Posts tagged ‘Jesus’

The Message in Easter

[ C ] Caravaggio - Martha and Mary Magdalene (...

Image by centralasian via Flickr

Matthew 28:1-10After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”

So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.” (NIV)

This Sunday I celebrated Easter at church. It was great. The Mr. Brewsters and I went to MCC in Austin. It’s the second time I’ve been. Lots of churches in Austin claim to be inclusive, but this one may be the first where I’ve actually seen gay and lesbian couples and transgenders free and welcome to worship. They are comfortable here, and it’s a loving, affirming environment.

Also, this is a true Christian church. The theology is sound. It’s not all over the map. It’s not new age. It’s not read Eckhart Tolle and the Dalai Lama and Deepak Chopra and believe whatever you want to believe like the Luby’s Cafeteria of theology — but neither is it dogmatic. And it seems to get the emphasis of Christianity just right. It’s about the love, the faith. We can debate and overthink the miracle of Christ until we suck all the joy right out of it, and that doesn’t make us any different from the atheists.

About a week ago a young man who writes his own very funny blog left a comment on a post of mine about Early Christianity, and he noticed that I seem to be concerned with women’s issues. He asked me to expound upon the significance of Jesus’ appearing to the women on Easter. And I think I’m ready to address that issue now.

First off, one of the things we know about Jesus and his ministry is that he was chiefly concerned with the “little people,” if you will. He ministered to people that his society shunned. In some cases these people were truly corrupt individuals and in other cases they were just people who were needlessly suffering.

Regardless of whether the person’s status in society was of his own making or simply a byproduct of blind misfortune, Jesus ministered to them all. He shook hands and broke bread with tax collectors and lepers and prostitutes.  If He were on this earth ministering today, He would be ministering to the gays and the transgender and the homeless and the crack addicts and AIDS victims and, yes, the prostitutes. Some things never change. Jesus said that the last shall be first and the first shall be last.

Women, in Jesus’ time, as they still are in many Asian and African and Latin American countries, were considered to be second-class citizens. Actually, that’s a fallacy. They were literally considered property, like cattle or children. That Jesus ministered to women and that some of his most faithful disciples were female should come as no surprise. They might not be listed in our Bibles as one of the twelve “chosen” apostles, but make no mistake that Mary and Martha and Mary Magdalene were just as devoted to Jesus as any of the men. In fact, the women did not deny Jesus after His death; it was the men who did that.

On the morning that our Lord rose from the dead and the angel rolled away the stone, the women were coming to attend to Him.  This was woman’s work, preparing a body for burial. There is irony in the fact that the first eyewitnesses to the resurrection were women. This is because women in those times were not considered to be reliable witnesses. They could not give testimony in a court of law; it would not have been accepted.

This explains why, when the women obeyed the command of the angel and went to tell Jesus’ disciples that he was alive, they initially refused to believe. In fact, they would not believe the resurrection until they saw the empty tomb for themselves. And one of them would withhold his faith until he was able to literally poke a finger through the Lord’s wounds. But the women, faced with a rolled stone, an empty tomb, and an angel, believed. They didn’t question it. They didn’t ask for proof. They didn’t ask the angel how he pulled off that trick. When the angel offered a wholly implausible, insane explanation, they accepted the word of the angel without question.

God is the master architect. Don’t mistakenly think that the women coming upon the Lord’s empty tomb was by happenstance. The women were meant to be the bearers of the Good News, the most important and defining brick in the mosaic of our faith, the resurrection that is definitive proof of our salvation. What an honor, if you think about it. The last shall be first.

April 26, 2011 at 11:38 pm 1 comment

Lord, Make Me An Instrument of Thy Peace

A garden statue of Francis of Assisi with birds

Image via Wikipedia

All too often what I see going on in the manosphere is a vilification of women, the flourishing of stereotypes without sound empirical evidence to back it up (i.e. all women are sluts, and this is the result of feminsm), and the same tired and stupid arguments being rehashed over ad nauseum by a group of people, some women but mostly men, who are all in agreement with each other’s biased viewpoints. These websites are one trick ponies written by men with their own rationalization warthogs.

