Leon Morris

Study Notes 1-13-13

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

10:30 I and the Father are one.

The Shema in Deuteronomy six is echoed here.  The ESV Study Notes explain this, and also why it is that this would have caused such an angry reaction:

Jesus’ claim that I and the Father are one (i.e., one entity—the Gk. is neuter; cf. 5:17–18; 10:33–38) echoes the Shema, the basic confession of Judaism, whose first word in Deut. 6:4 is shema‘ (Hb. “hear”). Jesus’ words thus amount to a claim to deity. Hence, the Jews pick up stones to put him to death. Jesus’ unity with the Father is later said to constitute the basis on which Jesus’ followers are to be unified (John 17:22). As in 1:1, here again the basic building blocks of the doctrine of the Trinity emerge: “I and the Father” implies more than one person in the Godhead, but “are one” implies that God is one being.

One thing I especially note here is how the people expect a non-divine messiah.  They ask Him the question about His messianic role in verse 24, but they didn’t do it in order to bait Him into claiming deity so that they could then stone Him. Instead, they had a misconception about the nature of the messiah. They felt it would be a man – a great man yes, but not the Son of YHWY!  This is not at all what they expected, so the idea of deity and the divine nature of Christ had not entered their thinking, and, apparently from this text, it was very difficult for them to wrap their head this truth.

There are some who would say that what Jesus articulates here is nothing more than the fact that He and the Father are “have the same mind” on things. In fact, this is the very argument that two Jehovah’s Witnesses made before me today at my door. When I presented them with the gospel of Jesus Christ, they recoiled at the idea that Jesus was preexistent and that He and the Father shared the same deity.

But this is why it is so important to read our Bible’s “for all their worth” as John MacArthur would say. For in the very next verses we see the reaction of those who were listening to Christ at the time, and its’ is a violent hatred. They do not seek to stone Him simply because He claimed to have the same mind as God, they understood the fullness of what Christ was claiming. He was claiming nothing short of equality with the God of the universe. James Boice says, “Is Jesus God?  That is the great question of John’s Gospel. Is He fully divine?  In this verse, Jesus declares that He is, doing so in just six words.”

10:31-35 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. [32] Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” [33] The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” [34] Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? [35] If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

First we see the reaction here of the people, and it is one of anger and violence.  We talk about why that is in the paragraphs above. But notice that Jesus’ defense appeals to two things: His words and His actions.

His Actions

There has been no greater healer and lover of mankind than Jesus Christ. During His time here on earth He practically banished sickness and diseases with all the miracles He was performing (see MacArthur). John himself states at the end of his gospel “…there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written (John 21:25).”

Boice comments, “Christ’s works should lead men to faith in him. It is as simple as that.”

Sproul comments, “Why did Jesus bring up His works again? I believe it was an ironic question. Jesus’ miracles had already well attested that He was from God and should have mitigated against any charge of blasphemy. But the Jewish authorities gave no credence to the miracles or to Jesus’ claim to be God. They could admit no evidence except that which they beheld with their eyes – that Jesus was a man, and therefore could not be God…The eternal second person of the Trinity, who from all eternity was very God of very God, became man. He took upon Himself a human nature. God made Himself man. But the Jewish authorities accused Jesus of being a man who made Himself God (or represented Himself as God). They got it completely backward.

His Words

But the men listening to Him wanted to bypass this defense and go straight to what Jesus had said just moments earlier.  “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

Jesus, in His graciousness, defends Himself here as well.  In so doing, He quotes Psalm 82:6 which states:

You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;

The full context of this quote must first be understood in order to see what Christ is saying here. God has been addressing the Judges of Israel and the people of Israel and is rebuking them.  Here is the full Psalm:

God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment: [2] “How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Selah [3] Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. [4] Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.” [5] They have neither knowledge nor understanding, they walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken.[6] I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; [7] nevertheless, like men you shall die, and fall like any prince.”[8] Arise, O God, judge the earth; for you shall inherit all the nations! (Psalm 82 ESV)

There are a few possibilities as to whom God is addressing as “gods” and “sons of the Most High” and DA Carson says these are: Judges of Israel, Angelic powers, or Israel as a nation at the time of the giving of the law.

Most people I have read think that the context assumes that God is talking to the Judges/leaders of Israel.  But Carson says, “the chief difficulty with the assumption that John 10 understands Psalm 82 in this way is that Jesus characterizes those who are addressed in Psalm 82 as those “who whom the word of God came.” Although this expression could refer to the word that came to the (alleged) angels in the Psalm, there is good evidence that Jewish leaders understood all of Israel to be the people to whom the word of the Lord came.”

Carson then argues, rather convincingly, that Christ has all of Israel in mind when He says that they are “sons of the Most High.” He says, “This interpretation is strengthened when it is remembered that Israel is also called God’s firstborn son (Ex. 4:21-22), generating a typology which Jesus has already claimed to have fulfilled.”

So what does all of this mean? What is Jesus saying here? Well, Christ isn’t trying to defend His deity here in full, but rather pointing out that He has said nothing wrong – His words are not blasphemous.  For if the terms “sons of the Most High” can be used to speak of mere mortals, how much more so ought Christ to speak of Himself as the Son of God.  For He is the very image of God, and is the firstborn of all creation (Col. 1:15).

Sproul explains:

By citing this verse, which gave evidence that some mere mortals were called gods, Jesus was not implying that He was a mere mortal too. That’s not the way the argument was going. This is a “lesser to greater” argument. Basically Jesus was saying to His adversaries, “If it was okay in the Old Testament time for people who were mere mortals to be called gods, how much more legitimate is is for the one who is God incarnate to be called God?”

Scripture Cannot be Broken

If we were to rephrase this in today’s terms, we might say, “scripture is fully inspired and accurate and because God is immutable, His word will not pass away.”

Later on, Christ was take this accepted principle and apply the same authority and divinity to His own words:

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (Luke 21:33; cf. Matt. 24:3 and Mark 13:31)

This is one of those small phrases that we take for granted today, and perhaps Christ’s hearers also took for granted. But it is wise perhaps to sit and ponder the everlasting nature of the words of God and of Christ. I believe that for all eternity we will rejoice at the words of the Bible and of Christ. We will never see a day when the things Christ has spoken will fall away because He is eternal, and everything He thinks and says and does is eternal and has eternal ramifications.

What we do and say and speak has eternal ramifications as well, and though we don’t have the authority of Christ’s words, we have His words in our hearts to share with others. These words have power – real power for salvation (Rom. 1:16).  That is why we must be cautious in how we use our tongue and our words, and realize that when we speak there will be fallout for generations to come either for good or for bad.

More to the point though here, Christ says these things to make a specific point and Carson paraphrases it well, “It is reprehensible to set aside the authority of Scripture, the Scripture whose authority you yourselves accept, just because the text I have cited seems inconvenient to you at the moment.”  As Ryle says, “every word of Scripture must be allowed full weight, and must neither be clipped, passed over, nor evaded.”

This would have shot like a bullet through their heart and pierced their pride!

10:36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

This verse really fits in as part of the larger text above, but I separated it off because in it there is another truth that we need to ponder, and that is the mission of the Son.

Notice how He says, “the Father consecrated and sent into the world.” First we see the divinity here of Christ, of course.  He is saying the He came from heaven – we can deduct this from His words “send into the world” because we know that Christ was not made, He was begotten. He pre-existed before time began.

But more than that we see that God consecrated Him.  What does that mean?  It means to have been set aside for a holy mission It means that Christ came into the world for a purpose.  I love what Paul has to say about this purpose in his letter to Timothy:

The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. [16] But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. [17] To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. (1 Timothy 1:15-17 ESV)

Carson remarks that this passage “points to Jesus’ entire mission as the Father’s emissary, a mission culminating in the cross, resurrection and glorification.”

10:37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; [38] but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” [39] Again they sought to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands.

Here it seems that Christ is calling them to ponder afresh the works He had done throughout His ministry. He is challenging them to meditate on all that He had done – it had been fully two and a half years now that He had walked among them.  There were plenty of things that they had seen or heard of Him doing.

But why should they do this? Carson explains:

The reason why the Jews should reflect on His deeds is that the might learn and understand that the Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father. This is offered in explanation of v.30, which provoked the running debate of vv.31-38. As a theme, it will not be developed thoroughly until 14:10-11; 17:21. There is between the Father and the Son what theologians call a ‘mutual co-inherence’: each is ‘in’ the other. This mutual co-inherence is the grounding of the teaching of 5:19. More important, it extends, in some derivative sense, to embrace believers, who are ‘in’ Christ while he is ‘in’ them.  However precious such teaching might be to later believers, it was further evidence of blasphemy to those who first heard it.

What Carson is getting at here is that we, like the Jews of Christ’s day, ought to ponder the beauty of what it means to be ‘in’ Christ and to abide in Christ. Of course we’ll learn more about that in the chapters to come, but for now it is wise for us to think on the fact that Christ’s claims are not for Himself alone. What He is saying affects us. He alone is God, but He has invited us into that family from which He came to save us. He has condescended not only for salvation but for adoption.  He has bestowed within us the down payment of that adoption (His Holy Spirit) that daily reminds us of who we are in Christ, and what He would have us do.

This mystery is too beautiful not to contemplate. I hope it causes you to worship as it does me.

Finally, the parallels between how this discourse ends and the way chapter eight ends are hard to miss:

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” [59] So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple. (John 8:58-59 ESV)

When I think of this passage I realize again how soverign God was in all things during His incarnate life on earth. Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man as He walked this earth. He knew our pains and our desires. He felt the anguish of physical torture. He knew the pains of hunger and of nights with no sleep. Here men are seeking to catch Him and arrest Him. His emotions must have been on high alert. I cannot pretend to know how Christ felt at this time, but I do know He felt.  If this would have happened to me I would have been scared. I would have run for my life, perhaps leaving behind my mission for good. But that’s not what Christ did. He may have alluded these men here, but we know that it didn’t stop Him from preaching the good news of the kingdom of God.

Perhaps it sounds trite, but this is such a courageous example. It sounds trite only because of the fact that we know who Christ was and what He was capable of.  But let that not persuade you that He didn’t not feel as a human feels. Indeed I imagine that the hurt and anguish running through His soul at this moment was great.

I do not compare His emotions to mine, for I would have been consumed with myself and my own safety.  I image He was consumed with hurt over the blindness and lostness of Israel. He cared so deeply for His people that He would return again in the face of constant death threats (this was the fourth time, according to MacArthur, in the gospel of John that people had picked up stones to kill Jesus) as we see here. What a love Christ had for His people and for the Father.  That love is what drove Him to finish the mission, to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom and to ultimately die on a cross.

10:40-42 He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing at first, and there he remained. [41] And many came to him. And they said, “John did no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true.” [42] And many believed in him there.

It is perhaps significant that as Christ’s ministry draws to a close, He returns to the place where it began, where John the Baptist said, “He must increase, I must decrease.”  Evidently the ministry of John had moved mightily in the hearts and minds of those whom God gave him to minister to.

Leon Morris speaks to the fruit of John’s ministry:

…his influence lived on. People still treasured his words, and acted on them. This final mention of John in this Gospel at the same time sounds a note of high praise and puts a definite stress on his subordinate position. It is high praise, for it affirms that his witness to Jesus was true, and true in its entirety. But there is subordination, for John did no miracle. His function was solely to bear witness to Jesus.”

James Boice takes another tact on these closing verses and suggests that we ought to consider the three things that were going on.  First, people were coming to Christ to listen to Him preach. Second, they were considering what He said carefully. Third, they were placing their faith in Christ – they were believing Him.

Boice points out that in this peaceful place, Christ ministered to “many” men and women before the dawning of the storm of His final trip to Jerusalem. We also, he points out, must learn to meditate in a quiet place upon the things of God, and he quotes Spurgeon, “Surely, heaven is worth a little thought if it is to be gained.”

As the 10th chapter of John comes to a close, John MacArthur captures the larger scope of where we are in Christ’s ministry: “So Jesus’ public ministry closed with one last rejection by the very leaders who should have hailed Him as the Messiah. Their rejection foreshadowed His final rejection a few months later, when the people, under their influence (Matt. 27:20) ‘cried out, “away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him”’ (Jn. 19:15)”

12-30-12 Study Notes

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

Introduction to Chapter 10

It’s important that we understand that this chapter’s dialogue flows directly on the heals of the encounters and dialogue Christ has in chapter nine. He has just healed a man born blind, and He is addressing the Pharisees and religious leaders of the day. These men scorned Him, and also threw the healed man out of the temple for his affiliation with Christ.

D.A. Carson comments, “The thematic break between ch. 9 and ch. 10 is not as radical as first appears. The healed man has been roughly treated by the religious authorities, and thrown out of the synagogue. What John next writes, then, is that many thieves and robbers destroy the sheep, while the good shepherd leads his own out from the sheep pen and into his own flock.”

10:1-5 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. [2] But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. [3] To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. [4] When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. [5] A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.”

Jesus is saying that He is the shepherd and we are the sheep.
Philip Keller, who is an expert shepherd and student of all things sheep, says this about the way a sheep responds to his master’s call:

The relationship which rapidly develops between a shepherd and the sheep under his care is to a definite degree dependent upon the use of the shepherd’s voice. Sheep quickly become accustomed to their owner’s particular voice. They are acquainted with its unique tone. They knew its peculiar sounds and inflections. They can distinguish it from that of any other person.

But there is a third party involved: thieves/robbers. Carson comments on how Ezekiel 34’s backdrop helps us understand this passage, “the thieves and robbers are the religious leaders who are more interested in fleecing the sheep than in guiding, nurturing, and guarding them. The are the leaders of ch. 9, who should have had ears to heard Jesus’ claims and recognize him as the revelation from God, but who instead belittle and expel the sheep.”

In the ancient near east, sheep were not herded as they are today. Today we use other animals like dogs to heard them into the general direction they are to go. But during the time of Christ, sheep followed the shepherd walking behind him wherever he called them. R.C. Sproul notes that if one went astray, the shepherd would simply call out to that sheep and get its attention. The sheep would recognize the voice of its owner and pop back into line.

