What do you think?
Rate this book
Bible #43
John
'John's Gospel sheds a unique light not only on the ministry of Jesus Christ, but also on the nature of his relationship with God the Father. This eBook also includes a special section of 'Subjects on the Theme of Salvation' that gives insight into 15 subjects of salvation. NIV 2011. The New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible is the world's most popular modern-English Bible---easy to understand, yet rich with the detail found in the original languages.'
Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 100
388 people are currently reading
887 people want to read
About the author
Anonymous
791k books3,374 followersBooks can be attributed to "Anonymous" for several reasons:
* They are officially published under that name
* They are traditional stories not attributed to a specific author
* They are religious texts not generally attributed to a specific author
Books whose authorship is merely uncertain should be attributed to Unknown.
See also: Anonymous
* They are officially published under that name
* They are traditional stories not attributed to a specific author
* They are religious texts not generally attributed to a specific author
Books whose authorship is merely uncertain should be attributed to Unknown.
See also: Anonymous
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 177 reviews
June 13, 2025
Of the four Biblical accounts of Jesus' life, John stands out as having more unique content than the others. Some would say it's the best-loved Gospel, but, I adore them all equally. There are many great stories here, and listening to a dramatized audio version while reading it really brought it to life. If you're a Christian, and haven't read this fourth New Testament book in its entirety, you should!
January 19, 2023
The Gospel of John is my favorite Gospel, though I prefer the King James Version.
May 12, 2020
I really enjoyed the gospel of John. It had some parts in it that I didn't remember reading before! So much good stuff. I liked the parts where it said no one could seize Jesus because it was not yet His time. Also, John 15, where it talks about the Vine and the branches; very lovely! I loved the parts in chapter 17 where Jesus prays for His disciples, and us! <3 So much beauty and tenderness in this book. And power! How awesome is our God!
"Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going." John 14:1-4 NIV
"Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going." John 14:1-4 NIV
May 5, 2023
عیسی بس کارهای دیگر نیز کرد که اگر آن ها را یکایک می نگاشتم، گمان نمی برم که جهان گنجایش کتابهای نگاشته شده را داشت
یوحنا و کار سختِ روایت کردن یک پیامبر
بی هیچ بحثی عهد جدید یکی از خاصترین کتاب های تاریخ اندیشه است. تقریبا هیچ کتابی نمی توان یافت که فرم مشابهی با آن داشته باشد. داستان این کتاب از این قرار است: پیامبری ظهور میکند. پیامبری که خودش هیچ اثر مکتوبی به جا نگذاشته. و چند تن تلاش می کنند تا آنچه را بر او گذشته روایت کنند. چرا؟ در واقع روایت عیسی از این رو اهمیت دارد که او جسمانیت خداوند بر روی زمین است. پس شرح او همزمان به شرح زندگانی خداوند نیز تبدیل میشود. زندگی او واسطه ای است برای رسیدن به فهمی از خداوند.
اما با این حال، میان چهار انجیل موجود در عهد جدید که به اناجیل اربعه موسوماند، یک انجیل از آن سه دیگر متمایز می شود و منحصر به فرد ترینانجیل به حساب میآید. بر خلاف سه نویسنده دیگر، یعنی لوقا، متی، مرقس که انجیل هایشان انجیل های نظیر نامیده می شوند (چرا که متن این سه انجیل شباهت زیادی با یکدیگر دارند) یوحنا قصد ندارد که صرفا راوی زندگی عیسی باشد. هربرت دریفوس، فیلسوف معاصر، در شرحش از انجیل یوحنا اشاره میکند که برخلاف آن سه، یوحنا احتمالا تربیتی یونانی داشته و تلاشش این است که با مفاهیمیونانی موقعیت عجیب و نامتعارف عیسی را قابل فهمکند. این تفاوت در سبک، خود را در جملهی آغازین انجیل یوحنا بلافاصله نشان می دهد.
لوگوس، هراکلیتوس، یوحنا و مسیح
"در آغاز کلمه بود". این جمله، جملهی آغازین انجیل یوحنا است. "کلمه" در اصل برگردان واژهی یونانی لوگوس است که در ترجمه نمیتواند بار معنایی سنگینش را انتقال دهد. لوگوس مفهومی است که دایره دلالت وسیعی دارد. این واژه در یونانی هم میتواند به معنای گزارش باشد، هم جدل، هم استدلال، هم عقل، هم روایت و همینطور بسیار معنای دیگر، که درهیچ زبانینمیتواند برگردان مناسبی برای آن یافت.
