The number of the Lord’s appearances during the forty days following the resurrection, before His ascension, is generally said to be nine.

  Of these, five were on the day of the resurrection, one on the Sunday following, two at some later period, and one when He ascended. As to place, five were in Jerusalem, one in Emmaus, two in Calilee, and one perhaps on the Mount of Olives.

   If to these we add the appearance to James (mentioned only by the apostle Paul in I Cor. 15:7), which probably was  at Jerusalem; then add also the appearance to Paul mentioned in I Cor. 15:8, we have eleven appearances. Most writers come to this conclusion, differing only on some fine points concerning some of the appearances.

   However, we do not need to say that these recorded and stated appearances were the only actual ones. Acts 1:3 “To whom he also showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs; appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God.”

   It is quite possible thiat there were other unrecorded appearances during this period of fifty days.

   I. The appearances on the day of the resurrection. (5) A. To Mary Magdalene, at the Tomb, just outside Jerusalem.

  1. Problem of when was this, at what time in the

morning?

   a. How to harmonize Mart. 28:1 with Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1 and John 20:l. The first part of the verse must be interpreted by the added specification of what is added in the last part of the verse.

   b. When did the women arrive at the tomb!

       1. Luke says, “Very early in the maming.”

       2. John says, “early, while it was yet dark.”

   3. Mark says, “and very early on the Erst day ofthe week”

    4. Matt. says, “as it began to dawn, toward the first day of the week.”

   c. We must consider where they came from. Probably from Bethany about two miles away.

   d. The time was probably about 5 A.M. for at this time of the year the sun would rise about 5:30 A.M. Objects would be discernible one-half hour before sunrise very hkely.

3. Wieand Harmony places the appearance to Peter first.

4. Lightfoot supposes one of the two at Emmaus to have been Peter.

  a. Since there are not actual details given, it is hard to harmonize the accounts.

 b. From Luke 24:34, it seems as if Jesus did appear to Simon (ifthe Simon talked of is Peter) before He did to the two disciples at Emmaus. McGarvey harmonized this verse with I Cor. 15:5.

D. Jesus appears to the two Disciples going to Emmaus. Mark 16:12, 13; Luke 24:13-35.

 1.  Who were these two  disciples!  One was Cleopas, of whom nothing further is known. Luke 24:18)

    a. Some say the other was Luke, for he writes almost like one that might have been present during this errperience.

    b.  Lightfoot (mentioned above) supposes him to be Peter.

2. About Earmaus and its location from Jerusalem.

  a. Luke 24:13, “village named Emmaus which was three score furlongs from Jerusalem.”

      1. How far is this!  If the ruins  called el Kukeibeh  is the ancient city of Emmaus, then it would be a distance of seven and thirteen-sixteenths of a mile fiom Jerusalem. The village has not yet been identified beyond dispute.

3. Time of this meeting. Probably leaving Jerusalem about noon, and allowing for a slow walk, they would arrive in Emmaus a good while before sundawn.

   4. Although the Lord met these two while on their way, their eyes were holden until the meal was being eaten. Luke gives the cause in Luke 24:31, “And their eyes were opened and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.”  Mark gives the affect or their reaction in Mark 16:13, “And they went away and told it unto the rest; neither believed they them.”

E. Jesus appears to the ten. Luke 24:36-43; John 20:19-25.

   1. Thomas is absent at this time.

   2. Place and time!

       a. Place- In Jerusalem. In all probability, they were gathered in the same room in which they had eaten the paschal supper.

   3. Problem: did Mary come alone or with others and perhaps run on ahead so that she was first at the tomb! She undoubtedly came with the rest. Then, seeing the stone rolled away, she ran immediately to tell John and Peter before even going to the tomb.

     a. When telling Peter and John, Mary used the pronoun we signifying that she was not alone.

     b. After telling Peter and John she returned to the tomb, probably following Peter and John. Then while she was alone outside the tomb the Lord appeared to her.

