The Message of Life in John's Gospel: A Resurrection Perspective

What is the message of life in John's Gospel for us today? Is it simply "Believe in Jesus for Eternal Life," or is a more specific content of faith required for salvation?

The Person and Work of Christ

Roger Fankhauser recently published an article on the gracelife.org website titled "The Person and Work of Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John," in which he attempts to show that after Christ's resurrection, belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus is essential for salvation. Fankauser's conclusion is: 

"Assertions about the person and work of Jesus permeate the book of John. No one denies this. Individual verses (such as John 3:16) do not stand in isolation but are written in the context of who Jesus is and his death, burial, and resurrection (still future relative to the time of the events recorded in chapters 1-12). Application today of those same verses must include what impact, if any, the progress of history and progress of revelation have on the details of the verses."¹ 

I agree! I recently made the same point on Mike Sampat's "Toronto Bible Study" YouTube channel, when I said: "Using the disciples of Jesus to try and prove that believing in the DBR [death, burial, and resurrection] of Jesus for salvation is unnecessary today is anachronistic and denies [i.e., functionally negates] the progress of revelation."² I wrote that comment in response to Sampat, who was advocating a "promise-only" view of the saving message similar to that of the Grace Evangelical Society (GES). Sampat appears to be a GES acolyte, even if he may not officially endorse their teachings. Therefore, I want to warn readers to beware of Sampat's teachings on this doctrinal issue! Although he espouses many Free Grace views, he is sadly a proponent of a "crossless" interpretation of what a person must believe to be saved. I am praying for his repentance (2 Tim. 2:24-26).

The Message of Life in John's Gospel

My disagreement with this "crossless" view is not merely academic; it stems from a fundamental difference in how we interpret the Fourth Gospel's stated purpose. In order to rightly interpret the Fourth Gospel (cf. 2 Tim. 2:15), it is essential to understand that it is written from a resurrection perspective and therefore it must always be interpreted with that end in view.³ Some years ago, Dennis Rokser wrote a statement pertaining to this in which he said: 

"Hodges fails to note that John does not even personally appeal to his readers to personally believe the content of what has been written in his Gospel until he declares the record of Christ's death (John 19:35) and His bodily resurrection (John 20:31)."⁴ 

This is true, but in light of the "content of what has been written" and the context of John's gospel, Rokser's statement would more accurately read: 

"Furthermore, Hodges fails to note that John does not even personally appeal to his readers to personally believe the content of what has been written in his Gospel until he declares the record of Christ's death for our sins (John 19:35; cf. Jn. 1:29-34) and His bodily resurrection from the grave to appear 'in the presence of the His disciples' (John 20:30-31; cf. Jn. 19:38-21:14)." 

 

This is John's gospel message and what must be "believed" (cf. 1 Cor. 15:1-11).⁵

When I first posted the above comment online, a reader replied saying: "Compelling!"⁶ Yes, it is compelling because it is biblical. And the Bible is "living and active and sharper than a two-edged sword" (Heb. 4:12; cf. Jude 3, NKJV). Have you used it recently? If not, do so today!

ENDNOTES:

¹ Roger Fankhauser, "The Person and Work of Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John" (gracelife.org). www.gracelife.org/resources/grr/pdf/Fankhauser_Gospel_and_the_Cross.pdf

² Mike Sampat, "The Plumbline of God," Toronto Bible Study YouTube channel. www.youtube.com/live/KmhBxpCPogI?si=YJgvYCyklIv8TChD&t=4862 (July 18, 2026). Note: Sampat responded to my comment by appealing in particular to 1 John 5:1. My thoughts on 1 John 5:1 are beyond the scope of this blog post, but for those who may want more information on my Traditional Free Grace (TFG) understanding and interpretation of 1 John 5:1, see my dialog with Antonio da Rosa in the comments section of his blog post titled "'Whoever [simply] believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God' (1 John 5:1). Do you believe this?" Free Grace Theology blog (October 1, 2007). https://free-grace.blogspot.com/2007/10/whoever-believes-that-jesus-is-christ.html

³ Why is it crucial to understand that John's Gospel is written from a resurrection perspective and with the end in view? Because a correct application of Scripture must be based on a correct interpretation of Scripture. For a more detailed analysis, see my articles: "Getting the Gospel in Focus, Pt. 1" (FGFS, October 24, 2024), and "Getting the Gospel in Focus, Pt. 2" (FGFS, October 25, 2024). Also see an earlier article I wrote titled "Three Resurrection Signs of the Savior" (FGFS, November 2007)

⁴ Dennis Rokser, quoted in Lou Martuneac's blog post: "Stakes Through the Heart of Zane Hodges' Hydra Head" (October 8, 2008). In Defense of the Gospel blog.

⁵ Jonathan Perreault, in the comments of Lou Martuneac's blog post: "Stakes Through the Heart of Zane Hodges' Hydra Head" (October 8, 2008). In Defense of the Gospel blog. Note: My comment is an edited version of a blog post I wrote titled "The Message of Life in John's Gospel: A Resurrection Perspective" (FGFS, October 8, 2008). The original blog post is no longer online.

⁶ See the comment by David Wyatt from 10/8/2008 at 11:56 AM in the comments of Lou Martuneac's blog post: "Stakes Through the Heart of Zane Hodges' Hydra Head" (October 8, 2008). In Defense of the Gospel blog.