Jesus began this part of his discussion with the eleven Apostles, and however many other disciples were with them in the upper room, by telling them he was leaving them (physically), in order that he could prepare a place with them. In the context of the first century AD, when a wedding agreement had been made, the groom had a fixed period of time to return to his father’s house and prepare a wing for his beloved. In the context of the Old Covenant, the Father’s House was the Temple, which was in Jerusalem, and which was destroyed in 70 AD. However, the House of God (cp. Exodus 25:1-9, 40) was supposed to represent an unseenreality, vis-à-vis in the context of the New Covenant, believers were the reality, or the Temple of God (1Corinthians 3:9-16; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1Peter 2:5). Read the rest of this entry »
In the Gospel of John, when Jesus speaks of his Father, his words are much more personal than when he speaks of his Father in the Synoptics. Indeed, Jesus speaks of the Father much more often in John’s narrative than in any of the Synoptics, nearly three times as often as he speaks of him in Matthew, which comes second in frequency. Moreover, when he uses the phrase: my Father, he does it nearly twice as often in John as he does in all the Synoptics combined. While the critics conclude the Synoptics don’t say God is literally Jesus’ Father, John leaves no doubt. In fact, Jesus’ enemies sought to slay him on several occasions, because they understood him to claim God as his own, personal Father. Read the rest of this entry »
As Jesus and his disciples escaped the grasp of the Jewish authorities who wanted to arrest him (John 8:59; 9:1), they paused at the gate, as they exited the Temple, perhaps to contribute to the blind beggar, who was sitting there. However, when it became known that he was born in this condition, the disciples wondered and asked Jesus, whose sin caused such a tragedy. Normally, it was understood by many Jews, as noted in the Apocrypha, that a man’s own sin caused his mishap (cp. Sirach 18:19-21), but how could the man who was born blind have sinned prior to his birth? Was his condition then caused by the sins of his parents/ancestors (John 9:2)? Read the rest of this entry »
Finally, we come to the place where Jesus actually healed a man, who was born blind, physically. In the previous two chapters, we had been discussing the spiritual blindness of the Jewish authorities. Like this man’s physical blindness, they had been born spiritually blind. Every man and woman, since Adam and Eve, have been born spiritually blind. The problem with the Jewish authorities of the first century AD was, they thought they could see and understand matters of the spirit (John 9:40-41). However, according to Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus, unless a man is born again vis-à-vis having a spiritual rebirth, he can’t even see the Kingdom of God (John 3:3). Read the rest of this entry »
An American attorney and author, Mike Godwin, is credited with what is known as Godwin’s Law, short for Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies. The law or rule asserts: the longer the discussion (regardless of subject matter or gravity), the more likely a Nazi comparison becomes, and with long enough discussions, it is a certainty. Of course, Nazi’s didn’t exist in the first century AD, but the rule for an ad hominem slur did exist, though probably not known or understood. The longer the Jewish authorities confronted Jesus, the more often their discussions with him descended into ad hominem remarks, and this one was no different. In John 8:48 they accused Jesus of being a Samaritan and having a demon. Since they had no good reply to deny Jesus’ claims, they began to attack his character. This sort of thing had been done throughout history by weak minded folk, Godwin’s Law notwithstanding. Read the rest of this entry »
Saying they were the spiritual children of God (John 8:41) meant that these Jewish authorities knew the will of God and did the will of God. In other words, they thought and acted in the same manner they believed God would. Otherwise, the relationship between man and God has no meaning, because God didn’t physically beget human children. The Jewish faith isn’t anything like the Greek religion, where gods rape one another, kill one another and show themselves as having the same lusts as mankind. However, although they understood a child of God is one spiritually, Jesus told them their statement that they were children of God couldn’t be true. Had they really been God’s children, they would have loved Jesus, for he had come to them from God as his physical representative. Jesus came willingly to witness to them, because God had sent him (John 8:42). Therefore, how could they be God’s children, if they didn’t believe the very one God had sent to them? Then Jesus asked: “Why don’t you understand my speech?” and immediately he answered his own question, saying: “Because you cannot hear my word!” (John 8:43). Read the rest of this entry »
If we assume that the Jewish authorities who believed (John 8:31) were sincere, their sincerity didn’t rise to the point of being Jesus’ true disciples (John 8:31). Rather, they may have been willing to accept Jesus as their Messiah, but belief in him rose only to the point of what they expected the Messiah would be like. For example, they looked for one who would be a great general who would lead them out from under the Roman yoke and subjection to all other enemies. They also believe this Messiah would never die (John 12:34). What they weren’t looking for in a Messiah was a spiritual leader, or one who would lead them out from under their bondage to sin (John 8:34). They believed they could see already, vis-à-vis they thought they could understand spiritual matters (John 9:40-41), and they were unaware that they were blind in the spirit and couldn’t enter the Kingdom of God in their present condition (John 3:3). Read the rest of this entry »
When folks engage in a debate, it is generally understood by unbiased listeners which of the participants is acting appropriately and who is not. Moreover, as long as the debate is conducted about matters that are generally understood by the bystanders, they who stand by and listen will also realize who has the better argument, and who does not. As Jesus and the Jewish authorities engaged in their debate over the identity of the Messiah, the people were able to understand that the Pharisees were being obnoxious in how they treated Jesus. They, not Jesus, engaged in slurs and didn’t conduct themselves in a serious manner. Jesus, on the other hand was always serious, and even replied to their slurs without descending into similar speech. He also had the better argument, using scripture correctly, and these folks, remember, were religious folk, pilgrims who took their faith seriously. Therefore, many of them who were paying attention to the proceedings began to trust in Jesus (John 8:30). Read the rest of this entry »
