The Rest of the Old, Old Story

This Week’s Readings

Monday, July 2: John 13-15
Tuesday, June 26: John 16-18
Wednesday, June 27: John 19-21
Thursday, June 28: Psalms 42-45; Proverbs 15
Friday, June 29: Psalms 46-49; Proverbs 16

Next week we will begin Isaiah. I gave us 3 weeks to work on that 66-chapter book.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 19:1-5: Roman Scourging

Pontius Pilate found Jesus innocent, but when the people asked for Barabbas in his place, Pilate took Jesus and scourged him.

There’s a lot written about this scourging. All of the Christian sources I’ve found say the same thing, and it’s pretty gruesome. I have to admit, though, that I haven’t seen a good source yet for standard practice in Roman scourging. It’s entirely possible that I just haven’t looked hard enough.

However, I did find two doctors who describe what the scourging would have been like, assuming that the scourging they describe is really what the Romans would have done. Those descriptions are here and here. You might want to be careful about reading or showing those to kids. It’s pretty gruesome.

I also found a reference to Roman scourging in general from just a couple hundred years after Jesus’ death. Eusebius writes about some martyrs who were put to death under Decius (most likely) around A.D. 250. He writes:

They say that the bystanders were struck with amazement when they saw them lacerated with scourges even to the innermost veins and arteries, so that the hidden inward parts of the body, both their bowels and their members, were exposed to view. (Eusebius, Church History IV:15:4)

John 19:6-16

Here we see an example of the inconsistencies of those who oppose God. They don’t care what’s true or consistent at all, even going so far as to cry out, "We have no king but Caesar," a proclamation that they would never dare make on any other day in the streets of Jerusalem.

Having said that about those who oppose God, let me warn those of us who wish to cooperate with God that we are not guilty of the same thing. So often, our doctrinal disputes devolve into arguments like this, where in order to bolster our position we say things that are illogical, unreasonable, or even inconsistent with our own position as Christians. It can take great effort to keep ourselves in a state of loving truth, especially when cherished doctrines are at risk or when we are personally convicted of some sin or weakness.

We can trust the Truth to take care of itself. The Truth, who is Jesus himself, does not need to dodge or hide evidence and arguments, because he is the Truth. An honest look at reality will point to him, and his power as giver of grace and truth will bring those open to the truth to him without our needing to become deceptive or dishonest.

John 20:1-18

John and Peter both went into the tomb, but it was not until Mary Magdalene peeked her head in the tomb that the angels appeared. It was no accident that Mary was the first person to whom Jesus revealed himself. It is possible that this is because she loved him the most. Whatever the reason, it was not chance. Jesus purposely chose to reveal himself to Mary after the two most prominent apostles had already left the tomb.

A lot of reasons have been advanced as to why Mary didn’t recognize him. In fact, today I read that the brutality of the scourging scarred him so much that he was unrecognizable after rising from the dead, though I really don’t care for that explanation. My favorite is that after the resurrection, we will recognize each other spiritually, not physically. Only those with a spiritual relationship with Jesus could recognize him when he appeared.

John 20:22-23

I think everyone knows these are Roman Catholic verses. Protestants don’t use verse 23 because for the most part we don’t believe that there’s ever a situation where we should not forgive someone’s sin.

The Roman Catholics believe these verses have to do with the authority of the church, and they are obviously correct. Jesus gives the apostles the authority to retain and remit sins. That authority would have been passed on to the elders that the apostles appointed to lead the churches after their death.

That authority is not capricious. It is desperately needed today. It is based on the fact that the church, and especially the shepherds of the church, should actually know the members of the church. They should know their weaknesses and strengths, and we should all be praying for one another.

Forgiving sin is to set a person free who cannot find forgiveness in themselves. Retaining a person’s sin is also to set a person free, only in this case it is for those who cannot find repentance or honesty within themselves.

All of this requires us to know one another. Elders especially, who are charged with shepherding the Lord’s flock, should know the members of the church and care for them with the same care Jesus has for them. How will an elder leave the 99 to go find the straying one if he does not know the sheep to recognize one is gone? (Matt. 18:12).

John 20:28-31

Yesterday or the day before I mentioned memorizing a verse or story from each chapter of the apostles writings in order to have an excellent overview of the New Covenant writings. These four verses provide both a story and a memory verse for John 20.

The story of doubting Thomas is famous and easy to remember, though it’s a little harder to remember, at least for me, that we need to avoid being like him. Trusting Jesus’ words—his commands, instructions, and promises—when it seems horribly frightening to trust him is the way to be blessed because we’ve believed without seeing.

Verse 31 is the memory verse to which I’m referring: "These have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name" (NASB).

John 21:1-14

One more appearance of Jesus is described here. Again the apostles don’t recognize him. I’ll repeat, I like the explanation that this was on purpose because Jesus wanted to be recognized spiritually, not by physical appearance.

John 21:15-17

This is a much more interesting passage in Greek. There are two Greek words for love used in this passage. One is phileo, meaning a friendship kind of love. The other is agapeo, which is a word that was put into common use by Jesus and his apostles, so it is their usage that infuses it with meaning. Christians normally define it as divine love, a love unmoved by circumstances or feeling.

Jesus asks Peter if he loves him using the word agapeo. Peter answers that he loves him with phileo love.

This happens a second time, then the third time Jesus uses the word phileo as well. Using those Greek words, Peter’s reaction to Jesus’ third question reads like this: "Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, ‘Do you phileo me?’"

I don’t have a deep teaching or commentary based on this information. My comment would only be that Peter was not yet ready to love with agape love until the Holy Spirit descended on the day of Pentecost. So, too, we may love with a natural love, but to agapeo others or even the Lord requires the descent of the Spirit, who sheds the agape of God abroad in hour hearts (Rom. 5:5).

John 21:18-25

The Gospel of John ends with an anecdote about Peter and John. Jesus prophesies (somewhat cryptically) that Peter will be martyred. When Peter asks about what will happen to John, Jesus gives him an answer that really means "None of your business; we’re talking about you, not him." However, because John was the longest lived apostles, that statement became a rumor that John would live forever.

One of the traditions about John is that he was thrown in boiling oil and was not burned. This, too, would have fueled rumors that he would live forever.

John’s last statement is that there is very much more that he could have written. That is more true now because Jesus has continued to good works through his corporate body, the church, for 2,000 years.

Yes, there’s been much counterfeit Christianity, but where men and women—and even boys and girls—have submitted themselves to God through Jesus, great deeds have continued to be accomplished. Without those men, women, boys, and girls, the Gospel of Jesus would not have continued to our time. Let us be among the people who give themselves to Jesus, walk by the Spirit of God, and carry the Gospel in power to the next generation of believers!

This Week’s Readings

Monday, July 2: John 13-15
Tuesday, June 26: John 16-18
Wednesday, June 27: John 19-21
Thursday, June 28: Psalms 42-45; Proverbs 15
Friday, June 29: Psalms 46-49; Proverbs 16

Next week we will begin Isaiah. I gave us 3 weeks to work on that 66-chapter book.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 16

Jesus’ words about the Holy Spirit convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment are a little cryptic, or I’ve always found them so. I looked at some commentaries, and they all took these words pretty simply.

• Sin: Primarily referring to the Jews refusing to believe in Jesus, but also referring to the future when the Holy Spirit would convict those who hear the Gospel of their sin and need for repentance.
• Righteousness: After Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, his righteousness and innocence would be established. He had been accused of many things, even of having a demon, but the resurrection would prove him to be Lord and Christ.
• Judgment: Several different explanations of this were offered, but it seems simple enough to me. Jesus mentions the ruler of this world being judged. Satan’s power was broken because of the cross and the resurrection. The Holy Spirit is going to convince the world of this judgment and bring those who repent into the freedom of that judgment.

In verses 12-15, Jesus is speaking primarily to the apostles. The Holy Spirit will lead them into all truth because the Gospel has been committed to them. Today, we occasionally teach that the Holy Spirit will lead us individually into accurate Bible interpretation, but all of that is wrong. The promise that truth will be revealed to us is directed at the church, as evidenced by the fact that all the "you’s" in those verses are plural (1 Jn. 2:27).

Also, truth is not the equivalent of "accurate Bible interpretation." Truth, as I hope you will see over and over again as we go through the apostles writings, has more to do with behavior, with obeying Jesus’ commands, than it does with accurately interpreting the Bible.

For too often, "accurately" interpreting the Bible results in proud proclamations that lead to division. Creating division is a terrible violation of the Bible and of the will of God. God is not so much interested in renewing our intellects and making us Bible scholars as he is in renewing our hearts and minds so that we are humble servants of God filled with the Spirit and power.

To "accurately" interpret the Bible, and then create division with your accurate interpretation renders your accurate interpretation completely useless; in fact, it makes it evil.

In verses 16-22 we should have some patience with the apostles. Today, we have grown used to (and perhaps even take for granted) the death and resurrection of the Messiah. We can easily put those verses into that context. Jesus was still alive and standing in front of the apostles here, and the thought that Jesus would die and rise again would seem very strange to them.

In verses 23-30, the apostles appear to understand, but that is only because Jesus’ death is no longer being discussed. Instead, Jesus promises that they will be able to pray to the Father in power just as he had been doing for three years in front of them. They understood this. Death and resurrection they still did not understand.

In verses 31-33, Jesus corrects their mistaken perception about how well they understand. He explains that he has said these things so that when they see what is happening, they will have something to fall back on so that they do not utterly despair.

John 17

John 17 is entirely a prayer.

We’ve already addressed the whole subject of the divinity of the Word of God back in chapter 1, so we shouldn’t have to address why Jesus calls the Father the one true God in verse 3. (See The Trinity if you want a more indepth discussion of the subject, or get my book for a thorough analysis of the Trinity and the Council of Nicea.)

In verse two, it’s important—especially the way we think today—to catch that Jesus is the one who gives eternal life. Eternal life is not an automatic thing that happens if you learn about the atonement and can pass a test on it. Eternal life is in the possession of Jesus Christ, and he gives eternal life to those who believe in him, which means that they become his disciples. The teaching that we can simply believe that Jesus died for our sins, then do whatever we want is a falsehood that needs to be driven out of the church until every vestige of it is gone.

Do people really teach that? Charles Ryrie, the person who put the notes in the Ryrie Study Bible, wrote a very popular book called So Great Salvation about 20 years ago that teaches that false gospel. (John MacArthur answered it with a book called The Gospel According to Jesus.)

Verses 6-19 may need to be read a couple times (or more) to fully catch what Jesus is saying. Overall, the basic message is that Jesus is returning to the Father, and he is asking his Father to work through the apostles the way he has worked through Jesus. Jesus is the living Word of God, and now he has given the Word to the apostles, who will proclaim that Word to the world.

In verses 20-23 Jesus prays for a certain result to the preaching of the Word. That result is unity. Through that unity, he prays, the world will know that the Father sent the Son.

Our Protestant traditions have caused us to forget the importance of unity. We love our denominations and our right to choose our own church—and sit in the pew and be non-participants—more than we love the Word of God, which says that by our division we are testifying against the authenticity of Jesus as the Son of God.

Of course, that’s not everyone, but the fact is that Christianity in general is not known for its unity. It is known for its division, and this is a horrible contradiction of what Jesus prayed for.

John 18

In verses 4-8, it is commonly held that Jesus is referring back, just as he certainly was in John 8:58, to the burning bush, where God told Moses, "I am that I am" (Ex. 3:14). You will notice that in most translations the "he" in "I am he" is in italics, indicating that it’s not in the original Greek, but added in English for clarification. Of course, if Jesus meant to say "I Am" as a title, rather than "I am he," then the addition of "he" was not a clarification, but an error.

