John 8:1-11 Caught in the Act!

Jesus did not go back to Galilee after the Feast of Booths. Instead, He went to the Mount of Olives, presumably to pray. Perhaps He stayed up all night praying, as He did on other occasions, in order to prepare Himself, and gain divine power, for the test that would come the next day. The previous day, the Pharisees had said that the multitude that did not know the law was cursed, implicitly because of their ignorance. But everyone knew the Ten Commandments, so the Pharisees set up a situation in which even the ignorant multitude would see that Jesus could not be a prophet or the Messiah. They thought they had Him on the horns of the dilemma. Either He would deny the Law, and thus prove He was not from God, or He would uphold the law and sit in judgment on this woman, and lose support among the people. Very clever, these Pharisees. But they did not consider the possibility that Jesus really was God incarnate and if that was the case, their trap for Him would fail. I Corinthians 1:17 quotes Isaiah 29:14 and Isaiah 5:21, to the effect that no man can outsmart God and no man is wiser than God. And so in this case.

          Jesus wrote in the ground with His finger. The Pharisees and scribes persisted in asking Him what should be done to this woman. Finally they got their answer: John 8:7. And then He stooped down and continued to write in the ground with His finger. What was He writing? Perhaps He was writing the sins of the accusers for all to see. Perhaps He was writing a profound revelation about the grace of God. In any event, He did not directly accuse them. He did not pass judgment on the woman. He did not respond to their question. The Holy Spirit responded, by speaking to each person there, and the accusers began to leave, one by one, starting with the oldest. Perhaps they had also committed adultery with this woman, or with some other woman. Perhaps they had committed other sins that were also egregious violations of the Law of Moses. As St. Paul pointed out, by the works of the Law no one can be justified. (Romans 3:20, Galatians 2:16) Every person has fallen short. (Romans 3:23)

          This is a difficult practical problem. Does the fact that every person has sinned mean that no one is qualified to be a judge of any legal matter? If so, where would human society be?  God appointed Moses as judge and told him to appoint lower level judges. (Exodus 18:13-26) And even when Moses sinned by not treating God as holy in the sight of the people, God did not remove him as being judge. His punishment was that he would not enter the Promised Land but only see it from afar. (Numbers 20:12) But Jesus seemed to imply that no one was qualified to carry out the sentence of the judgment of a person who had clearly violated one of the Ten Commandments. And so we come to one of the fundamental differences between the old and new covenants. Jesus was God incarnate. He came to earth to set things right. And that is the true purpose of judgment - even the final judgment. The right will be established. The wrong will be discarded. One of the reasons that we rightly fear this judgment is that we do not want to let go of what is wrong; we cling to it, and He will eliminate it, to be discarded. The lake of fire will be the city dump for all eternity. But Jesus was not about to discard this woman whose life had taken her to a point where she violated the Law of Moses. Perhaps she was a prostitute, or  she lived with a man who was married to someone else, or she was married to someone else. Interestingly, the Pharisees did not bring the man she was involved with to Jesus for judgment, even though it takes two people to commit adultery. Since this happened immediately on the day after the  Pharisees had been enraged by Jesus' words, they must have known about this woman and where and when to find her in the act. The fundamental difference between Jesus and the Pharisees at this incident is that Jesus came to make things right, the Pharisees wanted to enforce the law. But really, the Pharisees wanted to use this woman as a tool to get at Jesus.

          This has been reflected through church history throughout the time since Christ until now. The church has often been the motivating force behind rescue missions, homes for unwed mothers, and so on. This has been mixed with a history of church legalism, including the severest of punishment in some cases for people judged guilty of violating specific rules. This apparent schizophrenia reflects that reality that the Christian faith has seldom managed to integrate and synthesize a culture and lifestyle that seamlessly includes both love and holiness. Jesus showed us how it is to be done, but it is hard because it runs against the grain of our human nature. It is truly the reflection of the divine nature. If we are fully open to the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives, we can seek that He would impart this into our hearts and minds.

          The story winds down with Jesus asking the woman where are those who condemned her, and her recognition that they were gone. She was free. When we think of our own sin and the freedom that Jesus has given us through the cross, do we rejoice in seeing that no one condemns us?

          Jesus' parting words to her, and to us, are: "Go and sin no more." We have to see in this the spiritual reality that holiness is a gift from God to us. It is not for His benefit that He calls us to be holy. He is already holy in every atom (or spiritual equivalent of atom) of His being. His call to us to be holy benefits us in many ways. One of them is that if we are holy, we will enjoy His presence. Another result of holiness is elimination of the consequences of sin from our lives on earth. The Ten Commandments were given because God wanted to explain to the Israelites a simple standard of right behavior that would protect them from some of the worst consequences. Neither Israel nor we, on our own, can keep the Law. Jesus set this woman free from the law, to be what God had called her to be. Were the words "Go and sin no more" a 'thou shalt not' command, or a word of God that carried the power of fulfillment, as per the angel Gabriel's words to Mary recorded in Luke 1:37 - that nothing God declares is impossible? This was before the Holy Spirit was given (John 7:39), yet Jesus spoke these words to her. How much more now that the Holy Spirit has been given should we receive these empowering words from Jesus?

John 7:37-53 Rivers of living water

John 7:37-39 Jesus, on the last day of the feast of booths, stood up and gave a public proclamation of the same promise He had made to the woman at the well in John 4:10-14. John adds parenthetically here an explanation of what Jesus meant by living water that flows out of the innermost being. Jesus quotes Scripture, although the flow of water to symbolize God's presence is given in multiple places and figures. In Ezekiel 47:1, water flows from out of the millennial or eternal temple and becomes a mighty river. Jeremiah 2:13 chides the Israelites for forsaking YHWH, the fountain of living waters, to rely instead on broken spiritual cisterns which hold no water, referring to idol worship and relying on other gods.

