RLGN 301: Research and Writing for Religious Disciplines
February 26th, 2024
The historical Jesus in John’s Gospel is represented as dual-natured; the divine Logos of
eternality and Jesus of Nazareth born of human frailty. While the narrative of the Gospel of John
leans heavily on Christology, such as Jesus’ “I Am” proclamations, woven into his Gospel are
foundational, historical records of archaeology and topography that proves his Gospel is not
ahistorical. John’s records of the words of Jesus in the “I Am” statements prove to be grounds
for Christological debates on who exactly the “I” in these statements are referring to; the Logos
of eternality or Jesus of Nazareth born in Bethlehem. The “I Am” statements recorded in the
fourth
Gospel ties Jesus in the New Testament to Yahweh, God of the Israelites, in the Old Testament.
For decades, studies on Jesus from the Gospel of John have been linear; however, a bi-optic
perspective and consideration of the ministry and teachings of Jesus have launched significant
advances in Jesus studies. John’s narrative presentation of Jesus’ self-proclamation of being the
‘I Am” distinctively underscores the deity and eternality of Jesus; in addition, the fulfillment of
Old Testament prophecy, the vivid detail outlined by John on archaeological and topographical
sites, and the composition of John’s Gospel presents a reliable and credible account of the
historicity of Jesus’ life.
Jesus’ claim of being the Way, the Truth, and the Life in John 14:6 point directly to His
deity and has direct correlation to the Old Testament. This statement of fact by Jesus is a
cumulative proclamation of all seven “I Am” statements in John’s Gospel: Bread of Life, Light of
the World, the Door/Gate, the Good Shepherd, the Resurrection, and the True Vine. There is no
shortage of self-references made by Jesus claiming to be the “I am.”
Before identifying the “I” in all these statements, the significance of “I Am (egô eimi)”
needs to be examined. The use of “egô eimi” by Jesus shows its significance with both the
Jewish scriptures and the Septuagint. It has been identified that, “It is now generally recognized
that egô eimi serves as a form of divine self-identification in a number of places within the
Septuagint, especially in those sections of Isaiah associated with the Babylonian diaspora.”1 Such
examples include Isaiah 43:10, “…so that you may know and believe Me, and understand that I
am He,” Isaiah 51:12a, “I, even I, am He who comforts you,” and Isaiah 52:6, “…therefore they
shall know in that day that I am He who speaks: ‘behold, it is I.’” Even more indicative is, “the
occasion when Yahweh offers this definitive self-designation to Moses as divine authorization
for his rescue mission: ‘I am who I am [egô eimi ho ôn]’(Exodus 3:14).”2 It is not by happenstance
1 Ian Wallis. “Difficult Text: John 14:6-Is Jesus the Only Way?” Sage Journals 124, no. 5, 2021, 360.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0040571X211043174?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.3
2 Ibid.
Jesus uses the same phrase in the New Testament claiming to be the “I Am” as Yahweh does in
the Old Testament Septuagint. There is deliberate reasoning to the words Jesus spoke and John
captured in his Gospel.
Additionally, Jesus’ baptism, recorded by John, has profound correlation to Yahweh and
the Old Testament scripture in Exodus. Though Jesus’ baptism is not explicitly defined in John’s
Gospel, the accounts of it, “clearly identifies Jesus’ baptism as the definitive moment in his
spiritual transformation with the emergence of a filial consciousness, a sense of sonship, in line
with the Synoptics.”3 It is also highly recognized among scholars and theologians that Jesus’
baptism marked the beginning of Jesus’ ministry on earth and a transformation in spirit as
mentioned by Wallis. Evidence supporting such a claim is, “found in Yahweh’s indwelling of the
Tabernacle or tent of witness as narrated in the second half of the book of Exodus.”4 First,
understand notice the resemblance from John 1:14, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt
among us…” (New King James Version). Second, notice how Yahweh’s presence does not indwell
the Tabernacle until after construction and the Tabernacle was consecrated. In Exodus 25:8 God
calls Moses to begin building the temple and told Moses, “And let them make me a sanctuary;
that I may dwell among them” (NKJV). However, it is not until Exodus 40:9, when the temple is
anointed with oil and consecrated, that God came to dwell in the temple amongst them. Just as
the temple was consecrated then God dwelt amongst them, so was Jesus baptized (consecrated)
and anointed then the Holy Spirit came down like a dove and rested upon Jesus.