اما به خصوص در پاره های باقی مانده از هراکلیتوس، این واژه معنایی متعین و فلسفی پیدا میکند که میتواند استفادهی یوحنا از این واژه را با آنتوجیه کرد. برای هراکلیتوس، لوگوس تماماین جهان را احاطه کرده. نمی توان پا را از دایره لوگوس فراتر نهاد. لوگوس مرزهای این جهان را می سازد اما همجنان به جهان تعین می بخشد. لوگوس بر جهان فرمان می راند و جهان را تبدیل میکند به آنچه که ضرورتا هست. لوگوس است که ارزش ها را می سازد و به این جهانمعنا می دهد. تمام این توصیفات از لوگوس کار را برای یوحنا آسان میکند که بلافاصله پس از جملهی آغازینش اضافه کند:
"و آن کلمه خدا بود"
یوحنا به تناقض میافتد
یک لحظه خود را جای یوحنا بگذارید. فرض کنید میخواهید فهمی از زندگی یک انسان نامتعارف و عجیب به دست دهید. اما با همدلانه ترین شکل ممکن. با قبول هرچیزیکه این انسان عجیب دربارهخود میگوید. این که هرچندصورت انسانی دارد، اما گاهی ادعای خدایی می کند و گاهی خود را نیز فرزند خدا میخواند. با اینحال کهادعای خدایی دارد، خدایی (یا فرزند خدایی؛ هر دو تعیبر در انجیل ها در توصیف عیسی به کار می روند) که قاعدتا در سنت یهودی با قدرت مطلقش شناخته می شود، تصمیم میگیرد که برای آمرزیده شدن گناهان بشریت، خود را برای انسان قربانیکند. اما دقت کنید...مگر تا پیش از آن رسم بر این نبود که انسان ها برای خدایی قربانی شوند؟ چطور می شود این موقعیت را فهمید؟ و چطور می شود آن را شرحداد؟
و به همینخاطر است که یوحنا گاهی به ورطه تناقض میافتد. یوحنا در توصیف عیسی می نویسد:
جهان بواسطه او بود
و او در جهان بود
چطور چنین چیزی ممکن است؟ چطور ممکن است که چیزی بواسطه چیز دیگری بوجود آید و خود آن چیز همزمان صرفا جزئی از نتیجه و محصول کارش باشد؟
مسیح جهان را بوجود میآورد و خود صرفا جزئی از جهان است...یوحنا اما اشتباه نکرده. او تلاش کرده درست ترین توصیف را از حیات عیسی به دست دهد و هربرت دریفوس توضیح می دهد که چرا.
عیسی به مثابه اثر هنری
دریفوس مفهومِ اثر هنری (work of art) هایدگر بهکمک می طلبد تا بتواند سر از کار تناقضات یوحنا و زندگی عیسی درآورد. دریفوس به یک نکته اساسی اشاره میکند. اینکه انسان ها همیشه بر روی پسزمینه ای ناآگاهانه از ارزش ها رفتار می کنند. ارزش هایی که مشخص می کنند چه خوب است و چه بد. ارزش هایی که به زندگی معنا می دهند و کمک میکنند تا انسان ها چیزی را بر چیز دیگری ترجیح دهند. این پس زمینه برای هرگونه عمل ضروری است. اما کار اثر هنری در واقع این است که این پس زمینه ناآگاهانه را به ضمیرخودآگاهدر میآورد. (re-articulation) اثر هنری به انسان ها میگوید که بر چه مبناییعمل می کنند، چهچیزی برای آنها اهمیت دارد، چهچیز را خیر می دانند، و چه چیزی را میپرستند و حاضرند برای چهچیزی جانشان را فدا کنند. برای یونانیان هر یک از معابد خدایانشان در عین حالی که سنگی و ساختمانی بیش نیست، اما چیزی است به دنیا و هستی شان معنا داده. معابد آنان از نگاهی صرفاجزئی از دنیای اطرفشان است اما در عین حال این معابدند که دنیایشان را می سازند.
اما گاهی، در واقع بسیار به ندرت، اثر هنری تنها بیانگر ارزش های پس زمینه نیست. اثر هنری می تواند ارزش های جدیدی تولید کند، جهانی نو خلق کند و معنای تازه ای بیافریند. یعنی کاری خدایی؛ و دریفوس معتقد است تنها دو تن در تاریخ اندیشهی غرب دست به چنین کار بزرگی زدند و موفق نیز بودند: عیسی و دکارت. دریفوس چنین اثر هنری ای را reconfigurator مینامد. یعنی اثری کهاز نو قوام میبخشد و سامانمی دهد. اثری انقلابی. اما خطری بزرگ همیشه در کمین چنین آثاری است. از آنجایی که چنین اثری دست به خلق امری تازه میزند، نمیتواند با زبان گذشته سخن بگوید. اون باید که زبان تازه ای خلق کند و مفاهیم تازه ای و افق جدیدی را بیافریند و تمام این ها اثر هنری را در معرض سوتفاهم قرار می دهند و در مورد عیسی، در معرض دیوانه و مجنون خطاب شدن؛ به همین علت است که جا به جا در هر چهار انجیل، مخطابان عیسی نمی توانند سر از سخنان او در آورند. حتی حواریون دائما اشاره می کنند که او به زبانی رمزگونه سخن میگوید.