          The feast of booths celebrated the power of God in keeping the Israelites and providing for them for the forty years that they were in the desert during the Exodus, living in tents. During that time in the wilderness, God supernaturally provided manna ("what is it?") for food. He also provided water, or else the Israelites would have died from dehydration, although only two incidents instances are recorded in the Pentateuch. (Exodus 17:1-7, Numbers 20:2-13) Doubtless with this in mind, Jesus was trying to convey (just as He did to the woman at the well) that life in this world is like traveling through a spiritual wilderness, in which God tabernacles with us, and provides food and water for us. In the spiritual realm, water springs up from our innermost being, which John explains is the Holy Spirit who indwells believers, but not yet at the time Jesus spoke. It was not the supernatural works of power that Jesus was speaking of, but the nourishment of the parched soul, that the Holy Spirit would come to bring.

John 7:40-53 After this revelation by Jesus, some of the people thought that Jesus was the promised prophet, or the Messiah, based on what He had said. But there was continued bloviating about whether His birth lined up with prophecy. And then there was discussion between the Pharisees and the officers about why the arrest warrant was not executed. The officers had been impressed by Jesus' words. The Pharisees tell the officers that none of them has believed in Him. And then there is a curious little note that Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee, implies that the Pharisees had made a judgment without following the legal requirement to investigate everything thoroughly and not judge a matter until it has been fully heard. (Deut. 19:18, Proverbs 18:13) No doubt this irritated the rest of the Pharisees who doubtless did not like having their own hypocrisy pointed out to them. Eventually they would question Jesus (John 18:19-24), but that trial was not conducted exactly according to the Law of Moses either. And then the feast ended and everyone went home.

John 7:25-36 Will He go to teach the Greeks?

John 7:25-36 The people of Jerusalem talk among themselves, discussing the evidence and arguments that Jesus may or may not be the Messiah. What have the rulers of the Jews decided? Does His origin line up with prophecy regarding the origin of the Messiah? Do His works and the signs He has performed provide evidence that He is the Messiah? While the people were talking among themselves at the feast, the Pharisees and the chief priests decided to act. This is early on in Jesus' ministry, probably a few years before He finally was arrested.  John says they sent officers to arrest Him but does not explain the conditions that kept them from executing their arrest warrant until verses 45-46. But what He did say was that He would be with them for a little while longer, and then be gone. He was of course referring to His death, resurrection, and ascension. The Jews had no concept of this. The only interpretation they could assign to His statement was that He was going into some kind of exile. Since He was a Jew, this would mean that He would be going into the dispersion among the Greeks.

          The dispersion had started much earlier, beginning with the conquest of the northern kingdom of Israel in about 722 BC by the Assyrians. Subsequently the southern kingdom of Israel was carried into captivity by the Babylonians in about 586 BC. Some were allowed to return to Palestine after Babylon was conquered by the Medo-Persian Empire, but some stayed. And then after Alexander the Great conquered the known world in 334-323 BC, the Jews lived in various places throughout the Greek empire. Even though the Greek empire was divided up by Alexander's generals after his death in 323 BC, the four pieces of his empire were still considered Greek, because of the dominance of Greek culture that persisted even after their political dominance had passed into history. To the Jews, Greek culture represented the enemy culture, even though the political enemy was Roman dominance. They might have thought that Jesus would exile Himself to some remote part of the Roman Empire but they still thought of it as Greek. And symbolically, with Rome representing the political aspect of the world-system, and Greece representing the cultural aspect of the world system, two interest parallels can be drawn. Firstly, the apostles (or at least Paul) carried the gospel to both Greece and Rome, as described in the book of Acts and Paul's epistles, but they went as missionaries, not as exiles. Secondly, the situation is not much different than today, in which Rome represents large governments that attempt to control all things, and Greece represents worldly culture, such as epitomized by Hollywood and New York (at least in the United States). And to the same extent, believers today go into these spheres of existence (government and culture) not as exiles but as missionaries.

          But Jesus had something else in mind in this passage, in talking about His own departure.

John 7:14-24 Learning from God

John 7:14-24 Jesus begins to teach, which astonished the Jews. He was teaching what the Father had told Him to teach. Jesus makes a very fundamental statement about learning from God. It is a matter of the heart, not the mind. A person who is willing to do the will of the Father will know and understand His teaching. True and righteous teaching can only come from the Father, and only be communicated by someone who seeks His glory, rather than their own. For this reason, the teachers of the law of Moses do not understand what they are teaching. Jesus refers back to the healing He performed in Jerusalem on the Sabbath (John 5:1-9), and presents a simple quandary. They circumcise on the Sabbath if the appointed day for circumcision (the eighth day from birth - see Leviticus 12:3) falls on a Sabbath, but they are angry because He healed a man on the Sabbath. The question is how the heart responds to God's leading in cases where there is an apparent conflict in His direction. The problem is that the teachers' hearts were exactly wrong; they saw a man being made whole on the Sabbath, and instead of rejoicing in is healing, they sought to kill the healer. This indicated that their hearts did not understand or partake in the heart of the Father. And Jesus indicates this is because they were seeking to build their own kingdom, or feather their own nest, by their teaching of the Law of Moses, rather than seeking to build the kingdom of the Father and bring Him glory.

          The challenge to us from this passage is our approach to learning and teaching God's word, and the ways of God. There is a place for academic rigor and accuracy, but that place is subservient to the desire to understand what God is saying to us, individually, so that we can do what He says to do, and live how He says to live. This is from the heart, a desire to seek His glory above all other things. (See Psalm 42:1, for example) If our devotion to the word of God is more intellectual and self-centered than visceral and God-centered, we have inverted priorities and will not truly understand His word.

