11 Jesus is arrested (Carson 1991, 576). Jesus and his disciples have gone to an olive grove, well known to them. A large force of soldiers, possibly up to 600, but maybe smaller, more like 200, guided by Judas, came on the manhunt (Carson 1991, 577). When Jesus identified himself to the arrest party they fell back. Carson finds few adequate explanations for the situation (Carson 1991, 578).

Jesus is tried before Annas and then sent to Caiaphas. Carson notes that Annas had previously held the high priesthood but was removed and replaced by the Roman governor (Carson 1991, 580). During the trial, Peter, in the courtyard, denies knowing Jesus (Carson 1991, 581). By the end of verse 24, the interrogation of Jesus is complete. Jesus does not give much information but he does say his teaching is public (Carson 1991, 584). Meanwhile, Peter has continued to deny Jesus (Carson 1991, 586).

In John 18:28-19:16 Jesus is tried before Pilate, the Roman governor (Carson 1991, 587). Carson notes that it is difficulut to explain John’s knowledge of what happened inside Pilate’s court. He considers it entirely possible that Jesus may have given some details after the resurrection. It is also possible that John would have consulted the public records which were kept but have mostly been lost since the first century.

The Jewish leaders would not enter Pilate’s quarters. This would have incurred uncleanness and interfered with the Passover. Carson considers this situation and also the apparent discrepancy between John’s account and that of the Synoptics (Carson 1991, 589). Carson’s conclusion is that the Jews were considering the entire Feast of Unleavened Bread as part of Passover. The Jews expected that Pilate would go ahead with their plan to execute Jesus. Yet in verse 31 Pilate refused them, possibly simply to antagonize them (Carson 1991, 591). Yet, when Pilate questions Jesus, Jesus pushes him to make a conclusion. Is Jesus the king of the Jews? (Carson 1991, 593). By verse 36, Jesus is helping Pilate see that he is a king, over Pilate, but not of an earthly kingdom (Carson 1991, 594). Pilate is not eady to recognize this, so he calls off the interrogation (Carson 1991, 595).

After the crowd refuses to have Jesus released, John 19 begins with Jesus’ sentenceing. Jesus is mocked and beaten. Carson discusses the different types of flogging that Romans practiced. He does not have a clear opinion of which penalty was given (Carson 1991, 597). In 19:4-5 Pilate again presents Jesus to the people as a pathetic figure. Carson notes that Pilate’s mockery of the Sanhedrin is biting. Jesus doesn’t seem to be any sort of threat at this time (Carson 1991, 598). The response of the Jewish leaders is that Jesus claimed to be God’s son. This, Carson notes, creates fear in Pilate (Carson 1991, 600). If Jesus is divine in any sense, Pilate should fear for his life. He seeks relief by questioning Jesus more. Jesus eventually explains, in brief. Carson notes that Jesus shows that none of the events have happened apart from God’s authority. The person who turned Jesus over to Pilate was more guilty than Pilate. Humans are therefore responsible for sin in this event, though their sin accomplishes God’s purpose (Carson 1991, 601). Finally, Pilate tries to rescue Jesus and the Jewish leaders claim their allegiance to Caesar. It is an odd world (Carson 1991, 603).

Carson here considers the inconsistency about the date of the Passover and the crucifixion. This is in response to the “preparation” of John 19:14. Carson’s conclusion is that the accounts of John and Mark do conflict but for understandable reasons of approximation and emphasis (Carson 1991, 605). Pilate speaks mockingly about Jesus as the king. The chief priests react by denying any king but Jesus (Carson 1991, 606). John presents the incidnt as yet another time that people speak the truth in ignorance.

In John 19:16-30 Jesus is crucified. Carson observes that John gives several details which are not found in the Synoptic Gospels (Carson 1991, 608). He considers the route of the procession, possible locations of Calvary, and the actual logistics of a crucifixion (Carson 1991, 610). Pilate’s work with the sign agove Jesus continues to antagonize the chief priests (Carson 1991, 611). At the same time, it proclaims God’s glory to the whole world. At this point, Carson notes John’s move to explain the fulfillment of Scriptures, something John has rarely done (Carson 1991, 612). Finally, Jesus is crucified with a small band of witnesses (Carson 1991, 615). Among the witnesses Carson finds John and Mary, who becomes the ward of John (Carson 1991, 617). While numerous attempts have been made to establish symbolic meanings of the various events, Carson finds them tenuous at best. In 19:30, Jesus gives up his life. Carson reminds the reader that nobody took his life from him (Carson 1991, 621).

In John 19:31ff, the Roman soldiers, in light of the important upcoming Sabbath, break the legs of the criminals to hasten death. Jesus, appearing dead, is pierced witha spear, verifying his death (Carson 1991, 623). Carson sees John’s emphasis on the reality of Jesus’ death, rather than on the means. Various explanations of possible symbolism of the blood and water are less than compelling (Carson 1991, 624). Carson raises the question of the identity of “this” person, the truthful eyewitness to the events. There has been considerable debate of the identity. Carson concludes that it would appear to refer to the Evangelist John (Carson 1991, 626). The symbolism of verse 36 and none of Jesus’ bones being broken may be based on several Old Tstament passages (Carson 1991, 627). Many events in this passage happen for the stated purpose of fulfilling Scripture.

In John 19:38-42 Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, both members of the Sanhedrin, obtain the body of Jesus and prepare it for burial. Carson notes the large amount of spice was not out of accord with other recorded first century burials. Jesus was laid in a new tomb in a nearby garden (Carson 1991, 630). Carson does think the location is very likely that pinpointed today by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (Carson 1991, 631). This ends the account of the death of Christ.

Jesus Reveals His Nature As He Prays

6/22/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
6/22/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “D. The Prayer of Jesus (17:1-26)” pp. 550-571.

Commenting on John 17, Carson notes the surprise inherent in God the Son praying to God the Father (Carson 1991, 551). The relationship of Father and Son, of believers to one another, and Christians to the Christ is at the center of this prayer. The prayer in John 17 does not have the agony of the garden prayers in the Synoptic Gospels. However, Carson notes that Jesus is portrayed in John as quite aware of the pain to come (Carson 1991, 552).

In verses 1-5, as Jesus sees his hour coming, he is moved to prayer rather than resignation (Carson 1991, 553). Jesus prays that he will be glorified - a return to glory with the Father (Carson 1991, 554). The result of this is bringing glory to the Father. The glory of the Father is that people may know him as the true God (Carson 1991, 556).

In verses 6-19 Jesus prays specifically for his followers. They have been given to the Son and have received a revelation of God (Carson 1991, 558). Though the disciples’ understanding and obedience is imperfect before the resurrection, Carson thinks John is making a comparison to the rest of the world (Carson 1991, 559). This strong distinction appears in verse 9 (Carson 1991, 560). Jesus prays especially for divine protection for his disciples. The desire is that the disciples may be one, kept in God’s name (Carson 1991, 562). Jesus does make a disclaimer. Judas is lost, though the others are preserved (Carson 1991, 563). The disciples have been chosen out of the world. They are guarded by Jesus but hated by the world (Carson 1991, 564). As Jesus has been sanctified in vv. 17-19 he prays his disciples will be sanctified.

In verses 20-26 Jesus prays for future believers and that all believers will see Jesus’ glory (Carson 1991, 568). All are to be one. Their unity is to come through the specific message of the Gospel. The unity of Christians is intended to bring glory to the Father. The love of God for the world is seen in the unity of Christians (Carson 1991, 570).

In God's Care We Are Not of This World

6/15/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
6/15/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “C. The Farewell Discourse: Part Two (15:1-16:33)” pp. 510-550.

Carson notes that John 15:1-16 shows a very intricate link of the relationship of the Christian, the Christ, and prayer (Carson 1991, 510). Verses 9-16 may well be a commentary on verses 1-8 (Carson 1991, 511). The images of viticulture are, of course, very common in the Bible. In verse 1 not only is Jesus’ role central, as the “vine,” but there is the additional important character, the “gardener,” i.e., the Father (Carson 1991, 513). The Father cares for the branches. He trims all the fruit-bearing branches and cuts off those that are not fruitful (Carson 1991, 514). Jesus’ word has made the branches fruitful. Carson sees the job as done in verse 3 prior to the work of pruning (Carson 1991, 515). Believers are then told to persevere in the faith. The motif of dependence nad growth is continued through verse four. The growh results in what Carson identifies as “nothing less than the outcome of persevering dependence on the vine, driven by faith, embracing all of the believer’s life and the product of his witness” (Carson 1991, 517).

