John 17: The Lord’s Longer Prayer

If I were to inquire any Christian about the Lord’s Prayer, most of them would know immediately what I am asking about. Most of them would probably start rattling it off for me because most of them have it memorized. The “Lord’s Prayer” for Protestants is like the “Hail Mary” for Catholics. A lot of traditional Protestant Christian churches will have the Lord’s Prayer prayed in every church service. Everyone knows that prayer…yet very few people know about another prayer the Lord Jesus spoke. Perhaps Christians don’t know it because it’s too long. Maybe Christians don’t know it because Jesus didn’t teach His disciples to necessarily learn this prayer and pray this prayer. Yet this prayer can teach Christians a lot, so much that some Christians have suggested the prayer in John 17 should be the prayer actually called the “Lord’s Prayer.” In fact, some scholars have called this prayer in John 17 the “High Priestly Prayer” because Jesus talks like a High Priest in this chapter. So to learn from this chapter, I’m going to pick out special spots of interest to explain, then I’m going to use the chapter to paint the bigger picture of Jesus as the Son of God, then conclude with some good application.

Before I start taking note of things, let me remind of the setting and of the debate of the setting. The setting is not clear cut, and there are four places where this prayer could take place. The first possible place is in the Upper Room of the Last Supper, after Judas Iscariot has left. The second possible place is en route from the Upper Room to the Mount of Olives/Garden of Gethsemane, whether it be a “walking and talking” kind of deal to a pit stop outside in Jerusalem. The third possible place is the Mount of Olives, and the fourth possible place is in the Garden of Gethsemane. The first and second possibilities would make us think that it was said in public, in front of the disciples. The fourth possible place would kind of have a private feel. The third place could go either way in terms of publicly or privately. No matter where the location is, I don’t think it changes any interpretation of the prayer.

The first thing I like to note is the order that Jesus prays in. If you’re reading from the New International Version (at least, the 1984 edition), the NIV headlines John17 into 3 sections: Jesus Prays for Himself, Jesus Prays for His Disciples, Jesus Prays for All Believers. Jesus starts by praying for himself, then He prays for those people close to him (His disciples), and then He prays for other people, the ones not as close to Him (All believers). Between Christian middle school, Christian high school, Bible College, and ministry training, I’ve been told to do the opposite. First, you pray for the greater good of all humankind. This would include, but not be limited to, ending world hunger, access to clean drinking water for everyone, clothing the naked, building homes for the homeless, finding orphans loving families, ending child abuse, curing the AIDS epidemic, teaching inner-city kids how to read, bringing about world peace, keeping the earth clean, etc. (and before you know it, this portion of the prayer sounds like you’re competing to be Miss America). Second, you prayer for other people who are close to you with specific requests, or even just the general blessing on your family, relatives and friends (God bless mom, God bless dad, God bless grandma, God bless grandpa, etc.). Then you finally pray for yourself. These two methods are quite opposite. Does that mean that they are contradictory? Is Jesus wrong? Is the church/Christians wrong? I think neither of them is wrong. If you look at both methods, both agree on one thing: God, God’s Will, God’s Plan, God’s Desire, and God’s Glory all come first. All that Christians pray for, whether it is for humankind, close family & friends, or ourselves, it all should come back to God. Everything that Jesus prays for is in order for God the Father to get the glory. As Christians, when we prayer, whether it be for ourselves or others (whether those “others” are close to us or distant to us), we need to keep what God wills and desires in mind. (Also note that when Jesus prays for Himself, it is the shortest part.)

What you might notice through these 3 sections is that they all have the same basic pattern. First, Jesus states: “This is what I have done.” Then Jesus gives His request to His Father: “Now, Father, do this.” It’s almost like Jesus is saying, “I did my part, now you follow through and do your part.” Is this bossing God around or bargaining with God? It is neither. Instead, it opens up our eyes to the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. They are not fully independent of each other, yet at the same time, they are not dependant on each other. Instead, they are interdependent, which is the in-between result of dependency and independency. God the Father and God the Son work together for the greater good and to bring about glory. Ultimately, it is proof that the Father and the Son are one and the same, meaning Jesus is God.

John 17:1-5 is the section where Jesus prays for Himself. Jesus reports to the Father what He did: Jesus completed the work the Father gave Him and provided the people a way for eternal life. Jesus asks His Father to continue to give him glory up to the cross, so that God the Father may continue to the glory. The only other thing I want to point out is in verse 5. Jesus asks the Father for the same glory that Jesus had with God before the world was created. Jesus is stating that He was around before the world even came into existence. This verse shows that Jesus is just as eternal as God the Father, thus making Jesus God.

The second section is Jesus praying for His disciples, now down to eleven. Jesus starts out by reporting to the Father what He has done with His disciples, and it is quite a hefty list. First, Jesus made Hi disciples aware of God the Father (vs. 6). Second, Jesus taught His disciples the Word and made sure they obeyed it (vs.8). Third, Jesus prayed for the disciples (vs. 9). Fourth, Jesus has protected The Eleven, so they are safe (vs. 12). Fifth, Jesus commissioned them into the world (vs. 18). Sixth and last, Jesus began their process of sanctification (vs. 19). Jesus then pleads to His father on the disciples’ behalf. At least half of Christ’s requests are continuations of what Jesus began. Just as Jesus began sanctification, Jesus then asks God to continue to sanctify the disciples (vs. 17). Just as Jesus protected the disciples and kept them safe, Jesus requests that God should protect the disciples and keep them safe. But Jesus asks God for more than that. First, Jesus prays that the disciples may receive joy. Then Jesus petitions God to unify the disciples. All of these acts I see as only possible through the Holy Spirit. So although Jesus does not say it directly, I believe Jesus is requesting the Holy Spirit from the Father for His Disciples. Jesus didn’t want to break a promise that Jesus made with His disciples in chapters 14-16, so Jesus prays for it one last time to make sure it comes true.

In John 17:12, Jesus mentions he kept everyone safe and protected. In the NIV, Jesus proceeds to say, “None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.” This is one of the few times I don’t like the NIV because it doesn’t clearly show the wordplay here. For that, we need to look at a more literal translation. The NASB says, “not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.” This is much more helpful to see the wordplay. “Perdition” is pretty much the noun form of “perished.” Indeed, the Greek word for perish (apoleto) and the Greek word for perdition (apoleias) have the same root. Jesus is pretty much saying “the one who perished was the one meant to perish.” Clearly this is talking about Judas Iscariot, even though Jesus does not explicitly call him by name. And that’s the eerie part. The name Jesus gives Judas Iscariot, whether it’s “the one doomed to destruction” or “the son of perdition” (both are translations of the Greek phrase “huios tēs apoleias”), is a name given to Satan Himself, the Antichrist (with a Capital A), as well as antichrists (lowercase a). This is not a name to mess around with. It talks about someone in deep trouble with God. The person with this title is almost like sin incarnate, or something close to it. This person has been destined, even predestined to hell. So yes, Judas Iscariot is in the same camp as Satan and the Antichrist. This really adds on to your views on Judas Iscariot.

Some of your Bibles (like the NIV 1984 ed. or ESV) might have a footnote marked next to the word “sanctify” in John 17:17, in attempts to explain it. If you were to read the Bible in order, starting in Genesis, this would be the first time you’d come across it. The were is not found at all in the Old Testament, and none of the Synoptic Gospels mention it. Verses 17 and 19 in John 17 are the only two verses to have the word in the whole book of John. Yet in the rest of the New Testament, the word will be used 13 more times. Sanctification plays an important role in our salvation. What does it mean? The 1984 edition of the NIV does the best explaining of it. The Greek word for “sanctify” is hagiazo, which means “to set apart for sacred use” or “to make holy.” My 4th grade Sunday School teacher, teaching this term out of Romans, had an easy way to explain the noun form “sanctification”: “Sanctification is the process of becoming more like Jesus Christ.” Now this makes perfect sense for us as Christians. Despite being saved, that does not make us immediately perfect. We still fight the sinful nature, except now we have the Holy Spirit giving us the upper hand. In the Christian life, sanctification is the process of becoming less sinful and become more holy, like God and Jesus. But what did Jesus mean when he says he sanctifies himself? Isn’t he already holy or sacred? Yes, he is. Jesus is using “sanctify” differently when talking about himself. When Christians talk about being sanctified, they are sanctified in their lives, by becoming living sacrifices. When Jesus talked about being sanctified, he’s talking about His death. His death is a holy, sacred act, and it will make sanctification possible to all humankind.

The third section is Jesus praying all believers, both the present believers and the future believers. This would include the future believers his present believers will make. Jesus only reports two things that He has done for all his believers: Jesus has made God known to the believers (vs. 26) and Jesus has given the believers God’s glory (vs. 22). Yet Christ’s list of prayer requests for them is much longer. First, Jesus prays that all believers may have unity (vs. 20-23). Second, Jesus petitions God to give the believers His love, so that the believers may pass on that love to other people (vs. 23-26). Third, Jesus requests that God will continue to give the believers glory, just as Jesus gave them glory (vs. 24). Willmington’s Bible Handbook reminds everyone that these prayer requests were answered. They began at the First Coming of Jesus Christ, and they will end, fully completed, at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

Now the question that might have arisen from both the section praying for the disciples and the section praying for all believers is the topic of unity. What does Jesus mean when He is praying for unity? The obvious answer would be that the disciples and believers would be unified to one another. That would seem like the most literal understanding of the topic, and some scholars do understand that’s what unity is being prayed for. Yet other scholars will shy away from. These other scholars will think about the Great Schism in 1054, the Reformation in the 1500s, and all the denominations that have resulted from both events in history. It would seem like Christ’s prayer was not answer, or was not fulfilled. So other scholars will say that Jesus is praying that the disciples and believers will be unified with God, just like Jesus is unified with God. So which one is right? Well, it all depends on how you are seeing the relationship between God and Jesus in this passage. Do you see the relation between Yahweh and Jesus as the relationship between God the Father and God the Son? If so, it would be an equal relationship, or equal unity. Then Jesus is praying that the disciples and believers would be unified with one another, for Jesus would not be praying for humans to be equal to God, but for humans to be equal with fellow humans. Do you see the relationship between Yahweh and Jesus as a relationship between God and man, or a relationship between a lord/master and his servant? If so, it would be hierarchy relationship, or a hierarchy unity. Then Jesus is praying for unity between God and believers, for believers are just as much His servants as they are His friends and His children (and even children are below their parents). It’s hard to say which view of the relationship is right, for Jesus filled both roles: He is equal to God, yet He submits to God. If you were to ask me, I would go back to the overall picture John is trying to portray for us. John is trying to show the reader that Jesus is God’s Son. A son is not above his father, but the father is above the son. Thus, the relationship is not seen as equal, but as one submitting. Therefore, the better interpretation is Jesus is asking God for His disciples and His believers to be united with God. Yet this does not mean we can throw the idea of unity between Christians out the window. Paul constantly begs in his epistles for the church to reach unity. So Christians need to pray for and seek after unity with one another, just like they are unified with God. (And some scholars will say that if Jesus was praying for believers to be united with other believers, it still hasn’t gone unanswered. There are still some orthodox doctrine that all Christians believe in, no matter what denomination they are a part of. In this way, Christians are united.)

So how does John 17 add to the whole Gospel of John? What new insight does John 17 give the reader to demonstrate to the reader that Jesus is God the Son? Count the number of times you see Jesus pray “Father” in John 17. I counted 6 times. Furthermore, it is used 122 times in the Gospel of John, 53 times in John 13-17 alone! This is new for prayer. Old Testament Jews would rarely call God their Father in prayer. When Jesus prays, He is obviously talking to God. In John 17, Jesus is calling God directly His Father (as opposed to earlier in the chapter, where Jesus references God as “Father” in the 3rd person). For a Jew to do this, this would be bold, maybe even blasphemous. Jesus sees no problem in this, for He is the Son of God, He is God, and He is equal with God.

So what can Christians learn from all this? First of all, it gives Christians good ideas about what to pray for in our daily prayers. Christians should pray for God’s glory to be revealed. Christians should pray for God to shower down love on His people, so we as Christians can pass on the love. Christians need to pray for unity between God and Christians, as well as between fellow Christians. Christians need to pray for safety, both physically and spiritually. Second, prayer can happen anywhere and be just as effective. It doesn’t matter where Jesus prayed this prayer, and it shouldn’t matter where we as Christians lift up prayers to our God. Third, we need to keep God and His Will at the center of our prayers. I remember one time my friends and I got together to pray for a common friend whose non-Christian mom was facing death. While we went around in a circle, all my friends simply prayed that God would heal her, but I felt led to pray differently. So when it came my turn, I prayed, “Lord, may she not die until she has received you as Lord and Savior.” My friend’s mom would fight off death and live. So whose prayer was answered? Obvious the former prayers were answered, but I continue to pray that the latter prayer might be answered as well. My point is when praying, even for other people’s well-being, pray with God at the center. And when God is in the center, there is no such thing as a selfish prayer.

If there is anything that this prayer in John 17 and the Lord’s Prayer has in common, it would be that both pray for God’s Kingdom to come and God’s Will to be done. May we truthfully and honestly be able to pray that every time, and allow whatever it takes for it to come true.

John 16: The Trinity Revealed Again

In John 16, we will continue our talk about the Trinity. John 14-16 has been all about trinity. John 14 was the Trinity we are most familiar with. It’s the one between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, marked with a capital T. John 15 was a different trinity. This trinity was between God, Jesus and Christians, marked with a lowercase t. John 16 will get us back to talking about the Trinity with a capital T again. Yet John 16 will not be a full discussion on the Trinity. John 16 will focus on the person of the trinity we talked about the least so far: the Holy Spirit. But before we get into that, you’ll remember that John 15 I cut off at verse 17, explaining that verses 18 to 27 would fit better in chapter 16 than in chapter 15. So I’ll briefly go over the remaining verses in chapter 15 to set the scene, but then we’ll dive right into chapter 16.

John 15:18-25 is pretty much Jesus not trying to sugar-coat the dire situation the disciples would be facing. He reminds them of what he said just a few minutes earlier, as recorded in John 13:16: “No servant is greater than his master.” In its original context, it was simply Jesus calling the disciples to live a humbled life, for it was the only way to be truly great in the kingdom of God. Now Jesus says it again to state the obvious fact that if people hated the master, they will hate his servants as well. Jesus pretty much says to the disciples that every thing they see the Jews and the Romans do to Jesus, it will happen to them. Just as Jesus was persecuted, so the disciples will be persecuted. Just as Jesus was martyred, so the disciples will be martyred. Jesus tells the disciples not to take it personally because it’s really their hatred of the Father that results in the hatred towards them. But Jesus does add a flip side to all this negative talk. Anyone who listens to and receives the teachings of Jesus will also listen to the disciples’ teachings about the Father and the Son.

The last 2 verses of John 15 are the perfect transition to our talk about the Holy Spirit in John 16. In verse 26, the Holy Spirit is called the “Counselor.” Verse 26 tells us the Counselor is from the Father and is sent out by the Son. Putting together verses 26 and 27, we understand a job the Holy Spirit has. The Holy Spirit aids Christians in testifying about Jesus. Jesus specifically commands the disciples to testify because they have been with Jesus since the beginning. As we remember from John 1, some of the disciples were even there to witness the baptism of Jesus. The Holy Spirit was given to the disciples to help them remember everything about Jesus they witnessed, and the power to proclaim Jesus boldly in the face of persecution, for they are going to need it.

The first 4 verses of John 16 go back off the topic of the Holy Spirit and go back on the topic of the world hating the disciples. Once again, Jesus reminds of them of the persecution they will face. One of the persecutions they will face is being “put out of the synagogue.” This is not simply to be taken literally. This is excommunication, or shunning. Jews would treat anyone “put out of the synagogue” as if they were Gentiles. It was one of the greatest shames in the Jewish culture. The disciples would have to face this. Jesus goes on to say that not only will the disciples face execution, but even more so that the enemies of the disciples will think they are executing the disciples to please God. Once again, Jesus states the reason for giving them the bad news is to be realistic to them. He didn’t give the bad news right away because he knew the disciples weren’t ready for it yet, and He didn’t want them leaving merely because of it. But after hearing all this bad news, no wonder why the disciples will scatter during the Christ’s trials and crucifixion in John 18 and 19. No wonder the disciples will keep the doors locked after the resurrection in John 20. After hearing all this bad news, they seriously believe all the Jewish leaders will come after them next. And this bad news is starting to get to them. Jesus notices it in verse 6. If the disciples’ faces were sad in chapters 13 and 14, they are downright depressed in chapters 15 and 16.

Jesus tries to comfort the disciples by telling them that it is good for Jesus to leave them. If Jesus does not leave them, the Counselor will not come. Have you ever thought about if it was a good trade off to lose Jesus in order to gain the Holy Spirit? I think it was. The first and obvious reason that comes to mind is our access to God. If we had Jesus instead of the Holy Spirit right now, to see God, we’d probably have to get on a plane to Israel, get though the crowds in Jerusalem (you think it’s crowded in Jerusalem now, imagine how it crowded it could be with Jesus there), stand in a very long line to meet with Jesus, and then only get a few seconds or a couple of minutes, and then we’d have to move on and allow the next person his few seconds or couple of minutes. The relationship wouldn’t be that close. With the Holy Spirit, God comes to us and meets with us. Therefore, the relationship is closer and personal. Also, think about all the things the Holy Spirit equips and enables us to do. The Holy Spirit gives us spiritual gifts. The Holy Spirit aids in understand the Bible, the Word of God. The Holy Spirit guides us in prayer. The Holy Spirit encourages and strengthens us to evangelize. With Jesus still on earth, there’s no Holy Spirit, and we get none of them. It truly is for our own good that Jesus isn’t here.

Jesus goes on to tell the disciples about more of those roles the Holy Spirit has. One role the Holy Spirit has is to convict the world of sin. Notice the word is “convict” and not “condemn.” To condemn the world of sin would mean to say they world is beyond all hope of being saved from their sin. The Holy Spirit does not do that. The Holy Spirit simply convicts. To convict means “to present” or “to expose.” The Holy Spirit simply exposes that the world is in sinner. The task may seem simply, but in today’s society, we know it’s far from it. It seems like with every passing generation, more people adapt the theory that human beings are generally good creatures. They are born good, with a clean slate. Throughout their life, they make both good and bad choices on their own. By the end of their life, most people make more good choices than bad choices, making them good people. This is far from Biblical truth. The Bible tells us we were conceived in sin (Psalm 51:5), and born in sin (Genesis 8:21). We have a sinful nature, meaning our hearts are slaves to sin, always pulled to doing the wrong (Jeremiah 17:9, Romans 6:16,17). On top of that, we do sinful things. We have 3 strikes against ourselves: we are conceived/born in sin, we have a sinful nature, and we do sinful things. 3 strikes and we’re out. We are declared guilty from the start. And yet the world lies to us and tells us we’re good. As any AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) member will tell you, “admitting your problem is the first step.” The first step in the cure of sin is admitting you have a problem: you are a sinner. The Holy Spirit has a lot of work to do get a person to even recognize they are sinful.

On that same note, John 16:13 gives us another role of the Holy Spirit. This role is to guide human beings into all truth. That is why Jesus uses the title “The Spirit of Truth” for the Holy Spirit this time. “All truth” literally does mean “all truth.” Everything that is true the Holy Spirit will speak to the disciples. The Holy Spirit will speak and remind the disciples of God’s commandments and Christ’s teachings. But probably the most important truth the Holy Spirit gives goes back to the previous job. The most important truth is that the world has fallen into sin. But going back to all truth part, verses 13-15 once again show the active role of Trinity. When the Holy Spirit comes, he’s not going to teach on His own accord or His own will. He will not teach anything contradictory to what God has commanded or what Jesus has taught. He will only speak what He hears. What does the Holy Spirit hear? What Jesus spoke. And what did Jesus speak? Only what His Father taught Him to speak. It all goes around in this Trinity cycle.

On top of being saddened because Jesus is leaving, the disciples are also confused. Sometimes Jesus has been repeating himself in tongue twisters. Just look below, and I’ll show you what I mean. I’ll even bold it to draw it out.

John 16:16–19-
16 “In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.” 17 Some of his disciples said to one another, “What does he mean by saying, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me,’ and ‘Because I am going to the Father’?” 18 They kept asking, “What does he mean by ‘a little while’? We don’t understand what he is saying.” 19 Jesus saw that they wanted to ask him about this, so he said to them, “Are you asking one another what I meant when I said, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me’?

