The Gospel according to John (The Pillar New Testament Commentary

Pillar New Testament Commentary

by D.A. Carson

In this solid evangelical commentary on John's Gospel, a respected Scripture expositor makes clear the flow of the text, engages a small but representative part of the massive secondary literature on John, shows how the Fourth Gospel contributes to biblical and systematic theology, and offers a consistent exposition of John as an evangelistic Gospel. The comprehensive introduction treats such matters as the authenticity, authorship, purpose, and structure of the Gospel.

Genres: Theology, Biblical Studies, Reference, Christian, New Testament, Christianity, Religion

732 pages, Kindle Edition

First published December 1, 1990

About the author

Donald A. Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. He has been at Trinity since 1978. Carson came to Trinity from the faculty of Northwest Baptist Theological Seminary in Vancouver, British Columbia, where he also served for two years as academic dean. He has served as assistant pastor and pastor and has done itinerant ministry in Canada and the United Kingdom. Carson received the Bachelor of Science in chemistry from McGill University, the Master of Divinity from Central Baptist Seminary in Toronto, and the Doctor of Philosophy in New Testament from the University of Cambridge. Carson is an active guest lecturer in academic and church settings around the world. He has written or edited about sixty books. He is a founding member and currently president of The Gospel Coalition. Carson and his wife, Joy, reside in Libertyville, Illinois. They have two adult children.

Reviews

[Coleson White · Rating 5 out of 5]

This commentary is widely regarded as one of the best. I haven’t read a ton of commentaries all the way through but I would have to agree. DA carson is a special writer and his ability to exegete scripture while being practical and theological is superb. John especially needs commentaries that are exegetical but will delve into the deep theological themes he develops.

If you ever read John pick this commentary up. It has lifted my eyes to Christ, encouraged my faith, and challenged my presuppositions.

[Josie Seto · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s good no surprises

[Drake · Rating 5 out of 5]

Carson's commentary helped make my study through the Gospel of John an absolute joy. It dealt with the theological and academic issues in an accessible way while never losing sight of the messages and themes that John wanted his readers to recognize in his gospel. Carson is also very good at drawing out the implications of a given passage for discipleship, evangelism, and pastoral work, helping the text "hit home" in powerful ways. Highly recommended for anyone studying or teaching through John's gospel.

[Bill Forgeard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fantastic. I found it more useful as I acclimatised to Carson's economic style. Many of his insights, especially those useful for preaching application, are mentioned with only a few words. i.e. Read closely and there is much to be gained. Occasionally spent longer than I wished (for preaching preparation) on scholarly debates.

[David Kemp · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this commentary. It is stronger on research than devotional/sermon material but Carson will surprise you from time to time with a devotional application that is truly beneficial.



Bottom line, I see this commentary more for the serious scholar; it is not light reading.

[Vanjr · Rating 5 out of 5]

Top level conservative commentary on John. A must read commentary on this book.

[Franki · Rating 5 out of 5]

This commentary was a trusty companion for my in my personal study through John. Dr. Carson helpfully answered questions and was easy to understand.

[Kofi Opoku · Rating 5 out of 5]

The gospel of John is so theologically rich that it’s hard to imagine a commentary that can touch on every verse in detail while being mindful of the historical controversies surrounding the text. D.A. Carson’s work comes close. Of note is his excellent treatment of the passion narrative.

[Uriah O'Terry · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wore me out, not gonna lie

[David Pulliam · Rating 3 out of 5]

So dry but does a good job of bringing up various scholars and disagreements about John.

[Mark Nenadov · Rating 5 out of 5]

An incredible commentary, highly recommended.

[Tim Norman · Rating 5 out of 5]

I give this five stars as a commentary. Dr. Carson provides a clear explanation of the Gospel of John and draws from his extensive expertise in NT studies.

This book is not for everyone. It has some technical features and engages in matters that will not be relevant to all readers. I am preparing to teach a graduate course on John's Gospel and found this the best of the more academic commentaries.

[Jimmy Reagan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This commentary on the Gospel of John (Pillar New Testament Commentary series) by the renowned D. A. Carson has stood as a giant among commentaries for several years now. Glowing reviews can be found in a multitude of places. Carson himself comes the closest to having a following of any scholar I know. He’s conservative, sharp, thorough, and never fears going on record with what he believes. My guess is that the publishers of this series will hold on to this title for a long time, and if there’s ever any revision done it will be done by Carson himself.

Since Mr. Carson never beats around the bush about what he believes, he is particularly adept at writing an Introduction. He doesn’t meander through scholarly prognostications, but lines them up, assesses them quickly, and shoots down the ones that don’t deserve to stand. You will learn what he believes, why he believes it, and why it is right! Whether you will agree that he is right or not, his style of writing sticks in your mind and makes an impression long after other things would be forgotten.