10:6 This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

How ironic that they didn’t understand His voice…

10:7-9 So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. [8] All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. [9] I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture.

First, we see Christ laying forth another “I AM” statement. This one is based around exclusivity. He is saying He is the door to the sheepfold. In this analogy, heaven is the sheepfold, and Christ is the only way into that heaven. This is similar to when He would later claim to be the way the truth and the life and that no one comes to the Father except “by me” (John 14).

Another thing that struck me here was Jesus’ words “he will be saved” tied closely with “go in and out and find pasture.” Salvation is tied immediately with blessing. This He follows up with in verse 16.

Obviously when Christ says they will “go in and out” He is not saying the sheep looses his salvation by going in and out, for not only would that torture the metaphor, it would also contradict His own clear teaching on the matter in other places.

But what is so wonderful about this is the peace and provision that a green pasture provides. Christ our true and good shepherd takes care of us. He cares for us, and has compassion on us. He calls us by our names, He knows us intimately!

Carson’s comments are helpful:

That he calls his own sheep presupposes that several flocks are in the fold; the shepherd calls out this own. Near-Eastern shepherds have been known to stand at different spots outside the enclosure and sound out their own peculiar calls, their own sheep responding and gathering around their shepherd. This shepherd goes further: he calls his own sheep by name, which at the least means that he calls them individually.”

Certainly even in Scripture we aren’t unfamiliar with this intimacy, for God has shown it before in the Old Testament. He said through Isaiah, “But now thus says the LORD, he who created you, O Jacob, he who formed you, O Israel: “Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine” (Is. 43:1).

The whole purpose for our calling as His sheep is to be a special possession, a treasure for Him and also a light to the nations. This is a theme found in both the Abramatic Covenant and the Mosaic covenant (Deut. 7:6) and is fulfilled in the New Covenant Church. Listen to what Peter says:

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (1 Peter 2:9)

10:10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.

Again the contrast between the thief and the shepherd. Here Christ contrasts not His position, or the reaction of the sheep, but rather what the end game is: death or life. But He doesn’t simply stop at death and life; He says that He came to give us abundant life. MacArthur comments that this “describes something that goes far beyond what is necessary. The matchless gift of eternal life exceeds all expectation.”

It reminded me of Jesus’ discussion with the woman at the well in chapter four where He said:

…but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life. (John 4:14 ESV)

In past notes, I have made a point of citing this John 10:10 reference because I think it is such an important verse. Even from the beginning of Christ’s ministry at the feast at Canaan, He demonstrated that what He came to give was abundant. He was never stingy. He gave more wine than necessary (John 2:6-7), He gave more food than necessary (John 6:13), and He gives more life than we ever expected – more than we deserve.

10:11-13 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. [12] He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. [13] He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.

Characteristics of Sheep

In a sermon on Psalm 23, C.H. Spurgeon said that sheep are both “dependent” and “foolish” creatures. We as Christians must come to a place where we understand our foolishness apart from the wisdom of God, and feel that true dependence on our great Shepherd is the only way to approach a successful Christian life.

This is something that King David felt acutely. Even though he himself was a great king and the shepherd of his people, he also knew that in the eyes of the Lord he was merely a sheep in the Lord’s pasture – and he was okay with that because he trusted the Lord’s provision and care for him and his nation. Matthew Henry notes that David and Jacob both knew what it was like to guard a flock. Listen to just a few of the ways David talks about the God as the shepherd of Israel:

The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. (Psalm 23:1 ESV)

You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron. (Psalm 77:20 ESV)

Then he led out his people like sheep​and guided them in the wilderness like a flock. (Psalm 78:52 ESV)

But we your people, the sheep of your pasture, will give thanks to you forever; from generation to generation we will recount your praise. (Psalm 79:13 ESV)

Sheep are some of the most unwise creatures. They need a lot of help to subsist day to day, and without the help of the shepherd they would be lost. In fact, without the shepherd they wouldn’t even know they were lost. They would wander and wander. Spurgeon comments, “Left to itself, it would not know in what pasture to feed in the summer, or wither to retire in winter.”

All of this, of course, leads us to ask the question Spurgeon asked his audience: do we perceive the necessity for our dependence on God? If not, it is likely that we are puffed up and prideful. This pride is antithetical to a right relationship with God.

This text also teaches us that Christ knows His sheep. He knows us so intimately that he calls us by name. Not simply do we hear the voice of our Shepherd, but we hear Him calling OUR name! This is why Jesus calls Himself the “good” shepherd. He isn’t simply “a” good shepherd, but “THE” good Shepherd because he knows us intimately and addresses us by our names.

Hirelings…Who Are These Guys?

I’m not sure this is the most important part of this analogy, but the hireling could be depicting several people. It could depict the lesser, more lazy stand-in shepherds who are idle with their flocks (as Matthew Henry notes), or it could have less of a negative connotation and mean those who are put in place by the shepherd to lead the sheep while He is away. Sproul contends for the later, saying, in short, we who are teachers and pastors and leaders of the flock are the “hirelings.” We are not the shepherd, only Christ is the shepherd of His flock. But those who are in leadership positions over us are here by His good purpose and direction. There is nothing dishonorable in being a hireling, but as we can see, the hireling has a hard time keeping the best interests of the flock in mind when a bear or a wolf comes calling. We naturally want to fend for ourselves. Again, I don’t think that this is a major theme in this analogy, but I wanted to address it nonetheless.

Christ the Good Shepherd and Greater Son of David

When Christ says he’s the “good Shepherd” he’s using the Greek word kalos, and as MacArthur says, it “refers to His noble character.” One of the most notable characteristics of a good shepherd is the fact that he is willing to lay down his life to save the sheep. This isn’t something that a hireling is willing to do because the hireling cares about his wages, whereas the shepherd cares about the sheep.

It’s an amazing thought that we have a God who is not only willing to commune with us, to let us know Him, to interject Himself in our lives to bless and keep us safe, but we have a God who is willing to Himself suffer humiliation and death on our behalf. That is quite and amazing love.
Ezekiel foretold the coming of a shepherd who would be greater than all shepherds of Israel in his striking prophecy in chapter 34 of the book that bears his name. Listen to what he says about the coming of the Good Shepherd:

[11] “For thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I, I myself will search for my sheep and will seek them out. [12] As a shepherd seeks out his flock when he is among his sheep that have been scattered, so will I seek out my sheep, and I will rescue them from all places where they have been scattered on a day of clouds and thick darkness. [13] And I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries, and will bring them into their own land. And I will feed them on the mountains of Israel, by the ravines, and in all the inhabited places of the country. [14] I will feed them with good pasture, and on the mountain heights of Israel shall be their grazing land. There they shall lie down in good grazing land, and on rich pasture they shall feed on the mountains of Israel. [15] I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I myself will make them lie down, declares the Lord GOD. [16] I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak, and the fat and the strong I will destroy. I will feed them in justice.

[17] “As for you, my flock, thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I judge between sheep and sheep, between rams and male goats. [18] Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture, that you must tread down with your feet the rest of your pasture; and to drink of clear water, that you must muddy the rest of the water with your feet? [19] And must my sheep eat what you have trodden with your feet, and drink what you have muddied with your feet?

[20] “Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD to them: Behold, I, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. [21] Because you push with side and shoulder, and thrust at all the weak with your horns, till you have scattered them abroad, [22] I will rescue my flock; they shall no longer be a prey. And I will judge between sheep and sheep. [23] And I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd. [24] And I, the LORD, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them. I am the LORD; I have spoken.

“I will make with them a covenant of peace and banish wild beasts from the land, so that they may dwell securely in the wilderness and sleep in the woods. [26] And I will make them and the places all around my hill a blessing, and I will send down the showers in their season; they shall be showers of blessing. [27] And the trees of the field shall yield their fruit, and the earth shall yield its increase, and they shall be secure in their land. And they shall know that I am the LORD, when I break the bars of their yoke, and deliver them from the hand of those who enslaved them. [28] They shall no more be a prey to the nations, nor shall the beasts of the land devour them. They shall dwell securely, and none shall make them afraid. [29] And I will provide for them renowned plantations so that they shall no more be consumed with hunger in the land, and no longer suffer the reproach of the nations. [30] And they shall know that I am the LORD their God with them, and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares the Lord GOD. [31] And you are my sheep, human sheep of my pasture, and I am your God, declares the Lord GOD.” (Ezekiel 34:11-31 ESV)

This striking passage portrays God a great Shepherd over His people – a Shepherd who “will seek the lost” and who will “bring back the strayed.” Further He promises to “strengthen the weak” and “bind up the injured.”

Does this not fit will with Christ’s mission to “seek and save that which is lost”? Ezekiel says God “will rescue my flock; they shall no longer be a prey.”

Furthermore, look at the fulfillment of Christ as the coming better fulfillment of David. Ezekiel speaks for God saying, “I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall fee them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd. And I, the Lord, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them.”

The next thing He goes on to say is that along with this new and better shepherd comes a new and better covenant. God says, “I will make with them a covenant of peace and banish wild beasts from the land, so that they may dwell securely in the wilderness and sleep in the woods.”
He goes on to say He will break the bars of the yoke of slavery for His people. This is just an awesome prophecy of the amazing work of Christ as a great Shepherd, and as the greater fulfillment of David.

Separating Sheep from Sheep…

Lastly, Another thing that makes this passage pop so well is not only the character of God and His mission of compassion and love for His people, but also his saving them from the false religious leaders of both Ezekiel’s day, and Christ’s day – we saw earlier that those who do not enter by the door of the sheepfold were robbers or mischief makers. These people want to devour, and plunder the sheep and care only for themselves. Ezekiel has this to say about such people, “I judge between sheep and sheep, between rams and male goats. Its it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture, that you must tread down with your feet the rest of your pasture; and to drink of clear water, that you must muddy the rest of the water with your feed?”

This distinguishing between “sheep and sheep” is directly related to what Christ says next…

Study Notes 12-23-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

9:17 So they said again to the blind man, “What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.”

This might not be quite the full-orbed description of the Being of Christ, but as some note, it’s a mite better than “I don’t know.”           

9:18-23 The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight [19] and asked them, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?” [20] His parents answered, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. [21] But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.” [22] (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.) [23] Therefore his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”

First, “The Jews” here refer to the Pharisees.  It is a common thing for John to refer to the religious leaders as “the Jews.”

What we see here is that in response to the miracle of Christ, the religious leaders of the day react in unbelief. So what they try to do is seek verification from the parents since they don’t seem to believe the accounts of the people and the man himself.

However, what happens here is the parents respond in fear of what the religious leaders will do to them if they give their full and honest opinion of what has just happened to their son. Sproul and Carson both excoriate these parents in their commentaries as examples of unbelief, and I agree with them. But who cannot identify with them? Who can blame them? These people don’t yet know Jesus, they don’t have any reason as of yet to stand up for Him other than what they know of in regards to their son.  So they pass the buck back to their child, who is a grown middle-aged man.

Here’s what I mean by this: Overall, while we can identify with the parents, and even the religious leaders, what is it that is dominating their emotions and behavior here? Fear and unbelief. Perhaps that’s why we can so closely identify with them…

9:24 So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.”

Now they are frustrated and demanding.  Their tone is completely curt and to the point. They demand that the blind man give glory to God (as if he hadn’t been doing that already), and not to in anyway glorify the man (Jesus) who gave him his sight.

Ironically the very man who gave him his sight was Jesus the God-man.  The incarnation of God had healed this man in love and compassion.

Also, it is interesting that they “know” this man is a sinner. Their judgment has already been made at this point – for all the reasons we talked about before, specifically and especially regarding the Sabbath.

9:25 He answered, “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.”

I can picture this man, can’t you?  Recoiling a bit at the harshness of the conversation. But as we will see from the way he interacts with these religious leaders, he is bold.  Why is he so bold? Because his entire life has been resurrected from darkness! You too would be bold if a man healed your blindness! And indeed, if you are a Christian, you have been resurrected from darkness and death and our response ought to be this man’s response: One thing I do know, that though I was blind now I see”!  What a powerful statement!

As MacArthur notes, unbelief is simply irrational at this point, “Stopped dead in their tracks by the incontestable testimony of the man, and left with no way to advance their lame argument, the Pharisees began to go over the same ground they had previously covered.”

R.C. Sproul notes something really important about this whole passage with the blind man and how he interacted with the Pharisees.  At this point in the discussion, the man is bearing witness about Christ, but he is not evangelizing.  He is sharing his testimony, but he is not yet sharing the gospel message – there is a difference.  Our testimony is important, and its what Sproul calls “pre-evangelism.”  It helps us relate what God has done for us to others, and helps others relate to us on a personal level.  It gives glory to God, certainly, but it is not sharing the gospel.  We share the gospel when we announce the good work of Jesus Himself.  As Sproul notes, (to paraphrase) “the gospel is not about me…the gospel is about Jesus.”

We all need to learn to share our testimonies, but we also have to take the next step and share the gospel.

Now listen in your mind as you read below how they interact here…you can almost feel the tension rising…

9:26-27 They said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” [27] He answered them, “I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?”

Bravo! This man has moxie.  Frankly, if such a wonderful miracle happened to me, and then those around me were so determined to ruin it and slander the God who provided it, I would also be indignant.

Note the rebukes.  First, “you would not listen.”  This is so true.  They were never listeners; they were tellers.  They ordered people about, they didn’t take time to genuinely listen to people.  The man doesn’t let them get away with it.

Second, he taunts them by asking them if they “also want to become his disciples.”  The very thing they would have despised the most! He makes these religious leaders out to be merely ignorant pupils who need to be discipled.

9:28-29 And they reviled him, saying, “You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. [29] We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from.”

Now, obviously this (formerly) blind man was not a disciple of Christ yet, but the leaders throw it back in his face because he had just used the same thing to annoy them.

I think it is really emblematic of this generation that they claim to be disciples of Moses, and children of Abraham (in chapter 8) when they are neither. God knew all along that He would bless the nations through Abraham, which means that the seed of Abraham (spiritually) would populate the church. From Abraham’s body would come the body of Christ (the church) – in other words, the gentile makeup of the elect was never “plan b” for God.  Also, it’s worth noting that God only instituted the Mosaic Law as a “guardian” until Christ came (Gal. 3). Even Moses saw this (Deut. 18:18-19), but these religious leaders were not eagerly anticipating such a high priest, they were instead longing for the day when the Messiah would come and conquer their political enemies and redeem the land.