I think in verses 19 to 22, Jesus is presenting the idea that the disciples might be confused because they are sad. Once again, Jesus does sugar-coat the reality. The truth is the disciples will get sadder, while the world becomes happier. This is referring to the crucifixion of Jesus, where the world will rejoice while the disciples mourn at Christ’s death. But Jesus turns it around by comparing it to a woman in labor. A pregnant woman giving birth goes through much pain to give birth. But after the baby pops out and she is holding the baby, she is no longer complaining about the pain, but rather she is glad that she brought the life into the world. After the pain of the crucifixion, the disciples will witness the resurrection, and their grief will turn into joy. In a way, I see this as a prophecy of Jesus, for that is exactly what will happen. The witnesses of the crucifixion will be brought to tears, but they will gladly rejoice when they see the resurrected Jesus Christ standing before them.

John 16:23-28 I see as happening post-resurrection and post-ascension, so I see it as a third role of the Holy Spirit. Jesus says the disciples will have the power to request anything in the name of Jesus, and they will get it. Now let’s make sure we get our head in the right place here. This doesn’t mean Christians can ask for worldly possessions, likes houses, cars or money and it will land right in front of them. This is where the “in the name of Jesus” comes into play. “In the name of Jesus” means that anything that is of God’s Will or Desire, that will further the kingdom and reign of God. Well, how will the disciples know God’s Will? That’s where the Holy Spirit comes in. The Holy Spirit will reveal the will of God to the disciples because the Holy Spirit is God. Then, because of the Holy Spirit, the disciples will know what to pray for, and they will receive it from God.

Somewhere between verse 19 and verse 28, the disciples finally get what Jesus is saying. They can understand his figurative language and other figures of speech. They understand so well, they don’t even have to ask questions. Now they know that Jesus knows all truth, and this is enough proof for them that Jesus has come from God. When the disciples finally recognize what Jesus is saying, Jesus recognizes that a true faith has entered the disciples. But he also notes that the disciples don’t have that full, true faith because in a little while, they will all scatter and desert Jesus. But Jesus isn’t going to take it that hard. Jesus knows the Father is with him, so even if no human is behind Him, He knows the Father is with him. In the closing verse of this chapter, Jesus once again reminds the disciples of all the troubles they will face being disciples of Jesus. But He also tells them to not get stuck on the idea. Jesus will overcome all those troubles, and so will the disciples.

In closing with this chapter, there wasn’t too much revealing of Jesus as the Son of God. The biggest sign was that the disciples recognized Jesus as one from God from His teachings, and that is fairly close to recognizing Jesus is God. It also is implicitly stated by seeing Jesus as a person of the Triune God. But I tend to think this chapter was a little bit more about the Holy Spirit. If anything, this chapter shows us the Holy Spirit is God, too. So it doesn’t matter if you say that “Jesus lives in me” or “The Holy Spirit lives in me” for they are both God living in you.

John 15: A trinity of a different sort

Trinity. If you can figure out the two words that were brought together to make the bigger word, you can figure out its definition. Upon careful observation, you can notice the word “trinity” is a combination of tri-, a prefix meaning three, and unity, which means to bring together as one. In the most broad and basic sense, a trinity is when three of something are united as one. When Christians think of trinity, they usually think of Trinity with a capital T, which is the unity of the three-person Godhead as one God. Although Trinity can be seen throughout the Bible, the word “Trinity” itself is never used at all in the Bible. This has caused some controversy inside and outside the Christian community, even causing a few “denominations” (Evangelical Christians would claim these groups are more cult than denomination) to deny the doctrine of Trinity all together. This post is not a post defending Trinity, although I strongly believe in the Trinity. This post is going to look at a trinity, with a lowercase t. Lowercase t trinity means any 3 things closely related, in common unity with one another. While Christians like talking about Trinity, with a capital T, between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I see a trinity in John 15:1-17 of a different sort. This trinity has the God the Father and God the Son, but instead of God the Holy Spirit, it has Christians. John 15:1-17 shows the relationship between Yahweh, Jesus, and the people, and Jesus will use his last “I AM” statement of the Gospel of John to do so.

Before we dive into the material, we have to take a small step back, into the last verse of John 14. In John 14:31, Jesus says to his disciples, “Come now; let us leave.” But then, in John 18:1, John records that when Jesus finishes his discourse and finishes praying, Jesus leaves with his disciples and crosses the Kidron Valley to the Mount of Olives. These verses seem to be contradicting themselves, which has led to debate. Some people say Jesus said John 15-17 in the Upper Room, others say that Jesus speaks John 15-17 on the Mount of Olives, and yet others have tried to compromise, claiming that Jesus gave the John 15-17 discourse while walking from the Upper Room to the Mount of Olives. The proponents of the Mount of Olives setting claims that the Mount of Olives setting would be the perfect setting, for Jesus could use his surroundings as a visual aid to his preaching. Furthermore, the Mount of Olives is where the Garden of Gethsemane was at, which would be the perfect setting for Christ’s prayer in John 17. Yet the wording of John 18:1 sounds too clear and too plain to say that Jesus just got to the Mount of Olives at John 18, and Jesus wasn’t there before. So this reverts back to that Jesus said this en route to the Mount of Olives. He might have even stopped part way outside to teach one last teaching at pray. These people would say that John 14:31 is departing the Upper Room, while John 18:1 is departing the city. The opponents of this view claim it makes no sense for Jesus to be teaching, and especially for Jesus to be praying, while walking. Once again, they will point to the clearness of John 18:1. That would leave the view that John 15-17 took place in the Upper Room. This would fit, as it goes along with the teaching in the Upper Room, and it make sense for Jesus to pray during the Passover Feast. The only hole that these people leave uncovered is that they will totally ignore the John 14:31. Well, that’s all the possibilities, right? Well, there are a few people who have suggested that the chapters should be rearranged in John. Some would put chapter 14 between chapters 17 and 18, while others say the order should be John 13, 15, 14, 16, John 18:1, 17, and then 18:2-40. And of course, you also have to have a couple people who try to give an allegorical meaning to John 14:31. They would say something like, “What Christ meant was that His disciples and His teachings would not stay in Jerusalem after He died, but they would spread around the world.” All I have to say about this is a helpful reminder that John’s Gospel is a supplementary Gospel, and thus a topical Gospel. After Jesus entered Jerusalem on that Palm Sunday, John stopped caring so much about the setting, like the place and the time. So all views and possible, and yet at the same time, all views could be wrong. I would focus less on the setting and more on what is being preached. As Uncle from Jackie Chan Adventures would say, “Setting not important!”

Alright, let’s talk about the trinity (lowercase t) between God, Jesus and Christians. Jesus will explain this using the analogy of a vine. Let’s start out by pair the persons to the pieces of the analogy. God the Father is the gardener. God the Son, Jesus Christ, is the vine, and the Christians are the branches of the vine. It won’t be until later on the chapter that the connection between Christians and the branches are made, but the connections for God and Jesus are right there in the first verse of chapter 15. It’s also our last “I AM” statement in the book of John.

John 15:1-
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.”

As seen with some of the other “I AM” statements, the analogy is nothing new for the original Jewish audience. The Old Testament Jews knew themselves to be like a vine. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, even a Psalmist in Psalms called Israel a vine. But notice Jesus calls himself “the true vine.” I think there’s significance in that. If you ever get the chance, read through Isaiah. It’s a long one, so you’ll need a couple long sittings to do it. If you know a little bit about the book of Isaiah, you’ll know that there’s a debate between Jews and Christians about it. Jews will say that the Suffering Servant in Isaiah is Israel, while the Christians will say that the Suffering Servant in Isaiah is the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Well, I’m here to tell them both that they are both right. Isaiah starts out by saying that Israel is the Suffering Servant, but while they were good at the suffering part, they failed at the servant part because they sinned. So God would send the Messiah, who Christians know to be Jesus Christ, to succeed at the Servant part, just as much as the suffering (although I’m sure the suffering part wasn’t welcomed). Why do I mention this? I see the same explanation of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah to work for the vine in John 15. Israel was the vine, but it failed at being a vine, so God went to the true vine, Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus fulfilled the Suffering Servant for Israel, so Jesus also fulfills the Vine for Israel.

In John 15:2, the reader can see Jesus starts talking about fruit. By the end of the chapter, Jesus will say “fruit” eight times. Just as a vine and its branches are expected to produce fruit, so Jesus and His disciples are expected to produce fruit. Anyone can see Jesus produced fruit, but do His followers, the Christians, produce fruit? Well, what exactly is that fruit? If you are anything like me, you thought of Galatians 5:22,23, which is the Fruit of the Spirit. I think this would work because this passage is squished between two passages about the Holy Spirit. God the Father looks for Christians to produce those Fruit of the Spirit. If they do not, they are cut off from God. After all, they are not producing the proof that they are part of the vine. Therefore, they have no part in the vine, and are cut off. The branches that do produce fruit are then pruned. Pruning branches are important to any plant, whether it be a tree, bush or vine. In pruning, branches are cut back or completely cut off to allow the old branches, or new branches, to grow bigger, stronger and produce more fruit. Isn’t it interesting that some cutting back or cutting off is needed for true growth to happen? The Greeks didn’t really having a term for pruning, they just called it “cleaning,” as in “cleaning the vine.” This makes a perfect wordplay for verse. But the point I’m trying to get across is sometimes a little pruning, or cleaning, is necessary for our faith. Sometimes it might hurt, and sometimes it might seem damaging, but in the end, God will see us through and He’ll make us stronger through it.

In John 15:4, it may seem like Jesus is stating the obvious, but it has an important lesson. Plant branches apart from the plant, whether it be a tree, bush or vine, cannot produce fruit. The same is true for the Christian. The Christian cannot produce the Fruit of the Spirit that God the Father desires apart from Christ. So what should the Christian do? The Greek word John uses here is meno, which can be translated stay, remain, abide, or dwell. The Greek word appears 40 times in the Gospel, and 11 times in this chapter alone. What does it mean to “remain” in the terms of “remain in Christ?” There’s been a little debate. First, it can mean to believe in Jesus, as in accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. Second, it can mean to continue believing in Jesus, like an on-going process. Third, it can mean practicing what you believe. As postmodern as it sounds, I like all these answers to be right, for when you put all these answers together, it really points back to the purpose of Gospel of John. First, John writes his Gospel to get the non-believers to believe in Jesus as Christ and God. Second, John writes his book to the get the believers to continue their faith in Jesus as Christ and God. Third, John writes John to get the believers to practice their beliefs by obeying God’s commands and Christ’s teachings. I hope by now you too have come to faith, have continued believing what you were taught, and now are getting disciplined to commandments of Jesus.

Going into verse 5, the Father takes a back seat and a passive role in the analogy. Now, the focus will be on the relationship between Jesus and the Christians. John 15:5 restates the “I AM” statement, but now puts it in light to Christians, not the Father.

John 15:5-
“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

Jesus is the vine, and Christians are the branches. Now there are two types of branches, or rather, two types of Christians. There are those who do remain in Jesus. They believe that Jesus is God, Man, Savior and Lord, they follow the commandments of God and the teachings of Jesus, and they persevere through all times to stay true in their on-going process of sanctification. These branches produce much fruit, as verse 5 tells us. The other branches, the ones that do not remain in the vine, are dead branches that wither away. What kind of people are they? These branches are not as easy to define as the good branches, for it has brought about debate. There are 3 main camps for this debate. First camp would say these are the Christians who have fell away from their faith and lost their salvation. The second camp says these are the Christians that lose their reward, because producing fruit is necessary for the reward, but they do not lose their salvation. The third camp states that these branches are “false branches,” or people who claim they are Christian, but really aren’t. This would include people who say the believe in Christian doctrine, but they do not follow through with the Christian practices. All camps have good proof, and thus all camps are good possibilities. Instead of arguing which one is right, let’s see if we can find commonalities that carry both. In all cases, like a branch apart from the vine is dead, so this Christian is spiritually dead. Just like a dead branch gets thrown into the fire, so the spiritually-dead Christian will face judgment (throughout the Bible, fire is used as a symbol of judgment). The ultimate plan is to produce fruit, which is the Father’s desire and gives the Father glory. Producing fruit is also the sign, or the proof, that we, as Christians, belong to Jesus, the Vine.

So what’s the key to bearing much fruit? What’s the key to remaining in Jesus? The answer is love. Jesus will spend verses 9 to 15 illustrating this love. To remain in Jesus is to remain in His love. What does John 15:9-17 tell us about the love of Jesus? First, the love of Jesus is the exact same love as God has. The Greek word is agape, which is an unconditional love that can only come from God. Jesus has passed on this love from His Father to His followers, and He expects us to pass on the same love. Second, this love seems to be strongly related to the commandments of God and of Jesus. The only way to remain in the love is to obey these commandments. From verses like these, I really believe the Law found in the Old Testament is a Law of Love. The purpose of the 10 commandments, and every law under it, is to show humankind how to love. All 613 Jewish laws can be summed up into The 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments can be summed up into the 2 Greatest Commandments: “Love the Lord your God…” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” And what are the two words both greatest commandments have in common? Love! To truly love God and others, we must obey the commandments. If we don’t obey the commandments, we cannot love. Once again, in verse 13, Jesus commands the disciples to love each other as Jesus loved them. Jesus becomes the example of love. Jesus loved everyone and kept the commandments, and Christians need to follow that lead. What’s the ultimate sign of love? Verse 13 tells the reader that the greatest love is when someone lays down his life for his friend. This verse has an eerie foreshadowing, as Jesus will demonstrate His love for mankind by laying down his life for his friends (see Romans 5:8). Thus, as seen in verse 14, Jesus reveals to his disciples that they are not only his followers, but his friends. They are now more than just servants, who are unaware of what the master is up to. They are now friends, intimate with their master. The grand conclusion is a line Jesus has been repeating over and over in His last discourses: love one another. If there anything Jesus wants them to get out of all His teachings, Jesus wants them to love. It will be love that will keep them genuine, and keep them from turning legalistic like the Jewish leaders of the day.

I’m going to stop here. I’m not going to move onto the rest of the chapter. Remember that the chapter numbers and verse numbers are not inspired by God, and thus they are not inerrant. While John’s numbering has been good for the most part, here I disagree. I think the chapter should have ended after verse 17, and verse 18 should have begun the new chapter. Verses 18 to 27 fit better with John 16 than John 15. I also like John 15 ending at 17 because that verse is the grand conclusion, as well as the thesis, for John 17. The greatest commandment Jesus gave His disciples is love. Love is what unites the trinity between God the Father, God the Son, and the Christians.

John 14: The Trinity Revealed Fully

So far, if you’d ask me what the number 1 proof that Jesus was God that can be seen throughout the Gospel of John as a whole, I would have to say it’s the relationship seen between God the Father, Yahweh, and God the Son, Jesus. Throughout the whole book, Jesus has been calling God His Father and Jesus has been explaining how The Father and The Son interact and work with each other. We know God is one (Deut. 6:4), but from John 1-13 alone, the reader sees God the Father and God the Son. From John 1-13 alone (as if the book of John 1-13 alone was our New Testament), Christians would believe in a duality. Yet Christians know from elsewhere in the Bible that there is a trinity. John knows that, too, so in John 14 will introduce the third person of the trinity: God the Holy Spirit. But before we get into the Holy Spirit, let’s take a quick glance at John 14:1-4 and John 14:6.

But before we start anything in John 14, let’s remind ourselves of the setting of the story. It is a Thursday night. Jews would call this night Passover, but Christians would call this night Maundy Thursday. This is the Last Supper, the Lord’s Supper. Where we last left our heroes, Jesus had dismissed Judas Iscariot to go do whatever he was planning, which we know (and the disciples didn’t know) is to betray Jesus. Remember how I mentioned that maybe Jesus dismissed Judas Iscariot so early because Jesus didn’t want Judas Iscariot around to see, hear or be a part of what was happening next? You’ll see why I say that in this chapter because Jesus will really get in-depth, get specific, get private, get personal and also say it the clearest fashion. Perhaps Jesus withheld it from Judas Iscariot because Judas would have no part in it, or maybe Jesus didn’t want Judas blabbing this to the Pharisees and chief priests. After Judas Iscariot left in John 13, Jesus wraps up the chapter by telling the disciples that He is going somewhere where they can’t go, followed by Jesus prophesying that they all will abandon him, even have one disown him.

So now imagine how tense the atmosphere is by the time the reader gets to John 14. Jesus is in a down mood because He knows He is hours away from the most painful time in His human life. The disciples are in a downer mood, too, because, first of all, they see their Lord depressed and second, they’ve just been told they cannot follow Jesus to wherever He’s going. Remember that most of the disciples totally left their lives behind to follow Jesus. They couldn’t just begin where they left off. Those who tried would have to at least start from the bottom and work their way back up. Maybe when some of the disciples heard Jesus say that could no longer follow him, they felt like their entire life had gone to waste. I think Jesus noticed how down and depressed the disciples were after all this bad news, for it puts John 14:1-4 in context.

Since Jesus sees the mood in the room as down and depressed, Jesus tries to cheer the disciples up. First, he tells them that their hearts should not be troubled. The NIV translates the Greek verb tarassesthō as “troubled,” but it also has been translated as “stirred,” “agitated,” or even “indignant” (Interesting note: this is the same verb is used to describe Jesus in John 11 every time it said Jesus was “deeply moved”). It is possible some of these disciples were irked to hear Jesus was abandoning them after they provided years of dedicated allegiance to him. Jesus tells the disciples this feeling is rather unnecessary. Second, Jesus command the disciples to trust in him. He does that by renewing their faith in God and trusting in God, then, through reminding them that Jesus is God, the disciples should trust Jesus, just like they trust God. Jesus is telling the disciples, “Trust me.” Third, Jesus starts talking about something he’s never talked about before: heaven. Jesus describes His Father’s Son like a mansion, a mansion with many rooms. His disciples all have a room prepared for them, and from this, Christians believe that all Christian believers have a room for them. Jesus then describes himself preparing a place for His disciples there. Once the place is prepared, Jesus will come back for his disciples and take them there. It seems like Jesus is telling the disciples about the surprise he has for them in heaven. He’s reminding them of their reward for being faithful to His ministry. This is perfect timing for the setting. The disciples are not to be troubled because Jesus is leaving for their good, so there’s nothing to worry about and no waste at all. Jesus closes the paragraph by saying “You all know the way.” Thomas says to Jesus, “Um, no we don’t,” and then proceeds to ask, “What is the way?” Jesus answers with an “I AM” statement. Let’s take a look at it.

John 14:6-
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

The 6th “I AM” statement provides 3 ways to describe Jesus: way, truth, life. I’ve seen some people scratch out the last two and focus on “I am the way” only. I know they are doing this for evangelistic reasons, but I think they are missing out on a big part. The reason that Jesus is the way is because He is the truth and the life. So let’s look at all 3, for all 3 are important. First of all, Jesus is the way. The only way to get to God the Father and the only way to get to heaven is through Jesus. Jesus is the only way to God because God is God and Jesus came from God, as we read in chapters 1 and 3. Also, Jesus is the only one who has seen the Father, as stated in John 1. So to even see God the Father, we must see Jesus. Acts 4:12 and 1 Timothy 2:5 are other places in the Bible that would back up the only way to God is Jesus. The way to God is not only Jesus, but also the way of Jesus. The way to God through Jesus is following Jesus, and this means following Jesus in all aspects. Just as Jesus lived humbly, Christians must also live humbly. Just as Jesus suffered for the faith, so Christians must suffer for the faith. Just as Jesus served people, so the Christian life is to be one of service.

Second, Jesus is the truth. He is God, who founded the world at the beginning. He has decided what is wrong and what is right, what is true and what is false. All truth belongs to God, and thus all truth belongs to Jesus. God the Father spoke the truths to Jesus for the people, and Jesus spoke those truths to the people. People from all over came to Jesus to hear Him speak because they knew Jesus had the truth. Ultimately, Jesus had the true way to life. People from all nations, all races, all cultures and all societies explored different religions, cults and philosophies to find a way to eternal life. All those other ways were lies or falsehoods. Jesus had the truth, the true way to eternal life.

Third, Jesus is the life. John has been building up on this throughout the whole book. It started when John proclaimed in John 1 that Jesus, the True Light, gives life. It escalated throughout the teachings of Jesus, from his “I AM” statements to Christ’s teachings about raising up on the last day. It climaxed in John 11, where Jesus resurrects Lazarus from the dead with his last miracle. The effects were numerous people coming to faith, and those people then shared the gospel with other people. We know Jesus is the life because, as stated in John 1, Jesus was the God who created the world in Genesis 1. Jesus the giver of life, and Jesus is the source of eternal life. The [eternal] life is the end of the way, and both are found in Jesus.

To reunite all 3 parts of the “I AM” statement found in John 14:6, let’s remember the purpose of these “I AM” statements is to prove the purpose of the whole book of John: that Jesus is God the Son. How does the “I AM” statement in John 14:6 show Jesus is God the Son? The only way to God the Father is through God the Son. Jesus has the same truth as God the Father does, the truths of the world. The provider of eternal life must be the giver of life. If Jesus provides eternal life, He must the source of life. The only one who gives life is the creator God from Genesis 1. In John 14:6, Jesus reveals threefold to be God Himself.

