The J-Bomb - A Bible Teacher's Blog

Harmonizing the Gospels 101 - Part I

2012-01-30T18:21:00.004-05:00

1) INTRODUCTION

In our study of John thus far, we have encountered a number of narratives that also appear in the synoptic Gospels.
• We have found that differences between John’s account and the synoptic Gospels are quite common.
• Our lesson last week, the triumphant entry, was one such example.

In light of these differences, it is time to have a primer on the discipline of Gospel Harmonization.
• Doing so will strengthen our view of the reliability of Scripture and provide for us an apologetic against those who mischaracterize the differences.
• And it will provide for us a foundation from which to approach apparent errors and contradictions in Scripture.

Inerrancy and Harmonization:
Before we get into definitions and methods, a fundamental relationship needs to be addressed.
• There is a direct relationship between one’s view of inerrancy and one’s view of harmonization.
• In other words, the extent of harmonization one thinks is necessary is related to one’s view of inerrancy.
• The more demanding one’s view of inerrancy the more crucial harmonization becomes.
• Conversely, the lower one’s view of inerrancy the more irrelevant harmonization becomes.

An illustration will help tease this relationship out.
• My brother has a very demanding view of the reliability of computers.
• He seems to think that they should never have glitches, crashes, hiccups, etc.
• This view is based on wishful thinking, ignorance or a caricature; it is not based on actual computers.
• His view persists because he has invested very little time in learning the “ins” and “outs” of computers.
• Therefore he has virtually no ability to trouble shoot and solve problems.
• As a result of his expectations, when the smallest problem arises he has a fit, and concludes that computers are useless and should be thrown out.

By contrast, I have a more realistic view of computers.
• I know how they work, know their strengths and weaknesses and know how to trouble shoot.
• My expectation of computers is based on knowing computers, not on wishful thinking or some caricature of what someone thinks a computer should be.
• As a result of my view, when problems occur I am not put off; I simply look for a solution or work-around.
• I recognize the value and importance of computers and never suffer any disillusionment with them.

We will see that contained in the two orthodox views of inerrancy and harmonization are implications very similar to the above two views just illustrated.

Takeaway:
The most important takeaway I hope to give you in the course of this discussion is this:
• Our view of harmonization needs to reflect what the Gospel writers would expect, not what we would expect in the 21st century.
• In other words, we need to let the Gospel writers themselves and their methods of teaching and transmitting God’s Word inform our view of harmonization not modern, outside influences.

What is needed:
The information needed to arrive at a properly informed view of Harmonization is extensive.
• With respect to the Gospels, for example, considerations have to be given to how knowledge was learned and transmitted.
• This would involve such things as individual and collective memorization, the role of eyewitness testimony, oral history, oral tradition and literary styles such as historiographies and biographies.
• And it would involve not only seeing these things in a Jewish context but also in a Greek context.
• And, of course, there are the theological and supernatural considerations.

Fortunately, scholars have done all the leg work for us.
• All we will do here is synthesize and summarize their insights.
• But first, we will begin with definitions.

2) DEFINITIONS

Some terms relevant to our discussion are inspiration, inerrancy and harmonization.
• Because each flows from the other, we need to know what they all mean.

INSPIRATION:
“By inspiration of Scripture we mean that supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit on the Scripture writers which rendered their writings an accurate record of the revelation or which resulted in what they wrote actually being the Word of God” – Millard Erickson.

Inspiration is directly taught in Scripture:
• 2 Timothy 3:16–17 (ESV) — 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
• 2 Peter 1:19–21 (ESV) — 19 And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

And that what the Apostles taught was considered God’s Word (and thus inspired) is also taught in Scripture:
• 2 Peter 3:2 (ESV) — 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles,
o The apostles transmission was both oral and written.
• 2 Peter 3:15–16 (ESV) — 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
• 1 Thessalonians 2:13 (ESV) — 13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
• 1 Corinthians 14:37 (ESV) — 37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord.

The Doctrine of the Inspiration of Scripture is straight forward.
• The concern is simply, if “it should be shown that the Bible is not fully truthful, our view of inspiration would also be in jeopardy” – Millard Erickson.
• Understanding that Scripture is the “fully truthful” inspired Word of God, the question arises what does it mean to be “fully truthful”?
• This is the question inerrancy.

INERANNCY:
Unlike the Doctrine of Inspiration, “the doctrine of biblical inerrancy [is not] explicitly affirmed or taught in the Bible” – Erickson.
• It is a logical implication of the Inspiration of Scripture and the attributes of God.
• And to simplfy the discussion, we will narrow down the orthodox views to just two.

Two Orthodox Views on Inerrancy (Erickson):
• (1) Absolute Inerrancy – This view holds that when the Bible writers spoke of something, whether it was science, history, or anything else, they intended to make “fully true” statements.
o Under this view, “apparent discrepancies can and must be explained”.
o This is the literal or wooden view.
o That the Bible speaks of the “sun rising” is problematic for this view.
o There are those who currently argue that the earth is at the center of the universe.
• (2) Full Inerrancy – This view also holds that the Bible makes “fully true” statements.
o But it qualifies this position.
o References to science, history, etc. “are reported the way they appear to the human eye. They are not necessarily exact; rather, they are popular descriptions, often involving general references or approximations. Yet they are correct. What they teach is essentially correct in the way they teach it” – Millard Erickson.
o From a human perspective, the sun rises.
o This view understands Scripture to be without error in its original manuscripts and from the perspective of the writers, not necessarily with 21st century precision – context is king.

The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy expands on Full Inerrancy this way:

We affirm that canonical Scripture should always be interpreted on the basis that it is infallible and inerrant. However, in determining what the God-taught writer is asserting in each passage, we must pay the most careful attention to its claims and character as a human production. In inspiration, God utilized the culture and conventions of his penman’s milieu, a milieu that God controls in His sovereign providence; it is misinterpretation to imagine otherwise.

So history must be treated as history, poetry as poetry, hyperbole and metaphor as hyperbole and metaphor, generalization and approximation as what they are, and so forth. Differences between literary conventions in Bible times and in ours must also be observed: Since, for instance, nonchronological narration and imprecise citation were conventional and acceptable and violated no expectations in those days, we must not regard these things as faults when we find them in Bible writers. When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. Scripture is inerrant, not in the sense of being absolutely precise by modern standards, but in the sense of making good its claims and achieving that measure of focused truth at which its authors aimed.

The truthfulness of Scripture is not negated by the appearance in it of irregularities of grammar or
spelling, phenomenal descriptions of nature, reports of false statements (for example, the lies of Satan), or seeming discrepancies between one passage and another. It is not right to set the so-called “phenomena” of Scripture against the teaching of Scripture about itself. Apparent inconsistencies should not be ignored. Solution of them, where this can be convincingly achieved, will encourage our faith, and where for the present no convincing solution is at hand we shall significantly honor God by trusting His assurance that His Word is true, despite these appearances, and by maintaining our confidence that one day they will be seen to have been illusions.

So it is in light of these CSBI comments Millard Erickson can state:
• “The Bible, when correctly interpreted in light of the level to which culture and the means of communication had developed at the time it was written, and in view of the purposes for which it was given, is fully truthful in all that it affirms. This definition reflects the position earlier termed full inerrancy” – Millard Erickson.

Unorthodox views of Inerrancy:
• Though not relevant to our discussion on harmonization, there are a number of unorthodox views.
• Some examples include views that hold that the Bible is without error only as it concerns salvation; the Bible is not a revelation from God and so Inerrancy is not an issue; the Bible is not a collection of propositional truths it simply “points us to a person-to-person encounter” with the faith community; etc.
• Under these views harmonization is not a concern or an issue.

Inerrancy Summary:
It is seems obvious that trying to Harmonize Scripture holding to the Absolute Inerrancy view could prove to be problematic.
• This view is similar to my brother’s view of computers.
• This view could easily lead to frustration and disillusionment with God or Scripture.
• The Full Inerrancy view, by contrast, taking into account all that it does, might provide a more realistic view of Scripture.
• As such, it might allow for a less stressful relationship between Inerrancy and Harmonization.
• We will explore this soon enough.

Now we can move on to Harmonization.

HARMONIZATION:
Harmonization is simply the method by which we account for apparent errors or contradictions in Scripture.
• Millard Erickson gives us two primary orthodox views of Harmonization.
• Both hold that Harmonization is a direct corollary of Inerrancy which is a direct corollary of the Doctrine of Biblical Inspiration, as previously discussed.

Two Orthodox Views on Harmonization:
• (1) Harmonistic Approach – This view acknowledges the problem texts and holds that all can be resolved using “currently available information”.
o And not only can they be harmonized, they must be harmonized.
o If they aren’t harmonized, damage is done up the line – lack of Harmonization leads to holes in Inerrancy which causes problems with Inspiration.
• (2) Moderate Harmonistic Approach – This view acknowledges the problem texts and holds that most can be solved “as far as reasonably possible with the data currently available”.
o It understands that additional relevant information may come to light to help harmonize those texts for which no current reasonable solution is found.
o But it also acknowledges that some of the data needed to harmonize may be lost.
o Therefore, given the data we currently have, it might be that not everything can be harmonized.
o And the fact that Harmonization might have limits in no way damages Inerrancy and Inspiration.

It should be fairly obvious that the Harmonistic Approach is wedded to the Absolute Inerrancy view.
• Likewise, the Moderate Harmonistic Approach is wedded to the Full Inerrancy view.

It should also be obvious that the Harmonistic Approach is under the most pressure to Harmonize.
• As a result of this pressure, Millard Erickson says, “The harmonistic school has in many cases done a real favor to the cause of biblical scholarship by finding creative solutions to problems. To insist on reconciling all of the problems by utilizing the currently available data, however, appears to me to lead to forced handling of the material.”
• Richard Bauckham says that attempts to force harmonization, “denies each Gospel the integrity of its own distinctive portrayal of Jesus. It creates harmony too soon, before the diversity has even been noticed.”
• Moreover, we have to wonder if the text itself is asking us to harmonize it on such a grandiose scale.

Consider the following:
• We know that Matthew and Luke shared Mark as a source.
• And Matthew and Luke also shared another source, “Q”.
• It is also suggested that Peter, who served as Mark’s primary source, also had influence in at least one other Gospel (John – according to Richard Bauckham).
• Yet, in spite of all this commonality and familiarity the Gospels have substantial differences.
• The Gospel writers certainly knew about them; they were the ones that made them.
• So, apparently the differences were not a problem for them.
• In fact, “By presenting us with four portrayals that are not harmonized already for us, the texts keep us seeking the Jesus to whom all four portrayals are reliable but not exhaustive witnesses” – Bauckham.

Couldn’t they see they were hurting their cause and damaging their claims that Scripture is Inspired?
• They weren’t idiots; they could have simply decided, “I need to fix my story of the Rich Young Ruler, it doesn’t quite match up with Mark’s version”.
• Or, “If we are going to make up something about this Jesus fellow, it would be more credible if all of us were in agreement about the details”.
• But they didn’t; Why not?

The answer to this question is found in the answer to the following question:
• Are there good reasons to go with the Full Inerrancy/Moderate Harmonistic Approach over the Absolute Inerrancy/Harmonistic Approach?
• And the answer to this question relates directly to the options available to us in our harmonization efforts.

We will attempt to answer this question by getting a handle on how God’s Word was transmitted.
• As we stated in the introduction, there are a great many variables relevant to this issue.
• So once we delve into these variables, we will then examine the options available to us in the harmonization process.
• And then finally, we will see how these options help us harmonize specific examples.

John 12:12-18 – The Colt, The King and The Lazarus Thing

2012-01-23T20:08:00.002-05:00

Thus far in John 12, we have seen how costly and fragrant worship can and should be.
• And interestingly, we have repeatedly seen John reference Lazarus.
o “where Lazarus was” (vs. 1)
o “Lazarus was one of those” (vs. 2)
o “also to see Lazarus” (vs. 9)
o “put Lazarus to death” (vs. 10)
o And in today’s text, “called Lazarus out of the tomb” (vs. 17)
• This begs the question.
o Why, in the midst of a story about Jesus, does John repeatedly focus on Lazarus?

Additionally, our text today is ripe with symbolism and misunderstanding.
• From the palms, to the colt to the pronouncement as king.
• We will explore its meaning and significance and why it was misunderstood.

We will tackle the symbolism first.

1) THE KING OF ISRAEL

John 12:12–16 (ESV) — 12 The next day the large crowd that had come to the feast heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem. 13 So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him, crying out, “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel!” 14 And Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it, just as it is written, 15 “Fear not, daughter of Zion; behold, your king is coming, sitting on a donkey’s colt!”

It has to be pointed out that Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem is the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy in Daniel 9.
• Jesus’ entry took place “seven weeks and sixty-two weeks” from the time of Artaxerxes’ decree to rebuild the temple in 445 B.C.
• BTW – depending on the various calculations – that puts us at about 33 A.D.

“large crowd” (vs. 12).
• Scholars estimate that the population of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus was about 100,000.
• The Jewish historian Josephus tells us the population of Jerusalem swelled to over 1 million during Passover.
• So "large crowd" is no exaggeration.

BTW – knowing these numbers helps us understand the actions of the Jewish leadership at this time.
• Matthew 26:3–5 (ESV) — 3 Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4 and plotted together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. 5 But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.”

Why Palm Branches?
• Because “nothing in the Old Testament…prescribes palm branches at Passover” but at the Feast of Tabernacles (the lulav) – D.A. Carson.

Background:
• Psalm 92:12 (ESV) — 12 The righteous flourish like the palm tree and grow like a cedar in Lebanon.
o Spiritual Context - associated with righteousness
• 2 Maccabees 10:7 — 7 Therefore, carrying ivy-wreathed wands and beautiful branches and also fronds of palm, they offered hymns of thanksgiving to him who had given success to the purifying of his own holy place.
o Religious Context - used in rededication of temple in 164 B.C.
• 1 Maccabees 13:51 — 51 On the twenty-third day of the second month, in the one hundred seventy-first year, the Jews entered it with praise and palm branches, and with harps and cymbals and stringed instruments, and with hymns and songs, because a great enemy had been crushed and removed from Israel.
o Political Context - used to celebrate victory of Syrians in 141 B.C.
• Kostenberger tells us that, “palms appear on coins minted by the insurrectionists during the Jewish wars against Rome” in the 1st and 2nd centuries A.D.
o Political Context - used to signify the resistance of Israel against its oppressors.

Significance of Palms:
It is likely that in our text, the perceived context by the crowd was a political one.
• In other words, the palm branches were used to express “nationalistic hopes” with Jesus as a “messianic liberator” from the Romans – Kostenberger.

All of this is further supported by the following declaration of the crowd.

What kind of King?
“Hosanna…the King of Israel!” (vs. 13)
• Hosanna literally means, “give salvation now” and comes from Psalm 118:25, “Save us, we pray, O Lord”.
o Generally, it was used as a term of acclamation or praise.
• The crowd followed up this praise with Psalm 118:26.
o Psalm 118:26 (ESV) — 26a Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!
• By Jesus’ time, this verse was ripe with messianic implications.
• In fact, John the Baptist asked Jesus in Matt. 11:3 if Jesus was “the one who was to come”, an allusion to the expectation of Psalm 118:26.
• And of course the one who was to come, in a Davidic sense, would be the “King of Israel”.

This declaration by the crowd was similar to the crowds’ pronouncements in John 6.
• John 6:15 (ESV) — 15 Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself.
• And just as the crowds of John 6 abandoned Jesus when confronted with the truth at Capernaum, in just a few days, they would do so in Jerusalem as well.

Stark Contrast – Palm Branches, a War Horse and the Colt:
Jesus confronts the crowds’ perception of His kingship in a way that was completely at odds with the scene and their expectations.
• He purposely arranged entry into Jerusalem, in fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9 (see Mark 11:2-7), on a colt.
• Zechariah 9:9 (ESV) — 9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
• Jesus took it upon Himself to claim that He was the fulfillment of Zechariah’s king.
• A king quite different from the one the crowd longed for.

By Jesus’ action, the crowds’ expectation of the King of Israel who “was to come” and bring deliverance from Roman oppression is purposely challenged.
• The crowd “went out to meet” (vs. 12) their nationalistic warrior king.
• But Jesus took his place on the back of a colt - “humble and mounted on a donkey” (Zech. 9:9).
• By doing this, “Jesus refuses to reinforce their political and nationalist aspirations” – Carson.
• Carson says it had the effect of, “dampening down” their expectations.
• In other words, it was a buzz kill.
• “Nothing further from a Zealotic view of the Messiah could be imagined” – Beasley-Murray.
• To fulfill the crowds’ expectations, Jesus would have had to enter Jerusalem on a snorting war horse
o Something Jesus will do one day – on a white horse.

The Gentle King:
So, King Jesus was the gentle, humble and sacrificial king of Zechariah 9.
• One could easily see why, given the political context of the time (under Roman rule), so many rejected the gentle king.
o It was simply not something they wanted.
• Zechariah’s gentle king was in complete opposition to the crowd’s desired war king.

In fact, the gentle king of Zechariah can be contrasted with the war king as follows (D.A. Carson):
• (1) “the cessation of war” // the crowd wanted an insurrection instigator
• (2) “the proclamation of peace to the nations” (including Gentiles) // the crowd wanted Gentile Rome wiped out
• (3) “the blood of God’s covenant that spells release for prisoners” // the crowd wanted to imprison its Gentile captors

Now let’s examine John’s commentary in vs. 16 about understanding the difference between the war king and the gentle king.

2) WE DON’T GET IT – WHERE IS THE WAR HORSE?

John 12:16 (ESV) — 16 His disciples did not understand these things at first, but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things had been written about him and had been done to him.

It could be said that the hard hearted could only trust in a Jesus riding a war horse to deliver Israel from Rome.
• But those who had eyes to see and ears to hear could trust the Jesus on a colt.
• However, John points out in vs. 16 that not until after Jesus was glorified did the disciples fully understand the symbolism behind Jesus’ actions.
• Perhaps because, in part, the fulfillment of the Zechariah prophecy was legitimized by the resurrection.
o Otherwise, it could be seen as a dead Jesus who had manipulated events to appear as fulfillment.
o In other words, He is not king because He is dead.

This is peculiar because Jesus’ own words to the disciples, prior to his triumphant entry, made clear the nature of His kingship, as alluded to by Jesus appropriation of Zechariah’s prophecy.
• Mark 10:32–34 (ESV) — 32b And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, 33 saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. 34 And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.”

This inability to grasp certain truths, leads us to an interesting insight.

The Heart before the Mind
For the believer, the disciples lack of understanding points to the profound inability of the mind, due to cultural and other pressures, to sometimes lag behind the legitimate trust of a regenerated heart.
• In other words, our regenerated hearts can trust while simultaneously our minds fail to comprehend.
• The disciples believed in their hearts Jesus was Messiah.
• Yet they also thought and expected that He would restore Israel politically as the crowd did.
o Acts 1:6 (ESV) — 6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
• They were simply unable to understand all its implications until Jesus’ life was seen in context of His resurrection and until they were given the Holy Spirit.
o John 14:26 (ESV) — 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

This idea has a couple of important implications for us.
• (1) We should be capable of recognizing and shedding cultural and social intrusions that dim the clarity of the truths of Scripture held in trust by the Holy Spirit.
• (2) We should be patient with fellow believers whose understanding lags behind their heart.
o Jesus was certainly patient with the disciples.

Finally, it is worth ending this part of our discussion with some insight into what Jesus’ was feeling during the triumphant entry from Luke’s Gospel.
• Luke 19:41–44 (ESV) — 41 And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, 42 saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side 44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

Having understood the symbolism behind the triumphant entry, let’s explore why Lazarus plays such an important role in John’s Gospel.

3) WHY IS LAZARUS SO PROMINENT FOR JOHN?

John 12:17–18 (ESV) — 17 The crowd that had been with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to bear witness. 18 The reason why the crowd went to meet him was that they heard he had done this sign.

We saw last week that, with respect to salvation, the fact that Jesus resurrected Lazarus was really not the issue.
• The real issue was why wasn’t this recognition decisive in bringing about saving faith.
• In other words, signs were a witness to Jesus’ identity and relationship with the Father, but not all who witnessed the signs made the connection and trusted (salvifically) in Jesus.
o In fact, Matthew 11:20 tells us that the witnesses to Jesus’ works that did not repent were under judgment.
• Lazarus was, in a sense, symbolic of this conundrum.
o One which Jesus addressed in John 3, John 6 and John 10.

But Lazarus was also pivotal in more than just highlighting the need for a work of God in the heart of man.
• And these other reasons are why Lazarus plays such an important role for John since, as we saw in the introduction, John 11.

Reason 1:
The obvious reason is that Lazarus resurrection points to Jesus’ own resurrection.
• We covered this in depth in John 11.
• The Kingdom Resurrection was not at all what the Jews expected.
• Lazarus was symbolic of its inauguration through Jesus.

Reason 2:
Lazarus’ resurrection was the beginning of the end of Jesus’ earthly life.
• “Jesus knows his raising of Lazarus from death is going to provoke the course of events that will lead to his death” – Richard Bauckham.
• In verse 18, John tells us that, “the reason the crowd went to meet him” was because of Lazarus’ resurrection.
• In other words, the triumphant entry is how Jesus made a symbolic public declaration that His time has come.
o Remember, there were well over 1 million Jews in Jerusalem.
• And this entry was made possible by the attention He drew to Himself by raising Lazarus.
• Something He no doubt did at the request of the Father (see John 5).

Reason 3:
Lazarus represents the anguish of Jesus’ coming suffering.
• John 11 details the “exceptional stress on Jesus' emotions” in the context of Lazarus’ death and coming resurrection.
o “he was deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled” (vs. 33)
o “Jesus wept” (vs. 35)
o “deeply moved again” (vs. 38)
• We see that Jesus’ “sympathy with the bereaved is mixed with anguish on his own behalf” - Bauckham.
• WHY?
• “In order to help the family he loves by restoring their brother, he must initiate the process of his own suffering and death” – Richard Bauckham.

And Jesus’ initiation of “his own suffering and death” leads us directly to our 4th reason for Lazarus’ prominence.

Reason 4:
Lazarus represents both the extent of Jesus’ love for us and the extent of His obedience to the Father’s ordained mission.
• “John depicts the raising of Lazarus as the event which prefigures Jesus' willingness to die for the sake of those he loves” – Richard Bauckham.

We have now explored the symbolism of the triumphant entry.
• We have seen Jesus’ deliberate contradiction of the crowds’ expectations.
• And we have seen why Lazarus has played such an important role in John since John 11.
• Now we can move to the more general task of comparing and contrasting the 4 Gospel versions of the triumphant entry.

John 12:1-8 – Worship is Costly and Fragrant

2012-01-08T13:28:00.000-05:00

John has shown us in John 11 that Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin had already determined to kill Jesus.
• And John 11:55-57 makes it clear that the Passover will be the context for this action.
• In fact, John tells us in verse 57 that the Sanhedrin gave orders to the Jews to turn Jesus in “so that they might arrest him”.
• As we have seen previously in John, to disobey the Jewish leadership could result in excommunication from Temple life, not something a Jew would welcome.

It is within this context that John begins the last 6 days of Jesus’ life.
• This last week begins with a scene from Simon the lepers home just outside of Jerusalem, in the village of Bethany.

1) MARY’S ACT

John 12:1–3 (ESV) — 1 Six days before the Passover, Jesus therefore came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 So they gave a dinner for him there. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those reclining with him at table. 3 Mary therefore took a pound of expensive ointment made from pure nard, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

John tells us that Jesus had come to Bethany because Passover was near.
• Bethany, as we saw in John 11, was only a couple of miles from Jerusalem.
• This was a convenient stopover for Jesus as He made His way to Jerusalem.

And apparently, in honor of Jesus’ raising Lazarus from the dead, a meal was held with Mary, Martha and Lazarus in attendance.
• And at this meal, Mary did something remarkable.
• To understand just how remarkable, we need to get some background on the use of ointments at the time.

Background on Ointments/Spices/Fragrances:
There were several uses of ointments/spices/fragrances for the Jew at this time.
• Anointing Oil (Exodus 30:23-25)
• An incense, “for the exclusive use of priests” (Exodus 30:34-38; 2 Chr 2:4) – AYBD.
• A freshener for the home or bed
• As presents or a peace offering gift (Gen 43:11).
• And “they were widely used in connection with funerals” – AYBD.
o Most of the time to mask odors or for ceremonial purposes.

A couple of examples of their use in connection with funerals:
• Jeremiah 34:5 (ESV) — 5 You [Zedekiah] shall die in peace. And as spices were burned for your fathers, the former kings who were before you, so people shall burn spices for you and lament for you, saying, “Alas, lord!” ’ For I have spoken the word, declares the LORD.”
• 2 Chronicles 16:14 (ESV) — 14 They buried him [Asa] in the tomb that he had cut for himself in the city of David. They laid him on a bier that had been filled with various kinds of spices prepared by the perfumer’s art, and they made a very great fire in his honor.
• Mark 16:1 (ESV) — 1 When the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.

Background on Mary’s nard:
• Mary’s nard was made from the spikenard plant.
• This plant was only found in the Himalayan mountain's of India.
• This Indian spikenard plant is actually extremely difficult to get now.
• It was all the more difficult to get 2000 years ago.
• We also know that this type of nard was typically transported and stored in an alabaster jar (Mark 14:3).
• Beasley-Murray tells us that an “expensive perfume in an alabaster jar might be released only through breaking its long neck” (Mark 14:3).
• So when Mary broke the neck and began to anoint Jesus’ feet, there was no turning back.

So why was Mary’s act remarkable?
• We will get to the significance of her act shortly.
• For now, let’s look at Judas’ and Jesus’ response to Mary’s act.

2) JUDAS’ AND JESUS’ RESPONSE

Judas thought it a waste:
John 12:4–6 (ESV) — 4 But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was about to betray him), said, 5 “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” 6 He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.

Like so much they experienced, the disciples could use hindsight to look back with clarity.
• And John did so here by contrasting the sacrifice of Mary with the selfishness of Judas.
• Judas had apparently been stealing from Jesus’ ministry for some time, whereas Mary was serving.

Interestingly, however, it didn’t appear that at the time they suspected Judas’ motives.
• Even at the Last Supper they seemed surprised to learn that Judas would betray Jesus.
• John 13:22 (ESV) — 22 The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke.
• John 13:28–29 (ESV) — 28 Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him [Judas]. 29 Some thought that, because Judas had the moneybag, Jesus was telling him, “Buy what we need for the feast,” or that he should give something to the poor.

Moreover, we learn from Mark’s account that it wasn’t just Judas that had a problem with Mary’s actions.
• Mark 14:4 (ESV) — 4 There were some who said to themselves indignantly, “Why was the ointment wasted like that?

So what of the substance of his words?
• What was the worth of Mary’s alabaster jar of nard?
• And was it wasted?

Judas tells us that the nard was worth 300 denarii.
• As we have seen, the nard was very hard to get.
• And its rarity and point of origin were reasons why it was so valuable.

How valuable?
• 300 denarii was equivalent to a worker’s pay for a year (a denarii a day – excluding Sabbath and other holy days).
• Inflation makes that 300 denarii equal to about $50,000 today (2006 median annual household income).
• This is why, referring to rare ointments like Mary’s nard, we are told that “only the Kings and the very wealthy could afford to use them lavishly” – AYBD.

This means that Mary, Martha and Lazarus household must have been either fairly well off or had been the recipient of the nard as an heirloom passed down through the family.
• So whether or not this was a huge financial sacrifice for the Mary, Martha and Lazarus household we just don’t know.
• But in a broader context, the value of this nard was enormous.
• So Mary’s actions would have been seen as wasteful no matter how wealthy they were.

And so Judas’ question is no doubt one that we all would have been thinking.
• Was this a waste as some thought?
• Leave it to Jesus to give us some perspective.

Jesus thought it…:
John 12:7–8 (ESV) — 7 Jesus said, “Leave her alone, so that she may keep it for the day of my burial. 8 For the poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.”

To get at Jesus’ take, we have to answer this question.
• What does Jesus mean when He says, “so that she may keep it for the day of my burial”?

First, “the day of my burial” was obviously not literally referring to the day itself – that was still days away.
• Kostenberger addresses the “day of my burial” this way, “[It] refers not so much to the event itself as to the laying out of the corpse in preparation for burial”.

Secondly, scholars agree that Jesus’ words in verse 7 “most likely…involve[d] some kind of ellipsis” – Kostenberger.
• The ellipsis would have been something to the effect of, “[she did not sell it]” – Kostenberger.
• So the text is to be understood as, “Leave her alone, [she did not sell it prior to today] so that she may keep it for [the preparation] of my burial”.

This would mean, then, that Mary perhaps understood that Jesus’ time had come and that He had to die.
• “Jesus was symbolically set apart for burial by the only one who really understood what was happening” – Boice.
• However, many argue that, “There is no clear evidence that Mary or anyone else understood before the cross that Jesus had to die. She meant this to be an act of costly, humble devotion, but like Caiaphas (11:49–52) she signaled more than she knew” – D.A. Carson.
• Yet, even if Mary didn’t know what was coming, Jesus at the very least was saying that Mary had kept the nard, “in the providence of God—for just this purpose: the anointing of Jesus’ body in anticipation of his burial” – Kostenberger.
• And, whether knowingly or not, she had begun what Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea would complete later (John 19:38-42).
o John 19:40 (ESV) — 40 So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews.
o This was in preparation for Jesus’ burial.

The answer to our question about Jesus’ view:
• Whatever the extent of Mary’s knowledge, it is clear that Jesus approved of Mary’s use of the nard.
• He did not think it was wasted.
• And in so doing, He was also suggesting that He and His death were worthy of this lavish and extravagant honor.

But what of Judas’ claim that Mary’s use of the nard was at the expense of the poor?
• Surely Jesus loved the poor more than some extravagant symbolism?

To this question, Jesus simply says the poor will always be with us, but He will not.
• What does this mean?
• Scholars agree that Jesus was quoting The Pentateuch.
• Deuteronomy 15:11 (ESV) — 11 For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’
• You will notice that there is a command here to be generous with the poor.
• And, of course, this is echoed in NT teachings as well.

Therefore, scholars agree that Jesus is in no way justifying the neglect of aid to the needy for His sake.
• Jesus is not to be used to neglect the poor.
• This is not a justification, for example, to spend 12 million dollars on a new sanctuary at the expense of meeting the needs of the community.
• In fact, Kostenberger says that Jesus, “indirectly concedes that under normal circumstances Judas may have had a point” – Kostenberger.

But what Jesus is pointing out is that, in fact, current circumstances are not “normal circumstances”.
• So what is it that is not a normal circumstance?

The Incarnation – Not a Normal Circumstance:
The abnormal circumstance is the physical presence of the incarnate Son of God that will soon come to an end.
• Jesus speaks of the significance of this elsewhere.
• Mark 2:18–20 (ESV) — 18 Now John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. And people came and said to him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” 19 And Jesus said to them, “Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.
o Matt 6:18 tells us that the Father rewards those who fast.
o Many argue that one of these rewards is a sense of the presence of God.
o What need is there to fast when God is Jesus and walks with you?
o What need is there to seek His presence?

How does Jesus pointing this out help us?
• Jesus is not justifying poverty, He is warning against not placing proper value in His incarnation and mission.
• The Gospel necessitates the incarnation, the physical presence of God in human form.
• We give Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and His resurrection its due when we speak of the Gospel.
• But understanding the incarnation, the “Word in Sandals”, is as necessary and is just as worthy of our time and study.

Now back to a topic we skipped.
• What was the significance of Mary’s act?

3) THE SIGNFICANCE OF MARY’S ACT

We have already seen that she was symbolically preparing Jesus’ body for His coming burial.
• But was there more going on?
• Well answer a few questions to figure this out.

Additionally, John’s account seems to differ a great deal from Mark’s.
• How does John’s account harmonize with Mark’s where they differ?
• Understanding the symbolism behind Mary’s act will shed light will help us harmonize the two.

Meaning of Mary’s Act – what else was going on:
(1) What Her Behavior Tells Us.
• Interestingly, the fact that Mary let down her hair and used it to wipe Jesus’ feet was almost as shocking as applying a year’s salary worth of nard.
• This is because Jewish women simply did not let their hair down in public.
• To do this was to portray oneself as very loose morally and so to lose respect in the community.
• Additionally, because Jesus was single and a rabbi, her act would have been seen all the more as inappropriately suggestive in a relational context.
• In other words, this act was “sure to raise some eyebrows” – Kostenberger.

So from Mary’s behavior we see that to honor and worship Jesus is more important than our worldly reputation.
• We should desire to worship Jesus as He deserves and not concern ourselves with our reputation in the process.

(2) What the Perfume Tells Us
• John tells us, “The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume” (vs. 3).
• This speaks to and symbolizes the lavishness of Mary’s act.
• In fact Carson calls it an act of “extravagant love”.

So what?
• When we are lavish and extravagant in our worship and honor of Jesus, our act can have far reaching affects.
• “The fragrance of the act will extend far beyond the event itself” – D.A. Carson.
• We know this because Jesus said of Mary’s anointing:
o Mark 14:9 (ESV) — 9 And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her.”
• And Paul says of the Christian:
o 2 Corinthians 2:14–15 (ESV) — 14 But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing,

So from the perfume we see the power and fragrance of worship.
• And its power is far more “fragrant” than we previously considered (both before God and the world).
• Of Noah’s sacrifice, God said:
o Genesis 8:21 (ESV) — 21 And when the LORD smelled the pleasing aroma, the LORD said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth. Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done.
• Of the consequence of Israel’s idolatry, God said:
o Deuteronomy 4:28 (ESV) — 28 And there you will serve gods of wood and stone, the work of human hands, that neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.