John’s main purpose is stated near the end of his Gospel, rounding out his narrative
pointing out that Jesus is, in fact, the Christ, He is also the Son of God, and those who believe in
Him will have life. Jesus’ divinity is evident and pronounced throughout John’s Gospel, and
3 Ibid. 359
4 Ibid. 359
“Nowhere is this more evident than in the ‘I AM’ statements of Jesus.”5 In these statements,
Jesus is not simply proclaiming His divinity, rather, He is equating Himself with Yahweh. He is
putting Himself on a level playing field as Elohim, the creator of the universe. These
proclamations by Jesus, “give reference to the names of God given to Moses in the Old
Testament” and “would have been clear statements of divinity to the Jews of Jesus’ day.”6 This
is made evident by John 8:58-59 when Jesus clearly states, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before
Abraham was, I AM” (NKJV). Which is followed in verse fifty-nine by the crowd of Jews Jesus is
speaking to picking up stones to stone Him. Jesus’ proclamation of being God, the “I AM,” was
clear to the Jews of His day.
However, Jesus’ “I Am” statements are not merely supported on their own, “They not
only reference the names of God in the Old Testament and ascribe them to Jesus, but they are
5Fr Vasilios Avramidis. “I AM: Jesus’ Claim to be Jehovah the God of the Israelites in the Old Testament.” Saint Elias
School of Orthodox Theology, 2010, 2.
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/30618459/I_AM_and_the_Gospel_of_John-libre.pdf?
1391812731=&response-content-
disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DI_AM_Jesus_Claim_to_be_Jehovah_The_God_o.pdf&Expires=1707186957&Si
gnature=a-5R92tSnZRMw8CQR9PaVpXH0Z-giMG3mn-
zRrzWB~lV7WCGB7eNGlvrme9YsC26yrafDFzD9GnoIsGmfSckOyqek7dFBtR1krV5NoauuNAbYCU5oFQVtx85LlbFHdIB
~-vQlrzZzWy20OVvzN-y0gquviKeBhrBumAHyy2cIXTXVdDmmbT49FdrX39-
lKs7HmMengINulDAvOTBuQ4dnwJ55A4Lqukd1DS60d1r0gH2BHkXfO1GOhPlEu0wBpwkJpYtQKkwu0wRu6~MCnD~
AkHu01xc0U8lkjwnq1NYhyHXNnFQk~KJDdRmFZLOZilCXXKyweRWIUSXbdQrjpz7uA__&Key-
Pair Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA
6Ibid.
often accompanied by some divine revelation, or miracle, as in the case of the feeding of the
five thousand prior to Jesus declaring, ‘I AM the Bread of Life.’7 Jesus miraculously feeds five
thousand people with only two fish and five loaves of bread, giving “life” through sustenance
and food. He then declares that He is the Bread of Life, signifying that it is through Himself that
one finds sustaining life. John’s Gospel narrates the Christology of Jesus more abundantly than
the other Synoptic Gospels. John, “chooses events from Jesus’ life that best demonstrate that
He is God, the Messiah foretold by the prophets, the New Moses that was prophesied in
Deuteronomy chapter eighteen.”8
Compared to the other three Synoptic Gospels, John begins his account of Jesus from
the very beginning. Where Mark began his Gospel when Jesus was thirty years of age, Matthew
went further to Jesus’ birth and even used genealogy tracing Jesus’ roots back to Abraham.
Then, in Luke’s Gospel, he took it a step further and took Jesus’ title as the Son of Man and used
genealogy to trace His roots back to Adam, to the creation story. However, John introduces
Jesus by, “emphasizing that Jesus existed before creation.”9 John starts his Gospel by taking the
words from Genesis 1:1, “as the basis for his opening to the Gospel: ‘In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’”10
7Fr Vasilios Avramidis. “I AM: Jesus’ Claim to be Jehovah the God of the Israelites in the Old Testament.” Saint Elias
School of Orthodox Theology, 2010, 2.
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/30618459/I_AM_and_the_Gospel_of_John-libre.pdf?
