Non-Christian Knowledge of the Bible

[T. Scott Morgan]

I'm interested in trying something and would like to know if our few non-Christian visitors would be interested in taking part. How about a commentary on a book of the Bible from a non-Christian perspective? If I post one chapter of a book each day and ask our non-Christian visitors to simply give their opinion, verse by verse, on what is being said in that chapter, would anyone be interested in participating?

I've done this before a couple of times with friends and have consistently been quite impressed by how often people will express opinions about the Bible beforehand, but after a few weeks of studying with me come to admit that they really haven't actually read much of anything in the Bible before. Surprisingly enough I've even met quite a few professing Christians who have come to admit the same during such studies. Sometimes this motivates people to better study the text for themselves before they develop their opinions about it.

I'm not particularly trying to argue or suggest anything about any of our visitors' knowledge of the Bible, however. I've also consistently been impressed by how much interest this can spark in some people to continue reading, and it's always intriguing to see what others think. So I just think this could be an interesting exercise. I've found that a lot of people who criticize things taught in the Bible do so because they listen to what other critics say, and not because they've read it and come to their own conclusions. I think people have a tendency to do this even if they don't realize they are doing it, so again I don't intend to criticize or suggest anything. But people are sometimes surprised with what they can find when just reading through a book of the Bible, and sometimes it really piques their curiosity to study it further.

The book of John is a favorite place for people to suggest as a starting point in reading through the Bible, so I'll go with that book. I'll begin by posting a single chapter and if we start getting any responses I'll continue with the following chapters each day or so. If any of our non-Christian visitors wish to participate (and I hope you will), simply quote each verse (or even phrase ... however specific you want to be) from the posted chapter and share what you think it means (just be careful to consider verses in their context). Try to comment on each verse, even if it seems self-explanatory. Don't go to commentaries, just state your opinions, and we can maybe have discussion later on if you wish. The only thing I would ask, though, is that those who choose to participate do their best to set aside their biases and offer opinions which demonstrate an attempt to honestly and critically handle the text they are reading.

I'll begin by quoting John 1 and then we'll just see how it goes. If we get any participation I'll continue with it in a day or so.

John Chapter 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15( John bore witness about him, and cried out, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.'") 16And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

19And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?" 20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, "I am not the Christ." 21And they asked him, "What then? Are you Elijah?" He said, "I am not." "Are you the Prophet?" And he answered, "No." 22So they said to him, "Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?" 23He said, "I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way of the Lord,' as the prophet Isaiah said."

24(Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25They asked him, "Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?" 26John answered them, "I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, 27even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie." 28These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

29The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.' 31I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel." 32And John bore witness: "I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God."

35The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, 36and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!" 37The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, "What are you seeking?" And they said to him, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher), "where are you staying?" 39He said to them, "Come and you will see." So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which means Christ). 42He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas" (which means Peter).

43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, "Follow me." 44Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." 46Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see." 47Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!" 48Nathanael said to him, "How do you know me?" Jesus answered him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." 49Nathanael answered him, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!" 50Jesus answered him, "Because I said to you, 'I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these." 51And he said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."

[theatheistguy]

Sounds like a good idea, lets have a go. Not too much to say on this chapter.

If I may ask, who is supposed to have written the book of John, and when?

I'm guessing it's just a typo that each reference to Yeshua (he, his, him, etc) does not start with a capital 'H'? I was just getting confused towards the start thinking it was talking about John as the Word.

Verse 51, did this happen?
Verse 49 and 50, Yeshua doesn't seem to accept this assigned title or am I missing something?

[T. Scott Morgan]

Well that's part of the fun of it . What do you think? I'm honestly not really looking to argue anything here as much as I am simply curious to see how you and others would interpret the text. If you would be willing to comment verse by verse when you have the time, no matter how self-explanatory some statements may seem to you, I would be very interested in reading it. Maybe a good way to look at this would be to ignore for a moment the fact that this is a religious text of a belief system you do not accept, act as though this is just some text you ran across or were even assigned to read in a class, and simply try to provide an interpretation of what you believe the author is saying. I'm simply curious to see what you guys would have to say about it.

[theatheistguy]

Hey, yea sorry, I am more than happy to take part in this, though I was just looking to get some context on it, hence the questions. However, if you'd rather answer it 'as is' then I'll gladly do that too.

