Local Preachers’ Group on John's Gospel
Notes of meeting held 3rd November 2009
John 3:1 – 17
After an opening prayer we began by reading these verses in turn. It became immediately apparent that we all had different translations, which made the sense of some verses hard to follow when read alongside the other translations.
We thought that many preachers would take verses 16 & 17 as their text from this passage. These two verses express the whole gospel in a nutshell; in fact they probably express the whole of Christian faith. It was thought that these two verses had some element of the parallelism that can be found in the psalms: “judged & saved”, “perish & eternal life”.
We looked first at verse 5. Being born of the spirit is faith which is experienced, not learnt like Nicodemus learnt the law. We may not be able to explain our faith to non believers, but they should be able to see the effects of it, just as we can see the effects of the wind which we cannot see. A spirit-driven person will move on when the spirit moves them. We can recognise people who are spirit-driven.
The term “born again” had much currency among Christians some years ago and it can be a pejorative term, indicating that those who have not had a major experience of faith like Paul could be second class citizens. It was pointed out that there could be a misunderstanding of the Greek word translated as “born again,” which can mean renewed: that everyone is different and will have a different faith experience. Being “born from above” meant a complete change from where you were before, a change of attitude. Is it possible to change that completely? Paul did, and in the Methodist Recorder are stories from Alpha Course converts of just such changes of heart and mind. But these changes are impossible without God, and God takes people from where they are. So not everyone will have a road to Damascus experience, because not everyone needs it. Some people are bothered that they have not had an experience like Paul, others are not. When we preach on this subject we need to be careful and sensitive to the needs of the congregation, but also careful that we do not hesitate to say something that needs saying. Is it better to be controversial rather than bland?
This passage varies between what Jesus is saying and John’s authorial voice. Do we understand this passage as being a real incident or something which John uses to make a point? Nicodemus could be a real person and, as one of the ruling council, he could have come to see Jesus at night time. But it was pointed out that this use of darkness and misunderstanding also fits in with John’s whole imagery of the light illuminating the darkness. This passage read in reference to the beginning of John’s gospel takes on a more subtle meaning than simple reality. John starts his gospel by introducing Jesus as the light of the world which overcomes the darkness. Here Jesus illuminates Nicodemus’ darkness with the truth of the spirit. These layers of meaning, real and metaphorical, can be used with different congregations to good effect, but different translations can make these layers of meaning and the double meaning of some words difficult to interpret.
Because we are so used to these words, we forget just how revolutionary they were at the time. Nicodemus, as a Pharisee, would have been steeped in the law and probably tried to follow all its precepts. Jesus is apparently very hard on him at verses 10 – 12. John is writing his gospel to make sense of Jesus for his culture and background, and this is what we do when we preach.
Verses 14 & 15 -“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the son of man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life” -links God to Jesus as saviour. This image of Moses lifting the snake in the desert may have come out of the temple worship they had just attended. John is saying that God is the same, but now seen in the flesh and person of Jesus. John was trying to make sense of why Jesus had been rejected by the Jews and we are still trying to make sense of this. It is the Christian belief that Jesus is God incarnate that separates us from other faith bodies such as Jews and Muslims. In the modern world this difference causes some friction. How can we preach reconciliation and understanding between different faith groups without losing our essential difference and compromising our faith?
Whether John or Jesus spoke these words may not be relevant. Both used stories to make people engage with what they were saying. This is what we do as preachers. Stories tell truth on different levels. This allows different congregations to enter into the story wherever they are in their faith journey. Whether the Bible is factual or metaphorical is still up for discussion, but it tells eternal truth. The lectionary passage ends at verse 17, which is a high note to end on, but if we read on we find that John has some bad news for non-believers. Should we try to include this in our message?Some thoughts on what we would preach on from this lectionary passage:
It would depend on what was happening in the world at the time of preaching. Would consult newspaper and internet news. Leave it until the moment.
If preaching on the first part of the passage, using Nicodemus as an example would alter the reading to end before verse 16 at “How can this be possible”.
SC