Verses 9-16 then unpack the material of 15:1-8. Jesus’ love for his disciples is similar to the Father’s love for the Son. The relationship is vital. Obedience and love go hand in hand (Carson 1991, 520). In considering the love of believers in 15:13, Carson concludes that the command to love one another does not negate the commands to love God. We are obligated to both (Carson 1991, 522). Carson further clarifies that when Jesus calls the disciples his friends in vv. 14-15, he does not say they are no longer to obey him. He is still the master, but he tells them his reasoning as an authority would tell his friends (Carson 1991, 523).

John 15:17-16:4 speaks to the world’s opposition to Christ and his people. Carson notes that the theological difference between Church and the world is fundamental. The differences result in a different sociology which provokes enmity (Carson 1991, 524). A Christian view of joyful submission to God is foreign to a world which wishes to assert the independent individual (Carson 1991, 525). Despite this opposition, Jesus is clear in verses 22 and following that God’s redemptive work is not in any danger (Carson 1991, 527). The Scriptures point to redemption. There is no need to doubt God’s plan. It is confirmed by the coming of the Holy Spirit, who will testify about Jesus (Carson 1991, 529). Carson sees the important emphasis not on the source of the procession of the Holy Spirit but on the fact that the Holy Spirit will work as Jesus is ascended. In sum, the persecution faced by Christians is to be seen as a rejection of Jesus. Carson concludes that many times there are clear ideological reasons which lead to the death of Christians (Carson 1991, 531).

John 16:4-15 speaks of the Holy Spirit’s work (Carson 1991, 532). The passage does not follow as clearly as some commetators would like. Carson suggests that the disciples’ questioning of Jesus’ departure is not their actual concern. They may rather be expressing grief that he is leaving at all (Carson 1991, 533). The disciples are clearly (vv. 6-7) filled with grief. Jesus promises the Holy Spirit to relieve their grief. The Spirit will make the sinfulness of sin obvious. He will demonstrate that the world is guilty (Carson 1991, 535). Though some of the nuances of the language can be debated, it is clear that the Holy Spirit confirms the work of Jesus. While Jesus is the authoritative Word of God, the Holy Spirit enables Jesus’ people to interpret him well (Carson 1991, 539).

John 16:16-33 looks ahead to a future joy (Carson 1991, 542). This future time is unclear. It could refer to the time after the resurrection or to a future second coming (Carson 1991, 543). Regardless, as shown in 16:17-18, the disciples are unprepared for the resurrection. It does not make sense to them. Jesus reassures them that their sorrow will turn to joy (Carson 1991, 544). The communication with God will also be wide open. Vese 24 speaks of a very direct kind of prayer (Carson 1991, 545). The care of the Father is very present for the Christian (Carson 1991, 547). The section ends with Jesus’ listeners affirming their understanding and commitment. Jesus contradicts their testimony. They will not be loyal. Yet, in verse 33, they will be restored (Carson 1991, 548-549).

Jesus' Departure and the Holy Spirit

6/8/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
6/8/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “B. The Farewell Discourse: Part One (13:31-14:31)” pp. 476-510.

Jesus makes an extended speech to his disciples after Judas’ departure during their meal. Carson begins his discussion of this discourse by detailing several topics scholars have recently studied. It is unclear precisely where the discourse begins (Carson 1991, 476). 14:31 seems to be a transition. There is some debate about the relationship of material before and after that verse (Carson 1991, 477). Some have broken the entire discourse into very small phrases from different traditions, assembled by force (Carson 1991, 479). Others have suggested that the discourse takes its shape from other literary farewell discourses (Carson 1991, 480). Some have noted the importance of the discussion of the Holy Spirit, here and in 1 John (Carson 1991, 480). Others have noted what Carson thinks is of primary interest. The passage emphasizes the ongoing life of the Christian, even after Jesus’ departure (Carson 1991, 481).

In John 13:31-38 the process of Jesus’ arrest has begun. Judas has left on his mission. Jesus begins speaking of glorification (Carson 1991, 482). Jesus tells his disciples of his departure. He tells them what he expects of them. Their obligation is a “new” command which is not new. Love one another. But it is expanded. The love is to be as Jesus has loved them (Carson 1991, 484).

In 14:1-4 Jesus encourages his disciples. The place he will go is for them a lso (Carson 1991, 487). The disciples are rightly troubled. They are enduring great turmoil. But Jesus’ departure is for their good (Carson 1991, 488). He will use it to care for them. Jesus has told his disciples of their destination. In John 14:5-14 Thomas has misunderstood. He wants more concrete information. He has not made sense of what Jesus said was clear (Carson 1991, 491). Jesus’ clarification is that he himself is the way to the Father. Thomas’ failure to recognize this is sad (Carson 1991, 494). Verses 9-11 make it clear tht Jesus’ teaching is not the goal. his person is the way to the Father. Commenting on John 14:12, Carson considers that the works of Jesus’ followers are “greater” simply because they are done in the context of the resurrected Lord (Carson 1991, 496).

John 14:15-31 speaks to Jesus sending the Holy Spirit to those who love him (Carson 1991, 498). This is the normal expectation of the Christian. The Paraclete will come to Jesus’ people (Carson 1991, 499). Though the timing of the Holy Spirit’s arrival is not entirely clear from the passage, it is clear that the Holy Spirit will come and later Jesus will come (Carson 1991, 501). Carson notes that Jesus’ love and the presence of God is shown in some special way to the Christians which is not visible to others (Carson 1991, 503). This, Jesus says, in verses 25 and following, is completely consistent with what he has previously told his disciples (Carson 1991, 505). The peace and love he gives are unbreakable. They are not like the substitutes we can generate (Carson 1991, 506).

Foot Washing, Dinner, and Permission to Betray

6/1/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
6/1/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“IV. Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in His Cross and Exaltation (13:1-20:31)” “A. The Last Supper (13:1-30)” pp. 455-476.

Carson observes a shift in order of events starting in John 13. In the earlier chapters, Jesus would do a sign, then explain the sign. Now, Jesus’ teaching points forward to his final sign of death and resurrection (Carson 1991, 455).

Before digging into the events of the passage, Carson weighs different views of the date of the passion. The Synoptics point clearly to the meal being a Passover, placing Jesus’ death on Friday, 15 Nisan. John seems to point to one day earlier, with Jesus’ death at the same time as the slaughter of Passover lambs (Carson 1991, 455). Carson’s resolution is that the chronology of the Synoptics is not directly contradicted by John. He cites several verses which he will consider in his running commentary. The verses are 13:1, 27; 18:28; 19:14, 31, 36, 42b (Carson 1991, 457).

Carson also considers why John did not give an explicit teaching about the Eucharist, though this passage clearly provides opportunity (Carson 1991, 458). Carson thinks John is pointing away from the Eucharist itself to the sacrifice of Christ, both here and in John 6.

John 13:1-17 describes Jesus’ washing of his disciples’ feet (Carson 1991, 458). Dinner is about to begin. Verse 2 says that the plan to betray Jesus was already conceived. Carson does note that the text is slightly oblique. Was it Judas’ plan? Was it the devil’s plan? Regardless, Jesus will be betrayed (Carson 1991, 462). Jesus prepares himself and circles the disciples, washing their feet. Carson notes the embarrassment the disciples would have (Carson 1991, 463). Yet Jesus persists. Carson emphasizes that all our relatioship with Jesus is tied to assent to his cleansing (Carson 1991, 464). Yet Jesus does not wash all of Peter “Individuals who have been cleansed by Christ’s atoning work will doubtless need to have subsequent sins washed away, but the fundamental cleansing can never be repeated” (Carson 1991, 465). Carson insists that baptism as an effective and salvific event can’t be maintained (Carson 1991, 466) But he does allow for the washing to be a very strong symbol of God’s self-sacrifice (Carson 1991, 467). Carson does note that footwashing lacks the command and promise most would require of a sacrament. It is, however, a sign of care and service (Carson 1991, 468).