   4. John writes of this appearance in detail, Jolm 20:11-18.

   a. The account is personal to Mary.

   b. She alone acknowledged the questions of Jesus.

   c. Jesus addressed her in the singular.

B. The other women soon after appearing to Mary; while they are on their way to tell the message of the angels. (Matt. 28:9, 10)

   1. Who were these other women! How many were there! (Lk. 24:9-11)

      a. Mark 15:41, saysthatmzmyotherwame~ came up to Jerusalenn.

      b. These names are motioned: Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James, Salorne, Joanna, Susanna imd “many others.

          1. John mentions only Mary Magdalene.

          2. Matt. mentions Mary  Magdalene and “the other Mary.” Matt. 28.1.

          3. Mark mentions Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.

     4. Luke mentions Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of lames, and the “other women.” Thus we see there are five, and possible others.

2. Many variations of order are given for this account, due to our not being able to tell whether these women arrived at the tomb in one or two groups.

   C. Jesus appears to Peter. (I Cor. 15:5; Luke 24:33, 34)

        1. McGarvey places this before the appearances to the two disciples on the road to Emunaus and at Emmaus.

       2. R. C. Foster writing in Standard Bible Tearhev, Vol. 38, No. 2; Apr.-May-June 1936, article “The Risen Christ in Galilee” places this appearance after the Emmaus appearance.

    a. Time — In the evening, fbr the two disciples who went to Emmaus arrived back in time to tell them of their experience.

      3. The actual appearance of Jesus in the room.

           a. John writes that when they saw Jesus they were glad.

           b. Luke writes that they were terrified and frightened.

           c. Why the apparent difference!

               1. Luke tells the immediate reaction as Jesus stands in the midst of them. How did he get here! They knew nothing of the possibilities of a resurrected body.

              2. John tells their attitude after they had been satisfied this was not a ghost, but their Lord!

II. Jesus appears to the eleven, Thomas being present this time. Mark 16:14; John 20:26-31; I Cor. 15:5,

      A. When and Where! In Jerusalem, probably the same as where Jesus appeared to the to. When! The first day of die week. (Jn. 20.26).

      B. Main object ofthought. Getting Thomas to believe

           1. While so doing,  this  was  also  reassuring proof the others.

           2. Thomas asked to place his hand into Jesus’ side.

               a. Thomas’ answer, “My Lord and my God !” (Jn. 20:28).

III. Jesus appears to the Seven disciples by the Sea of Galilee. John 21:1-25. Only John records this incident.

   A. Time – Some suggest the next Lord’s Day

   B. The seven disciples: Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathanael,  James and John, and two other disciples.   

   C. Order of events that happened:

        1. Peter and the others probably gathered in Peter’s home in Capernawn.

       2. This waiting made then impatient. Thinking of an honest means of getting food, Peter said “I am off to fish tonight.” The rest join in, ‘We are going with you.”

       3. With all the old enthusiasm they go fishing, but luck was against them that night, remindfUl of an experience three years earlier.

       4. At early moming someone appeared on the beach and asked, “Lads, have you anything to eat!” Their answer was, “No!”

           a. Advice from the man on the shore. “Cast on the right side of the boat.”

            b. The results: 153 fishes were caught in the net.

            c. John at this, turned to Peter and said, “it’s the Lord.”

            d. Peter immediately started swimming for the shore.

            e. They all had fish forbreakfast.

5. Jesus turned to Simon Peter and probed the recesses of Peter’s heart to secure for him the humility necessary for service.

6. Peter asks about John.

  a. Jesus’ answer: John 21:221  “If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee! Follow thou me.

IV. Jesus appears to the five hundred in Galilee. Matt. 28:16-20; I Cor. 15:6.

      A. Problem: Some would separate this appearance, and make two appearances here, one to the eleven separately, then to the eleven as counted with the five hundred.

      a.  If Jesus gave the Great Commission at this time, would he give it to the eleven gathered together with so large a group!

     b. But in Matt. 28:17, “some doubted,” could be evidence that the groups were together.

     c. Solution, if we separate these two appearances it eliminates this problem.