John 7:1-13 Fulfillment of the feasts

John 7:1-9 The reference to Jesus' brothers suggests that there was some tension in the family. His brothers did not believe in Him, and most likely in sarcasm, told Him to go show Himself and His works to the world, or at least to the Jewish nation that would assemble at the feast of booths. Per the command of Moses, every devout Jew was to gather at this feast annually, one of the three mandatory celebrations of the Jewish calendar. (Exodus 23:14-17, Deut 16:13-16) However, Jesus' brothers said that Jesus should show Himself to the world. Jesus' response was that the world hated Him because He testified that its deeds are evil. So this discussion is not about the fulfillment of the type that is embodied in the feast of booths. That feast is a picture of God tabernacling with men. First the Jews all lived in tents in the desert for forty years, and God traveled with them, showing His presence by the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night. (Leviticus 23:33-43) In Jesus, God tabernacled with mankind by living in a human body and walking and talking with them. But Jesus is here saying that the world hated Him because of His testimony that its deeds are evil. There is little in the preceding part of John in which Jesus explicitly passes judgment on the evil deeds of the world. At the preceding feast, recorded in John 5, Jesus healed a crippled man, and then gave testimony that He was the Son of God, that God was His Father. This caused many to stumble. So it seems to be a bit of a mystery why at this time Jesus would say the world hates Him because He testifies that its deeds are evil. When He said that His time was not yet fully come, most likely He was referring to the pre-ordained time when He would go to be offered as a sacrifice for the sins of the world, which is identified in John 13:1. So He did not go up to Jerusalem with His brothers to observe the feast of Booths, but stayed in Galilee.

John 7:10-13 After the preceding, it seems paradoxical that Jesus then went up to the feast in Jerusalem, but secretly. There must have been sightings because some of the Jews were looking for Him, and there was apparently some murmuring among them, with differing opinions. Perhaps Jesus wanted to hear what the various people within the crowd were saying.

          One has to wonder what people did for seven days at a feast like this. I'm sure there were daily religious assemblies, but they couldn't have lasted all day every day, so there must have been considerable time available for people to relax and talk or play or take meals together. Something like a modern vacation, except that this vacation was being taken in the presence of The Lord. Not meaning specifically in Jesus' presence, but appearing before The Lord as commanded by Moses, they spent seven days celebrating a feast to the Lord according to the Law of Moses. (Leviticus 23:41)

          The feast of booths followed the day of atonement. (Leviticus 23:26-32) What better picture could there be of the process of redemption and then salvation? On the tenth day of the seventh month, they were to humble themselves and present an offering by fire to The Lord. Atonement has only one meaning. Kippur (Strong's #3725) is derived from Kaphar (Strongs # 3722) which means to cover over, to expiate. In modern English, it has come to mean amend or reparation for a wrong, and implicitly reconciliation between the parties. And all this is rolled up in a single day, Yom Kippur, in the Jewish calendar of holy days. Five days later begins the seven day feast of booths, from the fifteenth to the twenty-second day of the seventh month. The atonement which Jesus paid for by His blood (Hebrews 9:7-14) is followed by a celebration in the presence of The Lord, which likely prefigures the marriage celebration of the Lamb. (Revelation 19:7,9).

John 6:52-71 Unless you eat My flesh....

          John 6:52-58 The Jews begin an internal argument among themselves about how it would be possible for a person to voluntarily offer their own body in some kind of cannibalistic meal. Jesus tries at this point to explain the sacramental aspect of the Lord's Supper. His flesh is true food, His blood is true drink. Physical food and drink are mere copies, weak shadows of the real things. Spiritual life comes from receiving Him, consuming Him, drawing life from Him, and thereby receiving eternal life.

          It was probably not even in the back of their minds that the blood sacrifices that were offered as part of the temple worship, and are also offered by pagans as part of pagan worship, are all intrinsically drawing on the innate human understanding that life is in the blood. (Leviticus 17:10-14) It was later explained in the epistle to the Hebrews. (Hebrews 10:1-18) The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin, but they all prefigured or were a picture of the offering of Christ, whose blood would take away sin, opening the door to God putting His law and His righteousness in the hearts and minds of His people.

John 6:59-71 The foregoing passage was actually not on the occasion of His multiplication of the loaves and fishes, but in the synagogue in Capernaum. His disciples rightly said this is a difficult statement. Jesus told them that only the Holy Spirit could enable them to receive the teaching He had just given them, and that would only come through faith in Him. There is almost an aside here, that Jesus already knew that Judas Iscariot would betray Him, and that Judas had no spiritual depth whatever. One almost has to wonder why Jesus called Judas as a disciple. We could speculate - perhaps it is the universalism of Jesus' call - that Judas had a chance, heard everything the other disciples heard, and could have responded in faith at any time, but chose not to. Or perhaps Jesus called Judas because He knew that the prophecies had to be fulfilled. Many others who had followed Him decided not to after this teaching. Simon Peter gave a statement of faith. It doesn't necessarily mean Peter understood everything Jesus had said, but the Holy Spirit was stirring - Peter knew that Jesus was speaking on behalf of God and offering eternal life.

