A one text sermon – John 1:12

This gentleman passed away today at the age of 91.  What a great message from John 1:12.  This was also the verse that was first told to me when I was 16 years old and the verse that God used to grip my heart some 39 years ago.

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Gospel according to John, Gospel Truth, Relationship with Jesus Christ, Salvation. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to A one text sermon – John 1:12

  1. Sam Shamoun says:

    Ken, I am posting this here just in case Paul Williams deletes my comment:

    Here goes Yahya talking about issues that if turned against him, would bury Muhammad and his Quran for its thousands of corruptions and missing verses. This is the same coward who ran behind Yusuf Ismail’s and Ija ‘s mirts to avoid debating me on the 20th.

    Now Ken, note what Irenaeus in the 2nd century said about the variant 616:

    Although certain as to the number of the name of Antichrist, yet we should come to no rash conclusions as to the name itself, because this number is capable of being fitted to many names. Reasons for this point being reserved by the Holy Spirit. Antichrist’s reign and death.

    1. Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies [of the Apocalypse], and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]; while reason also leads us to conclude that the number of the name of the beast, [if reckoned] according to the Greek mode of calculation by the [value of] the letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred and sixty and six; that is, the number of tens shall be equal to that of the hundreds, and the number of hundreds equal to that of the units (for that number which [expresses] the digit six being adhered to throughout, indicates the recapitulations of that apostasy, taken in its full extent, which occurred at the beginning, during the intermediate periods, and which shall take place at the end)—I DO NOT KNOW HOW IT IS THAT SOME HAVE ERRED FOLLOWING THE ORDINARY MODE OF SPEECH, AND HAVE VITIATED THE MIDDLE NUMBER IN THE NAME, AND DEDUCTING THE AMOUNT OF FIFTY FROM IT, SO THAT INSTEAD OF SIX DECADS THEY WILL HAVE IT THAT THERE IS BUT ONE. [I AM INCLINED TO THINK THAT THIS OCCURRED THROUGH THE FAULT OF THE CPOYISTS, AS IS WONT TO HAPPEN, SINCE NUMBERS ALSO ARE EXPRESSED BY LETTERS; so that the Greek letter which expresses the number sixty was easily expanded into the letter Iota of the Greeks.] OTHERS THEN RECEIVED THIS READING WITHOUT EXAMINATION; SOME IN THEIR SIMPLICITY, AND UPON THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITY, MAKING USE OF THIS NUMBER EXPRESSING ONE DECAD; while some, in their inexperience, have ventured to seek out a name which should contain the erroneous and spurious number. Now, as regards those who have done this in simplicity, and without evil intent, we are at liberty to assume that pardon will be granted them by God. But as for those who, for the sake of vainglory, lay it down for certain that names containing the spurious number are to be accepted, and affirm that this name, hit upon by themselves, is that of him who is to come; such persons shall not come forth without loss, because they have led into error both themselves and those who confided in them. Now, in the first place, it is loss to wander from the truth, and to imagine that as being the case which is not; then again, as there shall be no light punishment [inflicted] upon him who either adds or subtracts anything from the Scripture, Revelation 22:19 under that such a person must necessarily fall. Moreover, another danger, by no means trifling, shall overtake those who falsely presume that they know the name of Antichrist. For if these men assume one [number], when this [Antichrist] shall come having another, they will be easily led away by him, as supposing him not to be the expected one, who must be guarded against.

    2. These men, therefore, ought to learn [what really is the state of the case], AND GO BACK TO THE TRUE NUMBER OF THE NAME, that they be not reckoned among false prophets. BUT, KNOWING THE SURE NUMBER DECLARED BY SCRIPTURE, THAT IS, SIX HUNDRED SIXTY SIX, let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order, and advance their kingdom, [let them learn] to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself, and shall terrify those men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number, is truly the abomination of desolation. This, too, the apostle affirms: “When they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction shall come upon them.” 1 Thessalonians 5:3 And Jeremiah does not merely point out his sudden coming, but he even indicates the tribe from which he shall come, where he says, “We shall hear the voice of his swift horses from Dan; the whole earth shall be moved by the voice of the neighing of his galloping horses: he shall also come and devour the earth, and the fullness thereof, the city also, and they that dwell therein.” Jeremiah 8:16 This, too, is the reason that this tribe is not reckoned in the Apocalypse along with those which are saved. Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 30: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm

    Here we see that the variant 616 is nothing new, since Irenaeus who was a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was a disciple of the Apostle John, spoke about saying that this was a corruption of what the original reading said. And yet Wallace pretends he has stumbled upon something new and unknown by the early church fathers, and the disciples of the Apostles.