Let’s jump ahead to John 14:15, the meat of the chapter. From John 14:15 to the end, Jesus will talk about the Holy Spirit. In John 14:15, I see Jesus defining what salvation is and what it means (or what you have to do) to be saved. As seen in verse 15, being a born-again, saved Christian isn’t just confessing sins or just adopting the beliefs from orthodox Christianity as your own. Being a born-again, saved Christian means loving Jesus and following Jesus. How should people love Jesus? By following the way of Jesus and obey His teachings. How am I sure that Jesus is defining what it means to be saved? Look at verse 16. Christians know that the “proof of purchase” (if you will) of being saved is that you receive the Holy Spirit. So link verse 15 to verse 16. If we love Jesus, follow Jesus and obey Jesus, then we are saved, and then we receive the Holy Spirit.

Jesus gives 2 names to the Holy Spirit in John 14: Counselor and Spirit of [the] truth. Both names help describe the Holy Spirit. The Greek for Counselor, paraklete, means “one who comes along to help.” In the Greco-Roman world, this term usually was used for legal help and legal advice, like a lawyer. Thus, some Bible translations have chosen to translate paraklete as “advocate.” The Holy Spirit is the helper to the Christians, who works through Christians. The Holy Spirit is also called the “Spirit of [the] truth.” The Holy Spirit reveals the truth to Christians. The Holy Spirit helps the Christian understand Christian. The Holy Spirit helps the Christian discern between true and false teachers, prophets and apostles. The Spirit of Truth aligns our lives with the Word of God. How is this possible? The name is self-exclamatory. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of [the] Truth. The Holy Spirit has the Truth, just like Jesus does. In fact, on that note, John 14:16,17, in the names alone, show that Jesus is God, that the Holy Spirit is God, and that the Holy Spirit and Jesus are persons in the trinity. First, let’s look at the obvious one. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of [the] Truth. Jesus is the Truth. This Truth is only found in God. Therefore, Jesus and the Holy Spirit must be one and the same. Both of them are God. Now onto the less obvious one. In John 14:16, the Holy Spirit is called the Counselor. In Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah calls the Messiah the “Wonderful Counselor.” This Old Testament Scripture clearly is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus is the Wonderful Counselor. The Holy Spirit is the Counselor and Jesus is the Wonderful Counselor. Therefore, Jesus and the Holy Spirit must be one and the same: God. (Note: The reason I keep putting the word [the] in brackets is because a literal translation of the phrase has the word [the] in it. Some scholars have suggested it’s pointing back to absolute truth, or divine truth).

But that’s not all Jesus tells us about the Holy Spirit. The reader can find out more about Jesus beyond the names for the Holy Spirit. Jesus says the world does not accept Him, because the world cannot sense Him, nor know Him. Christians know the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit lives within Christians. The Bible Knowledge Commentary helped to give me a good analogy for this. A person cannot know radio waves are going through their house without a radio, for their can neither see, smell, taste or feel radio waves. They can’t even hear the radio waves without a radio. No one can see television waves going through the sky, yet if someone has a television, they can see what those waves were carrying. No one can see or hear the voicemail or text messages from a cell phone being carried across the airwaves unless they have a phone, and the right phone! In the same way, the world cannot see, hear, smell or feel the Holy Spirit. The only ones who can are the Christians because they have the spiritual life prepared to recognize Him. Also, note that Jesus says the Holy Spirit will be with the Christian forever. It’s not like the Old Testament, where the Holy Spirit would only come to special believers for special missions. Now the Holy Spirit was poured out for all Christians for all time, even unto the end of the age.

One last notice Jesus makes on the Holy Spirit can be found in John 14:26. In the original and immediate context, I believe the true meaning of this passage to mean that the Holy Spirit will guide the disciples to writing the New Testament Scriptures. But I also got to believe there’s some kind of application that come out of it for the modern-day Christian. The Holy Spirit is the teacher and the reminder-er. The Holy Spirit teaches us what the Bible is saying. This does not mean that the Holy Spirit alone will give us perfect interpretations, but it helps reveal to us how to apply the Scriptures in specific situations. The Holy Spirit also helps remind the Christian of what to do and what not to do. The Holy Spirit helps the Christian remember, and even memorize the Scriptures, that Christians may take the Scriptures to heart.

I know this might seem like a cliffhanger for the subject of the Holy Spirit. It might even seem like it’s incomplete. But Jesus does go back to talking about the Holy Spirit in John 16, and I will pick up the subject again there. When we finish the subject in John 16, I will put it all together and make a grand conclusion. But before we get there, there’s a chapter in between: John 15. John 15 is interesting. It has the last “I AM” statement, and through it, it teaches of a different type of trinity of sorts.. Do I have you giving me the “raised eyebrow” look or the “head scratching” look? Good. You’ll have to wait to see it.

John 13: A Betrayer and A Denier

Last chapter focused around the events of Palm Sunday, as well as other surrounding events. John does not see any important events happening in the Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday following, so he skips right to Thursday evening, in which traditional Christians call Maundy Thursday or Holy Thursday. The Jews know this meal to be Passover, but Christians know it to be the Lord’s Supper or the Last Supper. Interesting enough, John does not mention the Last Supper at all. He must have assumed his readers read about it in the Synoptic Gospels, and with nothing more to add, he leaves it out. Instead, John decides to add a lot of the last teachings of Jesus, which the Synoptic Gospels do not give. John 13-17 are all the last teachings of Jesus, given at the Last Supper. Right now we’ll just focus on John 13, and I want to focus in on Jesus predicting both his betrayer and denier.

Since Jesus talks about the betrayer before the denier, let’s start off with the betrayer, since that’s who Jesus started off with. There’s no need to be hidden with the identity of the betrayer in John. It’s clearly Judas Iscariot. John has been foreshadowing a lot. In John 6:70,71, Jesus calls one of the disciples the devil, which John reveals to be Judas Iscariot. In John 12:4-6, Judas calls out Mary for wasting money. John interprets this to be Judas Iscariot exposing his evil heart. In John 13:2, John tells the reader the devil had prompted Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus. This could simply be interpreted as Judas Iscariot making the deal with the Jewish leaders to betray Jesus. Even in John 13:10, while John does not specifically mark Judas as the betrayer, John remembers Jesus saying not everyone was clean, and John interprets it to mean that the betrayer, Judas Iscariot, was not the clean one. So clearly both Jesus and John have been foreshadowing what Judas Iscariot will do in the whole book, but now it will come fully out in a prediction in John 13:18-30. Interesting enough, John, along with Matthew, are the only 2 who specifically and explicitly mention Judas Iscariot as the betrayer by name. Mark and Luke do not mention Judas Iscariot by name in the prediction. Only when he actually betrays Jesus is his name used. Between Matthew and John, Matthew is more specific and more explicit, as Matthew records Judas Iscariot asking if he’s the betrayer, to which Jesus affirms.

It might be obvious to us, but it wasn’t obvious to the disciples. The only reason John makes it so obvious is because he is writing this after the events went down (also, since he’s assumed his readers has read the Synoptic Gospels and know who the betrayer is, instead of keeping a surprise, he shows how it could have been foreshadowed). But John, as well as the rest of the disciples, has no clue. They are lacking a clue so much, that in the synoptic Gospels, each disciple asks Jesus if he himself is the betrayer. Yes, each disciple accused himself before anyone else. Despite all the foreshadowing that made it obvious to the reader, in the mind of the disciples, Judas Iscariot is probably the least likely candidate. He was the treasurer of the group, and a treasurer is a highly valued position in any group. The job, in theory, shows that the group trusts you with their money and their finances. If the disciples were mostly unaware of the embezzlement Judas Iscariot was guilty of, they trusted him with their money and finances, so they saw Judas Iscariot as a trustworthy man. Later on, the text will show the reader that Judas Iscariot was within arm’s reach of Jesus. When it came to seating guests at the table during Bible times, the closer the person was to the host, the more honored the guest was. If Judas was within arm reach of Jesus, he was one of the higher up guests. The disciples must have thought Judas Iscariot was an honorable man. Already we have described (at least, by outward appearances) Judas Iscariot as trustworthy and honorable, which are not the qualities of a betrayer. Although a weak argument, we can even use an argument from the silence to show Judas wasn’t a suspect. Quickly skim through all your Synoptic Gospels. Besides when the Twelve Disciples are called, you’ll notice Judas isn’t mentioned until the Last Supper or the Betrayal. From the Gospels, he doesn’t seem to have an active role in the ministry of Jesus. Besides the words of Jesus, which are only mentioned in John, nothing seems to stick out with him. If you were one of Twelve Disciples in the 1st century, you wouldn’t have suspected Judas Iscariot either. The disciples are so unaware, they have to ask Jesus who it is.

To reveal the identity of the betrayer, Jesus dips a piece of bread in a dish and gives it to the betrayer. This was to fulfill the Scriptures, but also in irony of the custom of the day. In Biblical times, “sharing bread” or “breaking bread” (better translation) was an act done between two close people, like family or best friends. When it was done among 2 strangers, it was to acceptance and welcoming. It’s so ironic because here it represents the opposite. Jesus is not saying Judas Iscariot is a friend or a brother to him. Jesus is not welcoming Judas Iscariot, nor is He showing acceptance of Him. Instead, Jesus breaks breads with him to reveal a betrayer, a enemy or an antagonist. The action of breaking bread also fits very well with the context of the fulfilled Scriptures. Most Bibles will say that the Scripture Jesus is referring is Psalm 41:9. Most scholars will tell you that Psalm 41:9 is about Ahithophel, David’s trustworthy and honorable table companion, who betrayed David and then hanged himself for doing so. The parallels fit very well between Ahithophel and Judas Iscariot. Both betrayed a close companion, and both committed suicide over the guilt of the betrayal.

At the sign, John 13:27 tells the reader that Satan entered Judas Iscariot. Now most scholars will agree (although a few have said differently) that the bread that Jesus gave Judas Iscariot is not what caused Satan to enter Judas Iscariot. The issue is how to define “Satan entered.” The question is how much control Judas Iscariot had. Was Judas Isacariot possessed by Satan, or was he acting upon his own free will, but being tempted by Satan? Scholars have been split 50/50 on the two. A few liberal scholars have taken this metaphorically, simply stating it means that from this point on Judas Iscariot was no longer a disciple of Jesus. While in some contexts it fits, it really denies the evil present in this situation. We can’t go to the Greek, for the best literal translation of the Greek is “Satan entered.” Let’s try the other Gospels. Luke 22:3 does also say that Satan entered Judas Iscariot, but the Matthew and Mark passages paralleling the Luke passage do not mention Satan. In fact, Luke and John seem to be the only ones suggesting that Satan had any kind of hand on this. Since Matthew and Mark do not mention the devil with Judas Iscariot, it would almost seem like the Devil has no role at all. On top of that, in Matthew chapter 26, Jesus calls Judas Iscariot “friend.” It would be odd to call a Satan-possessed person “friend.” Possibly the best answer we can get it combining all the answers in harmony. Yes, Satan did play a role. Yes, Satan did enter him. Yet Satan did not have to put up a fight with Judas Iscariot’s free will. Judas Iscariot did not resist the temptations to betray Jesus. In fact, he entertained them. I think James 1:14 accurately describes what happened to Judas Iscariot. Judas entertained his own evil desires, he was enticed by his evil desires, and his evil desires dragged him into sin. Whether Judas Iscariot intended it or not, I think Judas virtually allowed Satan (“handed over the keys of his body” to Satan, if you will) by giving into sin. Judas Iscariot allowed Satan to use him as a tool, and Satan took full control of the opportunity. Even if Judas wanted to change his mind, it was too late, he was stooped into sin.

But our conversation doesn’t end there. Our next prompt is to ask why. Why would Judas do such a thing? Why would Judas betray a close friend and his messiah and savior? I think this is why many people would simply say “Satan entered him.” Their answer to the question would be, “He wouldn’t and he didn’t. Satan did.” Yet that denies Judas Iscariot’s free will. In the paragraph above, we decided Judas Iscariot’s free will to sin that led him to be controlled by Satan. So now we have to ask what would cause Judas to sin and betray Jesus. There’s been lots of theories on why Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, beside that he was Satan-possessed. First, it could be the sin coveting money. John 12 already revealed Judas Iscariot was concerned about his own personal wealth, so much he would steal from the disciples’ money bag. When the chief priests put a price on Jesus, Judas Iscariot was more than willing to hand Jesus over to get richer. Second, Judas Iscariot might simply have been a good Jew, respecting the Jewish leaders. Judas might have believed that Messiah and the Sanhedrin would get along in perfect harmony. When Judas saw Jesus, who he believed was the Messiah, disagreeing with the Jewish leaders, he had to decide whether the Jewish leaders were wrong or Jesus was wrong. He would decide Jesus was wrong. So when the Jewish leaders requested that anyone with information about Jesus should report it to them, Judas, being the good Jew, followed his leaders and handed Jesus over. Third, Judas Iscariot might have been a zealot, disappointed that Jesus was not the warrior Messiah he was expecting, which in turn could 2 results: either Judas handed over Jesus because Judas saw his an antichrist (false Christ), which is blasphemy, or Judas was trying to force the hand of Jesus, hoping to force him to violence. The last option is not a fourth option, but a combination of all of them. Maybe it was multiple reasons, such as the ones above, that led Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus. Yet I can hear people saying that these all excuses to take the blame off of Judas Iscariot and say it’s not his fault.

That leads us to an even bigger question: How much responsibility does Judas Iscariot assume in the betrayal of Jesus? This question is usually put in the form of asking about Judas Iscariot’s eternal whereabouts. Most people have put Judas in Hell. In Dante’s Inferno, Judas is put in the center and worst part of hell. Very few people will say Judas Iscariot is in heaven. I had a friend who did believe and he explained it to me quite well. To believe Judas is in heaven, you have to have a belief somewhere between Calvinist and fatalist. Judas Iscariot destined, even predestined to be the one to betray Jesus. He had to betray Jesus, for it was the only way for Scripture to be fulfilled and for salvation to be brought along properly. If Judas didn’t do this, then salvation would never come. So why should Judas Iscariot be punished for fulfilling Scripture and helping to bring salvation? Why should Judas be punished for a will predestined to him? He should be rewarded because he did what he was destined to do. May I also add to believe this, you have to have a strong belief in double predestination, the belief that not only does God select people for heaven, but also selects people for hell. While I understand their logic, there is holes in their logic that the Scriptures point out. In both Matthew and Mark, Jesus proclaims woe on him, saying it would be better for him to not be born. Some scholars have further contested this view, claiming that while Scripture does say there needs to be a betrayer, it didn’t have to be Judas Iscariot. Other scholars say the sin of betraying Jesus is not an unforgivable sin. What got Judas Iscariot in trouble was that he did not seek repentance, forgiveness or reconciliation. He instead committed suicide. That is why Judas is in hell, not because he betrayed Jesus, but because he did not seek repentance, forgiveness or reconciliation. While I’m satisfied with the Biblical proof, I am not fully satisfied with the logic the scholars give either. I’ll play along with the scholars who say it didn’t have to be Judas, but if it was any of the other 11 disciples, would they have been off the hook for betraying Jesus? And if you ask me, if you read Matthew 27:3-10, Judas does try to seek repentance and forgiveness. When the chief priests do a bad job and condemn him, he believes he is condemned and hangs himself in remorse. I’ve heard a lot of Calvinist scholars, both single and double predestination, say Judas was predestined to betray Jesus, but he still was accountable to his sin of betrayal, so he is in hell. On the other side, Armenian scholars will say that Jesus foreknew Judas Iscariot as the traitor, but he did not predestine him as the traitor. Thus, Judas Iscariot is guilty for his own sin, and thus in hell. Both views seem to be compromising, and I’m not comfortable with either.

There are other questions we do have concerning Judas Iscariot. I don’t have the time or space to go over every option, but one more I will throw out is “When Jesus selected Judas Iscariot as a disciple, did he truly select him as a disciple, or did he merely select Judas Iscariot be the betrayer?” I remember a while back watching a movie made for TV on Jesus from the eyes of Judas Iscariot. When it came time for the calling of the disciples, Jesus cheerfully called each disciple by name, giving them a hug. Last, he called Judas Iscariot, in a solemn tone, merely giving him a pat on the back. Did it go down like that? Did Jesus merely drag Judas along to fulfill Scripture, keeping an emotionless relationship with him? (Interesting note: According to this movie, Judas Iscariot could not perform the miraculous the disciples did when sent out. I believe they did the further the idea Judas was not a legitimate disciple.). The New Bible Dictionary suggests that Jesus did choose legitimately choose Judas Iscariot as a real disciple, yet Judas Iscariot never really met the title of disciple and apostle. For example, Judas Iscariot never called Jesus “Lord” but only “Rabbi.” Judas never saw Jesus as anything more than a teacher. Therefore, Judas was never really saved in the first place. For the most part, I like what they are saying, but they do seem to bounce back and forth between Calvinistic and Armenian, predestination and free will.

Here’s my grand conclusion. Judas Iscariot was legitimately chosen as a disciple by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, being God, was just like God and gave Judas Iscariot a fair and honest chance to do the right thing. Judas Iscariot, however, did not meet the expectation of a disciple of Jesus. He got caught up in his own selfish and sinful desires, whether those selfish and sinful desires be coveting money or overthrowing the political system. In accordance to James 1:14, those selfish and sinful desires enticed Judas Iscariot to sin and dragged Judas Iscariot into sin on his own free will. In accordance to Romans 1:24,26, God handed Judas Iscariot over to his own sinful desires and his own sin. Judas Iscariot got so caught up in his sin that no longer he controlled himself, but he was a slave to sin and a slave to Satan. He got in too deep, so deep, it led him to betraying Jesus Christ. But it didn’t stop there. Judas Iscariot was so steeped into sin that even after betraying Jesus, he could not fully repent or forgive himself. He instead committed suicide. Sin left unforgiving only led him to hell.

Back to the Judas Iscariot in the story. After Jesus gives Judas Iscariot the bread, he gives Judas the nod to do whatever he needs to do. Many scholars believe this is Jesus giving Judas Iscariot permission to excuse himself to set up to betray Jesus. Notice how Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot before any of Christ’s last teachings. If you have a Harmony of the Gospels, you’ll notice Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot even before Communion happens. I do believe these are signs that go back to our questions about Judas Iscariot, mainly his end whereabouts. Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot before Communion or the last teachings because Jesus knows Judas Iscariot will have no part in either of them. This time of communion and teaching is just for the true disciples of Jesus. What do the rest of the disciples think about this? They think Jesus is excusing their treasurer to do something with the money, either buy more food for the Passover Feast or give money to the poor. Both would fit the customs of the day. It was the treasurer’s job to make sure there was enough food and supplies for everyone at the Feast. To fail to do so would bring embarrassment upon the host and the treasurer. The disciples might have thought perhaps Judas Iscariot had to go pick up more food in case they ran out. Also, it was custom to give money to the poor during the Passover feast. The disciples might have thought that maybe Jesus was giving Judas Iscariot permission to leave the Feast to perform that task. Judas Iscariot’s part of the chapter ends with the sentence, “And it was night.” Scholars think John puts this in here for metaphorical purposes, although the Feast did happen during the dinner hours of the evening. Remember that both John and Jesus called Jesus “the [true] light” and call the ways of the world and the ways of sin “darkness.” John is stating that Judas Iscariot went from the light of Jesus Christ into the darkness of sin.

Now Judas Iscariot isn’t the only bad example among the disciples. There’s another highlighted in John 13. Believe it or not, it’s Simon Peter. Let’s take a quick look at him.

Now that Judas Iscariot has exited the building, Jesus wants to get more intimate in his conversation with his disciples. Now Jesus wants to reveal personal and deep secrets about Him and His Kingdom. Jesus makes His disciples aware that He is leaving soon, so he wants to also pass on new, important instruction, as well as remind them of old, important instruction. Jesus emphasizes all important teachings because He knows He will not be with the disciples for much longer, and he needs the disciples to keep following His teachings.

Right here, in John 13:36, I believe is one of those moments where all the disciples are thinking about it, but only one gets the nerve to say it out loud. All the disciples are not listening to the instruction, but rather, they are caught up on the sentence, “Where I am going, you cannot come.” They are in great distress because of this, and if you understand the context, you’ll understand why. These men have left their whole lives behind them 3 or 4 years ago to follow Jesus. They banked their whole lives on following Jesus for the rest of their lives. Most of them have nothing to go back to. If they tried to go back, they’d start all over again. So when Jesus says He is leaving, there is much reason for distress. Some of them might have felt like they threw their whole lives away for nothing. So Simon Peter, as concerned as everyone, speaks up, “Where are you going?” From his tone (as well as verse 37), you can tell he’s trying to figure out a way to go with Jesus.

