That You Might Believe: A Study of the Gospel of John

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

Introductions, Arguments, Outlines

1. John: The Man and His Gospel

Introduction

In some scholarly circles, this message would not be considered worthy of a hearing. Leon Morris cites A. M. Hunter, who says, “‘For these and other reasons, scarcely a reputable scholar in this country nowadays is prepared to affirm that the Fourth Gospel was written by John the Apostle.’”¹

Liberal scholarship has tended to the view that this Gospel was not written by John the Apostle, but by some anonymous second century Christian who “never set eyes on Jesus.”² If this were true, of what value could a study of John the Apostle be to the study of this great Gospel? I would like to explain why I believe it is of great value.

To begin, I believe the Gospel of John was written by the Apostle John.³ There are a number of reasons we should accept the Johanine authorship of this Gospel. This was the conviction of the second century church fathers, who first addressed this matter.⁴ This has always been the view of truly evangelical scholarship.⁵ Morris comments, “The basic reason for holding that the author was John the Apostle is that this appears to be what the Gospel itself teaches.”⁶

In reading through the four Gospels, one finds that Matthew refers to the Apostle John by name three times; Mark ten times; Luke seven times, and John not at all. John does refer to the “sons of Zebedee” in 21:2, and there are allusions to himself in 13:23; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:1-10; 21:7, 20-23, 24. It is not at all surprising that John would refrain from directly referring to himself by name. Neither does he specifically refer to the “inner three” (Peter, James, and John—see Mark 5:37; Matthew 17:1; Mark 14:33) in his Gospel. Of the four authors of the New Testament Gospels, two (Mark and especially Luke) were not present with our Lord as one of His 12 disciples. Matthew was not one of the inner three. And so while Matthew can write about our Lord’s ministry from the perspective of one of the nine “outside” disciples, it is only John who can describe certain critical events from the perspective of one of the inner three. Each Gospel thus has its own purpose, its own perspective, its own audience, and its own unique contribution.

John: The Man

The Gospels give us a fairly clear picture of the Apostle John. For us to understand John’s Gospel, we should consider the biographical sketch the Scriptures give us of this man.

Our first introduction to John may come in John 1:35-40. Here, John the Baptist looks upon Jesus and declares, “Look, the Lamb of God!” (John 1:36, NET). Immediately, two of John’s disciples leave him and attach themselves to Jesus. We are told that the name of one of these two men is Andrew (verse 40); the other disciple of John the Baptist is not named. I doubt that it was Peter, Andrew’s brother, because Andrew will find Peter and inform him that they have found the Messiah (verses 40-42). Since Peter and Andrew were partners of James and John, there is a fair chance that John the Apostle may be the second disciple of John the Baptist. It is interesting that John’s Gospel quickly turns our attention to “John the Baptist,” who is never called by this title in the Gospel of John; he is always referred to simply as “John.” This may be because the Apostle John knew him so well, as his former disciple.

Next, we read of the call of John and his brother James, right after the call of Peter and Andrew (Matthew 4:18-22; Mark 1:19). Jesus is walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee. He first comes to Peter and Andrew, to whom He says, “Follow Me,” Jesus said to them, “and I will have you fish for people” (Mark 1:17). Next, He comes to James and John, who were sitting in the boat with their father mending their nets. He called them, and these two brothers immediately left their nets to follow Him. This does not appear to be a permanent leaving and following, which will take place later. It is a calling to leave their occupation for a time so that they can be with Him. John appears to be one of the first to follow our Lord as a disciple. If so, he was with Him from the beginning.

John, along with his brother James, accompanied Jesus to the home of Simon Peter and Andrew, where Jesus healed Simon’s mother-in-law, and then many others (Mark 1:29-31f.). According to Mark, this happened after Jesus taught in the synagogue of Capernaum. The people who heard Jesus were amazed because He, unlike the scribes and Pharisees, taught with authority (verses 22, 27). The authority which Jesus possessed was demonstrated by His ability to heal and to cast out demons. If anyone was a witness to the authority of our Lord, it was John who, along with Peter and James, witnessed more miracles at the hand of our Lord than nearly anyone.

During the time he spent with the Lord, John became increasingly aware of just how great and awesome Jesus was. In Luke 5:1-11, John’s grasp of who Jesus was takes a quantum leap. Jesus had been teaching the crowds beside the lake of Gennesaret (the Sea of Galilee). Two boats were nearby; one belonged to Simon and Andrew and the other to James and John. As Jesus taught, these men were in their boats, washing their nets after having fished all night without success. Jesus taught from one of the boats, and then instructed Peter to put out into deep water and to let down the nets for a catch. Peter momentarily protested, but then relented and let down the nets, which encompassed a very large catch. The catch was so large he had to call to his partners, James and John (verse 10), to help bring in the nets. They filled their boats until they began to sink. Seeing this, Peter fell trembling before our Lord with the words, “Go away from me, for I am a sinful man, Lord!” (verse 8). But the text also tells us that Peter’s partners, James and John, did likewise. Jesus’ words, “Do not be afraid, from now on you will be catching people,” were spoken to all three men, not just to Peter (see verse 10). John was on his way to understanding the majesty and power of the One he would follow.

John was chosen by our Lord to be numbered with the twelve (Matthew 10:1ff.; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16). Mark informs us that at this time Jesus nicknamed James and John “sons of thunder” (Mark 3:17). This certainly squares with what we see of these two elsewhere. These two fellows were an ancient version of movie stars John Wayne and Clint Eastwood—they were a rough and tumble pair. John does not seem to have talked as much as Peter, but he was certainly one who could hold his own. He was the strong, silent type, the kind of fellow you would not want to make mad at you.

John was one of the “inner three” disciples of our Lord. Only Peter, James and John were allowed to accompany Jesus into the house of the synagogue official, whose daughter had already died before Jesus arrived (Mark 5:35-43; Luke 8:49-56). Here, apparently, John first witnessed our Lord’s power over death.

John was present at the transfiguration of Jesus, along with James and Peter (Matthew 17:1ff.; Mark 9:2ff.; Luke 9:28ff.). Here, John had a foretaste of the glory of our Lord and His kingdom. While Peter did not hesitate to speak on this occasion, John seems to have remained silent, perhaps having been dumbstruck by what he saw.

It was John who confessed that he and others had come across a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name and forbade him to do so again (Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49). John and others (which must have included at least Peter and James) had somehow concluded that they owned the “Jesus franchise,” and thus had the right to license or to prohibit others from acting in His name. Jesus did not agree, and He went on to warn them about causing “little ones to sin [stumble].”

It was James and John who asked Jesus for permission to call down fire from heaven and “torch the place” when some Samaritans did not want Jesus to come to their village (Luke 9:54). These two brothers were ready and willing to use God’s power to punish the pagans.

At a most inappropriate time, John, along with his brother James, asked Jesus for prominent positions in His coming kingdom (Mark 10:35). When Jesus was approaching Jerusalem, He told His disciples He was soon to be condemned to death there (Mark 10:32-34). As the time of our Lord’s death draws near, He takes His disciples into His confidence by telling them what is about to happen. It is as though James and John did not even hear what Jesus had just said. They took Jesus aside and asked Him privately to grant their request that they be given positions of prominence in the kingdom, above the other disciples. Naturally, the other disciples were incensed. James and John had no idea what they were asking, or what true discipleship really was.

Peter, James, and John, along with Andrew, privately asked Jesus to reveal to them details concerning the last days (Mark 13:1-4). Jesus and His disciples were in Jerusalem, and the disciples were awe-struck by the beauty of the temple. Jesus cautioned them not to become too attached to the temple since it was to be destroyed. The two sets of brothers waited until they could get Jesus alone, and then asked Him to tell them the “inside story” of what was going to happen and when. Actually, they were not so concerned with “what” would happen as “when” it would happen. They had the “what” figured out, they thought; they just needed to know “when.” Their seeking to obtain secret knowledge from Jesus, apart from the rest, was just another form of one-upmanship. There have always been—as there will always be—those who seek to obtain “inside” prophetic knowledge which is unknown by others. This inside knowledge enables some to think of themselves as superior to others.

When Jesus sent two of his disciples to make preparations for the Passover, one of these men was John and the other was Peter (Luke 22:8). Among other things, it seems these two (who would spend much time together in the Book of Acts) were the most trusted disciples. Judas could certainly not have been trusted to do this task. There was a certain mystery about the location of this meeting room, but these two were able to find it just as Jesus had indicated. There is an almost prophetic element in the way Jesus both informed and instructed these two, so that they could make preparations for celebrating the Passover, yet without allowing Judas to know where.

John seems to be the “disciple whom Jesus loved” in John 13:23, and the one who leaned on Jesus’ breast during the Passover celebration. Jesus and His disciples were in the upper room celebrating Passover. During the meal, Jesus told the disciples that one of them would betray Him. The disciples could hardly believe their ears. They had no idea whom He referred to as His betrayer. Peter was a close friend of John. They were not only partners in fishing but appear to have been close friends as well. It seems that John must be “the one Jesus loved” (verse 23), who was leaning on Jesus’ breast and to whom Peter signaled, hoping John would be able to press Jesus for more details.

John was there when our Lord agonized in the Garden of Gethsemane, along with Peter and James (Mark 14:33).

After our Lord was arrested, Peter followed Jesus, along with “another disciple” who appears to be John. It was this “other disciple” who was known to the high priest, and thus was able to enter the court of the high priest and bring Peter with him (John 18:15-16).

As our Lord was hanging on the cross, the “disciple whom Jesus loved” was there at the foot of the cross. From the cross, Jesus entrusted the care of His mother into this disciple’s hands. It seems that this man almost has to be John (see John 19:26-27).

John was one of the first to see the empty tomb and to believe that Jesus was indeed risen from the dead (John 20:1-10). After Jesus had been crucified, buried, and resurrected, Mary came to the tomb early in the morning on the first day of the week. When she found the stone already taken away, she ran to tell Peter and the “other disciple whom Jesus loved” about it. The “other disciple” (John) outran Peter, arriving first at the empty tomb. Looking in, he saw the linen wrappings, but he did not enter. When Peter arrived (huffing and puffing, I imagine), he barged right in and saw the grave clothes neatly arranged, but without the Lord’s body. John then entered the tomb, appraised the situation, and believed. John was not only one of the first to witness the resurrection, he was one of the very first to believe it.

John appears to be the “other disciple” about whose future Peter is inordinately concerned after our Lord’s resurrection (John 21:20-23). In John 21, we read of our Lord’s words to Peter, with the three-fold question, “Do you love Me?” After charging Peter to tend His sheep, our Lord informs Peter that he will be led away against his will, a veiled prophecy of his death as a martyr. Peter immediately looks in the direction of “the disciple whom Jesus loved” and asks, “What about him?” Our Lord replied that this was none of Peter’s business. Some seem to have mistakenly understood our Lord to mean that this “other disciple” would live until the Lord’s return. The Apostle John corrects this misconception, and then goes on to say that this same fellow is the one who witnessed the things recorded in his Gospel and who was the author of it (John 21:23-24). This “other apostle” is the one whom Jesus loved, the one who leaned on Jesus’ chest at the Passover meal, and who wrote the Book of John. This “other apostle” is almost certainly John.

We have not seen the last of John when we reach the end of the Gospels, for (apart from the Apostle Paul) John and Peter are the dominant apostles in the Book of Acts. John is one of the disciples gathered in the upper room (1:13). He accompanies Peter on his way to the temple at the hour of prayer and thus participates in the healing of the lame man (3:1ff.). John and Peter are arrested and instructed to cease preaching Christ by the Sadducees, but they refuse, insisting they must obey God rather than man by preaching that Jesus has been raised from the dead (Acts 4:1-22). When the Gospel is proclaimed in Samaria and many come to faith, Peter and John are sent there, and when they lay their hands on these new believers they receive the Holy Spirit, just as the apostles did at Pentecost (Acts 8:14-17). James, the brother of John, was killed by Herod, who intended to kill Peter as well, but God delivered Peter so that he could continue to preach the Gospel (Acts 12:1ff.).

In Galatians 2:9, Paul refers to John as one of the “reputed pillars” of the church in Jerusalem. John is, of course, the author of the Johanine Epistles (First, Second and Third John) and of the Book of Revelation. This one who once “leaned on Jesus’ chest” in the Gospel of John is also the one who “fell as a dead man” at the feet of his resurrected and glorified Lord in the Book of Revelation (1:17).

Lessons We
Learn From the Life of John

The “John” of Acts and the epistles is a very different “John” from the Gospels. The changes we see are not a credit to John, but rather to his God. John’s life is applicable to us in some areas that we would do well to ponder. Allow me to share some lessons which can be learned from the life of John.

First, John’s life is an illustration of the grace of God. We can safely say from what we see of John in the Gospels that our Lord did not choose him for all the fine qualities he possessed. John had no status in life as a fisherman nor was he an educated man, even by the standards of that day (see Acts 4:13). He certainly did not possess any qualities or education that impressed the scribes and Pharisees. He was a volatile fellow, a “son of thunder.” He is not represented as a magnetic personality or charismatic leader. He was self-centered and self-serving, an opportunist who did not hesitate to get the jump on his peers. The fact that our Lord chose John is testimony to the grace of God. The Apostle Paul pretty well sums it up when he writes,

26 Think about the circumstances of your call, brothers and sisters. Not many were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were members of the upper class. 27 But God chose what the world thinks foolish to shame the wise, and God chose what the world thinks weak to shame the strong. 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, what is regarded as nothing, to set aside what is regarded as something, 29 so that no one can boast in his presence. 30 He is the reason you have a relationship with Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 1:26-31).

Who would ever have imagined that this rough and tumble fisherman would become the apostle of love? If God can change a man like the “John of the Gospels” into the “John” we see later in the New Testament, He can surely transform us as well.

Second, John’s life is an illustration of divine sovereignty. We see the sovereignty of God in choosing to save John, in making him one of the twelve, and selecting him to be one of the inner three (Peter, James, and John). We can especially see the sovereignty of God when we compare John with his brother, James. These two brothers grew up in the same home and had the same shaping experiences. Both brothers followed Jesus for the same length of time, and both were included in the inner circle of three. In spite of all these similarities, James was the first to die as a martyr for the cause of Christ; John seems to have been the last of the twelve to die. James did not write any New Testament books; John wrote five. How can this be explained? I am not sure it can be, but we can acknowledge this as an illustration of the sovereignty of God. God does not operate in the ways men expect. God raises up one and puts down another. God is sovereign.

Third, I see from the life of John an illustration of the love of God, a prominent theme in this Gospel,⁷ and in John’s Epistles. John frequently refers to himself as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (13:23; 20:2; 21:7, 20). Believe it or not, some scholars feel this is one of the strongest arguments that can be made against John as the author of this Gospel. Morris writes, “The biggest objection to this identification, in my opinion, is the contention that a man is not likely to refer to himself as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ I agree.”⁸ For some, this may be the biggest objection to John’s authorship of this Gospel, but in my estimation, it is a most noteworthy title, given himself by John. What better epitaph than to be known as a man whom Jesus loved? If David was a man after God’s heart, it was John who saw himself as a man after whom the heart of God sought.

“Love” is one of the great themes of the Bible and certainly the theme of the Gospel of John. In the New King James Version, some form of the word love appears 57 times in the Gospel of John. It is no wonder that men come from a study of John with an overwhelming sense of being “loved” of God: “In this Gospel the love of God is dramatically mediated through Jesus Christ—so much so that Karl Barth is alleged to have commented that the most profound truth he had ever heard was ‘Jesus loves me, this I know / For the Bible tells me so.’”⁹

Some years ago I was actively involved in prison ministry with Prison Fellowship. One seminar I conducted was in a maximum-security prison in the State of Texas. It was a tough prison. During a break, one inmate came up to me and said he had heard that some of the volunteers at the seminar were themselves former offenders. He asked if it would be possible for some of these ex-offenders to share their testimony during the seminar. I thought it was a great idea and asked if any of the volunteers wished to share their testimony. One of them told this story, as best as I can remember the details:

I was an inmate in this prison some years ago. I was a member of a motorcycle gang, living in a house with other gang members. In fact, I served time for stealing a motorcycle. My life was not going well at all, and someone told me that I should read the Bible, so I got one—well, actually, I stole one. I began to read the Gospels. As I read of the person of Jesus Christ and His love, I was so overwhelmed that I began to weep. I wept so loud I had to go into the bathroom to read, where I could turn on the shower to cover the sounds of my crying. …

There is something about our Lord in the Gospels which draws men and women to Him. The disciples who heard Him say, “Follow Me,” could do nothing but follow Him. Men and women guilty of shameful sins drew near, somehow assured that He would not reject them, sensing that He had come to forgive them. I believe a significant part of that magnetism which drew men and women to our Lord was His love.

I believe one of the things about Jesus which overwhelmed John was the love which He had for him. Like Karl Barth, John believed, “Jesus loves me, this I know. …” This was also more than enough for John. And so John referred to himself in those terms which meant the most to him. John knew he was “the one whom Jesus loved,” and in this he reveled. What label would John rather have than this: “the one whom Jesus loved”? How could anyone view John’s referring to himself in this way as a problem? My mind is boggled by the possibility that anyone would think that referring to himself in this way could be an argument against his authorship of this Gospel.

There is a particular text I especially appreciate in the Gospel of John:

Just before the Passover feast, Jesus knew that his time had come for him to depart from this world to the Father. He had loved his own who were in the world, and now he loved them to the end (John 13:1).¹⁰

Some of the other versions read:

It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love (NIV).

It was before the Passover festival. Jesus knew that his hour had come and he must leave this world and go to the Father. He had always loved his own who were in the world, and now he was to show the full extent of his love (New English Bible).

It was before the festival of the Passover, and Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to pass from this world to the Father. He had always loved those who were his in the world, but now he showed how perfect his love was (New Jerusalem Bible).

The “full extent” of our Lord’s love was shown on the cross of Calvary. It was there that He took upon Himself the sins of the world. It was there that He bore the wrath of God for our sins. Have you experienced this love personally by accepting His sacrificial death for your sins? I urge you to simply sit down and read through this marvelous Gospel of John, and sense the love God has for you in Christ, and then to receive it by trusting in Him. There is no greater love. There is no greater gift than the gift of salvation in Jesus Christ.

John: His Gospel

I played the trumpet in our high school band, which frequently marched in parades, and we had a trombone player named Pete who was painfully predictable. Whenever anyone took a picture of the band, Pete was out of step. He was always out of step. Now mind you, it wasn’t that he didn’t try. Not only did he know he was out of step, he constantly tried to get back in step. And so he was persistently doing a strange kind of shuffle, trying to synchronize his feet with the music and with the rest of the band members. By the time the shuffle was over, Pete was back out of step.

A number of scholars seem to look upon John and his Gospel like my friend Pete—out of step. Some scholars would say that the Gospel of John is out of step with the three other gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These three gospels are often referred to as the Synoptic Gospels, because these Gospels all tend to approach the life of Christ from the same perspective. John, on the other hand, approaches the life and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ quite differently. I would like to point out some of these differences and the impact this has on our study of the Gospel of John.

What Is Missing in John’s Gospel¹¹

It is possible to compare John’s Gospel with the synoptic Gospels by simply consulting any harmony of the Gospels. These “harmonies” place the events described in all four Gospels side-by-side. When you compare John with the other three (Synoptic) Gospels, you discover that John does not include many of the elements contained in the other Gospels. Let me identify some of these “missing” items. When compared with the Synoptic Gospels, John’s Gospel does not include …

Jesus’ genealogy
an account of our Lord’s birth
any events in our Lord’s childhood
our Lord’s baptism
our Lord’s temptation
the Sermon on the Mount
the account of John the Baptist’s doubts
any casting out of demons
any healing of lepers
any parables of our Lord
an account of our Lord’s transfiguration
the selection and sending out of the 12, or of the 70
any eschatological (prophetic) address
a pronouncement of woes on the religious leaders (e.g. Matthew 23)
the institution of the Lord’s Supper
an account of our Lord’s agony in the Garden of Gethsemane
the giving of the Great Commission
an account of our Lord’s ascension

What Is Found Only in John’s Gospel?

Lest we feel short-changed by a reading of John’s Gospel, I should also point out that there is much in John which is not found in any of the other Gospels. Allow me to identify some of the unique contributions of John’s Gospel. In John’s Gospel only we find …

Jesus as the Creator (John 1)
Jesus as the “only begotten” of the Father (John 1)
Jesus as the promised “Lamb of God” (John 1)
Jesus revealed as the great “I Am” (see “I Am” texts on page 11)
Jesus turning the water into wine (John 2)
Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus (John 3)
Jesus’ conversation with the woman at the well (John 4)
Jesus and the woman caught in adultery (John 8)
the raising of Lazarus from the dead (John 11)
Jesus washing the disciples’ feet (John 13)
the Upper Room Discourse of our Lord (John 14-17)
Jesus’ teaching on the coming of the Holy Spirit (John 14-16)
Jesus’ high priestly prayer (John 17)

In summation, over 90% of the material found in the Gospel of John is unique to his Gospel.¹² John has avoided the unnecessary repetition of those things the other Gospel writers have already told us, choosing to devote his attention to that which we have not yet been told. In the process of doing this, we find that the teaching of John’s Gospel provides us with much “inter-locking” truth, which not only goes beyond what we are told elsewhere, but which helps to make better sense of what we are told elsewhere in the Gospels.

The Emphasis of John’s Gospel

There are certain points of emphasis in John’s Gospel which we should also keep in mind as we begin our study of this great Gospel. John’s emphasis includes …

the ministry of our Lord in Jerusalem and Judea, as opposed to His Galilean ministry
more precise indications of time, especially in relationship to the Jewish feasts
Christ’s teaching (though not in parables)
emphasis on the “King,” rather than on “the Kingdom of God”
Jesus’ private conversations with individuals (Nicodemus, woman at the well, Peter)
Jesus’ ministry to His disciples
Jesus’ teaching in the upper room, especially related to the coming of the Holy Spirit
the last 24 hours of Jesus’ life
belief ¹³and unbelief¹⁴
“My Father” occurs 35 times; “Verily, verily” (KJV) appears 25 times

There are several other areas of emphasis which require a little more discussion. The first is John’s use of the Old Testament. It might appear that John places less emphasis on the Old Testament, since he quotes it less frequently than any other Gospel writer—a mere ten times. In fact, John’s Gospel is steeped in Old Testament allusions, as D. A. Carson points out:

Although John’s use of the Old Testament is not as frequent or as explicit as that of Matthew, it is not slight (despite charges to that effect), and it is enriched by an extraordinarily frequent and subtle number of allusions to the Old Testament. One of the features of these allusions is the manner in which Jesus is assumed to replace Old Testament figures and institutions. He is the new temple, the one of whom Moses wrote, the true bread from heaven, the true Son, the genuine vine, the tabernacle, the serpent in the wilderness, the Passover. Rarely articulated, there is nevertheless an underlying hermeneutic at work, a way of reading the Old Testament that goes back to Jesus himself.¹⁵

A second important emphasis of John is his highly developed theology. Ironically, some use this fact to argue against the Apostle John as the author of this Gospel:

The highly developed theology of John is thought by many to indicate a late date.¹⁶

I am reminded of years ago when I was a sixth grade school teacher, and I showed a movie to my students. It has been awhile, but I believe the title of the movie was, “The Mystery of Stonehenge.” Those highly committed to the theory of evolution had presumed that ancient men had to be primitive, fresh from the cave, so to speak. When the amazing pattern of rocks was discovered at Stonehenge, some scientists adamantly refused to believe that there could be anything sophisticated here. Primitive men were incapable of such things. But the more Stonehenge was studied, the more men were amazed at the way in which these rocks related to the heavenly bodies and perhaps in a way that made it a very simple computer. Let us beware of letting our presuppositions cloud our vision. If John wrote by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, why should we expect his theology to be primitive and undeveloped?

The content of John’s theology is of interest as well. He certainly has certain doctrines that he wishes his reader to grasp. Christology is one major area of theological emphasis. In the Synoptic Gospels, we see our Lord’s deity gradually dawning upon the disciples. They begin wide-eyed at what Jesus says and does. In Luke 5 (see verses 1-11), Peter, James, and John marvel at the miracle of the great harvest of fish. In Luke 7, the widow’s deceased son is raised from the dead (see verses 11-17). In Luke 8, Jesus stills the storm on the Sea of Galilee, and the disciples marvel (see verses 22-25). The great watershed of the Synoptic Gospels is the great confession of Peter, followed by the transfiguration of our Lord. In John, there is no suspense. The reader had already been told, at the very outset of the book, who Jesus is …

He is God, the Creator of the Universe, who has no beginning—1:1-3
He is God come in human flesh—1:14
He is vastly greater than John the Baptist, the greatest prophet—1:19-28
He is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world—1:29-36
He is the Son of God, the Messiah, the King of Israel—1:40-51

One of the other major theological thrusts of John is the doctrine of the sovereignty of God:

12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children 13—children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God (John 1:12-13).

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:44).

So then they tried to seize Jesus, but no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come (John 7:30).

27 “My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; no one will snatch them from my hand. 29 My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one can snatch them from my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30).

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that continues to exist, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you” (John 15:16).

The doctrine of the Trinity is clearer in the Gospel of John than in any other Gospel. Jesus often spoke of God the Father, of Himself as God, and of the Holy Spirit of God. The Trinity is everywhere you turn in John’s Gospel.

John makes a great contribution by the use of “signs” which attest to our Lord’s deity and claims to be Israel’s Messiah. These signs are …

1. Turning water into wine in Cana (2:1-11)

2. Healing an official’s son in Capernaum (4:46-54)

3. Healing an invalid at the Pool of Bethesda (or Bethsaida) in Jerusalem (5:1-18)

4. Feeding the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee (6:5-14)

5. Walking on the water of the Sea of Galilee (6:16-21)

6. Healing a blind man in Jerusalem (9:1-7)

7. Raising dead Lazarus in Bethany (11:1-45)

In addition, there are the “seven witnesses” of John …

1. John the Baptist	“This is the Chosen One [literally, “Son”] of God” (1:34)
2. Nathaniel	“You are the Son of God” (1:49)
3. Peter	“You are the Holy One of God!” (6:69)
4. Martha	“You are the Christ, the Son of God” (11:27)
5. Thomas	“My Lord and my God!” (20:28)
6. John	“Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (20:31)
7. Jesus	“I am the Son of God” (10:36; see also 4:26; 8:58)

Finally, there are the seven “I am’s” of John …

1. “I am the bread of life” (6:35)

2. “I am the light of the world” (8:12)

3. “I am the door for the sheep” (10:7; cf. v. 9)

4. “I am the good shepherd” (10:11, 14)

5. “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25)

6. “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (14:6)

7. “I am the true vine” (15:1; cf. v. 5)

The Gospel of John
and John’s Other Works

I have not seen this subject addressed to any great extent in any of the commentaries, and this may tell the reader all he or she needs to know. Yet one cannot overlook the fact that John was used of God to pen five books in all. These include this Gospel, the three Epistles of John (First, Second, and Third John), and his grand finale—the Book of Revelation. There is a certain sense of unity and of completeness in these five books. (This is not at all to imply that John’s works are all we need and that the other books of the Bible are unnecessary.) In the Gospel of John, for example, Jesus spoke to His disciples about loving one another and about the marks of a true disciple. In his Epistles, John has much to say about the outworking of love toward the brethren.

Summarizing some of the points of continuity between the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation may be helpful:

In the Gospel of John, John begins with Jesus at creation, as the Creator. He begins, as it were, in Genesis, at the beginning of recorded biblical history. In Revelation, John focuses on the close, the consummation of history.

In Genesis, we have the fall; in the Gospels, we have a new Genesis, a new beginning, where a new faithful “son” comes in the image of God, and where sin is dealt with by His sacrificial death. In Revelation, this salvation is fully realized with a return to the Garden, but now it is a perfect Garden.

In John, we have God coming down from heaven to earth, not to condemn, but to save men. In Revelation, we have God coming down from heaven, to bring heaven down for the saints, and to judge the wicked.

In John, we have John leaning on Jesus’ breast; in Revelation, we have John fallen at the feet of Jesus as a dead man.

In John, we have God tabernacling among men, with His glory veiled. In Revelation, we have God seen in Christ, unveiled, in all His glory and splendor, so great that the sun is no longer needed, for the light of the glory of the Father and the Son.

In the Book of Revelation, John writes of the difficult times ahead and the need for perseverance and endurance, followed by a description of the blessings which come to those who overcome. There is a “river of the water of life” (22:1), and a “tree of life” (22:2). There is no temple, nor is there any sun or moon, because the Father and the Son are the temple, and the “Lamb” is its “light” (21:23). The very things John has highlighted in the first chapter of his Gospel are also highlighted in the closing chapters of his last work—Revelation. As you study through the Gospel of John, you may wish to think about how what is said in John’s Gospel is picked up elsewhere in John’s later writings.

John: The Gospel of Belief

This Gospel of John is a marvelous work; it is a book to which some scholars have devoted much of their lives. Listen to what some of them have written of about this Gospel:

The Gospel according to John is the most amazing book that was ever written. ‘Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.’ This may well be the attitude of anyone who steps upon the threshold of the study of this book; for if its testimony is true, the faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God has received glorious confirmation.¹⁷

John was a poet; his Gospel, an elaborate poem. Its simplicity is deceptive. John specialized in double meaning, allusion, allegory, irony, and symbolism. His well-crafted work, like a symphony, advances new themes, drifts into others, then returns with similar sounds yet fresh and alluring. Most readings and commentators get lost in the sway. I have—again and again. It is difficult to step back and comprehend the greater movement of this work. But I am convinced that this book takes the reader on a designed journey led by Jesus himself and narrated by John. … And I am persuaded that this work was motivated by a writer who had been on a spiritual journey with Jesus all of his life, and was encouraging others to join him.¹⁸

The Gospel of John is deceptive in that it appears to be simple. When I was in seminary, John was the first New Testament book we were to translate because it was thought to be the simplest Greek. We often translate the Gospel of John into the language of an unreached people first, so that they will have access to the message of the Gospel. We encourage the lost and new Christians to read John first, because it is so clear and simple. In spite of this apparent simplicity, there is a depth of profound meaning that scholars note, even after years of study.

I like the comparison of John’s Gospel to a pool in which a child may wade and an elephant can swim. It is both simple and profound. It is for the veriest beginner in the faith and for the mature Christian. Its appeal is immediate and neverfailing.¹⁹

John was not written primarily for scholars; it was written for everyday men and women, in order to convince them that the Jesus of the New Testament is the promised Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of the world. By trusting in Him, men and women become God’s children, their sins are forgiven, and they come to possess eternal life. There is no more important question in all the world than this: “Who is Jesus Christ?” And there is no better place to find the answer than in the Gospel of John.

John’s presentation of who Jesus is lies at the heart of all that is distinctive in this Gospel.²⁰

I will end this lesson with a story from my experience of the first time I ever taught through the Gospel of John more than 25 years ago. An unsaved couple from down the street began to attend the Bible study I was teaching on the Gospel of John. Somewhere around the third chapter of John, the wife suddenly blurted out, “Well, if I didn’t know any better, I’d think that Jesus was claiming to be God.” A few weeks later, I was walking down the street with her husband, as he made his way home after the Bible study. He told me that something had happened in his life somewhere in the last few weeks. (I knew he was telling me that he had been saved—that he had come to a personal faith in Jesus as his Savior.) I asked Charlie when this change took place. I shall never forget his answer, which went something like this: “Well, it was somewhere between John chapter 3 and John chapter 6.” Charlie did not think of his conversion in terms of time, but in terms of the progression of the argument of the Gospel of John. Charlie was ready. He didn’t need to wait until chapter 21 to trust in Christ. He was convinced and converted by the time he reached chapter 6.

I invite you to commit yourself to a study of the Gospel of John. I can assure you that it will change your life, just as Jesus changed the life of the Apostle John, and Peter, and all the rest of those who trusted in Him and followed Him in this Gospel. Join with me, will you, in a study of this great book? Make the message of this book your own. There is no more important message in all the world than the message of this Gospel.

1 A. M. Hunter, Introducing the New Testament (London, 1945), p. 50, as cited by Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 9.

2 See Morris in footnote 1, p. 8.

3 Some evangelical scholars believe that John is the source of this Gospel, but that he may have had help writing it, something akin to Mark writing his Gospel, but with Peter as his source. I am not convinced of this view, but neither would I call it heretical.

4 “When we turn to the external evidence we are confronted by the fact that, while John the son of Zebedee is not named as the author of this Gospel in the earliest days, there is no other name in the tradition. The first person of whom we have record who definitely ascribes this Gospel to John appears to be Theophilus of Antioch (c. A.D. 180). Irenaeus also says it was written by John the Apostle, and his source appears to have been Polycarp, who knew John personally.” Leon Morris, p. 21.

5 “The Fourth Gospel has been designated since the second century ‘according to John’; and this has been taken to imply in Christian tradition that the authority of the apostle John, the son of Zebedee, lies behind it, and that it embodies his testimony to the life and teaching of Jesus. The present commentator is in full agreement with the dictum of the late Archbishop William Temple, who wrote: ‘I regard as self-condemned any theory about the origin of the Gospel which fails to find a very close connection between it and John the son of Zebedee. The combination of internal and external evidence is overwhelming on this point.’” R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980 [tenth printing]), p. 11.

6 Morris, p. 9; see John 21:24.

7 “It is interesting that John uses both verbs [for love] more than twice as often as anyone else. … Clearly love matters a good deal to this author.” Leon Morris, p. 229, fn. 71.

8 Leon Morris, p. 12.

9 D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 21.

10 The translator’s note in the NET Bible reads: “Or ‘now he loved them completely,’ or ‘now he loved them to the uttermost’” (see John 19:30).

11 In dealing with the problem of the cleansing of the temple in chapter 2, Morris points out: “… nothing else in the first five chapters of this Gospel is to be found in any of the Synoptics.” Morris, p. 190.

12 “Thus John’s distinctive portrait of Jesus contains 93 percent original material in comparison to the Synoptics.” Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.), 1983, 1985. “John,” en loc.

13 The Greek verb for believe appears 98 times in John. Strangely, the noun form does not appear at all in John.

14 “No Gospel preserves more instances of misunderstanding and of failures to understand than does John.” Carson, p. 98.

15 Carson, p. 98.

16 Morris, p. 32

17 William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953), p. 3.

18 Philip Wesley Comfort, I Am the Way: A Spiritual Journey Through the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994), p. 11.

19 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 7.

20 Carson, p. 95.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Character Study

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

2. What Child Is This? (John 1:1-18)

Introduction

During the Christmas season, many sing a carol by William Chatterton Dix, a portion of which goes like this:

What Child is this, who laid to rest
On Mary’s lap, is sleeping?
Whom angels greet with anthems sweet,
While shepherds watch are keeping?

This, this is Christ, the King,
Whom shepherds guard and angels sing:
Haste, haste to bring Him laud,
The Babe, the Son of Mary!²¹

As I write this message, Christmas is almost here. For this reason, it may seem appropriate to title this message, “What Child Is This?” Looking at our text in the Gospel of John, however, some might suggest I shorten the title to, “What Child?” There is no child in our text—no Mary, pregnant by the Holy Spirit, no babe in the manger, no shepherds or magi, no threatened King Herod. So why call this message, “What Child Is This?” when there is no “child” in our text?

In their Gospels, Matthew and Luke supply a considerable amount of detail about the conception and coming of the Christ child. Mark passes over these details, commencing his Gospel with the ministry of John the Baptist. John begins his Gospel with a prologue, which we find in the first 18 verses of chapter 1. This prologue to John’s Gospel is our text for this lesson. In spite of the absence of many of the familiar “Christmas” elements from the other Gospels, John’s prologue makes a significant contribution to the celebration of Christmas, a contribution which has not been overlooked. J. I. Packer writes of John’s prologue: “The Church of England reads it annually as the gospel for Christmas Day, and rightly so. Nowhere in the New Testament is the nature and meaning of Jesus’s divine Sonship so clearly explained as here.”²²

John’s prologue provides us with insights which enhance our understanding and appreciation of the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke. These two Gospels highlight the humanity of our Lord, without denying His deity. John’s Gospel highlights the deity of Jesus Christ, without minimizing His humanity. If we are to celebrate Christmas in its fullest meaning, we must not neglect the truths which John’s prologue contains. Let us listen carefully to these very special words from the Apostle John, so that our adoration of the Savior may be enriched and enhanced. Thanks to the rich doctrines contained in this text, we are virtually compelled to join with those who will sing this Christmas, “O come let us adore Him, Christ the Lord.”

In the Beginning:
The Word and the Father
(1:1-2)

In the beginning God … (Genesis 1:1).
1 In the beginning was the Word,and the Word was with God, and the Word wasGod. 2 The Word was with God in the beginning.

Matthew and Luke begin with the birth of John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus, and Mark begins with the ministry of John the Baptist. John goes all the way back to “the beginning.” The first words of John’s Gospel, “In the beginning … ,” bring to mind the account of creation in Genesis 1. The phrase, “in the beginning,” both in the English and in the Greek,²³ is the same in Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. This cannot be merely coincidental; it must be intentional. When Moses wrote the Book of Genesis, he began, “In the beginning God …” John is doing virtually the same thing in the first two verses of his Gospel.

In this first chapter of his Gospel, John does not mention the name “Jesus” until verse 17, and then not again until verse 29. He does not say, nor can he, that “Jesus” was in the beginning. “Jesus” is the name given to the God-man, born of the virgin Mary. It is His human name, which is given Him only after His incarnation. In attempting to teach this text, I have frequently fumbled for my words when referring to our Lord. I find myself sometimes using another expression, “the second person of the Godhead.” This is because our Lord always existed with God and as God, as the “second person of the Godhead,” yet He took on human flesh at a point in time. In John 1:1-3, John is speaking of our Lord’s pre-existence as “the second person of the Godhead.” When John refers to our Lord here, he calls Him “the Word.”²⁴ By and large, the terms “Messiah,” “Son of God,” and “Jesus” are only appropriate when referring to our Lord after His incarnation.²⁵ Our Lord has always existed as God, and He has always existed in unity and fellowship with God the Father. But He did not become God incarnate (Jesus) until the incarnation, described by Matthew and Luke.

What John tells us in the first two verses of his Gospel is mind-boggling: Jesus is God. Before He took on human flesh, “the Word” existed eternally as God, and in fellowship with God the Father. It is important that we grasp this fact. John’s words cannot be reduced to mean anything else, to mean anything less. Our Lord is God. He is eternal. He existed in the very beginning, and He has ever existed with the Father. This is what John expects us to understand him to be saying, and it is what he hopes to convince us is true.

The most obvious and important connection John makes is this: The God who created the universe is the One who was found lying in a Bethlehem manger. John wants us to know that the “Jesus” he introduces is the Messiah promised in the Old Testament. More than this, the Jesus who is the Messiah is the Jesus who is God. Our Lord did not “begin to be” in Bethlehem. He did not even have His origins in Genesis 1 and 2, when God created the world. He was there; He already existed when the world was created. He was there with God. He was there as God.

Are we reading something into the Bible that isn’t there? Not at all! This affirmation of the deity of Jesus Christ is constantly made in the Gospel of John. Jesus claims not only to be God, but to have come down from the Father in heaven. This is what those who trust in Him come to believe. This is what His enemies seek to deny:

“I have both seen and testified that this one is the Son of God” (John 1:34).

Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel!” (John 1:49)

“No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven—the Son of Man” (John 3:13).

“The one who comes from above is superior to all. The one who is from the earth belongs to the earth and speaks about earthly things. The one who comes from heaven is superior to all” (John 3:31).

For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God (John 5:18).

31 “Our ancestors ate the manna in the desert, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”²⁶ 32 Then Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but my Father is giving you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world” (John 6:31-33).

“For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me” (John 6:38).

47 I tell you the solemn truth, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, and they died. 50 This is the bread that has come down from heaven, so that a person may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats from this bread he will live forever. The bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” … 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like your ancestors ate and died. The one who eats this bread will live forever” (John 6:47-51,58)

28 Then Jesus shouted out while teaching in the temple, “You both know me and know where I come from! And I have not come on my own initiative, but the one who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29 but I know him, because I have come from him and he sent me” (John 7:28-29).

Jesus answered, “Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true, because I know where I came from and where I am going. But you people do not know where I came from or where I am going” (John 8:14).

Jesus replied, “You people are from below; I am from above. You people are from this world; I am not from this world” (John 8:23).

40 But now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth I heard from God. Abraham did not do this! 41 You people are doing the deeds of your father.” Then they said to Jesus, “We were not born as a result of sexual immorality! We have only one Father, God himself. 42 Jesus replied, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come from God and am now here. I have not come on my own initiative, but he sent me” (John 8:40-42).

56 Your father Abraham was overjoyed to see my day, and he saw it and was glad.” 57 Then the Jewish people who had been listening to him replied, “You are not yet fifty years old! Have you seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!” (John 8:56-58)

Then some of the Pharisees began to say, “This man is not from God, because he does not observe the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner perform such miraculous signs?” So there was a division among them (John 9:16).

29 We know that God has spoken to Moses! We do not know where this man comes from!” 30 The man replied, “This is a remarkable thing, that you do not know where he comes from, and yet he caused me to see!” (John 9:29-30)

“If this man were not from God, he could do nothing” (John 9:33).

1 Just before the Passover feast, Jesus knew that his time had come for him to depart from this world to the Father. He had loved his own who were in the world, and now he loved them to the end. 2 The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, that he should betray Jesus. 3 Jesus, because he knew that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God … (John 13:1-3).

“Do not let not your hearts be distressed. You believe in God; believe also in Me” (John 14:1).

“Now we know that you know everything and do not need anyone to ask you anything. Because of this we believe that you have come from God” (John 16:30).

“Now they understand that everything you have given me is from you. 8 because I have given them the words you have given me. They accepted them and really understand that I came from you, and believed that you sent me” (John 17:7-8).

The Jewish religious leaders replied, “We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he claimed to be the Son of God!” (John 19:7)

Jesus replied to her, “Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father. Go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’” (John 20:17).

Thomas replied, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28)

But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:31).

You may remember from my previous lesson (1) that years ago I was teaching the Gospel of John at a Bible study in our home when a young couple began to attend. By the third chapter of John, the woman blurted out, “If I didn’t know better, I’d think Jesus was claiming to be God.” It is very clear that Jesus does claim to be God. It is also clear that John is attempting to convince us that Jesus is God. This is the truth that the enemies of our Lord could simply not tolerate.

What John teaches us here about the deity of Jesus Christ is consistent with what the Old Testament taught about the promised Messiah. The Old Testament prophets indicated that the coming Savior was going to be a man, of the seed of Abraham, Jacob, Judah, and David (Genesis 49:8-10; 2 Samuel 7:12-14). They also indicated that the Savior would be the eternal God:

6 For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this (Isaiah 9:6-7, NKJV).

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old,
From everlasting” (Micah 5:2, NKJV).

The New Testament writers clearly agree with John in affirming that the Jesus of the Gospels, the Jesus whom the church worships as Savior and Lord, was not only a sinless man, but also perfect and undiminished deity:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, 16 for all things in heaven and on earth were created by him—all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers—all things were created through him and for him. 17 He himself is before all things and all things are held together in him. 18 He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn from among the dead so that he himself may become first in all things. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him 20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross—whether things on the earth or things in heaven (Colossians 1:15-20).

1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. 3 The son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence and sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Hebrews 1:1-3).

8 But of the son, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness. So God, your God, has anointed you over your companions with the oil of rejoicing.”

10 And, “You founded the earth in the beginning, Lord, and the heavens are the works of your hands 11 They will perish; but you continue. And they will all grow old like a garment. 12 and like a robe you will fold them up and like a garment they will be changed; but you are the same and your years will never run out” (Hebrews 1:8-10).

9 I, John, your brother and the one who shares with you in the persecution, kingdom, and endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island named Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony about Jesus. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day when I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet 11 saying, “Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches—to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.” 12 I turned to locate the voice that was speaking with me, and when I did so, I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the lampstands was one like a son of man. He was dressed in a robe extending down to his feet and he wore a wide golden belt around his chest. 14 His head and hair were as white as wool, even as white as snow, and his eyes were like a fiery flame. 15 His feet were like polished bronze that has been refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the roar of many waters. 16 He held seven stars in his right hand, and a sharp double-edged sword extended out of his mouth. His face shone like the sun shining at full strength. 17 When I saw him I fell down at his feet as though I were dead, but he placed his right hand on me and said, “Do not be afraid! I am the first and the last, 18 namely, the one who lives! I was dead, but look, now I am alive—forever and ever—and I have the keys of death and Hades!” (Revelation 1:9-18)²⁷

The Word and the World
(1:3-5)

3 All things were created through him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life,²⁸ and the life was the light of mankind. 5 And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it.

Verses 1 and 2 place our Lord at the beginning—in fact, before the beginning. He was there with the Father before the world existed. Now, in verse 3, John goes on to show that our Lord was not only present at the beginning, but He was the source of all that had a beginning. The “Word” was not passive, but active, the One through whom all things came into existence. He was not created; He was the Creator. He did not merely create all things for God, He created all things as God. All things came into being through Him. The “Word” spoke, and all things came into existence. As the Creator, He is the origin, the source of life.²⁹

John now draws upon the imagery of “light” introduced in Genesis 1, applying it once again to the “Word.” In Genesis, one of the first things Moses tells us is that God called light into existence (1:3). God then separated the “light” from “darkness” (1:4). After creating “light,” God created “life” (Genesis 1:11f.) John draws a parallel to the original creation at which “the Word” was present and active. Almost without recognizing it, we are transported in time from the original creation (John 1:3) to the appearance of our Lord in human history at the incarnation (verses 4-5ff.). When the “Word” came into the world, the world was in a state of chaos, spiritually speaking. When the “Word” appeared, He was the “light” that illuminated the darkness, revealing the righteousness of God and exposing man’s sin. This had the effect of separating the “light” from the “darkness.” The darkness observed the light, but did not “master” it (verse 5).

That “light,” which appeared at the coming of our Lord continues to shine. There are several ways to translate verse 5, as seen below:

The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it (NIV).

The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it (NRS).

The light shines on in the dark, and the darkness has never quenched it (NEB).

The crucial word in the NET Translation is the word “mastered”:³⁰ “And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it” (emphasis mine). The Greek word can have the sense of “grasping” or “comprehending” mentally, but it can also have the sense of “overpowering” (as the marginal note in the NASB indicates) or “overcoming.” Either nuance of the word would be acceptable in this context.³¹ Jesus came into the world as the true “light,” but lost men were not able to grasp it (compare 1 Corinthians 3:14). Or, even more strongly, Jesus came into the world, illuminating its sin and need for redemption, and the world chose to remain in its sin, thus seeking to oppose and even to overcome the light, but they could not do so.

John introduces “light” as a theme that will recur throughout this Gospel (John 3:18-21; 5:35; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36; 12:46). It is a prophetic theme, which is highlighted in Matthew (4:13-16; 5:14-16) and Luke (1:76-79; 2:25-32; 16:8) as well. Jesus came as the “light,” and He left His disciples and His church behind to reflect that “light” in His absence. The world’s efforts to suppress the “light” have failed, and thus the light continues to shine, even till the present time, through the people of God:

3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing, among whom the god of this age has blinded the minds of those who do not believe so they would not see the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For we do not proclaim ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” is the one who shined in our hearts to give us the light of the glorious knowledge of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:3-6).

7 Therefore, do not be partakers with them, 8 for you were at one time darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of the light—9 for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness, and truth—10 trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For the things they do in secret are shameful even to mention. 13 But all things being exposed by the light are made evident. 14 For everything made evident is light, and for this reason it says, “Awake! O sleeper. Rise from the dead, And Christ will shine on you!” (Ephesians 5:7-14)

14 Do everything without grumbling or arguing, 15 so that you may be blameless and pure, children of God without blemish though you live in a crooked and perverse society, in which you shine as lights in the world 16 by holding on to the word of life so that I will have a reason to celebrate in the day of Christ because I did not run or work in vain (Philippians 2:14-16).

Jesus and John:
The Word and the Witness
(1:6-8)

6 A man came,³² sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the light, so that everyone might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify about the light.

John the Baptist was a very prominent and respected individual. Many came to him to hear him preach, even though his message was a call to repentance. They were content to follow John, and even open to the possibility that he was the Messiah:

People from all over Judea and Jerusalem were going out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan river, as they confessed their sins (Mark 1:5).

While the people were filled with anticipation, and they all pondered in their hearts whether perhaps John could be the Christ (Luke 3:15).

33 “You have sent to John, and he has testified to the truth. 34 (I do not accept human testimony, but I say this so that you may be saved.) 35 He was a lamp that was burning and shining, and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time in his light” (John 5:33-35).

The amazing thing about John the Baptist is that he never performed a miracle or a sign; he only preached and baptized:

40 Jesus went away across the Jordan River again to the place where John had been baptizing at an earlier time, and he stayed there. 41 Many came to him and began saying, “John performed no miraculous sign, but everything John said about this man was true!” 42 And many believed in Jesus there (John 10:40-42, emphasis mine).

The Apostle John turns his attention to John the Baptist in verses 6-8. If I am correct in assuming that John the Apostle was the second disciple of John the Baptist who left him to follow Jesus (John 1:35-42), then it is little wonder that the author of this Gospel has something to say about John the Baptist. How interesting that the Apostle John does not refer to the Baptist here as “John the Baptist,” but simply as “John.” The emphasis of verses 6-8 is not on John as a “baptizer,” but on John as a “witness.” John came as a witness to the “light,” that all men might put their trust in Him. He was not the light, but only a witness to the light. In his reference to John the Baptist, the Apostle John was careful to point out the Baptist’s subordinate role, as was the Baptist himself (see verses 19ff.).

John the Baptist’s task was to bear witness to the “light.” His mission was the same as his disciple, John the Apostle: to focus his ministry on Christ, so that men might come to believe in Him for salvation. The “light” to which John had been bearing witness had not dawned as yet, nor had Jesus yet been identified as that “light.” John could only speak of the “light” as One who was coming, One who was yet to be revealed.

The “Light” and Lost Sinners
(1:9-13)

9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was created through him, but the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become God’s children, 13 children not fathered by human descent or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God.

John himself is not the light to which he bears witness. The light to which he bears witness is the true³³ Light. He is the fulfillment of all that “light” foreshadowed. The “Word” is the source of light; He is the One who called light into existence (Genesis 1:3). After the creation account in Genesis, “light” becomes a prominent Old Testament theme. Consider some of the Old Testament “light” texts that foreshadow our Lord’s coming:

“‘And he shall be like the light of the morning when the sun rises, A morning without clouds, Like the tender grass springing out of the earth, By clear shining after rain’” (2 Samuel 23:4, NKJV).

For You will light my lamp; The LORD my God will enlighten my darkness (Psalm 18:28, NKJV).

The LORD is my light and my salvation; Whom shall I fear? The LORD is the strength of my life; Of whom shall I be afraid? (Psalm 27:1, NKJV)

Who cover Yourself with light as with a garment, Who stretch out the heavens like a curtain (Psalm 104:2, NKJV).

In the Old Testament prophets, God’s “light” becomes a dominant messianic theme:

The people who walked in darkness Have seen a great light; Those who dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, Upon them a light has shined (Isaiah 9:2, NKJV).

So the Light of Israel will be for a fire, And his Holy One for a flame; It will burn and devour His thorns and his briers in one day (Isaiah 10:17, NKJV).

I will bring the blind by a way they did not know; I will lead them in paths they have not known. I will make darkness light before them, And crooked places straight. These things I will do for them, And not forsake them (Isaiah 42:16, NKJV).

Indeed He says, “It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6, NKJV).

Then your light shall break forth like the morning, Your healing shall spring forth speedily, And your righteousness shall go before you; The glory of the LORD shall be your rear guard (Isaiah 58:8, NKJV).

1 Arise, shine; For your light has come! And the glory of the LORD is risen upon you. 2 For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, And deep darkness the people; But the LORD will arise over you, And His glory will be seen upon you. 3 The Gentiles shall come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising (Isaiah 60:1-3, NKJV).

19 “The sun shall no longer be your light by day, Nor for brightness shall the moon give light to you; But the LORD will be to you an everlasting light, And your God your glory. 20 Your sun shall no longer go down, Nor shall your moon withdraw itself; For the LORD will be your everlasting light, And the days of your mourning shall be ended” (Isaiah 60:19-20, NKJV).

He reveals deep and secret things; He knows what is in the darkness, And light dwells with Him (Daniel 2:22, NKJV).

8 Do not rejoice over me, my enemy; When I fall, I will arise; When I sit in darkness, The LORD will be a light to me. 9 I will bear the indignation of the LORD, Because I have sinned against Him, Until He pleads my case And executes justice for me. He will bring me forth to the light; I will see His righteousness (Micah 7:8-9, NKJV).

When John tells us that Jesus is the “light,” he is telling us that our Lord is the fulfillment of Israel’s hopes, realized in Messiah, who was symbolized and characterized by light in the Old Testament. Jesus is the “true light,” that is, the final consummation of that “light” foreshadowed in the Old Testament. The appearance of the “true Light” established a standard of righteousness which exposes the sins of those who walk in darkness:

19 “Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God” (John 3:19-21).

11 Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For the things they do in secret are shameful even to mention. 13 But all things being exposed by the light are made evident. 14 For everything made evident is light, and for this reason it says:

“Awake, O sleeper. Rise from the dead, And Christ will shine on you” (Ephesians 5:11-14).

The “true light” came into the world, but the world’s response to that light was not what we would have hoped. The Word, who existed before the world was created, who brought the world into existence, who brought forth the light, came into the world which He made and yet the world did not know Him. The one who was both the Word and the Light came into the world He created, and this world did not want Him.

He came to possess what was His, but even His own people did not receive Him. There is a clear play on words in verse 11. Some English translations do not even indicate that there are two different words employed by John, with a slightly different meaning. They translate both Greek terms by the same English words, “His own”:

He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him (verse 11, NKJV, emphasis mine).

He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him (verse 11, NASB, emphasis mine).

He came unto his own, and his own received him not (verse 11, KJV, emphasis mine).

The NET Bible renders this verse the most accurately:

He came to what was his own,³⁴ but his own people did not receive him (NET).

How ironic that the One who created all things should come to possess what was His, and yet He was rejected by His own people. How similar this sounds to our Lord’s parable of the “wicked tenant farmers” in Matthew 21:33-46. It is indeed a dark picture, one that reveals the wickedness of men who would reject their Creator (see Romans 1:18-32).

There is good news, however. The rejection of “the Light” by His own people did not at all thwart the purposes of God. John is not simply telling us the story of “God in the Hands of Angry Sinners”;³⁵ in verses 12 and 13, he will tell us about those sinners who are in the hands of a gracious God. Not all will reject the Light that has come into the world. Those who receive Him are given the authority to be called God’s children—twice His: they are His by virtue of creation, and His by virtue of sonship. This is true of everyone who places faith in His name.³⁶

Lest anyone dare to give themselves credit for being among the company of the saved, let them listen to the words of John in verse 13, which clearly teach that salvation is God’s work, not our own, God’s choosing us, more than our choosing Him:³⁷

“Children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision,³⁸ but by God.”

There is considerable discussion about what these words mean. Literally, the text reads, “Who were born, not of bloods …” Rather than spend time exploring all the options, it is more profitable to take the broader view here. All three expressions, “of bloods,” “will of the flesh,” and “will of man” describe human origins from the standpoint of human initiative and human action. John seems to draw together all the expressions he can think of which his readers accept as the source of human conception and birth. Both in terms of the actual joining of cells, and in terms of the motivations and initiatives behind this union, John tells us that our spiritual birth does not originate from, or through, human intent or endeavor. Rather, those who are born into the family of God as His children are those who are “born of God.” God is the Creator; He is the ultimate cause, the One through whose will and work men become His children. This will be played out in greater detail in our Lord’s conversation with Nicodemus in chapter 3. Put concisely in biblical terms:

“Salvation is of the Lord” (Jonah 2:9; Psalm 3:8, NKJV).

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:44; see 6:65).

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever! Amen (Romans 11:36).

The Word and Human Flesh
(1:14-18)

14 Now the Word became flesh and lived³⁹ among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the only [begotten]⁴⁰ One, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 15 John testified about him and cried out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’” 16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. The only One, himself God, who is in the presence of the Father, has made God known.

These verses are the climax of all that John has been leading up to in his prologue. Up to this point, we have been told that “the Word” is a person who is eternal, who is in fact a member of the Godhead. He was there at creation; indeed, He was the Creator. He is distinct from, yet intimately in fellowship with, God the Father. He is the source of light and life. He is the One to whom John the Baptist bore witness, foretelling His appearance. He is the One whom His own people rejected, but those who receive Him become children of God. Those who do become God’s children do so not out of human volition or effort; they are divinely “conceived.” We have not yet been told who this person is. We are now told in verses 14-18.

Until now, the One John has been introducing to us has been identified only as “the Word.” This “Word” is also the “Light” which shines upon men. Illumination can occur from a great distance, as the light of the sun shines on us from afar. But John is now about to tell us an astounding fact: the “Word” became flesh and lived among men. Here is something absolutely unique to human history. In the pagan religions, the “gods” have come down to the earth in some form, but never was there an incarnation like that of our Lord. So too, in some false religions, men are promised that they will become gods, but never that God would take on humanity as John describes here.⁴¹

The “Word” lived (tabernacled)⁴² among His people by adding perfect humanity to His undiminished deity. Thus He manifested His glory to men. God’s “glory” was once displayed by means of the tabernacle:

42 “This shall be a continual burnt offering throughout your generations at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD, where I will meet you to speak with you. 43 And there I will meet with the children of Israel, and the tabernacle shall be sanctified by My glory” (Exodus 29:42-43, NKJV).

33 And he raised up the court all around the tabernacle and the altar, and hung up the screen of the court gate. So Moses finished the work. 34 Then the cloud covered the tabernacle of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter the tabernacle of meeting, because the cloud rested above it, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle (Exodus 40:33-35, NKJV).

At the incarnation, God “tabernacled” among His people by means of His Son, and thus John can say, “We saw his glory—the glory of the only [begotten] One, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father” (John 1:14; see also 1 John 1:1-4).

John says, “we saw his glory.” The “we” must certainly be the apostles, although others may be included as well. The transfiguration of our Lord would be one of the more dramatic demonstrations of His glory (see Luke 9:30-32; 2 Peter 1:16-19). Another instance would be the turning of water into wine (John 2:11) and the raising of Lazarus (John 11:4, 40). The greatest display of the glory of God in Christ up until now would be His death, burial, and resurrection (see John 12:28; 13:31; 17:5, 22, 24; 1 Corinthians 15:43). It may well be that John’s use of the word “glory” should force us to reconsider and redefine “glory,” so that it encompasses things we do not normally associate with glory. As One who came forth “from the Father,” who was “full of grace and truth,” we would certainly expect Him to reveal God’s glory.

This One John has been introducing is Jesus Christ. He is the One of whom John the Baptist bore witness. He is the One who is greater than all. He is greater than John the Baptist; He existed before him. He is greater than the law. He is “full of grace and truth” (verse 14). The law was a revelation of God, written in stone. The Lord Jesus Christ is the revelation of God, manifest in human flesh, who tabernacled among men. He is the full and final revelation of God:

1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. 3 The son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:1-3).

Jesus Christ is greater than the law because He is the full revelation of God (when the law only partially revealed Him). Furthermore, His grace is greater than the grace provided by the law: “For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another [literally grace upon grace]. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ” (John 1:16, 17).

While there is a sense in which we can contrast “grace” and “law,” it is also true that the law was God’s gracious gift to men. The law is not devoid of grace. Rather, through Jesus Christ and the New Covenant, God manifests greater grace.⁴³ Thus, John can say that in Christ we have received “grace upon grace.” Moses was the instrument through whom “the grace of law” was given; Jesus Christ is the instrument through whom “grace upon grace” is given.

In the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, the invisible God is now visible to men. Moses longed to see God more fully and was granted a partial glimpse (Exodus 33:17—34:7). In Christ, we see God dwelling among men in human flesh. It is more than we could ever have hoped. It is more than we shall ever be able to grasp. It is a wonder that will inspire our worship throughout time and eternity.

Conclusion

The mind is taxed beyond its capacity as one reads the words of John in the prologue to his Gospel. These are great truths, which we shall seek to fathom throughout this life, and which shall fuel our worship of our Lord throughout all eternity. Consider some applications this text may have for the reader as we conclude our message.

First, the reader should recognize in John’s prologue the introduction of the great truths and themes which we will continually visit throughout the Gospel.

In the prologue we are introduced to the key themes that follow in the narrative: the Word, God, life, light, darkness, witness, the world, rejection/reception, belief, regeneration (becoming a child of God), incarnation (the Word become flesh), the one and only Son of the Father, glory, grace, truth, and fullness—all these expanded upon and illustrated in the rest of the Gospel. And we are introduced to the key figures in the Gospel: God, the Word (Jesus, the Son of God), John the Baptist, Moses, the writer (as a spokesperson for the apostles), and all the believers.⁴⁴

Perhaps you too have had the frustrating experience of answering the doorbell or the telephone to find a salesman, who most often assures you that they are not “selling” anything. We know they are selling something, and usually, we don’t want to buy anything. (Girl Scouts, selling their thin mint cookies are a welcomed exception, both in their method and their product.) John does not do that. He immediately informs his readers where he is coming from and where he is going. Whether or not we agree, we at least know what to expect. Do we agree that Jesus is God? Perhaps some may not, but they must admit that John believes so, and confidently claims that He is.

Second, the truths John sets out in his prologue are not only foundational to his Gospel, but foundational to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. While the other Gospels build up to the realization that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, John blurts it all out at the beginning of his work. Jesus is “the Word,” the God who existed from eternity, who was present and active at creation. And, wonder of wonders, the Word who existed in eternity past with the Father took on human flesh at the incarnation. He is the source of light (truth) and of (eternal) life. Through Him, grace and truth are abundantly provided by the Father.

These foundational truths are the point of attack for those who prefer darkness to light, who will not receive the One who came to lay claim to His creation. These fundamental doctrines John holds forth are those which men seek to deny, and which they endeavor to replace with false doctrines and beliefs. The deity of Christ was attacked by Arianism, which claimed Jesus was but a mere man, like all other men. The humanity of Christ was refuted by Docetism, which sought to persuade men that Jesus did not have a real body, that He was some kind of ghost or spirit being. This is precisely why John gives such emphasis to these foundational truths of our Lord’s deity and incarnation. These are not later embellishments, peddled as truth; they are the truth.

Third, foremost among the teachings of John’s prologue is the doctrine of the incarnation of our Lord. J. I. Packer defines what is meant by the incarnation:

The baby born at Bethlehem was God made man. The Word had become flesh: a real human baby. He had not ceased to be God; He was no less God then than before; but He had begun to be man. He was not now God minus some elements of His deity, but God plus all that He had made His own by taking manhood to Himself. He who made man was now learning what it felt like to be a man. He who made the angel who became the devil was now in a state in which He could be tempted—could not, indeed, avoid being tempted—by the devil; and the perfection of His human life was only achieved by conflict with the devil.⁴⁵

The incarnation means that God added unfallen humanity to undiminished deity. It does not in any way mean that our Lord’s deity was diminished or set aside. It does mean that certain manifestations of His glory were veiled, and that the use of some of His powers were voluntarily restrained. It does not mean that our Lord was created in Bethlehem, but only that He came down to the earth at His incarnation. It does mean that the baby in the manger was God manifested in human flesh.

The doctrine of the incarnation of our Lord is important for several reasons. It is important because it is true, and because it is clearly and emphatically taught here in John’s Gospel, as elsewhere. Further, it is important because the incarnation of our Lord fulfilled Old Testament Scriptures. The Old Testament taught that the promised Messiah would be human, the descendant of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, and David (see 2 Samuel 7:12-14). The Old Testament also taught that Messiah would be divine (see Isaiah 9:6; Micah 5:2). The incarnation of our Lord was a practical necessity. In order to save men, there needed to be a sacrifice, a perfect human sacrifice—a man who did not need to die for his own sins, and thus could die for the sins of others. This person must be a “son of Adam” in order to be the “last Adam” (1 Corinthians 15:45), who could reverse the effects of the first Adam for all who believe in Him (see Romans 5:12-21). It is also by our Lord’s incarnation that He could empathize and identify with man, and thus become a merciful and faithful high priest (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:14-16; see also 1 Timothy 2:5).

Fourth, if John’s teaching on the incarnation is true (as it surely is!), then we must certainly heed what our Lord has said. Jesus Christ is the full and final revelation of God (Hebrews 1:1-4). Since this is true, we do well to heed what He has said:

1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken through angels proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, 3 how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was first communicated through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, 4 while God confirmed their witness with signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will (Hebrews 2:1-4).

Let us remember what the Father said after He identified Jesus as His Son: “While he was still speaking, a bright cloud surrounded them, and a voice from the cloud said, ‘This is the Son I love, in whom I have great delight. Listen to him!’” (Matthew 17:5)

Fifth, John’s prologue and its teaching on the incarnation of our Lord enhances our appreciation of the Christmas story of the birth of our Lord, as recorded in Matthew and Luke. The “wonder” of Christmas is not that a baby was born to humble parents. It is not confined to the fact that this child was the fulfillment of many prophecies and the object of God’s care and protection (from Herod, for example). The wonder is that this Child was the second person of the Godhead, come to dwell among men as a man (a God-man), come to bear the sins of the world.

John does not tell us the “old, old, story” of the birth of our Lord. Instead, he chooses to tell us that this One born of the virgin Mary was, as the prophet Micah said, one “whose goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity” (Micah 5:2b, NASB). What John tells us sheds a whole new light on what we read in the birth accounts of Matthew and Luke. He chooses to tell us that this birth was a unique event in history, never to be repeated, and always to be the source of great wonder, joy, and gratitude.

Have you noticed those times in the Gospels when someone (especially Mary) “wondered” or “pondered” or “treasured things in her heart”? Mary witnessed things that were beyond her. John tells us things in his prologue which are beyond us, which should cause us to ponder this text for a good long while. Think of it: the babe in the manger is none other than God. The One to whom the Magi were led by a star was the One who made that star.

The Maker of the universe
As Man, for man was made a curse.
The claims of Law which He had made
Unto the uttermost He paid.

His holy fingers made the bough
Which grew the thorns that crowned His brow.
The nails that pierced His hands were mined
In secret places He designed.

He made the forest whence there sprung
The tree on which His body hung.
He died upon a cross of wood
Yet made the hill on which it stood.

The sky that darkened o’er His head
By Him above the earth was spread.
The sun that hid from Him its face
By His decree was poised in space.

The spear which spilled His precious blood
Was tempered in the fires of God.
The grave in which His form was laid
Was hewn in rocks His hands had made,

The throne on which He now appears
Was His from everlasting years.
But a new glory crowns His brow
And every knee to Him shall bow.

Author Unknown

Sixth, John’s prologue, and especially his teaching on the incarnation of our Lord, fleshes out for us the true “spirit of Christmas.” John wrote, “No one has ever seen God. The only [begotten] One, himself God, who is in the presence of the Father, has made God known” (John 1:18). The expression, “has made God known” might be rendered by a seminarian, “exegeted Him.” “Exegesis” is the explanation of a text of Scripture. Jesus, by His incarnation, has “explained” the Father to us. He did not do this merely with words, but by means of His actions. Many of us who are prone to think we best represent our Lord by our talk had better consider this text, which says we explain our Lord by our walk, along with our talk.

The incarnation of our Lord is more than an event in history, albeit an important event. It is an example⁴⁶ for each of us to follow:

5 The attitude Christ Jesus had, you should have toward one another, 6 who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing human nature.
8 He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death … even death on a cross
(Philippians 2:5-8).

The “Christmas spirit” which we learn from the example of our Lord is the exact opposite of the “Corinthian spirit” described in Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians. The Corinthians thought only of themselves. No wonder there was immorality, self-indulgence, pride, and division. The Corinthians wanted “glory” now; they did not wish to wait. They did not wish to suffer or to deny their pleasures. The true Christmas spirit is seen in our Lord, who set aside His glory and His heavenly pleasures, so that He could give His life as an atoning sacrifice for the sins of men. The Corinthian spirit demanded all heavenly benefits now and avoided any sacrifice in the present.

Satan has ever been in the business of attempting to drive a wedge between humanity and deity. In the Garden of Eden, Satan succeeded in creating a barrier between man and God by tempting man to do away with the one thing which appeared to distinguish God from man—the knowledge of good and evil. In tempting man to sin, Satan managed to drive a wedge between man and God. In the temptation of our Lord in the wilderness, Satan tried to drive a wedge between our Lord and His Father, by urging Him to fulfill His human desires in spite of His divine calling. It didn’t work. The incarnation of our Lord made possible the union of man with God in a way that none would ever have imagined possible. By receiving God’s gift of the forgiveness of sins, and eternal life in the person and sacrificial work of Jesus Christ, we enter into a union with Christ which surpasses our ability to fathom such amazing grace.

Seventh, the incarnation of our Lord puts all the other teachings of the New Testament Gospels into perspective. No one puts it better than J. I. Packer, whose fifth chapter in Knowing God (“God Incarnate”) is worth reading and re-reading, especially at Christmas:

It is no wonder that thoughtful people find the gospel of Jesus Christ hard to believe, for the realities with which it deals pass man’s understanding. But it is sad that so many make faith harder than it need be, by finding difficulties in the wrong places. Take the atonement, for instance. … Or take the resurrection, … Or, again, take the virgin birth, which has been widely denied among Protestants in this century. …

But in fact the real difficulty, because the supreme mystery with which the gospel confronts us, does not lie here at all. It lies, not in the Good Friday message of atonement, nor in the Easter message of resurrection, but in the Christmas message of incarnation. The really staggering Christian claim is that Jesus of Nazareth was God made man—that the second person of the Godhead became the ‘second man’ (I Cor. 15:47), determining human destiny, the second representative head of the race, and that He took humanity without loss of deity, so that Jesus of Nazareth was as truly and fully divine as He was human. Here are two mysteries for the price of one—the plurality of persons within the unity of God, and the union of Godhead and manhood in the person of Jesus. It is here, in the thing that happened at the first Christmas, that the profoundest and most unfathomable depths of the Christian revelation lie. ‘The Word was made flesh’ (John 1:14); God became man; the divine Son became a Jew; the Almighty appeared on earth as a helpless human baby, unable to do more than lie and stare and wriggle and make noises, needing to be fed and changed and taught to talk like any other child. And there was no illusion or deception in this: the babyhood of the Son of God was a reality. The more you think about it, the more staggering it gets. Nothing in fiction is so fantastic as is this truth of the incarnation.

This is the real stumbling-block in Christianity. It is here that Jews, Moslems, Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and many of those who feel the difficulties above-mentioned (about the virgin birth, the miracles, the atonement, and the resurrection), have come to grief. It is from misbelief, or at least inadequate belief, about the incarnation that difficulties at other points in the gospel story usually spring. But once the incarnation is grasped as a reality, these other difficulties dissolve.⁴⁷

As we enter the Christmas season and the celebration of Christmas, I must ask this simple question: “Have you received God’s gift to you in the person of His Son?” God sent His Son into the world, so that lost sinners need not spend eternity in hell. God sent His Son as the perfect God-man, so that men could be saved from their sins. Have you received the gift of the forgiveness of your sins and of eternal life? Confess your sin, and that your sin condemns you to eternal torment. Receive Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection as His work on your behalf, as the payment for your sins, and as the source of a righteousness that God accepts as sufficient for eternal life. May you know what it is like for God to dwell in you, to His glory and for your eternal good.

21 Joyful Noise Music Company, Logos Hymnal (Fort Worth, TX: Joyful Noise Music Company, 1994).

22 J. I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1973), p. 48.

23 In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the phrase in Genesis 1:1 is the same as the phrase in the Greek text of John 1:1.

24 “He does not bring the term ‘son’ into his opening sentences at all; instead, he speaks first of the Word. There was no danger of this being misunderstood; Old Testament readers would pick up the reference at once. God’s Word in the Old Testament is His creative utterance, His power in action fulfilling His purpose. The Old Testament depicted God’s utterance, the actual statement of His purpose, as having power in itself to effect the thing purposed. Genesis 1 tells us how at creation ‘God said, Let there be …and there was …’ (Gen. 1:3). ‘By the word of the LORD were the heavens made … he spake, and it was done’ (Ps. 33:6, 9). The Word of God is thus God at work.” J. I. Packer, p. 48.

25 It is true that one might speak of the “Messiah” or the “Son of God” in a prophetic sense, before the incarnation.

26 In the NET Bible, New Testament quotations from the Old Testament are indicated by a combination of boldface and italic type. Less direct allusions to Old Testament passages are indicated by italic type only.

27 See also 1 Corinthians 8:4-6; Titus 2:11-14; 1 John 5:20.

28 See footnote 7 above. These words are an allusion to Psalm 36:9.

29 See Colossians 1:15-20, cited above.

30 “Mastered” seems to best convey and allow for the two possible meanings of the Greek word used here.

31 Verses 9 and 10 seem to combine the two nuances of the word, so that the world neither “knew” Him who was the light nor “received” Him as the light.

32 There is a clear contrast here between the Word and John. The Word was; John came. The term translated “came” in verse 6 is employed three times in John 1:3, where in each case it refers to things created, things which came into being at the will of God. John came (into being, we might say); the Word was. Morris writes, “Jesus ‘was’ in the beginning. John ‘came into existence.’ The contrast is continued when John is described as ‘a man,’ for Jesus has already been spoken of as ‘the Word.’” Morris, p. 88.

33 Of the 27 occurrences of the word always (in the KJV) rendered “true,” other writers employ the term but 5 times; all the rest of the occurrences are in one of John’s writings. The word “true” can mean “true as opposed to what is false” (see Luke 16:11). It can also (as here) mean “true” in the sense that it is the ultimate and final fulfillment of earlier prototypes. Thus, our Lord is the true light (John 1:9; 1 John 2:8), the true bread (6:32), the true vine (15:1), and the true witness (Revelation 3:14).

34 I am inclined to agree with Leon Morris, who renders this “he came home,” but I will take this matter up in our study of the “cleansing of the temple” (John 2:12-22). Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 96.

35 This is R. C. Sproul’s title for a most excellent chapter in his book, R. C. Sproul, The Holiness of God (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1985), chapter 9, pp. 221-234.

36 “The ‘name’ meant much more to people of antiquity than it does to us. … For men then it stood for the whole personality. When, for example, the Psalmist spoke of loving the name of God (Ps. 5:11), or when he prayed, ‘The name of the God of Jacob set thee up on high’ (Ps. 20:1), he did not have in mind simply the uttering of the name. He was thinking of all that ‘God’ means. The name in some way expressed the whole person.” Morris, p. 99.

37 See also John 15:16. This is not to say that we have no choice to make; it is to say that His choice of us precedes our choice of Him.

38 I paraphrase the words, “a husband’s decision,” “the twinkle in a husband’s eye.”

39 The Greek word, rendered “lived” would literally be rendered “tabernacled.” This can hardly be coincidental. John again plays upon Old Testament history and imagery. The tabernacle was God’s means of dwelling in the midst of His people. How much better our Lord’s incarnation was to the Old Testament tabernacle.

40 The word “begotten” is omitted in the NET Bible, but I believe it must be present. It is deeply embedded in the Greek word, and it is a key element in the messianic scheme in the Bible. Begetting can refer to physical birth (Hebrews 11:17), and to spiritual birth (1 Corinthians 4:5; Philemon 1:10). In its messianic sense, to be “begotten” is not to be “born,” but to be appointed and enthroned as God’s King (see Psalm 2:7). God the Father did not quote Psalm 2:7 at the birth of our Lord, but later (see Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; 5:5).

41 It is interesting to consider Satan’s strategies in this regard. At the fall of man, described in Genesis 3, Satan promises man (technically, he promised Eve this) that he can become like God (see Genesis 3:5). In Genesis 6:1-4, it would appear that Satan is seeking to bring about a kind of “incarnation” by having fallen angels cohabit with the “daughters of men.”

42 See footnote 19 above.

43 The writer to the Hebrews would prefer the term “better.”

44 Philip Wesley Comfort, I Am the Way: A Spiritual Journey Through the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), pp. 33-34.

45 Packer, p. 50.

46 Liberal scholarship wants to confine our Lord’s life and ministry to the category of “example.” The biblical view sees our Lord first as the Son of God and the Lamb of God, who by His atoning death and resurrection has accomplished salvation for all who believe. Then, and only then, does it look beyond to the marvelous example of our Lord. The two elements (of atonement and example) are not to be separated, as Philippians 2 demonstrates.

47 J. I. Packer, Knowing God, pp. 45-46, from chapter 5, “God Incarnate.”

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Incarnation

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

3. The Witness of John (John 1:19-37)

Introduction

Thirty years ago, my wife Jeannette and I concluded that God was leading us to attend Dallas Theological Seminary. After college, I began to teach school in a little town called Gig Harbor, just across the Narrows Bridge from Tacoma, Washington. God led us to a wonderful little church and a godly pastor, who fueled a passion to expound the Word of God. When we left, we had a one-year-old child and another on the way. Bidding a tearful farewell to our family and friends, we set out on an adventure which we believed would be four years long. It has ended up being many more years than that. We had a part-time job waiting for us in Dallas, managing an apartment complex, which would at least provide us with our housing. We did not know of any other employment for certain, and even when we learned that God had another job waiting for me, our income met only half of our monthly needs. I am sure there are those who feel that we should have waited to come to Dallas, until we were assured of the means to accomplish what we believed God had called us to do, namely to graduate from Dallas Seminary.⁴⁸ Our seminary years were some of the most challenging and exciting times of our lives, as we witnessed God’s care and provision on many occasions.

Our experience was not unique. Can you imagine Abraham leaving his family and homeland and setting out for an undisclosed place far away from home? Or think of how Moses felt leaving his father-in-law’s flocks in the wilderness and going to Egypt to confront Pharaoh and demand that he let God’s people go. Think of what it would have been like for the Israelite priests to step into the Red Sea, trusting God to somehow make a path through the sea to the other side. Or imagine setting off into the desert with your family and all of your possessions, trusting God to provide all you need until you reach the promised land of Canaan.

Now place yourself in the sandals and camel hair suit of John the Baptist. God commands you to go out and to begin calling the nation Israel to repentance, announcing that the Messiah is soon to be revealed. You are not even certain at the time just who the Messiah is—or how He is to be revealed. You are to preach in the wilderness, so that all who want to hear you must come out of the city and into the wilderness. You have never even performed so much as one miracle. Can you imagine faithfully preaching a message of repentance in preparation for Messiah, as John the Baptist did, without even knowing the name of the one about whom you were preaching?

Truly John the Baptist is a remarkable man, and Jesus had only good things to say about him:

7 While they⁴⁹ were going away, Jesus began to speak to the crowd about John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 What did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothes? Those who wear soft clothes are in the homes of kings. 9 But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes. I tell you, even more than a prophet. 10 This is the one about whom it was written: ‘Look, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.’

11 “Now I tell you the truth, among those born of women, no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he is. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and forceful people lay hold of it. 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John appeared. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, who is to come. 15 The one who has ears, listen!” (Matthew 11:7-15 NET)⁵⁰

It was not just our Lord who thought highly of John the Baptist. Even though John had condemned Herod’s marriage to his brother’s wife, Herod had great respect for John and his preaching. He even protected him:

17 For Herod himself had sent men to seize John and bind him in prison, on account of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, because he married her. 18 For John told Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” 19 So Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him, but she was not able to, 20 because Herod feared John, since he knew that he was a righteous and holy man, and he protected him. When he heard him, he was thoroughly baffled, yet he liked to listen to him (Mark 6:17-20).

By nearly any standard, one would have to admit that John is “unique.” He dressed strangely, wearing a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt. His diet consisted of locusts and wild honey (Mark 1:6). He kept the Nazarite vow, refraining from wine and strong drink (Luke 1:15; 7:33-34). Filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15, 40-41), he was a man of prayer, who taught his disciples to pray (Luke 5:33; 11:1).