He begins by explaining some distinctive characteristics of John’s Gospel. That section opens up issues that will reappear in many ways later. His second section has to do with the early reception of John’s Gospel. He sifts a lot of history quickly and makes a strong case for his opinion. As he moves closer to present times, he effectively banishes some of the stranger scholarly reconstructions that have been foisted upon John. In the third section on authenticity he gets into evaluating source criticism as well as some other critical analyses. To be the conservative hero that he is, he occasionally steps farther into criticism than I would expect, but his conclusions still come down firmly in the conservative camp. These discussions, of course, lead naturally to one about the relation of John and the Synoptics. At length, he gets to the section on the authorship of John’s Gospel. In my opinion, he particularly excelled in this section. After you read this section, you will see that attempts to discredit the possibility that John the Apostle wrote this gospel are more smoke and mirrors than reality. In the section on the date and provenance of John’s Gospel he well surveys the field before he arrives at a date around A.D. 80-85. Another section on the purpose of John’s Gospel is enlightening as is the one on the theological emphases in John. He barely discusses structure before he provides us with an outline.

The commentary proper is the same thoughtful, careful, determined work that you found in the Introduction. The Gospel of John is one of the most important books in the Bible, and I have two or three special commentaries on John that I never fail to consult when looking at a passage in John. This commentary is one of those volumes. You could almost label this commentary “famous”. Believe it or not, it’s quality can bear its fame.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

[Nicholas Abraham · Rating 5 out of 5]

This commentary is really the gold standard for John. This is the second time I've read through it. Carson provides a great balance between interaction with history of interpretation and interpreting the text.

[Luke Wagner · Rating 3 out of 5]

D. A. Carson’s commentary on John is thorough, well-researched, and contends with a number of differing viewpoints, making clear the author’s aims and beliefs. Carson, as opposed to more moderate commentators, is staunchly conservative in his assessment of the Gospel, which is healthy and helpful at times, while at other points proves to be far too wooden and unrealistic, in my opinion. I appreciate his reverence for the text as well as his commitment to Jesus; these are things that I wish to see more of in the academic world. Yet, sometimes I was left unconvinced by his conclusions that seemed to be influenced more so by his evangelical tradition than by his commitment to the text. I would recommend this commentary as a supplement or a secondary resource for a class or a paper on the topic of John’s Gospel, but I would probably recommend a few other commentaries ahead of this one, like Brown’s, Keener’s, and Burge’s.

[Andrea]

I'm not going to rate this because it feels disrespectfully but I really like this book in the bible I think its one of my new favortie books because it reminds me so much of myself, in the way that John he was pushed out by his people and reclaimed by Jesus and I really feel like that really reminds me of well me.

[Dani Pop · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure there can be a more painful and complex relationship with a book than the one I have with this one. For starters, it took me more than 2 (!) full years to finish it.

Carson may be the dean of evangelical academia, but he can do better than here.

Although this book shines in making Jesus shine and stay central, and that is really important, I didn't really like the pedantry that is so common to the book. I would've better read hundreds more pages about Jesus or the theological meaning of John than read one more page about the meaning of the 153 fishes.

[Seth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Finished this in November when we started on Luke but forgot I was tracking here. This is a really helpful commentary. I continue to not totally connect with Carson’s style - but the content makes up for it.

[Sean McGowan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A go to commentary on John. Very helpful—even with some of my disagreements with Carson’s conclusions.

[Brian Parks · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent commentary! Not much application mentioned but well reasoned exegetical conclusions make it a "must have" if you're going to preach John. It took me 2 years :)

[Joshua · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the process of studying the writings of John I kept seeing various commentators making reference to Carson. I have a friend who is also a big fan of Carson's works so both of these things influenced me to buy this work. This book actually exceeded any expectations I had. I cannot decide what is the best work on John but it is certainly between F.F. Bruce and this one.

First I would like to say that Carson is very articulate and exact. He is not given to fanciful fits of imagination of clumsy exegetical comments. He is a real scholar who approaches the topic with class and sensitivity. The book started with him giving a synopsis of past hundred and fifty years of scholarship on John. He systematically deconstructs and dismantles every objection to the authorship of the Apostle John. He does this in a cool and calm manner that takes all views into account while exposing the weaknesses of the methodology espoused by Bultmann and his school of thought. This part of the work was colossal!

Carson proceeds with the narrative with reserve and caution. He talks about a variety of views and usually shows their strengths and weaknesses pointing out the one he thought was most likely. He has mastery over New Testament Greek and his command of the language makes his ideas even more plausible. There are areas where he is unsure and he leaves those areas open with a few possibilities but usually he discusses why he favors one over another. He never resorts to belittling or running another view down but always proceeds with a cool-headed approach to theology.

