The Rudolf Steiner Archive

35. The Gospel of John and the Future of Christianity

[ 1 ] Goethe, who had such a penetrating insight into so many things, once spoke the following remarkable words about the fate of the Bible in modern times: For many centuries, the people did not actually have the Bible in their hands, but came to know it only indirectly; and when wider circles began to engage with the Bible, people were already more inclined to think critically about the Bible and its origins and much less inclined to immerse themselves directly in its content and the effects it produces, so that, as Goethe observes, since the Bible became known to wider circles, people have spoken much less from the spirit of this document than they have spoken about it.

[ 2 ] What Goethe felt a hundred years ago has intensified significantly over the course of this century. In scholarly circles, it has become increasingly rare to immerse oneself impartially in the spirit of this religious text itself; instead, critical inquiry has become more and more common: How do the individual parts fit together? When and how did each part come into being? What is the external history of this work? Less and less attention is paid to its spiritual content.

[ 3 ] At the same time, Goethe observes that, fundamentally speaking, the Bible is the Book of Books; this is what Goethe—this so-called pagan—says. Yes, he says that it is not an exaggeration to say that everything that lives today in our attitudes and feelings, in our sensations and ideas, in our way of thinking, has the Bible as its foundation. It is particularly noteworthy that even those aspects of our civilization that seem to have made us independent of the Bible are, nevertheless—if one examines things closely—a result of the Bible. People are so quick to believe that modern science since the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is merely an adversary of the Bible. But the power of thought and the direction of imagination, even if they seem to contradict the Bible, are drawn from the very depths of the Bible.

[ 4 ] Although Copernicus explored the heavens in a way that seemed to contradict the Bible, he drew the power of his thoughts from the Bible. Yes, the thought forms of modern monism and materialism have drawn their strength from the Bible. Those social parties that are radically opposed to biblical faith have also—as anyone versed in the study of the soul will recognize—drawn the power of their thoughts and feelings from the Bible. This is most evident in so-called biblical criticism, which, after all, is most strongly opposed to the Bible. Its proponents have been shaped by the culture of the Bible. If one traces this intimate historical development of the modern era, one might say in this regard:

Your good nature, flowing through foreign veins
Will immediately come into conflict with yourself.

[ 5 ] Goethe said this in reference to a man who had been his student, but who, in certain views, opposed Goethe and became his critic. Thus, it is the ideas that have taken root in people over the centuries within our Western culture—ideas that have strengthened our thinking, feeling, and will—the ideas of our ancestors that, flowing through the veins of their descendants, are at odds with those ancestors.

[ 6 ] Among the parts of the Bible that have suffered the most from modern ways of thinking is the Gospel of John, which for centuries was the most vibrant source of Christianity. It is held in far lower regard by modern biblical criticism than the first three, so-called synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Biblical critics strive, with the best of intentions, to examine the books of Scripture for their historical value. They say that if one studies the first three Gospels—which, apart from minor details, agree with one another—one finds a picture of Jesus Christ that proves to be credible. If one adds the Gospel of John to this, however, there are so many contradictions with the first three Gospels that it is impossible to reconcile it with them. The first three Gospels recount historical facts that provide a vivid picture of the One who walked the earth in Palestine. The fourth evangelist, they say, cannot be regarded as a chronicler of historical truths. Rather, he is an enthusiast for the person of Jesus Christ. His aim was to compose a significant hymn to Jesus Christ, to express in lyrical form what he perceived as the truth about this revered figure, and to merely clothe this in historical facts.

[ 7 ] Thus, to many, the Fourth Gospel does not appear to be a historical document, but rather a doctrinal text from which one can draw spiritual edification, much like a poem; however, it is not suitable for saying anything about the founder of the Christian religion on earth. — As this view became increasingly widespread during the nineteenth century, the scholar Bunsen remarked in the 1850s: “If it were truly the case that the Gospel of John could not be taken as a historical document, then the state of historical Christianity would be dire.”

[ 8 ] It cannot be denied that in the first three Gospels, Jesus is portrayed as even more human, as a personality whose greatness unfolds gradually; whereas in the fourth Gospel, we are immediately confronted with a perfected being who has descended from unseen heights, who has nothing left to learn from his surroundings, who is endowed with grace and truth from the very beginning, and who himself bears the fullness of the Godhead within himself.