دریفوس معتقد است عیسی با تبدیل شدن به یک اثر هنری در اصل به مقام خدایی می رسد. او جهانی نو خلق می کند. اما در عین حال رابطه فرزندی او با خدا حفظ می شود، چرا که در سنت یهودی ای که خدا از نظر پنهان است و باید که پنهان بماند بر روی زمین بواسطهی عیسی ظاهر می شود. در اصل عیسی اثر هنری ای است که خداوند را که در پس زمینه است در برابر چشم آدمیان عیان میکند اما به شکلی کاملا انقلابی، با زیر و زبر کردن سنت یهودی. با عیسی است که "لوگوس جسم می گردد"
پینوشت: متون ذکر شده از انجیل یوحنا از عهد جدیدی است که پیروز سیار ترجمه کرده. منابعی که برای نوشتن این مرور استفاده کردم، کتاب تاریخ فلسفه یونان باستان گاتری ذیل مدخل هراکلیتوس و همینطور سخنرانی هربرت دریفوس در باب انجیل یوحنا که لینکش را در ادامه می بینید:
https://youtu.be/Hnx3_2a_FWQ
یوحنا و کار سختِ روایت کردن یک پیامبر
بی هیچ بحثی عهد جدید یکی از خاصترین کتاب های تاریخ اندیشه است. تقریبا هیچ کتابی نمی توان یافت که فرم مشابهی با آن داشته باشد. داستان این کتاب از این قرار است: پیامبری ظهور میکند. پیامبری که خودش هیچ اثر مکتوبی به جا نگذاشته. و چند تن تلاش می کنند تا آنچه را بر او گذشته روایت کنند. چرا؟ در واقع روایت عیسی از این رو اهمیت دارد که او جسمانیت خداوند بر روی زمین است. پس شرح او همزمان به شرح زندگانی خداوند نیز تبدیل میشود. زندگی او واسطه ای است برای رسیدن به فهمی از خداوند.
اما با این حال، میان چهار انجیل موجود در عهد جدید که به اناجیل اربعه موسوماند، یک انجیل از آن سه دیگر متمایز می شود و منحصر به فرد ترینانجیل به حساب میآید. بر خلاف سه نویسنده دیگر، یعنی لوقا، متی، مرقس که انجیل هایشان انجیل های نظیر نامیده می شوند (چرا که متن این سه انجیل شباهت زیادی با یکدیگر دارند) یوحنا قصد ندارد که صرفا راوی زندگی عیسی باشد. هربرت دریفوس، فیلسوف معاصر، در شرحش از انجیل یوحنا اشاره میکند که برخلاف آن سه، یوحنا احتمالا تربیتی یونانی داشته و تلاشش این است که با مفاهیمیونانی موقعیت عجیب و نامتعارف عیسی را قابل فهمکند. این تفاوت در سبک، خود را در جملهی آغازین انجیل یوحنا بلافاصله نشان می دهد.
لوگوس، هراکلیتوس، یوحنا و مسیح
"در آغاز کلمه بود". این جمله، جملهی آغازین انجیل یوحنا است. "کلمه" در اصل برگردان واژهی یونانی لوگوس است که در ترجمه نمیتواند بار معنایی سنگینش را انتقال دهد. لوگوس مفهومی است که دایره دلالت وسیعی دارد. این واژه در یونانی هم میتواند به معنای گزارش باشد، هم جدل، هم استدلال، هم عقل، هم روایت و همینطور بسیار معنای دیگر، که درهیچ زبانینمیتواند برگردان مناسبی برای آن یافت.
اما به خصوص در پاره های باقی مانده از هراکلیتوس، این واژه معنایی متعین و فلسفی پیدا میکند که میتواند استفادهی یوحنا از این واژه را با آنتوجیه کرد. برای هراکلیتوس، لوگوس تماماین جهان را احاطه کرده. نمی توان پا را از دایره لوگوس فراتر نهاد. لوگوس مرزهای این جهان را می سازد اما همجنان به جهان تعین می بخشد. لوگوس بر جهان فرمان می راند و جهان را تبدیل میکند به آنچه که ضرورتا هست. لوگوس است که ارزش ها را می سازد و به این جهانمعنا می دهد. تمام این توصیفات از لوگوس کار را برای یوحنا آسان میکند که بلافاصله پس از جملهی آغازینش اضافه کند:
"و آن کلمه خدا بود"
یوحنا به تناقض میافتد
یک لحظه خود را جای یوحنا بگذارید. فرض کنید میخواهید فهمی از زندگی یک انسان نامتعارف و عجیب به دست دهید. اما با همدلانه ترین شکل ممکن. با قبول هرچیزیکه این انسان عجیب دربارهخود میگوید. این که هرچندصورت انسانی دارد، اما گاهی ادعای خدایی می کند و گاهی خود را نیز فرزند خدا میخواند. با اینحال کهادعای خدایی دارد، خدایی (یا فرزند خدایی؛ هر دو تعیبر در انجیل ها در توصیف عیسی به کار می روند) که قاعدتا در سنت یهودی با قدرت مطلقش شناخته می شود، تصمیم میگیرد که برای آمرزیده شدن گناهان بشریت، خود را برای انسان قربانیکند. اما دقت کنید...مگر تا پیش از آن رسم بر این نبود که انسان ها برای خدایی قربانی شوند؟ چطور می شود این موقعیت را فهمید؟ و چطور می شود آن را شرحداد؟
و به همینخاطر است که یوحنا گاهی به ورطه تناقض میافتد. یوحنا در توصیف عیسی می نویسد:
جهان بواسطه او بود
و او در جهان بود
چطور چنین چیزی ممکن است؟ چطور ممکن است که چیزی بواسطه چیز دیگری بوجود آید و خود آن چیز همزمان صرفا جزئی از نتیجه و محصول کارش باشد؟
مسیح جهان را بوجود میآورد و خود صرفا جزئی از جهان است...یوحنا اما اشتباه نکرده. او تلاش کرده درست ترین توصیف را از حیات عیسی به دست دهد و هربرت دریفوس توضیح می دهد که چرا.