B. Where is this mountain that is spoken of in Matt. 28:16!

     1. Some possible places: The Place of the Sermon on the Mount; The Mount of Transfiguration; The place where He choose the twelve, The place on the east side of the lake where Jesus fed the 5.000.

V. Jesus appears to James. I Cor. 15:7.

     A. No details given of this appearance.

     B. Who is this James!

      1 . Possibly one of Jesus’ half-brothers, who had been converted after the resurrection.

      2. Later served as minister of the Church at Jerusalem.

VI. Jesus appears to the eleven in Jerusalem and leads them to the place of Ascension. Mark 16:19, 20; Luke 24:44-53; Acts 1:2-12.

     A. Luke, who also wrote Acts, gives us the account of this in both of his writings, one a continuation of the other.

     B. What Jesus told them at this time.

          1. Charged  them  not  to  depart  from Jerusalem.

• For continuity and the progressive nature of the Lord’s redemption work (Not only in seeing the Lord in His resurrected body, but most important, hearing what He taught after His resurrection.

JOHN 21 in review

The final chapter shows Christ as the Master of our service and the Friend of sinners. Were it not for this chapter, we would wonder what happened between Peter and the Lord and whether or not his disobedience was really dealt with.

I. A Night of Defeat (21:1-3)

Some make the strong suggestion that Peter acted without orders in returning to his fishing, that he had forsaken all to follow Christ (Luke 5:1-11), and now he was turning back to the old life. This is not certain, though Peter is definitely called back into service to His Lord.

Everything about this scene speaks of defeat: (1) it is dark, indicating that they are not walking in the light; (2) they had no direct word from the Lord; (3) their efforts met with failure; (4) they did not recognize Christ when He did appear, showing that their spiritual vision was dim.

How tragic is a bad influence! We need to keep in mind that God blesses us only when we abide in Christ and obey the Word. “Without Me you can do nothing” (15:5). Too many Christians enter into well-meaning but unscriptural activities, only to waste time, money, and energy for nothing. Let us beware of impatience. It is better to wait on the Lord for directions, and then let Him bless, than to involve ourselves in useless activities.

II. A Morning of Decision (21:4-17)

When Christ appears on the scene, then the light begins to shine. He instructs them from the shore, and they catch a great host of fish! A few minutes’ labor with Christ in control will accomplish more than a whole night of carnal efforts! It is interesting to compare this miracle with the one at the beginning of Peter’s career in Luke 5:

Luke 5	John 21
1. Followed a night of failure	1. Followed a night of failure
2. No exact number of fish given	2. 153 fish (v. 11)
3. The nets began to break	3. The net did not break
4. Christ instructed from the boat	4. Christ instructed from the shore

Some see in these scenes a picture of the church today (Luke 5) and of the church at the end of the age when Christ returns (John 21). Today we are casting out the Gospel net, but often the nets break, there is seeming failure, and we do not know how many souls are really won. But when Christ returns the exact number will be known, and none will be lost. Today there are many boats and fishermen at work, but when Christ returns, we will see the one church and all the redeemed in the one Gospel net.

There are actually several miracles in this chapter, besides the catch of fish. Peter is given miraculous strength to draw up a net that seven men were not able to draw together (v. 6 and v. 11).

The fact that the net did not break is amazing. The fire of coals and the cooked breakfast were certainly supplied miraculously. The entire scene was designed to awaken Peter’s conscience and open his eyes. The catch of fish reminded him of his past decision to forsake all and follow Christ. The fire of coals would take him back to his denial (John 18:18). The location—the Sea of Galilee—reminded him of several past experiences with Christ: feeding the 5,000, walking on the water, catching the fish with the coin, stilling the storm, etc.

Because Peter had denied Christ three times publicly, he had to make it right publicly. Note that Christ fed Peter before He dealt with his sins. How like the Lord to bless us first, then deal with us! The issue was Peter’s love for Christ.