It is possible that the "he" was understood in Greek. I don’t suppose there is any way to be certain that Jesus meant to use "I Am" as a title in these verses, even though it’s clear he was using it as a title in John 8:58.

Of course, we do have to pay attention to the fact that the soldiers fell backwards when he said it. That seems evidence that he meant to identify himself as the great "I Am" in this passage.

The "other disciple" who is mentioned in verse 15 is supposed by all, including me, to be John himself. Tradition has it that he was related to the high priest’s family.

In verse 19-24, it is easy to wonder who the high priest is, Annas or Caiaphas? The answer is that at that time, Annas and Caiaphas were switching off as high priest every year. Verse 13 tells us that it was Caiaphas’ year to be high priest, so Jesus wasn’t really addressing the high priest when he addressed Annas. Annas had been the high priest the year before.

Verse 28 raises a real quandary, at least for those for whom inspiration means that there can be no historical errors nor any differences between the various witnesses of Jesus’ life. John tells us that the Pharisees did not go into the praetorium because they did not want to be defiled for the Passover meal. However, we read in the other Gospels that Jesus had eaten the Passover meal the evening before.

You can read through various explanations of this. There are two main explanations offered:

• That eating the Passover is a reference to the rest of the feast, which lasted seven more days, and not to the Passover meal itself.
• That Jesus ate the Passover early, knowing that he was going to be arrested, and that he was crucified at the actual hour that everyone else was eating the Passover. A day for the Jews ran from sunset to sunset, so if Jesus and the apostles at the last supper after the sun set on Thursday evening, then they would have still eaten it on the same day as any Jews who ate the Passover meal before sunset on Friday.

Of course, the proponents of these explanations both refer to the other explanation as unlikely.

I’d like to throw in a third possibility, which is that John wrote his Gospel some 60 years after the events that happened, and that he got the timing wrong because of memory. I don’t know that is the case, but I wish we didn’t rule it out. I wish that we didn’t confuse inspiration with "complete historical and scientific inerrancy down to the tiniest detail, even if there was no way for the writer to have understood modern science."

If we could get free from such an interpretation of inspiration, we could quit making bizarre excuses for why Genesis one and two are so contradictory or why the book of Job says that the sky is as hard as metal (Job 37:18). We might even be able to extract the real spiritual lessons that God inspired through Moses and the standard Hebrew creation myth in Genesis one, rather than trying to explain how there could be water above the "firmament" even though the firmament includes the sun, moon, and stars.

Verse 36 was a pretty central verse to the early churches. In case you don’t know, until the fourth century, Christians were opposed to participating in war. They talk about it over and over, calling war murder on a mass scale.

Part of the reason for that was Jesus’ statement here that his kingdom was not of this world. Ancient Israel fought wars because their kingdom was of this world. The Israel of God, however, which is the church, the kingdom of heaven revealed on earth, does not fight with carnal weapons but with spiritual weapons.

Primarily, though, they referred to Isaiah’s prophecy in Isaiah 2:2-4. They applied "out of Zion" to the apostles, and they pointed out that the hearers of the apostles would "beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks … neither shall they learn war anymore."

This chapter ends with the Jews asking for Barabbas to be released. It is of note to me, and I’ve pointed it out before, that "Barabbas" means "son of the father." The real Son of the Father was rejected by the Jews (and by us all through them) and a lesser, criminal, human son of the father was taken in his place.

This Week’s Readings

Monday, July 2: John 13-15
Tuesday, June 26: John 16-18
Wednesday, June 27: John 19-21
Thursday, June 28: Psalms 42-45; Proverbs 15
Friday, June 29: Psalms 46-49; Proverbs 16

Next week we will begin Isaiah. I gave us 3 weeks to work on that 66-chapter book.

The overall year’s plan is here.

Intro Comment on John 13-15

Today we have three very famous chapters of the Bible. Chapter 13 has the story of Jesus’ washing the apostles feet. Chapter 14 is where Jesus talks about going to prepare a place for us, so that we can be where he is. Chapter 15 is the vine and branches chapter ("I am the Vine; you are the branches").

It got me to thinking that if we were to memorize one verse or a story for each chapter of the apostolic writings, then we would have an excellent overview of all the New Covenant books that the church accepts as inspired.

For example, verse 1 would be a great memory verse for John 1. Lots of people have it memorized already, and they often include John 1:14 with it. In John 2, you could simply remember that the story of the wedding in Cana, where Jesus turned the water to wine, occurred there. John 3 is the born again chapter, containing the talk with Nicodemus, and of course it also has John 3:16 which even many non-Christians have memorized.

And so on.

John 13:1-20

Jesus washes the apostles feet, and he says that he did this as an example for them. He says they will be blessed if they follow his example.

Jesus did a lot of work to show the apostles another way, a way in which the greatest among us would be servants. It is very easy to lose that mindset and begin to take seats of honor and titles of honor. In fact, let’s harken back to a previous Gospel and discuss titles. It seems as though in the church today we have completely forgotten that Jesus ever said anything about titles.

Do not be called rabbi, for only one is your guide, Christ, and you are all brothers.
Call no one on earth your father, for only one is your Father, he who is in heaven.
Nor be called teacher, for only one is your teacher, Christ.
But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he that humbles himself shall be exalted.
~ Matt. 23:8-12

What’s embarrassing is how often we who are not Roman Catholics have used this verse (rightly) against the Roman Catholic practice of addressing their clergy as "Father." However, we completely ignore this passage when it comes to our use of "Pastor Jones" or "Reverend Wilson." (Those names are made up; no actual people are intended.)

This does not mean that you cannot call your dad "father." The passage is entirely about religious leaders who love "to be called by men ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’" It’s about taking religious titles to honor yourself, or even about accepting religious titles from others who want to honor you. "Don’t be called teacher," Jesus said. That is not the usual word for a teacher in the New Covenant writings. The word Jesus uses means guide or leader.

To refer to someone as being a shepherd or a teacher is one thing. To give them a title is what Jesus is talking about. I’m supposed to be just Paul, one of the brothers, even if I’m a shepherd or a teacher. I can’t be set apart by a title like "Pastor Pavao," while others wind up with "lower-ranking" titles like "Brother Frank" or "Deacon Smith."

I’m not a pastor, by the way, though I teach a lot in my church and occasionally others. I was just using that as an example.

There is a difference between knowing who the elders are in your local church and giving them a title of honor. The apostles’ writings give numerous examples of the former, and Jesus strictly forbad the latter.

But I guess we’ve forgotten.

John 13:20: Those Whom God Has Sent

We tend to think, "I just listen to the Bible."

Well, that’s a bad idea. According to Jesus here in verse 20, the way to receive him and his Father is to receive the ones that Jesus sends. I believe in this verse Jesus is primarily referring to the future ministry of the apostles. He is sending them out with the Gospel, just as his Father sent him to earth with the Word of Life, and those who do not receive the apostles don’t receive Jesus, either.

We can find ourselves in the same position.

Today, that’s really tough. We can receive the apostles by receiving the apostles’ writings, which are what the "New Testament" consists of. (I suppose you’ve noticed that I don’t like to call their writings "the New Testament.") While not all books of the "New Testament" were written by apostles, the early churches understood them all to have at least been approved by apostles. (Peter approved the Gospel of Mark, and Paul approved Luke’s Gospel, for example.)

However, what about others? In the late first and early second century, that was easier, too. The apostles appointed leaders in the churches, and the churches were confident that the majority of those leaders were preserving the truth, passing it on to the church as they had received it from the apostles, changing nothing.

Today, though, the argument of ancient churches that they can show a lineage of bishops back to the apostles means nothing. The "telephone game" doesn’t work across 2,000 years. The likelihood that the faith got passed on unchanged from one leader to the next across 20 centuries is slim indeed. We need more than just a roll of bishops back to the beginning.

Jesus has spent a lot of John telling us that if the Word of God is in us, we will recognize the words of God when they come. His sheep know his voice. When we hear the words of God, we must receive the messenger as well as the words!

Years ago, a pastor came to visit the Christian community of which I am a part. In one sense, he loved what he saw. He wrote, "In stark contrast to the petty backbiting and self-centeredness that characterizes so much of the church today, this gathering of Christians is a living testimony of what the church should be; a harmonious body of believers loving and laying down their lives for one another."

But did he receive the messengers that had produced this fruit? Not at all. He labeled the head elder of our community a wolf, and since I was the main writer on our web site, he labeled me a wolf as well. Why? Because he disagreed with one or two things that we had said, one of his main issues being the interpretation of a parable!!!

John 13:21-33

The reason the apostles didn’t understand what Jesus said to Judas was because his statement about passing the morsel of bread was whispered to John. None of the other apostles, including Judas, heard it.

When I was told I had leukemia last year, I took a moment to make sure that I really believed the verse that says, "All things work together for good for those that love God and who are called according to his purpose" (Rom. 8:28). After that, I treated the news of leukemia as a great blessing. People have even tried to correct me when I called it good or an adventure rather than a trial.

In verses 31-33 we see Jesus filled with glee and praise as the end comes upon him. He was going to be crucified, one of the worst deaths imaginable (much worse than leukemia). Later, he would sweat tears of blood in the garden getting himself geared up for what he was about to go through. At this point, however, Jesus knows to trust his Father, and he rejoices.

For the joy that was set before him, he endured the cross, despising the shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Heb. 12:2).

John 13:34-35: Love and Evangelism

Jesus says that everyone will know we are his disciples if we love one another.

It is good to love others. James even says that true and undefiled religion includes helping the orphans and widows in their distress. However, our best testimony to the world is not our love for those outside the faith but for each other.

Our example of getting along and taking care of each other is, according to Jesus, the ultimate testimony of the truth of the Gospel (see also Jn. 17:20-23).

Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially those who are of the household of faith. (Gal. 6:10)

John 14:1-3: Mansions in Heaven?

The King James Version uses the word mansion in verse 2, but that is not accurate. There are many "mansions" in Jesus’ Father’s "house"? Does that even make sense?

The word the KJV translates mansion is only used one other time in Scripture. It’s in this chapter, in verse 23. There it says that if anyone keeps Jesus’ words, then he and his Father will come make their "abode" with him. In other words, in verse 23, the Greek word mone is applied to us. We are the home.

Most modern translations render mone as "dwelling places."

What place is Jesus’ preparing for us? What house is the Father’s house?

• " … in the house of God, which is the church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:15).
• "Christ [was faithful] as a Son over his own house, whose house we are, if we hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope until the end" (Heb. 3:6).
• "You also, as living stones, are being built into a spiritual house" (1 Pet. 2:5)

The house that Jesus is preparing for the Father—and for us—is us. Not only can the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit take up residence inside of us, but spiritually, we can create dwelling places for one another. We can have one another in our hearts.

I believe this is the primary meaning of John 14:1-3. It’s entirely possible that Jesus is also talking about the eternal kingdom, but I highly suspect that even then, God’s house will still be us, and we will still bethe dwelling places that Jesus has prepared.

John 14:6

In verse 6, Jesus tells us that he is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life." Those are rich statements, worth meditating upon. Beyond that, though, he also tells us that the is the only route to the Father. That is questioned a lot today, even in the church, but it’s what Jesus said.