In John 13:18-30 Jesus predicts his betrayal. Jesus still speaks of Judas as one of his Twelve. Carson says, “the argument assumes that not all election is to salvation” (Carson 1991, 470). He views Jesus as actively choosing Judas for destruction. The text in John 13:18 does say that Judas is responsible for his betrayal. Yet the betrayal does lead to Jesus’ redemption of the world (Carson 1991, 471). Carson does comment on Jesus’ reactions here. Jesus was troubled. He was really going to be betrayed by one of his Twelve chosen ones (Carson 1991, 472).

Carson discusses the custom of reclining at table in brief. He thinks the Passover by this time was almost always elebrated reclining, as a contrast to the haste of the first Passover (Carson 1991, 473). In verses 24-26 Jesus reveals to John who would betray him. He gives him a gesture of affection before sending him out (Carson 1991, 475). Carson dismisses the difficulty of the Eleven thinking Judas was sent to make a purchase for Passover. He considers that some shops would remain open, on a credit only basis, even on the Sabbath. Further, Judas may have been sent to give to the poor, a common event on Passover (Carson 1991, 475). Judas went out on his grim errand, and the narrative closes.

Jesus as King and Suffering Servant

5/25/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
5/25/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“III. Transition: Life and Death, King and Suffering Servant (11:1-12:50);” pp. 403-453.

Taking a cue from the end of chapter 10 referencing John the Baptist, Carson sees chapter 11 of John as the start of a new segment (Carson 1991, 403). In John 11:1-44 the death of Lazarus is described (Carson 1991, 403). Counter to critics, Carson sees the Lazarus incident as showing all signs of an authentic account of a real event (Carson 1991, 404). John’s identification of the family suggests that they were known to the readers, possibly from other accounts (Carson 1991, 405). Jesus receives a message that Lazarus is ill. In verse four he asserts that the sickness will not “end” Lazarus. Carson notes this as an event in which Jesus intends to show his glory (Carson 1991, 406). Carson discusses the logistics of the various journeys briefly. He conclude that the trip made to notify Jesus would have taken about two days each way (Carson 1991, 408). Jesus’ delay assures us that the only way Lazarus could live was by divine intervention. He had been dead for several days before Jesus arrived. Jesus’ eventual comments that Lazarus has died make it clear that to God death is very much like sleep. Jesus intends to raise the dead (Carson 1991, 410). The response of Thomas in verse 16 is very bold. Thomas is willing to go and die also.

Carson notes that in verse 17 the Jews came to visit Mary and Martha. Because their village is close to Jerusalem he concludes that these people were from there and that Lazarus’ family was well known (Carson 1991, 411). The family is moved with gief. Jesus states rather ambiguously that Lazarus will rise. He then, in verse 25, begins to show that Lazarus will rise soon (Carson 1991, 412). Jesus is here making statements that show his people as possessing eternal life now, as well as later (Carson 1991, 413).

John 11:28-37 takes Mary and a number of visitors to the tomb. Mary also expresses her grief, as does Jesus (Carson 1991, 415). Carson considers some explanations of Jesus’ sorrow, but concludes that it is complex and unexplained (Carson 1991, 416).Jesus goes on in verses 38-44 to raise Lazarus from the dead. Carson describes tombs and the recognized location of Lazarus’ tomb (Carson 1991, 417). Jesus’ prayer emphasizes his unity with the Father. He then calls Lazarus to life. Carson notes that in Lazarus’ resurrection he is still bound. When Jesus rises from the dead he leaves his grave clothes behind (Carson 1991, 419).

Following the raising of Lazarus, people put their faith in Jesus. The Pharisees were consulted. Carson notes that the Sanhedrin was mostly Sadducees (Carson 1991, 420). The concern expressed is that Jesus could spark an uprising and anger Rome. The Sanhedrin does consider the matter. Carson briefly considers the identity of the high priest. Caiaphas and the politicized nature of the priesthood (Carson 1991, 421). John identifies Caiaphas’ statements as prophetic (vv. 51-52). It is best for Jesus to die on behalf of the peopl (Carson 1991, 422).

The third Passover mentioned by John begins at 11:55. Carson notes the importance of purification prior to the Passover. Jesus, however, needs no purification (Carson 1991, 424). The anointing of Jesus ast the start of John 12 is often compared with an anointing recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 7 (Carson 1991, 425). Luke’s account is strikingly different. John, Matthew, and Mark are more similar, but there are still significant differences. Carson suggests that at least Matthew/Mark and John can be reconciled (Carson 1991, 426). The date would appear to be after the Sabbath ended, the evening before Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Carson 1991, 427). It may have been a private dinner in the home of Lazarus or may have included the whole village (Carson 1991, 428). Carson notes details in the anointing which can tie this account to the one in Matthew/Mark. Judas’ objection in verses 4-5 is based on the value of the oointment, possibly a year’s wages (Carson 1991, 429). Jesus recognizes the event as a preparation for his burial. It does not appear that the others did so (Carson 1991, 430).

In John 12:12 Jesus moves to enter Jerusalem (Carson 1991, 431). Jerusalem would be very crowded at this time. Josephus notes immense numbers of people coming to Passover. What appears to be an impromptu parade welcomes Jesus in the way one would welcome a king (Carson 1991, 433). Carson observes the prophetic significance of the coming of a gentle king (Carson 1991, 433). The people understand the prophecies only after the resurrection (Carson 1991, 434). The presence of the crowds does create more challenges for the leaders. They wished to arrest Jesus quietly (Carson 1991, 435). In verse 20 even some “Greeks” seek out Jesus. Carson considers who the people might have been and why they came but sees it as inconclusive (Carson 1991, 437). Jesus does not respond plainly to the requet but does point out the necessity of his death to reach all people (v. 23). Jesus’ death brings glory by giving life to others (v. 24) (Carson 1991, 438). Likewise, in verse 25, as a man gives his life away in this world, he gains it in eternity (Carson 1991, 439). This is dependent on Jesus’ work to replace our mortal life with his immortality. Carson sees that Jesus’ conflict over this prospect is real. He is troubled by death (Carson 1991, 440). Jesus’ commitment to give himself is affirmed by a heavenly voice in vv. 29-30. Carson notes that here the stage is set for Jesus’ final victory over sin and his judgment of the world (Carson 1991, 443). Carson points out that in Christ’s exaltation he will draw people to himself, not to any other thing, such as the cross (Carson 1991, 444). The difficulty at this point is the people’s expectation that the Messiah would remain forever. They did not take this to allow for death (Carson 1991, 4455). Jesus, however, in verses 35-36, refers to his death and says people must trust in him. He then leaves and hides himself. Carson sees this as a demonstration of the consequence of unbelief.

In John 12:37-50 Jesus addresses the idea of unbelief (Carson 1991, 447). Humans are responsible to believe (vv. 37-43). Yet their desire to sin forces them not to believe. Carson connects this passage with Isaiah 53 and Isaiah 6. He concludes that God’s judicial hardening of hearts is not capricious but actually confirms the people’s will (Carson 1991, 448-449). This work is alien to God’s general will (Isaiah 28:21-22) and brings about God’s redemption. Jesus states that Isaiah saw his glory. Carson ties this to the vision in Isaiah 6. It is only reasonable that others who have seen Jesus in prson would believe (Carson 1991, 450).

Jesus Openly Claims Deity

5/18/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
5/18/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:19-10:42) D. Radical Confrontation: Climactic Signs, Works and Words (8:12-10:42)” pp. 337-401.

Carson begins this segment of his commentary by noting that John 8:12 follows 7:52 perfectly. If the passage from 7:53-8:11 is not original the text remains smooth (Carson 1991, 337). He then goes on to discuss the theme of light in John’s Gospel and Judaism. It was a familiar concept. When Jesus said he was “the light of the world” the people would have understood the concept (Carson 1991, 338).

Carson notes that Jesus’ words in 8:13 should not be understood to prohibit him from asserting his identity. Rather, they say that Jesus is not speaking or acting on his own initiative. He is speaking in accord with his overall testimony, in which his claims are documented by others’ (Carson 1991, 339). Jesus does testify to himself. He also makes judgment, which is fair (Carson 1991, 340).