This book is unique because he achieves a strong balance. For those who are well-versed in the Gospel of John they will find this book to be a great addition to their library and will no doubt acquire some things to add to what they are already know. At the same time, it is not an overwhelming work and one could hypothetically read this book without any previous background to John's works and still walk away with valuable insights into the overall theme of John's Gospel.

I would like to offer some criticism as I often do for other works but I really can't think of anything that was big enough to bring up. It is accessible, theologically sound, well argued, exhaustive, and professional all the way around. He deals with some delicate theological issues and does so without resorting to dogma like Sproul did in his work on John. Overall, this is a must for your library. I would say that this and Bruce are two of the best works out there on the subject. Carson offers great advice for young preachers who are preaching John to their people for the first time and great devotional reflections. It is a big work so be ready to labor working your way through it but it is worth it!

[Sue · Rating 5 out of 5]

16 May 2015
I like the Pillar commentaries very much for my personal Bible study. Infinitely readable, this exegetical and expository commentary on John is full of thoughts to ponder and insights that enrich my study.

Today, I am reading about Jesus' encounter with the Samaritan woman, John 4. Carson gives me a greater understanding of the Samaritan's view of God as opposed to Judah's ongoing revelatory relationship with God. At the same time, I am reading 2 Kings and the fall of both kingdoms - Samaria and Judah, so Carson's words gave me a more "up close and personal" view of these kingdoms as I looked back to the OT readings. Food for thought. Today, though, more particularly, Carson digs into the nature of God - spirit, and he gives me this sentence: "And he has chosen to reveal himself: he has uttered his Word, his own Self-Expression." That sentence, with the descriptive phrase "Self-Expression," is worth a whole morning of meditation for me.

27 May 2015 Carson uses the language of more sophisticated learners than I, but he tells me what he means in a way that smoothly gives me an opportunity to learn. This is an example from the commentary on John 10:34-36: "... although the argument is ad hominem– i.e. it does not require Jesus to subscribe to the same literal exegesis as his opponents ... " I appreciate this effort and trust it more than I trust a more watered down explanation of the scriptures. The challenge causes me to think, and in the challenge, I engage more in my study.

Carson gives the opinions of many other commentators, sharing his pros and con's of their way of thinking in a way that seems to give me space to consider the merits of those other ways in a respectful, not derogatory, way. I have in mind another set of commentaries where the author seemed to be waging a personal battle against those with whom he disagreed. The commentaries seemed to be more about the commentator's "Look at me" stance than about the scripture text. I appreciate Carson's civility.

12 June 2015 There are many teaching moments in Carson's commentary, similar to those in a Life Application Bible.

14 Jun 2015 Certainly a commentary I will read again during further studies of John. Well worth the price!

[Luis Dizon · Rating 5 out of 5]

The PNTC commentary on The Gospel According to John by D. A. Carson is perhaps one of the best treatments of John that have been published from an Evangelical Protestant perspective. It is more comprehensive than introductory commentaries on the Gospel, and provides interaction with various views (both conservative and liberal) regarding the social and historical background of the book, as well as form and source criticism.

As Carson states in the preface to this commentary, anybody who embarks upon writing a new commentary on John has to give good reasons for doing so. Thus, he outlines four objectives that he attempts to accomplish in his commentary: 1) To make clear the flow of the text of the fourth Gospel, 2) to engage some of more significant pieces of secondary literature that have been written on the Gospel of John, 3) to demonstrate how the Gospel contributes to the development of biblical and systematic theology, and 4) to provide a defense of the minority viewpoint that the Gospel of John is primarily an evangelistic Gospel rather than a Gospel with Christian readers in mind. All of these four objectives are fulfilled reasonably well in this commentary, which is why it is worthwhile to read it in order to provide a better perspective on the narrative and theology of John. The information and details provided in the commentary are geared towards those who bear the responsibility of ministering the Word of God to others in the context of preaching and leading Bible studies. However, it is also accessible to the well-informed layperson. Some of the details provided therein may not be as familiar to the average churchgoer who is not interested in in-depth studies, but that is the reason why other commentaries exist to fill that niche.