Their sinfulness had clouded their judgment, and as they were not God’s children (John 8), they were speaking out of their character here.

Now listen to how the man responds to their claims at Mosaic discipleship…does he back down? Not at all!

9:30-33 The man answered, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. [31] We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. [32] Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. [33] If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”

First he castigates them for their lack of knowledge of who Jesus was. Then, in an amazing show of boldness, he gives them a theology lesson! I honestly don’t recall any other time in scripture where a common beggar gives the religious establishment a theology lesson, but here it is!

He says to them, basically, that they aren’t thinking logically. First, he reasons that “God does not listen to sinners” – true enough.  We know that God hears the prayers of those who are His own, and the man goes on to say just that, “if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him.” I have to believe he is speaking out of practical experience here. This man has not been healed in vain by God. He is grateful, and from the sounds of his words, was probably in daily prayer for this miracle.

Then he uses some hyperbole to drive home the point that this miracle was done in the power of God – there’s simply no other explanation for it!

9:34 They answered him, “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they cast him out.

The word “utter” here is holos in the Greek, and it means “whole” or “complete.” And thus the response of the Pharisees is accurate here.  He was born in utter sin – complete fallness like all mankind, and of course they mistakenly believe they were not.  Paul’s words are apt:

But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; [28] God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, [29] so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. (1 Corinthians 1:27-29 ESV)

There is perhaps nothing more appalling than the arrogance of ignorance, but that is what he have here. And it is instructive for us as well. Let us, who were also born in “utter sin” not think ourselves too good or too pure to learn from our great teacher. We have all fallen way short of His glory. No man is worthy to boast before God – because Paul’s passage in 1 Corinthians I mention above goes on to say this:

And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, [31] so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 1:30-31 ESV)

If we are to boast, let us boast in the power of the Lord Jesus Christ as this man did.

9:35-37 Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” [36] He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” [37] Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.” [38] He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.

I love the compassion of the Lord Jesus. He knows that this man must go through a trial, and He allows it as a testing of his faith perhaps. Whatever the reason as it relates to the man, it certainly gave glory to God – and still continues to do so even to this day.

Note also that Jesus requires something of this man more than simply standing up for Him.  Jesus isn’t looking for a supporter for a political or religious movement, He looking for a lost sheep.

Lastly, it is evident that God had touched the heart of this man as significantly as He had touched his eyes.  The man responds in belief, and that’s the challenge for us today. Do we really believe Jesus is who He says He is?  Here he says that he is the “Son of Man” – that favorite designation that Jesus uses for Himself that comes from the book of Daniel, which says:

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. [14] And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:13-14 ESV)

This “Son of Man” is reigning right now – and His reign will one day see its consummation at His second coming.  When Jesus asks the blind man who had been healed whether he believed in the “Son of Man”, He is asking him to place his faith in the one who is from God, of God, and is God. The one who will one say have “an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away.”

9:39 Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” [40] Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, “Are we also blind?” [41] Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains.

Finally, we notice that Jesus isn’t saying these things in just the presence of the healed man any longer. Now others have gathered.  The Pharisees are now listening in, and, aware of this, Christ begins to address them.

First Christ uses the miracle He performed to give greater light to a spiritual truth. We could divine all of these things and see the picture of Christ’s work here pretty easily, but in this case we don’t even have to because He has done that for us here.

He says that He came so that those who don’t see will see.  Conversely, He says that those who see “may become blind.”  The Pharisees immediately feel as if they are the butt of this joke – only its not a joke at all, it’s a hard truth, and one that they refuse to swallow.

The point of the analogy as it relates to “guilt” is much like Paul’s argument in Romans 1.  We all bear the weight of guilt of knowing at least something about God through general revelation. But these were men who were learned.  They knew the law, had access to all the writings of Moses, knew and had heard of the words of the prophets, and yet they who saw all of these words on scrolls were blind to their truths.  In this way they became blind.

It reminds me of what God said to the prophet Isaiah as He commissioned him to go and preach to Israel:

And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” [9] And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ [10] Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” (Isaiah 6:8-10 ESV)

Later God says through Isaiah:

Bring out the people who are blind, yet have eyes, who are deaf, yet have ears! (Isaiah 43:8 ESV)

Spiritually speaking, only God can open the eyes of mankind. He is completely sovereign over who can “see the kingdom of God” (John 3).

In His sovereignty, God has sent Christ to heal us of this blindness. Another verse from Isaiah speaks of this as well:

I am the LORD; I have called you in righteousness; I will take you by the hand and keep you; I will give you as a covenant for the people, a light for the nations, [7] to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness. (Isaiah 42:6-7 ESV)

Secondly, I want to make note about what Christ says about judgment and blindness here.  MacArthur hints at the way in which spiritual blindness reacts to the light.  He says, “It receives judgment, refuses to admit its blindness, rejects spiritual sight, and results in doom.”

Specifically as it relates to “judgment”, Christ says “for judgment I cam into this world”, whereas in another place He says, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (John 3:17).

So which is it?  Is Christ contradicting Himself here? Not at all – these are two truths co-existing in the character of Christ. MacArthur explains this in his commentary, and its worth quoting a lengthy portion of what he has to say:

…far from being contradictory, those two truths are complementary; they are two sides of the same reality. To reject Jesus’ peace is to receive His punishment; to reject His grace is to receive His justice; to reject His mercy is to receive His wrath to reject His love is to receive His anger to reject His forgiveness is to receive His judgment. While Jesus came to save, not to condemn (cf. 12:47, Luke 19:10), those who reject His gospel condemn themselves, and subject themselves to judgment (John 3:18, 36). Spiritual sight comes only to those who acknowledge that they do not see, who confess their spiritual blindness and their need for the Light of the World. On the other hand, those who think they see on their own apart from Christ delude themselves, and will remain blind. They will not come to the Light, because they love the darkness and do not want their evil deeds to be exposed (3:19).

So their response was “self-condemning” as MacArthur goes on to say, and the role of Christ as judge will certainly happen eventually (Jon 5:22, 27), for He has been given all authority to judge by the Father, but during His time on earth (first advent) His mission was to “seek and save that which is lost” (Luke 19:10).

Leon Morris puts it this way, “In one sense He did not come to judge people (3:17; 12:47). But for all that, his coming represents a judgment; for people divide according to the way they react to that coming. The coming of light shows who are spiritually blind and thus judges them; judgment is not the purpose of the coming of the light, but it is an inevitable consequence.”

Finally, and perhaps ironically, the great hero the Pharisees were looking for ended up being the one they mocked openly. The great warrior who they hoped would one day set them free from oppression had just set another captive free before their very eyes. The great king they hoped would rule over Jerusalem was in their midst ushering in a kingdom “that shall not be destroyed.”

Study Notes 12-9-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

John Chapter 9

Introduction

In the last two chapters we have seen how Christ angered and amazed the people and the religious leaders of His day by His teaching and His knowledge. Now John is going to tell us of another physical miracle that Christ performed – a “sign” – that would point once again to who this great man was.

The ESV Study notes tell us that “This miracle is one of several events in John in which the events in the physical world are a “sign” that points to a deeper spiritual meaning. Here Jesus gives sight to a man born blind, but this is also an evident symbol that Jesus, “the light of the world” (v. 5), brings the light of the knowledge of God.”

D.A. Carson says, “This chapter portrays what happens when the light shines: some are made to see, like this man born blind, while others, who think they see, turn away, blinded, as it were, by the light.”

9:1-5 As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. [2] And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” [3] Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. [4] We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. [5] As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

A Man Lost in Blindness

Perhaps no one that I read on this passage does a better job of existentially reading the passage, and getting inside the thoughts of this blind man than R.C. Sproul. Here is what he says in his commentary on John:

How many years did that man grope in the darkness, asking: ‘Why me, God? Everybody else can see, but I can’t see anything. My whole life I have listened to people talk about what they’re seeing, and I can only imagine. I don’t even have any memories to aid me in my imagination because I’ve never seen anything. Why me?’ Imagine the frustration, the torment. Year after year he dealt with this affliction. He had no idea that one day the Son of God would come to him and heal him. But that was the plan of God for his life from all eternity.

The reason I quoted Sproul here is because I think we often forget that we are called to identify with others in their trials and struggles. As we share the gospel with others, as we care for others, we are called to love them. John’s entire first epistle is crying out “Christians show they are Christians by showing love to others.”

Imagine yourself in your neighbor’s place, in your husband’s place, in your wife’s place. Imagine the ultimate fate of your co-worker, and the difficulties of their struggles. This is important because it helps us remember that these people are all important to God. They are all to be objects of our love.

The Universality of Sickness and Death

Jesus gave sight to this man, just as He would give men spiritual sight. That is why He called Himself the “light of the world.” He is the One true God who imparts right knowledge of God to a lost and dying world.

It seemed like a common, and even obvious question for the disciples to ask whether or not it was sin that caused the blind man’s sickness. And indeed original sin is the cause of all blindness, both physical and spiritual. Sin is at the root of all sickness and disease. The entire world was plunged into darkness because of the Fall.

John MacArthur says this, “Sickness is a universal effect of the fall, as a result of which sin, death, and decay exist in this imperfect world. It afflicts all human beings, periodically reminding each of them that they ‘are but dust’ (Ps. 103:14), and that one day ‘to dust (they) shall return (Gen. 3:19).”

J.C. Ryle agrees and says, “If Adam had never fallen, we cannot doubt that people would never have been blind, or deaf, or dumb. The many ills that flesh is heir to, the countless pains, and diseases, and physical defects to which we are all liable, came in when the curse came upon the earth. ‘By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin (Rom. 5:12).”

But Why?

But the assumption that the man’s blindness was a direct result of either his sin or the sin of his parents was incorrect. For this man would have had to have sinned prior to birth, which is impossible (although MacArthur notes that it was a popular thought among Jews of the day that a baby could sin in the womb).

Also, it seems wrong that the man would have been responsible for the sins of his parents. MacArthur addresses this:

The disciples may also have been thinking of certain Old Testament passages in which God seems to promise punishment on children for the sins of their parents (Ex. 20:5, 34:7; Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9)…Such passages, however, must be understood in a national or societal sense. The point is that the corrupting effect of a wicked generation seeps into subsequent generations. This is axiomatic, an obvious reality. The idea that a child will be punished for the sins of his own parents is a concept foreign to Scripture (cf. Deut. 24:16).

What the disciples did here was setup a false dilemma, a logical fallacy based on only believing that the answer for the man’s condition was one of two things (Sproul and MacArthur both note this logical misnomer).

But what Christ told them was that they were wrong on both accounts. The reason the man was born this way was because God was going to be glorified. What a thought! From the foundation of the world God had prepared this man to show forth the riches of His kindness in him.

F.F. Bruce has framed this truth brilliantly (as MacArthur also notes):

This does not mean that God deliberately caused the child to be born blind in order that, after many years, his glory should be displayed in the removal of the blindness; to think so would again be an aspersion on the character of God. It does mean that God overruled the disaster of the child’s blindness so that, when the child grew to manhood, he might, by recovering his sight, see the glory of God in the face of Christ, and others, seeing this work of God, might turn to the true Light of the World.

Sproul says, “The blind man’s life is a concrete example of suffering that went on and on for year after year until it finally resulted in glory. That’s why the apostle Paul wrote, ‘For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us’ (Rom. 8:18).”

Finally, D.A. Carson notes that Christ has been the one initiating all of this, and in this way it is a picture of salvation (as MacArthur notes later). He says, “Now the man (who of course has still not seen Jesus) obeys and washes, and came home seeing. John’s readers know that, although the healing is as thorough as the blind man’s obedience, the power itself came not from the obedience, nor from a pool called ‘Sent’ (Siloam), but from the ‘sent one’ Himself.”

The Urgency

I also think we need to note the urgency of the mission of Christ. He says, “We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work.”

MacArthur notes that “Here the plural pronoun ‘we’ includes the disciples, who also were empowered to do the words of the Father who sent Jesus…the phrase ‘as long as it is day’ conveys a sense of urgency. It refers to the brief time that Jesus would still be physically present with the disciples.”

Ryle says, “He (Christ) knew well that his own earthly ministry would only last three years altogether, and knowing this, He diligently redeemed the time. He let slip no opportunity of doing works of mercy, and attending to His Father’s business.”

We also ought to have this sense of urgency about our mission here on earth. Paul tells us:

Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, [16] making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. [17] Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Ephesians 5:15-17 ESV)

Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. [6] Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person. (Colossians 4:5-6 ESV)

Ryle concludes, “The life that we now live in the flesh is our day. Let us take care that we use it well, for the glory of God and the good of our souls. Let us work out our salvation with fear and trembling, while it is called today.”

9:6-7 Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man’s eyes with the mud [7] and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.

The Miracle

John MacArthur rightly points out that Christ’s healings were amazing, “He virtually banished disease from Palestine during that time in an explosion of miraculous healings.” MacArthur goes on to note in some detail some of the characteristics of Christ’s healings. Here is a condensed point-by-point list as Dr. MacArthur sees it:

  1. He healed with only a word or touch
  2. He healed instantly – “unlike some of the alleged healings of modern faith healers, none of His healings were progressive or gradual.”
  3. He healed completely
  4. He healed everyone who came to Him
  5. He healed organic, physical diseases and infirmities – not invisible ailments such as lower back paint, headaches etc.
  6. He raised people from the dead “unlike modern fakes”

Carson goes into a lengthy explanation as to exactly what the significance of the use of mud and saliva might have been, but admits, “It is extremely difficult to decide just what this signifies.” He notes that “Not a few church Fathers saw an allusion to Genesis 2:7: since God made human beings out of the dust of the ground, Jesus, in an act of creation, used a little dust to make eyes that were otherwise lacking.”

There is also a possible sense in which using saliva would have been a social and religious taboo, and that Christ was attacking the norm of thinking – once again making Him Lord of all things. Though it is hard to say for certain whether this is the statement He is making here in chapter 9.