And finally, the lavishness of Mary’s act can be seen in what it symbolically said about Jesus.

(3) What the Anointing Tells Us
• To get at the symbolism, we need to take a look at what the anointing can signify.
• 1 Samuel 10:1 (ESV) — 1 Then Samuel took a flask of oil and poured it on his [Saul] head and kissed him and said, “Has not the LORD anointed you to be prince over his people Israel? And you shall reign over the people of the LORD and you will save them from the hand of their surrounding enemies. And this shall be the sign to you that the LORD has anointed you to be prince over his heritage.
• 1 Samuel 16:13 (ESV) — 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers. And the Spirit of the LORD rushed upon David from that day forward. And Samuel rose up and went to Ramah.
• Psalm 89:20 (ESV) — 20 I have found David, my servant; with my holy oil I have anointed him,
• 2 Kings 9:1–3 (ESV) — 1 Then Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets and said to him, “Tie up your garments, and take this flask of oil in your hand, and go to Ramoth-gilead. 2 And when you arrive, look there for Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat, son of Nimshi. And go in and have him rise from among his fellows, and lead him to an inner chamber. 3 Then take the flask of oil and pour it on his head and say, ‘Thus says the LORD, I anoint you king over Israel.’ Then open the door and flee; do not linger.”
• In each case, who has been anointed?

So given the context and extravagance of Mary’s anointing, it is clear that the anointing of Jesus was, “a consecration of Jesus to royal service” – Beasley-Murray.
• In fact, the symbolic expansion of this royal service is further clarified with Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
o John 12:13 (ESV) — 13 So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him, crying out, “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel!”

So from the anointing, whether she knew it or not (as discussed earlier), Mary was anointing Jesus as Messiah and King.
• And Messiah, of course, means “Anointed One”.

Now that we have seen the deeper meanings behind Mary’s act, we need to address why it helps us harmonize John’s version with Mark’s version.

Harmonizing Mark and John:
First, what differences are we concerned with here?
• 1) John names Mary – In Mark she is anonymous and referred to as “a woman” (Mark 14:3).
• 2) John says Mary anointed Jesus’ feet – Mark says she, “poured it over his head” (Mark 14:3); and has Jesus saying she, “anointed my body” (Mark 13:8).

Now we will see how the symbolism behind Mary’s act helps explain the seeming contradictions between John and Mark.
• We will deal with the Mary’s anonymity in Mark first.

Mary’s Anonymity:
Given the fact that Jesus says in Mark 14:9 that the woman’s act will be “proclaimed in the whole world”, her anonymity in Mark is “quite extraordinary” – Bauckham.
• How is an anonymous woman’s act told “in memory of her” (Mark 14:9)?
• And if John knew her name, certainly Mark’s source for his Passion narrative did too.
• It doesn’t seem to make any sense.

So how do scholars account for her anonymity?
• Bauckham and Theissen do so via a literary convention called “protection anonymity”.
• This can be best understood by knowing both (1) how early Mark’s Passion narrative was (as in its nearness in time to the actual event) and, (2) it geographical source (where it originated).

With respect to (1) above – nearness in time:
• We know that John was probably written in the late 80’s or 90’s A.D.
• But scholars argue that, “parts of [Mark’s] Passion account would have to have been composed within the generation of the eyewitnesses and their contemporaries” – Gerd Theissen.
• This would put the source for Mark’s Passion narrative as early as the mid 30’s A.D. – Theissen.

With respect to (2) above – geographical source:
• “Only in Jerusalem was there reason to draw a cloak of anonymity over followers of Jesus” – Gerd Theissen.
• If Mary’s name was left out on purpose, as B&T claim, this would only have been necessary if the source for the narrative was Jerusalem – ground zero the Passion narrative.
• In other words the geographical source of Mark’s Passion narrative was Jerusalem.

So all this means is that:
• At the time and place the source of Mark’s Passion narrative “took shape”, “this woman would have been in danger were she identified as having been complicit in Jesus’ politically subversive claim to messianic kingship” – Richard Bauckham.
• Otherwise, there would be no need for anonymity and protection.

So, Mary’s anonymity in Mark actually speaks to just how fragrant and powerful the Kingly symbolism we just discussed actually was.
• Mary’s act put all involved in danger.
• And remember, the Jewish leadership’s case to Pilate was that Jesus had claimed to be “King of the Jews”.
• Mary was part of that “inauguration” and so was part of the “uprising” and thus in danger.
o BTW – another example of this “protection anonymity” is Mark 14:47.
o “one of those who stood by drew his sword and struck the servant”

So now we have an explanation as to why Mary is anonymous in Mark and not in John.
• What about the differences in where on His body Jesus was anointed?

The Anointing:
As we have seen, Mark has Mary anointing Jesus’ head, and Jesus’ body, whereas John has Mary anointing Jesus’ feet.
• How do we account for this?
• The simplest explanation is that Mary anointed all of the above, and Mark and John differ only in their focus and emphasis.
• This certainly fits with burial preparation attributed to Mary by Jesus since “a body for burial required covering the entire corpse” – Apologetics Bible.

However, there is another explanation.
• As discussed earlier, it is possible (as James Boice suggested) that Mary knew what Jesus was about to face.
• This knowledge would have been a revelation from God similar to the following.
• 1 Samuel 16:2–3 (ESV) — 2b And the LORD said, “Take a heifer with you and say, ‘I have come to sacrifice to the LORD.’ 3 And invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what you shall do. And you shall anoint for me him whom I declare to you.”

If this were the case, the only question is how much did she know?
• In other words, if Mary knew how Jesus was ordained to die, as He had hinted at Himself (His “lifted up” language), it seems reasonable that she anointed as follows:
• Jesus’ Head – the place the Kings crown of thorns would be placed.
• Jesus’ Body – perhaps His side (the spear) or wrists (the nails)
• Jesus’ Feet – the nails

So the difference in the anointing in John and Mark is probably just a difference in emphasis.
• However, if Mary knew of the nature of Jesus’ coming death, her anointing was recognition that Jesus’ Kingship and Messiah status were to be fulfilled through the cross.

Lesson for Us:
Mary’s example demonstrates for us the extent to which Jesus is worthy of our honor and worship.
• She shows us that proper worship of Jesus can be humiliating and costly.
• But that its impact in our lives can be pervasive.
• We are still living under the repercussions of Mary’s act of anointing the King Messiah.
• The question, then, is do we worship Jesus as we should?

Judas’ attitude and John’s commentary, on the other hand, demonstrate that denying Jesus His due honor and worship is tantamount to stealing from Jesus.
• It is denying Jesus what He is due.
• It is to live life out of balance.
• Do you have a fragrant and costly life of worship like Mary, or do you count the cost like Judas?

John 11:45-57 – Clash of the Kingdoms

2011-12-23T17:43:00.000-05:00

Throughout John 11, Jesus has challenged both the Jews and us on what Love, Death, Grief and Resurrection look like in the Kingdom of God.
• And as we will see, because His challenges are at odds with the status quo, they demand to be reckoned with.
• In our text today, three areas of contention are brought to bear as the Jews reckon with the Kingdom of God.
o The first is Reason’s relationship to Belief
o The second is Jesus’ Identity
o The third is who is in Control

1) IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD – REASON IS NOT ENOUGH

John 11:45–46 (ESV) — 45 Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him, 46 but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done.

This text is remarkable in what it implies.
• Some of those who were mourning with Mary and Martha over the death of Lazarus actually “believed in him” because of Lazarus.
• And remember, in John, to believe in Jesus means, among other things, that Jesus is of the Father and works under his authority.
• Remarkably, however, some actually did not believe in Him!
• They were confronted with the most awesome of supernatural miracles and still did not believe.
o Surely they believed Lazarus was now alive.
o Surely they believed Jesus had something to do with it.
o However, their conclusion was Jesus was a potential problem not a Messiah.
o I think the Gospel of John teaches clearly that those that aren’t called, drawn, and given by the Father to Christ, simply didn’t have eyes to see.
o They interpreted the evidence as their hearts saw fit.
• This begs the question, was the raising of Lazarus really the source of belief for those that believed?
o Or was it something else?
o The miracle was perhaps just a means to call the called.
• Jesus Himself has addressed the presence of unbelief by those who witness His power and authority.
o How does He account for it?

Just last week Lewis Wolpert, an atheist biologist at University College London, made the following comments in an episode of Unbelievable? Radio:
• He says God is a “mystical person for which there is zero evidence”.
• And wants to know if God is real why He doesn’t perform a miracle.
• In fact, God certainly hasn’t performed a miracle in the last 2000 years, Wolpert claims.
• He says, “If God is so jolly clever, why doesn’t he give us a more recent example [of a miracle], like tomorrow?”
• This is because, “a miracle would be very helpful in explaining the existence of God”.

What is Wolpert saying?
• Now, does the unbelief that persisted before the very presence of the incarnate Word of God’s raising Lazarus from the dead shed light on the premise of Mr. Wolpert?
• In other words, does belief in God necessarily follow from witnessing a miracle?

Contrasted with Wolpert, G.K. Chesterton has the following to say about miracles:
• "I had always vaguely felt facts to be miracles in the sense that they are wonderful: now I began to think them miracles in the stricter sense that they were willful."
• Hebrews 1:3 (ESV) — 3a He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.
• Colossians 1:17 (ESV) — 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
• Psalm 75:3 (ESV) — 3 When the earth totters, and all its inhabitants, it is I who keep steady its pillars. Selah

From the perspective and teaching of John’s Gospel, what is the difference between Lewis Wolpert who sees God in nothing and Chesterton who sees a miracle of God in the fact that there are facts that we can know?

2) IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD – WHO IS JESUS?

Within the kingdom that Jesus is inaugurating, the Jews inevitably had to answer two questions.
• We will deal with each separately.

John 11:47–48 (ESV) — 47 So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.”

Who Is Jesus – Messiah or Threat?
• The unbelievers told the Pharisees, and then the Pharisees convened the Sanhedrin.
• Rightly, the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin were greatly concerned with the implications Jesus’ work would have on them.
• Unfortunately, however, their concern was misplaced.
• They were preoccupied with the political implications instead of the spiritual implications of Jesus’ work.
• And worse still, notice that they specifically were concerned that the Romans would take away, “our place” and “our nation”.
• Their fear was a self-serving; “this Jesus is going to screw up our cozy arrangements with the Romans”.

Why did they have this fear?
• There are at least two reasons.

Pax Romana:
• Rome allowed the Jews to remain semi-autonomous.
• They could worship their God.
• They could maintain their temple, etc.
• However, in threat of an uprising by the Jews the Romans would crack down.
• Peace would be maintained but at the loss of liberty.

Jesus’ own words and actions:
• With His words and actions, Jesus was drawing large crowds, many of which were seeking to label Him the Messiah and overthrow Rome.
• These same words and actions were also seen as an affront to God and Judaism.
• And because of this, certain events began to draw the ire of the Jewish establishment.
o Healing on the Sabbath – John 5:15-17
o Claiming Equality with God – John 5:18
o His Self Proclamation – John 7:28-30
o His “I Am” Statement – John 8:58-59

So, having decided Jesus was a threat to their status quo, a solution had to be found.
• This leads us to our second question.

3) IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD – WHO IS IN CONTROL?

John 11:49–54 (ESV) — 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 53 So from that day on they made plans to put him to death. 54 Jesus therefore no longer walked openly among the Jews, but went from there to the region near the wilderness, to a town called Ephraim, and there he stayed with the disciples.

Who is in control – God or man?
• Here we have a powerful, in your face example of the sovereignty of God.
• Caiaphas, in agreement with the “our place” and “our nation” talk, knew exactly what they had to do to solve their problem.
• Kill Jesus so that everyone else would not go down in flames at the hands of a Roman crackdown.
• We know this because John tells us that after Caiaphas’ words, they, “made plans to put him to death” (vs. 53).
• Beasley-Murray tells us that the language of vs. 53 is so definitive it means that there is no adjudication to take place because the verdict has already been rendered.
o Jesus has already been found guilty.
o “All that remains is to find a way to accomplish their purpose.”
• The logic was that if they killed Jesus, they could prevent a messianic frenzy and thus the loss of the “whole nation”.
o Ironically, Jesus himself feared such an upheaval (John 6:14-15).
o Moreover, the Kingdom of God and its new covenant could not be thwarted.
o 70 A.D. would bring an end to Jewish temple life and their cozy arrangements.

But John makes a startling admission about Caiaphas’ words.
• He says, “He did not say this of his own accord” (vs. 51).
• In fact, Caiaphas’ words were a prophecy that “Jesus would die for the nation” (vs. 51).
• And that Jesus would even die for the “scattered abroad” (v. 52).
o These are the Gentiles in anticipation of the Gentile mission.

So we half to ask, did Caiaphas speak these words because he wanted to say them or because God wanted him to say them?
• Scholars are certain that Caiaphas’ “certainly did not mean [his words] in a Christian sense” – D. A. Carson.
• But as we just pointed out, John says Caiaphas did not speak “of his own accord”, “on his own”, or “own his own initiative”.

So if both Caiaphas and God are speaking, the answer to our question has to be, paradoxically, “yes”.
• D.A. Carson puts it like this, “Caiaphas spoke his considered if calloused opinion. But when Caiaphas spoke, God was also speaking, even if they were not saying the same things” – D.A. Carson.
• In other words, Caiaphas meant what he intended and at the same time God spoke through Caiaphas His intended meaning.
• Joseph puts it like this:
o Genesis 50:20 (ESV) — 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.

So, in the Clash of the Kingdoms who is in control?
• Can the answer be both?
• This is one of the most profound mysteries of the Bible, the relationship between God’s sovereignty and man’s actions.
• As we see in our text, and in those that come, Jesus Christ is ground zero for this mystery.

Jesus was killed due to the sinful actions of man.
• Yet, God the Father had chosen to kill Him from the beginning.
o It was God’s will and desire that Jesus should die.
• Did the Father illicit the sinful actions of the Jews and Romans to kill Jesus?
o Placing before the people the exact circumstances in which He knew they would choose to kill Jesus in the way He desired.
• Or was He simply a skillful chess player that saw their move and made his move?
o If so, how many steps ahead of man’s actions does God stay?
• How much control, exactly, does God have?
• How does man’s freewill exist within God’s sovereignty?
o John’s Gospel has already made clear this relationship with respect to salvation.
o But what of the rest of our actions?
o We will save this for another day.

John 11:28-44 – Messiah in the Kingdom of God

2011-12-12T21:38:00.000-05:00

Thus far in John 11, we have seen how the Kingdom of God that Jesus was inaugurating revolutionized love, death, grief and resurrection.
• And the events leading up to Lazarus’ resurrection makes this monumentally clear.
• However, there is one thing that is foundational to the working out of the Kingdom of God that John 11 also plays out for us.
• It was first alluded to with Jesus’ words in 11:4.
o John 11:4 (ESV) — 4 But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”

Here we see that the glory of God the Father is foundational to understanding John 11.
• But more than that, this verse also suggests a distinction, yet a relationship between, Jesus’ glory and God the Father’s glory.
• And the one aspect of this relationship that I want to deal with today is the glorification of God the Father by Jesus the Son through Jesus’ humanity, His authority and His divinity.

We will start with how John 11 brings Jesus’ humanity into view and how it glorifies God the Father.
• As we go, we will occasionally allude back to our 4 previous lessons from John 11.

1) JESUS’ HUMANITY

John 11:28–39 (ESV) — 28 When she had said this, she went and called her sister Mary, saying in private, “The Teacher is here and is calling for you.” 29 And when she heard it, she rose quickly and went to him. 30 Now Jesus had not yet come into the village, but was still in the place where Martha had met him. 31 When the Jews who were with her in the house, consoling her, saw Mary rise quickly and go out, they followed her, supposing that she was going to the tomb to weep there [related to our grief lesson]. 32 Now when Mary came to where Jesus was and saw him, she fell at his feet, saying to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.” 33 When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled. 34 And he said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to him, “Lord, come and see.” 35 Jesus wept. 36 So the Jews said, “See how he loved him!” 37 But some of them said, “Could not he who opened the eyes of the blind man also have kept this man from dying?” 38 Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. 39 Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, “Lord, by this time there will be an odor, for he has been dead four days.”

First, let’s look at how our text puts Jesus’ humanity in view.
• 1) “Where have you laid him?” (vs. 34)
• 2) "Jesus wept." (vs. 35)
• 3) “Take away the stone.” (vs. 39)

I don’t know if John intends us to notice this or not, but I find these three comments striking.
• We have already seen that Jesus supernaturally knew that “Lazarus has died” from vs. 14.
• And then in vs. 25, He makes the astounding claim that “I am the resurrection and the life”.
• But now, it almost appears that His divinity, certainly at the request of the Father, has been “restrained”.

Why does this appear to be the case?
• (1) Jesus asked where Lazarus was, certainly He had it in is power to know exactly where Lazarus was.
o As we just saw, He knew that Lazarus had died.
• (2) Jesus wept even though He would shortly raise Lazarus from the dead.
o This seems contrived.
• (3) Finally, already in John, Jesus has performed miracles involving physical, inanimate objects – wine, loaves, etc.
o But here He asks others to “take away the stone” (vs. 39).
o Wouldn’t it have been all the more magnificent had He moved the stone away by Himself?

Could there be a reason that Jesus’ humanity is in view?
• In general terms, Paul seems to think so.
• Philippians 2:6–7 (ESV) — 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.

I think John is showing us that because Jesus was “born in the likeness of men,” He, in His humanity, was totally dependent on the Father to accomplish His mission.
• He had “emptied himself” for our sake.
• Of this emptying, “Perhaps we could say that he had such knowledge as was necessary for him to accomplish his mission; in other matters he was as ignorant as we are” – Millard Erickson.
• And, “the fact that Jesus found it necessary to pray and depend upon the Father is indication that we must be similarly reliant upon him” – Millard Erickson.
• And Jesus’ “emptying”, His reliance on the Father in His humanity, “is for the glory of God” (vs. 4).

On a theological note, Millard Erickson gives 6 reasons why Jesus being fully human is significant:
• (1) “The atoning death of Jesus can truly avail for us.”
o “He was one of us, and thus could truly offer a sacrifice on our behalf.”
o “everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die” (vs. 26)
• (2) “Jesus can truly sympathize with and intercede for us.”
o “When we are hungry, weary, lonely, [and grieving] he fully understands, for he has gone through it all himself (Heb. 4:15).”
o “Jesus wept” (vs. 35)
o “a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief” (Isa. 53:3)
• (3) “Jesus manifests the true nature of humanity.”
o “Jesus has not only told us what perfect humanity is, he has exhibited it.”
o “though he die, yet shall he live” (vs. 25)
• (4) “Jesus can be our example.”
o He shows us what “full dependence upon the grace of God” entails and the power it has.
o “If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble” (vs. 9)
• (5) “Human nature is good.”
o “When we tend toward asceticism, regarding human nature, and particularly physical nature, as somehow inherently evil or at least inferior to the spiritual and immaterial, the fact that Jesus took upon himself our full human nature is a reminder that to be human is not evil, it is good.”
o “deeply moved” and “greatly troubled” (vs. 33)
• (6) “God is not totally transcendent.”
o Deism is not an option.
o God is with us.
o “she went and met him” (vs. 20)

So we have seen why John may have wanted us to notice Jesus’ humanity in John 11.
• Now, let us move on to Jesus’ authority.

2) JESUS’ AUTHORITY

John 11:40–42 (ESV) — 40 Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God?” 41 So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42 I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.”

Our text certainly puts Jesus’ authority in view.
• 1) “Father, I thank you that you have heard me…that they may believe that you sent me.”
• With these words Jesus is acknowledging publicly before the crowd that what He is about to do is under the authority and power of God the Father.

Could there be a reason that John brought Jesus’ authority into view?
• Elijah expresses precisely the reason that John, and thus Jesus, would do so.
• In fact, the sentiment expressed by Jesus here, many believe, purposely echoes the words of Elijah in 1 Kings.
• 1 Kings 18:37 (ESV) — 37 Answer me, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that you, O LORD, are God, and that you have turned their hearts back.”
o “Many…believed in Him” (vs. 45)

What this means is that the ensuing miraculous event was not the primary focus in Jesus’ mind.
• But rather, that we would recognize in Christ the power and authority of the Father working through Him and believe in Him.
• That the Father was the source of Jesus’ glory and authority was so primary in His mind that John tells us Jesus “said this on account of the people standing around” (vs. 42).
• And in the “rightness” of this relationship, Jesus could be certain that those who believe in Him “would see the glory of God” (vs. 40) in His actions and words.
• Kostenberger puts it like this, “Jesus’ focus is not on the ensuing miracle but on the revelation of God’s glory (and thus his own messianic calling) in and through it”.

This is the Father’s Jesus that we have talked so much about.
• John 5:19-21 (ESV) — 19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.

All that Jesus said and did was at the direction of and under the authority of God the Father – including giving life.
• And this ensured that whether Jesus’ submission was as “Son of God” to Father or “the last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45) to Father, it was the Father who was glorified.
• So Jesus’ reliance on the Father for His authority “is for the glory of God” (vs. 4).

So, now we have seen how Jesus used both His humanity and His authority “for the glory of God” (vs. 4).
• We now need to see how John 11 reveals Jesus’ divinity.

3) JESUS’ DIVINITY

John 11:43-44 (ESV) — 43 When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” 44 The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”

Obviously, our 2 verses have Jesus’ divinity in view.
• 1) “Lazarus, come out” (vs. 43)
• 2) “Unbind him, and let him go.” (vs. 44)

Like with Jesus’ humanity and His authority, could there be a reason for John to bring Jesus’ divinity into view?
• Jesus had just told Martha that “I am the resurrection and the life” (vs. 25).
• And now having made sure all knew the authority under which He was operating, the Word of God spoke and even the dead obeyed Him.
• Lazarus, who had been dead for 4 days, and whose body had already begun to decay, walked out of the tomb.
• And at the command and authority of Jesus, was unbound and let go – clearly this was both in a literal and spiritual sense.
• For these reasons, we can see that Jesus’ display of His divinity to raise Lazarus from death “is for the glory of God” (vs. 4).
o As we have said, people believed as a result.

Additionally, on a theological note, Millard Erickson gives 4 reasons why Jesus being fully divine is significant:
• (1) “We can have real knowledge of God.”
o Jesus said, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).
o To, “know what the love of God, the holiness of God, the power of God are like, we need only look at Christ.”
o “you would see the glory of God” (vs. 40)
• (2) “Redemption is available to us.”
o “The death of Christ is sufficient for all sinners who have ever lived, for it was not merely a finite human, but an infinite God who died.”
o “He, the Life, the Giver and Sustainer of life, who did not have to die, died.”
o “I am the resurrection and the life” (vs. 25)
• (3) “God and humanity have been reunited.”
o “It was not an angel or a human who came from God to the human race, but God himself crossed the chasm created by sin.”
o “Where have you laid him?” (vs. 34) and “Lazarus, come out” (vs. 43)
• (4) “Worship of Christ is appropriate.”
o “He is as deserving of our praise, adoration, and obedience as is the Father.”
o “you are the Christ, the Son of God” (vs. 27)
o “she fell at his feet” (vs. 32)

Finally, it seems to me that John was purposely bringing our attention to one of the most profound paradoxes in Scripture.
• Paul put it like this; Colossians 2:9 (ESV) — 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,
• John had shown us that Jesus was fully human, and fully divine.
• This paradox, one that skeptics call a contradiction that cannot be reconciled, was one that John did not shy away from highlighting.
• And even though this human/divine nature of Christ is, “one of the most difficult of all theological problems, ranking with the Trinity and the relationship of human free will and divine sovereignty” – Millard Erikson.
• It is to be celebrated and embraced and not ignored.
• And as with the resurrection, the nature of the Messiah in the Kingdom of God was unlike anything the Jews had expected.
• Yet this paradox and how it played out in John 11 was also “for the glory of God” (vs. 4).

So John has shown us that Jesus glorified God in John 11 in the context of His humanity, His authority, and His divinity and in the mystery of the union between humanity and divinity.
• How are we to emulate that?

Lessons for Us:
• We are capable of glorifying God in our humanity.
o As we live dependent on God.
• We are capable of glorifying God by subjugating ourselves to His authority.
o As we serve God.
• We can glorify God by pointing others to His divinity.
o As we evangelize for and worship God.

John 11:21-27 – Resurrection in the Kingdom of God

2011-11-28T18:41:00.001-05:00

In the past few weeks we have seen how John 11 addresses Love, Death, and Grief in the Kingdom of God.
• Today, we come face to face with Resurrection in the Kingdom of God.
• And it is here that we not only come face to face with how transformative Jesus’ ministry was in this regard.
• But we also encounter a powerful apologetic for the Resurrection of Jesus.

1) KINGDOM RESURRECTION

John 11:21–27 (ESV) — 21 Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22 But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.” 23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” 24 Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” 25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, 26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” 27 She said to him, “Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world.”

In order to get at what is going on in this exchange between Jesus and Martha, we need to get at the background.
• When Martha says, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day”, what is she referring to?
• We can suggest that whatever else she was saying, she was probably affirming Jesus’ own teaching on the subject thus far (John 6:44; 54).
• And when asked in vs. 26 if she believed Jesus’ words about Himself concerning the resurrection, her response betrays her ignorance of the nature of Kingdom Resurrection.
o She didn’t yet have the foundation to properly understand what she was just told.
o Her Jewish heritage had not prepared her for Jesus’ response.
o So she answered as best as she could with what Kostenberger suggests is a creedal response.
o Yet as correct as her answer was, it was still missing a piece of the puzzle.
• So in answering this question, we will be able to appreciate all the more Jesus’ answer, “I am the resurrection and the life” and how it unexpectedly complements, for the believing Jew, Martha’s vs. 27 response.
• The sources for all of the following background info are N.T. Wright’s lectures found at www.ntwrightpage.com and his book, The Resurrection of the Son of God.

What Does Resurrection Mean?
• First, we need to define resurrection.
• “Resurrection means bodily life after ‘life after death’, or, if you prefer, bodily life after the state of ‘death’” – N.T. Wright.
• What happened to Elijah and Enoch, for example, is not resurrection because they did not die.
• And what happened to Enoch and Elijah was something the Jew did not “expect to happen again” – N.T. Wright.
• Resurrection is what happens only to people who are “at present dead” – N.T. Wright.

Does the OT speak of resurrection?
• “Nobody doubts that the Old Testament speaks of the resurrection of the dead” – N.T. Wright.
• However, it is something that is “deeply asleep, only to be woken by echoes from later times and texts” – N.T. Wright.
• In other words, there just isn’t a lot of OT info on resurrection.
• And where the OT does speak of a bodily resurrection it appears late.
• In fact, most of the sources for what we know about Jewish views of bodily resurrection are from post-biblical literature such as the Mishnah, Talmud, The Wisdom literature and from communities like Qumran – N.T. Wright.
• This is why it is said that the OT itself, “is not particularly concerned with life after death at all, still less with resurrection” – N.T. Wright

What is the foundation of OT bodily resurrection?
• The foundation appears to be the hope for the restoration of Israel from exile.
• In the OT the life of Israel is associated with the land, AND the death of Israel is associated with exile.
• Land is life – Exile is death

So, allusions to a bodily resurrection were expressed in the context of the death of exile and an expectation for:
• Restoration – the restoration of Israel as a nation
• Return – the return of Israel to its land from its exile in Babylon.
• Ezekiel 37:12 (ESV) — 12 Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel.
• This is why in the OT, “The nation and land of the present world were far more important than what happened to an individual beyond the grave” – N.T. Wright.
• And so the hope of Israel was that, though individual would die, “YHWH’s purposes [for Israel], however, would go forwards, and would be fulfilled in their time” – N.T. Wright.

Why is this foundation important – Root of Hope?
• “This explicit link of life with the land and death with exile, coupled with the promise of restoration the other side of exile, is one of the forgotten roots of the fully developed hope of ancient Israel. The dead might be asleep; they might be almost nothing at all; but hope lived on within the covenant and promise of YHWH” – N.T. Wright.
• The “roots of the fully developed hope” easily accommodated a developing view of bodily resurrection.
• And these roots “could well have been read within post-biblical Judaism” as having undertones of a bodily resurrection – N.T. Wright.

Where does the OT speak of a bodily Resurrection?
• As mentioned earlier, Jewish resurrection was fleshed out mainly in the 2nd temple post-biblical texts.
• But there are some OT verses that speak of a bodily resurrection.
• The most obvious are Isaiah 26:19, Hosea 13:14, and Daniel 12:2-3.
• Isaiah 26:19 (ESV) — 19 Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For your dew is a dew of light, and the earth will give birth to the dead.
• Daniel 12:2–3 (ESV) — 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.
• Hosea 13:14 (ESV) — 14 Shall I ransom them from the power of Sheol? Shall I redeem them from Death? O Death, where are your plagues? O Sheol, where is your sting? Compassion is hidden from my eyes.

What do these verses say about a bodily resurrection?
• (1) The expectation expressed in the resurrection language was at a minimum that God “will reverse the actions of the wicked pagans, and raise the martyrs, and the teachers who kept Israel on course, to a glorious life” – N.T. Wright.
• (2) God will also, “raise their persecutors to a new existence: instead of remaining in the decent obscurity of Sheol or ‘the dust’, they will face perpetual public obloquy [public disgrace]” – N.T. Wright.
• (3) And specifically for Daniel 12, “the resurrection of God’s people (at least in the persons of the martyrs, seen as representing the nation) is the form that national restoration takes. This is the real end of the deepest exile of all” – N.T. Wright.
• (4) Finally, in these texts the “hope for nation, family and land joins up with the emerging belief in the creator’s faithfulness even beyond the grave” – N.T. Wright.

BTW – “However concrete the reference in any of the passages [to a bodily resurrection], there is no doubt that even in such cases the overarching context is that of the hope of the nation for national restoration and resettlement in the land” – N.T. Wright.

So taking into account these OT verses and the post-biblical literature, what was the resurrection view of Martha when she said “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day”?
• For, as we have said, it is in answering this question that we can fully appreciate what Jesus was doing when He said, “I am the resurrection and the life”.

This is what we know about Martha’s [Jews’] view of resurrection at the time of Jesus:
• (1) Jews “ultimate hope was [not] the resurrection of the body” – N.T. Wright.
• (2) “There were no traditions about a Messiah being raised to life”
o “There was hope for a resurrection”
o “There was hope for a Messiah”
o But the two never intersect
o There weren’t even “traditions about prophets being raised to new bodily life”
• (3) There was no concept of a resurrection split in two.
o For the Jew, “resurrection [was] a single all-embracing moment, not a matter of one person being raised ahead of everybody else” – N.T. Wright.
• (4) Life after death was as a disembodied spirit in “some kind” of intermediate state.
o In the “hand of the creator god”
o “In paradise”
o In “some kind of Sheol”
• (5) Vindication of the Messiah would come through the exaltation and restoration of Israel.
• (6) The Jewish view of resurrection was all over the map.
o Wright’s book spends literally hundreds of pages examining these differences.
o The variety of Christian views on Jesus’ Second Coming are a possible parallel here – Premillenial, Amillenial, Postmillenial, Dispensation Premillenial, Pre-Tribulation, Post-Tribulation, etc.

The book of Acts has two great examples of the Jewish views of resurrection:
(1) Acts 23:6–9 (ESV) — 6 Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Br`others, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.” 7 And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. 9 Then a great clamor arose, and some of the scribes of the Pharisees’ party stood up and contended sharply, “We find nothing wrong in this man. What if a spirit or an angel spoke to him?”

Sadducees believed in neither (vs. 8):
• (1) Life after ‘life after death’ (resurrection) – “there is no resurrection”
• (2) ‘Life after death’ – “nor angel, nor spirit”
• And this view, by the way, was the conservative view at the time.
• This is because resurrection and ‘life after death’, as we have said, were not to be found in the Torah and the earlier OT books.
• That is to say that most of the influential texts on these subjects were very recent and were outside the OT canon.

Pharisees and most Jews believed in (vs. 8):
• Both (1) and (2) above.
• Specifically, after death, the righteous Jew lived as a disembodied “spirit” or “angel”.
• And then ‘The Resurrection’, “will take place at a future date when all the righteous dead are raised to share God’s new world” – N.T. Wright.
• “They do not suppose for a moment that Paul has actually been a witness of the resurrection itself; that is out of the question as far as they are concerned” – N.T. Wright.
• This is why they suggest that Jesus presented Himself to Paul during the disembodied intermediate state as “a spirit or an angel”.
• Had Jesus been bodily resurrected, all the righteous Jews from Israel’s history would have also been resurrected and Israel’s glory would have been restored.

