Questions from John

The answer to question #1 is the Prophet Moses spoke of in Deut 18:15.

The answer to #2 is that John and Jesus grew up far apart, Jesus grew up in Nazareth in Galilee, John grew up in Judah (Luke 1:39). John's father was a priest and served in the temple in Jerusalem, so likely lived very close by. Jerusalem and Nazareth are about 60 miles apart, so they likely never met again until Jesus came to be baptized.

The answer to #3 is most likely John himself as he was very humble and rarely spoke of himself by name in his gospel. See John 13:23 and John 21:20-24. This is not known for certain, but what I personally believe.

 

Winman, your answers make a lot of sense, and certainly fit.

 

1
most will agree that this is Moses from Deut 18:15.

2
John did not know Jesus was Messiah, till he witness the sign that God had given him. God (the one that sent John) told John that when he "saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.".... he would know that person was the Messiah. This is what happened, and this is when John knew.

3
John, the writer never uses his own name. He calls himself the beloved. We can know this is John by reading the whole book.

a...the writer is an apostle. 1:14
b...he is one of the 12...13:23, 19:26, 20:2
c...John was one of the sons of Zebedee.... James, and John. James was dead when John wrote this. This on leaves John

ADDED...d...Gal 2 says...."For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, " Again, James was dead, Peter is named in the book, the unnamed must be John

Also...Irenaeus says it is John

 

The only distiction I will make, as a matter of text is #2, though in a general view Win would/could be correct.

However here is the point scripture makes about the subject. Not about personal knowledge of Jesus.. but what John didn't 'know' -for certain - who this Lamb of God that takes away Israel's sin was yet. We note this in verses 33 and 34. John would have known Jesus at the very least, in passing, due to Jesus family going to Jerusalem for sacrifice at least once a year - as was required. Not to mention the fact thsy Mary's cousin would spoken of the event often and with John later in life about what happened with John in the womb, Mary's pregnancy and the circumstances surrounding Jesus birth.

So what was not known to John, and revealed and verified by GOD, was if Jesus really was the coming Messiah. God told him that he would KNOW him by the sign, that of a dove coming to rest (to light) upon him.

It was THEN that John said of a certainty,

 

Agreed!

 

Hi Menageriekeeper, thanks for honoring us with actual questions concerning scripture.

My view is just that, my view. So test what I say against scripture to see if it checks out. When dealing with those who expound upon the meaning of scripture, trust but verify.

First off because John the Apostle did not refer to himself as John, when we see referrences to John, they refer to John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ.

Who came to check out John who was drawing crowds in the desert? A delegation from Jerusalem, probably sent from the Sanhedrin.

Why the usage of a triple phrase, he confessed, he denied not, he confessed? Probably to illustrate John's emphatic denial, his vigorous denial that he was the Christ, the deliver anointed by God.

Why did John deny that he was Elijah? Jesus tells us in Mathew 11:14 that John is Elijah who is to come, referring to Malachi 4:5. The solution to this difficulty may be that in the sense that John fulfilled the prophecy of the forerunner, Luke 1:17, "in the spirit and power of Elijah" he was Elijah, but in another sense John was not, for though he may not have known it, John was greater than Elijah. So not the same person, but fulfilling his role of forerunner "if you care to accept it."

The other prophet was probably Moses as others have said.

As for why John did not know that Jesus was the Messiah before it was revealed to him, I would agree with some of the other posts. John probably knew Jesus as a boy, seeing Jesus perhaps once a year when they came to Jerusalem (Luke 2:41) but might have not seen him for a long time. John had left his parents and gone "into the wildnerness" for years. Clearly John was not given the insight via some sort of core character alteration, but based his identification on what he saw and heard. When John was in prison and sent his own delegation to Jesus to ask if Jesus was really the Messiah, Jesus answered "tell him the lame walk, the blind see, the sick are healed, and the good news is preached to the poor. All of us can trust that Jesus is the Messiah, not only because of His words, but because as the Annointed, He demonstrated who He is through miracles performed by the Power of His Anointing, the Holy Spirit of God.

Final question, was the "other disciple" John the Apostle? I believe so. No other gospel tells us how Peter got his new name (verse 42) and so John the Apostle must have been there as an eyewitness.