Now if you have a Harmony of the Gospels, here’s where it gets interesting. Harmony of the Gospel books can be helpful tools to compare parallel passages in the Gospels, however, they are far from inerrant. There is no one right Harmony of the Gospel. All these books will have their own interpretation on the order of events and which passages parallel one another. Such is Peter’s denial. Each Gospel has a prediction of Peter’s Denial: Matthew 26:31-35, Mark 14:27-31, Luke 22:31-38, and John 13:37-38. These books will disagree whether they parallel one another. There are 2 main camps of thought. The first is all 4 Gospel writers are telling the same story from 4 different points of view. The second is that Matthew and Mark are telling about one prediction, while Luke and John are talking about another prediction. Let’s examine each camp closely, first the one that puts them all together, then the one that separates Matthew and Mark from Luke and John.

The first camp does have good evidence to put all 4 together. All 4 have Peter making a pledge of allegiance to Jesus. All 4 Gospel accounts have Jesus saying that Peter will disown or deny him. All 4 Gospel narratives have Jesus telling the reader the denial will happen before the rooster crows. With so many parallels, it’s easy to see why all 4 described as retelling the same exact event.

The second camp also has good evidence to bunch Matthew and Mark together and bunch Luke and John as a separate bunch. Read Matthew 26:31-35 and Mark 14:27-31 together. They are about 98% to 99% the same thing, even down to Zechariah prophecy. Both Luke and John are nowhere near the same wording. Where they do talk about the same things, notice the small detail differences. In Matthew and Mark, Peter simply says he will never fall away. In Luke, Peter tells Jesus he will go to prison and death for Jesus. In John, Peter claims he will lay down his life for Jesus. While you might say they are small details, I see big differences. In both Matthew and Mark, Peter denies Christ’s prediction, while in Luke and John, Peter does no such thing. Context also helps. In Matthew and Mark, Jesus seems to be talking to all the disciples (minus Judas Iscariot). In Luke and John, Jesus seems to be talking directly to Peter. The biggest evidence, though, would be the location. Matthew and Mark record the events happening at the Mount of Olives, before going into the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke and John record the events happening in the upper room during the Last Supper.

Therefore, despite the parallels in all 4 Gospel stories, the best view is to say they happened at 2 different times. This is not a contradiction, but rather a repeat. Jesus predicted Peter’s denial first in the upper room, when Peter claimed that he would go wherever Jesus went, even if it meant giving up his life. The second time Jesus predicted Peter’s denial was on the Mount of Olives, before the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus told the disciples they will all scatter. In response to the second accusation of denial, Peter once again claims he will never disown Jesus, even if it means giving up his life for him. Perhaps there’s a parallel happening there: Peter declares 3 times he will stick with Jesus, Peter denies Jesus 3 times. Maybe Peter denied Jesus for each time he said he would stick up for Jesus. We’ll talk about that more when we get to the actual event.

In closing this chapter, we know there is a betrayer and a denier among the Twelve Disciples. The betrayer is Judas Iscariot and the denier is Simon Peter. This was no new news to Jesus, as Jesus foreknew Judas Iscariot would betray him and Simon Peter would deny him. But Jesus, being the all-knowing God, knew more than just that. Imagine Jesus at the dinner table of the Last Supper. He looks at Judas Iscariot, and He knows Judas will betray Him. He looks at Simon Peter, and He knows Peter will deny him 3 times before the rooster crows twice. He looks at Thomas (called Didymus), and He knows that Thomas will doubt Him when He rises from the dead. Then Jesus looks at all the rest of disciples, and He knows they will all scatter when He gets arrested. In a sense, they will all betray him, they will all deny him, and they will all doubt him. I wonder if Jesus ever questioned himself to why He was sticking with this sad, sorry bunch. Yet Jesus knew that this was totally worth it, for His disciples, and for all mankind. So He stayed true for His disciples, as well as mankind, to bring everyone salvation.

John 12: Palm Sunday

Now that we’re entering the second half of the book of John, John’s writing is going to shift. He’s going to go from the 3-4 years of the ministry of Jesus to the Passion Week of Jesus. He’s going to shift from touring Galilee, Samaria and Judea with Jesus to just staying in the city of Jerusalem. He’s going to shift from action-packed miracles to solely focus on teachings of Jesus. Things are going to slow down, become more local, and become more focused. Since John is slightly changing up his writing style, I am going to do the same. I’m not going to be as concerned with staying inside the chapter boundaries, the section boundaries, the paragraph boundaries or the verse boundaries. One blog post might have a couple chapters in it or it might have only a section or two in it. I might focus a long time on certain paragraphs, a short on some other paragraphs and some paragraphs I might completely ignore. Why? Since John’s writing is more central in time and location, as well as style (teachings), I don’t have to continually set the scene. For the remainder of John, the setting will remain the same, so the context will remain the same. I’m only going to pull out things that are debated, in which all sides need to be heard, or things that need a deeper explanation to fully understand. My hope is to reveal things to you that you’ve never thought about. If there’s nothing new to reveal, it will skipped over.

The first pericope (story) in John 12 stills has Jesus in Bethany. Now since we’re still in Bethany, it is important to set the scene because it’s debatable. Matthew and Mark also tell this story…or so most believe. The stories in Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9 and John 12:1-8 have many commonalities. All take place at Bethany in the home of Simon the Leper. All have a woman breaking open an alabaster jar of perfume (pure nard) and using it on Jesus. All have someone object to the motion, and all have Jesus defending the woman. Yet there are differences. Matthew and Mark just say it’s a woman, while John names the woman as Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Matthew and Mark says that the woman uses an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, while John tells the reader it was a pint of pure nard. Matthew and Mark say the woman poured the perfume on the head of Jesus, while John recalls the nard going on the feet of Jesus. John also adds more detail, such as Mary wiping the feet of Jesus with her hair. Mark says everybody watching opposed, Matthew gets specific and says it was only the 12 disciples that opposed, John gets even more specific, calling out Judas Iscariot to the opposer. Yet the biggest difference would be that Matthew and Mark state this happens 2 days before the Passover, while John puts it 6 days before the Passover. What are we to do? Are we to admit that the Gospel writers mixed up their facts and made mistakes in their writing? Never! It just requires some shifting through.

Let’s look at how the scholars have dealt with it. Some scholars have tried to argue that the accounts of Matthew and Mark are the same, but the account of John is a different story. Their proof is Luke 7:36-50. In Luke 7:36-50, Luke also tells a story of a woman cleaning the feet of Jesus with her hair, then anointing it with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, followed by objections. Yet it would be ridiculous to try to say it is the same event as recorded in Matthew, Mark and John. If you thought Matthew, Mark and John disagreed, wait until you see the Luke story. While all stories take place in the home of a Simon, Luke’s story is in the home of Simon the Pharisee, not Simon the Leper (Simon is very common name back then). Simon the Pharisee’s house is in Galilee, while Simon the Leper’s house is in Bethany in Perea. Luke denotes the woman as a very serious sinner, while Matthew, Mark and John make no notation of that (although some have suggested that’s why Matthew and Mark kept her anonymous). Only Luke mentions cleaning with tears, and no one else does. Luke has the opposer being one person, a Pharisee. Definitely from Matthew and John, and possibly from Mark, no Pharisees are present. Matthew and John definitely, and Mark possibly, show the objectors to be supporters of Jesus, no opponents. Furthermore, the objection is different. Simon the Pharisee objects at a sinful woman touching a righteous man. Judas Iscariot, as well as the rest of the disciples, object that it was a waste of money. Lastly, the reaction of Jesus Luke has recorded is way different than the reaction Jesus gives in Matthew, Mark and John. In Matthew, Mark and John, Jesus calls for the disciples to serve Jesus over the poor. In Luke, Jesus says that the sinful woman was more hospitable to Jesus than the so-called righteous Pharisee. So most scholars would definitely agree Luke’s pericope is a totally different story that happened earlier. Yet some people would take it further to show this anointing by women happened more than once so they conclude it happened 3 times. The first time is recorded in Luke, when Jesus was in the early years of the Galilean ministry. The second time is recorded in John, while Jesus is in Bethany six days before the Passover. The third time is recorded in Matthew and Mark, 2 days before the Passover. I will admit, I was tempted to go along with this thinking. They did have a point showing the major differences meant they were different events. Yet I could help but notice that the similarities were too strong to call them different. All of them have the same setting, all of them have the woman using expensive perfume, all of them have the opposition of wasting money, and all of them have the same reaction from Jesus. So Matthew, Mark and John have to be telling the same story, just from different points of view.

Like I said, this takes further sifting, so let’s sift. First of all, let’s talk about John’s use of names. While Matthew and Mark say “woman,” John says “Mary.” While Mark says, “those present,” Matthew says, “the disciples” and John says, “Judas Iscariot.” What’s the deal? Remember, John likes to pick on people, not in a negative connotation, but in for story-telling purposes, like character development. By giving the people names, the story becomes more real to us. So John reveals the woman to be the Mary, the one we all know, the one who sat at the feet of Jesus and listened, the one whose brother was raised by Jesus. John also reveals the objector to be Judas Iscariot. Now I’m saying that Matthew and Mark were wrong by assigning the objections to a large group of people. They easily agrees with one another. I believe that the grumbling about Mary’s actions started among the 12 disciples, as they all indignantly objected to one another. The other people observing, most likely supporters of Jesus, heard the Twelve Disciples grumble, so they followed suit. Finally, Judas Iscariot gets the balls to stand up to Jesus say what’s on everybody’s minds. If everyone was thinking this, and Judas Iscariot was the only one brave enough to say it aloud, you almost want to give kudos to Judas. Yet John uses this moment to reveal Judas is not the stereotype of a good disciple of a righteous man. John reveals Judas to be guilty of embezzlement. Like I said, character development. Also, it could simply be John’s use of details. That would also explain John saying a “pint of pure nard” instead of saying “an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume.” Pure nard was a very expensive perfume, shipped all the way from India. To get even a pint, or a half leader, a person would have to pay 300 denarii, which took about 300 days of work to save up for. This perfume was so expensive, it was put in the finest and most expensive of jars, like an alabaster jar. Simply because John does not mention it doesn’t mean it was not so.

As for where the perfume went, or how Mary anointed Jesus, I don’t think that really matters. If we were to get fussy and care about it, I would compromise and say it went both on his head andhis feet, but still, I think the grander point of this story in John 12:1-8 is all the foreshadowing going on. First and foremost, the whole event is foreshadowing the death of Jesus. Pure nard was a perfume using in burying the dead. Mary anoints Jesus likes He is a dead body. Jesus outright states that soon the disciples will not have Jesus. The ever-present danger Jesus is in becomes more obvious to Jesus, to His disciples and to everyone around him, including Mary. It’s like they all know when Jesus goes into Jerusalem, He’s not coming out alive. On that, the second foreshadowing the reader sees is Judas Isacriot’s role in the death of Jesus. It will be his own greed for money that will lead him to betray Jesus and hand Him over to death.

So that leaves us only to deal with the time frame. Matthew and Mark says it is two days before the Passover, while John says it is six days before the Passover. Well, location could be taken into account. As stated before, it seems like once Jesus enters Jerusalem, he isn’t leaving. In Matthew and Mark’s context, it would seem like Jesus would leave Jerusalem for a day to go visit the village of Bethany during that final week. Yet my ultimate conclusion is going to come from the writing style of John. Once again, I call you to remember the book of John is not a synoptic Gospel, but a supplementary Gospel. Therefore, of all the Gospel writers, John is the least concerned about the proper chronological order. His transition-of-time words have been vague throughout this entire book. If this book were to be written topically, which is most likely was, it would make the most sense to put together the two stories with the same main characters together. In John 12:1-8, Mary, Martha and Lazarus are all present, the same Mary, Martha and Lazarus in John 11. So I do believe Matthew and Mark, who would at least be slightly more concerned about time frame, do have the right time frame. As for Jesus leaving Jerusalem during Passion Week, I say it’s possible. After Jesus cleared the temple shortly after the Triumphal Entry, the Jewish leaders wanted to arrest and put Jesus on trial right there. Jesus probably had to leave the city for a day until things cooled down because it was not his time.

The pericope ends with the chief priests planning to kill Jesus, and Lazarus as well, because Jesus raising Lazarus is bringing so many people to believe in Jesus. I’m not going to talk about in-depth any further because that was already done for last chapter. But I will point out that it further foreshadows the fate of Jesus: Jesus is not coming out of Passover week alive.

By the time the reader gets to John 12:12, the reader hits the story familiar with Palm Sunday: The Triumphal Entry. Notice while all 3 Synoptic Gospels go into detail on the preparations for the Entry into Jerusalem, but John does not. Once again, Johns knows and expects his readers to have already read the Synoptic Gospels. They know how the disciples prepared, and John has nothing new to add, so he skips over the preparation details. I will mention that it seems like the only preparations the disciples made were the donkey ride for Jesus. It was the greater crowd of followers that did the rest. What did they do? They pull off palm branches and palm leaves to put on the ground and to wave. The Synoptic Gospel writers even add some people put their cloaks on the ground. Then they begin shouting and cheering when Jesus enters. I’ve written down what they are saying below from all 4 Gospel accounts.-

-Hosanna!
-Hosanna to the Son of David!
-Hosanna in the Highest!
-Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!
-Blessed is the king of Israel!
-Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!
-Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

If you want any further proof that the Twelve Disciples didn’t orchestrate this, John 12:16 tells the reader that Twelve Disciples saw what was going on and had no idea why this was happening. So what’s so important about this? In this second half of the Gospel of John, John’s going to start to portray Jesus as the Son of God by aligning the Son of God portrait with the portrait of Jesus according the Synoptic Gospels. The Synoptic Gospel that John will agree with in John 12 is the Gospel according to Matthew. Both Matthew and John see Old Testament Prophecy being fulfilled. The explicit one both Matthew and John mention is Zechariah 9:9, in which Zechariah sees the Messiah riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. Riding on a donkey has a lot of symbolism within itself. In Bible times, a king would either ride into a city on a horse or on a donkey. If the king rode on a horse, it meant he was going in an act of aggression, such as declaring war or taking control as the conquering king. If the king came riding on a donkey, it meant he came in peace, like making a peace treaty or an alliance of some sorts. Jesus did not come to Jerusalem to start a violent revolt to overthrow the Romans, but to peacefully proclaim and establish the kingdom of God on earth. The implicit Scripture being fulfilled is Psalm 118:25,26. Most Bibles have footnotes that connect the crowd’s shouting to the verse. Both Matthew and John have noted this, but they did not write it down. Perhaps they both assumed it was common knowledge to their Jewish reader. Indeed, this Psalm is believed to a Messianic Psalm. Thus, the crowd shouted it when Jesus entered Jerusalem because they believed this man was their messiah.

What do these people do after they give Jesus His parade? They go out and spread the news that Jesus has come to Jerusalem. What’s their tagline? It’s the Jesus who raised Lazarus from the dead! So the people of Jerusalem come out to see this Jesus, hoping to see a miracle. Their faith seems a little shallow, but it’s working. How can a reader know it’s working? Well, for starters, it’s frustrating the Pharisees. So a crowd has assembled large enough to annoy the Pharisees. But on top of that, look at whose attention they get.

The same week Jesus is in Jerusalem, there are also Greeks in Jerusalem. Most likely these Greeks are Greek proselytes (Greeks converted to Judaism), who are in Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover and worship in Jerusalem, but they could also be Greek philosophers learning about different cultures. Some of these Greeks have heard about Jesus. These Greeks ask Philip if they get see Jesus. Philip asks Andrew, and Philip and Andrew ask Jesus. Let’s pause right there. First of all, notice how popular Jesus is getting. Word is getting around fast about Him. The resurrection miracle really helped, too. It’s nowhere near as many followers as Jesus had around the miraculous feeding, but it’s got to be the second highest spike. Also, we see Jesus getting famous on a bigger scale. While it’s possible these Greeks are from Decapolis, a region east of the Sea of Galilee and northeast of the Jordan River, if these Greeks actually came from Greece, the name of Jesus is getting around fast. People all over the world want to marvel at him. But it’s even bigger than popularity or fame. The Greeks wanting to see Jesus is a sign to Jesus that His ministry is about to explode…in a good way. No longer is it just the Jews looking for the Messiah, but now the world will seek a Christ. But Jesus knows that there’s an important in between step: His death on the cross. Jesus uses the analogy of a kernel of wheat that “dies” and is placed in the ground to produce many more seeds. (Quick note: This is not an error in the Bible, nor does it mean the Bible is not inerrant. This is called the “Phenomenon of Appearance.” A seed looks like it’s not living, and when someone puts it in the ground, it almost looks like it’s being buried. We in the 21st century know it’s not true, but it sure looks like it.) In the same way, Jesus must die in order that many more believers will believe in Him.

In John 12:27,28, Jesus seems to go into a little soliloquy of sorts. When he realizes His time is near, his heart is troubled thinking about taking on the sin of the world, as well as taking upon the pain and suffering of the cross. He states it is very tempting to ask the Father to remove the responsibility, but He stays on task and instead asks the Father to glorify the name of God. A voice from heaven reassures Jesus that the name of God has been gloried and it will be continued to be glorified. Jesus makes clear that this voice from heaven wasn’t to reassure him, but to reassure the disciples and the greater crowd of followers. Yet check out the reaction of the people in Jerusalem. The believers know it’s the voice of God the Father from heaven, but they are the only ones who can make the connection. The non-believers and rationalists try to rationalize it with a natural occurrence, like thunder. The skeptics, those who are 50/50 or those who think Jesus is merely a rabbi or a prophet, try to compromise it by using something indirect, like an angel. Either way, we still see division among the Jews. But the amazing part is that even some of the Jewish leaders, who are unbiased towards Jesus, realize and admit Jesus has to be the Messiah. Yet most of the Jews, especially Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests and Sanhedrin will not come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. How is this possible?

John continues to go back to the Old Testament prophecy in John 12 to show Jesus is Messiah and God. The two remaining quoted passages are both from the prophet Isaiah. The first is from Isaiah 53:1. Isaiah 53 is most famous for its Suffering Servant passage, describing the Messiah’s death and how it will bring about salvation. John sees it even before we get to the events of Good Friday. John believes that the opener to the chapter is stating that despite the Christ revealing Himself to the people as the Messiah, they will not believe in his message. If you’re thinking that’s pushing it, John gives another passage from Isaiah that’s a little more specific and a little more close. The passage is Isaiah 6:10, and it is quoted numerous times in the New Testament. If Isaiah 53:1 is saying the Jews would not listen to God’s Message, then Isaiah 6:10 is saying the Jews could not listen to God’s Message. Both seem to be true in John 12. John concludes both passages are saying the same thing because Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus, so Isaiah spoke about Him. Wait a minute, I thought Isaiah saw God, not Jesus. Bingo. This is another way John is telling us Jesus is God. Isaiah recognized Jesus is God, the Jews failed to recognize Jesus as God, so now the reader has to choose to decide if Jesus is God or not.

So in closing John 12, Jesus turns to plea to the crowd to listen to Him and follow Him. Jesus knows His time on earth is running short, so he wants to get as many last minute converts as possible until He leaves up totally to the disciples. He is also well aware this is the last chance for many people, for they won’t convert, even after his death and resurrection. Jesus is no longer playing games. He’s not playing games with Pharisees and Sanhedrin, like dodging trick questions or hide-and-seek. Jesus has to get His Father’s business done. With Christ’s final message comes a stern warning: accept the light now or forever walk in darkness. Jesus puts a strong sense of urgency on the gospel. My prayer is we also carry that same urgency.

John 8: I AM and I AM

Remember how I told you to begin looking out for “I AM” statements? Well, 2 of these “I AM” statements will appear in John 8 alone. So let’s check them out.

But before we get to the “I AM” statements we have to discuss John 7:53 to 8:11 (although it has nothing to do with the I AM statements) because most of you probably won’t let this topic go. The last verse of John 7 and the first 11 verses of John 8 do not appear in any of the earliest manuscripts of John. The earliest manuscripts found with this story are not the most reliable manuscripts either. These manuscripts will put this story in the middle of John, at the end of John, in the middle of Luke, or at the end of Luke. None of the earliest church fathers (100s-300s AD) mention it, but that is an argument from the silence. The earliest mention of the story is in 450 AD. It was most likely part of the oral tradition (the story was passed down by word of mouth) and later on thrown in there by copyists. Isn’t it quite obvious, though? There is no smooth transition in and out of this story. As a matter of fact, some people say the transition is smoother without this story in it. The writing style, both the vocabulary and grammar, does not fit the rest of the book. For example, this is the only time the term “teachers of the Law” (“scribes” in more literal translations) is used in the whole book (yes, quizzers, “teachers of the Law” is key for the year). Another example is that this is the only time Jesus is called “Teacher” (Greek word didaskale), whereas the rest of the book calls him “Rabbi.”