[ 9 ] The first three Gospels contain articles of faith and doctrinal teachings, whereas in the fourth Gospel, the essence of Christ Jesus seems for the most part to speak for itself—about what He is meant to be for humanity and His disciples. These are differences that anyone can see. Those who notice them are compelled to ask: How does this fourth Gospel relate to the other three Gospels? We must realize that these contradictions have actually always existed, but that throughout the centuries, even the wisest people have not taken offense at them. Anyone who does not take the view that people only became wise in the nineteenth century knows that in the earliest times, the wisest people strove to establish harmony among the Gospels and also believed that they had succeeded in doing so.

[ 10 ] Every age understands every matter in a way that reflects the nature of that age itself. In other ages, this exclusively materialistic way of thinking—which has even found its way into the critique of religious scriptures—did not exist. Another era did not have that fondness for the “simple man from Nazareth.” There has been a growing urge to reduce Jesus Christ to the level of humanity, to say more and more: “Although an ideal figure lives within Him, He is still human.” Measuring Him against other human beings has increasingly become the way of thinking in our time. Other eras did not have this urge; throughout centuries of Christian development, there was a different ideal, a different aspiration. The Christ-being stood there in an unapproachable distance. All human scholarship, all depth of wisdom, all depth of feeling and sensibility sought to elevate itself to those heights where one might glimpse something of that being. It was believed that only the purest, most refined knowledge could approach this being. The impulse of earlier times was to elevate oneself through knowledge and feeling in order to sense the loftiness of that being. Thus, the interpretation of the Gospels reflects nothing other than the spirit of the age in which people think, feel, and conduct their research.

[ 11 ] We are now once again in an era that seeks to elevate humanity to a higher world. But even though this era is still in its infancy, it knows its goal precisely and also knows how to pursue it in every detail. The aim of theosophy is to grasp and understand the Gospel of John. It may well be that, through this research, the Gospel of John will experience a kind of resurrection. Through spiritual research, we will once again come to understand the evangelist who portrays the essence of Christ Jesus in such a sublime manner. Once one delves into its content using the methods of spiritual research, this Gospel indeed reveals itself to be the most profound book of humanity. Throughout many centuries, this Gospel has been regarded as a book of life. Perhaps it can become a book of life once more.

[ 12 ] Let us try to consider some of the insights that emerge for those who seek to understand this subject. It turns out that the Gospel of John is a text that is in wonderful harmony with the Old Testament. The Gospel of John begins with the beginning of all things, as does the Old Testament. There, in the beginning, the gods bring heaven and earth into being out of what was chaos. — The Gospel of John also begins with the words: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

[ 13 ] Thus, both texts refer us back to the beginning. In both cases, humanity’s gaze is directed toward the same thing. A congruence is evident here, yet one that exhibits a remarkable difference. In the Gospel of John, this presents something truly new. In the Old Testament, we are transported to the starting point of humanity. Through grand, powerful imagery, the creation of the world is depicted up to the point of humanity, which appears to us as a fellow being among other creatures in the world of minerals, plants, and animals—presented as an external, visible entity. Its development is traced up to the emergence of a people, the Jewish people. It is not a particular incarnation of humanity that is depicted, but humanity as it arises in the world, and then ascends to the level of a people. A people is portrayed as a whole. Only those who understand how to properly appreciate the progression of this line can truly understand the Old Testament. The meaning of the Old Testament lived in the soul of every single Jew. There, the individual feels himself to be a member of the entire people. When a Jew wanted to express his deepest feelings, he spoke of his kinship with Abraham. When he wanted to speak of his spiritual being, which extends beyond death, he spoke of his spiritual self entering into Abraham’s bosom. He did not feel a separate “I,” but rather the great “I” of the people, and that the shared blood bound him to the people, leading upward to the father Abraham. When he looked up to the Most High, he looked upon a being who revealed Himself through the blood of the entire people. Holy to him was not only the memory of the patriarch Abraham, but also the feeling of oneness with him. Further back, the connection was made to the beginning of the world, how a single blood flowed through a unified human whole, and how the laws of the universe—God himself—permeate and spiritualize such a group of people.

[ 14 ] Let us now consider the Gospel of John. It, too, takes as its starting point the beginning of our entire development. However, it does not begin where the Old Testament begins, but rather, in a certain sense, begins before it. The Old Testament places the origin of the sensory world—that which can be seen, that which exists for the external senses—at the very beginning. “And God said, ‘Let there be light!’” (Gen 1:3). The writer of the Gospel of John takes us even further back, to a time that was even earlier, to a point where there was still nothing sensory, where only the spiritual existed: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God” (John 1:1)—this is nothing other than the spiritual, of which all the sensible world is the manifestation. He says: It is true that the visible world began as described in the Old Testament. But it was preceded by a spiritual world. All the laws that played out in that very beginning are expressed not in any single individual, but in the shared blood that connects him to the entire people. If one goes back to the Spirit that precedes this sensory beginning of the world, one also arrives at that which is sublime in the human being—transcending all that is sensory, transcending all national connections—and reaches that which is found in every human being, in every human individuality. If we put ourselves in the Jew’s place regarding his sense of the divine principle, we find that he felt at one with Father Abraham when he traced his entire bloodline back.