John 8:21-30 speaks of Jesus’ source of authority. Carson sees Jesus repeating the ideas from 7:33-34, but more forcefully. This does not, however, make the people accept his word (Carson 1991, 341). Jesus, from the heavenly realm, is not understood by his hearers, who, in v. 23, are said to be from the fallen and rebellious world (Carson 1991, 342). In relation to verse 24, Carson speaks at length about the reference to Exodus 3:13-14. Carson concludes that Jesus’ statement of ἐγὼ εἰμί without a direct quote of ὅ ὦν from Exodus makes it difficult to see a direct claim here (Carson 1991, 343). The context, however, made it clear to Jesus’ hearers at some times that he was claiming deity (Carson 1991, 344).

John 8:31-59 introduces some people as believers, but they are later described as slaves to sin (Carson 1991, 246). Carson considers a variety of explanations for this apparent change of attitude. He concludes that some people may have a “fickle faith” which he contrasts with that of the genuine believer (Carson 1991, 348). Carson goes on to identify Jesus’ calls to count the cost of following him as a call to rightly analyze works. Thus the Christian can be sure his commitment to Jesus is true (Carson 1991, 348). Jesus moves the discussion to the concept of slavery next. Carson notes that the Jews no doubt understood Jesus’ reference to a moral servitude to sin. Otherwise they would not have denied being subjects. However, the status of slaves as compared to children is apparently the target of Jesus’ discussion (Carson 1991, 350). Conduct, whether as a slave, a son of Abraham, or the Son of God, shows our true status (Carson 1991, 351). In verses 42 and following, Jesus does not even allow for God to be the Father of the Jews in general. He ties fatherhood very closely to behavior (Carson 1991, 353). Carson notes that in verse 45 unbelief is explained. People who do not believe are children of their father, the Devil. The passage does not explain why some do believe. Carson reiterates the ideas from chapter six of God drawing people to believe (Carson 1991, 354). Jesus does go on to say he is the one who gives life. Verses 51-52 show this as his purpose (Carson 1991, 355). This sparks an objection. Does Jesus think he is greater than Abraham? Jesus claims perfect knowledge of God (Carson 1991, 356). He does claim to be greater than Abraham. He does so in such clear terms in verse 58 that the Jews move to stone him for blasphemy (Carson 1991, 358).

In chapter 9 Jesus heals a man born blind. Carson notes that much critical scholarship will attempt to distinguish as “source” miracle story from the “more mature” spiritual applications of the Evangelist. Carson does not consider much of that inquiry to be convincing (Carson 1991, 360). The heart of the controversy is dependent on whether John was narrating an event from Jesus’ work or if he was creating a story to comment on the conflict between the churc of his time and the Jewish heirarchy.

The sign of healing itself is in John 9:1-12. The specific time and place are unclear. We last knew that Jesus was in Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles. The next known marker is the Feast of Dedication, a fw months later (Carson 1991, 361). In verse 2, though the disciples assume a link between sin and the man’s suffering, Carson notes the connection to individuals is normally not made in Scripture. Verse 3 indicate that even an inborn condition is under God’s control (Carson 1991, 362). Carson concludes that Jesus’ statement in verses 4-5 indicates that his departure will hinder the Jewish leaders from conversion. They will be left in the dark, blind (Carson 1991, 3653). The contrast is shown in verse 6 when Jesus gives light to a man who has never seen. The use of saliva in the healing may imply Jesus’ authority over what is unclean (Carson 1991, 364). The name of the pool, “Siloam,” may be a reminder that the man was healed by the one “sent” by God (Carson 1991, 365).

The Pharisees investigate the healing in verses 13-34 (Carson 1991, 366). Carson notes the importance of the specific title. The man was not brought to the religious court. He was brought to the theological experts. He was not on trial (Carson 1991, 366). In verse 16 it is apparent that the discussion turns, in some minds, on the Sabbath. If Jesus is violating the Sabbath he is not from God (Carson 1991, 367). In other minds, the miracle can only be done by God, so Jesus must be from God (Carson 1991, 368). Neither argument is compelling. The Pharisees question the man and his parents. The parents, not wishing to incur penalties, do not tell how the son was healed Carson notes that many scholars reject the idea of this conflict being genuine. Threats of removal from the synagogue may not have been established as early as this healing (Carson 1991, 369). Carson does not consider it unreasonable that local synagogues would expel followers of Jesus even prior to the death of Christ (Carson 1991, 371). By verse 24 the authorities had decided Jesus was a sinful man. The man and his parents will not confess the sin. This provokes more questioning (Carson 1991, 372). The issue eventually asks whether one is a disciple of Moses or of Jesus (Carson 1991, 374). Carson notes that the Pharisees considered Moses to include the oral tradition surrounding the Pentateuch. By that measure Jesus is a lawbreaker. The instance of the man born blind makes the Pharisees more resistent than they had been previously (Carson 1991, 375).

Verses 35-41 comment on sight and blindness. Those who would reject Jesus as the savior are found to be blind (Carson 1991, 375). Jesus is rightly understood as the “Son of Man.” Carson notes that the term emphasizes Jesus as the one who can judge and disclose God to man (Carson 1991, 376). Those who are blind will receive sight. In verse 39 Jesus acknowledges that the reverse also applies. Those who think they see reject the light of God, so are in darkness (Carson 1991, 377).

John 10:1-21 records a discussion of Jesus as the shepherd (Carson 1991, 379). Carson notes that some scholarship considers this to be a dislocated piece of material. He does not think it necessary to rearrange the narrative (Carson 1991, 380). In the text, Jesus compares himself to a shepherd as opposed to violent outsiders who harm the sheep. Carson makes the very natural connection to Ezekiel 34, along with other passages witha motif of sheep and shepherd (Carson 1991, 381). In verse six, since Jesus’ opponents do not understand what he is talking about, Jesus shifts to a more detailed explanation. The opponents do not understand this either (Carson 1991, 383). Carson considers the changes in metapho to be an expansion, not a completely different idea (Carson 1991, 384). The intensification includes the idea of the shepherd laying down his life. This is not an example. Rather, it is a substitution. The work of Jesus is clearly that of a savior (Carson 1991, 386). Carson goes on to emphasize that the New Testament never shows Jesus as merely an example to people who make themselves like him. It always sees Jesus as the savior who rescues helpless people. Further, Jesus dies not to earn the Father’s love, but in order to rise and gather others to the Father (Carson 1991, 388).

The remainder of John 10 sees Jesus making claims as the Christ. These claims result in open opposition (Carson 1991, 390). Carson gives a brief history of the Feast of Dedication from verses 22-23 (Carson 1991, 391). This Feast is now known as Hanukkah, also the Feast of Lights. Carson notes several reasons why Jesus would not want to proclaim himself the Messiah (Carson 1991, 392). Despite these reasons, Jesus begins to lay out what kind of Messiah he is in verse 25. Carson again notes that Jesus’ hearers, not being his “sheep,” are not going to understand (Carson 1991, 393). Nevertheless, the Fathe and Son have one will. Together they care for the sheep. Carson is clear that in verse 30 this refers to a “metaphysical unity,” not one person or merely of one will (Carson 1991, 395).

Because Jesus’ opponents understood him to be making claims to deity, they desired to kill him. Carson points out the urgency with which they may have wished to act (Carson 1991, 396). Jesus remains present long enough to press his claims more. His reference to Psalm 82 is decidedly cryptic. Carsn evaluates some of the possible explanations. He conludes that Jesus is giving a biblical reason not to assume that he is speaking wrongly. This buys him an opportunity to appeal again to his miracles (Carson 1991, 399). As the chapter ends, Jesus leaves Jerusalem to go back to where John was widely accepted. There he is contrasted to John, who did not do miracles (Carson 1991, 400).

Who Condemns You?

5/11/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
5/11/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:19-10:42) Excursus: The Woman Caught in Adultery (7:53-8:11)” pp. 333-337.