In his analysis of the Gospel of John, Carson divides the Gospel into five parts, which forms the basis for the five divisions in the commentary. The first part is the prologue (1:1-18). The next part that comes Jesus’ self-disclosure to the world by His words and deeds (1:19-10:42), which covers the ministry of John the Baptist as Jesus was beginning to make His appearance, as well as the early parts of Jesus’ ministry prior to the raising of Lazarus from the dead and Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The third part is the transitional phase (11:1-12:50), which connects the second part to the fourth part. This part encompasses the raising of Lazarus, the anointing of Jesus by Mary of Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem and the declaration that “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified” (12:23). The fourth part of the Gospel is Jesus’ self-disclosure to the world in His cross and exaltation (13:1-20:31), which covers the upper room discourse, Jesus’ passion and the resurrection appearances to Mary Magdalene and the Apostles. Then the final part of the Gospel is the epilogue (21:1-25), which contains Jesus’ appearance to seven of His disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, where Jesus repeats the miracle of the fish which He did early on in His ministry (cf. Luke 5:1-11), as well as reinstates Peter after his three-fold denial of Christ. The Gospel ends with a note on how many signs and wonders Jesus performed throughout His ministry: “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written” (John 21:25).

The introductory portion of the commentary lays out the various issues behind the study of the Gospel of John. This is where most of the interaction takes place with secondary literature on the Gospel by other scholars. Carson interacts with literature from a wide variety of positions across the spectrum of biblical scholarship, some of whom uphold the inerrancy and inspiration of scripture, whereas others hold to more neo-orthodox or liberal views of scripture. Carson begins with the distinctive features of the Gospel of John, where he summarizes the similarities and differences between John and the Synoptic Gospels, and the interpretive challenges that the differences (such as in chronology) pose. The writing style of the Gospel writer is also tackled, as well as alleged historical anachronisms or other discrepancies.

How the Gospel of John has been understood over time is also looked at, with historical understandings of the text compared and contrasted with more recent developments in how the Gospel is understood. Of particular interest is how the Gospel was pressed into service by both Gnostic heretics (including Gnostic sources such as the Gospel of Truth which allude to John) and orthodox church fathers in their theological disputes. These also provide us with some of the earliest unambiguous quotations of the Gospel, most of which are in the mid to late second century, as well as the near-universal agreement that John is its author.

Carson also spends considerable amount of space on the authenticity of the Gospel, where he tackles the arguments of liberal source critics and argues for the historical reliability of John, as well as its harmony with the Synoptic Gospels. He then goes through the authorship of the Gospel, the date and provenance (where he states that the Gospel could have been written at almost any date between AD 55 and AD 95), the purpose of its writing, its theological emphasis, some tips on preaching from the Gospel and its literary structure.

After the introduction and analysis is the commentary proper. As Carson already noted, the main aim of the commentary is to present the narrative flow of the Gospel. Although the commentary does provide plenty of significant information on the various pericopes, as well as individual verses of the Gospel, irrelevant side issues are avoided. That way the commentary makes for a smooth read without the clutter of unnecessary tangents. The historical and social backgrounds behind various passages is mentioned; a helpful thing to have in interpreting the text, as it provides more light on various things such as the use of “word” in John, as well as the role of the Pharisees and Jewish leaders in the Gospel.

Overall, Carson’s commentary on the Gospel of John is a good intermediate level commentary that provides detail and clarity to one’s understanding of the Gospel while still remaining accessible enough for laypersons who may not be familiar with the biblical languages or the socio-historical backgrounds behind the Gospel. This is a good commentary to keep around for reference, especially those who are interested in more in-depth studies and exegesis that goes beyond more surface-level readings of the text.

[Ryan Bates · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent commentary on John. One of my favorites of any book. Carson is the premiere scholar on the gospels and the life of Jesus. He gives wonderful pastoral insight while crafting his study with love and diligence. He provides great overviews and exalts Christ in every chapter. He still gets rather deep with his handling of Greek and pointing out and critiquing other views on various theological stances, which may overwhelm the average reader looking for devotional material. But he brings it back the heart of the gospel and accurately reflects "the one whom Jesus loved" in his treatment of the text. This is a go to every time I study John.

[Michael Vincent · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic, thorough commentary on John. Plenty of scholarship and application throughout. This has been one of my go to commentaries on John throughout my ministry. Since I am finally finishing preaching through each chapter on John, I am also finishing this commentary.

[Jess Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un excellent commentaire sur l'évangile de Jean. Carson n'hésite pas à exposer les différents points de débats parfois très pointus que génére cet évangile tout en restant, selon moi, accessible au plus grand nombre.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best commentary on the Gospel of John. I also liked Leon Morris and Kostenberger, but I found this commentary so helpful as I preached through John.

[Dave Courtney · Rating 4 out of 5]

I recently found myself motivated to work my way through the Gospel of John, for which Carson's thorough commentary provided a decent support. I have found my time in John's Gospel to touch on some deeply personal issues and emotions. It is interesting as I was first pushed to reread it following a discussion with an old friend, one who walked away from the Christian faith years back and who had been recently challenged himself to read through the Gospel of John. The challenge was to see if fresh perspective could reignite some of those old passions. I desired to join him in that journey, albeit as a Christian. The following week the Church we started attending was just starting a series on the book of John, and a Bible study group from outside of the Church we had just joined had voted to go through the book of John, both interesting coincidences (or divine interaction?).