          Sometimes unbelievers say that the reason they will not become Christians is that people who claim they are behave in ways that contradict what Jesus taught. This may often be the case. But here people in large numbers turn away from Christ because of what He taught. He did not attempt to soften this teaching with words about love. He said that all who came to Him would have eternal life, but He did not in any way back off from His teaching about His body being food that must be consumed to have eternal life, even though it caused people to stumble. We can only speculate that the reason for this insistence is that, in the Lord's Supper, we proclaim the Lord's death until His coming again, by eating the bread and drinking the wine, and that it is His death that saves us and gives us eternal life. (I Corinthians 11:26)  There is no other way. Receiving the communion elements in faith is the only way that it can be effectual in our life. Rejecting them, or receiving them without faith, is rejection of faith in the efficacy of the death of Christ to save us. If people stumble over this, no matter how much they want the Jesus of love and acceptance, they do not have Him.

John 6:33-51 The Quest for the Meaning of Life

John 6:33-51 And then Jesus goes on to give a new revelation. This bread that comes from heaven - the supernatural provision - gives life to the world. It is not physical bread - some wonderful health-bread - that gives life to the world, but He Himself is that bread. This is the first of the seven great "I am"s in John. Jesus said, "I am the bread of life." (John 6:35,48) He explains that He is the living bread that if anyone eats, they shall live forever; this bread is His flesh. During the last supper, He identified the bread that was consumed in the Passover Seder celebration with His body. (Matthew 26:26,Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19, I Corinthians 11:23-24) The eternal life is not promised in this body of flesh.(I Corinthians 15:50)  It does not simply mean existence, or the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change, either biological or intellectual. It would seem to be closer to meaning spiritual vitality, vigor, or energy. It seems to mean continuous, unbroken relationship with His Father. (John 17:3)

          Perhaps the modern man's philosophical quest for the meaning of life derives from the fundamental rejection of relationship with the Father. When Adam chose to disobey God, he hid himself from God when He was walking in the Garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:8) And every person since then who lives long enough to reach a capacity to make such a choice, makes the same choice as Adam. And so we all hide ourselves from the Father. And then we ask "What is the meaning of life?" The question itself implies that we know there is something fundamental about the why of our existence that we just don't get. We instinctively know that the universe, and our presence in it, cannot be the result of mere causation. But separated from the Father, we come up with all sorts of ideas about the why of existence, all of which are futile, because they miss the point.

          God gave Adam his purpose for existence: he was to rule over the fish, birds, and animals (Genesis 1:26); he was to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it (Genesis 1:28); he was to cultivate and keep the garden (Genesis 2:15); and he was to walk with The Lord in the cool of the day (implied in Genesis 3:8). We can see little pieces of this purpose surface in multiple aspects of our lives. Police and firefighters usually feel called to their profession because they feel fulfilled when they are rescuing people and making things right. Farmers raise crops, including weeding and fertilizing, because they find satisfaction in it. Many people have gardens that they tend because they find joy in creating beauty with flowers and plants. People keep pets because there is something innately satisfying in having a relationship with an animal that includes both ruling and nurturing it. But in establishing a purpose for life, it is not within us to establish it for ourselves. This is related to the same issue as first causes. The universe cannot explain its own existence because a causal system has to have a starting point. God is the only being or entity whose existence is not contingent. And this includes the source of meaning and purpose. Only God can do this. So when Jesus told His listeners that He is the bread of life, implicit in this is beyond mere eternal existence, He is the origin of meaning and purpose for all eternity.

          In this passage, Jesus emphasizes that the bread He offers, His body, will satisfy; furthermore, He does this because it is the Father's will. He does nothing on His own initiative. (John 5:30, 8:28) It is the Father's will that everyone who believes in Jesus will have eternal life.

          This is profound. Stop and think about it.

          It is the Father's will that mankind be given the true bread of heaven, which gives eternal life, and that this will satisfy them. Those who come to Jesus will never hunger nor thirst. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:6), Jesus pronounced a blessing on those who hunger and thirst for righteousness: they shall be satisfied. This goes far beyond simply being forgiven for sins, although that is both huge and necessary. But in these passages, Jesus promises that those who come to Him will be satisfied with righteousness. It is a life that no longer seeks satisfaction in the things of the world, or in things that are sinful. It is a life that is satisfied with righteousness. Contented with righteous things. Does not hunger or thirst for anything else. And this is the quality of life that will endure for all eternity.

          There may be those who believe heaven will be a happy place because their existence will not be troubled by the consequences of sin. And this is true, but it is an incomplete picture of eternity. Eternity in heaven will be joyous because there is no desire for anything that is sinful. We will be satisfied to be in Jesus' presence.

          At the end of this passage, the Jews grumble because they see Him as the son of Joseph and Mary, whom they know. In repeating Himself, Jesus reveals that it is the Father who draws people to Jesus. But the Jews, as epitomized by the Pharisaical approach to religion, are simply unable to receive Jesus' revelation of the Father. 

John 6:16-32 Work for the bread of heaven

John 6:16-25 Jesus was up on the mountain alone, so His disciples decided it was time to go home to Capernaum. They got in the boat and a storm came up. Is this a different incident from the time when Peter walked on the water? (Matthew 14:22-33) Both are recorded immediately after the feeding of the 5,000 with five loaves and two fish. But John records that when Jesus got there the boat was immediately at its destination and mentions nothing about Peter walking on the water. In any event, the disciples were terrified by the storm. There was a contrary wind. When they had rowed 25 to 30 stadia (each stadion being approximately 185 m, for a total distance of 4.6-5.6 km), Jesus came to them walking on the water. Perhaps this metaphor illustrates the ups and downs of spiritual life. Jesus had performed a great miracle, and then seemingly vanished. The disciples, left to their own decision-making, did something routine, and ran into a terrible storm. But Jesus hadn't really left them completely, He had withdrawn so that they could grow a little bit. He came to them in their distress, and said "I am; fear not." The 'I am' is one of several that occur in the gospel of John. In this case, He did not add a qualifier as He did in the other 'I am's' that John recorded. He simply identified Himself with YHWH, the great I am that I am of the Old Testament. And so, when we see great miracles followed by great tests, we should trust in His unconditional existence and not fear the trials. Perhaps that is the reason for the mild rebuke recorded in Mark 6:51-52.

