A question about John Chapter 14

[sandy whitelinger]

Thats the tricky question isn't it? I believe the Bible was inspired by God--but am enough of a realist to understand that any document that has an oral tradition that is thousands of years old is going to take some bias from the story teller.

I spent different periods in my life questioning/doubting religions, christianity and others. Without making it seem maudlin or like some great epiphany--one day I made a choice to believe (I know some would say I was saved--cannot say I go along with that either)--I just made the choice--and felt at ease with the decision to accept Jesus and HIS teachings. The problem is I don't think the Church Paul created is necessarily the Church Jesus intended--I don't know that-I have no proof of course-it is just my feeling. I think probably the Church Jesus intended was the Church of Jerusalem which was headed by his brother James--and which quietly faded away. The Jesus we see in the Gospels--doesn't seem to me to be the same as the Jesus we see in Paul's Epistles--forgive the tacky example--but its like Jesus started up this nice little bakery using organic flour and all made with loving hands. Jesus died, James was trying to hold the bakery together and along came Paul who said lets sell franchises--it will all have Jesus name--but to make it sell we need to change this, and expand that etc, etc--all of a sudden we have christianity with a capital C--with alot of fluff and very few of the original basic principles.

I tend to draw my views and beliefs from Matthew, Mark, and Luke (which agree on many points and seem to emphasize Jesus humanity). They may agree because they originated with 1 common source. John places alot of emphasis on Jesus' divinity. I tend to believe it was written later to embelish on the earlier Gospels.

Its not so much that I try to distinguish between what is from God and what is someone's opinion--its more a sense of what feels right.

You sure have to ignore a lot of non-Pauline scripture to posit that view.

 

[kateyes]

Ok. thanks for explaining. I understand your view now but of course I have a different one.

Of course you do--that is what is so great about the forum.

 

[Comprehend]

Of course you do--that is what is so great about the forum.

agreed.

 

[kateyes]

You sure have to ignore a lot of non-Pauline scripture to posit that view.

Perhaps I should clarify--first I was referring to the New Testament (which is starting point for Christian religions.) I ignore the Pauline scripture. To keep it short and sweet , I generally refer to the first 4 Gospels as the basis for my beliefs. I actually don't have issues with the Epistles of James, or Jude, or even Peter or the Acts.

John I do have some issues with(alot of scholars do as well you know)--the focus on divinity seems off to me (but again these are purely my beliefs)--Revelation comes across as a bogey man story to me (there is speculation that John was under the influence of halocinogens as in he ate some really bad bread or maybe just severely unbalanced when he wrote it.)

 

[Blackmarch]

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.


How do you interpret the above ? I understand that a mansion is a house in itself that has many rooms; the defender's notes of the KJ Version doesn't really explain what is meant by this. So how do you interpret it?

As I understand it, there will be differences- either levels, houses, worlds, classes something based on how dilligent/faithful a person is.

It's kind of like saying Heaven is like the US of A but not every part of the US of A is the exact same as the other.

 

[Clear]

Micel asked regarding : (John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.)

How do you interpret the above ? I understand that a mansion is a house in itself that has many rooms; the defender's notes of the KJ Version doesn't really explain what is meant by this. So how do you interpret it?

The ΝΑ-27 greek reads: εν τε οικια (home, house, property, etc) του πατρος μου μοναι (rooms, lodgings, etc) πολλαι εσιν ει δε μη, ειπον αν υμιν οτι πορευομαι ετοιμασαι τοπον υμιν.

For me, the meaning of Jesus’ μοναι depends upon the meaning of the Fathers’ οικια.

If the Fathers οικια, means “house” then I think the μαναι must then refer to "rooms" inside that house. “In my fathers house are many rooms” (as it is rendered in both Zondervan and NA-27). However, one can certainly argue that οικια (typically referring to a "house"), in this case is “property” or “domain” depending upon the context.

If the text is referring to “my fathers domain”(or “property”, in this case, a “kingdom”, in the context of his “heaven”), then there can be many “mansions” there.

μονη, found in verse two IS used in just this way in vs 23 when Jesus and the Father will “make our home [lodging]” with him. In either case, the base concept, to me, is that the apostles (and “he who has my commandments and keeps them” vs21) are the ones who love him and who become qualified to live with Jesus and his Father in this specific context.


The concept of multiple levels of reward and punishment according to varying levels and varying qualities associated with individuals

I like the return to the early Judeo-Christian tradition and concept of multiple levels of reward for the varying level of qualities all mankind possess. Though there were multiple versions as to how many heavens there were inside God the Fathers “domain”, the concept of varying level of reward and punishment that permeated so much of early Judeo-Christian literature has always seemed more fair to me than the “light switch” theology of either a wondrous heaven or a terrible torturous hell. I like blackmarchs' point and logic in the post prior to this one.


Micel;

Good luck coming to your own concept as to what meaning you will give to such ancient phrases.


Clear
εισεσεειω