So the passage is not written by John, but is it still Scripture? Is it still inspired, infalliable, inerrant, authoritative revelation breathed by God, which makes it Scripture? I would say yes. Why? As John will later tell us in John 21:25, Jesus did many other things that are not in the 4 Gospels, so much that there is not enough books in the world to write it all down. To put in my words, it would be easier putting the internet in a book than it would be to put every word and deed of Jesus in a book. But the biggest and greatest proof is that whether or not the passage belongs in the Bible is if it agrees or disagrees with the overall theology of the Bible. We know what books are psedupigraphal (fake Bible books) because their theology does not agree with biblical theology at all. John 7:53-8:11 certainly does not promote any theology that is against the Bible. The words and actions of Jesus are line with the character of Jesus. Same could be said for the Pharisees. In fact, going back to Jesus, the reader can find in John 8 alone preaching from Jesus that would defend his words and actions in John 8:1-11. For example, in John 8:15, Jesus says He passes judgment on no one. I conclude that this story is a true account of Jesus and does belong in the Bible. Even if John didn’t write it, we can say for certain God authored it. So let’s take a look at it.

The action of the story begins when the Pharisees and teachers of the law bring Jesus a woman caught in adultery. Adultery, in the most general sense, is a sexual sin. I define it in the most general sense because John uses the word “adultery” in most general sense in John 8. It could be premarital sex (having sex with someone before marriage), extramarital sex (having sex while married with someone who is not your spouse), homosexuality (having sex with someone of the same sex), incest (having sex with a family member or relative), bestiality (having sex with an animal), prostitution (having sex as a business, and being paid for it), or even rape (having sex with someone against their will). All these are strictly forbidden by the Law (see Leviticus 18 & 20) as adultery. While John isn’t specific on the adultery, one thing he is specific on is the Pharisees’ and teachers of the law’s wording. The Pharisees and teachers of the Law say that the woman was “caught in the act.” Isn’t that disturbing? Imagine the Pharisees and teachers of the law going around, going house to house, and checking to see if all couples having sex have a marriage license. Once they caught someone, they dragged that person out to a trial.

Using this adulterous woman as a visual aid, the Pharisees and teachers of the Law ask Jesus what her fate should be. Should the woman be stoned, as the Law says, or not? As John 8:6 reveals, this question is merely meant to trap Jesus. It seems like a simple “yes” or “no question, but there is no right answer. If Jesus says “no,” He is breaking the Jewish Law, for indeed, the Law of Moses did say adulterers need to be stoned to death (see Lev. 20:10 and Deut. 22:22-24). If Jesus said “yes,” He is breaking the Roman Law, for the Romans would allow occupied people groups to carry out their own trials, but would forbid occupied people to carry out executions; they had to go to the Romans for permission. The Pharisees and teachers of the law set Jesus up to make him look like a bad teacher or even make him look like a sinner. Yet the Pharisees and teachers of the Law aren’t as pure as they think they are. They had made mistakes themselves. First, the Law of Moses (once again, both the Lev. 20:10 and Deut. 22:22-24 passages) declare both the man and the woman are to be stoned, not just the woman. The Pharisees and teachers of the law needed to bring forth the man as well. Second, according to the Law, for a proper trial to happen, the trial must be performed by a proper judge. By the 1st century, judges were commonly from the Sanhedrin. Although the Christian reader knows Jesus is the real, true judge because He is God, in the human mind and in human terms, Jesus could not be the judge because He was not in the Sanhedrin. So the fact is the Pharisees and teachers of the law were breaking the Law by setting up this question, thus sinning.

Of course Jesus knows this is a trap so instead of stating an answer, Jesus bends to the ground and draws on the ground. John doesn’t say what he wrote, so many people have guessed what He was writing. The most common one I hear was Jesus was writing down the names of the people there, followed by all the sins they have committed. Some even go a step further and say Jesus was writing down all the names of those who committed adultery themselves, as well as their adulterous acts. Along with the previous thought, some scholars have suggested Jesus was literally acting out Jeremiah 17:13, where the names of those who have fallen away are written in the dust. Perhaps Jesus was writing down the names of the people who did not believe in Him, showing them to be as guilty as the woman was. Some have suggested Jesus was writing down one of the Laws that spoke out against false witnesses or false testimony, such as the 9th commandment or Exodus 23:1,7. Others think that Jesus was following a Roman custom, in which it was a requirement for the conviction to be written out during the trial. There’s even a few crazy guesses. For example, Jesus was merely doodling or Jesus was drawing 2 sets of tablets on the ground to remind the Jews that the Israelites sinned, causing Moses to break the tablets. Whatever it was, it was enough to rattle the people watching, especially the Pharisees and the teachers of the law. It causes the people in the crowd to walk away, in the order of oldest to youngest. Why? Once again, the Bible does not say, and a whole array of reasons could be given. Again, the point is that it the drawing/writing shook the people up so bad, they walked away.

In the middle of the drawing, Jesus interrupts himself to say, “If one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Simply put, I see Jesus throwing the question back at the accusers. This is why the most popular interpretation of the drawing on the ground is the most common. Jesus had exposed that all the people there were sinners. Jesus exposed all the people there deserved to be stoned to death because they were sinners. Paul will state this clearly to Christians in his book which we call Romans. Take a look in Romans 3:23 and 6:23a and put the 2 verses together to make a fine doctrine. “For all have sinned” + “for the wages of sin is death” = We all deserve to die because of our sins. Jesus showed the Pharisees, the teachers of the law, and everyone else watching that they deserved to be on death row as much as they were. On the same note, Jesus is demonstrating that they have as much a right to accuse and condemn the adulterous woman of sin as the adulterous woman has the right to accuse and condemn them. A lot of people would say Jesus is making a bold and powerful statement against the death penalty, and I would agree. No one should be executed for a crime because all deserve to be executed for their sins. But I think there’s a strong message here, a message about judging people and condemning people. No person should judge a person (the person himself/herself, not their acts), nor should a person condemn a person (judge them as guilty beyond hope of redemption). Why? We all have sinned, so we all deserve to be judged and condemned. Yet a sinless Jesus, who had the right to judge and condemn us, forgave us, so we should forgive as well. I hope you can see and understand that, and if you can’t wait until the end of the story in verse 11, and you’ll definitely be able to see it.

The crowd thins out until only Jesus and the adulterous woman is left. Jesus shows her all her accusers have gone away, even asking if there is anyone left to condemn her or stone her. I imagine the woman looking around and giving her simple answer: “No, sir.” Jesus replies that he does not condemn her either, but he sends her away, commanding her, “Go now and leave your life of sin.” Now I hope you understand what I was saying. The last person standing with the adulterous woman was the man who was without sin and could throw the first stone with a clear conscience. Yet He did not. He chose to forgave her. If the sinless man, who could condemn, chose to forgive, shouldn’t the sinners who are trying to walk in His footsteps also do the same?

The best example that really hits home is another example of adulterous women. It is the pregnant teenager and the single mom. The Church still struggles with this question every day. They set themselves up with the same question that the Pharisees and teachers of the law tried to set Jesus up with: Do we condemn the sin, and thus possibly condemn the sinner with the sin? Or do we instead ignore the sin, but instead support and help? Christians, whether it be in the church, Christian schools/colleges, Christian ministries, or any other Christian organizations, get stuck in a rut trying to answer this question. If Christians cast out the mother, they might appear as mean, rude and heartless to someone in need, and legalistic as well. But if Christians help the mother, they might look like they are ok with the unwed pregnancy, which in turn would make them look like hypocrites. What should Christians do? I don’t think there’s an easy answer, but John 8:1-11 does shed some light on it that would help. Condemnation of the sinner is a definite no-no. The pregnant teenager or single mother is not to be treated like a hopeless sinner, and neither is her child. Neither the mother nor the child are to be treated like lesser humans. Instead of condemnation, forgiveness needs to be given. Even if the mother does not ask for forgiveness, it still needs to be given. It can be given in support and care. What does need to be done is confession and repentance of sins. Jesus did not dismiss the woman’s sin as if it was nothing. He told her to leave her life of sin. This does not need to be some kind of public spectacle for everyone to watch. It just needs to be taken care of with the woman who committed the adultery. There needs to be an evident change in the woman’s lifestyle. This can be a little more conditional. If she still continues a life of adultery and gets pregnant again, then maybe that support and care should be withdrawn. But not to the point where there is no hope of redemption and reconciliation. Christians must struggle daily to find a way to love the sinner and still hate the sin. God does not tolerate sin, and neither should Christians. But God does love and forgive the sinners, and Christians should do likewise.

Alright, that’s the end of the questionable story and the end of the questionable “hot button” topic. Let’s get to the rest of the chapter and look at what we know is true Scripture, and look at what the topic of this chapter is. Indeed, there are 2 “I AM” statements in John 8. Lo and behold, one of those statements are in John 8:12, once the reader gets past the first 11 verses of the last story. It’s interesting to think that if that story really wasn’t in John, John 8:1 would be have the been the “I AM” statement. An “I AM” statement would be definitely the right way to start off this chapter. So let’s look at it

John 8:12-
When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

Some people will say that talking about Jesus as the light of the world is a smooth transition from the adulterous woman story because the adulterous woman story is showing how Jesus is the light of the world. I’m not sure if I see this, so I’m going to skip that. Actually, for John chapter 8, I am not going to spend a lot of time talking about Jesus as the light of the world because I actually believe John 9 will be better for it. But I will cover what the verse says about itself.

This isn’t the first time Jesus is called light in John. As early as John 1:4-9, John called Jesus The True Light. In John 1:4-9, John proclaimed The True Light gives light and life, the True Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not understand The True Light. In the greater scheme of the Bible, light is constantly used as a metaphor for God, most specifically in reference to His holiness. On the opposite end, the sinful and evil world is described as being in darkness. After all, darkness is the opposite of light, and the opposite of holy God is a sinful and evil mankind. A specific Old Testament example would be Isaiah 9:2, where Isaiah describes the sinners heading for death as “people in darkness” and those with God are ones with light. Jesus brings this idea into the New Testament. The “people in darkness” are those without Jesus, who are also sinners heading for death. Those who believe in Jesus are the ones with light. They will have life, as Isaiah 9:2 and John 1:4-9 tell us. If any Jew knew Isaiah by memory, it’s quite possible Isaiah 9:2 came to mind when Jesus said John 8:12. Also many Jews called God “the giver of light,” going back to Genesis 1:3. For Jesus to proclaim Himself as the source of life, He was calling himself God. Other specific examples of Old Testament metaphors of light would be Psalm 27:1 and Isaiah 58:8. In both verses, light symbolizes God bringing salvation. When Jesus called Himself “the light of the world,” he was calling Himself the source of God’s salvation. (I also want to note many people have tried to connect Jesus as the “light of the world” using typology of things in Old Testament, such as the candelabra in tabernacle/temple, the pillar of fire and the Feast of Lights, but these tend to be allegorical views that ignore the practicality and the original context.)

Now I will admit, this verse does seem to be a little out of context. From verse 13 to verse 30, there’s not going to much talk about light or how Jesus is the light of the world. It’s more going to talk about the testimony Jesus has. Now it’s not Christ’s fault that this happens. The Pharisees take Him off track my challenging His testimony. Jesus does not ignore these challenges, but confronts them. I’m not going to talk about this too much because we’ve already covered it in John 1 and John 5, but I will skim over it and hit new parts.

The Pharisees challenge the testimony of Jesus because their interpretation of Deuteronomy 17:6 said that a self-testimony or a testimony of one person was not good enough. Some scholars believe the Pharisees are trying to throw back Christ’s words at Him (see John 5:31) Once again, Jesus is forced to defend himself. First, Jesus calls the Pharisees out for their judgment of Him. Jesus legitimately uses the fallacy so many 21st century teenagers commit in the right context: “You don’t know me, so don’t judge me.” Second, Jesus claims that He does have someone to second His motion: the Father. Once again, we see a clear image of trinity, and once again, it’s in the light of judgment. It’s as simple as this: the judgments of Jesus are the same judgments God the Father would make. Thus, the Father testifies for the Son, and the Son testifies for the Father. Jesus demonstrates that this fulfills the Law’s requirement of needing at least 2 witnesses, as found in Deuteronomy. When the Pharisees question Jesus on who His Father is, in verse 19, Jesus merely says that they don’t know Him because if they knew Jesus, they would know His Father. To know Jesus is to know God, and to know God is to know Jesus. In John 8:14-19, John demonstrates to reader the trinity, more specifically the relation between the Father and Son, which indirectly shows us Jesus is God the Son.

In John 8:21-22, Jesus once again proclaims to everyone with hearing range that He is going to a place they cannot go to. The Jews are still stumped on this. Last time we left the Jews in John 7, their guess was Jesus was going to the Gentiles areas of the Roman Empire, such as Greece. Their current guess is that Jesus is going to commit suicide. (This is really ironic because after Christ’s death, which skeptics have joked as a “suicide mission,” God did spread the Word to the Gentiles.) Jesus does try to correct the view, using more heavenly metaphor, such as “above the earth.” Even the Jewish culture and customs understood heaven to be above. Jesus turns their misconception about Jesus committing suicide. It’s almost as if Jesus is saying that those who do not believe in Jesus are “committing suicide” because they are killing themselves with their sin.

Let’s jump down to John 8:31 because from John 8:31, Jesus will start talking about a subject that will set him up for His next “I AM” statement, which is near the end of the chapter (which is ironic since John 8:31 is close to the halfway point of the chapter). After the end of the first half of John 8, many Jews came to believe in Jesus through His preaching. So Jesus goes on to preach the next step for these new believers to become disciples. They are to keep believing in Christ’s words, which are the truth, so they can be free. When the Jews hear this, they raise objections. They claim that since they are children of Abraham, they have always been free and never been enslaved. It’s funny to think they these men were scholarly because they have easily forgotten that the children of Abraham time after time were enslaved and were not free. The most obvious example would be the Israelites were slaves to Egyptians for 400 years. During the times of the Judges, many times a people group would invade the land and take control of it for a few years. Even if the Jews didn’t count the Judges, they had to count being exiled to Babylon for 70 years, and even after that, they did not have political sovereignty, as they would always be occupied by the Persians, the Greeks and the Romans. So how could the Jews claim they were free? Well, for once, the Jews agreed with Jesus that freedom is a spiritual thing. The Jews did believe they were spiritual free, meaning they were children of God, not slaves of God. Why? Abraham was their father, and the Jews considered Abraham a child of God. If Abraham is a child of God, then Abraham’s descendants are children of God. Jesus does not agree with this.

Jesus attempts to open the Jews’ eyes. Clearly, the Jews cannot see that they are slaves to sin. In fact, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. The Jews did not see themselves as sinners, so they don’t see themselves as slaves to sin. Jesus has to show them they are sinners, so He can open their eyes to their present slavery. In verse 35, Jesus uses common knowledge of the slavery system back in the 1st century AD. In the 1st century AD, slaves were not considered part of the family unit, so they did not benefit from the same benefits family did, including the final will of the father of the children and master of the slaves. Jesus calls himself the Son because if the son of the family set a slave free, the slave was indeed free. Since Jesus is the Son, he can indeed set people free of their sin.

The Jews keep insisting, as seen in verse 39, that they are sons of Abraham (and now the song “Father Abraham” is stuck in your head: “Father Abraham, had many sons, many sons had Father Abraham…”). It reveals a sad reality among the Jews. For salvation, the Jews were banking on themselves as being children of Abraham. Their thinking was along the lines of “If God wants to keep His promise to Abraham, He has to save us. If he didn’t, He would be breaking His promise to Abraham.” What really makes this sad is that this was the same thinking of the Jews before they got swept off into exile: “God won’t punish us and send us into exile because we’re the descendants of Abraham, and He promised Abraham his descendants would get the land.” Like I said, the Jews were really banking on God saving them because they were Abraham’s descendants. No wonder the Jews felt threatened when Jesus brought this thinking into question when he declared that a true believer would follow Christ’s words.

Doesn’t this sound familiar in the 21st century? Today, we’re not banking on being Abraham’s descendants, but like the Jews, we’re banking on the actions of someone in the past. The Jews were banking on Abraham’s past actions. Some Christians today bank on Christ’s past actions, mainly His death and resurrection. The Christians bank on Christ’s actions so much that, like the Jews of the 1st century, they don’t think obedience is necessary. They think that all they have to do is “believe.” To them, “believe” just means to accept a doctrinal statement as their own. So for them, to be saved means to just take on the Christian doctrinal statement as a personal beliefs statement, and they are saved. Jesus would correct these Christians just as much as He corrected the Jews. What did Jesus say was the qualifications of being a disciple of Jesus. In John 8:31 (NIV), Jesus says it’s “hold to my teaching.” More literal translations say, “abide in my teaching” or “continue in My Word.” More dynamic equivalencies and paraphrases say “continue to obey.” The point they are trying to get across is that this “believe,” used over 90 times in John, is not simply accepting a doctrinal statement. It’s living out what Jesus taught. After reading this, I no longer evangelize saying “believe in Jesus” but rather “follow Jesus” because that encompasses practices as well as doctrine. I pray that you Christians out there are not merely “believing” in Jesus, but following Jesus.

Jesus points out a big flaw the Jews have in John 8:40. Jesus comments that a true child of Abraham would follow in Abraham’s footsteps, such as believing in God and obeying God. The Jews were doing neither, and so they did not have the same justifying faith. The Jews might have been the biological descendants of Abraham, but in no means were they spiritual descendants of Abraham. Jesus also points out that Abraham would have never killed a messenger from God, yet the Jews were trying to kill Jesus, the Son of God. Thus, the Jews cannot be children of Abraham, but children of sin and children of the devil. (Another quick note. The majority view is that the “father” in John 8:41 is the Devil. A minority view is that the “father” in John 8:41 is the forefathers of the Jews that killed the prophets. While the majority view makes more sense in the immediate context, I do think the minority view holds some water.) Yet the Jews end verse 41 by saying that they are not illegitimate children, but children of God. I find it funny that the Jews are now waffling. They first insist they are children of Abraham, and now they insist they are children of God. But then again, maybe they see “children of Abraham” and “children of God” as interchangeable.

If I could sum up Christ’s reply in John 8:42-47 in one sentence, it would be “No, you’re not.” Jesus explains this by setting up a sharp contrast between God and the Devil. More specifically, he talks about the truth and lies. This well sums up a common theological theme in John 8. God speaks only the truth, but the devil’s native langue is lies. The Son of God (Jesus) also speaks the truth, but the children of the Devil (the Jews in their sin) speak lies. Thus, when they talk to one another, it’s like 2 people of 2 different languages speaking to each other. They can’t comprehend what the other one is saying. Therefore, the Jews do not understand Jesus, and they do not believe. Instead, like the Devil, they want Jesus dead.

Since Jesus called the sinful Jews children of the Devil, now the accusations from the Jews are going to fly. First, they call him a Samaritan. Is Jesus a Samaritan? No. But remember the Jews see the Samaritans as “half breeds” and “half human.” Calling Jesus a Samaritan is calling him a lesser human. That one is out there, so I’m going to leave that one be. I want to spend more time on the Jews’ accusation of Jesus as “demon-possessed. Not only do they do it twice in this chapter alone, but 4 times in John alone (7:20, 8:48, 8:52, 10:20)! This one sticks out to me because it is turning the tables on Jesus. They are now trying to call Jesus the Son of the Devil, or the Spawn of Satan. John 8:53b sums up it when they ask, “Who do you think you are?”

Yet Jesus keeps going back to God the Father for His testimony. Jesus says He knows the Father, while the Jews do not. Jesus reminds the Jews He is out to honor and glorify the Father, not Himself. He does so by keeping the Father’s Word, which is also His Word. Now Jesus is getting bold. He calls out the Jews for dishonoring Him, because dishonoring Him means dishonoring the Father. He accuses the Jews of lying because they claim to follow God, but they are not. Jesus then reveals that Abraham looked forward to seeing “[Christ’s] day,” saw “[Christ’s] day” and was glad and rejoiced. To understand what Jesus is saying, we got to understand the Abrahamic Covenant. God promised Abraham salvation through the Messiah, who would come in His family line. When the Messiah fully brought salvation to His descendants, that day would the “Day of the Lord.” Now we can say for certain that Abraham, in his old age, did get to see a son born to him and did get to see that son enter adulthood. Most scholars believe this is what Jesus meant when He said Abraham saw “[Christ’s] day.” There is a Jewish tradition, however, that states near the end of Abraham’s life, God gave Abraham a vision which allowed Abraham to see everything played out, to see His seed, to see the Messiah, and to see the Day of the Lord. If that is true, then indeed Abraham saw Jesus and Jesus saw Abraham. Whether or not that is true, we all know Jesus did indeed see Abraham because Jesus is God and God saw Abraham, knew Abraham and worked with Abraham. But once again, the Jews faced the problem of taking things too literally. They saw a man in His 30s proclaim He saw a man who lived about 2,000 years before their time. How can this be? The Jews set Jesus up perfectly for His next “I AM.” Let’s read it together.