John 6:22-25 People are genuinely puzzled by the circumstances on how Jesus got across the sea to Capernaum. Just as people today are genuinely puzzled when The Lord works in the world and, even though they may experience one miracle, are unable to grasp the totality of the power that is inherent in Jesus. Or maybe they just want the details of everything that He does.

John 6:26-32 Jesus does not rebuke the people for their curiosity, but for their motives. He uses this interaction to have a genuinely spiritual revelation of Himself and God to the crowd. The important thing is not to have food to eat to nourish the body, although God will provide that because He knows we need to eat. But when He tells them that the important thing is to work for the bread of heaven, they are naturally mystified. So He reminds them that He miraculously fed them the previous day, and that this is essentially the same kind of supernatural provision that God made for the Israelites in the wilderness when He gave them manna every day, by quoting Psalm 105:40. Psalm 105 recounts the miraculous provision of God for Israel over the course of their early history, with the perspective that all the promises made to Abraham were fulfilled during their sojourn in Egypt and the exodus from Egypt and travels in the wilderness. The point is that it was not Moses who gave the Israelites manna in the wilderness, but God, His Father, just as He had done the previous day. 

John 6:1-15 A different kind of king

John 6:1-15 Jesus feeds the multitude. There are several accounts of this miracle, which apparently occurred more than once. (Matt 14:15-21, Matt 15:32-88 , Mark 6:33-44, Luke 9:12-17) However, John has an extended discussion of the significance of this which differs from the other accounts. (see John 6:26-58) Mark 6:51-52 notes that the disciples did not learn anything from this incident because their hearts were hardened, but this comment is made by Mark in the context of Jesus calming the storm. Mark's implication seems to be that they were terrified because they did not understand the power of Christ nor did they trust Him, even though He had just the day before miraculously fed the five thousand.

          Is there any significance to the number of loaves and fish that Jesus started with, or the number of loaves and fishes that were left over when the feeding had been completed? Except for the second incident (recorded in Matthew 15:34), the gospels agree that Jesus started with five loaves and two fishes, and that afterwards the disciples collected twelve baskets of bread fragments.  Perhaps ending up with far more bread fragments than could have come from the initial loaves was simply intended to silence any doubters that a miraculous event had occurred.  If there is any other significance to the numbers, it is not obvious.

          The people, on seeing this miracle, said that Jesus was the coming prophet. But Jesus perceived that their intentions were not to regard Him as a prophet of God, but to forcibly make Him king. It was not yet time for Him to assume His rightful place, nor was He going to become king the wrong way. It is true that He came to establish the kingdom of God on earth. But He was not going to do it by miraculous works, any more than He was going to become king by bowing down to the devil (Luke 4:5-8). He would not become king by force because that is not the way His kingdom works. When He told Pilate that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36-37), it was because His kingdom is established on truth, not force. His followers would not fight for His kingdom, as the Maccabees had done. And He knew that any allegiance these people might have to Him as king, at that time, would be based on economic or physical well-being (John 6:28), not on a heart-commitment to Him and the kind of people that He came to lead people to become. So He withdrew to the mountain alone, implicitly so that they people could not force Him to become king.

John 5:10-47 The authority of the fully submitted Son

John 5:10-16 There is a bit of uncertainty about what had happened. It appears that the formerly crippled man saw the authority of Jesus as the one who had healed him, while the Jews saw the authority of Moses' Law, which forbid the carrying of a load on the Sabbath. (Deut 5:14). The Jews sought to kill Jesus because He healed on the Sabbath. Perhaps they were thinking of the example of the man who chopped wood on the Sabbath and was stoned. (Numbers 15:2-36) The  Jews apparently felt that Jesus could not possibly be acting on God's initiative since God would certainly never heal on the Sabbath, since He had told the Jews not to do any work. This subject will come up again in regard to kosher food, in which Jesus declared all foods to be clean, despite the law of Moses. (Mark 7:15-19; Matthew 15:17-19)

          In these signal moments, Jesus took the position that He had the authority to re-interpret or even replace the Law of Moses. Whether He was a prophet greater than Moses, or God incarnate, becomes clearer in the next section.

John 5:17-47 This section details a talk that Jesus gave to the Jews after the miracle just described, and the Jews reaction to it. In this discourse, Jesus makes the following points.

·        They had correctly understood that He had called God His Father;

·        He was an obedient Son and did only what the Father did;

·        He gives life to men, just as the Father does;

·        The Father has given all judgment to Him (but see John 12:47)

·        Those who hear His voice and believe will be resurrected from the dead on the Father's authority;

·        John the Baptist had given witness concerning Him, but the witness of the Father was greater;

·        They think that the Scripture gives life, but the Scriptures speak of Him, and He is the One who gives eternal life, to those who come to Him;

·        Glory comes from the Father only; any glory or honor received from men is superseded by the Father's honor and glory;

·        Moses spoke of Him; they miss the point of Moses' revelation if they use his writings to try to reject Him.