John was the “talk of the town” from the time of his birth. His father, Zacharias (a priest), and his mother had been unable to bear children, especially after she reached old age (Luke 1:5-25; 59-66). John’s birth was supernatural. When John began to preach, people came in large numbers to hear him:

People from all over Judea and Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the Jordan river, as they confessed their sins (Mark 1:5).

“He was a lamp that was burning and shining, and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time in his light” (John 5:35).

John’s popularity continued, even after his death. John’s ministry and message reached far and wide. Peter used the words of John to defend his actions at the home of Cornelius (Acts 10-11, see especially 11:15-18). Paul included the message and ministry of John in the gospel he preached (Acts 13:23-25). Apollos was a man “well-versed in the Scriptures,” and until he came across Aquila and Priscilla, he knew only the baptism of John (Acts 18:24-25). When Paul reached Ephesus, he came across those who were disciples who knew only John’s baptism (Acts 19:1-7).

John did not gain popularity by catering to his audience. His headquarters were not in Jerusalem with a fine church building and full service programs; he offered no childcare or free meals. In fact, John never attracted crowds by performing signs (John 10:41-42). From what Luke writes, we know that John’s message did not appeal to the flesh:

7 So John said to the crowds that came out to be baptized by him, “You offspring of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8 Therefore produce fruits that reflect repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. 9 Already the ax is aimed⁵¹ at the root of the trees; thus every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. 10 So the crowds were asking him, “What then should we do?” 11 John answered them, “The person who has two tunics must share with the person who has none; and the person who has food must do likewise.” 12 Tax collectors also came to be baptized, and they said to him, “Teacher, what should we do?” 13 He told them, “Collect no more than you are required to.” 14 Then some soldiers also asked him, “And as for us—what should we do?” He told them, “Take money from no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your pay. 15 While the people were filled with anticipation, and they all pondered in their hearts whether perhaps John could be the Christ, 16 John answered them all, “I baptize you with water; but there is one coming more powerful than I am, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his storehouse, but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire.” 18 Thus with many other exhortations, John proclaimed good news to the people (Luke 3:7-18).

The Apostle John, author of the Gospel of John, seems to have previously been a disciple of John the Baptist. It must have been with great affection and regard for the Baptist that the Apostle writes of him in the first chapter of his Gospel. We find the ministries and messages of John the Baptist and Jesus interspersed and inter-twined in this first chapter. John sought to identify himself with Jesus, and Jesus surely sought to identify with John and his message. There is, however, a great difference between these two individuals, as the Apostle John makes clear in this chapter. William Hendriksen⁵² calls attention to these points of contrast:

Christ	John
a. was from all eternity	a. came
b. is the Word	b. is mere man
c. is himself God	c. is commissioned by God
d. is the real light	d. came to testify about the real light
e. is the object of trust	e. is the agent through which men came to trust in the real light, even Christ

In trying to expound this text about John the Baptist, I feel very much like that future time when I am supposed to preach my grandmother’s funeral. Nearly 20 years ago, Grandma Deffinbaugh wrote me a note, asking me to preach her funeral sermon. Now almost 99 years old and doing quite well for her age, she has given me the texts she would like emphasized. In essence, she has directed me to preach the gospel and to avoid a great deal of talk about her. It is a noble request, but a difficult thing to accomplish, especially at her own funeral!

It is clear that the Apostle John is attempting to honor the Baptist’s guiding principle of exalting Christ and not himself. Nevertheless, we will not do justice to our text, or to John the Baptist, if we do not reflect on those things which set this man apart. After all, our Lord Himself referred to the Baptist as the greatest Old Testament saint (Matthew 11:11). We will do well then to explore the greatness of John the Baptist, the last Old Testament prophet.

Although our text begins at verse 19 of John 1, we must go back to the earliest references to John the Baptist in this Gospel to learn about, and from, this great prophet.

Verses 6-8

6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the light, so that everyone might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify about the light.

The Word was; John came. The Word was the Light; John came, sent from God as a witness to this Light. John was a witness, and the Lord Jesus was the One about whom John testified. John was not the light, but a witness sent to testify that the Light was coming. To us, these words may seem redundant—old news. But they were, and they are, revolutionary. Nothing like the coming of our Lord in human flesh has ever happened before—nor will it ever happen again. John’s role in this is important, yet definitely subordinate. No one knows this more than John. What the Apostle John writes in verses 6-8, the Baptist⁵³ reiterates and underscores in his own testimony. These verses give us the reality by which John the Baptist governed his life and ministry.

Verse 15

John testified about him and cried out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am⁵⁴ because he existed before me.’”

The first words of the Baptist, which the Apostle John records in verse 15, concern the Baptist’s subordinate status in relation to the Word, the One of whom he bears witness. Notice that the Baptist does not refer to Jesus by name. How can he? He doesn’t know for certain who the “coming One” is. This is partly the reason He is called the “Word” (verse 1) and “He who comes after me” (verse 15). The identity of the Messiah is yet to be revealed to John. What he does know, he tells us: this “coming One” outranks him because He existed before him (verse 15).

Verses 19-23

19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 He confessed—he did not deny but confessed—“I am not the Christ.” 21 So they asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.” 22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” 23 John said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the desert, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.”

We have already seen that John is exceedingly popular. The unusual circumstances surrounding his birth aroused interest and curiosity, if not hope (Luke 1:65-66), and his public ministry fueled the flames of Israel’s messianic hopes: “While the people were filled with anticipation, and they all pondered in their hearts whether perhaps John could be the Christ” (Luke 3:15).

John drew large crowds, and many were going to him for baptism. John recognizes some of these baptismal candidates as insincere, and he appears to refuse to baptize them (Luke 3:7-9). John is of a priestly line, although his ministry is certainly independent of official mainline Judaism. Early in his youth, he retreats to the deserts to live until the time comes for him to commence his public ministry (Luke 1:80), and even then his ministry is conducted in the wilderness rather than in Jerusalem or any city (Luke 3:1-3). While it seems that nearly every segment of society is represented in the crowd which comes to hear John and to be baptized by him (see Luke 3:10-14), one group is conspicuously absent: “However, the Pharisees and the experts in religious law rejected God’s purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John” (Luke 7:30).

Are these Pharisees some of those John refused to baptize? It does not seem likely. Luke does not tell us John refuses to baptize them, but that they refuse John’s baptism. I am therefore inclined to believe these Pharisees and lawyers are folks who never went out to the wilderness to hear John. In fact, I am inclined to think these same Pharisees and lawyers are those who sent the delegation to John to inquire who he claimed to be, and just what his ministry was about.

We know from our Lord’s later words that the scribes and Pharisees loved a following: “Woe to you experts in the law and you Pharisees, hypocrites! You cross land and sea to make one convert, and when you get one, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves!” (Matthew 23:15).

From what the Gospels tell us, it also seems that these Pharisees were not inclined to give up the place they had made for themselves: “47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, ‘What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. 48 If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation’” (John 11:47-48). It is neither orthodoxy, nor a love for the truth, which motivates these religious leaders, but garden variety jealousy (see Matthew 27:18).

“The Jews” who send the delegation to investigate John the Baptist and his ministry are the religious elite of that day, Jews who hold positions of power which they are not inclined to give up, either to John or to Jesus. These men do not come to John personally, for this would acknowledge John’s importance. Instead, they send a lower level delegation of “priests and Levites”⁵⁵ to John, telling them what to ask, and by so doing, send John a signal that they are in power: they are the ones who accredit the ministry of others. In their minds, they issue religious franchises to men like John, and he can only operate with their permission and under their authority. John is being interrogated like a recent seminary graduate going through an ordination exam.

The first question the delegation asks is, “Who are you?” (verse 19). No one in this delegation seems able to actually speak the word “Messiah.” They do not ask directly, “Are you the Messiah?” But John knows this is the essence of their question.⁵⁶ Thus he answers, “I am not the Christ” (verse 20), which prompts a sequence of follow-up questions. If John is not the Christ, is he Elijah (verse 21)? This question arises due to the prophecy of Malachi:

4 “Remember the Law of Moses, My servant, Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, With the statutes and judgments. 5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD. 6 And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse” (Malachi 4:4-6, NKJV).

This question about Elijah, and the answer John gives, may pose a problem for some because of what Luke and our Lord said about John:

15 “For he will be great before the Lord. He must never drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even before his birth. 16 He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 And he will go before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him” (Luke 1:15-17).

11 “I tell you the truth, among those born of women, no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he is. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and forceful people lay hold of it. 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John appeared. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, who is to come” (Matthew 11:11-14).

How can John the Baptist say he is not Elijah, when Jesus says that he is? The answer may not be difficult. You may remember that Elijah did not die, but was taken into heaven in a chariot of fire, so that his body could not be found (see 2 Kings 2:1-17). It seems some expected Elijah to return in person. John rightly denies being Elijah in person. Yet, we read in Luke’s Gospel that John the Baptist will go before Messiah “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17). Jesus then tells His disciples that John is “Elijah who is to come” (Matthew 11:14) and prefaces His statement with, “If you are willing to receive it.” Thus, John is a kind of Elijah, who comes in the spirit and power of Elijah, fulfilling (or partially fulfilling) the prophecy of Malachi 4. John both is and is not Elijah. He is Elijah in spirit; he is not literally Elijah in the flesh.⁵⁷

If John is not Elijah, then is he “the Prophet”?⁵⁸ “The Prophet” must refer to the “Prophet like Moses,” prophesied in the Old Testament Book of Deuteronomy:

15 “The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear, 16 according to all you desired of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, nor let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die.’ 17 And the LORD said to me: ‘What they have spoken is good. 18 I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him. 19 And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him” (Deuteronomy 18:15-19, NKJV).

This “Prophet like Moses” is not John the Baptist; He is the One for whom John is the forerunner, the Messiah. And so John quickly responds “No” to their question about him being this Prophet (John 1:21). Here is a man of very few words, and his responses are becoming shorter and shorter. The longer response of verse 23 is a quotation of Scripture taken from Isaiah 40, verse 3.

This delegation of less-than-prominent Jewish officials is becoming concerned. They have been sent to put John on the spot by asking for his credentials and his agenda. As they press him with possible options, he persistently answers in the negative. He is not the Messiah, not Elijah, not the Prophet. Who, then, is he? These fellows must return to Jerusalem with a report, and yet they have almost nothing to tell the Jewish Sanhedrin. They must fill out their “report forms,” and John is of no help at all. And so they press John to tell them who he is. They do not really want to hear his answer, because it is merely the citation of a text from the Prophet Isaiah: “I am ‘The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Make straight the way of the LORD,”’ as the prophet Isaiah said” (Isaiah 40:3, NKJV).

John’s answer is still not satisfactory. Here is a man who virtually refuses to dwell on himself. Verse 24 presents some problems for Bible scholars. It is not entirely clear whether John is telling us:

that a second delegation is present, sent by the Pharisees; or,
that some in the first delegation have been sent by the Pharisees; or,
that the whole delegation formerly referred to has been sent by the Pharisees.

It really does not matter greatly. We know that the question about to be asked expresses the concerns of the Pharisees. If John is not the Messiah, not Elijah, and not the Prophet, then what in the world is he doing baptizing (verse 24)?

Baptism was not a new or novel ritual to the Israelites. Baptism was one of the rituals⁵⁹ by which Gentiles were brought into Judaism as proselytes.⁶⁰ John’s baptism is distressing in light of the meaning and use of baptism in Judaism. These were not Gentiles who were being baptized, but Jews. These were not Gentiles who were being indicted for their sin and warned of God’s coming wrath, but Jews. John was treating Jews as though they were lost sinners, in need of salvation. Most distressing of all, many Jews were believing John and coming to him for baptism. Jewish religious leaders had convinced their Jewish followers that simply being Jewish and keeping the Law (as they interpreted it) was sufficient to save them. John’s ministry and message said otherwise. The Jewish religious system was under siege, and it looked at the moment as though John was prevailing. Of all those who were threatened, the legalistic Pharisees (along with the status quo Sadducees) were most often singled out by John (see Matthew 3:7-9).

Those sent by the Pharisees challenge John to defend his practice of baptizing those who follow him. If he is not the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet, then why is he baptizing? The Baptist does not really answer their question, at least in an immediate response.⁶¹ We are inclined to anticipate the way he will finish his response by the way he begins: “I baptize with water, but …” We immediately supply what we have read elsewhere: “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (see Matthew 3:11-12; Luke 3:15-16). But the Apostle John does not include these words. The Baptist does not want to get into a debate about baptism, whether it be his baptism or that of the Messiah to come. The Baptist continues to press the point that the Apostle John has been underscoring in this first chapter of his Gospel—the supremacy of Christ and the subordination of John, His forerunner.

This delegation wants John to talk about himself and his ministry. But John’s ministry is to magnify the Christ—to focus Israel’s attention on Him. He cannot do so by talking about himself, and so he answers their question about baptism by once again emphasizing the superiority of the coming One, by whom he is outranked. This coming One is somewhere among them, but simply not yet designated. They have not recognized Him either (verse 26).

This One outranks John the Baptist, because He existed before John.⁶² John begins his Gospel by declaring the Word to be God, who existed before time and creation began. Now the Baptist chooses to underscore the same fact in his response to his questioners. The One who “was” in the beginning is the One who is among them and who is soon to be designated as the Messiah. This One “was,” but John “came.” This One is God, while John tells us that he is simply a man, sent by God. This One is so much greater than the Baptist that John says he is unworthy to loose his sandal straps (verse 27).⁶³

We are told that “these things” took place in Bethany (NIV, NAV, NAB) or Bethabara (KJV, NKJV). But no one knows exactly where this place is—or was. It cannot be the Bethany near Jerusalem, where Martha, Mary, and Lazarus lived (John 11:1, 18; 12:1). The “Bethany” of which John writes is “beyond the Jordan.” There could be more than one city in Israel with the same name, so the fact that there were two Bethany’s is no real problem. Even the fact that the location of this place is not known should come as no surprise. When the Jews sought to stone Jesus, He is said to have gone “beyond the Jordan to the place where John was baptizing at first” (John 10:39-40). It should be safe to conclude that Jesus departed to an out-of-the-way place, where He could not be easily found. If this were the “Bethany” of our text, we would expect that few knew of it, and that none would know today where it once was.

Verses 29-34

29 On the next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one about whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’ 31 I did not recognize him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.” 32 Then John testified, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 And I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining, this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have both seen and testified that this one is the Son of God.”

If the Gospel of John includes a great deal of new material, there is also a lot of material in the Synoptic Gospels which is not in John. The Synoptic Gospels record the baptism of our Lord by John the Baptist:

13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to John to be baptized by him in the Jordan. 14 But John tried to prevent him saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and yet you come to me?” 15 So Jesus replied to him, “Let it happen now, for it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John yielded to him. 16 After Jesus was baptized, as he came up from the water the heavens opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is the Son I love, in whom I have great delight” (Matthew 3:13-17).

9 Now in those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan by John. 10 Just as he was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens splitting apart and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, the one I love. I am very pleased with you” (Mark 1:9-11).

21 Now when all the people were baptized, and after Jesus had been baptized and while he was praying, heaven was opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased” (Luke 3:21-22).

In his Gospel, Matthew emphasizes John’s humility at the time of our Lord’s baptism. If—as John has been constantly saying—our Lord is vastly superior to him, then why should John baptize Jesus? Should Jesus not baptize him? Matthew’s words tell us even more—they tell us that John has some inkling before His baptism that Jesus is the Messiah. John protests against baptizing Jesus because Jesus is the greater One. Jesus convinces John to baptize Him “to fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15). In being baptized, Jesus identifies Himself with John, and thus with John’s message and ministry.

More importantly for John, in the process of baptizing Jesus, God confirms Him as the promised Messiah. The Synoptic Gospels all speak of the Holy Spirit descending like a dove and remaining upon Jesus. All the Gospels tell of God the Father’s testimony, coming from heaven, declaring Jesus to be His beloved Son, in Whom He is well pleased.

John’s Gospel alone explains the significance of our Lord’s baptism to John the Baptist. All the time John has been preaching, telling the Israelites that the Messiah is coming, the Baptist has not known the identity of Messiah for certain. As mentioned, John may have had his suspicions, but he does not have absolute proof. That proof comes at the baptism of Jesus. One day, John the Baptist is proclaiming to the people of Israel that Messiah is among them—but not yet identified. The next day, John is pointing to Jesus, testifying that He is the Messiah—the One of whom he has been speaking, and declaring, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).⁶⁴

What made the dramatic difference in the Baptist’s preaching from one day to the next? It is what John the Baptist saw and heard at the baptism of our Lord. When, under protest, John baptizes Jesus, he sees the Spirit descend upon Him and remain upon Him. He hears the voice of the Father from heaven, declaring Jesus to be His beloved Son, in whom He is well pleased. He now knows for certain who the Messiah is, and from this point on, He refers to Jesus as God’s Messiah, the Son of God (verse 34).

Verses 35-37

Technically, these three verses are a part of the text we will study in our next lesson, but they also reveal a great deal about John’s character. John has no ambition, other than to exalt the Messiah, and to urge men to prepare for His coming. He refuses to talk a great deal about himself, but he persistently speaks of the greater One, who is coming after him. He keeps pointing men and women to Christ, rather than to himself.

We sometimes hear that “words are cheap,” and so they may be. But John the Baptist is a man whose words are powerful, even seizing the attention of powerful pagan rulers like Herod. Whenever John speaks, he exalts Christ and not himself. Proof of John’s greatness can be seen by the way he responds to Christ’s appearance. John does not play down his message, hoping to keep his following; John promotes Jesus as the promised Messiah. John calls Him the “Lamb of God” (verses 29, 35), and so He will prove to be.

Perhaps the greatest reflection on John’s character is the way in which he encourages his disciples to cease following him and to begin following Jesus as the Messiah. When John the Baptist sees Jesus, he identifies Him to his two disciples as the “Lamb of God.” The two disciples with John at that time leave John and set out after Jesus. This is precisely what John intended. He couldn’t be happier that Jesus is taking some of “his” disciples. He knows this is what he has been called to do—to prepare men to leave him and to follow the Messiah. John’s work is nearly done. It will not be long before God takes him home at the hand of an unwilling Herod.

Conclusion

We can do nothing less than agree with our Lord about the greatness of this man, John the Baptist. Let us pause to summarize some of the things that made John great.

John serves as a model of humility and true servanthood. John is a great man, yet a man of humility. He grasps his role in life, his calling and ministry, and devotes himself to carrying it out. He does not agonize that he cannot be more prominent. He rejoices in exalting the Savior and does not seek to further his own interests.

When the Apostle Paul writes to the Philippians, he speaks of sending his “son” Timothy to them before he visits. It is sadly true that then, as now, there are few men like Timothy, or John:

19 Now I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you quickly, so that I too may be encouraged by hearing news about you. 20 For there is no one here quite like him who cares so genuinely for you. 21 Others are busy with their own concerns, not the Lord’s. 22 But you know his qualifications, that like a son working with his father, he served with me in advancing the gospel (Philippians 2:19-22).

The norm is for men to “seek their own concerns,” rather than the things of God, or others. Timothy is rare in this regard, and so is John. John refuses to feather his own nest at the expense of the gospel. Even when he does not know for certain who the “coming One” is, he still exalts Him above himself.

Those who “seek their own” are many, and examples of such are easily found. Satan is the chief self-seeker (see Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:11-17). When he tempts men, he tempts them to seek their own interests, as we see in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3). He even attempts the same strategy with our Lord in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-12). The scribes and Pharisees who opposed Jesus did so out of a desire to protect their own interests. In the Gospels, it is easy to find the disciples individually seeking their own interests, oblivious to our Lord’s resolve to die for sinners on the cross of Calvary. Later, Paul warned of church leaders who would get caught up with gaining a personal following:

28 Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son. 29 I know that after I am gone fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Even from among your own group men will arise, teaching perversions of the truth to draw the disciples away after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that night and day for three years I did not stop warning each one of you with tears (Acts 20:28-31, emphasis mine).

John the Baptist is to Jesus in this Gospel what Barnabas is to Paul in the Book of Acts.⁶⁵ Both these men have their time of prominence and visibility. Both prepare the way for the one who comes after them, who surpasses them. Perhaps it is best to say that John is most like his Master, the Lord Jesus, who is the model for all who would serve others in humility:

1 If there is any comfort in your relationship with Christ, any consolation in love, if any fellowship in the Spirit, and any affection and mercy, 2 complete my joy by being in agreement, having the same love, being harmonious and mutually committed to unity. 3 Instead of doing things for selfish ambition or personal vanity, each of you should be characterized by humility and treat the other person as more important than yourself. 4 Rather than taking care of only yourself, look out for the welfare of others as well. 5 The attitude Christ Jesus had, you should have toward one another, 6 who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing human nature. 8 He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross (Philippians 2:1-8).

In a day when individualism, competition and success are the guiding principles for life, for work, and even for Christian ministry, we would do well to reflect on the spirit of humility so evident in the life of John the Baptist.

John the Baptist is a man who boldly proclaims the truth of the Gospel. John is marked by humility, but this does not prevent him from preaching with boldness. John’s message is not watered down to please his audience. He speaks against sin, whether it be that of tax-gatherers or soldiers or even Herod himself. He clearly identifies sin, condemns it, and calls for repentance. This boldness is not a contradiction to his humility, but a manifestation of it. He is inferior and subordinate to his Lord, the Messiah. He was called of God to proclaim the message he was given. He would do no less than proclaim that message with boldness and clarity. No doubt this played a part in the powerful impact of that message on those who heard it. There are those today, as there have always been, who water down the gospel, and leave out the hard words which define and condemn sin, and which call for repentance. Those who do so think they are doing the gospel a favor by making the message more appealing. In fact, they are emasculating it. Let us not seek to dilute the truth of God’s word as we proclaim it to men.

1 When I came to you, brothers and sisters, I did not come with superior eloquence or wisdom as I proclaimed the testimony of God. 2 For I decided to be concerned about nothing among you except Jesus Christ, as one who had been crucified. 3 And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. 4 My conversation and my preaching were not with persuasive words of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that your faith would not be based on human wisdom but on the power of God (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).

For we are not like so many others, hucksters who peddle the word of God for profit; but we are speaking in Christ before God as persons of sincerity, as persons sent from God (2 Corinthians 2:17).

1 Therefore, since we have this ministry, just as God has shown us mercy, we do not become discouraged. 2 But we have rejected shameful hidden deeds, not behaving with deceptiveness or distorting the word of God, but by open proclamation of the truth, we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience before God. 3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this age has blinded the minds of those who do not believe so they would not see the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For we do not proclaim ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said “Let light shine out of darkness,” is the one who shined in our hearts to give us the light of the glorious knowledge of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:1-6).

1 I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is going to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom, 2 preach the message, be persistent whether it is convenient or inconvenient, reprove, rebuke, exhort with complete patience and teaching. 3 For there will be a time when people will not tolerate sound teaching. Instead following their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves, because they have a craven curiosity to hear new things. 4 And they will turn away from hearing the truth, but on the other hand they will turn aside to myths. 5 You, however, be self-controlled in all things, suffer hardship, do an evangelist’s work, fulfill your ministry (2 Timothy 4:1-5).

John the Baptist does not assume that just because a person is religious (even a leader) they are righteous. John does not assume that a devoutly religious person is exempt from the preaching of the gospel and the need for repentance and forgiveness of sins. Some of John’s strongest words are addressed to those who are convinced they will be sitting on the 50-yard line in the kingdom of God (see Luke 3:7ff.). Neither the liberal (but powerful) Sadducees, nor the conservative and strict Pharisees were exempt from John’s rebuke (Matthew 3:7). John, like the Lord Jesus whom he served, recognized hypocrisy when he saw it. Both had the harshest words for “religious” hypocrites. Being religious does not get anyone into heaven. Feeling religious is just what Satan wants for you, so that you can rush on to your destruction, all the while supposing that God is pleased with you and your religion. As John said to them, the day of judgment is rapidly approaching (Matthew 3:7-12).

John has much to teach us about witnessing. The Gospel of John speaks of John the Baptist, not as a baptizer, but as a witness. He is a witness whose testimony was faithful and powerful. We can learn both from his message and from his method. John always exalts the Messiah, keeping the spotlight on Him. He avoids drawing attention to himself or even talking about himself. He continually brings the conversation back to Jesus and to what men must do to be saved. While I would not wish to belittle the value of a personal testimony (after all, Paul’s personal testimony is given three times in the Book of Acts), John’s ministry warns us that we must beware not to let ourselves become too prominent, so that the Lord Jesus receives only an “honorable mention” while we get the “first prize.” John always keeps the focus on Christ.

John is an example of a man of faith, the kind of person every Christian should be. Faith believes in what God has promised, rather than in what we now see. Faith lives in the present, in light of the future God has told us is certain. Faith is willing to suffer now in order to enter into God’s glory for all eternity. John spends a good deal of his time in public ministry speaking about a person whose identity he does not know for certain. He speaks a great deal about a Person who is going to come, who is even then present, but not identified, trusting that God will reveal Him. This is faith. And this is the very same kind of faith each of us is called to exercise. Faith is what Hebrews 11 is all about—and faith is what the Christian life is all about as well.

16 Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, our inner person is being renewed day by day. 17 For our momentary light suffering is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, 18 because we are not looking at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen; for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal. … 5:7 for we live by faith, not by sight (2 Corinthians 4:16-18; 5:7).

John is an example of true spirituality. I wish to be very careful how I say this, but I believe the Apostle John represents John the Baptist as a spiritual (shall we say “Spirit-filled”) man of God. We know that the Holy Spirit came upon him while he was still in the womb. We can see many evidences of the fruit of the Spirit in his life. But this is also the man who never performed a miracle. His spirituality was not evidenced by unusual phenomenon, by signs and wonders and healings, because there were none (see John 10:41). His spirituality was evidenced by his faith, his integrity, his humility, and his message. Let us be careful about the kinds of things we look for as proof of piety.

By example, John teaches us a lesson about knowing the will of God. Specifically, I am referring to the “will of God” as to the identify of the Messiah. John had been instructed by God to proclaim the message of the coming of Messiah. John was given the privilege of identifying the One who was the Messiah. But for much of his ministry John did not know who this person was. The way John learned the identity of the Messiah was by going about his “job” (his work) faithfully, and in the course of doing his job, God revealed to him that Jesus was the promised Messiah. Some are tempted to give up the normal routines and duties of life in order to find God’s will. Such was not the case with John. He discerned God’s will by doing the will of God he already knew—preaching his message of the coming of Messiah and of divine judgment, calling men to repent in preparation for His coming, and baptizing.

May God grant that we become more like John the Baptist, living obediently and expectantly, proclaiming to men that the Savior is coming, and urging them to repent of their sins, knowing that a day of judgment is coming. With the identification of Jesus as the promised Messiah, John’s message then focused upon Jesus as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world.” Have you trusted in God’s Lamb? Jesus was God’s full and final sacrifice for sin. To trust in His sacrificial death for your sins is to enter into eternal life. I pray that if you have not yet trusted in what Jesus Christ has done on your behalf you will do so today.

48 There are a very few times in my life when I have made commitments, not knowing at that moment how God would provide, but assured somehow that He would. By what I am saying, I am not encouraging you to “put God to the test” by taking some precipitous action, assuming that God will bail you out. On the other hand, it may well be that God will give you opportunities to exercise your faith by taking action without knowing how God will provide, if you are convinced that God is leading you to act.

49 That is, the delegation John sent to Jesus (see 11:2ff.).

50 Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the NET Bible.

51 As an old country boy, I would not say “aimed,” but “poised.”

52 William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), p. 76. I have modified his words somewhat, but the essence of this contrasting chart comes from his work.

53 I am referring to John the Baptist as “the Baptist” to clearly distinguish between the Apostle John and John the Baptist. I do this knowing that the title “John the Baptist” is not found in John’s Gospel, but only in the Synoptic Gospels.

54 I prefer “outranks Me,” which is closely approximated in the NAS, NAB, and NRS translations.

55 It is logical that the priests came, since John the Baptist came from a priestly line (Luke 1:5). The Levites were almost a kind of security guard for the temple. No high level Jewish authorities appear to be present. They remained in Jerusalem, for it was from there that they dispatched this delegation to look into John’s ministry.

56 In reading of the arrival of this delegation and the questions they ask John, I have the distinct impression they have never personally heard John speak. How can they possibly ask such questions if they had?

57 An illustration of what I am saying might be found in the bread and the wine which we eat and drink in the celebration of Communion. Symbolically, the bread is our Lord’s flesh and the wine is His blood; in reality they are not, they are just symbols (see Luke 22:17-20; John 6:51-66).

58 It seems evident that then, as now, the various elements of prophecy are confused. The Prophet and the Messiah were one and the same person. “Elijah” was not. It is easy to see this when looking back on fulfilled prophecy, but not at all easy when looking forward.

59 Circumcision was another required ritual for Jewish (or Jewish proselyte) males (see Acts 15:1; 16:3).

60 This may have been self-baptism, but it was baptism nonetheless.

61 Verses 29-34 certainly give us one of the reasons why John baptized—to obey God and thus discern who the Messiah was.

62 You will remember that John the Baptist was born before our Lord (see Luke 1 & 2), so this prior existence cannot be understood to mean that Jesus was older than (born before) John. Furthermore, John has not yet been informed that Jesus is the Coming One. He must therefore be speaking of our Lord’s pre-existence (i.e. pre-incarnation existence) as God.

63 “Loosing the sandal was the task of a slave. A disciple could not be expected to perform the task. To understand the full impact of this, we must bear in mind that disciples did do many services for their teachers. Teachers in ancient Palestine were not paid (it would be a terrible thing to ask for money for teaching!). But instead, in partial compensation, disciples were in the habit of performing little services for their Rabbis. But the line must be drawn somewhere, and menial tasks like loosing the sandal thong came under this heading. There is a Rabbinic saying (in its present form, dating from c. A.D. 250, but probably much older): ‘Every service which a slave performs for his master shall a disciple do for his teacher except the loosing of his sandal-thong’ (SBk, I, p. 121). John selects this task which the Rabbinic saying stresses as too menial for any disciple, and declares himself unworthy to perform it.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 141,

64 Much has been written on this verse. It is true that one may not be able to clearly link John’s words with any one verse or portion of Scripture (e.g., the Passover Lamb of Exodus or the “lamb led to slaughter” in Isaiah 53), but they may well sum up the sacrificial references to Messiah in the Old Testament. John the Baptist’s words are pregnant with meaning, more than he knew at the time (see Luke 7:18-19ff.; 1 Peter 1:10-12).

65 At the outset of the Book of Acts, Barnabas is the prominent person (see Acts 4:36-37; 9:26-29), who is the leader when he and Paul minister together (Acts 11:19-30; 13:1), but then suddenly Paul emerges as the leader, who overshadows Barnabas from that point on (Acts 13:9ff., see especially verse 13). Barnabas not only graciously accepts this, one gets the distinct impression this was his intention from the beginning.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Revelation

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

4. The First Disciples (John 1:35-51)

Introduction

Like many, my wife and I were first brought together by a relative. Jeannette, my wife-to-be, was a college student in Seattle while I still lived at home with my parents. My sister Ruth lived on the same dorm floor as Jeannette, and they became friends. When my sister married David Harrison (whom I had been trying to set up with Jeannette), the wedding was held in Shelton where I lived, and Jeannette had a part in the marriage ceremony. A year or two later Jeannette and I became good friends when we both held a leadership position in our college class at church. I actually borrowed Jeannette’s car to take “Nancy” out on a date. Eventually it became apparent to Jeannette and to me that we were to be much more than “friends,” though never less. Thanks to my sister Ruth, Jeannette and I began a life-long relationship.

Relationships often commence with the help of a friend or relative, and when such a relationship begins, one has no idea where it may lead. This was certainly true of my relationship with Jeannette. I got much more than I bargained for, and even got the best of the bargain! This was also true for the disciples of Jesus, the earliest of whom were brought to Him by a friend or relative.

The disciples of our Lord play a very significant role in the New Testament. Each of the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke)⁶⁶ has two “callings.” The first “calling”⁶⁷ is preliminary, which comes very early in our Lord’s ministry and does not seem to be permanent. At this time only two sets of brothers are called: James and John, the sons of Zebedee, and Simon and Andrew. In Matthew and Mark, the calling of the four fishermen is more briefly described.

A more expanded account of the first calling is found in Luke chapter 5, which goes a long way in explaining the terse accounts of Matthew and Mark. Jesus came to the Lake of Gennesaret,⁶⁸ where He began to teach the multitude gathered to hear Him. Two boats were nearby, one belonging to James and John, and the other to Peter and Andrew. Jesus got into Peter’s boat and asked him to push off from shore so that He could teach those on the shore more easily. After Jesus finished teaching, He instructed Peter to set out into deeper water and let down the net for a catch. He didn’t suggest that they try to catch fish, but spoke of it as a certainty. Peter and his partners had been up all night fishing, with no success. If there was one thing in which Peter felt he was an expert, it was fishing. He let Jesus know this was not his idea of a great plan, but he did as Jesus instructed. When they reached deep water and drew the net in, it was filled. Peter had to call to James and John for help. They brought their boat alongside, and both boats were so full of fish they began to sink. Peter suddenly realized that Jesus was far greater than he had supposed, and he fell before Him. Peter told Him to depart from him because he was a sinful man. Immediately following this, Jesus challenges these men to follow Him, because from now on they “will be catching people” (Luke 5:10). Luke then tells us that they beached their boats and left everything to follow Jesus. John does not even mention this first “calling.”

We know that it was not until the second “calling” that Jesus appointed the twelve to be His disciples. This later calling is recorded in the Synoptic Gospels,⁶⁹ but it is not found in the Gospel of John. In fact, there is no “calling” of disciples in John except for the “calling” of Philip⁷⁰ found in our text. There is not even a listing of the names of the twelve disciples in John’s Gospel. There are only four references to “the twelve,” three found in the same chapter (John 6:67, 70, 71), and the final one found in chapter 20, verse 24. In John, the most extensive listing of our Lord’s disciples is found in the final chapter: “After this Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberius. Now this is how he revealed himself. Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael (who was from Cana in Galilee), the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples of his were together” (John 21:1-2).

Here, three disciples are named: Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. James and John are referred to indirectly as the “sons of Zebedee,” and two other disciples are mentioned as present but not identified. There is no mention of James by name in John’s Gospel, no mention of the inner three (Peter, James, and John). The closing verses of chapter 1 are the only description of how Jesus obtained any of His disciples. From chapter 2 on, we read of “Jesus and His disciples” (2:2), or just “His disciples.” Let us look, then, at these verses which describe how Jesus obtained some of His disciples.

Jesus and the Two Disciples of John
(1:35-39)

35 Again the next day John was standing there with two of his disciples. 36 Looking at Jesus as he walked by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” 37 When his two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned around and saw them following and said to them, “What do you want?” So they said to him, “Rabbi” (which is translated Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 Jesus said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day. Now it was about four o’clock in the afternoon (John 1:35-39).

One day we find John speaking of Messiah as One who is somewhere in Israel, among His people but not yet recognized (1:26-27, 30-31), and the next day he is proclaiming Jesus as the promised Messiah (1:29-30). The identity of Jesus as the Messiah is revealed to John at the Lord’s baptism (1:31-34). Immediately, John begins to declare that Jesus is the One of whom he has been speaking. Shortly afterward, the Lord walks by John and two of his disciples. As Jesus walks away, John tells his two disciples that Jesus is the “Lamb of God” (verse 35). These disciples leave John’s side and set out after Jesus. As they begin to draw near to Jesus, He turns around, and seeing that they are following Him, asks, “What do you seek?”

Jesus does not ask them, “Whom do you seek?” but “What do you seek?” This is not an unfriendly question, intended to put them off. Rather the question seems designed to encourage them to verbalize what they want from Him and to crystallize just what they are doing. These two men may be caught off guard by the question because they respond, “Rabbi, where are You staying?” I must confess I initially was inclined to think this was a rather stupid response, the kind I have given when caught off guard and I cannot think of the right thing to say. Their answer may be more thoughtful than I first suspected. They may be politely asking Jesus to be His disciples.

Our Lord’s answer is encouraging: “Come and see” (verse 39). It is a very different answer than the one Jesus gave to another volunteer: “As they were walking along the road, someone said to him, ‘I will follow you wherever you go.’ But Jesus said to him, ‘Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head’” (Luke 9:57-58).

If being a disciple literally means following one’s master, then one would stay with that master. Jesus telling this “would be” volunteer that there was nowhere to stay may have been a polite way for our Lord to decline the offer to become His disciple. When Jesus encourages John’s two disciples to come and see where He is staying, He seems to be inviting them to follow Him as His disciples. Thus, some students of Scripture understand that these two men, who encounter Jesus at 4:00 p.m., spend the night at His house.⁷¹

Andrew Brings Simon to Jesus
(1:40-42)

40 Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two disciples who heard what John said and followed Jesus. 41 He found first⁷² his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated Christ). 42 Andrew brought Simon to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, the son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter).

We know from verse 40 that Andrew, Simon’s brother, was one of the two disciples who followed Jesus home. I assume, with many others, that the Apostle John was the other man who left John the Baptist to follow Jesus. Andrew wasted no time finding his brother Simon and telling him, “We have found the Messiah” (verse 41). The term Messiah is a transliteration of the Hebrew term, meaning “anointed.” In each case, this Hebrew term is translated CristoV (“Christos”) in the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint). Priests (Exodus 28:41; 40:15; etc.), prophets (1 Kings 19:16) and kings (1 Samuel 9:16; 16:3; 2 Samuel 12:7) were anointed with oil to consecrate them for their office and duties. Among all the “anointed ones” of the Old Testament, one figure stands apart and above the rest: “You love righteousness and hate wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions” (Psalm 45:7; see also 2:2, NKJV).

In the Old Testament, this (“Christos,” “the Christ”) term became one of the names by which the promised Savior (Daniel 9:25-26) was known. Only twice is the term “Messiah” found in the New Testament, and both times it is in the Gospel of John:

He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated Christ) (John 1:41).

The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (the one called Christ). Whenever he comes, he will tell us everything” (John 4:25).

Most of the time the expected Messiah (to use the transliteration of the Hebrew term for “the Anointed One”) is called “the Christ.” This expression occurs 56 times in the New Testament, 17 of which are in John’s Gospel.⁷³ John’s purpose in writing this Gospel is to convince his readers that Jesus of Nazareth is “the Christ”: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:31, emphasis mine).

Now when Andrew comes to his brother Peter, he informs him that they have found “the Messiah,”
“the Christ.” Andrew is certainly right in what he says, but he is saying far more than he realizes at this point in his life. He is right in concluding that Jesus is “the Messiah.” What he and all the other disciples need to learn is what it means to be “the Messiah.” Their understanding of this is limited, and at times distorted. So it is that when Peter makes his “great confession” that Jesus is “the Christ” (Matthew 16:16), he almost immediately thereafter rebukes “the Christ” for talking about His imminent suffering and death on the cross of Calvary (Matthew 16:21-23).

Peter accompanies Andrew and they make their way to Jesus. When our Lord looks upon Peter, He gives him a new name: Cephas, the Aramaic equivalent to Petros (Peter), meaning “rock.” It is interesting that Jesus does not “call” Peter here, nor does Peter volunteer (though John may simply have chosen to omit such details). Instead, Jesus renames Simon, calling him Peter, “the Rock.” Giving a name to someone implies much in the Bible. Adam named the animals God created, reflecting the fact that God had appointed him to “rule” over His creation. God renamed a number of people, including Abram (to Abraham), Sarai (to Sarah), and Jacob (to Israel). In each case, it reflects God’s sovereignty in that He is going to change the destiny of the one whose name He has changed.⁷⁴ Simon is far from a “rock” when Jesus first meets him. He begins to evidence some rock-like traits at the “great confession” (Matthew 16:15-19), but not until after the resurrection of our Lord and Pentecost does Peter truly become a “rock.” I do not believe our Lord saw “rock” tendencies or potential in Simon; I believe our Lord purposed to make a rock of Simon, and that He did. There is nothing “rockie” in this “rookie”; it is our Lord who makes a rock of this man. His naming of Simon is therefore prophetic.⁷⁵

In the Synoptic Gospels, we are never told how or when Simon was given the name Peter. We are only told that his name was Peter. Throughout these Gospels, he is either called Simon, or Peter, or Simon Peter. Our text alone supplies us with the story of how Peter got his name. Once again, we see the unique contribution of the Book of John to the canon of Scripture.

The Calling of Philip
and the Confession of Nathanael
(1:43-51)

43 On the next day Jesus⁷⁶ wanted to depart for Galilee. He⁷⁷ found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.” 44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida,⁷⁸ the city of Andrew and Peter. 45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also wrote about—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”⁷⁹ 46 Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip replied, “Come and see.” 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said about him, “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael asked him, “How do you know me?” Jesus replied, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus said to him, “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 He continued, “I tell you the solemn truth: you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”⁸⁰

When Jesus reaches Galilee, He first encounters Philip and calls him as a disciple.⁸¹ It is interesting that our Lord makes this invitation to Philip alone in this Gospel. In the Synoptic Gospels, there are other callings to discipleship, as we have indicated. But in the Gospel of John, only Philip is invited to “follow” Jesus, and that is here in our text. This is most interesting since Philip does not appear to be the kind of person who would be distinguished in this way by our Lord.

In the Synoptic Gospels, Philip is included once in each Gospel, and this is when the twelve men Jesus appoints as His disciples are named. Nothing else is said of him as an individual in the Synoptics. If asked what kind of person Philip was, based upon the Synoptics, we would not know. Philip’s name appears 12 times in the Gospel of John, and several incidents are depicted which tell us something about him:

4 (Now the Jewish feast of the Passover was near.) 5 Then Jesus, when he looked up and saw that a large crowd was coming to him, said to Philip, “Where can we buy bread so that these people may eat?” 6 (Now Jesus said this to test him, for he knew what he was going to do.) 7 Philip replied, “Two hundred silver coins worth of bread would not be enough for them, for each one to get a little” (John 6:4-7).

20 Now some Greeks were among those who had gone up to worship at the feast. 21 So these approached Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and requested, “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” 22 Philip went and told Andrew, and they both went and told Jesus. 23 Jesus replied, “The time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified” (John 12:20-23).

6 Jesus replied, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you have known me, you will know my Father too. And from now on you do know him and have seen him.” 8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we will be content.” 9 Jesus replied, “Have I been with you for so long, and you have not known me, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father! How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak from my own authority, but the Father residing in me performs his miraculous deeds. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me; but if you do not believe me, believe because of the miraculous deeds themselves” (John 14:6-11).

I find myself chuckling when I read Leon Morris’s tongue-in-cheek comment that in these texts Philip seems “a little out of his depth.”⁸² Philip does not appear to be the one who would have been voted “most likely to succeed” by his graduating class. He may have lacked the confidence and initiative to assert himself in following Christ without invitation. The calling of Philip may well be an illustration of a principle often demonstrated in the Bible, but spelled out most clearly by the Apostle Paul:

When all is said and done, let us remember that Philip is a man who became, at our Lord’s invitation, one of the privileged few to follow Jesus as one of the twelve. He is also a man who, regardless of his limitations, brought others to the Savior, as we are about to see for ourselves.

Next is Nathanael, who is a most interesting character. His name is found only in the Gospel of John, five times in chapter 1 and once in chapter 21. He is never mentioned in the other Gospels or anywhere else in the New Testament. There are good reasons for supposing that Nathanael is “Bartholomew” in the Synoptic Gospels.⁸³ Nathanael comes across quite differently in John than Philip. If Philip is a man who seems “out of his depth,” Nathanael appears to be a man of great spiritual depth, greater than the others.

Philip is the one who introduces Nathanael to Jesus: “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also wrote about—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (verse 45). Philip portrays Jesus as the fulfillment of all the prophecies pertaining to Messiah, beginning with Moses and concluding with the prophets. He is, of course, absolutely right. I am reminded of these words at the end of Luke’s Gospel:

25 So he said to them, “You foolish people, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Wasn’t it necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and enter into his glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures (Luke 24:25-27).

One thing Nathanael hears bothers him a great deal. It is not that Jesus is “the son of Joseph,” but that He is “Jesus of Nazareth.” We know that, in Jesus’ time as in our own, there is prejudice about certain places. In the United States, there are still feelings between those of the North and those of the South. There are certain attitudes toward people who live in the Ozarks or in Appalachia. There is the assumption that great people come from certain areas, while those in other areas are somehow inferior. This may be subtle, but such “geographical” prejudice exists.

Galilee seems to have been “the Ozarks” of Jesus’ day, so that being called a Galilean appears to be no compliment (see Mark 14:69-70). For our Lord to be known as a Nazarene (one from Nazareth, a city of Galilee) does not seem to be a compliment either. For Nathanael, at least, coming from Nazareth is not in Jesus’ favor, so far as any claim to being Messiah is concerned. The Apostle John has included these words for a very good reason, and that is to show that Nathanael is skeptical about Jesus. From what little he knows of Him, Nathanael is not predisposed to accept Him as the Messiah. Thus, the radical change of mind we see in these few verses is further indication of the compelling weight of the evidence that causes Nathanael to confess Jesus as Messiah. John obviously saves the best for last in that Nathanael’s confession is the most thorough and complete: “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel!” (verse 49). Let us now consider just what it is that so quickly and thoroughly changes Nathanael’s mind.

To set the scene, we must go all the way back to the Old Testament Book of Genesis and read the following incident in the life of Jacob, whom God renamed “Israel”:

10 Now Jacob went out from Beersheba and went toward Haran. 11 So he came to a certain place and stayed there all night, because the sun had set. And he took one of the stones of that place and put it at his head, and he lay down in that place to sleep. 12 Then he dreamed, and behold, a ladder was set up on the earth, and its top reached to heaven; and there the angels of God were ascending and descending on it. 13 And behold, the LORD stood above it and said: “I am the LORD God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and your descendants. 14 Also your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread abroad to the west and the east, to the north and the south; and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed. 15 Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have spoken to you.” 16 Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven!” (Genesis 28:10-17, NKJV)

Jacob was a schemer and a deceiver. He managed to take advantage of his older brother and his father, depriving Esau of his birthright (Genesis 25) and Isaac and Esau of a blessing (Genesis 27). He fled from Canaan, and especially from Esau on the (partially true) pretext that he was seeking a wife among his relatives in Paddan-aram. On his way to Paddan-aram, Jacob spent the night under the stars. During the night, he had a dream in which he saw a ladder extending from the earth into heaven. On this ladder, angels were ascending and descending. God then spoke to Jacob, reiterating the covenant He had made with Jacob’s forefathers, Abraham and Isaac. God promised to make a great nation of Jacob and also to bring him safely back to this land which he was leaving.

In the morning when Jacob awoke, he vividly recalled the dream he had during the night. His response is most interesting in terms of what elements of the dream he perceived to be important and impressive. Jacob’s mind fixed upon the place where this dream was given (Genesis 28:16-17). He was awe struck that God was in that place, and yet he did not know it (until after his dream). He fixed upon that place as the place of God’s presence and dwelling, as the place where heaven and earth, God and man meet. In Jacob’s words, it was the gateway to heaven.

This dream had a very direct bearing on Jacob because it was a reiteration of the Abrahamic Covenant, only this time it was Jacob through whom these blessings would be bestowed. Perhaps of more importance to Jacob (at that point in time), it provided a very real incentive for Jacob to return to Israel. How easy it would have been for Jacob to flee to Paddan-aram and never return to the promised land. Jacob now realized not only that God had promised to bless him, but that ultimately He would bless him in this place. The land of Israel was, in some sense, the gateway to heaven, a special place where God and men could meet, where heaven and earth met as well. He may leave this holy place for a time, but he must return. So it was that Jacob vowed that if God protected and prospered him, he would return, and he would give God a tithe.

What does all of this have to do with our text in John, and with Nathanael trusting in Jesus as the promised Messiah? It has a great deal to do with it! I base this upon the words our Lord speaks to Nathanael in verses 47-51, especially in verse 51: “I tell you the solemn truth: you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.” These words can be nothing other than an allusion to the story we have just read in Genesis 28. Let me suggest how things may have happened. Although they may very well not have happened exactly this way, they may have happened in a similar fashion.

We do know for certain that when (or just before) Philip found Nathanael, he was “under the fig tree” (verse 48). Some suppose this was the place where Nathanael, like other Israelites, went to meditate and pray:

The fig tree was almost a symbol of home (cf. Isa. 36:16; Mic. 4:4; Zech. 3:10). Its shade was certainly at a later time used as a place for prayer and meditation and study, and there is no reason for thinking that the practice does not go back as far as this. It seems probable that Nathanael had had some outstanding experience of communion with God in the privacy of his own home, and that it is this to which Jesus refers. Whatever it was, Nathanael was able to recognize the allusion.⁸⁴

I am inclined to think that Nathanael had been reading and meditating about Jacob, and this text in Genesis in particular, under the fig tree (not unlike the way the Ethiopian eunuch had been reading in Isaiah, just before Philip drew near to him—Acts 8:26-40). Jacob was a man in whom there was much deceit. Most of his life he schemed and manipulated to get ahead at the expense of others. Jacob was also the first “Israelite,” in that God would soon rename him “Israel” (Genesis 32:28). He was the first “Israelite, in whom there was much guile.”

After Philip finds Nathanael and tells him they have found the Messiah, the One who was promised in the Law of Moses and the Prophets, Nathanael makes his way to see this Jesus. As Nathanael approaches, Jesus speaks of him to others, so that he overhears these words: “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” These words stop Nathanael in his tracks. He has not yet met Jesus, nor even talked with him, and yet Jesus describes his heart and his character accurately. If Jesus had said this of me, I would respond “Who? Me?” But Nathanael accepts our Lord’s words as the truth, and so he responds, “How do You know me?” In other words, “How do you know that I am an Israelite without deceit?”

A couple of things should be said at this point. First, Jesus does not say, “Behold, an Israelite in whom there is no sin.” Nathanael is a sinner, like every other man (except our Lord). Second, if our Lord’s words are both true and complimentary with regard to Nathanael, they may not have been complimentary toward the Jews in general. Some races do have certain sinful tendencies (see Titus 1:12-13), and Jesus hints that deceit may be something found too often in Israelites. Third, our Lord’s words somehow accurately appraise the character of Nathanael, as though our Lord could look into his soul and evaluate him without even knowing him personally. This is what seems to impress Nathanael.

There is a fourth factor to be considered here as well. Our Lord’s words not only accurately appraise the character of Nathanael, they also seem to address the very things that Nathanael had been meditating upon under the fig tree, before he even met Jesus. Jesus “saw” Nathanael coming (verse 47), but before this, he “saw” Nathanael under the fig tree when he thought no one could (verse 48). To top it all off, Jesus addresses Nathanael in terms of the very text and subject he has been meditating upon. Was Jacob, the first Israelite, a schemer, a man full of deceit? Nathanael is a true Israelite, without deceit. He is a man who acts in a straightforward manner, without underhanded tactics.

I think John is saying even more here. Nathanael’s first impression of Jesus is wrong. He doubts that anything good can come from Nazareth. Nathanael has questioned Philip’s recommendation of Jesus, solely on the basis of his place of origin. Is it not interesting to note that the “place” was the thing that most impressed Jacob in the dream he had of the ladder? Jacob realized that this “place” was holy, that this was where God met men; it was the gateway to heaven. This, of course, was true, though it was not necessarily all of what God was trying to convey to Jacob.

All it takes to make Nathanael a believer in Jesus is for our Lord to look into his soul, to assess his true character, to tell him He saw him where he knew he had not been seen, and to reveal to him the very subject and text he has been meditating upon. Nathanael enthusiastically responds, “You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.” As if this were not enough, Jesus goes on. Is Nathanael impressed by this? This is only the tip of the iceberg, the firstfruits of greater things to come. Nathanael will see much greater things than these.

Jesus introduces His next, climactic statement to Nathanael with the words, “I tell you the solemn truth …” (literally, “truly, truly,” verse 51). These are words of great importance, which need to be heard with care and attention. The term “verily” or “truly” is literally the Greek word that is a transliteration of the Hebrew “amen.” What is fascinating here is that Jesus is going to take this term and give it a unique and specialized meaning. He is going to modify its meaning. Morris says it best:

“Verily” is not a translation of a Greek word, but the transliteration of an Aramaic (or Hebrew) word, namely Amen. It is the participle of a verb meaning ‘to confirm,’ and it was used to give one’s assent. For example, it was (and still is) the response of the congregation to a prayer uttered by him who leads their worship. In this way they make it their own (1 Cor. 14:16). Very occasionally it is the conclusion to one’s own prayer (e.g. Tobit 8:7f.), when it has the nature of a wish. But this use is rare. Characteristically it is one’s assent to words uttered by another. In the Gospels it is used only by Jesus, and always as a prefix to significant statements. Presumably this is to mark them out as solemn and true and important. This use of Amen to introduce one’s own words appears to be Jesus’ own, no real Jewish parallel being adduced.⁸⁵

Does Nathanael, somewhat like Jacob, have an attachment to a particular place? Does Nathanael think God will only meet with men at a certain place? There is a certain element of truth in this, especially in Israel’s past. But from now on, the issue is not the place, but the person.⁸⁶ Does Jacob fix his attention on the land upon which the ladder into heaven was placed? That is fine. But Jesus wants Nathanael to know that in time he will see that He is Himself the ladder. It is by means of Jesus Christ, Israel’s Messiah, that there is access to heaven from earth. It is through Jesus Christ, God’s only Mediator, that men may enter into a relationship with God and find their way to heaven. It is as though our Lord is saying, “Don’t look at the ground, on which the ladder is placed; look at the ladder. I am that ladder. I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by Me.”

Conclusion

Our text teaches us much about the subject of discipleship. When our Lord came to the earth, He came in human flesh. He came to live among men, and in particular to associate Himself closely with a few men. The Marines would like us to say, “He associated Himself with ‘A few good men.’” This is not really the case; although there were a few men, they were not all what we would call good men. They were not all top caliber men, the kind of men who would succeed at anything to which they set their hand. The first four men Jesus calls in the Synoptics are fishermen, and the Apostle John is one of those men. Simon is destined to become “the rock,” but this is not due to any qualities that lie dormant and untapped within him, which association with our Lord quickens and develops. While Peter becomes a “rock,” it is largely in spite of what is in him. It is the result of what God does in and through him.

Philip does not seem to be such a great “catch,” either, from what we see of him in the Book of John. Maybe he was “out of his depth.” Do you not feel out of your depth when you attempt to witness, when you attempt to carry out the commands of Christ, when you endeavor to love your enemy? Our Lord chose the “weak things” of this world to be His disciples, so that it would be very clear that He is the source of their later success (see Acts 4:13; 1 Corinthians 1:26-31). But there is another sense in which He simply chose men sovereignly, in spite of their weaknesses and flaws, in order to bestow His love and mercy upon them.

This text and others that speak of the “calling” of the twelve should challenge our belief that Jesus chose these men to be His disciples because of what they could and would do for His kingdom. I hear this said all too often: “If so and so were to be saved, just think of what he (or she) could do for the cause of Christ?” Among the twelve Jesus chose, three of these men were Peter, James, and John. These men were all included in the “inner circle” of three of our Lord’s disciples. James and John were brothers. They had the same background, the same experiences in following our Lord. And yet James was the first to die, and John was the last. Did Jesus choose James to be one of the twelve and one of the three because of the contribution he would make? It does not seem so.⁸⁷ Jesus may have chosen James to be one of the inner three solely to grant him the privilege of intimate fellowship with Himself. If Jesus chose the twelve because of what they would do for the kingdom, why is it that we see so little of most of the twelve in the Book of Acts? Why do men like Stephen and Philip (and others not even named; cf. Acts 11:20-21) play such a prominent role in the expansion of the church? God’s choice of the twelve was His sovereign choice, as He has always chosen those to enter into fellowship with Himself. There is no room for boasting here.

I would have predicted that Nathanael would be the one Jesus chose to become “the rock,” instead of Peter. Nathanael seems to be the “most spiritual” of those who followed Jesus in this chapter of John, and yet in the rest of the New Testament we never hear of any significant ministry or contribution from him (or from Bartholomew, who may be the same man). I think we may be forced to rethink some of our pre-conceived ideas about the twelve disciples of our Lord, and perhaps even the inner three (Peter, James, John). From my experience in church leadership, there has always been the popular misconception that leadership is dealt out on the basis of spirituality—the higher one gets in Christian leadership, the more spiritual he must be.⁸⁸

If one reads through the Gospels, it seems fairly clear that a number of the women associated with Jesus had much greater spiritual insight into our Lord and His ministry than did the men who followed Him. There are certain spiritual qualifications for elders which should be met by any elder, but I would not wish to say that the elders are (as proven by the fact that they are elders) the most spiritual people in the church. To broaden this discussion to an important area in the church today, one of the errors prevalent in the early church (specifically in the church at Corinth) was the misconception that certain spiritual gifts were proof of greater spirituality on the part of those who possessed them. I do not believe it can be shown that the disciples were chosen because they were more spiritual than others.

Instead of thinking of the qualities these disciples possessed, perhaps we should think of their deficiencies. Maybe a factor in their calling was simply mercy. Have you ever watched a litter of pups when you were trying to choose one of them to be your own? Do you recall seeing the “runt” of the litter, smaller, perhaps bullied by the others, timid, maybe even cowering? Did you desire to grab that little pup and bestow special love and affection on it, because of all it lacked? I think there is an element of this in our Lord’s choice of men, not only to be His disciples, but of those whom He chooses to save.

When our Lord chose to draw these men to Himself, there were no surprises. He knew precisely who He was choosing. If I were Simon Peter, I would have been greatly relieved that Jesus chose to disclose the innermost character of Nathanael, rather than mine. He would not have said of me, “Behold, a man in whom there is no guile.” I don’t think I would want to hear what He would say about what was in me. I am certain that I would not want you to hear what He said about my character and qualities. But then, I don’t think you would want me to hear what He had to say about you, either.

Over the years, I have watched many young couples “fall in love” and marry. Some fail to see their “beloved” as they really are. There are also those who seem to know their beloved well. And for some, when they marry all goes well—at least for a while. I don’t know how many times I have witnessed a radical change in the character of one or both marriage partners, so that they appear to have become an entirely different person. Sometimes this is the result of some stress or tragedy, sometimes not. All of a sudden, the one marriage partner begins to feel as though they are married to a stranger, a person they did not know when they first met and decided to marry. It is tragic, and it happens more than we would like to admit.

Jesus is never surprised about those whom He chooses to save and to follow Him. He knew what He was getting in Simon (Peter), because He knew what Simon was, and because He knew what He was going to accomplish in and through Simon. He knew what was in Philip and Nathanael, James and John. He knows what is in us when He saves us. He also knows what He will do in and through us, by His grace and power. God is never surprised, because He knows all. He knows our character and our weaknesses and strengths. Most of all, He knows what He has purposed to achieve in us, and He will achieve it: “For I am sure of this very thing, that the one who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 1:6).

How easily we could convince ourselves that the addition of these disciples as Jesus’ followers in our text has little or nothing to do with us. After all, these were the disciples. Eleven of them were to become the apostles of our Lord, the foundation of the church. So they were. But first and foremost, they were chosen to believe in Jesus as the Messiah, then to follow Him and be with Him. Eventually, some of them would do great things for Him. But most of all, they were to simply follow Him.

It is no different for men today. Jesus calls us first to believe in Him as the Son of God, the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. But He also calls us to follow Him, to be with Him, to have fellowship and communion with Him. John seems to have most enjoyed this fellowship with our Lord. He seems to be the one “leaning on Jesus breast” at the Last Supper. He seems to be the one who sticks close, even when our Lord is arrested and put on trial, and hung from the cross. This is what our Lord invites each of us to do, to draw near in intimate fellowship with Him. What a privilege is ours to be His disciples! To be His disciple, you must first believe in Him as the Messiah, God’s only means of saving lost sinners. He is the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” He is the One who died in the sinner’s place on the cross of Calvary, and the One who was raised from the dead. He bore the penalty for our sins, and He provides the righteousness we lack, which God requires for anyone to enter into His heaven. We must believe in Him to become His sons and to enter into His kingdom. It is not only our privilege to trust in Him, but our privilege to follow Him as His disciples, walking daily with Him in intimate fellowship. I pray that you have believed in Him, and that you are now His disciple, walking in fellowship with Him.

66 The “Synoptic Gospels” tend to view the life of Christ from the same perspective. John, on the other hand, takes a very different approach. This we have pointed out in greater detail in the introduction to this series.

67 Matthew 4:18-21; Mark 1:16-20; Luke 5:1-10.

68 It is also called the “Sea of Galilee” (Mark 1:16) and the “Sea of Tiberias” (John 5:1).

69 Matthew 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16.

70 In John, it is to Philip alone that our Lord speaks the words, “Follow Me” (John 1:43). The others are certainly encouraged to follow Jesus, but they are not “called” in the technical sense.

71 I see no contradiction between our text in John 1:39 and that found in Luke 9:57-58. Early on in His ministry Jesus did have a place to stay (see John 2:12), but as His ministry grew and became more mobile, He had no permanent place of residence. Incidentally, this also made it more difficult for the enemies of our Lord to arrest or kill Him “before His time,” since they would not know where to find Him from one day to the next. Telling this “would be” disciple of Luke 9 that He had no place to call home was not only true, it was all it took to put this fellow off.

72 Because of a variation of the word rendered “first” here in the Greek manuscripts, there is some discussion as to which word was used and how it should be translated. I refer you to the commentaries to pursue this if you think it worthwhile. Frankly, it does not change the sense of the text much in terms of its meaning.

73 1:20, 25, 41; 3:28; 4:29, 42; 6:69; 7:26, 27, 31, 41 (2x), 42; 10:24; 11:27; 12:34; 20:31.

74 “The giving of a new name when done by men is an assertion of the authority of the giver (e.g. II Kings 23:34; 24:17). When done by God it speaks of a new character in which the man henceforth appears (e.g. Gen. 32:28).” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p.160.

75 This was the case in other instances of renaming in the Bible as well. God did not rename an individual after the changes took place, but before they came about. Abram (meaning “exalted father”) was renamed Abraham (“father of a multitude”) before Isaac was born (Genesis 17:5).

76 Literally “he.” Jesus is supplied for clarity by the NET Bible (see translator’s note). There is some question as to whether this “he” actually refers to Jesus. D. A. Carson (The Gospel According to John, pp. 157-158) argues that the “he” (“Jesus” in the NET Bible) refers not to Jesus, but to Andrew. If his view is accepted, it would be Andrew who is now seeking Nathanael.

77 The translator’s note in the NET Bible indicates to us that the text literally reads, “and Jesus said to him, ‘Follow Me.’”

78 There is some scholarly discussion as to whether or not there were two Bethsaida’s. I do not think this is a matter worth pursuing in this lesson, though the commentaries do discuss the matter in greater detail. The translator’s note in the NET Bible suggests that the Greek preposition rendered “from” here should be understood to mean “originally from.”

79 I like Carson’s comment here, when he writes, “Philip provides exactly the kind of information that positively identifies a man in the first-century Palestine: the name of his village, and the name of his (reputed) father.” Carson, p. 159. Some are troubled that Philip would speak of Joseph as the father of Jesus. Two major options are possible. First, Philip may have actually assumed that Joseph was the biological father of our Lord. In such case, he would be wrong, not because he denied the virgin birth of our Lord, but because he had not yet even considered it. He, like all of his fellow-apostles, had many misconceptions about Jesus in the beginning. Second, it may be that he is merely identifying Jesus in the normal way of doing so. He would thus be referring to Joseph as Jesus’ father in terms of common perception. This would set Jesus apart from others by the same name, but not with the same (reputed) father.

80 This is probably not the time or place to go into the subject of angels, but let me simply suggest a thought for further consideration. These are days in which “angels” are a very popular topic. We should consider the fact that angels are not only inferior to our Lord Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1), but that their ministry is closely related to and subordinate to our Lord. They ascend and descend upon Jesus. When we begin to think of angels independently of our Lord, we begin to go astray from the picture our Lord has drawn here and what the Bible teaches elsewhere.

81 Carson (p. 154) points out that “follow” usually refers to more than just “trailing along after” someone; it is our Lord’s way of speaking of being His disciple. This is not always the case, but it is usually so. Here, there may be a little of both senses implied. Jesus invites Philip to “come along” and to “join with Him as a disciple.”

82 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 162.

83 “Others … suggest that Nathanael is to be identified with Bartholomew, an apostle who is never mentioned in John, just as Nathanael is never mentioned in the Synoptists. Bartholomew is coupled with Philip in all three Synoptists (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14), while another link is that he is mentioned immediately after Thomas in Acts 1:13 and Nathanael is in the same position in John 21:2. Moreover Bartholomew is not really a personal name, but a patronymic meaning ‘son of Tolmai’ (cf. Barjona = ‘son of Jona’). The man who bore it almost certainly had another name. The other disciples mentioned in this chapter all became apostles, and it is suggested that Nathanael is, accordingly, likely to have done so too. If he is to be identified with one of the apostles Bartholomew is probably our man.” Morris, p. 164. I should point out that Morris is not entirely persuaded that this is the case. Carson seems more convinced: “The most likely suggestion is that Nathanael is the personal name of ‘Bartholomew,’ which is then understood to be an Aramaic patronymic (i.e. identifying the person as the son of someone: ‘the son of Tholomaeus’ or the like).” Carson, p. 159.

84 Morris, p. 167.

85 Morris, p. 169.

86 This truth will be emphatically taught in John 4.

87 Of course, James made a great contribution by his death.

88 The Pharisees had this same error with regard to wealth. They seemed to think that the richer one was, the more spiritual he must be. Conversely, the poorer one was, the more unspiritual. Jesus’ words about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 challenged this mindset. See also the Beatitudes, where those who are blessed seem to be those who are “cursed.” Psalm 73 also deals with this same issue.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Discipleship

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

5. The First Sign: Jesus Turns Water Into Wine (John 2:1-11)

Introduction

My wife and I know what it is like to get married on a limited budget. When we became engaged, Jeannette and I both contributed to the purchase of her engagement ring. When we got married, we had to stop and cash one of the checks given to us as a wedding gift in order to pay for our room that night. The second night of our honeymoon was spent on the living room couch of my former roommate’s parents’ house in Eastern Washington. If you think that’s bad, our third night was spent at a state park. Jeannette slept in one seat of the car, and I slept in the other. The next night was a little better; we stayed with Karl and Martha Lind, our friends in Portland, Oregon.

Some of you may remember the story I have told about staying in their son David’s room, since he had moved away from home. John, the older brother, still lived at home. We were awakened in the morning to the sound of a booming voice over the intercom announcing: “Breakfast will be served in the dining room in ten minutes!” The voice sounded so dignified, so formal, but I knew it was John. Before he could even take his finger off the intercom button, we heard a huge crash and the breaking of glass. It literally sounded as though every dish in the cupboard had fallen and broken on the floor. This thunderous crash was quickly followed by a bellowing voice that I knew was Karl’s: “John!”

Getting married on a limited budget is not easy. It was not easy when Jeannette and I married, and it may not have been easy for some of you. Neither does it seem to have been easy for this unnamed couple whose wedding Jesus, His mother, and His disciples attend in Cana of Galilee. The story of the wedding at Cana of Galilee is found only in John’s Gospel. It is on this occasion that our Lord performs His first demonstration of power. It is no mere miracle; it is a sign, a miracle with a message. Let us listen carefully to the words of this text to learn what the Spirit of God intends to teach us from this wedding miracle.

The Occasion
(2:1-5)

1 Now on the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee.⁸⁹ Jesus’ mother was there,⁹⁰ 2 and both Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine ran out, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no wine left.” 4 Jesus replied, “Woman, why are you saying this to me? My time has not yet come.” 5 His mother told the servants, “Whatever he tells you, do it.”

In the Old and New Testament worlds, weddings were happy, festive occasions just as they are today. The marriage ceremony was considerably longer, during which time there was feasting and celebration. Two passages in the Bible shed light on what may have taken place at this celebration in this second chapter of John. The first is the marriage of Jacob and Leah in Genesis chapter 29. Actually, Jacob thought he was marrying Rachel, the younger sister for whom he had labored seven years. Laban outdoes Jacob in deceit by switching brides. A lengthy celebration, a good quantity of wine, and a very dark tent seem to explain how Jacob could spend the night consummating his marriage with Leah rather than Rachel.

The second, and most instructive, wedding celebration is that of Samson in Judges 14. The marriage is never actually consummated, and in the end, this Philistine bride is given to Samson’s friend and perhaps even his best man (14:20). Samson finds this woman in Timnah and demands that his parents arrange for the marriage. On his way to the place, Samson is attacked by a young lion, which he tears apart with his bare hands. Samson says nothing of this to his anyone. Later on, when he is on his way to Timnah to be married, he comes across the lion’s carcass, in which a swarm of bees have created a honeycomb. Samson scoops out some honey, which he eats and shares with his parents, without telling them where it came from. During the week-long wedding celebration, Samson propounds a riddle to the Philistine young men who are guests at the feast. He promises to give them 30 linen wraps and 30 changes of clothes if they can solve this riddle within the seven days of the feast. The Philistine men cannot figure out the riddle, so they force Samson’s intended bride to extract the answer from Samson. When the young men solve the riddle and Samson learns how this was accomplished, he goes down to the Philistine city of Ashkelon and kills 30 Philistines, taking their clothing and giving it to the young men of Timnah. As a result of Samson’s revenge, the marriage is never consummated, and the woman is given to another man. This story provides insight for us into what takes place during the week-long wedding ceremony in our text.

Leon Morris supplies us with some additional background from the Jewish writings:

According to the Mishnah the wedding would take place on a Wednesday if the bride was a virgin and on a Thursday if she was a widow (Ket. 1:1). The bridegroom and his friends made their way in procession to the bride’s house. This was often done at night, when there could be a spectacular torchlight procession. There were doubtless speeches and expressions of goodwill before the bride and groom went in procession to the groom’s house, where the wedding banquet was held. It is probable that there was a religious ceremony, but we have no details. The processions and the feast are the principal items of which we have knowledge. The feast was prolonged, and might last as long as a week.⁹¹

Mary, the mother of Jesus, is at the wedding, although her role seems to be more than that of a guest. One gets the impression that the couple being married are either friends, or possibly related to Mary, and that she is helping with the arrangements, especially the serving of the food and wine. She seems to be one of the first to know that the wine is running out. She instructs the servants to do whatever Jesus tells them to do, and they appear willing to take her instructions.

Jesus and His disciples are also at the wedding as invited guests. There seem to be only five disciples at this point: Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and John (if indeed he is the other disciple of John who follows Jesus). The fact that Mary, Jesus, and His disciples are all invited to this wedding suggests that this wedding is that of someone known to all of them, perhaps a friend or a relative. Well into the festivities, Jesus’ mother becomes aware of a most embarrassing situation—the wine has run out, and there appears to be no solution. Either no more wine is available, or there is no money to buy more wine. The guests seem unaware of what is happening. If something is not done, all will be embarrassed. Some commentators even inform us that litigation was possible in such cases.⁹² (Can you imagine being sued for not providing enough food and drink at a marriage ceremony?)

Jesus’ mother seems to step in and take charge when she says to Jesus, “They have no wine left.” This is no mere report, as our Lord knows, and as John expects us to understand. Though not all perceive this to be so, I believe Mary informs Jesus with the hope that He might do something about the situation.⁹³ Of all those present, the mother of our Lord knows Jesus best. She knows better than anyone of the miraculous events surrounding His birth. She knows of John the Baptist’s miraculous birth as well, and of his ministry in which he has identified Jesus as the promised Messiah. Apparently Jesus has not yet performed a miracle, and we do not know for certain that she expects one. But from what she does know, it is certainly possible that she expects Jesus to do something out of the ordinary.

Mary may have considered this crisis providential. Perhaps she thinks it is time for Jesus to present Himself to the world as the Messiah.⁹⁴ John the Baptist has already designated Him as Messiah, and He already has a following of disciples. A well-timed miracle could be the means by which He declares His identity to the nation. At the same time, the newlyweds would greatly appreciate His providing a remedy to their problem! Mary is very careful not to tell Jesus what to do, but it seems clear that she hopes He will do something.

Jesus knows that His mother expects a response of some kind, and He gives her a response, though it is hardly what she expects. Yet, it is not an unkind response—it simply serves to set the record straight by redefining His relationship to Mary, His earthly mother. Jesus does not call her “Mary,” or “mother,” but “woman.” This is the same term Jesus will use when He speaks to her from the cross (John 19:26). Here, at the wedding, Jesus asks Mary the question, “Why are you saying this to Me?”⁹⁵

Jesus is not employing a new or unique expression when He refers to His mother as “woman.” This expression is found a number of times in the Old Testament (Judges 11:12; 18:24; 2 Samuel 16:10; 19:23; 2 Kings 3:13; 2 Chronicles 35:21) and a few times in the New (see also Mark 5:7; Luke 8:28). The expression has a way of distancing two parties. For example, when the Ammonites come to do battle against Israel, Jephthah is recruited as Israel’s leader. He sends this word to the king of Ammon: “What do you have against me [literally, “What to me and to you …”], that you have come to fight against me in my land?” (Judges 11:12b, NKJV)

Jephthah’s expression, “What to me and to you?” is virtually identical in meaning (in the Hebrew text, and in form and meaning in the Greek translation of this text in the Septuagint) with the phrase employed by our Lord in our text in John. Jephthah asks the king of the Ammonites what the problem is between them. What problem pits you and I against each other? Jephthah is distancing himself from the king of Ammon in any way that will lead to war. He achieves this by pointing out to the king that they do not have enough issues between them to fight about.

In the New Testament Gospel of Mark, the demoniac speaks to Jesus on behalf of the demons possessing him, “What is there between me and you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you will not cause me anguish!” (Mark 5:7). It is the same Greek expression by which the demon tries to distance himself from Jesus. He begs Jesus not to trouble him, not to make his demonic existence more miserable. What differences do they have between them at this moment in time?

Jesus uses this same expression to ask Mary just what has caused her to think the problem she has identified is His problem as well as hers. As His mother, she might think she has some parental authority over Him. As her sovereign God, she has no authority over Him at all! This is what Jesus conveys with these words. It is almost as though Mary has said, “Jesus, they are out of wine. We really need to do something,” to which Jesus responds, “Ma’am, what do you mean ‘we’”?

This response reminds me of the shop-worn joke about the Lone Ranger and his faithful Indian companion, Tonto. The Lone Ranger and Tonto are surrounded by a tribe of Indians and greatly outnumbered. Turning to his companion, the Lone Ranger says, “Tonto, I think we’re in trouble.” Tonto looks back at the Lone Ranger and responds, “What do you mean, “we,” White man?”

In his Gospel, Luke makes the point that Jesus lived in submission to His parents as a child (2:51). We do not know at what point in time it happened, but it appears that Joseph died prior to our Lord’s adult years, since he is never mentioned after our Lord’s early years. Jesus honored His mother and lived in submission to her authority, but it is now time for our Lord to indicate to His mother that there will be a change. Not only is He a grown man about to set out on His own, He is the Messiah, who will some day establish His kingdom on the earth. He can no longer relate to Mary as He formerly has. He cannot allow His submission to His Father to be “overruled” by the requests of His earthly mother.

This wedding crisis provides Jesus with the opportunity to set a precedent which clearly indicates to His mother that He will not be instructed or influenced by her—as His mother. A new relationship between Jesus and His mother commences at the wedding in Cana. Catholics and Protestants strongly disagree on this matter. Catholic scholars, consistent with their exaggerated view of Mary’s importance, are convinced that she uses her influence on Jesus to get Him to do what He would not otherwise have done.⁹⁶ The text seems to tell us just the opposite. Jesus reminds her that she is just a woman, and that He, as God, cannot comply with her wishes if and when they are not in “His time.”

Our Lord neither abruptly nor arbitrarily turns His mother down. He does not say, “No,” and neither does He say, “Yes.” He simply reminds her of the change in their roles and relationships. He is no longer her “little boy,” obliged to do whatever she asks. He is the Messiah, who must obey His true Father. He is thus sensitive to the timing of His “debut.” Jesus informs His mother that it is not yet “His time.”⁹⁷ He refers here to “His time” as the time of His public debut as the promised Messiah—not His death on the cross of Calvary.⁹⁸

Duly informed, Mary certainly is not offended, nor is she entirely put off by Jesus’ words. She simply turns to the servants and instructs them, “Whatever He tells you, do it.” She does not argue with Him, for He has made His point. She does not plead with Him. By her words, it seems that she leaves her request in His hands to deal with as He sees fit. He may not tell the servants to do anything. Yet, if He does tell them to do something—anything—they should obey, for then it is His good pleasure and done in His good time.

Water Into Wine
(2:6-11)

6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washing, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the water jars with water.” So they filled them up to the very top. 8 Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the head steward,” and they did. 9 When the head steward tasted the water that had been turned to wine, not knowing where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), he called the bridegroom 10 and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper wine when the guests have become drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!” 11 Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs, in Cana of Galilee. In this way he revealed his glory, and his disciples believed in him.

The Old Testament Law required various washings, but to the Pharisees and some others this was not enough:

1 Now the Pharisees and some of the experts in the law who came from Jerusalem gathered to him. 2 And they saw that some of Jesus’ disciples ate their bread with unclean hands, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they perform a ritual washing, holding on to the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. They hold on to many other traditions: the washing of cups, pots, kettles and dining couches.) 5 The Pharisees and the experts in the law asked him, “Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with unwashed hands?” (Mark 7:1-5)

Consequently, a devoutly Jewish wedding ceremony might have required many ceremonial cleansings. To facilitate these washings, a substantial amount of water was kept on hand. Nearby, within sight of our Lord it would seem (but perhaps out of sight of the guests as they ate), are six large stone waterpots. Each pot has a capacity of between 20 and 30 gallons of water, a total of around 150 gallons.

Jesus instructs the servants to fill each of the six waterpots to the brim. We would have to agree that these stone waterpots would be heavy when empty, and even heavier yet when full (the weight of the water alone in a full pot would be about 200 pounds). It does not appear Jesus intended for the servants to carry these pots away, dump them, refill them, and then carry them back. They are far too heavy for this, especially when filled with water. I am inclined to think that at least some of these pots were partially filled at the time—the wine ran out, not the ceremonial cleansing water. The servants must have fetched water in smaller containers, and by this means eventually filled the large stone containers.

Up to this point I doubt that either the servants or Mary, or our Lord’s newly-acquired disciples have a clue as to what Jesus is about to do. When the six stone pots are filled, Jesus instructs the servants to draw out some of the “water” from one of the pots and to serve it to the master of the feast. Here is where Mary’s words to the servants are put to the test.

I am not sure we can understand just how difficult an assignment this was for these servants. It was one thing to fill the stone waterpots, which was probably a part of their responsibilities. But who would ever think of someone drinking this “water”? Imagine working for a caterer who is serving a very large group of people at a banquet. In the kitchen, one of the large “squares” (cooking pots) falls to the floor, and half of the gravy spills out onto the floor. One of the employees manages to scoop up most of the gravy from the floor, which he then pours into the serving pitchers. Would you let a waiter pour it on your potatoes if you knew where that “gravy” had been? I don’t think so.

Those of you who are campers have probably stayed in a remote campsite where the water comes from a well, but is not pure enough to drink. You look for signs there that clearly differentiate “potable” water from that which is not. You would not think of drinking water that is not entirely pure. You may wash your hands with it, but you would certainly not drink it. This ceremonial cleansing “water” may not have been considered suitable for drinking. Wine is to be drunk at such times. I doubt that any devout Jew would have considered drinking water from one of those six stone pots.

With this in mind one can better imagine what it must have been like for the servants when they finished filling the stone waterpots and returned to Jesus for further instructions. Not one of them could have ever imagined what Jesus would say next: “Now draw some out and take it to the head steward.” In absolute unbelief they must have thought, “I know Mary said to do whatever Jesus said, but surely He can’t be serious! We are to serve this “water” to the head steward? When he finds out it is only water, and not wine, he’ll have our jobs. And if he finds out where this water came from, we’re really in big trouble.”

No one could even remotely imagine what was about to happen. Jesus does not wave his arms over the waterpots, commanding the water to become wine. It appears that He never even touched the water or the pots. Jesus does not even tell them that the water has become wine, or that it is about to do so. As far as they know, Jesus is instructing them to serve water, ceremonial cleansing water, to the head steward no less! This is horrifying! To tell them more would have surpassed the limits of what their minds could conceive.