No room for dissent here. If a critically thinking person brings up evidence or viewpoints to the contrary, then the blogger or the community resorts to personal attacks. It would bother me if I respected their opinions, but since I don’t I just see it as further proof of their single-minded ignorance, and, to some extent, stupidity. If you have to resort to personal attacks, then the truth is that you just don’t have what it takes to bring it. I don’t hate them. Beyond my initial outrage, it doesn’t even make me angry. It makes me pity them.

These men also aren’t self aware enough to realize that if you’re failing at relationships with women repeatedly, then the one common denominator in all these relationships is: you. The same rule applies to the females, absolutely. I’ve previously admitted to my own failures personally on this blog, if you regularly read it. I absolutely think that I bear responsibility for my failure to secure a long-term commitment. I own that. But you can’t apply that rule to the females only, and then go, “Look! It’s exactly like I told you; they’re all either harpy hags or shallow, slutty bitches!”

Well, actually, you could. But this would be a fallacy. Maybe the reason that these men aren’t more successful with long-term relationships is BECAUSE the women recognize that these men deep-down actually hate women and discount their contributions to society beyond their sexual market value and their ability to conceive and incubate a child. If that’s the case, then women are right to respond to these men as they do. After all, even the hottest youngest woman gets old one day, and fertility isn’t a guarantee, and no person likes being someone else’s slave.

Now I realize that I’ve seen a small portion of the websites and blogs that favor men’s rights, and probably not all of them are resorting to blaming rape victims and outright saying that a woman’s only worth is motherhood. There are probably a lot of guys out there who are bringing up some very good points about the relationship between the sexes. There are some guys out there that are probably writing smart stuff about legitimate areas in our society where men are getting shafted, real examples of misandry. The websites I’ve been to, unfortunately, aren’t it. Although, I will say that several men who have commented on this website have brought up excellent topics for debate. I thank them.

My advice to anyone who’s seeking to bridge the gender gap, as I am, instead of perpetuating it, or, God forbid, widening it, is to listen, seek to understand, be open and tolerable to other viewpoints. We don’t have to agree. There’s no law that says we have to agree on everything, but if you’re open and willing to listen, instead of outright dismissing someone on the basis of his or her sex, you just might learn a thing or two that you didn’t know previously. Someone might bring up a point you hadn’t thought about before.

My goal is for women and men to live in peace with one another, enjoy one another, sacrifice for one another, be selfless and kind and think about the ways in which we might fulfill one another and lift one another up rather than tearing each other down. That counts for everywhere from the battlefield to the boardroom to the bedroom.

Whether you are religious or not, much wisdom can be learned from an ancient prayer widely attributed to St. Francis of Assissi:

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.

Where there is hatred, let me sow love.

Where there is injury, pardon.

Where there is doubt, faith.

Where there is despair, hope.

Where there is darkness, light.

Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,

grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console;

to be understood, as to understand;

to be loved, as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive.

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,

and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.

Amen.

February 19, 2011 at 5:08 pm 22 comments

The Cure for Vague Ennui

happy valentine's day

Image by mugley via Flickr

There is a man at my new workplace who is all heart. Whenever I am playing my self-pity tape in my head, he always says something to put my life in perspective. I might be thinking internally about how little money I’m making or how none of my dreams will ever come true, and he will tell me the story of a friend of his whose daughter died from schleroderma. Or he’ll mention that he saw a homeless man outside the donut shop across the street. He had to nudge the guy ‘cause he was passed out drunk, and he thought the man might have actually died.

One of the Mr. Brewsters told me the other day that one of my former coworkers is getting a divorce. They seemed like such a happy couple, and they have a daughter who is very near Punky’s age. Turns out that the wife got caught drunk driving…because she ran over someone’s child and killed the kid. She refused to go to counseling or get any help to resolve her issues with alcohol abuse, and now a kid is dead, and a marriage is over as well.