          The essence of this sermon is that Jesus is explicitly declaring the He is God, citing four categories of witnesses, and making the case that He therefore has the authority to set aside the law of Moses. Actually it is more a matter of transcending the Law of Moses than setting it aside. The four witnesses are:

·        John the Baptist (5:33-35)

o   A reference to John's testimony (John 1:34,36)

·        The works of power that He did (5:36)

o   Most likely a reference to the healing that triggered this exchange (John 5:1-9), although in context, there had been other miracles

·        The Father (5:37-38)

o   Most likely a reference to the Father's voice heard at Jesus' baptism (Matthew 3:17, Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22 but not mentioned in John's account)

·        Scripture (5:39-47)

o   Perhaps this is a reference to John 3:14, in which Jesus cited the serpent on a pole as a type of Himself. Luke 24:27 indicates that He taught the disciples a very comprehensive explanation of Old Testament types. Paul cites Jesus as following the Israelites in the wilderness (I Cor 10:4). More generally, the furnishings of the Tabernacle that were detailed in the Books of Moses spoke of the person of Christ. (Heb 9:1-10), and the calendar of festivals outlined by Moses (Exodus 23:14-17) was and will be fulfilled ultimately by Jesus, specifically in the feast of unleavened bread (Luke 22:15), the feast of weeks (Acts 2:1), the feast of booths (John 14:2), and the feast of ingathering (Matthew 24:31).

Mosaic Law only required two or three witnesses to establish a fact. (Deut 17:6, 19:15) so Jesus went above and beyond the requirements Moses established.

          What were the implications of Jesus calling God His Father? The Jews clearly thought this blasphemy, because He was thereby claiming Himself to be equal to God. And from pagan mythology there are many stories of the Greek gods (for example) taking on human form and then procreating with human women. And then the offspring of these unions taking on godlike powers and challenging their parent. In these stories, there was a mixture of the absurdity of what it would look like for the Greek gods to intermix with humans in their earthly nature rather than retaining godlike moral qualities, with the pride and hubris of humans attempting to and sometimes succeeding in challenging the gods for power. All of this was abhorrent to the Jews. So Jesus' claim that God was His Father, in this context, would have been blasphemous.

          But what did Jesus mean when He called God His Father? From the first aspect, the incongruity of divine procreation is resolved in the virgin birth. And in this way, the moral holiness of the Jewish God is maintained. And the second dimension of the problem of God being a Father, that of the rebellious offspring who seeks to challenge a divine parent, is utterly refuted by Jesus' explanation that He is the obedient Son who does only what the Father does. In other words, He is completely subject and submissive to His Father. This is not a passive submission of a slave, but the active, initiative-taking obedience of a Son who fully understands His Father's nature and character and joyfully strives to spread it to all mankind. And for this reason God has exalted Him. (Philippians 2:5-11)

          One other implication of Jesus calling God His Father is that it opens the door to charges of polytheism. Israel had been taught, through the pain of 500 years of history, that The Lord their God is one. He is God and there is no other. (Deut. 6:4). For Jesus to claim to be God incarnate appears to them to be a claim of polytheism. This mystery of the Trinity, how there can be one God yet three Persons, is beyond our ability to fully grasp. John 17:11 & 21 give greater insight into this mystery and will be discussed then, but the mystery is not revealed.

John 5:1-9 Jesus heals at Bethesda

John 5:1-9 The previous reference to a feast was Passover, which Jesus went to Jerusalem to observe. (John 2:13) The next major feast in the Jewish calendar would have been Pentecost, the feast of weeks. (Deut. 16:16) John did not record which feast these events occur at. The pool where these events occurred was called Bethesda, which being translated, is most likely house of mercy or kindness. It was at the sheepgate, which was referenced in Nehemiah 3:1 & 32, and 12:39. Maps of old Jerusalem show it to be located at the north end of the old city of Jerusalem, near the temple. According to the website "Gates of Jerusalem"

The Sheep Gate, also known today as Stephen's Gate (as it was by this gate that St. Stephen was martyred), or the Lions Gate (As Suleiman, one of the Muslim leaders who captured Jerusalem, had a dream that Lions were attacking Jerusalem, so he build this gate with pictures of lions on it to protect the city - little did he know that one lion was Satan, trying to bar God's people from entering His city and the other was Jesus, the Lion of Judah, claiming Jerusalem for His own), is located on the east wall, north of the Temple Mount.

"Eliashib the high priest and his fellow priests went to work and rebuilt the Sheep Gate. They dedicated it and set its doors in place, building as far as the Tower of the Hundred, which they dedicated, and as far as the Tower of Hananel. Next to Eliashib the men of Jericho built. And next to them Zaccur the son of Imri built."

Nehemiah 3:1-2 (NKJV)

The Sheep Gate was the first to be restored, and was rebuilt by the High Priest and his fellow priests (see Hebrews 4:14-15; 7:24-8:2). It was called the Sheep Gate because it led out to the sheep markets, where lambs were sold for sacrifice in the Temple (see John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7), and in to the Sheep pool where sheep were washed for sacrificing (later it became the Pool of Bethesda). This gate also led to Golgotha, the path Jesus took to the crucifixion.

It has been noted that whenever Jesus entered into the city it was though the Sheep gate. It was at this gate (Pool of Bethesda) that Jesus healed the palsied man as he entered into the city. (John 5:1,2)The only time this was different was when Christ entered into the city from the Mount of Olives at His triumphal entry. If Jesus came into the city through the sheep gate it was significant. He was saying, behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. The sheep gate led into the temple compound and the brazen altar. [ http://gatesofjerusalem.99k.org/html/7fdivn.htm

retrieved 1 Jan 2014]

The explanation of the healing powers of the waters after an angel troubles them (John 5:4) is frankly puzzling. Why would God work in this way? Perhaps it was a temporary arrangement that presaged the coming of Christ. In this case, Messiah had come. The crippled man may have legitimately been unable to get to the pool under the provisions of the angel's healing touch, if he indeed lacked any kind of support network. Having been crippled for thirty-eight years, perhaps he had pretty much lost hope. Jesus simply told him to get up and walk and he did. 

