The day of Pentecost was 50 days after Resurrection Sunday so how does John manage to speak of the coming of the Spirit in his gospel account (20: 19-23)? Are these two accounts to be harmonised somehow are just recognised as contradictory?
I wouldn't accept either of these approaches. Both are concerned to bring everything in the Scriptures under the rubric of historicity when the Scriptures evidence in many instances a lack of concern for historical exactitude. The Scriptures were not primarily given to tell us about history. They are intended to "open the mind to the salvation which comes through believing in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim 3:15, Phillips). To understand both St John and St Luke's differing accounts, we would have to examine their different renditions of the coming of the Spirit in the context of their gospel accounts.
Despite the differences in timing, both connect the coming of the Spirit with the mission of the church. According to one writer, John's language is heavily freighted with the middle-eastern patronage system in mind: patron, brokers, and clients. (God the Father is the patron, who has all the goods necessary for life; Jesus is the broker, who dispenses those goods; and humanity is the client, who receives those goods and returns loyalty to the patron through the broker.)
Additionally, St John mentions many times that Jesus is sent by the Father; now, he sends the disciples as he has been sent. And breathes -- only used here in the NT -- on them, connecting their mission with the forgiving and retaining of sins. This passage tends to be avoided by Protestants because it raises embarrassing questions about its meaning. Is this a power that the Church has or individual Christians, or the institutional church?
This gospel does not major on the forgiveness of sins as such, which is not specifically mentioned in John except here (although,the idea of forgiveness is implied when Jesus was first revealed in chapter 1 as "the Lamb of God").
Like many others, I know, I have struggled over the issue of forgiveness: some Christians believe that we should forgive anyone who sins against us regardless of any show of repentance. These Christians interpret all the forgiveness passages of Scripture consistently with that view. However, I stand with those who say that forgiveness is ideally a relational process between people leading to reconciliation. In scripture, forgiveness between Christians is usually on the basis of repentance or being asked for it (see Luke 17:3-4). Even the well-know sections in Matthew (18:15-35), both presuppose repentance or lack thereof.
I do also accept that Jesus forgave his tormentors from the cross because of their ignorance and blindness and that that provides us with a model for forgiveness of a certain offence in certain situations. Nevertheless, Christians are not to harbour retaliatory thoughts towards those who have wronged them because the Lord is the Judge of us all (Rom 12:19).
"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent" (Jn 17.3). I have always been attracted to this passage for some unknown reason. One cannot argue that it is even the burden of the passage (vv1-5). Rather, it is explanatory as C. K. Barrett says of the 'eternal life' mentioned in verse 2.
It is also a text that is a battleground between Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian views with some arguing that Jesus Christ cannot be God because Jesus says that the Father is the 'only true God'. However, this position avoids the embarrassment found in considering that eternal life is found in knowledge of God the Father and in Jesus Christ. The simple but powerfully evocative bracketting of the two speaks volumes re the status of the Son (quite apart from many other passages of scripture).
Knowledge of the Father and the Son is eternal life; in this, St John is stating what every Jew knew about God. To acknowledge or know (so the literal sense according to Barrett) God is to experience his direction of one's paths (Prov 3.6).
In St John chapter 20 (v31), believing is related to life through his (Christ's) name. Barrett ties believing and knowing together by saying that they are not to be pitted against each other but are to be understood as correlated.
Eternal life is equated with knowing the only true God and his apostle, Jesus Christ, and that knowledge is experiential, personal and intimate brought about by the Holy Spirit enlightening the eyes of the understanding captured by obedience to his word.
Why is the Ascension of Christ so important? Significantly, Psalm 110 (particularly verse 1) is the most quoted passage in the NT and typically it is referred to the Ascension. 'The LORD says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool". St Peter applied this verse to the Ascension of Christ in Acts 2 (vv34-35) noting that the verses could not be definitively applied to David because he did not ascend into the heavens! The full meaning of Psalm 110 is found in the Ascension to (and present Session of Christ at) the Father's right hand.
The Ascension concerns authority, Christ's authority; for Jesus Christ ascended after the resurrection to where He is at the right hand of God "with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him" (1 Peter 3. 22). Significantly again, Hebrews 1, which also quotes Psalm 110 (v1), speaks of Christ's ascension by implication (1.3) but adds that Jesus the Son, sat down 'at the right hand of the majesty on high'. Sitting down indicated the status of the Son. No one sat in the presence of the King except the King's heir; here Jesus sat down to point to his rank. According to Psalm 110, he is now waiting until all his enemies recognise his rightful place as Lord of the heavens and earth.
It's important for us to recognise afresh the place of our Lord at the right hand, the favoured place beside the Majesty on high, to bow our hearts before Him and continually to reverence Him in our hearts.
And, he is doing something remedially as his enemies are subdued; of course, it often does not look like it but to urge the problem of evil as an argument against the existence of the God revealed through the Christian scriptures does not work. It does not work because, as is now accepted more and more, man cannot stand in a position with regard to the whole universe so as to be able judge the plans and purposes of God.
However, apologetics aside, mankind can reflect on the fact if it will, that full humanity now dwells in the heavens with the King of the Universe. We note that in Luke's account (ch24), Jesus eats before his disciples, showing thereby his humanity but then a little later parts from them and is taken up into heaven (following the KJV text). Hebrews reminds us that this Son in the heavens who intercedes for us is able to do that effectively because he knows what it is to be human, to be tested, tried and tempted (2.18). So, are you in pain, need, sickness or any other kind of trouble; the Man in the heavens knows what that is like and sympathises with your condition not necessarily leading to our being lifted out of our condition but strengthening us in the condition.