عیسی به مثابه اثر هنری
دریفوس مفهومِ اثر هنری (work of art) هایدگر بهکمک می طلبد تا بتواند سر از کار تناقضات یوحنا و زندگی عیسی درآورد. دریفوس به یک نکته اساسی اشاره میکند. اینکه انسان ها همیشه بر روی پسزمینه ای ناآگاهانه از ارزش ها رفتار می کنند. ارزش هایی که مشخص می کنند چه خوب است و چه بد. ارزش هایی که به زندگی معنا می دهند و کمک میکنند تا انسان ها چیزی را بر چیز دیگری ترجیح دهند. این پس زمینه برای هرگونه عمل ضروری است. اما کار اثر هنری در واقع این است که این پس زمینه ناآگاهانه را به ضمیرخودآگاهدر میآورد. (re-articulation) اثر هنری به انسان ها میگوید که بر چه مبناییعمل می کنند، چهچیزی برای آنها اهمیت دارد، چهچیز را خیر می دانند، و چه چیزی را میپرستند و حاضرند برای چهچیزی جانشان را فدا کنند. برای یونانیان هر یک از معابد خدایانشان در عین حالی که سنگی و ساختمانی بیش نیست، اما چیزی است به دنیا و هستی شان معنا داده. معابد آنان از نگاهی صرفاجزئی از دنیای اطرفشان است اما در عین حال این معابدند که دنیایشان را می سازند.
اما گاهی، در واقع بسیار به ندرت، اثر هنری تنها بیانگر ارزش های پس زمینه نیست. اثر هنری می تواند ارزش های جدیدی تولید کند، جهانی نو خلق کند و معنای تازه ای بیافریند. یعنی کاری خدایی؛ و دریفوس معتقد است تنها دو تن در تاریخ اندیشهی غرب دست به چنین کار بزرگی زدند و موفق نیز بودند: عیسی و دکارت. دریفوس چنین اثر هنری ای را reconfigurator مینامد. یعنی اثری کهاز نو قوام میبخشد و سامانمی دهد. اثری انقلابی. اما خطری بزرگ همیشه در کمین چنین آثاری است. از آنجایی که چنین اثری دست به خلق امری تازه میزند، نمیتواند با زبان گذشته سخن بگوید. اون باید که زبان تازه ای خلق کند و مفاهیم تازه ای و افق جدیدی را بیافریند و تمام این ها اثر هنری را در معرض سوتفاهم قرار می دهند و در مورد عیسی، در معرض دیوانه و مجنون خطاب شدن؛ به همین علت است که جا به جا در هر چهار انجیل، مخطابان عیسی نمی توانند سر از سخنان او در آورند. حتی حواریون دائما اشاره می کنند که او به زبانی رمزگونه سخن میگوید.
دریفوس معتقد است عیسی با تبدیل شدن به یک اثر هنری در اصل به مقام خدایی می رسد. او جهانی نو خلق می کند. اما در عین حال رابطه فرزندی او با خدا حفظ می شود، چرا که در سنت یهودی ای که خدا از نظر پنهان است و باید که پنهان بماند بر روی زمین بواسطهی عیسی ظاهر می شود. در اصل عیسی اثر هنری ای است که خداوند را که در پس زمینه است در برابر چشم آدمیان عیان میکند اما به شکلی کاملا انقلابی، با زیر و زبر کردن سنت یهودی. با عیسی است که "لوگوس جسم می گردد"
پینوشت: متون ذکر شده از انجیل یوحنا از عهد جدیدی است که پیروز سیار ترجمه کرده. منابعی که برای نوشتن این مرور استفاده کردم، کتاب تاریخ فلسفه یونان باستان گاتری ذیل مدخل هراکلیتوس و همینطور سخنرانی هربرت دریفوس در باب انجیل یوحنا که لینکش را در ادامه می بینید:
https://youtu.be/Hnx3_2a_FWQ
August 31, 2009
In an attempt to get the Nick Cave introduced book from this series I thought I was doing something sly and ordering the whole set for nine bucks, instead of paying the eighty something dollars that the Nick Cave book alone is going for. I didn't realize it, but they have different authors doing the introduction for the US versions than the UK versions, so now I have the US version with a bunch of authors I'm not so excited about, compared at least to the UK versions. But since I'm now the proud owner of the whole first set of these books I figured I could bring one of them with me to do laundry today. I like brining little books with me to do laundry so I can shove them into my pocket when I have to do things besides sitting around waiting.
These books are put out by Grove Press, as opposed to one of the big bible conglomerates, and they are presented as literature, with the line numbering still there, but reformatted into paragraphs. This is only important because I choose to read this today as a novella.
From the outset the reader knows he's in trouble, the Word is thrown out there, and it's there at the beginning and it's God and he was there at the beginning and more logical relations are made and you have to wonder if you're in for one of those psuedo-philosophical novellas of ideas, but one where the author, some guy named John, is going to pull some sophistry on you. But the author gets all of the Word stuff out of him pretty quickly, and really doesn't return to it too much, which makes one think the author was just trying to dazzle with the first few lines, seriously there is so much more that could have been done with the Word, since it was originally the Greek word Logos, that has such a rich amount of connotations to it, but maybe the author never went to grad school and took seminars on pre-Socratic philosophers.