    Irenaus’ witness shows that the early church knew AND PRESERVED the original wording of Scripture, and therefore in God’s providence there IS NOTHING LOST.

    In the next post I am going to quote Irenaeus and others who cite the longer ending of Mark AS PART OF WHAT MARK ORIGINALLY WROTE.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Here I will quote from Irenaeus who is a witness to the longer ending of Mark 16:19-20. Enjoy!

      5. Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, which shall prepare Your way. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make the paths straight before our God. Plainly does the commencement of the Gospel quote the words of the holy prophets, and point out Him at once, whom they confessed as God and Lord; Him, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who had also made promise to Him, that He would send His messenger before His face, who was John, crying in the wilderness, in the spirit and power of Elias, Luke 1:17 Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight paths before our God. For the prophets did not announce one and another God, but one and the same; under various aspects, however, and many titles. For varied and rich in attribute is the Father, as I have already shown in the book preceding this; and I shall show [the same truth] from the prophets themselves in the further course of this work. ALSO, TOWARDS THE CONCLUSION OF HIS GOSPEL, MARK SAYS: So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God; Mark 16:19 confirming what had been spoken by the prophet: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on My right hand, until I make Your foes Your footstool. Thus God and the Father are truly one and the same; He who was announced by the prophets, and handed down by the true Gospel; whom we Christians worship and love with the whole heart, as the Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things therein. (Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 10: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103310.htm)

      Irenaeus, who was a disciple of the Apostle John’s disciple Polycarp, claims Mark wrote the longer ending.

      So much for the assertions of Licona and Wallace. I have more early witnesses but I think this suffices to silence and muzzle YahyaSlime. Now watch as a turn the tables against him by showing how much of the Quran is lost and missing.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Thanks. I mentioned the quote from Irenaeus earlier (see earlier in the com box at Paul Williams blog, bloggingtheology, but scroll down), quoting Mark 16:19 and gave the reference at the ccel.org early church fathers reference.

    • θ says:

      Irenaeus vs. KJV (and other translators).
      How can Irenaeus be a valid reference for the Biblical inerrancy if that man has different texts even deletes some verses?

      Irenaeus omits at least four verses entire from Gospel of Matthew and of John: Matthew 21:44, Matthew 9:8, Matthew 5:44, and John 4:42.

      In more than dozen places Irenaeus differs from KJV. If Irenaeus were a judge for the variant texts, the Bible’s corruption is so evident.
      1. Matthew 1:18. Χριστου (Christ) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      Ιησου Χριστου (Jesus Christ) — KJV

      2. Matthew 1:22. δια Ησαιου του προφητου (through Isaiah the prophet) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      δια του προφητου (through the prophet) — KJV

      3. Matthew 3:3. τριβους του Θεου ημων (paths of our God) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      τριβους αυτου (his paths) — KJV

      4. Matthew 3:17. λεγουσα προς αυτον Συ ει (saying to him, You are) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      λεγουσα Ουτος εστιν (saying, This is) — KJV

      5. Matthew 4:2. και νυκτας τεσσερακοντα (and forty nights) — omitted by Irenaeus
      vs.
      και νυκτας τεσσερακοντα (and forty nights) — KJV

      6. Matthew 5:18. παρελθη απο του νομου και των προφητων (pass away from the Law and the Prophets) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      παρελθη απο του νομου (pass from the Law) — KJV

      7. Matthew 5:33. τοις αρχαιοις (of old time) — omitted by Irenaeus
      vs.
      τοις αρχαιοις (of old time) — KJV

      8. Matthew 8:12. εξελευσονται (they will go forth) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      εκβληθησονται (they will be cast out) — KJV

      9. Matthew 11:23. και συ, Καφαρναουμ, μη εως ουρανου υψωθηση (And you, Capernaum, will not be raised up unto heaven) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      και συ, Καπερναουμ, η εως του ουρανου υψωθεισα (And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven) — KJV

