Why is James missing from the Gospel of John?

[gilgal]

Since John introduced the Word he is talking about the words of Jesus.
It is strange that John refers to himself in the 3rd person:

John 13:23 KJV - Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
John 20:2 KJV - Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
John 21:7 KJV - Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt [his] fisher's coat [unto him], (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.
John 21:20 KJV - Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

John gives the eternally existent nature of Christ "I AM" forever present.

Mark on the other hand says that he sat at the right hand of God as said in Psalm 110.

[RC Christian]

Since John introduced the Word he is talking about the words of Jesus.
It is strange that John refers to himself in the 3rd person:

Hello Gilgal!

Could you elaborate on what you were expressing in the quote above? I want to make sure I understand correctly what you're saying. Thanks man.

[gilgal]

Hello Gilgal!

Could you elaborate on what you were expressing in the quote above? I want to make sure I understand correctly what you're saying. Thanks man.

Well...it's simple. Jesus' conversation is more in focus than his actions in the Gospel of John.
Mark is action.
Luke is humanity as I understand.
Luke's account is most probably from women and it involves a few women such as Elisabeth, Mary the mother of Jesus.
Matthew is political and prophetic.

Somehow John has picked up the love that Jesus had for him. Jesus didn't love by word but in deed.

But he puts himself out of focus and concentrates on Jesus. John isn't exalting himself. This is my understanding.

[RC Christian]

Well...it's simple. Jesus' conversation is more in focus than his actions in the Gospel of John.
Mark is action.
Luke is humanity as I understand.
Luke's account is most probably from women and it involves a few women such as Elisabeth, Mary the mother of Jesus.
Matthew is political and prophetic.

Somehow John has picked up the love that Jesus had for him. Jesus didn't love by word but in deed.

But he puts himself out of focus and concentrates on Jesus. John isn't exalting himself. This is my understanding.

OK. Thanks, I understand what you meant now.

[Charisma]

Hi RC,

Yeah, the Gnostic were a varied bunch, just like the other different sects of early Christianity.

Since when were gnotics anything to do with Christ - the One who can be known?

[RC Christian]

Hi RC,

Since when were gnotics anything to do with Christ - the One who can be known?

Not sure where to start, but...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

[Charisma]

Hi RC,

Not sure where to start, but...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

You don't have to answer my question. And you may think me rude to say so, but I asked you, not wikepedia.

I could have looked wikipedia up for myself, but they do such a poor job in explaining Christianity and the Bible, that I would not expect them to understand gnosticism, and even if they do, why should I believe their version of it? My strong impression is that 'religion' is not their strong point.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi RC,

You don't have to answer my question. And you may think me rude to say so, but I asked you, not wikepedia.

I could have looked wikipedia up for myself, but they do such a poor job in explaining Christianity and the Bible, that I would not expect them to understand gnosticism, and even if they do, why should I believe their version of it? My strong impression is that 'religion' is not their strong point.

Hey there Charisma,

What's your souce for knowledge about gnosticism?

Are there any particluar authors or books that you think are authoritative?

Richard

[Bob May]

Could be.

Hey, that's some good insight! Thank you! I've never noticed "when" the name was changing back and forth, just that it did a lot. Have you looked into all the passages where the name change occurs? Because if that remained the case, what a deep spiritual lesson there is to learn there...and it was meant for us to learn it the way you described. I like how you bring in the ego vs the Christ concept. Good job, and thanks for pointing that out. Please do let me know if you have or do find that Jacob/Israel to hold true consistently.

Hi RC,

Ge 32:24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
Ge 32:25 And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.
Ge 32:26 And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.
Ge 32:27 And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.
Ge 32:28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed

Ge 35:9 And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram, and blessed him.
Ge 35:10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel

Ge 45:26 And told him, saying, Joseph is yet alive, and he is governor over all the land of Egypt. And Jacob's heart fainted, for he believed them not.
Ge 45:27 And they told him all the words of Joseph, which he had said unto them: and when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, the spirit of Jacob their father revived: Ge 45:28 And Israel said, It is enough; Joseph my son is yet alive: I will go and see him before I die.

There may be more places but we see here a pattern of Jacob's name changing when he has Spiritual experiences.
He wrestles with an angel until the "breaking of day",..enlightenment.
He sees God.
He realises that his son Joseph (a type of Jesus) is yet alive.

Each time his name changes. Jacob seeks after God but is only able to operate from that level (Israel) for a certain period of time and then goes back to same old way of thinking.


Joseph is a seed buried in a pit by his (12) brothers. These brothers are faculties of our nature. Seeing, hearing, Joining, (love), judgement, etc. Then he goes into Egypt.
But Joseph grows within us in obscurity. The seed of Christ Consciousness.
Hidden within us and growing until it begins to show itself. Jesus at (12) years old came out of the obscurity of Egypt and began to show himself speaking to the doctors of the law and they were amazed at his wisdom.
We also have Spiritual experiences that we do not understand at first. We put them away in Egypt (our subconscious mind) where they are organised within our growing doctrine of "what it is all about." After a while, an incubation period, It shows itself and becomes a part of the "big picture." Understanding.

These are the two sons of Joseph born in Egypt. Manassah and Ephraim. Wisdom and understanding.
Wisdom (Mannasah) comes first. Little revelations. First born.
But Understanding (Ephraim) gets the greater blessing because it is then that we begin to see a pattern to it all.

Bob

[RC Christian]

Hi RC,

You don't have to answer my question. And you may think me rude to say so, but I asked you, not wikepedia.

I could have looked wikipedia up for myself, but they do such a poor job in explaining Christianity and the Bible, that I would not expect them to understand gnosticism, and even if they do, why should I believe their version of it? My strong impression is that 'religion' is not their strong point.

Charisma,

I could tell you my reasons, but they would just be a repeat and rehash of what Bart Ehrman says in this YouTube video, since he is the source that I use in understanding Gnosticism and early Christianity. The video is about his book "Forged" (an excellent and well referenced book). Ehrman is recognized as possibly the world's leading authority on the New Testament and writings of the first and second centuries CE. He actually states, in his lectures, that he has read every single, available text involving Christianity, over the first 5 centuries of the 'faith'. So...

To quote the info under the video (which is accurate) : "About the Author:

Bart Ehrman is the author of more than twenty books, including the New York Times bestselling Misquoting Jesus, God's Problem, and Jesus, Interrupted. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and is a leading authority on the Bible and the life of Jesus. He has been featured in Time and has appeared on NBC Dateline, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, CNN, History Channel, and other top media outlets. He lives in Durham, North Carolina."