So the story gets going, and there quite a few characters, and I think in the future the author may want to try giving more of them different names, multiple John's, Mary's, Peter's and Judas's get really confusing sometimes, especially when the author also insists on not naming himself in the story until the very end. This is the kind of cheap literary trick that just isn't that cool. Instead of 'some other disciple', just say me, no need to be coy. And who is this second Judas guy who comes out of nowhere?
But the main character is this guy named Jesus, who is sort of an angry young guy who yells at people a lot, does some magic tricks and speaks in riddles. He gets kind of angry at his Mom when he's trying to just hang with his friends at a wedding and she starts nagging him about there not being enough wine. He throws a few temper tantrums along the way, and anytime anyone tries to get to the bottom of what he's talking about he just acts like a sullen teenager who no one understands, talks in riddles and then runs off to hide someplace. In the end he stages an elaborate entrance into a city, and sets things in motion so that all the signs of some ancient prophecy are fulfilled with him, and he gets killed.
Then things start to get a little strange. He comes back from the dead, and freaks the fuck out when a whore tries to touch him, and goes on about not ascending yet, but a few days later has no problem with one of his old buddies fingering his wounds; a kind of creepy scene (paraphrase: Tommy: Dude, I don't believe JC is back. You know what dudes, I won't fucking believe it until I stick my finger right into that holes in his hands and in his stomach." flash forward a few days. JC (barging into a locked room where his buddies are all sitting around): Hey Guys I'm back, Tommy get up here and finger me."). There is also something weird about the whole back from the dead thing because no one seems to recognize him, maybe the three days he was dead caused him to start decomposing, I don't know. They aren't too clear on why his buddies can't seem to recognize him until he tells them who he is. I get it the first time, because they all think he's dead, but the second and third times? C'mon, realize who the lurking guy with the wounds is already.
The story ends with JC going back to his father, which is a nice ending because he was kind of a broken record about his Dad for most of the story. I think he might need some kind of therapy.
These books are put out by Grove Press, as opposed to one of the big bible conglomerates, and they are presented as literature, with the line numbering still there, but reformatted into paragraphs. This is only important because I choose to read this today as a novella.
From the outset the reader knows he's in trouble, the Word is thrown out there, and it's there at the beginning and it's God and he was there at the beginning and more logical relations are made and you have to wonder if you're in for one of those psuedo-philosophical novellas of ideas, but one where the author, some guy named John, is going to pull some sophistry on you. But the author gets all of the Word stuff out of him pretty quickly, and really doesn't return to it too much, which makes one think the author was just trying to dazzle with the first few lines, seriously there is so much more that could have been done with the Word, since it was originally the Greek word Logos, that has such a rich amount of connotations to it, but maybe the author never went to grad school and took seminars on pre-Socratic philosophers.
So the story gets going, and there quite a few characters, and I think in the future the author may want to try giving more of them different names, multiple John's, Mary's, Peter's and Judas's get really confusing sometimes, especially when the author also insists on not naming himself in the story until the very end. This is the kind of cheap literary trick that just isn't that cool. Instead of 'some other disciple', just say me, no need to be coy. And who is this second Judas guy who comes out of nowhere?
But the main character is this guy named Jesus, who is sort of an angry young guy who yells at people a lot, does some magic tricks and speaks in riddles. He gets kind of angry at his Mom when he's trying to just hang with his friends at a wedding and she starts nagging him about there not being enough wine. He throws a few temper tantrums along the way, and anytime anyone tries to get to the bottom of what he's talking about he just acts like a sullen teenager who no one understands, talks in riddles and then runs off to hide someplace. In the end he stages an elaborate entrance into a city, and sets things in motion so that all the signs of some ancient prophecy are fulfilled with him, and he gets killed.
Then things start to get a little strange. He comes back from the dead, and freaks the fuck out when a whore tries to touch him, and goes on about not ascending yet, but a few days later has no problem with one of his old buddies fingering his wounds; a kind of creepy scene (paraphrase: Tommy: Dude, I don't believe JC is back. You know what dudes, I won't fucking believe it until I stick my finger right into that holes in his hands and in his stomach." flash forward a few days. JC (barging into a locked room where his buddies are all sitting around): Hey Guys I'm back, Tommy get up here and finger me."). There is also something weird about the whole back from the dead thing because no one seems to recognize him, maybe the three days he was dead caused him to start decomposing, I don't know. They aren't too clear on why his buddies can't seem to recognize him until he tells them who he is. I get it the first time, because they all think he's dead, but the second and third times? C'mon, realize who the lurking guy with the wounds is already.
The story ends with JC going back to his father, which is a nice ending because he was kind of a broken record about his Dad for most of the story. I think he might need some kind of therapy.
March 17, 2017
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. (John 21:25 KJV)
July 31, 2022
The Gospel of John has been called the "spiritual gospel" and the "Gospel of Life." It tells the saving story of Jesus as the Son of God dwelling among humans. This Gospel focuses on Jesus' encounters with individuals and his summary of his identity and mission. I really enjoy how each of the Gospels sees things a little differently and helps make us aware of all the nuances of Jesus' perfect character and as the man who could save us from eternal death.
August 21, 2022
I read the reader’s edition of John today (no breaks, no verse numbers, just narrative), and it was truly amazing!
I cannot recommend enough reading through the testimony of Jesus in this way, because I see his earnest passion for the people to believe and love him deeply. Also so many connections that I didn’t make before by studying this gospel in short sections!
I’m super encouraged and thankful!!!!!