I like what Ryle has to say on the matter as well, “The reason why our Lord used the action (spittle) we cannot tell…He is not tied to any one means of doing good, and that we may expect to find variety in His methods of dealing with souls, as well as with bodies.”

Historical NOTE: As an aside, there have been several archeological discoveries around the Pool of Siloam. You can see some of the pictures if you click here. Or you can visit: http://www.bibleplaces.com/poolofsiloam.htm

Study Notes 10-21-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

Chapter 8

CONTEXT NOTE: There is a great deal of discussion amongst scholars as to whether or not the first 11 verses of John 8 are part of the Canon of Scripture.  After consulting with our own pastor, and with commentators from every age of the church, I believe that it is part of the Canon, although it was not perhaps originally part of John’s gospel and may have been meant to go in Luke’s gospel, or may have been meant to be placed elsewhere.

Nevertheless, while men across church history seem to agree that this was not a passage in the original manuscripts, they almost all equally agree that the passage should be included in the canon.  Here are a few thoughts from wiser men than myself on the matter, and why we ought to still consider this passage as inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore worthy of our consideration and reverence:

Calvin says this, “…it has always been received by the Latin Churches, and is found in many old Greek manuscripts, and contains nothing unworthy of an Apostolic Spirit, there is no reason why we should refuse to apply it to our advantage.”

Our own Pastor Gabbard said, “Even though this passage is not found in the earliest manuscripts, my recollection is that it is in enough later manuscripts to still give it some credibility. I have always taken the position that since God in his sovereignty allowed this passage to be in our Bibles for hundreds of years and it is a beautiful story which is consistent with the character and ministry of Christ, I teach it as the word of God.”

D.A. Carson says, “On the other hand, there is little reason for doubting that the event here described occurred, even if in its written form it did not in the beginning belong to the canonical books.  Similar stories are found in other sources. One of the best known, reported by Papias (and recorded by the historian Eusebius) is the account of a woman, accused in the Lord’s presence of many sins (unlike the woman here who is accused of but one). There narrative before us also has a number of parallels with stories in the Synoptic Gospels.  The reason for its insertion here may have been to illustrate 7:24 and 8:15 or, conceivably, the Jews’ sinfulness over against Jesus’ sinlessness (8:21, 24, 46).”

MacArthur, speaking to the external evidence says, “The external evidence also casts doubt on the authenticity of these verses. The earliest and most reliable manuscripts, from a variety of textual traditions, omit it.”  But then goes on to say, “It contains no teaching that contradicts the rest of Scripture. The picture it paints of the wise, loving, forgiving Savior is consistent with the Bible’s portrait of Jesus Christ. Nor is it the kind of story the early church would have made up about Him.”  Finally he comments, “The story was most likely history, a piece of oral tradition that circulated in parts of the Western church. (Most of the limited early support for its authenticity comes from Western manuscripts and versions, and from Western church fathers such as Jerome, Ambrose and Augustine.)”

Leon Morris has this to say, “The textual evidence makes it impossible to hold that this section is an authentic part of the Gospel (of John)…In addition to the textual difficulty many find stylistic criteria against the story. While the spirit of the narrative is in accordance with that of this Gospel the language is not Johannine.”  Morris continues, however, by stating, “Throughout the history of the church it has been held that, whoever wrote it, this little story is authentic. It rings true. It speaks to our condition. And it can scarcely have been composed in the early church with its sternness about sexual sin. It is thus worth our while to study it tough not as an authentic part of Jon’s writing.”

James Montgomery Boice says this, “The difficulty, simply put, is that the majority of the earliest manuscripts of John do not contain these verses and, moreover, that some of the best manuscripts are of this number…Interestingly enough, very few scholars (even man of the liberal ones) seem willing to do this (omit the passage), and the fact that a good case can be made out for the other side, should make one cautious in how he deals with it. I am willing to deal with the story as genuine – though perhaps not a part of the original Gospel as John wrote it (then he lists several reasons which I will not take time to list here).”

Finally, R.C. Sproul says this, “The overwhelming consensus of textual critics is that it was not part of the original Gospel of John, at least not this portion of John. At the same time, the overwhelming consensus is that this account is authentic, it’s apostolic, and it should be contained in any edition of the New Testament…I believe it is nothing less than the very word of God, so I will treat it as such in this chapter.”

I know that John Piper, John Calvin, Ambrose, and many other great pastors and theologians also lay out good and convincing cases for including this passage in Scripture.  And so the task before us is no longer to question the veracity and authenticity of this text as apostolic, but to agree that it is the “very Word of God” as Sproul says, and submit ourselves to its teaching and authority.

The Text

7:53-8:1 They went each to his own house, but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

The first thing we note here is that Jesus went up on the Mount of Olives after everyone else went home.  This is significant for a few reasons.

First, this is the only reference to the Mount of Olives in John – perhaps a reason to doubt the manuscript here should be included in John and not in Luke or one of the other synoptics.

Second, it reminds us that Jesus was homeless.  In Matthew 8:20 we hear Christ say, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” MacArthur notes that we cannot note for certain that He slept out under the stars or whether He went a short distance on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives at the home of Lazurus, Martha and Mary, however, I think it’s a good reminder of the humiliation of the incarnation.  MacArthur also agrees and cites the famous passage from Phil. 2:7-8.

Third, Boice points out that what Jesus normally did on the Mount of Olives was commune with His Father in prayer.  This is something to keep in mind as we head into the text ahead of us.  While Jesus was communing in prayer with His Father, the Pharisees and Scribes were laying a sinful plot to trap Him. Boice says that from a practical standpoint, if we are to imitate Christ in His handling of the situation before us in all the difficulties we face in our own lives, we must also imitate Him in His devotion to prayer.  “Where does this compassionate attitude toward other persons come from in practical experience? It comes only from communing with our heavenly Father. We are personal with others only when we know ourselves to be persons (as opposed to “things”).  We know ourselves to be persons only when we see ourselves as persons before God.”

8:2 Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them.

In classic Rabbinic style, Jesus sits down to teach.  Note also that all the people were coming to Him on their own.  Truth draws people in who have a desire to learn about God – something many modern day pastors would do well to remember as they lay out their church “marketing campaigns.”

8:3-4 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst [4] they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.

Several scholars take time to note how the author puts together “the scribes and the Pharisees” here.  This isn’t a very Johannine phrase – but is one used a lot in the synoptic gospels.

Scribes were also called lawyers and they were experts at reading and writing opinions about the law of Moses.  We ought not to be confused here into thinking that the scribes and Pharisees were one in the same, for they were not.  Scribes were simply lawyers – that was their training and trade.  It is how they made their living.  Pharisees were a political type of party (at least that’s the best way I can describe it).  Not all Pharisees were scribes, and conversely, not all scribes were Pharisees.  In fact, my scribes had strong alliances with the ruling class of the Sadducees.

Now, we note here that this group of people says that this woman has been “caught” in the act of adultery.  What they are inferring is that she has been caught in the very act – not in simply a compromising situation.  Jewish scholars (note Morris, Boice, and Sproul) are clear that in order to be seized on this matter, it would require at least 2-3 witnesses, and all the details of the witnesses had to match exactly.  Thus it was very hard to get into this situation.  For one had to be caught in the very act, and there had to be several witnesses, and their testimony had to agree in every part down to each detail.

8:5-6 Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” [6] This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground.

The Evil Trap for a Young Woman

The text that these guys are referring to is found in a few places.  First, the most notable text for this would have been in Deuteronomy 22:22, which says:

“If a man is found lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.

The first thing we note here is that someone is missing from the scene.  Who?  Why the man who committed the act along with the woman!  Perhaps the man got away, though this is unlikely if he was caught in the very act (a requirement of the law as mentioned above) of adultery.  It is also possible that the man was an important person – perhaps on the Sanhedrin council – and the Pharisees didn’t want to arrest him.  There is also the very dark and nefarious possibility that James Boice is right on this and that the man (whoever he was) was involved in the plot to setup this young woman by the Pharisees, and therefore have something with which to trap Jesus.

I can’t think of a more dark and sinister thing than this.  But as we read on here, it becomes apparent, at least to me, that this is probably what these evil men had done.

Now, looking at the language that the Pharisees’ use here, we note that they have a specific intent in mind, a specific form of execution that they believe that Moses commands them to follow – namely stoning.   If we read further on in Deuteronomy 22 we read this:

“If there is a betrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her, [24] then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbor’s wife. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:23-24)

So we see that this method of execution was reserved only for those who were betrothed and fell into immorality – most of whom were young women and men, probably 13-15 years old.  Therefore, it’s very likely that this young woman was not a prostitute, but a teenage girl that was lured into a terrible trap by these evil men.  They were using her for their own evil purposes.

The Legal Trap for Jesus

Now that we see what this group of evil men had been working on with regard to this poor young woman, we turn our attention to the legal trap that they had concocted for Jesus.

R.C. Sproul explains, “The Romans permitted significant self-rule in the nations they conquered, but they did not allow vassal nations to exercise the death penalty in capital cases…If Jesus were to say, ‘Stone the woman,’ they would run to the Roman headquarters and say, ‘This teacher is advocating that we exercise capital punishment without going through the Roman system.’ That way they would get Jesus in trouble with the Romans. But if He were to say, ‘Don’t stone her,’ they would run back to the Sanhedrin and say, ‘This Jesus is a heretic because He denies the law of Moses.’ No matter how Jesus answered the question, He would be in serious trouble.”

In addition to the issue with Him getting into trouble with the Romans if He were to pronounce the guilty verdict, some Scholars (MacArthur, Boice, Morris among others) think that Jesus would also undermine His ministry which was marked by compassion – and would perhaps even contradict what He said in John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”

Though this might be the case, I don’t think it is necessarily what the scribes and Pharisees had in their minds.  I don’t think their mission at this stage was to simply undermine His ministry, but to find a reason to put Him to death.

Jesus Write in the Sand

The reaction of Jesus to their question is odd – very odd indeed!  There are so many theories on what it is that Jesus wrote that I can’t even begin to list them all here.  Most scholars that I respect say that we simply cannot know what He wrote, and that, as Sproul says, “We have to be careful about speculation. As John Calvin said in his commentary on Romans, when God closes His holy mouth, we should desist from inquiry.”

So I will not spend time on what He might or might not have said.  Needless to say, it further provoked His enemies, who continued to pester Him for an answer.

8:7-8 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” [8] And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground.

Jesus’ words are masterful.  He doesn’t vacillate between Moses and Roman law (as Sproul notes), but sides with Moses, and upholds the law of the Old Testament without directly engaging in the judgment Himself, and therefore not incurring any legal issues with Rome.

But His words are masterful in other ways as well.  He is actually shedding light on a problem – namely that we are all guilty of sin, we have all fallen short of God’s glory and high standard (Rom. 3:23), and that there is only one righteous judge of the universe who is fit to issue the verdict.  But at the same time, if we are all guilty, and we all deserve to die, how can the law of Moses be upheld while still believing in a God that is good and merciful?

This is the problem that Paul addressed in Romans 3:26 – As Boice points out, “Ho can God be both just and the justifier of the ungodly? From a human point of view the problem is unsolvable.”

But because with God “all things are possible” there is a solution.  Namely that Jesus bore our punishment in His body on the cross.  So that God would be just and not wink at sin (as Sproul is commonly saying) and still punish sin and therefore remain just, while providing mercy for those whom He has predestined to salvation (the elect).  Our punishment has not been excused and forgotten.  That sentence has been carried out – Jesus bore our sentence for us on the cross.

8:9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.

These men thought they had trapped Jesus, but now they were so utterly undone by the overpowering nature and truth of His words (and perhaps even His presence) that their hearts melted within them.  One minute they had stones in their hands ready to physically kill someone, the next they were so struck in mind and heart that they had to flee the scene.

James Boice comments “Think of the efforts they had gone through! Think of the plotting! Yet there were destroyed in a moment when they were confronted by the God who masters circumstances.”

8:10-11 Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” [11] She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”

How can we explain the reaction of Jesus here?  Boice says that His response was characterized by understanding, compassion, forgiveness, and a challenge.  I think he is right on the money with this breakdown (MacArthur offers a similar, though less compelling outline as well).  I will use his outline here but add my own thoughts under each section:

He is Understanding: Jesus knows all circumstances, all hearts, all minds.  There is nothing about this situation that Jesus doesn’t fully comprehend or understand.  He sees the hearts of the scribes and Pharisees, and He sees the heart of the young woman here.

He is Compassionate and Loving: The best way to think about the love and compassion Jesus had for this young lady is to think about how you love your own children.  It’s an unconditional kind of love.  You don’t love them because they are good, or because they are yours (they could have been adopted), or because they are talented or handsome or pretty.  There is an almost divine and unexplainable love you have for them.  Your heart is knitted to theirs in an almost supernatural way.  That is the way Christ sees people.  That’s how He saw this young lady, and that’s how He sees you and me.

Furthermore, that’s how we are called to see others.  We aren’t to use people like these Pharisees did.  What they did was so evil and so dark that we think we never act this way.  But as Boice points out, we are all guilty of using people from time to time.  We treat others as less than human, and we forget how God loves them, and how He loves us despite our deep sinfulness.

Boice says this, “Love is unexplainable. The best you can say is that love is divine and that you love him (others/your children) because God himself has loved us.”

Christ is Forgiving:

I think it may well be said here that Jesus forgave this young lady – for he says that He does not condemn her.  However, we aren’t told specifically if she sought repentance.  I do think, though, that He would not have issued these words if He had not already looked into her heart and seen her repentance.  I don’t want to get too far down the road of speculation here though, for no one can know what is in a man’s (or woman’s) heart.

The most important principle here is that of Christ’s forgiveness not merely for the specific sin in view, but for sin of any kind.