[T. Scott Morgan]

My apologies, I don't mind offering a bit of context, that would of course help. The conservative view is that the Apostle John wrote the book. The early church strongly and consistently identified him with this book, including Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John. He testified that the Apostle John wrote the book while he was living in Ephesus in Asia Minor in his old age (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.22.5; 3.1.1). The other church fathers also assumed this to be the case, and then there is of course plenty of internal evidence in the book itself which would suggest that the Apostle John was the author. (The Apostle John was a man who knew Jesus and had first-hand encounters with him.) Because he was in his old age, according to the church fathers, the argument is that he would have been writing it around 50 years after he witnessed Jesus' ministry, around AD 80-90.

And no the "him, his, he, etc." is not a typo when it isn't capitalized. Some translators just prefer to capitalize all words referring to God, but there isn't anything as far as I know in the original language which indicates that it necessarily should be capitalized.

As for verses 49-51 those are interpretive issues that I'm curious to hear your thoughts on. What do you think they mean? But yes they are assumed to have already happened. Verse 51 refers to the disciples experiencing supernatural communication revealing to them who Jesus was.

[Nomad]

And no the "him, his, he, etc." is not a typo when it isn't capitalized. Some translators just prefer to capitalize all words referring to God, but there isn't anything as far as I know in the original language which indicates that it necessarily should be capitalized.

You're right. There's nothing in the Greek text that requires a capital letter when referring to God. It's merely a way of showing respect to God for some.

[theatheistguy]

EDIT: I had originally saved this as a draft as opposed to posting it, not sure how it was actually uploaded, anyways, I've changed a lot now, I'd be happy to get a response or continue this. Thanks =]

And no the "him, his, he, etc." is not a typo when it isn't capitalized. Some translators just prefer to capitalize all words referring to God, but there isn't anything as far as I know in the original language which indicates that it necessarily should be capitalized.

Well in Aramaic and Hebrew there are no capital letters, however, whether or not there was an original Aramaic NT which was then translated to the Greek, is a point of contention. If it were true, then there should be no capital letters, but I'm unaware of the Greek even having capital letters for him, his, he, etc.

Now for the chapter analysis.

John Chapter 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

So I take this to mean that Yeshua was God and this is being written by someone who has either been told this by Yeshua (though that is never said in the Bible), told by someone else (in which case it is next to meaningless), or has made it up (which is indeed meaningless). These first few verses appear to massively summarise the creation story; making all things, breathing life into man and light beating darkness.

6There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

See these verses make me think that John did not write this book, perhaps a disciple of his, for example, Polycarp, or his disciple, Irenaeus, because who would talk in the third person? If this is so, then how accurate can it be? Play a simple game of Chinese Whispers (Telephone) to see how much of a message can be lost in a short time, now take that across 50 or 60 years, add to that parts lost or confused due to bad memory. It's well documented that eye witness accounts are highly unreliable, and story telling even more so, so combine them and add 60 years of memory degradation, and I have substantial grounds to doubt all of this.

9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

I'm guessing this is meant to mean that people didn't realise that Yeshua was the Christ, but also have the more subtle meaning that only those who accept him as their saviour will become 'children of God', but it it means this, then why does it say that the world didn't know him, I thought we all knew God in our hearts?

14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15( John bore witness about him, and cried out, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.'")

More third person references to John.

16And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

No one has ever seen God? Thought many people had seen him? And even if this just talking about Yeshua then again, many people have seen him.

19And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?" 20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, "I am not the Christ."

Honest fellow.

21And they asked him, "What then? Are you Elijah?" He said, "I am not." "Are you the Prophet?" And he answered, "No." 22So they said to him, "Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?" 23He said, "I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way of the Lord,' as the prophet Isaiah said."

Wondering why he isn't a prophet is he is foretelling the coming of Yeshua?

24(Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25They asked him, "Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?" 26John answered them, "I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, 27even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie." 28These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

Again he's foretelling the coming of Yeshua, yet not a prophet?

29The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.' 31I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel."

Seems like a prophet to me...

32And John bore witness: "I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' 34And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God."

Well again it's third person which makes me wonder if he wrote it, but also, a question I've always had, the capitalising of S in Son of God, is this another personal preference by translators or is it indicated any way? And if only the former, then what makes it different from saying I'm a son of god? Just to clarify, I'm not asking why Yeshua is different, just the phrase son of god and why it is different for him.

35The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, 36and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!" 37The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, "What are you seeking?" And they said to him, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher), "where are you staying?"

See I can get my head round Yeshua being a Rabbi, either a respected or rebellious one, but god in the flesh...

39He said to them, "Come and you will see." So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which means Christ).

Messiah and Christ meaning anointed one, no? Which is just a way of saying high priest, or Rabbi. No link to god just yet.

42He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas" (which means Peter).