I might make very little money, and I might not have health insurance. I might not drive a Prius. I might never make a significant professional contribution of any kind and spend every day of the rest of my life as a glorified secretary, barely getting by, paycheck to paycheck, hand to mouth, nose to the proverbial grindstone and any other hackneyed cliché you’d care to add. But when I hear stories like the ones above I know that I am blessed.

I know that whenever I am spending a lot of time playing the self-pity tape that my worldview has become very small. My worldview, in essence, is all about me. It’s important to be in communion with other people. One of the posts I wrote on Jesus was commented on by a Muslim gentleman from Pakistan, and we’ve struck up a little email friendship. He mentioned in one of his emails that people in Pakistan live much simpler lives. They live together with their extended families.

Children aren’t expected to be financially independent, and many families live with the husband’s parents, even after babies are born. People in Pakistan don’t purchase homes on credit. They prefer, instead, to save money over a lifetime and use their inheritance when their parents die in order to purchase a home. Old folks don’t go live in a “home;” they live at home. Their families care for them. The concept of any institutionalized care setting is just so foreign for them, and they wouldn’t want it. They like to care for their own loved ones.

Americans have record levels of depression and mental health issues and obesity. We have the greatest material abundance of any nation in the world, and yet we are still unhappy. I think it’s because we’re a lonely nation. We are a nation of people who need people who don’t spend time with people. We are preoccupied with our own thoughts, our own careers, our own obsessions and issues and our own vague ennui. Americans are obsessed with independence when we should really be thinking about our interdependence.

It comes from our own constant navel gazing. I’m writing this from a Starbucks where there are approximately twenty people. Of those twenty people, very few of them are actually interacting with each other. Most of us are lost in our laptops and iPhone screens and books, a large room filled with people who are not paying any attention to each other.

I was pissing and moaning about Valentine’s Day the other day when one of the Mr. Brewsters said to me, “Well, what you do is you pick someone who’s in the same boat that you are, and you do something nice for her. Buy someone a card or candy and flowers and make someone happy.” And I thought, well, that’s so profound, why didn’t I think of that? The reason, of course, is because I wasn’t thinking about anyone but my own damn self. Oh, whoa is me, destined to be alone forever. Yeah, if you think like that, you will be.

This morning I went to a new church, and I sat down next to a giant yellow Labrador who smelled like wet dog. Yes, the dog attends church, which I think is a good sign that I might be in the right place. I hate going to a new church. It’s always so intimidating. But it’s important to be a part of something bigger than myself. And while you can pray and worship in solitude, the Bible clearly says that wherever two or more are gathered in Jesus’ name, he will be with them. There’s a reason why other people are meant to be involved.

January 30, 2011 at 8:12 pm 1 comment

The Post In Which I Eat Crow

A bottle of Hannaford store brand Dijon mustard.

Image via Wikipedia

Mmmm. Yummy crow. I will not eat the whole crow, but I will serve myself up a nice big gnarly piece of breast meat and chow down, carefully, with lots of honey mustard or barbecue sauce to help with the taste.

Remember my post on The Man Box, and then the one about The Bet? Remember dear old Vern? Well, after Kay’s comment on The Bet I rushed to old Vern’s defense pretty quickly, and I realized that something about the cynicism of the situation really bothered me.

I realized that I liked thinking that on some level Vern had been my friend and that he had genuinely wanted to look out for me. I realized that something about me really cherished that memory. And that, despite my nasty but truthful comments about his fatal flaws of vanity, narcissism, bigotry, and small town small mindedness, I really thought this guy and I had a friendship at one point. I liked thinking that someone was watching over me. Just like the old song. Some feminist I am.

So, I thought about it some more, and then I thought, well, I could “settle” this once and for all (not really; I mean, you never really know if someone is telling you the truth or not) by contacting Vern and allowing him to respond with his side of the story. Naturally, I did not tell him that I had written an uncomplimentary essay about something he did nearly twenty years ago and published it on the internet. Let’s keep that secret just between us guys and gals.

How did I go about performing this feat of achievement? Why, with Facebook, of course. It’s easy to find Vern on Facebook. You just type Vern and then Smalltown, Oklahoma, and he pops up. Amazing. And then you can email some guy who tried to get into your pants nearly twenty years ago. Gotta love the internet.