John 8:58-
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

Some translations, make this shorter, like “Before Abraham was, I am!” or “Before Abraham, I am!” but either way, this statement is meant to be short and impacting. It indeed was, for look at the reaction! Jesus might as well said, “Before Abraham, YHWH!” for that’s what He was claiming. This can be taken quite literally. The Jews knew the name of their God was “I AM,” as recorded in Exodus 3:14 (In fact, the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the New Testament, translates the “I am” in Exodus 3:14 as the same “I am” in John 8:58). Jesus was using the same name God gave Himself to name Himself. We can also go deeper into this. Jesus was claiming He existed before Abraham, during the time of Abraham, and after Abraham, all the way up to the current time (and further!). By doing so, He was claiming He was greater than their forefather Abraham, one of highest (if not the highest) human figure in the Jewish religion. To make this claim, Jesus had to claim to be God. Jesus was claiming for Himself the same eternal attributes as God Himself, so Jesus must be God.

Like I said, you know that’s what Jesus was claiming by their reaction. The believed Jesus was committing blasphemy. Blasphemy is claiming that you (or it could be another human) are God or you (or another human) is the messiah. Blasphemy was a serious crime, as the punishment was death. When they heard Jesus claim to be God, they were ready to pick up stones and stone him. Remember I said above that the Jews could not perform an execution without Rome’s permission. Yet these people were so offended by the claims of Jesus, they would have stoned him and accepted whatever consequence the Romans gave them. Yet they could not. Jesus can hide in the thick crowd and slip away. Many times through his Gospel account, John will accredit this to God’s Will keeping Him safe, for God has planned for the right time for Jesus to give His life, and only then would an execution happen.

So there it is. In 1 chapter we saw 2 “I AM” statements, bringing us up to 3 “I AM” statements. Yet we were only able to fully flush out 1 of the statements, the other one was just there. Well have no fear, for the next chapter in John will give us a better picture on that “I AM” statement. I hope in this chapter you saw how an “I AM” statement reveals Jesus to be God, and I hope the next chapter will do the same.

John 7: The Word on The Street

The title of this post comes from the title of a paraphrased Bible. The Word on the Street Bible was an attempt to paraphrase the Bible using 21st century language, including 21st century slang and jargon. Rob Lacey, the British author, still seemed to miss the urban feeling he was going for, perhaps because the British urban slang is much different than American slang. (For example, his 21st century equivalent to “amen” is “absolutely.” How many gangsters do you hear saying “absolutely!”?) There’s debate whether the Word on the Street Bible is to be taken seriously as inspired Scripture, or if Lacey has gone too far with paraphrasing, making it dangerously close to heresy. I decided to name this post, not after the paraphrase of the Bible, but because it does literally cover the topic about this chapter. John 7 is about the word on the street about Jesus.

I believe there are 2 ways to understand what the brothers of Jesus are saying in John 7:3,4. The first way is to approach what they say as sarcastic. This would render us the most literal interpretation of verse 5. The brothers are sarcastically telling Jesus to act like a public figure because they really think Jesus isn’t all that and He shouldn’t be a public figure. Now some people are wary to say people are speaking sarcastically, so the second way to look at John 7:3,4 is to look at what the brothers say as literal. In this case, verse 5 would more mean that they do not believe in Christ’s ministry or mission, for His mission is not one to become a popular leader. The brothers seem like they care more about the popularity, fame or even riches that would come with popularity and fame. Jesus is not interested in that. Jesus is interested in proclaiming the gospel message.

Jesus knows it’s too dangerous to go to Jerusalem. The Jewish leaders, such as the Sanhedrin, have more control in Judea than in Galilee, and even more control in Jerusalem than the rest of Judea. Jesus is well aware people are trying to kill him, especially after His teaching in John 6. Jesus also understands why the people are trying to kill him. The people (mainly the Pharisees and Sadducees) want him dead because He exposes the sin of the world, especially the sins of those who think of themselves as righteous. So Jesus decides not to go…or does he? John 7:10 tells the reader he went later secretly.

Why did Jesus go? First, Jesus was a good Jew. The Jewish Law commanded that all laws were mandatory. Yes, Jews had to celebrate holidays. To not celebrate a holiday would be breaking the Law. Jesus was sinless, so to remain sinless, He had to obey the Law and celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem. Second, it’s fair to point out that Jesus did not say he wasn’t going to the Feast of Tabernacles. He just said it was not his time. Apparently His time to go up was a bit later, after everyone else went up. Why? That leads us right into point 3. Third, Jesus just wanted to go in secret to prevent public attraction. If he went with all His family and His disciples at once, Jesus would have stuck out like a sore thumb. When Jesus goes by Himself, He is able to sneak into the city without anyone noticing. Fourth (and this is purely argument from the silence, but it makes logical sense to me), Jesus knew ministry needed to be done in Jerusalem, and nothing could keep Jesus from performing the mission that His Father gave to Him. Well what about His life? It goes back to point. Jesus knew it was not His time for His death. So Jesus knew the Father would keep Him safe. We’ll see that play out.

Sure enough, in John 7:11, all the Jews, the small and the great alike, are looking for Jesus. Now John 7:12,13 is an interesting 2 verses. John puts the reader in the mind of the Jews in Jerusalem. How does he do this? Perhaps he interviewed the Jews. Maybe he just eavesdropped on the gossiping going around. Or maybe even the Holy Spirit told John as John was writing the book. Either way, listening in on this gossiping about Jesus shows how things have changed after Christ’s teaching in John 6. Before John 6 (more specifically, John 6:66), those for Jesus were the majority, and those against Jesus were the minority. Those who were pro-Jesus were large in number and those anti-Jesus were small in number. Then Jesus taught the Bread of Life message in John 6, and John 6:66 reveals that the message caused many to turn away from Jesus. Now we can see that, as John 7:12,13 almost make it look like the approval rating of Jesus is 50/50 or half-and-half. Those who still approve of Jesus say that Jesus is a good man. Those who disapprove of Jesus claim Jesus deceives the people. Both groups are afraid to say anything out loud, in fear of the Sanhedrin. They know they hold the power in Judea and the Jewish faith to announce if Jesus is in the right or in the wrong. Anyone against the Sanhedrin’s decision would be the wrong one, and that would make them a bad Jew. This foreshadows a Jewish crowd that is easily persuaded by its leaders.

But let’s quickly go back to the two statements. Those pro-Jesus, or for Jesus, say, “He is a good man.” Those anti-Jesus, or against Jesus, say, “He deceives the people.” Deception is a form of lying. So those against Jesus call Jesus a liar, but those supportive of Jesus call him a good man. This reminds me of C.S. Lewis’s “trilemma.” Just like in the early 2000s, the people of the early 1900s were trying to simply declare (or rather, simply dismiss) Jesus as a good man and a good teaching, and nothing more, like God. But C.S. Lewis sees a problem with this because of 2 things Jesus taught. First, Jesus taught He was the Truth, and He always told the truth. Second, Jesus taught that He was indeed Lord and God. So C.S. Lewis stated we are left with three options, hence a tri-lemma. First option, Jesus wasn’t God, knew he wasn’t God, but still taught He was God, which would make him a liar. Liars do not make good teachers, or even good people. Second option, Jesus wasn’t God, but He really thought He was God, thus He taught the people He was God, which would make Him insane, crazy or a lunatic. Insane and crazy lunatics do not make good teachers. Third option, Jesus was truly God, Jesus knew He was God, and Jesus taught the truth that He was God to people, which would make Him Lord. This is the only way Jesus could be a good teacher. He had to be the Lord God, for His teaching testifies to it. C.S. Lewis stated this 1900 years after the earthly ministry of Jesus, but it seems like even the people of the 1st century know C.S. Lewis’s trilemma had to be the truth.

The Feast of Tabernacles is a week long feast, so about a half of a week in, Jesus decides He has had enough time alone in private, so He comes out, teaching in temple courts. In teaching, He amazes they Jewish people. They ask in verse 15, “How has this man get such learning without having studied?” The Jews did take studying the Scriptures very seriously. They went through Torah School in what we would call the preschool, elementary school and middle school years. Then they prominent students did an internship/mentoring with a rabbi during what we would call the high school years. At the minimum, the Jews had the whole Torah memorized. That’s Genesis to Deuteronomy! At the maximum, the Jews had the whole Tanak (Hebrew Bible) memorized. That’s Genesis to Malachi! Some of the most outstanding Jews would even attempt to memorize parts of the Talmud, which is Moses’s commentary on the Torah. But not all Jews got to this point. Many could not make it beyond their regular schooling. These Jews went back to their family trade, like farming, fishing, or carpentry, for example. I said carpentry on purpose because that was the trade of Joseph, the father of Jesus, and so that would have been the trade of Jesus. It got the Jews hung up because a carpenter shouldn’t be this wise when it came to the study, interpretation and application of the Scriptures.

Today, Christians can get caught up in the same rut. Christians want the people with the most degrees or the highest degrees teaching and preaching. All Christians would acknowledge that the Holy Spirit is dwelling in every believer of Christ, yet few would be willing to trust an uneducated person as much as an educated person with Biblical matters. Christians cannot get hung up on this. Trust me, I can attest to this. I know two very good pastors, who have never stepped foot on a seminary, and yet they are very good preachers. Another good example would be my quiz coach of 5 years. He never got any formal teaching or training in the Scriptures beyond Sunday School and church. He’s not a lead pastor, an associate pastor, or a youth pastor. In fact, he’s an electrician! Yet he knows the Bible inside and out, and he has a wisdom that rivals Solomon’s. A third example I could give is my favorite childhood Sunday School teacher. Once again, he had no formal training or teaching. His occupation was painting decals on vehicles. Yet he had a heart of spiritual leadership. Christians, never put a person down because they have less education. If we truly have the same Holy Spirit in us all, the Holy Spirit can speak truth to us all through us all. So make sure you carefully listen to everyone. (And this is saying a lot, coming from a Bible college graduate!)

In response to the Jews, Jesus calls out the Jews twice on hypocrisy. First, Jesus points out the Jews hate them for exalting God, while the Jews exalt themselves. For if the Jewish leaders did glorify God, their teaching would sound a lot like the teachings of Jesus. Second, Jesus also points out that the Jews yell at him for healing on the Sabbath, yet they circumcise on the Sabbath. Jesus clearly shows that healing is no more work than circumcising. In fact, Jesus actually has to correct the Jews. By this time, the Jews are claiming circumcision came from Moses. Jesus has to get them back to the Scriptures so they can see Abraham is the one who brought circumcision, and Isaac and Jacob followed through with it. Yet the Jews act like circumcising it not work, and healing is. So Jesus calls them out in verse 24, and he says something that people say all the time in the 21st century, but only Jesus really has the right to say: “You have no right to judge me.”

This leaves the Jews dumfounded. The Jewish people look to towards the Jewish leaders, but they can’t get a peep in. The most they can get in is a denial and an accusation, both of which are false (John 7:20). Since the Jewish leaders are remaining silent, some of the Jewish people are starting to take the silence of the Jewish leaders to say, “We got no argument against Him. He’s right,” which could be interpreted, “He is the Christ.” So the crowd is left to decide on their own. Some come to faith and side with Jesus, believing that no one can give a greater testimony that he is the Christ than Jesus can. Others still are hesitant in coming to faith. They are clinging onto a Jewish tradition that said the Messiah would have no background, like family or hometown. So they can’t believe Jesus is the Messiah because they know He is from Nazareth and they know His mother is Mary and His father is Joseph. Jesus is even willing to demonstrate that He fulfilled the tradition by coming from God the Father, who is mystery to human beings, so it is almost as if Jesus doesn’t have a background because His “background” can’t be comprehended by mere mortals. Still, the Jewish people are cautious.

The Jewish leaders, still dumbfounded, quickly send the temple guard to come and arrest Jesus. To the chief priests and Pharisees, it’s the only way to get Jesus to shut up, since the chief priests and Pharisees can’t say anything to prove Jesus wrong. Yet even arresting Jesus won’t work. John, in his narration, simply says that it was not Christ’s time to be arrested, so the Father prevented Jesus from being arrested. Of course, temple guards, chief priests and Pharisees can’t see this. So when the Pharisees and chief priests question the temple guards on why they came back empty handed, the simply report that while pushing through the crowd, they heard Jesus preach, and they stopped and listening, for even they were perplexed by His words. The chief priests and Pharisees simply dismiss as stupidity. They claim that the only reason Jesus is winning over people is because the people are uneducated and thus are too stupid to know real teaching from fake teaching, good teaching from bad teaching. But Nicodemus, our good from John 3, who is also a Pharisee, raises an eyebrow at this. Nicodemus calls out the Pharisees, his own religious party, for not giving Jesus a fair chance to speak because they are going in to listen to Jesus with a bias against them. Once again, the Pharisees simply dismiss this, arguing that the only reason Nicodemus is defending Jesus is because Jesus is from Galilee, just like Nicodemus is from Galilee.

Jesus preaches in Jerusalem all the way to the end of the Feast of Tabernacles. By now, it almost sounds like he’s repeating himself, for his words, his metaphors and his message sound the same as in John 4-6. It shows Jesus is really trying to get out this message to the people. They need to believe in Him.

So what’s the reaction of the people in the crowd to all of Christ’s teaching? It hasn’t changed too much from before. It’s still split half-and-half, or 50/50. Some people are siding with Jesus, claiming He is either the Christ or the Prophet. Other people are still not willing to side with Jesus. They are still caught up with the fact Jesus grew up in Nazareth in Galilee. Even getting past their Jewish tradition, they know the Scriptures clearly say that the Messiah will come out of David’s family, which means the Messiah would have to come from Bethlehem in Judea. If the people would simply do their genealogy homework, they could see that both Mary and Joseph are descendants of David, thus making Jesus a descendant of David. If the people would simply do their history homework, they would have discovered Jesus was indeed born in Bethlehem. (It’s interesting to see the issue of the location of Christ’s birth comes in the book of John during chapter 7, yet John does not include a birth story. But as we already talked about, John’s telling of the origins of Christ, as told in John 1, fit John’s overall message better.) Yet the Jews remain ignorant about it, and because of it, many refuse to come in faith. So what’s the thesis, or main verse, for John 7?

John 7:43-
“Thus the people were divided because of Jesus.”

Sorry if this post seemed to be all over the place, bouncing back and forth in the chapter. But you’ll see that no matter where I bounced, every verse pointed back to John 7:43. Sorry if it doesn’t seem like there is an overall, primary application to this chapter (although I did make sure to put in small, secondary applications), especially in relation to John’s overall purpose and portrayal of Jesus Christ. What I wanted to show you, and I believe that John wanted the reader to see this in chapter 7 as well, is that after Jesus taught the Bread of Life in John 6, much of the crowd went from follower to skeptic, which led the people to be sharply divided on the subject of Jesus. Some still supported Jesus, while other opposed Him. If there is a group that is larger than the supporters, and larger than the opposers, it would be the undecided and the skeptics. In John chapters 1-6, Jesus laid down the evidence that He was God the Son. Now Jesus is calling for the crowds listening to Him, as well as the reader reading about Him, to make the decision if Jesus truly is God or not. As we read through the next 2/3 of the book of John, we’ll continue to see Jesus prove Himself as God, call the people to make a decision to believe, and see the growing split between those for and against Jesus.

John 6: The Real, True Story of the Feeding of the 5,000

Nothing like a controversial title to get your attention. Don’t get me wrong, I do fully believe in the inspiration, infallibility, inerrancy, authority and revelation of the Scriptures. But remember we agreed that John is writing his book to an audience that he assumes has read and understood the synoptic Gospels. Thus, John writes about the new, unique stories of the life of Jesus. Yet John decides to include the Feeding of the 5,000, which all 3 synoptic Gospel writers also include. Yes, this is the only miracle (and possibly the only story period) that all 4 Gospel writers include in their Gospel. Broadly speaking, why would all 4 Gospel writers include the story of this miracle? More specifically speaking, why would John include the miraculous story, and how does it add to his purpose?

Well, let’s do some pre-thinking brainstorming here. Let’s do so by answering this question: How has movies, television (both TV shows and movies made for TV), music, books, magazines and other forms of media depict this story? This was the answer I came up with: “Unless the source of media is sticking to staying true to a certain Gospel account, most of the time, the media will combine all 4 Gospel accounts to get a full picture.” Notice the preamble I used: “Unless the source of media is sticking to staying true to a certain Gospel account…” Well, we are sticking to staying true to a Gospel account, more specifically, John. So we’re going to want to pick out the unique points that John mentions. After all, he wants to give the readers a fresh look at Jesus. The biggest difference I see in the book is the length of the story. While the synoptic Gospel writers take 12-15 verses to tell the story, John takes 70 verses! You might be thinking to yourself, “Well, that’s because you are including every verse of the chapter for John’s account, while for the synoptic accounts, you’re only taking the verses from the actual story.” I do that because I believe while the synoptic Gospel writers simply summarize the events of the pericope (a story from the life of Jesus) and then move onto the next pericope, John connects the rest of the events (mainly the teaching in 6:22-71) back to the Feeding of the 5,000. Like I said in the introduction, if John repeats a story from the synoptic Gospels, he’s going to bring new information with it, like a teaching. So once again, I’m just going to highlight a couple differences in the actual story, but mainly focus on the preaching afterward.

The first difference I want everyone to notice is that Christ’s response to the hunger of the people. John’s Gospel doesn’t mention this, but all 3 synoptic Gospels say that the disciples said to Jesus that the people were probably getting hungry from listening to Jesus in a remote area for so long. Their idea is to send them away to get their own food. In the 3 synoptic Gospels, Jesus says to the disciples, “You give them something to eat,” but John records Jesus saying in John 6:5, “Where shall we buy bread for these people to eat?” Does this mean that John got it wrong, and there is an error in the Bible? By no means! All you have to do is look at the next verse, John 6:6. Jesus is saying this to test the disciples. So what Jesus said, according to John, could be summarized, “You give them something to eat” because whatever Jesus said, he meant to bring to light the severity of the need. Actually, I believe that John’s different wording brings to light the disciples’ response. Mark is the only author to record that the disciples objected by claiming they didn’t have enough money. This objection and claim doesn’t make sense how they made the jump from Christ’s suggestion to feed them to the disciples’ claim that they didn’t have enough money. John clarifies that. John records Jesus suggesting they pay for this. Once again, this is Jesus bringing to light the severity of the situation. In order to give each person (the Bible records 5,000 men, but if there was at least 1 woman and 1 child for every man, that’s at least 15,000 people) at least 1 bite, it would take 200 denarii, or 8 months worth of pay, and even that would not fill the people. Things were dire.

The second difference I want to point out is the use of the disciples’ names. In Matthew, Mark and Luke, it simply says, “the disciples.” Jesus tells the disciples to give the people something to eat. The disciples tell Jesus there is not enough money. The disciples find a boy with 2 fish and 5 loaves of bread. John picks out specific disciples. Jesus speaks to Philip when he asks how to feed the people. Philip tells Jesus there is not enough money. Andrew finds a boy with 2 fish and 5 loaves of bread. This is not meant to be seen as John picking on people. Instead, this is to be seen as good character development to make the story telling have more of a real feeling. Instead of giving the generic group “the disciples” John picks out specific people, like Philip and Andrew to show the real-life interaction between Jesus and His disciples. And once again, if John has to re-tell a story, he’s going to do it in a new way, even if it is adding some details.

The third difference I see is the reaction of the crowd. As a matter of fact, neither Matthew, nor Mark, nor Luke records the reaction of the people in the crowd. But John does. John says that the people believed Jesus was The Prophet the Scriptures foretold about. John also tells the reader that they were planning to make Jesus king by force. Why would they do that? Imagine a politician running for president claiming that if he is elected president, he would feed everyone, whether it be handing out government-grown food, reimbursing everyone’s food bills, or simply giving everyone food stamps. I bet he would win the presidential race if he could prove his claim. Well, that’s what the crowd of 5,000 men saw. They saw a man feed them with very little food. It got them thinking, “If this man were our king, we would never go hungry ever again because he could feed the whole nation with whatever little food we had!” They loved this thought so much, they were willing to start a revolution to overthrow the Romans and make Jesus king, even if Jesus didn’t want it! But John also records Jesus knew about their intents, so he high-tailed it out of there!