(2) Acts 12:13–15 (ESV) — 13 And when he knocked at the door of the gateway, a servant girl named Rhoda came to answer. 14 Recognizing Peter’s voice, in her joy she did not open the gate but ran in and reported that Peter was standing at the gate. 15 They said to her, “You are out of your mind.” But she kept insisting that it was so, and they kept saying, “It is his angel!”
• The background from our resurrection discussion and Acts 23 also sheds light on the above text.
• Peter had been captured and many were praying for him at Mary's, the mother of John’s house.
• After Peter’s escape, he too went to the house.
• Rhoda recognized Peter at the gate by his voice.
• So she ran and told the others that Peter was “standing at the gate”.
• Understanding her implication that Peter was actually there, “They said to her, ‘You are out of your mind’”.
• Clearly, they assumed Peter was killed by Herod just as James was in Acts 12:2.
• Therefore, just as the Pharisees thought, if anyone was there it was Peter’s disembodied “angel”.
• For as we saw with the Pharisees, it couldn’t be Peter’s resurrected body, or all the righteous of Israel would be resurrected and Israel’s glory restored.

Back to John 11:
So when Martha responded to Jesus’ proposition, “Your brother will rise again” (vs. 23), with the statement, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day” (vs. 24) we can now see what she meant.
• And it was not at all what Jesus meant and what He was about to demonstrate with Lazarus and Himself.
• The resurrection was and would be unlike anything she imagined.
• Let’s see why.

So, when Jesus said, “I am the resurrection and the life”, what was He saying about Resurrection in the Kingdom of God?
• (1) Resurrection in Jesus Christ is our ultimate hope.
• (2) The Messiah is the Resurrection.
o The hope of the Messiah intersected with the hope of Resurrection.
o And, “Nobody put those two hopes together until the early Christians did so” – N.T. Wright.
• (3) Resurrection is in two phases.
o Kingdom Resurrection held that there were “two phases: first the Messiah, then at his coming all his people” – N.T. Wright.
• (4) Life after death is in heaven in the presence of God (before resurrection – our life after ‘life after death’).
o We are immortal for all eternity – not an angelic or spiritual being having life “by the creative power of YHWH” – N.T. Wright.
• (5) Jesus as Messiah was vindicated through His resurrection.
• (6) Resurrection in the Kingdom of God had a “precise shape and content” – N.T. Wright.
o It is an act of “new creation, accomplished by the Holy Spirit.”
o It involves new, glorified bodies – “not be a simple return to the same sort of body as before”
o It will involve the creation of a new heaven and new earth in which are resurrected selves will live for eternity.

BTW - There will come a day when the Christian view of the Second Coming will also have “a precise shape and content”.
• And that day will be when Jesus actually does return.
• Just as Jesus’ Resurrection accounts for the clarity on resurrection, so His Second Coming will have the effect of bringing clarity to all the “millenials”.

Conclusion:
Resurrection in the Kingdom of God was “a sudden and dramatic mutation from within the Jewish worldview” – N.T. Wright
• It “burst the boundaries” of Jewish views of resurrection – N.T. Wright.
• In fact, Martha and the Jew’s beliefs about life after death, “and resurrection in particular, had not prepared them” for Resurrection in the Kingdom of God – N.T. Wright
• So, given the differences between Martha’s Jewish view and Jesus’ Kingdom view of resurrection, we can see why her answer in John 11:27 seemed a bit disjointed.

Jewish vs. Christian Resurrection

Furthermore, Jesus words, “I am the resurrection and the life”, are also radical in the following ways:
• It’s a radical claim against both the orthodoxy of the Sadducees and the enlightenment of the Pharisees and the other Jews of which Martha was a part.
• Resurrection was here and now in Jesus – “I am the resurrection and the life”.
• Resurrection would bring life after ‘life after death’ and Jesus, the Messiah, would be the first and Lazarus was the preview.
• Resurrection, shockingly, would be as much about the individual as it was about Israel’s exaltation.

Apologetical Significance:
The historian has to account for the above 6 differences between OT and Kingdom Resurrection.
• How did they arise?
• What accounts for them?

Additionally, the historian also has to contend with the following:
• Jesus’ Death
• Jesus’ Burial
• Empty Tomb
• Jesus Appearances (1 Cor. 15) to Multiple Witnesses (some hostile – Paul and James)
o Embarrassing Witnesses - women
• Conversion of Enemy – Paul
• Conversion of Skeptic – James
• Context of Jewish Messianic Expectations and Jesus
• Belief of disciples that Jesus was raised from the dead

The historical sciences make deductions based on a principle call the “the inference to the best explanation”:
• Many infer that some of the following ad hoc explanations are the best.
o Jesus didn’t really die.
o He was given something that knocked Him out.
o The women went to the wrong tomb.
o The disciples merely had hallucinations.
o The disciples were in such shock over Jesus’ death, they dealt with it by concocting His resurrection.
o The resurrection accounts were written in later.

However none of these are a best explanation because not one or even two of them account for all that needs to be accounted for.

IT IS THE BODILY RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST THAT IS THE BEST EXPLANATION!

John 11:17-20 - Grief in the Kingdom of God

2011-11-21T20:56:00.001-05:00

Over the past two weeks, we have seen how John 11:1-16 provide profound insight into both Love in the Kingdom of God and Death in the Kingdom of God.
• In each case, Jesus challenged the worldly view of love and the Jewish view of death.
• Today, we see one more way that Jesus challenges us.
• This time He is challenging us to trust Him during our grief.

1) MARTHA DOES THE UNEXPECTED

John 11:17–20 (ESV) — 17 Now when Jesus came, he found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb four days. 18 Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off, 19 and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to console them concerning their brother. 20 So when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary remained seated in the house.

John tells us that when Jesus finally arrived at Bethany, Lazarus had been dead four days.
• Many suggest that this observation is meant to highlight the fact that Lazarus was dead as dead can be.
• And in light of verse John 11:4, in which Jesus says Lazarus’ death, “is so that the Son of God may be glorified through it”, it also reminds us again just how radical love in the Kingdom is.
• God’s desire to glorify Jesus had put Lazarus’ family through 4 days of mourning.

In verses 18 & 19, we also get a glimpse of why the disciples expressed concern over Jesus’ life.
• Bethany is only 2 miles from Jerusalem, the place where He was almost stoned just a few months prior.
• And “many of the Jews” had come from Jerusalem to mourn with Martha and Mary.
• Jews who no doubt would know who Jesus was.

Finally, John tells us something more significant that its one sentence seems to indicate.
• John 11:20 (ESV) — 20 So when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary remained seated in the house.

How to mourn – Sit Shiva:
We know that Martha and Mary would have been sitting shiva after the burial of Lazarus.
• Sitting shiva is, “a traditional seven-day period of mourning the dead that is observed in Jewish homes” – Merriam-Webster.
• This is part of the Talmud’s prescription for 7 days of deep mourning – Kostenberger.
• In addition to mourning, the point of sitting shiva was to receive the “condolences of their friends” – Kostenberger.
• So given the expectations of sitting shiva, Martha should have stayed in the house with Mary – Kostenberger.
• However, John tells us that “she went and met him”.

Why is this significant?
• Most suggest that Martha’s breaking shiva and leaving the house is simply her personality.
• We know, for example, that Luke 10:38-42 portrays her as a busy body.
• However, we also know something else about her actions due to ANE cultural norms.
• "In the Middle East, village people show honor to an important guest by walking some distance out of town to greet the guest and escort him or her into the village” – Kenneth Bailey.
• In fact, the more important the guest, the farther they will travel to meet him.

To appreciate what Martha was doing here, think of it like this:
• Your loved one falls terribly ill; you know who can heal him; you send for the healer but he delays his coming; your loved one dies; he has been dead 4 days; you are in the middle of mourning; finally, the healer shows up.
• What do you do?

Martha did the unexpected – showing great respect to Jesus, she went out to meet him.
• In the midst of her mourning and grief, Martha didn’t wait for Jesus to meet her sitting shiva.
• She broke shiva, and went out to meet Jesus, thereby honoring the very one who let Lazarus die.
• This is an amazing example for us on how to handle grief.
• Is our trust in Christ such that we can honor Him in the midst of our pain and grief?
• In any view but the Christian worldview this makes little sense.
o Honor the one who could have prevented the whole thing to begin with.
o Love the one whose love for you manifested itself in the death of your brother.
• What possible fruit can come from such a silly looking trust?

In this case, her trust in Christ results in a profound and necessary lesson on the Resurrection in the Kingdom of God.
• We will get into this next week and it is awesome.

John 11:7-16 – Death in the Kingdom of God

2011-11-14T20:11:00.000-05:00

Last week we discussed the startling and remarkable way love is expressed in the Kingdom of God.
• Jesus taught us that beholding the glory of God is a priority for the expression of love in the Kingdom.
• Beholding God’s glory takes precedent over our desire to avoid death, pain and grief.
• And this is why he waited 2 days after hearing of Lazarus’ illness.
• Today, Jesus continues His Kingdom education by redefining death.
• We will see that Jesus has at least two comments to make concerning death in the Kingdom of God.

1) DEATH WILL NOT COME IN THE “DAY”

John 11:7–10 (ESV) — 7 Then after this he said to the disciples, “Let us go to Judea again.” 8 The disciples said to him, “Rabbi, the Jews were just now seeking to stone you, and are you going there again?” 9 Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in the day? If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world. 10 But if anyone walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him.”

Our text today starts with a concern over death.
• The disciples don’t think Jesus should return to the area around Jerusalem because the Jews are “seeking to stone” Him.
• And it is His answer to their concern that provides us with the first way He addressed death in the Kingdom.
• BTW – I like that in a context where Jesus was laying the groundwork to challenge their very notion of death, they express fear of the very thing He seeks to challenge – good timing.

Death is in God’s Timing:
So the first way Jesus addressed death in the Kingdom of God was to tell the disciples that His death is in God’s timing.
• He did this by saying “If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world. (vs. 9)”
• Jesus intent here, all agree, is to convey the same meaning to be found in the following passages of John.
• John 9:4–5 (ESV) — 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.”
• John 7:6 (ESV) — 6 Jesus said to them, “My time has not yet come, but your time is always here.
• John 7:8 (ESV) — 8 You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.”
• John 7:30 (ESV) — 30 So they were seeking to arrest him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his hour had not yet come.

Jesus’ appointed time to die on the cross was set by His Father, not by the mobs in Judea.
• Jesus wanted the disciples to know this.
• Death comes only at God’s appointed time – no sooner or no later.

However, we must be clear that He is not telling them that the night will not come.
• He will die and they will die.
• John 12:27 (ESV) — 27 “Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour.
• However, this death will be much different than what they conceive.

And this leads us to the second way he addressed death in the Kingdom of God.

2) DEATH IS NOT WHAT YOU THINK

John 11:11–16 (ESV) — 11 After saying these things, he said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep, but I go to awaken him.” 12 The disciples said to him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13 Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that he meant taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus told them plainly, “Lazarus has died, 15 and for your sake I am glad that I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.” 16 So Thomas, called the Twin, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go, that we may die with him.”

Why did Jesus describe death as a sleep from which Lazarus will awaken?
• What was Jesus trying to convey?
• To answer that and to appreciate the second way Jesus addressed death in the Kingdom of God, we need to get at some background on the Hebrew view of death.
• Because it is this view that Jesus was about to profoundly change.

Death in the OT:
Death in the OT can be said to have 3 general meanings (AYBD).
• (1) a “metaphor for those things which detract from life as Yahweh intends it”
• (2) “as a ‘power’ in opposition to the created order”
• (3) “for biological cessation”
• Number (1) is spiritually related; number (2) can be both spiritually and physically related; number (3) is physically related.

With regards to (3), “biological cessation” the following can be said:
• “Belief in a substantial, meaningful existence after death is a relatively late development in the history of Israelite religion. The usual view expressed in the biblical books is that, upon death, one’s shade descends to Sheol, where one remains forever, cut off from God’s presence” – AYBD.
• This slow change from “forever” dead to “meaningful existence” was a somewhat of a sequential process, though the views did coexist.
• N.T. Wright puts this process as follows, “absence of hope beyond death; hope for blissful life after death; hope for new bodily life after ‘life after death’” – N.T. Wright.
• We will briefly describe some of the specific OT views of (3), “biological cessation”.

Death as Sleep:
The phrase “fallen asleep” was a Hebrew way of speaking of physical death, number (3) from above – Beasely-Murray.
• 1 Kings 2:10 (ESV) — 10 Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David.
• Psalm 13:3 (ESV) — 3 Consider and answer me, O LORD my God; light up my eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death,
• It is for this reason that, as we will see shortly, Jesus’ characterization of death as a sleep would not have been unusual, but describing it as a sleep from which Lazarus would awake would have been.

Death is Permanent:
We also need to know that with respect to physical death (3), no one was immune and it was considered to be a permanent condition – not something that one would awake from as Jesus told us in vs. 11.
• 2 Samuel 14:14a (ESV) — 14 We must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again.
• Psalm 6:5 (ESV) — 5 For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise?
• Psalm 115:17 (ESV) — 17 The dead do not praise the LORD, nor do any who go down into silence.
• Job 14:11–12 (ESV) — 11 As waters fail from a lake and a river wastes away and dries up, 12 so a man lies down and rises not again; till the heavens are no more he will not awake or be roused out of his sleep.
o Elijah was the exception – 2 Kings 2:11.
o And the boy brought back to life by Elisha was also an exception, but we can assume he ultimately did not escape death – 2 Kings 4:35.

That biological death was considered as something permanent by the Jews is also seen in Mark.
• Mark 5:39–40 (ESV) — 39 And when he had entered, he said to them, “Why are you making a commotion and weeping? The child is not dead but sleeping.” 40 And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside and took the child’s father and mother and those who were with him and went in where the child was.
• BTW - though Daniel 12:2 reflects a different meaning, one more in line with the view Jesus was about to reveal, it had not yet “seized the minds of the people” – Beasely-Murray.

Death is Corruption:
And as conveyed by numbers (1) and (2) from above, the disobedience in the Garden of Eden that led to death, “detracted from life as Yahweh intended and it” corrupted the “created order”.
• This corruption manifested itself as both physical death, as we have just seen and spiritual death for all of humanity.
• Athanasius put it this way, “men began to die, and corruption ran riot among them and held sway over them”.

Paul gives us an example of the “corruption ran riot” due to death.
• Romans 1:28–32 (ESV) — 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Death and Corruption did not Glorify God:
Finally, we have to realize the problem corruption and its death caused for the purpose of life and creation – the glorification of God we spoke of last week.
• This purpose is not just a NT theme.
• In fact, “The most significant theme for Israel was the understanding that life provided an opportunity for the individual and community to praise Yahweh. Praise of God was the sign of life” – AYBD.
• Those engulfed by corruption and its death could not praise God, and thus could not participate in this “most significant theme” – AYBD.
• The consequences of death and corruption are one of the reasons that for the Jew, it was a profound blessing to have a long life and many children.
• Thus, it was unthinkable that even the “Holy One”, who we know from Paul to be Jesus, would taste death.
• Psalm 16:10 (ESV) — 10 For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.

So now that we have an idea about the notions of death Jesus was confronting, we can appreciate and get at what He was doing.

Death Redefined in the Kingdom of God:
In telling the disciples that He will awaken Lazarus from death, Jesus is both:
• (1) Departing radically from the typical view of death
• (2) And pointing to Himself as the reason why

It departs radically because Jesus is now saying that death is a sleep, but one “from which they shall be awakened through Jesus” – Beasely-Murray.
• In other words, death is not permanent!
• He makes this claim in verse 11 when He says that He will “awaken him” (Lazarus) from death.
• And by His own resurrection He demonstrates forever that death is dead.

It points to Himself because He is about to claim and then demonstrate that He is “the resurrection and the life” (vs. 25).
• And it is He, in union with the Father (John 11:41-43), that will shortly raise Lazarus from the dead.
• He will do so in public with the spoken word of God so that all can see and hear.
• John 11:41–43 (ESV) — 41 So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42 I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.” 43 When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.”

And this redefining of death in the Kingdom of God is why Jesus tells the disciples in verse 4 that an illness that led to death is in fact an “illness [that] does not lead to death”.
• And why he says in John 8:52, “If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death”.
• Believers will never be deprived of the presence of Jesus Christ.
• We will never taste death, because we will be full and satisfied in the glory and eternity of Jesus Christ.

And importantly, Jesus shows us in verse 15 with His words, “for your sake”, that Kingdom Love and Kingdom Death intersect.
• In teaching, and shortly in demonstrating, that death is not permanent, Jesus is loving the disciples, Martha, Mary and Lazarus with Kingdom Love.
• He is pointing all of them to the glory and power of the Father as manifested in the Son to defeat death!
• What could be a higher expression of love than to show the disciples that through the Father-ordained ministry of the Son, death is defeated.
• What a glorious victory to behold; what a marvelous love to receive!

But there is more!
• Jesus was not only telling them that the corruption and permanency of death was about to be defeated, but that death itself would soon be, in complete opposition to its prior status, an occasion to praise God!
• As we just saw, those engulfed by corruption and death, could not praise and glorify God.
• The very things we were created to do.
• But now, through death, Jesus would demonstrate His victory via the resurrection over it and thereby vindicate His Father-ordained misery.
• He would overturn death’s permanency.
• He would cleanse death’s corruption.
• He would restore the created order and His intent for creation.
• Athanasius put like this, “The renewal of creation [would be] wrought by the self-same Word Who made it in the beginning”.
• This would enable us to praise and glorify God for eternity.

And it is this view of death that Jesus wants the disciples to “believe” when He says, “and for your sake I am glad that I was not there, so that you may believe”.
• Not just because it is truth, but in order that they may also be prepared for Jesus’ coming death.

Paul put the Jesus’ Kingdom view of death this way:
• 1 Corinthians 15:51–55 (ESV) — 51 Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53 For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. 54 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.” 55 “O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?”

Lessons for Us:
• Finally, Thomas’ words, “Let us also go, that we may die with him” (vs. 16), seem to demonstrate that Jesus’ teaching is taking hold.
• D.A. Carson characterizes Thomas’ words as reflecting “raw devotion and courage”.
• And as such, they are a challenge to us all.
• Mark puts the challenge to us this way:
• Mark 8:34 (ESV) — 34 And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
• Because as Jesus as just shown, death is defeated and not to be feared.

John 11:1-6 – Love in the Kingdom of God

2011-11-08T21:26:00.003-05:00

The way love is expressed in the Kingdom of God is often at odds with its worldly expression.
• In our lesson today, Jesus makes these differences plainly clear.
• He shows us this love is a Glory kind of Love.

1) JESUS LOVED LAZARUS, MARTHA & MARY - BACKGROUND

Knowing the nature of Jesus’ relationship with Lazarus, Mary and Martha is necessary to fully appreciate one of the remarkable principals to be found in our text.

Jesus Loved Lazarus:
• Jesus had a very special relationship with Lazarus (means – “whose help is God”).
• John tells us that Jesus “phileo” (vss. 3 & 36) and “agapao” (vs. 5) Lazarus.
o In other words, Jesus not only had a deep, selfless love for Lazarus, but He also had a deep affection for Lazarus based on a personal relationship; they were very close – DBL.
• The depth of Jesus’ love for Lazarus is also revealed in that:
o On his way to where they “laid him” (vss. 34), words that spoke of the stark reality of Lazarus’ death, “Jesus wept” (vs. 35).
o Even the Jews present, perhaps mourners, noticed, “See how he loved him!” (vs. 36).
o And John tells us twice that Jesus was “deeply moved” (vs. 38) over Lazarus’ death.
• “deeply moved” literally means to have “an intense feeling of concern” [a combination of anger and sorrow] in our context – DBL.
o It is translated as “groaning in himself” in the ASV and YLT and “angry” in the NLT.
o Jesus’ deep love for Lazarus meant the feeling of a deep loss with Lazarus’ death, even by Jesus.

Jesus Loved Martha and Mary:
• As with Lazarus, Jesus “agapao” Mary and Martha (vs.5).
• As with Lazarus, Jesus was “deeply moved” by their grief because of His love for them (vs. 33).

Now that we fully understand Jesus’ love for Lazarus, Mary and Martha we can move on.

2) A STRANGE RESPONSE

John 11:1–6 (ESV) — 1 Now a certain man was ill, Lazarus of Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha. 2 It was Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair [John 12:3], whose brother Lazarus was ill. 3 So the sisters sent to him, saying, “Lord, he whom you love is ill.” 4 But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” 5 Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus. 6 So, when he heard that Lazarus was ill, he stayed two days longer in the place where he was.

Mary, Lazarus’ sister, sent word to Jesus about Lazarus’ illness.
• Given Jesus’ relationship with Lazarus, Mary knew Jesus would want to know that His dear friend was ill.
• And no doubt, Mary had a pretty good idea that Jesus could heal Lazarus (vs. 32).
• Jesus reply to the messenger must have struck him as rather peculiar.

Jesus’ words to the messenger from John 11:4:
• “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”
• This answer is very similar to the one Jesus gave for the blind man’s blindness.
• He was blind not due to sin, “but that the works of God might be displayed in him” (John 9:3).

Yet, even stranger than His words were His actions.
• John reminds us that Jesus loved Martha, Mary and Lazarus (vs. 5).
• This reminder in vs. 5 seems to be an acknowledgement of how strange Jesus’ coming actions are.
• So, after softening the blow, John tells us what Jesus did in response to the news of Lazarus’ illness.

Jesus’ action from John 11:6:
• “So, when he heard that Lazarus was ill, he stayed two days longer in the place where he was.”

How is Jesus’ action in verse 6 a demonstration of the kind deep love we know He had for Lazarus, Martha and Mary?
• We have to try and make sense of this answer.

Let’s acknowledge the obvious.
• 1) Given Jesus’ relationship to Lazarus, Mary and Martha, we would have expected Him to rush at once to Lazarus’ aid.
• 2) Jesus’ response is the complete opposite of this expected response.
• 3) In fact, it seems almost to contradict, or at least show that John’s description of Jesus’ love for Lazarus to be hyperbole.
• 4) And, frankly, we can’t relate to it at all.

However, I think we will find here an understanding of love that suits perfectly with the Kingdom of God which Jesus inaugurated and operated.
• In fact, we will find that the “two-day delay was motivated by Jesus’ love for Martha, Mary and Lazarus” – D.A. Carson.
• This of course means that our perplexity over Jesus’ response is informed by a worldly understanding of love and not a Kingdom understanding.

3) LOVE IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD

To get at the answer to our question posed above, “How is Jesus’ action in verse 6 a demonstration of the kind deep love we know He had for Lazarus, Martha and Mary?” we need to understand a little of the foundational principals of the Kingdom of God.
• A definition: “The Kingdom of God is primarily the reign, rule, or authority of God himself; secondarily, it is the realm in which that rule is directly exercised, consisting largely in the laws governing the natural world and, more importantly, the individual and collective hearts of those who have bowed to God’s rule.” – J.P. Moreland.
• Dallas Willard says simply that The Kingdom of God is “death to self” and “where what God wants done is done”.

Why will it help us to have a basic understanding of the Kingdom of God to answer our question?
• Because the Kingdom of God “stands at the very center of the message of the historical Jesus” – AYBD.
• It is “the worldview of Jesus of Nazareth and Holy Scripture” – J.P. Moreland.
• It “established a radically new order of life on earth” – Dallas Willard.
• And Jesus’ odd response clearly points to “a radically new order of life on earth”.

Kingdom of God in Scripture – a few examples:
1) The Kingdom of God is at hand – the now and not yet.
• Matthew 3:2 (ESV) — 2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
• Matthew 10:7 (ESV) — 7 And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
• Matthew 12:28 (ESV) — 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

2) The Kingdom of God is priceless.
• Matthew 13:44 (ESV) — 44 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
• Matthew 13:45-46 (ESV) — 45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, 46 who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.

3) The Kingdom of God requires self-sacrifice.
• Mark 9:47 (ESV) — 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell,
• Acts 14:22 (ESV) — 22 strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.

4) The Kingdom of God has different priorities than the world.
• Luke 9:60 (ESV) — 60 And Jesus said to him, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.”
• Luke 12:29–31 (ESV) — 29 And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. 30 For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things will be added to you.

5) The Kingdom of God is not about worldly gratification.
• Romans 14:17 (ESV) — 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

Right away we see that all of these things have in common the denial of self and the glory of God.
• In this context, love will look different than it does in the world.

So, how does this relate to our question and a “glory kind of love”?
• In the Kingdom of God, the “deepest essence of God is love” – Dallas Willard.
• And our expression of this love is NOT an expression or fulfillment of our desires or the desires of those that we love – Willard.
• But, love expressed in the Kingdom of God IS the “will to good”.
• In other words, “We love something or someone when we promote its good for its own sake” – Willard.
• This love is contrary to a secular worldview, one outside of the Kingdom of God, which sees love as a fulfillment of desires or not standing in the way of the fulfillment of desires.

And in the Kingdom of God, the best way to love someone, to “will to good” and to promote someone’s “good for its own sake” is to point them to, and help them behold the glory of God.
• Isaiah 66:19 (ESV) — 19 and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.
• 1 Peter 4:10–11 (ESV) — 10 As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: 11 whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
• 1 Corinthians 10:31 (ESV) — 31 So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
• This is why, for example, the Westminster Catechism states that the chief end or aim of man is to “glorify God, and enjoy him forever”.
• And John MacArthur says, the glory of God is “the most important theme in the universe”.
• Clearly, not an aim of any worldview but that of the Kingdom of God and thus Jesus.

So, the answer to our question is that, in spite of looking like Jesus didn’t care much for Lazarus, Martha and Mary, Jesus’ actions actually demonstrated the highest form of love to them and even His disciples.
• He showed them a “glory kind of love!”
• A love that fulfilled much more than a desire to avoid pain and grief.

If an expression of love in the Kingdom of God is to point people to the glory of God, how did Jesus’ actions do this?
1) Jesus loved them and glorified God by using Lazarus’ death, not just his sickness, to glorify Himself.
• As Jesus’ own words declared, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”
• This is because, as Jesus said in John 5:23, “Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him”.
• Jesus resurrection of Lazarus was the means used to glorify Himself and the Father.
• Jesus was showing that He is “the resurrection and the life” (vs. 25).

2) Jesus loved them and glorified God by His example of obedience.
• John 5:19–20 (ESV) — 19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel.
• We can deduce, then, that Jesus waited because it was the Father’s will He do so.
• Obedience to God’s commands and law “is the structure of a life of grace in the kingdom of God” – Dallas Willard.

3) Jesus loved them and glorified God by preparing them for His death and crucifixion.
• John 11:14–15 (ESV) — 14 Then Jesus told them plainly, “Lazarus has died, 15 and for your sake I am glad that I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”
• The disciples, Mary and Martha “are manifestly unprepared to endure the shock of faith that lies ahead of them; the awakening of Lazarus from his death will grant them a fresh vision of his glory” – Beasley-Murray.
• “Lazarus’s death becomes occasion for rejoicing because it will serve to strengthen the disciples’ faith in Jesus once Lazarus has been raised” – Kostenberger.

Lessons for Us:
• The result of all this was that Jesus resurrection of Lazarus “confirmed the faith of his disciples and friends with dramatic power that would have been lacking if Jesus had responded immediately to the plea for help” – D.A. Carson.
o Jesus’ waiting here is very similar to our lesson from John 6:16-21 – Jesus Had Not Yet Come.
o In fact in verse 30 John tells us, “Now Jesus had not yet come into the village”.
• And to grow and increase a believer’s faith is both to glorify God and is to love the believer at the same time.
• This, in the Kingdom of God, is more important than the keeping people from pain or fulfilling their desires.
• In fact, as discussed, Jesus Himself also endured deep emotional pain over Lazarus’ death.
• This means that outside of the Kingdom of God, pain and suffering have no purpose – this is both sad and disturbing.
• But in the Kingdom of God, God desires that we glorify Him by enduring what is necessary that we might “manifest the radical nature of the Kingdom of God and the fruit of the Holy Spirit” – J.P. Moreland.
• And bringing us to this nature is to show us a Glory Kind of Love.
o On one level, this is what Jesus means when he says to us, “This illness does not lead to death” (vs. 4).

Decision Making – Choosing God’s Will in Wisdom

2011-10-31T19:02:00.001-04:00

As Christians, we are often faced with making difficult personal, family or even church based decisions.
• Sometimes the correct choices are to be found explicitly in God’s word.
• However, sometimes they aren’t.
• And in these cases, Gary Friesen’s book, Decision Making and the Will of God, provides us with some much needed insight.
• He outlines 4 principals which he argues can free us up to be much better decision makers for God’s kingdom.
• This lesson is based largely on his book as well as J.P. Moreland’s The Kingdom Triangle; Dallas Willard’s Renovation of the Heart; and Sam Storm’s The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts.

The Four Principals Outlined:
(1) “Where God commands, we must obey” (chapter 8).
• Here God provides Moral Guidance
• Here God may also provide Special Guidance
• Moral Guidance and Special Guidance express God’s Moral Will for us.
• God’s Moral Will is “all the commands in the Bible” – Friesen.
(2) “Where there is no command, God gives us freedom (and responsibility) to choose” (chapter 9).
(3) “Where there is no command, God gives us wisdom to choose” (chapters 10-11).
• Here, God provides Wisdom Guidance
• Wisdom Guidance ultimately results in expressing God’s Moral Will for us.
(4) “When we have chosen what is moral and wise, we must trust the sovereign God to work all the details together for good” (chapters 12-13).
• Here, God provides Sovereign Guidance
• Sovereign Guidance expresses God’s Sovereign Will for us.
• God’s Sovereign Will is His “secret plan that works all things together” for His good purposes.
o Certain—it will be fulfilled
o Detailed—includes all things
o Hidden—except when revealed by prophecy
o Supreme—without violating human responsibility or making God the author of sin
o Perfect—working all things together for God’s glory and our good

I will briefly cover all 4, but will spend most of our time on (3) Wisdom Guidance.
• First, however, let’s begin with number (1) above.

1) WHERE GOD COMMANDS, WE MUST OBEY

When God commands through either His Moral Guidance or His Special Guidance, we must obey.
• It is the de facto right thing to do.
• And therefore becomes our moral obligation.
• Let’s look at a couple of examples.

Moral Guidance:
A) Exodus 20:13–16 (ESV) — 13 “You shall not murder. 14 “You shall not commit adultery. 15 “You shall not steal. 16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
• Just (4) of the Ten Commandments demonstrate the nature and breadth of God’s Moral Guidance.

Special Guidance:
B) Acts 16:7 (ESV) — 7 And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them.
• God, in some supernatural way, made His will known to Paul.
• Paul was not to go to Bithynia.
• Paul was thus morally obligated through this Special Guidance to obey.

There really isn’t much else to be said on this topic.
• It is plainly obvious that if God provides specific commands or direction through Moral Guidance and/or Special Guidance, we have no moral freedom – to obey is the right decision and to disobey is the wrong one.
• He has revealed His Moral Will to us and there is no more discussion.

However, what about those decisions we face where God doesn’t give specific Moral or Special Guidance?
• In these cases, we have some latitude of freedom in our decision making.

2) WHERE THERE IS NO COMMAND, GOD GIVES US FREEDOM (AND RESPONSIBILITY) TO CHOOSE

The below graphic will help us to visualize the freedom the Christian has in the decision making process.

This circle illustrates that the freedom we have to decide exists within the purposes of God’s Sovereign Will (within which is His Sovereign Guidance) and within the restraints of His Moral Will (Moral and Special Guidance).
• There are many biblical examples of this; let’s look at just a few.

A) Genesis 2:16–17 (ESV) — 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
• Here God has made known to him His Sovereign Will in the form of a command which obligates Adam and Eve morally.
• The command is simply, “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat”.
• However, they have freedom to choose from every other tree as they see fit.

B) Deuteronomy 14:26 (ESV) — 26 and spend the money for whatever you desire—oxen or sheep or wine or strong drink, whatever your appetite craves. And you shall eat there before the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household.
• Here, within the restrictions God outlined on clean and unclean foods, the Israelites can eat, “whatever you desire”.

C) 1 Corinthians 7:39–40 (ESV) — 39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40 Yet in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I too have the Spirit of God.
• Paul advises Corinth that the widow can remarry, “whom she wishes”.
• He suggests, however, that the wise choice may be to remain unmarried.

So we have some freedom to make decisions.
• 2 Corinthians 3:17 (ESV) — 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
• However, God has placed some restrictions on us.
• As revealed in our graphic, our freedom is contained by God’s Moral and Special Guidance (as previously discussed) and by His Wisdom and Sovereign Guidance.
• Let’s examine God’s Wisdom Guidance.

3) WHERE THERE IS NO COMMAND, GOD GIVES US WISDOM TO CHOOSE

So what is wisdom (in context of decision making)?
• James 3:17 (ESV) — 17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
• It is “knowledge of God’s word and a pious mode of life” – TDNT.
• It is that which “God imparts to those who are close to God” – BDAG.
• It is “good judgment in the face of Christian demands” – BDAG.
• Gary Friesen sums these up by suggesting that wisdom “enables us not only to live life morally, but to live it skillfully”
• Finally, A.W. Tozer puts it very simply when he says wisdom is “sanctified common sense”.

Are we commanded to us Wisdom Guidance in our decision making?
• Ephesians 5:15–16 (ESV) — 15 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.
• Colossians 4:5 (ESV) — 5 Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time.
• Ecclesiastes 2:13 (ESV) — 13 Then I saw that there is more gain in wisdom than in folly…
• Ecclesiastes 10:10 (ESV) — 10 If the iron is blunt, and one does not sharpen the edge, he must use more strength, but wisdom helps one to succeed.
o These verses demonstrate that we are to use wisdom in a variety of contexts.
o So, wisdom is something we are commanded to use and so are morally obligated to use.
o Interestingly, in this sense, it is part of God’s Moral Will (the 2nd circle in our graphic).