So, of course, I sent off my pissy email. And basically, it went something like how’s your kid and the wife, and by the way, did you really think your friends wouldn’t tell on you? That’s a really great way to contact someone you haven’t seen or heard from in years. I recommend that everyone show such discretion and judgment.

He responds with two emails. The first one is one where he says, basically, I’m not sure if I know you, but didn’t we work together at the physical plant at State Mental Hospital University? The second response, about four minutes later includes an apology in advance. It reads basically that he did a lot of stupid stuff in college, not all of which he could possibly remember but that if he ever at any time hurt my feelings that would really upset him. Also, he tells me he has a seventeen year old son and that he and his wife have been divorced for thirteen years now.

A sane woman receiving this response would probably just think, yay, I got my apology, but no! I have never claimed to be sane. I email him back, mostly smarting because he pretended not to remember me. Bullshit; I knew he remembered me! And that basically made me go all passive aggressive on his ass, by telling him that I would hardly say that he hurt me since that’s really making a bigger deal out of the situation than it was but that I think he’s a jerk because he tried to get in my pants when he had a fiancée and a baby on the way, and what’s more he made a bet about it with his friends.

I don’t ask him what happened. I just go right ahead and accuse him. I also recommend this tactic. Be pissy and make accusations and then fly off the handle with resentment because someone who hasn’t seen you in nearly twenty years might want to ask where they remember you from. I should teach a class in conflict management.

If I haven’t made enough of an ass of myself yet, did I mention that I also told him that he was full of himself and then added that I’ve met bigger jerks than him since then? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, a proud moment. Jesus is smiling down on me from heaven. I didn’t come across as bitter, not at all.

Vern responds with a book. I mean the email practically had diagrams and everything. The friend (let’s call him Ernest (an Oklahoma joke for those in the know)) that I got my wild accusation from about the bet, because come to think of it, it was just the one guy, turns out that he and Vern aren’t buddies anymore.  And according to Vern this guy used to make up stories about him because he was jealous. Okay. That’s plausible.

Then he gives me a timeline of he and his ex-wife’s courtship. This includes the date of the original breakup, after which he would’ve been free to screw around, so to speak. He admits to being promiscuous but says he’s not proud of it. He then tells me when he and the girlfriend started dating again, and it was, lo and behold, the same month he graduated, the one when I turned 21, and it is not just plausible but in fact likely that he might not have even been together with her on my 21st birthday. They didn’t conceive their son until October of that year. The wedding was in January of the next year, and the kid was born in July. So, hmm, the timing for my version of events is all wrong.

He then goes on to say that he admits to using poor judgment in waiting until the last minute to make a move and that he thought about it often over the years and regretted how it probably made me feel. He swears on his Father’s grave (I’m not making this up, just reporting the facts) that there was never any bet.

Then he goes on to talk about how he’s been raising his son alone as a single parent and that he doesn’t date or “chase tail” and that his kid is an honor student who’s graduating in the spring with a full ride scholarship for vocal music and drama. Huh? A son in musical comedy? Vern? Didn’t you make him play football? He tops that off with saying that he’s raised his son “not to be like me.” What was that I said about small town small mindedness? Pass the honey mustard.

He apologizes again, even though, at this point I think we all know who the ass is in this scenario. He tells me he had a crush on me and  liked me because I was sweet and attractive and yes, he wanted to have sex with me because he genuinely liked me. I admit. It’s a novel concept, but sometimes people want to have sex with someone because they find the other person attractive and they like the other person.

So, now I have a dilemma. I can either choose to believe the story I originally believed, or given that his explanation is plausible and his explained motivation the simpler of the two possibilities, I can choose to believe Vern, or, well, at least give him the benefit of the doubt. So, I apologize. I tell him that I’ve been unforgivably rude, and that the truth about a bet or no bet is ultimately between him and God, and he shouldn’t really give a damn what I believe.