Now the next story seems to “interrupt” the story of the Feeding of the 5,000, between the miracle and the teaching. It’s a famous story. It’s the story of Jesus walking on the water during a storm on the sea. This one isn’t in all 4 Gospel narratives, but it is in 3 of the 4: Matthew, Mark and John. Yet John seems to talk about the miracle the least. Once again, we ask ourselves, “Why would John include this story?” Well, first of all, it’s just the natural progression of events. After the Feeding of 5,000, the crowd is pressing on Jesus and His disciples. I can almost imagine Jesus shoving the disciples on the boat, yelling, “I’ll fend them off. Go on ahead without me. I’ll catch up!” And I bet the storm came up the minute a disciple said out loud, “How do you think Jesus is going to catch up with us?” Most likely, they thought he would go around the lake or take a different boat later on, but I’m sure the least likely response would be “Walk on water.” I would even more say this story is here for progression of events because Mark tells us that despite Jesus walking on water and calming the storm, they still don’t understand the miracle of the Feeding of the 5,000. This is the perfect segway into John 6:22-71, even if John doesn’t record it. But the second and just as important reason is for the disciples’ reaction because it fulfills John’s purpose. It’s interesting to see that although it answers John’s purpose, John does not record it, but Matthew does. So you don’t have to leave your place in John 6, I’ll put it up right here.

Matthew 14:33-
Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Bam! There it is. When the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, they knew Jesus was the Son of God, or God the Son. Although John does not explicitly state it, John believes that through seeing this miracle, the reader will also see Jesus as God. Remember, John only puts 7 miracles in his book, and all of these miracles are to point to Jesus as the Son of God and God the Son. So we understand why the miracle of Jesus walking on water shows Jesus as God, but we still need to see how the Feeding of the 5,000 reveals Jesus to be God. So let’s begin in verse 22.

Meanwhile, while the disciples were sailing across the Sea of Galilee, and Jesus was walking across it (I always wondered if Jesus started walking while the crowd was pressing on him, and if so, I wonder what the crowd’s reaction was…), the crowd has been going to every town on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, looking for Jesus. They still have the intent of forcing him to be king so he can continue making lots of food out of very little food. I love their reaction when they finally find Jesus in the synagogue at Capernaum. It’s like they are saying, “Jesus! It just so happens all 5,000 of us men just so happened to be visiting Capernaum, and lo and behold, you are here! What a coincidence!” Jesus, instead of continuing to try to run away, confronts the people. Jesus basically says in John 6:26, “You’re not here to truly listen to my teaching and follow me. You’re only here to eat more food.” It would be like a youth leader confronting his youth group by saying, “You’re not here for Bible study. You’re just here to eat my snacks and play my games.”

Now the youth accused of such things might try to prove this wrong by playing along in Bible study, even fully participating in answering questions. So the crowd also plays along. They pretty much ask Jesus in John 6:28, “What are teaching, and how do we follow it?” Maybe they are truly playing along, too, hoping that if they do follow Christ’s teaching, He will truly give them more food. Jesus plays along, too, giving a simple answer: Believe in the One Sent. Obviously, the one sent is Jesus. Are you seeing a reoccurring theme of believing in Jesus as the Christ and the Son of God? John in 6 chapters has already driven home his purpose. But he’s not done yet, neither in this book nor in this chapter. He’s got a stronger statement to reveal Jesus is God in John 6. Let’s keep reading.

The crowd is sick of playing games by verse 30, but they don’t want to come out and say it, either. So, being the good Jews they are, they ask Jesus for a sign. You’d think they are completely forgetting the Feeding of the 5,000 that happened just a few verses earlier, but in fact, the opposite is true. They remember the Feeding of the 5,000 quite well, and they are trying to coax Jesus into doing it again. They even use the manna from heaven story in the Old Testament as an example. It’s like the crowd is saying, “Sure, we’ll believe in you, Jesus, but first give us a sign to prove you’re the One. Let’s see, Moses provided manna/bread from heaven as his sign, how about you provide more bread too?” 😀

Jesus isn’t falling for it. First, Jesus corrects the crowd by explaining it was not Moses who gave them bread, but rather God providing bread. Such an attitude reflects the Jews clinging on to the Law and the Lawgiver Moses, instead of God, the true author of the Law. Second, Jesus talks about a bread that gives life. Uh-oh. Another Samaritan Woman at the well incident is about to happen. The people believe that Jesus can provide a literal bread from heaven that can literally give eternal life. Just like the Samaritan Woman, they then demand of this bread. Jesus has the perfect response for that, and I’m going to record it right here.

John 6:35-
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.”

There it is. There is our first occurrence of the 7 “I AM” statements in John, and what a better statement to start it with. This statement is rich with Jewish typology. First and foremost, when Jesus starts off this statement with I AM, the Jews are immediately linking it back to the Great I AM Yahweh. Second, as the Jews earlier in this chapter mention, Jesus is probably linking this back to the manna from heaven. Just as God provided physical bread for the people in the desert, so God provided spiritual bread for the people, who is Jesus Christ. Third, there is a connection to the table of showbread. The table of showbread was inside the tabernacle, on the north side of the Holy Place. On the showbread table was placed twelve loaves of unleavened, fine flour bread. A fresh batch of bread was placed on the table at the beginning of the week, and it would remain there until the end of the week. At the end of the week, the priests would come together to eat the bread together, and a new batch of bread would be put in its place. Jewish tradition says that God kept the bread fresh at all times, as fresh as it was right out of the oven. Another Jewish tradition says that all it takes is a piece of this bread the size of a bean to fill you up completely. The table of showbread had much symbolism to it. There were 12 loaves of bread for the 12 tribes of Israel. The table had a special reason for its location. It was in front of the Holy of Holies, in front of the presence of God. It symbolized that the 12 tribes of Israel were always in the presence of God. God would never forget Israel, and He was keeping a watchful eye over them. This image is further shown with the priests eating the bread together, because it shows God fellowshipping with the people. The bread was a reminder that God was the provider of Israel. All this symbolism transferred to Jesus when Jesus declared Himself “the Bread of Life.” Jesus is always in the presence of God. Jesus is always in the presence of His people, the church. Jesus never forgets His people, the church, and He always keeps a watchful, protective eye over them. Jesus always provides for them, too. Fourth, many times the prophets would mention the Messiah providing for the people food and drink. All these added up together give us strong evidence that Jesus was clearly declaring Himself as God.

Furthermore, in John 6:36-50, Jesus continues to demonstrate that He is God by once again talking about Himself as the Son and talking about God as the Father. Also, Jesus displays He is God because He shows the interlinking between God the Father, Yahweh, and God the Son, Jesus. The Son has everything and everyone the Father gives Him. The Father’s Will and the Son’s Will are one and the same. The Father’s Will is that the Son will raise up everyone who the Father gives the Son. The Father’s Will is that everyone who believes in the Son will have eternal life, which will be given by the Son (and if you remember chapter 5, that power has been given to the Son by the Father). Everyone who listens to the Father and obeys the Father listens to the Son and obeys the Son, and vice versa. No one has seen the Father except the Son, and the only way to see the Father is to see the Son. The interchangeability between the Father and Son makes the reader conclude the Father and the Son are one and the same, so Yahweh and Jesus are one and the same. Once again, the reader sees Jesus is not only the Son of God, but also God the Son!

Now we have a “fun” passage we need to deal with: John 6:51-59. Indeed passages like this are what the Catholics use to support transubstantiation, which is the belief that the bread and wine/grape juice literally becomes Christ’s body and blood respectively. Yet there a lot of holes to expose on using this passage to support transubstantiation. First, the Last Supper has not happened yet, so it can’t be a reference to communion (in fact, the Last Supper will not happen for another year). Second, the Law strictly forbid drinking literal blood, whether it be from man or animal (see Leviticus 3:17, 17:10-14). Third, if Jesus was to talk about the Lord’s Supper, it would only be among the disciples (as he did with the Last Supper) and not unbelievers, like the crowd he is facing now. Fourth, what Jesus is talking about in John 6:51-59 seems to be a requirement. If this were true, then anyone who has not taken communion is not saved and is in hell. Once again, I will bring up that one criminal crucified next to Jesus. He probably never took communion, yet Jesus acknowledged he would be in heaven. So the Last Supper can’t be a requirement. On that same note, this would be hinting that practicing a religious sacrament is what saves you, not believing in Jesus Christ. Last, this passage as a whole makes more sense figuratively than literally. It seems like Jesus rebukes the ones who take what he says literally (see John 6:60-64).

Unfortunately, while we have a strong defense against transubstantiation, we, however, only have a weak stance on any other point of view. The Bible Knowledge Commentary tries to parallel this passage with John 6:35, claiming “eating Christ’s body” means coming to Jesus, and “drinking Christ’s blood” means believing in Him. The New Bible Commentary believes “the body of Christ” refers to Christ’s human nature and “the blood of Christ” refers to Christ’s divine nature. The Bible Exposition Commentary and The Pulpit Commentary: St. John (Vol. 1) both sum up the metaphor along the lines of, “Just as food and drink gets absorbed into your body for your physical well-being, so you must absorb Jesus in your life for your spiritual well-being” (my paraphrase). There’s a just a few to name. Whatever the right interpretation may be, overall, most schools of thought believe that “eating Christ’s body” and “drinking Christ’s blood” in John 6:51-59 is simply a metaphor for Christ’s atoning death on the cross.

Don’t worry if either the John 6:36-50 or John 6:51-59 got you hung up in confusion. It did the same to the Jewish crowd following Jesus. One minute, the Jewish crowd thinks Jesus is talking about cannibalism. The next minute, the Jews are whining that Jesus is claiming to be all that, while he is simply the son of a carpenter. After both passages, it leaves Christ’s followers to say, “This is a hard teaching. Who can understand it?” (I must note that indeed most Bible translations use the word “disciples” in John 6:60 and 6:66, but in most of our minds, when we think of the disciples of Jesus, we automatically think of the Twelve Disciples Jesus chose. This cannot be the case, for in verse 67, Jesus turns to the Twelve Disciples. Remember that on top of the Twelve, Jesus had a great number of people who followed Jesus wherever Jesus went, even if these people weren’t specifically called by Jesus. To prevent confusion, I will call these people “followers” instead of “disciples.”) What did Christ’s followers mean in verse 60 when they said it was a hard teaching they didn’t understand? Perhaps it could have been they still didn’t comprehend or understand Christ’s teaching. In the parable of the sower, Jesus calls these people “the seed sown along the path” (see Matthew 13, Mark 4 & Luke 8). Maybe the followers meant it was hard to apply to their lives. Either way, they could no longer accept the teachings of Jesus. They were almost unbearable to the Jews to follow. Jesus explains in verse 65 that the reason they do not comprehend or the reason they cannot apply is that the Father has not enabled them. The result? John 6:66. I will put this verse up since this is going to be a climatic event that will totally change the ministry of Jesus, or at least those receiving the ministry.

John 6:66-
From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

The joke about this verse is that a verse that talks about people falling away from Jesus or people who aren’t Christian is a verse prescribed the verse number 666, the number given to the followers of the Antichrist during the Great Tribulation (who would also be non-Christians). Whether this was intentional or not, this verse does show an epic turning point. Before this verse, or even this chapter, Jesus indeed had a large following. Why did Jesus have to feed 5,000 men, and possibly 15,000-20,000 people? Because that’s how many people were following Jesus up to this point. Jesus had followers in the thousands. After this, Christ’s followers would only be in the hundreds, and maybe not even that (Acts 1:15 tells us that after the ascension, there was only 120). Before this point, it’s very possible people were just following Jesus because it was the popular thing to do. Jesus clearly states that following Him isn’t merely a fad. Jesus called for people to truly follow Him, or don’t follow Him it all. Most public relations experts would tell a public figure this is a bad move to make, for if you want to be popular, you need to appease to your fans. Jesus did not come to this earth to become a popular icon, so in no way was He going to appease to followers just to be liked. Jesus set out His life on earth to glorify the Father, and anyone who wanted to come along was more than welcome, but those who were not on the same path had no part in the ministry of Jesus.

Today celebrities are well aware that a majority of Americans are Christians, so they will appeal to their fans or “followers” by “practicing” Christianity. Politicians will go to church. Rappers will wear crosses around their neck. Athletes will take a knee in prayer after scoring a goal or points, such as a homerun or touchdown. Actors and actresses of both the small television screen and the big silver screen will throw somewhere in their speech accepting an award that they want to thank God or Jesus. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe some politicians, rappers, athletes, actors and actresses legitimately are believers giving God the glory. But at other times I can’t help but wonder if they are just jumping on the popularity bandwagon, knowing that they can earn fans or followers from the Christian faith by doing such things. Sure they might believe in the Jesus who fed 5,000 men, but do they believe in the Jesus that preached hard teachings, not just eating his body and drinking his blood, but also giving up your life, giving up riches of the world, and giving up a sinful lifestyle? Just like the people in John 6:66, when they faced with these teachings, they too might turn their backs and no longer follow Jesus. But the ones who stayed are the true believers.

That’s what we see in John 6:67-71. Jesus turns to the Twelve Disciples, and He pretty much asks them, “Are you going to leave me too?” It’s almost as if Jesus is saying, “Now’s your chance to leave if you want to.” I really love Simon Peter’s answer. Even though Simon Peter says it, you can tell all Twelve are behind him on this. To sum it all up, Peter says, “Yeah, your teaching is hard, but it’s still the truth, and we know it’s the truth because You are the Holy God. So we’re committed to being your disciples.” I will say it again, I really love Peter’s answer. It’s a great application for Christians today in the 21st century. Indeed, the teachings of Jesus are hard. They call us to be holy not in our actions alone, and not just words and actions, but in actions, words and thought. They call us to constantly confess and repent of sins in our life. They call us not to lift up ourselves, but to lift up God in glory. They teach us to love God and others before ourselves. They call us to reject riches if it puts someone in poverty. None of this is easy, and they are especially hard with a sinful nature which wants all of them. Our world tries to live by this philosophy: “If it’s too hard to do, all we have to simply do is stop believing, and then we can stop following them and take the easy path.” But as Simon Peter revealed, when we entertain such thinking, we are really fooling ourselves. Simply choosing not to believe in something does not mean it ceases to exist. I can stop believing gravity exists, but that doesn’t mean I’ll start floating away because I stopped believing gravity. Gravity is still there, whether I believe it or not. The same is true for God. God still exists, whether people choose to believe it or not, and choosing not to believe in God does not lead to escape of God’s Law. But many people, as the people in John 6:66, believe that when God’s teaching gets too tough, we can walk away so we can take the easy path. On the contrary, it makes us guiltier because we are consciously aware of the Law, yet refuse to follow it.

I must also point out that Simon Peter calls Jesus “The Holy One of God.” Once again, Peter’s testimony is the proof that Jesus is God because you can’t get any more straight forward than the Holy One of God. To be the Holy One of God, you must be God. It fits John’s purpose perfectly. Speaking of John’s purpose, let’s conclude John 6 by going back to my introduction to the chapter and answering the broad and specifics of why John, as well as the other Gospel writers, decided it was necessary to mention the Feeding of the 5,000.

Broadly speaking, why did all 4 Gospel writers decide their accounts of the life of Jesus needed the Feeding of the 5,000? Think about the other miracles Jesus performed. Jesus healed the blind. The only people who can really relate to this are blind or visually impaired people who desire to see with 20/20 vision. Jesus healed the deaf, but the only people who could relate to this or the blind or those who need a hearing aid, both who wish to hear on their own. Jesus healed the mute, but the only ones who could relate are the mute, or possibly those who stutter, has a lisp or some other speech impediment. Jesus healed the paralyzed, but the only people who can relate are those who need the help of a wheelchair, crutches or a walk to move around. Well what about those who see, hear, talk and move perfectly? How can they relate? All people need food. Most people can’t go more than a month without food. There are roughly 800 million people around the world who are starving, but even if you’re not one of those 800 million, you’ve probably felt hunger before, when you’ve gone a long time without food and your stomach starts growling. Everybody can relate to needing food, so everyone can relate to needing to be fed. Thus, everyone can relate to the Feeding of the 5,000. Therefore, all the Gospel writers including the Feeding the 5,000 narrative because it doesn’t matter if you are Jew, Roman, Greek or Christian, everyone needs food and everyone Jesus to be that ultimate provider.

Specifically speaking, why did John decide to include the Feeding of the 5,000, especially after Matthew, Mark and Luke did it before him? We’ve already discussed the broad reasons, but to get to specific reasons, we got to look at John’s purpose and portrayal of Jesus. What’s John’s purpose? John wrote the book of John to persuade Christians [to continue] to believe Jesus is the Son of God and Christ. How is John portraying Jesus? Jesus is the Son of God, or God the Son. So how does the Feeding of 5,000 demonstrate to the reader Jesus is the Son of God, or God Himself. We can go with the obvious answer of “Only God could manipulate nature to fully feed all those people with such little food,” but let’s look deeper than that. How does John add to the story what the synoptic Gospel writers did not? Giving names and revealing Christ’s intent as well as the crowd’s intent seems kind of petty. The best answer is that John demonstrates that the Feeding of the 5,000 was a small part of a bigger picture. Since the pericope of the miracle is only about 1/5 of the chapter, it almost seems as if the miracle is only the introduction, or the attention-getter, of the bigger message Jesus wants to preach. It is like the miracle is only the visual aid to His teaching. So to look into how it reveals Jesus as Christ and God the Son, we have to look into the message. What does it say? It makes Jesus and God one and the same. It makes salvation and eternal life only possible through Jesus. All these add to up to Jesus being portrayed as the Son of God. But suppose we wanted to narrow it down to one verse. If the miraculous Feeding of the 5,000 was the introduction, then the thesis of the chapter would be John 6:35, where Jesus declares “I AM the Bread of Life.” Everything before the verse points forward to this verse, and everything after points back to the verse.

After 6 chapters of John, we’ve already gone through 5 miracles, and only have 2 remaining. But in John 6, we reached our first “I AM” statement and have 6 more to go. So as we continue through John, let’s focus less on miracles and more around the teachings that surround the “I AM” statements about Jesus.

John 5: Not Just A Guitarist

The title for this chapter is probably going to take some explaining. The only ones who will probably get it is from my generation, and even then, not everyone in my generation will know what I’m talking about. “John 5” is the stage name for John Williams Lowery, who was the lead guitarist for David Lee Roth, Marilyn Manson, and Rob Zombie. I did not know about John 5 until Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock put on their game “Black Widow of La Porte” by John 5 (featuring rhythm guitarist Jim Root). Every time I heard or I played this song, I would always think of John 5 as in the book of John chapter 5. But now every time I read the book of John chapter 5, I think of John 5 the guitarist and the song “Black Widow of La Porte.” Let’s talk less about the guitarist and more about the book and chapter.

John 5:1 is proof I’m pretty sure this supplemental Gospel was written topically and not chronologically. If you read to the end of John 4, the last place you leave Jesus is Cana in Galilee. At the beginning of John 5, Jesus is in Jerusalem in Judea. The best transition we get is “some time later.” But let’s talk less about time and more about location. More specifically than Jerusalem, Jesus is at out pool by the Sheep Gate, which has the name Bethesda (or Bethzatha or Bethsaida, depending on what manuscript your translation used). The name literally means, “House of Healing,” so you know where this story is going. The setting is a sad story, as the place is crawling with the ill, the injured and the disabled. Why?

Now’s the perfect time to point out John 5 is missing verse 4. Why is it missing? Verse 4 can only be founded in the later manuscripts. All the discovered early manuscripts don’t have it. Most likely, John never wrote verse 4. Later on, an editor put in it to explain the significance of the pool because people forgot the importance. So let’s look at verse 4.

John 5:4-
“From time to time an angel of the Lord would come down and stir up the waters. The first one into the pool after each such disturbance would be cured of whatever disease he had.”

So legend had that every now and then (and it was a rare every now and then), an angel would come down and stir up the waters. When the angel stirred the waters, the waters had healing powers, but only enough power to heal one person. The first one in the water would be healed. You might be thinking, “Then why don’t you just sit the pool the whole time?” It didn’t work like that. It would have to be the first one in the pool after the water was stirred, not during or while the pool was being stirred. Besides, if you sat in the pool waiting for a rare occurrence, you’d have more wrinkles than a raisin and a prune combined. Now this legend isn’t as pure as you think. First, I will note that this was a local legend, local meaning only the people of the city believed it. You probably couldn’t find any other believers in the rest of Judea, Samaria, Galilee or anywhere else in the world. Second, the legend was brought about by the Greeks while they were in the land, not the Jews. You will find nowhere in the Old Testament, New Testament, or even the Jewish Talmud (commentary on the Torah) that would support this legend. The Bible Knowledge Commentary points out that this is unbiblical because it’s so cruel to make disabled people compete for healing. So it’s not a Jewish legend, but rather a Greek legend. It has to be a Greek legend, because when the Greeks were in the land, they worshipped snakes there. As a matter of fact, a lot of them worshipped snakes on poles, just like the Bronze snake on the pole Moses made while the Israelites were wandering in the desert. In the Greek legend, it probably wasn’t an angel that stirred the waters, but their god of healing, which is also symbolized by a snake on a pole. (And that is why hospitals and ambulances use a snake on a pole as their symbol. It is the Greek god for healing.) When the Jews took back the land, the local Jews fixed the legend, replacing the Greek god with an angel of the Lord. It really doesn’t matter where the legend came from. The point to be to made is that the disabled people were willing to anything to be healed, even if it is hoping in a silly superstition.