Back when we went through Romans, I mentioned in Romans 2 that I thought it was possible for Gentiles to be excused at the judgment by their conscience because they lived a life obedient to their conscience. I felt free to say that, despite the fact that I know about John 14:6, for two reasons:

• Romans 2:14-15 states this is true, pretty plainly. I don’t like to play the game of saying, "Yeah, I know Paul said that, but he knew it was impossible when he said it." I don’t think Paul or God talk like that.
• According to Peter, Jesus preached to "spirits in prison" and "the dead" after his death and before his resurrection (1 Pet. 3:19; 4:6). I am presuming (along with most Christians) that these were righteous people who were awaiting the crucifixion of Christ so that they could be partakers of the great gift of the New Covenant and receive the Spirit of God and be equipped for immortality. Why would the modern righteous, who have not heard the Gospel, not be given the same opportunity?

John 14:7-14

We read back in 1:18 that the Word, after he became flesh, "exegeted" (interpreted, explained) the Father to us. The Son reveals the Father for they share the same nature. The Son is the Father’s Word and Thought.

John 14:15

If you love Jesus, you will keep his commandments.

The mark of loving Jesus is not saying that you love him. It is keeping his commandments. The person, John says in his letter, who says he knows God and doesn’t keep his commandments is a liar (1 Jn. 2:3-4).

John tends to be very straightforward.

John 14:16-31

Here is the very heart of the New Covenant again. This is what Jesus came to do. He came to bring us the Holy Spirit, who is called the Comforter here.

The Greek word for Comforter is one that even non-Greek-speaking Christians have been familiar with for centuries. It is parakletos, and it is usually written as Paraclete in English. The word can mean not only Comforter, but Exhorter, Encourager, and even One Who Pleads. It has such a wide usage in the apostles’ writings that I like to translate the verb form of parakletos (parakaleo) as "to use words in any manner to persuade someone to do something."

This is a great passage not necessarily to memorize, but certainly to be familiar with. It is better, yes better, for Jesus to have gone to sit at God’s right hand because this allows him to live in all of us by the Holy Spirit. Jesus had a singular body that could only be in one place at one time. Now he has a corporate body that can be all over the world, controlled by the head of the body, the Son of God, seated at the right hand of the Father.

John 14:28

We’re a little scared nowadays to repeat Jesus’ words that the Father is greater than he is. That’s because somewhere around the beginning of the fifth century, someone wrote a creed called the Athanasian Creed (not written by Athanasius, despite the name), which says that in the Trinity "none is before or after another, none is greater or less than another."

It appears that we put more stock in a creed written by an unknown person, the official creed of no church at all, over the words of Jesus. That’s kind of scary.

We explain John 14:28 by saying that Jesus meant that the Father was greater than he was only while he was on earth. The problem is that if that’s what Jesus meant, then he was a very bad communicator—either that or the apostles were—because every comment about John 14:28 before about A.D. 350 takes Jesus’ statement as applying eternally:

The Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as he himself acknowledges: “My Father is greater than I” [John 14:28] … Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as he who begets is one, and he who is begotten is another. (Tertullian, Against Praxeas 9, c. A.D. 210)

I have several more quotes on John 14:28 from the second century to the early fourth century at Is the Nicene Creed Heretical? (And far more in my book, In the Beginning Was the Logos.)

John 15:1-9

A very famous and very important passage. I want to highlight verse 5: "Apart from me you can do nothing" (v. 5, NASB).

It’s crucial that we believe this and learn how to abide in him.

The easiest, simplest way to abide in him is going to sound like a surprise to most Protestants: Simply remain in the body of Christ.

We tend to spiritualize everything, and I most certainly emphasize walking in the Spirit of God, but the church is Jesus living in his people on earth. It is his body, and if we are in his body, then we are remaining in him.

The Scriptures say some amazing things about the church. We grow up into Christ together, speaking the truth in love to one another, each part doing its share (Eph. 4:11-16). Attending a meeting and listening to one gifted (or not so gifted) person is not what we are called to. We are called to be together in such a way that we "may all prophesy one by one" (1 Cor. 14:31).

It seems unquestionable to me that the person living in what Eph. 4:11-16 describes is abiding in Christ, no matter how he feels.

There is a book called Hudson Taylor’s Spiritual Secret, which makes the powerful point that if we belong to Christ, then we are in Christ whether we feel like it or not. It’s not about feelings; it’s about what Christ has done for us, and we should believe and walk in it (cf. Rom. 6:11). Hudson Taylor was powerfully effective as an evangelist in China, but he says that the last five years of his ministry, after he knew this principle, were more fruitful than the first thirty.

John 15:10-17

Jesus calls us friends. If it is a great honor to be known as children of God (1 Jn. 3:2), it is just as great an honor to be known as friends of Jesus. This offer is made to those who obey Jesus commandments, not just to those who believe nice things about him or can pass a theology test on the atonement.

The commandment Jesus emphasizes, because with the love of God it is the greatest commandment, is that we love one another. By this everyone will know that we are his disciples.

John 15:18-25

Christianity is not a popularity contest. In fact, if you are too popular it is a very bad sign ("Woe to you when all men speak well of you"—Luke 6:26).

John 15:26-27

It is not just the Holy Spirit that bears witness to Jesus. The apostles would bear witness to Jesus because they had been with him from the beginning. This is why, when they had to replace Judas, they looked for someone who had also been with them from the beginning (Acts 1:21-22).

Today we picture the Bible as the authority in the church, and it does have authority. It must be obeyed, as long as we are obeying God’s interpretation of it and not our own. (We must not be like the Pharisees—John 5:39-40.) It is inspired (God-breathed), and it is profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, the purpose of which is to equip us for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

To the early churches, however, the primary authority was the apostles. God had sent the Gospel to the earth through Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ had sent the apostles. Thus, we are exhorted not to fight for the writings once for all delivered to the church, but for the faith once for all delivered to the church (Jude 3). That is also why they collected the 27 books that they collected, which we call the New Testament. These are the ones that the churches believed were approved by the apostles. (It’s a bit more complicated than that, but it’s accurate enough. Something very close to our 27 books were settled on by the early second century.)

The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. … Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Spirit, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. (Clement of Rome, 1 Clement 42, A.D. 96)

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.3309 For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came down [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming the peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually possess the Gospel of God. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III:1:1, c. A.D. 185)

Sorry I’m late with this! I was up late last night (almost) finishing it, and I wanted to review it after a good night’s rest because I was getting too tired to trust my writing. Chapter 12 was partially done; I’ll put it up in a few minutes when I’m finished with it.

This Week’s Readings

Monday, June 25: John 1:1-3
Tuesday, June 26: John !:4-3
Wednesday, June 27: John 4-6
Thursday, June 28: John 7-9
Friday, June 29: John 10-12

Next week we will finish the Gospel of John, then cover more Psalms and Proverbs on Thursday and Friday.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 10

In chapter 9, Jesus talked about having the Word of God within so that we could hear God’s words. Here in chapter 10, the illustration is a different, but the message is the same. Now he is talking about sheep who know the Shepherd’s voice. These are the same ones who have the Word of God within them. They recognize the voice of the Shepherd, and they follow him; however, they will not follow a stranger, for they do not recognize his voice (verses 4-5).

To those who are not his sheep, Jesus says, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name, these testify of me. But you do not believe because you are not of my sheep" (verses 25-26, NASB).

There are some theological issues we should address here, too. Verse 27, where Jesus says that no one can pluck the sheep out of his hand, is used as an "eternal security" verse quite often. Eternal security teaches that once we believe, we are going to heaven, and nothing can happen that will change that. Verse 27 doesn’t say that. It does say that once we believe, nothing can take us out of his hand. That is true, but this verse says nothing about those who walk away; who by their own volition do not stay in his hand.

I once heard a radio preacher quote John 10:27 as a "clear" verse that we ought to listen to and believe. He was contrasting it with 2 Peter 2:20-21, which, he said, was a "difficult" verse that we should interpret in the light of clear verses like John 10:27.

Let me post 2 Peter 2:20-21 here for you. Do you find anything difficult to understand about this verse?

If after they have escaped the pollutions of this world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, their final end will be worse than their beginning. It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than, having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.

What’s difficult about that verse is that the radio preacher didn’t believe it. It wasn’t difficult to understand. It simply didn’t fit his theology—his "traditions of men"—and so he chose to interpret it "in the light of" a verse that did fit his theology.

It is true that nothing can snatch us from Jesus’ hand and the Father’s hand. It is true that nothing can separate us from the love of God, not even principalities and powers, nothing present and nothing that shall be (Rom. 8:38-39). If we continue in the faith, grounded and settled in it, then Jesus is going to present us to his Father as a trophy of grace, blameless and without fault …if we continue in the faith … (Col. 1:22-23).

It would be nice if we didn’t have to issue such warnings, but it is human nature to turn the grace of God into a license for sin. The remedy for that is to use the Scripture to reprove, rebuke, exhort, and instruct in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). We must be reminded to continue in the faith. When Paul and Barnabas returned to the churches they had started, the Scriptures sums up their message to those churches in just one sentence: "… strengthening the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that through many troubles we must enter into the kingdom of God" (14:22). Christians, even good and godly Christians, need to be exhorted and encouraged (Heb. 3:13).

In verse 30, Jesus says that he and the Father are one. The Jehovah’s Witnesses like to argue that this simply means that he and the Father are in spiritual unity. John 14:30 is not a "Trinity" verse, they say. It’s a little more complicated than that, as we talked about Monday when we looked at John 1:1, but basically they are correct. You and I, assuming that we are both New Covenant disciples possessed by the Spirit of God, are told to be as one with each other as the Father and Son are (Jn. 17:20-23).

In fact, even the source of our unity is the same. The Father and Son are united in their very nature. According to Scripture, we escape the corruptions of this world because we partake of that divine nature. We are empowered and united by the very nature of God. Christianity should be a supernatural religion!

That’s more than a theological position. It’s a command (Php. 1:27-2:4) and a necessity: The Father and Son are one, and we must be one exactly as they are one if we expect the world to believe the things that we say! (Jn. 17:20-23).

John 11

This chapter is famous for the resurrection of Lazarus.

There are many things we can learn from this passage, and if you let your mind work on this passage repeatedly (like a cow repeatedly chews on the cud), then you will get much more out of it than I could possible cover in this small commentary. I do want to highlight a couple things.

Jesus waits two days, on purpose, after he hears that Lazarus is sick. He knew that he would have to raise Lazarus from the dead (vv. 6,11).

Despite the fact that Lazarus was four days dead, Jesus is in no hurry. He wants to talk to Mary, apparently away from the crowds and mourners, and he simply waits right where he talked to Martha for Mary to arrive (v. 30). Most of us, in such a tense situation, would have been in a hurry even if we knew the things Jesus knew, which is that Lazarus was dead and that Jesus would raise him from the dead.

It’s entirely possible that the reason Jesus wanted to see both Martha and Mary was to make sure that they had real faith, which would help him. He questioned Martha about her belief in him, and Mary volunteered her faith, "Lord, if you had been here he would not have died" (v. 32). He had experienced the people of Galilee being so unbelieving and so opposed to the work of God that his ability to work miracles there was impaired (Mark 6:5).

In verse 35, the shortest verse in the Bible, we are told that Jesus wept. Jesus was not weeping because Lazarus was dead. He was weeping over Mary’s tears, and he loved not only Mary, but also the crowd, which he longed to gather under his wing as a chicken does her chicks (Matt. 23:37).

At Rose Creek Village, we like to apply verse 44 to new believers. Just as Lazarus came out of the tomb in grave clothes, needing to be unwrapped, so those who are newly come to Christ are still in need of the removal of layer and layers of burial cloths put on them from their previous life. We must help them escape their old grave clothes and come into the freedom of Christ. Those grave clothes come in many forms, including false beliefs, fears, insecurities, self-righteousness, etc.

