Life at Creation and at Salvation

John 1: 6-14                                                    January 21, 2021

⁶There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. ⁸He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. ⁹The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. ¹⁰He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. ¹¹He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. ¹²But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, ¹³who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. ¹⁴And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.

            A witness.  That’s our call.  He testified to the light.  We are called to testify to the light.  He came that all might believe through him.  Well, that gets a bit big to consider.  Isn’t it arrogant and presumptuous to consider that all might believe through us?  We are going to pick that up tomorrow, where the Gospel writer specifies that John was NOT the light. 

            What is the light?  We know two things from verses 1-5, the light shines in the darkness and the darkness does not overcome it and the light is the life that came into being through him (the Word-not John, got to watch the pronouns) for all people.  This is what John is testifying to, the light that came for all people.  John is testifying to the life that came for all people.  John is testifying to the life that came into being through Jesus.

            Who loves a double entendre?  And I will admit, the double entendre is not the first thing I think about when considering how to interpret Scripture.  It is the double meaning.  It is a favorite ploy in movie scripts when someone says something that can be interpreted in a ‘normal’ fashion and in another, usually sexual, manner.  Thankfully, those kinds of references occur only rarely in the Bible, most often in the Old Testament (seriously).

            We have walked through these steps, using the Bible’s words to interpret the Bible, which IS one of the first things we should think about when considering how to interpret Scripture.  The Light is a title of Jesus.  What does it mean?  The life that came into being through Jesus.  Yes, I know, redundant, said it a couple times now.

            The life that came into being through Jesus comes first at the act of Creation.  Verses 1-4 set that up.  Then verse 5 speaks of the light, identified with the life, shining in the darkness.  I would suggest that the double meaning here is the second time that life came into being through Jesus for all the people.  I mean Jesus’ resurrection.

            What does it mean, generally, to testify, to witness to Jesus Christ?  That is He is our Lord and Savior.  Why?  Because of the event of salvation, Jesus’ death and resurrection.  When Jesus arose, He brought the gift of new life by the free gift of salvation from our God.  That is the heart of the message. It is not the bumper sticker “What WOULD Jesus do?”, but it is the reality “What DID Jesus do?”, for us all.  He brought new life through the punishment of death that all people deserve for their sins.

            So the double entendre, the Light is the gift of life for all people at the creation event AND at the salvation event.  Is that what John meant?  Well, it is not like we have a book called “What I Meant, A Guide To Reading My Gospel” by John (or whoever I really am that wrote the Gospel of John).  What we have instead is our ability to read the Gospel and draw out the truth invested in her pages.

            I am harping on this because the life that came into being through Him for all people, that is the recorded act of creation, is rebranded as ‘the light’ which shines in the darkness.  What was a universal (at creation) was spoiled by sin but has now become a beacon of hope (at salvation).  The Gospels are here to tell us the story of Jesus, and the salvation he wrought for us all.  And I think it infuses everything in the Gospel story.

So…from creation, we have the foundation of salvation.

A Man Sent From God, Before Jesus Was Sent From God

John 1: 6-14                                                  January 20, 2021

⁶There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. ⁸He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. ⁹The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. ¹⁰He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. ¹¹He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. ¹²But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, ¹³who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. ¹⁴And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.

            A man sent from God…in the Old Testament, we call this a prophet.  His name was John.  John the Baptist.  In current translations, his name and title are translated as “John the baptizer”.   This is to move John away from a denominational identity.  (John is not a Baptist).  This is John, the Cousin of Jesus (probably not a first cousin), and not John who wrote the Gospel.  The John referred to as the author of this Gospel is Jesus’ disciple, the one who wrote Revelations as well as 1 John, 2 John, and…surprise, surprise…3 John. 

            This verse cuts away from the first five verses of John.  That first paragraph is a contextual preface of God’s power into which John’s ministry is introduced.  The message that John is about to share is to be read in the context of the ‘preface’. 