John 7:53-8:11 is normally considered to be an insertion in the text. Carson agrees with that decision. It is omitted in nearly all the early evidence. In many later manuscripts it is marked as questionable. Some manuscripts place it in different locations, including in Luke’s Gospel (Carson 1991, 333). However, Carson thinks it quite likely that the event occurred. There are other similar events recorded in extrabiblical sources (Carson 1991, 334). The idea of Jesus and other teachers in the court of the temple is entirely normal. Officials could easily bring up difficult cases, as they do in 8:3-4. Carson observes the odd situation of only the woman being brought. He also notes the authorities seem mainly to be pursuing Jesus rather than the woman (Carson 1991, 334). The punishment of stoning may well have passed from use i n Jesus’ day. Yet the heart of the question was whether Jesus would uphold Moses (Carson 1991, 335). His doing so, further, could usurp authority of Rome. Carson lists several speculations authors have made about what he wrote on the ground in verse 8. He is ceratin it is a delaying tactic to make the accusers uncomfortable (Carson 1991, 336). This worked. Jesus addressed the woman’s guilt, forgave her, urged her to purity, and sent her away. The passage ends clearly and does not seem tied to any other texts.

Jesus, Bold and Offensive

5/4/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
5/4/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:19-10:42) C. Rising Opposition: More Signs, Works and Words (5:1-7:52)” pp. 240-332.

Carson classifies John 5-7 as one unit. These chapters “record the shift from mere reservation and hesitation about Jesus to outright and sometimes official opposition” (Carson 1991, 240). The challenges go from the Sabbath to Christology to charges of Jesus being possessed by demons. Jesus continues to advance his claims to be the true Son of God.

In the beginning of chapter five, Carson notes a variety of excavations and historic accounts which suggest the five colonnades are quite literal, as opposed to a symbolic suggestion of the Pentateuch (Carson 1991, 242). The disputed text of 3b-4 may well have been an explanatory gloss (Carson 1991, 242). It is unclear why Jesus picks the one man to heal. John makes no explanation (Carson 1991, 243). Carson notes that the man healed does not seem proactive or very thoughtful. He may view himself asa victim of circumstances (Carson 1991, 243). The fact that the healing was on the Sabbath serves to move the narrative along with a dispute over working on the Sabbath (Carson 1991, 244). Carson sees verse 14 as a statement of Jesus that whether the illness was related to sin, and it may have been, he needs to expect that future sin could have serious consequences (Carson 1991, 246).

Jesus responds to the situation in 5:16-47. The affirmation of God working on the Sabbath is not taken to imply that God is responsible to keep the Sabbath. Carson sees it as a statement that God is always caring for creation (Carson 1991, 247). Carson suggests the use of the Sabbath discussion may be John’s way of tying the Sabbath to all Jesus’ redemptive work (Carson 1991, 248). The opponents recognize verse 18 as a statement that Jesus is equal with God (Carson 1991, 249). Carson notes that the Jews assumed Jesus was calling himself an alternate God, while John has Jesus claiming unity (Carson 1991, 250). Especially Jesus’ statements of unity of will and the ability to raise the dead in v. 21 make a claim to being one with the Father (Carson 1991, 252). Though the Father and Son have different roles in judgment (v. 22), they act with one will (Carson 1991, 254). Carson sees Jesus’ claims here as a bold statement of mature Christology. There is no reasoned choice other than Jesus as God or an insane person (Carson 1991, 255). Jesus insists that the one who believes has life (Carson 1991, 256). Yet, in v. 31 and following, Jesus points out that his work is attested elsewhere. Carson observes that Jesus does not deny the truth of his testimony but that he affirms that it is documented elsewhere (Carson 1991, 259). Jesus goes on to mention a number of sources of testimony. Carson sees the testimony of the Bible, especially that of Moses, as the source Jesus’ hearers would accept as reliable. they viewed these as God’s endorsement (v. 44) (Carson 1991, 265).

In the start of chapter six, John records the feeding of the five thousand. Carson points out that this is the only chapter of John which works with the Galillean ministry. The Synoptics spend a good deal of time on Galilee (Carson 1991, 267). Jesus’ moves from place to place suggest either a purposeful editorial arrangement or simply that Jesus was moving a good deal, though it was difficult (Carson 1991, 268). Carson thinks there is a strong theological reason for John to mention the Passover here. Jesus goes on to speak of the eating and of bread. The connection of ideas is hard to escape (Carson 1991, 268). The situation in 6:1-5 was such that Jesus’ hearers would not have food because they were learning from Jesus. The needed food would cost a great deal (Carson 1991, 269). The five thousand men plus others were all fed. They wished to make Jesus a king. Carson concludes they thought they had adequate force for revolution (Carson 1991, 270). Carson notes that Jesus did not use this as an occasion for revolution. He also notes that John omitted numerous actions which could make this passage seem more like the Eucharist (Carson 1991, 270). The emphasis is on the people having all they need. Jesus avoided the kingship issue. Carson observes it was not Jesus’ time (Carson 1991, 272).

Verses 16-20 show Jesus walking across the water to his disciples. Carson discusses various theories of the structure of the Gospel and the coordination of the sign accounts (Carson 1991, 274). When Jesus arrives, walking on the lake, the disciples are frightened. Carson is unsure that Jesus’ self-identification in verse 20 bears any theological weight. It is both a typical identifier and the way God introduced himself to Moses (Carson 1991, 275).

John 6:22-58 is the passage in which Jesus calls himself the bread of life (Carson 1991, 276). Carson discusses some issues of the passages’ unity, meaning, and the argument’s source. He concludes that the passage is cohesive and original. It has a strong sacramentarian feeling to it, which was recognized by early Christians (Carson 1991, 277). This is, however, not entirely decisive (Carson 1991, 278). Carson goes on to discuss the words “sacrament,” “mystery,” and “ordinances” as used for the Eucharist. He concludes that the terms “sacrament” and “ordinance” are both appropriate (Carson 1991, 281). A crowd has sought Jesus after his healing miracle across the Sea of Galilee. Jesus turns their attention in verse 26 to true bread from God (Carson 1991, 282). The speech itself seems to take place in a synagogue (v. 59) but there is no indication of a move indoors (Carson 1991, 283). Jesus identifies himself as the true giver of the true food which nourishes to eternal life (Carson 1991, 284). He is also the food, though Carson considers it uncertain whether that statement is meant to refer to Jesus at that time or some later manifestation (Carson 1991, 284). What God requires of His people is faith, not some sort of additional works (Carson 1991, 285). Jesus boldly says in verse 35 that he himself is the bread of life (Carson 1991, 288). Carson notes that the language is “essentially symbolic” (Carson 1991, 288) in that there is metaphor, that eating is referred to as coming to Jesus and that it is not drinking but believing which prevents thirst. Carson sees a strong predestinarian view in verse 37. Jesus calls people to him and will keep them (Carson 1991, 290). Carson affirmst that God’s sovereignty “is a major theme in the Fourth Gospel” (Carson 1991, 291). He sees the idea of irresistible grace as central here and in chapter 17. At the same time, though, John is clear that humans are responsible to have faith. The concept of God drawing people to himself is very clear, especially in verse 44 (Carson 1991, 293). Jesus makes a bold invitation to people. They must believe on him to have eternal life (vv. 47-4) (Carson 1991, 294). Jesus then speaks even more boldly in terms of eating his flesh. This i the way his people receive life (vv. 49ff). Though Jesus uses the term σάρξ rather than σώμα, which is regularly used in passages about the Eucharist, Carson does see strong references to communion (Carson 1991, 295). Jesus’ words are so offensive Carson does not think anyone could take them literally. However, he is not ready to say definitively how they were intended (pp. 295-296). He remains insistent that it cannot be a reference to truly eating and drinking the Lord’s body and blood in communion (Carson 1991, 297).

John chapter six concludes with many of Jesus’ disciples leaving him (Carson 1991, 300). Carson, commenting on verse 63, points out a rejection of a sacramental interpretation of the passage. If the “flesh counts for nothing” the entire passage is symbolic (Carson 1991, 301). Therefore, Carson reads the text as a call to believe, for which eating is a metaphor. Verses 66 and following show that in our responsibility to come to God in faith, the Lord is always active to draw us (Carson 1991, 303).