1391812731=&response-content-
disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DI_AM_Jesus_Claim_to_be_Jehovah_The_God_o.pdf&Expires=1707186957&Si
gnature=a-5R92tSnZRMw8CQR9PaVpXH0Z-giMG3mn-
zRrzWB~lV7WCGB7eNGlvrme9YsC26yrafDFzD9GnoIsGmfSckOyqek7dFBtR1krV5NoauuNAbYCU5oFQVtx85LlbFHdIB
~-vQlrzZzWy20OVvzN-y0gquviKeBhrBumAHyy2cIXTXVdDmmbT49FdrX39-
lKs7HmMengINulDAvOTBuQ4dnwJ55A4Lqukd1DS60d1r0gH2BHkXfO1GOhPlEu0wBpwkJpYtQKkwu0wRu6~MCnD~
AkHu01xc0U8lkjwnq1NYhyHXNnFQk~KJDdRmFZLOZilCXXKyweRWIUSXbdQrjpz7uA__&Key-
Pair Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA
8Ibid.
9David Pawson. Unlocking the Bible: A Unique Overview of the Whole Bible. Rest True Potential Publishing, Inc.,
2007, 552.
10David Pawson. Unlocking the Bible: A Unique Overview of the Whole Bible. Rest True Potential Publishing, Inc.,
2007, 552
Now, to understand the significance to the opening line of Johns’ Gospel, we must
understand some of the etymology behind the title John bestowed upon Jesus: the Logos
(Word). They etymology of the word “logos” definitively identifies Jesus’ deity, and the divine
Logos Johns speaks of. The historical backdrop to “logos” helps to understand the root definition
and understanding behind John’s use of it in entitling Jesus as the Logos. Between Heraclitus
and the Septuagint, it is clear why John bestowed “Logos” to Jesus Christ as the “reason why.”
According to David Pawson, about six hundred years before John’s Gospel written in Ephesus,
there lived a man by the name of Heraclitus, who was, “acknowledged as the founder of
science.”5 He believed in inquiring about the science of the natural world, asking why things
were the way they were? He even, “looked for patterns or ‘laws’ to see if he could deduce some
logic behind the operation of the natural world.”12 Heraclitus used logos to stand for, “the
purpose behind what took place.”6 When he would look to life (bios), he would look for the
logos of life; he did the same with weather (meteor). This concept is plainly seen in our world
today in different fields of study such as biology, psychology, meteorology, geology, sociology,
etc.7 With this line of thought and understanding of logos, John realized that “Jesus is the
ultimate reason ‘why’ everything happened.”8 With this, John took this idea and entitled Jesus
as the Logos, the Word. John realized Jesus is the “reason why” behind everything. The world
was made for Him. He was the Logos before anything or one existed. John understood Jesus is
why anyone is even here. It will all be summed up in Jesus; He is the “reason why.”
The word “logos” has another point in history as well, in Alexandria, Egypt. Alexandria is
where a school was located which combined both Greek and Hebrew thinking.9 It was at this
school where the translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek took place, by seventy
scholars known as the Septuagint. Of particular note, was a professor named Philo. In Philo’s
5
Ibid. 553 12
Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 David Pawson. Unlocking the Bible: A Unique Overview of the Whole Bible. Rest True Potential
Publishing, Inc., 2007, 553 17 Ibid.
efforts to interpreting this Hebrew way of thinking into Greek, he, “seized on the word Logos
and said that Logos was not to be spoken of as ‘it,’ but as ‘he.’ He was personifying the Logos,
rather in the way that in Proverbs wisdom is personified as a woman.”17 Those taking on the
arduous task of interpreting Hebrew thought and writing into Greek understood the weight
“logos” carried and that such weight could only be carried by one man, Jesus.
Though the tone of John’s Gospel is theological, it does not mean his Gospel is
ahistorical. John’s references on archaeology and topography must not be ignored when looking
to his Gospel for the historicity of Jesus. Breakthroughs by Albright on the Gospel of John have
strengthened the historical authenticity of the Johannine tradition. William Foxwell Albright’s
“archaeological contribution has forced biblical scholars to consider, again, significant aspects of
Johannine historicity.”10 The fact that John uses early Palestinian and Judean references derived
from Christians in the Greco-Roman world, most likely being conveyed by oral tradition, means,
“that instead of a second-century creation completely detached from the time and places of the
events it describes, the Gospel of John does contain, good, ancient reminiscences, which
necessarily favors the authenticity of its content.”11 This cannot be undermined when taking into
consideration the reliability of John’s sources when he references archaeological and
topographical sites in his Gospel.
According to Paul Anderson, James Charlesworth’s 1988 monograph, “outlines the top seven
archaeological breakthroughs in the last half of the twentieth century.”12 In descending order:
the seventh most important discovery is that of Jewish synagogues in Palestine, and
10 Wilson Paroschi. “Archaeology and the Interpretation of John’s Gospel.” Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, 2009, 77.