John 4:43-54 A miracle in Galilee

John 4:43-45 Jesus' return to Galilee is marked by a bit of confusion. John notes that Jesus Himself said that a prophet has honor, except in his own country. But the Galileans had seen Jesus' works at the feast (John 2:23) and received Him. This implies that perhaps they acknowledged His works and honored Him as a prophet or a miracle worker.

John 4:46-54 Jesus performs His second miracle in Galilee. He went to Cana where He had already performed one miracle. But the officer of the king was in Capernaum, which was approximately 30 km from Cana, both obviously in Galilee, so he went to find Jesus. Jesus healed the child remotely, in response to the request of faith. Jesus' response seemed almost ambivalent about whether He cared about the child, or thought that the only reason the nobleman asked was because he wanted to see a miracle. The nobleman persisted in his request and Jesus granted it. This was similar to other instances in which people had to persevere in their efforts to get Jesus to help them. (Matthew 15:21-28; Mark 5:25-34 , Luke 8:43-48).

          Is there a pattern here? It could be possible that Jesus tests whether people approach Him in petition out of faith, or simply out of a desire for either having a need met or wanting to see a miracle. In John 6:26, we see that Jesus told the crowd that they were seeking Him because they ate the (supernaturally provided) loaves and fishes and were satisfied. In the incidents cited in the previous paragraph, it seems that Jesus either allowed or even created tests to see if people wanted His presence enough to continue despite difficulty.

John 4:1-42 Meeting a woman at the well

John 4:1-3 It seems curious that the condition for Jesus to return to Galilee was that He knew that the Pharisees knew that he had made more disciples than John the Baptist. Why did it matter to Him what the Pharisees knew? But He went to Galilee by way of Samaria.

John 4:4-42 Jesus needed to pass through Samaria. Why? There were other routes. Jews normally didn't have dealings with Samaritans. But Jesus had an appointment with a woman that He had to keep.

          Sychar - Jacob's well - is not specifically called out in the Old Testament. Evidently it was well-known in the time of Christ. The blessing that Jacob gave Joseph is described in Genesis 49:22-26, but it did not specify any land. The specific allocation of land to the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim was made by Moses as recorded in Joshua 13:29-32, and then by Joshua in Joshua 16:11-17:18. So a direct gift from Jacob to Joseph must have predated any of these tribal allocations, and would have occurred in the time frame described in Genesis 30-50.

          The Samaritans were the descendants, both culturally and genetically, of the mixture of the descendants of the ten northern tribes of Israel and the various people that had been brought from all over the mideast at the time of the deportation of the Northern Kingdom. This included people who were from Babylon, Cuthah, Avva, Hamath, and Sepharvaim. (2 Kings 17:24)  In terms of religion, they practiced a synthesis of Judaism with the religions of the various places people had come from (2 Kings 17:27-34), plus some residual Canaanite religions (2 Kings 17:16-17). So at the time of Christ, the highly law-abiding Jews from Judea, who had the warnings of the Old Testament constantly before them (for example, 2 Kings 17:18 & 23) shunned all contact. This was an enormous cultural barrier that Jesus needed to tear down in order for the gospel to be carried to the whole world.

          So much has been written about the meeting between Jesus and the woman at the well that little needs to be added. By contrast to the woman caught in the act of adultery (John 8:3-11) this woman did not face the threat of being stoned for her adultery. In Samaria, she was probably considered a standing joke - that loose woman who just slept with whoever would have her in order to not be alone. But Jesus, who knew all of that (John 4:18,29), did not evaluate her that way. He saw in her a person who would respond to the gospel. He saw value in a person who had been created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:27), and had fallen to such depths.

          In His presentation of the good news of the kingdom of God, Jesus started with a revelation of the supernatural presence of God in Himself. The woman responded with a discussion of the historical roots of Jewish worship - that is, worship according to the Law of Moses. The gist of Jesus' response to this was the revelation of the spiritual dimension of worship. The Law of Moses gave instructions for worship that were a picture of eternal spiritual truths, which Jesus announced would soon (in that hour which is coming) be superseded by the reality of that spiritual worship. Because the promise of the coming Messiah, who would pay the price for the sins of mankind and then deliver individual humans from the power of sin so that they could live out God's plan and intention for and in His kingdom, was fulfilled in Him who was standing there talking to her.

          The disciples did not have a clue. Jesus tried to explain to them the transcendence of the kingdom of God. Jesus used sowing and reaping parables - the metaphor of raising and harvesting crops - on many occasions. Speaking in these terms, Jesus told them that the time had come to reap for the Kingdom of God. They probably had a very hard time accepting this teaching because Jesus was giving the gospel to Samaritans. But it did prepare them for events in the book of Acts, when the Holy Spirit impelled the disciples to take the gospel to the Gentiles. And the gospel was offered to a woman who was the basest of sinners.

John 3:22-36 Jesus the bridegroom and John the baptizer

John 3:22-36 Jesus begins baptizing people, although actually it is His disciples who do the baptism. (John 4:2) And then there is a dispute between Jesus' disciples and John's disciples. Verses 22-23 do not give a precise location in Judea where Jesus' disciples were baptizing. But Aenon near Salem is at the eastern edge of Samaria near the Jordan River north of the Sea of Galilee, some distance from Judea. And there is the parenthetical comment that John had not yet been put in prison. It is not clear how Jesus' disciples and John's disciples came into contact. In any event, John's disciples were concerned that Jesus was baptizing and apparently far more were coming to Him than to John for baptism. John's response to his disciples is a very humble statement about his recognition of his place in God's kingdom and who Jesus really was. Apparently his disciples still didn't get it. John makes several statements regarding Jesus:

•    The only gifts that matter are given by heaven

•    He had previously told them that He was not the Messiah, but was the messenger sent before Him.