How does God give it to us?
• (1) We need to ask for it.
o Colossians 1:9 (ESV) — 9 And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding
o I call this “Seeking Christ’s Living Water”
• (2) Life of the Mind – obviously we must learn, study and grasp the truths of scripture and acquire a “thoughtful Christian worldview” – J.P. Moreland.
o I call this “Knowing Christ’s Living Water”
• (3) Heart/Spirit/Will – we must cultivate our “inner life, developing emotional intimacy with God, engaging in classic spiritual formation practices” such as prayer, worship, service, self-sacrifice, fasting, etc. – Dallas Willard.
o I call this “Drinking Christ’s Living Water”
• (4) Relationship with the Holy Spirit – we must learn “to live in and use the Spirit’s power and the authority of the Kingdom of God, developing a supernatural lifestyle, receiving answers to prayer, learning to effectively pray” thereby growing in our ability to “hear God’s voice through impressions, prophetic words of knowledge and wisdom, dreams and visions” – J.P. Moreland.
o I call this “Sourcing Christ’s Living Water”

BTW – It must be emphasized that intent alone to grow as a believer and increase in wisdom will only lead to failure.
• Because as we try in our own power with only our good intentions, we will wonder why we are making very little progress and will become disillusioned, disconnected and plagued by doubt.
• However, the four points above provide us with the means, in Christ, to flourish in our Christian walk!

Clearly, then, God’s Wisdom Guidance does not come by osmosis.
• Sure, simply being born again provides us with insights far superior to the world.
• But, God’s wisdom is “deep and wide” and we are called to jump in and dive deep.
• And because we are called on to use God’s Wisdom Guidance, we are morally obligated to seek it through the ways just outlined.
• Not to do so is to reject God’s Moral Guidance.

So how do we use God’s Wisdom Guidance when we have “freedom and responsibility to choose”?
• Paul gives us excellent advice on this in 1 Corinthians.
• 1 Corinthians 10:23 (ESV) — 23 “All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up.

Friesen, in his exegesis of this verse, tells us that, “In the area of freedom, the believer’s goal is to make wise decisions on the basis of spiritual usefulness”.
• So in the freedom we have to decide, we are to find the choices that “build up” and that are “helpful” in our Christian lives.

To really get at the meaning of Paul’s words, it will help to define the words Paul uses for “helpful” and “build up”.
• HELPFUL – to be advantageous, help, confer a benefit, be profitable/useful – BDAG.
• BUILD UP – to help improve ability to function in living responsibly and effectively, strengthen, build up, make more able – BDAG.

So if we insert these meanings into Paul’s verse, I think the way we are to use God’s Wisdom Guidance in the freedom we have to decide becomes crystal clear.
• 1 Corinthians 10:23 (ESV) — 23 “All things are lawful,” but not all things are [advantageous, useful or confer a benefit]. “All things are lawful,” but not all things [improve ability to function in living responsibly and effectively or make more able].
• So a decision made using God’s Wisdom Guidance is one that chooses the option that is the most advantageous, useful or confers the highest benefit to our Christian walk.
• And it is the one that improves one’s ability to live responsibly and make one more able to be a Christ-centered Christian.

Biblical Examples of using God’s Wisdom Guidance:
1 Thessalonians 3:1–2 (NIV) — 1 So when we could stand it no longer, we thought it best [choose as better] to be left by ourselves in Athens. 2 We sent Timothy, who is our brother and co-worker in God’s service in spreading the gospel of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith,
Philippians 2:25–26 (NIV) — 25 But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus, my brother, co-worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger, whom you sent to take care of my needs. 26 For he longs for all of you and is distressed because you heard he was ill.
1 Corinthians 16:3–4 (ESV) — 3 And when I arrive, I will send those whom you accredit by letter to carry your gift to Jerusalem. 4 If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me.
2 Samuel 18:1–3 (ESV) — 1 Then David mustered the men who were with him and set over them commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds. 2 And David sent out the army, one third under the command of Joab, one third under the command of Abishai the son of Zeruiah, Joab’s brother, and one third under the command of Ittai the Gittite. And the king said to the men, “I myself will also go out with you.” 3 But the men said, “You shall not go out. For if we flee, they will not care about us. If half of us die, they will not care about us. But you are worth ten thousand of us. Therefore it is better that you send us help from the city.” 4 The king said to them, “Whatever seems best to you I will do.” So the king stood at the side of the gate, while all the army marched out by hundreds and by thousands.

4) WHEN WE HAVE CHOSEN WHAT IS MORAL AND WISE, WE MUST TRUST THE SOVEREIGN GOD TO WORK ALL THE DETAILS TOGETHER FOR GOOD

As we have said, God’s Sovereign Will is:
• Certain—it will be fulfilled
• Detailed—includes all things
• Hidden—except when revealed by prophecy
• Supreme—without violating human responsibility or making God the author of sin
• Perfect—working all things together for God’s glory and our good

It would take an entire month to discuss the Scriptural foundations that outline the nature of God’s Sovereign Will.
• So instead, I want to briefly discuss what its implications are for our decision making when we do have freedom to decide – the center of the graphic discussed earlier.
• Even though it is hidden from us, it still, nevertheless, provides us with Sovereign Guidance.
o Romans 11:33–34 (ESV) — 33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! 34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?”

Examples of God’s Sovereign Guidance:
Philippians 2:12–13 (ESV) — 12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Psalm 37:4 (ESV) — 4 Delight yourself in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart.
Romans 8:28 (ESV) — 28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.
Job 23:10 (ESV) — 10 But he knows the way that I take; when he has tried me, I shall come out as gold.

Implications of God’s Sovereign Guidance:
The 4 principals of decision making are how God provides for us a “framework that enables us to avoid making the wrong choice but provides a range of ‘right’ choices” – Friesen.
• And within this protective framework God “has created room for creativity and development.”
• Yet, because of God’s Sovereign Will and its Guidance, we have no need to angst over every decision we have within the center circle of our graphic.
• And though we are morally obligated to make wise decisions (as outlined).
• We also know that we can’t thwart God’s Sovereign Will with our decision making.
• This means that the pressure of trying to control final outcomes is off of us.
• As a result, the decision making process is no longer about us.
• It is about God’s Sovereignty over the decision we have made in Wisdom, as informed by our trust in Him and the Guidance(s) He has provided.

Proverbs 2:1–6 (ESV) — 1 My son, if you receive my words and treasure up my commandments with you, 2 making your ear attentive to wisdom and inclining your heart to understanding; 3 yes, if you call out for insight and raise your voice for understanding, 4 if you seek it like silver and search for it as for hidden treasures, 5 then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. 6 For the LORD gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.

John 10:34-36 – The Divine Council, Sons of Man, Coregent and Jesus

2011-10-24T19:58:00.004-04:00

Last week we understood Jesus’ quote of Psalm 82:6 through what is called the “human” approach.
• In other words, the “gods” in Psalm 82:6 were human judges.

However, after a lot of reading and research, I feel we also have to look at what I call the “heavenly” approach.
• In other words, the “gods” in Psalm 82:6 aren’t humans but some sort of heavenly beings.
• My main source for this is the work of Michael Heiser – The Divine Council.
• The work of Richard Bauckham and general sources like the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary were also very helpful.

Our Second Look will lead us to answer 3 questions.
• What is the divine council?
• Who are the “gods”?
• How do these change the meaning of John 10?
o And related to this change in meaning, who is the coregent of the divine council?

The main text we will be referencing is Psalm 82:1-7 which gives us the full context of Jesus’ quote in John 10:34-36.

Psalm 82 (ESV) — 1 God [“elohim” – referring to singular God] has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods [“elohim” – referring to plural 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!

Keeping this text always in view, let’s answer our first question.
• What is the divine council?

1) THE DIVINE COUNCIL

To begin with, our text in Psalm 82 demonstrates that the divine council is a place in which God exercises judgment.
• “in the midst of the gods he holds judgment” (vs. 1)

Additionally, we have more examples of the divine council, also known as the “host of heaven”, in 1 Kings, Job and in other verses from the Psalms.
• 1 Kings 22:19–21 (ESV) — 19 And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; 20 and the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, ‘I will entice him.’
• Job 1:6 (ESV) — 6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan [the accuser] also came among them.
• Job 2:1 (ESV) — 1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan [the accuser] also came among them to present himself before the LORD.
• Psalm 89:5–7 (ESV) — 5 Let the heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones! 6 For who in the skies can be compared to the LORD? Who among the heavenly beings is like the LORD, 7 a God greatly to be feared in the council of the holy ones, and awesome above all who are around him?

From these four examples we see the following:
• In the 1 Kings texts, we see God consulting with the council from His throne.
• The prophet Micaiah tells us that, “I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him” (vs. 19).
• Micaiah then reveals to us that God and the council, the “host of heaven”, were discussing how to deal with Ahab.
• In the Job texts, we see the council convening before God with “the accuser”.
• In the first instance God offers up Job to the accuser as a test.
• In the second instance, Job had passed the first test, and “the accuser” requests a second go at Job.
• In the Psalm text, we see the council as a place where its members praise and fear the Lord.

So to summarize what we know of the divine council:
• (1) It is a place in which judgments are made
• (2) It is a place in which the affairs of men are discussed
• (3) It is a place in which interventions in the life of men are orchestrated.
• (4) It is a place in which “the accuser” has access.
• (5) It is a place in which the Lord is feared and praised because none are like him.

The divine council also has a bureaucratic structure.
• “In the divine council…Yahweh was the supreme authority over a divine bureaucracy that included a second tier of lesser ‘elohim’, and a third tier of ‘mal’akim’” – Michael Heiser.
• “Mal’akim” is the Hebrew word for angels.
• But what are the elohim?

This is where we move on to our second question.
• Who are the “elohim” that are members of the divine council?

2) THE “SONS OF GOD”

The word “elohim” is actually the plural form of “eloah”.
• In our main text from Psalm 82, the verse 1 “elohim” is the word for both “God” and “gods”.
• And interestingly, it is this plural form which is used over 2000 times in the OT to refer to God as in God of Israel.
• Yet, as we just saw, “elohim” is also the same word that refers to the members of the heavenly host or divine council.
• The referent, “God of Israel” or “gods”, is determined by context – Heiser.
• Also, the “elohim” members of the divine council are commonly referred to as “beney elohim” which helps clarify the referent as “sons of god” and not the “God of Israel”.

Let’s look at a number of the Scriptural references to these “elohim” or “beney elohim”.
• “in the midst of the gods he holds judgment” – Psalm 82:1
• “I said, ‘You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you’” – Psalm 82:6
• “I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him” – 1 Kings 22:19
• “when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD” – JOB 1:6 AND 2:1
• “and all the sons of God shouted for joy” – Job 38:7
• “‘Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?’” – Exodus 15:11

So before we can get an idea of who these “elohim” are, let’s see what they can’t be.

Are they angels?
• Now as we have already suggested, we know that angels are not in view here because the Hebrew word for angel is “mal’akim” – Heisner.
• Remember, we are dealing with the word “elohim”.

Are they members of the Trinity – Father, Son, Spirit?
• Our text from Psalm 82 rules this out because we see that these “elohim” have some problems.
• (1) they “judge unjustly” and “show partiality to the wicked” (vs. 2).
• (2) they are told they “shall die” (vs. 7).

Are they human judges and rulers?
• Again, our text in Psalm 82 seems to be problematic for this view.
• (1) It makes no sense that God would tell humans, “like men you shall die” (vs. 7).
• (2) There is no scriptural precedent that God oversees a council of humans that “governs the nations of the earth” - Heisner.
• (3) In fact, elsewhere we have in scripture a description of the divine council as existing before humans were created.
o Job 38:4–7 (ESV) — 4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, 7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Are the “elohim” and the divine council just metaphorical?
When we look at the three following verses with a metaphorical view in mind we face some logical inconsistencies.
• Exodus 15:11 (ESV) — 11 “Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?
• Psalm 29:1 (ESV) — 1 Ascribe to the LORD, O heavenly beings, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength.
• Psalm 97:7 (NLT) — 7 Those who worship idols are disgraced— all who brag about their worthless gods— for every god must bow to him.

The inconsistencies:
• (1) “… if Moses is comparing Yahweh to beings that don’t exist, how is Yahweh glorified. To have Moses ‘really’ saying ‘Who is like you, O Yahweh, among the beings that aren’t real’ is to judge God’s greatness by nothing. We’re greater than something that doesn’t exist! So is a microbe”…this is “tantamount to comparing Yahweh with Mickey Mouse, Spiderman, or some fictional literary character” – Michael Heiser.
• (2) And given number one, Psalm 29:1 has the psalmist telling “Spiderman” to worship the Lord.
• (3) And from Psalm 97:7, we even see a distinction made between “idols” and the “elohim” that “must bow to him” - Heisner.

So, in answer to our 2nd question, the “gods” are:
• (1) Spiritual beings created by God. See Psa 148:1-5; Psa 33:6; Neh 9:6 (cp. Psa 29:1)
• (2) Appointed by God to oversee the cosmos.
• (3) Apparently capable of botching this oversight.
• (4) In existence before the creation of the earth.
• (5) And because they were created by God they are inferior to Him.
o It is important to note that “the worship of [them] was forbidden in Hebrew tradition (Deut 4:19; 17:3; cf Jer 8:2, etc.)” – AYBD.

Now we can move on to answering our third question.
• How do the divine council and the sons of god change how we see John 10:34-36?
o And lead us to the OT concept of the coregent?

3) JESUS AS COREGENT

Remember, last week we took the view that Jesus is not arguing his divinity.
• He was refuting the Jews’ poor hermeneutic; they really shouldn’t have had a problem with His use of the word “god” given the “human” view of Psalm 82:6-7.
• Jesus’ hermeneutical rebuke enabled Him merely to appeal to His works – the evidence for His claims – the working of God in the history of Israel.
• But, interestingly, all the commentators we looked at couldn’t, at the end of the day, escape the fact that Jesus’ divinity was presupposed in John 10 (though they never really said why).

But, taking the “heavenly” view of the “sons of god” and the divine council we can say the following (M. Heisner):
• (1) Jesus’ hermeneutically shows that other non-human, “elohim” exist.
• (2) These “elohim” are called “sons of god”.
• (3) Jesus’ is also an “elohim” and thus a member of the divine council.
• (4) However, given Jesus’ words in 10:30, “I and the Father are one”, and in verse 38, “the Father is in me and I am in the Father”, His status as a “son of god” and member of the divine council is categorically different than that of the other “sons of god”.
o In fact, Jesus is Ruler and Creator of the other elohim.
• (5) It is categorically different because He “is connecting himself to the council coregency. In effect, he equates himself as coregent to the lord of the council, Yahweh himself” – M. Heisner.
• (6) Given this view, the blasphemy charge “now makes good sense” as compared to our discussion last week where it seemed a little forced.
o See note below about prophets of Israel.

What is this coregent business?
• We just said that Jesus in essence identified Himself as the coregent of the council.
o He did this by saying He is the “son of god” but is also “one” with God in action and is “in the Father”.
o For the Jew and the OT, the only “elohim” that was part of the divine council yet “in the Father” was the coregent.
o The coregent was often described in the OT as “Wisdom” and “the Word of the Lord” - Heisner.

Coregent As the Word:
Genesis 15:1–6 (ESV) — 1 After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the word of the LORD came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” 5 And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” 6 And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
• Here we have “the word of the Lord” first coming to Abram in a vision.
• Then “the word of the Lord came to him” and actually “brought him outside” and spoke to Abram.
• And then we see that Abram believed in the “word of the Lord” as “the LORD”, YHWH.

Coregent As Wisdom:
Proverbs 8:29–31 (ESV) — 29 when he [YHWH – vs. 22] assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, 30 then I was beside him [I, as in Wisdom was beside YHWH], like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, 31 rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man.
• Here we have the Wisdom of God, the coregent, described as being “beside him”, YHWH.
• This is incredibly significant for understanding Jesus identity in John’s Gospel.
• To see why, we need to look at John 1:18.

In John 1:18, John describes Jesus as having the same relationship with God as Proverbs 8:30 does.
• John 1:18 (ESV) — 18 No one has ever seen God; the only [monogenes (begotten)] God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.
o “beside him” and “at the Father’s side” mean the same thing
• Literally, we are told that Jesus is “in the bosom of the father” – Heisner.
• But more than that, Jesus is the “monogenes” as in the “unique” or “one of a kind” God who is “in the bosom of the father”.
• And remember, John already told us in John 1:1 that Jesus is the Word.
• What this means is that the Gospel of John is clearly expressing the Jewish understanding of the coregent and telling us in John’s words in John 1 and Jesus’ words in John 10 that Jesus is the coregent of the OT; the one who is in the Father!

BTW - We learned in our lesson on John 8:12-20, that Jesus is exalted and sits at the right hand of God – this also identifies Him as coregent (Psalm 110:1) Ruler and Creator.
• It is also worth noting that the New Testament links all of the following “coregent figures with Jesus” – Hesiner.
• “Jesus is the Word (John 1:1; cf. Genesis 15:1-6; Jeremiah 1:1-10), the incarnated Glory (John 1:14; 17:5; 24; cf. Ezekiel 1:26-27; Exodus 24:9-11; 33:7-34:5; Isaiah 6), and Wisdom (1 Corinthians 1:24; cf. Luke 11:49-51 and Matthew 23:34-36). He was given/bears the Name (John 17:6-12; Revelation 19:12-16) and was thought to be the delivering Angel (Jude 5; cf. Exodus 23:20-23; Judges 2:1-5)” – Heisner.
• “Such identifications would mean that Jesus is in the Israelite Godhead” – Heisner.
• The significance of this is that, “Jewish writers committed to monotheism, even upon pain of death, could accept that there was a council of elohim in Psalm 82 and that there was a second power in heaven [the coregent] who ‘was Yahweh but wasn’t Yahweh the Father’” – Heisner.

All of this is something the audience would have understood and found to be highly offensive and blasphemous for Jesus to associate Himself with.
• But there is more!

We saw last week that Jesus sought to bring the attention of the Jews back to His actions.
• “believe the works, that you many know and understand” (John 10:38)
• Given the “heavenly” view we have been discussing, we now see that He was doing this in His role as coregent.
• Therefore, Jesus’ desire to highlight His works as evidence of His identity becomes even more significant than it was under the “human” view.

Why is this?
• Simply because, “In his particular actions for his people, YHWH shows that he is God” – Nathan MacDonald.
• And Jesus has just told us that he participates in the “particular action” of securing our salvation with the Father.
o A philosophical side note – YHWH is not the unique Creator and Ruler because of His actions, “but Israel recognizes this uniqueness only through what he does for Israel” – Bauckham.
• Isaiah 43:12–13 (ESV) — 12 I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and I am God. 13 Also henceforth I am he; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work, and who can turn it back?”
o OT description of YHWH securing the salvation of Israel.
• This meshes perfectly with Jesus’ argument in John 10:30 – He and the Father are one (one in action).
o John 10:28–29 (ESV) — 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.
• Therefore, Jesus’ work or action in Israel’s redemptive history in John 10 demonstrates that He is claiming to be the coregent YHWH of Israel.

Lesson for Us:
I think it becomes plainly obvious that this “heavenly” view presents us with a Jesus who is so much more than the Jesus of the “human” view.
• As a result, our text in John 10:34-36 makes much more sense.
• Without the “heavenly” view we have “Jesus being charged with blasphemy for asserting he had been commissioned by God” – Heisner.
• “Every prophet in Israel could make this claim” and “they were not accused of blasphemy for claiming a commission” – Heisner.
o Remember, last week we had to assume on the mortal view that Jesus must have said something that wasn’t included in the text to illicit the charge of blasphemy.
• This view also gives us a Jesus who was clearly present in the Old Testament – coregent, Wisdom, Word of the Lord, etc.
• This view also gives us a firmly grounded Jewish foundation to accommodate the NT revelation of the Trinity.
o “…the necessary concepts and categories were in place” – Heisner.
• And these last two are a powerful answer to the critic that claims that Jesus as God and the Trinity are all 1st or 2nd century inventions influenced by Greek philosophical thought.
o “The key conceptual elements are certifiably Israelite” – Heisner.

For more reading on these topics, here are two papers on the subject from Dr. Michael Heisner - Jesus Quotation of Psalm 82:6 and You've Seen One Elohim You've Seen Them All - A Critique of Mormonism's Use of Psalm 82.

John 10:30 & 34-36 – Divinity, Hermeneutics and Inerrancy

2011-10-17T20:56:00.001-04:00

Over the last three weeks we have examined four things in John 10.
• The symbolism behind the sheep, shepherd, sheepfold, watchman, thieves, wolves and robbers.
• The implication of Jesus’ words for both the believers (sheep) and unbelievers (thieves, robbers, wolves).
• The implication of Jesus’ works for believers and unbelievers.
• And the tendency of unbelievers (and even believers) to divorce Jesus words from His works.

In today’s lesson, we deal with the texts that we skipped.
• Specifically, we will look at three very important topics that Jesus brings to our attention.
o His divinity
o His hermeneutics
o His view of Inerrancy

1) JESUS’ DIVINITY

John 10:30 (ESV) — 30 I and the Father are one.

The implications of this statement are powerful and wide-ranging.
• I want to deal with just two of them.
• (1) It’s often overlooked meaning in context
• (2) It’s relationship to the Jewish Shema

Meaning in Context:
This is a fascinating study that revolves around the meaning of the Greek word for “one”.
• There are two words used in Greek for “one” – “heis” and “hen”.
• Their meanings are as follows:
o “heis” – “a single thing” – DBL; “single person or thing” – BDAG.
o “hen” – “under the control of, under the influence of, in close association with” – BDAG.
• In other words, “hen” is “one in action, not in person” – Beasley-Murray.
• Interestingly, the word in our text today for “one” is “hen”.

What does this mean for our text?
• So, in line with Jesus’ apologetic for His ministry in John 5, Jesus is telling us here that He and the Father are “one in action” – Beasley-Murray.
• D.A. Carson says simply, “Jesus and His Father are perfectly one in action…what Jesus does the Father does”.
• And Jesus Himself says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise” (John 5:19).

In the context of John 10, what is the action that Jesus and the Father are one in?
• The action is the preservation of our salvation.
• Jesus says of Himself in vs. 28, “no one will snatch them out of my hand”.
• And He says of His Father in vs. 29, “no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand”.
• In other words, Jesus and the Father are unified in eternity in their securing our eternity.

But does this verse speak to the Deity of Christ as we so often us it to do?
• D.A. Carson says it, “does not affirm complete identity”.
• Kostenberger says it is, “not an affirmation of complete identity”.
• Beasley-Murray says its purpose is to show the “functional unity of the Son and the Father”.

However, all of these men also concede that given the greater context of the entirety of John’s Gospel, “some kind of metaphysical [identity] unity is presupposed” – D.A. Carson.
• Or, as Kostenberger puts it, “an ontological [nature of being] unity between Jesus and the Father seems presupposed”.

And so with respect to the presuppositions of deity behind this verse, Kostenberger and Richard Bauckham point out that what they see is a clear allusion to the Jewish Shema.
• Let’s briefly explore this connection.
• And this connection may be why the Jew’s sought to stone Him for blasphemy.

The Shema:
What is the Shema?
• Deuteronomy 6:4 (ESV) — 4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

What is Jesus purpose in alluding to the Shema in verse 30 (Bauckman’s take)?
• Bauckham seems to be saying that Jesus chose His words carefully in light of the Shema.
• He calls Jesus choice of words here a “necessary adaptation of language”.
• As we have seen, the “one” in verse 30 allows for a distinction to be made between the person of the Father and the person of Jesus.
o They are not one person.
• Theirs is a unity that “does not erase their difference”.
• This distinction allows for Jesus and the Father to be separate persons, but one in identity as God.
• Bauckham says this is how Jesus includes Himself in the Jewish Shema.
• God is one God, one in identity as Ruler and Creator of the universe.
• But God is different persons – the Father and the Son in our text.
• “Jesus’ claim to oneness with the Father amounts to including Himself with His Father in the unique identity of the one God as understood in Jewish monotheism” – Bauckham.
• And this means that a Jew can affirm Jesus as God without compromising the Shema!

2) JESUS’ HERMENEUTICS

John 10:34–36 (ESV) — 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— 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’?

Before we go any further, it seems that at some point in this discourse with the Jews, Jesus made reference to Himself as the “Son of God”.
• This, along with His allusion to the Shema, would explain why the Jews sought to stone Him in verse 31.
• And it would explain why Jesus says here that this is the reason they had previously accused Him of blasphemy.

Moving on, let’s see how Jesus rebukes them with a proper hermeneutic.

Jesus Refutes – Hermeneutics 101:
The Jews told Jesus, as we discussed last week, that they sought to stone Him not because of His works but because of his words – “you, being a man, make yourself God” (vs. 33).
• So obviously they took offense that Jesus used the word “God” to refer to Himself – “I am the Son of God”.
• Jesus responds to their accusation with a little Bible interpretation lesson.

To get at what Jesus is saying, we need a little semantic range background on the word for “god”.
• The Hebrew word “elohim” or Greek “theos” has numerous meanings.
• For example, it can mean “God”; “idol”; “mighty one”; “judge”; “great”; “ruler”; “heavenly being”; etc.
• In other words, it does not always mean “the God” and is used to refer to people who are “judges” or “rulers”.
• BTW – It is for this reason that we know Jesus is not using this line of reasoning as an argument for His deity.
o If He were, His “argumentation would be without merit” – D.A. Carson.
o “I’m God because men who weren’t God were called God” – makes no sense.

It must be pointed out here that there is a completely different way to understand Jesus' quote from Psalm 82 and it is a view that does advocate that Jesus is arguing for His divinity.
• The key to this approach is how one understands "elohim".
• I will cover this approach next week.

Knowing this about how “god” is used in the OT, Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6-7.
• Psalm 82:6–7 (ESV) — 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.”
• He then asks the Jews, “If he called them god”, why do you call me a blasphemer “because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?”
• His logic is pretty simple (D.A Carson).
o (1) “Scripture proves that the word ‘god’ is legitimately used to refer to others than God himself.”
o (2) “If there are others whom God (the author of Scripture) can address as ‘god’ and ‘sons of the Most High’ (i.e. sons of God).”
o (3) “On what biblical basis should anyone object when Jesus says, I am God’s Son?”
• And, given the works He has done through the Father, “how much more can he whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world be so termed?” – Beasley-Murray.
• “If the word ‘gods’ can be used of mere men because of their function—if judges can be called gods—then how much more should I be called God in the full sense since I have received a unique commissioning and exercise unique power?” – James Boice.

So what is the point:
• Remember, they never contested His works.
• Their beef was with His words.
• And, here Jesus shows them that given the use of the word “god” in Scripture, they really shouldn’t have a problem with His words either.
• But, so as not to discount the Jews understanding of Jesus’ claim, D.A. Carson points out:
o (1) They are “partly right (he does make himself equal with God)”
o (2) They are “partly wrong (this fact does not establish a competing God)” - blasphemy
o (3) They are “profoundly mistaken (they have not grasped the drift of their own Scriptures)”
• In other words, their misuse of Scripture with the word “god” is only the beginning of their errant relationship with God’s word – in its written and incarnate forms.
• Finally, Jesus’ hermeneutical rebuke enables Him, once again, to appeal to His works – the evidence for His claims.
o This gives Him some “breathing space” between Him and the violent mob (D.A. Carson).

Speaking of God’s word and error – Jesus has something to say about that too in John 10.

3) JESUS’ VIEW ON INERRANCY

John 10:35 (ESV) — 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

We see in verse 35 that Jesus’ argument about the usage of the word “god” hinged on His declaration that “Scripture cannot be broken”.
• So what exactly is Jesus saying about Scripture with this comment?

The Greek word for “broken” in our text is “lyo”.
• When Jesus says that Scripture cannot be “lyo”, He is saying that it cannot be annulled, abolished, invalidated, destroyed or dissolved – BDAG.
• Or, put another way, He is saying that Scripture cannot be “proved false” – D.A. Carson.

Two other uses in Scripture can help us see this meaning.
1) Matthew 5:17 (ESV) — 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them”.
• Jesus didn’t come to destroy, dissolve, falsify or annul Scripture under His new covenant of grace.
• If He did, this would indicate that the Law (God’s word) was now invalid.
• This is why Jesus stressed He came to “fulfill them”.
• The importance of this is that Jesus came to fulfill what was true.
• For if He fulfilled what was false, He did nothing.
• So in relation to our text today, “Scripture cannot be broken”, in part, because Jesus is its fulfillment.

2) 1 John 3:8 (ESV) — 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.
• This verse contrasts beautifully the difference between fulfilling what is true and cannot be broken (God’s Law) vs. destroying (“lyo”) what is a lie and deceit (Devil’s work).
• This implies, then, that from God’s perspective there is a quality about that which “cannot be broken” and that which Jesus came to “destroy”.
• So in relation to our text today, that quality has to do with origins.
• “Scripture cannot be broken” because it has its origin in God; it is His Law.
• Those things which are “of the devil” such as sin and the “works of the devil”, on the other hand, will be destroyed (“lyo”) because they have their origins in a rebellion from God and His Law.

So, if we remember nothing else from today’s lesson, we must remember that Jesus viewed Scripture as inerrant.
• He did so because its origin was God and He was its fulfillment.
• And so the claim of many liberal scholars that the Doctrine of Inerrancy is a modern invention is complete nonsense.
o For more on this, visit this link.
• BTW - for a thorough treatment on the meaning of inerrancy, see the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.

Lessons for Us:
• Jesus is one in action with the Father.
• Jesus can be worshipped as God in the context of the Shema – 3 persons but 1 identity.
• Hermeneutics matters – we have to be careful.
o Mishandling verse 30 is an example.
• Jesus considered God’s word incapable of being destroyed, invalidated, annulled or proved false.
o We call this Biblical Inerrancy.

John 10:31-39 – Words & Works – Part II

2011-10-10T20:01:00.001-04:00

Review using Last Week’s Intro:
• For two and a half years, Jesus had sought to convey to the Jews His identity and the reason for His incarnation.
• He had done so through at least two ways.
o His works – signs and wonders
o His words – teaching
• Both His works and His words pointed to His ministry as being sanctioned and authorized by God the Father and to His identity as the Son of God.

As with last week, we are confronted with some powerful implications for the believer and unbeliever with respect to Jesus’ works and His words.
• Last week we dealt with Jesus’ WORDS, so today we will deal with the implication of His WORKS to the believer/unbeliever.

John 10:31–33 and 37-39 (ESV) — 31 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.” – AND – 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.

1) JESUS’ WORKS – ROUND 1

John 10:31–33 (ESV) — 31 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.”

We saw last week that the Jews asked Jesus to speak plainly about His identity.
• His response was “I told you” and it didn’t matter because still “you do not believe” (John 10:25).
• He then went on to explain why they didn’t believe in spite of both His words and His works.

In today’s text, we witness the action that results from the Jews’ unbelief.
• (1) They write Jesus off as a blasphemer.
• (2) They try to stone Him after He spoke plainly again and declared that He “and the Father are one” (vs. 30).
o We will deal with the significance of this verse 30 next week.

Jesus’ response to the Jews’ attempt to stone Him is interesting.
• And it is here where we dig into the relationship of Jesus’ works to the unbeliever.
• His response turns the Jew’s question about His words into one about His works.
• Jesus says in verse 32, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?”

Works and the Unbeliever:
The Jews make a remarkable statement – “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you” (vs. 32).
• Jesus’ plain words weren’t enough to convince and today we see His works weren’t enough for them either.
• This is another beautiful example of the irony that is so prevalent in John’s Gospel.
• Clearly, because of His works they should have fallen at His feet in worship.
• But here they not only blow them off, but they seek to divorce them entirely from Jesus’ words.
o “Your good works are fine, but Your words are blasphemous”

What are the Jews missing concerning Jesus’ works that they would so easily dismiss them from the equation?
• They are missing the purpose of His works!
• Luke 7:20–23 (ESV) — 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?’ ” 21 In that hour he healed many people of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many who were blind he bestowed sight. 22 And he answered them, “Go and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them. 23 And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.”
• Jesus quotes Isaiah to John’s disciples that they may know the purpose of His works.
• Jesus’ works declare that He is “the one who is to come”.

John’s Gospel also made abundantly clear the purpose of Jesus’ works.
• John 20:30–31 (ESV) — 30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

John’s Gospel also makes clear that this purpose finds fulfillment.
• John 1:48–49 (ESV) — 48 Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
• John 2:11 (ESV) — 11 This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory. And his disciples believed in him.
• John 3:2 (ESV) — 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “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.”
• John 7:31 (ESV) — 31 Yet many of the people believed in him. They said, “When the Christ appears, will he do more signs than this man has done?”

But the unbeliever, those not part of the flock, not drawn, taught and given by the Father responds differently.
• They do not see the purpose in Jesus’ works.
• John 12:37 (ESV) — 37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him,
• John 6:30 (ESV) — 30 So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform?
o Here they even belittle Jesus’ works as insufficient.