            A man sent from God is going to introduce Jesus, the Word who was God.  For the gospel background of John, read Chapter 1 of the Gospel of Luke.  After a dedication of the Gospel in the first few verses, Luke 1 gives us John’s birth narrative.  But it is not a “Christmas” story.  It is the story of Zechariah and Elizabeth, John’s parents, that provides the story of God’s presence and miraculous intervention around the call of Mary to become the mother of Jesus.

            In his birth and in his ministry, John prepares the way for Jesus. 

Follow Through:

            The ministry of John will continue after Jesus’ ministry is up and running.  There is some communication between them, between their disciples.  It seems that John’s ministry turns to one of social commentary, as he calls into question the moral choices of the King.  And the King, always frustrated and angry at his critique is also, as the Bible implies, fascinated by him.  Whether he feels he cannot remove John because of public opinion or because of a personal interest in John, or from a combination of both, John goes on. (Bible Nerd Alert: This reminds me of the relationship between King Ahab and the prophet Elijah-see 1 Kings 17 for more details).

            It is not until Herod is tricked into making a public promise of a gift that he is called upon to provide John’s head on a platter.  Publicly backed into a corner, John will die, beheaded in prison.  That story will be shared as the Gospel unfolds.

Creation and Jesus: Planned Together

January 19, 2021

John 1: 1-5

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was in the beginning with God. ³All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being ⁴in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. ⁵The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

To Sum Up... 

John 1: 1-5, in other words…

            So we presuppose that the “Word” is Jesus, because of what comes later.  The Word was in the beginning-before Creation.  The Word is with God and the Word is God.  So God is not a solitary figure, but also not dual figures.  The Word, in the Genesis story, stands out as the Creative Voice of God.  God spoke, and it was.  Everything in Creation came into being through him (Jesus), without exception.  Of all that Jesus created, life is singled out, not any life, but life that is the light of all people.  God’s first creative act, “Let there be light.”  This light shines in the darkness, the darkness that was what God was creating from and the darkness of our lives of sin, because of what comes later.

            By inserting Jesus into the opening of this reading of John 1, it lessens some of the Creation parallels.  John says “the Word”, Genesis tells us “God said…”  In him was life…for all people…feels like the verse in Genesis where God breathed into the nostril of the dirt manakin.  The life was light to all people.  That’s the hinge for me.  If the people need light, they were in darkness.  If the life is the light-the light that came into being in him (Jesus), that life is light in the darkness.  So…darkness came to the lives of all people?  Sin is the darkness that overtook life and brought about death.  Jesus is the Light that shines in the darkness, his life for our lives, his light overcomes the darkness in all.

An Implication…

            Adam and Eve screwed up and because of them, we all live into sin.  They opened the way for each of us to spit in God’s eye and do our own thing.  The coming of Jesus might be considered the ‘divine fix’.  Humans broke it and God needed a repair plan.  Action…reaction.  The trouble with that is God is left looking a little helpless.  God did not see it coming?

            Or is John, instead of ‘rewriting’ the Creation story to backfill it with the presence of Jesus, what if John is revealing to us how Jesus was integral to Creation?  One thing to remember about how God reveals Godself to us in the Bible, it is over a long timeframe, and it progresses.  What God revealed to Moses was more than to Abraham.  What God revealed to Isaiah was more than to Moses.  What God revealed to John was more than to Isaiah. 

            So ‘in the beginning’, before Creation, God’s plan for us was already in place.  It is the age-old Christmas paradox…naughty or nice?  According to Ralphie’s father (A Christmas Story)… “he (Santa) knows, he always knows…”  For humanity, naughty or nice?  God knows, God always knew.  To truly love someone, there must be the possibility of rejection, otherwise it is just fancy programming.  God created us with the possibility of our rejection, which we took disadvantage of, and God started with the Plan of Restoration in place.

            And that is just the first five verses…imagine what the next five will bring?