Carson is unapologetically evangelical and conservative and assumes John "the beloved" as the author. This might frustrate liberal readers, however Carson is a heavy weight in his position. Any liberal position should demand (at the very least) a conversation with Carson's arguments before solidifying their own conclusions. The work is scholarly, researched and concise. It is accessible to both the educated, the layperson and the common reader. Given that Carson writes with a preconceived conclusion (as any scholar would), he travels that thin line between allowing himself to face each portion of the text with an unbiased approach versus leaving the reader with the feeling that he is forcing (or demanding) the text to support his specific position. There are certainly moments where it feels like he is exasperating (and complicating) certain portions beyond what is necessary (perhaps to further solidify his position), but for the most part he leaves you with enough material and well constructed arguments that you are forced to wrestle with it before you write anything off. His commentary could have benefited though by allowing some of these more difficult sections (such as the competing sections with the synoptics regarding the flow of the last supper/prayer/crucifixion narrative) to simply remain complicated rather than explained away.

I have been wrestling with some of the distinct theology represented by strongly Calvinist/Reformed positions regarding total depravity, reprobation and particular views on the substitutionary atonement of Christ that follow. I recently confessed to my Bible study group that I have been at once greatly frustrated and challenged as I read through the Gospel of John which seems to represent these themes in what is the most theologically driven and defined Gospel. It is usually accepted that John is the latest Gospel to be formed, and yet it also stands as the most intimately connected with Jesus' ministry. Carson deals with many of these questions adequately, but any reader can walk away with the understanding that John's particular focus is unique within the four Gospels. If Mark is the earliest, there is evidence that Matthew and Luke were associated with this source (Matthew bringing a particular Jewish response and Luke bringing a researched and motivated Gentile response). Carson argues that although John's composition arrives later (and is particularly influenced as a source of encouragement for the Christian/Jewish people following the final destruction of the temple), he seems to write from outside of the grand influence of other source material. As well, some speculation leaves John with a degree of gnostic influence which could also reflect his connection with the Essene community (who were distinctly Christ centered but somewhat removed politically and highly apocolyptic). Given all of this there are certain immediate convictions that any reader needs to wrestle with. First, John's Gospel is intended to be comforting and assuring to its original audience, whoever that audience is seen to be. This motivation must speak to our struggle to read it as modern day readers as John's words can come across as somewhat harsh and exclusive in its understanding of salvation. Second, John's Gospel is exclusive because it is focused inward on the early Christian community. If John was removed from political motivation (from the force of the Roman/Greek pressure, the (assumed) misguided Jewish convictions of the Pharisees, and of and the corrupted political position of the Sadducees and the Priests), he wrote his Gospel from a visible position within the Church motivated by a period which demonstrating a fractured Jewish identity (indeed, following the destruction of the temple the entire Jewish sacrificial system was permanently altered and changed) He has a special interest in protecting the original witness of Jesus' ministry. The most direct themes are highly symbolic contrasts of light and dark, sight and blindess, along with highly symbolic visions of the light in action (water and spirit, sheep and shepherd). Interestingly the purpose of the book is clearly set out in chapter 20 (who some see as the more likely ending to the Gospel) and is defined as a record of the "signs" of Jesus (the book of John can be divided in to two parts, the first a series of 7 signs which lead up to the second part, the road to the cross and the death and resurrection as the "greatest" sign) written down so that they ("you") might believe and have life. Carson firmly understands this purpose to be evangelical in nature and describes John's letter as a direct and intentional witness to the Jews who have yet to commit Jesus and/or who are struggling to stay committed to Jesus. This would place John's motivation outwards rather than inwards. Whether this is true or not the message remains clear. Believe (or see) and have life, or reject (remain blind) and remain dead in sin.

The language of John can be confusing. Some of this confusion can be explained by recognizing that although John is presenting his final material after the destruction of the temple, his eye witness account desires to capture the more immediate sense of Jesus' ministry. What is clear (John goes out of his way to point this out) is that while the truth was hidden during Jesus' ministry it was eventually revealed after His resurrection. This causes the material to navigate between the allusion of what they do not already know during His ministry and the application of what they now know following the resurrection. John is also highly symbolic. It is unclear whether he insists on adding historical value or whether his deliberate use of elements such as specific Jewish festivals is incorporated to give his central themes more power in speaking to what one can speculate is primarily a Jewish audience. But it does create confusion when trying to connect His Gospel with the synoptics.

