SemperFi

If Deere had stated some totally off-the-wall comment, I wouldn’t have shared his message. Did you understand the message? Were you challenged to seek an overwhelming passion for the Person of Jesus, instead of worry about the idiosyncrasy of one paragraph? Besides, his comment regarding John being the closest to Jesus of all the disciples is a long held understanding within the traditions of the Church. I have many friends, a few of those friends are closer and more intimate than the others, two I consider as close as brothers. Of the two, certainly one stands out above all the rest.

Why would it be difficult to grasp that of all the people who traveled with Jesus, one would be the closest? And who stayed with Jesus during His death? John. Who did he entrust with the care of His mother? John.

I think you focused too much on the gnats within the tract and missed the wonder of the teaching . . . maybe you need to consider where your passion lies.

You said that John “was the closest to Jesus and everyone knew it.”

Really? Well, clearly, “the ten” didn’t seem to think so. They were incensed when John and his brother (note very humbly mind you) tried to snag the seats on the right and left of Jesus — “And when the ten heard [it], they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.” (Mt. 20:24); “And when the ten heard [it], they began to be much displeased with James and John.” (Mk. 10:41). Surely, “the ten” were not under the impression that John should be preferred over any of the rest of the apostles. Jesus told the apostles that they would ALL forsake him, and after letting Jesus down by falling asleep three times in the garden of Gethsemane, John behaved JUST LIKE his fellow apostles, as Jesus had said he would.

When the Bible urges the readers of scripture to “prove all things” it certainly was not suggesting that they should look to the hearsay of men as their standard of truth but, rather, in accord with Ps. 118:8 they should look to scripture and trust the authority of God’s word — and not the traditions of men which may be added to that word. And, since these words are true: “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” (Pr. 30:5-6), one is always better off conforming their hypothesis to the scriptures rather than the other way around. So, I hope you will accept this note of biblical correction.

You claim that, “John is called “the disciple whom Jesus loved.”” but what happens when one subjects this claim to biblical scrutiny, will it hold up?

Point 1: No one has ever cited a single verse of scripture that would justify promoting the idea that the unnamed “disciple whom Jesus loved” was anybody named John — not the Apostle John, nor any other John. (And the reason why NO such verse is cited by those who put forth the unbiblical John tradition is because no such verse exists.)

Point 2: The facts recorded in the plain text of scripture can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that WHOEVER the unnamed “other disciple, whom Jesus loved” was he could not have been John — because the man-made John tradition forces the Bible to contradict itself, which the Bible cannot do if it is true. Those interested will find a free eBook that lays out a presentation of the Bible evidence on this topic — non-Bible sources are quoted, just scripture — at BelovedDiscipleBibleStudy.com.

Two good rules of respect for the authority of God’s word: A) One should not be presenting an idea AS IF IT WERE BIBLICAL if they cannot cite a single verse that would justify teaching that idea – and – B) If the facts in the plain text of scripture prove that an idea is false, then those who love the truth will reject that false idea — no matter how many people believe it, no matter how loud some may shout it, no matter if a big-wig so-and-so believes it, no matter how long the false idea has been around, etc.
One can pick and choose their favorite non-Bible source to cite as a reason why they believe the idea that the unnamed “other disciple whom Jesus loved” was John. But what no one has ever done is cite a single verse that would justify teaching that the unnamed “disciple whom Jesus loved” was John — not those who originated the unbiblical John idea and not those who repeat their error to this day.

The truth is that the John tradition is simply a case of mistaken identity. This, for example, explains why the Jesus’ transfiguration, his prayers in the Garden of Gethsemane, and his raising of the daughter of Jairus are NOT in the fourth gospel. Only three disciples were present at each of these events and John was one of them. Thus John was able to give eyewitness testimony when it came to these key incidents and yet there is no mention of these events in the fourth gospel, because the author, “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, was not John. And the missing ‘John testimony’ is just the tip of the iceberg.

Evolution is not based in fact.

Adaptation to environment is.

Intelligent design is evident.

Jonathan

“let the peace (soul harmony which comes) from Christ rule act as umpire continually in your hearts [deciding and settling with finality all questions that arise in your minds, in that peaceful state to which as members of Christ’s one body you were also called to live.”

When you have a question, such as ministry or regarding relationships or any question that come to your mind, look for the peace that settles in your spirit. Don’t go by “feelings.” Look for the peace in your spirit. Also, visit your Pastor or someone close to you who you trust and have confidence in.