•    The bridegroom metaphor - that the Messiah is the groom who ultimately has the bride; he is the friend of the groom (perhaps the best man?) who rejoices because he hears the Groom's voice.

•    His ministry is on the wane as the Messiah's ministry grows

•    Jesus came from heaven and is over all that is of the earth. The spiritual transcends the physical.

•    John testifies again that Jesus is speaking the words of God - that He is the very Word of God.

•    The Son of God is loved by God and has been given authority over all things, and is the one who gives eternal life.

•    Whoever disobeys the Son of God faces God's eternal wrath.

The bridegroom metaphor perhaps alludes to the wedding that the disciples had just attended. But the bottom line is that in humility John acknowledges that Jesus has the authority of the sovereign God and he is just a messenger. Now that God's kingdom has begun to be established on earth, the ministry of preparation is winding down. Not over yet, but that is where it is headed.

John 3:1-21 Talking to Jesus at night

Jesus was visited at night by Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee and one of the rulers of the Jews. The only other mentions of Nicodemus are in John 7:50 and John 19:39, which will be discussed in context. In this case, early in the ministry of Christ, he asks questions which indicate that although he has been schooled in the Law of Moses, He lacks spiritual understanding. Nicodemus' words are recorded in 3:2, 3:4, and 3:9. In John 3:2, Nicodemus admits that the signs Jesus performed (see John 2:23) have convinced him the God is with Jesus.

          Jesus’ response seems a mixture of serious engagement and a spiritual challenge. He tells Nicodemus that unless one is generated from above, he cannot perceive the kingdom of God. This is the famous "born again" passage that raises the bar for religion. We can study the Scriptures and translate them, compare them, logically parse the propositions, evaluate the evidence, and so on. But unless God Himself reveals the spiritual dimensions of His kingdom, we cannot perceive it. This is not a slur on Nicodemus or anyone else who studies theology. It is a statement about the nature of the kingdom of God. It is a spiritual kingdom.

          In the second exchange, John 3:4-8, Nicodemus takes that quite natural view that the only way to be generated is to be born, presumably from a woman. And that only happens once in our life. He does not understand the "from above" part of Jesus' statement. The only interpretation he can get from Jesus' words makes no sense to him. In Jesus' response, verse 8 summarizes the problem that Nicodemus has. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Jesus likens the Spirit to wind - the breath of God - which was revealed as a mighty wind on the day of Pentecost. But the breath of God does not result from pressure differentials and atmospheric lows or fronts. It comes from God and cannot be explained in the natural. God is sovereign, and he is  also beyond our comprehension. He reveals Himself to us, but we cannot understand those things He chooses not to reveal to us. Nicodemus' problem was that he was using natural means to perceive spiritual realities.

          In the third round, John 3:9-21, Nicodemus admits that he does not understand what Jesus is talking about. Jesus then reveals to Nicodemus a few profound truths.

•    The Son of Man will be lifted up, just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so that whoever believes will have eternal life. (3:14-15)

•    God is making this provision to save humans because of His love for the world. (3:16)

•    Jesus is not the Judge, but the Savior. (3:17)

•    There will be a judgment, but it will be based on whether come to the light or hate the light; those who come to the light will be recognizable because their works are in God. (3:18-21)

          The first truth is based on Numbers 21:8-9. In Numbers 21:5-6 the people grumbled immediately after God granted them a great victory, and complained about the manna He provided. So He sent fiery serpents among the people, and many died. They then repented and asked Moses to ask God to take the serpents away. Instead, God instructed Moses to make a likeness of the serpents, out of bronze, put it on a pole, and whenever someone was bitten by a serpent, they could look to the brazen snake and live. This is a very clear metaphor for sin and salvation. Grumbling and murmuring about God's plan and provision is a perfect picture of sin. The serpents represent the consequences of that sin, i.e., death. Jesus took our sins upon Himself when He was raised up on the cross. Everyone who looks to Him can receive eternal life and not receive the consequence of their sin, which would be spiritual death.

          The second truth is hard for us to grasp. God loves the world. It is His very essence and nature to love. Jesus did not say that God love religious people, or God loves people who are righteous and keep the law. God loves the world.

          In John 12:47 Jesus said that He is not the judge. In the Old Testament we have pictures of God as judge, first in Moses as a type (Exodus 18:13) and the lower tier judges he appointed (Exodus 18:26), and then in the promised land through various judges (Judges 3:10, 4:4, 10:2-3, 12:7-14, and so forth).  The prophets give warnings of God as judge (Isaiah 3:13, Ezekiel 18:30). And the New Testament also gives us pictures of the final judgment (Revelation 20:11-13). But here, Jesus states that He did not come to be that judge. Whoever throws his lot in with Jesus will not be judged by Him, and ultimately will not be judged by God, because he will be saved by Jesus.

          This statement by Jesus implies that when that final judgment comes, people will self-select, whether they choose to come to the light or flee the light because they prefer darkness. And that will be the judgment. It is an interesting question, why do people who do not want to come to Jesus now, want to go to heaven and spend eternity in His presence? I cannot explain it, except to say that perhaps because of our cloudy understanding of spiritual things, many people mistakenly believe that in heaven they will be able to continue their lives doing the things they want to do, without having to face any consequences. The kingdom of God consists of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. (Romans 14:17) Fundamentally, it is not self-denial so much as loss of self-centeredness. We will not rejoice in pleasure, nor in power, nor in self-righteousness or self-justification. We will simply rejoice in God - in His presence, in His nature and character. Those who are unable to do this will simply not be there. As much as anything, this may be mercy on the part of God - to not subject self-centered people to His infinite love. It would be hell for them.