⁶There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. ⁸He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. ⁹The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. ¹⁰He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. ¹¹He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. ¹²But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, ¹³who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. ¹⁴And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.

Pastor Pete

 

Darkness and Light: Who Wins?

John 1: 1-5

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was in the beginning with God. ³All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being ⁴in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. ⁵The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

 

            Feels like the first day of Creation.  There was darkness and God said, “Let there be light”, and there was.  While this verse draws from that imagery, it is metaphor.  There is another darkness and there is another light.  What do we know about the light?  We know that the light of all people was the life that came into being in Jesus. 

            The light of all people came in the creation of Adam and Eve.  They were to be the parents of all humanity in right relationship with God.  The light should have been all over us.  But then came the Fall of Humanity.  Original Sin.  Disobedience to God.  Darkness was introduced into the light of all people.

            Understand that John is one entire story, beginning to end.  The death and resurrection of Jesus were accomplished so that the light, the life, shines in the darkness and the darkness does not overcome it.  So humanity messed up in the Garden, they got booted, and things got rather rough.  But we were never without hope.  The darkness is the darkening of the light of God in our lives because of sin.  Yet that beacon, that light, it shines on and the darkness did not overcome it.

            Adam and Eve fell, latter part of Genesis 2 into Genesis 3.  There are curses put in place against humanity by God for what we did.  But even in those curses, there is hope, there is looking forward.  There is a Plan.  And John is writing down the record of that plan.

Assumption:

It occurred to me last night to ask the question, “If the gospel writer wants us to make all these leaps and connections, why didn’t John make them obvious?”  That goes to the question of why the gospels became written documents in the first place.  Our best guess is that these started as oral traditions, the apostles themselves sharing the stories of Jesus to the gathered people.

            But then two things happened.  The first is that the church began to expand well beyond the people who knew Jesus personally.  Acts says there was a hundred and twenty or so “in the church” at Pentecost.  After that, it grew exponentially.  The second thing that happened is that Jesus did not return in the living memory of the first generation of apostles.  They began to die and, with them, the ‘authority’ of the eyewitness died.  So these things were written down.  It keeps the story straight as Jesus’ church expands and it keeps the story right as the witnesses moved on to be with our Lord once again.

            What that means for the study of John is that we are uncovering what presuppositions that John makes about what his audience already knows.  What does he have to make explicit?  What can he assume they already know?  How much they knew is different from how much we know. 

            So, in the community of faith, the Gospel of John is a document with authority, and we are digging into what it means.  For those of us in the faith, it deepens our understanding of the incredible vista of what God has revealed.  For those of us who are new to the faith, it invites us into the joyful work that God has accomplished for our redemption through Jesus.

Pastor Peter

For Humanity, Not Just Life, But Light!

John 1: 1-5

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was in the beginning with God. ³All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being ⁴in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. ⁵The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

 

Backstory and Sidebar.

            To read the book of Genesis is to read what many scholars have called ‘two’ accounts of creation.  The first, in Genesis 1, is the story of the Week.  In six days, God created the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day, God rested.  The 'second' is found in Genesis 2.  I put that is ' ' because, for me, these are not so much separate accounts, implying they were put together, instead of the second developing from the first.  

Sidebar.

Irrespective, it is from this seventh day, when God rested, it is from God’s hallowing of this day that we have the Sabbath, the day of the Lord.  In Jewish Scripture, this is Saturday, the final day of the week.  In the Christian tradition, we moved the Sabbath to the first day of the week, to Sunday, the day on which Jesus rose from the dead.

Return.

            In Genesis 2, there is another, more focused account of creation.  One of the significant distinctions between the two accounts has to do with humanity.  In Genesis 1, there is no distinction between the creation of plants, animals, birds, fish, and humans, except for the days on which they were created AND the designation that humanity was created 'in the image' of God.  In Genesis 2, there is an added focus on the life of humanity not present in Genesis 1, ⁷then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.  If this were a consideration of Genesis, looking at the connection of God's breath and God's image would be our next step.  But this is about John, so we will stay with John's language.

