Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus
[1] There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: [2] The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him."
[3] Jesus answered and said unto him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
[4] Nicodemus saith unto him, "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?"
[5] Jesus answered, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. [6] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. [7] Marvel not that I said unto thee, 'Ye must be born again.' [8] The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."
[9] Nicodemus answered and said unto him, "How can these things be?"
[10] Jesus answered and said unto him, "Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? [11] Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. [12] If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?"
*
The author's commentary
[13] And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
[14] And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: [15] That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. [16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. [17] For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
[18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
[19] And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. [20] For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. [21] But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
*
John the Baptist endorses Jesus
[22] After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judæa; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. [23] And John also was baptizing in Ænon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. [24] For John was not yet cast into prison.
[25] Then there arose a question between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purifying. [26] And they came unto John, and said unto him, "Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him."
[27] John answered and said, "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. [28] Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. [29] He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. [30] He must increase, but I must decrease."
*
The author's commentary
[31] He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all. [32] And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony. [33] He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true. [34] For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. [35] The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. [36] He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sabbatical notice
I'm taking a break from blogging for a bit, exact timetable undetermined. In the meantime, feel free to contact me by email.
-
Following up on the idea that the pecked are no longer alone in their bodies , reader Ben Pratt has brought to my attention these remarks by... -
Disclaimer: My terms are borrowed (by way of Terry Boardman and Bruce Charlton) from Rudolf Steiner, but I cannot claim to be using them in ... -
1. The traditional Marseille layout Tarot de Marseille decks stick very closely to the following layout for the Bateleur's table. Based ...
6 comments:
"the wrath of God abideth on him"
That's one of the phrases in the IV Gospel that is either mistranslated or interpolated - it sticks-out like a sore thumb. The 'wrath of God' indeed! - what is it? Nothing of the kind is said or implied elsewhere in the Gospel.
As an exercise - if it helps, as a means to an end, this is valuable.
But there is a reason why this separation was not done. All attempts to make the poetic-symbolic and ancient more clear, explicit and modern inevitably misrepresent in the direction of Ahrimanic literalism - so we need to move back to the (albeit flawed) original to complete the understanding. What we are trying to do is attune to the original spirit, to the person who was writing.
Yes, of course this is just an exercise, not an attempt to improve on the text as it has come down to us.
Actually, that "wrath of God" bit almost makes me second guess my conclusion that the quotation from John the Baptist ends with v. 30, since this sounds more like him (as quoted by Matthew and Luke: "O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?") than like the Beloved Disciple.
If this verse is excluded, the only NT writers to refer to the "wrath of God" are Paul and John of Patmos. Nowhere is the phrase ascribed directly to Jesus.
@WmJas - I think of it as an 'as if' - and maybe a (sometimes necessary) shorthand, for use with young children and the simple minded... perhaps...
Partly, I think this kind of thing comes from a kind of 'my God is bigger than your God' mentality - but if Christians feel that way, then they should probably consider converting to the purer and clearer monotheism for which this is axiomatic; rather than complicating matters with a divine Jesus.
Christians (and there are plenty) who regard the difference between God and man as an impaasable and infinite gulf - likewise. Rather than wrecking Christianity, they should embrace the absolute monotheism they so clearly crave...
(Sorry, I'm feeling a bit irritable this morning!)
"Christians (and there are plenty) who regard the difference between God and man as an impassable and infinite gulf"
Yes, I can't understand how a Christian can have this position, when the core of the whole religion is that there was a particular man who actually was God.
In his famous "trilemma" argument, C. S. Lewis says that a Jesus who mistakenly believed himself to be divine would be "on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg" -- and someone else (perhaps it was Peter Kreeft?) has elaborated on this by saying he would actually be crazier than the poached-egg guy, because the difference between man and God is infinitely greater than that between man and poached egg!
If one really believed this, how could he ever reach the conclusion that Jesus actually was divine? If I met a person who seemed otherwise sane and even deeply moral and insightful, but who claimed to be a poached egg, I would scarcely be justified in concluding, "Well, he's obviously not a liar or a lunatic, so he must really be a poached egg!" The whole point is that a man can't possibly be a poached egg -- and much less, on the premises accepted by a poached-egg Christian, could a man possibly be God.
@WIlliam - As you know, I think you err in this by making Lewis's point so narrowly specific - when one does that, nothing that could ever happen ever proves anything. Now, that is strictly true, because there are always an open-ended number of hypotheses to explain anything. But on the other hand, in the context of normal life, I think Lewis is perfectly correct to say that if Jesus was wrong about such a massive thing - ie if Jesus believed he was uniquely fully divine, but was not - then this would indeed very significantly discredit him as a wise and valid teacher.
Therefore, those who claim that Jesus was on the one hand, the greatest ever spiritual teacher (or one of just a few) BUT on the other hand (and this doesn't make any real difference to the validity of his teachings) he just-happened to believe/ teach-repeatedly that he was uniquely divine... well, such people are making an outrageous claim.
"If Jesus believed he was uniquely fully divine, but was not - then this would indeed very significantly discredit him as a wise and valid teacher."
Yes, I agree with that, because I don't subscribe to classical theology. Under classical theology, it should be strictly impossible for a man to be God, just as it is impossible for him to be a poached egg.
Post a Comment