As far as we know, the servants immediately obey our Lord. We read of no hesitation, no words of protest. The servants draw out of the pots and begin to serve the wine, starting with the head steward. I wonder at what point the water turned to wine and changed color. (Or, what if it had been white wine and it did not change color at all? There would be no visual indication that the water had been transformed into wine.) The head steward has no idea where his drink has come from, but the servants know. The suspense of those moments between the time the head steward drinks the wine and the time he responds must have been sheer torture for the servants. The head steward sniffs the cup, and then sips. He then calls for the bridegroom—what is he about to say? The scenarios which played in the heads of the servants would make interesting reading.

With a smile, and perhaps a pat on the bridegroom’s back, the head steward proclaims this wine to be great—the best yet. The timing is a little unorthodox, he tells the bridegroom, but the wine is great. Usually, he notes, the trick is to save the inferior wine until last. When everyone has had their fill of wine, or more (literally “have become drunk”),⁹⁹ their taste will not be as discerning, and thus the inferior wine may not be detected. But this wine is the best yet! The bridegroom has outdone himself, saving the very best until last. What looks like certain shame has turned to sudden fame for the bridegroom and the head steward.

Conclusion

This miracle at Cana of Galilee has much to teach us today. Allow me to make some observations, and suggest some implications and applications for us today.

First of all, this is the first of our Lord’s miracles. John calls it “the beginning of signs” in verse 11. Liberal scholarship is unwilling to take the words of Scripture at face value. They do not believe this was a miracle at all. They explain the story this way: There was a wedding, and they were running out of wine. Jesus told the servants to serve water when the wine ran out. This was like a child’s make-believe tea party. To try to play down the embarrassing situation, the head steward tastes the water that is served in place of the wine and says (in good humor), “Good wine!” Then, someone else at the celebration catches the spirit of the moment and adds, “Yes, this is the best wine yet!” I prefer to take John’s account literally. This was a miracle. Jesus turned water—ceremonial cleansing water—into the best wine men ever drank.

Second, while this miracle appears to be an exercise of supernatural power that our Lord is reluctant to perform, but which He does because of His mother’s persistence, it is not. I believe it is correct to observe that, in the Gospels, our Lord is often not as eager to perform miracles as others are to have Him do so. He knows the limitation of such displays of power, as we shall see at the end of this chapter. Jesus’ reluctance is not a resistance to helping this couple in need, but a concern that His mother understand that their relationship has changed forever, and that therefore His calling is not to do her bidding, as though she has an inside track with God. He also is concerned that He fulfill His Father’s plan at the divinely appointed time, rather than in His mother’s time-frame. He knows it is not yet time for Him to make a public display of His power, by which He publicly presents Himself as the promised Messiah. Those today who are overly eager to see God perform miracles (some almost insist upon them) should consider this fact carefully. Jesus is not as eager to perform miracles as others are to see Him do so.

Third, this miracle was not a “necessity,” but rather a “luxury.” Stop and consider this fact for a moment. This miracle is not like some of the other miracles Jesus performed, where an individual has suffered for years, or a child’s life hangs in the balance. This is not an emergency situation which demands immediate and dramatic action on our Lord’s part.

Years ago, when our family visited our good friends in Canada, we received a phone call from the U.S. while we were out. We were told the call came from someone with a strong accent. Since there is no way for me to reflect sounds (especially accents) in print, if you can switch your mind to “Swedish mode,” you may be able to “hear” the conversation as I did. When I called our home, where a Swedish couple was staying in our absence, Schel answered. “Bob, we’ve had a tragedy here … Carmen is dead.” Carmen was our little poodle, and we liked her a lot. She had gotten outside and was run over by a passing car. We were sad, but this was not a tragedy. We did not feel obligated to cut our trip short and rush home for the “funeral.” Similarly, running out of wine was a problem, but it was not a tragedy. Jesus’ first miracle was the solution to a non-critical problem, though I am sure that in the newlywed couple’s minds, and perhaps in Mary’s, the problem was a little more crucial than my assessment of the situation. But a crisis it was not.

There is a lesson to be learned from this miracle. God is concerned with our “non-critical” problems. Prayer is not like calling 911. Some may have the idea that God is like the President of the United States—a person with many (too many) demands on His time, so that He cannot possibly respond to them all. They may think of God as sitting at a large heavenly desk with an array of telephones before him which are all ringing with “prayer requests,” and He is busy answering them all. Who are we to “bother” God with our problems? If this is our idea of God, we are wrong. God is all-powerful and all-knowing. He is never overtaxed by our calling upon Him for help.

He is also a compassionate and merciful Father, who cares about His children. God is never annoyed when we come to Him with our small problems. Continuing the analogy of “bothering” a busy President, God does not look upon our “calls” (prayers) to Him as interruptions, as if someone were calling the President for the time and temperature. We are God’s children. I can tell you that a President who loves his child will (or should) gladly suffer the interruption of something that greatly concerns his child when he or she interrupts their father.

I am greatly encouraged that our Lord’s first miracle is one that many would consider non-essential. Later in our Lord’s ministry, His disciples begin to act like our Lord’s “secret service,” shooing away little children and people whom they consider to be a bother to the Savior—and Jesus rebukes them for doing so. God cares about the little things in our lives. I am reminded of the story of the “lost ax head” in 2 Kings 6, where Elisha retrieves an ax head for one of the sons of the prophets. Many have tried to spiritualize this text to make it relevant. I believe it is very relevant: God cares about lost ax heads, and lost car keys and flat tires … God cares about the little things that affect His children.¹⁰⁰

Fourth, this miracle is a lot like some of my jokes—most people in attendance just didn’t “get it.” It would seem that Jesus would want everyone to know what He was doing. He could have called for everyone’s attention, announcing to all that He was about to turn water into wine. He could have been much more dramatic, waving His hands over the waterpots, and then personally presenting the “good wine” to the head steward. In fact, Jesus does not seem to even touch the waterpots or the wine. He simply gives instructions to the servants to fill the pots and to serve the contents. If you had interviewed the head steward or any of the guests and asked what they thought of the celebration, they probably would have said: “Oh, it was a really nice celebration, and the wine at the last was really something.” Most of the people never knew a miracle had taken place. It seems that only Mary, the servants, and the disciples were aware of what happened. John tells us that because of this miracle, the disciples believed in Him (verse 11). My impression is that the servants knew “what” happened, but they were not sure exactly “how” it happened, so they simply kept quiet, scratching their heads with wonder.

Minimizing the visibility of this first display of our Lord’s power is by design. Everything our Lord did in transforming the water into wine was intended to minimize His exposure. Done in this way, our Lord was able to perform the miracle without violating His Father’s will concerning “His time.” It was not yet the moment for our Lord to publicly display His power and glory. Thus, He performed the miracle privately, in a way that conformed to God’s timing. In one sense, there are two miracles here in these first verses of John 2. The first is the transformation of water into wine. The second is accomplishing this miracle in a way that was not apparent to everyone.

Most likely, this is the way many miracles occur today. They occur in ways that seem so natural many do not even recognize them as supernatural. Perhaps an illustration would be helpful. As I was about to graduate from seminary a number of years ago, it came time for me to make the decision about where I would be going to minister. I had a couple of possibilities, but there was one I really did not want to consider, largely because of where the ministry would be. It was the one place in all the world I did not want to be. But God worked in my heart to the point that I relented and expressed to Him my willingness to serve Him even in that place. A church in that city had contacted me and expressed a desire to pursue the possibility of my ministry with them in that place. At the same time, I also had to make a decision about continuing in my current ministry, where I did want to be. Because I had to make a commitment within a certain period of time, I set a kind of deadline. If God wanted me to go to the other place—the place I preferred not to go—then that church would have to contact me again before the deadline passed. They did not, and I made the commitment to stay where I was. Only a few days later, a letter arrived in the mail from the “other church.” Interestingly, the letter had been mailed a month earlier, and from the marks on the letter, I could see it had been many places—except our mailbox. Somehow, the letter was not delivered on time, even though it was mailed to the correct address. Some might very easily say this was just a Post Office blunder. But I believe it was providential—a miracle—or, as one of my friends used to say, “another one of those strange coincidences.”

Fifth, notice especially how this miracle “manifested our Lord’s glory.” This is what John tells us: “This beginning of signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory; and His disciples believed in Him” (John 11, emphasis mine).

This is a rather interesting statement, because it seems inconsistent with what we have just observed. How could our Lord’s glory have been manifested when so few even knew a miracle had been performed? The answer to our question may be answered in chapter 1:

10 He was in the world, and the world was created through him, but the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children 13 —children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God. 14 Now the Word became flesh and lived among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the only One, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father (John 1:10-13, emphasis mine).

Paul’s words to the Philippians may help to clarify what John has told us:

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (Philippians 2:5-8).

Jesus was God. He was in the beginning with God. He actively participated in the creation of this world (John 1:1-5). He was the true Light, the Light of the world, but the world did not know Him (John 1:6-11). The disciples beheld His glory, but the vast majority of those who saw and heard Him did not really see Him for who He was; they did not behold His glory.

This matter is taken up later on in John’s Gospel, but let me briefly turn your attention to an important text in John: “I glorified you on earth by completing the work you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created” (John 17:4-5). Our Lord had great glory in heaven, and this visible glory He set aside to come to the earth in human flesh. He glorified God by His humility and obedience, which culminated in His sacrificial (and humiliating) death.¹⁰¹ Because of this, the Father has given Him even greater glory. That glory will be openly and visibly manifested at His Second Coming, and in heaven (“glory”).

My point is this: I fear we have a distorted definition of “glory,” very much like our Lord’s disciples had in the Gospels. We wrongly think that if the glory of God is present, it will be in some dramatic display of power, one that is visible and spectacular, one that is seen and acknowledged by all.¹⁰² Let me remind you that the glory of God was manifested in this miracle, even though few recognized it as such. We may be looking for the wrong kind of “glory.” All too often in the “triumphalism” of the New Testament church (i.e., Corinth) and in the church today, we look for the wrong kind of glory. The glory of God, as I understand the Scriptures, is manifested in and through the saints as they—like their Savior—live humbly and suffer patiently for the sake of Christ and the Gospel (see 1 Peter 2; also 2 Corinthians 3 and 4).

Sixth, this miracle is called a “sign.” Various terms are used in the New Testament to designate miracles. Of this term D. A. Carson says,

The New Testament uses several words to denote what we call ‘miracles.’ One of the most common, dynameis (‘mighty works’) is not found in John; another, terata (‘wonders,’ ‘portents,’ ‘miracles’) is found only when linked with semeia (‘signs’), as in ‘signs and wonders’; but this combination is found only once in the Fourth Gospel (4:48). John prefers the simple word ‘signs’: Jesus’ miracles are never simply naked displays of power, still less neat conjuring tricks to impress the masses, but signs, significant displays of power that point beyond themselves to the deeper realities that could be perceived with the eyes of faith. Jesus himself in this Gospel refers to his miracles and to his other activity as his ‘work’ or ‘works’ (e.g. 5:36; NIV ‘miracle(s)’ in 7:21; 10:25).¹⁰³

This transformation of water into wine is closely related to chapter 1. In the first few verses of this Gospel, John informs us that Jesus of Nazareth is the Logos, who was not only with God in the beginning, but was God in the beginning. He is the Creator, who brought all that is into existence. Is it any great wonder that we should see Jesus “creating” wine from water, just as He once created the cosmos from chaos? Are we surprised that the disciples beheld His glory through this miracle when, in chapter one, the Apostle John writes, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14)?

This miracle, as the other signs of the Gospel of John, teaches us about the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. The purpose is simple: that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that in believing you might have eternal life (John 20:31). Do you believe? There is no more important decision in life than what you believe about the person and work of Jesus Christ. He alone is God manifested in human flesh. He alone is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, who alone can forgive your sin.

Seventh, in this first miracle of our Lord, Jesus takes something not so great and turns it into something very wonderful. He takes that which is the cause of drudgery and makes it the source of great delight. The Old Testament Law required various kinds of washings. All of these were to demonstrate to the Israelites how deeply sinful and unclean they were, and thus how unfit to enter into God’s presence. These washings were drudgery, yet the Israelites were to do them in obedience to God’s law. By the time legalistic Judaism added even more washings, Judaism was a laborious religion. Jesus took this ceremonial cleansing water and made it into wine. Jesus took that which was a pain and made it into a pleasure. Jesus took that which Jews would have found unfit to drink, and He made of it the best wine that has ever passed the lips of man.

What a picture this is of the superiority of the New Covenant to the Old, of grace to law. Because He came and perfectly fulfilled the law, meeting all of its requirements, our Lord was uniquely qualified to die for sinners on the cross of Calvary. The salvation He procured through His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary makes it possible for men to leave the drudgery behind and to enter into the joy of His salvation.

Our Lord is able to take that which is less than desirable (for drinking, at least) and make it into a vintage wine, the finest man has ever tasted. He is able to take fallible men like Peter, James, John, Andrew, Philip, and Nathanael and make them into apostles. He is able to take the “weak and foolish things of this world”—people like us—and transform us so that people marvel at God’s grace and power. What a wonderful Savior!

Eighth, Jesus not only produces something beautiful and blessed in this miracle, but something bountiful. The wine Jesus created was the best ever, but He did not create a small quantity. He produced much more than was needed. Can you imagine the joy of this married couple, who may have been poor, being left with over 100 gallons of the finest wine ever? When Jesus fed the 5,000 (Matthew 14:13-21) and again the 4,000 (Matthew 15:32-39), there were plenty of leftovers (14:20; 15:37). God’s blessings are always bountiful. “Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you” (Luke 6:38).

God’s goodness and grace abounds to His children; they are without measure. What a wonderful Savior!

Heal then these waters, Lord; or bring thy flock,
Since these are troubled, to the springing rock.
Look down, great Master of the Feasts! O shine,
And turn once more our water into wine!

Henry Vaughan (1622-1695), “RELIGION”¹⁰⁴

89 In the entire Bible, Cana is mentioned only in the Gospel of John (2:1, 11; 4:46; 21:2). There are a number of theories as to its whereabouts, but no one can really say where it was located with certainty. We will be told in 21:2 that Nathanael was from Cana, so he probably knew the couple being married.

90 Mary is never called “Mary” in the Gospel of John, but is referred to only as the mother of Jesus, as here in our text.

91 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 178-179.

92 “To run out of supplies would be a dreadful embarrassment in a ‘shame’ culture; there is some evidence it could also lay the groom open to a lawsuit from aggrieved relatives of the bride.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 169. Morris goes into even greater detail. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 177, see also fn. 7.

93 Calvin writes, “It may be doubted if she expected or asked any thing from her Son, since he had not yet performed any miracle; and it is possible that, without expecting any remedy of this sort, she advised him to give some pious exhortations which would have the effect of preventing the guests from feeling uneasiness, and at the same time of relieving the shame of the bridegroom.” John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Volume 7: The Gospels (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.), p. 622. I find Calvin’s explanation hard to believe. It seems more natural that Mary hoped Jesus would do something, without knowing what that might be.

94 The cynical half-brothers of Jesus suggested this in John 7:1-5, so it would not be surprising for Mary to suggest it sooner, in sincerity.

95 Literally, Jesus asked, “What to Me and to you, woman?” The various translations give this expression somewhat different nuances: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” (KJV); “Dear woman, why do you involve me?” (NIV); “Woman, what does that have to do with us?” (NAB); “Woman, what concern is that to you and to me?” (NRS).

96 Morris writes, “Sometimes Roman Catholic scholars see Mary as asking for a miracle. Thus J. Cortes sees Jesus’ words as meaning: ‘What has changed between us? Why do you hesitate to ask me for a miracle? The hour of my Passion in which you will not be able to ask me for miracles nor will I work them, has not come yet. You are as always my mother and I am your son. Therefore I will gladly accept your petition’ (New Testament Abstracts, III, 1958-59, p. 247). The difficulty with this position is that there was a change. Jesus had never previously worked a miracle (v. 11), so Mary might well hesitate to ask for one.” Morris, p. 180-181, fn. 20.

97 On several occasions in the Book of John, Jesus refers to “His time.” In chapter 7, the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was at hand, and our Lord’s brothers urge Him to go up to Jerusalem with His disciples and “show Himself to the world,” performing miracles so that He could be recognized for what He was. They did not say this in sincerity, but tongue-in-cheek, because they did not believe in Him as yet (7:1-5). Jesus declined to go up to Judea with them because He was not yet ready. He encouraged them to go on without Him. Later, He went up to the feast secretly to avoid, rather than to gain, attention (7:6-13). Later in the chapter, we are told that even though some of the Jews tried to seize Jesus, they were not able, because it was not “His time” (verse 30). A similar thing happens in chapter 8, verse 20. On other occasions, Jesus spoke of “His time” as having come (12:23, 27; 13:1; 16:32; 17:1).

98 Morris (p. 181), says that by this Jesus means, “It is not yet time for Me to act.”

99 Sadly, many look to this text primarily to prove their point about the use or non-use of alcoholic beverages, and thereby miss the main point of the story. One must work very hard to convince himself or anyone else that the “wine” was merely grape juice. On the other hand, the “wine” of that day and the wine of our own are probably not the same. The Bible does not forbid drinking any alcoholic beverage at all, but it does condemn the use of “strong drink” and drunkenness (Proverbs 20:1; Isaiah 5:11, 22; 28:1, 7; 56:12; Ephesians 5:18). It should be remembered that while John the Baptist was a “tee-totaler” and criticized for it, Jesus was not, and was accused of being a “winebibber” (Luke 7:33-34). Much can be said about the abuse of alcohol today, as in ancient times, but it is going too far to say that all alcohol is flatly condemned, or to attempt to convince us that the wine our Lord created was completely free of alcohol.

100 I had better add this caveat. While God does care about the little things that trouble us, He is not pleased with our petty, selfish petitions. James tells us that our prayers may not be answered because they are self-serving—James 4:3. Many of our prayers are self-serving, and God may not answer them because of this.

101 Morris cites Richardson, who sums up what “glory” means in our text: “Richardson points out that John ‘records no scene of Transfiguration, as do the three Synoptists; he regards the whole of Christ’s incarnate life as an embodiment of the [glory] of God, though the glory is revealed only to believing disciples and not unto ‘the world’” (An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament, London, 1958, p. 65), as cited by Morris, p. 186, fn. 38.

102 Satan thought in these terms as well, as we can see in Luke 4:9-11.

103 Carson, p. 175.

104 I found this quotation in one of the front pages of Michael Horton’s book, In the Face of God: The Dangers & Delights of Spiritual Intimacy (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1996).

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Miracles

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

6. The Cleansing of the Temple (John 2:12-22)

Introduction

Old timers will remember the story of the “car of my dreams.” Well, actually it was a pickup truck. To be precise, it was a 1940 Ford pickup, with a late model higher performance V-8 engine, custom exhaust system (nice and loud), a jacked-up back end, and a custom paint job (maroon with white scallops and pin striping). It all started when my father concluded that our 1936 Ford pickup was no longer serviceable. This was a good decision since it frequently broke down, it was not licensed (we drove it only on our property), and there was no driver-side door. We owned a small fishing resort, so we needed a pickup to haul firewood and garbage, among other things. The old 1936 pickup was mine, at least in my mind, and it was no longer able to fulfill its duties. We were ready for an upgrade.

So it was that my Dad and I hitchhiked over one hundred miles to Portland, Oregon, where we believed a good used truck could be found. We started on one end of a street lined with used car dealers. By the end of the day, we were nearing the last car dealer on the street, and the deadline we had set for ourselves to begin making our way home, hitchhiking again. We decided to try one last dealer before making our way home. “You don’t have any older used pickups, do you?” my father asked. “Just one hot rod,” the salesman responded. Did he say “hot rod”? I couldn’t believe it! I was not yet 16, but I had been driving (on our place) for several years. “Hot rod?” I was all ears.

The car dealer took my Dad and me around to the back of the lot, where this marvelous little pickup was parked. It was perfect. My Dad told the man we had $400 in cash, and that was all we could pay. The man took it. On the way home, my Dad could not help leaving a little rubber on the pavement (he was used to driving a 6-cylinder Plymouth). We were so proud when we drove into our driveway, but my Mother was skeptical, and with good reason. There was nothing wrong with the truck. That was the problem. It was almost perfect, too perfect. We refused to “defile” this vintage vehicle by transporting firewood and garbage. It just wouldn’t be right. Needless to say, the truck did not last long at the resort. There were legends about it after it changed hands. We traded it for a 1951 Dodge pickup, with fluid drive, and if you don’t know what that means, I can sum it up in just a few words: “pathetic and powerless.” I had no problem putting garbage in that truck; it could hardly be defiled.

I suppose all of us have owned something we consider very special, something we would not wish to be “defiled” by misuse. Whatever this precious object may be, it could not be as precious to us as the “temple” was to our Lord. Our lesson is about our Lord’s “cleansing” of the temple as described in John, chapter 2. John considered this incident one of the more significant actions of our Lord at the outset of His public ministry. Our task is to learn why this is true, and what the temple cleansing has to do with men and women living centuries later. I assure you this incident is important, and that it has much to say to us today. I urge you to seriously consider this text and its message to us today, and especially its message to you.

A Little Background

The “temple” of our text is the temple in Jerusalem. It was not the first temple, built by Solomon (see 1 Kings 6-7), nor the second temple, rebuilt by the Jews returning from their Babylonian captivity (Ezra 6:15).¹⁰⁵ It was the third temple, known as “Herod’s Temple.” This temple was built by Herod, not so much to facilitate Israel’s worship, but as an attempt to reconcile the Jews to their Idumaean king. Construction of this temple began in 19 B.C. and continued for 46 years. The temple was largely complete in the time of our Lord, but was fully completed a mere 6 years before it was destroyed in 70 A.D. Perhaps it did not have the glory of the first temple built by Solomon, but it must have exceeded the beauty and splendor of the second temple (compare Ezra 3:12; Mark 13:1).

In His early infancy, Jesus had been taken to the temple in Jerusalem for His purification, and there both Simeon and Anna worshipped Him as the promised Messiah (Luke 2:21-38). When our Lord was 12 years of age, He accompanied His parents to Jerusalem, where He absolutely amazed them and others:

41 Now Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem every year for the feast of the Passover. 42 When he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. 43 But when the feast was ended, as they were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, 44 but because they assumed that he was in their group of travelers they went a day’s journey. Then they began to look for him among their relatives and acquaintances. 45 When they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem to look for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Jesus were astonished at his understanding and his answers. 48 When his parents saw him they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Child, why have you treated us like this? Look, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously.” 49 But he replied, “Why were you looking for me?Didn’t you know that I must be in my Father’s house?” 50 Yet his parents did not understand the remark he made to them. 51 Then he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them. But his mother kept all these things in her heart (Luke 2:41-51).

Our Lord’s parents certainly found Jesus a model child, a young man whom they could trust. They felt no need to check on Him, and as they were traveling in a caravan, they didn’t even miss Him on their return from Jerusalem. Eventually, they realized He was not with them and made their way back to Jerusalem, where they found Him in the temple. There He was, sitting in the midst of the Old Testament scholars, not only asking intelligent questions, but giving answers to their questions (Wouldn’t you love to know what some of these questions and answers were?). The scholars were amazed, and most certainly so were our Lord’s parents.

Nevertheless, Jesus caused them considerable inconvenience by not telling them He was staying behind. His absence caused them to leave the caravan of worshippers and return to Jerusalem, a day’s journey away. There was certainly a hint of frustration in their rebuke when they scolded Him for staying behind, but Jesus was not taken aback. He was surprised they had to look for Him. Did they not know where He would be? Did they think it was wrong for Him to be there? He was in His Father’s house,¹⁰⁶ doing “His Father’s business” (verse 49). It was not He who was wrong, but they, for not seeing this situation for what it was. Even at the age of 12, our Lord had a good grasp of who He was and what He was sent to do. The “temple” Jesus visited in Luke 2 was the kind of place it should have been, a place to worship God and to study His Word. The “temple” Jesus finds nearly 20 years later seems to have greatly changed, and thus the need for its cleansing.

A Brief Interlude in Capernaum
(2:12)

12 After this he went down to Capernaum¹⁰⁷ with his mother¹⁰⁸ and brothers¹⁰⁹ and his disciples, and they stayed there a few days.

One may wonder about John’s reasons for including this verse. John is not a man to waste time or space. His words are carefully selected (John 20:30-31; 21:25). Why then does he include them? One reason is that we know Capernaum will become our Lord’s headquarters for His ministry (See Matthew 4:13; 9:1). His family appears to have relocated¹¹⁰ there. It is where the centurion (and others—see John 6:24) come to find Jesus, to plead with Him to heal his servant (Matthew 8:5-13). Capernaum is deemed worthy of greater condemnation, because the people of this city have seen more of our Lord and His miracles (Matthew 11:23; see Luke 4:23). Another reason is that this seems to have been our Lord’s final stay with His family. His “family” is about to change (see Mark 3:31-35).

Finally, John wants us to see these events as closely following one upon the other. He is maintaining a rather precise account of the timing of the crucial events at the outset of our Lord’s ministry.¹¹¹ John therefore describes the first few days of our Lord’s public ministry in chapter 1 and the first 11 verses of chapter 2. Then, he tells us that after the wedding, Jesus, His disciples, and His family make their way down to Capernaum. The disciples appear to be taken in by our Lord’s family for the few days they stay in Capernaum. From what we know of our Lord’s brothers at this point in time, they do not believe in Jesus as the promised Messiah (John 7:5). They may even resent the intrusion of Jesus and His disciples. Jesus and the men who accompany Him do not stay long in Capernaum. After a few (“not … many”) days, they make their way up to Jerusalem for the Passover celebration.

The Cleansing¹¹² of the Temple
(2:13-17)

13 Now the Jewish feast of Passover was near,¹¹³ so Jesus went up¹¹⁴ to Jerusalem. 14 He found in the temple courts people selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting at tables. 15 So he made a whip of cords and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen. He scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make my Father’s house a marketplace!” 17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Passion for your house will devour me.”

The Jewish Passover celebration commemorates the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, when the death angel passed over every home where the first Passover was observed and the blood of the paschal lamb was placed on the two door posts and the lintel (see Exodus 12 and 13). The celebration of the Passover also commenced the Feast of Unleavened bread, so that the entire Passover celebration took a week.¹¹⁵ Attendance for adult Israelite males was compulsory:¹¹⁶

Every male Jew, from the age of twelve and up, was expected to attend the Passover at Jerusalem, a feast celebrated to commemorate the deliverance of the people of Israel from Egyptian bondage. On the tenth of the month Abib or Nisan (which generally corresponds to our March, though its closing days sometimes extend into our April) a male lamb, of the first year, without blemish, was taken, and on the fourteenth day, between three and six o’clock in the afternoon, it was killed.¹¹⁷

It is very difficult to imagine the scene that our Lord’s eyes fall upon as He enters Jerusalem and approaches the temple. We know from the scene at Pentecost, described in Acts 2, that a great many people thronged to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, as they also did to the Feast of Tabernacles and the Feast of Pentecost (or, the Feast of Weeks). It is very difficult to estimate the influx of people to Jerusalem, not only from other parts of Israel, but from all over the world (see Acts 2:5-12). These Jews and proselytes would have to pay the half-shekel temple tax in the coinage of the temple, and thus foreign monies were unacceptable and had to be exchanged for the proper coins. These worshippers also had to offer up their sacrifices, and for many of these travelers, the only solution was to buy a sacrificial animal there in Jerusalem.

In days gone by, they would have been able to purchase these animals and exchange their money in a place outside the temple courts: “At one time the animal merchants set up their stalls across the Kidron Valley on the slopes of the Mount of Olives, but at this point they were in the temple courts, doubtless in the Court of the Gentiles (the outermost court).”¹¹⁸ For some reason, the animals have now been brought into the temple courts. It is certainly more “convenient.” People can purchase their sacrificial animals right at the temple, and they can also exchange their money. It is very difficult to believe that this is the real reason this is done, however.

It is true, in the abstract, that each worshipper was allowed to bring to the temple an animal of his own selection. But let him try it! In all likelihood it would not be approved by the judges, the privileged venders who filled the money-chests of Annas! Hence, to save trouble and disappointment, animals for sacrifice were bought right here in the outer court, which was called the court of the Gentiles because they were permitted to enter it. Of course, the dealers in cattle and sheep would be tempted to charge exorbitant prices for such animals. They would exploit the worshippers. And those who sold pigeons would do likewise, charging, perhaps, $4 for a pair of doves worth a nickel (A. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, New York, 1897, vol. I, p. 370). And then there were the money-changers, sitting cross-legged behind their little coin-covered tables. They gave the worshipper lawful, Jewish coin in exchange for foreign currency. It must be borne in mind that only Jewish coins were allowed to be offered in the temple, and every worshipper—women, slaves, and minors excepted—had to pay the annual temple tribute of half a shekel (cf. Ex. 30:13). The money-changers would charge a certain fee for every exchange-transaction. Here, too, there were abundant opportunities for deception and abuse. And in view of these conditions the Holy Temple, intended as a house of prayer for all people, had become a den of robbers (cf. Isa. 56:7; Jer. 7:11; Mark 11:17).¹¹⁹

The view represented here is one commonly accepted by students of the New Testament Gospels. Those who attempted to bring their own sacrificial animals may very well have had them “rejected” by the temple priests, and thereby were forced to purchase “approved” animals at much higher prices. The same gouging no doubt took place at the money-exchangers’ tables. I doubt very much that our Lord later called the temple a “robbers’ den” (Mark 11:17) without having such corruption in mind. In our text, however, John does not focus on the way in which these merchandisers go about their business, but rather on where they are conducting their business—in the temple courts.

Mark’s Gospel seems to take up this theme as well, pointing out that “where” these businessmen are doing business interferes with an essential purpose of the temple. The temple was to be a “house of prayer for all nations” (Mark 11:17). The outer courts of the temple are the only places where Gentiles could worship. They are not allowed to pass beyond a certain point (see Acts 21:27-30). If the outer courts are filled with oxen and lambs and doves, there is no place for the Gentiles to pray and to worship God. Can you imagine trying to pray in the midst of a virtual stockyard, with all the noises of the animals and the bickering businessmen? Can you conceive of trying to squeeze in between cattle who are tied up in the courts? Think of what it would be like to have to watch where you walked, lest you step in something undesirable?¹²⁰ It appears that Gentile worship is functionally prohibited, and I doubt this troubled many of the Jews, who are not all that excited about including the Gentiles in their worship in the first place.

What Jesus sees going on in the temple courts troubles Him a great deal! The place of prayer has become a place of profit-taking. It sounds more like the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange than the outer courts of the temple of God. It smells more like a barnyard than the place where one would seek God’s presence.¹²¹ Jesus enters the outer court of the temple, fashioning a whip from materials at hand (probably from the cords used to tie up the animals). He then drives them all out of the temple area. By the word “all,” I understand Him to have driven out not only the animals, but also those who are selling them as well. The coins of the moneychangers are poured out and scattered on the ground and their tables overturned. To those selling the doves, Jesus says, “Take these things away from here! Do not make my Father’s house a marketplace!”¹²²

After His death and resurrection, our Lord’s disciples remembered that it was written,¹²³ “Passion for your house will devour me” (verse 17). The disciples came to view this cleansing of the temple in the light of Psalm 69:¹²⁴

8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, And an alien to my mother’s children; 9 Because zeal for Your house has eaten me up, And the reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on Me (Psalm 69:8-9, NKJV).

Several things catch my attention in these two verses. The first is that this Messianic Psalm speaks of the alienation of the Messiah from his “mother’s children.” Could this be part of the reason for John’s mention of the brief family gathering in Capernaum (John 2:12)? Our Lord’s mother is not mentioned again until the cross, and the reference to our Lord’s “brothers” in John 7:3-5 reveals their skepticism about Jesus and His ministry. Has Jesus already begun to feel alienated from His own brothers?

In addition, you will notice that in Psalm 69:9 David writes in the past tense: “Because zeal for Your house has eaten me up.” There are some differences in the Greek texts of John, so that the KJV and the NKJV employ the past tense: “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.” As a rule, the other versions render it in the future tense, following what appear to be the best Greek texts.¹²⁵ I like the way the New English Bible renders it best:

“Zeal for thy house shall destroy me.”

Psalm 69 is a psalm of David. It is a prayer for his deliverance, due to his piety. The psalm speaks of David’s imminent danger due to the enemies of God who hate him for his fervent devotion to God, and thus who seek his death. Later portions of this psalm depict events that occur at the crucifixion of our Lord (see Ps. 69:21). It seems clear in this psalm that there is a prophecy of our Lord’s sacrificial death, due to His zeal for pure worship.

Jesus acts out of zeal for His Father’s house, laying claim to the temple and cleansing it in His Father’s name. In so doing, He fulfills a prophecy that our Lord’s zeal for His Father’s house will bring about His death. It is the second cleansing¹²⁶ of the temple (Matthew 21:10-17; Mark 11:15-19; Luke 19:45-46) that actually sets into motion the events which lead to our Lord’s crucifixion.¹²⁷

Answering the Challenge
(2:18-22)

18 So then the Jewish leaders [literally, “the Jews”]¹²⁸ said to him, “What miraculous sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” 19 Jesus replied to them, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.”¹²⁹ 20 Then the Jewish leaders said to him, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 21 But Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the saying that Jesus had spoken.

“The Jews”—in particular the Jewish religious leaders directly challenged by our Lord’s actions in cleansing the temple—confront Jesus with a challenge. They demand a sign to demonstrate His authority to act as He has. The irony is that Jesus’ actions are the sign:¹³⁰

1 “Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple, Even the Messenger of the covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming,” Says the LORD of hosts. 2 “But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner’s fire And like launderer’s soap. 3 He will sit as a refiner and a purifier of silver; He will purify the sons of Levi, And purge them as gold and silver, That they may offer to the LORD An offering in righteousness” (Malachi 3:1-3, NKJV).

I find the words of the Jews most interesting. They do not argue with Jesus about the evil of making the temple courts an emporium. I suspect the Pharisees agree with Him on this point. The issue is not what has been done, but who has done it. They raise the issues of Jesus’ identity and authority, which is not altogether hard to understand. Suppose you ran a stop sign and were pulled over by a police officer. If you were smart, you would politely listen to the officer, admit you were wrong, take the ticket, and pay it. If, however, you ran a stop sign and were pulled over by an irate citizen, you would be much less inclined to listen politely. Even if you were wrong, you would likely protest, “Who do you think you are, pulling me over to lecture me about my driving?”

In one sense, the Jews do view our Lord’s actions as a sign. For someone to cleanse the temple and correct wrongdoing found there implies having the authority to do so. If Jesus is acting in God’s behalf (they cannot yet grasp that He is acting as God), then let Him establish His credentials by an exercise of divine power. If He is acting with God’s authority, let Him perform a sign to prove it. We have an irreverent expression, which captures the spirit of the Jews’ challenge (who are not very reverent either): “Put up, or shut up!” They have thrown down the gauntlet. It is Jesus’ turn to respond.

Jesus does not give them a sign. He does not even refer to any of the signs He seems to have already performed in Jerusalem (see 2:23; 3:2). He is not about to jump through their hoops. He does not even try to convince them who He is. Instead, He speaks to them of the “ultimate sign,” His death and resurrection: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again” (verse 19). Typically, the Jews can think only in the most literal terms (see Nicodemus in chapter 3). They assume Jesus is referring to Herod’s temple, a temple which has been under construction for “forty-six years.” Does Jesus think He can build a temple in three days that has already been under construction for forty-six years and is not yet complete?

John tells his readers what we already know. Jesus is not speaking of that earthly temple; He knows that it, too, will soon be destroyed (Mark 13:1-2). But He is speaking of Himself as the temple of God, and of His coming crucifixion. He is not trying to persuade these Jews to believe in Him, but rather to prophesy that they will not believe, and that they will put Him to death on Calvary. His triumph will be evident in three days, when He will be “raised up” from the dead.¹³¹

The Jews do not understand at all. They probably walk away, shaking their heads, convinced that Jesus is out of His mind. The disciples don’t understand either. Not until after our Lord’s death and resurrection does this prophecy come to mind, and they see how He fulfilled it exactly as He said. Then they believe both the Scripture and what Jesus has spoken. One might say they believe that what Jesus said and what was written in the Scriptures are one and the same, and both were fulfilled.¹³² They came to believe in Jesus, and His words as the fulfillment of Scripture.

We are not actually told here what “Scripture” John has in mind, which the disciples remember and believe. After our Lord’s resurrection, the apostles used the Scriptures to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, and that His death and resurrection were foretold (see Acts 2:14-36; 13:16-41). Jesus Himself gives His disciples a lesson from the Old Testament on these matters before He ascends to the Father (Luke 24:44-49).

Conclusion

The cleansing of the temple does not permanently eliminate the abuses described in our text. We know that conditions in the temple were the same at the time of the second cleansing (described in the Synoptic Gospels) as they were in the first cleansing (as described by John). I suspect that immediately after our Lord departed from Jerusalem all the temple businessmen set up shop again and went right on with their evil deeds. I believe our Lord’s purpose in this first cleansing is to “make a statement,” about Himself, the temple, and the Jewish religious system—not to permanently solve the problem He attacks.

The temple is being abused, and Jesus rightly responds to such abuse. Even the hard-hearted Jewish religious leaders realize that more is going on here than this. They understand that Jesus is making a claim. He is claiming to have the authority to correct evils performed in the temple. He calls the temple “His Father’s house.” No one who actually witnessed this event fully grasped its meaning or significance. The disciples will understand, but only after our Lord’s death and resurrection, only after the coming of the Holy Spirit (see John 16:12-14). Jesus not only came with God’s authority (as a prophet might do); He came as God. In fact, He is God tabernacling among men, as John tells us (John 1:14). Later, He speaks of Himself as the temple, and so He is:

21 And the twelve gates are twelve pearls—each one of the gates is made from just one pearl! The main street of the city is pure gold like transparent glass. 22 Now I saw no temple in the city, because the Lord God All-Powerful is its temple, and the Lamb. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, because the glory of God lights it up, and its lamp is the Lamb. 24 The nations will walk by its light and the kings of the earth will bring their grandeur into it. 25 Its gates will never be closed during the day (for there will be no night there). 26 They will bring the grandeur and the wealth of the nations into it, 27 but nothing ritually unclean will ever enter into it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or practices falsehood, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life (Revelation 21:21-27, emphasis mine).

At the cleansing of the temple, our Lord symbolically comes to possess what, as God, is His. As the Son of God, the temple is His Father’s house, and thus He has the right to correct temple abuses. He has the right to drive men and animals out of the temple courts. As I read this account of this first temple cleansing, I am reminded of a comment by Leon Morris on John 1:11, which directly relates to our text. Let’s first look again at this text:

Here is what Morris has to say about the expression, “His own”:

With vivid touches John highlights the tragedy of the rejection. We might translate the opening words, ‘he came home.’ It is the exact expression used of the beloved disciple when, in response to Jesus’ word from the cross, he took Mary ‘unto his own home’ (19:27; cf. 16:32). In one sense, when the Word came to this world He did not come as an alien. He came home. Moreover, He came to Israel. Had He come to some other nation it would have been bad enough, but Israel was peculiarly God’s own people. The Word did not go where He could not have expected to be known. He came home, where the people ought to have known Him.¹³³

Various translations try to capture the significance of the subtle change of terms John deliberately employs in verse 11. Unfortunately, some translations render these two terms by the same expression, “His own.” The New English Bible renders this sentence, “He entered his own realm, and his own would not receive him.” The NET Bible translates, “He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him.” Morris would render it, “He came home, and His own would not receive Him.” Do you see it? When Jesus comes into the temple, He is coming “home.” This is His Father’s house. He is about His Father’s business. And in the process of doing so, He declares Himself to be God. In response, He is rejected—“His own did not receive Him.”

God has the right to possess what is His. Here, Jesus claims the right to possess the temple because it is His. This incident may seem very distant and detached from us today. We live in a place very distant from Jerusalem, where no temple (like Herod’s temple, which was destroyed) exists. How can this event possibly relate to us? It does, my friend; it really does.

The first coming of our Lord was, in part, to claim what was His. The Second Coming of our Lord, an event still future, is a time when He will come and fully possess what is His. Jesus speaks a good deal about stewardship, as we can see in the Gospels. The reason should be obvious: We do not own anything; ultimately, He owns it all. This puts everything we think of as our “possessions” in an entirely different light. Some seem to think they own everything they have, and if they feel generous enough, they may give a percentage of it to God. In truth, God claims it all, and we are merely stewards of His possessions. If we use these to indulge ourselves, we are failing our stewardship. If we fail to make good use of them, we fail as stewards. Let us cease thinking of anything as our own. Let us hold much less tightly to the things that we call possessions. And let us use them well as His stewards.

Jesus came to possess what was His—His temple. Jesus had the right to define how men could use His temple, and the right to correct those who abused it. The church is now being built up as His temple:

19 So then you are no longer foreigners and non-citizens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of God’s household, 20 because you have been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Ephesians 2:19-22; see also 1 Peter 2:4-10).

As a result, those who in any way do damage to the church, God’s temple, are guilty of a most serious offense:

16 Do you not know that you¹³⁴ are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? 17 If someone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, which is what you are (1 Corinthians 3:16-17).

And what mutual agreement does the temple of God have with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, “I will live in them and will walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people” (2 Corinthians 6:16).

If the church collectively is the temple of our Lord, it is also true that we are individually “temples” of the Holy Spirit. Because this is true, our sins in the body are taken most seriously.

19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? 20 For you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God with your body (1 Corinthians 6:19-20).

God owns us; He owns our body as His temple. We do not own ourselves.¹³⁵ In the context of 1 Corinthians 6, Paul tells us that sexual immorality, though taken very lightly by our society (see 6:13), is a most serious sin, especially for the Christian. If our body is the temple of God, then to defile it is to defile God’s temple. If Jesus took the defilement of Herod’s temple so seriously, how do you think He feels about the way you and I use our bodies? To abuse or defile them is an affront to God, to whom our bodies belong, and in which He dwells by His Spirit.

Our Lord’s words and actions also relate to our use of church buildings (or our places of worship). Let me be very clear: church buildings are not “God’s house” in the sense that the temple was. God is with His people when they gather, though it is not the “building” He indwells, but the church, His body. Nevertheless, our text has something to say about our gathering for worship.

Is it possible that we can turn the church (building) into an emporium, a house of merchandise? Whenever we begin to sell things in the church, that danger exists. At first, we may do this because we are trying to facilitate the worship of those who come. I think the temple businessmen would have said the same thing about their motivation. Whether it is songbooks, tapes and video’s being sold by a guest speaker or musician, or candy bars being sold to pay for a youth retreat, we need to be very careful that it does not turn the church into a shopping mall. There are lots of things being sold in churches today, so the danger is there.¹³⁶

Let me press beyond the church walls for a moment, and give a word of warning about the commercialization of Christianity. Much of the ministry which was once viewed as the ministry of the church and by the church is now being handed over to “professionals” in Christian ministry. Some of this may be biblically defensible and even good, but some may not. I fear we have turned some Christian ministries into industries, “Christian industries,” where some Christians begin to view the needs of others as an opportunity to make a profit, rather than an occasion to sacrificially minister to others. I am most distressed when such “Christian ministries” are willing to minister only to those who have the means to pay, and who purposely reject or pass over those who are poor, and perhaps in the greatest need. Let us be on guard about commercializing the ministry.

We also need to be very careful about adopting “merchandising principles” as a means of assuring that we have a “successful” ministry.¹³⁷ I hear a lot about this today, as though secular business principles are the key to effective ministry. For example, a church may be engaged in a building program, trying to raise money for expansion. All too often, charts, thermometers, or advertisements dominate the auditorium (I refrain from using the word “sanctuary”) and distract from the worship that should take place there. Principles employed in the business world, which are truly biblical, may be applicable to the church. But many of the guiding principles of secular business are opposed to biblical principles. Much of the merchandizing promoted by Madison Avenue tactics is based upon an appeal to the flesh. When such is the case, Christian ministry can well do without such merchandizing principles and methods.

Finally, let me say a word about Jesus and judgment. Many like to think of Jesus as a “God of love,” who never criticizes, never judges, never condemns, whose calling is to affirm everyone and to make them happy. I must remind you that the way our Lord chose to publicly reveal Himself to the world was not by the turning of water into wine, or by raising the dead or healing the sick; Jesus revealed Himself to Israel as her Messiah by His cleansing of the temple. I would remind you that while John the Baptist foretold the coming of one who was the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world,” he likewise urged men and women to repent, because the Messiah was coming to judge the world. The Jesus of the Bible, the “real Jesus,” is the One who is merciful and gracious to those who trust and obey and the One who will judge those who resist and reject Him.

The changing of the water into wine and the cleansing of the temple give us a broad overview of the person and work of our Lord, Jesus Christ. He is the gentle and gracious Savior, who saved the newlywed couple from embarrassment by making water into wine. He is also the holy and righteous Judge, who will punish His enemies and correct the evils of men. As Paul writes,

Notice, therefore, the kindness and harshness of God: harshness toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness toward you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off (Romans 11:22).

Have you considered the harshness of God, which you justly deserve as a sinner? Have you received the kindness of God in the gift of Jesus Christ, who died for your sins on the cross of Calvary? I urge you to “believe” in Him, for this is John’s purpose in writing this Gospel.

Addendum:
Were There Two Temple Cleansings or Just One?

If one accepts the accounts of the Gospels at face value, there are obviously two temple cleansings. The first occurred at the outset of our Lord’s earthly ministry and is described by John. The second takes place at the end of our Lord’s public ministry, and it is the incident which appears to precipitate His death by crucifixion. Amazingly, many scholars seem to have great difficulty with two cleansings. D. A. Carson comments, “Only a very few judge it likely that there were two temple cleansings, one near the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry and the other at the end (e.g. Hendriksen, p. 120; Morris, pp. 188-191)” (Carson, p.177).

In my opinion, the reasons for holding a “one cleansing” view are exceptionally weak.

Many modern scholars have found great difficulty in supposing that Jesus twice ‘cleansed’ the temple. Thus V. H. Stanton wrote, ‘When in different ancient documents we find two accounts in many respects so similar referring to different times, it is on the whole most probable that we have to do with different traditions about the same event.’ And Bernard comments, ‘Apart from the fact that the duplication of similar incidents is improbable, we find it difficult to suppose that this particular incident, or anything like it, could have happened at so early a stage in the ministry of Jesus as is suggested by the traditional order of chapters in the Fourth Gospel.’¹³⁸

We are also told that a two-cleansing position should be rejected because it does not seem reasonable to assume that if Jesus succeeded in cleansing the temple the first time, He would have been allowed to do so a second time. Although Carson is inclined toward the two-cleansing view, even he is reluctant to be dogmatic on this point:

In short, it is not possible to resolve with certainty whether only one cleansing of the temple took place, or two; but the arguments for one are weak and subjective, while the most natural reading of the texts favours two.¹³⁹

Hendriksen (p. 120) takes a firm stand for two cleansings, as does Morris (pp. 188-190) and Tasker. I like Tasker’s assessment of the matter:

John is not correcting a supposed chronological blunder on the part of the earlier evangelists, nor deliberately altering their history in the interests of theological exposition, but, we may reasonably suppose, relating an additional ‘cleansing’ which the Synoptic writers had no occasion to relate, for it did not form part of the Petrine, Galilaean tradition which they were embodying.¹⁴⁰

I am troubled that the one-cleansing theory receives any support from conservative scholarship. The text is straightforward. Those who accept it as the inspired Word of God should accept its statements without feeling obliged to change them. It is not at all difficult to believe there are two cleansings, one at the beginning of our Lord’s ministry, and the other at the end. Why do some want to challenge the text, based solely upon their own presuppositions?

Must we suppose (like Stanton, as quoted in footnote 34) that just because two somewhat similar events are described, they must be the same event, even though the authors tell us otherwise? If Jesus fed 5,000 in one place and 4,000 in another, can we not believe there were two similar, but separate, miracles? Dare we “correct” the inspired text because we think this miracle comes “too early” in our Lord’s ministry? Who are we to say what God can do, or when? Do we really believe Jesus could not get away with cleansing the temple twice? No one could arrest Him, or put Him to death until it was “His time”? Soldiers who came to arrest Him fell before Him when He spoke. And yet do we dare to think He could not go into the temple and cleanse it daily if He willed? The objections to taking the text literally are not only weak, they are presumptuous.

105 There had been a kind of “cleansing” of this temple by Nehemiah (Nehemiah 13:4-9). Eliashib the priest was related to Tobiah, to whom he gave permission to use one of the large rooms in the temple courts. This room had been used for storing grain offerings, utensils, frankincense, and other items needed for sacrifice and worship. Nehemiah threw out Tobiah’s goods, had the room cleansed, and restored it to its original use.

106 These words are not to be found in Luke 2, but this is what we imply from the context. It certainly is clearly stated in John 2, verse 16.

107 “Capernaum … lay on the northwest shore of Galilee, about sixteen miles east-northeast of Cana: so travellers literally ‘went down’ to Capernaum. The modern site is Tell-Hum.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 176.

108 This is the last time Mary, the mother of Jesus, is mentioned in this Gospel, until we find her at the foot of the cross (John 19:25-27).

109 I will not take the time to refute the views of those who would try to convince us that our Lord’s “brothers” are not His earthly half-brothers: James, Joses, Jude, and Simon (see Mark 6:3).

110 Morris believes that the family of our Lord may have moved to Capernaum, and thus writes, “It may support this in that in Mark 3:31ff. our Lord’s mother and brothers appear at Capernaum, and that in Mark 6:3, while Jesus brothers are named, only his sisters are spoken of as remaining at Nazareth. This would be natural if the sisters had married, and later the rest of the family had moved to Capernaum.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p.187, fn. 42.

111 “After this, the first thought which occurs to us is that what is about to be recorded took place shortly after the wedding at Cana. This would seem to follow from the very expression that is used, for elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel it indicates an event which followed soon after (11:11; 19:28). This inference receives further corroboration from the very next verse where we read, ‘And the Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.’ Now, all of this is very logical: Jesus in February or early March changes the water into wine; from Cana’s wedding he proceeds to Capernaum where he stays a few days; there follows the Passover festival, which was held in early Spring (about April). We cannot agree, therefore with those who are of the opinion that the temple-cleansing here recorded took place at the close of Christ’s ministry and is to be identified with the one about which we read in Matt. 21.” William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), p. 120.

112 In the first part of chapter 2, Jesus turned cleansing water into wine. In the second half of the chapter, Jesus cleansed the temple and the religious leaders “whined.” It seems that John is contrasting Jewish ceremonial cleansing with Jesus’ cleansing of ceremonial Judaism.

113 “John keeps meticulous track of Jewish feasts. In addition to other feasts, he mentions three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 11:55), possibly a fourth (5:1). This one probably takes place in AD 28.” Carson, p. 176.

114 “… true in this case even in a literal sense (actually ascending from 680 feet below sea-level near the Sea of Galilee to 2,500 feet above sea-level, the altitude of the Holy City), but ever true in the religious sense.” Hendriksen, p. 122.

115 “So very close was the connection between the Passover-meal proper and the immediately following Feast of Unleavened Bread that the term Passover is frequently used to cover both. Thus, in Luke 22:1—a very significant passage—we read: ‘Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover.’ Also in Acts 12:4 (see the preceding verse) the term Passover clearly covers the entire seven-day festival. The Old Testament, too, calls the Passover a feast of seven days (Ezek. 45:21).” Hendriksen, pp. 121-122.

116 See Deuteronomy 16:16.

117 Hendriksen, p. 121. Hendriksen then goes on to detail the events of the Passover meal itself.

118 Carson, p. 178.

119 Hendriksen, p. 122.

120 “Now at this occasion Jesus, entering Jerusalem’s temple, notices that the court of the Gentiles had been changed into what must have resembled a stockyard. There was the stench and the filth, the bleating and the lowing of animals, destined for sacrifice.” Hendriksen, p. 122.

121 Grocery stores very often have a bakery, and the smell of freshly baked goods beckons one to the bakery to buy something. As one came to the temple, one would smell the aroma of the sacrificial offerings, and the fragrance of the incense (Luke 1:9-11). It would surely be a pleasant aroma, but not when the temple courts were turned into a stock market.

122 The Greek word John uses here could be transliterated “emporium.” The temple courts had been transformed into a shopping mall.

123 I do not believe John intends for us to conclude that the disciples understood this immediately, but that they eventually came to understand it, in the light of His death, burial, and resurrection, and by means of the illumination of the Holy Spirit (see John 16:12-14).

124 “Now, in expressing this thought use is made of Ps. 69, which is one of six Psalms most often referred to in the New Testament (the others being Pss. 2, 22, 89, 110, and 118). Other echoes of various passages of this Psalm (which is Ps. 68 in LXX) are heard in Matt. 27:34, 48; Mark 15:36; Luke 23:36; John 15:25; 19:28; Rom. 11:9, 10; 15:3; Heb. 11:26; Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 16:1; 17:8; 20:12, 15; and 21:27. While some of these are quotations, others are allusions, references more or less indirect. Jesus himself (15:25) cites Ps. 69:4, ‘They hated me without cause,’ and refers it to his own experience. In fulfillment of Ps. 69:21 he uttered the word from the cross, ‘I thirst’ (19:28).” Hendriksen, p. 123. See also Ezekiel 10:15-19; 11:22-23; Zechariah 14:21; Malachi 3:1, 3.

125 “It was the failure to understand that the disciples regarded the Psalmist’s words as prophetic of Christ’s death and the assumption that they referred to the energy and fearlessness of Jesus on this occasion, that gave rise to the later and poorly attested reading followed by AV hath eaten me up in verse 17.” R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980 [tenth printing]), p. 63.

126 See Appendix: “Were There Two Temple Cleansings or Just One?”

127 “With other New Testament writers, however, John detects in the experiences of David a prophetic paradigm that anticipates what must take place in the life of ‘great David’s greater Son.’ That explains why the words in 2:17, quoted from the LXX, change the tense to the future: Zeal for your house will consume me.… For John, the manner by which Jesus will be ‘consumed’ is doubtless his death.” Carson, p. 180.

128 “This expression [‘the Jews’] is rare in the Synoptic Gospels. Each of them refers a few times to ‘the King of the Jews’ and scarcely uses the term otherwise. But in John it is used some seventy times. Sometimes the Evangelist employs it in a neutral sense (e.g. 2:6, ‘the Jews’ manner of purifying’). He can even use it in a good sense (e.g. ‘salvation is from the Jews,’ 4:22. But more often he uses it to denote the Jewish nation as hostile to Jesus. It does not necessarily denote the whole nation. In fact characteristically it means the Jews of Judea, especially those in and around Jerusalem.” Morris, p. 130-131. Morris then cites G.J. Cuming in a footnote: “Especially does it apply to ‘the chief priests and Pharisees, whom he depicts as our Lord’s bitterest opponents.’” (p. 131, fn. 2).

129 “The Synoptists report that at Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin false witnesses charged him with making the statement, ‘I will destroy this man-made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man’ (Mk. 14:58 par.; cf. Mk. 15:29). The only record of such a statement is in this account provided by John: the Fourth Gospel here provides a detail that corroborates the Synoptic evidence.” Carson, p. 181.

130 “‘The action is not merely that of a Jewish reformer; it is a sign of the advent of the Messiah’ (Hoskins)” Morris, p. 196.

131 In our text, it is our Lord who raises Himself from the dead: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again” (verse 19; see also John 10:18). Elsewhere, the resurrection of our Lord is viewed as the work of the Father (Acts 2:24, etc.) and of the Spirit (Romans 8:11). The resurrection, like creation, is the work of the Trinity.

132 “We ought to observe the connection of the words, that they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had spoken; for the Evangelist means that, by comparing the Scripture with the word of Christ, they were aided in making progress in faith.” John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Volume 7: The Gospels (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.), p. 630.

133 Morris, p. 96.

134 The three “you’s” of verses 16 and 17 are all plural. Here, Paul is speaking of the church, collectively, as the temple of God.

135 Here is a verse that needs to be etched in stone, and put in neon lights for any woman who would assert her right to have an abortion, because it is “her” body.

136 Whether or not certain things should ever be sold by or to church members is another question. In our text, Jesus is most concerned about where these animals and birds were being sold.

137 I do not wish to be understood as making a blanket condemnation here, but I do believe that many secular systems are embraced by Christians without any consideration of whether they truly have a biblical basis.

138 Tasker, p. 61.

139 Carson, p. 178.

140 Tasker, p. 61.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Finance

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

7. “Second Class Faith” (John 2:23-25)

Introduction

For some time, John the Baptist had been preaching to the nation Israel, calling men to repentance in preparation for the coming of Messiah. At that time, even John the Baptist did not know for certain who the Messiah was. And so he spoke about Him in general terms.

6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify about the light so that everyone may believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify about the light. 9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world (John 1:6-9).

John testified about him and cried out,

“This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me’” (John 1:15).

26 John answered them, “I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not know, 27 who comes after me. I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandal” (John 1:26-27).

Finally, God revealed the identity of the Messiah to John as he was baptizing Jesus:

30 “This is the one about whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’ 31 I did not recognize him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.” 32 Then John testified, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 And I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining, this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God” (John 1:30-34).

John was quick to point out to his disciples and others that Jesus was the One of whom he had been speaking. It was not long before several disciples attached themselves to Jesus, traveling along with Him, and even staying with His family in Capernaum (John 1:35ff.). They accompanied our Lord to the wedding at Cana of Galilee (2:1-2). It certainly seemed that it was time for Jesus to make His debut as Israel’s Messiah. This may have been in Mary’s mind when she informed Jesus that the wedding party had run out of wine. Jesus provided the wine, but He did so in a way which kept His identity—and even His power—a secret.

A few days later, Jesus and His disciples went up to Jerusalem, where our Lord publicly proclaimed His identity in a most unusual way. He cleansed the temple by driving out the sheep and the oxen, and also the men who were making His Father’s house a place of business. While John does not call this a “sign,” it surely was a “statement” by our Lord, a very public statement. Jesus was not merely correcting some evil; He was doing so as One who had the right to do so—Israel’s Messiah.

In Jerusalem, Jesus was beginning to gain a following. This looked like the start of something big. It is precisely that for which the disciples had hoped. It is what our Lord’s brothers almost defied Him to do (see John 7:1-5). One would expect our Lord to “fan the flames” of His rising popularity and expand the ranks of His followers. Instead, we read these words, which are not recorded in any other Gospel: “But Jesus was not entrusting himself to them, because he knew all people. 25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, for he knew what was in man” (John 2:24-25).

What does Jesus have against popularity and large numbers? What does it mean when John tells us that Jesus would not “entrust Himself” to these people who believed in Him? Why does Jesus keep His distance from those who want to be near Him? What are we to learn from all this? The purpose of this message is to learn the answers to these questions, and then to explore their implications for Christians today. It is my belief that these three verses which conclude the second chapter of John set the stage for chapters that follow. Let us listen closely to the words of John, and let us look to the Spirit of God to interpret and apply them to our hearts and lives.

The Setting
(2:23)

Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing.

A few days before this, our Lord turned the ceremonial cleansing water into wine. He then went up to Jerusalem with His disciples. Upon His arrival at the temple, Jesus drove out those who had made “His Father’s house” a place of business. One might think that this temple cleansing was counter-productive, so far as our Lord’s popularity is concerned. Other than making Jesus unpopular with the religious elite, this does not seem to be the case at all. In reading the Gospels, one does not get the impression that the Jewish religious leaders were exceedingly popular. They seem to have been arrogant snobs, who cared little about the common people and much about their position and power. Listen to the response of these leaders to the officers who were sent to arrest Jesus when they came back empty handed:

45 Then the officers returned to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, “Why didn’t you bring him back with you?” 46 The officers replied, “No one ever spoke like this man!” 47 Then the Pharisees answered, “You haven’t been deceived too, have you? 48 None of the rulers or the Pharisees have believed in him, have they? 49 But this rabble who do not know the law are accursed!” (John 7:45-49, emphasis mine.)

The religious elite did not appear to share the attitude of the common people toward the rule of Rome. The common people seemed eager to “throw the rascals out.” They seemed to look to the Messiah to do this. But listen to the words of the chief priests and Pharisees, when they realize how popular Jesus has become, due in part to the recent raising of Lazarus:

47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. 48 If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation” (John 11:47-48).

When Jesus took on the religious leaders and exposed their ignorance, arrogance, and hypocrisy, the common people seemed to love it:

35 While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he said, “How is it that the experts in the law say that the Christ is David’s son? 36 David himself, by the Holy Spirit, said, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet.”

37 David himself calls him ‘Lord.’ So how can he be his son?” And the large crowd was listening to him with delight (Mark 12:35-37, emphasis mine).

At this very early stage of our Lord’s ministry in John’s Gospel, I am inclined to think that even the Pharisees were pleased by what Jesus had done when He cleansed the temple. It seems to be the high priest and the Sadducees who were most involved in the temple market Jesus “closed” when He made His debut at the temple. The high priests seem to have been Sadducees (see Acts 5:17). The Pharisees appear to be laymen, as opposed to the priests and religious officials. The Pharisees and Sadducees¹⁴¹ had some very sharp differences (see Acts 23:6-8). We might sum up these differences by saying that the Sadducees were liberals, while the Pharisees were very conservative, theologically speaking.

When Jesus cleansed the temple, He was confronting and challenging the Sadducees. As rivals of the Sadducees, the Pharisees probably enjoyed watching one “man” (of apparently common stock) make the religious establishment look bad. This “Jesus” might come in handy to the Pharisees, or so they might have thought. Such thinking would quickly vanish, but it may have been present in the first days of our Lord’s ministry, while He was still in Jerusalem.

Yet another factor added to our Lord’s popularity. While He was in Jerusalem, Jesus performed a number of signs:

Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing (John 2:23, emphasis mine).

He came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could do the miraculous signs that you do unless God were with him” (John 3:2, emphasis mine).

So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him because they had seen all the things he had done in Jerusalem at the feast (for they themselves had gone to the feast) (John 4:45, emphasis mine).

John is very selective in the signs he chooses to include in his Gospel. The turning of water into wine seems to be our Lord’s first public sign. John now tells us that while Jesus was in Jerusalem, He performed a number of signs. These signs made a great impact on many who observed them. Many who witnessed them “believed in His name” (verse 23).

Are These “Believers” Really Saved?

If Jesus would not entrust Himself to these folks, we must wonder if these “believers” were true believers at all. There are some who conclude that these “believers” must not be saved. It is true that elsewhere in the Bible there are “believers” who do not appear to be “saved.” James speaks of the demons who “believe … and tremble!” (James 2:19). Surely these demons are not true believers! In Acts 8, we read of a certain “Simon,” who “believed,” along with many Samaritans (8:13). Peter’s words to this man, who sought to buy the power to bestow the Holy Spirit, certainly cause us to wonder if “Simon” was really a believer:

20 But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could acquire God’s gift with money! 21 You have no share or part in this matter, because your heart is not right before God. 22 Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that he may perhaps forgive you for the intent of your heart. 23 For I see that you are bitterly envious and in bondage to sin” (Acts 8:20-23).

Having said this, I must conclude that in the Gospel of John, I am compelled to conclude that those who are said to “believe” in our text are true believers. There are several reasons for this:

First, John tells us that these people “believed in His name.” This same expression is found in John chapter 1: “But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children” (John 1:12, emphasis mine). John tells us that those who “believe in His name” are those who have “received Him,” and thus have become children of God. If all those who “believe in His name” are said to be saved in chapter 1, how can we say that such folks are not saved when described by the same words in chapter 2?

Second, John’s purpose for this Gospel is to bring people to a saving faith. He employs signs to bring his readers to “believe in His name”: “Now Jesus performed many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book. 31 But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31, emphasis mine).

If John records these selected “signs” he uses to bring people to faith, one would hardly think he would challenge the faith of those who “believe in His name” because of these signs.

Third, the two examples which follow (Nicodemus in chapter 3, and the woman at the well in chapter 4) both recount conversations our Lord had with individuals who became believers. Nicodemus does not immediately understand the Gospel or come to faith, but he certainly does seem to do so eventually. In chapter 3, John does not tell us when Nicodemus left Jesus; he just disappears. Nicodemus is speaking with our Lord, and then somewhere after verse 9 we come to the realization that he has gone away, and we are not exactly sure when this was. I think he leaves scratching his head, wondering what Jesus meant. He is mystified by what Jesus has just told him, and perhaps humbled by his own ignorance concerning these things. John continues on in chapter 3, and we are not certain whether the words are those of our Lord, or those of the Apostle John.¹⁴² In chapter 7, Nicodemus is chastised by his peers for defending Jesus. They ask him if he is also a Galilean (7:50-52). Nicodemus seems to simply clam up. When we last see Nicodemus, he, along with Joseph of Arimathea (another secret believer), quietly obtains the body of our Lord to prepare it for burial (John 19:38-39). When we last see Nicodemus, he is an “under cover” Christian, but a believer nonetheless.

Nicodemus seems to be John’s first example of one who “believes” by virtue of our Lord’s signs, yet he is also one to whom our Lord does not “entrust” Himself. Here is a man who appears to have great potential for furthering our Lord’s ministry. Nicodemus is a Jew, a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and one of the most renowned teachers of the day. Wow! This is impressive. It certainly looks as though he could do much to further our Lord’s ministry. But Jesus does not “entrust” Himself to Nicodemus. He does, however, “entrust” Himself to the Samaritan woman at the well, and to the people of Sychar. As a result of our Lord’s ministry to the woman at the well, the entire city comes out to hear Him. Jesus then spends two days with these Samaritans.¹⁴³ I believe, in John’s words, Jesus “entrusted” Himself to them.

For these reasons, I conclude that John intends for us to understand that these people who “believed in Jesus’ name” became true believers. The question then arises: “Why does our Lord not commit Himself to them?” Let us seek to find the answer to this question.

Why Does Our Lord
Not Entrust Himself to Some Saints?
(2:24-25)

24 But Jesus was not entrusting himself to them, because he knew all people. 25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, for he knew what was in man.

First I must point out something that is not sufficiently clear in the English translations of this passage. John uses the same Greek term¹⁴⁴ to refer to the faith of those who believed (this is the word) in His name as he does for our Lord’s not entrusting (here it is again) Himself to them. The closest English approximation of the Greek text would be translated something like this: “Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people trusted in His name because they saw the miraculous signs He was doing, but Jesus was not entrusting Himself to them, …”

We are seeking to learn what John means when he tells us that Jesus did not entrust Himself to some believers. I believe we can do so by answering this pair of questions: (1) Why didn’t Jesus entrust Himself to these believers? and, (2) To whom, if any, did Jesus entrust Himself? Let us pursue these two questions, beginning with the second question.

John’s words in 2:23-25 indicate that Jesus did not entrust Himself to certain people, but by inference we would conclude that there were those to whom He did entrust Himself. Would we not agree that if our Lord entrusted Himself to any group of people it would be His disciples? Now we can move to the first question, slightly modified: “Why did Jesus entrust Himself to His disciples but not to these Jerusalem believers?”

John tells us the reason: Jesus is God. As God, He knows all things. Among the things He knows is what is in men’s hearts. We know from the Gospels that our Lord knew the thoughts of men:

3 Some people came bringing to him a paralytic, carried by four of them. 4 Whenthey were not able to bring him in because of the crowd, they removed the roof above Jesus. Then, after tearing it out, they lowered the stretcher the paralytic was lying on. 5 WhenJesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” 6 Now some experts in the law were sitting there, turning these things over in their minds, 7 “Why does he speak this way? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 Now at once Jesus knew in his spirit that they were contemplating such thoughts, so he said to them, “Why are you thinking such things? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your stretcher, and walk’? 10 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,”—he said to the paralytic—11 “I tell you, get up, take your stretcher, and go to your home” (Mark 2:3-11, emphasis mine).

A dramatic example of our Lord’s omniscience¹⁴⁵ has already been described by John in chapter 1. Jesus welcomed the two disciples of John the Baptist, one of whom was Andrew (1:35-40). He knew what was in the hearts of the men He chose as His disciples. He renamed Simon “Peter” (the stone). He knew what Peter’s character would be. The most dramatic example of our Lord’s omniscience was our Lord’s knowledge of Nathanael as a man in whom there was no guile, the man whom Jesus “saw” while he was unseen, under the fig tree (1:45-51). The hearts of the disciples were an “open book” to our omniscient Lord. He also knew what was in the heart of Judas, who was to betray Him (see Matthew 9:3-5; John 6:70-71; 13:26).

I take it, then, that because Jesus fully knows the hearts of all men, He does not entrust Himself to those whose faith is second class. There is a tension here, which I cannot overlook or deny. On the one hand, we have nothing to commend us to God. He does not choose to save us because of what we are, what we have done (see Titus 3:4-5), or for what we can do for His kingdom (contrary to some popular misconceptions). He chooses the weak and the foolish things to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:26-31). There is nothing we have but what we have received from Him (1 Corinthians 4:7). On the other hand, God does look on the heart. He rejected Saul and He chose David, not because of his stature or his good looks, but because of his heart (1 Samuel 16:7). The issue here is not God’s choice of men for salvation, but His choice of men for service, and for intimate fellowship and ministry with Him.

After John Mark abandoned Paul, the apostle refused to take this young man along on his next missionary journey. Paul did not want to entrust himself and his mission to a man who had deserted him under fire (see Acts 15:36-41). Paul instructed Timothy: “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Timothy 2:2, emphasis mine). Leadership in the local church is restricted to those who have met certain qualifications, many of which have to do with character (see 1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9). The disciples, to whom our Lord entrusts Himself, are those to whom He will give the Great Commission, those who will be the foundation of His church (Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 2:17-22).

What is it about these Jerusalem “believers” which causes our Lord to distance Himself from them, while He entrusts Himself to His disciples, spending a great deal of time with them? I believe our text tells us the reason: their faith was “sign faith.” John says, “Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing” (John 2:23).

The faith of these saints is based upon our Lord’s signs. I would suspect that when things got tough, their faith, if it did not grow beyond this dependency on signs, would seek for some new sign. We know, of course, that there were many who demanded to see a sign in order to believe, but these folks seem to never have enough sign-proof to believe. There are those like Nicodemus, however, who remain “secret saints,” who out of fear of the Jews keep quiet about their faith in Jesus:

However, no one spoke openly about him for fear of the Jewish authorities (John 7:13).

After this Joseph of Arimathea, a disciple of Jesus (but secretly, because he feared the Jewish authorities), asked Pilate if he could take away the body of Jesus. Pilate gave him permission, so he went and took away the body (John 19:38).

Jesus would shortly send His disciples out in teams of two to proclaim the Gospel. They would face opposition, rejection, and persecution. Jesus would not entrust Himself to those who would wither and withdraw under this kind of adversity. Jesus knew the hearts of men, and because of this He committed Himself to His disciples and kept His distance from others, whose faith was dependent on signs.

Conclusion

These three verses which conclude the second chapter of John have some important lessons to teach us. The first lesson pertains to a very “hot” topic among Christians, that of “signs and wonders.” There is a great deal of debate as to the role which “signs and wonders” should play in the life of the Christian. There is much debate over whether “signs and wonders” even exist today.

Let me begin by saying that God is sovereign. He does not need our permission to produce “signs and wonders” any time He chooses. Neither does He need our prompting to do so. Those who deny even the possibility of any miraculous intervention in our time seem to go beyond the Scriptures. Those who insist that such phenomena must occur today also go beyond the Scriptures. In what I am about to say, I am granting the possibility that a “sign” might occur today, whether or not it actually does. Our text says a couple of things about “signs” which need to be heard today. First, Jesus was not eager to perform “signs,” especially on demand. People wanted Jesus to perform “signs,” and nearly always those who requested them were those whose faith was weak or non-existent. The performance of “signs” by our Lord did not produce widespread faith, nor did it necessarily increase the faith of those who believed.

There are those today who would have us believe that “signs and wonders” are a necessity. They seem unwilling to go on with their Christian lives without them. Worse yet, they look down their spiritual noses at those who do not experience them. In short, those who claim to experience “signs and wonders” feel spiritually superior to those who don’t. This sounds a great deal like the Corinthian Christians, who abused spiritual gifts, and who took pride in things that should have humbled them.

It is hard to read John’s words in John 2:23-25 without coming to the conclusion that “sign-faith” is second class faith. Jesus refused to “entrust” Himself to those whose faith was merely a “sign-faith.” Why do those who claim to experience “signs and wonders” today think of themselves and their faith as superior? “Sign-faith” is not a bad place to begin; it is a very poor place to stop.

As I think about the early chapters of John’s Gospel, I realize there is a contrast made between “sign-faith” believers and what I might call “word-faith” believers. Nicodemus (a sign-faith believer) was no spiritual giant. He brings no one to Christ. He only secretly comes to our Lord himself. The turning of water into wine took place at the servants’ obedience to the spoken word of Jesus. He spoke, they obeyed, and the water turned to wine. The woman at the well and the people of Sychar believed because of our Lord’s words:

39 Now many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the report of the woman who testified, “He told me everything I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they started asking him to stay with them. He stayed there two days, 41 and many more believed because of his word. 42 They said to the woman, “No longer do we believe because of your words, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this one really is the Savior of the world” (John 4:39-42).

So far as we know, Jesus performed no signs at Sychar. He did not need to do so. It was the spoken word which brought creation into existence (Genesis 1; John 1; Hebrews 11:3). It is the Word of God which brings new spiritual life into existence, empowered by the Holy Spirit:

63 “The Spirit is the one who gives life; human nature is of no help! The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus had already known from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) (John 6:63-64; see also 3:5-8.)

17 All generous giving and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or the slightest hint of change. 18 By his sovereign plan he gave us birth through the message of truth, that we would be a kind of firstfruits of all he created (James 1:17-18).

You have been born anew, not from perishable but from imperishable seed, through the living and enduring word of God (1 Peter 1:23).

It was Thomas who had to “see” in order to believe. That was a kind of “sign-faith.” Jesus and the authors of the New Testament commend that faith which is based not upon what is seen, but upon what is not seen—the Word of God.

26 Eight days later the disciples were again together in the house, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and examine my hands. Extend your hand and put it into my side. Do not continue in your unbelief, but believe.” 28 Thomas replied, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are the people who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:26-29).

The eleventh chapter of Hebrews is the “hall of faith” for Old Testament saints. These saints believed God’s Word, and acted accordingly, choosing not to trust in what they saw, but in what God said. That is the kind of faith Jesus commends. It is to these saints, whose faith rests on His Word, to whom our Lord entrusts Himself, for intimate fellowship and service. Let us strive to move beyond faith in what is seen to faith in what God has said.

I should also draw your attention to what our text does not teach. All too often, people rush to John 3 and 4, to our Lord’s conversations with Nicodemus and the woman at the well, as a pattern for how we should evangelize. There are lessons to be learned here, but let me remind you that John is reporting these conversations, not as a pattern for evangelism, but as proof of the uniqueness of Jesus. One such uniqueness is given in John 2:24-25: Jesus knows what is in the hearts of men. We cannot imitate our Lord by trying to be omniscient. Our Lord knew men’s hearts; we do not. This is exactly why Paul warns Christians about judging the motives of others:

1 People should think about us this way, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2 Now what is sought in stewards is that one be found faithful. 3 So for me, it is a minor matter that I am judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. 4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not acquitted because of this. The one who judges me is the Lord. 5 So then, do not judge anything before the time. Wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the motives of hearts. Then each will receive recognition from God (1 Corinthians 4:1-5, emphasis mine).

Our Lord knew everything about every man’s heart. He could commit Himself to some and not to others. While we are to “commit ourselves to faithful men, …” we must recognize that our judgment on such matters is fallible. Years of ministry have proven this over and over again. Some of those whom I feared would fail have persevered, and even prospered. Some of those I was sure would be very successful in Christian living and service have failed miserably. We must recognize that it is only God who knows the hearts of men, and thus we should be careful in the judgments we make, especially when it comes to motives. Nevertheless, “by their fruit you shall know them” (Matthew 7:20).

My point is that we can never evangelize or lead just like Jesus did because we are not just like Jesus. We are not omniscient and omnipotent. He is. Nevertheless, Jesus has sent His Spirit to enable and empower us for service. We must rely upon His Word and His Spirit to accomplish His purposes. This is why “the ministry of the Word and prayer” are so vital to Christian ministry.

While God sovereignly chooses us to salvation and service, and foreordains the fruit we will produce by His grace (see John 15:16), it is also true that God seeks those for service and intimate fellowship who have a heart for Him, those who have a faith that is firmly rooted, which can withstand the adversities of life. David was one of those men; Saul was not. Paul taught Timothy that God’s use of a man is, in some manner, related to that person’s desire to be a pure and holy instrument in His hand:

20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay, some for honor and some for dishonor. 21 Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful for the Master, prepared for every good work (2 Timothy 2:20-21).

Let us seek, by His grace, to be the kind of vessel that God uses for honorable purposes. And when He does use us for such things, let us remember that it is all of Him (Romans 11:36).

Finally, I want to remind you that our Lord knows men’s hearts. He knows what is in your heart and what is in mine. It is a frightening thought, isn’t it? We may be able to fool others, but we cannot fool God. Our hearts are wretched and unclean. Our hearts are deceitful and wicked. When God saves us, He gives us a new heart. May He find us faithful, so that we find Him entrusting Himself to us, intimately communing with us, teaching and guiding us, so that we may proclaim His mercy and grace to a lost and dying world.

141 I should point out, however, that the term “Sadducee” never appears in the Gospel of John.

142 I am inclined to make the break at the end of verse 15, but this could certainly be disputed.

143 It has been suggested by some that our Lord’s ministry to the Samaritans here is what paved the way for the later revival in Samaria, described in Acts 8:1-25.

144 I should clarify a bit. It is the same Greek verb in both verses. When describing the faith of those who believed in Jesus, John uses the aorist tense, focusing upon the moment of faith. When describing our Lord’s refusal to “commit” Himself to these “believers,” John uses the imperfect tense. John was informing us that this was Jesus’ course of action, something that He practiced consistently, in case after case, situation after situation.

145 To be omniscient is to know all. It is an attribute of God alone. Jesus, as God, has this attribute.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Soteriology (Salvation)

Faith

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

8. Jesus and Nicodemus (John 3:1-21)

1 Now there came a man of the Pharisees whose name was Nicodemus, a member of the council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could do the miraculous signs that you do unless God were with him.”

3 Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?”

5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born from above.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

9 Nicodemus replied, “How can these things be?”

10 Jesus answered, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things? 11 I tell you the solemn truth, we speak about what we know and testify about what we have seen, but you people do not accept our testimony. 12 If I have told you people about earthly things and you don’t believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven—the Son of Man. 14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.”

16 For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. 19 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.¹⁴⁶

Introduction

A number of years ago, I read a newspaper account of a speech given by the president of a well-known university to a group of influential businessmen and civic leaders. The president told of a recent experience which he, his audience, and the newspaper reporter found humorous. The president was shopping during the Christmas season and happened to pass by a Salvation Army volunteer, standing by a “donation kettle” and ringing a bell. As he paused to make a donation, the woman volunteer asked this educator: “Sir, are you saved?” When he replied that he supposed he was, she was not satisfied, so she pursued the matter further: “I mean, have you ever given your full life to the Lord?” At this point, the president told his audience, he thought he should enlighten this persistent woman concerning his identity: “I am the president of such and such university, and as such, I am also president of its school of theology.” The lady considered his response for a moment, and then replied, “It doesn’t matter wherever you’ve been, or whatever you are, you can still be saved.”

The most tragic part of this incident is that both the seminary president and his audience actually thought his story was amusing. One can imagine that if Nicodemus had been confronted by this Salvation Army volunteer, he would have thought—and said—just about the same thing as the university president. Nicodemus is the “cream of the Jewish crop.” One dare not dream of having life any better than he has it. He is a Jew, a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin (the highest legal, legislative and judicial body of the Jews), and a highly respected teacher of the Old Testament Scriptures. Can you imagine being Nicodemus and having Jesus tell you that all of this is not enough to get you into the kingdom of God? Yet this is precisely what Jesus tells Nicodemus. If a man like Nicodemus is not good enough for the kingdom of God, then who is? That is the question, and Jesus has the answer, which John records for us. Let us listen well to the inspired words of this Gospel to learn how one must enter the kingdom of God.