Some parts though are simply just confusing for a modern reader. For example, in John 3:16 God's love for the world is contrasting elsewhere with a love/hate relationship with the world. Does he understand that the Spirit came earlier than Pentecost, or was there more than one coming of the Spirit? How do we make sense of his complicated arrangements of the relationship between father, son and spirit. Are they one in the same? Do they have separate roles? What are these roles? Is John intended to be sacramental in its theology or simply practical? Where this gets more difficult is when we begin to try and make sense of the more implicit theological conceptions. "Belief" is central to this Gospel. What is confusing is how exactly it suggests one comes to believe and how one knows they believe. John brings in a conviction that everything that happens in his narrative happens under God's direct and sovereign will and control. In John 2:24 God's foreknowledge is indicated and follows this in 4:15. In 6:64 Jesus knows all who would believe and the one who betray him. In John 10:18 we hear the conviction that Jesus death (the hour) will come on his own terms, a response to Jesus' careful navigation through the general response to his public signs (Jesus withdraws so the people don't take him before his time in 6:15). Everything in this Gospel is clearly calculated for a purpose which in effect leads us to question the nature of belief, namely God's love for the world. It is easier to understand the connection between seeing, hearing, believing and doing. However it is much harder to view this through John's stark realization that God has hardened the hearts of the people so that they cannot see, and that Jesus, even at personal request to speak plainly (chapter 10) chooses to speak in ways that cannot be understood. How can he speak at once about a sort of assurance to some while at the same time negating the opportunity to believe to others? And further, in John's Gospel the explicit purpose of belief in Christ is that His commandments are revealed, and he is clear that His commandments are to love others/one another. And yet he appears on the surface to highly exclusive in exactly who God loves, especially in a Gospel which suggests God is solely interested in loving those who are on the inside?

It is hard to wrestle through John and not come face to face with the fact that the light is seemingly arbitrary in how it affects any given person. It is also somewhat defeating as as soon as someone opens their eyes to believe they are at once chastised around the next corner for not believing. The signs which remain so central seem to be presented as a sort of witness of who Jesus is, and yet over and over again we see people seeing, hearing and following only to fall victim to a hardened heart (John 12:39-40) around the next corner. That Jesus has overcome the world (16:32) is supposed to speak of peace, and yet it is presented as something so incredibly allusive and selective that even John reserves the right to ask what is "offensive" about this sort of declaration (6:60) These are the things I have struggled with and continue to struggle with. So how do I make sense of it in terms of my own faith?

First, it seems necessary to me to be able to connect the love of God with the activity of human love. Love God and love others is so readily connected that it would appear entirely out of place to suggest otherwise. We are commanded not to be selective in our love, and if it is God's love which informs our own His love must provide the ultimate example. In the sacrifice of Christ Jesus declared His love for the world, a term in its original language that stays fairly closely connected whether speaking to the evil/sinful nature or the expanse of Christ's saving work. It is difficult to distinguish between the positive and negative use despite the confusion in our relationship to this "world".

Second, what is clear is that sin is always referenced as unbelief and a lack of love for others. Our modern eyes and ears are tempted to expand this term to include a lengthy list of laws and activity in our fervor to assure we are on the inside, yet John's Gospel does not give any weight to such a description. For him sin is reflected not directly in terms of works of the law but rather the works of the Father and the Son and the Spirit. And what is this work? While the work of the Father is a bit harder to grasp, the work of the son is clearly two fold: to reveal and to give life, ultimately through the death and resurrection. This leads me away from an association with the works of the law and pushes me works in light of the saving work of Christ (a truly reformed idea). This also (in its natural flow) causes me to recognize that the direct attention of God/Christ is given to the "condition" of sin rather than the person's unique successes or failures. If John wanted us to perceive anything more than this he would have given effort to defining sin in more specific terms.

Third, it is helpful for me to recognize the appropriate use of the terms "righteousness" and "word" (or Word) which are both a part of Johanine language and understanding. Far too often the "word" is translated as simply "scripture". This is done under the assertion that the scripture is said to be "God breathed". However, this misplaces the use of the "word" in scripture, which in its capitalized form indicates Christ, and its lower case is connected directly with "spirit". In both cases it is connected with revelation, but more rightly involves the activity of the spirit in "revealing". It is hard to escape this throughout John's Gospel as the movement of the disciples is one in which they are asking, discovering and learning under the (S)spirits guidance. Is scripture a part of this revelation? In a sense yes. It is the written (and at one time spoken) testimony of the witness of the Christian relationship in the life of its characters/authors and original readers. It is the testimony of how Christ changed the lives of these early followers/believers. But we cannot miss the truth that as Christians we are given a similar charge towards this witness today. What establishes our relationship with God is our experience of spirit, a spirit that is confirmed by the witness of those in scripture as well. The (S)spirit is light and life. When we limit it to a collection of laws and dogma (words written on a page) we end up with a works based approach, or rules we are intended to follow. Likewise righteousness is often misunderstood when it is connected with works. Good Reformed fashion recognizes righteousness as "imputed". This means that when Christ died his perfect "righteousness" (works) was given to us so that in effect God sees Christ in our place (and thus saves us on His behalf). The term "righteousness" though is best understood as "right standing" rather than works. This gives it a more judicial leaning in that as Christ died and rose again He effectively placed us in the right regardless of our works. This gives the work of Christ a decidely declarative stance which fits well with John 9:4 and 5:20 (in which the work of the Son is connected with the work of the Father in the activity of bringing "light" or life to the world), and is much more personal