And then the emails fly back and forth, and we have a nice flirty time on memory lane where I fish for compliments about how hot I was back in the day, and I think I’ve been somewhat unfair to this guy over the years. Maybe very unfair. I don’t trust him entirely, but I do know which version of the story I prefer. Not enough to want to pursue something with him, although he left the door wide open for that and told me he’d love to buy me dinner to make it up to me. I got the last email at noon today. I won’t respond this time, but it started off with this sentence, “I did like to look after you and make sure you were safe.” Is it a line? Yeah, but I liked it just the same.

December 31, 2010 at 1:08 am 7 comments

Early Christianity: Josephus

Scanned from a copy of Josephus' 'The Jewish W...

Image via Wikipedia

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” – Josephus, from Antiquities of the Jews

Josephus was a Jewish historian. He was a law observant Jew who lived from approximately the years 37 to 100 C.E. He watched and chronicled, among many other things, the existence of Jesus and his ministry and the birth of the fledgling church.

Why is he considered so important to Christianity? He wasn’t even a Christian. Well, he’s vitally important to Christianity because he provides us with an impartial view of the times. The writers of the Bible can be accused of bias for Christianity. The gospels, for instance, could be said to be pro-Christian propaganda.

What proof do we have in the year 2010, for instance, that Jesus even existed? Some atheists question not only Jesus’ divinity but whether or not such a historical figure even lived. Josephus puts that rumor to death.

Josephus was raised in Jerusalem to a family with priestly and royal connections. He was a soldier and a diplomat. He was a Hellenistic Jew (which meant that he believed that Judaism was not in conflict with Graeco-Roman thought) but also a Hebrew patriot. His works were written in Greek, and he is considered to be a Roman apologist. He was a Pharisee by birth but perhaps not by inclination. He served for the Jews in the first Jewish-Roman revolt, although there is some question as to his loyalty since he was the only surviving member of a suicide pact.

His most important works were The Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews. His works chronicle not only the early Christian church and Jesus but also the first Jewish-Roman revolt and the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E. Because of Josephus we have an account of Masada, the Maccabees, the Hasmonean dynasty, and the rise to power of Herod the Great. His works directly reference John the Baptist, Pontius Pilate, and James the Just.

The oldest surviving manuscripts of Josephus’s works date to the tenth and eleventh centuries. Justin the Martyr failed to include Josephus’ reference to Jesus in his Christian apologies, and Justin was a known admirer of Josephus’ writings. This leads some to doubt the authenticity of Josephus’ account of Jesus. They believe that the information may have been added later by someone with a pro-Christian agenda.

Many other passages, beyond the one quoted at the beginning of this article, however, corroborate New Testament characters and stories and the existence of the political climate and social mores that are present in the Gospels and letters of the New Testament. These passages are unchallenged by scholars. It seems likely that there may have been some tampering with the text in calling Jesus the Christ, since Josephus was not a Christian, but there seems little doubt that he would have included information about Jesus.

This account of Josephus’ life and work is grossly oversimplified. To read more about Josephus for yourself, check out these links:

http://www.josephus.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_history

http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/

December 4, 2010 at 6:51 pm 3 comments

Early Christianity: The Writing of The New Testament

Jesus appearing to Thomas the Apostle, from th...

Image via Wikipedia

The New Testament consists of 27 books written by an assortment of different authors. There’s a lot of argument and speculation about who wrote a great many of the books, with some scholars even insisting that some of the Pauline letters were not written by Paul. There isn’t even any agreement about when the books were written.

The gospels could have been written as early as the 50s C.E. or as late as the second century. The debate for when and who wrote many books of the New Testament is important because it establishes the authenticity of the books. If the gospels were written within the Apostolic Age, then there is a good chance that they were written by eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus.

If the date of authorship is later, then the gospels lose some of their clout as they are most certainly a written version of an earlier oral tradition. And we all know what happens when you play a game of Telephone.

The earliest church didn’t see a need for a New Testament. The Jewish scriptures were their scriptures. No need to reinvent the wheel. Also, early Christians were convinced that Jesus’ return was imminent. They wouldn’t have seen the importance of preserving church tradition or the stories of Jesus because they were convinced that Jesus was coming for them before they could have children to whom they might pass it on.