The Setting

While the exact chronology of the following events may not be accurate, the sequence outlined by these texts cannot be too far from the way our Lord’s teaching (and John the Baptist’s) caught the attention of the Jewish religious leaders, particularly the Pharisees:

46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Jesus were astonished at his understanding and his answers (Luke 2:46-47).

19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 He confessed—he did not deny but confessed— “I am not the Christ.” 21 So they asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.” 22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” 23 John said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the desert, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.” 24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25 So they asked John, “Why then are you baptizing if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” (John 1:19-25)

30 However, the Pharisees and the experts in religious law rejected God’s purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John (Luke 7:30).

28 When Jesus finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed by his teaching, 29 because he taught them like one who had authority, and not like their experts in the law (Matthew 7:28-29).

17 On one of those days, while he was teaching, there were Pharisees and teachers of the law sitting nearby (who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem), and the power of the Lord was with him to heal the sick (Luke 5:17).

At the age of 12, our Lord accompanied Mary and Joseph to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover with them. When His family left for home, Jesus stayed behind, His absence unnoticed. When Mary and Joseph returned to Jerusalem in search of Jesus, they found Him in the temple listening to the teachers and asking questions (Luke 2:46). It wasn’t long before they were asking Jesus questions, and they were amazed at His answers (2:47). Our Lord was already an astounding teacher at 12 years of age, whose understanding of the Scriptures amazed Israel’s finest scholars.

A number of years later, John the Baptist commenced his public ministry, proclaiming the Word of God and calling Israel to repentance in preparation for the coming of Messiah. The Jewish religious leaders took note of him and sent a delegation to inquire about his ministry and message. It is apparent that the Pharisees chose not to identify themselves with John and his preaching, as they refused to be baptized by him (Luke 7:30).

When Jesus began His public ministry, the people who heard Him recognized a difference between His teaching and that of the Jewish religious teachers. Jesus taught as one having authority and not as their experts in the law. Our Lord’s authority was evident in His healing of the sick and casting out of demons. It also seems to have been evident in the impact His words made on His listeners. The experts in the law taught with great dogmatism (Romans 2:17-20; 1 Timothy 1:6-7; 2 Peter 2:18), but their message lacked the power of our Lord’s words. His teaching seems to have “rung true” to His audience.¹⁴⁷

We learn from Luke 5:17, the Pharisees quickly take note of Jesus. At some point in time, Pharisees from the entire nation of Israel gather to observe His ministry and teaching. We know from Luke’s words that Jesus was also performing miracles at this time. It is uncertain whether this occurred before or after our Lord’s interview with Nicodemus, but it must have been close to the time Nicodemus comes to Him by night, as our text in John describes. The Pharisees are hard pressed to speak critically of our Lord or His ministry. How can His teaching be criticized? How can anyone speak against Him, when He performs miracles openly, and many take note of them? Jesus makes the Pharisees look bad, and there seems to be little they can say against Him at the moment, though this will soon change. But Jesus does not have much good to say about them:

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place. 19 So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do this, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness goes beyond that of the experts in the law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-20).

Jesus performed His first sign at the wedding in Cana of Galilee, but very few even realized what had happened. It was the cleansing of the temple which captured the attention of the religious leaders (John 2:18-22), while the signs our Lord accomplished in Jerusalem caught the attention of many others (John 2:23-25). Still, the Pharisees were not the ones who caught the brunt of our Lord’s attack. They were not the ones behind the merchandising which took place in the temple courts. This was the work of the priests and of the Sadducees.¹⁴⁸ It may be that the Pharisees even stood by as Jesus cleansed the temple, looking on with great satisfaction as the priests and Sadducees were publicly humiliated.¹⁴⁹

All of these events seem to rivet the Pharisees’ attention on Jesus. We know one Pharisee in particular is greatly impressed—a Pharisee named Nicodemus. At one time, I thought Nicodemus was seeking, on behalf of the Pharisees, to recruit Jesus as a kind of junior partner. I am not certain Nicodemus’ colleagues would even have accepted Jesus into their ranks. I also thought Nicodemus came with a memorized script, and when Jesus interrupted him, he was totally disarmed and disoriented.

I now view our text in a different light. For the moment, suppose you are a renowned pianist, trained by the finest concert pianist the world has ever known. When you perform, crowds gather to listen. Everyone hails you as the master in your area of musical expertise. Now suppose some young man comes along who grew up in the Ozarks and who never had a piano lesson in his life, but simply taught himself to play on a broken-down instrument in his grandmother’s house. When this hillbilly musician comes to town, his talent is discovered, and people throng to hear him perform. When he does, tears come to the eyes of those in his audience. You too listen to him play. You, better than anyone else, recognize in him a musical genius that you have never had and that you never will. When you hear him play, you wish you had his abilities.

I believe this is the way Nicodemus must have felt about Jesus. Nicodemus is a Pharisee who is at the top of his field. Not only is he a member of the Sanhedrin, he is the most renowned Bible teacher of his day—the “Billy Graham” of first century Jerusalem. Yet when he hears Jesus teach, he hears the answers to questions that have bothered him for years. He watches the crowds as they listen to Jesus, and he knows he has never held the attention of an audience like Jesus does. Jesus speaks in simple terms, but His message has great power. Nicodemus observes the miracles Jesus performs, knowing he has never performed so much as one miracle. By nearly any standard, Nicodemus does not hold a candle to Jesus.

Nicodemus’ Night Interview With Jesus
(3:1-2)

Nicodemus cannot overlook the weight of the evidence. His fellow Pharisees will quickly begin to find alternative explanations for Jesus’ success, but Nicodemus cannot get away from his personal conviction that Jesus has some kind of divine mission, and that He possesses divine authority by which He speaks and heals. I am now inclined to read the first verses of chapter 3 in this way: “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could do the miraculous signs that you do unless God were with him …”

I am not sure Nicodemus knows what to say from here on, or that he came with a predetermined agenda for this interview. If he does have a plan, we do not know what it was as he never gets to it. He simply tells Jesus that, from what he has personally seen, he has concluded that Jesus has come from God on some divinely inspired mission. Having said this, Nicodemus may have waited, hoping Jesus would take up the subject where he leaves off, fill in all the blanks, and answer all his questions. If this is his hope, he is in for a big disappointment.

By his words, we can see that Nicodemus has a great respect for Jesus. Nicodemus calls Jesus “Rabbi.” No doubt this is the same title many used to address him, for he was a teacher of the law as well. He further refers to Jesus as “a teacher come from God.” When Nicodemus speaks to Jesus, he does not say, “Rabbi, I know that You are a teacher who has come from God,” but rather “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God.” To whom is Nicodemus referring when he says “we”? It must be the Pharisees, his colleagues.¹⁵⁰ Is Nicodemus speaking for his fellow-Pharisees here, expressing their point of view? Has Nicodemus come as the official spokesman for the Pharisees? It is certainly possible, but it just does not seem to be the Pharisees’ style to act in such a secretive manner. In the cases above (John 1:19-25; Luke 5:17), the Pharisees make their moves very publicly, almost as though they intend to be seen. They wanted to be viewed as the accrediting agency for all those who taught the law.

I am inclined to think that Nicodemus is acting independently, without the sanction of the Pharisees. Why “we” then? Because Nicodemus is still a Pharisee, a member (and even a leader) of their organization. He thinks in terms of this system; his observations and preliminary conclusions are drawn as a Pharisee. When Nicodemus says “we,” this should suggest to us that at this point in his life, Nicodemus is still 100% Pharisee. Not until Nicodemus recognizes the failure of Pharisaism and renounces his faith in this religious system will he cast himself on Jesus alone for salvation. This is precisely what our Lord’s response is all about. Jesus seeks to show Nicodemus that his system of religion does not, and cannot, save anyone.

Before we move to our Lord’s response, we should observe that Nicodemus is partly correct in his assessment of Jesus. Jesus is a “teacher come from God,” and God is “with Him” (verse 2). What Nicodemus does not know is that his words are even truer than he realizes. Jesus is literally a “teacher come from God.” He has come down to earth from the Father. And God is “with Him.” But Jesus is much greater than Nicodemus ever imagined at this moment in time. He is God, and He manifests the power of God in His teaching and working of signs. It will be some time yet before Nicodemus realizes the full truth of what he has just said. What he hears next catches him completely off guard.

“You Must Be Born Again”
(3:3)

Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is [re]born from above,¹⁵¹ he cannot see¹⁵² the kingdom of God.”

In the conversation which Nicodemus initiates, let us remember that Jesus is the focus. Nicodemus has not come to talk about himself or about Pharisaism. He has come to find out about Jesus, His message, and His relationship to God. What does Jesus have to say for Himself? Nicodemus opens the door by assuring Jesus that he sees Him as a man with a mission and a message from God. It is a perfect opener for Jesus. All He has to do is pick up from here and tell Nicodemus what His mission is. It doesn’t turn out at all as Nicodemus may have expected.

Our Lord’s words will stun Nicodemus. He begins by indicating to Nicodemus that the words He is about to speak convey a most solemn truth. He uses an expression unique to this Gospel, which in the King James Version is rendered, “Verily, verily …”¹⁵³ Leon Morris sums up the impact of our Lord’s few words:

Then in one sentence He sweeps away all that Nicodemus stood for, and demands that he be re-made by the power of God.¹⁵⁴

Nicodemus’ brand of Judaism did not know anything of re-birth.¹⁵⁵ Quite frankly, the Pharisees thought one birth of the “right kind” was quite enough.

7 But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “Offspring of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8 Produce fruit worthy of repentance! 9 And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ because I tell you that God can raise up children for Abraham from these stones! 10 Even now the ax is ready at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Matthew 3:7-10, emphasis mine).

To many Jews, to be born a Jew was to be born into the kingdom of God. We know the Jews also believed that Gentiles are born “lost.” Even the Jerusalem church leaders had to be forcefully convinced that God had purposed the salvation of Gentiles (see Acts 10; 11:15-18), and even then, the practice of many Jewish believers did not match their profession (see Acts 11:19). Paul, likewise, hit hard at this point. All Israelites are not true Israelites (Romans 9:6). Those who trust in the atoning work of Jesus Christ for salvation are true Israelites, whether their racial origins are Jewish or Gentile (see Galatians 3:28; 6:16).

Imagine the shocked look on the face of Nicodemus when Jesus tells him that his natural birth (as a Jew) will not save him, and that he must be reborn from above. The implication is clear: Unless Nicodemus is reborn from above, he will not see the kingdom of God. Here is a man who thinks he has reserved seats on the 50 yard line of heaven. Jesus tells him that he is not even going to get into heaven as he is. He first must be born again, from above.

Nicodemus Takes Jesus Literally
(3:4)

4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?”

Nicodemus chooses to understand Jesus’ words literally, so that he assumes the expression “reborn from above” must refer to some kind of literal re-birth.¹⁵⁶ I am not convinced that this is because our Lord’s choice of words forces Nicodemus in this direction, but because he does not wish to pursue the implications of the only other direction open to him. It is easier to take Jesus as Nicodemus does, because then His words might be brushed aside as ridiculous and absurd. And so Nicodemus objects, “You can’t mean that in order to enter the kingdom of God one has to repeat the human birth process, can you?”

The reader of this Gospel has an advantage over Nicodemus. First, we know John has already identified Jesus as God. The creation of life was His work in the beginning, and so it is in the work of creating spiritual life. We have also read that those who become God’s children are those born by a divine act of creation (John 1:12). All of this is beyond Nicodemus at the moment, who can only think in the most crass literalism, and who cannot understand Jesus at all.

What It Means to Be Reborn From Above
(3:5-8)

5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you,¹⁵⁷ ‘You¹⁵⁸ must be born from above.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Once again, Jesus begins His response to Nicodemus by indicating the solemnity of His words. He then goes on to answer the objection Nicodemus raises: “… unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (verse 5). I believe we can safely reason that to be “reborn from above” is synonymous with being “born of water and spirit.” The question many ask is, “What is meant by the terms “water” and “spirit”? Some take the term “water” to refer to natural birth, while they believe “spirit” refers to one’s spiritual re-birth from above. If this is what our Lord intended, then He would be saying that a man must first be born naturally (“of water”) and then supernaturally (“of the Spirit”). The support for interpreting “water” in this way is less than compelling. Neither do I find it necessary for Jesus to argue the need for both physical birth and spiritual birth.

I am inclined to understand the terms “water” and “spirit” as one expression, “water and spirit,” which together refer to spiritual rebirth. There are several Old Testament texts which seem to justify the conclusion that both “water” and “spirit” refer to one’s spiritual rebirth:

3 “’For I will pour water on him who is thirsty, And floods on the dry ground; I will pour My Spirit on your descendants, And My blessing on your offspring; 4 They will spring up among the grass Like willows by the watercourses.’ 5 One will say, ‘I am the LORD’s’; Another will call himself by the name of Jacob; Another will write with his hand, ‘The LORD’s,’ And name himself by the name of Israel” (Isaiah 44:3-5, NKJV).

24 “For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. 25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them” (Ezekiel 36:24-27, NKJV).

This work of regeneration, is also described in the Old Testament as the work of the “wind”:

9 Also He said to me, “Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.”’” 10 So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived, and stood upon their feet, an exceedingly great army (Ezekiel 37:9-10, NKJV).

The New Testament describes God’s work of salvation as the “washing of the new birth and the renewing of the Holy Spirit”:

3 For we too were once foolish, disobedient, misled, enslaved to various passions and desires, spending our lives in evil and envy, hateful and hating one another. 4 But “when the kindness of God our Savior appeared and his love for mankind, 5 He saved us not by works of righteousness that we have done but on the basis of his mercy, through the washing of the new birth and the renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us in full measure through Jesus Christ our Savior. 7 And so, since we have been justified by his grace, we become heirs with the confident expectation of eternal life” (Titus 3:3-7).

I believe that the “water” of which our Lord speaks here is also related to the “water” of baptism. The Pharisees are most concerned to know why John is baptizing (John 1:25). Immediately after our text, John’s disciples express their concerns to him about the rising popularity of Jesus. John has just told us that Jesus has been spending time with His disciples and baptizing (3:22). John’s disciples then protest to John: “Rabbi, the one who was with you on the other side of the Jordan River, about whom you testified—see, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him!” (3:26). I believe our Lord’s baptism and John’s baptism are, at this point in time, one and the same. It is the baptism of repentance, in preparation for Messiah’s coming. Baptism was a part of the message and the ministry of both John and Jesus, and baptism by the Spirit is what John said distinguished the Messiah’s ministry from his own (John 1:33). Thus, to be born of water and the Spirit is to be “reborn from above,” to be saved.

I do not mean by this that baptism is a good work that we perform that results in salvation. This would be the exact opposite of the point our Lord is making to Nicodemus in our text. John’s baptism was viewed as preparatory to the coming of our Lord. It was a baptism of repentance. By being baptized, one testified that he (or she) was renouncing Judaism (law keeping) as the means of their salvation. This is precisely why unbelieving and unrepentant Pharisees refused baptism:

29 (Now all the people who heard this, even the tax collectors, acknowledged God’s justice, because they had been baptized with John’s baptism. 30 However, the Pharisees and the experts in religious law rejected God’s purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John.) (Luke 7:29-30)

Jesus was very careful to identity Himself with John and his ministry. If a Pharisee or anyone else wished to enter the kingdom of God, they must do so through the means God had appointed—identification with John and with Jesus, the One of whom John bore testimony.

While I believe that baptism was expected, our Lord is not placing the emphasis on human action, but rather on the sovereign work of God in salvation. To be born from above is to be born of God. To be born of God is to be spiritually born by the work of His Spirit (born from above). Jesus now describes the sovereign saving work of God through His Spirit by using the analogy of the wind.¹⁵⁹

Before we consider the meaning of our Lord’s words about the wind here, let us pause to consider the context in which they are spoken. Jesus shocks Nicodemus by indicating to him that apart from being reborn from above, neither he nor anyone else will see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus thinks that his birth alone (as a Jew) assures him of seeing the kingdom of God (see Matthew 3:9; John 8:39; Romans 9:6). But even beyond this, Nicodemus must feel as though he holds the keys to the kingdom. Pharisaism saw itself as the guardian of the Law of Moses. It viewed itself as the pure remnant of Judaism. Pharisaism viewed itself as the “gate keeper” of the kingdom, governing it by the rules and regulations it had added to the law through oral tradition (see Matthew 23:13-15). In short, Nicodemus, like his peers, felt as though the Pharisees had the kingdom under their control. Jesus is about to blow this myth away.

Jesus likens the saving work of God through His Spirit to the working of the wind. The effects of the wind can be seen, but the wind itself is not seen. Neither can the wind be controlled. The wind goes where it wishes and does what it will. Men do not control the wind. The Spirit’s saving work is like this. The Spirit goes about His life-giving work, and no man controls Him.¹⁶⁰ No one, by his own works, or striving, or manipulation can direct the Spirit in His work. But when the Spirit brings about the new birth, the effects are evident. We know it is the work of God’s Spirit, unseen and beyond man’s control. In this sense, neither Nicodemus nor anyone else can save themselves, nor anyone else for that matter. Salvation is the sovereign work of God, accomplished by the Holy Spirit.

How Can These Things Be?
(3:9)

9 Nicodemus replied, “How can these things be?”

Nicodemus has been at a loss for words ever since our Lord’s response to him in verse 3. In verses 4 and 9, Nicodemus asks two different questions, but both begin the same, “How is it possible …?”¹⁶¹ He is so dumb-struck by what Jesus has told him that he cannot conceive of how our Lord’s words could be true. Nicodemus is so much a part of the natural world that he cannot fathom the possibility of anything spiritual and supernatural. In theory, the Pharisees believed in the miraculous (see Acts 23:6-8), but in practice Nicodemus appears to be anti-supernatural. Let’s face it, we do the same thing. We claim to believe God is in control, and that He is all-powerful, yet we often fail to live like it is true.

Teaching the Teacher of Israel About Spiritual Things
(3:10-15)

10 Jesus answered, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things? 11 I tell you the solemn truth, we speak about what we know and testify about what we have seen, but you people¹⁶² do not accept our testimony. 12 If I have told you people about earthly things and you don’t believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven—the Son of Man. 14 Just as Moses lifted up¹⁶³ the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.”

Our Lord’s words are a gentle rebuke: “Can you really be the teacher in Israel and not grasp these things?” Nicodemus is not only a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin, he is “the teacher of Israel” (verse 10). It is generally understood that the definite article here indicates that Nicodemus was the most prominent and respected teacher of his day. How could a renowned teacher of the Old Testament not know what Jesus is talking about? It seems incredible; indeed, it is. Notice the words of verse 12 in this regard. Jesus contrasts “earthly things” with “heavenly things.” He seems to place the things of which He has been speaking in the category of “earthly things.” “Heavenly things” would thus refer to those things associated with the coming kingdom of God, things presently beyond our comprehension.¹⁶⁴

How can Nicodemus, a teacher of the Old Testament law, not grasp those things the law teaches? The problem with mankind has always been with the heart (Genesis 8:21; Exodus 7:14; Deuteronomy 5:28-29; 8:14; Isaiah 29:13; Jeremiah 17:9), a problem which God alone can solve by giving men a new heart (Deuteronomy 30:6; Jeremiah 31:31-34). To be reborn by the Spirit of God makes one a new man (see 1 Samuel 10:6-13), and it is the Spirit who enables men to see such truths (see 1 Corinthians 2). Paul carries this even a step further:

12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we behave with great boldness, 13 and not like Moses who used to put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from staring at the end of the glory that was fading away. 14 But their minds were closed. For to this very day, the same veil remains when they hear the old covenant read. It has not been removed because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 But until this very day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their minds; 16 but whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom. 18 And we all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:12-18).

In verse 11, Jesus once again underscores what He is about to say with the words, “I tell you the solemn truth.” He assures Nicodemus, “We speak about what we know and testify about what we have seen.” He then goes on to say, “… but you people do not accept our testimony.” The NET Translation nicely informs us that the “you” is plural. Who is the “we” Jesus is speaking of, and who is the “you people”? The “we” seems to be John the Baptist and Jesus, both of whom have testified to what they have seen. The “we” might conceivably include the Old Testament prophets, though this is less likely. The “you people” is Nicodemus and his fellow-Pharisees.

John bore witness to the coming of Messiah. The Pharisees sent a delegation to inquire of John just who he was and what his message might be (John 1:19-25). They obviously did not accept John’s testimony because they refused to be baptized by him (Luke 7:30). The Pharisees also assembled in large numbers, coming from all over the land of Israel to hear Jesus and to judge His message and ministry (Luke 5:17). They certainly did not submit to Jesus as their Messiah. Thus, the witness of both John and Jesus was rejected by the Pharisees.

Jesus has been speaking of re-birth, a re-birth which comes from above. It is the work of God’s Spirit, who sovereignly brings about new life (verses 7-8), and it is a work that comes “from above” (verses 13-15). Does Nicodemus believe in a heavenly kingdom? He certainly should, as did the Old Testament men and women of faith (see Hebrews 11:13-16). If anyone could ascend into heaven, they must first come down from heaven. It is a round trip, with heaven as the point of origin. Only the Son of Man can return to heaven, because this is where He came from (verse 13). This is why salvation is “from above.”

The story of the bronze serpent, recorded in Numbers 21, foreshadows the salvation which God will provide through the “Son of Man.” The Israelites had been complaining against God, grumbling about the journey and their apparent lack of food and water. They did not like the manna God gave them day after day. And so God sent fiery serpents among them, and many of those who were bitten died. God provided a salvation for this disobedient people, so that they might survive divine judgment. He instructed Moses to make a bronze serpent and to set it on a pole, so that anyone who was bitten by one of the serpents could merely look up at the serpent and be healed. This is precisely what happened. All who were bitten and looked up were healed.

This Old Testament provision for Israel’s healing is illustrative of the salvation God is about to accomplish through His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ. As the serpent was lifted up, and thus became a source of salvation, so the Son of Man must be “lifted up,” so that those who look up to Him in faith can be saved from God’s wrath as well. The snake-bitten Israelites were smitten of God for their sin. They deserved to die, and apart from His provision of the serpent, they would have. Those who did not look up to the bronze serpent died. The act of merely looking up to the bronze serpent was an act of faith. So far as the people could see, there was no direct link between the snake bite they had received and the healing for which they hoped. But it was the means God provided for their salvation. It was the means God declared through Moses. It was the one way God said His people could be saved. Those who looked to the bronze serpent were saved from the death they deserved.

In verses 14 and 15, Jesus connects the serpent, which is lifted up on a pole, with His own death at Calvary, when He is lifted up on the cross. Nicodemus asks how a man can be reborn from above. Jesus first tells him by analogy; now He tells him more directly. If anyone is to be saved from the penalty of their sins, they must “look up” to Him for salvation. He, like the bronze serpent of old, will be “lifted up” on a cross, and He will later be “lifted up” in His resurrection and ascension. In so doing, He will be “lifted up” in another way—He will be exalted by God for His sacrificial obedience at Calvary. All those who “look up” to Him in faith, trusting in Him to remove the judgment for their sin, like the Israelites of old, will be saved.

The Love of God and the Coming and Cross of Christ
(3:16-21)

This brings us to verse 16, perhaps the most well known passage in the Bible. Unfortunately, this verse is almost always used in a “stand alone” fashion, without any reference to its context. In addition, virtually all the major later translations still follow the reading of the King James Version. This would not be bad except that the meaning of words change. The word “so” is particularly problematic:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life (KJV, emphasis mine).

The Bible in Basic English most clearly conveys what most of us understand this verse to mean:

For God had such love for the world that he gave his only Son, so that whoever has faith in him may not come to destruction but have eternal life (emphasis mine).

In so doing, the Bible in Basic English translation renders this verse in a way that obscures the principle thrust of what our Lord is saying. Fortunately, the NET Bible gets it right:

For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

A translator’s note in an earlier version of the NET Bible pointed me in the right direction. The note simply read, “Or, in this way.”¹⁶⁵ As I began to search out the use of this word (rendered “so” in John 3:16) in John’s writings and the rest of the New Testament, I came to realize that I understood the word in a way that John does not seem to have intended. The two words, “for … so,” are the rendering of a two-word combination in the Greek text, which occurs nine times in the New Testament.¹⁶⁶ None of these occurrences can or should be rendered in a “so much” way. Every one can, and perhaps should, be rendered “in this way,” or “this is the way,” or something very similar. This can be seen by the way the NET Bible handles these other eight occurrences of the expression found in John 3:16:

“In Bethlehem of Judea,” they said, “for it is written this way by the prophet” (Matthew 2:5, emphasis mine).

So Jesus replied to him, “Let it happen now, for [in this way] it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John yielded to him” (Matthew 3:15, emphasis mine).¹⁶⁷

Rejoice and be glad because your reward is great in heaven, for they persecuted the prophets before you in the same way” (Matthew 5:12, emphasis mine).

But the magician Elymas (for that is the way his name is translated) opposed them, trying to turn the proconsul away from the faith (Acts 13:8, emphasis mine).

For this is what [this is the way] the Lord has commanded us: “I have appointed you to be a light for the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth” (Acts 13:47, emphasis mine).

We went on ahead to the ship and put out to sea for Assos, intending to take Paul aboard there, for he had arranged it this way. He himself was intending to go there by land (Acts 20:13, emphasis mine).

For in the same way the holy women who hoped in God long ago adorned themselves by being subject to their husbands (1 Peter 3:5, emphasis mine).

For thus [or, “For in this way …”] an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be richly provided for you (2 Peter 1:11, emphasis mine).

Based upon the consistent use of this expression in the New Testament, I believe we should understand John 3:16 the way the NET Bible has translated it.

Now notice something else. The expression, “for in this way,” points back to something previously stated. It links what is being (or is about to be) said to what has just been said. To find out what “this same way” is, we must look back to what has already been said. What will, or should, happen must happen in a way similar to the way something has already happened. A study of the eight verses above demonstrates this.

Now let us apply this aspect of the expression to John 3:16 and earlier by going back to verse 14:

14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so [in the same way]¹⁶⁸ must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. 16 For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him (emphasis mine).

Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be reborn from above. Nicodemus is surprised and confused by what Jesus has said (3:4, 9). Jesus gently rebukes Nicodemus, a prominent teacher of the Old Testament law, because he finds our Lord’s words so new and so difficult (3:10). And so in verse 14, Jesus turns to the Old Testament to clarify what He has told Nicodemus. In this incident, Moses lifted up a bronze serpent in the desert, so that all who (by faith) looked up to it were saved. In the same way that Moses lifted up the serpent, the Son of man must be “lifted up.” The Son of man is to be “lifted up” so that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.

The words which commence John 3:16, “For this is the way God loved the world … ,” pick up and expand upon the thought of verses 14 and 15. Notice the repetition of the statement, “so that everyone who believes in Him … may have eternal life,” in verses 15 and 16. The argument of Jesus (and John) goes something like this: “How can one be reborn from above, Nicodemus? Well, first, no one can ascend into heaven except the One who first descended from heaven. Thus, God’s provision for man’s salvation has come from above. The story of the salvation of the Israelites in the desert speaks of salvation from above. Moses lifted a bronze serpent up on a pole and placed it where all the Israelites could see it. All those bitten by a serpent could “look up” to this bronze serpent and live. The salvation of which I speak, and about which you inquire, is from above, not only in that God has provided it through Him who descended from heaven, but also in that men must look up to Him to be saved.”

This salvation in the wilderness by means of the bronze serpent was a prototype of God’s salvation in Jesus Christ. “In the same way” that the bronze serpent was lifted up on a pole for all to see, the “Son of man” must be “lifted up,” so that all who look to Him by faith may have eternal life. “For in this way God loved the world: He gave His only begotten Son in order that all who believe in Him may not perish but have eternal life.” God gave His only begotten Son by sending Him to this world, by lifting Him up on the cross of Calvary, and by lifting Him up from the grave and exalting Him above every name.

God’s love for the world was demonstrated in Jesus, the One whom Pharisaism rejected, whose testimony (along with John’s) they did not believe. The Jews wrongly assumed that God loved them because they were Jews. Now they are informed that God loves them only through Christ. If they reject Christ, they also reject the love which the Father manifested toward them in Christ.

In verse 16, Nicodemus has yet another shock in store for him. This verse declares that God’s love extends to the world, and that God has purposed to save Gentiles as well as Jews. This was literally beyond the comprehension of many Jews, including believing Jews. The Prophet Jonah, for example, could not conceive of the Ninevites (Gentiles) being saved, and thus he did everything in his power to see that this city would be destroyed. John and his brother James wanted to call down fire from heaven and “torch” a Samaritan village (Luke 9:52-56). When Peter went to the home of Cornelius and preached the gospel to the Gentiles who had gathered there, the church leaders in Jerusalem called him to account for his going to the Gentiles with the gospel (Acts 11:1-3). After Peter convinced them that this was of God, and they confessed that God must be saving men from among the Gentiles, Jewish believers continued to go out, “speaking the message to no one but Jews” (Acts 11:19). When Paul addressed a hostile Jewish audience, they listened to him patiently—until he mentioned that God had called him to take the gospel to the Gentiles—and then they were enraged (Acts 22:1-24, note especially verses 21-22). For Jesus (or John) to say that God loved the world was revolutionary, shocking, and very distressing for a strict Jew.

I would like to highlight another lesson to be learned from John 3:16. The word “loved” is in the past tense. The Greek verb is in the aorist tense, indicating a specific act at a particular point in time. This verse does not say, “God loves (present tense) the world.” I believe the reason for this is because we are to understand that God has manifested His love for the world in a particular way. He “loved” the world through His Son, Jesus Christ. He “loved” the world by sending His son into the world, so that He might be “lifted up” as a sin-bearer.

This brings us to a new element in John’s Gospel, introduced in verse 16, which surely must have caused Nicodemus and his colleagues a great deal of difficulty. That “new” element is the concept of hell, or eternal judgment, introduced by the term “perish.” Our Lord’s earlier reference to the bronze serpent raised this issue in a more subtle way. The people who were “saved” by looking up to the bronze serpent were those who were dying. They were “perishing” because God was judging them on account of their sin, and they knew it. If they did not quickly look up to the serpent in faith, they would perish. Jesus first shocked Nicodemus by telling him that he would not even see the kingdom of God unless he was reborn from above. Jesus’ words in verses 14-21 are even more disturbing. Nicodemus is not only unable to see the kingdom of God in his present state, he is destined to perish.

Nicodemus must surely be in a state of shock by now. He is no longer even speaking. In fact, he may already have left, and it may be John who now fills in these details, writing these words after the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of our Lord. The man who thinks he has arrived is told he isn’t even on his way to heaven; he is on his way to eternal torment. He is a condemned man. Spiritually speaking, Nicodemus is on death row.

God’s purpose in sending Jesus into the world was not to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. We may wonder how our Lord (or John) can make such a statement in the light of these later verses in John:

26 “For just as the Father has life in himself, thus he has granted the Son to have life in himself; 27 and he granted the Son authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man” (John 5:26-27).

“I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me” (John 5:30).

Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that those who do not see may gain their sight, and the ones who see may become blind” (John 9:39).

We see above in John chapter 5 that Jesus is talking about the judgment He will execute at the resurrection of the dead (see verses 25, 28-29). The judgment spoken of in John 9 seems to be essentially the same as that in verses 17-21 of John chapter 3. Jesus came into the world as the expression of God’s love for the world. He came to save those sinners who believe in Him. Those who do not receive Jesus Christ as God’s only way of salvation (see also John 14:6) reject God’s love. The primary purpose of our Lord’s first coming was to implement the love of God toward lost sinners by providing a way of salvation, like the bronze serpent provided a means of healing for all who would look up and be saved.

The story of the woman caught in the act of adultery, recorded in chapter 8, illustrates the relationship between Jesus’ first coming and the judgment He will execute at His second coming. The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman to Jesus who was caught in the very act of adultery (notice, they did not bring the man). Desiring to put Jesus on the spot, they virtually dared Him to “judge” or condemn her. Under the law, she did deserve to die, but Jesus did not respond as His opponents expected. Jesus did not deny the woman’s guilt; He showed her accusers that they were guilty sinners as well. Perhaps their form of sin was self-righteousness and pride, rather than immorality, but they were not “without sin.” No one present was truly qualified to condemn this woman, except Jesus. And rather than condemn her, He forgave her of her sins. The purpose of Jesus’ first coming was to make an atonement for man’s sins. Jesus refused to condemn this woman, because He had come to save her. Indeed, He came to bear the guilt and punishment for her sins, so that her sins could be forgiven.

Judgment is a secondary effect of our Lord’s first coming, and it will be a more dramatic part of His second coming. Those for whom He came to provide a way of salvation are guilty sinners, already under condemnation (see Romans 3:9-18, 23). Those who reject the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ reject God’s love, and fall under even greater condemnation for having seen the light and then rejecting it (see John 9:35-41). A person’s response to the light of our Lord’s coming is indicative of their moral and spiritual condition. Those who practice the truth do not fear the light, but welcome it. Light reveals the righteousness of righteous men. Those who are unrighteous hate the light because it exposes their sins. Wicked men reject the light while righteous men welcome it. One’s response to the light, then, demonstrates his or her moral and spiritual condition. Light condemns, both by exposing sin and by exposing sinners, who reject the light. In this sense, our Lord passively judged (exposed) the sins of men in His first coming. He will actively judge sinners at His second coming.

Conclusion

This text is rich in truth and applications. Let me conclude by pointing out some important principles.

First, being religious is not the same as being a Christian. Some time ago a book was published, based on the Book of Romans, and entitled “How To Be Christian Without Being Religious.” It attempted to show that one can become a Christian without having to act “religious.” I believe one could very well write a book entitled, “How To Be Religious Without Being a Christian.” This would apply not only to Nicodemus, but to many “religious” people today. One could not get much more religious than Nicodemus, but our Lord’s words make it clear that as “religious” as he is, Nicodemus is not yet a Christian. He must be reborn from above.

I must ask you, my friend, “Are you a Christian, or are you just religious?” If you take the words of our Lord seriously, there is a great difference between those who are religious and those who are reborn from above. Nicodemus was as lost as the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4). Hell will be populated by many people who are “religious,” who have trusted in their religion to save them, rather than trusting in Christ alone. There will be many in hell who trusted in their works to get them to heaven, rather than in His work—the work of our Lord Jesus Christ and the cross of Calvary. He came down from heaven, and He was lifted up on a cross to bear the penalty of your sins and mine. He was raised from the dead and exalted to the right hand of God. He offers to us His righteousness and His life. If you trust in Him, rather than in yourself, you will be reborn from above, and thus you can be assured that you will see the kingdom of God.

Second, God’s love for the world has been manifested through the coming and the cross of Jesus Christ. This is the way God “loved” the world. It is the only way anyone can enjoy the love of God for now and eternity. To reject Jesus Christ as God’s provision for our salvation is to reject God’s love, and to be under divine condemnation, awaiting the day of God’s eternal judgment. Many today seek to find comfort by assuring themselves that God loves them. God “loved” them in Jesus Christ. To reject Him is to reject His love. It is both foolish and dangerous to believe in a “God of love” without submitting to the Son of His love, Jesus Christ. How often I hear it said, “Well, I believe in a God of love …” They go on to say that such a God would never condemn anyone to hell. Our text tells us just the opposite. The God of love who sent Jesus Christ to save the world from sin is the God who will send Him a second time to judge the world for sin. Those who have “looked up” to Him for salvation, now “look up,” waiting for His return. Those who have rejected Him fail to grasp that when He returns He will come as their judge. What a terrifying thought! What a blessed salvation!

It is my hope and prayer that God will give you no rest or peace until you have experienced the love of God in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

146 I have purposely formatted the text so that the words of Nicodemus are distinguished from those of our Lord. Notice that as the interview between our Lord and Nicodemus develops the comments of Nicodemus get shorter and shorter, and those of our Lord get longer and longer. In verses 16-21, I have changed the font, indicating the question of whose words these are, John’s or our Lord’s.

147 So too, we might add, with the teaching of John the Baptist. There was something forceful about his teaching, that even attracted and fascinated a man like Herod, and yet John never performed a sign (John 10:41).

148 The Sadducees are named seven times in Matthew, and once each in Mark and Luke. John never names them.

149 I am not suggesting that the priests or the leaders of the Sadducees were actually present at the cleansing of the temple at the outset, but they most certainly got there in time to challenge our Lord (see John 2:18ff.).

150 The “we” could also include the Jews more generally.

151 “The word rendered “anew” [‘from above’ in our text] might equally be translated by ‘from above.’ Both senses are true, and in the Johannine manner it is likely that we should understand both here (as Barclay does; he gets the best of both worlds with his ‘unless a man is reborn from above’).” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 212-213. In the Gospel of John, this term, which is capable of both meanings (“from above,” and “again”), is used three times in John 3 (verses 3, 7, 31) and twice elsewhere in this Gospel (19:11, 23). In the three uses not involving Nicodemus, the term always means “from above.”

152 For the Jews in general or for Nicodemus in particular, “seeing was believing” (see John 2:18, 23; 3:2; 6:30); Jesus reversed this, telling Nicodemus that “believing is to see.”

153 The expression ‘Truly, truly’ or ‘Verily, verily’ is a translation of the repeated Greek word amhn, which would be transliterated ‘amen.’ John uses the word only as a doubled expression (‘Truly, truly’), and this he does 25 times in his Gospel. Matthew (31x), Mark (14x), and Luke (6x) use the term in a single form (‘Truly’), but never doubled. The statement by Morris, cited earlier in this series, bears repeating: “‘Verily’ is not a translation of a Greek word, but the transliteration of an Aramaic (or Hebrew) word, namely Amen. It is the participle of a verb meaning ‘to confirm,’ and it was used to give one’s assent. For example, it was (and still is) the response of the congregation to a prayer uttered by him who leads their worship. In this way they make it their own (1 Cor. 14:16). Very occasionally it is the conclusion to one’s own prayer (e.g. Tobit 8:7f.), when it has the nature of a wish. But this use is rare. Characteristically it is one’s assent to words uttered by another. In the Gospels it is used only by Jesus, and always as a prefix to significant statements. Presumably this is to mark them out as solemn and true and important. This use of Amen to introduce one’s own words appears to be Jesus’ own, no real Jewish parallel being adduced.” Morris, p. 169.

154 Morris, p. 212.

155 I like what L. S. Thornton has written: “‘The Christian doctrine of a new life stands in contrast to the contemporary Jewish expectation of a new world. Doubtless the two doctrines overlap in the New Testament. But the relation between them might be not inappropriately described in terms of kernel and husk.’” Cited by Morris, p. 209, fn. 1.

156 Often in the Gospel of John, men err by taking statements literally that were meant to be understood spiritually or symbolically (see, for example, John 2:18-22; 4:10-11; 6:48-65).

157 This “you” (soi) is singular.

158 This “you” (uma") is plural.

159 It should be pointed out that the same Greek word (pneuma) is rendered both “wind” (John 3:8) and “spirit” (John 1:32-33; 3:5, 6, 8, 34) in the New Testament. In John 3:8, the term occurs twice; the first time it is rendered “wind,” the second time “Spirit.”

160 This is a lesson which Simon the magician had to learn the hard way (see Acts 8:9-24).

161 In the Greek text the first two words of Nicodemus’ questions in verses 4 and 10 (pw" dunatai) are identical. Both inquire as to the possibility of what Jesus has just said. The same two words are found in Matthew 12:29; Mark 3:23; John 6:52; 9:16. In each of these instances, the issue is a matter of logic. Mary’s question to Gabriel in Luke 1:34 is similar, but significantly different, I think. She is not asking how it can be, but how it will be. She does not question God’s ability to give her a child as a virgin, she only asks by what means it will be. Zacharias, on the other hand, reveals his own doubts and asks for some verification, for which he is rebuked (see Luke 1:18-20).

162 The translation, “you people,” along with the informative footnote in the NET Bible make it clear that the “you” is plural, not singular as it was in verse 10.

163 The term “lifted up” (Greek, uywsen) has a double meaning. It can mean, literally, “lifted up,” but it also has the sense of exalting (see, for example, Matthew 11:23; 23:12; Acts 2:33). Our Lord was literally “lifted up” on a cross, but in the same breath we must also say He was “exalted” by being “lifted up” in this manner. His death on the cross also necessitated His being “lifted up” by His resurrection and ascension.

164 “He has borne witness to ‘earthly things’ without being believed. The simplest way of understanding this is to see a reference to the present discourse. It was taking place on earth and concerned a process with effects discernible on earth. In contrast with this, Jesus can impart ‘heavenly things,’ i.e. higher teaching. But if men like Nicodemus will not believe the simpler things they cannot be expected to believe what is more advanced.” Morris, p. 222.

165 The latest text of the NET Bible translation has been changed to more accurately reflect the meaning of the original text of John 3:16.

166 Matthew 2:5; 3:15; 5:12; John 3:16; Acts 13:8, 47; 20:13; 1 Peter 3:5; 2 Peter 1:11.

167 In this instance, the NET Bible did not convey the full sense of the expression, which I have supplied in brackets. The NAS version does capture the correct sense, however: “But Jesus answering said to him, ‘Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to filfill all righteousness’” (emphasis mine).

168 The same Greek word, rendered “so” in verse 16, is found here. It is not, however, the two-word combination referred to above.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Soteriology (Salvation)

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

9. John’s Joy and His Disciples’ Jealousy (John 3:22-36)

Introduction

Like many of you, I too watched the winter Olympics on television. I was most interested in the women’s figure skating, particularly the gold medal performance of Tara Lipinski, who just happens to be from Texas. A number of very fine and more favored contestants performed ahead of Tara, but it was clear she had a chance for the gold. The pressure was on, which made her final difficult jump even more exciting. I’ll never forget the look on her face when she executed the jump flawlessly. Immediately, her face illuminated as she flashed her now famous joyful smile. She knew she had done it, and she was right! At that moment, Tara Lipinski experienced the joy of having fulfilled her mission, and she absolutely delighted in having done so.

Somehow, I’ve never really looked upon John the Baptist as a happy person. From some of his severe words, I must confess to thinking of John as a grouch, a sort of angry, hostile fellow, who didn’t know how to smile. A friend of mine used to say, “It’s hard for a watchdog to smile.” I guess I always looked on John as a “watchdog.” Our text forces me to rethink my opinion of John the Baptist.

Some parents in our church have their children sit in with them as they listen to me preach. Some of these young listeners draw cartoons for me of what they have learned from the text of Scripture. I know what to expect from my young artist friends at the end of this sermon. I will get a picture of John the Baptist, with a broad smile on his face. In the picture also will be his disciples, all wearing a huge frown. That which gives John great joy causes his disciples great concern, even distress. How can this be? What has gone wrong? We shall see in our study of John 3:22-36.

Is Our Text “Out of Place”?

It may seem difficult to believe, but some scholars try to tell us that this passage is out of place. I like what Leon Morris has to say on this point:

It is often suggested that vv. 22-30 are out of their proper place. Some advocate transferring them to a position after 2:12, others after 3:36. The arguments usually revolve round their suitability to the context in which we find them. There are suggestions of displacement at various points in this Gospel, and more or less plausible arguments are produced to support such theories. But we must always bear in mind that what we think an appropriate sequence is not necessarily the one that the compiler of this Gospel would have adopted. And in any case our first duty is to see whether the verses in question fit into the Gospel where they are traditionally found. … In the case of the present passage examination does not appear to disclose any such compelling reason.¹⁶⁹

I point this out for a very good reason. Those who seek to change the order of the text show themselves to be very much “sons of Nicodemus.” Nicodemus comes as an authority to Jesus, and yet he simply cannot accept His authority. He wishes, it seems, to adapt Jesus to his theology, rather than to sit at our Lord’s feet and receive a new theology. Those who consider themselves experts are not as eager to learn as they are to teach and to correct. We do better to take the text as it is and try to learn what John is telling us by it, just as it is written.

Who Is Speaking in This Passage?

There is some discussion as to whether John the Baptist or John the Apostle is speaking in verses 31-36. Perhaps the major reason many think these must be the comments of John the Apostle is that the statements seem too advanced for this moment in time. How can John the Baptist know these things at this early point in the ministry of Jesus? Let us remember that John the Baptist is a prophet. His words, “Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (1:29), might also be called too advanced.

The Structure of This Text

Our text divides into four sections: (1) Jesus baptizes, too (vss. 22-24); (2) John’s disciples are jealous (vss. 25-26); (3) John’s joy (vss. 27-30); and (4) the superiority of the Savior (vss. 31-36).

These are the final words of John the Baptist¹⁷⁰ in the Gospel of John. They are a fitting and honorable tribute to this man, and they are also his final testimony concerning Jesus as the Christ.

Jesus Baptizes in Addition to John
(3:22-24)

22 After this, Jesus and his disciples came into Judean territory, and there he spent time with them and was baptizing.¹⁷¹ 23 John was also baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was abundant water there, and people were coming and being baptized.¹⁷² 24 (For John had not yet been thrown into prison.) (emphasis mine)

Jesus and His disciples had been in the city of Jerusalem, where He had cleansed the temple (2:13-22), performed a number of signs (2:23), and spoken with Nicodemus (3:1-21). They are now leaving the city of Jerusalem, making their way into the countryside.¹⁷³ There, Jesus “spent time with” His disciples. We should ponder these three words, “spent time with,” because they remind us of a very important element of discipleship. As it should be, the church is very interested in discipleship. Jesus is seen as the model for “discipling,” and rightly so. Nevertheless, our discipleship programs seldom do what our Lord actually did. Rather, we emphasize a kind of classroom instruction, and usually a highly structured program with “accountability” and other controls. While this may be commendable, I cannot overlook the fact that Jesus “spent time” with His disciples. To be our Lord’s disciple was to “be with Him”:

13 Now Jesus went up into the mountain and called for those he wanted, and they came to him. 14 He appointed twelve (whom he called apostles), so that they would be with him and he could send them to preach 15 and to have authority to cast out demons (Mark 3:13-15, emphasis mine; see also Matthew 17:1; 26:37; Mark 5:37; 16:10; Luke 7:11; 8:1; 9:10; 22:14; John 15:27; 17:24; Acts 4:13).

Discipleship is about witnessing, accountability, and one-on-one relationships with those who come to faith in Christ. But first and foremost, a disciple is one who spends time with the Master. Those of us who are professionals in ministry (who make our living by our ministry) often confuse the time we spend in preparation for our ministry with personal time with the Lord. Our time of study should be a time of fellowship and intimacy with the Lord, but we also need time with Him for His sake and ours, personally. Let us not lose sight of the fact that a significant part of our Lord’s discipling was simply spending time with His disciples.

While in the Judean countryside, the disciples of our Lord baptize those who come to them. At the same time, John and his disciples are also baptizing.¹⁷⁴ We would expect that John’s baptism had not changed from what it had always been. His was a baptism of repentance in preparation for the coming of Messiah. Our Lord’s baptism—or rather the baptism our Lord’s disciples conducted in His name—was essentially the same as John’s.¹⁷⁵ His disciples could not baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, since our Lord had not yet been crucified, buried, and risen from the dead.

John then interjects a parenthetical explanation in verse 24: “(For John had not yet been thrown into prison.)” Why would the Apostle John feel this statement is necessary? The Synoptic Gospels all start our Lord’s public ministry after the arrest of John the Baptist:

14 Now after John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee and proclaimed the gospel of God. 15 He said, “The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the gospel!” (Mark 1:14-15; see also Matthew 4:12f.)

At this later point in time, Jesus picked up where John left off, with virtually the same message as John. Only in the Gospel of John do we learn of an earlier time when both John and Jesus were ministering simultaneously, with both groups (John and his disciples, and Jesus and His disciples) doing virtually the same thing at the same time (baptizing those who came to them).

John wants his readers to know of this unique, if very brief, period of simultaneous ministry because it is the setting from which a perceived problem arises. This problem arises because of our Lord’s successful ministry at this time. In our text, the Apostle John bids what I suspect is a sad farewell to John the Baptist. He will be referred to later in this Gospel, but this is the last time we read his own words. Our text is a fitting tribute to a great man. John the Baptist’s response here is a model of humility and Christian servanthood. Let us listen very carefully, not only to his words, but to his heart.

John’s Disciples Are Distressed
(3:25-26)

25 Now a dispute came about between some of John’s disciples and a Jew concerning ceremonial washing. 26 So they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the one who was with you on the other side of the Jordan River, about whom you testified—see, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him!”

John tells us of a dispute between the disciples of John and “a Jew,”¹⁷⁶ who argue over ceremonial washing. If this Jew was resistant to John’s message and his baptism, it may well be that he argues for the superiority of the Jewish ceremonial cleansings. Somehow, the conversation seems to gravitate to a comparison of John’s baptism with that of Jesus. The dispute between John’s disciples and this Jew appears to prompt them to return to John with their concerns about Jesus.

We are not told what is said in this dispute. For the purposes of illustration and clarification, allow me to suggest one possible scenario: John’s disciples encounter a Jew and ask him if he wishes to be baptized. He responds that he is not interested; he is convinced that the Jewish ceremonial cleansings are more effective. Unwilling to leave it at this, the disciples begin to debate with him. Seeing that he is not making any progress, the Jew may have “put the icing on the cake” with a statement something like: “Well what are you so dogmatic about? Don’t you know that Jesus is baptizing in the same way you are, and far more people are going to Him than to you folks? Why don’t you just give it up?”

John’s disciples return to him frustrated and upset, not with the Jew, but with Jesus. They are distressed that Jesus and His disciples are more successful than they are. In fact, they almost seem distressed at John the Baptist, irritated that he has not done anything to remedy this situation. After all, it was John who pointed the crowds to Jesus, and he who had greatly contributed to the success of Jesus. Listen to the anger and frustration in their words to their “master”:

“Rabbi, the one who was with you on the other side of the Jordan River, about whom you testified—see, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him!”

The words of John’s disciples give them away. Notice how they choose to refer to Jesus. They do not call Him by name (Jesus), nor do they refer to Him as the Messiah, though that is the way John refers to Him. They speak of Jesus as “the one who was with you, … the one about whom you testified.” I believe they did so because they actually came to resent who Jesus was. His identity and His success are related. If they are jealous of His success, they are not as enthusiastic about His identity as they should be. Neither are they as enthusiastic about acknowledging Jesus as Messiah as John is. John associates himself with Jesus, giving Jesus credibility. Worse yet, from their point of view, John testifies about Jesus (notice that they don’t mention what he testifies). Now, they complain, “everyone is going to him!”

Note the similarity of these words to the words of the Pharisees:

17 So the crowd who had been with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead were continuing to testify about it. 18 Because they had heard that Jesus had performed this miraculous sign, the crowd went out to meet him. 19 Thus the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you can do nothing. Look, the world has gone after him!” (John 12:17-19, emphasis mine.)

One is also reminded of these words in the Book of Numbers:

26 But two men had remained in the camp: the name of one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad. And the Spirit rested upon them. Now they were among those listed, but who had not gone out to the tabernacle; yet they prophesied in the camp. 27 And a young man ran and told Moses, and said, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp.” 28 So Joshua the son of Nun, Moses’ assistant, one of his choice men, answered and said, “Moses my lord, forbid them!” 29 Then Moses said to him, “Are you zealous for my sake? Oh, that all the LORD’s people were prophets and that the LORD would put His Spirit upon them!” (Numbers 11:26-29, NKJV)

Lest we think John’s disciples are the exception, let me suggest that their mindset is virtually the same as the disciples of our Lord. Our Lord’s disciples are jealous for Jesus’ success. They don’t like it when others attempt the same ministries they perform (see Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49). They dread the thought of failure and suffering (Matthew 16:21-22). In the Gospels, the disciples of John and the disciples of our Lord are in it for themselves, until they learn the meaning of taking up one’s cross. John’s disciples therefore are put out with John for having created this situation. They do not like the fact that Jesus is now baptizing, just as they are, but with greater success. They see the end in view, for themselves and for their ministry. Yet this is the way God meant it to be.

This raises an interesting issue: Why don’t John’s disciples—the ones chastising him—leave John to follow Jesus? Why do they stay on with John? What do they expect, as far as the future is concerned? John’s ministry was to introduce the Messiah. He has done that, and his mission has been accomplished. John’s disciples are acting as though John is the Messiah. They seem to think that their mission and ministry will continue on indefinitely. Judging from the broad impact of John’s teaching (e.g., Acts 19), they may have worked at it for some time. But they look upon Jesus as their competition, rather than as the culmination of their ministry. None of these men seem to be considering leaving John and joining Jesus, as the first two disciples of John did.¹⁷⁷ Had they cast their lot in with John, so that now they are unwilling to face up to what is in store for him and for them? It seems so. It is not a pretty picture which the Apostle John draws for us, but it is certainly true to life.

With the attitude of John’s disciples, one can understand why it was necessary for John to be imprisoned and then beheaded by Herod. Even then, one wonders how long it took John’s disciples to give it up and to begin to preach Christ.

A Servant’s Heart
(3:27-30)

27 John replied, “No one can receive anything unless it has been given to him from heaven. 28 You yourselves can testify that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but rather, ‘I have been sent before him.’ 29 The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands by and listens for him, rejoices greatly when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. This then is my joy, that is complete. 30 He must become more important while I become less important.”

If John the Baptist were a coach, I know exactly what he would say to “his men” at this moment: “Men, it’s time for us to get back to the basics.” Coaches always have to take their teams “back to the basics.” Preachers must do the same thing (Romans 15:15; 1 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Timothy 1:6; 2 Timothy 2:14; Titus 3:1; 2 Peter 1:12; Jude 1:5). John is about to do this as well. In verse 27, he takes his disciples back to the basics of what his ministry is all about, and reminds them about their ministry as well.

John’s ministry is the ministry he received from God. His God-given ministry was not to be the Messiah, but to introduce the Messiah. He was the forerunner; Jesus was the fulfillment, the grand finale. John illustrates what he is saying by using the analogy of marriage. Jesus is the “bridegroom”; John is the “friend of the bridegroom.” The “friend of the bridegroom” is not distressed when the “bridegroom” appears at the wedding celebration to take his bride—he is elated. The friend’s task is to bring the bride and the groom together. When the voice of the groom is heard, the friend of the groom knows his task is accomplished, and he can rejoice in fulfilling his mission. He can rejoice that the bride and the groom are joined in marriage.¹⁷⁸

Verse 30 projects this principle and practice into the future. John’s disciples do not like things as they are at the moment. John is about to tell them it will get much “worse” (from their point of view). John is saying, as it were, “But wait, there’s more. If you think Jesus’ success has peaked, and that my humbling has ceased, you are wrong.” We see then yet another governing principle:

“He must become more important while I become less important”¹⁷⁹ (verse 30).

Jesus must become preeminent, while John must fade from the picture. The “must” of verse 30 is crucial. John is showing deep humility, it is true, but he is also saying that this is the way it “must” be, the way it will be—because this is the plan and the purpose of the sovereign God. Verses 31-36 spell out some of the ways in which Jesus is superior to John.

The Supremacy of Christ
(3:31-36)

31 The one who¹⁸⁰ comes from above is superior to all. The one who is from the earth belongs to the earth and speaks about earthly things. The one who comes from heaven is superior to all. 32 He testifies about what he has seen and heard, and no one accepts his testimony. 33 The one who has accepted his testimony has confirmed clearly that God is truthful. 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for he does not give the Spirit sparingly. 35 The Father loves the Son and has placed all things under his authority. 36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath remains on him (emphasis mine).

Here, John the Baptist sets out to prove the supremacy of Jesus Christ and to show how vastly superior Christ is to him. John hangs his whole argument on several key premises. First, John informs us that He is superior to John because of where He has come from. Jesus has come “from above,” “from heaven.”¹⁸¹ Jesus is “from above”; John is “from the earth.”

Second, Jesus is superior to John in that of which He speaks. Since Jesus is “from above,” He speaks of the “heavenly things” which He has seen and heard in heaven. John is “from the earth,” and thus he speaks about “earthly things.”¹⁸²It sounds irreverent, but there is an idiom that says: “I got this right from the horse’s mouth.” That is what John is saying about Jesus and His words. In spite of this, John also calls attention to the amazing truth that even though Jesus speaks divine truth, “no one accepts his testimony” (verse 32).

Third, Jesus speaks as One who has the fullest measure of the Spirit of God. Jesus speaks for God with full authority; indeed, Jesus speaks as God. He alone has the Spirit without limit. He is the One who speaks as empowered by the Holy Spirit. You may remember that this is the very thing which set Jesus apart from all the others in the land. The Messiah would be the One “on whom he saw the Spirit descending and remaining” (John 1:33-34). It is not John who is to have the spotlight, but Jesus. No one knows that better than John, and so he informs his disciples.

Fourth, Jesus is uniquely loved by His Father in heaven and has been given the Father’s full authority (verse 35). The Father loves the Son, and all things have been placed under His authority. You simply cannot go any higher than this. Who is John compared to the Son? Why would his disciples seek to defend him against Jesus, when he is His servant?

Finally, Jesus is the One on whom the destiny of every human being rests. Jesus is the key to our destiny. The answer to one question determines where we will spend eternity: “Who is Jesus Christ, and what have you done about His claim to be God’s only means for your salvation?” The one who accepts His testimony has declared that “God is true” (verse 33). To reject the words of our Lord, who speaks for the Father, is to call God a liar. To believe in the Son is to have eternal life. The one who rejects the Son will not see life; indeed, God’s wrath abides on him (verse 36).

Conclusion

The most important question anyone can ask and answer is, “Who is Jesus Christ?” The answer is the key to everything. It is the key to one’s eternal destiny. It is the key to one’s ministry and service. It is the key to the gospel itself. Is it any wonder that the truths John the Baptist affirms here are the same truths the Apostle John emphasizes in this Gospel? Is it any wonder that these same truths are those most under attack by unbelieving “scholars”?

The claims Jesus makes, which John the Baptist declares here, and which the Gospel of John was written to proclaim, are found everywhere one looks in the New Testament. But perhaps nowhere is the thrust of our text more clearly stated elsewhere in the Bible than in the Book of Hebrews:

1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. 3 The son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. 4 Thus he became so far better than the angels as he has inherited a name superior to theirs.

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my son! Today I have fathered you”? And in another place he says, “I will be his father and he will be my son.” 6 But when he again brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all the angels of God worship him!” 7 And he says of the angels, “He makes his angels spirits and his ministers a flame of fire,” 8 but of the son,

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness.
So God, your God, has anointed you over your companions with the oil of rejoicing.”

10 And,

“You founded the earth in the beginning, Lord,
and the heavens are the works of your hands.
11 They will perish; but you continue.
And they will all grow old like a garment,
12 and like a robe you will fold them up
and like a garment they will be changed;
but you are the same and your years will never run out.”

13 But to which of the angels has he ever said, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to serve those who will inherit salvation?

Do you believe what John the Baptist has said about our Lord? If Jesus Christ is who the prophets of old prophesied He would be, who He Himself claimed to be, and who the apostles laid down their lives to declare Him to be, then what have you done about Him? He not only claims to have come from God, but to be God. He claims to have been sent to bear the penalty for your sins. He claims to be the only way to heaven. Have you acknowledged your sin and received the gift of the forgiveness of your sins and the assurance of eternal life through Him? If not, then I urge you to reconsider who Jesus Christ is. If so, I urge you to continually reflect on who He is. This is what shaped John’s ministry and mindset—and this is what his disciples failed to grasp.

As I read this text, I am impressed with John’s joy and with his disciples’ jealousy. John’s joy comes from knowing Jesus Christ—and from knowing his relationship to Him. John understood that his ministry, his moment in the spotlight, and his declining popularity, were all a part of God’s sovereign plan and purpose. John’s preoccupation was to make Christ preeminent, not to promote himself, his ministry, or his disciples. In this, John found great joy. He saw himself swallowed up in the service of Him who is the greatest. Whether by life or by death, his ministry was to exalt Christ. In this, John the Baptist sounds like the Apostle Paul (Philippians 1) and all the other apostles.

In contrast to John and his joy, we see the jealousy and frustration of his disciples. How can this be explained? What went wrong here? I would begin by saying that this same “sourness” seems to characterize many Christians and their service to the Lord. How quickly and easily we lose sight of Christ’s preeminence, and start to think of our position and our pleasure. Is this not what characterizes the disciples of our Lord? Are they not interested in promoting Christ so that they can prosper with Him? Is this not why they react so strongly to His words about His own rejection, suffering, and death? They are serving God for self-serving reasons.

Too often I hear Christians in ministry talking in terms of success, and this is problematic. But I also hear too much talk about “personal fulfillment.” Is this what motivates our service? A friend sent me an e-mail message this week, which seems to directly relate to our text and its teaching for us:

Bob: I just finished reading over your above outline and commentary. Would have loved to have been in the audience. Just wanted to pass something along that you probably have already read from Enoch Coppin of New Zealand. On Page 5 of his small book on The Any-Moment Coming of Christ, he makes this statement: “The Hope of The Church is the Bridegroom, for the simple reason that the Church is the Bride of Christ. Collectively the Church has one aspect of Hope, and individually the disciples who form the Church have another. So the time is coming when the Appearing will take place, and personally I must say that the greatest desire a Christian could have today would be, not his own satisfaction in being snatched away from the world, as he certainly will be if he is alive at the moment, but that His Master to whom he owes his present and eternal all, Who has been rejected by a world of sinners, who has been Crucified and put to shame on the cruel Cross on Calvary, might be vindicated before the world. It will be so, in the day of the Manifestation, for that is what it will be when He comes in that way, He is going to be Manifested (2 Thes. 2:10) and that is the true Hope of the disciple even in this age.” I thought this was an important point that most believers miss today. Most talk about the coming of Christ and how good it will be to have all the suffering past and forget that God has one purpose, to glorify His Son Jesus Christ. I myself at times really want it to be all over and live in the eternal happiness of the cleansed Kingdom just for my own selfishness.¹⁸³

Is this perhaps the reason why your joy and mine is not that of John the Baptist? Are we serving our Lord selfishly? Jesus calls us to “take up our cross.” Serving God is in our own best interest, but when we begrudge the glorification of Christ because it seems to come at our sacrifice and our expense, then we have become like John’s disciples. If this is the case, we should repent of our sin, asking God to restore to us the joy of our salvation.

12 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that my situation has actually turned out to advance the gospel. 13 The results of this are that the whole imperial guard and everyone else knows that I am in prison for the sake of Christ, 14 and that most of the brothers, having confidence in the Lord because of my imprisonment, now more than ever dare to speak the word without fear. 15 Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from goodwill. 16 The latter do so from love because they know that I am placed here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former proclaim Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, because they think they can cause trouble for me in my imprisonment. 18 What is the result? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed, and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice, 19 for I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayers and the support of the Spirit of Jesus Christ. 20 My confident hope is that I will in no way be ashamed but that with complete boldness, even now as always, Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22 Now if I am to go on living in the body, this will mean productive work for me; yet I don’t know what I prefer: 23 I feel torn between the two, because I have a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far, 24 but it is more vital for your sake that I remain in the body. 25 And since I am sure of this, I know that I will remain and continue with all of you for your progress and joy in the faith, 26 so that your boasting in Christ Jesus may overflow because of me, through my coming back to you (Philippians 1:12-26).

169 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 235-236.

170 John the Baptist is mentioned again (5:33; 10:40-41), but he essentially departs here. In John’s Gospel we are not given an account of his death (see Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:14-29; Luke 9:9), nor of his doubts (see Matthew 11:2-6; Luke 7:18-23).

171 This is the first and only reference to our Lord or His disciples baptizing.

172 “The tense of the last two verbs is continuous and we might give the force of it as ‘they kept coming and being baptized.’” Morris, p. 237.

173 Jesus seems to have settled here for several months. Hendriksen theorizes that our Lord remained on here from May to December of 27 A.D. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 1, p. 146.

174 The exact location of Aenon is not known, nor is the location of where Jesus was baptizing.

175 Morris writes, “We do not read of Jesus as baptizing in any other Gospel than this, and from 4:2 we learn that the actual baptizing was carried out by the disciples, not by Jesus in person. It is difficult to think of this as Christian baptism in the later sense. More probably it represents a continuation of the ‘baptism of repentance’ that was characteristic of John the Baptist.” Morris, p. 237.

176 Some manuscripts have the plural here. It really doesn’t seem to matter whether the dispute was with one Jew or many.

177 If the Apostle John was the second disciple of John the Baptist to follow Jesus, think how he must have felt as he wrote this account, realizing this could have been him, and knowing that he is exposing the self-serving attitude of his former associates.

178 One can hardly dismiss the distinct possibility that John has a double meaning here, based on the fact that Israel is represented as the “bride” of God (Isaiah 62:4-5; Jeremiah 2:2; Hosea 2:19; Ezekiel 16; Malachi 2:11. See also Matthew 22:1ff.; 25:1ff.; Ephesians 5:32; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19; 21:2, 9; 22:17.).

179 I am inclined to say, rather, “He must become more prominent, and I less so.”

180 Note the way John uses the expression “the one who …” He first uses it to contrast Jesus and John. He then employs it to contrast those who believe in Jesus with those who do not.

181 “Some forty times in the Gospel through John, Christ is spoken of as being sent from heaven or going back to heaven.” John G. Mitchell, with Dick Bohrer, An Everlasting Love: A Devotional Study of the Gospel of John (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1982), p. 63.

182 In John 3:12, Jesus claimed the ability to speak both “earthly things” and “heavenly things.” John claims to be able to speak only “earthly things.”

183 This e-mail message came from my friend, Dick Plowman. Dick and his wife Beth were members of our church before they moved to Waco, Texas. Dick and I served together in prison ministry, as he continues to do with Bill Glass Ministries.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

10. The Woman at the Well (John 4:1-42)

Introduction

“This is the transcript of an ACTUAL radio conversation of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. Radio conversation released by the Chief of Naval Operations 10-10-95. (This is an apocryphyal story, but still useful for illustration.)

Americans: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision.

Canadians: Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.

Americans: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.

Canadians: No. I say again, you divert YOUR course.

Americans: THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS LINCOLN, THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES’ ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH, THAT’S ONE FIVE DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER-MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP.

Canadians: This is a lighthouse. Your call.”¹⁸⁴

Who you think you are is important, but who you really are is even more important. Every once in a while we begin to think too highly of ourselves … What am I saying? We always think too highly of ourselves. Every once in a while someone comes along who cuts us down to size. The captain of the USS Lincoln thought he was so important he could demand that a Canadian crew change its course to avoid a collision. When he finally learned that the “Canadian crew” was someone tending a lighthouse, things took their proper perspective. The American vessels changed their course.

This story reminds me a great deal of what is taking place in the Gospels, which is especially evident in the third and fourth chapters of John’s Gospel. Nicodemus is a bit like the captain of the American ship. He is a little too caught up in his position as a Jew, a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and a renowned teacher of the Old Testament law. There is a kind of confrontation in the third chapter of John. Nicodemus is willing to acknowledge that Jesus is “a teacher who has come from God” (3:2); yet he falls a little short of actually saying that Jesus is a prophet. When Jesus tells him that he will not make it into the kingdom of God as he is—without being reborn from above—he seems to try to get Jesus to change His course rather than to change his own. Nicodemus does ask questions, but there seems to be little progress toward genuine faith, at least so far. His questions do not convey a willingness on the part of Nicodemus to change his thinking, but rather a resistance to what Jesus is saying.

The same fundamental issues described in John chapter 3 are present in chapter 4. The “woman at the well” is a Samaritan, and Samaritans have their own distinct religion—a corruption of the Jewish faith.¹⁸⁵ If the woman at the well is to come to a saving faith, she must change her course, just as Jesus required of Nicodemus. Both Nicodemus and the woman at the well must decide what to do with what Jesus has told them. Ultimately, this decision is based upon who they believe Jesus to be. To Nicodemus, Jesus is an “inspiring,” perhaps even an “inspired,” teacher. The woman at the well comes to see Jesus as much more than this, as we soon shall see.

This is a great story, one most Christians believe they know and understand well. Let us revisit the story, as though we are looking at it for the first time. Let us seek to learn what makes the difference between a “Nicodemus” and a “woman at the well.”

Jesus Retreats to Galilee
(4:1-3)

1 Now when Jesus knew that the Pharisees had heard that he was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself was not baptizing but his disciples were), 3 he left Judea and departed once more to Galilee.

We know that John’s disciples were watching our Lord and His disciples. They resented our Lord’s ministry because it was overshadowing theirs (John 3:26). It looked as though Jesus was putting them out of business, and they didn’t like it. The Pharisees were also watching Jesus (Luke 5:17), just as they took careful note of John the Baptist (John 1:19-28), whose popularity they feared (Luke 20:4-6). Intent upon gaining their own following (see Matthew 23:15), the Pharisees were bitterly jealous of our Lord’s success (see John 11:47-48; compare Matthew 27:18).

But it was not yet time for our Lord to take on the Pharisees. That time would come soon enough. To let the situation cool a bit, Jesus left Judea and returned north to Galilee, no doubt relieving the fears of the Pharisees. They must have felt that Jesus could cause them little trouble there. You may remember that even Nathanael felt that no one important could come from Nazareth (John 1:45-46). The Pharisees seem to agree:

50 Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus before and who was one of the rulers, said, 51 “Our law does not condemn a man unless it first hears from him and learns what he is doing, does it?” 52 They replied, “You aren’t from Galilee too, are you? Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet comes from Galilee!” 53 And each one departed to his own house (John 7:50-53, emphasis mine).

It must be with a sigh of relief that the Pharisees receive the report that Jesus has left¹⁸⁶ Judea and returned to Galilee. Their relief will only be temporary.

Samaria, Sychar, and Jacob’s Well
(4:4-6)

4 But he had to¹⁸⁷ pass through Samaria. 5 Now he came to a city of Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of land that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6 Jacob’s well was there, so Jesus, since he was tired from the journey, sat right down beside the well. It was about noon.

As Jesus made His way from Judea to Galilee, he “had to” pass through Samaria. Politically, Samaria was not a distinct region, but its culture and religion were definitely distinct from that of Israel. We would do well to recall the historical relationship between Israel and Samaria.

Under Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, the United Kingdom of Israel split into two fragments (1 Kings 12): the northern kingdom of Israel, led by the rebel Jeroboam, and the southern kingdom of Judah, under Rehoboam. Because Jeroboam feared that the two kingdoms might reunite, he established a counterfeit religion, with its own place of worship—Bethel (1 Kings 12:25-33). Later, a wicked northern king named Omri built the city of Samaria, which he made his capital, the capital of the Northern Kingdom. He also built a temple and an altar to Baal, a heathen deity (1 Kings 16:24-34). Eventually, the name of this city became synonymous for the entire Northern Kingdom, and thus its name, Samaria.

After repeated warnings from God’s prophets, divine judgment finally came at the hand of the Assyrians, who defeated Israel and scattered the middle and upper classes throughout the other nations they had conquered. They replaced the dispersed Israelites with heathen from other lands (2 Kings 17:23ff.). These heathen intermarried with the remaining Israelites resulting in a nation of half-breeds, a most distasteful and evil thing for a devout Jew (see Ezra 9 and 10; Nehemiah 13). Worse yet, the true religion of Israel became intermingled with heathen idolatry.

When the Jews of the Southern Kingdom of Judah were later taken captive by the Babylonians, they were allowed to maintain their racial and religious identity. After their 70 years of captivity were completed and they were granted permission to return to their own land, a number did so. When these returning exiles set out to rebuild the temple and Jerusalem, the Samaritans offered to help them and were summarily refused (Ezra 4:2ff.). In about 400 B.C., the Samaritans constructed their own rival temple on Mount Gerizim. At the end of the second century B.C., this temple was destroyed by John Hyrcanus, the Hasmonean ruler of Judea. This greatly increased hostilities between the Jews and the Samaritans.

The Samaritans professed to believe in the God of Israel and awaited the coming of Messiah (see John 4:25). They accepted only the first five books of the Law, but rejected the rest of the Old Testament Scriptures. Wherever they found it necessary to justify their religion and their place of worship, they modified the Law. The relationship between the Jews and the Samaritans was definitely strained.

Having said this, I am not convinced things were as bad as some seem to think. It is often said that the Jews would not pass through Samaria. Instead, we are told, they would go East, cross the Jordan River, head north or south, bypassing Samaria, and then cross the River Jordan again when they neared their destination. D. A. Carson, citing Josephus, maintains that Jews much more commonly passed through Samaria.¹⁸⁸ It would therefore seem that only a few strict Jews refused to do so.

If John chapter 1 informs us of our Lord’s deity, this chapter speaks also of His humanity: Jesus was tired. It was just about high noon,¹⁸⁹ so that our Lord’s fatigue may have been partly related to the heat of the day. Weary from their journey, Jesus and His disciples come to a parcel of land that Jacob had given to his son Joseph (Genesis 48:22?). On this land, a mile or so from the city of Sychar,¹⁹⁰ was Jacob’s well.¹⁹¹ It was a deep well—a hundred feet deep or so—fed by a spring. Other water was available in the area, closer to town, but this well may have provided the best water. It was at this well that Jesus sat down to rest.

Why the emphasis on Jacob, and on this well which once belonged to him? It seems as though this woman (and perhaps the Samaritans more generally) took pride in claiming Jacob as their forefather. This is especially strange in the light of the way this patriarch is portrayed in the Book of Genesis. I don’t remember any self-respecting Jew boasting about being a descendant of Jacob, but only of being Abraham’s offspring (see Matthew 3:9). John sets the scene so that this woman will ask if Jesus is greater than Jacob, and the answer will be, “Yes” (see also John 6:30-36; 8:53).

Just as in the Book of Genesis,¹⁹² the “well” in John 4 seems to be significant. One cannot help but be reminded of Abraham’s servant, who asks Rebekah for a drink of water at a well in Paddan-aram (Genesis 24:11f.). There, the character qualities of Rebekah were revealed at the well. In the case of our Lord, this woman’s presence at the well at this time of day may be further evidence of this woman’s lack of character, or at least her lack of popularity among the women of Sychar.

“Give Me a Drink”
(4:7-9)

7 A Samaritan woman came to draw water. Jesus said to her, “Give me some water to drink.” 8 (For his disciples had gone off into the city to buy provisions.) 9 So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you—a Jew—ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans.)

Three things about this woman seem to put her at a distinct disadvantage. First, she is a Samaritan. Second, she is guilty of sexual immorality, and third, she is a woman. We have already commented about the way the Jews felt toward the Samaritans. We are not left in doubt as to how the Pharisees would have dealt with such a woman:

36 Now one of the Pharisees asked Jesus to have dinner with him, so he went into the Pharisee’s house and took his place at the table. 37 Then when a woman of that town, who was a sinner, learned that Jesus was dining at the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster flask of perfumed oil. 38 As she stood behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. She wiped them with the hair of her head, kissed them, and anointed them with the perfumed oil. 39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner” (Luke 7:36-39).¹⁹³

Neither should we be surprised that our Lord would deal with this woman in a very different manner, as seen by Luke’s conclusion to this story in his Gospel:

40 So Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” He replied, “Say it, Teacher.” 41 “A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed him five hundred silver coins, and the other fifty. 42 When they could not pay, he canceled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?” 43 Simon answered, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt canceled.” Jesus said to him, “You have judged rightly.” 44 Then, turning toward the woman, he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house, you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I entered she has not stopped kissing my feet. 46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with perfumed oil. 47 Therefore I tell you, her sins (which were many) are forgiven, thus she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.” 48 Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” 49 But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, “Who is this, who even forgives sins?” 50 He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:40-50).

The Pharisees had a very simple system for being holy—they simply kept their (physical) distance from sinners. They thought sin was contagious, and that one could catch it by merely being close to sinners. This is one reason they are so distressed when they see our Lord having such close contact with “sinners”:

27 After this Jesus went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax booth; and he said to him, “Follow me.” 28 So Levi got up and followed him, leaving everything behind. 29 Then Levi gave a great banquet for Jesus in his house; and there was a large crowd of tax collectors and others sitting at the table with them. 30 But the Pharisees and their experts in the law complained to his disciples, saying, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” 31 Jesus answered them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:27-32).

I must admit that I have come to view the “woman at the well” differently than I once did. I have also come to feel compassion toward her, as our Lord did. Here in chapter 4 and again in chapter 8 (the woman caught committing adultery), we see that the Jews were inclined to look down upon these two women as “loose women,” which indeed they were. On the other hand, they were certainly no more guilty than the men with whom they committed sexual immorality. In John chapter 8 only the woman is accused before our Lord. The couple was caught in the very act of adultery (8:4), and yet only the woman was apprehended and brought to Jesus. Why was the man not brought before our Lord as well? There was obviously a double standard—one for men, and another for women.

The “woman at the well” is a woman whose sins are apparent, but she has not sinned alone. In those days, husbands divorced their wives, but wives did not divorce their husbands. If this woman was married and divorced five times, then five men divorced her.¹⁹⁴ This woman was “put away” five times. Think of how she must feel about herself. And the man she is now living with is not her husband. She isn’t even married this time, but just living with (or sleeping with) a man, perhaps another woman’s husband. This woman has been passed around by some of the male population of Sychar. Jesus’ words not only call the woman’s attention to her sins; they call our attention to the sins of the men of that city.

The third thing which puts the “woman at the well” at a disadvantage is the fact that she is a woman. John does not tell us the disciples are shocked to find Jesus talking to this Samaritan woman because she is a Samaritan, or because she is sinful (they don’t know this). They are surprised to see Him talking with her because she is a woman. There may be a race issue here, but there is also a gender issue. The Jews were inclined to hold a very demeaning view of women.¹⁹⁵ The disciples seem to embrace this view.¹⁹⁶ They cannot fathom why Jesus would be “wasting His time” talking to a woman.

With this background in mind, let us consider the process by which the woman at the well is brought to faith in Jesus as the Messiah. You will see by the way the text is formatted at the beginning of this lesson that I have highlighted the interchange between Jesus and this woman. A similar interchange occurs between Jesus and Nicodemus in chapter 3. There is a significant difference, however. The more Jesus tells Nicodemus about Himself and His teaching, the more uneasy Nicodemus becomes. His questions and comments become shorter and shorter, until he simply disappears from the text.

The conversation with the Samaritan woman is quite different. Each interchange brings her closer to faith. The conversation moves from literal drinking water to the spiritual “water” of salvation. Her grasp of who Jesus is continues to grow, until she eventually trusts in Him as the Messiah. While Nicodemus comes to faith very slowly and somewhat reluctantly, the woman at the well seems to much more quickly grasp the issues and trust in Jesus as the Messiah. While Nicodemus, an influential leader among the Jews, brings no one to Christ, the woman at the well brings the whole town out to hear Jesus, and eventually to trust in Him. Let us consider the conversion of this Samaritan woman in terms of the process by which she is drawn to faith.

Step One:
Getting the Woman’s Attention
(4:7-9)

7 A Samaritan woman came to draw water. Jesus said to her, “Give me some water to drink.” 8 (For his disciples had gone off into the town to buy supplies.)

9 So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you—a Jew—ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans.)

In contemporary terms, our Lord already has two strikes against Him so far as being able to share the truth of salvation with the woman at the well. He is a Jew; she is a Samaritan. He is a man; she is a woman. There seems to be no common ground, no reason to talk, and nothing to agree upon. In spite of this, our Lord succeeds in getting this woman’s attention, not by telling her something she needs to know (at first), but by asking her for a drink of water. She has something He needs—water. In asking her for a drink of water, Jesus catches this woman completely off guard. Jews did not share eating or drinking utensils with Samaritans. The woman cannot help but inquire of Jesus why He would ask the unthinkable. Our Lord’s willingness to cast aside cultural barriers gets this woman’s attention.

She must know why. Thus we see the question and the parenthetical remark: “How can you—a Jew—ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common with¹⁹⁷ Samaritans.) Why does Jesus do so? Why does He ask her for water to drink? Notice that in the verses that follow, Jesus does not answer this question. It is the gospel which changes all this:

26 For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:26-29).

Step Two:
Jesus Whets the Woman’s Appetite
(4:10-14)

10 Jesus answered her, “If you had known the gift of God and who it is who said to you ‘Give me some water to drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.”