Why is this all so important. It remains important for me to reconcile some sense of comfort in John's words. It is difficult for me to perceive that one would write a book with evangelical intention that looks to declare our efforts to believe or to do good completely futile. This is even more defeating when I am given allusions of undefined works which are either the result of or will result in death, sickness and defeat. This would leave me helpless if I could not find a way to reconcile the truth that God/Christ loves the world and is motivated for a desire to see "all people" saved. Part of the way I reconcile the strong predestinarian slants in John is by recognizing the scope of John's view which is directly connected to Jesus coming to the cross on His terms. He is interested in this moment in history in which Jesus will die on His own terms and prophecy will be fulfilled in the coming spirit. He is looking to connect his witness of the ministry of Christ with a Jewish audience and understanding. if we read it beyond the scope that John presents we will tend to lose hope rather than gain it as even the disciples don't really believe until after the spirit has come. If we as modern readers can see (as I have argued) the message that we are asked to believe in is simply this: that Christ died so that we would be seen as righteous (or in right standing) we can find an inroad towards hope that connects us more readily with God's love for the world. But we do so recognizing that the hope for Jewish hearers of the day was found in the prophetic promise of the activity of God in Jewish history. In this sense John's intent is to show that the law cannot save, only Jesus can, and that the length he went to come to the cross on His own terms proves this.

John uses language that would have reflected a direct tension between four powerful public groups and a marginalized community, which also explains the harsh approach. These four groups were the Pharisees who laid claim to protecting the tradition of the law, the Sadducees who laid claim to the authority of the temple and high priestly roles out of political motivation, the Priests who had become puppets of Rome and the Sadducees, and lastly the mighty Roman empire and the Roman/Greco philosophical and religious polarity. John is speaking as a Jew who now understands that the works of God are not wrapped up in law, political power or personal preference. The one thing needed to unify the Church is love, and love can only be found if Christ is unified with the father. Because four of these groups are Jewish John can come across as anti Jewish at points (which he is not), but it also means that the traditional understanding of "God's chosen and elect children of Israel" is an important part of his dialogue. And yet this is precisely where he needs to balance this truth with the witness of the prophets and scripture as fulfilled in Christ which points to the the promised outpouring of the spirit (that we read of in Joel and Jeremiah) and a Gospel that reaches to all nations. Some read around this by translating all as in "all kinds" (to protect a limited Calvinist approach to particular salvation). But I find this does not fit nearly as well as "all" with the larger witness. The boundaries of God's saving work are not defined by moral works or righteous behavior (even though moral behavior remains an important study in relation to love). The boundaries of God's saving work is also not defined by entitlement. John's continued efforts to connect us with the tribes of Israel (as he does in 6:13) and the larger story of God is found in his urge to move back to the "beginning" (ch 1). We see this in chapter 4 where John makes sure to connect his Gospel back to Jacob and the field that Jacob had given to Joseph. This location was at Shechem which is the place where Moses guided his people, and the place where Joshua led his people (lining them alongside both shoulder mountains to declare the difference between blessing and curse). It is also here where the Samaritans, cast out from their own people as half breeds (seen as corrupted Jews who had mingled with foreigners during the conquest in 1Kings 16:24), decided to erect their own version of the temple that would sit high on the mountain top to show that they could still worship God. There is an interesting note regarding the development of the word Shechem (or Hashkem) which means shoulder mountain. Over time it became connected with the action of putting ones belonging on the shoulder of an ox to make a long journey. It then developed a sense of getting up early in the morning to prepare and start on ones journey, out of which it finally gained the definition "persistant/persistance. It is this allusion of persistence that Jonn gives to God's activity of grace and love in Christ and spirit. The truth that John is defending is that Jesus is the Christ and that the true spirit bears witness to this with a persistent purpose to reach the world with the message of the Gospel. That is that we have been placed in right standing through the death and resurrection of Christ. John focus is on the theological implications of Jesus' work, but we cannot miss the larger witness that speaks to the spirits continued movement. This is the message of grace and the message of love we are asked to give to one another. Love with no boundaries. Love that sees not the privileged or entitled but the heart that reflects life. This is the kind of life and light that Christ brings to the world and through which we find hope.