So, in spite of the fact that Jesus’ works so powerfully attest to His identity and His relationship with the Father as prophesied:
• The unbelieving Jews are completely unable to see and acknowledge this fact.
• In our text today, they dismiss the significance of His works.
• In fact, they appear to only be concerned with the content of His words.
• And it’s no wonder, because Jesus’ words divorced from His works make little sense.
o By one’s fruit you will know him.
• His works are an essential part of the divine, supernatural context of His ministry.
• So without that context, to claim He is one with the Father is a little crazy.
• No wonder they accuse Him of blaspheme.

So really there are at least three ironies in our text today.
• (1) The Jews are so oblivious to His works and what they point to.
• (2) That they refuse to see His words in context of His works.
• (3) Which leads to an accusation based on His words that Jesus reveals to be hermeneutically groundless.
o We will see how He did this next week in verse 34-36.

Now let’s look at Jesus’ response to the Jews ironic errors.

2) JESUS’ WORKS – ROUND 2

John 10:37–39 (ESV) — 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.

Jesus follows up his hermeneutics lesson (next week) by restoring what the Jews had sought to divide.
• He reunites His words with His works.
• He argues that His words should be heard and understood in the context of His works.
• The Father’s Jesus is a Jesus whose ministry and authenticity is united in His words AND His works.
• From Jesus’ perspective, both His Words given to Him by the Father and His Works authorized to be performed by the Father are a clear and unambiguous witness to His identity.
• And His words and works are as inseparable from each other as He is from the Father.
o They demonstrate why He is one with the Father.

Jesus demonstrates the necessity of uniting His words and works in two ways.
• (1) He argues that His words are believable because His works are from the Father.
• (2) So united are they that He then stakes their belief in Him on this claim and gives them permission to not believe His words if His works aren’t from the Father.
o He is not asking them to believe blindly.
o The reasons to believe in Him are plentiful.
o And, remember, the works are a fulfillment of prophecy.

Jesus does this very same thing in a passage from Matthew.
• He links His words to His works and unites them in His authority as the Son of Man, the Father’s Jesus.
• Matthew 9:2–8 (ESV) — 2 And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming.” 4 But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? 5 For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk’? 6 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he then said to the paralytic—“Rise, pick up your bed and go home.” 7 And he rose and went home. 8 When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men.

And finally, in response to the Jews error, Jesus demonstrates a deep love for the unbelievers with one last plea.
• He knows these Jews were not hearing and following Him.
o John 10:27 (ESV) — 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
• So He makes one final plea for them to believe – a plea of love, grace and mercy.
• Even though His words and works validate each other and therefore Him.
• He implores them to, in spite their reaction to His words; believe in His relationship with the Father because of His works.
o This is the spurious faith we talked about some time ago.
• This gesture, I believe, fits beautifully with Jesus’ words from another passage in Matthew and expresses Jesus’ desire that all would be saved.
• Matthew 23:37 (ESV) — 37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!

But His finally plea fell on rocky ground.
• Their response was merely to have Him arrested.
• And the reason for their rejection?
o See last week’s lesson.

Lessons for Us:
I can’t help but wonder how often people today do what the unbelieving Jews did and what Jesus is trying to correct here.
• That is to say, divorce Jesus works from His words.

Before I give two specific examples of this divorce, I need to point out a generalized occurrence of it within our conservative evangelical circles.
• We have a habit of esteeming highly the word of God, as we should, but at the expense of the subjective work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.
• Scripture clearly teaches that the believer is energized by the Spirit to do works that glorify God and benefit the church and its flock.
• We CE’s, however, wrongly shy away from pursuing and teaching about these gifts.

Example 1 of this Divorce in Action by the Atheist:
Speaking of the Sermon on the Mount atheist Geoff Crocker argues (Unbelievable 17 Sep 2011, 32:39) that what Jesus speaks to it is not “based upon on anything absolute” but “based upon a statement of the intrinsic attraction of the virtues of justice, of the virtues of mercy, of the virtues of love themselves”.
• In other words, the Sermon on the Mount does not find its real meaning in the fact that it was spoken by someone who performed supernatural works, claimed to be fulfillment of OT prophecy, and operated His ministry at the direction and authority of God the Father.
• Its real meaning is simply in Jesus’ eloquent delivery of virtues that are celebrated by all reasonable people on the planet.

This is absolute nonsense and can only be said if Jesus’ words are dismissed and divorced from the supernatural (works).
• “theirs is the kingdom of heaven” – What is heaven? a work of God
• “they shall see God” – How do we see God? A work of God
• “they shall be called sons of God” – How are we made sons of God? A work of God
• “I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” – What is the fulfillment of the law? A work of God
• “be liable to the hell of fire” – What is hell? A rejection of the work of God
• And these examples are only from the first 17 verses.

Example 2 of this Divorce in Action by the Christian (Unbelievable 4/16/11 & 8/27/11):
Bart Ehrman and Mike Licona have encountered each other a number of times to debate the resurrection.
• With respect to the resurrection, Bart Ehrman argues that miracles are “outside of the realm of what history can show”.
• In other words, an appeal to the supernatural is outside of the discipline of history; it is not in the “historian’s toolbox”.
o This is classic David Hume enlightenment stuff
o But Hume, by the way, was honest about the grounding problems for reason that arise from this, Ehrman is not.
• So whatever Jesus said or did, history cannot confirm any of it was supernatural.
• So you can believe Jesus was raised by God from the dead, but this is not historical.
• This means, of course, that it is myth.

Mike Licona, for sake of argument, concedes this point to Ehrman and as a result is left with the following statement:
• “Let’s put it this way. If the historical evidence is good enough to show that Jesus rose from the dead, we’ll just not call it a miracle. We’ll just say, ‘well we don’t know how He was raised. We don’t know the nature of the body He was in’”… “You want to leave the cause of the resurrection a question mark? I’m fine with that.”

The result is that the resurrection becomes the “inference to the best explanation” that accounts for the events surrounding the resurrection, not a supernatural act of God.
• It is divorced from its entire prophetic and eschatological context.
• Now, we know Mike Licona is a conservative evangelical Christian who writes and debates powerfully for the historicity of a supernatural resurrection.
• But one has to ask, what is gained by doing what the unbelieving Jews did?
• What is gained by divorcing Jesus from His works?
• If the resurrection was not a supernaturally caused work of God, what good is it?
o   Resurrection as just an “inference to the best explanation” can’t help Bart Ehrman.
o   In fact, Ehrman could call Licona’s bluff, concede the resurrection and then say “now what?”
o   This is because Ehrman doesn’t even have to jettison his naturalist worldview to do this.
o   This is why, for me, the resurrection is powerless divorced from its supernatural context.

Jesus doesn’t seem to appeal to the unbeliever in this way in our text.
• His appeal to them IS the supernatural – His works.
• He urges them to believe because His works clearly indicate that He is one with the Father and operates under the authority of the Father.

From Jesus’ perspective, as we have seen the past two weeks, it is the Father that draws and gives the unbeliever and it is the Father who authorizes and ordains Jesus’ works.
• The common denominator is a WORK of the Father.
• The Father saves (a supernatural act) and the Father authorizes Jesus works (a supernatural act).
• So in appealing to His works, Jesus is appealing to the Father!
• It is an appeal to the Father to
o (1) Draw the unbeliever via Jesus works (a supernatural act)
o (2) Perform a supernatural act in the life of the unbeliever.
• There really is nothing more right to appeal to.
• Jesus truly is seeking to “tell us plainly” this fact.

So though the unbeliever has no choice but to reject the works of God…the believer has no excuse to do so.
• We should preach, teach, and argue for BOTH just as Jesus did.
• Do not shy away from the supernatural, the very thing that saved you.

John 10:22-29 – Works and Works – Part I

2011-10-03T18:35:00.000-04:00

For two and a half years, Jesus had sought to convey to the Jews His identity and the reason for His incarnation.
• He had done so through at least two ways.
o His works
o His words – teaching
• Both His works and His words pointed to His ministry as being sanctioned and authorized by God the Father and to His identity as the Son of God.

In our text today, we are confronted with some powerful implications for the believer and unbeliever with respect to Jesus’ works and His words.
• Over the next two weeks, we will seek to understand what the implications are.
• And I think we will see that these 22 verses are some of the most powerful in all of Scripture.
• James Boice suggests that in these verses we get, “the most highly condensed statements of the doctrines of grace in the entire Gospel”.

In Part I, we will deal with the relationship of Jesus’ WORDS to the believer/unbeliever.

1) JESUS WORDS

John 10:22–29 (ESV) — 22 At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23 and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon. 24 So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.”

A note about the context of this discussion:
• This encounter with the Jews took place in December.
• We are less than 6 months from Jesus’ crucifixion.
• The Feast of Dedication “celebrated the rededication of the temple in December 164 B.C. after its desecration by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus Epiphanes and the successful Maccabean revolt” – Kostenberger.

Today we will deal with verses 22-29.
• Next week we will contend with verses 30-42.
• I want to pay special attention to Jesus words in verses 25 and 27.

1) “I told you, and you do not believe” (vs. 25):
The Jews gather around Jesus at the temple mount and request, “If you are the Christ, tell us plainly”.
• And Jesus tells them plainly, “I told you, and you do not believe”.
• In other words, He has taught them with words and they have rejected His teaching.
• He doesn’t stop there, however.
• He goes on to explain, interestingly, not why they should now believe, but why they don’t believe!
• This is exactly what Jesus did in John 6.

John is clearly seeking to convey something to us about Jesus’ reason for highlighting the reason for unbelief.
• No doubt, the question was asked then and is asked now, if Jesus was/is the Messiah the Christ and God incarnate, why did so many Jews reject Him?

Logically, it seems we are left with 2 choices.
• (1) Jesus’ words in John 6 and John 10 were a later addition to the text which were fabricated in order to explain why so many Jews rejected Jesus.
• (2) Or, Jesus is speaking the truth. He is teaching us about the sovereignty and work of God in the context of belief/unbelief because He sees it as what fundamentally makes the difference between the two.

As just mentioned, Jesus had previously contrasted the believer, the one who trusts in the Father’s Jesus, with the unbeliever, the one who rejects the Father’s Jesus, in John 6.
• And in our text he also does this.
• These instances are worth digging into so that we might understand what Jesus is saying about the sovereignty of God the Father and unbelief.

John 6 – A Similar Example:
Our similar example is the interaction with the crowd at Capernaum in John 6.
• Jesus had fed the 5000 and then crossed the Sea of Galilee to Capernaum.
• Much of the crowd followed Him.
• He told them, “you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of loaves” (John 6:26).
• He went on to teach them that the bread that matters is the bread of life that only He gives.
• They ask Him what they must do for this bread.
• He said the real work of God is to “believe in him whom he has sent” (vs. 29).
• They “do not believe” (vs. 36) in Him and continue to challenge Him throughout the encounter.
• His response to their unbelief – “But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe” (vs. 36).
• His explanation for their unbelief – “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (vs. 37).
• And again – “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44).
• And again – “Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me” (John 6:45).
o This is clearly a “hearing” quite different from just an audible hearing
o And, the origins of this hearing are with the Father and not Jesus

And in our text today, Jesus also explains the unbelief of the Jews in relation to a work of God the Father.
• This brings us to the 2nd verse I want to focus on – vs. 27.

2) “Hear My Voice” (vs. 27):
John 6:26-27 (ESV) — 26 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
• And in vs. 29, Jesus elaborates, echoing His words in John 6, when He says that those that hear His voice were given to Him by His Father, “who has given then to me”.
o This “giving” presumably occurs after they have “heard and learned from the Father” (John 6:45).
• It is striking that the Wisdom literature of Proverbs tells us:
o Proverbs 20:12 (ESV) — 12 The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the LORD has made them both.
o Our ability to hear audibly is attributed to God, and (in Jesus’ words) our ability to hear spiritually is attributed to God.

And so Jesus’ teaching in John 10 is the same as John 6 we just reviewed.
• Those that believe are those that are the beneficiaries of a work of God which frees them from the limitations of their moral deficiency, depravity and inability to “hear” Jesus Christ.
• The unbelievers then, in Jesus’ own words, are those that have not heard, learned, been drawn or given by the Father.

What this means:
The implication of this is that we can’t just “hear” Jesus’ words or “see” Jesus’ signs AND THEN, in our own capacity, realize our need for Him and thus desire to trust in Him as Savior.
• We simply do not have the moral ability to do so.
• There simply does not exist a neutral ground from which mankind can decide yea or nay based on a rational consideration of the work and words of Jesus Christ.
• Jesus, in John’s Gospel, is making this perfectly clear.
• A work of God is first necessary – a drawing, hearing, learning and giving.
• This is why is teaching us that the difference between the believer and unbeliever is to be found in this work of the Father.
o Jesus is submitting to the will of, and giving glory to God the Father!

Our moral inability:
Jesus Himself acknowledged our moral inability to do this in John 2:24.
• John 2:24–25 (ESV) — 24 But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people 25 and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man.
• Jesus did not “believe in” or “entrust” Himself to mankind because what was in them.

What is in man?
• Not one of us does good (Ps. 14:3).
• We have wicked and deceitful hearts (Jer. 17:9).
• We are dead in trespasses and sin (Eph. 2:1-2).
• We are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3).
• We love darkness and hate the light (John 3:19-20).
• Our hearts are hard like stone (Ezek. 36:26; Eph. 4:18).
• We are unable to submit to God and are hostile towards God (Rom 8:7-8).
• We are unable to accept the gospel (Eph. 4:18; 1 Cor. 2:14).
• We are unable to come to Christ or embrace him as Lord (John 6:44, 65; 1 Cor. 12:3).
• We are slaves to sin (Rom. 6:17).
• We are slaves of Satan (Eph. 2:1-2; 2 Tim. 2:24-26).
• No good thing dwells in us (Rom. 7:18).

If we look at it logically, it makes perfect sense that we can’t hear His words or see His signs AND THEN realize our need for Him and thus desire to trust in Him as Savior in our own ability (especially given our depravity).
• The existence of a need and having the desire to satisfy that need are not grounded in, or do not originate from, the thing that satisfies that need.

Let’s look at a simple example.

Why do we need water and why do we desire to satisfy that need by drinking it?
• Is it because water exists?
• No, to say so would mean that to remove the existence of water would be to remove our need for water and desire for it.

Is it because we can rationally understand the physical and chemical properties of water and how it interacts with our body?
• No, to say so would mean that an infant or mentally handicapped person, who can do no such thing, has no need for water.

So why do we need water and why do we desire to satisfy our thirst?
• We need water because we have been made to need water.
• This need is part of what we are, not what water is.
• So because we have been made for water, we desire to seek out water and drink it.
• If we don’t we die.

The same holds for our need of Jesus and a desire to trust in Him as Savior.

Why do we need Jesus and desire to seek Him out?
• Is it because Jesus walked in the flesh and performed signs and taught?
• No, to say so would mean that those in the OT or those that don’t’ encounter Christ have no need for Him.

Is it because we can rationally understand the life of Christ and how brilliant His teachings are?
• No, to say that would mean that Satan and his demons understand their need for Jesus and desire to satisfy that need through a relationship with Him.
• To say that would also mean that the infant or the mentally handicap person who cannot do these things has no need for Jesus.

So why do we seek after Jesus to meet a need we have for Him?
• We seek after Jesus and recognize our need for Him because we have been “born again” (John 3 & Ezekiel 36:26).
• We have been “remade” by a work of God to do so.
• God has taken our fallen, depraved, corrupt will that does not seek after God, and remade it to recognize our need for Jesus and pursue satisfaction of that need in Him.
• So, our need for Christ and our desire to trust in Him is grounded in, and originates in the work of God in our heart.
• If we don’t see this need and trust Jesus, we die.

So whatever else can be said, Jesus’ has told us “plainly” that the sovereignty of God explains the difference between believers and unbelievers.
• So what are we to do at this intersection of human responsibility and God’s sovereignty?
• John MacArthur frames it this way, “From the perspective of human responsibility, the hostile Jews did not believe because they had deliberately rejected the truth. But from the standpoint of divine sovereignty, they did not believe because they were not of the Lord’s sheep, which were given Him by the Father. A full understanding of exactly how those two realities, human responsibility and divine sovereignty, work together lies beyond human comprehension; but there is no difficulty with them in the infinite mind of God”.

Why an understanding of the Father’s necessary work on our hearts should be a comfort and not a concern:
It means that our salvation is secure.
• Jesus tells us that, “no one will snatch them out of my hand” (vs. 28)
• The word for “snatch”, “harpazo”, means “to forcefully grab or seize so as to gain control”.
• Contrasted with the wolf from John 10:12 who “snatches” because the “hired hand” “leaves the sheep”, Jesus is saying that, as our shepherd, not only will He not flee, but none can seize or gain control of our eternal life from His hand.
• In fact, in vs. 29 He points out that our eternal life is not just in His hand but also in the Father’s hand.
• So as we look to the sovereign work of God to bring us to salvation in Christ, we also see a sovereign work of God secure it for all eternity.
o Isaiah 43:13 (ESV) — 13 Also henceforth I am he; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work, and who can turn it back?”
o Wisdom of Solomon 3:1 (NRSV) — 1 But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment will ever touch them.

Lesson for Us:
So what are we to do with God’s sovereignty?
• Praise Him and rest secure in the
o (1) “realness” of our trust in Christ because it is grounded in a work of God.
o (2) “security” of the eternity of our salvation because it is grounded in a work of God.
• This is why God’s sovereignty should be an awesome source of daily comfort for the believer.
• This should free us to be bold and confident in our walk.

John 10:1-21 – The Door and Shepherd

2011-09-26T17:32:00.001-04:00

In our text today, Jesus describes salvation and the kingdom of heaven on earth in terms of a relationship between sheep and their shepherd.
• In the course of this teaching, He unveils two more “I am” statements.
• We will explore the meaning behind the metaphor, the “I am” statements, and the relationship of all its characters – the sheep, the shepherd, the thieves/robbers, and the hired hand.

1) THE METAPHOR

John 10:1–6 (ESV) — 1 “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.” 6 This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

We need to define some terms so we can get a handle on this sheepfold metaphor.

What is a sheepfold?
• It is “an area open to the sky, freq. surrounded by buildings, and in some cases partially by walls; enclosed open space; courtyard” – BDAG.
• In other words, we aren’t out in the countryside.
• D. A. Carson says “it is better to think of a larger, independent enclosure, where several families kept their sheep, hiring an undershepherd to guard the gate.”
• See picture example for an idea.
• And in Jesus’ metaphor, it represents Israel.

It was customary in Jesus’ time to hire a watchman, the gatekeeper from vs. 3, to keep watch over the sheep.
• Typically, there was only one way for the sheep themselves to enter or leave – the gate or door.
o Sheep couldn’t climb the walls or jump over them.
• This gate/door was guarded by the watchman.
• However, there were other ways for the “thief” and “robber” to enter or leave.

The Wrong Way In:
• Jesus tells us that he that enters the sheepfold by any means other than the gate/door “is a thief and a robber” (vs. 1).
• This person’s motives are to evade the watchman and steal or devour the sheep.

The Right Way In:
• Jesus then tells us that the one who enters correctly through the gate/door is “the shepherd of the sheep” (vs. 2).
• He has no need to evade the watchman.
• The watchman obviously knows the shepherd because he is the one who hired him in the first place.
• Therefore, the watchman does not hesitate to open the door for the shepherd.
o “The verb ἀνοίγω (anoigō, open) is used repeatedly in the context for Jesus’ opening of the congenitally blind man’s eyes (9:10, 14, 17, 21, 26, 30, 32; 10:21; 11:37)” – Kostenberger.
o Given the context, this may be significant.

The Voice:
Jesus also points out a unique relationship the shepherd has with His sheep (vss. 2-5).
• They know him by the sound of his voice.
• And even more than that, they will follow only his voice.
• If there are other villager’s sheep in the sheepfold, they will not follow.
• In fact, Jesus tells us that at the sound of a stranger’s voice the shepherd’s sheep will flee to the other side of the sheepfold.
• And remarkably, Jesus tells us that He will call His sheep by name.
o Revelation 13:8 (ESV) — 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.

John tells us that the Jews listening didn’t understand what Jesus was saying.
• Most believe Jesus is still talking to the same group of Jews here as He was in John 9.
• If so, what John is telling us is that those that Jesus called spiritually blind also lack the ability to understand spiritual things.
o Does this inability in the unbeliever make it difficult to evangelize?
• In verse 7, John tells us Jesus sheds a little more insight into His intended meaning.

2) THE MEANING OF THE METAPHOR

John 10:7–18 (ESV) — 7 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. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. 11 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. 14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”

We will deal with the thieves, robbers and hired hand before we get into Jesus and the sheep.

Thieves and Robbers (vss. 8 and 10):
Jesus tells us that the thieves and robbers come before Him.
• This may refer to at least three things (Kostenberger).
o (1) The corrupt leadership throughout the history of Israel.
o “The OT prophet Ezekiel refers to the ‘shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves’ and ‘do not take care of the flock’ (Ezek. 34:2–4 [see the entire chapter])” – Kostenberger.
o (2) The Messiah pretenders similar, for example, to those in Acts 5:36-37.
o (3) And false prophets cited by throughout Jewish writings (Scripture and Josephus).

Given the context of John 10 and its relationship to John 9, the thieves and robbers clearly represent the very Pharisees and Jewish leaders hearing Jesus speak.
• The Pharisees, of course, were self-righteous and corrupt.
• In keeping with the sheepfold metaphor, MacArthur tells us that they sought “to spiritually fleece and slaughter the people”.
• Their dealings with the healed blind man, casting him out, show us why.
• They not only rejected Jesus, but also those that believed in Him.
• Under their leadership, Israel, the sheepfold, has suffered.
o Jeremiah 50:6 (ESV) — 6 “My people have been lost sheep. Their shepherds have led them astray, turning them away on the mountains. From mountain to hill they have gone. They have forgotten their fold.

Hired Hand (vss. 12-13):
Whoever they might be, they do not have an abiding interest in the welfare of the sheep.
• When serious danger comes, a wolf/theif/robber, they abandon the sheep.
• The sheep are then left to be ravaged by the wolves.
• Kostenberger suggests that the hired hand represents leaders throughout the history of Israel “who fail to perform their God-given responsibilities”.

Let’s now look at the symbolism for Jesus which is ripe with OT allusions.

The Door and the Good Shepherd:
Jesus tells them twice that He is the door.
• “I am the door of the sheep” (vs. 7)
• “I am the door” (vs. 9)
• Jesus is clearly alluding to Psalm 118:20.
o “This is the gate of the LORD; the righteous shall enter through it.”
• BTW – Interestingly, as is attested in Greek literature since Homer, people in ancient times frequently thought of entering heaven by a gate.
o Jesus’ claim to be “the gate” would have resonated with this kind of thinking (cf. 1:51) – Kostenberger.

Jesus also tells them twice that He is the good shepherd.
• “I am the good shepherd” (vs. 11)
• “I am the good shepherd” (vs. 14)
• As with the door imagery, Jesus here is also alluding to the OT.
o Genesis 48:15 (ESV) — 15 And he blessed Joseph and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day,
o Jeremiah 31:10 (ESV) — 10 “Hear the word of the LORD, O nations, and declare it in the coastlands far away; say, ‘He who scattered Israel will gather him, and will keep him as a shepherd keeps his flock.’
• And Kostenberger tells us that when Jesus’ uses “shepherd”, He is purposely placing Himself within “traditional Jewish messianic expectations”.

Now let’s take a look at the relationship Jesus describes that He (as the door and the shepherd) has with the flock and the Father.

The Door/Shepherd’s Relationship to the Sheep
(1) If they enter the sheepfold the right way, through Jesus, they will “be saved and will go in and out and find pasture” (vs. 9).
• This is covenant language and also alludes directly to such language in the Old Testament.
o Deuteronomy 28:6 (ESV) — 6 Blessed shall you be when you come in, and blessed shall you be when you go out.
o Isaiah 49:9–10 (ESV) — 9 saying to the prisoners, ‘Come out,’ to those who are in darkness, ‘Appear.’ They shall feed along the ways; on all bare heights shall be their pasture; 10 they shall not hunger or thirst, neither scorching wind nor sun shall strike them, for he who has pity on them will lead them, and by springs of water will guide them.

(2) They will “have life and have it abundantly” (vs. 10).
• Abundant life is salvation, but it is more than that.
• What it is NOT is the prosperity gospel.
• In fact, Jesus in John 15:18-25 , teaches that “if they persecuted me, they will also persecute you”.
• So what is the abundant life lived in the here and now?
• Psalm 23:1–6 (ESV) — A PSALM OF DAVID. 1 The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. 2 He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. 3 He restores my soul. He leads me in paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. 4 Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. 5 You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. 6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever.

(3) Jesus lays down his life for them (vs. 11).
• This is how salvation and the abundant life are secured for the sheep.
• This is God initiating the new covenant with those that hear his voice and follow him.

(4) Jesus knows His sheep and His sheep know Him (voice) (vs. 14).
• Those that are born again and saved are those that hear and trust in the voice and witness of Jesus.
• And like the sheep, they follow Him.

What is helpful about this concept is that it provides a way that we can have assurance of our salvation.
• With respect to His claims to be God, His relationship to the Father, and His hard sayings:
o Does the voice of Jesus ring true to you?
o And what do you do with the words of Jesus?
o Do they make sense to you?
o Do you follow Him?
o Or are the words of Jesus offensive and awkward to you?

(5) Jesus has other sheep from a different sheepfold – Gentiles (vs. 16).
• Yet another allusion to the Old Testament.
• Isaiah 56:8 (ESV) — 8 The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares, “I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered.”

The Door/Shepherd’s Relationship to the Father
• Very similar to our lessons from John 5 on “The Father’s Jesus”.
• The Father loves Jesus (vs. 17).
• Jesus lays down His life at the charge of and under the authority of the Father (vs. 18).
• Jesus knows the Father and the Father knows Jesus (vss. 14-15).
o In the same way Jesus and the sheep know each other.

This statement of knowledge by Jesus in John 10:14-15 is extremely significant.
• The Greek word for “know” here is “ginosko”.
• It has a variety of meanings.
• However, in our context today, the BDAG shows us that it means “to grasp the significance of” something.
• So to paraphrase, Jesus is saying that believers are such that they grasp His identity in the same way that the Father grasps His identity.
• This is an awesome claim!

So why is this so significant and how is this possible?
How can we have the same kind of grasping of Jesus as the Father does?
• (1) It is clear from the entirety of John’s Gospel that we can’t grasp in this way without a work of God.
o So this points us to the Holy Spirit.
o John 3 and Ezekiel 36:26 point us to this work of God through the Holy Spirit.
• (2) It is also obvious that those who recognize the voice (John 10:4) of Jesus, the good shepherd, and follow Him are those that grasp His identity and His relationship with the Father.
o So this points us to the miracle of the new birth.
o The new birth gives us the eyes to see and the ears to hear.
• (3) It also reveals to us the objective and transcendent nature of our knowledge.
o Salvation, knowing and grasping Jesus’ identity, is somehow related to the relationships within the Trinity.
o In other words, we know Jesus because the Father knows Jesus.
o This means our knowledge of Jesus is not subjective and relative, but exists objectively and transcendentally in God.
o Our knowledge of God is not a feeling or just intellectual assent.
o Our knowledge of God is not our doing.
o It is eternally grounded in our Creator…what a relief!

Now let’s look at the response to Jesus’ sheepfold metaphor.

3) THE MUMBLING OVER THE METAPHOR

John 10:19–21 (ESV) — 19 There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. 20 Many of them said, “He has a demon, and is insane; why listen to him?” 21 Others said, “These are not the words of one who is oppressed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
• The Jews continue to insult Jesus.
• They call Him insane.
• They call Him demon oppressed.
• These are actions of those who do not recognize His voice and follow Him.
• However, given the healing of the blind man and the words of Jesus in John 10, it appears that there are some who recognize in Jesus something of the Father.
• And like Jesus, they also allude to the Old Testament when they ask, “Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
o Psalm 146:8 (ESV) — 8 the LORD opens the eyes of the blind. The LORD lifts up those who are bowed down; the LORD loves the righteous.

Lessons for Us:
• It seems that the Gospel presentation for Jesus often consisted of contrasting unbelievers with believers.
• He did so in John 6, in John 9 (blind/seeing) and He does so again in our text today.
• And when making this contrast, He attributes a work of God as accounting for the difference between believers and unbelievers.
• Why do you think He does this?
• How should this influence or inform our presentation of the Gospel?

John 9:35-41 – The Seeing Blind – The Blind Seeing

2011-09-18T14:22:00.001-04:00

John 9:35–41 (ESV) — 35 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. 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.

1) A REMARKABLE CLAIM

John 9:39 (ESV) — 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.”

Verse 39 is ground zero for our text today.
• In it is found the meaning behind the conversation with the blind man that precedes it, and the condemnation of the Pharisees after it.
• It leads us to ask two questions.
• Who are those that “do not see” but see?
• Who are those “who see” but are blinded?
• The answers are important because Jesus says Himself that the reason He “came into this world” was to expose each through judgment.

Apparent Contradiction:
Before we move on, however, let’s resolve some apparent contradictions about Jesus and judgment.
• In addition to our text today, John’s Gospel says the following about Jesus.
• John 5:27 (ESV) — 27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

However, these seem to contradict John’s commentary on Jesus in John 3.
• John 3:17 (ESV) — 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.

How is this resolved?
• The world into which Christ came was not a neutral one morally and in relation to the truth of God.
• Christ, the Light and the Truth, came into a wicked and fallen world.
o Remember, in John 2:25 we are told that Christ couldn’t believe in men because he knew what was in them.
• So when Christ shed His Light and Truth into this world, there were and are unavoidable consequences for unbelievers.

The Consequence - a Kind of Judgment:
• Though Jesus came to save, “saving some entails condemning others” – Carson.
• This is because those who reject Jesus are revealed as being spiritually blind to the presence their sin.
• In fact, Jesus’ mission was an act of grace for all unbelievers.
• And “in order to be grace [for all] it must uncover [everyone’s] sin” – Carson.
• Therefore, “he who resists this [uncovering] binds himself to his sin” in spiritual blindness – Carson.
• So, “The judgment referred to here is the division of humanity into believers [the blind who see their sin] and unbelievers [the seeing who are blind to their sin] brought about by Jesus’ coming into this world” – Kostenberger.

Now back to our two questions.
• Who are those that do not see but see?
• Who are those that see but do not see?
• The answer to the first is found in the blind man.

2) THE BLIND MAN – SIGHT BY JESUS

John 9:35–38 (ESV) — 35 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.

The Blind Man:
The blind man clearly represents those persons who humbly accept what the light of Christ shows them about their sin.
• This acceptance played out in 2 acts in John 9.
• In John 9:6-7 we see the blind man responding in faith to Jesus’ direction during the spittle spectacle.
• The result of this, of course, was the restoration of his sight – literally.

In our text today, we see that by his faith he also had his spiritual sight restored.
• The blind man was and represents “those who do not see may see” (vs. 39).
• This type of person has a “poverty of spirit (cf. Mt. 5:3)” and “an abasement of personal pride”.
• These attributes represent “a candid acknowledgement of spiritual blindness” which leads to “spiritual sight” and “true revelation, at the hands of Jesus” – D.A. Carson.

What He Sees – The Son of Man:
In John, those that see are those that recognize the authority of the Father’s Jesus.
• Jesus gets to the heart of this by asking the blind man, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”
• Jesus is not asking the blind man if he thinks there is such a thing as the “Son of Man”, but “Do you place your trust in the Son of Man?” – D.A. Carson.

What is the Son of Man?
• Commonly, the phrase “Son of Man” can simply mean “someone” or “a certain person” – AYBD.
• However, in the NT the phrase is used 43 times “as a distinctive title of the Savior” – Eastons Bible Dictionary.
• And it is Jesus’ favorite title for Himself.

When Jesus uses the term to describe Himself, most believe He is alluding to Daniel 7:13-14.
• Daniel 7:13–14 (ESV) — 13 “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.
• D.A. Carson tells us that this “son of man” was seen by the Jews as a specific “transcendent eschatological agent of divine judgment and deliverance”.
• This description, then, fits squarely with Jesus’ Father-given mission.

So, the blind man asks for insight into the identity of the this “Son of Man” that he might trust in Him.
• Jesus, continuing to give spiritual sight to the blind, tells the blind man, “it is he who is speaking to you”.
• What the blind man does next reveals both that he
o (1) has spiritual eyes to see
o (2) his view of the identity of Jesus.

The blind man worships Jesus as the Divine Son of Man!
• “The NT uses proskyneín (worship) only in relation to a divine object” – TDNT.
• Matthew 2:11 (ESV) — 11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.
• Matthew 14:33 (ESV) — 33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
• Matthew 28:9 (ESV) — 9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.

Worship and Judaism:
• In Judaism, “God must be worshipped; no other being may be worshipped” – Bauckham.
• “Jews were sharply distinguished by their monolatrous practice”, unlike non-Jews “who believed in or worshipped a high god but never supposed this to be incompatible with the worship also of lesser divinities”.
• So, for the blind man to worship Jesus was to see Him as God.
• In other words, for the blind man “Jesus is such that he can be worshipped; God is such that Jesus can be worshipped” without maligning his Jewish monolatry. – Bauckham.