[ 15 ] In John’s Gospel, we find tremendous progress beyond this view. What does the Christ Jesus of the Gospel of John say? In what he says lies a tremendous advance over the spirit of the Old Testament. When we examine what appears to us to be the deepest human essence, we need not look beyond the individual human being. The individual human being can stand alone, on his own; he finds the Father within himself, that from which he has come.

I, my innermost being, I, and the Father are one. (John 10:30)

[ 16 ] This signifies the herald’s call, the revelation of the individual human being. How did Christ Jesus address the Jews who went up to the Father Abraham? He said precisely: This human “I” lives within you; if you find the human “I” or “I am” within yourselves—the power of individuality—then everyone may say: There is something within me that is beyond time.

Before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58)

[ 17 ] What can be experienced in the innermost core of a person’s being is more eternal than what can be experienced in the external world. We no longer ascend to Abraham; we ascend to that which will be within us as the Eternal.

I and the Father are one. (John 10:30)

[ 18 ] Every single human being finds access to the Eternal through himself or herself. In this way, we ascend to the very beginning of that which lives as the Eternal within each individual.

[ 19 ] Thus, the Gospel of John is the significant continuation of what is written in the Old Testament. It presents itself as a revelation of what existed before the very beginning of what is described in the Old Testament. To understand what is meant in the Gospel of John, we must engage with its use of language. What is meant by the Logos, the Word? Speculative scholarship notes that the beginning of the Gospel of John is not found in the other Gospels. They simply recount—albeit interwoven with miracle stories—what took place outwardly. It is often said, however, that the author of the fourth Gospel was a philosopher. John must surely have known Philo. One could say that Philo’s writings contain speculations similar to those found in the Gospel of John. Philo also states that the Word stands between the Creator of the world and humanity. John drew the elements of his writing from Alexandrian and Greek scholarship. From this, John derived the idea that he recounts in the Gospel that Christ is the Word made flesh. This had not occurred to any other evangelist.

[ 20 ] Let's read the beginning of the Gospel of Luke with this in mind:

Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the very beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the Word have handed them down to us. (Luke 1:1–2)

[ 21 ] Here it says exactly the same thing: Word or Logos. It says that the intention is to recount it to those who have been “servants of the Logos.” In fact, there is something else written there: “as those who have been eyewitnesses and servants of the Word know.” — Luke also speaks in the same way that John speaks of the Word. He, too, says that those who have known something from the beginning have been eyewitnesses of the Word. Among the innermost initiates at that time, it was customary to speak of the being that lived in Christ as the Word and to call themselves servants of the Word. The writer of the Gospel of John derived the expression “the Word” from the language used by the initiates. Only spiritual science can explain what is actually meant by “the Word.” To understand this, we must consider the nature of the human being in the sense of theosophy.

[ 22 ] What external sensory observation reveals about human beings is only a part of the human being. Wherever spiritual science or theosophy existed, there was exactly the same classification of the human being as is taught today. Spiritual science speaks of a second aspect of human nature: the etheric or life body. It states that the human physical body consists of the same substances as the entire natural world. However, within the human body, these substances are arranged in such a way that, if they were to follow their own laws, the physical body would disintegrate. The etheric body, however, prevents this disintegration. The moment the etheric body leaves the physical body, the physical body follows its own laws and disintegrates. The fact that this does not happen in life is due to the fact that the physical body is permeated by the etheric or life body.