If a man really loves Christ, his life will be devoted and dedicated. Note that Christ gives Peter a new commission: he is now a shepherd (minister) besides being a fisher of men. (See 1 Peter 5.) He is now to shepherd the lambs and sheep and feed them the Word of God. All Christians are expected to be fishers of men (soul-winners), but some have been called into the special ministry of shepherding the flock. What good is it to win the lost if there is no church where they might be fed and cared for?

Bibliography of Cited Sources

Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. Vol. 1. Chicago: Moody, 1958.

Ash, Anthony L. The Gospel According to Luke. 2 Vols. Austin, TX: Sweet, 1972.

Barclay, William. The Gospel of Matthew. 2 Vols. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975.

Beasley-Murray, George R. John. Vol. 36: Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1987.

Blomberg, Craig L. Matthew. Vol 22: The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. Ed. by David S. Dockery, et al. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Brooks, James A. The New American Commentary: Mark. Nashville: Broadman, 1991.

Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John XII-XXI. New York: Doubleday, 1970.

Bruce, F.F. The Hard Sayings of Jesus. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1983.

Butler, Paul T. The Gospel of John, Vol. 1. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1961.

Carson, D.A. Matthew. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

__________. Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Crowther, Duane S. Atlas and Outline of the Life of Christ. Bountiful, UT: Horizon Publishers & Distributors, 1982.

Dodd, C.H. Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: University Press, 1955.

Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993.

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Foreman, Dale. Crucify Him: A Lawyer Looks at the Trial of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.

Foster, R.C. Studies in the Life of Christ. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1995.

Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992.

Guelich, Robert A. Mark 1-8:26. Vol. 34A: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1989.

Gundry, Robert H. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to John. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1953.

Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Gospel of Luke. Ed. by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991.

Lane, William L. The Gospel According to Mark. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lewis, Jack P. The Gospel According to Matthew. 2 Vols. Austin, TX: Sweet, 1976.

Liefeld, Walter L. Luke. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Linnemann, Eta. Is There a Synoptic Problem? Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992.

Longenecker, Richard N. Acts. Vol. 9: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

The Lost Books of the Bible. New York: Bell Publishing, 1979.

MacArthur, John. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16-23. Chicago: Moody, 1988.

Matthew-Mark. Vol. 8. The Broadman Bible Commentary. Ed. by Clifton J. Allen, et al. Nashville: Broadman, 1969.

McGarvey, J.W. and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel: Or A Harmony of the Four Gospels. Cincinnati: Standard, 1914.

Meserve, Albert D. The Olivet Discourse: A Study of Matthew 24. San Jose, CA: San Jose Bible College, 1970.

Morris, Leon. Expository Reflections on the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.

Mounce, Robert H. New International Biblical Commentary: Matthew. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991.

Nolland, John. Luke 1-9:20. Vol. 35A: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1989.

____________. Luke 18:35-24:53. Vol. 35C: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barder, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1993.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. The Topical Josephus: Historical Accounts that Shed Light on the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Ryle, John C. Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: St. Matthew. Greenwood, SC: Attic Press, 1974.

Stott, John R.W. Christian Counter-Culture: The Message of the Sermon on the Mount. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1978.

Tenney, Merrill C. John. Vol. 9: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Walvoord, John F. Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come. Chicago: Moody, 1974.

Wenham, John. Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Accounts in Conflict? Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Wessel, Walter W. Mark. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Westcott, Brooke F. The Gospel According to St. John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950.

Wiersbe, Warren, Be Series, Victor Books, A Division of Scripture Press Publications.

   

Gone fishing.

    How many times have you wanted to hang that sign on your door? Maybe when there’s a lull in business. Maybe when job pressures hem you in and you feel trapped.

   Maybe those were some of the disciples’ thoughts after Jesus died. Perhaps that’s why they took the day off and went fishing. The ministry, fbr all practical purposes, had shut down.

   For three years these fishermen learned from Jesus, observing how He calmed storms, how He walked on water, how He cast His saving net into humanity’s sea.

    But now, in the wake of death, all was calm, and the disciples returned to their old vocation — back to Galilee and their nets.