11 Wilson Paroschi. “Archaeology and the Interpretation of John’s Gospel.” Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, 2009, 77.
12 Paul Anderson. “Aspects of Historicity in the Fourth Gospel: John, Jesus, and History, 2006, 591.
https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1095&context=ccs
Charlesworth identifies fifty-four of their locations. Sixth are the walls and gates of Jerusalem,
which locates the original site of Jesus’ crucifixion outside of Jerusalem, stated in John 19:20.
Fifth is the Temple Mount in Jesus’ day, where it has been discovered of “double and triple
Hulda gates” near a large stairway and passages connecting the temple to stables, which makes
John 2:15 a reality and not a conspiracy or concoction. The fourth is discovering two pools
outside the Sheep Gate, which were by five porticos. This solidifies the fact that when
archaeologists started excavating, it was thought that John fabricated such a scene theologizing
a reference to the books of Moses. However, because of the discovery, John’s description is
completely accurate from an archaeological standpoint. Third is the discovery of certain material
found at Pilate’s Praetorium, which match very closely with John’s description in John 18-19.
These were found during the excavation of Herod the Great’s palace, which is also mentioned in
Josephus’ work s “the Upper City.” Second are discoveries of bones of Jehohanan, who was
crucified. More specifically, his ankle bone spiked. This helps to understand Pilate’s surprise in
Mark 15:44 that Jesus was already dead and explains why victims of crucifixion would have their
legs broken to quicken their death on the cross, which is described in John 19. This accounts for
John’s presentation of Jesus’ side being pierced with a spear, proving that he was already dead
and there was no need for his legs to be broken, which fulfills Psalms 34:20 and Zechariah
12:10. Lastly, of most importance, according to Charlesworth, is the evidence of the site of
Jesus’ crucifixion. Anderson explains,
While Gordan’s Calvary indeed loos like “the Place of the Skull (Golgotha) and is outside
the gate of the city (Heb 13:12), Charlesworth argues that the discovery that Herod’s
third wall was constructed after the death of Jesus plausibly confirms the traditional site
of the crucifixion, found within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The exposed rock on
that site rose 13 meters above the rest, and if this were the rock on which Jesus was
crucified, the Petrine reference to the stone rejected by the builders would have a
double meaning. The idea that the area was a quarry is echoed by John 19:41, as it
mentions a new tomb in which no one had been buried. If Jesus were to have been
buried near that site of the crucifixion as John’s narrative suggests, both the traditional
site and the garden Tomb site would corroborate those connections.13
By the discoveries made by Charlesworth, and brought forth by Anderson, it is clear in all
seven of these breakthroughs that John was among the earliest witnesses of followers of Jesus.
John does not shy away from a Christological narrative in his Gospel. He is clear about
who Jesus was, and is, both as a historical human and His divine nature as part of the God-head.
John’s references to Jesus’ “I Am” statements clearly identify Jesus’ deity in proclaiming to be
God and solidifies who the “I” in the “I Am” statements is, Jesus, God the Son. By understanding
the history of the word “logos,” John rightly bestows upon Jesus the title as the Logos as being
the “reason why” for everything in existence, past, present, and future. John surpasses the
other Synoptic Gospels by recognizing Jesus’ deity and begins his Gospel from before the
creation story as the Word with God. John’s Gospel narrative not only details Jesus’ deity, and
proves it without doubt, it also serves as a historical narrative with archaeological and
topographical details that have been proven accurate with modern-day excavations and
findings. The Gospel of John is enriched with both theology and history, proving Christ as both
fully God and fully man.
Bibliography
Anderson, Paul N. “Aspects of Historicity in the Fourth Gospel:” John, Jesus, and History, Volume 2
(2006): 379–386.
Avramidis, Fr Vasilios. “I AM: Jesus’ Claim to be Jehovah the God of the Israelites in the Old Testament.”
Sait Elias School of Orthodox Theology (October 23, 2010).
Paroschi, Wilson. “Archaeology and the Interpretation of John’s Gospel.” Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society 20/1-2 (2009): 67-88.
Pawson, David, and Andy Peck. Unlocking the Bible. Travelers Rest, SC: True Potential Publishing, 2007.
13 Paul Anderson. “Aspects of Historicity in the Fourth Gospel: John, Jesus, and History, 2006, 594.
https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1095&context=ccs
Wallis, Ian. “Difficult Text: John 14.6 – Is Jesus the Only Way?” Sage Journals 124, no. 5 (September
2021): 358–364.