In verse 49-51 we are granted an unusual look into how prophecy works. Caiaphas, who refused to hear the Word of the Lord even after Lazarus had been raised from the dead, was moved by the Spirit of God to prophesy because he was the high priest, even though he himself was not aware of it!

John 12

A lot of modern movies and stories like to portray Judas Iscariot as a basically good man who hoped to provoke Jesus to reveal his great power by betraying him. The apostle John didn’t believe that. He believed Judas was a thief and stealing from the money bag (v. 6).

We should remember that Jesus had his reasons for keeping a son of the devil among his disciples. It should help us when we begin to wonder about imperfect churches and some of the people that are in them. We need to obey God, and if there is wickedness in the midst of the church, the wicked man must be removed (1 Cor. 5:7-8,13). But where we have situations where we cannot obtain repentance, nor can we get others to carry out proper church discipline, then we should remember that even Jesus had a Judas with him.

In verse 10, we see how remarkably and persistently blind the chief priests were. They were going to try to kill Lazarus! Again!

Note verse 16. I know I point out verses like this every chance I get, but I think it’s important. Many Christians wander off into speculative prophecy about end times, and they are always wrong in their predictions–always. Many messages from God, especially long term prophecy, are not meant to be understood in advance. They are for the time that the prophecy occurs, at which time they will "remember that these things were written."

In verse 20, the Greeks mentioned are Gentiles. There is a similar word (similar in Greek) that refers to Greek-speaking Jews and is used in Acts 6:1. That word is generally translated Hellenists, but it is not used here (ref). These Greeks came up to worship at the feast, so they were in some stage of being converted to Judaism.

They wanted to see Jesus, and Jesus’ answer to them is cryptic, but full of meaning if we understand why he answered in this way. The time of the Gentiles had not begun. In Paul’s letters, Paul explains that the bringing in of the Gentiles to be part of the Israel of God was a great mystery hidden since the foundation of the earth (Eph. 3:2-6; Col. 1:25-27). It was not time for the Greeks to see him yet. The time had come for Jesus to be glorified. He would soon move from his individual physical body to his corporate body, consisting of many members, the church. There the mystery of the bringing in of the Gentiles would be fully visible. The "wealth of the glory" of that mystery among the Gentiles is "Christ in us." That is what the Greeks needed to see, and that is why Jesus responded by talking about his death. He mentions that he is to be glorified, and he explains how they will find him. They must fall into the ground and die like a grain of wheat. They must believe and follow him. Then they will find him, but coming to see his physical body now, on the way to the cross, was not the right thing.

Let’s talk about verse 31 a moment. The ruler of this world is cast out? Is the ruler of this world really cast out? The apostles would still cast out demons after the resurrection. Today we are still locked in battle with the devil, and John tells us that the whole world lies under his sway (1 John 5:19).

The answer to this puzzle is that in Christ, the devil’s power over us is broken. We are transferred from the domain of darkness into the kingdom of God’s beloved Son (Col. 1:13). The ruler of this world is cast out in Christ. As we enter Christ, as we live as part of his kingdom, the authority of the devil is no more. We can simply resist him, steadfast in the faith, and he will flee from us (Jn. 4:7).

Before Christ, we are slaves to the spirit that is in this world. We may not know it, but it is nonetheless true. We were all dead in our trespasses and sins, and we were all moved by that great deceptive spirit, the spirit that now works in the sons of disobedience (Eph. 2:1-3).

In verse 36 we are told again about the fact that the night is coming. The great light that not only rules the day, but makes it day, is departing this life. Jesus calls his hearers to believe in him so that they may become children of light and thus light the night that is coming. We are the lesser light that rules the light. We must live as children of light, exposing the unfruitful deeds of darkness (Eph. 5:8-14).

In verse 40, let’s address predestination again briefly. Did God harden the hearts of those who did not believe out of capriciousness? He just randomly chose some to harden and some to enlighten?

Not at all. It is as many as he foreknew that he predestined, not as many as he decided to rescue from perishing. We are told repeatedly that God wants everyone to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9). God hardens those who will not listen, who choose their own way. He taught us through his Word, Jesus, that we are not to throw pearls before pigs nor give that which is holy to the dogs, and he gives that advice because that is what he does. He doesn’t waste his time with those who refuse to hear. Because he’s God, he doesn’t have to block his own ears and not listen to them. He blocks their ears.

In verses 42 and 43, we read first a positive comment about some of the Pharisees, that many secretly believed in him, but then we read a negative one: They loved the approval of men over the approval of God.

Verses 44-50 ought to move our hearts. Jesus is saying, "Listen, this is not my idea. This is my Father’s idea. I do the will of the Father, and I have come here to save you. I’m the Servant who is going through all this trouble … for you! I know that the Father is offering eternal life, so here I am showing you the way to eternal life through great suffering and effort on my part."

This Week’s Readings

Monday, June 25: John 1:1-3
Tuesday, June 26: John !:4-3
Wednesday, June 27: John 4-6
Thursday, June 28: John 7-9
Friday, June 29: John 10-12

Next week we will finish the Gospel of John, then cover more Psalms and Proverbs on Thursday and Friday.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 7

Yesterday’s post was 4,000 words. May God grant me grace to keep today’s shorter!

Jesus’ brothers did not believe at this point. James and Jude, however, both became believers later because both wrote letters that are in our Bible. It’s pretty likely, in my opinion, that it’s the resurrection that did the job of bringing them around. 1 Corinthians 15:7 tells us that he appeared to James after he rose from the dead.

Verse 17 says something very interesting and of great importance today. "If anyone is willing to do his will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or I speak from myself" (NASB).

Today we have a lot of confidence in our Bible interpretation. Study the Bible, we think, and we’ll know whether the teaching is of God. No, the issue is whether we want to do the will of God because it is God himself who teaches us and protects us from those who want to seduce us spiritually(1 Jn. 2:26-27).

In verse 24, we find that Jesus does not want us to never judge. He wants us to judge with righteous judgment. We quote Jesus from Matthew 7:1—"Do not judge, lest you be judged"—and often we interpret that to mean never judge.

That’s impossible. Judgments must be made. How will we avoid false teachers if we do not judge who the false teachers are?

Paul rebuked the Corinthians for not judging a man who had committed a particularly heinous sin. He wrote, "I … have judged already, as though I were present, the one who has done this deed" (1 Cor. 5:3).

In verse 27, there’s a couple good theories as to why the Jews were saying that they shouldn’t know where the Messiah was from. The first is that the Jews had a theory that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, then disappear for a while to somewhere unknown before returning. There’s an explanation of this based on Song of Solomon 2:9 at this site.

The same site has Gill’s explanation—and he references rabbinic writings—that the rabbis interpreted Genesis 4:25, where Eve refers to her son Seth as "another seed," to mean that the Messiah would come from "another place," and that place would be unknown. (Gill’s commentary seems to suggest that the Jews had some idea that the Messiah should be born of a virgin based on Isaiah 7:14, which I do not believe is true.

In human words, Jesus does not answer their charge. In fact, he agrees with it, though he may not have cared about their tradition that the Messiah’s place of origin shouldn’t be known. He admits, "You both know me and know where I am from" (v. 28a, NASB).

Spiritually, though, he utterly refutes their charge, but they completely miss it. He says, "I have not come of myself, but he who sent me is true, whom you do not know" (v. 28b, NASB). The place of origin that they don’t know is the Father! "I know him, because I am from him," he says (v. 29, NASB).

I don’t suppose I have to explain the answer to the Pharisees’ question about where Jesus is going to you. He went first into the bowels of the earth—Hades, the place of the dead—to preach the Gospel to the dead and to the "spirits in prison" (1 Pet. 4:6; 3:19). Then he would rise again and ascend into heaven.

Verses 37-39 are one more set of verses we need to consider whether we believe. Are we spiritual sons of God, recipients of the grace of God and partakers of the New Covenant? If so, then we have rivers of living water flowing from our innermost being! If we will set our mind on spiritual things and not block the flow of that river, we will affect every room we walk into and every person we encounter … whether we say anything or not.

In verse 40, some suggest that the Christ would surely not come from some backwoods place like Galilee. However, Galilee—the tribal territory of Zebulun and Naphtali—is most certainly mentioned as an origin place for the Messiah:

The darkness shall not be like it was in her [i.e., Israel’s] distress, when he formerly lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward afflicted her more grievously by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations. The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light. They that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them the light has shined. (Isaiah 9:1-2)

By the way, the reason that the Jews knew the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem was because of a very clear prophecy in Micah 5:2.

In verse 46, officers sent by the Pharisees don’t arrest Jesus because of the way he spoke. It’s a pleasant verse that moves our hearts, but it frustrated the Pharisees. They claim that none of the rulers believe in Jesus, but of course we know that Nicodemus and "many" others believed secretly (Jn. 12:42). Terrifying people into being afraid to admit they believe does not mean that no believers exist.

Finally, they argue to Nicodemus that no prophet comes from Galilee according to the Scripture. (Of course, the Scripture didn’t prophesy any other prophet nor city they were from, either.) They are correct. The Scripture does not prophesy a prophet from Galilee, but a "great light" from Galilee.

John 7:53-8:11

We have to address this passage because hopefully it will affect the way we look at the Bible. We believe in the inspiration of Scripture, but inspiration has taken on some strange meanings in the modern age. We modern, western, and civilized people like our information straightforward, categorized, and with all loose ends tied up. God never provides that. If you don’t believe me, just keep your eyes open as you walk with God.

John 7:53 (the last verse of chapter 7) to 8:11 is probably the most disputed textual passage in the Bible. The note in the New International Version, one of the most popular modern Bible translations, says:

The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53—8:11. A few manuscripts include these verses, wholly or in part, after John 7:36, John 21:25, Luke 21:38 or Luke 24:53.

On this page, a discussion by Samuel P. Tregelles gives an excellent exploration into the early church fathers use—or rather lack of use—of this passage.

NotJustAnotherBook.com has a very honest but positive evaluation of the passage. Between this link and the one in the passage before, you’ll learn more about the textual evidence for this passage than you will ever have wanted to know.

However, the web page that was easily my favorite was by James Patrick Holding of tektonics.org. He suggests that the passage was originally written by Luke, but that it didn’t make it into Luke’s final cut, perhaps even because of lack of room on the final scroll.

If the idea that our English version of John might have a story that is not original to John bothers you, then you better find a way to deal with it. An argument could be made that this passage was originally in the Gospel of John, but the argument would be very weak. On the other hand, in the first letter of John is a verse for which no argument at all can be made that it is original. That verse is 1 John 5:7, and there is no doubt it was added later. It has no Greek manuscript support whatsoever except a forgery that was made specifically to get the verse included in Erasmus’ third revision of the Textus Receptus. Erasmus knew it was a forgery, so he took it out of his fourth edition. Ironically, though, the King James Version of the Bible was based on Erasmus’ third revision.

The web pages I link above seem agreed that there are some specific things about the story of Jesus and the adulterous woman that make it ring true and sound like an eyewitness story. For example, the testimony that Jesus wrote on the ground without an explanation of what he wrote, is the kind of thing a real eyewitness would give that a storyteller would probably not give.

Several of them suggest that the early churches were worried that the story might make it look like the church was lenient about adultery, and that is why it was not more well known in the early churches. (Origen, for example, doesn’t seem to even know about it in A.D. 225. His commentary on John jumps straight from John 7:52 to 8:12.)