So the blind man’s heart enabled him to see both himself and Jesus as God intends.
• He is one who did not see but now sees.
• One who lays down their pride and responds positively to the uncovering and illumination of Jesus Christ.
• One who acknowledges Christ as Lord and Saviour.
• But what of those who see but do not see?
• They are found in the Pharisees.

3) THE PHARISEES – BLINDED BY JESUS

John 9:40–41 (ESV) — 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.

The Pharisees:
Overhearing the words of Jesus to the blind man, they want to know where they fit in – “Are we also blind?”
• And when Jesus replies with “If you were blind” He is again speaking in spiritual terms.
• The blindness He speaks of is “a lost condition that cries out for illumination” – D.A. Carson.
o A humble acknowledgement of spiritual blindness
• So when the Pharisees imply that they see, they are aligning themselves with “those who see may become blind” (vs. 39).
• They are rebelling against God’s grace, their need for it, and the identity of Jesus.
• They are saying, “We aren’t in a lost condition and have no need for illumination by the Son of Man”.

The Pharisees demonstrate perfectly what we already discussed concerning a kind of judgment in John 9:39.
• They resist Jesus and by so doing demonstrate their pride and spiritual blindness.
• The complete opposite of the blind man’s “poverty of spirit” and “abasement of personal pride”.
• “So certain are they that they can see, they utterly reject any suggestion to the contrary, and thereby confirm their own darkness” – D.A. Carson.

What they see – Self-Righteousness:
The blind man saw Jesus as the Son of Man and worthy of worship.
• The Pharisees saw only their self-righteousness as Saviour, and Jesus as blasphemer.
• This condition, a fulfillment of prophecy, is highlighted over and over in the OT and NT.
• Isaiah 6:10 (ESV) — 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.”
• Jeremiah 5:21 (ESV) — 21 “Hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes, but see not, who have ears, but hear not.
• Mark 4:12 (ESV) — 12 so that “they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven.”
• 2 Corinthians 4:3–4 (ESV) — 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Grace and Sin:
Our text today teaches a remarkable lesson on the relationship between our sin and God’s grace.
• “Jesus makes clear, it is not the Pharisees’ sin, but their repudiation of grace, that renders them lost (Ridderbos 1997: 351)” - Kostenberger.
• Why is this so?
• Jesus light illuminates everyone’s sin.
• Remember, we all “are without excuse” and have a God-given moral knowledge.
• The question is what one does with Jesus’ illumination, with His light.
• One can acknowledge it and bow down to Jesus and accept His grace like the blind man?
• Or one can justify a self-righteous response, and in so doing reject the grace of Jesus Christ like the Pharisees?
• Both camps had their sin uncovered, but only the blind man accepted the grace that the uncovering of sin points us to.

Lesson for Us:
• So how is one made blind that they may see?
• This is a work of God we have spoken of so much since John 6 and will come to again in John 10.
• And a great example of this that contains all the elements of John 9 – blindness, Pharisees, salvation – is Paul.
• Paul, a self-righteous Pharisee, was blinded by Christ that he might see the truth about himself and the identity of Jesus.

And with regard to Paul’s encounter with his sin and response to grace:
• Was Paul’s illumination by Christ better than ours and so therefore accounts for his awesome and bold Christian walk?
• We have already seen the Pharisee’s problem was not illumination of sin but response to grace.
• Therefore, the difference between Paul’s boldness and our timidity is not the amount of illumination by Christ, but the nature of our response to Jesus’ grace.
• If we have been given eyes to see, why do we wear blinders?
• The Christian life is to be lived in boldness and full of drama, with eyes wide open, not with a ho-hum mediocrity.

John 9:8-34 – The Who, Not the How

2011-09-13T20:07:00.001-04:00

Last week we explored reasons for why Jesus put on such a “spectacle” to heal the blind man.
• We came up with about 7 possibilities.
• None of them, I thought, were arbitrary and most seemed quite reasonable.
• Especially in light of the fact that Jesus had healed in much simpler ways on other occasions and that John went out of his way to give us his commentary about the pool of Siloam.

In our text today, I want to focus on a question that shows up four times in the remainder of chapter 9.
• The question, of course, is how the blind man was healed.
• I think John wants us to notice it and this is demonstrated by the fact that he shows us that even the blind man became annoyed with the Pharisees’ repetition – “He answered them, “I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? (vs. 27)”
• Hopefully we can find out why John wants us to notice.

1) THE CROWD – THE 1ST TIME

John 9:8–12 (ESV) — 8 The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?” 9 Some said, “It is he.” Others said, “No, but he is like him.” He kept saying, “I am the man.” 10 So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?” 11 He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.” 12 They said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I do not know.”

I suspect the blind man, having just been given new eyes from Jesus, looked quite a bit different than he used to.
• So much so, it appears, that some of the crowd thought that he was not the blind man but someone who was “like him”.
• But he insisted he was the blind man, and no doubt could authenticate his identity with a little bit of historical info.
• So the crowd was satisfied and asked him, “Then how were your eyes opened?”

The man’s answer was the longest he would give over the next 30 or so verses.
• He identified the person responsible and described exactly what Jesus did, and how he was told to wash in the pool of Siloam.
• The end result being, of course, that he “received my sight”.
• It is remarkable to me that John didn’t record a more curious crowd.
• In other words, based on what John has given us, they didn’t appear to ask the man about what it was like to see, or are colors like what he would have expected, etc.
• They cut to the chase and asked, “Where is he?”

Now we move on from the crowd to the Pharisees.

2) THE PHARISEES – THE 2ND, 3RD, & 4TH TIMES

The 2nd Time:
John 9:13–17 (ESV) — 13 They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. 14 Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. 15 So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, “He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.” 16 Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?” And there was a division among them. 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.”

We see at least three things going on here:
1) This is still the same day and certainly one would expect that a man blind from birth who just received his sight would be tireless and full of joy in retelling his story.
• However, the healed man seems to sense the motives of the Pharisees as indicated by the shorter description of his healing.
• The Pharisees were up to something and they weren’t fooling anybody.
• John’s commentary in verse 14 really helps us understand this - “Now it was a Sabbath day…”.

2) We have a disagreement amongst the Pharisees about Jesus.
• Scholars agree that the root of the disagreement was more than likely the differences that existed between two schools of teaching – Shammai and Hillel.
• Kostenberger describes the difference this way, “The former based its argument on foundational theological principles (“Anyone who breaks the law is a sinner”), while the latter argued from the established facts of the case (“Jesus has performed a good work”)”.
• It is interesting that Nicodemus, in John 3, fell in line with the latter which might indicate his philosophical leanings.
o John 3:2 (ESV) — 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “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.”

3) We get a glimpse of the boldness of the healed man.
• When asked what he thought of Jesus, He replied that Jesus was a prophet.
• This is the same conclusion of the Samaritan woman in John 4:19.
• Kostenberger suggests that, “‘Prophet’ may well have been the highest position that the man knew to ascribe to Jesus”.
• What is striking about the blind man’s answer is that:
o The Pharisees did not hide their disdain for Jesus and His followers
o And he said this even after hearing some of the Pharisees say, “this man is not from God”.
• The blind man’s example here reminds us that our proclamation of Jesus is to be done boldly.

The 3rd Time:
John 9:18–23 (ESV) — 18 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.”

The Pharisees were really thrown by this healing.
• We just saw where they had a disagreement between themselves about the status of the healer.
• Now we see that they didn’t even believe that this man had been healed.
• Perhaps denial of Jesus’ identity and power is the only way an unbeliever can rationally respond to Jesus.

However, they did investigate further by questioning the parents of the healed blind man.
• The parents of the healed man, John tells us, feigned ignorance to protect themselves from being “put out of the synagogue”.
• Kostenberger elaborates on John’s commentary this way, “Since the synagogue was the center not only of Jewish religious life but also communal life, expulsion from it represented a severe form of social ostracism”.
• The presence of this threat of expulsion from the center of Jewish life demonstrates, once again, that the response of the blind man to the Pharisees really was bold.

The 4th Time:
John 9:24–34 (ESV) — 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.” 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.” 26 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?” 28 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.” 30 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.” 34 They answered him, “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they cast him out.

Awkwardly, the Pharisees called in the healed man again.
• This time, trying to corner him, they suggested that the only way to “give glory to God” was to agree with them that Jesus was a sinner.
• The healed man doesn’t take the bait and when asked again about his healing, he finally expresses his frustration and mocks them by asking them, “Do you also want to become his disciples?”

For the 3rd time we see the boldness of the blind man.
• He challenged the Pharisees conclusions about Jesus.
• He admitted that he had become a disciple of Jesus.

And in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15, he gives a reason for the hope that is within him in verses 30-33.
• The reason he gives is that he recognized that, “If this man were not from God, he could do nothing”.
• In other words, he understood that Jesus was acting under the authority and direction of God the Father.
• He schooled them in a way reminiscent of the way Jesus did in John 5:46 (Jesus’ Apologetic – Part III).
o John 5:45–47 (ESV) — 45 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?”
• And as a result of his boldness, “they cast him out”.
• The very thing his parents were trying to avoid.

There are two things deeply ironic about this last exchange:
1) The healed man, by affirming that Jesus was doing the will of God, was giving glory to God.
• The Pharisees, on the other hand, were simply pretending to “give glory to God” by accusing Jesus of being a sinner.
• In fact, it was they, and not Jesus healing on the Sabbath, who were blaspheming God.

2) The Pharisees, in all their self-righteous theological knowledge, were making the same mistake as the disciples of Jesus by suggesting that the man’s blindness was a result of sin (vs. 34).
• But, unlike the disciples or the healed man, they were wrong about Jesus as well as the reason for the man’s blindness.
• And in their arrogance, they showed contempt for the healed man by suggesting he was in no way qualified to teach them otherwise.
• But it was he, more than any other in this story, that could testify to the “explanation in purpose” of his healing.
• Their actions demonstrate that the self-righteous are so hard-hearted that, as John’s Gospel demonstrates, not a healed blind man or even Jesus Himself can teach them.

Lesson for Us:
We have just seen that 4 times the question was asked how the blind man was healed.
• And yet Jesus taught us in verses 1-3 that we need to find explanation in purpose.
• And yet 4 times we have the question of how.
• This serves as a sad illustration of the state of the hearts of so many of the Jews.
• They were looking for an explanation of the healing in its cause, in the HOW.
• They missed the very lesson Jesus taught the disciples and is teaching us.
• The question that should be asked about the man’s healing is WHO.

There are at least 3 things in our text that illustrate this – (1) in the negative and (2) in the affirmative:
1) The world is not interested in who Jesus IS but what He can do for them or how he offends them (in the case of the Pharisees).

The crowd, for example, asked the blind man, “Where is he?”
• This is certainly a good question to ask about Jesus.
• But, if we can assume anything about the crowd based on their interactions with Jesus in the past, then we can reasonably say that they wanted Jesus because he could either free them from political oppression and/or free them from whatever ailed them (John 6:15 & 26).
• If the purpose of the healing was to glorify God, then a proper response to the blind man’s healing would have been to recognize the purpose Jesus spoke of in verse 1-3 and John 5.
• And this purpose, Jesus as Messiah sent and operating under the authority of the Father, was something the crowds rarely recognized.
• In fact we see a rather odd response in verse 13; they brought the healed man to the Pharisees for questioning.

And the Pharisees’ only thought was to marginalize Jesus because he offended all that they stood for as we have just seen.
• “We know that this man is a sinner”.
• The word sinner here means more than just one who broke God’s law.
• It also carried with it a sense of “nonconformity” with what was culturally acceptable – BDAG.
• In other words, Jesus was not just immoral but He was a social pariah.
• Luke 15:2 (ESV) — 2 And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”
• Mark 2:16 (ESV) — 16 And the scribes of the Pharisees, when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

2) Our lives should point people to Christ.
• Our spiritual healing, as Christians, is no less magnificent and profound than the blind man’s physical healing.
• We should be willing at every opportunity to say; “The man called Jesus” gave me eyes to see, a heart to believe, the will to confess and repent, and His righteousness that I might be justified.
• And our prayer (not our measure of success) should be that the one we speak the Gospel to might say to us, “Where is he?”

3) Jesus uses signs and wonders to bring glory and attention to Himself and edify His church.
• John 3:2 (ESV) — 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “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.”
o Signs and Wonders validated Jesus’ ministry
• John 14:12 (ESV) — 12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.
o Signs and Wonders would be part of the body of believers’, the church’s, ministry.
• Acts 4:29–31 (ESV) — 29 And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, 30 while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” 31 And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.
o Signs and Wonders were given to the church through the Holy Spirit

Jesus’ followers are gifted and energized by the Spirit to heal and perform miracles in Jesus name!
• Paul teaches in his letters to the Corinthians that these edify the church.
• Jesus teaches us in John that they point to and glorify the Father.
• If “a passion for miraculous gifts is prompted not by a selfish hankering for the sensational, but by compassion for the diseased and despairing souls, God cannot but be pleased” – Sam Storm.

So, in John 9 we see a great lesson on Sovereign purpose and Savior.
• These should be our primary focus as believers and not the why and the how.
• A preoccupation with the why and the how is a worldly distraction that reveals hard heartedness.
• And it undermines the Sovereignty of God.

John 9:4-7 – The Spittle Spectacle

2011-09-05T15:12:00.000-04:00

We must come to the following verses with a clear understanding of last week’s lesson.
• Jesus’ explanation for the man’s blindness was in looking forward to a coming purpose not a past cause!
• This explanation, it seems, is crucial to understanding Jesus’ entire ministry, not just the man’s blindness.
• Jesus’ entire ministry was one of purpose and moving forward in time and history towards the cross and the Kingdom of God.
• And as we look at our text today, understanding explanation as a forward and coming purpose will illuminate our understanding of what is going on.

John 9:4–7 (ESV) — 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.” 6 Having said these things, he spat 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.

1) A SENSE OF URGENCY

John 9:4–7 (ESV) — 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.”

We are less than 6 months from the Passion events.
• Jesus expresses a sense of urgency about His work and a profound insight that His time on earth is coming to an end.
• He knows that Israel generally and His disciples specifically have benefited from the presence of His light.
o Exposure to God’s Word leaves us changed.
• But darkness is coming.
• As D.A. Carson puts it, “Those who enjoy his light will be engulfed by darkness when he is taken away”.

What is the coming darkness?
• It is both a historical period of time and a spiritual state.
• The period of time is the time between Jesus’ death and the giving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost – John MacArthur.
• The spiritual state is clearly the spiritual cowering the disciples embraced after Jesus death’ and their doubt and confusion between His ascension and Pentecost.
o John 18:17 (ESV) — 17 The servant girl at the door said to Peter, “You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?” He said, “I am not.”
o John 18:25 (ESV) — 25 Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You also are not one of his disciples, are you?” He denied it and said, “I am not.”
o Mark 16:14 (ESV) — 14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen.
• Acts 1:6 (ESV) — 6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
o And even after the resurrection, still hoping for their idea of a restoration of Israel, they are disappointed with a “not for you to know” (Acts 1:7).
o And then He leaves them alone…but only for a time.

Jesus must have been saddened to know what His disciples were going to endure due to their lack of trust in Him and due to their “kingdom baggage”.
• In fact, these things weighed so heavily on Jesus that He reiterates our text in John 12.
• John 12:35 (ESV) — 35 So Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going.”

BTW – What is so sad, is that so many Christians today walk as if we do “not know where [we are] going”.
• One of Jesus’ purposes was to provide the believer with the means (the tools) to live a fulfilled Christian life.
• We have at our disposal (1) the word of God; (2) the Holy Spirit; and (3) a new heart.
• We must foster a deep relationship and understanding with each to live fully the life Jesus purposed for us!

And then to emphatically symbolize what “the works of him” are, Jesus heals the man born blind by design.
• It appears that verses 4 and 5 are a little bit out of place.
• They are awkwardly wedged between the disciples’ question about the blind man, Jesus’ answer, and the blind man’s healing.
• But, D.A. Carson advises us that “these verses are crucial precisely because they signal to the reader how the healing of the blind man is to be understood.”
• What its forward looking purpose is.
• It is so much more than a miracle, but a powerfully presented, symbol-laden object lesson on Jesus purpose!
o A purpose which, unfortunately, will have negative consequences for those Jews who “refused to open their eyes to the light” – D.A. Carson.

2) WHY THE SPITTLE?

John 9:6–7 (ESV) — 6 Having said these things, he spat 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.

One can’t help but read these verses and wonder why the big production.
• In front of everyone there, Jesus kneels down and starts spitting in the dirt.
• It must have taken Him quite a few goes at it before He sufficiently wet the dirt.
• Then He scraped the mud into the palm of His hands.
• Mixed it all together into a blob of clay.
• Then spread the clay over the blind man’s eyes.
• Then sent the blind man off to wash in the nearby pool of Siloam.
• And after all this, the man “came back seeing”.

We know that all Jesus had to do was say a word or touch the man to restore the man’s sight.
• Matthew 20:34 (ESV) — 34 And Jesus in pity touched their eyes, and immediately they recovered their sight and followed him.

And we also know that if He was really set on using spit, He could have just spit directly on His hands and left the rest of it out.
• Mark 7:33 (ESV) — 33 And taking him aside from the crowd privately, he put his fingers into his ears, and after spitting touched his tongue.
• Mark 8:23 (ESV) — 23 And he took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village, and when he had spit on his eyes and laid his hands on him, he asked him, “Do you see anything?”

But remember, this is a powerfully presented, symbol-laden object lesson on Jesus purpose!
• He is teaching the disciples, the Jews, the blind man and us an urgent lesson about “the works of God” (vs. 3).
• This miracle is about more than a healing.

So what is the purpose?
• We will look at 7 suggestions compiled from Carson, MacArthur, Boice, Kostenberger and Wiersbe.

The purpose was to show us that:
1) Jesus is The Light
• Obviously the blind man received light through restored sight.
• But, Jesus’ light is of the Kingdom of God, eternal life variety as well.
• “The healing is thus a living parable, illustrating Jesus’ ministry as the Light shining in a spiritually darkened world” – John MacArthur.

2) Jesus is the Father’s Jesus
• Jesus gives the light, “the works of God”, at the direction of the Father.
• Jesus is working the Father’s purposes (“him who sent me” vs. 4), not His own.
• And one of those works (purposes) was to heal this blind man.

3) Jesus is Creator
• An illusion to Genesis 2:7 is not doubt intended.
• Genesis 2:7 (ESV) — 7 then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
• Jesus “created” working eyes for the blind man to restore his sight.

4) Jesus is Sovereign
• According to D.A. Carson (via John Calvin), it is possible here that there is an allusion to the water being poured on Elijah’s sacrifice at Mr. Carmel.
• Only the one true God of Israel could consume such a sacrifice with fire.
• Similarly then, Jesus is symbolically raising the stakes of the blind man’s condition by exaggerating his blindness.
• This links the Sovereign Creator God of Israel to Jesus who can use what is unclean (spittle clay) to restore what is blind (the man’s eyes).

5) Jesus is Authority
• “Palestinian Jews believed that human excreta (including urine, breast milk, saliva, menstrual flow, etc.) were all forms of pollutant” – D.A. Carson.
• But, under certain conditions “in the hands of people authorized with the appropriate power”, human excreta like saliva could be “transformed into an instrument of blessing” – Carson.
• Jesus was the authorized power.
• BTW - There is also a sense in which Jesus is using His authority to upend cultural taboos.
o This perceived uncleanliness of the spittle clay would have been an “irritation” to a Jew.
o And Jesus used the “irritation” this taboo caused to bring the blind man to light.
o “You might compare this ‘irritation’ to the convicting work of the Holy Spirit as He uses God’s Law to bring the lost sinner under judgment” – Warren Wiersbe.

6) Jesus is the Sent One
• Jesus tells the blind man, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam”.
• John tells us that Siloam means “Sent”.
• Why does John insert this commentary into Jesus’ words?

Siloam Background
• The pool was apparently constructed by King Hezekiah (2 Kings 20:20).
• It was recently rediscovered near the southeast corner of Jerusalem’s city wall (see picture).
• The pool of Siloam was the pool from which the water was drawn for the Feast of Booths watering drawing right.
o As such, it “symbolized the blessings God sent to Israel” – John MacArthur.
• It was during this event in John 7:37 that Jesus announced, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink”.
• Yet, remarkably, the pool of Siloam also at one time represented Israel’s rejection of God.
o Isaiah 8:6 (ESV) — 6 “Because this people has refused the waters of Shiloah that flow gently, and rejoice over Rezin and the son of Remaliah,

So Jesus and John are driving home the following:
• Jesus is the Sent One of God the Father.
• His purpose is to be the “ultimate blessing to the nation” – John MacArthur.
• And for those who trust in Him, He brings light and sight.
• But, as the Israelites had done so often in the past, “so also did the people reject Jesus, the true Siloam, the One sent by God to save lost sinners” – John MacArthur.

7) Jesus on His terms
• “He cured how He willed” – Leon Morris.
• Naaman was insulted when told to wash in the Jordan seven times to cure his leprosy.
• 2 Kings 5:10–14 (ESV) — 10 And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, “Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored, and you shall be clean.” 11 But Naaman was angry and went away, saying, “Behold, I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call upon the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place and cure the leper.”

No doubt, there were a few Naaman’s on the scene.
• Think about it for a moment.
• Jesus does the clay thing and the blind man was temporarily worse off than he was before.
• He had eye sockets full of spittle riddled dirt, unclean by almost any cultures standards.
• And then it gets even weirder.
• Jesus tells the blind man to go.
• Remember, the man is blind and they were at a temple gate not at the pool!
• That’s like telling a man with no hands to pickup something.
• Can you imagine the blind guy asking someone nearby, “Hey, can you lead me to the pool of Siloam so I can wash this unclean spit and clay off my eyes and have my vision restored.”

What is Jesus doing here?
• Jesus has taught us over and over that self and its baggage must be killed off, spiritually speaking.
• We have to give up pride and our way of thinking, feeling, understanding and living to come to Christ.
• In other words, we come to Him on His terms.
• Jesus makes demands of us that may not make sense.
• But, He has a purpose in doing so.
• I wonder how many times we miss out on what Jesus is doing because we “Naamanize”?
o Naaman even complained that Israel’s Jordan River wasn’t near as good as his own rivers.

Lesson for Us:
• So this is what we are saying.
• The man was born blind by design.
• And his healing, a work of God, was just the tip of the iceberg.
• Jesus used the elaborate healing to provide us and His disciples, who would soon be in darkness, a powerfully presented, symbol-laden object lesson.

All of this seems to be captured by Jesus’ own words to Paul on the road to Damascus because at the end of the day we are all “sent”:
• Acts 26:16–18 (ESV) — 16 But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, 17 delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles—to whom I am sending you 18 to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

I Was a Christian, Now I'm an Atheist - Say What?

2011-08-22T19:38:00.004-04:00

If you are like me and you find enjoyment listening to debates between Christian and atheist scholars, then you no doubt have heard on multiple occasions something like the following:

"Yes, Mr. Moderator, I was a Christian until the age of 24. And then I slowly came to the conclusion that faith was not reasonable, the Bible was full of contradictions, the God of the Old Testament committed genocide, and the problem of evil was bigger than God. So the only intellectually honest thing for me to do was to reject my faith and become an atheist."

Upon hearing such proclamations, I've always wondered if its actually possible for an atheist to have once been a Christian.

Here is the Problem:
Salvation is more than a work of man. It is not just our belief in Jesus, our intellectual assent to the propositions of the Bible, and certainly not just our feelings. Salvation is, at a fundamental level, a supernatural act. An act of grace by God, on our behalf, that literally changes our heart (whether this happens before belief or right after is not the issue here).

For example, in Ezekiel 36:26 we see that God changes the heart of "stone" to a heart of "flesh". And we see in John 3 Jesus teach on the necessity of the born again heart (regeneration). Both of these examples, and there are many more, reveal to us that salvation is more than just a work of man. We can't "born" our hearts again; we can't change our hearts from "stone" to "flesh". A work of God is necessary.

Therefore, for one to claim that they were a Christian is to acknowledge that they were the recipient of a supernatural work of God in their heart. It is to acknowledge that they had a heart transformed from "stone" to "flesh"; that their heart was born again.

This can be clearly understood as follows:

Salvation involves a work of God.
I was saved.
Therefore, I was the recipient of a work of God.

Now, if they later decide that they aren't a Christian, but an atheist, they are left with a serious philosophical problem. How do they account for their regenerated heart?

Since God doesn't exist for them any longer, they can't claim they ever had a regenerated heart - a work of God. To do so would be to acknowledge that God exists.

And if they explain their regenerated heart away as a feeling, experience, decision, or cultural baggage with no origin or grounding in God, then they have to admit they weren't Christians to begin with (at least in any Biblical sense).

So, is it possible for an atheist to have been a Christian? In the words of Seinfeld's Jackie Chiles, "It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous".

John 9:1-3 – Born Blind By Design

2011-08-15T18:20:00.000-04:00

Last week Jesus taught that His ministry was not about glorifying Himself but the Father.
• We looked at all of the bold claims He made about Himself and His relationship to the Father in John 8 and asked how He could make such a claim.
• We then discovered that both the incarnation and the crucifixion vindicated His claim.
• But, His ministry of self-sacrifice and seeking to glorify the Father instead of Himself left us with another problem.
• He set a very difficult example for us to follow.

In this week’s lesson, Jesus sets another example for us to follow.
• Specifically, how we are to see human suffering.
• And although He is dealing with a deformity from birth in our text today, the principle He teaches has broader applications.

John 9:1–3 (ESV) — 1 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.

BTW – “As he passed by” what? (Let’s begin with a very small rabbit trail)
• Because later in the text Jesus sends the blind man to wash in the pool of Siloam, we know Jesus was still in Jerusalem.
• And from texts like John 5:1-2 and Acts 3:1-2, we know that typically the needy congregated around the entrance gates to the city.
• So in all likelihood Jesus and His disciples were departing Jerusalem after the Feast of Booths and came upon this blind man at one of Jerusalem’s gates.

1) THE FIRST & SECOND CHOICE - FALSE DILEMMA

John 9:1–2 (ESV) — 1 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?”

One wonders what the disciples were after with their question.
• They were certainly confident enough in their knowledge to narrow down the options to two.

And because of their misplaced confidence, they committed the logical fallacy called false dilemma – blindness “B” is either due to sin of “X” or sin of “Y”.
• In other words, they were certain sin was the cause.
• The only uncertainty was whose sin was the cause.
• This was nothing new.
• Jewish tradition generally taught that there existed “a direct cause-and-effect relationship between suffering and sin” – Kostenberger.
• Therefore, they asked Jesus, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

Let’s talk about the false dilemma fallacy briefly.

Typical of the false dilemma fallacy, the disciples assumed they knew the answer before they even asked Jesus the question.
• This makes sense of course because the false dilemma is designed to corral the hearer to the conclusion the questioner has already made.
• In this case, the conclusion desired was that sin caused the man’s blindness.
• But importantly, with sin as the cause, God would also be logically excluded from the equation.
o “Underlying the disciples’ statement is the concern not to charge God with perpetrating evil on innocent people” – Kostenberger.
• We’ll see, however, that Jesus had something to say about the disciples’ conclusion.

BTW – We need to be aware of the current danger of false dilemmas.
• You can see that the false dilemma can be used a clever trap to beat up on the Christian worldview.
• And let’s also keep in mind that there are certainly times where there is no third choice – Jesus is God or He isn’t, e.g.

False Dilemma - a favorite of the New Atheists:
• In debate after debate, they routinely demand that the listener decide that life is best understood via the reasoned, empirical knowledge of science or the mythology of religion.
• Richard Dawkins, for example, quoting Douglas Adams’ A Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy asks us, "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
• What is the defeater to this false dilemma?
• As John Lennox points out, Dawkins can reject the fairies but he can’t reject the gardener or there’s no garden.

And a second example, which has a direct bearing on our lesson today, can be found in the conclusion of the following syllogism.
• If God is all loving and good, he would prefer a world in which evil does not exist.
• If God is all powerful, He would create a world without evil.
• But, evil exists.
• Therefore either God is not all powerful or not all loving and good (the false dilemma).

The problem with this conclusion is that it tries to force us to say that God is not really God.
• This is the false dilemma.
• But there is a choice that Jesus shows us in our text today, a third choice, that refutes the conclusion of this syllogism.
• What is the defeater, the third choice, to this false dilemma?
• William Lane Craig, puts it as follows, “God has morally sufficient reasons for permitting the evil that exists”.

As we look at Jesus’ own words, we will see one of these “morally sufficient reasons”.

2) THE THIRD CHOICE – PURPOSE

John 9:3 (ESV) — 3 Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him.

We notice right away that the disciples’ conclusion was wholly false.
• Jesus shot it down entirely, at least in this specific instance.
• This does not mean, however, that sin can’t cause and contribute to physical suffering.
• Numbers 12:10–11 (ESV) — 10 When the cloud removed from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, like snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. 11 And Aaron said to Moses, “Oh, my lord, do not punish us because we have done foolishly and have sinned.
• John 5:14 (ESV) — 14 Afterward Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you.”
• 1 Corinthians 11:27, 30 (ESV) — 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord…. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.

We also notice something else that seems very difficult to comprehend about Jesus’ words.
• It appears that God caused the man’s blindness.

The Bible itself seems to explicitly endorse this.
• Exodus 4:11 (ESV) — 11 Then the LORD said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the LORD?
• Psalm 139:13 (ESV) — 13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.

We need to dig into this just a little bit.
• Some fear, like F.F. Bruce, that taking this stance would “be an aspersion on the character of God”.
• Wiersbe agrees with Bruce and says that God did not deliberately make the man blind.
o They fear that doing so puts God too close to being the cause of evil.
• Others, like James Boice, say about Jesus’ words “…—let us state it frankly—God allowed the man to be born blind so that at this particular moment in his earthly life Jesus might come upon him and cure him and that, as a result, God might receive glory” – James Boice.

How do you see it?
• Did the man happen to be born blind because of a birth defect and then Jesus happened to come along and use the man to bring glory to God (F.F. Bruce)?
• Or, did God ordain from the very beginning that the man suffer with blindness from the very beginning of His life (Boice)?
• Or, is this a false dilemma and is there something else going on we can’t quite understand?
• Whatever the answer, these are the types of questions where we need to be very careful to not assert our feelings and thoughts above the Bible’s revelation.

Something to Consider – Explanation in Purpose not Cause:
John Piper suggests that the text clearly states that the man was born blind by design.
• In suggesting this, He argues that we look at the man’s blindness from another perspective.
• He says Jesus sets the example for the proper perspective from which to address God’s participation in the man’s blindness.

“…but that the works of God might be displayed in him”
• Jesus’ words reveal that the REAL EXPLANATION of the man’s blindness is to be found not in CAUSES but in the PURPOSES of God.
• The disciples asked about cause and Jesus answered that the cause is purpose.
• Piper paraphrases Jesus’ words to the disciples in this way, “The explanation of the blindness lies not in the past causes but the future purposes” – John Piper.

Jesus didn’t dodge the question.
• He answered it and in so doing showed us how we must seek to reorient our thinking to His thinking.
• Jesus “is saying turn away from your fixation on causality as the decisive explanation of suffering. And [in so doing you will] turn away from any surrender to futility, or absurdity, or chaos, or meaninglessness…and turn to the purposes and plans of God. There is no child and no suffering outside God’s purposes” – John Piper.

Why is this so important to do?
• To speak of purpose as explanation, is to speak of the intents and desires of God for His creation.
• But to speak of cause as explanation, is to reduce the man’s blindness down to nothing more than an unfortunate birth defect.
• This really is no more useful in explaining the man’s blindness than suggesting that natural selection acting on random mutations explains why we are here.
• Both are wrong, and more than that, they are a slight on the sovereignty of God.

Jesus’ teaching in our text is extremely liberating!
• Think about it philosophically for a moment.
• The man’s health was not relative to whatever malfunction happened to his eyes while in the womb.
• And the purpose of his blindness was not relative to what he happened to make of it during the circumstances of his life.
• His health and purpose were grounded securely in the sovereignty and purposes of God!

In fact, even finding the purpose Jesus spoke of requires that we speak of and look to God.
• God has to be part of the equation.
• It requires us to look forward with hope to the fulfillment of His kingdom on earth.
• And it requires that God “be supremely valuable to us. More valuable than health and life” – Piper.
• For if God is not part of the equation and not our “supreme value”, then there is no purpose and hope – only misery, death and random, purposeless mutation.

Let’s look at one more “Explanation in Cause” vs. “Explanation in Purpose” example to help us flesh this out even more.

Going Hungry:
Exodus 16:2–3 (ESV) — 2 And the whole congregation of the people of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness, 3 and the people of Israel said to them, “Would that we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the meat pots and ate bread to the full, for you have brought us out into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly with hunger.”
• The Israelites used the disciples’ “Explanation Found in Cause” view and came off as ungrateful for God’s salvation from Pharaoh.
• And it led them to look backwards and long for their enslaved past.

– BUT –

Deuteronomy 8:2–3 (ESV) — 2 And you shall remember the whole way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble you, testing you to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not. 3 And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.
• But when we take Jesus’ “Explanation Found in Purpose” view, we see that God sought to humble them for their long term good, teach them to depend on God for life, and ultimately point to Jesus Christ!
• God has them looking forward to His grand purposes which are completely grounded in His sovereignty.
• There is no more “morally sufficient” reason for suffering than to point people to dependence on God and to Jesus Christ.