11 “Sir,” the woman said to him, “you have no bucket and the well is deep; where then do you get this living water? 12 Surely you’re not greater than our father Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.”

13 Jesus replied, “Everyone who drinks some of this water will be thirsty again. 14 But whoever drinks some of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again, but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up to eternal life.”

Our Lord’s answer is far from what this woman expects to hear. Jesus does not explain how He can ask to drink water from her cup. Instead, He immediately seeks to show her that she is the one in need of “water,” and that the “water” He gives is vastly superior to the water she can give.

Notice the elements of this revelation. First, our Lord moves from literal water (a drink of water) to a “spiritual” water—the salvation which our Lord offers this woman. Second, Jesus indicates to this woman that there is something of which she is ignorant. She knows neither the “gift of God” nor the identity of the One speaking to her. If she knew these things, Jesus tells her, she would be asking Him for a drink, and He would have given her “living water” to drink. The woman does not understand what Jesus is saying, but she does understand that He is claiming to be someone important, and to have something she would want if she knew who He was and what He could give her.

As Nicodemus did earlier, the woman takes Jesus literally. She thinks Jesus is telling her that He can give her better water than that which this well provides. By “living water,” she understands Jesus to be speaking of spring water. If Jesus has “better water” than she can draw from Jacob’s well, how is He going to get it? This well is deep, and Jesus has no vessel with which to draw water. How, then, can He claim to have better water to give her?

If His water is truly better water than that which can be drawn from this well, then Jesus must at least think He is better than Jacob, who dug the well, used it to bountifully provide for men and flocks alike, and then gave it to his descendants, among whom this woman considers herself. Does Jesus dare claim to be better than Jacob?

Jesus does not answer the question about being greater than Jacob quite yet. He momentarily sets aside this question and answers it indirectly by showing that His “water” is better “water” than that provided by Jacob’s well. Jacob’s well “water” temporarily quenches thirst, but only for a time, and then more water is required. This woman recognizes the “inferiority” of this “water” because day after day she must return to the well for more. The “water” of which our Lord speaks is vastly better. This “water” permanently quenches one’s thirst. The one who drinks His “water” will never thirst again—and this “living water” produces eternal life.

Step Three:
The Woman Wants This Water
(4:15-18)

15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw water.”

16 He said to her, “Go call your husband and come back here.”

17 The woman replied, “I have no husband.”

Jesus said to her, “Right you are when you said, ‘I have no husband,’ 18 for you have had five husbands and the man you have now is not your husband. This you said truthfully!”

If there is one thing this Samaritan is willing to admit she needs, it is water. That is why she comes out to Jacob’s well. Jesus asks her for some of this water, and then proceeds to inform her that He has better water—living water—water that produces eternal life, water that permanently quenches thirst. The woman is ready for this kind of water. And so she tells Jesus she would like some of His “water.” She obviously doesn’t really understand what this “water” is, but she is ready to accept some of it. She would gladly make this her last trip to Jacob’s well in the heat of the day.

I want to pause for a moment right here. Let’s be honest. Doesn’t this woman sound gullible? Do we wonder if she would also be interested in the Brooklyn Bridge for $25? Would she foolishly believe anything anyone told her? I think not. Jesus Himself claims to be “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). Should the woman not believe Jesus? Everything He says is true, is it not? If He who is the truth told you He had “living water” to give that permanently quenched your thirst and that produced eternal life, should you not believe Him? This woman is not foolish; she has faith in Jesus, faith to believe His word. Let me simply remind you that all those who take Jesus at His word will be considered foolish by those who are unsaved and blind to the truth.

Jesus is now ready to move this woman along in her understanding of what this “living water” is. He is not speaking of actual water, but symbolically of the salvation which He brings. And so he turns this woman to a deeper level of need. She has already indicated her “need” for “water” that permanently quenches thirst. Now, Jesus shows her that she has need of “water” that will cleanse her of sin. And so Jesus instructs this woman to go and get her husband, and bring him back to the well.

Jesus has now moved to the deepest level of this woman’s need, her need for cleansing from sin. To do this, He gently exposes sin in her life. He does so by telling her to bring her husband. She makes a choice—not an unusual choice, but a very predictable one. She chooses to conceal her sin by giving Jesus an answer that is factually truthful, but functionally dishonest. She tells Jesus she has no husband.

Any other man (apart from divine revelation) would have accepted her answer at face value and withdrawn the request. Jesus reveals His omniscience by informing the woman that she is (technically) correct—she does not have a husband. She has had five husbands, and the man she is now with is not her husband. At a minimum, they are not married; at the worst, she is actually sleeping with some other woman’s husband. Either way, Jesus has told this woman enough for her to (correctly) conclude that He has divine knowledge. He is, at a minimum, a prophet. She reasons from what He has told her that He could go on to tell her virtually everything she has ever done. Her sexual sins may be only the “tip of the iceberg,” but she is convinced He knows the whole iceberg. And she is right!

Step Four:
A Spiritual Solution for Sin
(4:19-24)

19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I see that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you people say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.”

21 Jesus said to her, Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You people worship what you do not know. We worship what we know, because salvation is from the Jews. 23 But a time is coming—and now is here—when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers. 24 God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Now all the cards are on the table. The cat is out of the proverbial bag. Her sin—worthy of death—is out in the open. Now her true “thirst,” her real need, is self-evident. Some think the woman’s response is evasive, an attempt to get the conversation away from the subject of her sin. I disagree. I think this woman is eager to hear what Jesus has to say, and more eager than ever to have some of this “living water.” She perceives that Jesus is a prophet, and tells Him so. Is this not progress? Isn’t this more than Nicodemus was willing to grant? Nicodemus seems to “clam up” when Jesus gets too close to his sin, but this woman seems to “open up,” to want to know more. And so she asks Jesus (a prophet, in her mind) to give her the authoritative word on who is right, the Jews or the Samaritans. Her question does not look like a rabbit trail to me; rather it seems an honest effort to get to the heart of the difference between the “faith” of the Samaritans and the “faith” of the Jews.

One crucial difference between Samaritans and Jews was that the Samaritans’ believed they must worship God on Mount Gerizim, while the Jews insisted God must be worshipped in Jerusalem. If Jesus were “a prophet,” then He could settle the dispute, at least for this woman. Once again, our Lord’s answer is not what she might have expected. We would think that Jesus should say to her, “The Jews are right and the Samaritans are wrong; men must worship God in Jerusalem.” He does not say this, although this was true in the past.

Jesus takes up a point that John introduces in chapter 1, in the conversation between Jesus and Nathanael:

47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael asked him, “How do you know me?” Jesus replied, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus said to him, “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 He continued, “I tell all of you the solemn truth: you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:47-51, emphasis mine).

Let me remind you of the relationship between the words of verse 51 and Jacob’s vision in Genesis 28.¹⁹⁸ Jacob dreamed of a ladder, which reached into heaven. Angels were ascending and descending upon it. He came to realize that it was there, in the promised land of Canaan, that God met with men. This is why Jacob exclaimed, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I did not know it.” And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven!” (Genesis 28:16-17, NKJV).

In the first chapter of John, Jesus indicated to Nathanael that with His coming, things would change. Men and God will no longer meet in a certain designated place, but in a certain designated Person—the promised Messiah. He is now the mediator between heaven and earth. This being the case, it was pointless to continue the debate over which place was the place where men could worship God. He was the Person through whom men must worship God.

Jesus does not yet tell the woman that He is the only means to God. At this point, He simply tells her that it is not profitable to continue the debate over the proper place of worship. There is, however, a serious error with the Samaritan religion: They have sought to worship God their own way, independent of Judaism. In this, they are wrong—dead wrong. Seeking salvation apart from the Jews is wrong. Salvation is “of the Jews.” If Samaritans wish to be saved, they must forsake their system of religion and turn to a salvation that is “of the Jews.” It is “of the Jews” in that the Messiah is a Jew. It is “of the Jews” in that it is the fulfillment of God’s promises to the Jews, through His Word given to the Jews. Just as Nicodemus could not see the kingdom of God through adherence to the traditions of the Pharisees, so this woman cannot see the kingdom by following the religion of the Samaritans.

The worship God finds acceptable is not Samaritan worship, nor is it Pharisaical worship (see Luke 18:9-14). Men can only worship God when they do so “in spirit and truth” (verses 23 and 24). Bible students understand these words in a number of ways. I am inclined to understand our Lord in this way: Because God is Spirit, men must worship God “in spirit”; that is, they must worship God spiritually. Thus, the place is not so essential as the “spirit” in which worship is conducted. I am further inclined to think that Jesus uses the word “spirit” with a double-meaning, as He so often does (for example, with “water”). Thus, our Lord is saying that men can only worship through the ministry of the Holy Spirit, who facilitates spiritual worship. Finally, I understand “truth” to refer to truth both generally (according to what is true), and more specifically (the truth of God’s Word, and of our Lord’s words). Men cannot worship God any way they choose (as the Samaritans did by limiting the Old Testament to the five books of the law); men can only worship God in accordance with what He has divinely revealed in His Word. This is the kind of worshipper God seeks.

Step Five:
Trusting Christ as the Answer
(4:25-26)

25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah¹⁹⁹ is coming (the one called Christ). Whenever he comes, he will tell us everything.”

26 Jesus said to her, “I, the one speaking to you, am he.”

The woman is neither ignorant of the Samaritan faith nor of the Jewish faith. She makes the connection between our Lord’s words about worshipping “in spirit and truth” and the promised Messiah. She realizes that somehow when the Messiah comes, He will clear up these matters; He will reveal the truth about how men must worship God.

Would you not love to have witnessed this conversation, especially the words spoken in these two verses? The woman tells Jesus that she is waiting for Messiah, who will reveal the truth about true worship. Jesus says to her, “I am the Messiah.”²⁰⁰ I am reminded of Mary, weeping outside the empty tomb of our Lord. Her eyes are so filled with tears and her hopes so dashed that she pays little attention to the One who is speaking with her. But with that one word, “Mary,” comes the full realization of who is speaking, and what His being there means.

I would not assume that this woman is saved at this moment in time, but she is certainly “not far from the kingdom of God.” I do believe that by the end of our Lord’s stay with these Samaritans, not only this woman, but most of the people of Sychar, believe in His name for salvation. At this point, I simply wish to emphasize that our Lord brings this woman to the point where she understands that she is a sinner, in need of salvation, where she understands that her (Samaritan) religious system cannot save her, and that salvation comes only through faith in Jesus as the promised (Jewish) Messiah. This leads us to the next and final step.

Step Six: Sharing the Good News
(4:28-30)

27 Now at that very moment his disciples came back. They were shocked because he was speaking with a woman; however, no one said, “What do you seek?” or “Why are you speaking with her?” 28 Then the woman left²⁰¹ her water jar, went off into the city and said to the people,²⁰² 29 “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Surely he can’t be the Messiah, can he?” 30 So they went out from the city and began coming to him.

I am going to pass by verse 27 and pick it up when we see our Lord dealing with His disciples. For the moment, we will consider verses 28-30. These verses depict the final step in the process of salvation—the sharing of one’s newly-found faith with others.²⁰³ The woman’s original purpose was to draw water from the well, but now she forsakes her waterpot and hurries back to Sychar, where she tells the others about Jesus. She sees beyond our Lord’s revelation of the truth about her marriages and sexual morality, telling them that a man “told her everything she ever did.” The woman speaks of Jesus as a possible Messiah. The way she phrases her question does not indicate her certainty on this point, but she at least regards Jesus as a possible Messiah. The effect may have aroused curiosity among those who heard her question. The whole city begins to make its way out to the well, along with the woman.

Dealing With the Disciples
(4:27, 31-38)

27 Now at that very moment his disciples came back. They were shocked because he was speaking with a woman; however, no one said, “What do you seek?” or “Why are you speaking with her?” … 31 Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, “Rabbi, eat something.” 32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat that you know nothing about.” 33 So the disciples began to say to one another, “No one brought him anything to eat, did they?”

34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who sent me and to complete his work. 35 Don’t you say, ‘There are four more months and then comes the harvest?’ I tell you, look up and see that the fields are already white for harvest! 36 The one who reaps receives pay and gathers fruit for eternal life, so that the one who sows and the one who reaps can rejoice together. 37 For in this instance the saying is true, ‘One sows and another reaps.’ 38 I sent you to reap what you did not labor for; others have labored and you have entered into their labor.”

Let me attempt to paint this picture as I see it. Jesus and His disciples stop at the well. Jesus is tired and remains there while His disciples go into town to buy food. After they leave, the Samaritan woman arrives, and a conversation begins which John records for us. The conversation ends just as the disciples return from Sychar. The woman leaves her waterpot behind and rushes back to town. The disciples then urge Jesus to eat what they have just brought from town. In the background, just over the shoulders of the disciples, the people of Sychar are approaching en masse, to see and hear the One of whom the woman has testified.

The disciples arrive from Sychar just in time to observe the conversation between Jesus and the Samaritan woman end. They are astounded that Jesus has been talking with her. This is not because she is a Samaritan, nor because she is a sinner (they don’t know about her moral life, as Jesus does), but simply because she is a woman. This is not so much a case of racial bias as a manifestation of gender bias on the part of the disciples. They cannot think of a good reason why Jesus would be talking to a woman. Morris helps us understand why, from the Jewish point of view:

Perhaps the greatest blot on the Rabbinic attitude to women was that, though the Rabbis held the study of the Law to be the greatest good in life, they discouraged women from studying it at all. When Ben Azzai suggested that women be taught the Law for certain purposes R. Eliezer replied: ‘If any man gives his daughter a knowledge of the Law it is as though he taught her lechery’ (Sot. 3:4).²⁰⁴

In spite of their amazement that Jesus would talk to a woman, the Lord’s disciples do not bring it up. Perhaps they have put their foot in their mouth one too many times lately, so that none wishes to be embarrassed by being the one to ask another stupid question. They are at least beginning to learn that what our Lord does is always right, even if Judaism calls it wrong.²⁰⁵ Perhaps the disciples simply set their question aside because of a more important matter—lunch. It sounds silly, doesn’t it? But is it not the case? Are the disciples not preoccupied with getting our Lord to eat? Why would this be?

Several reasons come to mind, none of which are particularly pious. The best reading one could give the disciples’ words would be something like: “Jesus, You’re tired, and You need to regain Your strength. Please eat because You need the nourishment if we are to continue our journey.” There may be some of that here. It may also be that the disciples have been waiting to eat until Jesus can eat with them. They may wish that He would eat so they can eat also. (Or, perhaps Peter has already wolfed down half a sandwich, and with his mouth full, urges Jesus to do likewise: “Com’ on, Jesus, eat up.”) Finally, the disciples may be preoccupied with lunch because this is what they have worked so hard to provide, walking all the way into town and back. They went to town to purchase food. Having gone to all this effort to obtain lunch for our Lord, the least He can do is to take time to eat it. The disciples might have been a collective, male version of Martha (see Luke 10:38-42).

Once again, our Lord’s response to His disciples’ prodding is not what we expect. Instead of speaking of literal food, He talks of spiritual “food.” Our Lord’s response to His disciples sets down some very important principles, principles which not only governed His life and ministry, but which should guide His disciples as well—and we are to be included among such “disciples.”

(1) Our Lord’s most essential “food” is doing the Father’s will by completing His work (verse 34). Why does Jesus refer to His “work” as His “food”? I wonder if the answer is not suggested in the temptation of our Lord:

1 Then Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan River and was led by the Spirit in the desert, 2 where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days; and when they were completed, he was hungry. 3 The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread.” 4 Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man does not live by bread alone’” (Luke 4:1-4).

Jesus is hungry because He has been fasting for 40 days. Satan seeks to persuade Him to command a stone to become bread. Of course, Jesus has the power to do so. But Jesus refuses, citing from Deuteronomy 8:

1 “Every commandment which I command you today you must be careful to observe, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers. 2 And you shall remember that the LORD your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. 3 So He humbled you, allowed you to hunger, and fed you with manna which you did not know nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD” (Deuteronomy 8:1-3, NKJV).

God allowed the Israelites to experience hunger as a test, to show what was in their hearts. Even Satan believes that men will worship God if He blesses them with everything they want (see Job 1:6-12). The real test of men’s faith and obedience to God comes in the midst of adversity and affliction. Thus, God allowed the Israelites to experience hunger and thirst so that the condition of their hearts would be made evident, either by their obedience or by their rebellion.

Our Lord undergoes a similar testing in the wilderness, which involves His fasting for 40 days. Satan seeks to tempt our Lord to “create” bread to satisfy His hunger. Jesus refuses, pointing to this text in Deuteronomy, which parallels His circumstances. “Man does not live by bread alone,” Jesus reminds Satan, “but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the Lord.” It is not just physical bread that sustains our Lord (or anyone else); it is God’s Word, and specifically obedience to it.²⁰⁶

When Jesus is pressed by His disciples to eat, He refuses to do so, telling them that He has other “food” to eat, of which they are unaware. In so doing, He is expressing the same truth He spoke to Satan, which God, through Moses, spoke to the Israelites. It is not just eating physical food that sustains us; it is doing the will of God. If eating interferes with doing the will of God, eating must be set aside, not obedience to God. Fulfilling God’s will—providing and proclaiming salvation (even to the Gentiles!)—was our Lord’s primary purpose and calling. He would not allow a meal to keep Him from it. There is work to be done at this very moment—the people of the city are almost there. This is no time for lunch.

Is this not the truth that underlies the practice of fasting? I know some may make more of fasting than they should. Fasting is not magic; it does not manipulate God to do our will. It is our submission to His will, as evidenced by the fact that our time is better spent in prayer or in some specific ministry than in eating a meal. Is this not also evident on less frequent occasions, when a husband and wife voluntarily agree to abstain from sexual relations, so that they can devote themselves to prayer (see 1 Corinthians 7:5)?

I must confess that very few things keep me from a meal. Jesus subordinated eating to doing the will of God. Usually, we should eat, so that we have the strength to do His will (see 1 Samuel 14:24-30). But there are times when we must let nothing keep us from full devotion to our duty. Doing God’s will is more important than downing a meal. I wonder what we are willing to do without so that the gospel can be shared with those who are lost and destined for an eternity in hell?

(2) Our Lord’s mission was all the more urgent because His time on earth was short (verses 35ff.). Does Jesus not have the time to sit down and eat a sandwich? Jesus has a sensitivity to the proper time for things to be done (see John 2:4; 7:6)—His time really is limited. And because He has so little time, He will not take the time which eating a meal requires.

Surely the application to saints today is obvious. Do we realize how short the time may be? Do we have a sense of urgency about our mission? It is the wicked servant who feels there is much time, and therefore no need for urgency (Luke 12:35-48). The Word of God consistently challenges us to redeem the time, for our time is short.

15 Therefore, be very careful how you live, not as unwise, but as wise, 16 taking advantage of every opportunity, because the days are evil. 17 For this reason do not be foolish, but be wise by understanding what the will of the Lord is (Ephesians 5:15-17).

29 And I say this, brothers and sisters: the time is short. So then those who have wives should be as those who have none, 30 those with tears like those not weeping, those who rejoice like those not rejoicing, those who buy like those without possessions, 31 those who use the world as though they were not using it to the full. For the present shape of this world is passing away (1 Corinthians 7:29-31).

Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunities (Colossians 4:5).

You do not know about tomorrow. What is your life like? For you are a puff of smoke that appears for a short time and then vanishes (James 4:14).

Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy aloud, and blessed are those who hear and obey the things written in it, because the time is near (Revelation 1:3).

The time for the harvest is now— not later. It seems that the statement, “There are four more months and then comes the harvest” is a way of saying that harvest time is still a ways off. That may be true for the grain harvest, but it is not true for the harvest of souls about to take place right there, within moments. There is no time to lose, no time to waste. Harvest time has come.

(3) Our Lord fulfilled His mission, but He has given us the task of proclaiming the gospel to a lost world before He returns. The time is short, and a team of workers is required to complete the task (verses 36-38). It would seem that a different group of individuals had sown the fields than those who were to reap the harvest. I believe this is still true today. Where wheat is grown in the United States today, the farmers may plant their own crops, but the time to harvest is so short that a caravan of professional harvesters is often employed. Trucks and combines are brought in, and the fields are harvested within hours. If there is undue delay in the harvest, much of the grain is lost.

The disciples have no idea that a great “harvest” is about to take place, and that they are the harvesters. They have been so preoccupied with lunch, while others have been at work sowing the gospel. In the past, the prophets had sown the seed through their words and the Scriptures. Men like John the Baptist²⁰⁷ had also sown the seed of the gospel. And this very day the Samaritan woman has gone into the town, bearing testimony that Jesus is at the well, and that He has “told her all she had done.” She did the sowing; now it is time for Jesus and His disciples to reap. No wonder there is no time for lunch. The “fields are already white for harvest.”²⁰⁸

In our country, individual effort is highly prized and rewarded. Competition seems more appropriate than cooperation. Jesus tells His disciples that they are about to reap a harvest, but He also reminds them that they are reaping where others have sown. It is not their work alone. They are completing what others have begun. Evangelism in not a one man-show, but a team effort.

Salvation Comes to Samaria
(4:39-42)

39 Now many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the report of the woman who testified, “He told me everything I ever did.” 40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they started asking him to stay with them. He stayed there two days, 41 and because of his word many more believed. 42 They said to the woman, “No longer do we believe because of your words, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this one really is the Savior of the world.”

What a contrast chapter 4 is to chapter 3. In chapter 3, Jesus speaks with Nicodemus, who is the most prominent teacher and leader of his day. This man recognizes something special in Jesus and confesses that God is somehow with Jesus; yet he resists everything our Lord tells him. There is no evidence that Nicodemus comes to faith during this first meeting with our Lord. This great “leader” finds it difficult to “follow” Jesus, and he leads no one to Him. The woman at the well seems much more perceptive and receptive to what Jesus has to say. She is well on her way to faith as a result of her first conversation with Him. More than this, she brings many others to Him as well. Who would have ever imagined how little Nicodemus would do for the kingdom of God, and how much God would use this Samaritan woman?

Look at the kind of faith these Samaritans possess, as reflected by their words. At first they took the word of the Samaritan woman, but having heard Jesus for themselves, they no longer relied on her testimony, but on what they heard Jesus say. We are told of no miracles (other than Jesus letting this woman know that He knew all about her life of sin), of no signs being performed by our Lord in Samaria (though of course there could have been miracles that John chose not to record). These Samaritans have a vastly superior faith than mere “sign faith.” Their faith is “Word faith,” faith in Jesus Christ, based upon His own words. They came to trust in Jesus as the Messiah, as the “Savior of the world.”

Conclusion

This is a great text, is it not? There are many lessons to be learned from this text, but I shall conclude by pointing out only a few. Is this whole chapter not a prototype, a foretaste of things to come? Was it not due to the hardness of heart and unbelief of the Jews that the gospel came to the Gentiles? What an amazing example of the grace of God, manifested toward sinners, and what an encouragement! Once again we see that those who reject the gospel are those who think themselves “too good for it.” But this woman, along with many from her home town, acknowledge their sin and find salvation in Jesus Christ. No one is ever too sinful to be saved, but many are those who are too “righteous” (self-righteous) to be saved. John chapter 4 prepares us for the great harvest of Gentile sinners, who are soon to be saved as a result of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the rejection of Him as Messiah by the Jews.

What an amazing thing that our Lord found it necessary to pass through Samaria. Why was this? Well, of course it was because God had purposed to save these Samaritans from their sins. But there is yet another reason, a very simple one: These Samaritans would not come to Jesus, but Jesus did come to them. I think there is sometimes the presumption that the unbelievers should come to us, but it is a presumption on our part, and a bad one. “Go” is an important word in the great commission, and Jesus has set the example for us.²⁰⁹ If the church is saying, “Come” to unbelievers, let us remember that our Lord says, “Go” to the church. The first thing the Samaritan woman does is to “go” to those who are lost in her home town.

Our text challenges me to question just how committed I am to obeying our Lord. The “work” to which our Lord was committed was the “Father’s work,” the work of salvation. He was so committed to completing His work that He refused to eat a meal when it interfered with this work. Am I as committed to the salvation of men as God is? Am I willing to forego a meal, a restful evening, a bigger house, a more affluent lifestyle, so that God’s work might be advanced? This text exposes my own self-centeredness, my own reluctance to subordinate my self-interests to God’s interests.

I am also challenged to reevaluate what inspires and motivates me. My appetites provide me with strong motivation to eat and to satisfy myself. God’s purposes and work motivated our Lord. Food gives us strength and sustenance. If our Lord’s “food” was to complete the work His Father had given Him, then His strength and motivation for service came from this work. I hear a lot these days about “burnout,” and I’ve always been troubled because I don’t find this term in the Bible. Now, I’m beginning to wonder if the concept is biblical. Are Christians “burning out” because they have been working too hard at doing the Father’s will? It seems to me that if the Father’s work is that which strengthens and empowers us, then we can hardly “burn out” by making His work our work. This whole matter needs to be given more careful thought in the light of our text.

If the salvation of the lost is so important, then it is clear that nothing should keep us from it—even something as “good” as “lunch.” Is this not what Jesus told His disciples? And if something essentially good and necessary may need to be set aside to complete God’s work, then surely those things which are not good must to be set aside too:

1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, we must get rid of every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and run with endurance the race set out for us, 2 keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith. For the joy set out for him he endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:1-2).

What are some of the hindrances we ought to set aside so that we can more effectively carry out the Father’s will in the salvation of men? We have already seen that we must set aside “self-interest.” In our text, we see that we must also set aside our prejudices in regard to race, culture, and gender (to mention a few). We must set aside all self-righteousness, realizing that Christ came to save sinners, among whom we are chief (see 1 Timothy 1:12-16).

We must set aside our false views of piety. We are not more holy for separating ourselves from any contact with sinners. We are holy when we put off those practices that once characterized us as sinners. Keeping our distance from sinners as the Pharisees did was ineffective in making them more pious, and it kept them from sharing the light of the gospel with those who needed it.

We must also set aside erroneous ideas as to whom God can use to save others. Why do so many Christians today (of those who do attempt to evangelize) seem to fix their attention and focus their efforts on the “Nicodemuses” of our time? Why do we go after those whom we suppose to have position and power, thinking they will bring more to Christ? Does the contrast between Nicodemus in chapter 3 and the woman at the well in chapter 4 not teach us something? Is this not exactly what the Apostle Paul taught?

18 For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will thwart the cleverness of the intelligent.” 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the expert in the Mosaic Law? Where is the debater of this age? Has God not made the wisdom of the world foolish? 21 For since in the wisdom of God, the world by its wisdom did not know God, God was pleased to save those who believe by the foolishness of preaching. 22 For Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks ask for wisdom, 23 but we preach about a crucified Christ, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles. 24 But to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. 26 Think about the circumstances of your call, brothers and sisters. Not many were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were members of the upper class. 27 But God chose what the world thinks foolish to shame the wise, and God chose what the world thinks weak to shame the strong. 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, what is regarded as nothing, to set aside what is regarded as something, 29 so that no one can boast in his presence. 30 He is the reason you have a relationship with Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

Finally, our text is instructive as to how we should evangelize the lost. I have already pointed out that we must see the importance of this ministry—it is God’s passion, and it should be ours as well. It is so important we should be willing to miss a meal (or more) to do it. We need to set aside our prejudices and rearrange our priorities. We need to go where the lost can be found. And, we need to start by talking to people where they are, in terms of things they understand, and that they know they need. We should move from these matters to the deeper issues of sin and of salvation. We need to earn the right to do this, and it will very likely take much more time that it took our Lord. But it is what God wants us to do, indeed what He commands us to do. It is what He did to seek and to save us. It is what we need to do as well.

184 I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this report, as it was handed to me by a friend. It was probably circulated on the Internet. I have given the report as I received it.

185 Just to be clear, I consider the Pharisaism of Nicodemus to be a corruption of true Judaism also.

186 Morris observes, “John’s word for ‘left’ is unusual in the sense of leaving a place. It often has the meaning ‘abandon’ (as in v. 28 of the woman’s waterpot), and there may be something of this meaning here.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 253. Morris then cites Morgan: “‘We should not misinterpret the thought if we said He abandoned Judaea. He did go back, but very seldom. He had been to Judaea. He had gone to the Temple. He had exercised His ministry in the surrounding country with marvellous success; but hostility was stirring there, and He left Judaea; He broke with it.’” Morris, p. 253, fn. 10.

187 “Although some take the impersonal verb dei' (dei, ‘had to’) here to indicate logical necessity only, normally in John’s Gospel its use involves God’s will or plan (3:7, 14, 30; 4:4, 20, 24; 9:4; 10:16; 12:34; 20:9).” NET Bible study note on verse 4.

188 “Popular commentators have sometimes insisted that the longer route through the Transjordan was the customary route for Jewish travelers, so great was their aversion to Samaritans; this in turn suggests that the ‘had to’ language (edei) reflects the compulsion of divine appointment, not geography. Josephus, however, provides ample assurance not only that the antipathy between Jews and Samaritans was strong, but also that Jews passing from Judea to Galilee or back nevertheless preferred the shorter route through Samaria (Ant. Xx.118; Bel. Ii. 232; Vita 269).” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 216. Morris adds, “Josephus uses exactly the expression rendered ‘must needs’ when he says, ‘for rapid travel, it was essential to take that route (i.e. through Samaria).’” Morris, p. 255. He further adds, “Josephus says that it was the custom of the Galileans to pass through Samaria when they went up to Jerusalem for the feasts (Ant. xx, 118).” Morris, p. 255, fn. 16.

189 There is some discussion about the time here, since there were two ways of reckoning time in that day: the Roman method (by which reckoning it would have been evening), and the Jewish method, which puts the woman’s arrival at noon. Overall, it seems best to assume that the woman reached the well at noon, when others may not have been so likely to come. This also serves to contrast the woman’s arrival with that of Nicodemus, who came to Jesus at night.

190 The exact location of “Sychar” is not known. Morris writes, “Sychar is perhaps to be identified with the village called Askar, near Shechem. There is a reference to Jacob’s buying of a piece of ground in this vicinity (Gen. 33:19). … There is no Old Testament reference to his having dug a well there, but there is nothing improbable about it.” Morris, p. 257.

191 The word John uses here is phgh, rather than the usual Frear. “On the difference between the two Loyd comments: ‘A spring is a God-given thing. God creates the spring; man only digs the well.’ It is a curiosity that such a deep well should have been dug in a country where there are many springs. (Godet says that there are as many as eighty springs in the region.) The well must originally have been well over a hundred feet deep, so that digging and lining it was no small task. This has been worked into an argument that the well really was dug by Jacob. Only ‘a stranger in the land’ would have gone to all the trouble to construct such a well in a land as plentifully endowed with springs! Many commentators give the depth of the well as about seventy-five feet, but according to Hendriksen a great deal of debris has been cleaned out and the well restored to its original depth.” Morris, p. 257, fn. 20.

192 Time does not permit an extensive exploration of the “well motif” in Genesis, but it has been noted elsewhere. Many of the important events in Genesis took place at a well. It was at a well that Abraham’s servant found a wife for Isaac (see Genesis 24). It was also at a well that Jacob first met Rachel (Genesis 29). A spring plays a vital role in the survival of Hagar and her son, Ishmael (Genesis 16).

193 See also John 8:1-11.

194 “A woman could not divorce her husband in Jewish law. But under certain circumstances she could approach the court which would, if it thought fit, compel the husband to divorce her (see for example, Mishnah, Ket. 7:9, 10). Or she might pay him or render services to induce him to divorce her (Git. 7:5, 6). In theory there was no limit to the number of marriages that might be contracted after valid divorces, but the Rabbis regarded two, or at the most three marriages as the maximum for a woman (SBk, II, p. 437).” Morris, p. 264, fn. 43.

195 “Whatever might be thought of the propriety of asking for a drink …, no Rabbi would have carried on a conversation with a woman. One of their sayings ran: ‘A man shall not be alone with a woman in an inn, not even with his sister or his daughter, on account of what men may think. A man shall not talk with a woman in the street, not even with his own wife, and especially not with another woman, on account of what men may say.’” Morris, p. 274, citing SBk, II, p. 438.

196 Note the change in Peter’s view of women, as reflected in 1 Peter 3:7.

197 “The verb sugraomai has usually been understood here in the sense ‘to have familiar intercourse with.’ However D. Daube has shown that this sense is not found elsewhere and that it is highly unlikely in the present passage (JBL, LXIX, 1950, pp. 137-147). The verb means properly, ‘to use with,’ and this appears to be the meaning in the present passage. Jews do not use (utensils) with the Samaritans.” Morris, p. 259, fn. 25.

198 See Lesson 4, “The First Disciples.”

199 Was this woman looking for a Samaritan “Messiah,” or had she already come to embrace our Lord’s words about “salvation coming from the Jews” so that she was willing to accept the Jewish Messiah, whenever He came? I am inclined to see progress in this woman’s faith, even as our Lord speaks to her. She believes Jesus, as He moves from physical, literal “water” to the “spiritual water” of eternal life, and from the Jewish hope of Messiah, to Messiah Himself—Jesus. I believe all this happens within hours, not only for this woman, but for the people of Sychar as well.

200 Literally, the Greek text reads, “I am, the One speaking to you.” The “I am” is almost certainly tied to the “I am” of John 8:58, which the Jews understood to be a reference to Exodus 3:14. They knew this was a claim to be God.

201 See footnote 3.

202 Some would argue that “people” should be translated “men,” and that the males of Sychar are those to whom this woman spoke. Given her situation, this is at least possible. No wonder the “men” of the city came out to see this One who told the woman “all she ever did.”

203 I understand that salvation has a past, present, and future aspect. Here, however, I am speaking of the final step in the process of one’s coming to faith in Jesus Christ, and not of one’s subsequent progressive sanctification or ultimate and final salvation.

204 Morris, p. 274, fn. 68.

205 I would hasten to add here that I do not see the issue as being something inappropriate in the way Jesus is dealing with one of the opposite sex. What Jesus does is shocking, because He gives this woman credit for being capable of an intelligent spiritual and theological conversation, not because He is acting in a morally inappropriate manner toward the opposite sex.

206 Isn’t it interesting that Adam and Eve did not eat of the fruit of the tree of life, but fell because they disobeyed God by eating of the forbidden fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? The Corinthians were not willing to miss a meal, so they insisted on eating “meats offered to idols” (1 Corinthians 8-10). So too they would not wait for their brothers and sisters to arrive at the Lord’s Table, choosing rather to indulge themselves to the detriment of those of lesser means (1 Corinthians 11). Food really is a test, is it not?

207 “J. A. T. Robinson has argued, convincingly to my mind, that the reference is primarily to the work of John the Baptist and his followers. His work in this very area had prepared the way for Jesus and His band.” Morris, pp. 281-282.

208 The “harvest” seems to have lasted longer than our Lord’s short stay. “Cullmann, who is supported by M. Simon (St. Stephen and the Hellenists, 1958, 00. 36ff.), sees in the ‘others’ the Hellenists of Acts 8 (pre-eminently Philip), who took the gospel to Samaria after which the apostles Peter and John entered the fruits of their labor.” Morris, p. 282, fn. 93.

209 I know all about the fact that the “go” of Matthew 28:19 is a participle, and not an imperative, but the force of our Lord’s words makes it so, and the grammar supports this. There is an excellent note in the NET Bible at verse 19:

“Go … baptize … teach” are participles modifying the imperative verb “make disciples.” According to Wallace (Exegetical Syntax 645) the first participle (poreuqevnte", “Go”) fits the typical structural pattern for the attendant circumstance participle (aorist participle preceding aorist main verb, with the mood of the main verb usually imperative or indicative) and thus picks up the mood (imperative in this case) from the main verb (maqhteuvsate, “make disciples”). This means that semantically the action of “going” is commanded, just as “making disciples” is. As for the two participles that follow the main verb (baptivzonte", “baptizing,” and didavskonte", “teaching”), according to Wallace these do not fit the normal pattern for attendant circumstance participles, since they are present participles and follow the aorist main verb. However, some interpreters do see them as carrying additional imperative force in context. Others regard them as means, manner, or even result.

Deutsch

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

11. Jesus Heals the Royal Official’s Son (John 4:43-54)

Introduction

I know what it’s like to have a loved one’s life in jeopardy. When I was 16 years old, my mother was seriously injured by a hit-and-run driver. I was the one driving her to the hospital, while my dad tried to stop the bleeding. When we reached the hospital, I rushed out of the car and into the hospital, where a lady on duty attempted to start filling out papers. I put an end to that quickly. I wanted help to save my mother’s life, and I had no time for paper shuffling. Later in my life, my wife and I awoke to find our first child had died in his sleep. You can imagine my response when our next child appeared to be seriously ill. When I picked my daughter up, her eyes rolled to the back of her head. I did not care about speed limits that day; I only cared about getting help for her as quickly as possible.

The royal official in our text must feel the same way as his son’s life hangs by a thread. Jesus is his only hope. He rushes the 20 miles from Capernaum where he lives to Cana of Galilee, where he has heard that Jesus has returned and can be found. He cannot know whether his son is still alive, or whether he has died during his nearly eight-hour journey to find Jesus. But when he finds Jesus, he has only one thing on his mind—getting Jesus to come to Capernaum with him as quickly as possible, in the hope that there is still time to save his child’s life.

What a shock it must be for this royal official when he realizes that Jesus is not going to accompany him to Capernaum. Worse yet, our Lord’s response to this official’s request for help almost appears to be a rebuke. How can this be? How can Jesus respond so harshly to a father who is only trying to save the life of his son? We shall seek to answer this question in our study of this text. It is a wonderful text, with lessons for us, as well as for the royal official. Let us listen and learn what the Spirit of God has for us in this portion of His holy Word.

Return to Galilee
(4:43-45)

43 After the two days he departed from there to Galilee. 44 (For Jesus himself had testified that a prophet has no honor in his own country.) 45 So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him because they had seen all the things he had done in Jerusalem at the feast (for they themselves had gone to the feast).

These verses cause some students of the New Testament considerable grief. The problem centers around verse 44, where Jesus testifies that “a prophet has no honor in his own country.” Some see an inconsistency between verses 44 and 45: If Jesus believed that He would have no honor in “his own country,” then why does John tell us that the Galileans “welcomed” Him? All kinds of solutions to this problem are offered. The problem does not seem that difficult. This same proverb is found in Matthew 13:57; Mark 6:4; and Luke 4:24. In each of these instances, the circumstances are the same. In Matthew, we read:

53 Now when Jesus finished these parables, he went away from there. 54 He came to his hometown²¹⁰ and taught them in their synagogue. They were amazed and said, “Where did this man get such wisdom and miraculous powers? 55 Isn’t he the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother called Mary? And aren’t his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And aren’t all his sisters here with us? Where then did he get these things?” 57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own hometown and in his own house.” 58 And he did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief (Matthew 13:53-58).

Jesus has come to Nazareth and is teaching in the synagogue. Some of these folks had probably been in Jerusalem when Jesus was there, performing signs (see John 2:23; 4:45). If they had not personally been in Jerusalem, they must certainly have heard about some of the miracles He had performed there. When Jesus arrives in His own “hometown,” expectations are running high. “What will Jesus perform here, in His own “hometown”? In spite of their high expectations, a question begins to formulate in the minds of some. Jesus is becoming a very popular person and attracting a following. But they know (or think they know) His origins. Because Nazareth is His hometown, they think they know all about Him. They know His mother and (so they think) His father, His brothers and His sisters. How can anyone so important come from such humble origins? Due to this perception of Jesus, there was a drawing back or falling away on the part of Jesus’ countrymen. Jesus sees this response as typical and proverbial. After all, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own hometown and in his own house” (verse 57). As a result, Jesus performs few miracles there because of their unbelief.²¹¹

Now let’s relate this description of our Lord’s ministry in Nazareth to our text in John, which speaks of His return to Galilee, to His “own country.” The question at hand is this: “How can John quote this same proverb about a prophet not having honor in his own country when he then tells us that when Jesus arrives in Galilee, the people there “welcome Him”? From what we have seen in Matthew’s account of our Lord’s arrival at Nazareth, we see virtually the same phenomena. Jesus returns to His “hometown” and there receives an initial warm welcome. The people are aware of the miracles He has performed in Jerusalem (and perhaps elsewhere) and hope to see many more in their own town. But as they reflect on the origins of Jesus, they are not so sure. Has He come to bless the Gentiles as well as the Jews? This is unpardonable (Luke 4:16-30). And so what seems to start off well ends up in a very disappointing way, both for our Lord and for those of His “hometown.”

A principle is involved here when, once recognized, resolves the apparent problem in our text: A short-lived, superficial acceptance of our Lord is not the same as an informed, long-term commitment to Him. In the parable of the four soils, the second soil represents what I believe to be this same superficial, short-term commitment:

16 And these are the ones sown on the rocky ground: whenever they hear the word, they receive it at once with joy. 17 But they have no root in themselves and are temporary. Then, when trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they fall away²¹² immediately (Mark 4:16-17).

Therefore we should not suppose that just because the Galileans initially “welcome” Jesus that they truly accept Him as Messiah. These folks are not even “sign-faith” believers; they are unbelievers fascinated by signs. The outcome of our Lord’s visit to His homeland is disappointing and yet exactly what our Lord intends. He leaves Judea because He is becoming too popular too quickly (John 4:1-3). He goes to His homeland so as not to be “honored.” There, He is initially welcomed, but He is not truly honored.

The Royal Official’s Plea
(4:46-50)

46 Now he came again to Cana in Galilee where he had made the water wine. In Capernaum there was a certain royal official whose son was sick. 47 When he heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went to him and begged him to come down and heal his son, for he was about to die. 48 So Jesus said to him, “Unless you people see signs and wonders you will never believe.” 49 The official said to him, “Sir, come down before my child dies.” 50 Jesus said to him, “Go home; your son will live.” The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him, and set off for home.

Because others have made much of it, I will mention the fact that some say this story is just another version of the healing of the centurion’s servant (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 7:2-10). The similarities are very few; the differences are many. Allow me to mention some of these differences:

The Centurion was a Gentile; the Royal Official appears to be Jewish.
The Centurion’s slave suffered from a paralysis; the Royal Official’s son was ill with a fever.
The Centurion is in Capernaum; the Royal Official is in Cana.
The Centurion’s faith wins Jesus’ praise; the Royal Official and others are rebuked for a deficient faith.
The Centurion urges Jesus not to come, but only to speak the word; the Royal Official urges Jesus to come.
The Centurion has Jewish elders to plead his case; the Royal Official pleads with Jesus personally.²¹³

I think we can safely assume that the miracle of the healing of the royal official’s son is unique, as is most of the material in the Gospel of John.

Jesus returns to Cana of Galilee, where He turned water into wine (John 2:1-11). A royal official²¹⁴ living in Capernaum hears that Jesus is once again at Cana. The official’s son is at the point of death and this father is desperate, as anyone who has ever been in his predicament knows. Jesus is his last and only hope to save his son. He hastily makes the 20 mile trek to Cana, in search of Jesus. When he finds Jesus, he pleads with Him to return immediately with him to Capernaum and to heal his son, who is about to die.

Our Lord’s response to the royal official is puzzling, almost disturbing: “So Jesus said to him, ‘Unless you people see signs and wonders you will never believe.’” The NET Bible, along with some other translations, indicates that the “you” in verse 48 is plural, and not singular. Jesus is therefore speaking to a larger audience than just the royal official. It is my assumption that the royal official asks around town to find out where Jesus is staying. As he does, a small crowd of curious bystanders gathers around the royal official and follows him to where Jesus is staying, hoping to see Jesus perform a miracle. Jesus has left Judea and come to Galilee to avoid the crowds. He does not wish to create undue messianic excitement too soon. Thus, our Lord does not seem eager to perform a miracle in a way which will draw attention to Himself.

I suspect that if our Lord had accompanied the royal official home to Capernaum, a crowd would have followed Him there too. Had they witnessed the healing of this lad, they would have told others, and many would have flocked to our Lord for healing. Jesus does not want this situation to arise. Our Lord’s response to the official, as well as to those gathered, achieves His desire to disperse the crowd. His words are a rebuke. These Galileans do not really believe in Him as the Messiah. They simply know of the signs He has performed elsewhere and want to see if He will do the same (or even more) for them. Jesus rightly rebukes them for being interested only in His miracles and not taking to heart what these signs signify. Our Lord’s words of rebuke send a message that Jesus is not going to “jump through their hoops” on this occasion. If they have come only to see signs, they will not see one now. The only thing they get is a rebuke.

Why stick around if nothing sensational is going to happen? I think the crowds left. It is true that Jesus’ next words should give them pause for thought. Jesus tells the man, “Go home; your son will live.” Looking back from our vantage point in time, you and I would expect the whole town to follow the official back to Capernaum to see if our Lord’s words actually come to pass. But remember that these people are sign-seekers, not men and women of faith. They are those who do not trust in Jesus as their Messiah. When they hear our Lord say, “Go home; your son will live,” they probably say to themselves, “Yeah, right!” I think they believe that His words are only intended to get rid of this persistent father, not words of assurance that his son really has been healed. We are not told that anyone accompanies the official to Capernaum, or that anyone other than his own servants come to trust in Jesus. The crowd disperses, and the sign-seekers go away disappointed, and perhaps a little angry.

But if our Lord rebukes the crowd, He seems to include the royal official as well. Does our Lord not seem to lack compassion toward this desperate man, whose only concern is the well-being of his son? Some might be tempted to ask, “How can Jesus be so rude, so insensitive, so critical?” Let me suggest that the solution to this dilemma may be found in the Gospel of Mark:

24 Jesus left there and went to the region of Tyre. Whenhe went into a house, he did not want anyone to know, but he was not able to escape notice. 25 Instead, a woman whose daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him and came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, of Syrophoenician origin. She asked him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27 Hesaid to her, “Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and to throw it to the dogs.” 28 She answered, “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” 29 Then he said to her, “Because you said this, you may go. The demon has left your daughter.” 30 She went home and found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone (Mark 7:24-30).

Is our Lord being unduly harsh with this Gentile woman, who begs Him to cast the demon out of her daughter? I think not. First of all, what Jesus says is true. He has come “to the Jew first” and then to the Gentiles (see Matthew 10:5-6; Romans 1:16; 2:9-10). Beyond this, I believe our Lord is dealing with this woman in a way that inspires faith. Having heard Jesus, does this woman cower and walk away? No; she presses Jesus even harder for her daughter’s sake, reminding Him that Gentiles are to benefit from His coming as well as the Jews.

I believe the same thing is taking place in our text. The on-lookers are merely sign-seekers, and our Lord’s words seem to send them home. The royal official is not about to let his son die, and he knows that Jesus is his only hope. It may be that his faith is weak, that he needs to see to believe, but he does believe that Jesus is able to heal his son, and so he persists with his request. I believe our Lord’s words press him in the right direction. They are not intended to turn him away, but to turn him to Jesus in faith.

It seems from what we are told that this official believes the saying, “Where there’s life, there’s hope.” He thinks Jesus can heal the sick, but not raise the dead.²¹⁵ And no wonder he thinks so, for Jesus has not yet raised anyone from the dead. The royal official seems to believe that Jesus can heal his son if He is at his side, but not from 20 miles away. Jesus now says to this official, “Go home; your son will live,” and the official goes home. This man’s faith seems to grow in the few moments he pleads with Jesus. And so the official leaves to return to his son, believing the word of our Lord.

I am reminded of my days as a seminary student in the Masters Program. I signed up for a class taught by Dr. S. Lewis Johnson. Dr. Johnson was then teaching at Believers Chapel, where I attended, and I was greatly blessed by his ministry. I wanted to take every class he offered at the seminary. When his class, “Paul’s Use of the Old Testament,” was offered, I signed up. The first day of class Dr. Johnson was obviously surprised at how many had signed up—more than he expected—more than he wanted. And so Dr. Johnson proceeded to inform the class that this was a “doctoral level” class that would be too difficult for others. He literally invited a number of us to get up and leave, and to sign up for something else. I didn’t move. I wanted that class, and I was not going to let him scare me out of it. I survived the class and did reasonably well. His words caused some to “fall away,” but not me. I knew what I wanted, and I knew he was the one I wanted it from. That is the way it was with the royal official and Jesus.

A Miracle and Belief
(4:51-54)

51 While he was on his way down, his slaves met him and told him that his son would live. 52 So he asked them the time when his condition began to improve, and they told him, “Yesterday at one o’clock in the afternoon the fever left him.”²¹⁶ 53 Then the father realized that was the very time Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live”; and he himself believed along with his entire household. 54 Jesus did this as his second miraculous sign when he came from Judea to Galilee.

Jesus tells the royal official, “Go home; your son will live.” The official does not get what he asks for; Jesus does not volunteer to return to Capernaum with him. Nevertheless, the man believes Jesus and leaves Him to return home. Exactly what does he believe? I think that he trusts Jesus, not knowing exactly what He meant. He understands Jesus to say that his son has not yet died, and that he will not die. As he makes his way home, his mind must be racing as he considers all the possibilities. While still on his way, he is met by his servants, who have news of the boy’s condition and do not want their master to agonize any longer than necessary.

We should pause momentarily to view this incident from the servants’²¹⁷ point of view. Their master’s son becomes very ill, and they watch helplessly as his temperature climbs dangerously high. They know that if something does not happen quickly, the boy will die. They watch as, in desperation, their master hastens to Cana of Galilee, hoping to find Jesus and to convince Him to come and heal the lad. The child’s condition continues to deteriorate after their master leaves. They begin to lose all hope. They hate to think of how their master will respond when he returns home to find his son dead. Then, suddenly, the child’s fever breaks, and he begins to improve rapidly. They know the danger is past and that he will live. They do not have any clue as to how it happened, but they do not wish their master to agonize any longer than necessary. And so some servants go out to meet their master and to give him the good news.

As soon as their master is in sight, they call out the good news that his son will live. The words sound strikingly similar to the assurance our Lord has given the father just a few hours before. You can almost see the face of this father, the look of relief and joy that comes over him. And then there must be a subtle change of expression to a more thoughtful look. The father is starting to put the pieces together. He recognizes (as his servants do not) the relationship between the words of Jesus and the words of his servants. Jesus was right. The royal official’s faith in Him is well-founded. But now the ruler begins to wonder about these words. Has Jesus spoken as a prophet, assuring him that the child will not die, and will get better on his own? Or, did Jesus produce a miraculous “long distance” healing as he spoke some eight hours earlier, assuring him that the boy would live?

There is a way to find out. The ruler poses this question to his servants: “Just exactly what time was it when the boy suddenly improved?” They tell him it was 1:00 o’clock when the turning point came. Then he knows for certain, for he knows that was precisely the time Jesus assured him of the child’s well-being. It is a miracle indeed, a miracle brought about by our Lord speaking only a word. It is a miracle not unlike creation, when He spoke the world into existence (see John 1:1-3; see Hebrews 11:3; Genesis 1).

The father²¹⁸ knows he has witnessed a miracle, and he “believes,” along with his entire household. Have we not already been told that he “believed” in verse 50? In that passage, the official believed what Jesus said. The belief I see in verse 53 is a deeper, more informed belief, a belief in Jesus as the Messiah, as the Savior of the world. This man and his whole household become a household of faith. This is the way faith is. Look at the disciples in the Gospels. In John chapter 1, several disciples come to believe in Jesus as the promised Messiah. Then they observe the Lord changing water into wine, and we are once again told that they believe in Jesus (John 2:11). Throughout the life of our Lord, more and more miracles are performed as the disciples witness them. And the more they see of Him, the more their faith in Him grows. Faith is not a static thing, something we experience once and then it remains constant. Our faith should grow as we come to know our Lord and His Word better, as we see that this One in whom we have placed our trust is even greater than we imagined!

John tells us in verse 54 that this is the second miraculous sign that Jesus performed when He came from Judea to Galilee. This cannot mean that He performed only two signs, for we know that John has been very selective (John 2:23; 3:2; 20:30-31) in the signs he has chosen to record. It is the second of his “selected signs,” employed to bring men and women to faith in Jesus as the promised Savior.

Conclusion

What a great miracle this is! Do you notice that in one sense it is a miracle very similar to the changing of water into wine? Jesus turns the water into wine in a way that keeps most of those at the wedding from even knowing what had happened. It is a “sign” evident to a few, which results in the faith of only our Lord’s disciples (2:11). So it is too with the healing of the royal official’s son. If Jesus had chosen to perform this miracle as the official had hoped (by personally coming and attending to his son), many would have followed along, and our Lord’s popularity would have greatly increased. But this is not what our Lord wants at this point in time. That is why He left Judea and returned to Galilee (4:1-3). Jesus performs this miracle in such a way that only the official knows it is a miracle. As he “testified” of this miracle to his servants, they too become members of the “household of faith.” Jesus not only performs a miracle, He does so in a way that is consistent with His purpose.

Jesus accomplishes this miracle in a way that enhances the official’s faith from “sign-faith” to “word-faith.” John introduces a theme in chapter 2 which persists in this Gospel:

23 Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. 24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people. 25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, for he knew what was in man (John 2:23-25, emphasis mine).

It is apparent that “sign-faith” is not pleasing to our Lord, for He chooses not to commit Himself to “sign-faith” believers. Sign-faith is not a bad starting point, but it should never end here. Jesus wants people whose faith is grounded in His word, not in miracles.

John the Baptist never performed a sign, but his words were powerful, and many believed them. Nicodemus, like his fellow-Pharisees, was not willing to take Jesus at His word. He had one question after another, but they did not bring him to faith at that moment (John 3). The woman at the well took Jesus at His word, and so did all the people of Sychar (John 4:4-42). The Galileans were impressed with our Lord’s signs, but they were not so inclined to accept His word. This royal official came to the point where he was willing to take Jesus at His word, and he and his household became believers.

If I sound like a broken record persisting in repeating the same theme, let me simply say that it is a theme John also keeps on repeating: “Sign-faith” is inferior to “word-faith.” Our Lord wants those to follow Him as His disciples who will take Him at His word.

We can learn another lesson from this royal official. He is wrong in (first) supposing that God can only accomplish what we ask for by doing it the way we prescribe. We all are like this when we pray. We tell God what we want, and then we proceed to tell Him how to do it. We think that the way we expect Him to act is the way He is most likely and able to act. The royal official thinks Jesus can save his son only if He comes to Capernaum and personally attends to him. He is wrong. Our Lord does intend to heal this man’s son, but in His way. He does not need to be at his bedside. He can heal him from a distance. (And, humanly speaking, if Jesus had agreed to go with the official, the son may well have died while they were on their way. Of course, He could have raised the boy from the dead, too.) Our Lord’s way of healing the boy keeps the crowds from witnessing the miracle, and restricts those who believe to the official and his household. Let us not lose hope when God refuses to “jump through our hoops” and does not answer our prayers the way we expect.

33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how fathomless his ways! 34 For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? 35 Or who has first given to God, that God needs to repay him? 36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever! Amen (Romans 11:33-36).

But just as it is written, “Things that no eye has seen, or ear heard, or mind imagined, are the things God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Corinthians 2:9).

God delights in answering our prayers in a way that highlights His power, grace, glory, and sovereignty. We do better to trust Him to answer our prayers His way.

As I close, let me point out a very important principle: God often brings adversity into our lives—adversity beyond our ability to handle—so that we must come to Him as our only hope, so that we must trust in Him alone. I doubt very much that this royal official would have traveled 20 miles to beg Jesus to come heal his son if his son had athletes’ foot or an in-grown toenail. This man is desperate. He is helpless and hopeless, apart from Jesus Christ. Jesus said it: He came to heal the sick, not to minister to those who are healthy. There are those who came to argue with Jesus, who were trying to make themselves look good and Him look bad. But setting these trouble-makers aside, most of those who come to Jesus in the Gospels are those who desperately need help, those who are hurting and helpless.

Are you hurting? Do you feel helpless, unable to cope with what you are facing? This could be the gracious hand of God, drawing you to Himself for mercy and grace in your time of need. Let’s face it; we do not seek God when things are going well for us. We tend to turn to God only in our weakness, in our need, in our despair. If your life is like this, it may be the gracious hand of God, compelling you to come to Him in faith. Take Him at His word. Come to Him who is the solution to your every need.

210 The word “hometown” here is the same Greek term as found in Matthew 13:54, 57; Mark 6:1, 4 and Luke 4:24. In each case, the NET Bible renders it “hometown.” It is therefore reasonable to assume that this same term means basically the same thing in John 4:44.

211 This is a most interesting turn of events. John wrote this Gospel, including all the signs that He did, so that men might come to believe in Jesus as the Christ (20:31). The people of Nazareth do not believe, and thus they see very few miracles.

212 The Greek word, rendered “fall away” in Mark 4:17, is essentially the same word rendered “took offense” in Matthew 13:57.

213 See Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 288.

214 “Although basilikov" has often been translated ‘nobleman’ it almost certainly refers here to a servant of Herod, tetrarch of Galilee (who in the NT is called a king, Mark 6:14, 22; Matt 14:9). Capernaum was a border town, so doubtless there were many administrative officials in residence there.” Translator’s note from NET Bible.

215 Compare Martha’s words in John 11:21.

216 Some agonize about what time it was when Jesus assured the official that his son would live. Since there are two means of reckoning time (Roman and Jewish), there is a certain amount of room for discussion about the exact time that Jesus assures the official his son will live. By the Roman system of reckoning time, it would have been 7 p.m. By the Jewish system, it would have been 1:00 p.m. Some are troubled as to why it took the man a full day to return to his home, and theories abound to explain the apparent discrepancy. Frankly, John didn’t find these details important enough to supply, and they appear to have nothing to do with the meaning and the message of this miracle, so I will pass this matter by.

217 One may wish to consult the translator’s note on this word in the NET Bible.

218 Note that this official is now called “the father” in verse 53, for this is his prominent role. He has dealt with this situation, not as a royal official, but as a concerned father.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Miracles

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

12. Jesus Heals the Man at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-18)

Introduction

My daughter recently handed me a book which records some very strange laws still on the books in our country. Some of these “whacky laws” are listed below:

“In Pennsylvania, the penalty for cursing is a forty-cent fine. However, if God is mentioned in the curse, the fine is sixty-seven cents.”
“It is illegal to mispronounce the name of the city of Joliet, Illinois.”
“In Utah, the law requires that daylight be seen between two dancing partners.”²¹⁹
“In San Francisco, you are not permitted to carry a basket suspended from a pole.”
“It is unlawful for goldfish to ride on a Seattle, Washington, bus unless they lie still.”
“Michigan law once required taking a census of bees every winter.”
“In Natchez, Mississippi, it is against the law for elephants to drink beer.”
“An old Hollywood, California, ordinance forbids driving more than two thousand sheep down Hollywood Boulevard at one time.”
“In Muncie, Indiana, you cannot bring fishing tackle into a cemetery.”
“The California penal code prohibits the shooting of any animal, except a whale, from an automobile.”
“In Kansas City, Missouri, children are prohibited by law from buying cap pistols. However, the law does not restrict them from buying shotguns.”
“A Minnesota law requires that men’s and women’s underwear not be hung on the same clothesline at the same time.”
“In Joliet, Illinois, women are not allowed to try on more than six dresses in one store.”²²⁰

I mention these “whacky laws” of our own land because I am about to point out some of the “whacky Jewish laws” of Jesus’ day. We are inclined to look at these laws and laugh, amazed at how ridiculous they seem. Before getting too carried away with our laughter, let me say this. Every one of these apparently ridiculous laws made sense to the lawmakers at the time they became law. These “whacky laws” did not come about in a vacuum; they were a legislative attempt to prevent or solve a real problem of some kind. Lest we think lawmakers wish to spend all their time making up silly laws, let me suggest that they must do so because of “whacky” folks like you and me.

As parents, we should be able to understand how this happens. We would love to be able to give our children a very general principle or guideline, and trust them to follow it. For example, we wish we could say to our child, “Just be home at a reasonable hour.” The trouble is that they do not agree with us about what “reasonable” means, and so we have to give an exact time. Our child says, “Mom, can I go down the street and play with Charlie?” We say, “No, I don’t want you to play with Charlie at his house.” So our child goes down the street and plays with Charlie out in the yard (to keep our rules), or he plays with Charlie’s brother in his house. We therefore learn to make our rules more and more specific, lest our child fail to behave as we intended. The more specific we make these rules, the sillier they appear to others.

I am not defending Pharisaism or the legalism of the Jews of Jesus’ day. Many of their rules would be very difficult to defend. Nevertheless, I must also say that most of the regulations I am about to call to your attention were probably necessitated by people who were unwilling to abide by principles; thus, religious leaders were forced to become more and more specific, to the point of unbelievable gnat-straining. Here are some of the regulations of the Jews in our Lord’s time:

Some of the detailed regulations are passing wonderful. For example, ‘(On the Sabbath) a man may borrow of his fellow jars of wine or jars of oil, provided that he does not say to him, ‘Lend me them’ (Shab. 23:1). This would imply a transaction, and a transaction might involve writing, and writing was forbidden. Or again, ‘If a man put out the lamp (on the night of the Sabbath) from fear of the gentiles or of thieves or of an evil spirit, or to suffer one that was sick to sleep, he is not culpable; (but if he did it with a mind) to spare the lamp or to spare the oil or to spare the wick, he is culpable’ (Shab. 2:5). The attitude to healing on the sabbath is illustrated by a curious provision that a man may not put vinegar on his teeth to alleviate toothache. But he may take vinegar with his food in the ordinary course of affairs, and the Rabbis philosophically concluded, ‘if he is healed he is healed’ (Shab. 14:4)!²²¹

The Mishna says: ‘He that reapeth corn on the Sabbath to the quantity of a fig is guilty; and plucking corn is reaping.’ Rubbing the grain out was threshing. Even to walk on the grass on the Sabbath was forbidden because it was a species of threshing. Another Talmudic passage says: ‘In case a woman rolls wheat to remove the husks, it is considered sifting; if she rubs the head of wheat, it is regarded as threshing; if she cleans off the side-adherences, it is sifting out fruit; if she throws them up in her hand, it is winnowing’ [Jer. Shabt, page 10a]. The scrupulosity of these Jews about the Sabbath was ridiculously extreme. A Jewish sailor caught in a storm after sunset on Friday refused to touch the helm though threatened with death. Thousands had suffered themselves to be butchered in the streets of Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes rather than lift a weapon in self-defense on the Sabbath! To these purists, the act of the disciples was a gross desecration of the Sabbath law. The worst of all was that Jesus permitted and approved it.²²²

In the above citations, J. W. Shepard is referring to the Sabbath laws of Jesus’ day, but we would be incorrect to suppose things have improved with time. A friend loaned me a book by Rav Yehoshua Y. Neuwirth entitled, Shemirath Shabbath: A Guide to the Practical Observance of Shabbath.²²³ This volume (my friend reminds me that it is the first volume) goes into great detail concerning the interpretation and application of the Sabbath for contemporary Judaism. In the preface to this work the author writes, “The Mishna (Chagiga: Chapter 1, Mishna 8) likens the laws of Shabbath to ‘mountains hanging by a hair,’ in that a multitude of precepts and rules, entailing the most severe penalties for their breach, depend on the slightest of indications given by a biblical verse.”²²⁴

He also reminds us of the importance which Judaism has placed, and continues to place, on the keeping of the Sabbath:

May we be privileged, by virtue of the proper observance of the Shabbath, to see the final redemption of Israel. Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, “Were Israel properly to observe two Shabbathoth, they would immediately be redeemed” (Shabbath 118b). Until such time, God’s only dwelling-place on this earth is within the four walls of the Halacha (Berachoth 8a).²²⁵

The book contains many instructions about the keeping of the Sabbath, but I will mention only a few:

Cooking in most all forms (boiling, roasting, baking, frying, etc.) is forbidden on the Sabbath, in particular when the temperature is raised above 45 degrees centigrade (113 Fahrenheit).²²⁶

If the hot water tap is accidentally left on, it cannot be turned off on the Sabbath.²²⁷

Escaping gas can be turned off, but not in the normal way. One must turn off the tap of a gas burner with the back of the hand or the elbow.²²⁸

The preparation of food is greatly affected by the Sabbath. One cannot squeeze a lemon into a glass of ice tea, but one can squeeze lemon on a piece of fish.²²⁹

That one cannot light a fire on the Sabbath is taught in the Old Testament law (cf. Exod. 35:3). Strict Judaism views this to prohibit turning electric lights on or off on the Sabbath. The problem can be solved, however, by using a timer, which automatically handles this task.²³⁰

So, too, an air conditioner cannot be turned on by a Jew on the Sabbath, although a Gentile might be persuaded to do so.²³¹

One cannot bathe with a bar of soap on the Sabbath, but liquid detergent is acceptable.²³²

I find the section dealing with “discovered articles” (pp. 233-235) most interesting. One is prohibited from transporting goods on the Sabbath. This would prevent merchants from conducting business on the Sabbath. It has been so highly refined that now one cannot carry something which he unknowingly took with him. If one is walking along on the Sabbath and discovers that he is carrying something in his pocket, he has several courses of action so as not to violate the Sabbath. He may, for example, drop the item out of his pocket, but not in the normal or usual fashion (by grasping it, removing it from the pocket, and dropping it on the floor). He can, however, reverse his pocket, expelling the object unnaturally, and thus legitimately. If the item is valuable, and he does not wish to leave it on the ground, he can ask a Gentile to watch the item for him. Otherwise, the item could be carried, but not in the usual way. He can carry it for a prescribed distance (just under four amoth), put it down, then take it up, and so on. Or, the man could relay it between himself and a fellow-Israelite, each one carrying the object for no more than the prescribed distance. If this is not advisable, the object can be carried in an unusual way, such as placing it in the shoe, tying it to his leg, or managing to suspend it between his clothing and his body.

Morris adds this regulation regarding work on the Sabbath:

Mishnah, Shab. 7:2 lists thirty-nine classes of work forbidden on a sabbath, the last being ‘taking out aught from one domain into another.’ An interesting regulation provides that if a man took out ‘a living man on a couch he is not culpable by reason of the couch, since the couch is secondary’ (Shab. 10:5). This clearly implies that the carrying of the ‘couch’ by itself is culpable.²³³

This information is not supplied to amuse you, but to prepare you for the issues that arise in our study of John chapter 5, as well as later on in John’s Gospel. A decisive change takes place here. Until now, signs and miracles may not have convinced all, but they definitely were instrumental in drawing some to faith. When Jesus turned the water into wine, a few realized what had happened, but only the disciples of our Lord are said to have “believed” (John 2:11). When our Lord went to Jerusalem and cleansed the temple (John 2:12-22), He also performed a number of signs, which caused a number to “believe in His name” (2:23-25). Nicodemus was at least impressed by the signs Jesus performed (3:2). The Samaritans did not require a sign, but many believed in Jesus when they heard His words (4:4ff.). The royal official who came to Jesus was forced to believe the word which Jesus spoke to him, and the miracle that resulted was instrumental in his coming to faith, along with his whole house (4:43-54).

Suddenly, when we reach this fifth chapter of John our Lord’s miracles actually precipitate intense opposition and persecution. The healing of the man at the pool of Bethesda brings about a reaction so strong that the Jews are even more resolved to kill Jesus. In chapter 6, Jesus feeds the 5,000, but after He informs these would-be disciples that they must trust in His sacrificial death, virtually all forsake Him. In chapter 7, when Jesus appears in Jerusalem, the Jews send officers to arrest Him. In chapter 8, when Jesus has an animated debate with the Jews and makes the statement, “Before Abraham came into existence, I am!,” many want to stone Him. From chapter 5 onward, the Jews are determined to do away with Jesus. As time goes on, their opposition to Jesus only intensifies.

As we begin our study of chapter 5 and witness the wonderful works of our Lord precipitating intense reaction to Him, let us listen and learn those lessons which God has here for us.

The Setting
(5:1-4)

1 After this there was a²³⁴ Jewish feast, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool called Bethesda in Aramaic, that has five covered walkways. 3 In these a great number of sick, blind, lame, or paralyzed people were lying [“waiting for the moving of the water. 4 For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times. Whoever first stepped in after the stirring of the water was healed from whatever disease which he suffered.”]

We do not know which “feast” brought Jesus “up to Jerusalem” (see footnote 16). It seems clear that John did not care for us to know which one, and that this bit of information would not contribute to our understanding of what follows. There once was considerable discussion over the place where Jesus found this handicapped man. This now seems to be quite certain. William Hendriksen writes:

After much guess-work with respect to the identity of this pool, its site has finally been established to the satisfaction of most scholars. The pool (or, in reality, the reservoir which formed it) was laid bare in the year 1888 in connection with the repair of the church of St. Anne, in n.e. Jerusalem. A faded fresco on the wall pictures an angel ‘troubling’ the water. It appears, therefore, that by the early church this pool was viewed as Bethzatha. In the time of our Lord it had five porticos or covered colonnades where the sick could rest, protected from inclement weather.²³⁵

Multitudes of the physically infirmed are gathered around this pool. Among them is a man who has been disabled for 38 years. We do not know exactly what is wrong with him, but it is apparent he is immobilized by his malady, because it is necessary for someone else to put him into the pool (verse 7). The big question is: “What are all these ailing people doing at the pool of Bethesda?”

Those who know me well understand that I am not predisposed to set certain texts of Scripture aside, simply because they are omitted from a number of highly respected manuscripts.²³⁶ For example, in chapter 8 of John’s Gospel, even though the story of the “woman caught in adultery” is questioned as to whether it is a part of the original text, I am inclined to accept it as such. But the verses in question in our text just don’t seem to be original; rather, they seem to be an attempt of a later hand to explain the meaning of the ailing man’s words in verse 7. Let me summarize my reasons for doubting that the end of verse 3 and all of verse 4 are part of the original text.²³⁷

First, the verses which speak of an angel troubling the waters of the pool are not present in the best manuscripts.

None of the best and most ancient manuscripts have these words which accordingly, have not been retained in the A.R.V. On the other hand, Tertullian (about 145-220 A.D.) already shows that he knows this passage; for he states:

“An angel, by his intervention, was wont to stir the pool at Bethsaida. They who were complaining of ill health used to watch for him; for whoever was the first to descend into these waters, after his washing ceased to complain’ (On Baptism V).”²³⁸

Second, the alleged “miraculous healings” at the pool of Bethesda are not like any other healing I find in the Bible. Think about it. Have you ever read of any such miracle in the Bible, where an angel somehow energizes the waters, and the first person into the water is healed? Where do we ever read of angels being involved with healings? Water is often used in healings, but such miracles are always specific—not general. Naaman was healed of his leprosy when he obeyed Elisha’s instructions to dip himself seven times in the Jordan River (2 Kings 5). People are healed individually and specifically, not in some kind of “whoever can get there the first” manner. Even in the case of the bronze serpent, referred to in John 3, everyone who looked up to the serpent was healed. There is something very bizarre, very unusual (dare I say “troubling”?) about this “miracle.” Does God really heal someone because he can push and shove and bully his way into the pool first?

Third, this was not the time for miracles. The 400 years between the last book of the Old Testament and the coming of Christ were a time of silence. Prophets were not writing, nor speaking, so far as I can tell. Jesus broke that silence. John prepared the way for Jesus, but we are specifically told that he performed no signs (John 10:41). Why would we suppose there were “miracles on tap” for those who waited for an angel to “trouble the waters” at the pool of Bethesda when this was not a time for miracles?

Fourth, this ailing man, whose words in verse 7 are not in dispute, is not a man of faith, and thus his comments about the pool and its alleged magical powers should be considered cautiously. I do not dispute that this man supposed the pool had healing powers at certain times, but I do seriously question that this is indeed the case. Listen to what Carson has to say about this:

The invalid apparently held to a popular belief that the first person into the pool after the waters had been disturbed, and only the first person, would be miraculously healed. There is no other attestation of this belief in sources roughly contemporaneous with Jesus, but analogous superstitions both ancient and modern are easy to come by.²³⁹

Fifth, it is not at all uncommon for the sick to congregate around mineral water, which is believed to have healing powers:

In general it may be stated that it is never uncommon for people, afflicted with various illnesses, to gather around mineral springs. Think of the springs around Tiberias or, in our own country, of the waters of Hot Springs, Arkansas, which long before the Spaniards arrived were already being credited with healing virtues.²⁴⁰

Sixth, I am puzzled as to why Jesus has to ask this man if he wants to be made whole, and even more perplexed at the man’s answer. Why does Jesus ask this man if he wishes to get well? And why does the man not give a simple “Yes” in response? Instead, the man seeks to defend his “system” for failing to provide him with a healing. He blames this failure on others, since no one will help him into the pool, and others beat him to it. Unlike the woman at the well in chapter 4, or even Nicodemus in chapter 3, this man seems to have no spiritual insight, no theological content, and definitely no faith.²⁴¹ Carson doesn’t care much for this fellow, as evident in his assessment of him:

He tries to avoid difficulties with the authorities by blaming the one who has healed him (v. 11); he is so dull he has not even discovered his benefactor’s name (v. 13); once he finds out he reports Jesus to the authorities (v. 15). In this light, v. 7 reads less as an apt and subtle response to Jesus’ question than as the crotchety grumblings of an old and not very perceptive man who thinks he is answering a stupid question.²⁴²

Perhaps it would be helpful to sum up my reservations by encouraging you to “see” what this miraculous healing by angel-stirred waters might look like if you made a movie of this part of our Lord’s life. To be true to the text, there would be a very large group of sick and hurting people gathered at the pool of Bethesda. Every one of them would be hopelessly incurable. Nothing more could be done for them. All they could do is beg, and hope and pray for a miracle. How eager all of them would be to believe the stories they heard about miraculous healings at this pool, even if they had never actually seen anyone healed.

Suddenly, the waters of the pool begin to boil, or bubble, or froth in some way, and pandemonium breaks out. Only one person will be healed per “stirring”—the first one into the pool. Every ailing person there at the pool is in competition with the rest of the multitude who are also hoping for a healing. If and when the waters are actually troubled, no one dares to tell anyone else, for fear they might reach the pool first. Can you imagine the pushing, shoving, and tripping that takes place as every ailing person desperately strives to be the first into the water? What a pathetic sight, to see cripples crawling, hopping, rolling, clawing their way to the water’s edge. What chaos there would be! And then, even if one person was healed, it would not be the most needy person, because the one with the smallest ailment would be the most likely one to reach the pool first. The most needy person would be the least likely to get into the water first. Therefore, the least needy would probably be the one cured, while all the rest struggle to get out of the pool, get back to their “stations,” and await their next chance. What a very pathetic scene.

Two Views of This Miracle

Since there are many ways to understand the healing of this man at the pool of Bethesda, let me present two extremes—and then challenge you to choose one or the other, or something in between.

Best Case Scenario

Let’s give this man every benefit of the doubt as we work our way through the story. An angel really does come by the pool from time to time to stir it up, and the lucky²⁴³ person who manages to out-maneuver all the rest of the ailing folks gets a healing. Jesus comes by the pool and takes note of this one particular fellow, who seems to have been unsuccessful for the longest time, and asks him if he would like to be healed. In effect, the man says, “Yes.” Jesus commands him to stand, take up his bed, and walk, and trusting Jesus, he does. This just happens to take place on the Sabbath. The healed man is quickly intercepted by “the Jews,” who inform him that he is breaking the law by carrying his bed on the Sabbath. He tells them that the one who commanded him to get up and walk is the one who also commanded him to carry his bed. (The inference is that if He could command him to walk—and he did walk—then surely he would be wrong to fail to obey Him when He commanded him to carry his bed.) He also tells his accusers that he did not have the chance to find out the name of the One who healed him, and commanded him to take up his bed.

The former paralytic makes his way to the temple, where he praises God, and offers a sacrifice. There at the temple, while the man is worshipping, Jesus finds him. He warns him not to sin further, lest something worse happen to him. The man then knows that it is Jesus who healed him. So grateful is he for his healing that he cannot help but tell others. When he tells the Jews it is Jesus who healed him, it is to bear witness to his healing and the mighty work our Lord has done.

Worst Case Scenario

The paralytic is one of a great many physically infirmed folk gathered by the pool of Bethesda. This may be a comfortable place, out of the heat of the sun and the biting cold of the winter winds. It may be a good place to beg, since many would frequent the pool, just as Jesus does. And there is the popular myth about an angel, who comes from time to time to trouble the waters, so that the first one to get into the water is healed. The man waits by the pool, hoping for such a healing.

When Jesus arrives at the pool, neither this man’s pleas or his prayers or his piety fixes our Lord’s attention on him. It is our Lord’s awareness that the paralytic has suffered this way for 38 years. Our Lord seeks him out, asking him if he wants to become well. He does not ask him if he has the faith to be healed. The man isn’t even thinking in such terms. This man is locked in on only one kind of “miracle,” the miracle of being the first one into the angel-stirred waters. He does not—indeed will not—admit the failure of his system for obtaining healing. Instead, he makes excuses. It isn’t his fault; no one will help him into the troubled waters, and someone else always beats him into the pool. If he hopes for anything from Jesus, it is for Him to stand there beside him until another “stirring of the waters,” helping him into the water when this happens.

Jesus does not debate with the man about his superstitious system for being healed. But the way in which He does heal him is certainly in stark contrast with this man’s system. The man has to wait for “troubled waters.” Jesus immediately heals him, without the use of water. The man is one of a crowd, who hopes by his own efforts and initiative (with the help of others) to beat all the other ailing people into the water, thus obtaining a healing by his own efforts—a kind of “survival of the fittest” (or the fastest). Jesus heals him, without even being asked to do so. At the command of our Lord, the man stands up on his feet, takes up his bed, and walks.²⁴⁴ It seems he can do nothing other than obey. This happens to send the man on his way, avoiding a scene, and not attracting the attention of the crowd. Jesus is thus able to “slip out” without creating hysteria among this multitude of hurting people, all of whom would seek to be healed.

As he walks along carrying his bed on the Sabbath,²⁴⁵ the man is intercepted by the Jewish religious leaders. They are not concerned about this fellow—they do not even acknowledge his healing, let alone rejoice because of it.²⁴⁶ They are simply distressed that he is “breaking the rules”—their rules.²⁴⁷ The healed paralytic seems to be awfully quick to excuse himself. It isn’t his fault, he maintains; he is only doing what he has been told to do. The One who healed him told him to take up his bed and go. What was he to do? The One who has just healed him is now the One who is to blame.

The Jews demand to know just who this person is who told him to take up his mat and walk. He honestly doesn’t know. Jesus has managed to “slip out”²⁴⁸ since there is a crowd. The man would never have been able to identify Jesus as the one “guilty” of healing him unless our Lord had not Himself—for the second time—sought him out. This time Jesus finds the man in the temple. We are so eager for this man to “see the light” that we are almost willing to accept this as proof of some kind of faith. If this man has become a believer, why does John not mention it, as he has each previous time? Worse yet, why does John inform us that the man subsequently seeks out the Jews to tell them that the One they are after is Jesus? This man is a Judas—a betrayer, who turns on Him who has done only good to him.

Why then does Jesus find the man in the temple? How can I be so sure that he is not praising God and worshipping there? First, let me ask a question: Do you assume that just because someone goes to church—any church—that they are true believers, there to worship in spirit and in truth? Many are in church for the wrong reasons. How many of those in the temple are there to worship God in spirit and truth? When Jesus went to the temple earlier, He found it necessary to drive people (and cattle) out of the temple. Is the fact that they are at the temple proof of piety? I think not!

Jesus finds the man in the temple. Once more, He has sought him out. Jesus must know that doing so will identify Him to the authorities and cause Him great trouble (just as He knew that this man had suffered long and hard when He chose to heal him—verse 5:6). Even knowing this, Jesus goes to him with one thing in view—to warn this man to “stop sinning,” lest something even worse happen to him.²⁴⁹

One could say that the paralytic had sinned 38 years earlier, and that his malady is the consequence of that sin. Why then does Jesus seem to urge the man to “give up” his sin, as though it is ongoing?²⁵⁰ Some might naively suppose that because this man is handicapped he has no opportunity to sin. There are always the sins of the mind. This man could have found a way to sin in a way that his circumstances uniquely equipped (and tempted) him to do. I am inclined to infer that this man’s sin may have been related to his way of seeking deliverance from his malady. Those who suffer some severe affliction are often tempted to do almost anything to find relief. For example, some people turn to drugs or alcohol to “ease the pain”; others to different addictions to which they become enslaved. This man may know that his “cure” is pure superstition, and that God did not approve of it, any more than He did of Saul’s seeking guidance by means of a medium (1 Samuel 28). This may be why the man seems almost defensive as he seeks to explain to our Lord why his method didn’t work. Is this the reason Jesus presses him as to whether he really wants to be healed?