The story is important, but it speaks for itself. Now that I’ve talked about the text, I’m not going to comment on the story because it’s so clear.

John 8:12-59

How does one keep a commentary on John 8 short?!

We’re going to go light on the commentary here even thought it’s so tempting not to.

In verse 24, Jesus tells the Pharisees that unless they believe that "I am," they will die in their sins. The NASB has a note that says, "Most authorities associate this with Ex 3:14, I AM WHO I AM."

Some Bible translations will have "I am he" in that verse, but the Greek only has "I am."

If there’s any doubt that Jesus was referring back to Exodus 3:14, he will erase it in verse 58, but let’s get there first.

In verse 28, know that whenever Jesus mentions the Son of Man being lifted up, he is talking about his crucifixion. Knowing this makes me a little nervous about singing songs about lifting Jesus up from the earth, knowing that was Jesus’ terminology for being crucified, but perhaps we are right in assigning that phrase a double meaning. As we exalt him with our worship and the preaching of Gospel, he draws all men to himself (see Jn. 12:32).

Verse 34 is a strong verse. "Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin" (NASB). The last half of Romans 6 argues the same thing. Those who say that we can live however we want and go to heaven if we believe in the atonement are deceived about this. The point of the Gospel is to set us free from our slavery to sin, and if we are still practicing sin, then we are still slaves to sin. The truth will set us free!

We must pursue holiness and strive against sin (Heb. 12:4,14). It is not necessarily a simple thing. We must believe. We must walk by the Spirit. We must discipline our body (1 Cor. 9:27). We must not make provision for the lusts of the flesh (Rom. 13:14). We must look for the way of escape that God provides from temptation (1 Cor. 10:13). We must exhort one another (Heb. 3:13). We must restore each other with spiritual words (Gal. 6:1), give thought to how to provoke one another to love and good works (Heb. 10:24), and help bring about conversion when one of us "errs from the truth" (Jam. 5:19-20). Finally, we must diligently add to our faith, and thus be growing in our faith (2 Pet. 1:5-11).

It sounds overwhelming, and indeed it would be impossible if we were not spiritual children of God. As it is, we can believe, and we will find grace to be growing in all the things above, then rushing to the throne of grace for mercy and grace at the points where we stumble on the path to the fullness of the life of Christ.

We should learn from verses 39-47. Far too often we waste our breath and our reason on those who are completely deaf. They are not of God, and God has no intention of letting them hear our words. Jesus didn’t do that. He told them their condition straightforwardly, explaining that they were children of the devil, that they would die in their sins, and that they were not of God. The one that is of God hears the words of God, Jesus tells us. That is not just true when Jesus was speaking 2,000 years ago. According to John’s letter, it is true when Jesus speaks through us as well (1 Jn. 4:6).

We must remember that Jesus said not to throw that which was holy to dogs (Matt. 7:6). And, by the way, we can only know who the dogs are if we judge, though we must judge with righteous judgment.

In verse 51-58, Jesus finally begins to speak clearly enough about himself to enrage the Pharisees and have them charge him with blasphemy. They even attempt to stone him. His statement in verse 58 is clear. He is the great I Am who appeared to Moses (Ex. 3:14) and Abraham and judged Sodom and Gomorrah by calling fire down from his Father in heaven (Gen. 19:24).

Sigh … I have not kept this short, but I should add one more thing. One early Christian, one of the most well known and respected Christians of the late 2nd century, who started several churches in Gaul among the Barbarians and was eventually martyred, used John 8:57 to argue that Jesus had a ministry that was over ten years long and that he was at least 40 when he was crucified. Why, he argues, would the Pharisees have said he was less than 50 years old when he was only 33 years old? Wouldn’t they have acknowledged as few years as possible and said, "You’re not even 40 years old," if Jesus was only 33 or so? (Irenaeus, Against Heresies II:22:4-5).

In all of church history, there is no one else who suggests such a thing, but it was so interesting that I thought I ought to pass it on.

John 9

The story of the blind man speaks for itself. It is a great story, full of powerful lines from the healed man to the Pharisees. It’s rewarding and satisfying for a Christian to read. This man is brave and speaks up. Everyone who reads the story loves him.

I want to touch on just a couple things.

In verses 4 and 5, Jesus says he is working while it is day. The night is coming. Then he adds, "While I am in the world, I am the Light of the world" (v. 5, NASB).

What about when he is not in the world?

I want you to remember our discussion of Genesis 1 and its spiritual application. The sun and moon are not called the sun and moon when they are created. They are called "a greater light" and "a lesser light." One rules the day; the other rules the night.

Jesus is the sun of righteousness that rules the day. He was shining when it was still day, but he tells his disciples that night is coming. He’s the light during the day because he is the sun. When the night comes, there will be a lesser light, but it will rule the night.

That lesser light is the church, and the moon is a perfect picture of the church. It does not have its own light. It reflects the light of the sun/Son. The light the church produces waxes and wanes, though unlike the moon, we have control over how much light of the Son we reflect.

The picture Jesus paints here goes very deep and is covered by many Scriptures. Jesus says that he is the Light of the world while he’s in the world. Ephesians 5:8-14 explains that now we are the light of the world. Matthew 5:14-16 tells us the same. Romans 13:12 says that we are far into the night, so we must cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light.

Finally, in verse 41, we see that Jesus gives preference to those that admit they are blind over those who assert in their arrogance that they can see. This reminds us of the tax collector in the temple who beat his chest over and over, asking for the mercy of God (Luke 18:10-14). Jesus said he went to his house made righteous.

Of course, we all know this, but we do not always consider that we may be the arrogant Pharisee rather than the repentant tax collector! Are we looking to learn? Or can God teach us nothing because you can’t add water to a full cup?

In Isaiah 50, the prophet is clearly prophesying about the Messiah, and he has even the Messiah—Jesus, the Logos of God—saying, "The Lord GOD has given me the tongue of the learned, so that I would know how to speak a word in its proper time to the one that is weary. He awakens me morning by morning; he awakens me to listen like one who is taught" (Isaiah 50:4).

Even the Messiah loved to learn from God.

Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but the one who hates reproof is foolish. (Prov. 12:1)

This Week’s Readings

Monday, June 25: John 1:1-3
Tuesday, June 26: John !:4-3
Wednesday, June 27: John 4-6
Thursday, June 28: John 7-9
Friday, June 29: John 10-12

Next week we will finish the Gospel of John, then cover more Psalms and Proverbs on Thursday and Friday.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 4

Here we can see the importance of paying attention to the things we paid attention to as we were reading through the history of Israel. We know who Jacob was. We may not remember exactly where Sychar was (and I have no internet as I type this, so I can’t look it up and give you a link), but we do know where Samaria is, as far as it being a territory. It was north of the kingdom of Judah.

We also know the reason that the Jews have nothing to do with the Samaritans (v. 9) because we read about how the Assyrians captured the ten northern tribes and settled Israel with people from other countries. The Samaritans were "half-breeds."

Jesus has a strange conversation with this Samaritan woman. He doesn’t really answer any of her questions until the end, after he has thrown her off balance by telling her what he knew about her. Instead, he gently leads her to a spiritual desire, which she doesn’t really understand ("Give me this water so that … I don’t have to come here to draw"). Then he throws her off balance by pointing out here marital situation, which she is not proud of.

The Samaritan woman then does something all of us should be aware of. She tries to shift the subject to a religious debate. "Oh, you’re a prophet," she says. "Let’s talk about the temple controversy, Jerusalem vs. Samaria. Let’s ignore my sin and discuss theology, not obedience to God."

We love theology because discussing doctrines we have no control over is not threatening. Discussing the commands and judgments of God is much more threatening because it requires us to think every time we pull money out of our wallet. It requires us to question whether we care, whether we help people, whether we love the world, whether we’re more fascinated with Hollywood or Apple than we are with the things of the kingdom and the Spirit of God.

Notice, too, that Jesus did not berate the Samaritan woman for her sin. Instead he calls her to worship God in spirit and truth, then reveals who he is.

In the verses that follow, my opinion (for what it’s worth) is that Jesus didn’t eat because he was excited, not because he was fasting. He was satisfied by doing the will of the Father, and he was excited about reaching the Samaritan woman’s heart. He told us in Matthew that there is joy in heaven over one sinner who repents (15:7). Since Jesus is the Lord from heaven, he shares the joy of heaven over that repentance.

John 5:1-16

There’s a verse in this chapter that was quite surprising to me. In verse 14, Jesus tells the man he healed to stop sinning so that something worse didn’t happen to him. I think that surprises me every time I read it. When Jesus heals the blind man in chapter 9 of John’s Gospel, he tells his disciples that the blindness was not caused by sin but brought about so that God could be glorified.

The fact is, there are many sources for sickness. Whatever we wish were true, the fact is that God has not devoted himself to answer our question, "Why?" He reveals himself, he heals, and he transforms lives, but overall he does not answer our pleas to know why bad things happen.

At one time Jesus says that a bent over woman has been oppressed by satan for 18 years. Here he says that the healed man must stop sinning to prevent a worse problem than his paralysis. In chapter 9 he says that God let the blind man be blind so that his works would be glorified.

Right now, Steve Saint of Itec Ministries—son of Nate Saint who was martyred by Waodani Indians with Jim Elliott in Ecuador in 1956—is lying in a hospital bed in Florida. He is trying to get movement back in his legs, arms, hands, and feet after being hit in the head by an airfoil that snapped loose from a safety strap.

Steve’s testimony is incredible. He said (paraphrasing), "Despite all the pain, I have not been tempted once to ask why, which really encourages me." Steve simply says that he wants God to write this chapter of his story, just as he has written all the others. (See his book Walking God’s Trail.)

Concerning the Pharisees’ blind reaction to this man’s healing, focusing on a ridiculous religious technicality rather than an incredible miracle from God, we must all beware of how we exalt our own theology. We see the Pharisees exalting their theology above a miracle from God, but the worst exaltation of theology is to exalt it above love. Love can be found even in the judgment of God, not just in the mercy of God, but it cannot be found in pharisaical condemnation based on the traditions of men.

It’s easy to condemn the Pharisees for the traditions of men, but are we really willing to look at the Word of God (I’m referring to Jesus here, not the Bible) and the Scripture and face our own traditions that stop God’s commands from being carried out?

John 5:17-20

Oddly enough, the Pharisees had a little understanding of the idea of divinity, probably better than most of the modern church. They understood that the claim to be the Son of God was a real claim. The Son is called the Son because he really is a Son. He was actually begotten of God in the beginning, the firstborn of all creation.

Thus, referring to himself as the Son of God meant that he was equal to God. He was eternal. He was not made, and he never came into existence. The divine substance has always existed and is not created.

Equal, however, is not a universal word. There is a sense in which the Son is not equal. He will tell us in 14:28 that the Father is greater than he is. In Mark 13:32, he told us that there are things the Father knows that he does not.

Verse 19 is crucial to following God. Do we have our eyes open to what our Father is doing? Have we made any effort to be those that watch for what God is doing? Or are we concerned with our own plans and doings.

If we will give ourselves to God, we will find that he begins to intervene in our lives. Our plans will begin to go astray. Hurdles and roadblocks will arise, detouring us from our own path into his. After some time of this, you will begin to see quickly where God is going and where you should be following.

But if we complain and buck and kick, we will find that we learn nothing at all and remain carnal throughout our Christian life. This is bad because living according to the flesh will lead to our dying. It as we put the deeds of the body to death by the Spirit that we will live (Rom. 8:12-13).