[ 23 ] When we consider that, when a person stands before us, it is not only their physical and etheric bodies that stand before us, but also something that is much closer to the person than the physical and etheric bodies—that they are permeated by a sum of pleasure and displeasure, joy and pain, impulses and passions, wishes and desires, then we have here what spiritual science calls the astral body—the third part of the human being, which is far more primordial than the etheric body and the physical body. Just as ice forms from water—water in a different form—so too are the etheric body and the physical body condensed forms of the astral body. Spiritual science shows that the etheric and physical bodies are condensed forms of the astral body. The astral body is the source of the etheric body and the physical body. Human beings share the physical body with all visible beings in nature—minerals, plants, and animals. Humans share the etheric body with plants and animals, and the astral body with animals. But there is one thing that humans possess alone, which makes them the crown of all beings. Everyone can say a name only to themselves; that is the name “I.” No one can utter the name “I” if it is meant to refer to another. Each person can speak this name only to themselves. Here the true center of human nature reveals itself; thus spiritual science conceives of the human being as fourfold, with the “I Am” as the fourth element. This is a distinct force and entity. In his biography, Jean Paul describes how the thought first dawned on him: You are an “I.” He said: “There I looked into the most hidden sanctuary of my soul.” All religious creeds founded on spiritual wisdom have sensed this reality. The Hebrew people also sensed it. Yahweh or Jehovah is nothing other than the “I Am.” (Exodus 3:14) He is the “I Am” and points to the innermost core of human nature. Among this ancient Hebrew people, the “I Am” or Jehovah was perceived as something that expressed itself throughout the entire group. They applied this name to that which flowed down through the entire bloodline from Abraham onward.

[ 24 ] How was this “I Am” understood? In those places of ancient times known as mystery schools—which served as both church and school—the initiates sought to rise to the nature of the “I Am” through the mysteries. There they were guided from the sensory to the spiritual. — A complete renewal of this fourth member of the human being came about through the appearance of Christ Jesus. The term for this “I Am” is the Logos or the Word. From the invisible worlds, the spiritual announced itself in the “I,” revealed itself in the “I,” and permeated the “I.”

[ 25 ] In terms of his physical body, man is an extract of the entire mineral world. That is why man has been called a microcosm. His etheric body is an extract of the life forces that exist in the plant and animal kingdoms outside of him. His astral body is an extract of all the astral forces that live in animals. The “I” is not related to the surrounding mineral, plant, and animal worlds, but only to the invisible, divine-spiritual world. It is an extract of the spiritual, a drop from the substance of the Divine. The “I” is a drop from the ocean of the Divine. Thus the Divine reaches into the human being and sends its drop into the very core of the human being, and the expression of this Divine is the “I am.” This drop of the Divine nature is even older than the astral body. It existed in the bosom of the Divine before our astral body came into being.

[ 26 ] “In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1), or the “I Am,” that innermost power of human existence which represents the Eternal. People should be taught that each one can find within himself the drop of divinity if he seeks this communion within. People should be taught that they can find communion with God within themselves as unique individuals.

[ 27 ] The news of the Word spread throughout the world; it seemed to penetrate the darkness of the astral, etheric, and physical bodies. Only a few understood it—those who were not born of the flesh. They were able to reveal themselves as children of God. But now the primal, eternal, and all-encompassing essence of human nature—which existed before Abraham and is possessed by every human individual—came into being. This supersensory power became flesh in Christ Jesus. Thus, Christ Jesus is the force in human evolution that seeks to lead humanity to the knowledge of its innermost being, its “I Am.” From this perspective, the Gospel of John becomes understandable, and above all that deepest chapter in which so much is spoken of the “I Am.” He says explicitly: “Whatever I say about the ‘I Am,’ I do not say of my own accord” (John 14:10)—but he is saying that when people recognize the power of the “I Am,” they possess something higher than all other powers. When you express this “I Am,” you are speaking of the power that also lives in the light of the world. “I Am” lives in everything; it is what permeates the entire earthly realm in all kingdoms—it is what the earth provides you as nourishment. You can only truly explore this if you understand the “I Am”:

“I am the bread of life” (John 6:48),
“I am the vine” (John 15:5),
“I myself have been planted by the Father; the Father is the vine-grower” (John 15:1)

[ 28 ] Thus, this chapter of the Gospel of John presents itself as something that must give strength and life to people. These powers are rooted in the Father, the Spirit of the world: “I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)