[#DÏ4B7Ø Chinnamasta-Bhairav]

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~
~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~
~}--- :}|{:-:}|{:- * FOLLOW 4 FOLLOW * -:}|{:-:}|{: ---{~
~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~
~}--------:}|{:-:}|{:- * LINKS * -:}|{:-:}|{:----------{~
~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~
~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~
***********************************************

~} * -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- * - * -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- * {~
* -} https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... {- *

~} * -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- * - * -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- * {~

* -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- *

* -:}|{}|{:- ^ AUDIOBOOK ^ -:}|{}|{:- *

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

* -:}|{}|{:- * SUMMARY * -:}|{}|{:- *

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

* -:}|{:- * RATING * -:}|{:- * /10 * -:}|{:- *

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

* -:}|{}|{: =EXPERIENCES=&=DISCERNMENTS= :}|{}|{:- *

* -:}|{}|{: = THE PERFECT VOICE = 4 THE BIBLE = DAVID SUCHET = ITS NO SUPRISE IN PSLAM 47 - THE LORD HIMSELF IN FLESH = DANCED IN A MYRIAD OF REFLECTIONS OF LIGHT - THAT CLEARLY - STATES - IN THE UNDOUBTABLE CLARITY ONLY THE LOOORDDSSS PHENIMINAL - ECXSTATIC INFNITE DANCE COULD - DESCRIBE IN AN INEPHABLE - WAY - WITH THE DEAPEST OF KNOWINGS - HIS GREATEST OF AL PRECEPTS ----> THO SHALT BE SMIGHTED - IF THO LISTENS 2 ANY OTHER AUDIO-VERSION OF THE BIBLE ( OTHER THEN DAVID SUCHET ) <--- - & THO SHALT FIND ONES SELF CONDEMMED 2 ETERNAL DAMNATION - & ONES SALVATION SHALL BE FOUND IN THE - GRACE FOUND IN THE NARRATION ONES LIFE IN ITS INTIRITY READ IN 0.25 SPEED BY DAVID SUCHET= }|{}|{:- *

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

* -} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VWrl... {- *

* -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- *

* -} Gestalt Psychology Simplified with Examples and Principles {- *

* -:}|{}|{: = MY SYNTHESISED ( ^ GESTALT ^ ) OF THE * -:}|{}|{:=:}|{}|{:- * ( WAY THE AUTHOR FRAMES = HIS WRITING PERSPECTIVES ) & ( POINTERS & IMPLICATIONS = the conclusion that can be drawn IMPLICITYLY from something although it is not EXPLICITLY stated ) = :}|{}|{:- *

* -:}|{}|{: = ? = }|{}|{:- *

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

To SEE a WORLD in a Grain of Sand,
And a HEAVEN in a Wild Flower,
Hold INFINITY in the palm of your hand
And ETERNITY in an Hour"
~ William Blake ~

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

“Wisdom tells me I am nothing. Love tells me I am everything. And between the two my life flows.” Nisargadatta Maharaj

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

Form is Emptiness; Emptiness is form.
Form is not different than Emptiness;
Emptiness is not different than form
~ Heart Sutra ~

Like the ocean and its waves,
inseparable yet distinct

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

" I and The Father are one,
I am The Truth,
The Life and The Path.”

Like a river flowing from its source,
connected and continuous

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

Thy kingdom come.
Let the reign of divine
Truth, Life, and Love
be established in me,
and rule out of me all sin;
and may Thy Word
enrich the affections of all mankind

A mighty oak tree standing firm against the storm,
As sunlight scatters the shadows of night
A river nourishing the land it flows through

~}- - - - - - - - - - - - - -:}|{:- - - - - - - - - - - - - -{~

~}-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-:}|{:-{~

[RT · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the best commentaries on John’s Gospel. Carson provides a very helpful and thorough handling of the text, historical background, and insight into the languages. Of the John commentaries I’ve read and used for various research in the Gospel, Carson’s is by far one of the best. It will continue to be a go to for study in John’s Gospel.

However, despite the rich value this commentary is, there are a few issues I had with it. Though Carson is thorough, his vast intellect can prove to move this commentary right at the line of accessibility for some readers. Carson can be a bit unclear at times where he lands on a text, or what his particular convictions are regarding an issue raised by other scholars. Aside from some various disagreements on more minor issues with the text’s interpretation—which will be had with virtually every commentary to some degree—Carson has done the work as a scholar, and good work at that for John’s Gospel.

It is a must have for every study of God’s Word who desires to have a solid commentary on their shelf for the fourth Gospel.