We know this much for certain: The man is guilty of some sin he has not yet given up. Jesus heals him in spite of this, but then returns to inform him that He knows about the sin, and that he must give it up or face the possibility of greater consequences. There is no indication of any repentance, no mention of faith, and no inquiry as to who Jesus is or what He is about (as with the Samaritan woman). We are only told that after this confrontation, the man goes to the authorities to reveal Jesus’ identity to them. It is almost too terrible to be true. Perhaps this is why we find it so hard to accept.

The Battle Begins
(5:16-18)

16 Now because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish authorities began persecuting him. 17 So Jesus told²⁵¹ them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God.

The focus quickly changes from the paralytic to Jesus. Once informed that Jesus is the one who healed the paralytic, the Jews cease to harass the healed man and fix their attention on Jesus. John tells us that they “began persecuting him.” I was initially inclined to think that this “persecution” involved constant questioning, challenging, and heckling, and no doubt efforts to discredit our Lord before the people. John tells us in verse 18 that from this point on they “were trying even harder to kill him.” This seems to imply that the persecution mentioned here is very intense.

In each of the Gospels, the issue of the Sabbath arises, which becomes a point of on-going contention between Jesus and the Pharisees. The introduction to this message provides examples of the extremes to which some Jews went to “protect” the Sabbath. In each and every Gospel, Jesus is accused of violating the Sabbath. We will deal with these other instances in the Synoptic Gospels a little later in this series. Actually, the Sabbath controversy is short-lived in John 5, though it will be taken up again in chapters 7 (verses 22-23) and 9 (verse 16). Here in chapter 5, the Sabbath issue arises, but our Lord’s response to the accusation that He is a Sabbath-breaker raises a much more serious concern for the Jews—His claim to be one with God. The words of our Lord that follow focus on this larger issue, rather than on Sabbath-breaking.

Our Lord’s response to the Sabbath question here is unique to John’s Gospel. Though the same accusation of Sabbath-breaking is consistently made by the Jews in the other Gospels, our Lord’s response there is different from His defense here. Here, Jesus defends His actions by pointing out that He is merely imitating His Father by working on the Sabbath. You will recall that while the keeping of the Sabbath is the Fourth Commandment, the historical basis for the Sabbath is what God did at creation:

8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:8-11, NKJV).

The Sabbath is the “sign of the Mosaic covenant,” and thus to violate the Sabbath is to be worthy of death (Exodus 31:14-17; 35:2-3; Numbers 15:32-36). The Fourth Commandment requires the people of God to imitate God, who “rested” on the seventh day of creation. The logic is simple: God rested on the seventh day, and so must men. But Jesus gives us a very different twist on this. He argues that God is constantly at work, even on the Sabbath. Since God is working non-stop, the Son is also working, and cannot cease for the Sabbath.

It is not just this logic that distresses the Jews; it is how Jesus describes His relationship with God. Jesus does not say, “Our Father is working until now, and I too am working.” He says, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.”²⁵² The inference is very clear: Jesus is claiming that God is His Father; He is claiming to be God. If our Lord’s claim is true, the Jewish authorities cannot and should not hinder the working of the Son of God on the Sabbath.

In what sense is God “working”? There is certainly a general sense in which God is working to maintain His creation and to bring about His plans and purposes: “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28, NASB).

There is a specific sense in which God has been “at work” from the time of creation on, bringing about salvation for fallen men. Mere men can contribute nothing to this “working.” It is God’s work. And so men should rest on the Sabbath. But since Jesus is God, then He, as God, must work at that which His Father is working. A part of that saving work is healing the sick (see Luke 4:16-21; John 11:2-6).²⁵³ The Jews are therefore wrong in condemning Jesus for healing a man on the Sabbath.

The Jews grasp the implication of our Lord’s words. Notice that John does not tell us that from this point on that the Jews are trying to kill Jesus. He tells us, “For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him” (verse 18). These Jews have already determined that Jesus must be put to death. This incident, and especially our Lord’s words, give them further incentive for doing this as soon as possible. They resolve to redouble their efforts to kill Jesus, not just because He is violating the Sabbath (a sin punishable by death), but because He is making Himself equal with God.

Conclusion

This is not the “watershed” incident, which convinces the Jews that Jesus must die. That decision has been reached earlier, on an occasion that John does not include in his Gospel. John chooses to introduce the theme of opposition here with the story of the healing of the paralytic. This opposition continues to the end of the Gospel, reaching its climax at Calvary:

The three chapters of this section, John 5-7, record the shift from mere reservation and hesitation about Jesus to outright and sometimes official opposition. The first point of controversy is the Sabbath (5:9ff.), but this is soon displaced by a fundamentally Christological issue arising out of the dispute over the Sabbath (5:16-18), and this in turn leads to an extended discourse concerning Jesus’ relationship with the Father, and the Scriptures that bear witness to him (5:19-47). Although the miracles of ch. 6 evoke superficial acclaim (6:14-15, 26), that allegiance cannot endure Jesus’ teaching: even many of his disciples abandon him (6:66). By ch. 7, he is being charged with demon-possession (7:20), and, amidst profound confusion in the masses, the authorities try to arrest him (7:30), but without success (7:45-52). Throughout this rising clamour, Jesus progressively reveals himself to be the obedient Son of God, his Father (5:19ff.); the bread of life, the true manna which alone can give life to the world (6:51); the one who alone can provide the thirst-quenching drink of the Spirit (7:37-39).²⁵⁴

This incident in John 5 does two things. First, it discloses the wickedness of unbelieving Jews, especially of unbelieving Jewish leaders. Our text describes a man who has been handicapped for 38 years. Jesus sees him and takes pity on him, not because he is pious, but because he has suffered so long. Jesus heals him without even requiring faith of him. Jesus then seeks the man out, warning him about continuing in his sin. And what does this man do? He informs the Jewish leaders of our Lord’s identity. If he knows that the Jews have already purposed to kill Jesus (as John tells us in our text), then he turns Jesus over to be killed.

As a result of our Lord’s gracious miracle, these Jewish leaders are seen for who they are. They suppose that they love God and their fellow man, in obedience to the law of Moses. They think themselves pious, and expect to be the first to enter the kingdom of God. Indeed, they expect a prominent leadership role in that kingdom. And yet when Jesus comes to town and heals a paralytic, their only concern is that the healed man is “walking illegally” (with his mat). They hardly seem to notice or care that the man is “walking”—the paralytic has been healed! And then, because Jesus has performed such a miracle, they begin to persecute the Son of God.²⁵⁵ When Jesus points out that this is exactly who He is, they redouble their efforts to kill Him. The wickedness of man never ceases to amaze us.

The second thing this incident in John’s Gospel does is to provide the occasion for Jesus to state very clearly (and very early in this Gospel) just who He is. I have often heard someone say, “Just who do you think you are?” Jesus tells these Jewish leaders who He is, and they do not like it at all.

Here, my friend, is the most important point of all. Who Jesus is makes all the difference in the world. Some ignorantly or foolishly say that Jesus did not claim to be God. They have not read the Gospels well, and they can hardly have read John’s Gospel at all! John tells us that Jesus is God (John 1). He now tells us that Jesus claims to be God (chapter 5—not to mention chapters 3 and 4). And he tells us as well that Jesus’ claim to be God is the reason why the Jews feel justified in resolving to put Him to death.

It is completely clear that John claims Jesus is God come down to earth, having taken on human flesh. It is clear that Jesus claims to be God, having come from the Father in heaven. And it is also clear that the Jews understand Him to do so. The issue is not whether our Lord claims to be God, nor whether His enemies think He is claiming to be God. The issue is whether our Lord is who He claims to be.

If Jesus is who He claims to be, then we would expect Him to have authority over sickness, demons, and even death. The signs which He performs show this to be the case. If He is the Son of God, then He also has the authority to act in God’s behalf, indeed, to act as God—healing on the Sabbath, forgiving sins, or cleansing the temple. Everything our Lord says and does hangs on this single issue: is Jesus who He claims to be? If He is, then we should accept His words as the very words of God. We should cast ourselves upon Him for the forgiveness of our sins and for the gift of eternal life. In John’s words, we should “believe” and have life in His name (20:31).

The most important question you will ever answer is this: “Who is Jesus Christ?” John gives us the answer, clearly. Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who speaks and acts for God, and as God. Jesus Christ is the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” He is the only One through whom your sins can be forgiven, the only way to heaven (John 14:6). Do you believe this? John wrote this Gospel to convince you of this truth (20:31). Believing on Him is the only way to heaven. Rejecting Him is to remain destined for hell. It is as simple as that. These are not my words; they are His words, and you must determine whether or not you believe Him. Believing His words does not make them true, any more than denying them makes them false. You should believe them because they are true, because they are spoken by the Son of God. Believing them does save you, and rejecting them proves you worthy of eternal condemnation (hell).

It is not without significance that John selects this miracle as further evidence of Jesus’ identity as the Messiah. Note the words of the prophet Isaiah, and compare them not only with the story of the healing of the paralytic in our text, but with the healing of the lame man in Acts 3:

4 Say to those who are fearful-hearted, “Be strong, do not fear! Behold, your God will come with vengeance, With the recompense of God; He will come and save you.” 5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, And the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. 6 Then the lame shall leap like a deer, And the tongue of the dumb sing. For waters shall burst forth in the wilderness, And streams in the desert (Isaiah 35:4-6, NKJV).

1 Now Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time for prayer, at three o’clock in the afternoon. 2 And a man lame from birth was being carried up, who was placed every day at the temple gate called the ‘Beautiful Gate’ so he could ask for money from those going into the temple courts. 3 When he saw Peter and John about to go into the temple courts, he asked them for money. 4 Peter looked directly at him (as did John) and said, “Look at us!” 5 So the lame man paid attention to them, expecting to receive something from them. 6 But Peter said, “I have no silver or gold, but what I do have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, stand up and walk!” 7 Then Peter took hold of him by the right hand and raised him up, and at once the man’s feet and ankles were made strong. 8 He jumped up, stood and began walking around, and he entered the temple courts with them, walking and leaping and praising God. 9 All the people saw him walking and praising God, 10 and they recognized him as the man who used to sit and ask for donations at the Beautiful Gate of the temple, and they were filled with astonishment and amazement at what had happened to him (Acts 3:1-10).

Our text has several more lessons to teach us, which I shall briefly mention.

We cannot help but notice that those who are most in the wrong here are those who are most assured of being right. Wanting to be right, and thinking you are right are not the same as being right. There are few evils as great as doing wrong in the name of doing what is right. “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20, NKJV).

Those who do evil in the name of doing right are also those who call Jesus evil for being right and doing what is right.

Doing what is right does not always result in a righteous or a rewarding response. Doing what is right is always the right thing to do. Doing what is right may very well produce a favorable response. But we must also remember Jesus’ words that if men rejected and persecuted Him, they will certainly do so to us. If our Lord’s good deed resulted in betrayal by the recipient of a supernatural healing, and persecution by the Jewish religious leaders, let us expect that our good deeds may also produce unpleasant responses.

18 “If the world hates you, be aware that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own. But because you do not belong to the world, but I chose you out of the world, for this reason the world hates you. 20 Remember what I told you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they obeyed my word, they will obey yours too. 21 But they will do all these things to you on account of my name, because they do not know the one who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. But they no longer have any excuse for their sin. 23 The one who hates me hates my Father too. 24 If I had not performed among them the miraculous deeds that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen the deeds and have hated both me and my Father. 25 But this happened to fulfill the word that is written in their law, ‘They hated me without reason’” (John 15:18-25).

This passage is a reminder of the “weakness” of signs and wonders, and of the power of God’s Word. Signs and wonders do not necessarily produce faith, and the faith they do produce is second-class, in and of itself (2:23-25). Here, the miracle Jesus performs does not even produce faith in the one who is healed. The paralytic betrays our Lord by identifying Him to the authorities. Signs and wonders are something like illegal “drugs”—they may produce a spectacular effect at the beginning, but as time goes on, there is a demand for more and more. Signs and wonders have a diminishing effect. They are not wrong, for John uses them in this Gospel to convince his readers that Jesus is the Messiah, so that men and women might believe in His name and obtain the gift of eternal life.

While signs seem to produce fewer and fewer saints, the word of our Lord is mighty. Jesus does not need the angel-troubled waters of the pool of Bethesda to heal the paralytic. He does not even need the faith of this disabled man. All that is required is His word. At His command, the man who has been disabled for 38 years gets up and walks—not only walks, but carries his bed with him. He who is the Word, the Logos, who created the world with a word, is the One who heals with but a word. We should thus heed His words, for they are spirit and life (John 6:63).

Finally, we see in our text a beautiful example of sovereign grace. Grace is God’s unmerited favor, God’s undeserved goodness. Because it is grace, and cannot be earned, it must be sovereignly bestowed. That is, grace is not bestowed upon men because of who they are or what they have done. Grace is not given to those who are worthy and withheld from the unworthy. Men are always unworthy of the grace God sovereignly bestows upon them. Knowing what we know, who of us would have selected this fellow to be healed, rather than some other individual? Jesus heals this man, knowing him as well as He knew the woman at the well. He knows this man’s sin, which he persists in practicing up to the moment of his healing and beyond. Jesus knows this man will turn Him in to the authorities, who are determined to kill Him. This man is the recipient of God’s grace, not because of who he is, but because of the kindness of our Lord alone. If we are honest, we will quickly admit that we, too, are unworthy recipients of His grace as demonstrated by our salvation.

Pressing this point further, notice that our Lord ministers to this ailing man, knowing he will not come to faith. Jesus serves this man who will not be saved. Jesus does not just serve to save. That is, He does not just serve those who will be saved. He serves because of who He is, not because of the worthiness of those served. Let us be careful that we do not serve men, assuming they will be saved. They may not be saved, no matter how much we serve them. We, like our Lord, serve out of the depths of the love God has given us for others, regardless of whether that love is reciprocated or rewarded by those whom we serve.

Addendum:
An Important Question

Allow me to raise a question which may be on your mind: “Why doesn’t Jesus heal the others who are ailing at the pool of Bethesda? If Jesus is able (and surely He is), why doesn’t Jesus heal everyone at the pool that day?” My first “tongue-in-cheek” answer is that Jesus is leaving some for the apostles to heal, after His resurrection and ascension. For example, there was the crippled man healed by Peter and John on their way to the temple in Acts 3. However, this is not a satisfactory answer. Let us pursue the matter further then.

First, I must remind you that this question is not entirely academic. Jesus is still able to heal every sick person. God still heals today, but only a few, rather than all. The answer to the above question is also the answer to those who desire that God heal all the sick today.

Second, healing is a manifestation of God’s sovereign grace. No one deserves to be healed. Thus, no one has the right to complain if God does not heal them. We have no more right to complain about not being healed than we do to complain about not being a millionaire. If grace is undeserved, and sovereignly bestowed, then God is free to heal those whom He heals and not to heal the rest.

Third, it is very wrong to conclude that those who are not healed by God are those from whom God’s grace has necessarily been withheld. Do not understand me to say that those whom God heals are those who receive grace, and that those who are not healed are those from whom grace has been withheld. God may very well manifest His grace through physical affliction. One’s physical affliction may be that which God uses to draw men to Himself. How many healthy people came to Jesus for grace? But God may also use physical affliction in the life of the Christian to produce spiritual depth and growth, and thus to be a blessing to others (see 2 Corinthians 1:3-11).

Fourth, let us look at a text which deals directly with the question at hand:

29 Now as soon as they left the synagogue they went to the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. 30 Simon’s mother-in-law was lying down with a fever, so they spoke to Jesus at once about her. 31 Hecame and raised her by taking her hand. Then the fever left her and she began to serve them. 32 When it was evening, after sunset, they brought to him all who were sick and demon-possessed. 33 Thewhole town gathered by the door. 34 So he healed many sick with various diseases and drove out many demons. But he would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew him. 35 Then Jesus got up in the darkness of the early morning and went out to a deserted place, and there he spent time in prayer. 36 Simon and his companions searched for him. 37 When they found him, they said, “Everyone is looking for you.” 38 He answered, “Let us go elsewhere, into the surrounding villages, so that I can preach there too. For that is what I came to do.” 39 So he went into all of Galilee preaching in their synagogues and casting out demons (Mark 1:29-39).

For our Lord, one healing leads to many healings. Jesus heals Simon Peter’s mother-in-law. Word gets out, and by evening, a crowd of sick people assemble outside the door. Jesus graciously heals those who gather. In the morning, an even greater multitude has gathered, and yet Jesus is nowhere to be found. Simon and his companions set out to look for Jesus and find Him praying. Simon’s words (paraphrased) are almost a rebuke: “Lord, where have you been! What are you doing out here, praying? There is a huge crowd of sick people waiting for you back at my mother-in-law’s house. Let’s get going; there’s work to do!”

Does Jesus not care about these sick people? Of course He does. But He also knows that it is a never-ending problem. The more He heals, the more will come to Him for healing. The more who come, the more time He will spend healing. Jesus knows what His mission is. His mission is not primarily to heal, but to proclaim the good news of the gospel. In importance, His healing ministry is secondary. It accredits His ministry and message. It sets Him apart from other teachers. Here is a man who “teaches with authority,” by not only speaking about God’s grace, but by demonstrating it! Jesus heals very selectively because of His mission. In addition, He heals selectively because man’s primary problem is not sickness, but sin. In many cases, men’s ailments are used of God to bring them to faith.

For our Lord, healing the sick is a “tempting” thing to do. He cares about our sickness and our suffering. He is constantly moved with compassion toward those who are afflicted. Healing is also the easy thing for Him to do. It is not so much for His healing, but for His teaching that Jesus is opposed, rejected, and even crucified. Healing would make Jesus too popular, too quickly, and thus undermine His mission of proclaiming the truth—and ultimately of dying on the cross of Calvary to atone for man’s sins. Jesus purposes not to heal everyone who is sick, because that is not His primary calling, and it can become a hindrance to His priority of proclaiming the good news of the gospel.

One final observation: Jesus does not heal all because His mission is to bring about a much deeper and much more permanent healing from our sins:

I said, “LORD, be merciful to me; Heal my soul, for I have sinned against You” (Psalm 41:4, NKJV).

Who forgives all your iniquities, Who heals all your diseases (Psalm 103:3, NKJV).

He sent His word and healed them, And delivered them from their destructions (Psalm 107:20, NKJV).

He heals the brokenhearted And binds up their wounds (Psalm 147:3, NKJV).

But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed (Isaiah 53:5, NKJV).

This “healing” He offers to all who will receive Him as the “Lamb of God,” as the One who died in the sinner’s place, bearing the guilt and penalty for their sins. Have you experienced this healing? It is offered to all who will receive it.

219 I guess that this means one cannot dance at night.

220 Barbara Seuling, More Whacky Laws (New York: Scholastic Inc., 1975).

221 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 305, fn. 25.

222 J. W. Shepard, The Christ of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1939), p. 161.

223 Rav Yehoshua Y. Neuwirth, Shemirath Shabbath: A Guide to the Practical Observance of Shabbath, English edition, prepared by W. Grangewood (Jerusalem: Feldheim, 1984).

224 Ibid, p. xxx.

225 Ibid, p. xxxii.

226 Ibid, p. 1.

227 Ibid, p. 17.

228 Ibid, p. 11.

229 This is my understanding of the view expressed on pages 66-67.

230 Ibid, pp. 141-142.

231 Ibid, p. 146.

232 Ibid, p. 154.

233 Morris, p. 306, fn. 28.

234 The Greek New Testament manuscripts differ as to whether the definite article is to be found with the word “feast.” The NET Bible has chosen (with what seems to be the majority of conservative scholars) to follow the texts without the article. If it was “the” feast, the reference here would most likely be to the Passover. As it is (“a feast”), we are not certain as to which of the feasts reference is being made.

235 William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), p. 190. D. A. Carson adds: “The name of the pool is variously attested in the manuscripts as Bethesda, Bethzatha, Belzetha and Bethsaida. The first of these is almost certainly right, not only on various transcriptional grounds, but because it is now supported by the corresponding Hebrew name in the Copper Scroll from Qumran, first published in 1960. ‘Bethesda’ is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew [word rendered] ‘house of outpouring’; the Copper Scroll attests … the dual form of the same expression: ‘house of twin outpourings.’ … A Bordeaux pilgrim visited Jerusalem in AD 333, and described a pair of pools with five arcades (though he called the pools ‘Betsaida’). Sporadic excavations have probed the site for more than a century. It is located near the Church of St. Anne, in the north-east quarter of the Old City (near Nehemiah’s ‘Sheep Gate’). There were two pools, lying north and south, surrounded by four covered colonnades in a rough trapezoid, with a fifth colonnade separating the two pools.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), pp. 241-242.

236 I don’t wish to delve into the debate between differing schools of textual criticism here, but I must at least point out that not all scholars agree as to which texts are the most highly respected.

237 I should point out to those who are fans of John Calvin’s works that in his commentary on the Gospel of John, he makes no mention of any problem in verses 3 and thus seems to assume that the story about the angel troubling the waters is true.

238 Hendriksen, p. 190.

239 Carson, p. 243.

240 Hendriksen, p. 192.

241 “This healing differs from many others in that, not only is there no mention of faith on the part of the man, but there seems no room for it. The man did not even know Jesus’ name (v. 13) … Jesus is not limited by man as He works the works of God.” Morris, pp. 303-304.

242 Carson, p. 243.

243 I use the term “lucky” advisedly because it seems to me that it is either luck or assertiveness that wins one a miracle under these circumstances.

244 “‘Just as the thirty-eight years prove the gravity of the disease, so the carrying of the bed and the walking prove the completeness of the cure’ (Barrett, p. 254).” Cited by Carson, p. 244.

245 Notice how John refers to this fellow as “the man who had been healed,” while the Jews can only see him as the man carrying his mat on the Sabbath.

246 “There may also be a hint of irony (much more strongly developed in the healing of Jn. 9): the Jews hear of the wonderful healing and of the formal breach of their code, and are interested only in the latter. They think they see what is important, but in religious matters there are none so blind as those who are always certain that they see (cf. 9:39-41).” Carson, p. 245.

247 No doubt they would point to texts like Exodus 20:10; Nehemiah 13:15; and Jeremiah 17:21-22. Nevertheless, it was “their interpretation” of these texts which led to the extreme and hypocritical applications they drew from them.

248 Morris points out (p. 307, fn. 33) that the word rendered “slip out” is found only here in the New Testament, and that it means “‘to bend the head aside’ (AS), and thus ‘to dodge.’”

249 We must understand our Lord’s words here in the light of His words to His disciples in John chapter 9. There, the disciples automatically assumed that the man’s blindness was the result of someone’s sin. In that case, it was not so. That man had been born blind so that God might be glorified when our Lord healed him. In this case, the man’s sickness actually did result from his sin (see also Numbers 12:9-15; 2 Kings 5:25-27; Acts 5:1-11; 1 Corinthians 5:5; 11:30). Sickness may be the direct result of sin, but it is not always, not necessarily, the case.

250 There is some discussion as to the subtleties of the present imperative (with a negative: “stop _____”). The note in the NET Bible downplays this emphasis, but I am inclined to stick with Morris on this point, who writes: “‘Sin no more’ means ‘sin no longer’ (Goodspeed: ‘Give up sin.’). There is the implication that the man has sinned, and continues in his sin. Jesus enjoins him to break with it and be reconciled to God.” Morris, p. 307.

251 “Indeed, the verb behind ‘answered’ (apekrinato) is in the aorist middle—in John, found only here and in v. 19 (the aorist deponent passive, aprkrithe, might be expected). Abbott (par. 2537) argues that this verbal form has legal overtones: Jesus responds to their charge, he offers his defense. The fact that the middle voice of this verb is so regularly attested in legal documents (MM, pp. 64-65) may provide some support for this view.” Carson, p. 247.

252 “The expression ‘My Father’ is noteworthy. It was not the way Jews usually referred to God. Usually they spoke of ‘our Father,’ and while they might use ‘My Father’ in prayer they would qualify it with ‘in heaven’ or some other expression to remove the suggestion of familiarity. Jesus did no such thing, here or elsewhere. He habitually thought of God as in the closest relationship to Himself. The expression implies a claim which the Jews did not miss.” Morris, p. 309.

253 In the Greek text, the word translated “save” is the word often used to describe our Lord’s work of healing men (see, for example, Matthew 8:25; 9:21-22; Mark 3:4; 5:23).

254 Carson, p. 240.

255 “We are thus introduced to a theme which is important in the rest of this Gospel. Jesus does His mighty works, His ‘signs.’ But, instead of faith, strenuous opposition is aroused among the national religious leaders.” Morris, pp. 298-299.

Deutsch

Biblical Topics:

Faith

Miracles

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

13. Like Father, Like Son (John 5:19-30)

Introduction

As I approach our text, I am reminded of a story circulating among the outdoor types, which goes something like this. In the mountains of the Northwest, a man was sitting beside a campfire while he roasted some kind of bird over the fire with eager anticipation. About this time, a forest ranger came upon the camp and asked the camper what he was preparing for dinner. The camper replied that it was a seagull. A frown came over the ranger’s face as he informed this fellow that it was against the law to kill that particular bird, and that he would have to give him a citation.

The camper responded by telling the ranger how he had lost his way and had consumed all of his food. In desperation, he had managed to kill this seagull to maintain his strength. After listening sympathetically, the forest ranger told the fellow he would let him go this time with just a warning, and the camper thanked the ranger profusely. Just as the ranger was about to leave, he asked the camper, “Just out of curiosity, what does seagull taste like?” Thinking for a moment, the camper responded, “Well, I would place it somewhere between a spotted owl and a bald eagle.”

Needless to say, this camper’s words got him into even more trouble. He would have been better off not to say anything at all. Some may think our Lord’s words in our text are something like this camper’s statement. At the outset, Jesus is deemed guilty of breaking the Sabbath, and of instructing the healed paralytic to do likewise. But after our Lord defends His actions to the Jewish authorities,⁰ He is considered guilty of an even greater offense—claiming to be equal with God.

Our text is our Lord’s response to the accusations made against Him. Some may be tempted to think it is less than spectacular, for no debate is actually recorded, and there is no interchange between our Lord and the Jewish authorities. Only our Lord’s words are recorded.¹ Our text contains a three-fold use of the (King James) expression, “Verily, verily, I say unto you …” (verses 19, 24, 25).² Surely this tells us that the words spoken here are vitally important, both to be heard and to be heeded.

Listen to what others have said about our text:

“Nowhere else in the Gospels do we find our Lord making such a formal, systematic, orderly, regular statement of His own unity with the Father, His divine commission and authority, and the proofs of His Messiahship, as we find in this discourse” (Ryle).³

Ryle adds: ‘To me it seems one of the deepest things in the Bible.’ Similarly Phillips in his translation inserts a sub-heading ‘Jesus makes His tremendous claim.’⁴

It is, as Barclay says, ‘an act of the most extraordinary and unique courage … He must have known that to speak like this was to court death. It is His claim to be King; and He knew well that the man who listened to words like this had only two alternatives—the listener must either accept Jesus as the Son of God, or he must hate Him as a blasphemer and seek to destroy Him. There is hardly any passage where Jesus appeals for men’s love and defies men’s hatred as He does here.’⁵

Our Lord’s words are a bold stroke. If Jesus wishes to avoid trouble with the Jews, this is the time for Him to deny, to “clarify,” or to minimize, His previous claim to be equal with God. Instead, He makes His claim even more emphatically. Indeed, if you look at the text carefully, His words put the Jewish authorities on the defensive. They are the ones who should be uneasy—not our Lord. In our text, the Lord Jesus boldly claims to be the Son of God, equal with God, and thus having full authority to act like His Father.

This is one of the great texts in the Gospel of John and in the entire New Testament. The truths set down here are the very foundation of the gospel and of our faith. Let us listen well, for they are words that our Lord indicates we should hear and heed.

Background

Until now, Jesus has been keeping a relatively low profile. He has been very reluctant to draw too much attention to Himself too quickly, or to create too much enthusiasm of the wrong kind. When He turned the water into wine in chapter 2, He did so in a way that prevented most from even knowing that a miracle had taken place. Only His disciples are said to have “believed” as a result of this miracle (2:11). The cleansing of the temple was much more public, and it certainly got the attention of the religious leaders in Jerusalem (2:18ff.). It was not, however, the sort of event which attracted a large group of enthusiastic followers. The other signs our Lord performed in Jerusalem at this time would have gained our Lord a bigger following if He had not deliberately kept His distance from His “sign-faith” followers (2:23-25).

The events of chapters 3 and 4 are consistent with our Lord’s desire not to attract undue attention to Himself, and particularly to His miracles. From all appearances, His meeting with Nicodemus was a private interview, conducted at night. When our Lord’s ministry in the Judean wilderness became too prominent, He and His disciples retreated to Galilee, where He was not as enthusiastically sought (3:22–4:3). For a few days, He did have a very successful ministry among the Samaritans, but this had little or no impact on the Jews, who looked upon the Samaritans with disdain (4:4-42).

The healing of the royal official’s son, recorded in John 4:43-54, was accomplished in a way that left the curious crowds in the dark. Our Lord did not accompany the royal official to his home and to the bedside of his ailing son. Instead, Jesus rebuked the “sign-seekers,” and then simply informed the distraught father that his son would live. Not until the official had nearly reached his home did he learn that Jesus had healed his son from a distance. Only the man and his household are said to have come to faith as a result of this miracle (4:53).

It is the healing of the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda which draws considerable attention to our Lord. This miracle prompts the Jewish religious leaders to view Jesus as a notorious criminal, deserving the death penalty. This is no accident. Our Lord selects this paralytic to be healed, knowing not only how long he has suffered, but how he and others will respond to his healing. Jesus asks the man if he wishes to be healed, and the fellow proceeds to make excuses for all the time he has spent by the pool without being healed. Jesus does not require faith of the man, but commands him to rise, take up his bed, and walk. The man can do nothing else. As he does so, our Lord melts into the crowd. The healed man is quickly intercepted by “the Jews,” who accuse him of violating the Sabbath by carrying his bed on this sacred day. The former paralytic justifies himself by laying the responsibility on the One who healed him. But when pressed to identify this law-breaker, he is unable to give them our Lord’s name, for he never even found that out. When Jesus later finds the man in the temple, He admonishes him to forsake his sin, lest a worse condition come upon him. There is no repentance on this man’s part and no mention of gratitude. Instead, he seeks out the authorities so that he can identify Jesus as the villain.

Once Jesus is identified as the “culprit,” zealous Jews make it their business to wage an attack against Him:

16 Now because Jesus was doing these things⁶ on the Sabbath, the Jewish authorities began persecuting⁷ him. 17 So Jesus told them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God (John 5:16-18).

The Jewish authorities lose interest in the healed paralytic and actively press their attack against Jesus. Initially, they accuse Jesus of breaking the law by healing on the Sabbath and commanding this man to carry his bed. Jesus’ defense is simple: “I am only carrying out My Father’s work.” This is what really sets the Jewish authorities off. Jesus is not just a Sabbath-breaker; He is a blasphemer! He has boldly claimed to be God! For the Jews, there is no more serious offense than blasphemy. Now they are even more intent on putting Him to death. The words of our text are Jesus’ response to this charge of blasphemy.

Who Jesus Claims to Be
(5:19-23)

19 So Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him everything he does, and greater deeds than these he will show him, so that you may be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes. 22 Furthermore, the Father does not judge anyone, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all people may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

Our Lord makes a bold claim. It does not minimize or qualify His earlier declaration to be the Son of God. His words even more boldly affirm His previous claim. In verse 19 Jesus says, “I can do nothing apart from what My Father is doing.” He then sets out to give specific examples of His activities in relation to the working of His Father. In verse 23, Jesus declares the Father’s purpose in this and underscores the seriousness of refusing to honor the Son.

Let’s begin with our Lord’s claim: “I can do nothing apart from what My Father is doing.” The Jews are greatly distressed by the way Jesus speaks and acts. In short, Jesus acts like God. Like the Father, Jesus works on the Sabbath. To make matters worse, Jesus claims that God is His Father. One may not like what Jesus is saying, but it must be granted that at least He is consistent. Jesus acts like God and talks as if He is God. In fact, to defend His God-like actions, Jesus claims to be God.

It was Nicodemus, one of the Pharisees and a member of the Sanhedrin, who said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs that you do unless God is with him” (John 3:2, emphasis mine). Later on in John’s Gospel, the blind man whose sight was restored by our Lord said virtually the same thing:

28 They heaped insults on him, saying, “You are his disciple! We are disciples of Moses! 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses! We do not know where this man comes from!” 30 The man replied, “This is a remarkable thing, that you don’t know where he comes from, and yet he caused me to see! 31 We know that God doesn’t listen to sinners, but if anyone is devout and does his will God listens to him. 32 Never before has anyone heard of someone causing a man born blind to see. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing” (John 9:28-33, emphasis mine).

Jesus cannot do the things He does apart from His being the Son of God. Later, the Jews will attempt to counter our Lord’s statement by accusing Him of performing miracles by means of Satan’s power. Jesus then challenges His opponents to explain why Satan could be the one empowering Him, since He attacks the powers of darkness and casts out demons (see Mark 3:22-26). Our Lord’s defense is powerful. How can you deny the claims of One who says He is God and who also does the works of God?

I believe there is still another dimension to our Lord’s words. The thrust of the Jews’ accusation against our Lord is this: “How can you dare presume to act and speak as if you were God?” Jesus turns this accusation around by saying, in effect, “How is it possible for the Son of God to act in any way that is independent of, or inconsistent with God the Father and what He is doing?” The Jews are saying, “How is it possible for you to speak and act as you do?” Jesus is saying, “If I am God, how is it possible for Me to do otherwise?”

It is impossible for a lion to act like a lamb, for a bear to behave like a bunny rabbit. It is impossible for our Lord to act in any way that is not like His Father. Jesus is one with the Father. Jesus is God. He must therefore act and speak like God. Is this not what our Lord’s “temptation” was all about (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-12)? And this is exactly what Satan could not comprehend—that as the Son of God, Jesus could not act independently of God. Satan seems to have believed that because Jesus was God He could act as He pleased. In our text, Jesus tells us the opposite: because He is God, He must act like God. He cannot act independently of His Father! Satan’s efforts were all in vain. He tries to entice Jesus to do something that is impossible for Him to do—act in an unGod-like manner—because He is the Son of God.

I believe our Lord’s first defense is based upon His divine nature. He is, by nature, divine (to which, John tells us, sinless humanity has been added—John 1:14-18). He cannot act contrary to His nature. He must act as God the Father acts. His words and His deeds are those of the Father. Like father, like son, we say, and so does our Lord. The Son does what He sees His Father doing.

I remember when our first child, Timothy, was born.⁸ My parents came to the hospital to visit my wife Jeannette and me, and to see our new son. My Dad and I made our way down to the nursery, where he saw Timothy for the first time. I still remember that scene, even though it was years ago. I looked over at my Dad, and he had his elbow propped on the windowsill of the nursery, with his index finger characteristically placed alongside his nose. I then realized I was doing the exact same thing. I had my elbow on the windowsill, with my finger alongside my nose. I almost expected Timmy to do the same thing. Like father, like son.

The second element of our Lord’s defense is rooted in the Father’s love for Him as His Son. Even if Jesus could act independently of the Father (which He cannot), why would He ever want to? The Father loves⁹ the Son, and He shows the Son all that He is doing. The Father withholds nothing from the Son. The Father and the Son share all things. So what is it the Son needs to grasp for Himself by acting independently of the Father? The Father’s love for the Son removes any motivation for the Son to act independently of the Father.

The Father shows the Son everything He is doing so that the Son will do likewise. What Jesus is doing is that which He has seen the Father doing. Specifically, because He has seen the Father work on the Sabbath, the Son does likewise (5:17). As great as the things are that He has already done (see 2:23-25), the Father has even greater things to show the Son—so that when the Son does them men will be amazed (verse 20).¹⁰ Just what are these “greater deeds” yet to be shown the Son, and yet to be done by the Son? Jesus is just about to tell us:

21 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes. 22 Furthermore, the Father does not judge anyone, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all people may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him” (John 5:21-23).

Jesus has not yet raised the dead in John’s Gospel, but in chapter 11 He will raise Lazarus. Our Lord points to the works He has already done to prove His identity as the Son of God. Now, He speaks of the greater works He is yet to do, which will even more dramatically validate His claims. God alone raises the dead (Deuteronomy 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:6; 2 Kings 5:7),¹¹ giving men life. So also the Son gives life to whomever He wishes (5:21). This “giving of life” appears to be the giving of spiritual life up to this point in our Lord’s ministry (see John 3:1-16; 4:14). But before long, our Lord will “give life” by literally raising the dead.

The Son has the power to give life to the dead, and the Father has also assigned all judgment to Him. The Son saves men by bearing the wrath of God in the sinner’s place; He also executes God’s wrath upon those who reject His sacrifice for sins. That role once played by the Father—the judgment of all men—has now been given over to the Son exclusively, so that the Son might be uniquely honored by men, just as they honored the Father as the “Judge of all the earth” (see Genesis 18:25). Those who refuse to honor the Son also dishonor the Father, who has given all judgment to the Son (verse 23). Men must honor the Son as they do the Father, because the Father has purposed it to be this way.

Getting Personal and Practical
(5:24-30)

24 “I tell you the solemn truth, the one who hears my message and believes the one who sent me has eternal life, and will not be condemned, but has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the solemn truth, a time is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and the ones who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in himself, thus he has granted the Son to have life in himself; 27 and he granted the Son authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation. 30 I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.”

Jesus is defending Himself against charges that could (and eventually will) cost Him His life. Any other person in such circumstances would be terrified and very eager to do an adequate job of defending himself. In our text, our Lord is simply “stating the facts.” He is not seeking to save Himself. He is laying out His case so that His words and actions will be correctly understood as a bold claim to His being the Son of God.

Our Lord’s words in this text should cause His Jewish opponents considerable distress. In verses 24-30, Jesus spells out the practical implications of His being the Son of God. If what He says is true, several implications must be faced. These implications are introduced by the solemn words, “Verily, verily” (KJV; “I tell you the solemn truth,” NET Bible). If Jesus is the Son of God, then whoever hears His message and believes in the One who sent Him has eternal life. To possess eternal life is to escape divine condemnation. The one who believes crosses over from a state of death to the state of life.

Observe how our Lord intertwines His work with the works of God the Father. He is the Son of God. As the Son, He does what His loving Father shows Him. As the Father has life in Himself, and thus brings the dead to life, so the Son gives life. The judgment the Father once administered has now been given over to the Son. Those who honor the Son honor the Father, and those who dishonor the Son dishonor the Father who sent Him. The one who believes in the message Jesus speaks believes in the One who sent Him, and thus has eternal life. The Son is inseparably related to the Father.

Just how can the Son give eternal life to those who believe in Him, and judge those who reject Him? It is only through resurrection—His resurrection, and the resurrection of the dead. Jesus explains this in verses 25 through 30. He foretells of a future time when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live (verse 25). This is possible because of our Lord’s Father-Son relationship with God the Father. The Father has life in Himself, and thus He has also granted the Son the power to give life to others (verse 26). It is this power to give life that enables the Son to judge all men. How can our Lord judge an Adolf Hitler when this man died years ago? He can judge Adolf Hitler after He Himself has raised Hitler from the dead, and this He will do with all unbelievers:

30 Therefore, although God has overlooked such times of ignorance, he now commands all people everywhere to repent, 31 because he has set a day on which he is going to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whom he designated, having provided proof to all by raising him from the dead (Acts 17:30-31).

5 You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had, 6 who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. 8 He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross. 9 As a result God exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow—in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue should confess to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:5-11).

11 Then I saw a large white throne and the one who was seated on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne. Then books were opened, and another book was opened—the book of life. So the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to their deeds. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each one was judged according to his deeds. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. 15 If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, that person was thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15).

Jesus makes it very clear: a time is coming when He will raise all the dead from the grave. The dead include not only those who are saved, but those who are not. The righteous experience the resurrection resulting in (eternal) life. The unrighteous dead are the recipients of the resurrection resulting in condemnation (verses 28-29). The destiny of all who are raised is linked to the deeds they have done in this life:

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt (Daniel 12:2, NKJV).

15 “Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruit. People don’t gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? 17 In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit” (Matthew 7:15-20).

28 “Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation” (John 5:28-29).

3 And do you think, whoever you are, when you judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself, that you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance? 5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourselves in the day of wrath, when God’s righteous judgment is revealed! 6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 eternal life to those who by perseverance in good works seek glory and honor and immortality, 8 but wrath and anger to those who live in selfish ambition and do not obey the truth but follow unrighteousness. 9 There will be affliction and distress on everyone who does evil, on the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, for the Jew first and also the Greek (Romans 2:3-10).

These words may greatly trouble some. Do these texts not teach that salvation is obtained by works, rather than by faith? They most certainly do not teach salvation by works! Let us remember what we have already read in the Gospel of John:

3 Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?” 5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all be born from above.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it will, and you hear the sound it makes, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit” (John 3:3-8).

Works are not the means by which one is saved, but they are the evidence of having been saved. This is what James emphasizes so strongly:

14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but does not have works? Can this kind of faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacks daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, keep warm and eat well,” but you do not give them what the body needs, what good is it? 17 So also faith, if it does not have works, is dead being by itself. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith without works and I will show faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; well and good. Even the demons believe that—and tremble with fear. 20 But would you like evidence, you empty person, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that his faith was working together with his works and his faith was perfected by works. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Now Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And similarly, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26).

Jesus is speaking to the Jewish authorities, those who have condemned Him on the basis of His works. They believe He is guilty of breaking the Sabbath and of blasphemy. In their eyes, He is worthy of the death penalty. These folks profess to be the people of God, and yet they dishonor the Son of God. They condemn others on the basis of their works. Jesus reminds His adversaries that this cuts both ways. Our Lord’s works demonstrate that He is indeed the Son of God. Their works will be the basis for their eternal condemnation. Their “fruits” will show their professions of faith to be insincere.

God knows men’s hearts, and thus He alone can judge men apart from their works:

3 So for me, it is a minor matter that I am judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. 4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not acquitted because of this. The one who judges me is the Lord. 5 So then, do not judge anything before the time. Wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the motives of hearts. Then each will receive recognition from God (1 Corinthians 4:3-5).

As men, we cannot know what is in the hearts of others. Thus, as Paul says above in 1 Corinthians, we must leave such judging to God in the end time. What we can see and know is the “fruit” of men’s lives—their deeds. Thus, our Lord speaks of judgment based upon men’s deeds, because this is what is visible to men. What we do verifies or nullifies what we say. Our deeds demonstrate the condition of our hearts (see Deuteronomy 8:2).

There is yet one more thing. While no one is ever saved by their good works (see Romans 3:9-20; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5-6), men are condemned on the basis of their deeds. That’s what the Law (the Law of Moses) is about. The Law defines sin, largely in terms of deeds. When we break the law, we do something God has forbidden, or we fail to do something God has commanded. No one can be saved by their good works but must cast themselves upon Jesus Christ, who died for their sins and who offers them His righteousness. When men reject Jesus Christ as God’s only means of salvation, they choose to stand before God on the basis of their own works, rather than on the basis of Christ’s work on the cross. Lost men will stand before a righteous and holy God on the basis of their own worthless and wretched works. They will be condemned because their works are worthy only of condemnation (Isaiah 64:6), and because they have rejected Him, whose work is able to save them (John 3:16-21, 36).

Jesus then concludes His defense in almost the same way He commenced it:

So Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing” (John 5:19a).

“I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me” (John 5:30).

Jesus does not act independently of His Father. What He sees His Father doing, He does (verse 19). According to what He hears His Father say, He judges (verse 30). Jesus is acting like God and speaking like God because He is God. If He were not God, He could not speak or act as He does.

Conclusion

If we think through the Gospels, we will realize that our Lord’s claim is consistent with everything we read in the New Testament. In the first chapter of John’s Gospel, the apostle boldly claims that our Lord—“the Word”—is God, and that He was actively involved in the creation of the world. We would expect from our Lord’s words in this fifth chapter of John that what the Son sees the Father doing, He will do also. Our Lord’s claim to be God is seconded by John, who tells us that “the Word was God.” John also tells us that “the Word became flesh.”

The temptation of our Lord, described by Matthew and Luke, is completely consistent with what our Lord has said in our text: Jesus claims to be the Son of God. Satan seeks to tempt our Lord, predicated on the fact that He is the Son of God:

3 The tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written: ‘A person is not to live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” 5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, and stood him on the highest point of the temple. 6 He said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down. For it is written: ‘He will command his angels about you’ and ‘with their hands they will lift you up, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone’” (Matthew 3:3-6, underscoring mine).

In many ways, the temptation was a testing of our Lord as the Son of God. Having passed this test, it is clear that He alone is qualified to act as the Son of God, which He consistently does.

If Jesus is the Son of God, then His challenge to the religious leaders at the temple makes perfect sense:

18 So then the Jewish leaders responded, “What sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” 19 Jesus replied, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 20 Then the Jewish leaders said to him, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 21 But Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the saying that Jesus had spoken (John 2:18-22).

If Jesus is the Son of God, then He has the right—indeed the obligation—to correct abuses of the temple, His Father’s house. And since He is the Son of God, He has life in Himself, just as the Father does. No man can take away His life; He gives it up, and He will take it up again (John 10:17-18). Do these religious leaders wish to know just who Jesus thinks He is? He is God, and His resurrection will prove it once for all.¹²

Who Jesus is—the Son of God—explains why He “broke” the Sabbath by working (John 5:1-18). Jesus is the Son of God, and the Son does what He sees His Father doing. Since the Father is at work on the Sabbath, so is the Son.

Since Jesus is the Son of God, the resurrection of Lazarus in John chapter 11 makes perfect sense. Jesus says in our text that since He has life in Himself, He will raise the dead. In the Gospel of John, Lazarus is the first to rise from the dead. Our Lord will rise, too. This explains why His resurrection was a necessity:

22 “Israelite men, listen to these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man clearly demonstrated to you to be from God by powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed through him among you, just as you yourselves know—23 this man, who was handed over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you executed by nailing him to a cross at the hands of Gentiles. 24 But God raised him up, having released him from the pains of death, because it was not possible for him to be held in its power” (Acts 2:22-24; see also 1 Corinthians 15).

Imagine this: Peter tells us that it was impossible for our Lord not to rise from the dead. Many people today, as in times past, will say just the opposite. They will tell us that it is impossible for Him to rise from the dead. Why was it impossible for Him not to rise? The answer: because of who He is. If Jesus is God, then He has life in Himself. It would therefore be impossible for One who possesses life, who is life, not to live. That is Peter’s point. Let those who would deny the resurrection admit that they must first deny our Lord’s deity before they can deny His resurrection.

The fact that Jesus is the Son of God explains His voluntary death on the cross of Calvary. Jesus is the Son, who does whatever He sees His Father doing. His Father is seeking to save those who are lost. Is it any wonder that Jesus would die on the cross of Calvary? He was doing what His Father was doing—seeking to save lost sinners.

The fact that Jesus is the Son of God explains the agony of our Lord’s suffering at Calvary. Who can read the accounts of our Lord’s agony in Gethsemane, and on the cross of Calvary, without feeling a deep sense of awe at how much He suffered? It was not just the physical suffering of Jesus, because this was not His primary suffering. The great agony of our Lord is recorded in these words,

At about three o’clock Jesus shouted with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46; see Psalm 22:1.)

Jesus was one with His Father (John 10:30). He experienced a unity with the Father which only He, as the Son, could know. And yet it was on the cross that the Father turned His back on the Son. Who can grasp the agony of that separation between Father and Son?

Our text, and our Lord’s claim to be the Son of God, explains the importance and the significance of Easter. I am preaching this message on Easter Sunday. In one sense, this message is not an “Easter message.” It is but the next in a continuing series of messages from the Gospel of John. But it certainly seems providential that we would reach this text on Easter Sunday. Easter is the celebration of our Lord’s resurrection from the dead. If, indeed, He is the Son of God (as He claims to be, and as He surely is), then it would have been impossible for Him not to rise from the dead. But since He has risen from the dead, this historical fact proves that everything Jesus claims about Himself is true. He is the Son of God. And if He is the Son of God, then He has the right to “break the Sabbath,” just as His Father does. He has the right to cleanse the temple and to give life to others. He also has the right to judge all men.

Many people go to church on Easter as a kind of annual ritual. They come to church and tip their hat to God. They talk of the resurrection of Jesus and find a kind of comfort in the fact that He is said to have risen from the dead. Such a view of Easter is shallow and foolish, one that does not square with the Gospels. It most certainly does not take our text seriously enough.

The first thing we must acknowledge from our text is that Jesus claims to be God. His adversaries understand Him to claim this, and it is for this that they will eventually put Him to death. When given the opportunity to deny this claim—or at least to clarify it—Jesus only repeats the same claim more emphatically. He challenges His adversaries to explain how He can do the works He performs if He is not God. He promises to do even greater things. He claims to have power over death and the ability to give life. He claims that He will raise all men from the dead and that He will judge all mankind.

That our Lord claims to be God could not be more emphatically stated than it is in our text. If His words are false, then we are foolish to worship Him. We would be obliged to condemn Him as a fraud. But if His words are true, then we must do far more than tip our hats to Him. The Gospel accounts and the words of the apostles all affirm that our Lord’s claim to be God is true. If it is true, then we will do well to apply this truth as our Lord has indicated. We should first acknowledge Jesus to be the divine Son of God. We should endorse all of His actions and all of His teachings as those appropriate for the Son of God. We should expect that the things He promises which have not yet occurred will happen (such as the resurrection of all the dead). Most importantly, we should trust in Him as God’s only remedy for sin and His only provision for eternal life. We should believe in Him, knowing that it will save us from eternal condemnation.

Those who trust in Jesus for salvation should rejoice in the truths He has emphatically stated in our text. Those who do not trust in Him as the Son of God and the Savior of the world should not bother to tip their hat to Him, or to find some backhanded comfort in His life, death, and resurrection. Easter should not be a comfort to them, but a source of dread. The resurrection of our Lord from the dead is proof that He is God, and that His claims are true. The resurrection of our Lord from the dead assures us that all who trust in Him will be saved, and that all those who do not will suffer eternal condemnation.

Let no unbeliever find comfort in the fact that Jesus died and rose again. Let them not seek to find comfort in the thought that once they die they will cease to exist. Because Jesus Christ is the Son of God, He did rise from the dead, and He will likewise raise all the dead. While those who trust in Him will be raised to the resurrection unto life, those who have not trusted in Him will be raised to the resurrection of eternal condemnation. Our Lord’s deity and His resurrection from the dead should be the most dreaded of all biblical doctrines, because it means that those who have not trusted in Jesus Christ for salvation face an eternity of condemnation.

It is very clear from our text who Jesus claims to be. It is also very clear who the Jewish authorities believe Jesus claims to be. The two most important questions you will ever answer are these:

(1) Is Jesus right about who He claims to be?

(2) If He is right, what have you done about it?

There are no more important questions in life than these. What is your answer? The answer of the Gospel of John is crystal clear: Jesus is the Son of God, the Savior of the world. John wrote this Gospel to convince you of this truth (John 20:30-31). Do you believe our Lord and John? If you do, have you trusted in Jesus as your Savior, the One who died in your place, who bore the penalty for your sins? If you believe in Him, your sins will be forgiven, and you will have eternal life. You will also escape from eternal condemnation. If you do not believe, you are condemned already. There is no more frightening future than that which you have chosen by your unbelief.

I challenge you, as the Apostle John does, to consider the claims of Jesus Christ, and then respond to Him in faith by believing in Him for eternal salvation.

0 In the Greek text, John simply refers to these folks as “the Jews.” From the context, we would infer they are the “Jewish religious authorities.”

1 This is not at all to suggest that the Jews said nothing. It is to say that John did not find their words profitable for us, and thus included only our Lord’s words.

2 In the NET Bible this expression is rendered, “I tell you the solemn truth.”

3 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 311.

4 Morris, p. 311, fn. 52.

5 Morris, p. 311, fn. 53.

6 The study notes in the NET Bible suggest that the plural, “these things” refers to other miracles which Jesus performed on the Sabbath. While this is possible, and we know that Jesus did perform other miracles on the Sabbath, reference to this must be found elsewhere. I believe the plural refers to “sins” which the Pharisees would find in our text. I would therefore be more inclined to understand the plural as referring to two sins the Jews think Jesus is guilty of in this one incident John records: (1) breaking the Sabbath by healing this man on the Sabbath; and, (2) commanding the paralytic to break the Sabbath by carrying his bed on the Sabbath. Thus, in their minds, Jesus is not only guilty of breaking the Sabbath Himself, but also of commanding others to do so.

7 This same term is only found once elsewhere in John (15:20). From this text and Luke 11:49, I would think that more than “harassing” is in view. No wonder we read in the next verse (John 5:17) that the Jews were “trying even harder to kill him.”

8 Timothy died of crib death when he was three and one-half months old.

9 In John 3:16, we read that the Father “loved” the world; He loved the world through the Son, and specifically through the sacrificial death of the Son. Now we read that the Father “loves” the Son. This is an ongoing, persistent love. In the temptation of Eve, Satan implied that God did not love Adam and Eve, and that He was withholding something good from them. Our Lord knows better. His Father loves Him and withholds nothing from Him. There is no possibility of Him acting independently of the Father, because they are one. There is no need for Him to act independently of the Father, because the Father loves the Son and shows Him all that He is doing.

10 Jesus is talking to His opponents. He does not say that greater deeds will be accomplished so that you may believe, but rather, so that you may be amazed. These folks are dead in their trespasses and sins and will not be convinced or converted by signs and wonders.

11 “The idea was accepted throughout Judaism. SBk cite a Rabbinic saying: ‘Three keys are in the hand of God and they are not given into the hand of any agent, namely that of the rain (Deut. 28:12), that of the womb (Gen. 30:22), and that of the raising of the dead (Ezek. 37:13)’ (I, p. 523). Cf. ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the shield of Abraham. Thou art mighty for ever, O Lord; Thou restorest life to the dead … who sustainest the living with beneficence, quickenest the dead … who can be compared unto Thee, O King, who killest and makest alive again …? And faithful art Thou to quicken the dead. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who restorest the dead’ (E. Schurer, A History of the Jewish People, II, ii, Edinburgh, 1885, pp. 85f.).” Cited by Morris, p. 314, fn. 66.

12 See Matthew 12:38-40.

Biblical Topics:

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

14. Why the Jews Are Against Jesus (John 5:31-47)

Introduction¹³

For two years, I have been troubleshooting a problem with one of my daughter’s cars.¹⁴ Every time the car is put into forward or reverse, the automatic transmission gives a substantial “thud.” Having given this a lot of thought over the past two years, I finally replaced the transmission. With the new transmission, I was sure my problems would be solved. After laboring for a number of hours, the new transmission was in place, and I started up the engine for a test drive. That exact same “thud” was still there! I could hardly believe it. But yesterday, I found the trouble. When the transmission was previously overhauled, a repairman left one of the bolts out of the rear motor mount, and the other bolt was loose. Every time the car was put into gear, it jerked and made a noise as the transmission literally rocked in its mounts.

Certain problems simply cannot be ignored. On July 17, 1996, Flight 800 suddenly exploded in mid-air and crashed into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Long Island, killing all 230 passengers and crew. Thousands of hours and millions of dollars have been spent retrieving the wreckage and reassembling the plane—all in an effort to explain what caused this tragedy.

As we read the Gospel of John, we know that everything happened according to God’s plan. Jesus came as Israel’s Messiah, and He was rejected and crucified by the Jews. What “went wrong”?¹⁵ How could the Messiah come and Israel miss His coming? What caused the Jewish religious leaders to resist and reject Jesus as the Messiah? These men had spent much of their time in the Old Testament Scriptures. They heard John the Baptist and knew he had identified Jesus as the Messiah. These men personally witnessed our Lord healing the sick, casting out demons, and even raising the dead. How could they possibly fail to get the message? Our text in the Gospel of John may be one of the most informative passages in the New Testament concerning this matter. Here, our Lord not only defends Himself, but diagnoses the problem which prevents the religious leaders from trusting in Him as the Messiah.

The Setting

Jesus made His way once again to Jerusalem where, at the pool of Bethesda, He came upon a large crowd of the physically afflicted, hoping for a miraculous healing from the “angel-troubled” waters. Selecting a fellow who had been disabled for 38 years, Jesus asked him if he would like to be healed. At our Lord’s command, the man not only got up and walked, but took up his mattress and went on his way. It happened to be the Sabbath, so the Jews promptly stopped the man. These “Sabbath police” saw it as their calling to insure that the Sabbath was observed in accordance with Jewish traditions. When challenged for carrying his mattress on the Sabbath, the man explained that “the One who made him well told him to take up his mattress and walk.” The Jews wanted to know who this man was, but the paralytic had to plead ignorance because he did not find out who our Lord was before He slipped away.

Later, Jesus found the man in the temple and warned him that continuing in sin might result in even worse troubles. This seems to be all it took for the former paralytic to turn against Jesus and give His name to the Jews. The Jews then focused their attention on Jesus, accusing Him of breaking the Sabbath. Our Lord’s answer appears to produce mixed emotions: they are greatly distressed to hear Jesus explain His Sabbath-breaking by claiming to be the Son of God, but they also seem grateful to have such a serious offense with which to charge Him. Already intent on putting Jesus to death, this statement only prompts them to redouble their efforts in this direction.

Jesus responds to these serious accusations in verses 19-30. He declares what everyone should know: He cannot act as He does on His own initiative, authority, or power. The Father loves the Son and shows Him all that He is doing. Jesus only does what He sees the Father doing. Concerning the charges made against Him, the Father works on the Sabbath and therefore, so does the Son. In fact, He has works yet to perform that will be even more amazing. The Son is going to give life to the dead. In the future, when the dead are raised by the Son, some will be raised to eternal life and the others to divine condemnation. This, too, is a work the Father has given to the Son. The one who does not honor the Son also dishonors the Father, who sent Him. Those who charge Jesus with making an illicit (even blasphemous) claim to be equal with God are treading on very dangerous ice.

Jesus’ Testimony Concerning Himself
(5:31)

“[So far as you are concerned] If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true.¹⁶

We need to understand what our Lord is saying here in the light of John chapter 8:

13 So the Pharisees objected, “You testify about yourself; your testimony is not true!” 14 Jesus answered, “Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true, because I know where I came from and where I am going. But you people do not know where I came from or where I am going. 15 You people judge by outward appearances; I do not judge anyone. 16 But if I judge, my evaluation is accurate, because I am not alone when I judge, but I and the Father who sent me do so together. 17 It is written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I testify about myself and the Father who sent me testifies about me” (John 8:13-18).

Our Lord knows what His opponents are thinking and so in John 5:31, at the outset of His testimony, He informs them He knows they will not accept His testimony alone. The Old Testament law required two or three witnesses (see Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15) for a man to be found guilty of an offense. Jesus has much more testimony than this, but it doesn’t matter since the Jewish authorities are determined not to accept it. The reason becomes apparent by the end of our passage, and as the Gospel of John continues. In both our text in chapter 5 and in chapter 8, Jesus says He does not bear witness alone, but that the Father bears witness with Him. Once again, the unity of Father and Son is declared.

Perhaps a parenthetical comment would be helpful here to point out the hypocrisy of the Jews who oppose Jesus and His claims. They will not accept His testimony (5:31; 8:13), yet they accept others who come with only their own testimony: “I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me. If someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him” (John 5:43).

While the Jewish authorities seek to give the impression that they are sticklers for observing the letter of the law, actually they are not. When our Lord stands trial for His life, they employ false witnesses who give conflicting testimony, and yet no objection is raised (Matthew 26:60). The high priest illegally demands that Jesus give testimony about (against) Himself, and then condemns Him on the basis of His testimony (Matthew 26:63). These Jews seek neither justice or truth.

The Testimony of John the Baptist
(5:32-35)

32 There is another who testifies about me, and I know the testimony he testifies about me is true. 33 You have sent to John, and he has testified to the truth. 34 (I do not accept human testimony, but I say this so that you may be saved.) 35 He was a lamp that was burning and shining, and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time in his light.

It is possible that here in verse 32 Jesus is talking about John the Baptist, but I am inclined, along with others, to conclude that in this verse our Lord is referring to the witness of His Father. In verse 34, Jesus indicates that He does not accept the testimony of men. Our Lord refers to John’s testimony for the benefit of men, while He does not personally need such testimony (see John 2:25). Remember our Lord has justified His “Sabbath-breaking” (healing the paralytic on the Sabbath) by claiming to be equal with God. He is doing what His Father is doing (working on the Sabbath). It is our Lord’s identity that is being questioned. Jesus persists in claiming to be One with the Father. Thus, the most important testimony to our Lord is the testimony of the Father.

John the Baptist is a very popular fellow, a man many believe to be a prophet (Matthew 11:9; 14:5; 21:26, 46). Jesus reminds the Jewish authorities of their own high regard for John, when they “sent to John” (John 5:33). Initially, I read John 1:19-28 as an interrogation of John by the Jewish authorities, one carried out with considerable suspicion. Jesus seems to say otherwise. His words in our text seem to indicate that their “sending men” to John is their own “testimony” concerning John’s authority. In John 1, the Jews are really trying to “put words into John’s mouth.” They want John to admit that he is Messiah, or Elijah, or the Prophet. John is the one insisting otherwise.

If I understand Jesus (and John 1:19-28) correctly, for a short time the Jews actually wanted John to be the Messiah. This would explain our Lord’s words in Matthew regarding the Jews and John: “From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it” (Matthew 11:12, NIV).

The Jews are literally trying to force the kingdom into existence, and for a time they try to force John to become their Messiah. In the very next chapter of John’s Gospel, the Jews want to force Jesus to become their king:

14 So when the people saw the miraculous sign that Jesus performed, they began to say to one another, “This is certainly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Then Jesus, because he knew they were going to come and seize him by force to make him king, withdrew again up the mountainside alone (John 6:14-15).

Late in our Lord’s earthly ministry, the Jews challenge Jesus to prove His authority. Our Lord’s answer, and the Jews’ response, demonstrates the high regard the people have for John:

27 Theycame again to Jerusalem. WhileJesus was walking in the temple area, the chief priests, the experts in the law and the elders came to him 28 and said, “By what authority are you doing these things? Or who gave you this authority to do these things?” 29 Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one question. Answer me and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. 30 John’s baptism, was it from heaven or from men? Answer me.” 31 Theydiscussed with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Then why did you not believe him?’ 32 But if we say, ‘From men—’” (they feared the crowd, for they all considered John to be truly a prophet). 33 So they answered Jesus, “We do not know.” And Jesus said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things” (Mark 11:27-33; see also Matthew 11:25; Luke 20:4).

Early in John’s ministry, the Jews are eager for John to be the Messiah. In our Lord’s words, they “rejoiced greatly for a short time in his light” (John 5:35). But when it becomes apparent that John rejects their religious system (Matthew 3:7-10; 21:32; Mark 3:15), and worse yet, identifies with Jesus as the Messiah he promised would come (John 1:29-36), just as quickly they abandon him (Luke 7:29-30). Although initially they respected John’s testimony, they now refuse to accept his testimony. Nevertheless, Jesus reminds them, John, whom they once regarded as a prophet and a candidate for Messiah, bears testimony that He is indeed the promised Messiah.

Weighty Witnesses
(5:36-40)

36 “But I have a testimony greater than that from John. For the deeds that the Father has assigned me to complete—the deeds I am now doing—testify about me that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified about me. You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time, 38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent. 39 You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me; 40 but you are not willing to come to me so that you may have life.

The Works of Jesus

Set John’s testimony aside. Jesus doesn’t need it anyway (John 5:34). He has much weightier testimony; He has the testimony of His own works. Jesus is doing the works His Father assigned Him. These works testify to His identity, to His equality with the Father:

18 John’s disciples informed him about all these things. So John called two of his disciples 19 and sent them to Jesus to ask, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?” 20 When the men came to Jesus, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you to ask, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?’” 21 At that very time Jesus cured many people of diseases, sicknesses, and evil spirits, and granted sight to many who were blind. 22 So he answered them, “Go and report to John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have good news proclaimed to them. 23 And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me” (Luke 7:18-23).

Now while Jesus was in Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing (John 2:23).

1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees whose name was Nicodemus, a member of the council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs that you do unless God is with him” (John 3:1-2).

30 The man replied, “This is a remarkable thing, that you don’t know where he comes from, and yet he caused me to see! 31 We know that God doesn’t listen to sinners, but if anyone is devout and does his will God listens to him. 32 Never before has anyone heard of someone causing a man born blind to see. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing” (John 9:30-33).

30 Now Jesus performed many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples that are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30-31).

Nicodemus and the formerly blind man had it right: no one can do the things Jesus does on their own. They must be “connected.” Jesus is “connected” to God. The only other explanation (to which our Lord’s opponents are finally forced) is that Jesus is “connected” to Satan:

20 Now Jesus went home, and a crowd gathered so that they were not able to eat. 21 Whenhis family heard this they went out to take control of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.” 22 Theexperts in the law who came down from Jerusalem said, “He has Beelzebul,” and, “By the ruler of demons he casts out demons.” 23 So he called them and spoke to them in parables: “How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 Ifa kingdom is divided, that kingdom will not be able to stand. 25 If a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26 And if Satan rises against himself and is divided, he is not able to stand and his end has come. 27 But no one is able to enter the house of the strong man and remove his goods unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can thoroughly clean out his house. 28 I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies people may speak will be forgiven them. 29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. They are liable for an eternal sin 30 (because they said, ‘He has an unclean spirit’)” (Mark 3:20-30).

Our Lord’s response is simple. If He is “connected” with Beelzebul, then why would He oppose Satan and his kingdom by casting out demons? Jesus’ works are indeed a powerful witness concerning His identity.

The Word of the Father

Indirectly, Jesus’ works are the witness of the Father, who assigned these works to the Son (5:36). But the Father even more emphatically testifies that Jesus is His Son. The Father has testified¹⁷ about Jesus (verse 37). Just when and how did this take place? We see from the Gospels that the Father gave His testimony concerning the Son at the baptism of Jesus:

16 After Jesus was baptized, as he came up from the water the heavens opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is the Son I love, in whom I have great delight” (Matthew 3:16-17).

Jesus tells His accusers, “You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time” (John 5:37b). By inference, He claims otherwise. It seems that Jesus is referring, in part, to the time of His baptism, when John the Baptist and perhaps others saw the Spirit of God present (and abiding on Jesus) in the form of a dove. They heard the voice of God, identifying Jesus as His Son, in whom He took great delight. Here, the Father is bearing witness to Him as His Son, the Messiah.

Even beyond this, the Father has borne witness through the Son. Jesus is God manifested in human flesh. Jesus is the voice (the “Word”) of God:

Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only full of grace and truth, who came from the Father (John 1:14).

1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. 3 The Son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:1-3).

“I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me” (John 5:30).

God is bearing witness through His Son. Here is the irony. The Jewish authorities will not accept Jesus as the Son of God; they simply will not heed His testimony. Yet, He is the voice of God, the visible manifestation of God to men. They have never seen or heard God in person. God is now standing before them, being accused by them. They are accusing the very One they claim to worship and serve. They do not have God’s Word abiding in them because they do not believe in Jesus, the One whom the Father sent to “declare” or “explain” Him (John 1:18). Is this not a “catch 22”? How can anyone be saved? If people need to trust in Jesus to grasp the Word of God, and they need to grasp the Word of God to see that Jesus is the One to whom the Scriptures bear witness, then no one can be saved. The solution the Bible gives us is that men most certainly cannot be saved on their own; they can only be saved by means of God’s sovereign and gracious intervention, which is exactly what John has been telling us in his Gospel:

10 He was in the world, and the world was created by him, but the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children 13 —children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God (John 1:10-13).

Jesus Turns the Tables on His Accusers
(5:37b-47)

“You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time, 38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent. 39 You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me; 40 but you are not willing to come to me so that you may have life. 41 I do not accept praise from people, 42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God within you. 43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me. If someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44 How can you believe, if you accept praise from one another and don’t seek the praise that comes from the only God? 45 Do not suppose that I will accuse you before the Father. The one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have placed your hope. 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me. 47 But if you do not believe what Moses wrote, how will you believe my words?”¹⁸

Up to this point, it may appear as though Jesus is on the defensive, defending His claim to be equal with God. In a sense, this is true, but our Lord is equal with God because He is the Son of God. It is not Jesus who needs a good defense, but His adversaries, the Jewish religious authorities. In verse 37, the tone of our Lord’s “defense” changes, and we see our Lord now taking the offensive, challenging those who oppose Him. Here, He not only admonishes them for not receiving God’s witness, He informs all as to the real reason they reject Him as the Messiah.

The Jewish authorities are accusing our Lord of blasphemy and Sabbath-breaking. They have never seen God’s form, nor have they heard God’s voice. Yet both of these were evident at our Lord’s baptism. Jesus has seen the Father and heard His voice (5:19-20, 30). Most important of all, Jesus Himself is the form of God (see John 14:9) and the voice of God. It is He who came to make God known to men: no one has ever seen God. The only One, Himself God, who is in the presence of the Father, has made God known (John 1:18).

The Jews are those to whom, and through whom, the Old Testament Scriptures were revealed (see Romans 9:4). They studied the Scriptures diligently, thinking this was the way to eternal life.¹⁹ Ironically, these same Scriptures testify about Jesus, the Christ, the Messiah. How could these men possess the Scriptures and study them, and yet miss the main point of their teaching? Jesus tells them and us: they do not have the Word abiding in them. They are “in the Word,” but the Word is not abiding in them. This is so because Christ is not only the central theme of the Word, He is the key to the Word. Christ is the key that unlocks the message of the Word. The Jews are not willing to come to Him so that they may have life. Thus, they are blind to the central message of the very Scriptures they possess and regard so highly.

I remember teaching world history and psychology to a high school class in a medium security prison in Washington State. Somehow the conversation drifted to the subject of evolution one day, and an inmate said something I will never forget: “I’ll tell you why I believe in evolution,” he blurted out, “because I won’t believe in God!” The Jewish authorities will not believe in Messiah, and thus they cannot see Him in the Scriptures they study. Listen to how the Apostle Paul explains the “blindness of the Jews”:

Christ is a “blind spot” for the Jews, and yet He is both the central figure and the key to the Old Testament Scriptures. Because the Jews are blind to Christ, they read the Old Testament as though a veil were over their faces. Only by trusting in Jesus Christ is that veil removed. Then the Scriptures become clear, and the glory of the Lord is revealed and reflected, transforming those who believe into His image. Those opposing Christ in our text do so with “veiled faces,” so to speak. They are blind to who Jesus is, and rather than come to Him for eternal life, they seek to take His life.

Our Lord presses further in verses 41-44, explaining even more thoroughly the reason the Jews are opposed to Him. Why are they so unwilling to come to Jesus for salvation? It is because they seek glory and praise from men, rather than from God. Jesus does not seek the praise of men; He seeks to please the Father. This is because of His love for the Father, just as His Father loves Him (5:20). Jesus has come in His Father’s name, and the Jews have rejected Him. Others come to them in their own name, and they gladly welcome them. How can this be? It is really quite simple. Those who come and are quickly received tell their audience what they want to hear. Their message flatters the listener, so that the message is easily and quickly embraced as true, simply because it “tickles the ears” of the audience. Neither John the Baptist nor our Lord are willing to do this. They boldly proclaim the truth of the gospel.

Those who seek acceptance from men rather than from God cannot believe in Jesus because they are not willing to come to Him. To be saved, a person must admit that he or she is a sinner, deserving of God’s eternal wrath and unworthy of His favor. To be saved, one must humble himself, and accept God’s grace as a gift. The self-righteous find this highly offensive and abhorrent. The false teacher comes with a flattering message, one that diminishes sin and demeans grace. They assure the listener he can obtain eternal life by his own doing, by his own merits. This is the message the self-righteous love to hear, because it seems to offer them a salvation of their own making. Seeking the praise of others turns us away from seeking praise from God, and thus we seek to please men rather than God.

Once again, the Apostle Paul takes up this theme and applies it to the church at Corinth:

12 For we would not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some of those who recommend themselves. But when they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are without understanding. 13 But we will not boast beyond certain limits, but will confine our boasting according to the limits of the work to which God has appointed us, that reaches even as far as you. 14 For we were not overextending ourselves, as though we did not reach as far as you, because we were the first to reach as far as you with the gospel about Christ. 15 Nor do we boast beyond certain limits in the work done by others, but we hope that as your faith continues to grow, our work may be greatly expanded among you according to our limits, 16 so that we may preach the gospel in the regions that lie beyond you, and not boast of work already done in another person’s area. 17 But “The one who boasts must boast in the Lord.” 18 For it is not the person who commends himself who is approved, but the person the Lord commends (2 Corinthians 10:12-18).

If you remember the situation at Corinth in Paul’s day, it was Paul who led many of the Corinthians to faith. It was he who had invested a good part of his life in this church. Yet some false teachers came along who seemed so wise, so persuasive, so impressive. The Corinthians began to look down their noses at Paul and the other true apostles. The message of these “false apostles” appealed to the Corinthians. Paul calls attention to the fact that these are men (and women?) who care much about their status and standing with men, and all too little about the praise of God. They compare themselves with other men. They are puffed up with pride and arrogance, and they seek to undermine the authority of the “true apostles.” They are just like the Jews of our Lord’s day, aren’t they?

The Apostle John will have even more to say about such folks in his epistles. There he warns about false teachers and their message. Today, we call this temptation of seeking the approval of men rather than God “peer pressure.” John speaks of it as “loving the world.” That is what it is—seeking approval from our peers, rather than from God. When we seek the world’s approval, we abandon our desire to please God.

15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 16 because all that is in the world (the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the arrogance produced by material possessions) is not from the Father, but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away with all its desires, but the person who does the will of God remains forever. 18 Children, it is the last hour, and just as you heard that Antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. We know from this that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us, because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us. 20 Nevertheless you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. 21 I have not written to you that you do not know the truth, but that you do know it, and that no lie is of the truth. 22 Who is the liar but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This one is the Antichrist: the person who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. The person who confesses the Son has the Father also. 24 As for you, what you have heard from the beginning must remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25 Now this is the promise that he himself made to us: eternal life. 26 These things I have written to you about those who are trying to deceive you. 27 Now as for you, the anointing that you received from him resides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things, it is true and is not a lie. Just as it has taught you, you reside in him (1 John 2:15-27).

The Jewish authorities reject Jesus. They not only reject His testimony concerning Himself, they set aside the testimony of John the Baptist, of our Lord’s works, of the Father, and of the Scriptures. Because of this, they are the ones who should be accused. Those who are accusing Jesus will be accused, but not by Jesus. Their accusation will come from Moses, the one they revere, whose law they impose on themselves and others—as they interpret it. Their devotion to Moses is seen in the dialogue between the Jews and the blind man to whom Jesus gives his sight:

28 They heaped insults on him, saying, “You are his disciple! We are disciples of Moses! 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses! We do not know where this man comes from!” (John 9:28-29)

This Moses, so revered by the Jews, will be their accuser because he, too, testified of Jesus. They did not believe Moses, and neither will they believe Jesus. Jesus does not specify any particular passages in which Moses wrote of the Messiah, but we know there are many. For example, Jesus is “the Prophet” of whom Moses spoke:

Conclusion

Our text in John chapter 5 is crucial to the argument to the Gospel of John, and indeed crucial to the gospel of Jesus Christ. No words can more clearly communicate our Lord’s claim to be the Son of God, Israel’s Messiah. No one who hears our Lord speak or who reads the Gospel of John has any doubt about who He claims to be (see John 1:14-18, 29-34, 41, 45, 49; 2:14-22; 3:26-36; 4:25-26, 29, 42; 5:17ff.). The question is not whether Jesus ever claimed to be the Messiah, or whether His opponents understand Him to do so. The question is whether Jesus is right in what He claims. If He is right, then He does speak for God. If He is right, we had better listen well to what He says:

7 Then a cloud surrounded them, and a voice came from the cloud, “This is the Son I love. Listen to him!” 8 Suddenly when they looked around, they saw no one with them any more, except Jesus (Mark 9:7-8).

1 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. 3 The Son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:1-3).

16 For we did not follow cleverly concocted fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; no, we were eyewitnesses of his grandeur. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory: “This is my dear Son, in whom I am delighted.” 18 When this voice was conveyed from heaven, we ourselves heard it, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts (2 Peter 1:16-19).

Jesus not only claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God, He claims to be the only source of eternal life. He says that to reject Him is to reject life, to reject the Father, and to seal our eternal condemnation. It is not enough to revere the Word of God, or even to diligently read and study it. The Jewish authorities did all this, yet they missed the main point of the Scriptures—the promise of a Messiah exactly like Jesus, in fact who was Jesus. The Word of God must abide in our hearts by faith. We must look for Christ in the Scriptures, and having found Him, we should love and obey Him. The Bible is not given so that we may amass knowledge about God. The Bible is given so that we may know, love, and serve God.

Witnesses to the fact that Jesus is the Son of God are many, and they are compelling. Men do not reject the claims of Christ for lack of evidence. They reject Him because sinful men do not wish to submit to Him as God, nor do they wish to come to Him as unworthy sinners, seeking grace. This is the reason the Jews reject Jesus. It is why the Gentiles reject Him as well.

May the Spirit of God give us eyes to see Christ in the Word, and ears to hear what He says to us. May His Word be not just a source for scholarly study; may it be a love letter to us.

13 This same issue is taken up later in John. In chapters 5 and 6, why people don’t believe in Jesus is dealt with from a human perspective (“but you are not willing to come to me so that you may have life,” verse 40). In later chapters, it is again taken up from a divine perspective (see John 6:44, 65; 8:43).

14 My wife Jeannette and I have five lovely daughters, and as “Dad” I have built or rebuilt nearly all of their cars.

15 I speak of things “going wrong,” not in the sense that God’s plan failed, but that men failed to respond to our Lord as they should have. This “failure” on Israel’s part was in accordance with God’s eternal plan. Nevertheless, it is good for us to consider the causes of Israel’s failure, because there are lessons for us to learn from the failures of the people of old.

16 The NET Bible has rendered this verse literally, but in the process leaves the appearance of a contradiction with John 8:13-18. I have thus added the words in brackets. I believe this is the sense of what John meant to convey to the reader. The NASB attempts to do something similar: “If I alone bear witness of Myself, My testimony is not true.” There is a marginal note in the NASB which informs the reader that “true” should be understood as “admissible as legal evidence.” The New English Bible renders verse 31: “If I testify on my own behalf, that testimony does not hold good.” J. B. Phillips paraphrases: “You may say that I am bearing witness about myself, that therefore what I say about myself has no value, …” Our Lord’s testimony is true on its own merits, but not in the eyes of the Jewish religious authorities. I like what Calvin has to say here: “He does not here take any thing away from the credit due to his testimony, which he elsewhere asserts in strong terms, but he speaks by way of concession; for Christ, having been in other respects most abundantly supported, consents that they should not believe his word. ‘If my testimony concerning myself,’ says he, ‘is suspected by you according to the ordinary custom of men, let it go for nothing.’ Now we know that what any man asserts about himself is not reckoned to be true and authentic, although in other respects he speak truth, because no man is a competent witness in his own cause. Though it would be unjust to reduce the Son of God to this rank, yet he prefers to surrender his right, that he may convince his enemies by the authority of God.” John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Volume 7: The Gospels (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.), p. 684.

17 Notice the past (more precisely, the perfect) tense here. This is testimony the Father has already given regarding the Son, a testimony given in the past with lingering effects.

18 There is a certain overlapping of argument in these verses, and thus the repetition of verses 37b-40 above.

19 “Cf. The saying attributed to Hillel: ‘the more study of the Law the more life … if he has gained for himself words of the Law he has gained for himself life in the world to come’ (Ab. 2:7). There are several sayings like Baruch 4:1f., ‘This is the book of the commandments of God, and the law endureth for ever: all they that hold it fast are appointed to life.’” Morris, p. 330.

