The innocence of Jesus and how the opposition are more concerned for respect for authority than with truth.
It’s hard finding new light in familiar passages/stories. It seems very clear to me at least that opposition to the truth is coming from maintaining authority and position far more from a difference in opinion on what counts as truth. I guess that is “new” in the sense I had not noticed that emphasis here (but I had elsewhere).
An awful lot of what people in authority do is designed to protect — not the truth or the general welfare — but their own authority and position. But then so is an awful lot of what people with minimal authority do.
it changes how we approach differences of opinion doesn’t it — if one’s opponent on say — the peace testimony — or even we ourselves — have personal investment in the issue — what then?
and John the Evangelist is not himself exempt — he portrays the Jewish authorities as out of the truth and in it for their own mutual self-interest — but is that ALL that’s going on? Is not the gospel writer in a similar position — defending Christian faith against the big bad Jewish authorities?