      καταβηση (you will descend) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      καταβιβασθηση (shalt be brought down) — KJV

      10. Matthew 11:27. ουδεις επιγινωσκει τον πατερα ει μη ο υιος ουδε τον υιον ει μη ο πατηρ (no one knows the father except the son, nor the son except the father) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      ουδεις επιγινωσκει τον υιον ει μη ο πατηρ ουδε τον πατερα τις επιγινωσκει ει μη ο υιος (no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son) — KJV

      11. Matthew 13:11. το μυστηριον (the mystery) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      τα μυστηρια (the mysteries) — KJV

      12. Matthew 13:40. τη συντελεια του αιωνος (the consummation of the age) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      τη συντελεια του αιωνος τουτου (the end of this world) — KJV

      13. Matthew 23:26. καὶ τῆς παροψίδος (and platter) — omitted by Irenaeus
      vs.
      καὶ τῆς παροψίδος (and platter) — KJV

      In John.
      John 1:4. εν αυτῳ ζωη εστιν (in him is life) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      εν αυτῳ ζωη ῃν (in him was life) — KJV

      John 20:31. ζωην αιωνιον (life eternal) – Irenaeus
      vs.
      ζωην (life) – KJV

      In epistles.
      1Corinthians 15:3. ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον (I received) — omitted by Irenaeus
      vs.
      ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον (I also received) — KJV

      1Corinthians 15:15. εἴπερ ἄρα νεκροὶ οὐκ ἐγείρονται (if in fact the dead do not rise) — omitted by Irenaeus
      vs.
      εἴπερ ἄρα νεκροὶ οὐκ ἐγείρονται (if so be that the dead rise not) — KJV

      2Thessalonians 2:3. αμαρτιας (sinfulness) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      ανομιας (perdition) — KJV

      2Thessalonians 2:8. ο κυριος Ιησους (the Lord Jesus) — Irenaeus
      vs.
      ο κυριος (the Lord) — KJV

      • Ken Temple says:

        Irenaeus (ministered and wrote from around 180-202 AD) is much older than the Greek manuscripts that the KJV translators used. (you need to read James White’s book, The King James Only Controversy, for lots of good information on the Greek NT manuscripts.) Tyndale based the first English translation on Erasmus’s Greek Text, which he compiled from only 7 manuscripts. (that was all he could find in the west, since most of the Greek manuscripts were in the east under Islamic rule, the Greek orthodox monks protecting them in caves and many were buried in dry and deserted places. They found many paparii later in the 1800s in dry places that were much older than the Greek manuscripts used for the King James Version.

        Also, the original Greek of Irenaeus is missing; we have fragments of the Greek original, but not the whole thing. What they use to translate it into English is the oldest Latin translations of it, along with the older Greek fragments of it.

      • θ says:

        Irenaeus’ book Adversus Haereses or Against Heresies was written in Greek circa 180 AD (late second century) but unfortunately not in complete version, but his ancient Latin version came slightly later from the 3rd century and survived in full version, hence Latin version of Adversus Haereses preceded many old Biblical manuscripts.

        It is quite a shake of faith for the nominal Christians who hold a belief in the inerrancy NT Bible that the Latin Adversus Haereses of Irenaeus differs so much from today’s versions of English translations. Even shockingly he doesn’t have several verses that today’s Bible has.

  2. biblicalmonotheist says:

    Ken,

    Thanks for sharing that video of James White and Rob Price over at Pauls blog. I was impressed with White and how he handled Rob, especially in the back and forth dialoguing. Good stuff.

    Thanks again

  3. θ says:

    Irenaeus differs from KJV on John 1:13. KJV follows the old heresy of Valentinians by replacing the virgin birth of Jesus with the born-again Christians: “Who *were* born, not of blood, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of a human, but of God.”

    Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early.
    Other textual variants that stress the orthodox doctrine of the virgin birth occur outside the birth
    narratives of Matthew and Luke. One of the most striking appears in the manuscript tradition of the Fourth Gospel, a Gospel that does not record a birth narrative of its own. Some orthodox Christians of the early church thought that John nonetheless did allude to Jesus’ miraculous birth in the opening chapter of his Gospel. The most interesting patristic discussion occurs in Tertullian, who accuses his Valentinian opponents of tampering with the text of John 1:13 (de carne Christi, 19). Originally, claimed Tertullian, the text referred to the birth of Jesus: “Who was born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a human, but of God.” The Valentinians, he maintained, sought to replace this reference to Jesus’ miraculous birth by making the passage refer to their own. This they did by making the verb plural: “who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of a human, but of God.” Tertullian went on to argue that the verse affirms in no uncertain terms both the supernatural character of Jesus’ conception (in that it occurred apart from sexual intercourse [“born not from blood . . .“]), and the reality of his birth as a physical event (against the Gnostics).
    Is it possible that Tertullian’s form of the text, that is, with the singular form of the verb, was
    generated in an anti-adoptionistic milieu?72 It is worth observing that in another context Tertullian cites the verse (in the singular) explicitly to counter the teachings of “Ebion” (de carne Christi, 24). Somewhat earlier, Irenaeus also quotes the verse in the singular to argue that Jesus was not a mere man, but that he came from God and was born of the virgin (Adv. Haer. III, 16, 2; 19, 2). Earlier still, the orthodox forgery, the Epistula Apostolorum, uses the verse to sanction belief in the miraculous birth of Jesus, quoting it again in the singular (chap. 3).

    David G. Horrell, Ecological Hermeneutics: Biblical, Historical and Theological.
    The variant reading that Irenaeus here follows – ‘who was born’ rather than ‘who were born’ – is crucially important, referring as it does to the miraculous conception of Jesus himself.6 Where verse 13 is read as a singular reference to the Light rather than a plural reference to the children of God, it creates the strongest possible connection between Johannine incarnational christology and the Lukan and Matthean virginal conception tradition.

  4. θ says:

    If Irenaeus were a judge for the variant texts, the Bible’s corruption is so evident.
    Variant readings between Ireneaus and others on Acts. 20:28.
    – Irenaeus, codex Alexandrinus, Ephraemi Rescriptus, Bezae Cantabrigensis, Sahidic Coptic: “Church of the Lord”.
    Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, 14:
    Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood.

    – KJV: he hath purchased with his own blood.
    Acts 20:28
    Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

    – Syriac version and five of Beza’s exemplars: Church of the Lord and God.

    – Arabic version: Church of the Lord God.

    – Vulgate, Ignatius (Epistle to the Ephesians) and Tertullian: “he obtained wit the blood of God.”

    – Athanasius and others say the phrase “he obtained with the blood of God” implies the unscriptural phrase that supports the Monophysite heresy.

    – Translators: RSV, JB, NET: he obtained with the blood of his own Son.

  5. θ says:

    Agrapha or agraphon is a known-word from Jesus himself but somehow it fails to be a verse and not found in four Gospels and the NT canon, so that the NT Bible is not truly a complete source for all words of Jesus, hence the Bible is corrupt (incomplete, imperfect, unfaithful) even toward all Jesus’ sayings textually.

    Worse, if whatever Jesus says and teaches were the words received from the Father as God’s sacred sayings, the Christian writers acknowledged that they have failed utterly to canonise full words of Jesus or the Father. Hence today’s NT Bible is corrupt.

    Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.33.3-4:
    . The days will come in which vines will grow, each having ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand branches, and on each branch ten thousand twigs, and on each twig ten thousand clusters, and in each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape, when pressed, will give twenty-five measures of wine.
    . And, when one of those saints takes hold of a cluster, another cluster will clamor: I am better, take me, bless the Lord through me!
    .Similarly a grain of wheat also will generate ten thousand heads, and each head will have ten thousand grains, and each grain five double pounds of clear and clean flour.
    . And the remaining fruits and seeds and herbiage will follow through in congruence with these, and all the animals using these foods which are taken from the earth will in turn become peaceful and consenting, subject to men with every subjection.

    Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 1.19:
    For he says: Have you seen your brother? You have seen your God.

    Didache 1.6:
    But rather also concerning this he has said: Let your alm sweat in your hands until you know to whom to give it.

    Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 5.10:
    My mystery is for me and for the sons of my house.

    Pseudo-Clementine Homilies 19.20:
    And Peter said: We remember our Lord and teacher, how he commanded and said to us: Keep the mysteries for me and for the sons of my house.

Comments are closed.