            “What had come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all the people.”  In Genesis 1, there is life, then, in Genesis 2, we dig down some and there is “people life”, life coming from God ‘breathing’ into the nostrils of man the breath of life.  Why is that important?  In Genesis 1, humanity is distinguished from other animals because they are created in the image of God.  Humanity will become the stewards of God’s creation.  From life comes the light of all the people.  Humans are set apart from the rest of creation.

            It is life, it is light, it came into being through him, through Jesus, it came into being through the one who created us.  It is important, very important because as we go forward, the reference to ‘him’, to Jesus, as the light, is foundational to his presentation in the Gospel.  One of Jesus' titles is 'the Light of the World'.  

            This language takes us back to the very first day of Creation, where God's first command was "Let there be light."  And, as we will see next, where there is light, there is also darkness.

Jesus Not Just At Creation, But Creating...

John 1: 1-5

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was in the beginning with God. ³All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being ⁴in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. ⁵The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

            “Him.”  The pronoun continues.  This is ‘the Word’, already interpreted to mean Jesus.  Jesus was God.  Jesus was in the beginning with God-meaning before creation itself.  And now he is the Creator.  “All things came into being through him, and (to be clear), without him, not one thing came into being.”

            The scope of Jesus expands here.  If it were just the first two verses, it might be argued that Jesus was present for creation, on the sidelines, an observer.  Not ‘all’ of God was involved in creation.  But this sentence crushes that possibility.  All things came into being through Jesus.  We know from Genesis that God created all.  The Word, Jesus, was God, so Jesus is God who created all things.  The second half of the sentence looks reinforcement, ‘without Jesus, not one thing came into being.’  In other words, no exceptions.

            It is kind of a resume for Jesus.  There are a lot of other names and titles that will be attached to Jesus: Son of God, Son of Man, Son of David, Son of Mary….the Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed One…but John is taking pains to identify Jesus with God, Jesus as God.  What these first three verses of the Gospel of John have done is to take Jesus and lay him into the original creation story of Genesis 1.  First, in the beginning, in this verse, a summary that Jesus is the creator through the days of creation that follow.

            These are three verses and there is a whole Gospel to follow.  John begins by establishing the pedigree of Jesus in the orders of the creator and the creation.  This leads us into Jesus’ role in the present.

Sidebar: Who is John?  Did he write this gospel?  So, of the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in none of them does the author self-identify.  In the history of Biblical interpretation, they like to argue about this. 

Who is John?  There are a number of men named “John” in the Bible, including Jesus’ own cousin, John the Baptizer.  I understand this John to be the disciple of Jesus, the one who is listed as the author of four other books of the New Testament, the letters 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John as well as the last book of the Bible, the book of Revelations. 

For some context, if you remember the controversy over the novel “The Da Vince Code”.  The novelist referenced Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper and argued that Mary Magdalene was ‘hidden’ in it.  She was next to Jesus, leaning in on him-a place of intimacy.  History argues that this was John, who is described as ‘beloved of Jesus’-thus having this place of intimacy.  Traditionally, John was the youngest of the disciples, and-also according to tradition-the only one of the Twelve who was die naturally, in his old age, while the rest were martyred.

Who wrote the gospels?  It depends on what you assume about the timeline.  Many modern scholars argue that the gospels were not written until after the lives of the first generation of Jesus’ believers, thus it could not be those who are named.  This argument rests on dating the grammar of our earliest gospel manuscripts.  Other scholars will argue that these are written in the first generation because dating methods do not offer a particular date, but a range of time.  There are also arguments on how the gospels emerged.  Did the authors sit down and write them?  Or were the written forms based on oral accounts?  Is this a single work or a compilation of works? 

To make a long story short (and I am probably too late for that), there are arguments to be made for these authors and arguments to be made that the successors of these authors gathered these gospels ‘in the name of’ the authors, and arguments to be made that these names were attached by tradition to these writings.    