When the Feast of Tabernacles, 29 AD, was approaching, the Jewish authorities were keen on the idea of seeking Jesus and arresting him while he traveled with the other pilgrims from Galilee. However, when the time came that Jesus was seen in the Temple, the multitude who listened to him didn’t believe his claims. Instead, they sided with and even showed moral support for the leaders of the nation. Apparently, the chief priests and Pharisees thought the tide had turned in their favor. Perhaps, Jesus’ fame was ready to fade away, but, if not, the Romans would hear of him and do to him what they always had done to the enemies of Rome. If this occurred, the Jewish authorities wouldn’t have to arrest Jesus. What harm could anyone do, if he had no real support for his claims and was ignored by those to whom he looked for support? Read the rest of this entry »
It seems the Jewish authorities set up a watch to locate Jesus as soon as he arrived in Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:11). The Greek word (G2212) John used for seeking Jesus is variously translated: sought, wereseeking, lookedfor etc. Their search for him appears to be more than simply keeping an eye out for him. Rather, the same word was used in John 16:19 for Jesus’ disciples questioning one another, and by Mark and Luke for Jesus’ enemies seeking a sign from him (Mark 8:11; Luke 11:16). It is also used of Jesus’ parents searching for him when he was twelve years old (Luke 2:48-49). So, the Jewish authorities probably questioned many from the caravan from Galilee, including Jesus’ brethren. Read the rest of this entry »
After what appears to be several of Jesus’ teaching sessions, held in the synagogue at Capernaum, during the second Passover of his public ministry (spring of 29 AD), many of Jesus’ disciples struggled with his words, because they hadn’t a spiritual context in which to put them (John 6:60). These seemed to be leading members of Galilean social life, many of them zealots, and they prided themselves in their ability to understand scripture (cp. John 9:40-41). The problem was, they weren’t very good at that in which they thought they excelled (cp. Matthew 13:15; John 3:3-4). When one believes he understands, but doesn’t, it is difficult to get that one to admit his error, and these folks weren’t any different, so they murmured over Jesus’ words that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood, if they could hope to live eternally (John 6:53-54). Read the rest of this entry »
When Jesus knew the people were murmuring against him, he warned them against doing that (John 6:41-43). Murmuring expresses disbelief, and once one decides a person isn’t telling the truth, there is little that person can say that would change his listener’s mind and believe him. ‘We know this man, and we know his family, so how could he try to tell us he came out of heaven?’ Once one takes this attitude, why would he believe anything Jesus claimed? Once one believes he has identified a falsehood, it makes no difference what truth he may hear from the speaker, he won’t consider it, because he believes the man is a liar. Read the rest of this entry »
The first time it is recorded that the people murmured against Moses, after he led them out of bondage, was at Marah, almost immediately after he had led them through the Red Sea (Exodus 15:24-25). They murmured against him, because they had no water, for the water there was bitter. Therefore, Moses sweetened the water. Next, they murmured, because they were hungry and had no food, so the Lord rained bread (manna) from heaven (Exodus 16:2-4, 15; cp. John 6:31). A little later they murmured against him, once again, at a place in Rephidim, which Moses called Massah and Miribah, meaning strife, because the people had no water. Therefore, the Lord had Moses strike a rock in Horeb, and immediately drinking water came forth (Exodus 17:3-7). So, the people murmured over the lack of food and water to sustain life. Whenever they believed their lives were in danger, they murmured against Moses. Read the rest of this entry »
At this point in John’s Gospel, we have discovered that John the Baptizer had been slain, and Jesus had fed a great multitude of folks in Bethsaida, the other side of the Sea of Galilee from Capernaum. Jesus had been conducting his ministry by sending his disciples out two by two, preaching the Gospel and healing the sick throughout the cities of Galilee. Herod had heard of what Jesus had been doing in his realm and wanted to see him. However, presently, his interest in Jesus was merely one of curiosity. Nevertheless, the great multitude, composed of about 5000 men, was made up largely of John’s disciples, and they wanted Jesus to avenge John’s death and punish Herod. In other words, they accepted the idea that Jesus was the Messiah. After all, John had pointed to Jesus, identifying him as such, but now they wanted Jesus to behave like their savior by avenging John’s death. The problem facing Jesus at this point was many folks were willing to believe he was the Messiah, but for the wrong reasons. They expected the Messiah to do things Jesus had no intention of doing. Read the rest of this entry »
There was rebellion in the air, and Jesus sought to defuse it, first by leaving the growing multitude at Capernaum, while he took his disciples across the Sea of Galilee to a deserted place near Bethsaida. John the Baptizer’s disciples had come to Jesus to tell him Herod had slain John (Matthew 14:10-12). If Jesus were the Messiah, he’d do something. After all, didn’t John point to Jesus and say he was the Messiah (John 1:32-34)? What was a Messiah for, if not to destroy the enemies of the righteous? It was into this kind of wilderness, a wilderness of ignorant but thirsty people (cp. Ezekiel 20:34), Jesus was driven and was tempted almost constantly throughout his public ministry (cp. Matthew 4:8-9). Everyone had an idea of what the Messiah was to be like, and all wished to have Jesus become that Messiah. No one looked for a Savior who preached love for one’s enemies (Matthew 5:44). No one looked for a Messiah who came into the world to unveil the love God has for mankind—all men. When Jesus was born, there was no room for him (Luke 2:7), and when he grew up there continued to be no place for him or his Gospel (Luke 9:58). Read the rest of this entry »
Smoodock's Blog 