Marks RLGN301 ResearchPaperFinal ProfSnow

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4

"Title of Paper"

"Student's Full Name"

"Course # and Description (e.g., ENGL 100: Introduction to English)"

"Month Day, and Year"


1

It is generally accepted that the Gospel of John proclaims Jesus as Lord and God, One

with the Father. There are, however, those who challenge this view. Recently, Peter Nagel

(2019) pointed out that Jesus is not regarded as Theos in the Gospel of John. He refutes the

classical understanding of the texts that Jesus is One with God. He does not regard both the

Logos of John 1:1-2 as references to Jesus. Theological views of Jesus in John are often

understood as that he is One with God.1 Early in the twentieth century, scholars such as Wilhelm

Bousset marginalized such a high confession of Jesus as “Lord and God” with the argument that

such confessions were made in the latter part of the first century among Gentile Christians who

had been polytheists confessing many gods and many lords before confessing Jesus as Lord and

God. Larry Hurtado, among other scholars in the latter part of the twentieth century, dismantled

this argument because the author of John is clearly a Jew writing to monotheistic Jewish

Christians for whom there is only one Lord and God, namely, Yahweh.2

The Fourth Gospel shows the stark contrast of response between true belief and rejection

of truth, between the kingdoms of light and darkness. In John’s Gospel, knowing this “Word”

that “became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14) is more than mental assent—rather, it is a

knowing trust that leads to greater life in and with God.3 For the Scripture states, “So the Word

became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And

we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son” (Holy Bible, New Living

Translation, John 1:14). Differences, however, exist among those who emphasize that an early

high Christology is being reflected in the Gospel of John. For example, Richard Bauckham

argues that writers like John are seeking to identify Jesus within the mystery of the one God
1
Pieter Verster, “The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John,” Pharos Journal of Theology, no. 104(5)
(November 2023), doi:10.46222/pharosjot.104.58.
2
Charles A Gieschen, “The YHWH Christology of the Gospel of John,” Concordia Theological Quarterly,
85 No 1 Jan 2021, p 3-22, January 1, 2021.
3
Cara L. T. Murphy, “John,” in Approaching the New Testament: A Guide for Students (Nashville, TN:
B&H Academic, 2022), 74.
2

Yahweh, so they have a Divine Identity Christology that includes Jesus within the mystery of

Yahweh.4 Jesus's "I am" statements identify Him as God and connect to Old Testament themes.

Unique to John’s Gospel is Jesus’s use of the I AM statements. Drawing his audience

toward Old Testament parallels of Yahweh’s self-naming in Ex. 3:14, Jesus aligns himself with

this same divine nature. For the Scripture states, “God replied to Moses, “I am who I am. Say

this to the people of Israel: “I AM” has sent me to you” (Holy Bible, New Living Translation,

Exodus 3:14).

In John, we see Jesus with “I am,” (4:26; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:13, 19; 18:5–6, 8), and seven

more times he combines this declaration with a predicate-adjective qualifier: “I am the bread of

life” (6:35), “I am the light of the world” (8:12; 9:5), “I am the gate” (10:9), “I am the good

shepherd” (10:11, 14), “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25), “I am the way, the truth, and

the life” (14:6), and “I am the vine” (15:5). These statements invite the modern reader into a

reflection of how they are walking in discipleship with Jesus, the great I AM, who through his

incarnation has become “flesh and dwelt among us” (1:14).5

4
Charles A Gieschen, “The YHWH Christology of the Gospel of John,” Concordia Theological Quarterly,
85 No 1 Jan 2021, p 3-22, January 1, 2021.
5
Cara L. T. Murphy, “John,” in Approaching the New Testament: A Guide for Students (Nashville, TN:
B&H Academic, 2022), 75.
3

Bibliography

You might also like