How is it that a single verse in the Holy Bible can be said to have caused tens of millions of deaths? Was it the purpose of John 14:6 to be interpreted in a literal-external command whereby all those who would not bow to the name of Jesus were condemned to hell- and of course we’d help them get there faster?
For those not familiar with the verse, it’s most commonly is interpreted as, “Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.” So, what’s that mean? Can there be more than one interpretation?
I say yes!
The fundamentalist-literal-external view interprets that verse in a way that says if you do not accept Jesus, and thus Christianity, as the sole PURVEYOR of salvation, then you’ll obviously wind up in an eternal hell. So, what happened with the God is love mantra from Jesus? In this interpretation the church has made a “Jesus confession” as the litmus test for eternal life.
Could it be that all of the “I AMs” of the Gospel of John, leading up to John 14:6, were the product of his having become the Christos, knowing it experientially, and revealing to all that they too could rise to a higher level of consciousness?
What do we know 2,000 years later?
Could it be that what Jesus was saying was that his life, the WAY he lived life (non-violent as an example), and his model of love, forgiveness, and intimacy with God-Creator was the WAY. Could it be that what Jesus was talking about was a “Christ Consciousness”: or the mind of Christ? Could it be that Jesus was saying to those 2,000 years ago that their lower vibrational state of consciousness was not enough for them to know the Creator and have intimacy and that they needed to be transformed?
Maybe? Perhaps?
Jesus was not saying what the church is saying today: join a church, be baptized, declare Jesus as Lord and Savior, and accept the local denominational dogmas and doctrines. Christ Consciousness isn’t a one time, nor spontaneous event. Part of the path of Jesus was to be a spiritual teacher pointing us to Christhood.
Has there been a misunderstanding of John 14:6 or is Christianity the ONLY religion? Can God be confined to one religion? Are all the other religions false religions with every one of them going to hell because they not only have not spoken the name of Jesus- they’ve never heard the name before as well?
Ernie,
Jesus most likely did not say that he alone was the way, the truth, and the life. The Fourth Gospel contains precious little in the way of authentic words from our Savior. We go to the Synoptic Gospels to learn what Jesus said. And yes, John 14:6 does seem to be contrary to what we know Jesus really said. But yet, in the context of how the Fourth Gospel is a witness to Jesus Christ, we can understand John 14:6 according to the unique Johannine concept of the revelation of God in Jesus.
The Gospel of John is “High Christology” and we can see that right away in the Logos Hymn in chapter 1. So when we read that “what God was the Word (Logos) was, we know that the author is trying to show us that Jesus was “God in the flesh”. And in the sense that Jesus is “God in the flesh”, then all John 14:6 is saying is that the way to God is through God.
In High Christology, especially interpreted through the Nicene Creed and the Chalcedonian Formula, there is a full and true and eternal unity of God, the Father, and God, the Son. The Messiah, therefore, as the “way-shower”, the full and complete Incarnation of God, is the Way, the Truth, and the Life because that is how God chose to be fully revealed in the universe.
Therefore, John 14:6 is a statement of the Way God chose to be revealed to us, and therefore it is absolutely a “truism” that no one comes to God except through the manifestation of God in the universe: the Word of God made flesh. The action is God’s, not ours. And so this verse is in accord with Paul’s understanding that salvation is purely by grace lest we boast (of how we have found our way to God by ourselves).
Rich: Good thoughts and understanding. And obviously the Gospel of John is more about the spiritual Christos than the historical Jesus. Clement of Alexandria (150-215) wrote that John read more like an inspired meditation than a factual reading: and I agree. In fact, John’s whole chronology of Jesus differs from the Synoptics. Even the author himself (20:31) says so- “This is written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ”, not that you’ll have the biography of Jesus and what he said exactly.