Now matter how disgusting, evil, or hateful, our sin can still be forgiven by the Lord of lords.  Interestingly enough none of the commentators talk about Christ’s view of the Pharisees and scribes at this juncture. Surely if there was ever a group that could have been called Christ’s “enemy” it was this group of men.  But what does Christ tell us about our enemies?  He tells us to love them (Matt. 5:44).  And so none of His enemies receives a stinging rebuke by Jesus in this instance – though they deserved it. Rather He goes right to the heart of the matter, piercing their souls and pricking their consciences with truth that could not be warded off even by the stony defenses of a hardened heart.  What is amazing to me is the thought that not only did Christ love this woman, but He probably had a love for those who were accusing Him (Luke 23:34) – perhaps even some in that group would later repent of their sins and follow Him (Acts 6:7).

Christ Issues a Challenge:

He says, “go, and from now on sin no more.”  Forgiveness is followed by a challenge, and we receive the same admonition as well from Paul who says:

What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? [2] By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? [3] Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? [4] We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

[5] For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. [6] We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. [7] For one who has died has been set free from sin. (Romans 6:1-7)

As followers of Jesus Christ, we have had our sins atoned for and we are no longer slaves to sin. This is an important final point. In the garden Adam could choose to sin, or choose not to sin.  We know which way he went.  But he was not a slave to sin as most of the human race is today. When Adam fell into sin, all men born afterwards were born into slavery.  We couldn’t not choose to sin.  We were sinners by our very nature. Such was our state prior to Christ!  Now we, like Adam originally, can choose either to sin or not to sin.  Often we follow the flesh, but as we become more and more conformed into the image of Christ, we choose to sin less and less.

The challenge we face is to crucify our desires of the flesh, and put on the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 13:14). This challenge is one we can meet with gusto because we have motivation that most people don’t have – we have hope for a wonderful eternity in heaven, and we have the enjoyment and communion with God right now.  In short, we are motivated by the gospel and by His love for us.

 

 

 

 

 

Study Notes 10-6-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

7:32-34 The Pharisees heard the crowd muttering these things about him, and the chief priests and Pharisees sent officers to arrest him. [33] Jesus then said, “I will be with you a little longer, and then I am going to him who sent me. [34] You will seek me and you will not find me. Where I am you cannot come.”

Setting the Scene for the Warrant

Carson sets the stage for what is to follow: “The authorities have already indicated that they do not want Jesus to be the topic of conversation (cf. vs. 12-13), let along venerated as Messiah. The whispered and tentative faith of those described in verse 31, once it reached the ears of the Pharisees and chief priests, therefore served as a signal that is was time to sign an arrest warrant.”

The Pharisees and the chief priests (most of whom were Sadducees) didn’t get along, but the fact that they issued a warrant here shows that they were together on this matter (it would have taken all of them getting together to do this).  Sometimes “common enemies make strange bedfellows (witness Luke 23:12!)” (Carson).

Carson tells us that the “officers” mentioned in verse 32 were “temple guards” that “were a kind of temple police force, drawn from the Levites, with primary responsibility for maintaining order in the temple area.”  They served at the pleasure of the high priest and their leader was the Captain of the Temple.  The Captain of the Temple had a good amount of leeway to govern the area around the temple since the Romans didn’t really care about the Jews affairs so long as the order was kept.

You’re Not Coming With Me

It almost seems like there’s a double entendre here in the words of Jesus.  He says that he will be leaving to go to “him who sent me”, meaning that He will be going home to the Father, and then says that those listening to Him “will not find me.”  Why?  Because “where I am you cannot come.”  I think there are two potential reasons why He said, “you cannot come.”

First, I think that the obvious meaning is that since He will be going to heaven, those who are still on earth cannot physically follow Him to heaven.  This would have been more acutely directed at His disciples and crowd who would have loved to come with Him or who were indifferent one way or another.  Secondly, the saying could have had undertones directed at the Pharisees with the intent of meaning that they were not able to enter into the blessedness of heaven due to their unbelief.

Ryle puts it this way:

We can hardly doubt that these words were meant to have a prophetic sense. Whether our Lord had in view individual cases of unbelief among His hearers, or whether He looked forward to the national remorse which many would feel too late in the final siege of Jerusalem, are points which we cannot perhaps decide. But that many Jews did remember Christ’s sayings long after He had ascended into heaven, and did in a way seek Him and wish for Him when it was too late, we may be very sure.

However, taken either way, it seems that those listening still didn’t understand Him…

7:35-36 The Jews said to one another, “Where does this man intend to go that we will not find him? Does he intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks? [36] What does he mean by saying, ‘You will seek me and you will not find me,’ and, ‘Where I am you cannot come’?”

Contextual Note: The word “dispersion” is “diaspora” in the Greek.  Morris comments, “The Dispersion, a technical term for the large number of Jews who at this time were dispersed throughout the Roman Empire and beyond. Ever since the exile to Babylon there had been Jews living outside Palestine. When permission to return from Babylon was given many availed themselves of it, but many also did not.”

It would have been a natural (though not discerning) conclusion for them to assume that Jesus would have been referring to His returning to the northern country and then perhaps going further out to the northwest to Greece – where they would not be able to bother Him.

Morris notes “This would seem to mean going to the Jewish synagogues and making them the springboard for a mission outward to the Greeks. It is, of course the method that the first Christian preachers actually employed (as we see in acts). These Jews, however, dismiss the method as too fantastic to be considered a proper activity of the Messiah, which is another example of John’s irony.”

However, this is not what He meant at all.  And we don’t see that He answers them at all.  He just lets them wonder to themselves as to the meaning of the thing.  Morris agrees saying, “It is clear that the saying puzzled them greatly. And it not only puzzled them; it apparently made them uneasy. Was there perhaps some meaning in it that still eluded them?  Was the Man from Nazareth mocking them? Should they have understood more?”

In fact, Jesus is talking about His glorious return to heaven where He will once again enjoy the glory He had before the foundation of the world (cf. 17:1-5 – also see Carson’s notes).

Lastly, we see another underlying threat of the fact that where He was going they weren’t going to come – if He looks forward to this (the glory awaiting Him cf. Heb. 12:1-2), then what must await them is the opposite…a scary proposition that Christ touches on later in 8:21 when He says, “So he said to them again, ‘I am going away, and you will seek me, and you will die in your sin. Where I am going, you cannot come.’”

7:37-39 On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and cried out, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. [38] Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’” [39] Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Contextual Notes about the Feast: There is a disagreement from scholars as to whether the feast actually lasted 8 days or 7 days.  It seems as though originally the feast lasted 7, but that it may have grown to an 8th day by the time of Christ.  The “great day” of the feast was the last, and biggest, day of the weeklong celebration.  If anyone came in late for the feast (say, mid-week), they would not have wanted to miss this day.  Morris notes that Chrysostom thought that Christ might have waited until this final day, when the crowds would have been largest, to impart this important truth.

There is also a significance here to Jesus’ use of “living water” that tied in with both the celebration at hand, and with the remembrance of the experience of the Israelites at the waters of Meribah in Numbers 20:2-13.

Both Morris and Carson explain that during the seven days of the feast a golden flagon was filled with water from the pool of Siloam and taken “in a procession led by the High Priest back to the temple.”  During the procession the people following would be singing Psalms from chapters 113-118.  “When the choir reached Psalm 118, every male pilgrim shoot a lulab (see notes below) in his right hand , while his left raised a piece of citrus fruit (a sign of the ingathered harvest), and all cried ‘Give thanks to the Lord!’ three times” says Carson.

The lulab comes from Leviticus 23:40: “And you shall take on the first day the fruit of splendid trees, branches of palm trees and boughs of leafy trees and willows of the brook, and you shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days.”

SIDE NOTE: There was a disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees as to whether these “leafy trees and willows” were to be used to build the booths (as thought the Sadducees) or whether they were to be paraded in through the temple (as thought the Pharisees).  In the end the latter – the Pharisees’ interpretation – won out (Morris).

The lulabs signified the years of wandering in the desert and the citrus fruit the promised land of their forefathers, and both were also a celebration and thanks for current blessings as well.

Along with this procession and the recitation of the Psalms, Ps. 118:25 became a rallying cry: “Save us, we pray, O Lord! O Lord, we pray, give us success!”  Little did they realize that Jesus was about to answer their prayers in a way that they’d never have expected (Morris).

Rivers of Living Water

It is against this background that we read the words of Jesus.  We recall also that back in John 4, during His conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus said the following:

Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” (4:13-14)

But this text in front of us is the only time where we learn what exactly Jesus means by “living water” – the gospel writer tells us himself with an editorial note in verse 39 that “this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive.”

So now there is more clarity placed on His words – and more significance as well.  Not only is this “living water” equated with “eternal life” but we’re told Who gives this living water, and how: Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The people who were listening would have perhaps been familiar with some of Jesus’ words.  They might have thought about what Ezekiel saw in his vision:

Then he brought me back to the door of the temple, and behold, water was issuing from below the threshold of the temple toward the east (for the temple faced east). The water was flowing down from below the south end of the threshold of the temple, south of the altar. [2] Then he brought me out by way of the north gate and led me around on the outside to the outer gate that faces toward the east; and behold, the water was trickling out on the south side.

Going on eastward with a measuring line in his hand, the man measured a thousand cubits, and then led me through the water, and it was ankle-deep. [4] Again he measured a thousand, and led me through the water, and it was knee-deep. Again he measured a thousand, and led me through the water, and it was waist-deep. [5] Again he measured a thousand, and it was a river that I could not pass through, for the water had risen. It was deep enough to swim in, a river that could not be passed through. [6] And he said to me, “Son of man, have you seen this?”

Then he led me back to the bank of the river. [7] As I went back, I saw on the bank of the river very many trees on the one side and on the other. [8] And he said to me, “This water flows toward the eastern region and goes down into the Arabah, and enters the sea; when the water flows into the sea, the water will become fresh. [9] And wherever the river goes, every living creature that swarms will live, and there will be very many fish. For this water goes there, that the waters of the sea may become fresh; so everything will live where the river goes. [10] Fishermen will stand beside the sea. From Engedi to Eneglaim it will be a place for the spreading of nets. Its fish will be of very many kinds, like the fish of the Great Sea. [11] But its swamps and marshes will not become fresh; they are to be left for salt. [12] And on the banks, on both sides of the river, there will grow all kinds of trees for food. Their leaves will not wither, nor their fruit fail, but they will bear fresh fruit every month, because the water for them flows from the sanctuary. Their fruit will be for food, and their leaves for healing.” (Ezekiel 47:1-12).

 Other significant Old Testament texts that might have been ringing in their ears are found in Isaiah:

With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation. (Is. 12:3)

And..

“Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. (Is. 55:1)

It is significant that the Spirit is shown by Christ to give the life of water.  Why?  Because it is the Spirit who does the “washing of regeneration” as Paul tells Titus:

He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:5-7)

Passing the Blessing Onward

The most disputed portion of this text has to do with punctuation.  Is there a period in the right spot?  Some translations (some versions of the NIV for instance) separate the verses out differently in order to show that the living water doesn’t flow from those who believe, but rather from Christ.  The problem with this is that there is no Old Testament evidence or other scripture to support this interpretation (Morris).  However, it does make sense that once one is filled with the Holy Spirit that person produces spiritual fruit (Galatians 5:22-23) of a life giving nature.

Personally I believe that it makes all the sense in the world that the living water that Christ gives us also flows from us.  Not as though there is any power in ourselves, but rather we are vessels of service for the Lord’s Spirit (the Holy Spirit – for it is the Holy Spirit which does the washing of regeneration).

What is significant in this is to look at what Christ says in verse 38: “out of his heart” is what it says.  And thought He is not quoting from a specific text, one of the texts that scholars associate with this is the one from Ezekiel 47 I mentioned earlier.  In Ez. 47:1 it states that the water flowed from the “temple.”  We know that Christ referred to His own body as the temple in at least one way, and that is that it would be torn down and rebuilt in three days.  But the New Testament mostly uses the term temple in reference to the Christian.

Furthermore, if we are the temple we are so by the consecration of the Holy Spirit and are set apart for His service.  Indeed Christ is with us everywhere – (Matt. 28) through the indwelling of His Spirit.  Therefore we are the temple which flows with the Spirit’s living waters.  We are overflowing because of this life that Christ came to give us “abundantly” (John 10:10).

Conclusion

Jesus obviously meant for this to be a significant statement – one that we ought to take time and meditate upon.  Here are a few things we ought to be asking ourselves:

  • Am I keeping my temple pure and clean and ready for His service?
  • Do the waters of the Holy Spirit flow out of me in praise and adoration to God?  Is it evident to others by my actions that I am a believer in Christ? (We are not only saved from something, we are saved FOR something…)
  • Am I clinging to any false notion of the work of salvation, or have I realized that regeneration is the monergistic work of the Holy Spirit and Him along?
  • Am I quenching the Spirit’s work in any way in my life?
  • Are my words healing to those around me, or are they poisonous waters set on fire by Hell (James 1)?

Study Notes 8-26-12: John 6:55-66

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

Here are the study notes for John 6:55-66

6:55-56 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. [56] Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

The word “abide” is “meno” in the Greek and can mean to sojourn or tarry in a place, to be kept continually, to continue to be present, to endure, and when talking about it in relation to a state a condition of a person it can mean to “remain as one” and “not become different.”

To abide in Christ and have Him abide in us is normally meant that we are continually relying on Christ for our vitality.  I like what the ESV Study notes say, “abide in me means to continue in a daily, personal relationship with Jesus, characterized by trust, prayer, obedience, and joy.”

I think that in relation to verse 55 (and all the other surrounding verses), verse 56 is saying that abiding in Christ is continually eating of the “true” food and drink that He has to offer.  This means that He wants us to not simply seek His face on Sunday mornings, but rather reflects His desire to have our hearts continually seeking after Him as we would for food.  We look for food at least three times a day (plus tea time if you’re English!) because we’re driven to it by hunger.  The same ought to be true in our spiritual lives. “Don’t starve yourself!” Jesus is saying.

This notion of “abiding” is familiar to those of us who have closely studied the Bible for a number of years now and have heard Jesus say in John 15 that He is the vine and we are the branches.  In that passage – the last of His “I Am” sayings – He says that it is our abiding in Him that gives us life as well.  Here’s what John 15:1-11 says:

I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. [2] Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. [3] Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. [4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. [5] I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. [6] If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. [7] If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. [8] By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. [9] As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. [10] If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. [11] These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full.

