Christian Readers discussion

This is my walk through the book of John. John was an eye witness of Jesus, a follower, a disciple and one of the 12 apostles. He is the most reliable source of the Gospel writer's of Jesus' life, miracles, promises and teachings (in my opinion) because he was there seeing it with his own eyes and writing his book from his own recollection. Because of John's memory and biography of Jesus Christ we get a clear image of history, who Jesus was and why Christians didn't forsake him then and still exist today..

The Author prefers to identify himself as the disciple "whom Jesus Loved" (13:23; 19:26; 20;2; 21:7,20).

John, born into a priestly family, belonged to the tribe of Levi (Luke 1:5) He began his ministry in the Jordan Valley when he was approx 29-30 years old and boldly proclaimed the need got spiritual repentance and preparation for the coming of the messiah. He was the COUSIN of Jesus Christ and served as his prophetic forerunner (Matthew 33:3; Luke 1:5-25,36).

Thanks Melissa,
It's always good to take a walk through the Gospel According to John.

I think all the Bible writers were RELIABLE. :c)

Are you confusing John the Baptist with John the disciple???

Mëlissa wrote: "The Author prefers to identify himself as the disciple "whom Jesus Loved" (13:23; 19:26; 20;2; 21:7,20)."
Traditionally, the apostle John is the disciple whom Jesus loved. However, there is no direct tie to the apostle John, only an inference. My professor said it would be more appropriate for the disciple whom Jesus loved to be John Mark. John Mark was a young lad and more appropriate to lean upon Jesus' chest. John Mark's mother had the big house in Jerusalem and more appropriate to take Mary for comfort, instead of the apostle John's residence in Galilee. Jesus said that all of the disciples would forsake Him, therefore it would not be appropriate for the apostle John to be standing at the cross. The only thing inappropriate is to give a 14 year old boy recognition in Christian circles. Another interesting issue with the gospel of John is that there is no reference to repentance, which is the first step in today's contemporary evangelistic circles. Oh well, being a Reformed Christian is the minority position, but often the majority is wrong. However, occasionally one of the smartest thing one can say is, "I don't definitely know."

Thanks guys, I'm talking about both.. The author John is just such a wonderful writer, I can't help but get lost in his words! And the John in the book of John is also so interesting to learn about. When talking about him I will call him John. When talking about John the author I will "the author". You guys can correct me if I'm wrong as this is my first time in the book of John with very little background knowledge prior to opening! I'm excited to have others contributing to this thread!! Makes my reading so much more exciting!!

Makes you wonder. Perhaps that is the reason The Apostle John referred to himself as "The disciple who Jesus loved"... so as not to confuse the reader with John the Baptist.

BLB claims that Strong's G2491, Iōannēs, refers to John the Baptist 92 times, but John the Apostle only 36 times, throughout the entire New Testament.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/L...

I can see where this COULD cause potential confusion upon a linear, superficial, reading.

It is amazing how the 4 Gospel accounts give us different insights for different audiences. Yet all blend incredibly.

I often read the introductions to the books in all my different Bibles. They are very helpful.
Many study Bibles contain:

Author and title
Date
Theme
Purpose
Occasion
Background
Timeline
Salvation summary

John the baptist was the witness that will be with Jesus at the day of judgment. He witnessed the fact that Jeaus received the Holy Ghost. It went in His mouth and went down His throat in St Matthew 3:16 It never lighting on him as it reads.

St John is the only book in the KJB of 1611 that has what it means to be saved. My Bible reads an unknown person wrote St John none of the other Gospels have in them that you must be born again and receive the Spirit (Holy Ghost) to enter the kingdom of God. which is a parable and in Ezekiel it reads what that means
36:26-25-27 Paul was a false prophet so don't tell me what he says about salvation and St John 3:16 should not be in the Bible, 15 is ok but a parable.

God destroyed all but eight people in the day of Noah and they couldn't find 10 people that were righteous in Sodom. Does God love you? Genesis 6:6 And it repented (grieves) the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it "grieved him at his heart.'

Mickey, you outlook on the Bible is very warped, and there is more to the Old Testament saints and Gods dealing with them, and the New Testament and the dispensation of grace than the blank white page in your Bible.

Although the Gospel of John claims to be an eyewitness account, and the testimony of the unnamed “disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 21:24); and exactly who wrote the Gospel of John is a question that remains unanswered, noted theologians throughout the ages maintain that it was indeed the disciple John who penned this famous Biblical book.

Since you do not accept the majority of God's inspired Word, and especially Paul, how about Heb. 9:12 that says we have received eternal, not momentary, redemption. One sacrifice was made for all sin forever, and we have been perfected forever. Understanding salvation, the complete forgiveness of your sins, is foundational to understanding the New Covenant and how God deals with you today. If you are born again and still asking these questions Mickey, then you do not understand redemption and what it means to be saved!

Paul said it was inspired. Did I say anything about momentary, redemption? What question did I asked? Thomas Jefferson was smart enough he said Paul was the first corrupter of the Gospel it is to bad that he is the only one that I know of that figured that out. The Holy Ghost that I received told me. What do you think the,"like a dove" was in St John 3:16? chopped liver? No it was a white blob that went in both our mouth's, it never. "lighting on him as it reads." Satan needed an advocate if he was going to be like the most High, and that was Paul Isaiah 14: 13-14

Mickey, in a previous post you stated that John 3:16 should not be in the Bible, and now you are likening your born again experience to that same scripture... which is it going to be?