Biblical Topics:

Dispensational / Covenantal Theology

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

home

15. The Messiah: Mightier Than Moses (John 6:1-21)

The Feeding of the 5000 in Its Historical Perspective

Matthew	Mark	Luke	John
	The disciples are sent out. They preach repentance and heal many. 6:7-13	The disciples are sent out, preaching and healing everywhere, “taking nothing for the journey.” 9:1-6
John the Baptist is dead. John’s disciples bury him and report it to Jesus. 14:1-12	The death of John the Baptist is reported. 6:14-29	Herod hears of John’s death and rumors about who the people think Jesus is. He wants to see Jesus. 9:7-9
Jesus withdraws to an isolated place and the crowds follow Him. Jesus heals the sick. 14:13-14	His disciples tell Jesus about their mission experience. Jesus tells them to come away with Him for a while to rest. 6:30-31	The disciples return, report to Jesus, and withdraw to a private spot near Bethsaida where Jesus teaches the multitude and heals the sick. 9:10-11
Feeding of 5,000 14:15-21	Feeding of 5,000 6:32-44	Feeding of 5,000 9:12-17	Feeding of 5,000 6:1-14
Jesus makes His disciples get into the boat and go to the other side. He dismisses the crowd. He goes alone to pray. 14:22-23	Jesus makes His disciples get in the boat and leave. He bids the crowd farewell, and then goes to the mountain to pray. 6:45-46		People wish to force Jesus to be their king, and so He withdraws to pray. 6:15
Jesus walks on the water. Disciples say, “You are the Son of God.” 14:24-33	Jesus walks on the water. 6:47-52		Jesus walks on the water. 6:16-21
When Jesus and His disciples arrive, many come to Him, bringing the sick. Jesus heals them, some by touching the fringe of His cloak. 14:34-36	Crowds gather with their sick, wherever they think Jesus will be. Jesus heals many. 6:53-56
		Great confession and Jesus’ instruction. 9:18-22
		Call to discipleship. 9:23-27
		Transfiguration. 9:28-36

Introduction

Our church recently hosted a banquet for the Urban Evangelical Mission.²⁰ We have never attempted a banquet this large in our church. I am grateful to my wife, Jeannette, who coordinated this challenging, but rewarding, task. Our problem was in getting all the people into our one large room. We also feared we might not order enough food to feed the entire group. By the grace of God, all worked out well.

This experience gives me a greater appreciation for the feeding of the 20,000²¹ folks in our text, who not only show up uninvited but also stay for dinner. Can you imagine trying to feed a group this size—especially since there are no supermarkets, fast food restaurants, or sufficient funds to even begin to buy enough food? This is the dilemma facing our Lord and His disciples. It does not cause our Lord one moment’s anxiety, because He knows all along what He is going to do. The same cannot be said for the disciples, who are convinced that there is nothing they can do but pressure Jesus into sending the crowd home. When Jesus speaks to them of feeding this crowd, they cannot even imagine how it can possibly be done.

This is a very challenging moment in the lives of the disciples, one that teaches them some very important lessons. It is also the occasion on which our Lord performs two of His greatest miracles. Rather than bringing many to faith in Jesus as the Messiah, it prompts many to try to force Jesus to be their king. This leads to our Lord’s discourse on the “Bread of Life” in the latter part of chapter 6. By the end of this chapter, many of those who once considered themselves His disciples leave Jesus, never to follow Him again.

Aside from the resurrection of our Lord, the feeding of the 5,000 is the only miracle found in all four of the Gospels. The closely related miracle of our Lord walking on the water is found in three Gospels, but is omitted by Luke. These two miracles in the sixth chapter of John’s Gospel are a watershed. If Jesus is rejected by the religious leaders in Judea in chapter 5, He is rejected by the masses in Galilee in chapter 6. This chapter marks what we might very well call “the beginning of the end.”

The Setting
(6:1-4)

1 After this Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (also called the Sea of Tiberias). 2 A large crowd was following him because they were observing the miraculous signs he was performing on the sick. 3 So Jesus went on up the mountainside and sat down there with his disciples. 4 (Now the Jewish feast of the Passover was near.)

The chart on the previous page outlines the events which the Gospels include before and after the feeding of the 5,000, and our Lord’s walking on water. It is quite evident in this chart that John’s Gospel is the most pared down, bare-bones account of these events. This is not to say that John has nothing unique to contribute, for he does. It is in John’s Gospel that we learn the loaves and fishes come from a young lad, and that two disciples, Philip and Andrew, are particularly involved in the miracle of feeding the 5,000. Likewise, John informs us that the loaves were barley bread. Aside from these details, the Synoptic Gospels give us the greatest amount of detail regarding these two miracles.

Unlike the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), which give considerable attention to the “Great Galilean ministry” of our Lord (Matthew 4:12–15:20; Mark 1:14–7:23; Luke 4:14–9:17), John passes by this period, recording only the first and last miracles of this era. He has his reasons for doing this, which we shall explore a little later on. But for now let us simply review the sequence of events leading up to and beyond these miracles, as we piece them all together from the various Gospel accounts.

Two years into His public ministry, Jesus sent out His twelve disciples by two’s. They went about casting out demons, healing and preaching about the kingdom of God, and calling on men to repent wherever they went. John the Baptist, imprisoned earlier, has just been beheaded by a reluctant Herod, who has second thoughts afterwards. When he hears word of the miraculous ministry and rising popularity of Jesus, Herod fears that Jesus might be John the Baptist raised from the dead. He tries to see Jesus, but is not able to do so. The disciples return from their missionary journeys and begin to report to Jesus all that has happened. Jesus is so besieged by those seeking healing that He has very little time to spend privately with His disciples.

Jesus and His disciples withdraw to a private place near Bethsaida. It seems as though they are alone at last, away from the crowds, so that Jesus can talk with them about their ministry and further teach them. It also appears to provide a time for them to get some much needed rest. Their destination is just outside of Herod’s territory, just out of his reach. All in all, it appears to be a needed break from the frantic pace they have been keeping.

As we well know, it doesn’t work out that way. After the feeding of the 5,000, the crowds are even more intent on forcefully bringing about the promised kingdom. Jesus sends His disciples away in the boat, dismisses the crowds, and then goes off to pray by Himself. When He finishes praying, He begins to make His way across the Sea of Galilee by walking on the water. As He crosses the sea, Jesus comes across His disciples and ends up in the boat with them. Immediately, they arrive at their destination on the western shores of the Sea of Galilee, where many more miracles are performed. Some time after this, Jesus presses His disciples concerning His identity, and Peter makes his “great confession.” The transfiguration of our Lord follows. These are indeed great moments in the ministry of our Lord. The feeding of the 5,000 marks a critical moment in our Lord’s ministry.

Another factor also amplifies the impact of the feeding of the 5,000—the Passover is near (John 6:4). D. A. Carson reminds us of the patriotic and political implications of the Passover:

… the Passover Feast was to Palestinian Jews what the fourth of July is to Americans, or, better, what the anniversary of the Battle of the Boyne is to loyalist Protestants in Northern Ireland. It was a rallying point for intense, nationalistic zeal. This goes some way to explaining their fervour that tried to force Jesus to become king …²²

Having pointed out the chronology of events we gain from the Synoptic Gospels, I must call your attention to the fact that John does not present his account of the feeding of the 5,000 as one incident in a sequential chain of events. John is developing a theme, and therefore structures his Gospel differently. In the last part of John chapter 1, Jesus is identified as the Messiah by John the Baptist, after which our Lord begins to gather His disciples. In chapter 2, Jesus makes the water into wine and cleanses the temple in Jerusalem. In chapter 3, our Lord has an interview with Nicodemus. He then speaks with the Samaritan woman at the well in chapter 4, resulting not only in her faith, but also in the conversion of most of the citizens of Sychar.

It is here, in chapter 4, that John introduces the subject of “food.”²³ His disciples are intent upon Jesus having something to eat. They cannot understand what “food” He has to “eat” other than the food they have just obtained in town. The opposition to Jesus begins to become serious in chapter 5. Jesus heals the paralytic and then commands him to carry his bed, in spite of it being the Sabbath. On top of this, when attacked as a Sabbath-breaker, Jesus justifies His actions by claiming to be equal with God. By the end of chapter 5, the Jewish religious authorities are more committed than ever to putting Jesus to death.

This brings us to John chapter 6. Jesus changes location, moving from Judea to Galilee. He leaves behind the crowds in Capernaum to be alone with His disciples in an isolated place in the wilderness. It is a time when our Lord’s popularity among the common people is skyrocketing. But by the end of the chapter, many of His would-be followers leave Him, never to follow Him again. If Jesus was rejected by the Jewish authorities in Judea in chapter 5, He is rejected by the masses in Galilee in chapter 6. From this point on in the Gospel of John, it is only a matter of time until Jesus makes His way up to Calvary, bearing a Roman cross and the penalty for our sins.

Yet one more thing should be mentioned before turning to the actual account of the feeding of the 5,000. I cannot avoid the impression that Jesus has been at this wilderness location before. Let me suggest some of my reasons for coming to this conclusion. First, John tells us “Jesus went up the mountainside” (verse 3).²⁴ John seems to refer to a particular mountainside—the mountainside, not a mountainside. While some scholars point out that the definite article (“the”) does not necessarily indicate a particular, well-known place,²⁵ it certainly could. I think it does.

Second, there are some interesting parallels between our text in John and Matthew’s account of our Lord’s earlier ministry, when He preached the Sermon on the Mount. The similarities between these two accounts, the one in Matthew 4 and 5, and the other in our text in John, may be summed up as follows:

The Sermon on the Mount	Jesus Feeds the 5,000 on the Mount
John the Baptist is arrested (Mat. 4:12)	John the Baptist is put to death (Matt. 14:1-12)
Jesus retreats to Galilee (Matt. 4:12)	Jesus retreats to Galilee (Matt. 14:13)
Jesus chooses His 12 disciples (Matt. 4:18f.)	Jesus sends out His 12 disciples (Mark 6:7-13)
Jesus teaches on the mount (Matt. 5:1f.)	Jesus teaches on the mount (Mark 6:34)

Perhaps it is not a point worth belaboring, but it does seem as though this “mountain” is a more familiar place to our Lord, His disciples, and even the crowds than we might think. Would this not help explain why so many people hurry to this place when they realize Jesus is in a boat, heading out across the Sea of Galilee?

Feeding the Hungry
(6:5-13)

5 Then Jesus, when he looked up and saw that a large crowd was coming to him, said to Philip, “Where can we buy bread so that these people may eat?” 6 (Now Jesus said this to test him, for he knew what he was going to do.) 7 Philip replied, “Two hundred silver coins worth of bread would not be enough for them, for each one to get a little.” 8 One of Jesus’ disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, said to him, 9 “Here is a boy who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what good are these for so many people?” 10 Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” (Now there was a lot of grass in that place.) So the men sat down, about five thousand in number. 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed the bread to those who were seated. He then did the same with the fish, as much as they wanted. 12 When they were all satisfied, Jesus said to his disciples, “Gather up the broken pieces that are left over, so that nothing is wasted.” 13 So they gathered them up and filled twelve baskets with broken pieces from the five barley loaves left over by the people who had eaten.

In the Synoptic Gospels, it is late in the day when the disciples approach our Lord, urging Him to send the people away because there is no food to feed them. Jesus does not let the disciples off the hook. Instead, He instructs His disciples to feed the crowd (see Matthew 14:16; Mark 6:37; Luke 9:13). It is their responsibility to feed these people, and Jesus will not allow them to merely send the people away hungry.

In our text, John presents this miracle from a somewhat different perspective. It is much earlier in the day, and it is our Lord who first approaches His disciples about feeding the multitude. In John’s Gospel, our Lord raises the question before the crowds have even completely arrived. They are approaching as Jesus asks His disciples where they can purchase bread for these folks to eat (verse 5). Philip, to whom the question is posed,²⁶ does not even comment as to “where” food can be purchased; he is more concerned about “how much” the food will cost. To Philip, it doesn’t matter where the closest “store” is. He knows they will not have nearly enough money to pay for the large quantity of food they need.

From John’s words, we see that Jesus knows all along how He will handle this situation (verse 6). Jesus raises the question of how to feed the crowd before it is time to feed them. I believe that He wants the disciples to agonize a bit over this situation. The best they can do is recommend that Jesus send the people away, letting them fend for themselves. The question Jesus asks Philip is intended to start the disciples thinking about this need long before it is a crisis. Jesus raises the problem in terms that His disciples understand and expect—buying food to feed the crowd. After all, this is what the disciples did while Jesus waited at the well in Samaria (see John 4:8). His purpose is not to have them solve the problem, but to realize that, humanly speaking, there is no solution. Philip certainly concurs, and it seems he almost brushes off the whole matter as absurd. But then evening falls, and the people are still there without having eaten for hours.

The Synoptic Gospels begin their account of the feeding of the 5,000 when evening has come. John’s Gospel describes what happened when evening falls in verses 8 and following, but only after informing us that Jesus raised the issue earlier in the day. Jesus refuses to send the crowd away, and instructs His disciples to feed them. They must have looked at each other in astonishment. How could they possibly do what Jesus required? I would imagine that there was an uncomfortable period of silence, as Jesus waited for some kind of response from the disciples. It may have been that in response to this distressing situation Andrew felt compelled to blurt out, “Well, there is this one little lad, who has five loaves and two fishes.” I know that what I am about to say is not in the text, but it does at least sound true to life, life as I understand it. I can see the other disciples rolling their eyes at each other, amazed at the stupidity of mentioning such a puny quantity of bread and fish. I can hear his fellow-disciples harshly chastising Andrew for being so foolish: “Yeah, great idea Andrew, five barley loaves and two fish—to feed this entire crowd. Great idea! Real smart! Good grief man, what are you thinking?”

Jesus makes sure that the disciples participate in this miracle. He has the 12 instruct the people to recline on the grass, in groups of 50. It would require 100 such groups to serve only the men,²⁷ so there must be approximately 400 groups of 50 seated on this grassy slope. So far as we can tell, Jesus does not indicate what He is about to do, either to the crowds or to any of His disciples. What a curious thing this must be for the crowd—and what a troubling experience for the disciples. Imagine instructing everyone to sit down, as though a meal is about to be served, knowing there is nothing to serve but five small bread cakes and a little pickled fish for a relish.²⁸

Those in the crowd may not be experiencing consternation over what is taking place, but they must certainly be curious, because they know there is little or no food available. They must have realized this when they began to inquire whether anyone had brought food with them. And now, Jesus is telling His disciples to have the multitude sit on the grass. It would be something like our having a group of guests sit at the dining table. The implied “message” in this is that we intend to feed them. Where will the food come from? Jesus does not promise a miracle. He simply takes the barley cakes and two fish and blesses them, then begins to pass out portions of the young lad’s lunch for His disciples to distribute.

The miracle seems to take place in the hands of our Lord, as He breaks off pieces of the barley cakes and fish. It appears He keeps reaching into the little basket where the lad had his lunch, and the food simply keeps on coming. It must be something like the widow’s oil and flour in the Old Testament:

8 Then the word of the LORD came to him, saying, 9 “Arise, go to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and dwell there. See, I have commanded a widow there to provide for you.” 10 So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, indeed a widow was there gathering sticks. And he called to her and said, “Please bring me a little water in a cup, that I may drink.” 11 And as she was going to get it, he called to her and said, “Please bring me a morsel of bread in your hand.” 12 So she said, “As the LORD your God lives, I do not have bread, only a handful of flour in a bin, and a little oil in a jar; and see, I am gathering a couple of sticks that I may go in and prepare it for myself and my son, that we may eat it, and die.” 13 And Elijah said to her, “Do not fear; go and do as you have said, but make me a small cake from it first, and bring it to me; and afterward make some for yourself and your son. 14 For thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘The bin of flour shall not be used up, nor shall the jar of oil run dry, until the day the LORD sends rain on the earth.’” 15 So she went away and did according to the word of Elijah; and she and he and her household ate for many days. 16 The bin of flour was not used up, nor did the jar of oil run dry, according to the word of the LORD which He spoke by Elijah (1 Kings 17:8-16, NKJV).

Can you imagine the wonder and excitement as people begin to grasp that Jesus is performing a miracle of this magnitude? You’ve probably seen people do “the wave” in a football stadium. Can’t you just see the heads of people, making a “wave” as they spread the word that a miracle must be taking place before their very eyes? Yet here, as when He turned the water into wine, Jesus does not announce what He is doing. Jesus does not seek to attract attention; He is not attempting to attract a bigger following. Jesus is simply trying to minister to the needs of a hungry crowd, without adding fuel to the fire of their political enthusiasm.

Even when all have eaten, the task is not yet complete. Jesus instructs His disciples to collect all the leftovers. I do not believe this includes portions that have been nibbled on, but not completely devoured. I assume these leftovers are the untouched portions of bread and fish²⁹ which remain in the basket after it has passed among the group of 50. Jesus demonstrates what we might call today “good ecology.” He does not allow any food to be wasted, nor does He allow the hillside to be trashed with garbage.

The gathered leftovers are a lesson in themselves. We are told that the crowd eats and that they are “all satisfied.” Had we been there, we would say, “I’m so full I can’t eat another bite.”³⁰ It can hardly be a coincidence that when the unused portions are gathered, there are 12 baskets full of food. Our Lord is never stingy in His gifts. They are always bountiful. Each of the 12 disciples, who must have agonized over the shortage of food and the size of the crowd they are commanded to feed, walks away with a basket full of excess food. God supplies all our needs, and more.

We should notice one more thing about this meal our Lord provides in the wilderness. The meal is not a gourmet dinner; it is not “steak and ale.” Barley cakes are the food of the poor. They are not a bad meal, for it is a nutritional meal that satisfies their appetites and meets their physical needs. But it is not the food one expects to find at a very fine restaurant. Had our Lord provided such a meal, the crowd would have been even more determined to force Jesus to become their king.

The Hardest Task of All: Sending the Guests Home
(6:14-15)

14 So when the people saw the miraculous sign that Jesus performed, they began to say to one another, “This is certainly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Then Jesus, because he knew they were going to come and seize him by force to make him king, withdrew again up the mountainside alone.

Someone has said, “A guest is like a fish—after three days, he stinks!” Imagine the mixture of curiosity, messianic zeal, and even desperation³¹ that draws this huge crowd into the wilderness so hastily that they do not even bring a lunch along. Jesus both teaches and heals the sick on this occasion, as well as feeds this crowd. These things certainly do not “cool down” the enthusiasm of the crowd. If anything, His words and deeds cause the crowd to conclude that Jesus is the “prophet like Moses” whom Moses had foretold (Deuteronomy 18:15).

Jesus knows that the crowd is worked up by this last miracle, and that they are about to converge upon Him in an effort to forcibly make Him their king. It is definitely not the kind of king Jesus came to be. John does not give us a very full report here. He simply writes that Jesus withdraws by Himself further up the mountainside (verse 15). We know from the other Gospels that Jesus immediately sends His disciples to the boat to begin their journey across the Sea of Galilee to Capernaum, while He dismisses the crowds (Matthew 14:22; Mark 6:45). It is my opinion that the crowds obey the voice of our Lord, as did the wind and the sea when Jesus calmed the storm (see Mark 4:35-41), or as the paralytic did when he got up, took up his mattress, and walked (John 5:8-9). I believe it is not what they want or purpose to do, but what they must do because of Him who commands it. It is then that our Lord goes up on the mountain, alone, to pray.

Walking on the Water
(6:16-21)

16 Now when evening came, his disciples went down to the lake, 17 got into a boat, and started to cross the lake to Capernaum. (It had already become dark and Jesus had not yet come to them.) 18 By now a strong wind was blowing and the sea was getting rough. 19 Then when they had rowed about three or four miles, they sighted Jesus walking on the lake, approaching the boat, and they were frightened. 20 But he said to them, “It is I, do not be afraid.” 21 Then they wanted to take him into the boat, and immediately the boat came to the land where they had been heading.

The disciples are already in the boat and on their way to the other side of the lake when Jesus finishes His time of prayer. They have come in one boat, and now there seems to be only one way for Jesus to reach Capernaum, the same way the crowds came to this place from Capernaum—by walking around the Sea of Galilee. The problem is that this would require Jesus to walk past the crowds, between Him and the other side of the sea. If a boat were available, He could navigate His journey so as to keep enough distance between Himself and those on the shore. But there is no boat on hand. Once again, Jesus seems to be in an impossible situation. Once again, Jesus has no difficulty dealing with the problem. He simply crosses the Sea of Galilee by walking on the water.

As He is walking on the sea, Jesus comes upon His disciples, straining at the oars, fighting strong contrary winds. Mark tells us that Jesus “wanted to pass by” the disciples, because “the night was ending” (6:48). I think Mark means that Jesus is eager to get to shore, before daylight, so He will not attract a crowd. The crowds are not as likely to converge on the disciples if Jesus is not with them. But the disciples are having trouble, struggling against the wind. We are not told that they are in danger, and we know that at least four of these fellows are fishermen. This is nothing new to them.

But the disciples look out and see Jesus passing them by. They are terrified, not by the winds or by their difficulties in rowing the boat, but by the sight of Him whom they do not recognize as the Lord. If they have never believed in ghosts before, they surely do now! Jesus takes pity on them, assuring them that it is He, and that they need not be afraid.³² They eagerly take Jesus into the boat and are immediately at their destination.³³

Conclusion

As great as these two miracles are, very little is made of them in the Gospel of John. Jesus does not even bring them up, when He could have gained great notoriety from them. These two miracles, like virtually all of our Lord’s miracles, are miracles of necessity. Jesus does not frivolously employ His power to satisfy His own desires. (This is evident by His refusal to succumb to Satan’s futile attempts to tempt Him to do so.) Walking on the sea is necessary because Jesus needs to send His disciples away as quickly as possible, before He deals with the crowds. He then needs to return to Capernaum, but in a way that keeps Him from the fanatical king-makers in the crowd. Our Lord’s walking on the water and the boat’s immediate arrival on shore are miracles of necessity.

But why is John’s account of these miracles so terse, so skeletal? Why does he not make more of them? If he does not make something of them, why does he even mention them at all? I believe that on the one hand they hardly need any defense at all, or any explanation, given their relation to the rest of John’s Gospel. John has clearly told us in chapter 1 that Jesus is God. If He, the Word, is the One who called all creation into existence, is it any great wonder that He can create a meal for 5,000 men, or that He can walk on the sea? Jesus’ actions are completely consistent with who John says He is, who God the Father testifies that He is, and who Jesus Himself claims to be. So what is there to explain or to embellish?

Let me attempt to illustrate this in everyday terms. Among other things, I am a mechanic. I fix things, especially cars. If I work outside for a few hours and then come into the house, my wife Jeannette may say to me, “What were you doing out there?” If I answer, “Oh, I was torquing a cylinder head and changing the struts,” I do not expect her to respond, “Wow! That’s incredible! Tell me more about it!” I know what my wife will say (pretty much): “Hmm.” I was doing what she expected, given who I am and what I do. In our text Jesus is doing what we should expect Him to do, given who He is. Neither Jesus nor John feel obliged to provide a drum roll before these miracles or to blow a bugle afterwards. Jesus is doing what we should expect the Son of God to do.

There is another reason John does not make more of these miracles. These miracles are not in the foreground of this chapter, but instead provide the background for what John considers more important material. The main thrust of this chapter is our Lord’s “Bread of Life” discourse, which is occasioned by the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000. John records this miracle because it is the setting for what takes place in the remainder of the chapter, much like the healing of the paralytic sets the scene for the rest of chapter 5.

The feeding of the 5,000 and our Lord’s walking on the sea seem to have a definite connection with Moses and the events of the Exodus. Later in this very chapter, and again in chapter 9, Moses is a prominent figure in the Gospel of John; the Jews who are in opposition to Jesus refer to him as their hero (1:17, 45; 3:14; 5:45-46; 6:32; 7:19, 22, 23; 8:5; 9:28-29). Under the leadership of Moses, the Israelites passed through the sea on dry land, and God provided His people with manna from heaven. Jesus is the One who is greater than Moses. He personally walks on the sea, and He provides bread from heaven, the true bread which gives men eternal life. In our text, these two miracles link Jesus and Moses, and show that Jesus is the greater of the two.

There is another reason for John’s brevity. John, like our Lord (and very much unlike me) is a master of the art of understatement. In chapter 13, John records that Judas Iscariot went out to betray our Lord. Almost incidentally John adds, “and it was night” (John 13:30). This expression is pregnant with meaning, but John does not spell it all out for us. He expects us to meditate upon his words and ponder their significance. Jesus does the same thing in His teaching. When Jesus teaches, people go away scratching their heads, asking themselves, “I wonder what He meant by that?” This method requires the reader to do some thinking, rather than the teacher doing all the reader’s thinking for him or her.

Having learned that our text is preliminary to and preparatory for the “Bread of Life” discourse of our Lord in the latter part of this chapter, there are some principles to be learned from these miracles as we reflect upon them. Let me point out a few in closing.

(1) Jesus commands us to do more than we are (humanly) able, because He enables us to do what He commands. The disciples are inclined to shirk their responsibility to feed these folks because the task is “impossible.” Jesus does not let them off the hook, but rather lays the responsibility for feeding the 5,000 at their feet. What the disciples are not able to do on their own, they accomplish by the power of Jesus Christ. And not only are they able to feed this crowd so that all are filled, they even end up with a surplus.

God ministers through our weakness. He does not select “strong” people so that He can use their strengths; He chooses weak people so that He can demonstrate His power through their weakness (see 1 Corinthians 1:18–2:5; 2 Corinthians 4:7–5:10; also chapters 8, 10, 12). He gives us tasks which we do not have the strength to do ourselves, because He gives us His strength to carry them out.

(2) The magnitude of the task should not be used as our excuse for not attempting it, especially when the task is our Lord’s command. How easy it is to use the magnitude of a given task as our excuse for not obeying our Lord. The Great Commission is a command given by our Lord to His disciples, and thus to His church. The Great Commission is therefore a command we are to obey; it is not a suggestion, and not a request. We are to be about this task, in whatever ways God puts before us. Let us see the magnitude of the mission as the occasion for faith, obedience, and prayers, and not as an excuse for apathy and idleness.

(3) Wonder of wonders, God has chosen to multiply and expand our puny efforts and contributions, so as to accomplish His will. The young lad with five loaves and two fishes had little to offer, but God multiplied what he had. Our efforts are so feeble, so fallible, and yet God uses us as “clay pots” to do His will. Even our failures are used of God to bring about His purposes.³⁴

(4) Those whom God uses to minister to the needs of this crowd are also those who gain the most from serving others. I wish to be very careful here, because I am not advocating that we “give in order to get.” But it is interesting to note that this young lad ends up with “all he could eat,” which is probably more than he had in the first place. And the disciples, who thought they had nothing to serve, each ended up with a full basket. As we give ourselves in the service of others, God cares abundantly for our own needs.

(5) The disciples are inclined to limit their ministry to what they have seen and done before. One of the great weaknesses of the church is evident in the statement: “But we’ve always done it this way before.” Some things need to be done a certain way. But often we attempt to solve problems with only those means and methods with which we are familiar, to which we are accustomed. The disciples think of feeding the 5,000 only in terms of buying food at a store. Jesus has a better way. Jesus has a different way, a way they would never expect, a way they would never believe if told about it beforehand. God delights in doing the unexpected, so that His wisdom, power and grace are displayed through His handling of “impossible” situations. When we face difficulties, we should be careful not to limit the ways we expect God to minister through us. We dare not demand or even expect the unusual, but we certainly dare not deny the possibility.

(6) Our Lord cares about and takes care of our needs. Jesus ministers to these people because of their great need for teaching and healing. He also cares about their physical needs, because they are weary and hungry. Do you trust God to care for your needs? Jesus was thinking about feeding the 5,000 long before it ever entered the minds of His disciples. Jesus knew all along what He intended to do. Our Lord cares, and He cares well for our needs. Most of all, He cares about our need for the forgiveness of our sins. As we shall soon see, He became the “Bread of Life” by dying on the cross of Calvary, by bearing the guilt and punishment for our sins. Have you trusted in Him who cared so much that He died on Calvary?

20 UEM was formerly known as BEE (Black Evangelistic Enterprise), an organization committed to planting churches in the urban community, where crime and poverty are abundant, but where there is a scarcity of Bible-believing, gospel-proclaiming churches.

21 In Matthew 14:21, the author makes it clear that there are 5,000 men there, not counting the women and children. It seems to be generally conceded that on this occasion there must have been approximately 20,000 people present.

22 D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 269.

23 There is also the “wine” of chapter 2 and the “water” of chapter 3.

24 Today we know this place as the Golan Heights.

25 See the study note in the NET Bible, and also Carson, p. 268. It is interesting that Morris is more inclined to think that the definite article is significant here: “The place of these happenings is defined as ‘the mountain.’ This expression occurs several times in the Gospels (e.g. Matt. 5:1; Mark 3:13), and raises the question whether there was a particular mountain which Jesus and His immediate followers familiarly knew as ‘the’ mountain.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 342.

26 Morris (p. 343) points out that Philip is the logical one to ask, since his home town is Bethsaida (John 1:44).

27 See Matthew 14:21.

28 “The ‘small fish’ (opsaria) are probably pickled fish to be eaten as a side dish with the small cakes (scarcely ‘loaves’) of barley bread …” Carson, p. 270.

29 Matthew, Luke, and John mention only taking up the portions of bread; only Mark mentions the fish (Mark 6:43).

30 There are some pathetic efforts to explain this miracle away, so that it is no miracle at all. One “explanation” is that Jesus used the lad’s contribution to shame the rest of the crowd into sharing the food they brought with them. Another is that Jesus gives the crowd a symbolic meal, something like communion. If this is the case, how can John tell us they are all satisfied?

31 It is clear from the other Gospels that Jesus healed many on this occasion.

32 It is at this point in Matthew’s account that Peter walks on water—momentarily (see Matthew 14:28-30).

33 There are different ways of understanding verse 21, but I see this as another miracle. I believe this miracle took place because Jesus needed to be on shore before daylight, when His arrival would be noted by all who looked out on the sea.

34 David’s sin with Bathsheba resulted in a marriage from which Solomon was later born. David’s foolish act of numbering the Israelites resulted in the purchase of the land on which the temple was later built. The jealous act of Joseph’s brothers was used of God to “save” Jacob and his family, to prosper them in Egypt, and to prepare them to possess the promised land.

Biblical Topics:

Revelation

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

16. The Bread of Life (John 6:22-71)

Introduction

I know what its like to get excited about “free bread.” A few years ago, my brother Dan was visiting us over the Christmas holidays. On Christmas eve, we went to a nearby Safeway grocery store to purchase a few last-minute items, knowing all the stores would be closed on Christmas day. When we got to the checkout counter, I thought I overheard the clerk tell someone there was free bread. Did my ears ever perk up! When I inquired, the clerk said that since the store would be closed the next day, all the bread on the shelves was free.

You should have seen what happened from this point on. Some folks were too proud to go back for free bread; others made their way back to the bread and discretely picked through the loaves, taking one or two of their favorite varieties. Then there was me. I should begin by telling you we had come in our van—a large van. Signaling Dan to gather up some shopping carts, I proceeded to clear the shelves, raking the loaves into the carts, and with Dan’s help, wheeling multiple cart loads out to the van. Now some of you would not have wanted to be anywhere near me as I “gleaned” in the “field” of that Safeway store. I must tell you, though, that some of you in the audience ate that bread. Dan and I loaded the van, then I proceeded to call everyone I knew in our church who could use some free bread, and we had a number of takers.

This lets you know that when it comes to being enthusiastic about free bread, I am right there at the top of the list. I can identify with the people in our text who are privileged to be in the wilderness across the Sea of Galilee from Capernaum, in the wilderness where Jesus fed the 20,000 people who gathered (5,000 of whom were men). When Jesus fed this crowd, they were ready to make Him their king—by force if necessary. Jesus sent His disciples away, dismissed the crowd, and went off by Himself to pray. Later in the night, He set out for Capernaum, walking on the sea. Out on the sea, He came upon His disciples, and they were terrified, taking Him for a ghost. Our Lord identified Himself and got into the boat; immediately they reached shore.

In the morning, the crowd whom Jesus fed begin to search for Him. It takes them a while to realize that He is no longer nearby. They then set out for Capernaum in search for Him, and not long afterward, Jesus is spotted. A crowd gathers about Him once more, if not to hear Him teach, to have Him perform some miracle of healing—or to witness a healing. In our text, the folks who witnessed the feeding of the 5,000 find Jesus and challenge Him to be their “bread-winner” forever by providing them with bread, “like Moses did.” Jesus declines to grant this request. Instead, He offers them better “bread,” and He makes it clear to them in doing so that He is better than Moses.

Jesus is certainly better than Moses, but He is also one “like” Moses. Moses led the people through the midst of the Red Sea; Jesus just crossed over to Capernaum by walking on the Sea of Galilee. After the Israelites crossed through the Red Sea, God provided them with manna to eat. Jesus just fed the 5,000 in the wilderness “across the sea.” Even better, He offers men a “bread” that gives eternal life. It wasn’t long after the Israelites crossed the Red Sea that they began to grumble against Moses, and in our text, it isn’t long before the Jews begin to grumble against Jesus, especially His teaching. In chapter 5, our Lord was rejected by the Jewish religious leaders for healing a man on the Sabbath, for commanding the man to carry his bed on the Sabbath, and especially for claiming to be equal with God. Now, these Jerusalem Jewish leaders are more committed than ever to put Jesus to death. In chapter 6, our Lord will be rejected by many of the Galileans who once followed Him as His disciples. The reason will be our Lord’s teaching on the “bread of life” in chapter 6.

This sixth chapter of John is a watershed, a major turning point in the Gospel of John. From this point on, Jesus is not nearly as popular as He once was. His enemies are determined to do away with Him. From a historical point of view, it is only a matter of time until our Lord’s arrest, trial, and crucifixion. Our text plays a pivotal role in all of this, so let us listen well to the words of this Scripture.

Catching Up With Jesus
(6:22-24)

22 The next day the crowd that remained on the other side of the lake realized that only one small boat had been there, and that Jesus had not boarded it with his disciples, but that his disciples had gone away alone. 23 But some boats from Tiberias came to shore near the place where they had eaten the bread after the Lord had given thanks. 24 So when the crowd realized that neither Jesus nor his disciples were there, they got into the boats and came to Capernaum looking for Jesus.

It is hard to overestimate the excitement and eagerness of the people regarding our Lord and the kingdom of God at this moment in time, especially among those who have just witnessed the feeding of the 5,000. Jesus has been publicly ministering for approximately two years. His disciples have just returned from going about the land performing miracles in Jesus’ name and proclaiming the nearness of the kingdom of God. Many have seen Jesus perform miracles and heard Him preach. Many more have heard about Him. John has told us that the miracle of this feeding takes place near the time of the Passover (6:4). Messianic expectations are running high, and the ministry of our Lord only serves to fan the flames of enthusiasm.

The morning after the miracle of the feast in the wilderness, the crowds surely awaken with a great sense of expectation. Jesus has gone further up the mountain by Himself, but there seems to be no way for Him to return to Capernaum without passing by them. He surely will not walk around the Sea of Galilee the long way, and He can’t go in the boat as the disciples took it the night before, at the Lord’s command. Jesus is going to have to walk around the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and thus pass by the people on His way—or so they suppose. After some time passes, it becomes apparent that Jesus is nowhere to be found. Then, some people arrive in boats from Tiberias on the other side of the Sea, south of Capernaum, and they are looking for Jesus as well. The crowd finally realizes that Jesus has left, even though they do not know how He managed to do so. (They, of course, have no idea that He walked across the Sea of Galilee, rejoining His disciples.) As many as possible squeeze into the boats and return to Capernaum in the hope of finding Jesus.

Politically Incorrect
(6:25-27)

25 When they found him on the other side of the lake, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?” 26 Jesus replied, “I tell you the solemn truth, you are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs, but because you ate all the loaves of bread you wanted. 27 Do not work³⁵ for the food that disappears, but for the food that remains to eternal life—the food that the Son of Man will give to you. For God the Father has put his seal of approval on him.”

Those who have been searching for Jesus find Him on the other side of the lake and are obviously amazed to learn that He somehow eluded them and reached Capernaum before they arrived. They must wonder how He accomplished this, for they inquire, “Rabbi,³⁶when did you get here?” It is a way of satisfying their curiosity without really asking Jesus “how” He did it. The question seems awkward, and perhaps it is. If they are mystified about how Jesus got to Capernaum without passing by them, it may be difficult for them to articulate their thoughts. The possible answers to their question may seem unthinkable.

I have titled this section of our text, “Politically Incorrect,” for good reason, I believe. If Jesus had done the “politically correct” thing, He would have called the people’s attention to the miracles He had just performed, especially the “unknown” miracle of His walking on the sea. In today’s terminology, it would have been great PR (public relations) material. I can imagine what some people would make of this: “Well, it’s interesting that you ask. As you know, no boat was available, so I found it necessary to use My supernatural powers to walk on the Sea of Galilee, thus reaching the other shore ahead of you. This is just one more proof of My power to serve you as your Messiah.”

Jesus never even mentions this miracle. It is not for them to know, but only for our Lord’s disciples and those who read John’s Gospel. If the people of that region knew what Jesus had done, they would have been even more eager to make Him their king, even if by force. Jesus sees through their question and, beginning in verse 26, He does that which is politically incorrect: He exposes their motives and rebukes them for their sin. The reason the crowds are hovering around Jesus is that these folks are hoping He will provide them with free bread forever. The “messiah” they want is only a “meal ticket.”

Earlier in John chapter 2 (verses 23-25), we saw that those with only “sign-faith” were those our Lord kept at arms reach; He did not commit Himself to them. If our Lord avoided “sign-faith” believers, then you can well imagine how Jesus feels about these people who are looking for a “free meal messiah.” Though they witnessed the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000, these folks did not grasp its meaning, nor did they come to faith in Jesus as God’s Messiah. They have been given a free meal, and they want more of the same.

We need to read verse 27 very carefully lest we misunderstand our Lord here (as His audience does). The verb “to work” is found but once in this verse. In the Greek text, the verb is an imperative in the present tense, and it is negated. The negation conveys the thought that men should not work—more precisely, that men should stop working.³⁷We almost automatically read the verse this way: “Stop working for the food that disappears, but work for the food that remains to eternal life.” The words “work for” are not in the original text, however. I do not believe we are to read them into the text as we do. Jesus is not suggesting that men cease working for earthly bread, but work hard for heavenly bread. He is saying that the “bread” which He offers is “bread” which He gives. It is not bread for which men work. Thus, the sense of His words would be something closer to: “Stop working for the food that disappears, and seek instead the bread which remains to eternal life, the bread which I give.”

Our Lord now makes a very bold statement, which accompanies His offer of “bread from heaven.” On Jesus, the Father has put His seal. My Microsoft software, which I am running on the computer I am using to write this message, has a very carefully made “seal” on the box. Under this Microsoft seal, these words are printed: “These stickers indicate that this product is genuine Microsoft software …” This seal is proof that I have purchased genuine Microsoft software. There is no higher “seal” than that which the Son of God has from God the Father.

The question, of course, is just what constitutes this “seal” of the Father. Further, we need to know just what the “seal” authenticates as genuine. I have studied both Greek and Hebrew (actually, I majored in Hebrew), but I do not profess to be a scholar in either Greek or Hebrew. As a result, I am reluctant to translate or retranslate the text. I am going to make an exception here, however, because the order of the words in the Greek text seems to suggest the answer to one of our questions. Literally rendered, the text would read something like this: “For this One the Father has sealed, the God.” Nearly all take this to mean that God, the Father, has sealed the Son. Of course this is true. But our Lord may be saying that the Father has sealed Him as God. In other words, Jesus has been performing miracles—doing the work of His Father. The Father “set His seal” on the Son at His baptism. The Father “set His seal” on the Son through His Word, through the Old Testament Scriptures, which spoke of the coming Messiah. All of this has been emphasized in chapter 5 of John’s Gospel. The “seal” is the testimony of God to the Son. The “seal” authenticates the Son’s claim, not only to be the promised Messiah, but also to be the Son of God.

Here is another “politically incorrect” statement. This claim of our Lord is the claim He made in chapter 5, the same claim which got Him into trouble with the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem. One would think the “politically correct” thing to do would be to drop this claim, or at least to cease emphasizing it. Jesus does just the opposite. Once again He boldly makes this claim as a part of His gospel. If men will believe on Him for eternal life, if they will receive the “bread” He offers them, they must receive Him as “bread from God.” The deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (Jesus is God) is not an incidental claim, a secondary issue; the deity of our Lord is essential to the gospel. Men who would receive the gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ must receive it from Him as God. Someone might conceivably come to faith in Jesus without fully grasping this truth, but as I read the Scriptures, no one will receive eternal life from Jesus who rejects His deity. This is why Jesus makes such a point of this truth. This is also one of the things which offends men about our Lord’s gospel.

Doing and Believing
(6:28-31)

28 So then they said to him, “What must we do to accomplish the deeds God requires?” 29 Jesus replied, “This is [God’s work:³⁸ so that you]³⁹ believe in the one whom he sent.” 30 So they said to him, “Then what miraculous sign will you perform, so that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the desert, just as it is written, ‘He⁴⁰ gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”

Jesus does not rebuke His audience for seeking “free bread,” but rather for working for bread that does not last. Jesus is offering to give them free bread forever, but it is a very different kind of “bread.” As usual in the Gospel of John, our Lord’s words are not understood correctly. They think that Jesus is encouraging them to accomplish some work that will please God, and thus they can earn eternal life. So they ask, “What must we do to accomplish the deeds God requires?” Their question is a reflection of their distorted interpretation and application of the Old Testament law. They think the law spells out what God requires of them, so that through law-keeping they can earn His favor. They are wrong. Paul sums up what the role of the law really is, and how men must be saved:

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For no one is declared righteous before him by the works of the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin. 21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God, which is attested by the law and the prophets, has been disclosed—22 namely, the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. 24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 25 God publicly displayed him as a satisfaction for sin by his blood through faith. This was to demonstrate his righteousness, because God in his forbearance had passed over the sins previously committed. 26 This was also to demonstrate his righteousness in the present time, so that he would be just and the justifier of the one who lives because of Jesus’ faithfulness (Romans 3:19-26).

Our Lord’s words indicate that salvation is God’s work, not man’s. Salvation is accomplished through the Son of God, Jesus Christ. Men are not saved by striving, but simply by believing in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of eternal life. The Jews once again take these words the wrong way. They reason something like this: “Jesus claims that men must believe in Him in order to be saved. If we are to believe in Him, then He must prove Himself to us, showing us that He is worthy of our trust. He must perform some very impressive miracle if He is going to get us to believe in Him.” And so they attempt to turn the tables on Jesus, challenging Him to do something worthy of their faith. They even dare to hold Moses up as the standard, drawing attention to what they wrongly believe he accomplished, which “deed” Jesus must exceed if He is to earn their trust:

30 So they said to him, “Then what miraculous sign will you perform, so that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the desert, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat’” (John 6:30-31).

This is truly amazing. They seem to ask for one great work, one magnificent miracle. They then seek to remind Jesus of what Moses did (or at least what they thought he did). They claim that Moses gave their ancestors bread from heaven to eat. Jesus is expected to meet or exceed this standard. They are requiring that for them to believe in Jesus as their Messiah, Jesus must provide bread from heaven, as Moses did. This manna was provided for the Israelites for 40 years. It seems that this is at least how long Jesus is expected to provide bread for them.

Christ’s Corrections
(6:32-33)

32 Then Jesus told them, “I tell you the solemn truth,⁴¹ it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but my Father is giving you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

Our Lord’s words must be carefully considered, because they set forth a number of corrections to the view put forth by the Jews. First, the words which Jesus is about to speak are of the utmost importance. They are introduced by the words, “I tell you the solemn truth” (“Verily, verily,” KJV). Second, it was not Moses who gave the Israelites bread in the wilderness; it was God. This is the clear teaching of the Scriptures which speak of the feeding of the Israelites in the wilderness:

Then the LORD said to Moses, “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you. And the people shall go out and gather a certain quota every day, that I may test them, whether they will walk in My law or not (Exodus 16:4, NKJV).

“You gave them bread from heaven for their hunger, And brought them water out of the rock for their thirst, And told them to go in to possess the land Which You had sworn to give them” (Nehemiah 9:15, NKJV).

23 Yet He had commanded the clouds above, And opened the doors of heaven, 24 Had rained down manna on them to eat, And given them of the bread of heaven (Psalm 78:23-24, NKJV).

The people asked, and He brought quail, And satisfied them with the bread of heaven (Psalm 105:40, NKJV).

Third, the “bread” which God gave (past tense) Israel in the past is not the “true bread” which God is now giving (present tense) men from heaven. The Father who gave “bread” to their forefathers in the wilderness is still giving “bread,” but it is “true bread.” It is true bread in that it is the “ultimate and final fulfillment of earlier prototypes.”⁴²

Fourth, Jesus is not just the “giver” of bread, He is that bread. The “bread” of which our Lord is speaking is from heaven. The bread is a Person. Jesus is that bread:

“For the bread of God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world” (verse 33).

Jesus Defines “Bread” and Explains Jewish Unbelief
(6:34-40)

34 So they said to him, “Sir, give us this bread all the time!” 35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. The one who comes to me will never go hungry, and the one who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But I told you that you have seen me and still do not believe. 37 Everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will never send away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me. 39 Now this is the will of the one who sent me: that I should not lose one person of every one he has given me, but raise them all up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father: that every one who looks on the Son and believes in him will have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Our Lord’s audience does not understand what He is saying at all. They still think Jesus is offering them some kind of literal bread, which they can eat and fill their stomachs, just as they ate the barley loaves at the feeding of the 5,000. So when Jesus speaks to them about “bread,” they quickly ask for more: “Sir, give us this bread all the time!” They offer Jesus a full-time job as their chef.

In His response, Jesus makes it very clear that He is speaking of “spiritual bread,” not literal bread. It is He who is the “bread,” so whoever comes to Him will never hunger. In verse 35, Jesus speaks of the one who “comes to Him” as the one who “believes in Him.” To come to Jesus is to trust in Him, by faith, as the “bread from heaven,” who is God’s only provision for eternal life.

In verse 36, our Lord goes back to the challenge given Him in verse 30:

So they said to him, “Then what miraculous sign will you perform, so that we may see it and believe you? What will you do?”

If these folks are to believe in Jesus (as He has said they must in verse 29), then they must have proof, and He must provide it. They expect Jesus to perform some miracle to prove that He is worthy of their faith. The fact is that Jesus has already performed many miracles, and yet they have not believed in Him. So now Jesus takes up the matter of their unbelief.

He has already told them all they need to know, and they have seen Him at work, performing many miracles—miracles such as the feeding of the 5,000. None of this brings them to faith, however. They persist in their unbelief. The reason for this is not popular, but it is true:

37 Everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will never send away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me. 39 Now this is the will of the one who sent me: that I should not lose one person of every one he has given me, but raise them all up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father: that every one who looks on the Son and believes in him will have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Those who “come to Him” (see verse 35) are those whom the Father has given to the Son (verse 37). Everyone the Father gives to the Son comes to Him in faith. And everyone who comes to the Son in faith will be accepted—none will ever be sent away (verse 37). The reason we may be so confident about this is because of the Son’s relationship to the Father. The Son will not act independently of the Father, but only in submission to the Father. If the Father gives someone to the Son as a believer, the Son will receive this individual, because the Father has given them to Him. Think of it, our eternal destiny is contingent upon the Son’s submission to the Father. No wonder Satan sought to tempt our Lord to act independently of the Father! The Son’s will is to do the Father’s will, and so those whom the Father gives, the Son gladly receives, because the Father gives them to Him. And those the Father gives, He gives for keeps, and the Son does keep them. He turns none away who come to Him, and He loses none of those He receives. This must also mean that none who comes to our Lord in faith can be “lost” by death. The basis for this resurrection hope is that our Lord has the authority and the power to “raise them up at the last day” (verses 39, 40).

Grumbling Against Jesus
(6:41-51)

41 Then the Jews who were hostile to Jesus began complaining about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven,” 42 and they started saying, “Isn’t this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, “I have come down from heaven?” 43 Jesus replied, “Do not complain about me to one another. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to me. 46 (Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God—he has seen the Father.) 47 I tell you the solemn truth, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, and they died. 50 This is the bread that has come down from heaven, so that a person may eat from it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats from this bread he will live forever. The bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

By this time, there are many differing opinions about Jesus. The Jewish religious leaders have long since made up their minds that Jesus will not be the Messiah—not if they have anything to do with it! They have, in fact, already determined to put Him to death (see 5:18). Some would have Jesus as their king, even if by force (see 6:15). A number are still undecided about Jesus, but some sincerely believe in Him as the Messiah. Included in this number are the 11 disciples and a number of others (see 1:12, 49; 2:11, 23). Some of the people seem to embrace the view of their religious leaders, rejecting Jesus as an impostor, or at least not their kind of Messiah. Starting at verse 41, it is this latter group that reacts to Jesus’ teaching on the “bread of life” and begins to grumble.⁴³

The word “complain” or “grumble” implies complaining against Jesus behind His back. Angered by His claim to be “the bread that came down from heaven,” they begin mumbling among themselves and to those in the crowd against Jesus. Notice that their words are not addressed to Jesus, but to others about Jesus: “Isn’t this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven?’” Notice the “now” of verse 41. It underscores the alleged inconsistency those who oppose Jesus are claiming. They are saying, in effect, “We know who Jesus is and where He came from. We know about His birth as a mere man. How can he now, at this point in his life, claim to be divine?”

It isn’t really such a bad question when you stop to think about it. If Jesus was born of earthly parents alone, then His claim to have come from heaven is absurd. But these people don’t really have their facts down as well as they think. In one sense, Mary and Joseph were the earthly parents of our Lord. Mary was His biological mother, while Joseph was not His biological father. He did play the role of father in our Lord’s growing up years, and Jesus submitted to both His father and His mother (see Luke 2:51). Had these folks given careful heed to the Old Testament Scriptures, they would have known that the promised Messiah was to be both human and divine, God and man (see Deuteronomy 18:15; Isaiah 9:6). He was to be born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14). He was to be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2). And so these Jews who think they know our Lord’s origins so well are wrong in their facts. The Old Testament Scriptures indicate that our Lord would come to earth as He did, and the events of our Lord’s birth perfectly fulfilled the Scriptures. But these folks are determined not to believe in Jesus as God’s Messiah, as God’s provision of “bread from heaven.”

The asking of the question is not wrong, in and of itself. We should not hesitate to probe the claims of Jesus Christ and to expect a reasonable answer. This question is wrong because of the facts it assumes, and because it totally disregards other crucial facts. In the context of John’s Gospel, there are many witnesses to the truth of our Lord’s claim to have come down from heaven. Look at John’s statements in chapter 1. Look at the miracles our Lord performs in chapter 2 and elsewhere (5:36). There was the witness of John the Baptist and of the Father at our Lord’s baptism. Our Lord did not testify alone to His divine and heavenly origins; there were many witnesses. But His opponents closed their eyes to these witnesses. Theirs was a willful unbelief.

Our Lord responds to this complaint, but not in a way His adversaries expect, and certainly not in a way they wish. Jesus tells them to stop mumbling to one another. Do they not believe Him? This is no blow to His pride, nor is it a shock. Jesus expects this. They do not believe because they cannot believe. Jesus explains that it is impossible for anyone to believe in Him unless the Father who sent Him draws them, and these He (Jesus) will raise up in the last day (verse 44). God must draw men to faith in the Son, the same God who sent the Son.

Do these folks find it impossible to believe in Jesus? Jesus is not taken aback by their unbelief. Jesus does not strive to convince them that He is who He claims to be. He simply tells them that they are not among those whom the Father has given Him. Do you notice that the issues here in our text are very much the same issues that we find in chapter 5, when Jesus is in Jerusalem, rejected and opposed by the Jewish religious leaders? If He is who He claims to be, then He is from heaven, and He can raise men from the dead.

Here is something few people would recommend to those who desire to witness to others about Jesus as the Messiah, the Savior of the world—telling the lost that they cannot and will not be saved unless the Father draws them, unless they are chosen of God. Yet this is what our Lord chooses to emphasize in His response to the unbelief and opposition of His adversaries. But there is more. If verse 44 emphasizes the negative side of the story of election,⁴⁴verses 45-51 boldly declare the positive side of election.

Jesus turns to Scripture to make His point, citing Isaiah 54:13. In this prophecy, God is speaking to the Jewish people about their future hope in Messiah and His coming kingdom. Many wonderful things are promised in relation to the coming of the kingdom of God. Among these promised blessings is the assurance that “all of Israel’s ‘sons’ will be taught of God” (verse 13). Jesus applies this verse in a very different way than we might expect. If “all of Israel’s sons will be taught of God,” then those who are untaught—those who refuse to accept the teaching of Messiah—must not enter into the kingdom of God. These “grumblers” against our Lord do not receive His teaching, and thus show that they have no part of this kingdom. They are not those of His kingdom because God the Father (who sent the Son) has not chosen or drawn them.

The only One who has seen the Father, the only One who has “learned” directly from Him, is the Son (see John 1:18; 3:32-33; 5:20-21, 37-38). To be “taught of God” is to be taught by God through Jesus Christ, the Messiah. He alone has seen and heard the Father, and explains His Word and His will to men. Do these “grumblers” not accept Jesus and His teaching? This tells us more about them than it does about our Lord.

The one who hears our Lord’s teaching and trusts in Him as the “bread from heaven” is the one who gains eternal life, who gains entrance into the blessed kingdom of God, as promised by the prophets (and specifically Isaiah, whom Jesus has just cited). Jesus is the “bread from heaven,” and thus is the “bread of life,” the “bread” who gives men eternal life. This “bread” is vastly superior to the “bread” which their ancestors ate in the wilderness. Though they ate manna for many years, they eventually died. The “bread” which God provides in Jesus is a bread which results in eternal life. This is true bread, the real thing.

Now Jesus gets to the really hard part of His teaching. He is not talking about physical bread, about manna or even the barley loaves He provided in the wilderness for the multitude. He is talking about something “spiritual,” something from heaven which results in spiritual life. Those who are chosen and drawn by the Father will “come to” Jesus in faith (verse 37). They will believe in Him (verse 35). But what is the nature of this spiritual “bread,” and how does one partake of it? This is the focus of the next verses, and our Lord’s teaching on this matter produces a very different “exodus.”

Jesus gets to the bottom line of how men must respond to Him in verse 51: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats from this bread he will live forever. The bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” Jesus does provide the “bread of life,” but He is this “bread.” Those who “eat” of this bread will live forever. The bread that men must “eat” in order to have eternal life is the “flesh” of our Lord.

All along in the Gospel of John, Jesus has been speaking to men in spiritual terms, and men have been understanding Him in merely literal terms. For example, Jesus spoke to the Jerusalem Jewish leaders about “destroying this temple” in chapter 2, and they took Him to be referring to the literal temple, while He was referring to the “temple” of His body (2:19-22). In chapter 3, Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about being “born again,” and once again He was taken literally. Jesus spoke to the “woman at the well” about “living water,” and she thought it was something to drink (John 4:10-15). In our text, Jesus speaks about “eating” His “flesh,” which is the “bread of life,” and at least some of His audience takes His words in a most literal way, and they are repulsed.

The Real Mission of Jesus
(6:52-58)

52 Then the Jews who were hostile to Jesus began to argue with one another, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat!” 53 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood resides in me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so the one who consumes me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like your ancestors ate and died. The one who eats this bread will live forever.”

Many of us have had countless offers to obtain a “free gift” of one kind or another, only to learn that there is a catch. In almost every instance, what is supposedly “free” is not free at all. The Jews are very interested in “free” bread, and Jesus offers it to them. In fact, this “free bread” is even more “free” than His audience supposes. They think it is bread they have to work for, but Jesus makes a point of telling them it cannot be obtained by man’s good works, but only freely, as a gift of God’s sovereign grace.

Up to this point in time, no one has really grasped just how our Lord had purposed to save men from their sins. Even the disciples will not understand this until after our Lord’s sacrificial death and victorious resurrection. It is about this point in time, however, when our Lord begins to tell men how He is going to save them. In the Synoptic Gospels, it is shortly after the “great confession” of Peter that Jesus begins to inform His disciples about His coming death in Jerusalem (see Matthew 16:13-28; Mark 8:27-38; Luke 9:18-27). It would appear from a comparison of the Gospels that the great confession took place shortly after the feeding of the 5,000.⁴⁵ So it is that we find—for the first time in the Gospel of John⁴⁶—our Lord’s revelation that He will give men eternal life by His substitutionary death on the cross for the sins of men.

At least some of the Jews who hear Him advance from “grumbling” to “arguing”⁴⁷ (verse 52). It seems as though the words of our Lord have divided the audience. They are not said to be arguing with Jesus, but with one another. Some appear to accept our Lord’s words; others will have nothing to do with this line of teaching. And so those in the crowd begin arguing with one another. Those who oppose Jesus and His teaching interpret His words in a crassly literal way: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat!”

Once again, in verses 53-58, Jesus responds to what is being thought and spoken by those in the crowd. He is not really trying to convince His adversaries, but simply attempting to clarify His meaning, knowing that the more clear His teaching becomes, the more offended many will be. He does not at all back down from what He has said, but affirms it in the strongest possible language:⁴⁸“I tell you the solemn truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves” (verse 53). Jesus does not offer an alternative method for obtaining eternal life. Only those who “eat His flesh” and “drink His blood” will have this everlasting life. This “eternal life” extends beyond death and the grave! The one who eats and drinks of Him will have eternal life, and in the last day Jesus will raise this one up from the dead. The flesh of our Lord is “true” food, and His blood is “true” drink (verse 55). It is that which “truly” sustains life, beyond death, to eternal life. The one who eats His flesh and drinks His blood abides (NET Bible, “resides”) in Christ, and He in them (verse 56).

Jesus links this claim to be “true” food and “true” drink to His previous claims to be God and to have come down to the earth, sent by the Father from above (verses 57-58). Just as the Father sent the Son from heaven and the Son lives out the life of the Father, so the one who “eats” and “drinks” the Son lives because of the Son. The Father’s life extends to and through the Son to those who will partake of the Son’s flesh and blood. This is that “bread from heaven” of which Jesus has been speaking. Eating this bread gives eternal life to whoever eats it.

Another “Exodus”: A Parting of Jesus’ Disciples
(6:59-71)

Why the Jews Could Not Stomach the Bread of Heaven

59 Jesus said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum. 60 Then many of his disciples, when they heard these things, said, “This is a difficult saying! Who can understand it?”⁴⁹61 Because Jesus was aware that his disciples were complaining about this, he said to them, “Does this cause you to be offended? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascending where he was before? 63 The Spirit is the one who gives life; human nature is of no help! The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus had already known from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 So Jesus added, “Because of this I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has allowed him to come.” 66 After this many of his disciples quit following him and did not accompany him any longer. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You don’t want to go away too, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom will we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God!” 70 Jesus replied, “Didn’t I choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is the devil?” 71 (Now he said this about Judas son of Simon Iscariot; for Judas, one of the twelve, was going to betray him.)

Things have “progressed” from grumbling—to arguing—to downright rejection of our Lord’s teaching. Jesus has been saying all these things while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum. Many “followed” Jesus as “disciples” who did not really believe in Him, not in the way He is now defining His mission and ministry as Israel’s Messiah. They “followed” Jesus out into the wilderness, where He taught them and fed them, but they are not willing to “follow” Him where He is going with His teaching. They are not willing to “follow” Him to the cross of Calvary. They claim His teaching is too difficult, too obscure, but this is not really true. They are more than willing to follow Jesus when His message was not clear to them. They cease to follow Him as His message becomes more and more clear. They do not like what they are hearing, and they want to hear no more of it.

Once again, Jesus knows what they are thinking and saying, and thus He responds in verses 61-65. Do His words offend them, causing them to stumble and fall away? If they are offended by His insistence that He has come down from heaven, what will they do if they see Him ascending back into heaven? It is one thing to claim to have come down from heaven, and quite another to be seen returning to the place from which Jesus claims to have come.

But moving beyond the literal aspects of His teaching, Jesus gets to the heart of the problem—His audience simply cannot grasp the spiritual meaning of His words. In some ways our Lord’s conversation here with the crowds is similar to His conversation with Nicodemus recorded in chapter 3. Nicodemus wondered how a man could be reborn from above. This crowd wonders how one can obtain eternal life through eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood. In both cases, Jesus refers to the spiritual dimensions of His message, and specifically to the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Jesus’ words are “spirit and life.” Without the Spirit, His words do not “come to life,” and they do not produce eternal life. The Holy Spirit gives eternal life, quickening those who are dead in their trespasses and sins. Those who cannot grasp His words are devoid of the Spirit, and thus Jesus’ words are beyond human comprehension, and certainly beyond acceptance. Included with the unbelieving among our Lord’s disciples is one of the twelve, Judas Iscariot. Jesus does not name him here, though all of us now know immediately to whom He is referring. Unbelief does not shock Jesus, because He knows that no one can “naturally” believe, on their own; they must be called and drawn by the Father through the quickening (life-giving) ministry of the Holy Spirit. Even one so close to Jesus as Judas can see and hear all that he does without truly coming to faith in Jesus as the Messiah.

This is the breaking point for many. This is teaching that many can not and will not understand, nor are they willing to follow Jesus any longer. Many so-called “disciples” prove only to be “followers” for a time. Having heard these words of Jesus, they leave Him, never again to follow Him as His disciples. I am reminded of the parable of the soils, in which Jesus describes the seed which falls on rocky ground:

5 Otherseed fell on rocky ground where it did not have much soil. Itsprang up at once because the soil was not deep. 6 Whenthe sun came up it was scorched, and because it did not have a root, it withered … 16 And these are the ones sown on the rocky ground: whenever they hear the word, they receive it at once with joy. 17 But they have no root in themselves and are temporary. Then, when trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they fall away⁵⁰ immediately (Mark 4:5-6, 16-17).

In the parable of the soils, the seed sown on rocky ground represents those who too quickly embrace Jesus and His teaching, without fully grasping what it means. They are offended by the suffering and affliction that comes into their life as a result of following Christ, and thus just as quickly, they fall away. In the case of the “disciples” in our text who leave Jesus, it is the suffering of Jesus which causes many to cease following Jesus. One cannot help but wonder, however, if it isn’t fairly obvious to these folks that if their Master must suffer and die, they may also experience the same rejection and persecution, if not death. The teaching of Jesus is not what these “disciples” want to hear, and so they abandon the Master, who is God’s Messiah.

Jesus then turns to His closest disciples and poses the question, “You don’t want to go away too, do you?”⁵¹Predictably, it is Simon Peter who speaks for the twelve. Notice his answer to Jesus’ question. He does not seem to fully grasp what Jesus has been saying, either. We know from Peter’s great confession in the Synoptic Gospels that when Jesus introduces the subject of His rejection and crucifixion, Peter strongly objects:

17 And Jesus answered him, “You are blessed, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father in heaven! 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on the earth will have been bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.” 20 Then he instructed his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ. 21 From that time on Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and experts in the law, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. 22 So Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “God forbid, Lord! This must not happen to you.” 23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you are not thinking the thoughts of God, but of men” (Matthew 16:17-23).

Neither Peter nor any of the other disciples close to our Lord understand what Jesus is talking about at this moment in time. They will understand, but not until after the Lord’s death, burial, resurrection and ascension, and the coming of the Holy Spirit (see 16:12-13). But even if they do not understand the teaching of our Lord at this moment, they know no one else has the answers, and that He does. They believe that He is the Son of God, God’s Messiah. They believe that only through Him can they obtain eternal life. They know they have no one else to turn to but Jesus. They are going nowhere.

It is a wonderful profession of faith that Peter makes. He speaks for all of the twelve, save one—Judas Iscariot, who is to betray Him. This too is known to the Savior, and so He indicates this to His disciples. Though He has chosen all twelve of them, one of these twelve is “a devil.” Like much of what Jesus has been saying at this time, the disciples do not really understand Him. We know He is speaking of Judas, and they will know it in good time. But Jesus tells them ahead of time so that they will understand that He is not a victim in His death, but a Victor, a volunteer who chooses to submit to His Father’s will, and to die on the cross of Calvary in the sinner’s place.

Conclusion

In the unfolding drama of John’s Gospel, John chapter 6 is a watershed. Jesus has not only been rejected by the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem (chapter 5), He has now been rejected by the masses in Galilee, those who a few hours before would have made Him king by force. Is this not a preview of what will take place just a year later, when our Lord triumphantly marches into Jerusalem and is hailed as the King? Will it not be but a few hours before the crowds are calling for the death of Jesus? And will this rejection and death not be the very thing Jesus has foretold in our text?

Our text is much more than mere history, a skillfully written account of what happened in the life and ministry of our Lord. It is recorded to instruct us, and there is much for us to learn here. Let me conclude this message by pointing out some of the lessons it has to teach us.

This text exposes some of the wrong reasons people turn to God, and why they reject the gospel when they finally understand it. Consider some of the reasons why people seek God, which are not biblical. First, many people seek God to “meet their needs.” These “needs” are almost always physical or material, rather than spiritual, and they are the “needs” we define for God—which we expect Him to meet. We want physical health, success in our endeavors, and food on the table. We look to God to provide these for us, not as secondary desires, but as primary demands. When God fails to meet our demands, when life doesn’t go as we wish, we find God to blame. How many of us, as Christians, find God’s “meeting our needs” as the dominant theme of our prayer life? Unfortunately, in the presentation of the gospel, some people present God as the great “need-meeter,” rather than as the sovereign God, who seeks those who will serve Him and submit to His will, the God who came to seek and to save the lost. Our greatest need is the forgiveness of our sins, not more varieties of bread on the table.

Second, some people turn to God for salvation, but they seek a salvation to which they can contribute, a salvation which they control (see 6:36-37, 44). We all think we want something free, but we balk at a salvation that is completely free. In our pride and self-will, we seek for God to save us our way, and with our help. We don’t want “charity,” yet charity is the only thing that will save us. Everything we touch is defiled, even our efforts to please God (more accurately, especially our efforts to please God). Salvation is God’s work.

Seeing is not necessarily believing. Those who saw and heard our Lord could ask for no more proof that He was the Messiah. But for all they observed, they did not believe. Only the sovereignty of God in salvation explains their persistent unbelief and rejection of our Lord. Only the sovereignty of God in salvation explains the conversion of a lost sinner. And the sovereignty of God in salvation is the basis for our security. The fact that it is all of God is the reason we can be saved, and it is also the reason our salvation is so secure. He who began the good work of our salvation is also the One who will complete it (Philippians 1:6). This does not mean that we have no choice to make, or that we are not held responsible for that choice. It simply means that salvation is of the Lord; it is His work. Those whom He chooses and draws come to Him. Should this make us apathetic and passive in seeking to win others to Christ? Not at all. It should motivate us, both to pray to Him who saves and to share the good news of the gospel with those who are lost.

Third, some seek to abuse our text by claiming that it is the basis for obtaining salvation through the sacrament of holy communion. A friend of mine reminded me that this text is the primary text for those who teach that salvation comes through the sacraments, particularly that of holy communion. Unbelievers through the centuries (particularly the Jews, so far as the Bible is concerned) have sought salvation through rituals, rather than through the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus Christ. In John chapter 6 Jesus is not teaching us that we can be saved by our ritualistic partaking of communion, for this is but a symbol of our “partaking” of Christ by faith in His death, burial, and resurrection in our place.

Fourth, some seek a savior who is merely human, and they are repulsed by One who claims to be divine. Have you noticed that other (false) religions have their leaders, but only Christianity has a man who claims also to be God? The Jews in our text are not offended by a Savior who claims to be a man, but by a Man who claims to be God—and the only way of salvation. The deity of Christ is offensive to lost men. Have you wondered why men and women put their trust in individuals who are clearly fallible, clearly less than divine? I think it is because we would rather have a “god” in our image than to submit to a God who will conform us to His image.

Fifth, many people seek a savior who conforms to their distorted interpretation of Scripture. There are, of course, many “interpretations” of the Bible. Even born again Christians differ on many interpretations. But the people in our text want a messiah who conforms to their distorted views of what the Bible teaches. They want to give Moses credit for feeding the multitude in the wilderness, not God. Many are those who claim to offer a salvation that is taught in the Bible, but much that is claimed as biblical is simply man’s distortion of the truth. Only those whose eyes God has opened, who have the Spirit of God in them, can rightly interpret the Word of God (see John 16:12-15; 1 Corinthians 2:6-16).

Sixth, many are those who want a “bloodless” salvation, who do not wish to be saved by a suffering Savior. The most offensive thing about our Lord’s teaching in John 6 is His insistence that He came to save lost sinners by way of the cross of Calvary. While all of the specifics of this are not spelled out, this is the essence of what Jesus is teaching, and of what His “followers” find repulsive. How can they miss this, as familiar as they are with the Old Testament and the “bloody” sacrificial system. As the author to the Hebrews has written, “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Hebrews 9:22). John the Baptist introduced our Lord as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29, see also verse 36).

Our sin deserves the death penalty, because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). We deserve to die for our sins, because we are sinners. Jesus Christ is the sinless Son of God. He came to die in the sinner’s place, to bear the guilt and punishment for our sins, and thus to appease God’s holy wrath on our sin. By His sacrificial death on the cross of Calvary, Jesus paid the price for our sins. It is only by faith in His “flesh and blood” as He came to this earth and died in our place that we are saved. This is how our Lord became the “bread of heaven that gives life to the world.” Have you tasted this “bread”? Have you acknowledged your sin, and the divine wrath it merits? Have you trusted in the sacrifice Jesus Christ made on the cross of Calvary for your sins? I urge you to partake of this “bread” and to obtain eternal life through Him.

35 It occurs to me that while Jesus is here instructing His audience to “cease working,” it is He who is indicted in chapter 5 by the Jews for working (on the Sabbath). There, in effect, the Jews are instructing Jesus to “stop working.”

36 “Rabbi” is surely a term of respect, but it also falls short of a confession or acknowledgement of the deity of our Lord, as John sets it down in this Gospel.

37 Some would minimize the emphasis on ceasing this working, but many would agree that it is to be seen here, as is often the case with a negated present imperative.

38 “So here Jesus terms belief in him as the work of God. These Jews were thinking of various deeds of the Pharisaic type and rules. Jesus turns their minds to the central fact. ‘This simple formula contains the complete solution of the relation of faith and works’ (Westcott).” Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931), 6 vols., en loc.

39 I have chosen to differ with the NET Bible here, because I feel that our Lord’s meaning is clear. The words in brackets are my translation. The Jews thought salvation was their work. Jesus taught that it was God’s work. The Jews say, “What must we do to earn God’s favor?” Jesus replies, in effect: “Salvation is God’s work. The result is that when God works to save you, you will believe in Me, the One whom He sent to save you.”

40 This translation is a bit unfortunate. The NET Bible unfortunately does not capitalize pronouns referring to God. Because the pronoun “He” is the first word of the (English) sentence, we might be inclined to think that the people are referring to God here, but they most certainly are not. They are referring to Moses. If the word order of the original text had been followed a little more closely (something not always necessary, or even advisable), the sentence would read, “Bread from heaven he [Moses] gave them to eat.” This would make it much clearer that the people believe Moses gave the Israelites bread from heaven.

41 This is now the second time (see also verse 26) in our text that Jesus has prefaced His words with “Verily, verily …,” giving a very clear signal to the importance of His words.

42 See footnote 13 in lesson 2.

43 Grumble here is the same Greek word in the Greek text as is found in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures, when the Israelites grumbled against Moses (Exodus 17:3; Numbers 11:1; 14:27, 29; 17:6, 20). Is Jesus greater than Moses? He surely is, but He is also the “prophet like Moses” (Deuteronomy 18:15), who also experiences the grumbling of God’s people, the Jews.

44 The doctrine of election is a part of the doctrine of the sovereignty of God in man’s salvation. Ultimately, man does not choose God; God chooses man (see John 15:16). Men do not open their hearts to Jesus, God opens men’s hearts and minds to Him (see Acts 13:48; 16:14). It is God who chooses to save men, not men who choose to be saved. Those whom the Father has chosen will choose to trust in His Son, but only because they have first been chosen by God (see 1 John 4:19). Men are called to make a choice regarding Jesus Christ, but all who “choose to trust in Christ” are those who have first been chosen by the Father. This is a difficult doctrine for some to accept, but it is taught in the Bible. We find it difficult to accept, not because the Bible opposes it, but because our flesh and our pride opposes the thought that God is in control of everything, including our salvation. Sin is about man’s rebellion against God’s rule.

45 See the chart in lesson 15.

46 Our Lord’s substitutionary work on the cross of Calvary is alluded to prophetically by John in John 1:29, 36. Jesus also spoke about the destroying of “this temple”—His body—in John 2:19. Once again, our Lord spoke of being “lifted up” in John 3:14-16, but no one understood what He meant by this until after His death and resurrection. This is the clearest statement about the sacrificial and atoning death of Jesus as the Messiah made by our Lord up to this point in John’s Gospel.

47 “Strove … to fight in armed combat (Ac 7:26), then to wage a war of words as here and 2 Ti 2:24. They were already murmuring (41), now they began bitter strife with one another over the last words of Jesus (43-51), …” Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931), 6 vols., en loc.

48 Note the “I tell you the solemn truth” (“Verily, verily,” KJV).

49 I love the translation of the New English Bible here: “This was spoken in synagogue when Jesus was teaching in Capernaum. Many of his disciples on hearing it exclaimed, ‘This is more than we can stomach! Why listen to such words?’”

50 The word in the Greek text, rendered “fall away,” is the same word that is rendered “offended” in John 6:61.

51 The question is posed in a way that encourages them to stay, and not to leave.

Biblical Topics:

Passage:

17. Jesus in Jerusalem at the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:1-52)

Introduction

This past week I received a very angry e-mail response from a Jewish woman who had just read my exposition of the Book of Esther, which is published on the Internet. She was most distressed that I did not portray Esther as the great and godly woman of faith that many Jews (and Christians) suppose her to be. Her e-mail was angry and rude (it ends, “so long heathen!!!!”), but worst of all, it was blasphemous against our Lord Jesus Christ. I won’t repeat what she said about Jesus Christ or about the New Testament Scriptures. I believe this woman’s e-mail was providential, in that it has enhanced my own personal study of the Gospel of John. First, her anger toward our Lord helped me to recognize the same hatred and anger toward Jesus on the part of some of the Jews depicted in our text in John chapter 7.

It also caused me to rethink my way through the argument of John’s Gospel and his apologetic as a Jew—to the Jews. The woman who responded with such intensity to my sermons on Esther is convinced that there is no relation between the Old Testament and the New, nor between the Old Testament prophecies concerning Israel’s Messiah and the coming of our Lord Jesus as described in the Gospels. I think she is exactly the kind of person John hoped would read his Gospel. In the first chapter of John’s Gospel, he introduces Jesus as “the Word,” the One whose origin is not to be traced to a manger in Bethlehem, but One who is Himself the origin, the Creator of this world. Through Him, the world was spoken into existence. In the course of time, “the Word” became flesh and dwelt among us. Jesus was born of a woman, fully God as much as He was fully man. If Jesus is the “Creator” in John chapter 1, and in chapter 2 (when He turns the water into wine), He is also the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, 36), and the greater “temple” (2:13-22). He is foreshadowed by the bronze serpent, lifted up by Moses in the wilderness (3:14-15), and the One who is greater than Jacob, offering men and women “living water” (4:10-14). In fact, He is the ladder Jacob saw in his vision on his way from Beersheba to Haran (Genesis 28:10-17; John 1:51). He is the Messiah (4:21-26), the healer of the sick on the Sabbath, who claims the right to do so because He is God (5:1-18). Jesus is the “true bread” from heaven (6:22-71), who gives eternal life to men (much better than the manna that God gave Israel in the wilderness). He is the One who is greater than Moses (1:17; 5:43-47; 6:30-33; 9:27-33). John is telling his Jewish readers that Jesus is the fulfillment of everything in the Old Testament which looks forward to the coming of Messiah.

John would have us know that Jesus is the culmination and fulfillment of all the Jews eagerly awaited, based upon the Old Testament. One must either accept the witness of the Old Testament, of John, of the Father, and of those whose lives Jesus touched, or one must reject Him as a fraud and a deceiver. This is precisely what men and women will do in our text, and as we see throughout the Bible. This Gospel, and the truths set down in our text, are those which we must either accept or reject. Those who accept John’s account will trust in Jesus as the Messiah. Those who reject John’s words will reject Jesus, to their own eternal doom. The truths we find in our text are those to which we must respond, and our response will determine our eternal destiny. Let us listen well to what our Lord Jesus Christ claims.

A Turning Point in John’s Gospel

Chapter 7 is a rather clear turning point in John’s Gospel. In the first four chapters of John, there is very little opposition to our Lord and His teaching. In chapter 5, Jesus is accused and opposed by the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem, as a result of His healing of the paralytic on the Sabbath. In chapter 6, John records a large-scale departure on the part of would-be disciples of our Lord. This takes place after the feeding of the 5,000 and our Lord’s teaching on the “bread of life.” In chapter 7, we come to a point in John’s Gospel when the opposition to our Lord becomes more intense and more broad-based. Up till now, John has not allowed the opponents of our Lord to “have the floor” to articulate their point of view and carry on a debate with Jesus.⁵² Previously, John focused on our Lord’s response to His opponents, without fully conveying their arguments. Now, they have their chance, and so does our Lord, not only to refute the error of His opponents, but also to introduce some very important new subject matter:

From now to the end of the public ministry John depicts a steadily deepening hostility. In this chapter and the next John has a good deal to tell us about the arguments used by the enemies of Jesus. This may well be his way of saying that the objections raised to Jesus’ messianic claims all had their answers.⁵³

But though danger was in the air Jesus continued on His appointed path. He went up to the feast in due course, and there He gave the teaching that was appropriate to the occasion. The great advance was in His teaching on the Spirit. Some aspects of this have occupied us before, but on this occasion Jesus brings out the point that when the Spirit is within a man He overflows in abounding life. The Spirit-filled man cannot but be a blessing to other people.⁵⁴

Background:
The Feast of Tabernacles

The events of chapter 7 take place in the context of the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem. It would be good for us to understand the meaning and significance of this feast, and some of the elements of the ceremony. William Hendriksen summarizes these things for us very well:

On this feast see Lev. 23:33-44 and Numbers 29. It was celebrated from the fifteenth to the twenty-first or twenty-second day of the seventh month, which approximates our October. It was a feast of thanksgiving for the vintage. But besides being a harvest-festival it was also a joyful commemoration of the divine guidance granted to the Atonement, the idea of joy after redemption was naturally very prominent. In a decreased daily scale a special sacrifice of seventy bullocks was made. The temple-trumpets were blown on each day. There was the ceremony of the outpouring of water, drawn from Siloam, in commemoration of the refreshing stream which had come forth miraculously out of the rock at Meribah (Ex. 17:1-7), and in anticipation of blessings both for Israel and for the world. There was the illumination of the inner court of the temple, where the light of the grand candelabra reminded one of the pillar of fire by night which had served as a guide through the desert (Num. 14:14). There was a torch-parade. And above all, everywhere in and around Jerusalem, in the street, the square, and even on the roofs of the houses booths were erected. These leafy dwellings provided shelter for the pilgrims who came from every direction to attend this feast. But most of all they too were reminders of the wilderness-life of the ancestors (Lev. 23:43).⁵⁵

Jesus and Jerusalem
(7:1-13)

1 After this Jesus was traveling around in Galilee. He did not want to go around in Judea because the Jewish authorities wanted to kill him. 2 Now the Jewish feast of Tabernacles was near. 3 So Jesus’ brothers advised [said to] him, “Leave here and go to Judea so your disciples may see your miracles that you are performing. 4 For no one who seeks to make a reputation for himself does anything in secret. If you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 (For not even his own brothers believed in him.) 6 So Jesus replied, “My time has not yet arrived, but you are ready at any opportunity. 7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I am testifying about it that its deeds are evil. 8 You go up to the feast yourselves. I am not going up to this feast yet,⁵⁶ because my time has not yet fully arrived.” 9 When he had said this, he remained in Galilee. 10 But when his brothers had gone up to the feast, then Jesus himself also went up, not openly but in secret. 11 So the Jewish authorities were looking for him at the feast, asking, “Where is he?” 12 There was a lot of grumbling [mumbling, murmuring] about him among the crowds. Some were saying, “He is a good man,” but others, “He deceives the common people.” 13 However, no one spoke openly about him for fear of the Jewish authorities.