I think it’s worth noting that there are 120 different times that this word is used throughout scripture.  It’s an important concept, one that we will keep coming back to.  There are two sort of nuances to abiding, I think.

The first is that abiding is a synergistic work.  That is to say, it is something we work with God in accomplishing.  Abiding requires us reading the Word of God, and daily submitting our lives to His authority.  It requires us being in prayer, and asking for God to work through our lives, and work on us.  It’s a constant seeking of God’s face (1 Chron. 16:11).  This idea is articulated in the latin phrase “Coram Deo” which means to live in the face of God – to live with the mindset that we are continually dwelling in His presence.   Which leads to the second part of this…

The second part of abiding, is the part that is monergistic, that is to say that it is God’s work and not ours.  This kind of abiding is the kind that the Holy Spirit does in our lives once we are born again.  Our abiding is done out of a motivation and love for Christ’s abiding in us and saving us.  His abiding in us causes us to want to abide in Him – to spend time in His word, to spend time in prayer.  So in a sense we are always abiding in Him because He is in us.  But in another sort of lower sense, there is a call here for us to “abide” in Christ – and that means to seeking Him and resting in Him.

This is what we call a “paradox” because we are both seeking and resting at the same time.  These things seem to be naturally opposed to each other on the surface, but only through a closer look do we find that they are not opposed to each other, but are simply different ways of expressing our relationship with Christ, and His work of sanctification within us.  We rest in Him because we are secure in the promises He offers and we are secure in our salvation, but we seek Him and seek to abide in Him because we love Him and want to know Him more.

6:57-59 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. [58] This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” [59] Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.

I agree with Sproul who says that this is a lot like His saying to the Samaritan Woman at the well that He is the “living water” and that all who thirst should come to Him and receive water so that they may never thirst again.

The thing I think we need to particularly note is the life-giving power of Jesus.  It is almost too easy to simply call it “life giving power” because there is a whole other sort of power there.  And what I mean by that is that it is one thing to bring people to life who have died, and to breathe life into them, and to heal them as Christ had done – these are amazing, breathtaking things to be sure – but it is a whole separate thing to say that Christ has the power of life within Him.

So what I am getting at here, perhaps clumsily, is that Christ also has the power to bring life out of nothing.  Where there was nothing before, He speaks and BOOM there’s life.  He thinks and it is so.  He has the power of being in Himself.  In order to understand this we almost need to reach a whole other level of thinking on the person of Christ.  He’s so powerful, so glorious and has such authority that His words command the planets and their orbits.  The sea bows to His wishes, science works at His pleasure, and microbiology orders itself according to His good pleasure!

So again, He chooses these statements of power to punctuate His teaching on the nature of salvation.  The person who holds worlds in His hands and knows the every need of BILLIONS of people, is also the God who is sovereign over salvation.

He has now claimed to have come down from heaven, to be the I AM – the very Deity Himself – and He has offered up eternal life to whomever will come to Him.  In all of this He has preached His sovereignty (vs. 37 and 44 in particular), and His compassion.

Now, it is time for the disciples to digest the food Christ has given them, and at first they find it hard food to swallow…

6:60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”

Now there are two (and perhaps three) kinds of hard sayings, as R.C. Sproul likes to remind us.  The first is the kind of hard saying that is difficult to understand.  It is hard because it is truly a complex matter, which is prone to giving us a 3 aspirin headache!  The second kind of “hard saying” is the kind that we hear and don’t like to accept.  It is hard because we don’t care for it and would rather not believe in its truthfulness.

Steve Lawson says that this series of sayings are “not hard to understand, but hard to swallow.”

But I think that these sayings are a combination of both types of “hard” sayings.  It is both unacceptable to these men because of their pride, and it is difficult to understand for even the apostles because, though they perhaps want to understand it and believe it, they cannot without the aid of Christ (or the Holy Spirit).

We have to take note of the same thing and not to approach the Bible with arrogance or presuppositions.  The Bible is definitely definitive; it’s definitely clear; it’s definitely perspicuitous. But at the same time we have to be conscious not to jump to conclusions that aren’t there.  We shouldn’t read something into the text that isn’t there – or try to avoid the text simply because its saying something we find offensive.

In one way this text is very comforting because we see that the disciples of Jesus early on had difficulty with some of the things he was saying. On the other hand it’s challenging to us because we know that having the Holy Spirit we ought to be able to understand these texts – at least that’s what we tell ourselves. But this is why the Bible is an inexhaustible resource that we will never fully penetrate no matter how many years we live and how long we spend in its’ pages.

Just yesterday I was talking with a pastor who said he’s been reading the Bible every day for over 40 years and was still finding things in it that he had never seen before.  He told me that he says to himself “was that there the whole time?!”

But I do want to use this as an opportunity to talk about the perspicuity of scripture, and the private interpretation of scripture.  Perspicuity, in a nutshell, means that something is clear and able to be understood by someone who doesn’t have a doctorate degree in theology.  It means that you and me can read Scripture and understand clearly what it says without someone (i.e. a priest) from the church explaining the plain meaning of the text.  This isn’t saying that we don’t all benefit from the wisdom of the church and her teachers, but is simply to say that it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the sentences, paragraphs, and general meaning of words in this book.

Private interpretation is similar to perspicuity and basically means that an individual can read the Bible and understand it clearly enough (because it is perspicuitous) to be responsible for that understanding before God.

This is extremely important because with the proliferation of Bibles there is also the proliferation of wrong opinions about what those Bibles say.  This was the very thing that Martin Luther and the church was concerned about before his translation project began.  If the Bible were to get into the hands of the masses, how would they be able to understand it, and then have a great enough grasp of it to correctly conform their lives to its instructions?  Well Luther knew the danger in this, but said that it was worth the danger because of the number of souls that would be won with the opening up of Scripture.  The church as guardian of Scripture had failed miserably.  The situation really couldn’t get any worse!  But Luther also knew and understood that this scripture was perspicuitous and therefore, with the help of the Spirit and of wise church leaders, believers could read scripture and understand correctly what it said – even if there were mysteries within its pages that they found “hard”, as these disciples found in the verse we’ve just examined.

6:61-62 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? [62] Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

Of course the disciples wouldn’t have taken offense to Him ascending into heaven – they would have rejoiced at that.  So Christ is offering them a comparison to give them perspective.  He’s saying that “both A and B doctrines are true, and everything I say is true, therefore why are you offended at one versus the other?”

We need to realize that all of scripture is God’s truth.  It is all relevant, it is all true.  Just because one thing appears more difficult of offensive than another doesn’t mean its any less God’s word.

I can’t think of a better verse (except maybe 1 Tim. 3:16) to show us that all doctrine in scripture is God’s doctrine.  All truth is God’s truth!

Christ wants to elevate our perspective.  When He speaks, the matter is done.  There is no appealing for an easier doctrine or an easier truth.  We can’t go to God and say “please give me something easier to understand or believe in, because this really isn’t very comfortable.”  We need to see Jesus’ words through the lens of His authority, and bow before them in unquestioned allegiance to His truth.

So while we talk about perspicuity, we also need to understand that just because scripture is clear and readable doesn’t mean its not mysterious/difficult.  And that is what Christ addresses next…

6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

The “flesh” He’s referring to here is not His flesh that has been the topic of the last several verses, but rather the flesh of humanity.  As Sproul points out, this is a theme that runs through most of Scripture, and one that Paul especially expounds upon (Romans 7 comes to mind).  The Bible sees our “flesh” as our mind, will and emotions prior to the Holy Spirit’s breathing new life into us, which Jesus calls being “born again.”

What He is essentially saying here is that in the flesh they will not be able to understand what He is saying because He is saying something spiritually related.  Paul explains:

Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God.  And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:12-14)

6:64-65 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) [65] And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

As Sproul says, “there’s that doctrine of predestination again.”  I laughed when I read that because it is this doctrine that offends so many immature Christians, and yet I was once one of them.  Scripture exhorts us to strive toward greater understanding of even the most difficult doctrines.  In Hebrews we read:

About this we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. [12] For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, [13] for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. [14] But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. [6:1] Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, [2] and of instruction about washings, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. [3] And this we will do if God permits. (Hebrews 5:11-6:3)

There’s also a direct tie-in between verses 63-65 – they build on each other.  Jesus is saying that you can’t come to me (65) because you do not believe (64) and in order to believe you need the help of the Spirit (63), because in your own flesh you can’t understand these mysteries – this bread of life isn’t palatable to you (66).

This is why we say that regeneration precedes faith.  Before we can see the kingdom of God we must be born again (chapter 3).  Before we can believe on Christ (faith – 64), we must first be born again, otherwise we’ll simply walk away from Him and find something else that is more palatable to our sin natures (66).

The Case for ‘Limited Atonement’

It wasn’t until some time after I had first taught through this passage that I realized the significance of John’s editorial comment in verse 64. John says, “For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe.” It stands to reason that if Jesus knew from the beginning who would not believe, then He certainly knew from the beginning who would believe.

We have already seen that, as Morris says, “The truths of which Jesus has been speaking are accessible only to faith…only for those in whom God works come to Christ.” But interestingly enough John says that Jesus knew from the beginning about who would come to him and who would not. Carson points out that this could be either from the beginning of His ministry, or from the beginning of all time (i.e. John 1:1). Regardless, the fact remains that John’s assertion has natural consequences, namely that Jesus knew for whom He was dying, and those who would not come to Him. He could know this because He was divine, and therefore omniscient. It is a mysterious thing that He would not know certain things (like the time of his return), and yet appear to know something eternally set in stone (Eph. 1:4-5) – like who would come to faith in Him and who would not.

Nevertheless, it is not for us to pry into the reasons as to why Christ knew some things and not others, but one thing He certainly did seem to know is exactly who would not believe in Him, and therefore who would come to believe in Him. This reality is usually known as the doctrine of Limited Atonement, or ‘Definite Atonement’.  It has long been a stumbling block to those of a more Arminian persuasion, and even some in my own Baptist tradition have called themselves “4-point Calvinists” on the basis of eschewing this doctrine.

Yet here is the truth of God’s Word before us, in the context of highly predestinarian language, which has been set in the midst of a discussion on the sovereignty of God and His Christ in the Salvation of mankind. I don’t, therefore, think it’s a stretch to see this verse as affirming the doctrine that Christ came into the world with specific people in mind – His elect.

6:66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.

What was the result of Christ’s preaching the doctrine of the atonement, and salvation, and predestination?  The result was that people couldn’t take it anymore.  They didn’t like what this Jesus was saying, and they didn’t want to submit their lives to someone who wouldn’t simply focus on their physical needs.  These people were sinners who sought after their own desire and needs, and didn’t realize their greatest need wasn’t physical but spiritual.

The same thing will happen to us when we teach and preach hard truths.  It’s easy to be turned off by someone who teaches the doctrine of predestination, isn’t it?  We have to confront ourselves with the question: Am I following Christ for all the physical blessings He brings me in this life, or am I following Him because I love Him for what He’s done for me here and for eternity to come?  Am I following a Jesus that doesn’t exist?  Am I following someone who says, “come to me all who are weary”, but never says, “you can’t come to me unless you are drawn”? OR, am I following a Jesus who is so radical, so offensive, and so odious to my sinful self that if I had been there I would likely have “turned back” as well?

I think that this verse tells us a great deal about the nature of the entire discourse.  We may be troubled when we read verse 44 or 37 telling us that no one can come to the Father unless He draws them.  We may not fully understand what Christ means by eating of His flesh.  We might not exactly know what He means by calling Himself the “bread of life” and so on.  But we must not be like these men who gave up and walked away.  If we are true Disciples of Christ we will stand by Him and work to learn more from Him.  We must sit at His knees and be taught of God.

Let us humbly commit to following Christ no matter how difficult these saying may be, and no matter how our minds and hearts may not want to accept them.  Let us wrestle with God as Jacob did, and let us claim the promise of God that He will help us if we would only ask.  James 1:5 says, “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.”

Study Notes 8-12-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

John 6:46-47

6:46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father.

It is a well-known fact that no one can see God and live – for this is one of the first things that students of the Bible learn as they read through the Old Testament.  Moses records for us the words of God in response to Moses’ request to look on His holy face.  The exchange went like this:

Moses said, “Please show me your glory.” [19] And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The LORD.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. [20] But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.” [21] And the LORD said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand on the rock, [22] and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by. [23] Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.”(Ex. 33:18-23)

The Father does not rebuke Moses for wanting to look upon His glory, indeed He grants him an amazing opportunity to get to know Him more; for Moses wanted to know God more intimately, and this is a desire God wants us all to have. Moses wanted to bask in the glory of who God is in all of His awesome holiness. But God explains to Moses that if he were to look upon the glory of His holiness he would perish.

We get an idea of the power of this holiness in Isaiah 6 when we read about the Seraphim who have six wings – two of which are for covering their eyes.  These creatures have never sinned, and are holy beings, yet they cannot stand to look directly into the holy resplendency of God.

But Christ says here that there is one person who can look on the holiness of the Father: that is the Son.

Sinclair Ferguson makes the connection between this passage in Isaiah 6 and how John describes the “Word” in chapter 1 of the gospel we’re reading now.  Here’s what he says:

It is in stark yet glorious contrast to this (the Seraphim in Is. 6) that we find John opening his Gospel by saying, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God” (pros ton theon – literally ‘toward God’).  Do you see the picture here? If the Son is “toward God”, He must be face to fact with Him – alone (with the Spirit) able to bear the intensity of the Father’s gaze. That face is all-consuming love, and burns to destruction all in the object of its gaze that is not itself perfect love. Thus, He gazes on His Son. All creatures must cover their faces or avert their eyes. Only the Son (always in and with the Spirit) is able to love in return with an intensity that preserves His from being consumed by the holiness of the Father.

Jesus Himself states that He has “seen” the Father in John 8:38, “I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”

Only when we have a true sense of the powerful, awful, holiness of God the Father can we truly understand what it means that Christ says “no man has seen the Father” and also simultaneously comprehend that He (Christ) alone has the ability to view Him face to face in perfect holy communion.