[ 29 ] If we go far back in time, we arrive at an era in which blood ties played an increasingly important role. At that time, they were the foundation of what we call love. Love existed only among those whose veins carried shared, related blood. In those days, close-kin marriages prevailed. Later, marriage between distant relatives replaced marriage between close relatives. Back then, only shared blood gave rise to love. As humanity evolved over the course of subsequent eras, peoples became increasingly intermingled. The Jewish people felt the bond of shared blood even more strongly. But back when Christianity first emerged, that was the beginning of the era in which peoples became intermingled. That was also the beginning of an era of a new kind of love, one not based on blood ties. Jesus Christ said: “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.” (Matt. 10:37). “If anyone comes to me and does not hate (forsake) his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters—he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26). This saying must be interpreted to mean that at the beginning of Earth’s evolution, those who were related loved one another; but at the end of Earth’s evolution, people will love and recognize one another through spiritual love. That brotherly love which flows from soul to soul, which originates in the Spirit—that is the love that has its source in the power of Christ Jesus, which will gain ever more ground within humanity. Where the same blood flowed, people felt themselves to be members of a group “I.” At the end of human development, people will feel themselves to be members of all humanity. The “I Am” will then be sought not in the blood of the tribe or nation, but in the Spirit and in truth. The Old Testament worships God in the natural realm; in the New Covenant, God will be worshiped in that which precedes nature—in the Spirit and in truth. Even for those who were intimately connected to the Lord, it was not immediately clear how that other love was to take the place of the love of blood. The Lord’s beloved disciple was the only one who understood this. The other evangelists still trace the entire lineage back to Father Abraham. But the One who came into the world as the Being embodied in Christ Jesus could say: “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58). The Beloved Disciple had understood this. In his account, he ascends to the timeless. There is no outward contradiction between the Gospel of John and the other Gospels. It is merely the difference between a subordinate and a higher point of view. We are dealing here with different perspectives. When we know this, we also understand the ancient Bible commentators. They knew that the truth can be described from various points of view.

[ 30 ] In today’s scientific writings, we so often find the expressions “one” and “we”: “one cannot recognize this,” “we cannot recognize this,” and so on. These “one” and “we” people adopt the perspective of a blind person who seeks to judge what can or cannot be seen. A person can judge only what he knows, but not what he does not know. The higher a person ascends into the spiritual world, the deeper he also looks into it. John’s perspective may differ from that of the other evangelists, but the content does not.

[ 31 ] The task of theosophy is to reawaken an understanding of this neglected Gospel and to reveal its power to humanity. Because this Gospel possesses the greatest power, it will also play the greatest role in humanity’s future. Anyone who delves deeply into the Gospel of John will find something that lifts them beyond all the doubts of science.

[ 32 ] In modern times, the world has split into two halves: the world of nature and the world of moral life. Natural law is regarded as something distinct, and moral precepts as something distinct. It is precisely this dichotomy that cannot endure in the long run. Human beings had to seek something deeper, something that encompasses both. They must not feel a dichotomy between the inner and the outer. They no longer feel this dichotomy when they understand the innermost core of the Gospel of John. We find the origin of the world within ourselves through the development of our innermost “I.” There we arrive at something that encompasses both the laws of nature and our innermost being. What the “I Am” reveals to us was present as the primordial spiritual before the outer world. The Logos, the Word, existed before the external world. — Thus, there is a reconciliation between the external world and the innermost nature of the human being. Precisely the chapter of the Gospel of John that speaks of the “I Am” will prove to be an insurmountable conqueror of human nature. It is only that human beings have lost the thread that would allow them to recognize the purely spiritual in this.

[ 33 ] Theosophy will once again attempt to understand what was said by the one who gave the Gospel of John to humanity. When the revealed Word is understood, all laws of nature will be recognized as the revealed Word, but the inner moral law will also appear as the revealed Word. Whether one calls oneself an idealist or not, if one judges the testimony of the Spirit solely by what the senses perceive, then a materialistic mindset lives within us. Deeper spirits have sensed this, and they foreshadowed and longed for a time when humanity would learn to understand such things again—Goethe, for example, and also Carlyle, who said: “ We see in the present age how external institutions have turned away from the spirit that originally arose from the apprehension of spiritual life (religion), and how the spiritual seeks refuge in individual souls, or—where it finds none there—how it seeks it in external organizations and founds sect after sect and so on, in order to seek paths back to the original spirit. ”

[ 34 ] But the future of humanity and of Christianity lies in learning once again to understand a text such as the Gospel of John. We can trace various perspectives in the development of humanity regarding its relationship to the teachings about the world found in religious scriptures.

[ 35 ] The first perspective is that of naive belief. The second is the perspective of intelligent people. When they reach the third perspective, people interpret the document of humanity in a mystical sense; they view it as allegories and symbols.

[ 36 ] The fourth perspective is one in which, through theosophy, we learn once again to recognize spiritual realities in their true form. Then we approach such a text once more with the deep reverence that its inner greatness demands. This is how the Gospel of John will be understood in the future. In the future, spiritual science will once again point the way to a true understanding of the Gospel of John and to the true nature of Christianity.