I cannot recommend enough reading through the testimony of Jesus in this way, because I see his earnest passion for the people to believe and love him deeply. Also so many connections that I didn’t make before by studying this gospel in short sections!
I’m super encouraged and thankful!!!!!
April 16, 2017
by Andrea Renee Cox
Ah, this book always moves me to tears. It's God's love story with me (and you too!), and it makes my heart weep and sing, for He is so loving and generous and faithful. Definitely worth reading multiple times over the years.
Ah, this book always moves me to tears. It's God's love story with me (and you too!), and it makes my heart weep and sing, for He is so loving and generous and faithful. Definitely worth reading multiple times over the years.
Read
December 4, 2024Marginally easier to read than Luke, at least.
Class reads but at least my goal is closer 🤩
Class reads but at least my goal is closer 🤩
March 28, 2018
I love the book of John! It is definitely my favourite Gospel with Luke being a close second.
John delivers the Gospel of Jesus Christ in a intimate and relational way. I love that you find a few nuggets in this gospel that you do not find in the other three.
This time around two key things stood out to me. John's passion that we must follow the commandments especially to "Love one another" and the sacrifice of Christ (Chapters 18-21). John has written this in an intimate way that it truly impacted my heart.
This is not a story it's a reality and this is a message I felt the book of John delivered to me.
Recommend for those who want to experience the Gospel intimately :).
John delivers the Gospel of Jesus Christ in a intimate and relational way. I love that you find a few nuggets in this gospel that you do not find in the other three.
This time around two key things stood out to me. John's passion that we must follow the commandments especially to "Love one another" and the sacrifice of Christ (Chapters 18-21). John has written this in an intimate way that it truly impacted my heart.
This is not a story it's a reality and this is a message I felt the book of John delivered to me.
Recommend for those who want to experience the Gospel intimately :).
October 29, 2018
I once heard from a homeschooling mother that she used the Gospel of John to help teach her children how to read. It was an excellent idea. John's Gospel is very readable and this reader's edition from Crossway is a great tool. It is small so easy to handle, it has 12-point font and without chapter and verse numbers it makes the flow of reading easy for a young reader. I highly recommend it.
November 21, 2025
Among Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, John seems like the book that best shows much Jesus loves us. There are some really great passages, speeches from Jesus about his relationships with God, the Holy Spirit, and our relationship with the trinity. He doesn't rely on parables as in the other books, which I like. I really enjoyed re-reading this.
November 21, 2020
I think I got a lot more out of John than I have before. I've been through the book three or four times this year, and it is still so full of richness that I haven't even skimmed the surface!
March 24, 2023
Pretty dry, just a lot of Jesus going you must believe in God, and God is within me and you are in me and generally a lot of things that could be interpreted as innuendos. The only interesting thing I found about this is that there's several mentions of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" but it's never explicitly stated who they are, so that's cool. I read this for research for a play, so, bare that in mind.
May 4, 2020
Five Stars for Life Eternal.
February 2, 2025
I think the fact it was so short was more impactful amd I like the writing actually. Was interesting that it was an eye witness account it had some good quotes too
August 14, 2019
Though one can't really give a preference over any of the gospels, since they are all amazing, and all integrally compliment each other, I think I enjoyed John (followed closely by Luke) the most for his different, more reflective account of Jesus Christ, His life, His ministry, His death and His resurrection. Written by one of the actual disciples, one who stood there and watch the suffering and the glorious resurrection of Our Lord, this beautiful gospel truly is an intimate experience, where our kind and merciful saviour gently reprimands and educates us about God the Father, the Holy Spirit, the Son of Man, and the salvation of our souls which are all so precious to Him.
Read
February 25, 2025Logging the books of the Bible separately for two reasons: (1) Rescue my abysmal reading challenge stats, and (2) I have too much to say about each book, if I were to write a review all at the end, the review would be almost as big as The Bible itself
THE LITERAL & THE METAPHORIC
The part of this Gospel which really stood out to me was the dynamic between the 'literal' and 'metaphoric' in Jesus' teaching. The section that sums this up the best for me is when Jesus equates himself to seemingly literal food/drink:
From my perspective, the response of the disciples that Jesus is calling out doesn't so much relate to a lack of belief as a lack of understanding of what he is saying.
I don't think it's controversial to say that a lot of Jesus' teaching throughout John does not take the form of explicit rules/dictates that His followers should live by. Whilst there's the belief-in-Him part (about which he seems to be pretty explicit) many of His teachings more generally are delivered in the form of figurative language. Jesus' himself admits it:
Whilst I personally think this makes for a more engaging text from a literary perspective, part of me wonders why he didn't speak more plainly from the outset. From a/my practical perspective, the use of so much figurative language throughout his teaching results in the line between what should be taken literally and what should be taken metaphorically becoming quite blurry.
In the same breath that he talks about "eat[ing] flesh" and "drink[ing] blood" he brings in the notion that people who do this will have "eternal life". Which part is definitively the metaphor here? I suspect many will say the eternal life part should be taken literally as it has become a key fixture of the Christian belief system. But can eternal life be taken to mean some sort of profound sense of spiritual sense of fulfilment? How can we be confident that it literally means lasting forever in the "Father's house" with "many rooms"? Is it even a literal house? Who knows...