I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go. I will guid you with my eye. Don’t be like the horse or the mule, which have no understanding and whose mouth must be controlled with bit and bridle. (Ps. 32:8-9)

In verse 20, Jesus says that the Father shows him great things to do because the Father loves him. This does not leave us out! In chapter 14, Jesus tells us that we will do even greater works than he did (v. 12). That is not because any one of us is going to be more powerful than Jesus. It is because as there are many living by the Spirit of God, some with gifts of healing, some with miracles, some who teach, others who evangelize, some who shepherd, some who administrate, and many others … as we together do these things, our effect on the world and the miracles we perform will far outstrip those done by Jesus when he was living in just one body.

The fact is, anything we do is still being done by Jesus, but now he has a corporate body!!! He can work through all of us. We are called his body; in fact, we are called his very limbs (1 Cor. 12).

John 5:21-30

Jesus has a lot to say about judgment here. It is the Son who will resurrect us at the end of the age. It is the Son who will judge us.

There are two resurrections mentioned in this passage. In verse 25, Jesus is not talking about the physically dead, but about the spiritually dead (which we all are prior to knowing Jesus – Eph. 2:1-3). The dead will hear his voice and live.

In verses 27-29, he is talking about those in the graves. Notice that he says "all that are in the graves" rather than "the dead."

John 5:31-47: The Word and the Church (Advanced)

Verse 38 says something interesting. It’s important to remember. Jesus says that the Word is not living inside of the Pharisees because they don’t listen to the one God has sent. We may tend to think of that as only applying to Jesus, but that’s not true. In John’s first letter, he tells us that is true for the church as well.

We are of God. The one that knows God listens to us. The one that is not of God does not hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. (1 Jn. 4:6)

The next two verses add to Jesus’ point. You can make all the Scriptural arguments you want, but those who are not of God and who do not listen to the ones God has sent have already read the Scriptures. They study them, thinking that life is in them, but they refuse to come to Jesus Christ so that they will actually have life. The Scriptures testify of Jesus, which means …

It means that the Scriptures testify of the church, too, because the church is the body of Christ! The church is called the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). God has promised to lead the church into what is "true and not a lie" (1 Jn. 2:27). As the church speaks to each other, they are preserved from doctrinal error and they grow—together— into the fullness of Christ.

By church, if I haven’t explained it before, I do not mean this organization or that organization. I mean the local church. I mean the disciples who live in a town together and who are able to be in fellowship with each other, whether or not they actually are in fellowship with each other. They are the possessors of the promises. They are the ones who can be led into what is true. In most cases, they are not being led and they are not being taught by God because they are scattered, being taught by organizations not much different than the Pharisees—groups that had good beginning, but have settled into tradition and are unable to change or to receive the revelation of God.

Towards the end of the chapter, we see Jesus backing up Moses. Jesus always backed up Moses. This is not strange because God conversed with Moses face to face, like a friend (Ex. 33:11). That God would have been the Logos, the Word of God. So Moses is Jesus’ friend, and not just Jesus’ friend while Jesus is in a human body, but the friend of Jesus when Jesus was in the divine form of God’s Wisdom (whatever form that is).

Jesus is charging the Pharisees with misusing the Law to condemn the one that Moses spoke of.

Surely, too, when Jesus says that Moses spoke of him, he is referring back to the prophecy about "the prophet" like Moses that God would raise up and to whom Israel would be obligated to listen (Deut. 18:15-19).

John 6:1-35

Here we find two of Jesus’ most well-known miracles, the feeding of the five thousand and walking on water. John doesn’t mention that Peter attempted, and partially succeeded at, walking on water as well.

When Jesus is asked what the work of God is (v. 29), he replies that the work of God is to believe in the One God has sent. That is because real belief will issue forth in all other works, for the works we are to do are prepared since the foundation of the world (Eph. 2:10). We find those works by walking by the Spirit, which is the same as letting Christ live through you. The issue is not just good deeds, but doing spiritual deeds, those that are the product of a spiritual life and the motivations put in our hearts when we set our minds on spiritual things.

Jesus was apparently very patient. "What sign can you give us?" they ask in verse 30.

Oh, I don’t know. How about feeding 5,000 people with five loaves of bread and two fish, then gathering up baskets of scraps?

They may not have known about the walking on water, but the passage tells us that the majority of them were part of the 5,000 who were fed by the loaves and fish. Did no one notice that the apostles never had to refill their baskets when they passed out the food?

Jesus says in v. 35 that he’s the bread of life. He’ll have a lot more to say about that in this chapter.

John 6:37 and Predestination (Advanced)

In verse 37, he says that all that the Father gives him will come to him. Predestination is a true doctrine, and it’s mentioned several times in the Scriptures (Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:29; 1 Pet. 1:2). When I object to Calvinism it is not because I object to predestination but because I object to capricious predestination, wherein God randomly selects a few to be saved. Calvinists like to hide this random consignment of the majority of mankind to eternal fire with nothing they can do about it by calling it "sovereignty," then claiming that if God isn’t cruel tyrant they portray him to be, then he isn’t sovereign.

Predestination is based on foreknowledge. God knows in advance the response people will give, just as I know the response my wife, children, and friends will give to many questions because I know them. I’m finite, so I only know the answer to a few questions for my family and friends, but God, being infinite, knows everything. This does not mean that he predetermines everything, just foreknows it.

The elect are those inside of Christ. If you’re in Christ, you’re elect. If you’re not, you’re not elect. It is up to you to "make your calling and election sure" by diligently adding godly qualities to your faith through a spiritual walk and trust in God (2 Pet. 1:5-11).

Thus, those that the Father gives to Jesus are those that he foreknows will believe and continue to the end.

John 6:38-46

In verse 38, can we say what Jesus says? Can we say that we are living on earth to do God’s will and not our own? Are we really seeking first the kingdom of God and allowing God to provide for us the things that we need? (Matt. 6:33).

The Jews were a little bothered by his disagreement with them that Moses brought them the bread from heaven. They ignore his foray into his mission on earth, and they get right back to the issue of his being the Bread of Life and particularly his being the Bread that "came down out of heaven." That sounded like blasphemy, as heaven was almost a euphemism for God among the Jews of the first century.

Jesus answers their complaints by saying that these Jews need to listen to God, not their traditions or their favorite Bible characters (such as Moses). Isaiah 54:13 is where the prophets say that everyone will be taught of the Lord, and Jesus points out that if they will be taught of God, they will come to him.

Thus, in verse 44, those who are drawn by God are the same ones who are open to learn from God. These will come to Jesus. Those who are not open will be given parables and stumbling blocks so that "hearing, they may not hear, and seeing, they may not perceive." We saw parables in the synoptic Gospels; here we see Jesus putting a stone of offense before them (Matt. 21:42-44).

In verse 46, we have John 1:18 explained. John 1:18 says that no man has seen God, yet the Hebrew Scriptures repeatedly talk of seeing God. As explained several times in these commentaries it was the Logos of God that was seen. Verse 46 makes that clear, as Jesus explains that it is the Father who has never been seen by man.

John 6:47 and Eternal Life

We talked about this when we went through Romans, but Paul and John use eternal life differently. For Paul, eternal life is a reward still to be obtained. When he speaks of the life we have through Christ on this earth, he only uses the word "life" (e.g., Rom. 2:5-7; 6:22; Gal. 6:7-9). That is also true of Mark (10:30).

The reason for this is explained in John’s letter. 1 John 5:11-13. The eternal life we have now is the life that is inside the Son. It is not our possession. If we have the Son, we have the life. If we do not have the Son, we do not have eternal life. At the judgment, it will be made our possession. We will be given immortality, becoming sons of God just as (well, not just as, but equally immortal) Jesus is, so that "he might become the firstborn among many siblings" (Rom. 8:29).

Thus, John, Paul, and Mark have the same thought in mind. On this earth, we live by the life that is in Jesus, but at the judgment, we will receive eternal life in ourselves if we have continued in the faith, not moved away from the hope of the Gospel (Col. 1:21-23).

John 6:48-71: The Great Offense

If the Jews struggled with the concept of Jesus as being the Bread from heaven, he made it far worse by explaining that they needed to eat his flesh and drink his blood in order to partake of that bread. They were horrified! Cannibalism was far outside the morals of Judaism (and, thank God, still is), and even animal blood was forbidden to them, much less human blood.

Jesus did not bother explaining himself except to tell them that his words were Spirit and life (v. 63). By this, he did not mean, "Interpret this figuratively, and thus ignore what I said about eating my meat and drinking my blood."

He meant, "All of you are thinking carnally. I’ve been trying to tell you that it is the Father who must draw you to me, or you will never last. Go to the Father! Learn from him, and you will understand what I am saying. Become those who have the Word of God inside of them and then you will be able to recognize the Word of God when it is spoken to you!"

The apostles understood this. When many of the Jews either didn’t understand or refused to go to the Father for guidance and revelation, they were offended enough to quit listening to him. So Jesus asked the apostles if they would leave, too. Their answer is rich:

"Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. (v. 68)

John 6:48-66: The Bread of Life and the Eucharist/Communion (Advanced)

So, while I have said that Jesus wasn’t declaring his words figurative in verse 63, how does that apply to communion which has to come to mind in this passage. Protestants say Jesus’ words are figurative. Catholics say they are literal, and they not only teach that in some way communicants (those who take the Eucharist or communion) are eating the literal body and blood of the Lord, but they also keep the consecrated pieces of bread in a chalice in a small tabernacle on an altar in their church buildings and cathedrals. Worshipers literally bow down to this cup of bread, believing Jesus to be present in it, an act that many Protestants (and I) consider entirely inappropriate if not outright idolatry.

Let’s cover several things, beginning with the difference in wording: Eucharist vs. communion.

The word "Eucharist" comes from the Greek word for thanksgiving. It was used because Jesus gave thanks over the bread and wine at the last supper (Matt. 26:27). Justin Martyr says that "Thanksgiving" (Gr. Eucharist) is what the churches in general called the meal (First Apology 66, c. A.D. 155).

The word "communion" means fellowship. It is koinonia in the Greek. and Paul calls the bread and wine of the Lord’s supper "communion" or "fellowship" of the body and blood of Christ.

Both words are perfectly good words to use.

As far as whether the bread and wine of communion is figuratively the body and blood of Christ, the first thing we need to admit is, of course it is; at least to a certain extent. Jesus did not expect the Jews to begin biting him and lapping at his blood when he gave that speech. When we—whether we are Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox, or refuse to be called such names—eat the fellowship meal, we are eating bread and drinking wine, not meat and blood. (Some Roman Catholics have written me arguing that science has proven that the molecular structure of the bread really becomes meat when the priest blesses it, but the Roman Catholic Church itself does not teach or believe this. And the rumor is a rumor, not a real scientific study.)

The second thing we need to admit is that the idea that the Lord’s Supper is completely symbolic is unscriptural. Such an idea was rejected by everyone except gnostic heretics until at least the time of the Reformation.

By unscriptural, I suppose I am referring primarily to 1 Corinthians 11, where we are told that eating the Eucharist unworthily leads to the judgment of God, which can include sickness and death. If the Eucharist can bring such judgment, then does it not bring grace to those who eat it worthily?

Further, Paul calls the Eucharist the fellowship of the body and blood of Christ. While the bread and wine is not literally meat and blood, it does cause us to interact (commune) with the body and blood of Christ, something Jesus clearly wanted us to do when he spoke in John 6.