Does it matter?  Does it matter who wrote them?  They are in the Bible and have been since the New Testament became the Word of God.  Is the importance to be found in whose name is on the manuscript or its contents?  For me, I question scholarly motives on these things.  Does the scholar want to cast doubt on the Bible?  Does the scholar want to lock in the Bible narrative?

Here is what I think.  John wrote John.  In Seminary, I learned about grammatical studies that compared the gospel with the other writings attributed to John in the New Testament and they match.  In terms of the age of the gospels, John is argued by some to be the last of the gospels written but the earliest dated gospel fragment (not grammatical age but the age of the physical manuscript) we have is from John.  What bothers me about arguments to make John the last of the written gospels, the farthest from the ‘actual’ time and experience of Jesus, is that this somehow makes it less ‘trustworthy’ than the others.   

And that is no longer a scholarly debate on the origins of the New Testament, that’s an attempt to undercut the writings that are the foundation of my faith.

And Now For Something Completely Different…. “Santa Baby”

                 I have been using Spotify regularly for the last half year, getting a feel for how it works for both music and podcasts.  As Christmas has come, their playlists have been a welcome alternative to the Christmas radio stations that play ‘current’ stuff with commercials.  It is also more convenient and portable than the CD’s of our Christmas collection.  I save those for quiet times in the living room, considering the tree and reflecting on the beauty of the Season.

                I was not looking for anything in particular, sweeping between various Christmas playlists, when I settled on Santa Baby (not sure if I was preparing to listen or fast forward to something else) and I found seven versions of the song were available from this search.  I knew a few of them and the list caught my interest.  So, my family probably thought I was a little nuts listening to the same song seven times in a row.  That is not the first time I have done that, truth be told, but its usually one particular song that I “repeat” out of my system.

                I do not know how the selections were arranged in the search, by ‘play request  frequency’ or some other criteria, but I listened in the order the search provided.  So, if you have not settled on a particular version of Santa Baby, here is a brief overview of what I found.

                “Santa Baby”, offered by the Pussy Cat Dolls.  What struck me was that this version had excellent “girl group” vocals.

                “Santa Baby”, offered by Taylor Swift.  This is a more ‘country’ version, a little slower, with Ms. Swift providing us with a more soulful undertone to the lyrics.

                “Santa Baby”, offered in duet by Arianna Grande and Liz Gilles.  They take turns and harmonize as they sing the song.  The harmonies are very pleasant.  Individually, I am guessing it is Ms. Grande who is offering a very breathy ‘Betty Boop’ interpretation of the tune while Ms. Gilles sings it in a straight forward manner.

                “Santa Baby”, offered by Gwen Stefani.  I heard a natural ‘Betty Boop’ interpretation of the lyrics that I find in Ms. Stefani’s singing.  I also got a 1940’s vibe, as though she fronted a big band. 

                “Santa Baby”, offered by Michael Bublé.  His is one of the popular versions on the radio today.  He tries to ‘dude’ the lyrics, looking for a ’65 instead of a ’54 convertible, for example.  I like Michael Bublé and I love the meme that has him emerging from his cave for the Christmas Season but maybe because he is singing against the gender assumption of the song, it has an almost parody quality to it.  This quality emerged as I listened to it against the other versions in this list.

                “Santa Baby”, offered by Madonna.  This is ‘the’ radio version that I have heard in these past few years.  Hers is the most deliberate “Betty Boop” voice for the song and I found this version to have a little more of an upbeat to the tempo.

                “Santa Baby”, offered by Eartha Kitt.  This is the original version, offered back in 1953.  It is also my favorite, for me, THE version that I would put on my own Christmas playlist (which is an idea I have to think about now…)

Please note that there is no attempt to be objective in this list at all.  I share the distinctions and distinctives that I heard in them and I invite you to enjoy this Christmas song for yourselves.

Peace,  Peter Hofstra