THE COMPLEXITY OF PREDESTINATION
The other tidbit that I found interesting in both John and Exodus was the idea that God "hardens" people's hearts in order to achieve some form of symbolic or narrative end. To me, it kind of seems feels like rigging a game in order to get the outcome that you want. In my view, taking the spirit/fairness out of a game essentially ruins the game. (Ironic that I'm now talking in figurative terms after criticising the hell out of talking in figurative terms).
But in the same sense as the rigged game analogy, taking the genuine human response out of the event invalidates the point that is trying to be made from the narrative (as the outcome is artificial).
In this Gospel, John references Isiah:
This ties into a few interesting discussions that I've been having recently, mainly centring around the question:
How could people plainly see the laws of nature being broken in front of them and not believe?
The response to this seems to be that God orchestrates much of the rejection/disbelief himself in order to fulfil prophecy (as in the case with Isiah above) or to achieve some other end. Again, I appreciate the attention to detail from a literary perspective, but I don't necessarily think it reflects how people realistically respond when the laws of nature are broken right in front of them.
Would people today believe either?
I suppose if something like this were to happen these days - with the amount of video trickery/fact-twisting tomfoolery that happens online - the standard response from people hearing of these mystical events 2nd hand (who possess any level of critical sense) would need quite convincing assurance (i.e. from a credible source) in order to believe any of this stuff were true. These days we have the technology + a decent scientific understanding of things in order to scrutinise strange happenings in the natural world more systematically. And the scientific method/community is set up such that if we screw up our measurement the first time, someone's bound to get it right eventually. I get that miracles probably aren't repeatable in nature so Jesus might take some convincing in order to repeat the same thing a couple of times for a couple of nerdy guys in labcoats.
To me, I would go so far as saying that the standard response (i.e. needing convincing assurance) shouldn't change if the events happened today or 2,000 years ago. Who's to say Matthew, Mark, Luke and John weren't the Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Alex Jones and Joe Rogan of their time?
I would prefer to have a more optimisitc view of things, but seem to be stuck in the same old rut at the moment. Anyway, more to come...
THE LITERAL & THE METAPHORIC
The part of this Gospel which really stood out to me was the dynamic between the 'literal' and 'metaphoric' in Jesus' teaching. The section that sums this up the best for me is when Jesus equates himself to seemingly literal food/drink:
'Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them' [...] On hearing it, many of his disciples said 'This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?' [...] 'The words I have spoken to you - they are full of the Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe'
From my perspective, the response of the disciples that Jesus is calling out doesn't so much relate to a lack of belief as a lack of understanding of what he is saying.
I don't think it's controversial to say that a lot of Jesus' teaching throughout John does not take the form of explicit rules/dictates that His followers should live by. Whilst there's the belief-in-Him part (about which he seems to be pretty explicit) many of His teachings more generally are delivered in the form of figurative language. Jesus' himself admits it:
'Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father'
Whilst I personally think this makes for a more engaging text from a literary perspective, part of me wonders why he didn't speak more plainly from the outset. From a/my practical perspective, the use of so much figurative language throughout his teaching results in the line between what should be taken literally and what should be taken metaphorically becoming quite blurry.
In the same breath that he talks about "eat[ing] flesh" and "drink[ing] blood" he brings in the notion that people who do this will have "eternal life". Which part is definitively the metaphor here? I suspect many will say the eternal life part should be taken literally as it has become a key fixture of the Christian belief system. But can eternal life be taken to mean some sort of profound sense of spiritual sense of fulfilment? How can we be confident that it literally means lasting forever in the "Father's house" with "many rooms"? Is it even a literal house? Who knows...
THE COMPLEXITY OF PREDESTINATION
The other tidbit that I found interesting in both John and Exodus was the idea that God "hardens" people's hearts in order to achieve some form of symbolic or narrative end. To me, it kind of seems feels like rigging a game in order to get the outcome that you want. In my view, taking the spirit/fairness out of a game essentially ruins the game. (Ironic that I'm now talking in figurative terms after criticising the hell out of talking in figurative terms).
But in the same sense as the rigged game analogy, taking the genuine human response out of the event invalidates the point that is trying to be made from the narrative (as the outcome is artificial).
In this Gospel, John references Isiah:
Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they would still not believe in him. [...] For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isiah says elsewhere: 'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so that they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn - and I would heal them'
This ties into a few interesting discussions that I've been having recently, mainly centring around the question:
How could people plainly see the laws of nature being broken in front of them and not believe?
The response to this seems to be that God orchestrates much of the rejection/disbelief himself in order to fulfil prophecy (as in the case with Isiah above) or to achieve some other end. Again, I appreciate the attention to detail from a literary perspective, but I don't necessarily think it reflects how people realistically respond when the laws of nature are broken right in front of them.
Would people today believe either?
I suppose if something like this were to happen these days - with the amount of video trickery/fact-twisting tomfoolery that happens online - the standard response from people hearing of these mystical events 2nd hand (who possess any level of critical sense) would need quite convincing assurance (i.e. from a credible source) in order to believe any of this stuff were true. These days we have the technology + a decent scientific understanding of things in order to scrutinise strange happenings in the natural world more systematically. And the scientific method/community is set up such that if we screw up our measurement the first time, someone's bound to get it right eventually. I get that miracles probably aren't repeatable in nature so Jesus might take some convincing in order to repeat the same thing a couple of times for a couple of nerdy guys in labcoats.