As far as the tradition of the church, the teaching that the bread and wine is in some sense the body and blood of Christ is as early as it is possible to go. From the earliest Christian writings onwards, we read things like:

… breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, the antidote which prevents us from dying, and a cleansing remedy driving away evil so that we should live in God through Jesus Christ. (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians 20, c. A.D. 110)

we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. (First Apology 66, c. A.D. 155)

He has acknowledged the cup as his own blood, from which he bedews our blood; and he has established the bread as his own body, from which he gives increase to our bodies. When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made, from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported … (Irenaeus, Against Heresies V:2:2-3, c. A.D. 185)

What to do with that information is up to each church, but to the early churches the Eucharist was important, providing grace and being the food of eternal life. I love the terminology, "the medicine of immortality."

I have several more early Christian quotes on the subject at Christian-history.org.

This Week’s Readings

Monday, June 25: John 1:1-3
Tuesday, June 26: John !:4-3
Wednesday, June 27: John 4-6
Thursday, June 28: John 7-9
Friday, June 29: John 10-12

Next week we will finish the Gospel of John, then cover more Psalms and Proverbs on Thursday and Friday.

The overall year’s plan is here.

John 1

I wrote a lot yesterday about the Father and his Son, the divine Logos (or Word). It would be easy for that to be left as a theological issue. I didn’t know how to avoid that, but today I want to make sure we moved on to a better approach.

Theological issues easily turn into divisive issues. Because I think I have an excellent explanation on the relationship between the Father and the Son that answers several Scriptural problems that modern Christians have and that is based on the consistent, united testimony of the earliest churches and the confirmation of 250 church leaders at the Council of Nicea, I am always tempted to maintain that people ought to listen to me and agree with me. My position is not my own; it is the tradition of the church, and, in my opinion, clearly more Scriptural.

But what good does it do for me to worry about converting people to my position. If I fought vigorously enough for it, I could get followers and create much division. Creating division is a much worse violation of the traditions of the apostles than a misunderstanding of the difficult concept of how the Son can be divine, yet there be only one God.

On the other hand, there are much better purposes to understanding who the Son is. John is glorying in what he has to say about the Word of God throughout the first part of this chapter.

I don’t know that I’m very good and conveying poetry or excitement, but that’s what I’m trying to do there. I think that’s what John was trying to do in chapter 1. This is the Logos of God who was in the beginning! He came to earth to be with us!

In 1 John (the first letter of John, towards the end of the Bible), he says it this way:

Look at the kind of love that God has shown to us, that we should be called the children of God! (3:2)

Finally, he ends this glorious rejoicing in the Word and Son of God by saying that no one has seen God at any time, but the Son, who has lived in the bosom of the Father, has "expounded" him.

That word, in v. 18, that is translated "declared" (KJV) or "explained" (NASB) or "made known" (NET) is exegeomai. It’s the word we get "exegesis" from. Exegesis is the act of interpreting a text to find its true meaning.

Jesus interpreted the Father for us. He lived the life of the Father so that we could watch him live it.

John 1:11-12: The Gospel

This is a very important passage. "Those who are his" could be everyone in the world because he created them all. Most likely, though, this is a reference to the Jews, because the Logos is the Word and Reason of God. He is the Jews’ God. All the speaking from God to the Jews came through him because he is the Word of God.

This is also why John can say that no one has seen God at any time (v. 18) despite the fact that God was seen relatively often in old covenant times. They did not see the Father, who is the one God (Jn. 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:6), but they saw the divine Word of God, who proceeds from God and is of the divine substance.

Jesus came to his own, the Jews, and they did not receive him. John was probably writing this 65 years after the coming of Christ, and certainly at least 45 years. He saw the Jews not only reject their Messiah and put him to death, he also saw that the Gentiles were flocking into the church even when the Jews were not. Paul calls it a "partial hardening" (Rom 11:25).

The important part of this passage, though, is verse 12, which promises that those who do receive Jesus will be given authority to become the children of God.

Today we often teach that if we believe that Jesus died for our sins, then we have received him and we are believers. That’s not belief. Belief is belief in Jesus, not in things about Jesus, no matter how true or important those things are. We need to receive him, not just receive a teaching about him, no matter how true or important that teaching is.

Later in the Gospel, John will record this prayer from Jesus:

This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. (17:3)

The Jehovah’s Witnesses want to translate this as "take in knowledge about you" rather than know you. If there was ever a deadly mistranslation, that is it. Jesus Christ is the Life, and that Life enlightens every man that comes into the world. You don’t need to take in knowledge about the Life and Light, you need to know the Life and Light.

John 1:19-51

We’re over 1,000 words already. I think we’ve established a good basis, though. I’ll have to not be quite so thorough in from here through chapter 2.

In verse 21, when the Pharisees mention "the prophet," they are referring to Moses’ prophecy that God would raise up a prophet like Moses to whom the people would be obliged to listen.

Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptizer is another chance for the apostle to honor our Lord. John baptizes in water, but the Logos of God is able to baptize in the Holy Spirit! If ever there was a great power to have, that is the power to have!

In fact, as I try to emphasize over and over and over again, the ability of Jesus to baptize in the Holy Spirit is the very foundation of the New Testament. Jesus’ death brought forgiveness of sins and washed away the past. Jesus’ resurrection brings us a new life. But when he comes to live in us by the Spirit of God, that is the New Covenant (Acts 2:17-21).

More on that in chapter 3.

In verse 36, I suspect that John the Baptizer was not sure why he called Jesus the Lamb of God. There’s nothing in what we read about John to suggest that he knew that Jesus would give his life for the sins of the world. Jesus is "the Lamb slain since the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8), but I don’t think John knew that.

So what do I think? I think that John saw Jesus and was moved to call him the Lamb of God. I suspect that there are many times that a prophet doesn’t understand why he said what he said. There are no prophets unless they are willing to take some risk in obedience to the Word moving in their heart. The revelation of God sometimes reveals itself to the mind, but often it does not, and the prophet must proclaim what he does not understand.

John 2

There’s plenty of interesting things about the wedding in Cana. One of them is the interaction between Jesus and his mother.

I read a book once, called Do It Yourself Hebrew and Greek (which I HIGHLY recommend). He used Jesus statement to Mary, "What have I to do with thee?" (v. 4), to explain why those who are not experts should not trust their knowledge of Greek to back up novel interpretations.

The literal Greek of that statement is, "What to me and to you?" It really doesn’t mean much in Greek, but it is a standard Hebrew idiom, employed several times in the Hebrew Scriptures. Goodrick, the author, sends you to those various places, and he lets you put the statement in context of other uses of the Hebrew idiom.

That idiom is more strongly negative than we realize. David used it to Abishai when he wanted to put someone to death. The multiple demons in the man in the tombs at the Gaderenes said it to Jesus.

Despite such a strong statement to his mother, Jesus did what she said!

Drunkenness is expressly and repeatedly forbidden in the apostolic writings (e.g. Eph. 5:18; Gal. 5:19-21). Drinking, however, is not forbidden, and I’m pretty sure that no culture in the world besides the American one would ever have considered forbidding alcohol completely. At the wedding in Cana, Jesus not only made wine from water, but he made wine after everyone had drank until the original wine was all gone! The headwaiter clearly thought that the guests had drank enough that their ability to taste the wine was impaired (v. 10).

Note, too, that John calls this the beginning of the signs Jesus did. This is a bit of evidence for Eusebius’ assertion that John wrote the Gospel to cover the first year of Jesus’ ministry which the synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) did not cover.

In verses 13-17, we need to remember to learn about Jesus from what the apostles wrote about him, not interpret the apostles by what we think about Jesus. We’re Americans. We believe in being nice. Jesus wasn’t being nice. I think it’s clear from the narrative that Jesus was only trying to scare the merchants out of the temple, but I think it’s also clear that hitting a merchant or two with the whip would not have been out of the question.

In verse 19, Jesus gives a prophecy that could not possible have been understood by the Pharisees (and wasn’t). It wasn’t understood by the apostles, either, but after he rose again, the prophecy provided comfort and helped them believe.

The New Testament was the same way. No one understood the prophecies until after the events they portrayed happened, but they provided comfort and assurance once those things transpired.

In verses 24 and 25 we see that Jesus could read the hearts of man.

John 3

This is another of the most famous passages of Scripture. "Ye must be born again" (v. 7).

Shane Claiborne, whom I admire for the work he does, once wrote that we base our "born again" theology on one passage of Scripture. He didn’t object to the born again theology, just to the emphasis on it without also emphasizing taking care of the poor and widows and giving, which have many more verses.

His point is good, but this is nowhere near the only passage of Scripture that talks about new birth. 1 Peter 1:23 talks about the fact that we are born again, and James 1:18 says that God gave birth to us through the word of truth. There are other references to new life and to dying and rising again throughout the prophets and in the apostles writings.

I have heard it suggested relatively often that "born again" can also be translated "born from above." I read one really strong argument for that translation. The theologian who wrote on it spent an entire chapter defining the Greek word anothen. I got home and told my wife about it, and she took his argument apart with one question. "Then why did Nicodemus talk about entering a second time into his mother’s womb?"

We’ll stick with "born again" as the proper translation.

Being born again means being born of the Spirit and of water (v. 5). Since many Protestants don’t like what the Bible has to say about water baptism, they have come up with a couple alternate interpretations of water in verse 5. We will ignore those alternative interpretations because there are no value to them. I think David Bercot may have said it best in Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up. "If Jesus meant something other than baptism, then he was a terrible communicator because everyone for 1500 years thought that’s what he meant."

My favorite description of being born of the Spirit and walking in the Spirit is in this chapter. You don’t know where the spiritual man is going or coming from. He’s like the wind. You can’t see his source, but he is moved by it all the time.

I like it. I want to live like that. I do live like that, and you can, too. It is the New Covenant.

In verses 14-15 we are treated to a shocking statement by Jesus. He compares his crucifixion to the lifting up of the bronze serpent in the wilderness!

The first time I read that, I couldn’t believe it. I had to go see a commentary to make sure I understood what I was reading.

My mind isn’t so narrow now, though, and I can see the excellent typology of the bronze serpent. The story is in Numbers 21:4-9. The serpent on the stick did provide the shape of the cross, which was a prophecy of Christ. More so, though, as we are horrified by snakes, so the raising up of Christ on the cross because of how we lived and what we did ought to horrify us even more.

From verses 13-36, no one is certain whether Jesus is continuing to talk to Nicodemus or whether those verses are John’s commentary after Jesus asked Nicodemus, "How will you believe if I tell you heavenly things" (v. 12, NASB). Because of what we have read already in John, we can know that it doesn’t matter. Jesus is the Word of God. Whether those are his direct earthly words, summarized by John 60 years after the fact, or whether those are John’s words, inspired by the living Word of God, doesn’t really matter. The source is still Jesus, the Word.

John 3:16 is the most famous verse in the Bible, of course. It really needs to be taken in context, though. Those who believe in verse 16 are the same ones who "practice the truth" in verse 20 (NASB). Those who believe are also those who walk in the light so there deeds may be exposed. John says in his letter that anyone who says he is in the light but hates his brother is in the darkness no matter what he says (1 Jn. 2:9).

I haven’t pointed out that there are groups of people who believe that Jesus did not exist prior to coming to earth. He was just a man like the rest of us, but he was exalted to be the Son of God because of his obedience. John the Baptizer disagrees with them. John believes Jesus created all things, and he believes that Jesus "comes from heaven" (v. 31).

John 3:36 can be very confusing. Some Bibles translate "believe" twice in that verse; others have "believe" and then "obey."