John 5:5 picks out one of these men, but it’s only descriptive to a point. The NLT and NCV calls him “sick.” The RSV, NRSV, and NASB calls him “ill.” The NET calls him “disabled.” The NIV, ESV and Message call him an “invalid.” The KJV and NKJV says he has an “infirmity.” Very generic. I looked at the original Greek. The word they used is asthenia, which can be translated “weakness” or “frailty.” It still doesn’t help clear things up. A lot of commentaries will simply say he’s paralyzed because context clues says he has problems getting off his mat. The text does tell us this man has been invalid for 38 years, and he’s possibly been waiting at the pool for 38 years. The text doesn’t tell how many ill people are at the pool at this point, but Jesus chooses this invalid man to pick out.

When Jesus asks the invalid man in John 5:6, “Do you want to get well?” we may find it a stupid question. Of course a man disabled for 38 years wants to get well! Many scholars have given many interpretations for why Jesus asked a question that seemed so obvious. Perhaps the man made his living off begging for money out of the people’s pity for him. Healing him would take away his source of income (compare to Acts 16:16-21). Maybe the man got so use to a lifestyle of being invalid he had accepted it and no longer desired to change his lifestyle. It would be like asking a man in a wheelchair, “Would you like to walk?” and the wheel chaired man replying in anger, “What? Am I not good enough because I am in a wheelchair?! Does it make me less of a human because I am in a wheelchair?!” On that note, perhaps Jesus didn’t want to offend the man by making him look weak and pathetic being invalid. Sometimes disabled people do get offended if you baby them too much. Maybe Jesus asked the question because, as we’ll see later on the story, both He and the invalid man knew that they would be breaking the man-made “Sabbath laws” by being healed and carrying a mat. Jesus didn’t want to throw that kind attention on the invalid man if he didn’t want it. Perhaps Jesus said to get the man excited about the real possibility of getting healed. Also remember that Jesus many times connected physical ailment to spiritual ailment and physical healing to spiritual healing. Many people, back then and today, don’t recognize they have sin, and even if they do, both those who do and do not may enjoy their sin and not see as wrong. As much as God hates, he will still honor their free will and allow them to stay in their sin (see Romans 1:24,26,28). On last possibility is that Jesus is calling the man out on his superstition, and calling him to real faith in Christ. It’s like Jesus is saying, “Do you [really] want to get well? [Because this superstition isn’t working. Believe in Me instead. I can really heal you.]”

What may seem weirder than Christ’s question is the invalid man’s answer. The invalid man’s answer is somewhere along the lines of, “Yeah, but it’s not going to happen because I’m too weak and too slow to get in the water when it is stirred, so someone always beats me to it.” It’s like the invalid man doesn’t even answer Christ’s question. The man is so hooked on this superstition, he believes it’s his only way to get cured.

As expected, the miraculous healing takes place in John 5:8,9, but pay close attention to what’s happening. Jesus doesn’t say, “I’ll help you next time the angel stirs the water!” then precedents to wait until the next stirring, when Jesus throws him in the pool. Jesus doesn’t say, “Well, I’m God, so I’ll stir the water for you so you don’t have to wait for the silly angel” and then waits for the man to get so He can stir the water. In fact, notice Jesus doesn’t use the water at all. He just says the word, and the man is healed! Once again, Jesus is drawing the man away from believing in superstitions and towards believing in Jesus Christ. Actually, in light of John 5:14, maybe his superstitious beliefs caused him to sin, which led to his disability.

May I pause him here to say “Amen?” You won’t believe the number of Christians I know who are superstitious is some way, shape or form. Well, ok, I don’t know too many, but that number should be zero, but it isn’t! You might think “I’m not a superstitious Christian” but you might just be. Do you believe in good luck and bad luck? If you do, then you are! The idea of “luck” really denies God of His Will and His sovereign control. It states God cannot destine or predestine anything. But we all know God does control everything with His sovereign hand, and He can destine and predestine events in people’s lives. Thus, anything that happens in our lives, whether good or bad, shouldn’t be credited to luck because that’s crediting it to a non-existing force. Instead of “good luck” we have “blessings;” instead of “bad luck” we have “curses.” None of that is out of God’s control, for it is God who blesses and God who curses (although I will note that some bad things are the consequences of sin, which is the absence of God, but that’s another long post for another time). So Christians, stop believing in “luck” and stop involving yourself in those superstitious things that are suppose to give you good luck, for you are messing with forces that are not meant to be missed with. You too can be invalid by sinning, or something worse!

(Alright, that last paragraph reminded me of a funny saying I had during quizzing. I went into quizzing believing in good luck and bad luck. I even had a lucky t-shirt for quizzing. When I started quizzing for Spring City, my coaches Dave and Vicki Deitrick taught me there was no such thing as good luck and bad luck, but only God’s blessings and God’s curses. So I would teach my quizzing teammates the same, saying to them, “I don’t believe in luck. I only believe in God’s blessing. So remember that next time you see me turn my quizzing opponents and say, ‘Good luck!’.” 🙂 haha).

What might be crazier than Christ’s question in verse 6 or the invalid man’s answer in verse 7 is the Jewish leaders’ response in verse 10 when they see the man walking. Most people would be happy to see a lame man walking. Even in today’s day and age, we’d be glad to see a man who use to need a wheelchair, crutches or a walker walking on his own. Not the Jewish leaders, though. What is their reaction? They call him out for breaking the Law! The only problem is this “law” is not written in the Torah, not is it even written in the Talmud (Moses’s commentary on the Torah). It’s a law the Sanhedrin wrote out of their interpretation of the Law. Still, in their eyes, this man is in trouble, and he probably would have gotten into trouble, too. But then he mentions someone made him well. In their minds, they could be thinking, “Well, whoever this man is who made you well is in bigger trouble because he did a bigger work on the Sabbath: healing!” At least it got the healed man out of trouble. The Jewish leaders ask the man who healed him because they want to interrogate this healer, but all the man can do is shrug his shoulders. He doesn’t know either, but what does he care, he’s healed! Later on, though, the man finds out the healer was Jesus, and once he does, he reports back to the Jewish leaders that it was Jesus, possibly to keep himself out of hot water.

Before we go any further, we got to ask ourselves the question, “Why does Jesus perform this miracle?” or even “Why did John decide to include this miracle in his book?” Remember, John only put 7 miracles in books. We’re already up to the 3rd miracle (yes, I did skip the 2nd miracle in John 4, but that’s because the post on John 4 was already long enough and it was off topic). So why is this one so important? We could just stick with generic answers. It shows Christ’s power over nature. Jesus came to defeat the Fall, and Jesus defeated all aspects of the Fall, including sickness and disease. Christ’s power to defeat a physical ailment that everyone can see demonstrates His power to defeat the unseen spiritual ailment known as sin. All of those do work, all of those do show Jesus as God, but it would be better if we could have a reason that’s less generic and more specific to the story in this chapter. I’m not going to read the verse, but let’s just say the next verse, John 5:16, shows a dramatic transition in the chapter’s text. It’s almost like a cause-and-effect transition. Many commentaries agree on why Jesus performed this miracle, but they don’t really word it correctly, so it sounds harsh. If I were to paraphrase their belief on why Jesus performed the miracle, it would be, “Jesus healed the man to start a debate with the religious leaders.” Doesn’t that sound harsh, that Jesus would only heal a person to start an argument? It would totally reword Christ’s question in John 5:6 to “Can I make you well so I can pick a fight with the Jewish leaders?” But if you think about it, it does make sense. Jesus never healed people just for the sake of healing people. To borrow the title of an ApologetiX song, Jesus did not want to become the “Temple Physician.” Jesus performed His miracle to demonstrate His authority and verify His message. In short, Jesus performed miracles to demonstrate who He is and verify what He did. Once again, notice how this miracle smoothly transits into Christ’s preaching. So the commentaries did have it right; they just needed to word it better. They could say that the miracle was an attention-getting introduction to His preaching, or say that the healed invalid man was the “visual aid” his teaching.

Now it’s time for the great transition from miracle to teaching. John 5:16 says that because Jesus was preaching work on the Sabbath (or so it seemed) and even working himself on the Sabbath (miracles constituted as work), the Jewish leaders begin persecuting Jesus. Let’s quickly compare the Jews from Jerusalem’s reaction toward John the Baptist to their reaction toward Jesus. When it came to John the Baptist, it was just a close, watchful eye. Yeah, John the Baptist was calling out the Pharisees and Sadducees to hypocrites and sinners, but beside that He was doing nothing wrong. Baptism has its roots in Jewish cleansing rituals, so there was nothing really wrong with John baptizing (although the Jews didn’t think it was necessary to baptize yet). Both John the Baptist and the Jews believed the Messiah was coming, even though John thought he was coming sooner than the rest of the Jews thought. And as matter of fact, John the Baptist’s preaching called for the people to repent of their sins, which was very similar to the Jewish leaders teaching the people to follow the Law. So while the Jews from Jerusalem kept a close eye on John the Baptist to make sure he didn’t start a revolution, the Jews really didn’t see him as a threat. Now when the disciples transfer from John the Baptist to Jesus Christ, so the Jewish leader’s watchful eye also transfer from John to Jesus. At first, their reaction is skeptical. Their questions are merely to get a better understanding of what Jesus is preaching. But by now, by John 5:16, it goes from curiosity to persecution. Their questions go from curiosity and understanding to criticizing and doubting. Why? Jesus is not only working on the Sabbath, but telling others it’s alright to work on the Sabbath. Although healing and carrying a mat are not declared work in the Torah or Talmud, the Jewish leaders saw it as work, therefore they saw as a man breaking the Law and teaching others to break the Law, and the religious leaders would not put up with that. Any man who broke the Law and taught of breaking the Law, even if it was just their interpretation of the Law, was deemed a sinner, a blasphemer and a heretic. To them, the situation called for persecution.

We’re going to skip over John 5:18 for now, but we’ll come back to it. Right now, we’re going to jump right into Christ’s teaching, starting in John 5:19. Now I’ll point out some specifics, but I want to more show the overall message and how it reveals Jesus as God the Son because it will stick to the overall message of John’s Gospel. And you’ll see the number one way John shows Jesus is the Son of God is by teaching trinity.

To fully understand John 5:19-30, we have to get out of our Western mindset of thinking and go into an Eastern mindset of thinking. What’s the difference? The Western mindset of thinking is all about dissecting, breaking down and analyzing. When it comes to trinity, it will break the trinity into 3 parts, break it into 3 categories, and then try to nicely and neatly put categorize all the acts of God into these 3 categorize, by what entity performs what task. The reasons we want to get out of this mindset is because, as we’ll find out, it will create a big mess. Instead, the better thinking is the Eastern mindset, which sees the trinity as 3 persons, and then tries to see how these 3 persons relate to one another. You’ll see John 5:19-30 does not try to categorize the actions of the Father and the actions of the Son, but instead shows how the Father and the Son relate, and how they work together.

So first, starting with John 5:19, we learn that God the Son cannot act independently from God the Father, nor can the Son act in opposition to the Father. There is only love in this relationship, and they come to work together in unity. Just an earthly father mentors his earthly son, so the Heavenly Father mentors His Son and shows the Son the Father’s Will and the Father’s works. In John 5:21, Jesus gives the specific example of life and resurrection. Both the Father and the Son have the power of life. The Son offers eternal life (salvation), and the Father will raise from the dead whoever took up on Christ’s offer for eternal life. In John 5:22, Jesus provides judgment as another specific example. The Father has handed over His power to judge to the Son in order that the Son may be treated like the Father. After all, the Jews in the Old Testament feared God the Father because they knew of the power He had to judge them. Now the Jews in the New Testament were in a whole lot of trouble because the Jew in the New Testament were not treating the Son of God, Jesus, with that same honorable fear. Because Jesus warns the people that to not fear or honor Jesus is like not fearing or honoring God.

Since Jesus is on the subject of judgment, he will talk about the present state of judgment. This talk is going to be very similar to Christ’s talk with Nicodemus in John 3. Whoever hear Christ’s words and believes in Him will receive eternal life. If anyone does not, that person will remain in his or her state of condemnation. That is what is mean when Jesus mentions crossing over from death to life. Before a person has Jesus, the person stands condemned in his or her sin, condemned to death. When a person receives Jesus, the person goes from condemned to forgiven, the person goes from hell to heaven, the person goes from life to death. How can Jesus do this? Jesus is God the Son. God the Father has given the power of life to God the Son. So Jesus, God the Son, can give life to whomever He pleases. And while Jesus is on the subject of judgment, he will talk about the future state of judgment. To demonstrate that the Son has the power of life, the Son of God will resurrect everyone on the Last Day, both the good and the evil. Those who are evil will be condemned to eternal damnation, while the good will be raised to eternal life. Once again, how is this possible for Jesus? Only by the Father.

Before we transit into the next section, let’s once again summarize the teaching of Jesus here, as well as summarize the theology that goes along with it. God the Father loves God the Son, and God the Son loves God the Father. Therefore, they work in unity with one another. Their thoughts, words, and actions are always working together. They will never be in opposition, nor will they ever contradict. Since there is love and unity between the Father and the Son, the Father can entrust the Son will power, such as the power to judge and the power to give life. The Father does not have to worry about the Son abusing these powers because the Father knows the Son loves Him and wants to work to please Him. Everything the Son does is done just the way the Father wants it done because the Son wants to please the Father. Therefore, it doesn’t make sense to categorize the trinity into 3 parts because the Father, Son and Holy Spirit all have the same powers, such as the powers to judge, condemn, forgive, heal and give life. It all comes down to how the 3 persons relate to one another and work together for unity.

Let’s make one quick application pause before we move on. I’ve always believe the relationship between the persons of the trinity, or the community of the trinity, can demonstrate how humans should develop relationships, both with God and with other humans. Since this passage more talk about divine things, let’s look at what humans can learn about their relation to God the Father from God the Son. If we as Christians truly love God, we should seek unity with him. What does it mean to have unity with God? Our thinking should be the same as God. Our feelings should be godly. Our wants and desires should be the same wants and desires our Lord as. If it’s God’s Will, then it should be our will as well. When we do something, whatever it is, it should be done the way God wants it done, in order to give God praise, honor and glory. I believe when we do that, and when we get to that point, God will give us more power because He know and entrusts us to use it continue give him the glory and the praise. I believe that’s what all the authors of the Bible books had in common. They were able to get to the point where their wants, their needs, their desires and their will was the same as God’s. So God entrusted them to write His words.

Just as Jesus makes a smooth transition into another topic (or maybe it’s a sub-topic), so shall we make the same smooth transition. I want you to notice something very important about the transition. The last few paragraphs, John 5:19-30, Jesus talks about God the Father and God the Son. In the next few paragraphs, John 5:31-45, Jesus talks about God the Father and Himself in the first person (I, me, my, mine, etc.). I’ll put it into a simple sentence to show the transition more easily. It goes from God the Father and God the Son to God the Father and Himself. God the Father & God the Son –> God the Father & Himself. Notice the parallel in the transition. It’s almost like Jesus is talking about Himself interchangeably with God the Son. That’s because He is. This is another piece of evidence, another proof, another sign, another sighting that Jesus is God the Son. He declares by talking about Himself as God the Son.

The NIV calls the next section “Testimonies about Jesus.” The ESV calls the section “Witnesses to Jesus.” Both would be accurate descriptions of the section. As a matter of fact the Greek word martyreo, used throughout the section, is most accurately translated “testify” or “bear witness” (it is also where we get the word “martyr” from). Jesus is being nice to Jewish leader by offering the sign of authority that the Jewish leaders have been asking for. So Jesus lies down 4 pieces of evidence, 4 proofs, 4 reasons or 4 signs of Christ’s authorities. This would be similar to the God Sightings we did in John 1 because all 4 do reveal Jesus to be God the Son. So just like John 1, let me list the 4 witnesses that give testimony that Jesus is the Son of God.

4 Testimonies that Jesus is God the Son as found in John 5
1. God the Father’s testimony (vs. 31,32,37,38)
2. John the Baptist’s testimony (vs.33-35)
3. Self-testimony through miracles and miraculous signs (vs. 36)
4. Old Testament Scripture’s testimony (vs.39-47)

Once again, through 4 different testimonies, the evidence clearly proves Jesus is God the Son. I could go through each testimony explaining the proof, but most of these have already been covered, either in this chapter or the chapter before. The last one, however, hasn’t been discussed too deeply, and it’s the one that really hits home, back then and today. Let’s look at the testimony the Old Testament Scriptures gave.

First, let’s look at the testimony of the Old Testament Scriptures in light of 1st century context. Jesus was making no understatement in John 5:39 when he said the Jewish leaders had diligently studied the Scriptures. Any well-educated Jew had the whole Torah memorized. Imagine having Genesis to Deuteronomy memorized by heart! Most Jews did. The highly educated Jews that were rabbis, teachers of the law and Sanhedrin went further and memorized the whole Tanak (Hebrew Bible). Imagine having Genesis to Malachi memorized. Some went even further and memorized the Talmud, which is Moses’s commentary on the Torah. They knew the Scriptures and every possible interpretation. Why were they so dedicated? They truly believed that the Law would bring them salvation, so they made sure they knew it in and out, and they obeyed every word. Jesus says the only way the Scriptures bring salvation is that they point out salvation through Christ Jesus. The problem was the Jewish leaders did not recognize this, so they refused to recognize Jesus as Messiah, or even sent from God. Jesus really gets gutsy when He tells the Jewish leaders that they do not believe Moses and Moses is their accuser, condemning them. In the Jewish mindset, Moses is the hero because he is the lawgiver who gave the Law that brings salvation. Jesus corrects the Jewish mindset, remind them that the Law condemns them because it reveals they can never truly follow the Law, even if they declare they do. Moses also accuses and condemns them because Moses warned the Jews that a prophet like him was coming, and if they did not believe in the prophet, they would be cut off from God’s people (see Deuteronomy 18:15). The Sanhedrin refused to believe in Jesus, so as Moses foretold, they are condemned to be apart from God.

Now bring it up today. Today Christians use the term “Bible-based” like it is the ultimate safety net. For example, if a church is Bible-based, it’s a good church and nothing can wrong. Christians must be careful to use this term as a safety net, for if they are not, they will fall into the same problem the Pharisees and the Sadducees fell into. It will quickly lead to legalism, and before you know it, we’ll be worshipping the Bible, believing the Bible gives us salvation. The Bible can show us the way of salvation, but it does not give us salvation, as it has the Law in it, which condemns us. This is why I am Cristocentric, or Christ-centered, instead of Bibliocentric, or Bible-centered. It is Jesus Christ who created me, loved me and saved me, not the Bible. The Scriptures can only point me in the way to Jesus. Now it is true that there is a strong link between the Word of God and Jesus. After all, it was just in John 1:1 where we read the Word was God and was with God in the beginning. But the saving Word is the Word Incarnate, Jesus Christ. The Bible is just the words on paper. Scriptures are not to be treated like a 4th person of the trinity, for that would be a paradox.

And because I wrote this for the quizzers studying John, I believe this is a helpful reminder that our knowledge of the Bible does not save us. Your rank on the standings does not show how good of a Christian you are. The Top 50 Bible Quizzers List is not a list of the 50 most spiritual people in Bible Quizzing. It’s very possible that the most spiritual quizzer (if it’s possible to measure spirituality like that) may only score 10 points all year. Quizzers, don’t make the same mistakes as the Pharisees and Sadducees and know the Scriptures more than you know God. For that alone is proof that being Christ-centered and Bible-centered are not the same thing. Because it is possible to know the Bible, yet not know God. So quizzers, don’t get too stuck in the technicalities in knowing the material. Actually read the Bible as God’s Word, and get to know God through it.

Before we close, let’s go back to John 5:18, for I think it sums up the chapter, as well as connects back to John’s overall message for his gospel.

John 5:18-
“For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”

Remember how in the introduction to John I told you to look out for who Jesus claimed He was, as well as the claims about Jesus from those “pro-Jesus” and those “anti-Jesus”? Throughout John 1-4, we’ve seen the claims from Jesus and the “pro-Jesus” about who Jesus is, but not really from the “anti-Jesus” people. Here, in John 5, the religious leaders, who are clearly against Jesus, weigh in on their opinion. Why are they trying to kill Jesus? They knew he was calling God his Father, and they knew calling God your Father meant you were calling yourself equal to God. The only way to be equal to God is to be God. So what’s the testimony of the Jewish religious leaders? Jesus is the Son of God. Now with all 3 groups of people weighing on Jesus, we’re now starting to see a fuller picture of who Jesus is, more specifically the Son of God. As we move on in John 5, we’ll see how these 3 people groups will continue to weigh in on the subject. We’ll also see how the teaching of Jesus becomes bolder, how the proponents of Jesus continue to support Jesus, and the opponents of Jesus sharply oppose Him.