Mickey quote:
"Thomas Jefferson was smart enough he said Paul was the first corrupter of the Gospel it is to bad that he is the only one that I know of that figured that out."

Do you realize how evil Jefferson was Mickey? How he viewed Jesus? What he actually thought of the Bible and Christianity?

Here's a fun quote about the Jefferson Bible:
"What follows is, for the first time online, the complete Jefferson Bible--plus links to many of his key deletions. You'll see that Jefferson cut out miracles and signs or declarations of Jesus' divinity. As you read through the Jefferson Bible... and you'll see what Jefferson deleted.

You remind me of him Mickey. Have you deleted the divinity of Jesus as well? Maybe?

12 David: God made believe a condition or catalyst for the spirit of Genesis to act when a person believes in their heart a work that Jesus did St John 10:37-38 or 14:11 I believe in my heart that I could heal my mother.

13: No, Im not about the whole Jefferson bible and I don't care what he deleted, he was right about this one sentence. Which church or religious organization do you think is preaching the Gospel, that Jesus died for.

Any organization that clearly preaches the ENTIRE Bible is trustworthy about the Gospel.

Before you mention Jefferson you should GREATLY care about what he deleted from God's Word. Jefferson is no friend to Christianity. Neither are you for that matter. You someday will realize that the Apostle Paul's thoughts were clearly expressed throughout the entire Bible - Old And NEW Testament.

If you don't like Paul - then you also will see that you don't accept Moses, Luke, Daniel, Jonah, Job, Jude...

15 Rod: How did you know I never liked Luke who traveled with Paul. Who is "most ecellent Theoph-i-lus" 1:3 AND The Acts 1:1 The first chapter of Luke is a nightmare. The Holy Ghost wasn't to be except for Jesus in St Matthew 3:16. 4:4 go by what Paul the false prophet said. 24:47 After John the baptist was killed because he wasn't preaching the salvation plan 47 "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 49 The old speaking in tongues trick with fire coming out their nostrils. 1;28 ---blessed art thou among women. (Mary) St Matthew 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and (MOTHER)

Peter was a fruit cake (The Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized (in water)every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.) That was what John the Baptist was preaching. St John 3:27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. Ezekiel 36:26-25-27 or [https://www.createspace.com/4612897]

I have found out the only thing people wants in life is just to die, and don't bother me with the facts or truth.

Yes Mickey - I can see that facts and truth are not high on your list of priorities.

So you don't like Peter, Or Paul, Or Luke, or John the Baptist...?

What is the purpose of your Jesus??? Is he God? King of Kings and Lord of Lords? Alpha and the Omega? Saved a people out of Egypt? God's Son?

17 Rod: I have nothing against John the Baptist but what he was doing of baptizing in water unto repentance was not the salvation plan of being born again and receiving the Spirit or Holy Ghost. St Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. (Word)
Than we have Peter saying John the Baptist was correct in The Acts 2:38 There are a lot of people that would die over this verse or false doctrine the United Pentacostal is one of them. "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
The Holy Ghost will not go into your filthy body until it is clean. Ezekiel 36:26-25-27

It reads in St John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, (If we stoped there it would make sense because of 14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The Word then would be with God in Spirit form, from the beginning which would be Jesus. BUT BUT BUT somebody wrote AND THE WORD WAS GOD. That ment God died on the cross.

I don't know how anybody in their right mind would, or could, believe that Jesus was King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Alpha and the Omega? When two people get married it reads they are one and it is the same with God and His Son BUT BUT BUT they are two individuals that suppose to have the same goals.

I'll field this one Rod...

Mickey, in Matt. 3:11 John the Baptist was introducing baptism as we know it in the Church today. Under the Old Covenant there were many "washings" (Heb. 9:10) that may have symbolised baptism, but it was done for repentance purposes (Mark 1:4) as how John administered it. The Jews did not question baptism and even expected it to be a practice of the Christ and of the messenger whom God would send before Him (John 1:25). Hence, John baptised for two reasons: (a) for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3), and (b) to make Jesus "manifest" (or known) to the nation of Israel (John 1:31).

Under John's baptism, the people confessed their sins. In the Church age of salvation, we confess the Lord Jesus as the payment for our sins (Rom. 10:9). After salvation, we confess our sins for the purpose of receiving forgiveness and cleansing for our outer man (1 John 1:9).

Regarding Acts 2:38 and your quote "...a lot of people that would die over this verse or false doctrine ..." - well, good - some religion needs to die for the Word of God not to be further manipulated! What is your concern about Acts 2:38? Please don't say water baptism is a requirement for salvation?

Regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, it is a foundational and important truth in Christianity; even the three major church denominations – Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox – throughout the history of the Church, have been united on this doctrine. A denial of it constitutes a serious departure from the Christian faith and a rejection of the biblical witness to God as He has introduced Himself to us!

Trying to reason the Trinity by thinking of a person complicates matters, as when we think of a person we think of will, feelings and behaviour peculiar to that person alone. But this cannot be thought of in connection with the Trinity. Each One of the Godhead is God. That does not mean each One is a part of God, but rather that each One is the whole God – three coexistent, co-eternal Persons who make up God. Personality is not divisible, and God cannot be divided. He is one in essence, one in personality and one in will. Each Person of the Godhead has individual characteristics, responsibilities and operations, yet never act independently or in opposition. This is the order that is within the Trinity (not an order of importance, but an order of operation and revelation). All plans or revelations come from the Father, through the Son, by the Holy Spirit.