This difference between the creaturely and the divine is how Christ chooses to punctuate His teaching on the mode of salvation.  It is as if He is saying, “no one comes to the Father unless we (The trinity) teach Him, and in case you have a problem with the order of this, let me remind you of your place in the order of creation!”

6:47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.

Morris notes, “For the third time in this discourse there is the solemn ‘I tell you the truth’. Jesus’ main concern is with life and how people obtain it, not with his own person. Now he solemnly repeats the way to life.”

What is the upshot of all of this?  What is it that results in being “taught” and “drawn” by God?  The result is that you will believe, and like the golden chain in Romans 8:28-30, we see that it leads inevitably to a result.  That result is the obtaining of eternal life.  For if we are united with Christ in His death and His resurrection (Rom. 6), and if He has desired for us to come and be with Him and see Him in His glory (John 17), then it is a necessary precondition that we have eternal life with Him.

This verse isn’t stating that we wouldn’t have eternal souls without belief in Christ, for man is made in God’s image (Gen. 2:27), but rather that we will have eternal “life” in Christ.  Life is the word we use to identify with that which is eternal blessedness with Christ forever.  Those who do not have eternal “life” actually could be said to have something of an eternal “death” because they will continually suffer the consequences of their separation from God and His blessedness.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, we notice the shining doctrine of Solus Christus. Solus Christus is the doctrine that states that it is in Christ alone which our salvation lies.  In Him alone we find all of our sufficiency for life in God.

Monergism.com has an excellent blurb on this doctrine and states, “Christ’s all-sufficiency means, by implication, that we are insufficient of ourselves. Indeed the Scripture says “Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God.” 2 Corinthians 3:5.  We reaffirm that our salvation is accomplished by the mediatorial work of the historical Christ alone. His sinless life and substitutionary atonement alone are sufficient for our justification and reconciliation to the Father. We deny that the gospel is preached if Christ’s substitutionary work is not declared and faith in Christ and his work is not solicited.”

Michael Horton gives a good historical background to the this doctrine:

In the Middle Ages, the minister was seen as having a special relationship with God, as he mediated God’s grace and forgiveness through the sacraments. But there were other challenges. We often think of our own age as unique, with its pluralism and the advent of so many religions. But not too long before the Reformation, the Renaissance thinker Petrarch was calling for an Age of the Spirit in which all religions would be united. Many Renaissance minds were convinced that there was a saving revelation of God in nature and that, therefore, Christ was not the only way. The fascination with pagan philosophy encouraged the idea that natural religion offered a great deal–indeed, even salvation–to those who did not know Christ.

The Reformation was, more than anything else, an assault on faith in humanity, and a defense of the idea that God alone reveals Himself and saves us. We do not find Him; He finds us. That emphasis was the cause of the cry, “Christ alone!” Jesus was the only way of knowing what God is really like, the only way of entering into a relationship with Him as father instead of judge, and the only way of being saved from His wrath.

But not only is our salvation resting firming on the work of Christ, but as evangelical Christians, we believe that the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation is all about Christ.  As Martin Luther said, “(Christ is the) center and circumference of the Bible.”

So when Christ calls us to “believe” in Him, He is calling us to put our full faith and trust in Him and His work, and to lay aside any ideas that we can add anything to our salvation, and also to lay aside any ideas that we can add to His words.  In this verse, He is saying, in affect, “I have just laid out the truth about salvation and of heaven, and in order to have these things you must believe what I say is true, and also you must believe in me.  You must place all your faith and hope on me alone for these things.”

Finally, when Christ seals his teaching here with this verse, He is doing so on the heals of some difficult (some say “hard”) sayings.  Some of these are sayings our own class has struggled with.  But Christ doesn’t say, “if you’d like to believe in My sovereignty over salvation that’s fine, but regardless you need to believe in my words.”  No indeed.  For the two are invariably intertwined and cannot be separated.

Christ is saying in this discourse that:

  1. I am all sufficient for life here and in heaven
  2. I am the most satisfying thing you will ever experience
  3. God, not you, makes the choice over who will be saved
  4. In order to believe to me, you must have God’s help
  5. You aren’t going to believe in me unless you’ve been given faith from God to believe me
  6. In order to be saved you must believe in my words

What seems like a circle is in fact a linear line that starts with God in eternity past (Eph. 1:3-14) continues with God’s quickening us (John 3), drawing us (John 6:44) and ends with His keeping us in His bosom until the day of glorification (Romans 8).

Jesus, in affect, has said to his audience that they must believe to be saved but that those listening will not believe. The reason they can’t believe is because they love their sin more than they love God.  In order to believe we must be quickened by the Spirit of God and given faith, which we then place on our Lord.  Placing this faith on Christ is what results in salvation, as we see from above.

Getting back to the heart of what Christ is saying specifically in this verse, J.C. Ryle says, “He that would have his sins pardoned and his soul saved must go to Christ for it.”

The utter simplicity of the gospel message here is perhaps easily missed in our discourse because of how many other important things Christ has said, but I think its so important that we remember the simplicity of the Christian faith. There is no series of objectives, no rites, no hoops that we need to jump through, as the Catholics erroneously believe, there is simply Christ and Christ alone.  He alone is our sufficiency, and our only “work” is to believe (John 6:28).

 

Study Notes 8-5-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

I have re-adjusted this text to include only my notes for verse 45, as that is all we covered last week.  Enjoy!

John 6:45

6:45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—

There are really two parts to this verse, or at least two ideas that I think are important.  One corresponds with salvation, the other with sanctification.  First I will deal with that which is dealing with salvation and then move onto the upshot of the salvific teaching (sanctification), which is driven by several passages in the Old Testament.

Teaching = Drawing

As we see in verse 44, there’s a sine qua non (a necessary precondition) involved in the act of coming to God.  That precondition is that He first “draw” us to Himself.  In the previous section, I mentioned the “why” as well as the overarching “how” as it pertains to the mode of operation in the drawing process.  Now, with this verse before us, I want to get into more specifics of the “how” operation of the spirit in our lives, and some of the distinctions we need to make to understand this process more accurately.  I think we all want to know “what happened to me?” as John Piper puts it.  We all want to know what it is that God did to change our lives and bring us into His everlasting kingdom.

In the context of this verse, what does it mean to be “taught by God”?  Well the “teaching” that John refers to here is in direct connection to the “drawing” that He mentioned in verse 44 (see also 1 Cor. 2:13, 1 Thess. 4:9, and 1 John 2:20).  As John Piper says, “So the connection between drawing and teaching is clear. The drawn are the taught. They are drawn by being taught.”

Thus the thrust of verse 45 is that Jesus is explaining more of the how of this drawing. How does He do that?  Well, Jesus seems to indicate that not only is this teaching in coordination with the drawing, but that the teaching of God is effective – it can’t fail.

Piper’s longer explanation for this is as follows:

The answer John gives to how the Father draws people to the Son is by teaching them. “No one can come unless the Father draws him…It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’” So the connection between drawing and teaching is clear. The drawn are the taught. They are drawn by being taught.

And the connection between being taught and coming to Christ is unbreakable. No one is taught and then decides not to come. The teaching produces the coming. You see that most clearly in the second half of verse 45.

Verse 45 says, “Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me.” (This is why I said this verse confirms our understanding of John 12:32.) Not some of them come. All of them come. So Jesus uses at least three phrases to describe how the Father draws people to Jesus. He calls it “being taught,” and he calls it “hearing from” God, and he calls it “learning from” God. “‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me.”

Beale and Carson agree with Piper that there is a strong link between the “drawing” in verse 44 and the “teaching” in verse 45, “In light of the Jews’ largely negative response to his message, Jesus points out that while his ministry in fact fulfills the prophetic vision that one day – which has now arrived – all people will be taught by God, this applies only to those who are drawn by the Father (vs. 44), the sender of Jesus and who subsequently come to believe in him as the Messiah.”

Leon Morris mentions that liberal theologian Rudolph Bultmann got it wrong when he said, “any man is free to be among those drawn by the Father.”  The statement itself sounds so ridiculous that it almost need not be refuted. But this is, in effect, what Armenians hold to, when they hold to the complete dominion of man over his fate.  Surely the very thrust of the text here is quite the opposite of Bultmann’s conclusion.  Such is the fate of errant theologians who come to Scripture in an eisegetical (so to speak) fashion.

Calvin agrees, “It is a false and profane assertion, therefore, that none are drawn but those who are willing to be drawn, as if man made himself obedient to God by his own efforts; for the willingness with which men follow God is what they already have from himself, who has formed their hearts to obey him.”

The Old Testament Connection and Fulfillment

In teaching us, the Holy Spirit is “implanting” (as MacArthur says) a new desire and a new understanding of the ways and law of God. This is why Christ says to us that it is “written in the prophets.”  He is saying that in Isaiah and Jeremiah and others, we are promised to one day have the law of God written on our hearts.  As Piper says, “Both Isaiah and Jeremiah explicitly promise the day when the God’s teaching will no longer merely be external on tablets of stone, but will be internal written on the heart.  God will teach us in the New Covenant first by sending Christ as the sum of all truth, the fulfillment of the law, and then by making that truth real to hour hearts.”

Interestingly, MacArthur notes that, “Jesus’ statement was also a subtle rebuke of His Jewish opponents, who prided themselves on their knowledge of Scripture. But had they truly understood the Old Testament, they would have eagerly embraced Him (5:39).”

The passage Christ quotes is from Isaiah 54:13 and says:

All your children shall be taught by the Lord, and great shall be the peace of your children.

This also holds a close connections with Jeremiah 31:33-34 which says:

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

Carson and Beale paraphrase Young by noting that “the greatest spiritual wealth that Isaiah is able to imagine for God’s people is that all their children ‘will be taught by [literally “become disciples of”] the Lord.”

Note especially that Jeremiah says that “they shall all know me”, why?  Because “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts.”  And therefore, “no longer shall each one teach his neighbor” – because, as Isaiah says, “all your children will be taught by the Lord.”

So the inward work of the Spirit will help people “know” the Lord.  Calvin says, “The way of teaching, of which the prophet speaks, does not consist merely in the external voice, but likewise in the secret operation of the Holy Spirit.”

What does this mean? What does it mean to “know” the Lord?  To understand this, we must look at the close ties between knowing the Lord, and knowing His law (since Christ is quoting the Old Testament here, we do well to draw our conclusions by first looking at the context in which Isaiah and other wrote). The law was an outward guide and revelation to the holiness of God.  It showed us His standard of perfection, as well as our own sinfulness.  In other words, it showed us who we were in comparison to who God was, and in that way made us aware inwardly of a need to repent and rely completely on God.  Once under the new covenant, we no longer needed to be taught by men, because we had an inward law – one written on our hearts.  The law, which was a schoolmaster (or “guardian”) to lead us to Christ (Galatians 3:24), was now implanted on the hearts of those who are quickened by the Holy Spirit (John 16:13).

The reason I mentioned 1 Corinthians 2:13 earlier as a reference is because it so excellently reminds us that the great truths of Christ are only able to be discerned by us with the help of the Holy Spirit.   It says, “And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.”

As He’s wrapping up the discourse here, as we’ll see later, Christ explains why they can’t understand what He’s talking about.  He says in verses 63-65, “‘It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe. (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)’ And he said, ‘This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.’”

If by now you cannot see the sovereignty of God in salvation then you must not be reading or listening to the Words of Christ – you must not have “ears to hear”, for Christ is saying again and again that from the beginning of time through the end of time, He and the Father have chosen a people, and elect group of people, for themselves.  They have not only determined who these people will be, but have seen to it that by their power, and theirs alone, these people are brought to a saving knowledge of themselves (the trinity).  The operation of salvation is synergistic only in the sense that it is carried out by the three members of the Trinity acting in full knowledge and power, for their own purposes and glory and enjoyment.  The Godhead does not share power for salvation with man.

Conformity

Now I want to look at this inward work of the Spirit as it pertains to being continually “taught” by the Spirit of God and how we were all “taught” of God for a purposes.

As I mentioned earlier, the Old Testament prophecy that is connected with being “taught” by God has to do with His law being written on our hearts.  Galatians tells us the law “was added because of transgression” (Gal. 3:19) to keep the people of Israel in constant remembrance of the character and standards of their God, that they might conform their lives to His standard (a sort of Old Testament sanctification process minus the Spirit’s help, of course). Now we have that law written on our hearts by the power of the Holy Spirit, and we also have His help to guide us and conform us to Christ’s mind and complete image. This is significant, and ought to lead us to understand how Christ would want us to act, and live. That is part of the Spirit’s grand work in us to conform us to the image of Christ until that day when this work is complete (in heaven).

Taught for a Purpose

Remember, we have been saved not only from something (Hell), but for something (good works and conformity to the image of Christ).  As Ephesians 2:10 says, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

Now, as you can see, not only is Christ explaining how we were first quickened and “taught” of God and our deficit before Him, but He is also explaining how we are taught of God continually for the purpose of growth in grace and truth. You were saved for a reason, to become holy.  You aren’t saved so that you can simply enjoy the fact that you aren’t going to Hell. You aren’t saved simply so that you can enjoy heaven with Christ (although that is certainly a part of it – see John 17), but rather you are saved so that you can be made holy.  Why?  So that you can glorify your Father who is in heaven.

Christians today have lost a focus on practical holiness.  We don’t wake up in the morning thinking, “how can I be more holy today?”  We have no driving desire to be “taught” of God.  Instead we have minds full of trivial and temporary desires.  We need to refocus our attention as Christians back onto the process and goal of sanctification, and becoming a holy people.

Jerry Bridges says, “But here is a basic truth: We will not grow unless we see our need to grown, we will not pursue holiness unless we see how much we are still unholy, and we will not see our unholiness unless we look at the holiness of God instead of what we perceive to be the unholiness of our neighbor. This is why we must face up to the sinfulness of our sin.”

We also need to remember that when Christ was raised from the dead and was going to go back to heaven, He says to Mary, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (Jon 20:17b).  Therefore we now have been included in His family, and must be made fit for the family.  We must be made ready to enjoy this blessing in its fullness.