Chapter seven verses 1-13 bring out the uncertainty among some as regards Jesus’ identity (Carson 1991, 305). Jesus’ brothers seem to want him to prove himself by performing public miracles. Verse six specifies Jesus’ unwillingness to act publicly for this reason (Carson 1991, 307). Jesus has a right time, appointed by God. Carson contrasts this with earthly people, for whom one time is as good as another (Carson 1991, 08). When Jesus does arrive in Jerusalem the common people and the leaders are divided in their opinion of him.

John 7:14-44 deal with the events once Jesus did go to the Feast of Tabernacles (Carson 1991, 311). The authorities were amazed at the content of Jesus’ teaching. Literacy was common but his knowledge of doctrine was not (Carson 1991, 311). Jesus’ explanation in verse 16 is that he is saying what the Father says. This, Carson says, as well as the commitment of the Christian, is not a matter for debate or for a proof of a ceratin level of ethical behavior. The essence is a commitment to being pleasing to God. It will then be “self-authenticating” (Carson 1991, 312). As we choose to believe we find the proofs convincing. Here Carson moves in what seems a very circular and subjective direction. Yet in John 7:18 Carson returns to the solidity of Jesus’ statements. Jesus is committed to speaking as God the Father has spoken (Carson 1991, 313). The conflict spreads as Jesus states that those who would kill him are lawbreakers. This provokes a counter-argument that Jesus has a demon because nobody is trying to kill him (Carson 1991, 314). Jesus continues by pointing out that the good work of circumcision on the eighth day often violates the Sabbath. Jesus’ good work of healing is also acceptable for theSabbath (Carson 1991, 315). Jesus calls his critics to stop their self-righteous judgment (v. 24). Rather, they should judge appropriately (Carson 1991, 317). In response, in verses 25 and following, the people discuss what they think of Jesus and the Christ (Carson 1991, 317). Jesus points out that the people do not know what they think they do (Carson 1991, 318). They also do not know the Father. In verse 32, the guards sent by the Sanhedrin seek to apprehend Jesus. Carson notes the political structure which would require some cooperation among the functions on the council (Carson 1991, 319). Jesus expects to be arrested and die, another idea the crowds do not understand (Carson 1991, 320). In verses 37-44 Jesus speaks of pouring out the Spirit on people. Carson describes a ceremony involving pouring water which had become common at the Feast of Tabernacles (Carson 1991, 321-322). Jesus announces himself as the one who gives living water. Carson discusses at length the interpretation of the source of the water. Does it flow from Christ or the believer? Both are grammatically defensible. After analyzing a number of passages and the idea of the Spirit and water flowing, Carson concludes that Jesus is the giver of the Spirit who wells up out of the believer to bless his neighbor (Carson 1991, 328). The crowd remained divided in their understanding of Jesus’ identity (Carson 1991, 329).

Verses 45-62 conclude the chapter. The temple guards did not arrest Jesus. The leaders were upset with them. They should have known to stop Jesus (Carson 1991, 331). Nicodemus suggests a fair trial and is mocked by the other leaders. Carson notes that there seems to be a sharp disregard for the understanding of the crowds (Carson 1991, 331). The people are assumed to be ignorant and evil. This is the Sanhedrin’s opinion. It will not shift.

Jesus Goes Public

4/27/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
4/27/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:19-10:42) B. Early Ministry: Signs, Works and Words (2:1-4:54)” pp. 166-240.

Carson considers that John begins his narrative of Jesus’ “public ministry” in chapters 2-4, though the start of chapter two features a limited audience at a wedding (Carson 1991, 166). This portion of the Gospel features Jesus doing signs of his power. There is a repeated theme of the new replacing the old in chapters 2-4.

John narrates a variety of signs with the stated purpose of poeple believing that Jesus is the Christ (Carson 1991, 167). Carson notes that John’s careful counting of days, which occurs only here, culminates with the sign of turning water into wine on the seventh day (Carson 1991, 168). The sign, then, may be associated with rest.

In the narrative of the wedding at Cana, Carson notes the shame which would be associated with running out of wine (Carson 1991, 169). Jesus’ response to his mother’s request, though not disrespectful, is a rather abrupt and forceful statement (Carson 1991, 171). The reference to Jesus’ “hour” not having come may well suggest his coming death and resurrection. Carson considers Jesus to frequently move discussions of natural or temporal matters to refer to eternal situations (Carson 1991, 172). Likewise, Carson sees the use of a water pot for purification as a vessel for wine to represent a foreshadowing of the abundant joy of God’s cleansed people (Carson 1991, 173). Carson notes the closure of 2:11, where the sign reveals Jesus’ glory. Though the signs are not numbered clearly in the Gospel, most people will identify six or seven (Carson 1991, 175).

Shortly after the wedding, Jesus and his disciples go to Jerusalem for the Passover. Carson suggests that the “cleansing of the temple has not been moved by John out of its chronological order. He thinks, rather, that the clearest reading of the texts points to two incidents, separated by several years (Carson 1991, 178). Carson notes that Jesus did not accuse the people in the temple courts of any wrongdoing other than their location (Carson 1991, 179).

After the cleansing of the temple John records a discussion with Jewish authorities. Carson again notes the idea of replacement, as Jesus pictures himself as the one replacing the temple (Carson 1991, 180). John explains clearly that Jesus was referring to his body being torn down (Carson 1991, 182).

Carson notes the evident faith of people in 2:23-25, but takes Jesus’ choice not to trust the people as a sign that their faith was inadequate (Carson 1991, 184). Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus follows this immediately. Carson rejects ideas that the encounter with Nicodemus from John 3 is an attempt to place a situation from the time of John’s authorship into the early ministry of Jesus. Rather, he sees it as a very likely real event (Carson 1991, 185). The mention of the encounter being at night is consistent with John’s use of darkness as a metaphor for the spiritual world (Carson 1991, 186). Nicodemus’ questions were likely those of many people. Carson sees him seeking out answers to common questions (Carson 1991, 187).

Carson discusses Jesus’ slightly cryptic statement about being “born again” at some length. The kingdom of God is both a present and a future reality, into which one may enter by being born again (Carson 1991, 188). This appears to be a sort of transformation (Carson 1991, 190). Nocodemus does not seem to know what Jesus is implying. Carson sees Jesus’ words in verses 5-6 as an attempt to draw understanding out of Nicodemus (Carson 1991, 191). The reference to “water and the Spirit” has been interpreted as natural and supernatural birth or birth by baptism. Carson evaluates these and other views. He concludes that the term refers to a conjunction of events in which God cleanses his people, giving them his nature (Carson 1991, 195). In this context the remaining statements of Jesus in verses 6 and following make sense (Carson 1991, 196). Jesus’ authority to speak this way is given in verse 12. He is the one who came from heaven (Carson 1991, 199). The sign of new life is the lifting up of Jesus (Carson 1991, 201). This salvation is rooted in God’s love, which will be reflected in God’s people (v. 16) (Carson 1991, 204). Carson details a number of ways in which God’s love for the world does not interfere with a coming judgment (Carson 1991, 205-206). The judgment and condemnation is avoided by “coming to God” in faith (Carson 1991, 207).

As we move to the end of John 3, starting at verse 22, Jesus is shown as greater than John the Baptist (Carson 1991, 208). Jesus gives the new life, while John gives baptism. Carson maintains that the baptism is a sign rather than being regenerative (Carson 1991, 209). Jesus’ rise in popularity is consistent with John’s desire that a Messiah would be found (Carson 1991, 211). Jesus’ testimony in vv. 33-34 that God is truthful points to the idea that, with Jesus as a witness, God’s word is delivered faithfully. Jesus’ word is, therefore, reliable (Carson 1991, 213).