There are two different Greek words there. One is pisteuo and the other is peitho. The same two words are used interchangeably in Hebrews 3:18-19, though peitho is used first in that passage.

Peitho carries the connotation of "be persuaded by," and it is often translated "obey," especially in modern translations. The KJV translates apeitho (= not peitho) as "disobey" 7 out of the 16 times it is used. Peitho is used 55 times, and it is translated as "persuade" or "obey" 29 of those times. It has various translations the other 26 times, only being translated "believe" 3 times.

Okay, enough Greek. I think it’s clear that John used those two words on purpose. Belief in a person, in this case Jesus Christ, means that you are persuaded by them and that you intend to do what they say. That is not just an exposition of the Greek, that’s what we mean in English. If I were to tell you that I believe in the Libertarian party and I’m an advocate of big government and social programs, you’d know to tell me that I don’t really believe in the Libertarian party, which strongly opposes those things.

Belief in Jesus Christ is not some kind of joke, where you say you believe, announce that Jesus’ blood has paid for your sins, and then also announce that you’re not really interested in turning the other cheek when someone does you wrong. God is not mocked. The spiritual man will reap eternal life, but the fleshly one will reap corruption (Gal. 6:7-9). There is far too many "Christians" willing to say that the words of Jesus are "overboard" and unnecessary to follow.

Eternal life is an incredible gift! Until Jesus came, we had no promise of living forever. Forget cryogenics. Here is an opportunity right now, without technology to receive eternal life: to partake of it here through the deposit of the Spirit and then to experience it at the judgment as a reward.

The way to that is faith in Jesus, and it is well worth being a real believer, who does the work and reaps the benefits (Jam. 2:14-26). We don’t work to become a believer. We believe in Jesus to become a believer so that we can, through grace, be made new creatures who can do the works that God has prepared in advance for us to do (Eph. 2:8-10).

This Week’s Readings

Monday, June 25: John 1:1-3
Tuesday, June 26: John !:4-3
Wednesday, June 27: John 4-6
Thursday, June 28: John 7-9
Friday, June 29: John 10-12

Next week we will finish the Gospel of John, then cover more Psalms and Proverbs on Thursday and Friday.

The overall year’s plan is here.

Introduction

The introduction and first three verses of John’s Gospel seem important enough that they are all I am going to cover today. I spent almost four hours just on this section, and it is over 2,000 words long. My commentary on the first three verses mainly addresses the subject of the eternal relationship of the Father and the Son, a subject far too big for 2,000 words. I have provided links for further study, which you can follow as you feel led. You can also just leave the subject for teachers. In the early churches, most believers simply received the explanation of the Trinity as a teaching handed down by the apostles. It was to be believed, not researched, but teachers have a greater responsibility. Their job is to preserve the truth and, far too often today, to recover it when it is lost.

The Gospel of John

Eusebius, the famous fourth-century church historian, tells us that the Gospel of John was written later than all the others in order to cover the early part of Jesus’ ministry, which the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) leave out (Church History III:24:7-14).

The note in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series two, volume one, says that this position is untenable mostly because Eusebius, more than two centuries after the Gospel was written is the first to propose it. In its defense, there are several "this was the first … " statements in John’s Gospel.

The Muratorian Fragment is a list of the books that were considered Scripture. It is easily the earliest such list. It dates itself, saying that Pius was recently bishop of Rome, which would put it shortly after A.D. 155. That document says this about the Gospel of John:

The fourth Gospel is that of John, one of the disciples. When his fellow disciples and bishops pleaded with him, he said, “Fast with me for three days, and then we’ll tell each other whatever may be revealed to any of us.” That very night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should write everything in his own name as they remembered them. (text of Muratorian Canon at Christian-history.org)

This seems very unlikely to be correct because all other testimony is that John composed his Gospel late in life. By then the apostles were split up all over the world, and John outlived them all by up to 20 years. He is said by several early Christian writers to have lived until the times of Trajan, and Trajan’s reign began in A.D. 98, 65 years after the crucifixion of our Lord.

Irenaeus was a missionary to Lyons, Gaul (modern Trier, Germany) who is connected to John in history. Irenaeus was with Polycarp in Smyrna as a young man, and Polycarp was a bishop said to be appointed by the apostles in Asia. (Asia was Asia minor, not the huge continent containing Russia, China, and India. It was much smaller, found in modern Turkey, and included Ephesus.) The primary apostle in Asia was John.

Irenaeus says that John wrote his Gospel primarily to refute the gnostic Cerinthus (Against Heresies III:11:1). The gnostics, where they did use Scripture, tore it apart with bizarre figurative interepretations so that the Word, Church, Man, Light, Wisdom, Life, Truth and many others were all separate beings, manifestations of an unknowable god named Bythus, which means profundity (as in "profound").

To commend Irenaeus’ view, in the very first chapter, John refers to Jesus as the Word, the Light, and the Life. He also says that we have received of Jesus’ fullness. "Fullness" was the word the gnostics used to describe the dwelling place of these manifestations of Bythus, whom they called "aeons." John tells us that Jesus is the fullness. ("Aeon" is a useful Scrabble^™ word if you have a handful of vowels in Words with Friends.)

John himself says that he wrote his Gospel to convince us that Jesus was the Son of God, so that believing we would have life through his name (20:31).

Whatever the reason, it is clear to anyone who reads his Gospel that it is much different in tone from the others. Bible.org gives a list of specific differences between John and the synoptics.

So let us take a look at it.

John 1:1 (Advanced, but really important)

John 1:1-3 and 1:14 is one of the most famous passages of the Bible. It is used in religious debates all the time, especially between Jehovah’s Witnesses and Protestants.

The debates come, however, because people don’t know history or context of the Bible (or don’t care). John 1:1-3 is explained thoroughly by early Christians whose testimony is that the apostles taught them not only about the Trinity—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—but also specifically about the Word, the Logos (Greek for "word" or "reason"), who proceeded from the Father before the beginning began.

We talked about this some when we looked at Wisdom in Proverbs 8.

Let’s see if we can parse these few verses without being overwhelming.

John 1:1-3 can leave you wondering if there are two Gods. There’s the Word, who was God, and then there’s God, whom the Word was with. Do we worship one God or two?

Here’s the early Christian explanation of those verses, which Theophilus’, seventh bishop (= head elder) of Antioch (the apostle Paul’s home church), said that they had learned from the holy writings and from the teaching of the apostles themselves.

But when God wished to make all that he determined, he begot this Logos, … the firstborn of all creation. This is what the holy writings teach us, as well as all the Spirit-bearing men, one of whom, John, says, "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God" [Jn. 1:1], showing that at first God was alone, and the Logos in him. (To Autolycus II:22, A.D. 168, brackets mine)

Before the beginning—in fact, before even time was created—God was alone. Inside of him, however, was his Word, his Logos. Tertullian, a Greek and Latin speaking Christian of the late second and early third century, explained logos by saying that it is the voice we hear in our heads when we think or read.

God, they say, in some mysterious way that is beyond our understanding, was able to give birth to his Logos as a being second to himself. They are always careful to say that this did not involve "cutting off" or complete separation from each other. Instead, they explained that the Logos proceeds from the Father much as a stream proceeds from a spring or a sunbeam from the sun. There is no division in substance, but we do consider the spring and the stream as two separate things.

This power was begotten from the Father by his power and will, but not by abscission [i.e., cutting off], as if the essence of the Father were divided. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 128, c. A.D. 155)

The plant that springs from the root is something distinct from that which it grows up, yet it is of one nature with it. The river which flows from the spring is something distinct from the spring. For we cannot call either the river a spring or the spring a river. Nevertheless we allow that they are both one according to nature and also one in substance, and we admit that the spring may be conceived of as father and that the river is what is begotten of the spring. (Dionysius [the Great], Of the One Substance, A.D. 247)

Don’t let anyone think it ridiculous that God should have a Son. … The Son of God is the Logos of the Father … for after the pattern of him and by him all things were made, the Father and the Son being one. … The understanding and reason of the Father is the Son of God. But if … it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that he is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence, for from the beginning God … had the Logos in himself … but he came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things. (Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians 10, A.D. 177, brackets mine)

I have not given you the benefit of a long introduction to help you understand the concept of the difference between God who is eternal and material things, which are not. I have a longer, hopefully easier to understand, explanation of these things at The Trinity on my Christian history web site.

In the Beginning Was the Logos also has two chapters on the Trinity that an apologetics minister in Wales said ought to be required reading for the church history module in Bible school. In fact, you can just download chapters 16 and 17 of my book by right clicking and saving or you can left click the link and the .pdf should open in a new window.

Hopefully, however, the idea of the Son proceeding from the Father as a sunbeam proceeds from the sun is not difficult to grasp because it will help understand why John 1:1-3 does not teach two Gods. The unity of the Father and the Son that makes them one God, with the Holy Spirit, is that there is only one divine substance. The Son is the Wisdom and Logos of the Father, distinct in personality, but of the same essence or substance, undivided from the Father in that sense.

This is not a teaching found in one of the early church fathers, but it is explained thoroughly by Justin Martyr in A.D. 150, Theophilus in A.D. 168, Athenagoras in A.D. 177, Clement around A.D. 190, Tertullian around A.D. 210, and Origen and many others in the third century (the A.D. 200’s) before finally being defined at the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 in the very terms I’m using in this commentary.

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty … and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father; that is, of the substance of the Father … (Nicene Creed)

Thus John tells us that the Logos was with the Father in the beginning. However, he does not tell us that the Logos is God in exactly those terms, despite what your Bible translation says. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 8:6 that there is one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

John 1:1 uses a special construction. Word for word, the last phrase says in Greek, "… and God was the Word."

Greek scholars explain that when two words surround a reflexive verb (a verb like "to be," or in this case "was"), then the word without an article (an article is "the" or "a") is being used as an adjective, not as a noun. Thus, the word "God" here in John 1:1 is being used as an adjective to describe the Word.

I have heard this concept explained four times, each time as an answer to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who want to translate that passage, "And the Word was a god." You can read it at this web site, which teaches Greek.

After scholars explain John 1:1 this way like to translate John 1:1 as "The Word had the character and nature of God." I prefer something more simple because we have a word that is "God" used as an adjective. That word is "divine."

Thus, I would translate John 1:1 as, "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was divine."

A lot of people object to that wording, but it’s based on exactly what all mainline Christian scholars say that verse means. Again, see the Greek web site I linked (where he uses "same essence and nature" repeatedly). I don’t know Greek well enough to take a stand on those kind of things, but those who do consistently explain the verse just as I have explained it to you.

If any of this is confusing, rather than as simple as I’m hoping it might be, please look through my Trinity pages or download the two chapters of my book I linked above.

John 1:2-3

Now that we’ve had this long discussion of the Logos or Word of God, let’s simply point out that the Word is the Creator of everything.

His dear Son … is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him everything was created, that are in heaven or on earth … All things were created by him and for him, and he is before all things, and by him all things are held together. (Col. 1:13b,15-17)

I know we’ve already gone through Proverbs 8 in our read through the Bible, but I love what it says about the Logos (in the form of Wisdom) creating the earth with the Father:

He established me before time was in the beginning, before he made the earth … before the mountains were settled, and before all hills, he begets me. … When he prepared the heavens, I was present with him … and when he strengthened the foundations of the earth. I was by him, suiting myself to him, I was that wherein he took delight; and daily I rejoiced in his presence continually. For he rejoiced when he had completed the world, and rejoiced among the children of men. (Prov. 8:23,25,27,29-31, Septuagint Online)