To me, I would go so far as saying that the standard response (i.e. needing convincing assurance) shouldn't change if the events happened today or 2,000 years ago. Who's to say Matthew, Mark, Luke and John weren't the Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Alex Jones and Joe Rogan of their time?
I would prefer to have a more optimisitc view of things, but seem to be stuck in the same old rut at the moment. Anyway, more to come...
July 23, 2019
My Favorite Gospel: JOHN
The Gospel of John is my favorite Gospel as well as Book of the Bible! The Devotional Notes were very helpful! I enjoyed reading and committing to memory many of the verses! JaneElizabeth
The Gospel of John is my favorite Gospel as well as Book of the Bible! The Devotional Notes were very helpful! I enjoyed reading and committing to memory many of the verses! JaneElizabeth
August 30, 2016
"This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true." John 21:24
May 5, 2017
AMAZING(again)! :D
Read
November 22, 2016I didn't read this in large print... but that's all I could find. ;) One of my favorite Gospels, second only to Luke!
September 19, 2018
John is my favorite book of the Bible. Chapter 17 alone is enough to occupy me for years.
February 6, 2019
I read the gospels in chronological order, tying the four accounts together.
I read the NIV.
I read the NIV.
September 12, 2024
The Gospel of John is an account of the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, as told in the point of view of one of His twelve followers. Though its authorship is debated, we can safely assume it was written by someone close to John the Apostle in or around 80-90 AD. As a work of historical non-fiction, the book takes place between 0-33 AD. In the opening lines, John describes the purpose of the Logos, or “word”, which in this instance refers to the Divinity of Jesus Christ and His origin as “begotten, not made”. Throughout the book, we meet several characters, but the book focuses on Jesus and his twelve disciples, including the author of the book, John. As the Gospel plays out, we follow the life of Jesus, from His birth in a mager, the gathering of His followers, His miracles, all the way to His death by crucifixion and subsequent resurrection and the establishment of the Christian faith. The central themes of the Gospel of John revolve around Jesus’ divinity and the acknowledgement of his communion with God, being the second hypostasis in the Holy Trinity.
In my opinion, this book is the Magnum Opus of the four Gospels, in part due to the extra forty-ish years between this book and the synoptics. Jesus’ divinity is far more obvious in the context of John’s writing, with powerful declarations like “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58) and John’s declaration of Jesus’ divinity at the start of the book with, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Due to the distance in authorship between this Gospel and the synoptics, the validity of the text has come under heavy scrutiny from Biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman. Other groups are quick to label the book as “biblical fanfiction”, but regardless of your opinion on the text’s validity, the narrative told within its pages is one of the most profound works of literature in history. With the deep references to Old Testament passages and the overarching theme of selfless sacrifice for the betterment of mankind, the Gospel of John manages to tell a personal, yet communal story with its words. Despite religious or social differences, I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the Christian faith, or anyone trying to find a good read.
In my opinion, this book is the Magnum Opus of the four Gospels, in part due to the extra forty-ish years between this book and the synoptics. Jesus’ divinity is far more obvious in the context of John’s writing, with powerful declarations like “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58) and John’s declaration of Jesus’ divinity at the start of the book with, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Due to the distance in authorship between this Gospel and the synoptics, the validity of the text has come under heavy scrutiny from Biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman. Other groups are quick to label the book as “biblical fanfiction”, but regardless of your opinion on the text’s validity, the narrative told within its pages is one of the most profound works of literature in history. With the deep references to Old Testament passages and the overarching theme of selfless sacrifice for the betterment of mankind, the Gospel of John manages to tell a personal, yet communal story with its words. Despite religious or social differences, I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the Christian faith, or anyone trying to find a good read.
May 4, 2024
First time reading from the Bible and surprised at how much I enjoyed it. John’s Gospel is like a regular narrative which moves linearly through the life and ministry of Jesus. It is an amazing and interesting journey with fascinating tales of miracles, faith, and discipleship. I also appreciated the historical references which took me down many fun rabbit holes.
To see Christianity at its core from the way it was born in the words of Jesus himself was very refreshing and insightful. I would highly recommend it to someone who may be dissolutioned with the Church or curious about the true meaning of what Christ stood for. It also makes a great companion read while watching the TV series “The Chosen” !
To see Christianity at its core from the way it was born in the words of Jesus himself was very refreshing and insightful. I would highly recommend it to someone who may be dissolutioned with the Church or curious about the true meaning of what Christ stood for. It also makes a great companion read while watching the TV series “The Chosen” !
November 9, 2025
The Gospel of St. John offers the reader a different perspective of Christ. Not that it is inconsistent with the other three Gospels, but rather, the Gospel of St. John offers the reader to KNOW who Jesus is, through his own words, through his own behavior.
The latter half of chapter 6 till the beginning of chapter 8 are the most powerful parts of the Gospel for me. In these sections, I felt like I got to meet Jesus and I do not believe anyone can read this Gospel and not be changed after reading it carefully.
The latter half of chapter 6 till the beginning of chapter 8 are the most powerful parts of the Gospel for me. In these sections, I felt like I got to meet Jesus and I do not believe anyone can read this Gospel and not be changed after reading it carefully.
November 27, 2021
I love the gospel of John, but I love even more reading it with now verses just like it was written--as a letter. For me, it become more personal and connects more. This is my 10th time reading it and it still stirs in me a love for Jesus.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 177 reviews