Why the renaming? Is this meant to be be part of the whole 'born again' thing?

43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, "Follow me." 44Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." 46Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see." 47Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!" 48Nathanael said to him, "How do you know me?" Jesus answered him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." 49Nathanael answered him, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!" 50Jesus answered him, "Because I said to you, 'I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these." 51And he said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."

Again, just a Rabbi, and he doesn't seem to be quick to correct anyone that he's actually god.

[GrinningDwarf]

6There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

See these verses make me think that John did not write this book, perhaps a disciple of his, for example, Polycarp, or his disciple, Irenaeus, because who would talk in the third person? If this is so, then how accurate can it be?

I know this is an old thread, and I don't know if anybody planned on getting back to it, but if I may point out...

The 'John' referred to in this passage is John the Baptist. The book was written by John Zebedee, brother of James, and one of the Twelve Disciples. He's a different person than John the Baptist.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

[T. Scott Morgan]

Hah, I had completely forgotten about this thread.

[theatheistguy]

The 'John' referred to in this passage is John the Baptist. The book was written by John Zebedee, brother of James, and one of the Twelve Disciples. He's a different person than John the Baptist.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

Thanks very much for the clarification. Not doubting you, but where exactly did you get the information that it was John Zebedee?

Scott, feel free to start something like this again.

[Reformed Baptist]

The 'John' referred to in this passage is John the Baptist. The book was written by John Zebedee, brother of James, and one of the Twelve Disciples. He's a different person than John the Baptist.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

Thanks very much for the clarification. Not doubting you, but where exactly did you get the information that it was John Zebedee?

Scott, feel free to start something like this again.

Despite the fact the author is not names , the fact that the gospel of John was written by John Bar Zebedee is widely accepted by the vast majority of scholars for the following reasons;

1) John’s gospel was included in the earliest canon lists available to us, and was ascribed to John. So this places it in the 2nd century with the authorship accepted, that is just a couple of generations removed from the actually writing of the book.

2) The text itself gives us clues, John 21:20, 24 tell us that it was written byt eh disciple that Jesus loved. A process of elimination leads to identify this person. There were three disciples that Jesus was particularly close to. One was Peter, yet Peter is distinguished from the author in John 21:20. James was killed about AD 40 (long before this gospel was written) – so that just leaves John.

[theatheistguy]

1) John’s gospel was included in the earliest canon lists available to us, and was ascribed to John. So this places it in the 2nd century with the authorship accepted, that is just a couple of generations removed from the actually writing of the book.

What evidence do we have that there were copies made between the time of the original and the 2nd century? And if indeed we have evidence of this then do we have any way of knowing how accurate the copies were?

2) The text itself gives us clues, John 21:20, 24 tell us that it was written byt eh disciple that Jesus loved. A process of elimination leads to identify this person. There were three disciples that Jesus was particularly close to. One was Peter, yet Peter is distinguished from the author in John 21:20. James was killed about AD 40 (long before this gospel was written) – so that just leaves John.

I realise this may come of rather naive, but didn't Jesus love all his disciples/apostles?

[theopenlife]

Actually, if I recall correctly, the author identifies himself as leaning on Jesus' chest during the last supper in the upper room. In the final chapter, Peter identifies John as being that person.

[theatheistguy]

Actually, if I recall correctly, the author identifies himself as leaning on Jesus' chest during the last supper in the upper room. In the final chapter, Peter identifies John as being that person.

Are you referring to John 13:22-25 and John 21:20-21? In both cases John is not identified, but rather it is 'the disciple whom Jesus loved'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciple_whom_Jesus_loved

[T. Scott Morgan]

In both cases John is not identified, but rather it is 'the disciple whom Jesus loved'.

Yes he is, you have to keep reading. And I don't recommend wikipedia as a reliable source , and neither is modern "scholarship".

John 21:20-24:

20 Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them, the one who had been reclining at table close to him and had said, “Lord, who is it that is going to betray you?” 21 When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about this man?” 22 Jesus said to him, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!” 23 So the saying spread abroad among the brothers that this disciple was not to die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?” 24 This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.

"The disciple whom Jesus loved" is "the disciple who is bearing witness about these things" (i.e. the one writing this book). The Apostle John refers to himself in his gospel as merely "the disciple whom Jesus loved," while sometimes mentioning another disciple by name. E.g.:

"23 One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was reclining at table close to Jesus, 24 so Simon Peter motioned to him..." (John 13:23-24)

"2 So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” (John 20:2)

"7 That disciple whom Jesus loved therefore said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment, for he was stripped for work, and threw himself into the sea." (John 21:7)