Lessons for us:
• We need to realize that healing is not always God’s purpose for suffering.
• Paul continually prayed for healing from the “thorn in his side” but never got it.
• And God’s purpose for suffering may not be known to us this side of heaven.
• But Jesus wants us to know that suffering’s purpose is not dependent on us.
• We don’t have to try and find purpose in it.
• It is fully secured, grounded and founded in the sovereign purposes of God.

John 8:48-59 – The Father’s Glory and Abraham’s Jesus

2011-08-08T19:45:00.002-04:00

We finally reach the end of Jesus’ conversation with the Jews in chapter 8.
• In our previous lesson, Jesus explained how the Jews, by rejecting Him, rejected the Father.
• He also revealed to us yet another reason for unbelief, which was that they could not hear the “words of God” (John 8:47) because they were “not of God” (John 8:47).
• Jesus also accused the Jews who rejected Him as doing the will of their real spiritual father, the devil.

Jesus’ reasoning for this startling judgment seemed to go as follows:
• If one believes in Jesus and His testimony about Himself then one is in agreement with God the Father (and Abraham for that matter).
• On the other hand, unbelief, as we know, is rebellion against the claims of Jesus and the Father; a rebellion against the truth.
• And so whatever is done in rebellion to God, done in unbelief, is a rejection of the truth and an embracing of a lie.
• So this life glorifies the devil the “father of lies” (vs. 44) who has “no truth in him” (vs. 44) whether or not this glorification is implicit or explicit.

As we finish up John 8, we come to restatements of truths that Jesus has already revealed earlier in John 8.
• However, there are a couple of interesting comments He makes that we will explore a little deeper.
    o Jesus’ talk about His glory
    o Jesus’ suggestion that Abraham knew Him

John 8:48–59 (ESV) — 48 The Jews answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” 49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. 50 Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51 Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” 52 The Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham died, as did the prophets, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’55 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” 58 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.

1) JESUS – THE GLORY IS NOT HIS

John 8:48–51 (ESV) — 48 The Jews answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” 49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. 50 Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51 Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.”

In response to Jesus’ accusation that their spiritual father is the devil and that they are unable to hear the word of God, they respond, not to the merits of Jesus’ words but by attacking him.
• They have already insinuated that He was an illegitimate child, conceived out of wedlock (vs. 41).
• Now they proceed to call him:
    o Demon Possessed
    o A Samaritan

Why?
Nobody knows for sure, but the smart guys suggest the following:
• “It may simply be that Jesus’ accusers thought that for a Jew to question the paternity of other Jews was so despicable that only demon-possession could explain it” – D.A. Carson.
• Kostenberger suggests that, in the battle of paternity that has just ensued – God the Father/Abraham vs. the devil – that the Jews want to slander His paternity and so suggest that he was “birthed by a Samaritan!”
• John MacArthur thinks that, “the reference to Jesus as a "Samaritan" probably centers in the fact that the Samaritans, like Jesus, questioned the Jews’ exclusive right to be called Abraham’s children (vs. 33; vs. 39).”

Whatever the reason, their intent was certainly to imply that Jesus’ was the one doing the will of the devil and he wasn’t even a pure Jew.
• Jesus, of course, rejects this and simply states that He seeks to honor the Father.
• Jesus’ every word, every work and every action is about honoring the Father.
• The implication, of course, is that they can’t honor the Father because they dishonor Jesus and His Father-ordained ministry.

This point is exactly the one we discussed last week we when covered at least (9) ways that unbelievers suppress the truth in their thinking and “willing” (heart).
• The result of this incorrect thinking and “willing” is the dishonoring of God Jesus speaks of today.
• Romans 1:21 (ESV) — 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Jesus goes on to remind them of the stakes of “hearing” the word of God that he speaks – eternal life!
• James Boice suggests that this “hearing” (a work of God) encompasses both a “believing” and an “obeying”.
• “Indeed, no one can actually believe the truth about [Jesus] without trusting him by intending to obey him. It is a mental impossibility. To think otherwise is to indulge a widespread illusion that now smothers spiritual formation in Christlikeness among professing Christians and prevents it from naturally spreading worldwide” – Dallas Willard.

Jesus and His Glory:
As mentioned earlier, one of the things I want to explore more is the notion about Jesus not seeking His own glory.
We have seen throughout Jesus’ conversation with the Jews, very bold claims by Jesus about Himself and His relationship with the Father.
• John 8:18–19 (ESV) — 18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.” 19 They said to him therefore, “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.”
• John 8:23–24 (ESV) — 23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.”
• John 8:38 (ESV) — 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”
• John 8:40 (ESV) — 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did.
• John 8:42 (ESV) — 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.

And yet, in spite of making all these bold claims, Jesus says, “Yet I do not seek my own glory”.
• How is this possible and what can we learn from this?

First, we need to see what it is that Jesus is not seeking.
• Glory in our text means, “honor as enhancement or recognition of status or performance, fame, recognition, renown, honor, prestige” – BDAG.
• So knowing this, here is what this text is telling us.
• In spite of His identity, the incredible relationship He shared with the Father, and the powerful words of truth and life He possessed, Jesus never saw any of this as a reason to elevate Himself in a worldly way.
• As we have seen, His “renown” and “prestige” came when He was “lifted up” on the cross.
• And on the cross this “renown” and “prestige” came in the form of nakedness, injury, pain, humility!
• The cross vindicated not only His ministry generally, but even His claim of not seeking His own glory.

Jesus’ Example – Our Problem:
Now here is the real problem with this example of Jesus.
• He set it for us to follow.

Paul puts it like this:
• Colossians 3:1–10 (ESV) — 1 If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. 3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. 5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming. 7 In these you too once walked, when you were living in them. 8 But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

Unfortunately, to follow Jesus’ example and not seek our own glory, is completely at odds with our natural, fallen, intuitions.
• “You need no help from supernatural sources to engage in fornication…indulgences in passions and desires for what is evil, or greed to possess what belongs to others. Just follow the inclinations now built into your bodily existence and they will all just happen” – Dallas Willard.
• Humanity’s “time and energy is almost wholly, if not entirely, devoted to how their body looks, smells, and feels, and to how it can be secured and used to meet ego needs such as admiration, sexual gratification, and power over others” – Dallas Willard.
• In other words, we seek our own glory and it is the natural, fallen thing to do.

But as Jesus demonstrated, and as Paul taught, believers can combat these natural, fallen inclinations.
• “seek the things that are above”
• “set you minds on things that are above”
• “put to death therefore what is earthly in you”
• “put on the new self…renewed in knowledge…of its creator”

And praise God that Scripture tells us that this combat is funded and directed by the very glory of the Father that Jesus was trying to point the Jews to.
• Romans 6:4-6 (ESV) — 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.

2) JESUS – ABRAHAM’S PROMISED OFFSPRING

John 8:52–59 (ESV) — 52 The Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham died, as did the prophets, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’ 55 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” 58 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.

What is going on here?
It appears the Jews were saying:
• Abraham and the prophets certainly received and then “kept” God’s word.
• However, they died.
• So their “keeping” what everyone knows is God’s word did not keep them from death.
• So you, Jesus, have lost your demon-possessed, Samaritan mind.
• Do you seriously think you are somehow “greater than our father Abraham, who died (vs. 53)?”
• There is no way your words are better than the words received by Abraham and the prophets.
• And yet you say those who keep your words shall not die!

Typically, the Jews miss Jesus’ point entirely, further evidence they “do not hear” (vs. 47) the words of God.
• Jesus is obviously speaking of spiritual death and life.
• Jesus then, again, articulates the unique nature of his relationship with the Father that does in fact make Him “greater than our father Abraham” both in identity and quality.
    o (1) The Father glorifies Jesus (vs. 54)
    o (2) Jesus knows the Father (vs. 55)
    o (3) Jesus keeps the Father’s word (vs. 55)

The first (3) reasons are significant, but then Jesus drops two more J-Bomb’s that seal the deal:
• (4) Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad. (vs. 56)
• (5) Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am. (vs. 58)

The fifth we discussed in our lesson on John 8:21-29 – All Will Know.
• So what on earth does the fourth mean?
• Whatever it means, it was the ultimate setup for His “I Am” (vs. 59) proclamation.

Nobody really knows for sure what the 4th means, but the smart people speculate as follows:
• Genesis 15:17-21 was traditionally seen by Jewish teachers as the time when God “revealed to Abraham the mysteries of the coming [messianic] age” – Kostenberger.
• So, “to say that Abraham saw the Messiah was neither new nor offensive to Jewish teachers; it was its application to Jesus that was unbelievable” – Kostenberger.
• Jesus was teaching, incredibly, that “the ultimate fulfillment of all Abraham’s hopes and joys” culminate in the “person and work” of Jesus – D.A. Carson.
• What this meant for Jesus’ Jewish audience was “since Jesus fulfills what is written of and announced in the OT, for [them] to be true children of Abraham would have meant for them to share in his attitude of joyful expectation” of the coming Messiah, the promised offspring, Jesus – Kostenberger.

So when Jesus says “I Am” and “Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day” He is identifying Himself not only as the Sovereign Creator Yahweh but also as the eschatological fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham.
• Not the least of which is Abraham’s promised offspring.
• Galatians 3:15–16 (ESV) — 15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. 16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.

And Scripture agrees with John’s revelation of Jesus concerning Abraham’s knowledge of Him.
• Galatians 3:7–9 (ESV) — 7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
• Hebrews 11:13 (ESV) — 13 These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.
• 1 Peter 1:10–12 (ESV) — 10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

Is it any wonder, then, that the Jews responded to Jesus’ word with death threats.
• To those who cannot “hear” Jesus’ words, His words come off as blasphemous (as in our text), intolerant, crazy, idiotic, deluded, or even better, not even Jesus’ words but John’s fabrication.

Lessons for Us:
• So was Jesus’ discussion with the Jews in John 8 a success?
• Is it our job to make Jesus’ words not appear to be blasphemous, intolerant, crazy, idiotic or deluded?
• Does our motivation to do so find its impetus in our need bring “glory” to ourselves or to the truth of God’s words?

John 8:41-47 – What They Do and No Spiritual Orphans

2011-08-02T19:45:00.000-04:00

Having gone into detail about what Abraham did, we can now examine what Jesus says of the Jews actions.

John 8:41–47 (ESV) — 41 You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

1) CHILDREN DO THE WORK OF THEIR FATHER

John 8:41–42 (ESV) — 41 You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.

Works of their Father:
Jesus contrasts the work Abraham did, the work of his Father Yahweh, with the works the Jews are doing, “you seek to kill me” (vs. 37).
• He then suggests that they do this because this is what their “father did”.
• When speaking of what their “father did”, Jesus, among other things, is certainly referring at the very least to His encounter with Satan in the wilderness (Matt 4:1-11).
• Matthew 4:3–11 (ESV) — 3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written, “ ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’ ” 5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple 6 and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, “ ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’ and “ ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.’ ” 7 Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’ ” 8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” 10 Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “ ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’ ”
• What was Satan’s intent?
• Clearly he sought to “kill” the ministry of Jesus and subjugate Jesus to his dominion.

Are the Jews in our text really seeking to do Satan’s work?
• This teaching of Jesus is incredibly profound and significant.
• The Jews certainly did not wake up that morning and consider all the ways they could embrace and further the kingdom of Satan.
• They believed their service was to Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
• More on this shortly.

So what is the implication here?
• One implication of this has to do with one’s worldview.
• “A worldview functions as a set of habits, forming background beliefs that direct our acts of noticing or failing to notice various features of reality” – J.P. Moreland.
• The worldview of the Bible is asking us to understand that what we think we know from the 5 senses (empiricism) is not the only or even the primary source of truth and knowledge about reality.
• There is in fact a spiritual reality and truth behind all that we encounter with our senses.
• And this reality and truth is as real, valid and even primary.

What is sad here is that the Jews embraced the truth of a spiritual reality without hesitation.
• This is in stark contrast to the current western worldview of scientific naturalism.
• But they nevertheless rejected Jesus.
• As Jesus said, “If God were your Father, you would love me…” (vs. 42).
• And as Jesus said elsewhere:
o John 5:23 (ESV) — 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
o John 15:23 (ESV) — 23 Whoever hates me hates my Father also.
• Whatever was right with their beliefs and worldview, one glaring problem was that it failed “to notice various features of reality”.
• Specifically, Jesus relationship to the God of Israel and Abraham.

They certainly thought they noticed the truth of Jesus.
• After Jesus’ words, the Jews insult Jesus.
    o “The Jews’ rebuttal may imply the illegitimacy of Jesus’ birth” – Kostenberger.
• They then argue that their father is God (vs. 41).
• As such, they are perfectly qualified to make judgments about those who claim to speak on God’s behalf.
• They are not failing to notice anything – Jesus is a bastard and a blasphemer worthy of death.
• Jesus responds to their charge with the following logic:
    o (1) Trusting in the revelation of God the Father about Jesus leads to a love of Jesus
    o (2) You do not love Jesus
    o (3) Therefore you do not trust in God the Father’s revelation
    o (4) So God the Father is not your father and your trust is in someone else

Why did they fail to notice?
• Jesus has answered this question already on a number of occasions, e.g., in John 6.
• And in answering the question in today’s text He uncovers another facet of unbelief for us.
• Unbelievers, by default, are in service of the devil.

2) CHILDREN HEAR THEIR FATHER

John 8:43–44 (ESV) — 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

They don’t believe because they cannot bear (aren’t able) to hear Jesus’ Words:
A fallen heart produces a fallen worldview.
• As we have seen this worldview fails to notice various aspects of reality, namely the truth of Jesus.
• And in fact, Jesus now tells us that people who live in this realm (John 8:21-29) cannot even “bear to hear my word”, Jesus says.
    o By “cannot bear to hear” Jesus means that they don’t receive or accept what He is saying.
• As usual the Bible is its own best commentary:
    o Jeremiah 6:10 (ESV) — 10 To whom shall I speak and give warning, that they may hear? Behold, their ears are uncircumcised, they cannot listen; behold, the word of the LORD is to them an object of scorn; they take no pleasure in it.
    o 1 Corinthians 2:14 (ESV) — 14 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.

It gets worse:
• Jesus doesn’t ease up.
• As we have seen before, he is concerned with authenticity not numbers.
• He goes on to argue that they “are of the devil” (vs. 44) and their will is to do the bidding of the devil.
• In other words, they do what their father the devil does just as a little child naturally does what his father does.
    o I have a great example of this from my childhood with the burner.

The implications of this correspond to the rest of what the Gospel of John teaches on this subject.
• There is no neutral ground of belief, heart and mind, works, truth or knowledge.
• As alluded to earlier, this does not mean that those that reject Jesus are explicitly seeking to do the will of the devil.
• These people can often be kinder and more selfless than many believers.
• However, the truth of the matter revealed by Jesus here is that if you don’t believe He is who He and the Father say He is, then you are in service, even if only implicitly, of the devil in the spiritual realm.

Why is this so?
• If one believes in Jesus and His testimony about Himself then one is in agreement with God the Father (and Abraham for that matter).
• On the other hand, unbelief, as we know, is rebellion against the claims of Jesus and the Father; a rebellion against the truth.
• And so whatever is done in rebellion to God, done in unbelief, is a rejection of the truth and an embracing of a lie.
• So this life glorifies the devil the “father of lies” (vs. 44) who has “no truth in him” (vs. 44) whether or not this glorification is implicit or explicit.
• This is an incredibly divisive teaching and the world thinks we are “wacked out” for even suggesting it.

So why can’t unbelievers, who reject the testimony of Jesus and implicitly serve the devil, hear the truth of Jesus’ words?

3) CHILDREN ARE DECIEVED BY THEIR FATHER

John 8:45–47 (ESV) — 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

Jesus has (2) reasons in our text for this.
• (1) The truth of Jesus is rejected by unbelievers because as THE truth it is rejected by their father the devil.
    o And children do what their father do, as we just discussed above.
• (2) They are not of God.

Kostenberger sums Jesus’ explanation this way:
• “This undercuts Jewish presumption of their election by God and their own righteousness on account of keeping the law. Like Nicodemus, they must be born from above (3:3, 5, 7) with a birth that is not predicated upon human factors but is of God (1:13). Though in one sense they were God’s children, in another, all-important sense, they first must “become” God’s children by faith in Jesus (1:12).”

BTW – Jesus’ words in verse 46 are best explained as follows:
• “Jesus does not ask whether anyone thinks he is guilty of sin. Clearly, many did (e.g. 5:18, where some thought he was guilty not only of breaking the Sabbath, but also of blasphemy by making himself equal with God). The question, rather, is whether anyone can prove him guilty of sin” – D.A. Carson.
• If Jesus has no sin this means, contrary to the devil, He will not and cannot lie.
    o Isaiah 53:9 (ESV) — 9 And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.
    o 2 Corinthians 5:21 (ESV) — 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
• If they cannot find Him guilty of sin and thus incapable of lying, His testimony should be believed.

But as we have seen throughout this entire lesson, an explanation for why the truth is not believed by seemingly intelligent people even with a sympathetic spiritual worldview is because their father is a liar.
• 2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) — 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
• These people cannot see or hear the truth, and in fact see it as nonsense.
• And “by rejecting the truth incarnate [one has] marked themselves out as children of Satan” – MacArthur.

Lessons for Us:
2 Corinthians 2:11 (ESV) — 11 so that we would not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his designs.
• The devil is real and is personal and has an agenda to obfuscate the truth.
• The truth is found in God’s word and it is in His word that we gain knowledge to defeat his “designs”.
• And there are no spiritual orphans.
• One’s spiritual father is either God or the devil.
• If Jesus believes this then we need to.

John 8:38-40 – What Abraham Did

2011-07-25T20:22:00.000-04:00

Last week Jesus contrasted the difference between abiding in His word versus relying on one’s ancestral relationship with Abraham.
• In the first case one is free and in the second one remains a slave to sin.
• Clearly the inference made is that the free man abides in Jesus’ word and anyone else is enslaved to sin.
• As usual, there is no neutral ground.

In today’s text we continue Jesus’ conversation with the Jews.
• In their conversation we see a theme that will continue for the remainder of John 8.
• The theme is father Abraham.
• Abraham is brought up 11 times in a 25 verse span in John 8.
• We will see shortly why this is significant.

John 8:38–40 (ESV) — 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.” 39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did.

1) WHAT ABRAHAM DID

John 8:38–47 (ESV) — 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.” 39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did.

In our text today, Abraham is brought up in a conversation about Fathers.
• Jesus distinguishes between (2) fathers – His and theirs.
• The Jews argue that, presumably like Jesus, Abraham is their father.
• “The Jews are advancing the argument by saying, in effect, that even in the moral and ethical realm, they measure up well enough to be considered the descendants of Abraham” – D.A. Carson.
• In other words, they were following Abraham’s “pattern of faith in God” – MacArthur.
• Jesus disagrees.
• He makes the astute observation that if this were so, “you would be doing the works Abraham did” (vs.39).

But, as it stands, they are rejecting the truth they are hearing from God.
• They even “seek to kill” the truth giver.
• And Jesus says again, “This is not what Abraham did” (vs. 40).

At this point we need to find out what Abraham did.
• We will hang out here for the duration because this topic has significant theological implications.

What Abraham Did:
(1) He did not follow Mosaic Law.
• It seems odd to start with what Abraham didn’t do when asking what he did do.
• However, this is an extremely important point.
• Abraham’s election by God and his remaining in God was not founded on works – the Levitical Laws God handed down to Moses.
• Why was this so? – He didn’t have them!
• And Paul devotes Romans 4 to explaining that Abraham was not made righteous by works.
• We will see shortly what his relationship with God was founded on.

Why is our first observation this significant?
• Because the Jews Jesus was talking to and the Jews of today reject this fundamental teaching of both the OT and Jesus.
• They believe that righteousness (salvation) comes by works.
• And when Jesus argued over and over that if you believed Abraham, Moses and the Prophets you would believe in Him, He is being literal and dead serious (John 5:42; Luke 16:27-31).
• If you believe righteousness (salvation) is by works, you are rejecting what Abraham, Moses and the Prophets taught.

This rejection always has (3) parts to it as seen here by a current example of this rejection from Rabbi Shmuley – “America’s Rabbi”:
• (a) Reject the Father’s Jesus – “…I will be engaging in a debate as to whether belief in the divinity of Jesus is compatible with Judaism. It is not. Period. It never was, and it never will be” – Rabbi Shmuley.
• (b) Makeup the World’s Jesus – “The time has come for them [Christians] to once and for all declare their reciprocity by refraining from ever directly targeting Jews for conversion. This is what Jesus would want…” – Rabbi Shmuley.
o “Jesus’ mission was to renew Jewish attachment to the Torah in a time when the threads of tradition were being unwoven due to the oppressive hand of the occupying Roman beast” – Rabbi Shmuley.
• (c) Finally, Reject Faith for Works – “For instance, Christianity says that faith trumps action. What you believe is more important than what you do [straw man and plainly false]. And that’s why they want us to believe in Jesus. But is that really the problem in the world today, that people don’t have the right beliefs, OR that they don’t have the right actions?” – Rabbi Shmuley.
o “We Jews believe in righteous action. We don’t care what you believe; it’s what you do” – Rabbi Shmuley (Unbelievable Radio).

POI – As we discussed last week, action that satisfies God is linked to belief – the glorious consequences of abiding in Jesus’ Word.
• But this action begins with the new heart of Ezekiel 36 and John 3.
• And as we will see shortly, Abraham’s belief led to action and glorious consequences.

(2) He converted.
Genesis 15:6 (ESV) — 6 And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
• Abraham converted from “idolatry to monotheism” – Bauckham.
• The story of his conversion does not appear in the Bible, however it is clearly inferred.
• Yahweh spoke to Abraham in His own country and called him out of it physically, spiritually and culturally.

Abraham’s conversion was evidenced by the fact that he:
• Left Ur in Haran of Upper Mesopotamia for Caanan.
• Left his polytheistic pagan roots and at least 13 gods.
• Left his urban pagan culture for a semi-nomadic one.
• “Abraham exchanged an urban-based life for the semi-nomadic style of the pastoralist with no permanent home, living in tents (Gen 12:8, 9; 13:18; 18:1; cf. Heb 11:9)” – AYBD.
o This cultural upheaval he put himself and family through means that he didn’t count the cost of following Yahweh.

Interestingly, the story of his conversion does appear in the “Jubilees, Philo, Josephus, and the Apocalypse of Abraham” - Bauckham.
• All the stories agree on one crucial point about his conversion, “Abraham’s crucial recognition…that the only true God is the Creator of all things, himself uncreated” – Bauckham.

(3) He Worshipped
Genesis 17:1–4 (ESV) — 1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2 that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” 3 Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations.
• Abraham also built altars to the Lord to worship Him and memorialize the encounters he had with God.

(4) He Obeyed
Genesis 12:1 & 4 (ESV) — 1 Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. 4 So Abram went, as the LORD had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.
Genesis 22:1–3 (ESV) — 1 After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here am I.” 2 He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” 3 So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him.
Genesis 22:18 (ESV) — 18 and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.”

Summary of what Abraham Did:
• Left his gods – Marduk and the lot
• Left his home – Northern Mesopotamia
• Left his culture – Urban Pagan lifestyle
• He did all this because he believed the “truth that he heard from God” (John 8:40).

And as a result of his belief He:
• Followed the one true God – Yahweh
• Obeyed and Worshiped Him
• Made a new home - Canaan
• Embraced a cultural upheaval (didn’t count the cost) – Semi-Nomadic Monotheistic lifestyle

One final comment about Abraham’s righteousness:
• “… Yahweh pronounces Abraham to have fulfilled righteousness, to share righteousness, ṣĕdāqâ, not by an act or a work, ritual or otherwise, but by faith. Von Rad understands the verse…as a revolutionary statement. Faith sets one right with God, and it is God who reckons this internal act to Abraham as ṣĕdāqâ” – AYBD.

So Abraham did everything that Jesus’ Jewish audience would not do.
• They feared corrupting and maligning the very Judaism that they in fact were corrupting and maligning by rejecting the “truth that they heard from God” (John 8:40).
• That truth being the Father’s (Father God and Father Abraham’s) Jesus.

So when Jesus says, “but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did” (John 8:40), He is equating His words with the words that Abraham recognized as coming from Yahweh.
• He is saying that the Jews are rejecting Yahweh’s words by rejecting Jesus.
• He is saying that Abraham would not reject His words because He did not reject Yahweh’s words.

A related rabbit trail – Does the OT mistakenly lead the Jew to believe that righteousness comes by obeying God’s commands?

If the OT taught that humanity’s sin problem was entirely a matter of obedience to God’s commands, one could make the argument.
• However, the OT does not teach this.
• It teaches, like the NT, that the fundamental problem is a heart problem.
• And it demands a direct correlation between the state of one’s heart and the nature of one’s actions.
• Jeremiah 17:9–10 (ESV) —9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?
• Ezekiel 36:23, 26 & 27 (ESV) — 23 And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
• Jeremiah 4:14 (ESV) — 14 O Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil, that you may be saved. How long shall your wicked thoughts lodge within you?
• Jeremiah 11:8 (ESV) — 8 Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but everyone walked in the stubbornness of his evil heart. Therefore I brought upon them all the words of this covenant, which I commanded them to do, but they did not.”

Nor does the OT teach that obedience to the law atones for sins.
• Only the shedding of blood atoned for sin (unless one couldn’t afford a blood sacrifice – Lev. 14:21).
• Leviticus 17:11 (ESV) — 11 …for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.

So what did obedience do and why did God demand it?
• Obedience, especially in Israel’s corporate context, made a way for God to bless through prosperity, rain and abundant crops, peace, removal of harmful beasts, victory in battle, increase in population, protection, preservation of a remnant, life, etc. (Lev. 26:3-9; Deut. 6:24; Lev. 18:4-5).

BTW – Because of the nature of God’s nation building project with Israel, there does appear to be some differences between the roles of obedience for the nation as opposed to the individual.
• On an individual level, obedience to God’s law did not mean one was righteous (same as NT) because the nature of the individual’s heart was determinative in that regard.
• On a national level, it seems that if the general trend of the nation under this or that king was obedience, God would bless the nation.
• This topic would be a great book and it would take a book to give this topic justice.

Lessons for Us:
• Nothing has changed.
• Abraham was chosen by God and responded with belief and obedience.
• As a result, he was deemed righteous.
• The Jews Jesus was talking to were also chosen by God to be part of the people through which God would bless the nations.
• They responded with disbelief and disobedience and were deemed children of Satan by Jesus.
• In the OT and the NT it comes down to how you respond to the Word of God’s truth – not your works or ancestry.
• This is how it was, is and will be until Christ’s return.
• People have and always will try to circumvent this by reinventing works, faith, righteousness and even Jesus.
• Nothing has changed.

How Do Unbelievers Simultaneously Both Perceive God and Reject/Suppress God with Their Hearts and Minds?

2011-07-16T21:07:00.002-04:00

Romans 1:18–21 (ESV) — 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Most are very familiar with this passage and refer to it when asked to explain why a person who has never heard the Gospel is "without excuse" before God. In other words, why the default position for humanity is to exist in a state of accountability before a holy and just God.

Certainly Paul's words address this, but they can also be seen to address at least (2) other things: humanity's clear perception and knowledge of God; and humanity's unbelief in spite of this clear perception and knowledge. As the title of this article suggests, it is the relationship between these last two that I want to explore.

What is so interesting is that Paul explicitly puts the "perceiving" of "what can be known about God" in one's "thinking" and "heart". In other words, a fallen humanity can perceive God's "eternal power" and "divine nature" within their hearts and minds from "the things that have been made". A reason they are "without excuse". And yet, Paul also reveals that the heart and mind are also a barrier to "clearly perceiving" because they operate in "futile" and "foolish" ways.

So, why does a fallen humanity, who nevertheless can still perceive God's "eternal power" and "divine nature" in their hearts and minds, also fail "to acknowledge God" in their hearts and minds?

Of course, the answer can be found in the nature of depravity - the hardness of the heart and the noetic effects of sin that Paul speaks of in Romans 1. But is there an answer that fleshes out the way depravity interacts with the unbeliever's will that explains why they choose to be "futile in their thinking" and act with "foolish hearts"?

Enter J. Budziszewski's book What We Can't Not Know. In Part II and Chapter 4, "Explaining the Lost World - The First and Second Witnesses", he introduces a useful way to view the conscience, the location of moral knowledge. He states that the "older natural law thinkers" differentiated between the "deep conscience" and the "surface conscience". He laments that these are "two aspects of the moral intellect...that we have forgotten".

I use conscience as an example because it is here that we interact with the moral knowledge of God; part of His "divine nature".

Now, deep conscience "is the interior witness to the foundational principles of moral law". In it resides "the knowledge of basic goods, of formal norms, and of everyday moral rules." It is not a feeling but an innate knowledge of morality. In fact, it was "designed as a witness to moral truth" by God. Therefore, it "cannot be erased, cannot be mistaken, and is the same in every human being." And knowledge of moral truth obligates us with duties to self, neighbor and God. In relation to our discussion thus far, it seems possible that the deep conscience is, as Paul says, where all humanity can "clearly perceive" God's nature from "the things that have been made."

Surface conscience, on the other hand, is more subjective. Budziszewski says that surface conscience "presents greater possibilities for going wrong. It can be erased, it can be mistaken, and it can vary from person to person." In relation to our discussion thus far, if deep conscience is where clear perception of God's nature occurs, it seems possible that it is at the level of the surface conscience that "futile thinking" and "the foolish heart" corrupt the testimony of moral truth that the deep conscience provides. This corruption then warps our desire to fulfill, in the way God ordains, duties to self, neighbor and God and results in a personal, subjective and relative moral framework.

By way of example, Budziszewski cites (9) ways that the surface conscience can go wrong. And because it is here, the surface conscience, that we find a possible answer to our question asked above, I think it is worth quoting Budziszewski at length.

Surface conscience "can blur and err in at least nine different ways: (1) one way is insufficient experience, where I don't know enough to reach sound conclusions; (2) another is insufficient skill, where I have never learned the art of reasoning well. Then come (3) sloth, where I am too lazy to reason, and (4) corrupt custom, where it has never occurred to me to do so. Next come (5) passion, where I am distracted by strong feeling from reasoning carefully, and (6) fear, where I am afraid to reason because I might find out that I am wrong. Bringing up the rear are (7) wishful thinking, where I include in my reasoning only what I am willing to notice; (8) depraved ideology, where I interpret known principles crookedly; and (9) malice, where I refuse to reason because I am determined to do what I want."

These provide, it seems to me, a fairly articulate description of how the depravity of humanity finds expression on a day to day basis. And as suggested, provide an answer to the question we asked earlier.

One can easily see, for example, someone who abides within a naturalistic framework invoke #8 and claim that moral knowledge is only a subjective, cultural convention. Or an atheist invoke #9 because they refuse to admit that they have any moral accountability before a holy God. Or someone invoke #1 or #3 simply because in a world where "to each his own" is a guiding principal, who cares about moral knowledge. And finally, the person who lives under the illusion that feelings, and not a divinely informed moral knowledge, are the grounding for morality, would surely invoke #5.

Each is an act of a corrupt and depraved will in rebellion to the deep conscience convictions that Paul argues we all have in our Romans 1 text. But of our own choosing, we follow the desires of our heart and corrupt the revelation of God by one or all of the examples given. And because this corruption is an act of our fallen will, we "are without excuse" before God.

At the end of the day, humanity's "futile thinking" and "foolishness of heart" with respect to God's moral knowledge, is, as Paul suggests, a dishonoring of God as God and an exaltation of man as god. Budziszewski puts it this way, "we don't want the freedom of the creature but the freedom of the Creator - not freedom to be good but freedom to determine the good."

And so this dynamic between the deep conscience and the surface conscience perhaps explains how the unbeliever can both perceive in their heart and mind and yet also reject in their heart and mind the revelation of God - whether that revelation be of the general variety or the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Finally, I must share a personal and significant implication of this discussion. I always find it helpful to understand the extent of my depravity before my salvation. It seems that my unbelief was a bottomless pit of "futile thinking". What I mean is that I often embraced one if not all of these surface conscience errors before I trusted in Jesus as Lord and Savior. In fact, these errors articulate virtually every phase of unbelief I went through as I matured intellectually (by that I mean as I was indoctrinated into the liberal secularism of college). The "smarter" I became, the more clever was my corruption of God's moral knowledge. I left behind the errors #1 to #3 and "progressed" to errors #7 through #9. And in my own power, there was no escape.

And yet, on my behalf and by His grace, God smashed all the errors to oblivion and called me to believe in Him. Amen.

John 8:30-37 – Freedom – Found in Abiding or Abraham

2011-07-10T15:55:00.000-04:00

In our text today Jesus contrasts freedom and slavery.
• However, this is the kind of freedom and slavery that concerned Jesus the most – spiritual freedom and slavery.
• Jesus makes clear humanity either abides in His word and is free OR is enslaved to sin.
• Today we will try and understand the contrast Jesus is making.

John 8:30–38 (ESV) — 30 As he was saying these things, many believed in him. 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?” 34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you.

1) FREEDOM IN ABIDING

John 8:30–32 (ESV) — 30 As he was saying these things, many believed in him. 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

A few obvious questions arise from Jesus’ words.
• What is it to abide?
• What is His word?
• What is the truth?