“Everyone”

In the last part of verse 45 Christ says, “everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me.”  Note that He purposefully uses the word “everyone” to establish the fact that in the “teaching” or “drawing” of people, God the Father does not fail to bring to fruition that which He planted in the hearts of His elect.

As J.C. Ryle says, “The words do not mean that under the Gospel all mankind, or all members of the professing Christian Church, shall be ‘taught of God.’ It rather means that all who are God’s children, and come to Christ under the Gospel, shall be taught of God.”

Note also that Christ says “the Father” instead of the Spirit, and that is because while it is the Spirit doing the “drawing”, He acts on the eternal unchangeable will of the Father.  From the first, God had intended to “teach” certain people about Himself, and here we learn that “everyone” who is taught of God comes to Christ.  Not one of His pupils fails to come to Christ.  We’ve already talked briefly about why this is, but it doesn’t hurt to go over it again.

God is effective in all that He sets out to do because He is God and His purposes cannot fail.  When He teaches men of Himself (they have “heard” and “learned” of Him) they always come to Christ.  What is He teaching them?  The gospel.  He is teaching them of a (new) covenant (Jeremiah 31) that He is making with them, that if they believe on His Son Jesus Christ, they will be saved. That is why Christ goes on to say in verse 47 that, “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.”  This fact comes with a promise – if they believe, they will be saved and will also (an added benefit) have “eternal life.”

The heart which “hears” this message from God cannot refuse it.  It is irresistible! It is so not because God has cajoled them into belief, but because the sweetness of it is such that they flee to the cross.  Of course there are two elements to learning of the gospel of God.  It is not simply that a man learns of the benefit of eternal life, but that he also learns of his own sinfulness in light of the cross.  This is what inevitably happens when we are taught by God, we learn who He is and who we are in light of His holiness.  This is what happened to Isaiah in chapter 6 of his book.  We see that not only did he learn about who God was and what His surroundings looked like, but he immediately realized who he was in light of who God is.

Isaiah did not see the holy majesty of God and respond by saying “well, since I have free will to choose whether or not to believe in you, and since you seem to have laid out all the proper facts about things, I will make the choice now to believe what you have to say.”  No indeed.  His response was compelled – not forced by God – but he was compelled I say to do the obvious thing, and that was to repent of his utter sinfulness and throw himself on the mercy of God.  This is what happens when men and women are “taught” of God.  They do the obvious thing when their eyes are opened to His holiness, they repent and run quickly to the cross!  This happens without exception, and that is why it is that Christ can use the word “everyone.”

 

Study Notes 6-24-12

~ pjwenzel ~ Leave a comment

Well – not to be lazy here, but instead of bullet pointing the entire note section of my lesson, I have just given you all my notes in full form here.  Of course this may mean that there’s extra bonus material that I didn’t have time to bring up in class!  Feel free to skim and enjoy!

5:31 If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true.

I think there are two things He could be saying here.  At first, I thought of this purely as a legal qualification Jesus was pointing out to from Deuteronomy (Deut. 19:15).  Not only that, but we know it makes common sense as well, because if someone says something extraordinary about himself or herself and there is no witness to verify their claims, then we have to simply believe what they said or not believe it.  The veracity of their statement is wholly based on whether they can be trusted.  Jesus is not surrendering to the idea that He is not trustworthy (as MacArthur also points out), rather He is surrendering the right to be His own witness for the time being.  As Calvin puts it, “Now we know that what any man asserts about himself is not reckoned to be true and authentic, although in other respects he speak truth, because no man is a competent witness in his own cause. Though it would be unjust to reduce the Son of God to this rank, yet he prefers to surrender his right, that he may convince his enemies by the authority of God.”

But, there is also a secondary thing that I think Jesus is saying here, and I picked it up from something MacArthur seems to see in the text.  He seems to almost be saying sarcastically, “you don’t seem to want to believe my word, so if I bear witness about myself I doubt you’ll believe what I have to say.”  In light of that, He offers them several other witnesses that can verify His claims to deity.  

5:32-34 There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the testimony that he bears about me is true. You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. [34] Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved.

Jesus is saying that they went and asked John what he thought of Jesus and John verified His claims and testified about who Jesus was/is.  Now, Jesus clarifies His statement by saying that John’s role was as a witness to Him (John 1:29-34), but it wasn’t as though Jesus needed any witness at all, but for the sake of the weakness of the flesh He is providing that in John the Baptist.  Obviously these men had already checked out John the Baptist, and many seemed to believe that he was a prophet from God, even if they didn’t like or listen to the essence of his message (John 1:19-27).

Because He spoke these words in the past tense about John, many commentators seem to think this indicated that John was either already in prison or had died.  Noting the honor that Christ bestows on His faithful servants, Ryle says of the Baptist, “…this murdered disciple was not forgotten by his Divine Master. If no one else remembered him, Jesus did.  He had honored Christ, and Christ honored him.”  I find this personally significant because it has always been my desire to leave a legacy for those around me that signaled my love of Christ.  I want so badly for those at my funeral to note how I was faithful to God, and what I did for Him and for others on His behalf.  However, Ryle’s points struck a chord with me because in death there will be only one voice whose words of commendation I will care about: those of Jesus Christ.  This being the case, shouldn’t I ought to act as though this were the case now?

Lastly, turning to the end of the verse we see that He nurtures our small seed of faith until we are strong in faith.  This is why He says it was “so that you may be saved.”  This mission statement matches John’s mission statement near the end of the gospel as well (John 20:31).

5:35-36 He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light.

I love the use of the light vs. dark here.  It is a common theme in Christ’s teachings, and one that John loves to highlight.  And in this verse there is a neat thing that MacArthur points out in a sermon on this passage.  He mentioned that John here is the lamp – not the light itself.  The word for lamp here is luchnos, which is a small portable oil lamp.  The word for light that is used to describe Christ and is used in at the end of verse 35 is phos, and is used to describe the essence of what John shown (Christ to the world).

Jesus rebukes them by speaking of their temporary and fading zeal (for a while).  John MacArthur uses some Aristotelian thought when he says he thinks of these people like “moths to a flame” and that flame was John the Baptist.  When the fire got too hot though, they faded away from the light and went on their way.  They didn’t want to repent and change their lives, after all.  All they wanted was to see something novel.

Jesus goes on to put together a logical argument of progression “if x then y” – if you rejoiced in the light of John, then you should rejoice all the more in the light that I am bringing into the world.

Jesus sets Himself apart from John by claiming superiority of  (1) works, and superiority of (2) testimony as well as a (3) better witness of His work (from the Father).  Those are the three ways in which I see Christ as being superior to John here.

5:36 But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me.

Jesus is giving us the second witness – his works.  His works were greater than John’s works.  I can’t image anyone disputing that the man who calmed the seas and healed so many people, did not have a superior witness in this way!

Surely no one could have done the works that Jesus did if they weren’t from God.  Nicodemus said in John 3:2 that, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.”

I don’t think that anyone who was around Jesus could have denied the amazing nature of the works He was doing during His ministry.

Sproul has a great reminder to us about the nature of miracles in the witness of Christ:

Many people today look at the biblical miracles and say, “The miracles in the Bible prove the existence of God.” No, they don’t. The existence of God is established before a single miracle takes place. For a miracle to be recognized as a miracle presupposes the existence of God, because a miracle, technically and correctly defined, is a work that only God can do, such as bringing something out of nothing or bringing life our of death. For this reason, I please with you to fall into thinking that Satan can do actual miracles. He can perform tricks, but he can’t do what God can do.

5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,

It is tempting to take 37 and 38 together, but I want to point out that 38 says some distinctly deep things separate from 37.  In 37 we see that Jesus is putting the finally cap on the fact that it is the Father that is His witness.  This is the third witness that Christ gives as proof that what He is saying is right.  It doesn’t matter that no one as ever “seen” the Father, or even “heard” the Father up until this point in history; for no man can see Him in His full radiant splendor and live (Ex. 33:11).  But for our sake, He provided times (recorded in the gospels) where He was heard audibly to witness about His beloved Son (Matt. 3:17, 17:5 – 2 Peter 1:17).

Then Jesus goes on to say something even more difficult…

5:38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent.

Wow – so this is the judgment here.  They don’t have the word of God abiding in them, for they don’t love God.  We’ll see more of this reiterated in Jesus’ discourse with the Pharisees in the temple in chapter 8.  But we’ve already heard Christ talk about this in those crucial verses in 3:19-21.  This would have been such a stern rebuke that from here onward the conversation must have been highly uncomfortable for the listeners.

This is a good reminder that in our flesh we don’t love God, and we don’t receive the testimony of His son because we don’t have the ability to (we’re dead – Eph. 2:1), and because we’re dead we don’t have His word abiding in us prior to quickening.  We really don’t want to love Christ prior to what God does supernaturally in our hearts.  Christ is telling these people that they don’t get it.  They aren’t receiving Him because they are not from God (John 8) and don’t have His word abiding in them.  These are harsh, but important words; I’m sure they were swallowed with difficulty.

Incidentally, this is one way that we know Christians are Christians – they have the word of the Lord abiding in them and they show a love for Jesus Christ and for one another (1 John 3:10-11,17, 23-24, 4:8, 12, 15-16 etc.).

5:39-40 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, [40] yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.

This is very clearly the problem the Jews had then and many of them have now.  They look through Scriptures but don’t want to recognize that the entirety of the Bible in the OT points forward to Christ.  This is also the fourth witness Christ calls against them in this passage.  The Son of God, the fulfillment of all they had ever known or been taught was standing before them, yet they were too daft to realize this.  They were too dead to come forward and receive eternal life.

And what is probably most interesting for me in this passage is the words “you think” – Jesus is basically catching fools in their folly.  He’s saying “you’re zeal for knowledge has left you spiritually bankrupt.  You search for eternal life in vain unless you come to me.”  MacArthur notes, “The Bible cannot be properly understood apart from the Holy Spirit’s illumination or a transformed mind.”

Herein Christ demonstrates that they needed help, they needed to be saved by the power of God.  Despite their great learning, despite His presence, many still refused to “come to him” to have life.  This ought to refute the notion that some have that “if we had only been there to see Christ in person, we would believe.”  These people were students of the scriptures and they walked and talked with the Son of God and still didn’t come to believe!

5:41 I do not receive glory from people.

Christ never desired to receive praise or glory from humans during His ministry on earth. He only sought to glorify His Father.  We are to imitate Him in this and seek only to glorify God.  Too often we get caught up in worrying about pleasing people instead of pleasing God.  We think too much about what others might think about us.

5:42 But I know that you do not have the love of God within you.

This is His most powerful statement yet.  Again, Christ is very straightforward about the condition of these people’s souls.  He is confrontational with them, and doesn’t let them off the hook easily.

The same is true today.  You may want to think that Jesus is all loving (and indeed He is), but He is more than that.  He doesn’t accept your idolatry, and won’t accept anyone who thinks they can reject Him and still somehow make it to heaven.  That simply isn’t the case.

The specific accusation here mirrors what He said in vs. 38 – I’m assuming that “love” and “word” are different but have the same end (the acceptance of Christ’s claims).  The love of God in our hearts is not something we can manufacture.  Christ isn’t saying here “you just haven’t tried hard at all.  You need to do better at having the love of God!”  No.  He’s pointing out that they have a deficiency.  They thought they had salvation squared away because they were Jews.  In America we have a similar problem.  Many Americans think they are Christians simply because they are Americans.  Jesus is abolishing that idea.  He’s saying that they have a deficiency of love, and that He is the only one who can give it to them.

Romans 5:5 says, “…hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.”  It is God who pours His love into us.  It isn’t self-manufactured.

5:43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.

This pointed accusation is connected to the fact that these people are not spiritual but are sons of disobedience (Eph. 2:1-2).  The reason they will reject Christ is because He is spiritual and they are dead spiritually, and the reason they will accept another (the implication is a false prophet) is because they are fleshly and that false prophet would be fleshly as well and would make his appeal to the flesh.  MacArthur and Morris both point out that, to their best historical reckoning, there have been some 64 false messianic claims since Christ came.

5:44 How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?

Now, as proof that they are not spiritual, Jesus says that their actions are fleshly in that they seek their own glory.  This is the antithesis of faith and of true spirituality.

John Piper says this; “Itching for glory from other people makes faith impossible. Why? Because faith is being satisfied with all that God is for you in Jesus; and if you are bent on getting the satisfaction of your itch from the scratch of others’ acclaim, you will turn away from Jesus.”

5:45-47 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. [46] For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. [47] But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

He goes brings the argument full circle now and says that not only are they not truly spiritual, not only are they not accepting Him, not only do they not have the love of God in their hearts, but they also do not truly understand what Moses said about Him (cf. 39).

MacArthur tries to show just how shocking this statement would have been: “The Lord stunned them by identifying that accuser as Moses – the very one in whom they had set their hope.  It is difficult to imagine how profoundly shocked and outraged the Jewish leaders must have been by Jesus’ statement. In their minds, it was utterly incomprehensible to think that Moses – whom they proudly affirmed as their leader and teacher (Matt. 23:3) – would one day accuse them before God.”

Christ points out that they have a misunderstanding of what/who Moses was pointing forward to.  They didn’t fully understand Deut. 18:15-18 which states:

The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen—just as you desired of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ And the LORD said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.

And this is just once prophecy.  Ryle is right to say, “every part of our Bibles is meant to teach us about Christ. Christ is not merely in the gospels and epistles. Christ is to be found directly and indirectly in the Law, the Psalms, and the prophets. In the promises to Adam, Abraham, Moses, and David, in the types and emblems of the ceremonial law, in the predictions of Isaiah and the other prophets, Jesus the messiah, is everywhere to be found in the Old Testament.”

The last thing that really came to my mind when studying this passage is the parallel to Luke 16 where Abraham says to the rich man in torment who has begged Abraham to send messengers to his family of what awaits them, “If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.”  I want to take this seriously and remember the plight of those who are not saved, and who will one day deal forever with this torment and anguish.  I want to remember that just because someone claims to “know what Christianity is all about” doesn’t mean they are saved.  I need to keep the Gospel foremost on my lips so that God might use me – even if unwittingly – to save someone who hadn’t heard the truth and repented before the throne of Jesus Christ.