Remember, the Gospel of John has the peculiar characteristic of being the particular gospel with veiled meanings. What if, as many scholars believe, John is here setting forth a truth of history by means of a story which is not in its details intended to be literally true. If that is so then what the writer John is doing is reminding the church that it is called to confess by word and by deed a Christly love that also suffers, forgives, and sustains. For if what we see in the crucified One is true of God, then God's arms are reaching out to enfold a delinquent world, and invites us to do likewise. I sometimes think that those who rail most vigorously against the Christian faith take it more seriously than many who so casually embrace it.
Consent always lies at the heart of dissent.
It is an inverted form of faith. There's nothing so mysterious about it. He's not working at all. Or else He's forgotten all about us. That's the kind of God you people talk about a clumsy, bungling, brainless, conceited, uncouth hayseed.