John moves in chapter four to the narrative of the Samaritan woman. Carson finds this a very nified passage (Carson 1991, 214). Jesus’ move through Samaria avoided considerable travel distance which would be caused by going through Gentile territory across the Jordan (Carson 1991, 216). Since the exile in Babylon Carson observes that Samaritans were not accepted by the Jews (Carson 1991, 216). Jesus’ interaction with a Samaritan woman was surprising on several levels. Carson notes the timing, the cultural barrier, and the matter of a man asking a favor of a woman (Carson 1991, 217). Jesus’ reference to “living” or “running” water is misunderstood by the woman. He is speaking of something she cannot grasp (Carson 1991, 219). By giving the Holy Spirit, Jesus shows he is able to satisfy thirst eternally (Carson 1991, 220). Carson notes that Jesus immediately moves to discuss the woman’s sin as the root of her spiritual thirst (Carson 1991, 221). As to the Samaritan woman’s abrupt change of topic in verse 20, Carson considers that it may not be an attempt at distraction. Having met a prophet it may be a very genuine question (Carson 1991, 222). Jesus’ response in verses 21-24 points to the non-local nature of salvation (Carson 1991, 222). Salvation is found in Jesus, not in a location. Jesus identifies himself as the true and clear revelation of God (Carson 1991, 225). The return of the disciples and departure of the woman in verses 27 and following does point out Jesus’ unusual action in speaking witha woman (Carson 1991, 227). Jesus’ emphasis to his disciples is on his intention to do the Father’s will. Carson sees this as the most clearly stated priority of Jesus (Carson 1991, 228). The work of Jesus brings in the time of harvest. Carson observes the propheteic significance of harvest and the importance of the one sowing as well as the one harvesting (Carson 1991, 230). The Samaritans, in vv. 40-42, believe first because of the woman’s testimony but then because of Jesus’ teaching. God’s promises are confirmed (Carson 1991, 231).

John 4:43-54 describes Jesus’ healing of an official’s son. Carson observes that this passage bears a good deal of similarity to Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:2-10. There are also significant differences (Carson 1991, 233). The adult is a royal official with a son, not a servant, in need. It is not altogether clear to Carson and others what home of Jesus is referred to - Galilee or Nazareth - in verses 4445. Carson notes numerous possibilities (Carson 1991, 235). Regardless, Carson observes Jesus was not honored as he deserved. The official, however, does seek help. His son is dying and he hopes Jesus can heal him (Carson 1991, 238). Jesus makes it clear that faith should be in him, not merely in miracles (Carson 1991, 239).

John Introduces Jesus

4/20/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
4/20/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Jesus’ Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:19-10:42) A. Prelude to Jesus’ Public Ministry (1:19-51)” pp. 141-166.

Carson notes the altogether reasonable report of “the Jews” sending investigators to question John the Baptist about Jesus. Carson notes that John’s use of “the Jews” is multi-faceted and not always negative (Carson 1991, 141). The question of these priests and Levites in John 1:10-21 strongly suggests their concern was with the nature of the claims of Jesus to be Messiah (Carson 1991, 142-143). John the Baptist does not see himself as either the Messiah or as the “Elijah” to come. John does make it clear that he recognizes his role as a forerunner of the Messiah (Carson 1991, 144).

Commenting on vv. 24-25, Carson entertains and rejects the idea of a second embassy questioning John. He also does not think the entire group consists of Pharisees. He favors a subset of the interogators being Pharisees, asking more questions (Carson 1991, 144). Carson observes that the most serious question is the authority to administer baptism. As a washing of purification it was surprising that it would be administered by another individual. Most washings were self-administered (Carson 1991, 145). John turns attention away from the question to the authority of Jesus (Carson 1991, 146).

Verses 29-34 continue to introduce Jesus as the Messiah. Carson observes that John makes a point to use many Messianic titles (Carson 1991, 147). Verse 29 identifies Jesus as the “Lamb of God,” a title which may well have been hard to understand as Messianic. Carson observes that the disciples did not grasp the role of suffering until afte the resurrection (Carson 1991, 149). Carson examines several possible references before concluding that John may have been thinking of some literary references to a warrior lamb who would battle sin as a Messiah (Carson 1991, 150). The discussion continues with John’s witness of the Holy Spirit remaining on Jesus (Carson 1991, 151). The work of Jesus is that of the “chosen one” or “son of” God, who both reveals God and offers himself to save the world (Carson 1991, 152-153).

Verses 35-42 show various disciples attaching themselves to Jesus (Carson 1991, 154). Their early experience following Jesus helps them see the content of his life, persuading them that he is the Messiah (Carson 1991, 155).

Verses 43-51 portray two additional disciples, Philip and Nathaniel. Carson sees this as a demonstration that although the people as a whole did not receive Jesus, some did (Carson 1991, 157). The group follows Jesus into Galilee. Carson gives a brief geographical orientation (Carson 1991, 158). The encounter of Jesus and Nathanael serves to show Nathanael as a good Israelite and Jesus as the good which unexpectedly comes from Nazareth (Carson 1991, 160). Jesus is the true Son of God, real Israel (Carson 1991, 162).

Prologue to a Gospel

4/13/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
4/13/17

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“The Prologue (1:1-18)” pp. 111-139.

John 1:1-18 serves as a prologue, introducing the various themes to be explored in the rest of the work. Carson provides a list of topics in the order they appear in the Prologue, also referring to locations where they arise again in the Gospel (Carson 1991, 111). Although there are various ideas of later composition of the prologue, or its adaptation from another source, Carson observes no evidence, thus leaving those as matters of speculation (Carson 1991, 112). Structure of the prologue has also been a matter of some debate. Carson observes there is certainly a strong logical progression of thought (Carson 1991, 113).

In verse one “the beginning” statement refers to the Word being present before creation (Carson 1991, 114). Carson notes the apparently self-conscious use of verbs. The being verb refers to the presence of the Word, but a verb for becoming is used for the created order (Carson 1991, 114). The term “logos” for “the Word” is a challenge. It was used in various ways within Greek philosophy. Yet John consistently makes allusions to the Old Testament rather than philosophy. It seems fairly clear to understand as God’s “powerful self-expression in creation, revelation, and salvation” (Carson 1991, 116). The word order and emphasis in the opening verse specifically tells of the identity of the Word as God (Carson 1991, 117).

Verses 3-4 emphasize the creative work of the Word. He made absolutely everything (Carson 1991, 118). Carson discusses the statements about “light” and “life,” noting that these are common motifs in many religious and philosophical contexts (Carson 1991, 118). Verse 5 is a statement Carson sees as purposely ambiguous. It speaks of the light in the darkness. The darkness does not overcome/comprehend it. While someone who has no exposure to Christian thought might see a philosophical dualism, the Christian will almost immediately se a correspondence of light and salvation (Carson 1991, 119).

From this foundation, John discusses the coming of John the Baptist, the one who introduces the light (Carson 1991, 120).

This John is among the many witnesses who point to the glory of Jesus. Jesus is presented as the light embodied, hence the “true” light (Carson 1991, 122). The work of the light coming to overcome “the world” is seen by Carson as a comment on the power of God’s Word. This is not because the world is so good or big, but because the world, as protrayed in the Gospel, is generally seen as bad (Carson 1991, 123). Carson discusses the idea of the Word “enlightening” every man, from verse 10. He concludes that the work of the Word is to make clear what people are. Some will reject the light and some will not. All will be shown (Carson 1991, 124).

Verse 11 takes up the concept of the Word coming to every person. Carson sees it as taking the idea of verse 10 and then moving it farther. Although all creation does belong to God, at times he identifies people as being specifically his people. Carson considers this consistent with John’s habit of alluding to the Old Testament, thus referring to Israel (Carson 1991, 125). God’s people are portrayed as rejecting God. However, in verses 12-13 the people who do believe are received very enthusiastically (Carson 1991, 126). They are children of God. Carson notes that Paul identifies believers as “sons” but that John only identifies Jesus as the “son.” The adoption, however, is wholly from God’s will (Carson 1991, 126).

Verse 14 returns to “the Word.” Here he “becomes flesh,” a strong statement of the real humanity of the Word (Carson 1991, 127). The language of dwelling among us is a strong allusion to the Old Testament view of God in the Tabernacle (Carson 1991, 127). It is in this context that God’s glory is seen. Carson notes that the nature of God’s glory is not simply raw power. It is “full of grace and truth,” another strong allusion to the character of God as revealed in the Old Testament (Carson 1991, 129). Carson notes that this glory of God is not always evident in Jesus but is shown through his works (Carson 1991, 130). John’s statement in vv. 16-17, of “grace for grace” is challenging. Carson evaluates several possible interpretations and concludes that the statement indicates an additional outpouring of grace (Carson 1991, 132).

