Recently I have been reading a well known book on the New Testament by Berkhof. Written long ago its analysis and commentary is quite good. Periodically I may publish my own commentary on Berkhof's commentary. Some readers of the Bible never consider regarding it analytically and that is fine, yet after many years of reading the Bible it is also fun to abstract its structure. Berkhof was quite good at that.
John is the gospel differing from the synoptics significantly.
The disciple was an elder when the book was written for the churches of Asia at the request of the Bishops. Berkhof
provides insights into why John’s gospel is so theologically deep and
contemplative seemingly rather than simply matter-of-fact about the works of
The Lord.
Berkhof believed that John’s temperament that made him prone
to ‘vehemence of character’ and ‘great strength’ bringing them to miss a little
on the subtlety of love. Jesus named John and his brother James Boanerges- sons
of thunder. John were corrected by the Lord on several occasions (i.e. Mk. 9: 38; Lk. 9:49;Lk 9:54 & Mt. 20: 20-24; Mk. 10: 35-41).
Berkhov believed the correction changed John sufficiently that he became more
reflective and thoughtful about the deeper meaning of the Lord’s incarnation on
Earth. While the beginning of John’s gospel is brilliant theologically even so
we can discern in the Revelation again something of the vehement character of
the disciple applied to prophecy.
Berkhof divides the gospel of John into five parts like the
synoptics. In itself that coincidence
seems remarkable and possibly a result of book packaging by design, quite a
skill set for any publisher of the era, oh well, with God’s help…
1)
The Advent and Incarnation of the Word
2)
The Incarnate Word the only Life of the
World
3)
The Incarnate Word, the Life and Light,
in Conflict with Spiritual Darkness
4)
The Incarnate Word saving the Life of the
World through his Sacrificial Death,
5)
The Incarnate Word, risen from the Dead,
the Saviour and Lord of all Believers
John’s
gospel is written with the authority of an eyewitness Berkhof notes. In chapter
one verse 14 John relates that “we beheld his glory” and in 19:35. “And he that saw it bare record, and
his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true that ye might believe”.
Berkhof’s
analysis of elements of the book of John following his treatment of the five
sections of the gospel comprise.
1)
Characteristics
A-
John’s gospel ‘emphasizes the divinity of Christ
B- Teaching of Christ are discourses and a
couple allegories yet no parables in John’s gospel
C- John features Judea and Jerusalem and
not Galilee as in
the synoptic gospels
D- More definite about time and place of
events than synoptics
E- ‘Hardly any Hebraisms’ because book was
written for Greek speaking readers
2)
Authorship
Berkhof
points out that opinion of authorities of antiquity were nearly unanimous in
crediting John with writing the fourth gospel. Berkhof notes that for John
Hebrew was a native language and he is completely at home in the cultural
concepts yet learned plain Greek very well. John’s Greek sentence construction
is not elaborate.
John
does not use his known name in the gospel either, instead referring to himself
in the third person as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” Cf. 13: 23; 18:15; 19:26;
20:2, 3, 4, 8; 21:7.”
Berkhof
considers more recent criticisms of John the Apostle as the author and/or that
the gospel was written in the second century knocking those down adroitly.
Interesting reading though, even if only to discover the basis for such
opinions.
3)
Composition
A- Readers and purpose – Likely to the
churches of Asia Minor that
were having trouble with a heresy of Cerinthus, and also to get the authorized
record of a living disciple of Christ while it was possible.
B
Time and place – Probably between 68 and 98 A.D.
C
Method- The Gospel of John is of an autopic character, that is, he
recollected from memory and did not much use written documents although he was
familiar with them, and even presupposes the reader’s familiarity with the
synoptics. John remembers the ‘elaborate discourses’ of the Lord and writes of
those in his own style, as if they differed little.
4)
Canonical Significance- Berkhof reports that antiquity accepted the book of
John as canonical from the earliest time except for Marcion and the Alogi. The
Alogi it was remarked rather humorously may have been just one fellow, one
Epiphanius of a Monarchist sect.
