Читать книгу Jesus’ Teachings about the Father. Reconstruction of early Christian teaching based on a comparative analysis of the oldest gospels - - Страница 14
“Reconstruction of early Christian teaching based on a comparative analysis of the oldest gospels”
Gospel of John, Analysis
John, Chapter 7
ОглавлениеIn the seventh chapter we are talking about the same thing: how Jesus again went to fetch the Christmas tree… oh, sorry, that is, to Jerusalem for the feast, and not explicitly, but “as if secretly,” that is, apparently, alone. Interestingly, it begins with the phrase:
“7:1And after these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Judaea, because the Jews sought to kill him.” – and this is the holy truth, and everything else in this chapter is sheer blatant lie, except, perhaps, one single phrase in the verse 28, and even that one is disguised as Judaism with a preliminary insert.
In this chapter in verses 2—14 His brothers mock him, provoking him to go to the feast, he refused “because the hour has not come”; but he went in secret, entered the temple and taught:
“7:15The Jews therefore marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? 7:16Jesus therefore answered them and said, My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me. 7:17If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from myself. 7:18He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh the glory of him that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. 7:19Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you doeth the law? Why seek ye to kill me?” – that is, it turns out that the Teaching of Jesus is the knowledge of the Scriptures “without learning”, and this is the teaching of the Father, and therefore – as was required to prove to the Judaizers – the Father is Jehovah. At the same time, to be sure, they dragged Moses into this as well.
“7:20The multitude answered, Thou hast a demon: who seeketh to kill thee? 7:21Jesus answered and said unto them, I did one work, and ye all marvel because thereof. 7:22Moses hath given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers); and on the sabbath ye circumcise a man. 7:23If a man receiveth circumcision on the sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be broken; are ye wroth with me, because I made a man every whit whole on the sabbath? " – this is a reference to Ch. 5, inserted rather crudely, since it turns out that Jesus just performed a miracle in the pool, and it is fresh in the memory of those to whom he speaks – as if they have not left Jesus anywhere since then, similarly to how they advise on TV during advertising “do not go anywhere”. Jesus, being a Galilean, tells the Jews about circumcision on the Sabbath! Author, hello!
“7:24Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment. 7:25Some therefore of them of Jerusalem said, Is not this he whom they seek to kill? 7:26And lo, he speaketh openly, and they say nothing unto him. Can it be that the rulers indeed know that this is the Christ?” – again the Jewish Mashiach, and who else? Judaic righteousness was measured by the observance of the Law of Mitzvos, and nothing else!
“7:27Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when the Christ cometh, no one knoweth whence he is.”– that’s interesting, they themselves don’t know Him and don’t recognize, but where He comes from – they know in the crowd IN JERUSALEM
“7:28Jesus therefore cried in the temple, teaching and saying, Ye both know me, and know whence I am;” teaching and speaking about what? No, it is yet another insert. This is a parallel dispute between the authors of the Gospel and the “hard-eyed” Jews, who did not believe that Jesus was the very expected Jewish Messiah. And then: “and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. 7:29I know him; because I am from him, and he sent me. "– you do not know the True God, but I know, and He sent me – this is the sermon about another God, and where is anything about the law. Moses and Jehovah? Here is the time for the Jews to seize Jesus and execute him on the spot: what he said by their standards is a blasphemy.
Further, from 30 to 37 there is nothing interesting, so banal squarrel between Jesus and the Jews.
“7:38He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, from within him shall flow rivers of living water.” – you can check for yourself, there is no such statement in the OT at all. There are seven quotes [48], designated as parallel places, three of them somehow vaguely resemble the meaning, but there is no exact quote! And then the author of this opus remembers to explain what “Jesus” meant:
“7:39But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified. " – that is, the Spirit was not yet and could not have been before His death and Resurrection, about which the author already knows for some reason as well as about the descent of the Spirit on Pentecost. This is a very late insert, because the mention of the Pentecostal event dates back to the end of the 2nd and beginning of the 3rd century. And Jesus ALREADY invites everyone to go to His place and drink, although there is nothing to offer. And, again, what does it have to do with the believers in Him when he tells all this supposedly in the temple to the Jews, who do not know at all who he is in front of them.
Further, from 40 to 52, a fictional scene of squabbles between the people, the Pharisees, their servants and Nicodemus, who secretly sympathized with Jesus, is played out:
“40 Many of the people, hearing these words, said: He is exactly a prophet. 41 Others said: This is Christ. And others said, ‘Will Christ come from Galilee?’ 42 Didn’t the Scripture say that Christ would come from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, from the place where David was? 43 So there was a quarrel about him among the people.44 Some of them wanted to seize him; But no one laid hands on Him. 45 So the servants returned to the chief priests and the Pharisees, and they said to them, Why did you not bring Him? 46 The servants answered: Never a man spoke like this Man. 47 The Pharisees said to them: Are you also deceived? 48 Did any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees believe in Him? 49 But this people is ignorant of the law, it is cursed.50Nikodemus, who came to him at night, being one of them, saith to them: 51 Will our law judge a man, if they do not first listen to him and will they know what he is doing? 52 Then they said to him, Are you also from Galilee? look and you will see that a prophet does not come from Galilee.”
What is this passage about? The fact that the origin of Jesus was well known both to the people and, in particular, to the Pharisaic authorities, which, of course, by that time had already conducted their own investigation into the origin of a man who was glorified among the people as the great prophet and miracle worker. Many considered Him the expected Jewish Messiah, which all Israel was waiting for, and, of course, the church authorities could not ignore this, since they were also expecting the Messiah. For each such incident, a test was required to ensure consistency with the ancient prophecies of the Law, as stated in verses 41—43. After conducting a thorough investigation into the origin of Jesus from the family of the carpenter Joseph, the Pharisees became convinced that Jesus could not have been the expected Mashiach, and therefore did not believe in Him. That is, it was precisely established that He was not a descendant of David, and was not born in Judaic Bethlehem – otherwise they would have learned about it from the investigation carried out from His relatives and from living witnesses, as well as from the genealogical records, which were intact at that time. They would have learned about the descent from David, and about the birth in Bethlehem, and about the fulfillment of all the prophecies that are due to the birth of the Messiah – and they would have believed. But they did not know, and therefore did not believe in Him during His life.
An obvious, albeit shocking, conclusion follows from this.
That is, it turns out that, firstly, Jesus was never a Jewish Messiah, just as the Jews claim to this day. And secondly, the whole story about the Magi, the star, the deception of Herod by the Magi, the beating of infants, the census, the birth in a manger in Bethlehem and, possibly, the flight to Egypt and the return from it to Nazareth is probably a later invention of the authors of the synoptic gospels who bent over backwards to prove to the Jews that Jesus was the Mashiach they expected, and they simply made a mistake, not understanding and not accepting Him as such.
53 “and then they went home.”
So what, after all, did Jesus teach the Jews, why did he trudge on foot so far from Galilee? The Evagelist only promises and says: now, right now – but no teaching, except for the only statement for the whole chapter of the fact that He was sent by another God, the Father, with whom He is One (already fed up with the constant obsessive repetition of the same, completely understandable from the first time); we never hear anything else from Jesus in this chapter. In a word – another empty shell based on a single phrase, which they tried to give a sense of succession from Judaism, and for this they invented a whole chapter of yet another visit of Jerusalem by Jesus which actually never happened, just like the previous visits, and the arguments with the Jews that disguised the meaning of Jesus’ preaching about another, non-Jewish God. Nothing new.