In one short sentence, John deals with six months of our Lord’s ministry: “After this Jesus was traveling around in Galilee. He did not want to go around in Judea because the Jewish authorities wanted to kill him” (verse 1).

The events which occurred during the period April-October of the year 29 A.D. are by John summarized in one verse: ‘And after these things Jesus was going to Galilee, for he did not wish to go about in Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill him’ (7:1). In Matthew, Mark, and Luke we have the detailed account of the happenings which belong to this half year of Christ’s ministry. We may call it the Retirement Ministry; see Mark, Chapters 7-9. John says that during these months Jesus was going about in Galilee. This is in harmony with the account as given in the Synoptics, which indicates that the Lord went from Capernaum in Galilee to the border of Tyre and Sidon, traversing a large section of Galilee; then departing from Galilee in crossing over to Decapolis; went back again to Galilee (Dalmanutha); left it again for the region of Cesarea Philippi; and finally, covering another large stretch of Galilean territory, went on his way back to Capernaum. Here and there, however, it is not immediately clear whether these various journeys are described in chronological order (cf. e.g., Mk. 8:1: ‘in those days’). A glance at the map would seem to indicate that they are. What characterizes the period is that to a large extent Jesus withdrew himself (hence, Retirement Ministry) from the Capernaum multitudes, to be with his disciples.⁵⁷

John is very selective in his material, as he tells us in 20:30-31. After the feeding of the 5,000 and the desertion of many of His “disciples,” Jesus continued to go about Galilee, carrying on His itinerate preaching ministry⁵⁸ It was not yet time to make a bold entrance at Jerusalem. It was not wise to be traveling about Judea, for the Jews were intent on arresting Jesus and putting Him to death. Our Lord spent this six-month time focusing much more on His disciples, while He maintained a low profile in Galilee.

And so with a sweep of the pen, John leaps six months in time, taking us to the time of the Feast of Tabernacles. I must preface my comments here by calling your attention to John’s seemingly parenthetical words in verse 5: “(For not even his own brothers believed in him.).”

What our Lord’s brothers⁵⁹said to Him was rooted in unbelief and rejection—not in faith. For this reason, I have chosen to set aside the rendering (“advised”) of the NET Bible and revert to a much more basic rendering (“said to”) of the original text. I do not believe our Lord’s brothers are giving Him a piece of good advice. To sum up the essence of their words to Jesus irreverently (as unbelieving brothers would be inclined to do), “Put up or shut up!” I think our Lord’s brothers were embarrassed by Jesus and fed up with His ministry. I am tempted to believe that these brothers were aware that the Jews in Judea were seeking to kill Jesus. They urged Him to leave Galilee, the place of safety (and also the place where they lived), and to go to Jerusalem, the place of greatest danger. One finds the brothers’ words similar to those we see in the Gospel of Luke: At that time, some Pharisees came up and said to Jesus, “Get away from here, because Herod wants to kill you” (Luke 13:31).

These words spoken by the Pharisees are not words that are sincerely spoken, with our Lord’s best interest in view. They are words intended to scare Jesus off, to be rid of Him. I am inclined to view the words of our Lord’s brothers as being similar to those of the Pharisees. At best, these brothers are saying, “If you are really determined to go ahead with this thing, then get on with it. Go up to Jerusalem and see if you can convince anyone that you are Messiah by performing miracles, if indeed you can perform them.” Cynicism seems to virtually ooze from their words. At worst, they are encouraging Jesus to pursue His ambitions in a way that they are certain will result in His arrest, and perhaps even His death.

Our Lord’s response suggests that Jesus finds nothing meritorious in the words of His brothers. It was not “yet” His time; their “time” was any time. The world cannot hate them, but it does hate Him. This is not the same as saying, “The world does not hate you, but it does hate Me.” The world cannot hate them for the same reason that it does hate Jesus. They are a part of the world. They hate Jesus as the world hates Him. They and the world hate Jesus because He exposes their sin (verse 7). Let the brothers go on to Jerusalem without Him. It is not yet His time to go up to the feast, because His time has not yet fully arrived.

Just what “time” is it that has not yet fully arrived? It is my opinion that Jesus means that it is not “yet” His “time” to make His triumphal entry into Jerusalem, where He will momentarily be welcomed as the Messiah, and soon thereafter rejected as the “King of the Jews.” Jesus will go up to Jerusalem, but it will not be to make His bid for acceptance. Jesus will go up to Jerusalem to make yet another public announcement that He is the Messiah, not with a view to acceptance, but with a view to rejection. Jesus will go up to Jerusalem to pave the way for His final visit to Jerusalem, not many months away, when He will be crucified on a cross at Calvary.

Let me pause for a moment to reflect on what we have just read and on its application to us. Jesus knows what it means to be rejected by His family. I believe this was prophesied:

7 Because for Your sake I have borne reproach; Shame has covered my face. 8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, And an alien to my mother’s children; 9 Because zeal for Your house has eaten me up, And the reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on me (Psalm 69:7-9, NKJV, emphasis mine).⁶⁰

In addition, Jesus spoke of the way He would divide families, and thus He required that men love Him more than their families:

21 “Brother will hand over brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rise against parents and have them put to death. 22 And you will be hated by all on account of my name. But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 10:21-22).

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, 36 and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not take up his cross and follow me, is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for me will find it” (Matthew 10:34-39, emphasis mine).

Our Lord sets down the more general principle in the Gospel of John:

Let those who would follow our Lord take note that when we follow Christ, men will respond to us as they have to Him. Jesus was rejected by His family; we should expect that this may be our experience as well. If we would be disciples of Jesus Christ, we must love Him above family and, if need be, we must choose Him and renounce family.

After Jesus’ brothers depart for Jerusalem, Jesus goes up as well. He does not do so as His brothers challenge Him to do—to make a very public display of His “powers” in the hope of gaining a following. Instead, Jesus goes up to Jerusalem “in secret” (verse 10). I understand that this is just the opposite of what our Lord’s brothers urge Him to do. It probably means traveling by less-used roads and staying off the roads and out of sight when others are traveling. Jesus probably journeys without His disciples, at night. All of this enables Him to keep a “low profile,” avoid undue attention, and thus not reveal His presence until well into the feast, when it will be difficult to arrest Him.

John now turns our attention to the mood of the people who are in Jerusalem at the time. The Jews are all on the lookout for Jesus, as they are expecting Him to appear for the feast. There is considerable conversation concerning Jesus by those in the crowd. The Jewish authorities apparently forbid anyone to talk about Jesus, but this only keeps their conversations down to a “low roar,” as we would say. John describes these conversations about Jesus as mumbling or murmuring.⁶¹ John is not saying that all the people are complaining about Jesus, but rather that they are speaking about Jesus in hushed tones, out of fear of the Jewish leaders.

My daughter Amy has a dog named “Honey Bear.” Honey Bear is one of those “barkless” dogs. When someone comes to the door, Honey Bear greets them with a low, mumbling noise. Honey Bear is not necessarily unhappy, nor uttering a threat; she is simply conveying her desire for attention and affection in a way that does not include barking. Even our granddaughter, Taylor, recognizes this. When she comes to our house and sees Honey Bear, Taylor says, “Honey Bear, mmmmmmmmm .…” She knows mumbling when she hears it.

I am a former school teacher, and I began my teaching career teaching the sixth grade. If I had to step outside the classroom to talk with a parent or another teacher, I would instruct the class not to talk. Every teacher knows this is next to impossible, humanly speaking. One expects to hear a low, rumbling sound, knowing that those who talk do so in hushed tones. This is the way the people in Jerusalem talk with one another about Jesus, speaking in hushed tones so that the Jewish leaders will not hear them, or perhaps more accurately, so if they do hear them talking, they will not be able to hear what is being discussed.

There is not a clear consensus about who the people think Jesus is. Some speak well of Him, referring to Him as a good man. After all, healing the sick and showing compassion to those in need is good. But others strongly disagree. To them, Jesus is not a good man at all, but a cunning deceiver, who has taken advantage of the mindless masses, the common people. They feel that these poor, simple, gullible folks are being taken in by our Lord’s actions and words. Those who reject Jesus think themselves too smart to be taken in by Him. There is, then, a great diversity of opinion as to who Jesus is.

Jesus Appears at the Feast of Tabernacles:
The Reaction of the Crowd
(7:14-31)

14 When the feast was half over, Jesus went up to the temple and began to teach. 15 Then the Jewish authorities were amazed and said, “How does this man know so much when he has never had formal instruction?” 16 So Jesus replied, “My teaching is not from me, but from the one who sent me. 17 If anyone wants to do God’s will, he will know about my teaching, whether it is from God or whether I speak from my own authority. 18 The person who speaks on his own authority desires to receive honor for himself; the one who desires the honor of the one who sent him is a man of integrity, and there is no unrighteousness in him. 19 Hasn’t Moses given you the law? Yet no one of you keeps the law! Why do you want to kill me?” 20 The crowd answered, “You’re possessed by a demon! Who is trying to kill you?” 21 Jesus replied, “I performed one miracle and you are all amazed. 22 However, because Moses gave you the practice of circumcision (not that it came from Moses, but from the forefathers), you circumcise a male child on the Sabbath. 23 But if a male child is circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken, why are you angry with me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? 24 Do not judge according to external appearance, but judge with proper judgment.” 25 Then some of the residents of Jerusalem began to say, “Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill? 26 Yet here he is, speaking publicly, and they are saying nothing to him. Do the rulers really know that this man is the Christ? 27 But we know where this man comes from. Whenever the Christ comes, no one will know where he comes from.” 28 Then Jesus, while teaching in the temple courts, cried out, “You both know me and know where I come from! And I have not come on my own initiative, but the one who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29 but I know him, because I have come from him and he sent me.” 30 So then they tried to seize Jesus, but no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come. 31 Yet many of the crowd believed in him and said, “Whenever the Christ comes, he won’t perform more miraculous signs than this man did, will he?”

Midway through the feast, Jesus suddenly appears in the temple, teaching publicly. This is a bold and courageous move. Jesus knows the Jews are seeking to kill Him. For the past six months, He has kept away from Judea to avoid arrest, or worse. And now, suddenly, Jesus appears in Jerusalem, boldly teaching in the temple! It is incredible. The Jews are amazed, not only at His courage but at His content (verse 15). They have to admit that He is good, really good. They unwittingly praise Him by saying, “How does this man know so much when he has never had formal instruction?” (verse 15). They cannot understand how One who has not been educated by them has such a keen understanding of the Scriptures. They stand in awe of the One whom they choose to reject as their Messiah. We are reminded of the words of the Jews regarding Peter and John in the Book of Acts:

13 When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and discovered that they were uneducated and ordinary men, they were amazed and recognized these men had been with Jesus. 14 And because they saw the man who had been healed standing with them, they had nothing to say against this (Acts 4:13-14).

Our Lord answers their question: His teaching is not His own. His teaching is that which He learned from His Father, the One who sent Him. If anyone truly wants to know and to do God’s will, He will recognize the words of Jesus as the words of the Father. When a person seeks to advance himself, to “feather his own nest” as we might say, he uses his words to manipulate and even to deceive others. He has ulterior motives, and these affect everything he says. Politicians and campaign rhetoric come to mind here, as an example of what Jesus is saying.

The person who is committed to honor the one who sent him is concerned only with accurately communicating what he has been sent to say. He does not use his words to gain a personal following, but rather to urge men to follow the one he serves. He has no need to deceive, and thus he speaks with integrity. His speech is righteous. Jesus speaks here of Himself and of His integrity as He speaks for the Father. Moses gave them the law, and they all failed to keep that law. Why then are they seeking to kill Jesus as a law-breaker, when they break the law themselves?

In verse 20, John records the response of those “pilgrims” in the crowd who have come to Jerusalem from some distant place. They are not aware of all that has taken place with Jesus in Jerusalem beforehand. They certainly are not aware of the plot to kill Jesus (as the residents of Jerusalem are—see verse 25). These pilgrims take Jesus to be some kind of nut, someone who is mentally disturbed, paranoid that everyone is trying to kill him. They accuse Jesus of being demon possessed. They challenge Jesus as to who is trying to kill him.

Jesus responds by calling attention to His healing of the paralytic, as recorded in chapter 5. Do these folks wish to know who wants to kill Him? He will tell them. It is the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem, as a result of His healing the paralytic—and claiming to do so as God:

Jesus has performed this miracle, and the Jewish leaders are ready to kill Him for doing so. Their actions are completely inconsistent and blatantly hypocritical. Do they accuse Jesus of breaking the Sabbath by healing the paralytic? The law requires that every Jewish male child should be circumcised on the eighth day (Genesis 17:12; see Luke 1:59; 2:21-24). If the eighth day happens to fall on a Sabbath, the Jews would circumcise the male child, even though “work” is forbidden on that day. Doing so, they break one law (the law of the Sabbath) so as to avoid breaking another (the law of circumcision). If they can justify themselves for making one member of the child’s body “right” before God on the Sabbath, why do the Jewish leaders condemn Jesus for making a man’s entire body well on the Sabbath? There is, indeed, a double standard. Judgment should be made on the basis of substance and not merely on appearances.

The pilgrims believe Jesus is out of His mind to think someone is trying to kill Him. The old-timers of Jerusalem know better. Almost in answer to the response of the pilgrims to Jesus, the citizens of Jerusalem respond to the teaching of our Lord in the temple very differently. “Isn’t this the one whom the Jewish leaders are seeking to kill? What is He doing here, teaching publicly in the temple? Why is He still alive? How can it be that the One marked for death has not had a hand laid on Him?” There is only one possible explanation so far as these folks are concerned: the Jewish leaders must have changed their minds about Jesus. Have these Jewish leaders really come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah? Is this why Jesus is able to appear publicly, without anyone opposing Him? But how can this be? How can Jesus possibly be the Messiah, when they know who He is and where He comes from? They believe no one will know where the Messiah is from. How then can their leaders ever conclude that Jesus is the Messiah?⁶²

As usual, Jesus knows what they are thinking and what they are murmuring—and so He answers their objection. This He does publicly, in the midst of His teaching in the temple courts. Dramatically, Jesus cries out loudly, so that all will hear: “You both know me and know where I come from!” They know who He is. They know our Lord’s family, including the names of His brothers (Matthew 13:55). They know where He is from (Nazareth, in Galilee), though they seem not to know that He was born in Bethlehem. Jesus does not come motivated by self-interest, but rather in obedience to the will of the One who sent Him. The Father is true, yet these Jews are “false” in that they do not really know Him. Jesus is also true, and He does know the Father who sent Him, because He came from Him. Jesus is both divine and human. He has both heavenly and earthly origins.

These words are yet another clear indication from our Lord that He is claiming to be equal with God, to be God. If one refuses to accept His words, then one must reject Jesus as a blasphemer, worthy of death. The Jews try to get their hands on Jesus. If they had done so, they almost certainly would stone Him there on the spot. As it is, they are not able to lay a hand on Him. We don’t know what keeps them from achieving their goal, but God sees to it that Jesus is untouched. In spite of the zeal of those who wish to kill Jesus, there are also those who are drawn to Jesus by the very same words. They ask a most pertinent question: “Just what more does anyone expect Jesus to do, if He is the Messiah?” What else can Jesus do, beyond what He has already done? To these folks, it is not logical to reject the claims of Jesus. It flies in the face of all the evidence.

The Pharisees’ Failed Attempt to Arrest Jesus
(7:32-52)

32 The Pharisees heard the crowd murmuring these things about Jesus, so the chief priests and the Pharisees sent officers to arrest him. 33 Then Jesus said, “I will be with you for only a little while longer, and then I am going to the one who sent me. 34 You will look for me but will not find me, and where I am you cannot come.” 35 Then the Jews who were hostile to Jesus said to one another, “Where is he going to go that we cannot find him? He is not going to go to the Jewish people dispersed among the Greeks and teach the Greeks, is he? 36 What did he mean by saying, ‘You will look for me but will not find me, and where I am you cannot come’?” 37 On the last day of the feast, the greatest day, Jesus stood up and shouted out, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and 38 let the one who believes in me drink. Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water.’” 39 (Now he said this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were going to receive; for the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.) 40 When they heard these words, some of the crowd began to say, “This is really the Prophet!” 41 Others said, “This is the Christ!” But still others said, “No, for the Christ doesn’t come from Galilee, does he? 42 Don’t the scriptures say that the Christ is a descendant of David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?” 43 So there was a division in the crowd because of Jesus. 44 Some of them were wanting to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him. 45 Then the officers returned to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, “Why didn’t you bring him back with you?” 46 The officers replied, “No one ever spoke like this man!” 47 Then the Pharisees answered, “You haven’t been deceived too, have you? 48 None of the rulers or the Pharisees have believed in him, have they? 49 But this rabble who do not know the law are accursed!” 50 Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus before and who was one of the rulers, said, 51 “Our law doesn’t condemn a man unless it first hears from him and learns what he is doing, does it?” 52 They replied, “You aren’t from Galilee too, are you? Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet comes from Galilee!”

We know from John’s earlier words that the Jewish religious leaders are determined to do away with Jesus (see John 5:18; 7:1). Up to this point, however, it has not been the religious leaders who have sought to kill Jesus. Those in the crowd who are citizens of Jerusalem seem to be those who attempt to lay hands on Jesus when He claims to be the One sent from the Father in heaven, but they are unable to seize Him (7:28-30). It seems that the Jewish religious leaders find it unwise to openly oppose Jesus. It becomes apparent that He is the subject of conversation among the crowds, in spite of their threats. They have to take the offensive and have Jesus arrested. They can delay no longer. Things are getting completely out of hand. And so the temple police are instructed to go and arrest Jesus, and then bring Him to them. It is time to get this over with. He must die, now! Verses 33-44 describe what is taking place with the crowd as the temple police make their way to arrest Jesus.

Jesus speaks to the crowd, indicating to them that He knows the time of His death is near. He chooses His words very carefully, so that His meaning is not immediately apparent, but also so that His disciples will recall what He has said after His death and resurrection. He is soon to go away. He will be with the Jews no longer. He is returning to the One who sent Him. When He is gone, they will look for Him, but they will not find Him. Where He goes, they cannot come.

We know, of course, that Jesus is speaking of His sacrificial death, burial, resurrection, and ascension into heaven. The Jews have no clue what He means. The crowd begins to discuss with one another just what these last words of Jesus mean. Where can Jesus possibly be going that they cannot go as well? Can He mean that He is about to go to those in the dispersion, those Jews scattered abroad? Surely not! What can Jesus mean when He says they will look for Him but not find Him? Where is He claiming to go that they cannot come? The crowd is buzzing with questions. The more Jesus teaches, the more confused some people are.

Then comes “the last day of the feast,” the time when the most people will likely gather at the temple, the climax and emotional high point of the week. Jesus stands up in the temple and cries out once again, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink. Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water’” (verses 37b-38). There is considerable discussion as to just which Scripture our Lord is referring and to the precise meaning of His words. The commentaries spend considerable time here, and I would suggest that you consult them if you want to delve into the details.⁶³I must warn you that they too will refuse to answer all the technical and interpretive questions dogmatically. I will endeavor to stay with the most simple interpretation of these words, and in the light of what the Scriptures say, as opposed to other Jewish sources. It should be evident that if the commentators have trouble with these words of our Lord, those who hear them as Jesus speaks them have no idea at all what He means by them. Only after the cross and Pentecost does our Lord’s meaning become clear to the apostles.

Hendriksen makes a very interesting point about our Lord’s invitation, which bears repeating:

What is more important to remember in connection with the events of this day … is the fact that the Lord, far from turning himself away from the multitudes, many of whom in one way or another had rejected him, extended his gracious invitation: ‘If any one thirsts, let him come to me and drink.’⁶⁴

Jesus has been rejected and condemned by the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem (chapter 5), abandoned by the multitude in Galilee (chapter 6), and now the crowd in Jerusalem seeks to lay hands on Him (7:30), not to mention the religious leaders (7:32). In spite of this large-scale rejection, Jesus still offers to those who will hear and receive it the gift of eternal life. What a Savior!

It may well be that the words of our Lord should be understood in relation to the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles as it took place in Jesus’ day. Morris makes a fairly strong case for this.⁶⁵Although this may be true, only those privy to the Jewish practice of celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles at that time would be able to see the connection. I am therefore inclined to see the connection as more directly related to the biblical and historical account of Israel’s journey through the wilderness. Morris also suggests that this could be the primary reference to our Lord’s words and deeds.⁶⁶

Following the flow of John’s argument, I understand the meaning of our Lord’s words in this way. John has consistently presented Jesus as the antitype of Old Testament prophetic types. John would say that Jesus is the “true” reality, the “true” culmination of the Old Testament institutions, objects, ceremonies, and events which foreshadowed Christ. Paul likewise sees our Lord as the substance of these Old Testament “shadows”: “Therefore, do not let anyone judge you with respect to food or drink, or in the matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days that are only the shadow of the things to come, but the reality is Christ.”

In chapter 6, Jesus presented Himself as the “true bread” from heaven. While God once provided physical bread for Israel in the wilderness, He now offers “true bread from heaven,” which is His only provision for eternal life. Jesus is that bread from heaven. In chapter 7, Jesus presents Himself at the Feast of Tabernacles as the “rock” of Moses’ day, which, when smitten, produced life-giving water.⁶⁷Did Israel celebrate God’s provision and protection during Israel’s journeys in the wilderness at the Feast of Tabernacles? Did God provide not only manna (chapter 6), but water from the rock? Jesus is that rock. Jesus is the source of the water of life. All who would come to Him in faith are welcomed to partake of Him. The result is not only that they will have life, but that they will, through the Spirit, become a source of life and blessing to others (“From within him will flow rivers of living water”). This will happen after the atoning work of Christ is accomplished on the cross of Calvary, after our Lord’s resurrection and ascension to the Father, and after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.⁶⁸

When Jesus speaks these words, some are convinced that He is “the Prophet” (like Moses) of Deuteronomy 18:15. Others disagree, believing He is the Christ, the Messiah. (Obviously, they do not understand that “the Prophet” and “the Christ” are one and the same person.) Still others maintain their opposition to Jesus, pointing to what they believe are His earthly origins. Their problem with Jesus is that He comes from the wrong place—Galilee.⁶⁹ They are convinced that the Christ cannot come from Galilee. They call to mind the prophecy of Micah 5:2, where the Messiah is said to come from Bethlehem in Judah, from the “city of David.” The result is that the crowd is divided over whom they believe Jesus is. Some of those in the crowd are determined to seize Jesus, but no one is able to lay their hands on Him (verse 44).

How I would love to see how God foiled and frustrated the efforts of these men to capture and to kill Jesus. Surely it would be amusing to watch. We are not told how God could keep a crowd from capturing One who is in their midst, but we are told how it comes about that the temple police, sent out earlier to arrest Jesus by the religious leaders of Jerusalem, come back empty-handed. John takes us to the place where the religious leaders are convened and describes the return of the temple police. The chief priests and Pharisees immediately insist on an explanation for why Jesus is not in their custody. They meekly reply, “We’ve never heard anyone who spoke as this man has.”

Can’t you just see it in your mind’s eye? These fellows march dutifully to the temple, where they know Jesus can be found. They begin to press their way through the crowd so they can arrest Jesus and deliver Him to those who have dispatched them. As they work their way through the crowd, they cannot help but overhear Jesus as He speaks. In my mind’s eye, I can see one of the officers stop for a moment, so as not to miss what Jesus is about to say next. Turning to his colleagues, he sternly insists that they hush—they are making so much noise he can’t hear Jesus speak. Eventually, all of the police are standing in the crowd, transfixed by His every word. Jesus finishes teaching for the day and leaves, as do the crowds. Then, and only then, do the soldiers remember what they came to do. They are not going to go after Jesus and arrest Him! And so they return to the chief priests and Pharisees to get the scorching they expect.

John tells us very little about these matters, but something like this must have happened. They do come back empty-handed, and their only excuse is that they have never heard anyone speak as Jesus did. Some are not moved at all by His words. Others come to view Him as the Prophet; others as the Messiah. The temple police do not say who they think Jesus is, but they know they have never before seen or heard anyone like Him.

The temple police are not disappointed; they do receive a scorching from the Jewish religious leaders who are frustrated, angry, and amazed. How can these fellows be so gullible? “You have not been deceived also, have you?” Whoever speaks for these religious leaders speaks for the entire group, and his words must send chills up the spines of the temple police … and Nicodemus! “Do you see even one of us—your religious leaders, the most knowledgeable experts on the Old Testament—believing in Jesus? It is only these stupid commoners—worthless and cursed people that they are, who do not know the Scriptures as we do—who follow him. How can you be so stupid? No one with a head on his shoulders believes in Jesus—isn’t that right?”

It seems as though whoever is speaking turns to his colleagues and then looks Nicodemus right in the eye. Does he sense that Nicodemus has been taken in by Jesus? Does he know of the secret interview Nicodemus had with Jesus? Can he discern a change in this teacher’s message? Nicodemus feels the need to respond. All he needs to say are two words—“I do.” Here is his opportunity to declare his faith in Jesus, but he keeps quiet. Instead, he takes the more politically correct stance—he questions the process by which Jesus was judged a wrongdoer. “We haven’t really carried out due process, have we? After all, the law requires that a man not be condemned without giving him a fair trial, and the chance to speak in his own defense.” Nicodemus is right, of course, but it is the cowardly thing to do. He does not acknowledge his faith in Jesus, or at least his considerations that Jesus might be the Messiah.

Now it is Nicodemus who is in for a scorching. Even though half-hearted and evasive, Nicodemus has not taken a firm stand with the others. He has at least expressed doubts and concerns about their condemnation of Jesus and their determination to kill him. And so his colleagues turn on him. “What? Are you saying that you are from Galilee too, that you are as stupid and gullible as that rabble?” And then come the most amazing words, “Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet comes from Galilee” (verse 52). The great Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson, comments: “As a matter of fact, Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee.”⁷⁰

Conclusion

I am amazed at the arrogance of the religious leaders and at their disdain for the common people. No one from Galilee, in their opinion, can be respected or admired. Simply coming from Galilee is enough to disqualify Jesus, or anyone else. Those whom these leaders are to serve they despise as accursed. What a contrast to the Suffering Servant, who came to give His life as a ransom for many. It is not Jesus who should be condemned, but these “shepherds.” Is this not exactly what the prophets has rebuked Israel’s leaders for in the past?

1 “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of My pasture!” says the LORD. 2 Therefore thus says the LORD God of Israel against the shepherds who feed My people: “You have scattered My flock, driven them away, and not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for the evil of your doings,” says the LORD. 3 “But I will gather the remnant of My flock out of all countries where I have driven them, and bring them back to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase. 4 I will set up shepherds over them who will feed them; and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, nor shall they be lacking,” says the LORD. 5 “Behold, the days are coming,” says the LORD, “That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; A King shall reign and prosper, And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. 6 In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell safely; Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS” (Jeremiah 23:1-6; see also Isaiah 56:6-12).

The amazing thing is that those who consider themselves such experts, who perceive themselves as being so knowledgeable, are those guilty of the most foolish errors in matters of fact. It is as though they have sworn out an arrest warrant for Jesus’ arrest, misspelled His name, and made an error concerning His address. Is it not possible to discern where Jesus actually was born? Can this fact not be discerned? And yet these leaders are willing to assume that His place of birth was in Galilee, rather than in Bethlehem of Judah. And they are wrong. They rebuke Nicodemus by making an unsupported and erroneous generalization—that no prophet comes from Galilee. How stupid we are when we are willfully wrong! The facts are there before us, and we deny or distort them to justify our own sinful ways.

There is, in our text, the overwhelming “cloud” of our Lord’s impending death. The chapter starts by John telling us that Jesus avoids Judea, knowing the Jews there are intent on killing Him. And yet our Lord’s own brothers urge Him to go there. Jesus, who has been keeping a low profile in Galilee, finally makes His way to Jerusalem and boldly takes His stand in the temple, where He “cried out” before all. What courage! Jesus challenges the crowd as to why they seek to kill Him (verse 19), and the pilgrims from afar accuse Him of being demon possessed (verse 20). The people of Jerusalem know better and are amazed that Jesus is there in their midst, alive and publicly teaching (verses 25-26). It is not long before the Jewish religious leaders send the temple police to arrest Jesus, so they can do away with Him. But while these men are making their way to arrest Jesus, the crowd seeks to kill Jesus on their own, and fails. And then, of course, the temple police return empty-handed. There is no way that Jesus will be captured or killed, until it is His time, until it is God’s time.

The opposition has finally been given the opportunity by John to express their deepest concerns, their strongest arguments against Jesus. Our Lord’s words prove them wrong and convince some—without so much as a miracle being performed on this visit to Jerusalem—that He is indeed the Messiah. And the leaders of the Jews are exposed as arrogant, bigoted, and ill-informed as to the facts.

One thing about our text strikes me as never before. I am amazed at how early in John’s Gospel, how intense, and how widespread the opposition is to Jesus. Somewhere in the past I have picked up the idea that our Lord’s rejection and death was the desire and the work of a handful of people. I remember being told by someone that the crowds really were inclined to believe in Jesus, as can be seen by His reception at His triumphal entry, some six months later than the events of our text. The way that the religious leaders were able to put Jesus to death was that they held a secret trial at night, and then proceeded to bring about His conviction before the masses could mobilize or resist.

John’s Gospel forces me to rethink this whole matter and to reject such a view as incorrect. Our Lord’s rejection is wide-spread and intense. It is not just the religious leaders who reject Jesus and condemn Him to death. Already by John chapter 5 the religious leaders have committed themselves to killing Jesus, but in chapter 6 many of those who were our Lord’s “disciples” abandon Him when He clarifies what His mission is. By the time we come to chapter 7, the rejection of our Lord is very widespread. His brothers urge Jesus to publicly make Himself known in Jerusalem, the place where many are already determined to kill Him. The pilgrims in Jerusalem write Jesus off as a demon-possessed mental case. The crowd seeks to kill Jesus, even while the temple police are on their way to arrest Him and hand Him over to the religious authorities. Our Lord’s rejection is widespread, intense, and very apparent, and all this by chapter 7 of John’s Gospel.

As I have studied this text, I have been struck with the fact that all the crucial elements are now in place for our Lord’s final visit to Jerusalem a few months later, when He will be rejected, arrested, and put to death on the cross of Calvary. Jesus has gone up to Jerusalem, but not in the way His brothers expected. They urge Him to go and make His bid for a following. Jesus goes there to seal His doom, to set in motion the events which take Him to the cross. His family—at least his brothers—will not support Him, will not protest His arrest or execution. They are among the majority who do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah. The Galilean crowds desert Jesus as well (chapter 6). The pilgrims who come from afar write Jesus off as a demon-possessed mental case. The citizens of Jerusalem not only reject Him, they even try to seize Him. The religious leaders are also seeking the arrest and death of our Lord, and there is virtually no one to oppose them. Those among the crowd who do believe in Jesus are afraid to even mention His name, for fear of the Jews. And even a man as respected and powerful as Nicodemus is afraid to speak up in our Lord’s defense, at least as one of His followers. It is only a matter of time. All of the elements are in place. Jesus has made all the necessary preparations for His own death.

It is Jesus who is sovereign in the salvation of men. He is not a victim, but a Volunteer and a Victor. He is in control of His own destiny. His life will not be taken from Him; He will lay it down, just as He will take it up again. He will not be instructed or misled by His family. He will not be silenced by the Jews. He will not stay away from Jerusalem, even though those who will kill Him lay in wait for Him there. He will not die before His time.

As I come to the conclusion to this lesson, my thoughts return to the angry e-mail I received this week. It was written by a person who claimed to be a “Jew in pursuit of truth.” This individual would not consider the evidence which the Apostle John—a devout Jew—presented. She would not consider that Jesus, also a Jew, claimed to be the Messiah, and fulfilled every Old Testament prototype and prophecy pertaining to Messiah and Israel’s hope. She is right about one thing, however. She does not take the claims of Jesus lightly.

I am amazed at how casual people are today about Jesus. They politely speak of Him and think fondly of Him at special times like Christmas and Easter. They casually brush aside His claims, as though they are not worth getting excited or upset about. But the simple fact is this: either Jesus is correct in what He says, or He is a deceiver, worthy of death. If Jesus is the Son of God, as He clearly claims, then He speaks for God, as He also speaks as God. According to Him we are sinners, deserving of God’s eternal wrath, and our only hope is by faith in His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary. If He is the Son of God, we must fall before Him as our Savior and Lord. If we do not do so now, we will fall before Him as the Savior we rejected when He comes again, but not as our Savior:

6 Who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. 8 He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death —even death on a cross. 9 As a result God exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow —in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue should confess to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:6-11).

And if Jesus is not who He claims to be, then we should just as passionately reject Him as a fraud and a deceiver. In this sense, the Jews of Jesus’ day—as wrong as they are—are right in taking His claims seriously. We should do the same. Let me ask you, then, “Who is Jesus?” Is He the Son of God, who came to give His life as a ransom for many by dying on the cross of Calvary for your sins? Or is He a fraud and a deceiver, who deserved to die for His own sins? These are the only two options. Which have you chosen? Your decision, by our Lord’s words, determines your eternal destiny.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The Word was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. 5 And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it (John 1:1-5).

15 John testified about him and cried out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’” 16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. The only One, himself God, who is in the presence of the Father, has made God known (John 1:15-18).

47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael asked him, “How do you know me?” Jesus replied, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus said to him, “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 He continued, “I tell all of you the solemn truth: you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:47-51).

14 He found in the temple courts people selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting at tables. 15 So he made a whip of cords and drove them all out of the temple courts, with the sheep and the oxen. He scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make my Father’s house a marketplace.” 17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Passion for your house will devour me.” 18 So then the Jewish leaders responded, “What sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” 19 Jesus replied, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 20 Then the Jewish leaders said to him, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 21 But Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the saying that Jesus had spoken (John 2:14-22).

13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven—the Son of Man. 14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” 16 For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God (John 3:13-18).

31 The one who comes from above is superior to all. The one who is from the earth belongs to the earth and speaks about earthly things. The one who comes from heaven is superior to all. 32 He testifies about what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33 The one who has accepted his testimony has confirmed clearly that God is truthful. 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for he does not give the Spirit sparingly. 35 The Father loves the Son and has placed all things under his authority. 36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath remains on him (John 3:31-36).

10 Jesus answered her, “If you had known the gift of God and who it is who said to you ‘Give me some water to drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” 11 “Sir,” the woman said to him, “you have no bucket and the well is deep; where then do you get this living water? 12 Surely you’re not greater than our father Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.” 13 Jesus replied, “Everyone who drinks some of this water will be thirsty again. 14 But whoever drinks some of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again, but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up to eternal life.” 15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw water.” 16 He said to her, “Go call your husband and come back here.” 17 The woman replied, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “Right you are when you said, ‘I have no husband,’ 18 for you have had five husbands and the man you have now is not your husband. This you said truthfully!” 19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I see that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you people say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You people worship what you do not know. We worship what we know, because salvation is from the Jews. 23 But a time is coming—and now is here—when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers. 24 God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (the one called Christ). Whenever he comes, he will tell us everything.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I, the one speaking to you, am he” (John 4:10-26).

16 Now because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish authorities began persecuting him. 17 So Jesus told them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God. 19 So Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him everything he does, and greater deeds than these he will show him, so that you may be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes. 22 Furthermore, the Father does not judge anyone, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all people may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 I tell you the solemn truth, the one who hears my message and believes the one who sent me has eternal life, and will not be condemned, but has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the solemn truth, a time is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and the ones who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in himself, thus he has granted the Son to have life in himself; 27 and he granted the Son authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation (John 5:16-29).

37 “And the Father who sent me has himself testified about me. You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time, 38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent. 39 You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me; 40 but you are not willing to come to me so that you may have life” (John 5:37-40).

28 So then they said to him, “What must we do to accomplish the deeds God requires?” 29 Jesus replied, “This is the deed God requires: to believe in the one whom he sent” (John 6:28-29).

35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. The one who comes to me will never go hungry, and the one who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But I told you that you have seen me and still do not believe. 37 Everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will never send away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me. 39 Now this is the will of the one who sent me: that I should not lose one person of every one he has given me, but raise them all up at the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father: that every one who looks on the Son and believes in him will have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:35-40).

47 “I tell you the solemn truth, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, and they died. 50 This is the bread that has come down from heaven, so that a person may eat from it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats from this bread he will live forever. The bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 52 Then the Jews who were hostile to Jesus began to argue with one another, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat!” 53 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood resides in me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so the one who consumes me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like your ancestors ate and died. The one who eats this bread will live forever” (John 6:47-58).

28 Then Jesus, while teaching in the temple courts, cried out, “You both know me and know where I come from! And I have not come on my own initiative, but the one who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29 but I know him, because I have come from him and he sent me” (John 7:28-29).

You decide. Who is Jesus Christ? Is He a deceiver, or the promised Messiah, God’s only provision for your salvation?

52 I do not mean to say that there was no debate between Jesus and His adversaries before this. What I am saying is that John has not previously recorded a full account of their objections and arguments. In John 3, Nicodemus has his questions and concerns, but John limits his account of what Nicodemus says to Jesus. His words of response to our Lord get fewer and shorter as the conversation plays out. In chapter 5, the Jews in Jerusalem take on Jesus for “breaking the Sabbath,” but John does not give a full account of their arguments. All that changes at chapter 7, when John spells out the Jewish objections fully. John now gives the reader a much more thorough version of the opposition’s “best shot” at Jesus. Both their words and our Lord’s responses demonstrate just how shoddy their thinking and objections were.

53 At this point, Leon Morris footnotes with a comment by Dodd: “C. H. Dodd points out that in chs. 7, 8, there is a strongly polemical tone, with the enemies of Jesus having more to say than at any other place in the four Gospels. This is doubtless, as he says, in order to bring out the constant pressure of the opposition that Jesus met (note the repeated statements that Jesus’ life was in danger, 7:1, 13, 19, 25, 30, 32, 44; 8:37, 49, 59). It should also be noted that ‘The evangelist has brought together here most of what he has to say in reply to Jewish objections against the messianic claims made for Jesus’ (IFG, p. 346). Messiahship is central for John. This section of his Gospel is one in which he shows that objections to the messiahship of Jesus can all be met.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 392, fn. 1, citing C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge, 1953), p. 346.

54 Morris, p. 392.

55 William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 2, p. 4.

Morris adds, “The Feast of Tabernacles was a feast of thanksgiving primarily for the blessings of God in the harvest, but it was also observed with special reference to the blessings received during the wilderness wanderings, the time when God was pleased to manifest Himself in the tabernacle. It may be this which gives significance to John’s recording of the happenings in this chapter. Neither in the tabernacle in the wilderness, nor in the temple which replaced it, was God fully manifested. The final and … perfect manifestation of God was in Jesus, whose ministry would result in God’s dwelling neither in a tent nor in a temple, but in men’s hearts by His Spirit.” Leon Morris, pp. 392-393.

In a footnote, Morris adds, “This was not ‘a’ feast. It was ‘the’ feast. Tabernacles was the great feast held when the harvest was finally gathered in (Exod. 23:16 calls it ‘the feast of ingathering, at the end of the year, when thou gatherest in thy labors out of the field’; see also Lev. 23:33ff., 39ff.; Deut. 16:13ff.). There are references to the feast as lasting for seven days (e.g. Lev. 23:34), and also to the eighth day (as Lev. 23:36), from which the conclusion is drawn that an original feast of seven days had been extended by one day. Together with the note of thanksgiving for harvest the feast commemorated the goodness of God to His people during the wilderness wanderings.” Morris, p. 394, fn. 5, in part.

56 There is a textual problem here, and so there is also much discussion by the scholars. If the word in question is “not” (as most scholars seem inclined to believe—see Morris, p. 399, fn. 20), then we do appear to have a problem of consistency. Why would Jesus tell His brothers He is not going up to Jerusalem, only to go a little later? If the Greek term rendered “not yet” is present in the original text then no problem exists. He is not saying that He isn’t going to Jerusalem, only that He isn’t going yet, i.e. with them. There are a number of possible solutions to this problem, and so I simply refer the reader to the commentaries. As for me, I am inclined to embrace the “not yet” reading of the Greek text. If the term “not yet” is not in the original text, then Jesus seems to be telling His brothers that He is not going up to the Feast in Jerusalem in the way they have challenged Him to do, namely publicly, to attract a larger following. The text is very clear and emphatic in contrasting the motive and means the brothers indicate as opposed to the actual motive and means of our Lord.

57 Hendriksen, vol. 2., p. 3.

58 “So forbidding was their attitude (‘sought’ does not denote a solitary action; the tense is continuous, ‘they kept on seeking’) that Jesus withdrew from Judea altogether. He ‘walked’ in Galilee. The verb expresses the itinerant ministry of a Rabbi moving among the people with his disciples. ‘Would not’ signifies that He set His will against walking in Judea.” Morris, p. 394.

59 See Matthew 13:55, where these brothers are named.

60 Note the reference to Psalm 69:9 in John 2:17.

61 I differ with the NET Bible’s use of the word “grumbling,” preferring “mumbling” or “murmuring” instead.

62 “According to the present chapter of John’s Gospel there were two opinions among the Jews regarding the origin of the expected Messiah: a. according to some, no one would know where he came from (7:27); b. according to others, he would be born in Bethlehem (7:41, 42; cf. Matt. 2:3-5).

“The first of these two ideas—that Messiah would appear very suddenly, as if from nowhere—seems to have been a piece of popular theology, probably based upon inferences from certain passages in the Apocrypha (although we do not find it clearly stated in any of those books). The second idea (as the given references indicate) was correct, and was the official position of the Sanhedrin. On either score, however, since everybody ‘knew’ where Jesus came from, namely, from Nazareth in Galilee, he could not be the true Messiah!” Hendriksen, vol. 2, pp. 15-16.

A. T. Robertson writes, “This is a piece of popular theology. ‘Three things come wholly unexpected—Messiah, a godsend, and a scorpion’ (Sanhedrin 97a). The rulers knew the birthplace to be Bethlehem (7:42; Mt 2:5f.), but some even expected the Messiah to drop suddenly from the skies as Satan proposed to Jesus to fall down from the pinnacle of the temple. The Jews generally expected a sudden emergence of the Messiah from concealment with an anointing by Elijah… (Apoc. of Bar. XXIX. 3; 2Esdr. 7:28; 13:32; Justin Martyr, Tryph. 110).” A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, vol.5, en loc.

63 I would suggest Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 419-428; William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 2, pp. 21-27; and, D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), pp. 321-329, in that order.

64 Hendriksen, vol. 2, p. 22.

65 “The principal features of the observance, in addition to the erection of the leafy bowers in which the people camped out and the offering of the sacrifices, appear to have been these. The people carried with them bunches of leaves, called lulabs. There was apparently a disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees over the correct interpretation of Lev. 23:40, ‘And ye shall take you on the first day the fruit of goodly trees, branches of palm-trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook …’ The former took the words to refer to the material out of which the booths for the observance of the feat were to be constructed, while the latter held them to mean that the worshippers were actually to carry branches of the trees named as they entered the temple. The Pharisaic interpretation prevailed among the people, and accordingly each worshipper, as he marched in procession, would carry a lulab in his right hand and a citron in his left. The lulab symbolized the stages of the wilderness journey (marked by different kinds of vegetation), and the fruit of the goodly land that God had given His people. As certain Psalms were recited the worshippers shook their lulabs. The rejoicing was marked further by the flute-playing and dancing that went on for most of the feast and by bringing in young willow branches and arranging them round the altar (Sukk. 4:5). The tops thus were bent over the altar forming a leafy canopy for it. The reciting of the words, ‘Save now, we beseech thee, O Jehovah: O Jehovah, we beseech thee, send now prosperity’ (Ps. 118:25), is probably to be understood as a prayer for rain and fruitful season. On each of the seven days of the feast a priest drew water from the pool of Siloam in a golden flagon and brought it in procession to the temple with the joyful sounding of the trumpet. There the water was poured into a bowl beside the altar from which a tube took it to the base of the altar. Simultaneously wine was poured through a similar bowl on the other side of the altar. These symbolic ceremonies were acted … thanksgivings for God’s mercies in giving water in past days (probably looking right back to the smiting of the rock in the wilderness and then on to the giving of rain in recent years. … It is also significant that the words of Isaiah are associated with these ceremonies, ‘with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation’ (Isa.12:3). The Jerusalem Talmud connects the ceremonies and this scripture with the Holy Spirit: ‘Why is the name of it called, The drawing out of water? Because of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, according to what is said: “With joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation.”’

“Jesus’ words are to be understood against this background. Up till now nothing has been recorded of His teaching at this feast, for all His words in this chapter hitherto have been replies to the accusations of His foes. But now, at the culmination of the greatest feast of the Jewish year, He unfolds its significance in terms of the life that He came to bring. He takes the water symbolism of the feast and presses it into service as He speaks of the living water that He will bestow. The people are thinking of rain, and of their bodily need. He turns their attention to the deep need of the soul, and to the way He would supply it. In chapter 4 we have had references to the living water, but here only is the explanation given of its significance in terms of the Holy Spirit.” Morris, pp. 420-421.

66 “At the same time His primary reference may be not to the temple rite, but to the supply of water from the rock in the wilderness. The water supplied the physical needs of the Israelites, whereas no one drank from the water poured out of the golden ewer.” Morris, p. 422.

In an excellent footnote, Morris adds: “Godet favors this view and he points out that it accords with the symbolism of this Gospel in terms of Old Testament figures: ‘In chap. ii. He had presented Himself as the true temple, in chap. iii., as the true brazen serpent, in chap. vi., as the bread from heaven, the true manna; in chap. vii., He is the true rock; in chap. viii., He will be the true luminous cloud, and so on, until chap. xix. where He will finally realize the type of the Paschal lamb.’” Morris, p. 422, fn. 75.

67 We must recall the words of Paul here, as recorded in 1 Corinthians 10: “1 For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:1-4, emphasis mine).

68 After a lengthy discussion of all the issues related to this text, Morris sums up what he understands the meaning of our text to be: “The meaning of our passage then, in accordance with such Old Testament prophecies appears to be that when any man comes to believe in Jesus the scriptures referring to the activity of the Holy Spirit are fulfilled. On the day of Pentecost Peter claimed the fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel (Acts 2:16ff.). It is something like that we should understand here.” Morris, p. 424.

69 Notice how frequently the subject of Jesus’ origins arises. The Apostle John, John the Baptist, and Jesus have all maintained that He came from above. Many who will not and who cannot believe in Jesus insist that He came from Galilee. How easy it would have been to learn that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, as the prophet Micah had foretold, but these folks had already made up their minds. They would not be confused—or corrected—by the facts.

70 Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931), vol. 5, p. 135.

Biblical Topics:

Tabernacle

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras:

home

18. The Savior and the Sinner (John 7:53-8:11)

Introduction

In a recent Dallas Morning News, Christine Wicker wrote an article entitled, “Screen Savers,”about people who attempt to find God in contemporary films. In part, the article read:

As Camilla Ballard waits in the darkness for a movie to begin, she asks herself one question, “Where am I going to find God in this film?”

In L.A. Confidential she had to look past profanity, sex and violence for a glimpse of the Almighty. But she did find it—in the unconditional love of a prostitute played by Kim Basinger.

“When her policeman-lover beats her up, she just takes it. What a picture of God!” said the youth director at First Presbyterian Church of Dallas. “And in the police officer”—who misjudges her earlier actions—“what a picture of ourselves. We just rail at God and beat him up, and he takes it because he understands the big picture.

“Oh my gosh, I was just so excited. I thought about it for days.”

Ms. Ballard is among a growing number of religious people who advocate going to the movies for what Baptist layman Bruce Ruggles calls “an experience of worship.”

I prefer to have my worship rooted in Scripture, and my view of God based upon the Bible, particularly upon stories such as we find in our text in these first few verses of John chapter 8. Unfortunately, many would tell us this account should not even be considered Scripture. The marginal note of the NASB is most delicate about it. These verses are placed in brackets, with this marginal note: “John 7:53—8:11 is not found in most of the old mss.” Leon Morris, a highly respected evangelical scholar, writes, “The textual evidence makes it impossible to hold that this section is an authentic part of the Gospel.”⁷¹

Biblical scholars have raised questions about our text for several reasons: (1) Those Greek manuscripts judged by some to be both the oldest and the best⁷² omit this passage. When the passage does appear, the text varies considerably, and even occurs at a different place. (2) Some of the older (e.g., Latin, Armenian, Gothic) translations omit it, and some ancient commentators don’t comment on this text. (3) Some would say that both the style and vocabulary of this text differs from that of John. (4) Some argue that this passage does not fit well into the context. (5) A number of highly respected scholars do not believe this text is a part of the New Testament text.

Having said all of this, I am still confident in my own mind that this text is a part of the inspired Scripture, and that it is profitable for teaching as much as any other text of Scripture (whether written by the Apostle John or not).⁷³ Even after his very critical comments on this text, Leon Morris speaks positively of it:

But if we cannot feel that this is part of John’s Gospel we can feel that the story is true to the character of Jesus. Throughout the history of the church it has been held that, whoever wrote it, this little story is authentic. It rings true. It speaks to our condition. It is worth our while to study it, though not as an authentic part of John’s writing. The story is undoubtedly very ancient. Most authorities agree that it is referred to by Papias. It is mentioned also in the Apostolic Constitutions. But it is not mentioned very often in the early days. The reason probably is that in a day when the punishment for sexual sin was very severe among the Christians this story was thought to be too easily misinterpreted as countenancing unchastity. When ecclesiastical discipline was somewhat relaxed the story was circulated more widely and with a greater measure of official sanction.⁷⁴

Calvin speaks of this text in a similar way:

It is plain enough that this passage was unknown anciently to the Greek Churches; and some conjecture that it has been brought from some other place and inserted here. But as it has always been received by the Latin Churches, and is found in many old Greek manuscripts, and contains nothing unworthy of an Apostolic Spirit, there is no reason why we should refuse to apply it to our advantage.⁷⁵

It is my intention and commitment to preach this text with the same zeal and sense of biblical authority as I would any other text of Scripture. I would also add as an aside that I personally find this text one of the most moving portions of the New Testament.

Background

Our text comes to us in a context. In John chapter 1, the Apostle John introduces our Lord, not as the babe born in a Bethlehem manger, but as the One who existed from eternity past, the One who as Creator called everything we see into existence. John the Baptist identifies Him as the promised Messiah, of whom he has been speaking. In the closing verses of chapter 1, Jesus begins to call His disciples.

In chapter 2, Jesus turns ceremonial cleansing water into the finest of wines and then proceeds to go up to the temple in Jerusalem and cast out those who are abusing it by making God’s house a place of doing business. In chapter 3, Jesus has a private interview with Nicodemus, who is shocked to hear that Judaism alone will not save him. When Jesus tells him he must be born again from above, Nicodemus has no idea what that means. In chapter 4, Jesus and His disciples go through Samaria and stop for lunch at the well outside the city of Sychar. It is here that the Samaritan woman and many other Samaritans come to faith in Jesus Christ. These are the kind of people the Jews never imagined God would save. (The Samaritan woman is the same kind of woman we find in our text.) Chapter 5 begins with our Lord healing the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda, in Jerusalem. It is bad enough that Jesus heals him on the Sabbath, but He then dares to instruct this man to carry his bed on the Sabbath, too. But when our Lord makes it clear that He is equal with God as the Son of God, this is too much for the Jews to handle. The Jewish religious leaders are more intent than ever on killing Him (John 5:18). When Jesus feeds the multitude in the early part of John 6, the people are ready to make Jesus their king, by force if necessary. But after hearing Him speak of Himself as the “Bread of life,” many of our Lord’s Galilean “disciples” turn their backs on Jesus, never again to follow Him as they once did.

Chapter 7 brings our Lord back to Jerusalem once again, this time for the Feast of Tabernacles. Jesus has kept His distance from Jerusalem and Judea, knowing the Jews are seeking to kill Him. When His brothers challenge Him to “get His show on the road”—to go to Jerusalem, where He can seek to gather a following—He declines, at least for the moment, choosing to go up to Jerusalem secretly. In the middle of the feast, Jesus boldly presents Himself at the temple where He begins to teach publicly. During this time, a number of folks come to the conclusion that Jesus must be the Messiah, or at least “the Prophet,” whose coming was foretold by Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15). But most come to the conclusion that He is a demon-possessed mental case (at best), or a cunning deceiver (at worst). It is not just the religious leaders who try to get their hands on Jesus (John 7:25, 30, 32, 45-52). In spite of all of the efforts of men to arrest Jesus or to publicly expose Him as a fraud, no one is able to silence or to subdue Him. It is not His “time.” When Nicodemus weakly protests the actions of the Sanhedrin, they seem to come to an impasse, and all of them go home without a consensus.

One thing seems to especially trouble the Jewish religious leaders, whose obsession is the law and whose hero is Moses. Jesus claims that Moses was one of His witnesses, one of those who bore testimony to His identity as the Messiah (5:39-40). This Moses was also the one who would condemn them:

45 “Do not suppose that I will accuse you before the Father. The one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have placed your hope. 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me. 47 But if you do not believe what Moses wrote, how will you believe my words?” (John 5:45-47)

In chapter 6, the Moses matter does not go away. Jesus feeds the multitudes on the other side of the Sea of Galilee. As a result, many want Jesus to be their king. Some of those who have eaten and had their fill at the feeding of the 5,000 challenge Jesus to prove Himself equal with Moses. They claim that Moses gave their fathers bread from heaven in the wilderness, and they dare Jesus to do the same for them. Jesus corrects their mistaken assumption that Moses provided that “bread from heaven” for them to eat. It was God; it was His Father. Jesus is a better “bread from heaven,” a bread that gives men eternal life. Jesus needs not prove Himself equal to Moses, when He is vastly greater.

One cannot help but sense that the relationship issue between Jesus and Moses is one of the underlying issues of our text, as seen when the scribes and Pharisees drag a woman caught in the act of adultery before the crowd and before Jesus. They dare Jesus to differ with Moses about how this woman should be punished.

The Challenge
(7:53–8:6a)

7:53 And each one departed to his own house. 1 But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 Early in the morning he came to the temple courts again. All the people came to him, and he sat down and began to teach them. 3 The experts in the law and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught committing adultery. They made her stand in front of them 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. 5 In the law Moses commanded us to stone to death such women.⁷⁶ What then do you say?” 6 (Now they were asking this in an attempt to trap him, so that they could bring charges against him.)

The members of the Sanhedrin have gone home, frustrated and angry that they can neither silence Jesus nor even manage to arrest Him. They are also deadlocked over how to deal with Him. While Nicodemus will not profess faith in Jesus, he does insist on dealing with Him legally, and this means a public trial, not a private execution.

When the council members go to their own homes, Jesus and His disciples go to the Mount of Olives. Jesus also goes there in the latter days of His ministry to avoid being an easy target for assassination or arrest (see Luke 19:37; 22:39). Early in the morning, Jesus makes His way to the temple again. He most certainly has prevailed and is neither silenced nor sent away in fear. The people begin to gather around Him, forming a crowd, and He begins to teach them.

Suddenly, there is a commotion. Heads turn as a group of men rudely push their way through the crowd. They are the scribes and Pharisees. We do not see these two groups paired elsewhere in John, but it is common in the Synoptic Gospels.⁷⁷ Some wonder that we would find them here. To me, it is logical and predictable. Both the scribes and the Pharisees are self-confident, even arrogant, in their opinion of themselves as interpreters and guardians of the law. In the Gospels, their opposition comes quickly and lasts long (Matthew 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; 23:13ff.; Mark 2:16; 11:27-33; 12:28-34; Luke 6:7; 11:44). Furthermore, the “Moses question” has been prominent lately in the teaching of Jesus. It has also played a significant role in the opposition of the religious leaders to Jesus, especially in regard to Sabbath-keeping. Everyone else has failed to physically lay a hand on Jesus. These fellows are just arrogant enough to try to outwit Jesus intellectually by making use of their greatest strength, their mastery of the Law of Moses.

The group does not come alone. They have with them an unwilling accomplice—a woman whose sin the law condemns, a sin for which she deserves to die. If, indeed, she is caught “in the very act of adultery,” she may be only partly clothed, if at all. I suspect they do not gently bring her along, but probably drag her “kicking and screaming.” No doubt, the woman is in tears, humiliated by her guilt and her exposure. Worse yet, she is stationed before the One who knows no sin—and at the same time, before the eyes of the crowd gathered at the temple.

I cannot imagine a more horrible experience for anyone, and the scribes and Pharisees do nothing to make things easier for her. With self-righteous indignation, these men go about their mission, using this woman no less than a rapist does, and perhaps much more so. The worst is that they are not really interested in this woman, in her sin, or in her execution under the law. They are seeking to make an accusation against Jesus, which we are told clearly in verse 6. This is a sham, no less so than our Lord’s “trial” before the Sanhedrin will be a few months later. The scribes and Pharisees are attempting to manipulate matters in a way that (as we say in Texas) puts Jesus “between a rock and a hard place.”

These scribes and Pharisees claim that they caught this woman “in the very act of adultery.” Given the stringency of the law on how such matters were to be handled, it seems that two witnesses would have had to observe this woman and her partner in such a way that there was no doubt about what was taking place. In our day and time, the video camera makes such evidence possible. In that day and time, it would have been very difficult to convict a person of adultery, which is why many suspect there is a trap or a conspiracy here:

If the conditions required by Jewish law were as stringent as J. Duncan M. Derrett maintains this can scarcely indicate anything other than a trap deliberately set. All the more is this likely to be the case in that the man was not present. Why not? Since the woman was taken in the very act there should have been two sinners, not one, before Jesus.⁷⁸

With smug satisfaction and confidence, the scribes and Pharisees press Jesus to pronounce a verdict regarding this woman’s guilt and punishment:

They made her stand in front of them 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. 5 In the law Moses commanded us to stone to death such women. What then do you say?”

They set Jesus against Moses, thinking that in so doing our Lord will be trapped, that He can do nothing other than condemn Himself by opposing the teaching of the law and of Moses.

How can they be so confident? Why are they so bold as to carry out their confrontation is such a public fashion? From experience, they know that Jesus has compassion on sinners. They expect Him to be compassionate toward this sinful woman, and for good reason. Jesus said that He came to call sinners to repentance (see Luke 5:27-32). It was Simon, the Pharisee, who objected to our Lord’s acceptance of a woman very much like the woman brought before our Lord at the temple; Jesus rebuked Simon and said to the woman: “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:36-50). It may sound far-fetched, but our Lord’s opponents are also convinced that Mary, His mother, conceived Jesus by a similar act of immorality (see John 8:41). How then can Jesus condemn this woman? If He cannot condemn her, then (they assume) He must disagree with Moses and the law. They have Jesus just where they want Him.

Silenced
(8:6b-9)

Jesus bent down and wrote on the ground with his finger. 7 When they persisted in asking him, he stood up straight and replied, “Whoever among you is guiltless may be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Then he bent over again and wrote on the ground. 9 Now when they heard this, they began to drift away one at a time, starting with the older ones, until Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.

As elsewhere in the Gospels, it appears that Jesus is caught on the horns of a dilemma. When, for example, Jesus is asked whether the Jews should pay taxes to Caesar or not, it looks as though there is no way out for our Lord. If He answers “Yes,” then He is in trouble with the people, who hate paying taxes to Rome. If He answers “No,” then Jesus is in trouble with Rome for treason. But where His enemies err is in thinking He is limited to their answers. Jesus is not.

Here, it seems that the scribes and Pharisees suppose they have Jesus trapped, too. If Jesus votes to condemn this woman, then He will be acting against His stated purpose of seeking and saving sinners. If, on the other hand, Jesus proposes that this woman be shown mercy, He will be contradicting the law of Moses, which requires that both partners who are convicted of adultery be put to death (see Exodus 20:14; Leviticus 18:20; 20:10; Deuteronomy 5:18; 22:13-29). It seems that Jesus is indeed trapped. Whatever His answer, it will condemn Him, and His enemies will win.

Our Lord ignores His adversaries, responding to their challenge by His silence. How badly His opponents misinterpret this silence. They think His silence is because they have Him stumped.⁷⁹His silence achieves several things. With John Calvin, I believe our Lord’s silence is intended to shame His adversaries:

By this attitude he intended to show that he despised them. Those who conjecture that he wrote this or the other thing, in my opinion, do not understand his meaning. … For Christ rather intended, by doing nothing, to show how unworthy they were of being heard; just as if any person, while another was speaking to him, were to draw lines on the wall, or to turn his back, or to show, by any other sign, that he was not attending to what was said.⁸⁰

If our wives are offended by our reading the newspaper while they talk to us, imagine the offense of having Jesus refuse to look at His adversaries, appearing not to hear them, and instead occupying Himself by writing (or drawing) in the dirt!

Our Lord’s silence should shame His enemies, but in fact, they are not at all ashamed—at least not yet. Jesus’ silence gives them the impression that they have Jesus at a disadvantage, that He either cannot or will not answer them. So, they intensify their efforts. I suspect they raise their voices and press Jesus harder, demanding that He give them an answer. They put on a show for the crowd to see. All of this simply sets the scene for what our Lord is about to say. They could not have given Him a better introduction.

Before we consider our Lord’s verbal response, let me pursue our Lord’s silence further. I believe our Lord’s silence (and His writing in the dust) accomplishes something else, something very gracious. It is my opinion that this woman is only partially clothed. She has been caught in the very act of adultery. If she has been dragged along naked, or nearly so, it only serves to make the point of her accusers. Such was a way of shaming men (see 2 Samuel 10:1-5) and women (Genesis 9:22-23; Deuteronomy 28:48; Isaiah 47:3; Lamentations 1:8; Ezekiel 16:37; Nahum 3:5; Habakkuk 2:15). I believe that when our Lord stoops down to the ground, ignores His adversaries, and writes in the dust, He not only is prevented from looking upon this woman’s nakedness and shame, but He also attracts the attention of the crowd to Himself, rather than to her. I admit no one I have read has come to this conclusion, but it is just like our Lord. The scribes and Pharisees want to put this woman on display, shaming her in public. Jesus seems to take the spotlight off of her and onto Himself. Can’t you see the crowd fixing their eyes on the ground, stooping to see what Jesus is writing?

It is interesting to read all of the speculations concerning what our Lord writes in the dust. One suggestion is that Jesus writes the names and the sins of those who are accusing this woman. Like A. T. Robertson,⁸¹ I disagree with this suggestion, but for a different reason. I don’t think there is enough dirt available for our Lord to do so! The fact is that we are purposefully kept from knowing what Jesus writes (or draws) on the ground. The message to this woman’s accusers (and our Lord’s accusers as well) is not what He writes, but what He says: “Whoever among you is guiltless may be the first to throw a stone at her.”

The scribes and Pharisees think they have Jesus cornered, with no way of escape. Even though Jesus claims that Moses bore witness to Him as the Messiah, and that He also would be their accuser, they seek to use Moses to indict Jesus. What a bad mistake! Masterfully, Jesus deals with their challenge. First, our Lord does not deny this woman’s guilt. As an adulteress, she is condemned by the law, and she does deserve to die. (Our Lord does not deal with the matter of the other guilty party here, as this is a setup.) Jesus does not plead for mercy. He even agrees to an execution, one I’m not sure they want or intend. There is just one problem—who will be the first to cast a stone?

Jesus in no way seeks to set aside the law or to diminish its role in this situation. After all, He is the One who has come to fulfill the law, not to abolish it (Matthew 5:17-18). Our Lord’s response is a response from the Law:

6 “Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness. 7 The hands of the witnesses shall be the first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So you shall put away the evil from among you” (Deuteronomy 17:6-7, NKJV).

The scribes and Pharisees boldly insist that this woman should be executed in accordance with the Law of Moses. They seek to force Jesus to differ with the law and thus become guilty of violating the law Himself. Instead, Jesus presses this same law even further than His adversaries. It is as though He says, “You’re absolutely right. A woman who is caught in the very act of adultery is condemned to death under the law. She should be stoned, here and now. And since we are all so concerned with the keeping of the law, let us be sure that her execution is also lawful. The law stipulates that the guilty person must be stoned, and that those who cast the first stones are those who testified against her. These witnesses must, of course, be guiltless in all of this. Now, to fulfill the law, who will be the one to take up the first stone and cast it at her? Who is sinless in this matter? Who is guiltless before the law?” Oops. The law was more exacting, more demanding than they reckoned. It says too much. It not only condemns this woman; it condemns them all.

The question is not whether this guilty woman should be punished. The question is, “Who is sinless in this matter to be qualified to condemn her?”

“But Jesus stood up and invited any one among them who was sinless to throw the first stone. This answer completely disarmed them. It could not possibly be construed as a rejection of the law. Jesus specifically enjoined that a stone be thrown. But His limitation on who might throw it effectively prevented any harm coming to the guilty woman. The saying ‘does not deny that she may be stoned, but insists upon the innocency and therefore the competence of whoever stands forth against her as accuser and witness.’”⁸²

The words of Jesus are both an appeal to conscience and a warning to the hearers that their own lives might very well be at stake. If they stoned the woman they must be very sure of the witnesses.⁸³

Our Lord returns to His previous posture, commencing once again to write (or draw) in the dust. I am not certain whether it is out of conviction of guilt, or due to their failure to prove Jesus a law-breaker, that His adversaries shrink away silently, beginning with the oldest.⁸⁴ Our text tells us Jesus is left alone with this woman. Many understand these words to mean that those who leave are all of her accusers—the scribes and Pharisees who so rudely interrupted, trying to find fault with Jesus. They believe the crowd remains. I have doubts about this. I wonder if those in the crowd are not as condemned as the scribes and Pharisees. Would they not also be required to participate in this stoning? Who in the crowd is able to cast the first stone?

Not until they all leave does Jesus address the woman, for the first time. Jesus does not ask her about her guilt. He knows. He simply asks her where those are who a short while before seemed so eager to condemn her. Does no one remain to condemn her? Then if there are no witnesses, there can be no condemnation, no execution. The scribes call for an execution, and no one stays for it—no one is willing to cast the first stone.

She is a free woman. She is not an innocent woman, as seen from our Lord’s words to her. Jesus will not condemn her, either. He does not tell her that her sins are forgiven, though I would not be surprised if she later came to faith in Jesus as her Messiah. He does tell her to go, and from then on to give up her sin.

What an amazing turn of events. A woman is probably dragged through the crowd and cast at Jesus’ feet, overcome with guilt and shame, the object of attention. Her sin that seemed such a private matter only moments earlier is now known by the whole city. Her accusers boldly accuse her and virtually dare Jesus to disagree with their verdict. Jesus agrees with them and takes the law even further than they do, exposing their sin in the process. When it ends, her accusers leave with heads hung in shame, silent at last. She leaves a different person, I believe, and she will never be the same.

Conclusion

This text, short though it may be, abounds in lessons for us. Let me begin by observing from our text that some of the most terrible sins are committed by “religious” people, in the name of practicing and promoting righteousness. The scribes and Pharisees are as religious as it gets; yet they are exceedingly wicked in what they do to this woman and in what they attempt to do to Jesus. They are not really interested in righteousness and justice and holiness; they are interested in making themselves look good and Jesus look bad. Sin often comes with a very thin religious veneer.

What we dare not conclude from this story is that Jesus refuses to judge or condemn anyone. Over the years, I have heard this line of argument many times in slightly different forms: “Jesus taught us that just as He would not judge anyone, neither should we.” Let me remind you that what our Lord’s adversaries most want is for Him to refuse to acknowledge this woman is a sinner, deserving of death. They are disappointed because Jesus agreed with them that she is a sinner, deserving of death. Their problem is that they fail to see themselves as sinners as well. Jesus not only sees her immorality as sin, He urges her to forsake her sin in the future. Jesus does not give her a license to sin, but a reason and (shortly) the means to cease from sin. Jesus exposes much more sin than anyone expects, and He condemns it all. Jesus is not “soft on sin.”

Neither is our Lord teaching that we should not condemn sin or punish sinners.⁸⁵ In the 18th chapter of Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus instructs His disciples that they are to confront a brother who sins, and if necessary, to discipline him (18:15-20). Many New Testament texts make dealing with sin our duty (see, for example, Acts 5:1-11; Romans 12:9; 15:14; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:1-10; Galatians 6:1-5; 1 Thessalonians 5:14; 2 Thessalonians 3:14; Titus 3:10-11).

What our Lord teaches, I believe, is that when we must deal with the sins of others, we recognize that we too are sinners, and vulnerable to sin as well. We must first deal with our own sin, and then with the sin of others:

1 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of timber in your own eye? 4 Or why do you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite, first remove the beam from your eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (Matthew 7:1-5).

1 Brothers and sisters, if a person is discovered in some sin, you who are spiritual restore such a person in a spirit of gentleness. Pay close attention to yourselves, so that you are not tempted too. 2 Carry one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3 For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself (Galatians 6:1-3).

As I have thought through this amazing story of the Savior and the sinner, it occurs to me that this story is yet one more proof that Jesus is, indeed, the Messiah. I am reminded of Hannah’s prayer, recorded in the Old Testament Book of 1 Samuel, and taken up to some degree by Mary (see Luke 1:46-55):

1 And Hannah prayed and said: “My heart rejoices in the LORD; My horn is exalted in the LORD. I smile at my enemies, Because I rejoice in Your salvation.

2 “No one is holy like the LORD, For there is none besides You, Nor is there any rock like our God.

3 “Talk no more so very proudly; Let no arrogance come from your mouth, For the LORD is the God of knowledge; And by Him actions are weighed.

4 “The bows of the mighty men are broken, And those who stumbled are girded with strength. 5 Those who were full have hired themselves out for bread, And the hungry have ceased to hunger. Even the barren has borne seven, And she who has many children has become feeble.

6 “The LORD kills and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and brings up. 7 The LORD makes poor and makes rich; He brings low and lifts up. 8 He raises the poor from the dust And lifts the beggar from the ash heap, To set them among princes And make them inherit the throne of glory.

“For the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, And He has set the world upon them. 9 He will guard the feet of His saints, But the wicked shall be silent in darkness.

“For by strength no man shall prevail. 10 The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken in pieces; From heaven He will thunder against them. The LORD will judge the ends of the earth.

“He will give strength to His king, And exalt the horn of His anointed” (1 Samuel 2:1-10, NKJV, emphasis mine).

In our text, our Lord “put down” the arrogant scribes and Pharisees. He “lifted up” this humbled woman. Jesus is acting like the Messiah He is, like the Messiah He claims to be.

Someone has said, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” I believe this is true of the “pictures” John’s Gospel gives us in our text. There are two “pictures” I want to call to your attention, and with these, I shall conclude. The first “picture” is of the conflict between legalistic Judaism (the kind of religion Paul had before he was saved—see Philippians 3:1-16) and true Christianity (grace). These scribes and Pharisees, as intelligent and well taught as they are, do not understand the purpose of the Old Testament law. Ironically, the woman caught in adultery does seem to grasp the essence of what the law is about.

The scribes and Pharisees think the law is the means for obtaining righteousness. In their minds, if one will but keep the law, one will be righteous, and God’s blessings will be assured. No wonder these two groups are so devoted to the interpretation and application of the law to daily life—it is their life, their eternal life. But the law was never given so that men could work their way to heaven. The law was given as a standard of righteousness. The law was given to show all men that they are sinners, deserving of God’s eternal wrath. The law was given to show men that they need grace. The woman seems to see herself as the law does—as one guilty of adultery, as one without any excuse, without any basis for mercy. The scribes and Pharisees feel as though they are above the law as its interpreters and guardians. They use the law to condemn others and to justify themselves. This short story of the Savior and the sinner captures the essence of the difference between our Lord’s use of the law and the legalistic system of that day.

What John’s Gospel teaches through this story Paul applies to Judaism in the Book of Romans. Paul was a legalistic Pharisee himself. Like the Pharisees and scribes who are “attacking” Jesus, he thought that religious zeal and devotion to the law was his salvation. Anyone who challenged this view, or who taught otherwise was, to Paul, a heretic that deserved to die. But then he is confronted by Jesus Christ, and he comes to faith. From that point on, he sees legalistic law-keeping as worthless, and he gives it all up for faith in Christ’s work at Calvary:

2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh! 3 For we are the circumcision, the ones who worship by the Spirit of God, exult in Christ, and do not rely on human credentials 4 —though mine too are significant. If someone thinks he has good reasons to put confidence in human credentials, I have more: 5 I was circumcised on the eighth day, from the people of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews. I lived according to the law as a Pharisee. 6 In my zeal for God I persecuted the church. According to the righteousness stipulated in the law I was blameless. 7 But these assets I have come to regard as liabilities because of Christ. 8 More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things—indeed, I regard them as dung!—that I might gain Christ, 9 and be found in him, not because of having my own righteousness derived from the law, but because of having the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness—a righteousness from God that is based on Christ’s faithfulness. 10 My aim is to know him, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings, and to be like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:2-11).

In the Book of Romans, Paul shows that all men are sinners, who have failed to meet God’s standard of righteousness and thus are under divine condemnation, unable to save themselves. In short, all men need to be saved, and they must be saved by grace, not by works.

17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relationship to God 18 and know his will and approve the superior things because you receive instruction from the law, 19 and if you are convinced that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an educator of the senseless, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the essential features of knowledge and of the truth— 21 therefore you who teach someone else, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say not to commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law dishonor God by transgressing the law. 24 For just as it is written, “the name of God is being blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Romans 2:17-24).

9 What then? Are we better off? Certainly not, for we have already charged that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin, 10 just as it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one,
11 there is no one who understands, there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless;
there is no one who shows kindness, not even one.”
13 “Their throats are open graves, they deceive with their tongues,
the poison of asps is under their lips.”
14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
16 ruin and misery are in their paths,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

The Jews are eager to condemn the heathen, and so they are certainly “amening” all that Paul writes in chapter 1. But in chapter 2, Paul does to his Jewish readers what Jesus does to the scribes and Pharisees of John 8. Paul challenges them to apply the same standard of law to themselves that they apply to others. Note especially his words of verse 22: “You who say not to commit adultery, do you commit adultery?” He presses them to acknowledge that the law does not merely condemn pagans (Gentiles) or “sinners” (like the woman caught in adultery); it condemns all. The law also condemns self-righteous Jews. They may meticulously keep one part of the law (as they appear to be doing in condemning the woman caught in sin), but they blatantly ignore or disobey other portions of the law (which Jesus calls to their attention by requiring that the one who casts the first stone must be without sin). In Romans 3:10-18, Paul draws together a number of Old Testament texts which articulate this same truth: the law condemns everyone as a sinner. Then, in verses 19 and 20, Paul states the principle again so that no one can miss what he is saying. The law was never given to save men, but to show men their sin. Notice, again, what the law was to produce—silence: “so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable to God” (verse 19).

John chapter 8 is what the gospel is all about. The law condemns all men as sinners. The only One truly qualified to condemn anyone is Jesus, because He is without sin. And yet the One who alone can condemn is also the One who came to save. Jesus is not minimizing or excusing sin at all; He is exposing sin, and within a few months, He will endure the punishment for sin on the cross of Calvary. The reason He does not condemn this woman, the reason He does not stone her, is because He came to bear the sentence of death she deserves.

This brings us to our second “picture.” Is the story of the Savior and the sinner in John chapter 8 not a picture of what Paul writes later in the Book of Romans?

31 What then shall we say about these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 Indeed, he who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies; 34 Who is the one who will condemn? Christ is the one who died (and more than that he was raised), who is at the right hand of God, and who also is interceding for us (Romans 8:31-34).

The only One qualified to condemn us is the One whom the Father sent to save sinners. He who could have condemned us bore our condemnation on the cross of Calvary.

Where are you in this “picture” in John chapter 8? Are you one of the self-righteous religious folks, who are only too eager to point an accusing finger at the sins of others, while avoiding your own? Are you one of the crowd, enjoying the role of a spectator, seemingly uninvolved? Or are you like this woman, all too aware of her guilt and sin and shame? It is this last category of people that our Lord came to save—guilty, helpless sinners, who deserve God’s wrath, and who cling to Him for grace and forgiveness. No one is too sinful, too guilty, to be saved, but many are too good to be saved—too good in that they think they don’t need grace, when they desperately do.

May God use this story of His amazing grace to change your life, as I believe He changed the life of this “sinner.”

71 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 882.

72 There is a great debate taking place over the issue of whether the oldest manuscripts are also the best.

73 I am not conceding that this passage was written by someone other than John, but even if it were, I would still consider it a part of the inspired text. (We don’t reject the Book of Deuteronomy simply because someone other than Moses wrote the words about the death of Moses—see Deuteronomy 34.)

74 Leon Morris, p. 883.

75 John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Volume 7: The Gospels (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.), p. 734.

76 There is clearly a curling of the lip, a clear note of disdain—“such women.” Morris comments, “It is perhaps worth noticing that they slightly manipulate the text of the law. They speak of ‘such’ as being stoned, the word being feminine, ‘such women,’ whereas Lev. 20:10 and Deut. 22:22 both lay it down that the man as well as the woman is to be put to death. They are also a little more specific than the Old Testament, for they speak definitely of stoning, whereas the passages we have cited do not indicate the manner of execution. Stoning is prescribed for the guilty pair when the woman is ‘a virgin betrothed unto a husband’ (Deut. 22:23f.).” Morris, p. 886.

77 Carson writes, “The teachers of the law (lit. ‘scribes’) and the Pharisees are often mentioned together in the Synoptics, but never in the genuine text of John. The scribes were the recognized students and expositors of the law of Moses, but so central was the law in the life and thought of first-century Palestinian Jews that the scribes came to assume something of the roles of lawyer, ethicist, theologian, catechist, and jurist. Most of them, but certainly not all, were Pharisees by conviction …” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 334.

Morris cites Barclay, with this helpful observation, distinguishing the scribes and the Pharisees: “For a useful account of the scribes and the Pharisees see W. Barclay, The Mind of Jesus (London, 1960), pp. 158ff. He neatly sums up the differences between the two by saying, ‘It was the scribes who worked out all these rules and regulations; it was the Pharisees who devoted their whole lives to the keeping of them’ (op. cit., p. 161).’” Morris, p. 884, fn. 9.

78 Morris, p. 885. Morris here cites some very interesting work by Derrett, which may be of interest to the student of Scripture.

79 They wrongly conclude that His silence is like their own (see Matthew 21:27; 22:34, 46; Mark 12:34; Luke 20:40).

80 John Calvin, p. 734.

81 “There is a tradition that Jesus wrote down the names and sins of these accusers. That is not likely.” A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1932), vol. 5, p. 139.

82 Morris, citing Derrett (op. cit., p. 22), p. 889.

83 Morris, p. 889.

84 This seemingly incidental comment is intriguing. Jesus raises the question as to who should be first to cast the stone, and none is willing to step forward. There seems to be no problem deciding who should be the first to leave.

85 Calvin comments: “In this way, however, Christ appears to take out of the world all judicial decisions, so that no man shall dare to say that he has a right to punish crimes. For shall a single judge be found, who is not conscious of having something that is wrong?

“I reply: this is not an absolute and unlimited prohibition, by which Christ forbids sinners to do their duty in correcting the sins of others; but by this word he only reproves hypocrites, who mildly flatter themselves and their vices, but are excessively severe, and even act the part of felons, in censuring others. No man, therefore, shall be prevented by his own sins from correcting the sins of others, and even from punishing them, when it may be found necessary, provided that both in himself and in others he hate what ought to be condemned; and in addition to all this, every man ought to begin by interrogating his own conscience, and by acting both as witness and judge against himself, before he come to others. In this manner shall we, without hating men, make war with sins.” Calvin, p. 735.

Biblical Topics:

Forgiveness

Passage:

Taxonomy upgrade extras: