Filtered love.

[Elijah John]

John 15.9

As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.

For debate, why does the Synoptic Jesus preach direct love from the Father vs. Jesus as portrayed in John preaches a "filtered love". Love from the Father, through the Son to everyone else.

He goes on to say in verse 10

If ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

The "our Father" of the Synoptics becomes "my" Father in John. Why?

Why does John's Jesus filter the Father's love though himself, in contrast to the Synoptic Jesus who preaches a more direct relationship to the Father for his disciples?

[shnarkle]

[jgh7]

[Elijah John]

So the entire focus of God's love is in "Christ"? And those before Christ, and those beyond the reach of Christ-preaching are outside of the "long arm of the" love of God?

That would include King David, and other OT heroes of faith? None of them "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior". The only Savior they knew was the LORD YHVH, besides whom there is no Savior.

I, even I am YHVH, and beside me there is no savior.

Isaiah 43.11

Interesting to note that King David in the Psalms says of YHVH, "His steadfast love endures forever"...with no mention of Jesus, Christ or the Messiah, or the Messiah's impending death on the cross as an expression of the John 3.16 love of God.

Seems King David for one experienced the love of God without "accepting Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior".

Do you really believe the love of God is confined by NT dogma? And the movement of the Holy Spirit bound by your religion?

[jgh7]

So the entire focus of God's love is in "Christ"? And those before Christ, and those beyond the reach of Christ-preaching are outside of the "long arm of the" love of God?

That would include King David, and other OT heroes of faith? None of them "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior". The only Savior they knew was the LORD YHVH, besides whom there is no Savior.

Interesting to note that King David in the Psalms says of YHVH, "His love endures forever"...with no mention of Jesus, Christ or the Messiah, or the Messiah's impending death on the cross as an expression of the John 3.16 love of God.

Seems King David for one experienced the love of God without "accepting Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior".

Do you really believe the love of God is confined by NT dogma? And the movement of the Holy Spirit bound by your religion?

In Matthew 22:44 Jesus quotes Psalm 110:1 from King David to show that David knew of Jesus.

I do believe the love of God is that which is expressed in NT teachings. Whether people are aware of God or not, I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the NT are the Beings working behind the scenes. I do believe the movement of the Holy Spirit is solely that which is described in the NT (and the OT as well, it operated there too). I don't believe the Holy Spirit comes from any other religions.

[Elijah John]

So the entire focus of God's love is in "Christ"? And those before Christ, and those beyond the reach of Christ-preaching are outside of the "long arm of the" love of God?

That would include King David, and other OT heroes of faith? None of them "accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior". The only Savior they knew was the LORD YHVH, besides whom there is no Savior.

Interesting to note that King David in the Psalms says of YHVH, "His love endures forever"...with no mention of Jesus, Christ or the Messiah, or the Messiah's impending death on the cross as an expression of the John 3.16 love of God.

Seems King David for one experienced the love of God without "accepting Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior".

Do you really believe the love of God is confined by NT dogma? And the movement of the Holy Spirit bound by your religion?

In Matthew 22:44 Jesus quotes Psalm 110:1 from King David to show that David knew of Jesus.

I do believe the love of God is that which is expressed in NT teachings. Whether people are aware of God or not, I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the NT are the Beings working behind the scenes

Father YHVH and the Father's spirit anyway. Behind the scenes in the OT and in other ethical religons as well. Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, Ba'hai, Zoroastrianism etc. All variants of Ethical Monothesim.

I do believe the movement of the Holy Spirit is solely that which is described in the NT (and the OT as well, it operated there too). I don't believe the Holy Spirit comes from any other religions.

Comes from God, not any given religion. And who is anyone to say where the Holy Spirit goes? "The wind blows where it will, you can hear it, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going".

Also, your view here is at odds with Pope John Paul II who taught that whatever is "beautiful good and true" in the other great world religions is also from the Holy Spirit. Though he held that the fullness of revelation belonged to Christianity in general, and Catholoicism in particular, he allowed for the probability that the Holy Spirit was present in the other religions as well.

And regarding Psalm 110.1. That is one interpretation. Based on the assumption that King David wrote that particular Psalm. A widespread assumptrion that NT authors wrote into Jesus own assumptions. And maybe he did. But Jesus was a man of his times. And "Jesus" has been wrong before. (Matthew 16.28).

The Psalm makes a whole lot more sense when the probability that someone beside David wrote it is considered.

Yahweh said to my Lord

.

Who is the Psalmist's (110) "Lord"? King David. Who is King David's LORD? Yahweh.

Makes a lot more sense. The author of Psalm 23 King David knew only one LORD, Yahweh. Only one Savior. Yahweh.

So it seems doubtful that David was the author of Psalm 110 too. He would never have called anyone else "Lord". He was the King, and his only LORD was YHVH.

The NT Evangelist "Matthew" took a verse out of context and made a mystical messianic reference out of it, and placed it on Jesus lips.

If this is not so, where else do the Psamists ever refer to the Messiah? Can you give us one other indisputable (that even Jews accept) reference from the Psalms that refers to the Messiah?

[jgh7]

[Replying to post 6 by Elijah John]

Well I'm not gonna go down the road of debating that things written by people of the bible were actually not written by those people and that Jesus was false in attributing the psalm to be referring to himself. I know that's your shtick, but I'm just not interested. I made the points I wanted to so have a good day.

[dio9]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

The Gospel of John seems to have been written to sway Gnostic leaning Christ believers from the idea every believer can have a direct relationship with God. John's point was to say no only Jesus had a direct relationship with God and we could only connect directly through him. The effect was to centralize the church. It was a church authority thing. John said there is no salvation outside our authority.

Its like with my dog. ( its an allegory don't get upset) when I take her for a walk I don't want her to be distracted by every person bicycle rider motorcycle or barking dog. Ya see what I'm trying to say? I want my dog to pay attention to me.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 6 by Elijah John]

Well I'm not gonna go down the road of debating that things written by people of the bible were actually not written by those people and that Jesus was false in attributing the psalm to be referring to himself. I know that's your shtick, but I'm just not interested. I made the points I wanted to so have a good day.

Fair enough. It's not just "my shtick" to hold that the Gospel Evangelists were not eyewitnesses, and put some words on Jesus lips according to their own theological interpretation. Especially John. Many if not most Historical Jesus scholars take that position as well, with good reason.

Questioning Davidic authorship of Psalm 110 may be my own notion, but it does make sense. Not sure if there are scholars out there who have also questioned the source of that particular Psalm traditionally attributed to David.

Wishing you a good and blessed day as well.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

The Gospel of John seems to have been written to sway Gnostic leaning Christ believers from the idea every believer can have a direct relationship with God. John's point was to say no only Jesus had a direct relationship with God and we could only connect directly through him. The effect was to centralize the church. It was a church authority thing. John said there is no salvation outside our authority.

Its like with my dog. ( its an allegory don't get upset) when I take her for a walk I don't want her to be distracted by every person bicycle rider motorcycle or barking dog. Ya see what I'm trying to say? I want my dog to pay attention to me.

It was not only Jesus who had a direct relationship to God. Most of the OT heroes of faith had that as well.

And it does seem that is what Jesus actually taught. Consider the Lord's prayer. Direct to Father God? Or indirect and mediated. If mediated, why no mention of "in Jesus name we pray" as the Evangelist "John" taught?

And whether of not the GoJ was written for the purpose of establishing authority or swaying people away from Gnostocism, it was not just the Gnostics who taught or practiced direct, unmediated access to God.