At the end of the prologue, John concludes with the idea of Jesus as the final revelation of God. Jesus, the only begotten Son of God, the true Word of God, is the one who has made God known (Carson 1991, 134). He knows the fullness of deity as well as being the true man discussed earlier in the prologue.

Carson concludes that the prologue draws many parallels to things mentioned later. While it is innovative in form it is not unusual in making reference to many Old Testament concepts (Carson 1991, 136).

Introduction to the Fourth Gospel

4/6/2017

Thursdays are for the New Testament
4/6/17

We’re going to start a walk-through of a commentary on John’s Gospel. D.A. Carson writes from a strongly Calvinistic perspective. He tends to use terms like “law” and “gospel” more loosely and with broader range than I would. He is not very sacramental in his outlook. Yet he does attempt to play fair with his sources.

Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991.
“Introduction” pp. 21-104

Carson’s commentary, which is aimed at the pastor or lower level scholar, attempts to defend a view of the authenticity of the Fourth Gospel. He proposes that the text was written at least in large part for the purpose of evangelizing unbelievers. Prior to the textual commentary, he provides a lengthy introduction.

John’s Gospel is distinct from the other canonical Gospels. “There are no narrative parables in John, no account of the transfiguration, no record of the institution of the Lord’s Supper, no report of Jesus casting out a demon, no mention of Jesus’ temptations” (Carson 1991, 21). It seems clear that different events were chosen for inclusion. John records events which are not in the Synoptics. Carson also notes several instances which may seem to be contradictions between John and the Synoptics, along with chronological challenges (Carson 1991, 22). The language usage in John is quite distinct from that of other New Testament writings. Carson considers this an evidence of the author’s independence (Carson 1991, 23).

The earliest manuscripts and comments seem to show an early practice of gathering the fourGospels together, often with Acts (Carson 1991, 24). John’s Gospel was used by Gnostics in the second century to justify their points of view (Carson 1991, 25). The text was also used by orthodox Christians as early as Justin Martyr (Carson 1991, 25). Carson goes on to discuss several of the early authors who make references to John as the author of the Gospel.

Though there was considerable debate about John’s Gospel through the time of the reformation, there was strong agreement that it was authored by John the apostle and could be reconciled in its message with the Synoptic Gospels (Carson 1991, 29). Carson notes that in 1835, the work of David Friedrich Strauss applied the idea of “myth” to the miraculous in John, thus discounting the authenticity (Carson 1991, 30). From that point, studies were divided as to the reliability of the message of the Fourth Gospel. Carson details some of the debate, particularly focusing on Bultmann and his opponents, He suggests that the writing may well knowingly preserve materials and ideas independently of, but not contradictory to the Synoptics (Carson 1991, 34).

Carson reviews some recent scholarship. Observing that the book is now 25 years from publication, the information could use an update. In general terms, while some scholars pursue the idea of some form of source criticism (Carson 1991, 35), there is also a growing movement toward some form of literary criticism, which considers the text as a body not closely connected to a historic context (Carson 1991, 38).

Carson next turns to a discussion of the Gospel’s “authenticity.” By this he means an evaluation of its reliability as “witness to the origins, ministry, death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus the Messiah” (Carson 1991, 40).

As to source criticism, it is clear that John used various sources of information (Carson 1991, 41). Trying to identify the sources is another matter altogether. At the same time, the text has numerous strong and unifying characteristics (Carson 1991, 42). Carson suggests that many attempts to engage in source criticism are based on an assumption that thought will necessarily develop in a linear and consistent way (Carson 1991, 44).

Carson identifies a considerable unity of style and structure in John (Carson 1991, 45). There are signs throughout indicating a sermonic style consistent with a work of one who has practiced telling the material many times (Carson 1991, 46).

Carson questions the standard discussion of a relationship between John’s Gospel and the Synoptics. Rather than looking for a literary dependence, Carson suggests that the Gospels, informed by eyewitnesses of real events, were strongly influenced by those very events (Carson 1991, 50). While it seems likely that John had read at least Mark and Luke, it is unfair to suggest that his knowledge of events is dependent on those accounts (Carson 1991, 51). Carson prefers to see congruity of concepts. He describes it as “an interlocking tradition” (Carson 1991, 52). The different accounts are complementary. Carson observes that John can contribute to an understanding of the Synoptics and that the Synoptics can aid in interpreting John. Complementarity is reciprocal (Carson 1991, 54). Carson illustrates this briefly by discussing the growth in the Christology of the disciples, both in the Synoptics and John.

There have been various speculations about the philosophical concepts underlying John’s Gospel. Carson notes that John uses a vocabulary rich in terms used by other religious groups. The more important consideration is the referent. What does a term refer to? This is a very important factor in understanding a message (Carson 1991, 59). Carson points out that John’s references are overwhelmingly related to the Old Testament and a Palestinian Jewish understanding of history and philosophy. This, then, gives context to the message (Carson 1991, 60). John’s Gospel, then, uses philosophical language expressly to show how Jesus fits into the entirety of religious and philosophical thought (Carson 1991, 62).

Carson moves on to discuss the “new criticism” which analyzes John in terms of a novel (Carson 1991, 63). The search is for some sort of truthful insight which has no necessary relationship to actual events (Carson 1991, 64). Carson observes that in every age, readers have been aware of the distinction between factual and fictional narratives. The Gospels have always been recognized as relating factual accounts (Carson 1991, 66).

The ascription of authorship is a common question. Carson sees the early, external, evidence as very strong in affirming the apostle John as the author (Carson 1991, 68). Modern scholars who dismiss Johannine authorship almost uniformly do so based on internal, rather than external, evidence. Carson discusses the passage in Eusebius where Papias is cited as possibly discounting John the apostle as the author. Carson sees this as possibly an attempt of Eusebius to contradict Papias, a closer source to the author (Carson 1991, 70). Carson goes on to treat evidence in John and commented on by the Synoptics which points strongly to John the son of Zebedee as the author (Carson 1991, 73).

Carson discusses the dating of the Gospel in some detail. Because of recent papyrus discoveries he considers any second century date very unlikely (Carson 1991, 82) It appears to have been written after the death of Peter about 64, based on 21:19. The lack of any mention of the destruction of AD 70 suggests a date before 70 or considerably afterward (Carson 1991, 83). Many suggestions of late authorship are based on a premise that the sophisticated Christology shown took a long time to develop. Carson does not consider this a necessary assumption (Carson 1991, 84). His inclination is to tentatively hold a date between 80 and 85.

As to the purpose of John’s Gospel, Carson notes four common ut problematic assumptions. First is that John depended on, then purposely made a contrast with, the Synoptic Gospels. This fails to see the complementary nature of the biblical texts (Carson 1991, 87). Some suggest the book was an effort of a polemical Johannine community trying to promote one point of view. There is, however, disagreement about the actual purpose of the text (Carson 1991, 88). Others focus on one or another of the themes or literary features. Again, there is little agreement about which is preeminent (Carson 1991, 88). Some commentators try to synthesize a variety of views. This may confuse the purpose of the Gospel with its theoretical effect (Carson 1991, 89). Carson prefers to accept the author’s statement in 20:30-31, that the text is written so the reader may believe (Carson 1991, 90). The Gospel makes many references to Old Testament concepts, suggesting that the reader likely was familiar with the ideas, but needed to see them in light of Jesus’ work (Carson 1991, 91). Carson suggests that the author’s statement of purpose can articulate all his reasons for the material selected and his mode of presentation (Carson 1991, 93). It all encourages belief in Jesus.

Carson finds John’s theological work to be well integrated, thus difficult to reduce to a list of emphases (Carson 1991, 95). The fullness of Jesus’ identity is certainly important. Carson lists many of the titles used of Jesus, along with multiple chapter and verse references, to help illustrate the author’s concern with identity. Likewise, the concept of salvation is important in John, as is the eschatological nature of the Christian life (Carson 1991, 97). The work of the Holy Spirit and the relation of Jesus to the Old Testament are also important concerns (Carson 1991, 98), as is the way people misunderstand Jesus (Carson 1991, 99).

As regards preaching, Carson urges “attention to the narrative” (Carson 1991, 101), not divorcing passages or verses from their overall context. Above all, the preacher needs to remember that the Gospel is about Jesus, not about us.