Using what John’s Gospel has shown us thus far, our context, we can track down the answers to these questions.

Abide:
The “laboratory” definition conveys the idea of to Continue, Live, Dwell, or Lodge within a “certain realm or sphere” – BDAG.
• The “realm or sphere” was made clear last week when Jesus differentiated between the realm of God and the realm of a fallen and rebellious creation.
• John 8:23 (ESV) — 23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.
• And in our text today, the “realm of God” is specifically represented by Jesus’ Word.
• So Jesus is teaching that a believer (disciple vs. 31) is to Continue, Live, Dwell, or Lodge within God’s realm as represented, in this case, by Jesus’ Word.

And the importance of abiding is underscored by Jesus’ and John’s repeated use of the concept.
• John 6:56 (ESV) — 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
• John 15:4 (ESV) — 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.
• 1 John 2:6 (ESV) — 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
• 2 John 9 (ESV) — 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

We get a sense from these verses that we are to abide in more than just Jesus’ words.
• And it is interesting that, like our text today, these other examples appear in contexts that contrast the difference between authentic belief and spurious belief.
• In other words, abiding in Jesus’ Word (vs. John 8:31), His Vine (vs. John 15:4) and in Him (1 John 2:60) demonstrates authenticity of belief – fruit.
• As James makes so clear, belief is not void of action.
• James 2:26 (ESV) — 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

But, it is necessary to point out that our abiding and the “works” or “fruit” it produces is fueled and empowered by God’s grace, not our will.
• “the branch cannot bear fruit by itself” – John 15:4.

D.A. Carson fleshes out abiding nicely when he says:
• “A genuine believer remains in Jesus’ ‘word’ (logos), his teaching (cf. notes on 1:1): i.e. such a person obeys it, seeks to understand it better, and finds it more precious, more controlling, precisely when other forces flatly oppose it” – D.A. Carson.

So we have explored the idea of what it is to abide and why it is important.
• Now to answer the 2nd question concerning the object of our abiding in our text today – Jesus’ Word.
• What is it?

Jesus’ Word:
One need only look back at the last 8 chapters of John to see Jesus’ Words and some highlights are His teaching on:
• His relationship to the Father.
• The depravity of man.
• The nature of the work of God in salvation.
• His identity with Yahweh as found in His “I am” statements.
• His looking forward to being “lifted up” to the Cross.

BTW – the words of the rest of the NT writers are also Jesus’ words (unless they say otherwise).
• John 17:8 (ESV) — 8 For I [Jesus] have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.
• John 14:26 (ESV) — 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

So why Jesus Word?
• “To the Jews who have professed faith in him, Jesus, understandably enough, indicates what genuine faith does: it perseveres, it holds tight to Jesus’ teaching, with some glorious consequences” – D.A. Carson.
• In other words, the capacity to abide in Jesus’ words demonstrates a born again heart, eyes that see, ears that hear – i.e., salvation.
• John 5:24 (ESV) — 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

Salvation is not the only Glorious Consequences of Abiding in Jesus’ Word – a few more:
(1) God’s word produces knowledge that averts spiritual destruction.
• Hebrews 5:12–13 (ESV) — 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.
• Hosea 4:6 (ESV) — 6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me. And since you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.

(2) God’s word testifies to truth of Jesus Christ.
• John 5:39–40 (ESV) — 39 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.

(3) God’s word produces spiritual maturity and the benefits thereof.
• Acts 20:32 (ESV) — 32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

(4) God’s word exposes where we cling to the flesh in our heart and mind.
• Hebrews 4:12 (ESV) — 12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

(5) God’s word produces joy and delight.
• Jeremiah 15:16 (ESV) — 16 "Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart.”

(6) God’s word gives a proper spiritual perspective to a material world.
• Psalm 119:72 (ESV) — 72 The law of your mouth is better to me than thousands of gold and silver pieces.

(7) God’s word exposes deception and worldliness.
• Colossians 2:8 (ESV) — 8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
• Ephesians 4:14 (ESV) — 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.

(8) God’s word protects us from ourselves.
• Mark 7:8-9 (ESV) — 8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” 9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!

This is by no means an exhaustive list.
• Nonetheless, it has aptly revealed why Jesus would associates belief (“truly my disciples”) and abiding in His word.
• And incidentally, the list also answers the 3rd question we asked at the beginning.
• What is the truth that abiding in Jesus’ Words makes known to us?
• And more than that, it also demonstrates why the truth that comes from abiding in Jesus’ words sets us free from the slavery of sin.

This relationship between abiding and freedom from sin brings us to our next section, the response of the supposed believers.

2) FREEDOM IN ABRAHAM

John 8:33–37 (ESV) — 33 They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?” 34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you.

Strikingly, we see here (2) significant developments.
• (1) Those who “believed” were not authentic (vss. 37-38).
    o As is so often the case in John, they had a spurious faith.
    o And Jesus’ desire is always to expose a spurious faith as he did here.
    o It is not about numbers but about authenticity.
• (2) The Jews curiously ignored Jesus’ significant statement about abiding in His Word and latched on to the use of His word “freedom”.
    o It is the slavery/freedom discussion I want to unpack.

Interestingly, the Jews finally got the spiritual gist of what Jesus was saying to them.
• Usually they miss Jesus’ spiritual point and dwell on a literal view of His words.
• We know they got it this time because historically speaking the Jews had been slaves or captives – of the Egyptians, the Assyrians and the Babylonians.

So what was their point when they said, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone”?

As the Jews have so often assumed, being Jewish was to be free; to be saved.
• But nothing in the Old Testament Scripture teaches this.
• The OT does not teach that salvation is by birth or works.
• Habakkuk 2:4 (ESV) — 4 “Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith.
• In fact, Paul actually preached the Gospel from the O.T. in Acts 13 when he spoke of the promised offspring, the begotten one, the uncorrupted one, etc.

And in Romans, Paul, a Jew, states clearly the problem with this Jewish line of thinking.
• Romans 2:28–29 (ESV) — 28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

But the Jews in our text today were telling Jesus that in fact their “praise”, salvation and freedom were from man…Abraham.
• Jesus disagreed.

No Freedom in Abraham’s house:
Living in the “house” of Abraham (Israel) does not bestow on its occupants freedom.
• Especially when ones position in the house is a slave to sin.
• So irrespective of their relationship to Abraham, the Jew lives in this enslaved condition.
• And as a slave, there is no right to the righteousness of the God of Abraham.
    o Slaves have no inheritance rights
• As Wiersbe says, “The servant may live in the house, but he is not a part of the family; and he cannot be guaranteed a future” – Wiersbe.
• This is what Jesus means when He says, “The slave does not remain in the house forever”.
    o The Jew benefits from their covenantal relationship with God, but they are not, by default, spiritually free because of this relationship.

John MacArthur puts it like this:
• “His statement that the slave does not remain in the house forever, but the son does remain forever was a warning. The son has permanent rights in the household; the slave does not. Even though the Jews were Abraham’s descendants (and thus part of God’s chosen nation), they were like slaves, not sons, and in danger of eternally forfeiting the privileges they had received” – John MacArthur.

Jesus, on the other hand, is the Son and as such remains forever.
• In other words, as God/Man without sin He both is and gives the salvation of the Father.
• It is His rightful inheritance given His relationship with the Father.
• Therefore to be saved is to be in Jesus (to abide in His word), not to be in Abraham (a slave to sin).

Jesus is making the following contrast to teach us and the Jews:
• “The contrast is between a son, who is the inheritor of the father’s property and whose rights cannot be denied or taken away, and a slave who, although he may enjoy some of the privileges of being in the same house as the son, nevertheless can be sold at any time and thus lose his privileges. Obviously this applied to Christ’s hearers, who were Jews but who were not God’s sons by the new birth. They had all the privileges of being Jews, but unless they came to Christ for salvation the privileges would not last forever. The day would come when even Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jews would be scattered” – James Boice.

And as alluded to earlier:
• “By sketching genuine faith in such stark terms, Jesus is standing true to a pattern we find elsewhere: he is never interested in multiplying numbers of converts if they are not genuine believers, and therefore he insists on forcing would-be disciples to count the cost (cf. Lk. 9:57–62; 14:25–33)” – D.A. Carson.
• What is the cost in our text today?

Lesson for Us:
• Jesus’ warning to the Jews is a warning to us.
• In whom or what do we trust?
• And we can answer this question by examining in what we abide.
• Do we abide in Jesus’ words?
• Do our lives display the glorious consequences of this abiding?
• If our lives do not display theses glorious consequences, then are we abiding in something we shouldn’t be (at least for a season).
• Jesus words to the Jews, His truth, were more often than not incredibly offensive to the Jews.
• How is Jesus offensive to this day?

John 8:21-29 – All Will Know

2011-07-06T18:23:00.000-04:00

Last week we learned why the “where” of Jesus’ origin and destination was so important to establishing His identity.
• If fact, it was so essential that Jesus told the Pharisees that if they simply knew the “where” they would know Him.

Today, Jesus presses His point further by discussing the implications of not knowing His identity – I am He.
• He bluntly states that to die in this condition is to die in your sins.
• We will explore Jesus’ words and His conversation with the Jews about this type of death.

John 8:21–30 (ESV) — 21 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.” 22 So the Jews said, “Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” 23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.” 25 So they said to him, “Who are you?” Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been telling you from the beginning. 26 I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him.” 27 They did not understand that he had been speaking to them about the Father. 28 So Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me. 29 And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.”

1) BELIEVE IN ME OR DIE IN YOUR SINS

John 8:21–23 (ESV) — 21 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.” 22 So the Jews said, “Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” 23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

“Seek me” but “you will die in your sin”:
This doesn’t make sense unless we take into account a couple of things.
• (1) Father’s Jesus vs. World’s Jesus
• (2) What Jesus means by “seek me”

We have seen in numerous lessons that most of the Jews did not see Jesus as the Father saw Him but as something altogether different – fraud, charlatan, demon-possessed, miracle worker, political king, etc. (World’s Jesus).
• As a result they rejected any claims He made as to His identity and His relationship with the Father.
• However, this meant that they would still be left searching for the Messiah.
• Jesus understands that they will continue to “seek” the Messiah in a general sense.
• So, “What is meant…is that they will go on looking for the Messiah” – D.A. Carson.
• But of course their search will be fruitless because they have rejected the true Messiah.

Jesus then addresses the result of rejecting Him and seeking their false Messiah.
• They will die in their sins.
• In fact, Jesus goes on to teach that to “die in your sin” means they will be unable to go where Jesus is going.
• When they die in their sin they lose all hope of fellowship with the Messiah they rejected!
• And it is telling that the revelation of such a profound truth is mocked – “will he kill himself”.

BTW – Jesus’ pronouncement has a double meaning (cross & Father) which is made clear when we look at John 13.
• John 13:33 & 36 (ESV) — 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. You will seek me, and just as I said to the Jews, so now I also say to you, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’ 36 Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, where are you going?” Jesus answered him, “Where I am going you cannot follow me now, but you will follow afterward.”

Two Realms:
• Jesus responds to their mocking by heaping it on them even more.
• He describes just how great the divide is between believers and unbelievers.
• He explains and thereby implies that one lives within one of two possible realms.
• “The realm of God himself” OR “the realm of his fallen and rebellious creation” – John MacArthur.
• So, “The contrast is not between a spiritual world and a material world, but between the realm of God himself and the realm of his fallen and rebellious creation” – D.A. Carson.

John MacArthur sums up the fallen realm this way:
• “Those engulfed in the world “[love] the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds [are] evil” (John 3:19). As a result, they are utterly blind to spiritual truth (2 Cor. 4:4; cf. Matt. 13:11; John 12:39–40; Rom. 8:5; 1 Cor. 2:14)—having filled themselves with hatred toward Jesus (and His followers; John 15:18–19; 17:14; 1 John 3:13) for confronting their sin (John 7:7; 15:18)” – John MacArthur.
• Those in this realm actually rejoice at the death of Jesus.

But with respect to the realm of God, Jesus gives this encouragement and caution to the believer:
• John 15:19 (ESV) — 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.
• We are not of this world because Christ has laid claim to us (not doubt at the Fathers direction)!

2) WHO ARE YOU?

John 8:24–27 (ESV) — 24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.” 25 So they said to him, “Who are you?” Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been telling you from the beginning. 26 I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him.” 27 They did not understand that he had been speaking to them about the Father.

Jesus repeats the unbeliever’s condition underscoring how desperate it is.
• And then tells the Jews that the only remedy for dying in sin is to “believe that I am he”.
• What does Jesus mean “believe that I am he”?
• Would its meaning be as plain to the Jews as it is to us?

The answers to these questions will be found in the OT – where Jesus is alluding to.
• Deuteronomy 32:39 (ESV) — 39 “ ‘See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.
• Isaiah 41:4 (ESV) — 4 Who has performed and done this, calling the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.
• Isaiah 43:10 (ESV) — 10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.
• Isaiah 48:12 (ESV) — 12 “Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he; I am the first, and I am the last.

The Greek phrases from the Septuagint and Jesus’ words in the Gospel of John, egō eimi, are identical.
• Jesus’ use of this phrase is two things:
• (1) “A claim to diety” – D.A. Carson.
• (2) Blasphemy and an “invitation to face the wrath of God” – D.A. Carson.
    o Unless His claim is true

So the answer to our two questions:
• “The Jews of Jesus’ day understood perfectly that He was claiming to be God. In fact, they were so shocked by His use of that name, in reference to Himself (cf. vv. 28, 58), that they attempted to stone Him for blasphemy (v. 59)” – MacArthur.

What this tells us is that their response, “Who are you?”, is further evidence that they are “from below” and are “of this world” .
• Inhabitants of these realms have clear limitations on their ability (a moral inability/depravity) to know and believe in the Father’s Jesus.
• This, “is the fundamental reason why Jesus’ opponents can neither recognize who he is nor understand his teaching. Nothing will suffice to remove such blindness but being ‘taught by God’ (6:45), being born again (3:3, 5), finding the one who is himself the way, the truth and the life (14:6)” – D.A. Carson.

3) YOU WILL KNOW

John 8:28–30 (ESV) — 28 So Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me. 29 And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.”

But wait, is Jesus now contradicting Himself.
• Will those “of this world” know Jesus when they see Him on the cross?
• Jesus seems to be saying that all his listeners (not just a select few) will “know that I am he” when He is crucified.

To answer this question, we have to consider a couple of things.
• 1) Last week’s lesson on the “where” – the significance of the Cross to Jesus’ identity.
• 2) What He means by “know”.

(1) Identity and the Cross (from last week):
So in John’s Gospel, “the exaltation of the Servant of which this verse speaks [Isaiah 52:13] is the whole sequence of humiliation, suffering, death and vindication beyond death which [Isaiah] 53 describes” – Richard Bauckham.
• The “where” is not just the exalted right hand of God, but also the cross.
• It is amazing to think that even the cross was (and will be) a “where” where Jesus demonstrated His divinity and His relationship with the Father.
• Profoundly, “the witness, the humiliation, the death and the exaltation of the Servant of the Lord is the way in which God reveals his glory and demonstrates his deity to the world” – Richard Bauchkham.
• The Place of God is both:
    o 1) Exalted and on the Throne – Ruler and Creator
    o 2) Lifted up and on the Cross – Servant and Savior

Understanding the significance of being “lifted up” we need to look at the 2nd consideration.

2) What does Jesus mean by “know”:
Maybe Jesus doesn’t really mean “know”.
• Ginosko – “to grasp the significance or meaning of someth., understand, comprehend” – BDAG.
• It is a perception of things as they really are, “not an opinion about them” – TDNT.
• And in John’s Gospel, this knowledge is, “specifically about the relationship between the Father and the Son” – TDNT.
• In other words, “a knowledge of his unity with the Father (10:38), of his obedience and love as the one whom God has sent (14:31 etc.)” – TDNT.

So in our text Jesus’ words are not metaphorical or cryptic.
• He means exactly what it looks like He means – all will know His identity because of the Cross.
• Philippians 2:9–11 (ESV) — 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

If as a result of the Cross all will know, yet we see in Acts that most still did not know when confronted with the Cross, what is going on here?
• When will all know as Jesus and Paul tell us?
• How is it even possible for them to know Jesus?
• Can you actually have knowledge of Jesus’ identity on this level and not be saved?

The only answer that makes sense is that this must be a reference to coming to this knowledge after they die in their sins.
• “By this John is not saying that all of Jesus’ opponents will be converted in the wake of the cross. But if they do come to know who Jesus is, they will know it most surely because of the cross. And even those who do not believe stand at the last day condemned by him whom they ‘lifted up’ on the cross, blinded to the glory that shone around them, yet one day forced to kneel and confess that Jesus is Lord (cf. Phil. 2:10–11)” – D.A. Carson.
• So all mankind will come to this knowledge, but it will be a knowledge that comes from judgment and not from belief.

In other words, and especially in light of vs. 26, Jesus seems to be declaring that knowledge of Him for those who die in their sins is a form of judgment.
• “There is great irony in the fact that the Jews, by having Jesus crucified, are actually “lifting” Jesus up (Bultmann 1971: 350, followed by Witherington 1995: 176)…so “at the very moment when they think they are passing judgment on him, he becomes their judge” (Bultmann 1971: 350)” – Kostenberger.

All who reject Christ, who are “of this world”, will be confronted with the truth of Jesus’ testimony concerning Himself, His identity, via the Cross of Calvary.
• It is striking to me that the nature of Jesus’ identity will not be made known to them through His supernatural power – His healing powers, His miraculous signs, His virgin birth, His wisdom, etc.
• Condemnation comes because the God of the Cross was rejected.
• What a shock this will be!
• We often hear the unbeliever say that at judgment God will know something good in them, but in fact they will know something of Jesus.
• For the first time they will know Jesus as God because of the Cross…but it will be too late.

Lesson for Us:
• I pray that all of us have come to knowledge of Christ’s identity through belief and are “not of this world”.
• To know Jesus through judgment would have to be one of the worst things that a person could ever experience.

Abiding in Jesus' Word - Fundamental & Necessary

2011-06-29T18:33:00.001-04:00

I am struck by how seemingly poor a job Christians do at abiding in Jesus' word. In fact, to most men in the church R-E-A-D is not a suggestion from Jesus but an offensive 4-letter word. The following is a fleshing out of an outline I did a few weeks ago. The topic is so important I felt I had to address it again.

John 8:31–32 (ESV) — 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

What is abiding in Jesus’ word?

D.A. Carson simply says:
• “A genuine believer remains in Jesus’ ‘word’,[and] his teaching: i.e. [the believer] obeys it, seeks to understand it better, and finds it more precious, more controlling, precisely when other forces flatly oppose it” – D.A. Carson.

What are Jesus’ Words or some topics Jesus’ teaches on?

My Sunday School class is in the Gospel of John and is about to finish John 8.
• In the first 8 chapters of John, some highlights of Jesus’ teachings are:
    o His relationship to the Father.
    o Depravity of man.
    o Nature of the work of God in salvation.
    o His identity with Yahweh as found in His “I am” statements.
    o His looking forward to being “lifted up” to the Cross.

Can we consider the entire NT to be Jesus’ words?

If you think it is, why?

The Chain of Custody:
• The following verses make clear that there was a “chain of custody” in the revelation of God’s word.
• As you will see, this chain of custody confirms that the NT writers spoke the Words of God and thus Jesus!
• Just as crime scene evidence is tagged and bagged so that it is not contaminated.
• God provided a way to transmit His word through the NT writers so that it was still His and not “contaminated”.

(1) First Link in the Chain of Custody – God the Father.
• John 14:10 (ESV) — 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
• John 12:49 (ESV) — 49 For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak.
    o Jesus identifies that the authority and source of His words comes from the Father.

(2) Second Link in the Chain of Custody – Jesus Christ.
• John 17:8 (ESV) — 8 For I [Jesus] have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.
    o Jesus reveals that he gave the words he received to the disciples.
    o Therefore the authority and source rooted in the Father remain uncorrupted as Jesus Himself transmits the words to the disciples.

(3) Third Link in the Chain of Custody – Holy Spirit
• John 14:26 (ESV) — 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
• John 16:13–14 (ESV) — 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

So the “Chain of Custody” of God’s Word looks like this:
• Father – Source and Authority of His Word and Gave it to Jesus
• Jesus – Given the Words and Authority by the Father and Passed them on to NT writers
• Holy Spirit – Protected and Gave the words spoken by Jesus to the NT writers
• NT writers – Received both their Words and Authority from Jesus with the aid of the Holy Spirit

So all of it is Jesus’ Words!

Why abide in Jesus’ Word?
• Genuine faith “perseveres [and] holds tight to Jesus’ teaching, with some glorious consequences” – D.A. Carson.

Glorious Consequences of Abiding in Jesus’ Word:
(1) God’s word contains eternal life
• John 5:24 (ESV) — 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

(2) God’s word produces knowledge that averts destruction.
• Hosea 4:6 (ESV) — 6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me. And since you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.

(3) God’s word testifies to truth of Jesus Christ.
• John 5:39–40 (ESV) — 39 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.

(4) God’s word contributes to our sanctification.
• Acts 20:32 (ESV) — 32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

(5) God’s word exposes where we cling to the flesh in our heart and mind.
• Hebrews 4:12 (ESV) — 12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

(6) God’s word produces joy and delight.
• Jeremiah 15:16 (ESV) — 16 "Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart.”

(7) God’s word gives a proper spiritual perspective to a material world.
• Psalm 119:72 (ESV) — 72 The law of your mouth is better to me than thousands of gold and silver pieces.

(8) God’s word exposes deception and worldliness.
• Colossians 2:8 (ESV) — 8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
• Ephesians 4:14 (ESV) — 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.

(9) God’s word protects us from ourselves.
• Mark 7:8-9 (ESV) — 8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” 9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!

This is by no means an exhaustive list.
• But it makes clear why faith in Jesus and abiding in His word are an inseparable indication of authenticity.

Did the NT writers set an example of abiding in God’s word?

OT use in the NT:
• The NT contains roughly 312 direct OT citations and thousands of OT allusions – Walter Kaiser.
• The only books of the NT without any direct quote or allusion to OT texts are Philemon and 2 & 3 John.

Examples of NT writer’s abiding:
It informed their theology:
• Romans 4:2–3 (ESV) — 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”

It informed their painful circumstances:
• Romans 15:4 (ESV) — 4 For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

It informed their understanding that the Gospel is present in the OT:
• Galatians 3:8 (ESV) — 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”

It informed their view of salvation:
• Romans 10:11–13 (ESV) — 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

It informed their view of the relationship between the OT and NT:
• Acts 24:14 (ESV) — 14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets,

It informed their evangelism:
• Romans 10:15 (ESV) — 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”

It informed their view of worldly wisdom:
• 1 Corinthians 1:19 (ESV) — 19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”

It informed their view of economic issues:
• 1 Corinthians 9:8–10 (ESV) — 8 Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop.

It informed their view of Jesus:
• Romans 1:1–4 (ESV) — 1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

It informed their apologetics:
• Acts 18:28 (ESV) — 28 for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.

It informed their view of mans’ condition before God:
• Romans 3:9–12 (ESV) — 9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; 11 no one understands; no one seeks for God. 12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

Concerning the example set by the NT writers:
• “The point is clear by now: the interweaving of phrases and lines from the Old Testament by the New Testament writers with their own words and literary styles shows how the very fabric of their thought was immersed in the language and teaching of the earlier Testament” – Walter Kaiser.

Challenge For Us:
So we must ask ourselves, is the very fabric of our thoughts immersed in Scripture like the NT writers?

Do we treat Scripture as it demands to be treated?

If we agree with Jeremiah (15:16) that "Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart”, does our relationship with God’s word demonstrate this?

If we agree with Hosea (4:6) that “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge”, do we seek to grown in our knowledge of God’s word in a deep and abiding way or just devotionally and/or not at all?

A final thought:
“The Bible tethers us to reality. We are not free to think and speak whatever might enter our minds or what might be pleasing to any given audience—except God” – John Piper.

John 8:12-20 – Location, Location, Location of the Light

2011-06-28T18:14:00.000-04:00

Last week we learned about the significance of the Feast of Booths and the water-pouring rite to Jesus’ living water statements.
• We ended the lesson with the Jeremiah 2:13.
• Jeremiah 2:13 (ESV) — 13 for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water.
• We discussed how rejecting Jesus’ “fountain of living waters” is to make one’s own counterfeit water source – a broken cistern.
• Today we transition from the water to light.
• And specifically, where the light came from.

John 8:12–20 (ESV) — 12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” 13 So the Pharisees said to him, “You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true.” 14 Jesus answered, “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. 16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. 17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true. 18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.” 19 They said to him therefore, “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20 These words he spoke in the treasury, as he taught in the temple; but no one arrested him, because his hour had not yet come.

1) LIGHT OF THE WORLD

John 8:12 (ESV) — 12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

This is the second of the seven “I am” sayings in John’s gospel.
• The first one we covered in John 6:35 – “I am the bread of life”.
• Here Jesus states, “I am the light of the world”.
• We covered this quite a bit when we studied John 1:4–5 (ESV) — 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

A quick summary of that lesson:
At that time we considered the following point and a question that stemmed from it.
• Light is that which is “emitted form a luminous body” – Strongs.
• What, then, is contained or “emitted” in the light of Jesus Christ and what does it illuminate?
• To answer that question we looked at several bible verses – Psalm 27:1; Psalm 36:9; Psalm 119:105; John 12:46; 1 John 1:5; 2 Timothy 1:10, etc.
• We found that at a minimum Jesus’ light, “emits salvation, truth, holiness, and it illuminates or reveals darkness (sin)”.
• Through His light, Jesus brings “salvation, truth and holiness to destroy the stronghold of the darkness of sin and it consequences”.

Certainly more can be said about this topic, but we will move on and focus on the remainder of our verses.

2) THE PHARISEES CHALLENGE

John 8:13 (ESV) — 13 So the Pharisees said to him, “You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true.”

Interestingly, the Pharisees state that Jesus has a witness problem; a person cannot bear witness about himself.
• As we discussed with respect to our lesson on Paul’s apologetic in Acts 22:
• (1) Jewish law requires that at least two or three witnesses are necessary (Deut. 19:15).
• (2) The quality and relationship of the witnesses must be established and examined (The Jewish Law Annual).

The Pharisees are merely pointing out that Jesus is bearing witness to Himself and this is an invalid witness.
• Jesus’ response in the next few verses is where the conversation gets very interesting!

3) JESUS’ ANSWER – THE WHERE

John 8:14–18 (ESV) — 14 Jesus answered, “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. 16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. 17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true. 18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.”

Jesus seems to concede, on the face of it anyway, to their point when He says, “Even if I do…”.
• However, He suggests that even if the Pharisees point can be construed as a valid one, it does not apply in His case.
• We know this because He immediately tells the Pharisees that His “testimony is true”; He is the “light of the world”.
• We could simply end with D.A. Carson’s observation about Jesus’ testimony – “light cannot but attest to its own presence; otherwise put, it bears witness to itself, and its source is entirely supportive of that witness” – D.A. Carson.
• But there is so much more going here I am compelled to dive deeper.
• So, as we unpack His reasoning for stating His testimony is true, we will uncover some profound truths about Jesus’ view of Himself and John’s Christology.

If we look closely, Jesus implies that His claim “I am the light of the world” is true because of:
• (1) “where I came from”
• (2) “where I am going”.
• He even goes on to condemn the Pharisees’ because they “do not know where”.
    o In other words, the problem is not Jesus “bearing witness” but the Pharisees ignorance of the “where”.
• The “where” is what validates His bearing witness about Himself.

John 8:15 (ESV) — 15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one.
• In verse 15, alluding to “right judgment” from John 7, He suggests that not knowing the “where” is related to a lack of right judgment, a.k.a., judging “according to the flesh”.
• Or in John speak, the Pharisees are not “born again” and have not been “drawn” by the Father and “given” to Jesus.
• This is the at least the 3rd time Jesus has explained someone’s unbelief to us.
• And with respect to His words “I judge no one”, we covered this when we dealt with John 3:17 (ESV) — 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.
• Suffice it to say that Jesus does judge, but He does not judge according to the flesh (D.A. Carson).

John 8:16 (ESV) — 16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me.
• Interestingly, Jesus says even if He did judge “according to the flesh” His judgment would be “true” because of His relationship with the Father.
• This statement also reiterates the importance of the “where” because in stating that it was the “Father who sent” Jesus, He is making it clear that both He and the “where” are identified with the Father.

John 8:17–18 (ESV) — 17 In your Law it is written that the testimony of two people is true. 18 I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.”
• Jesus then explicitly concedes that He knows the witness standard spoken of by the Pharisees.
• And playing their game, He brings the (3) crucial elements of His argument together.
    o “where”
    o the Father
    o Himself
• He makes the remarkable statement that “the Father” who “sent” Him bears witness “about Him” – He has two witnesses.

5) PHARISEES’ RESPONSE – WHERE IS THE WHERE?

John 8:19 (ESV) — 19 They said to him therefore, “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.”

Acknowledging the importance of “the Father” who “sent” and how they bear on Jesus’ testimony, the Pharisees ask a simple question.
• “Where is your Father?”
• “If this ‘where’ is so important where is it so we can go question your Father”, they might be thinking.
• In usual fashion, Jesus’ holds them accountable for their ignorance.
• Jesus cuts this line of reasoning off immediately by suggesting that they would know the answer to this question if they knew that Jesus was “the light of the world”.
• But they don’t and nothing Jesus says will make any difference.

So having understood this encounter, we need to now understand for ourselves the “where”.

6) LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

So what is the “where” that Jesus came from and was going to and why is it so significant to Jesus’ identity?
• The source for most of this discussion is Richard Bauckham’s book – Jesus and the God of Israel.

OT Background:
We first have to check out two of the most important OT verses to the NT writers.
• Psalm 110:1 (ESV) — 1 The LORD says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”
    o Most quoted OT text in NT - 21 quotes or allusions.
• Isaiah 52:13 (ESV) — 13 Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted.

In these two verses, which the NT writers’ see as directly referring to Jesus Christ, we see some crucial clues about the “where” and its significance to Jesus’ identity.
• (1) He is called Yahweh
• (2) He sits at the right hand of the Father
• (3) He will be lifted up
• (4) He shall be exalted

So the “where” is the exalted right hand of the Father.
• This is where Jesus is come from and where he is going.

What is so significant and meant by exalted to the right hand of God?
• “There, seated with God on God’s throne, Jesus exercises or participates in God’s unique sovereignty over the whole cosmos” – Richard Bauckham.
• This is powerful Jewish symbolism of the Messiah’s divinity.
• Only God is Ruler and Sovereign over creation.
• And the Messiah, the Suffering Servant, is pictured in these verses as being at the place where only the Ruler and Sovereign of creation is.

In other words, as taught by the NT writers:
• (1) Jesus is sovereign Ruler over all things
• (2) Jesus shares God’s exaltation over all things as Creator
• (3) Jesus is the divine name Yahweh – He is God
• (4) Jesus as Yahweh is worthy of worship as only God is

But John takes it up a notch.
• He makes clear that the cross of Calvary is also linked to the “where”.

The examples of this in John:
John 3:14–15 (ESV) — 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.
John 8:28 (ESV) — 28 So Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me.
John 12:32–33 (ESV) — 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

So in John’s Gospel, “the exaltation of the Servant of which this verse speaks [Isaiah 52:13] is the whole sequence of humiliation, suffering, death and vindication beyond death which [Isaiah] 53 describes” – Richard Bauckham.
• The “where” is not just the exalted right hand of God, but also the cross.
• It is amazing to think that even the cross was a “where” where Jesus demonstrated His divinity and His relationship with the Father.
• What we see as an act of God’s grace and love to defeat death and sin on behalf of the believer through the sacrifice of His one and only perfect Son (as deep as that is) was even more than that.
• Profoundly, “the witness, the humiliation, the death and the exaltation of the Servant of the Lord is the way in which God reveals his glory and demonstrates his deity to the world” – Richard Bauchkham.
• The Place of God is both:
    o 1) Exalted and on the Throne – Ruler and Creator
    o 2) Lifted up and on the Cross – Servant and Savior

So, Jesus testimony about Himself is valid (among other obvious reasons) because of (2) “where's”:
• Where #1 – the exalted right hand of the Father
• Where #2 – the lifted up cross of Calvary.

To drive home the importance of the “where” symbolism futher:
Mark 16:19 (ESV) — 19 So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God.
Luke 22:69 (ESV) — 69 But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.”
Acts 2:33 (ESV) — 33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.
Acts 5:31 (ESV) — 31 God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
Acts 7:55-56 (ESV) — 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Romans 8:34 (ESV) — 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.
Ephesians 1:20 (ESV) — 20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places,
Hebrews 1:3 (ESV) — 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
1 Peter 3:22 (ESV) — 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him.

Lesson for Us:
• Jesus’ justification for His ministry, the reason it was true and right was due to who He is and where He came from and His relationship with the Father.
• This is why the “where”, the exalted right hand of God, was so important.
• For the Jew, it is an unmistakable reference to the throne of God and God’s Sovereignty.
• And for the Christian Jew, especially John, the cross of Calvary was no less a reference to God’s Sovereignty and the exalted place that only God could occupy.
• It is indescribable to consider that at a certain moment in history, God occupied at once the exalted heavenly throne and the exalted cross of Calvary.
• I am amazed that the believer is the beneficiary of this God ordained perfect storm of divinity.