This might explain some of Paul’s views on celibacy and marriage, which would have been contrary to Jewish tradition. These views, in turn, undoubtedly influenced the monastic tradition.

Some extremely conservative evangelicals would argue that all four gospels were written by disciples or contemporaries of Jesus. But I would ask you to remember that these are the same people who like to say that Moses wrote the Torah, which requires him to have written of his own death. Seems unlikely to me. So, I think we have to at least be open to the possibility that the Gospels were written after the death of Jesus’ contemporaries.

Does this mean that we should automatically disregard the New Testament as nothing but propaganda for a fledgling religion, a sect of Jews who were concerned with communal living? Well, oral history isn’t such a bad thing when it comes to scripture. The myths that make up Greek and Roman mythology were originally transmitted this way. This is also probably true for much of the Old Testament as well.

One great argument for the accuracy of oral tradition is the commonality of the flood myth amongst various cultures. Given that it’s a story that circulated through numerous peoples in geographical areas that couldn’t have influenced one another, there seems to be at least one case for the relative accuracy of oral tradition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

November 20, 2010 at 9:31 pm Leave a comment

Early Christianity: The Apostle John

Damian. "Jesus Christ and St. John the Ap...

Image via Wikipedia

“There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.” (John 1:6-8)

This post is about John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. John and his brother James were Galilean fishermen from a family of distinction. They were originally disciples of Jesus’ cousin, John the Baptist. Some say that John and Andrew were cousins of Jesus, through their mother, Salome.

John, like Peter, was sometimes quick to anger. He seems to have been a favorite of the Lord’s since he was present at many important events in Jesus’ ministry. As Jesus was on the cross dying he asked John to take care of his mother Mary in his absence and even told her that she had a new son in John.

John was one of the key leaders in the early church. Along with James the Just, Peter and Paul, he built the early Christian church and presided over the church in Ephesus for many years. John had disciples of his own, and some scholars believe that it is one of these disciples and not John himself who wrote the Gospel of John.

The authorship of I John, II John, and III John, the Gospel of John, and the Book of Revelation have generally been attributed to the disciple John, but modern scholars largely dismiss this idea, believing that the letters, gospel and apocalyptic vision were written by two or three separate authors.

John was present at the Pentecost and preached with Peter in Samaria. He was thrown in jail with Peter. John preached in Judea for twelve years until persecution of Christians caused them to generally flee the area, and he ended up in Ephesus where he stayed for many years.  The letters that bear his name were written there.

John was the longest living of all of Jesus’ disciples and is believed to have lived until approximately 100 C.E. Although he was eventually exiled on the island of Patmos and spent time in prison for his beliefs, he is the only one of Jesus’ original twelve disciples to escape death from violence (Judas having taken his own life and the others suffering martyrdom).

The Gospel of John is a lasting tribute to his memory. It is my personal favorite gospel, in that the language is of a superior literary quality. It’s also more concerned with theology than the other gospels. John’s gospel is less concerned with presenting factual evidence for Jesus’ divinity and establishing his claim as Messiah and more concerned with conveying the essence of Jesus’ message: love one another.

The other three gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, are generally grouped together and referred to as the synoptic gospels, so named because they have many incidents in common with one another. Matthew, Mark and Luke seem more preoccupied with a historical account of Jesus’ ministry than with a summary of his message.

“Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30-31)

If you haven’t done so already you really owe it to yourself to read his message. The first link goes right to the Bible Gateway site where you can read the entire Gospel of John online.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John&version=NIV

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/578522/Synoptic-Gospels

http://www.biblepath.com/john1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Apostle

http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/john-the-apostle-faq.htm

http://www.essortment.com/all/theapostlejo_rxqe.htm

http://atheism.about.com/od/biblepeoplenewtestament/p/JohnApostle.htm

November 13, 2010 at 3:30 pm 1 comment

Older Posts


Blog Stats

  • 176,600 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 82 other followers

March 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031