   The purpose of this epilogue is to show how the belief which the disciples had achieved should be applied. The witness of the risen Lord to His followers had been completed, and they were ready to undertake the responsibilities of discipleship.

    Consequently, the last chapter of the gospel opens the door to the future and shows how belief should be translated into terms of daily activity.

  It seems also apparent that John did not want to end his gospel without telling his readers that Peter was restored to his apostleship. He also wanted to refute the foolish rumor that had spread among the people that Peter would live until the return of the Lord (21:23).

   The average reader would conclude that John completed his book with the dramatic testimony of Thomas (John 20:28-31), and the reader would wonder why John added another chapter.

   The main reason is the Apostle Peter, John’s close associate in ministry (Acts 3:1). Apart from the information in this chapter, we would wonder why Peter was so prominent in the first twelve chapters of the Book of Acts.

   I think John may have had another purpose in mind: he wanted to teach us how to relate to the risen Christ. During the forty days between His resurrection and ascension, our Lord appeared and disappeared at will, visiting with the disciples and preparing them for the coming of the Spirit and their future ministries (Acts 1:1-9).

   They never knew when He would appear, so they had to stay alert! The fact that He may return for His people today ought to keep us on our toes! It was an important time for the disciples because they were about to take His place in the world and begin to carry the message to others.

   Besides, Jesus had trained these men for something besides fishing. The manifestation of Jesus was, then, a call to a new reality.

* We are fishers of men—obey Him (20:1-8)

   “Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias[1]. It happened this way: {2} Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. {3} “I’m going out to fish,” Simon Peter told them, and they said, “We’ll go with you.” So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing. {4} Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus. {5} He called out to them, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?” “No,” they answered. {6} He said, “Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some.” When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish. {7} Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, “It is the Lord,” he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water. {8} The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards[2].”

It was certainly someone who knew the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee who wrote this story.  Night-time was the best for fishing.  W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book describes night fishing:  “There are certain kinds of fishing always carried on at night.  It is a beautiful sight.  With blazing torch, the boat glides over the flashing sea, and the men stand gazing keenly into it until their prey is sighted, when, quick as lightning, they fling their net or fly their spear; and often you see the tired fishermen come sullenly into harbour in the morning, having toiled all night in vain.”

The catch here is not described as a miracle, and it is not meant to be taken as one.  The description is of something which still frequently happens on the lake.  Remember that the boat was only about a hundred yards from land.  H. V. Morton describes how he saw two men fishing on the shores of the lake.  One had waded out from the shore and was casting a bell net into the water.  “But time after time the net came up empty.  It was a beautiful sight to see him casting.  Each time the neatly folded net belled out in the air and fell so precisely on the water that the small lead weights hit the lake at the same moment making a thin circular splash.  While he was waiting for another cast, Abdul shouted to him from the bank to fling to the left, which he instantly did.  This time he was successful….  The he drew up the net and we could see the fish struggling in it….It happens very often that the man with the hand-net must rely on the advice of someone on shore, who tells him to cast either to the left or the right, because in the clear water he can often see a shoal of fish invisible to the man in the water.”  Jesus was acting as guide to his fishermen friends, just as people still do today.

It may be that it was because it was the grey dark that they did not recognize Jesus.  But the eyes of the disciple whom Jesus loved were sharp.  He knew it was the Lord; and when Peter realized who it was he leaped into the water.  He was not actually naked.  He was girt with a loin cloth as the fisher always was when he plied his trade.  Not it was the Jewish law that to offer greeting was a religious act, and to carry out a religious act a man must be clothed; so Peter, before he set out to come to Jesus, put on his fisherman’s tunic, for he wished to be the first to greet his Lord.

Now we come to the first great reason why this strange chapter was added to the already finished gospel.  It was to demonstrate once and for all the reality of the Resurrection.  There were many who said that the appearances of the Risen Christ were nothing more than visions which the disciples had.  Many would admit the reality of the visions but insist that they were still only visions.  Some would go further and say that they were not visions but hallucinations.  The gospels go far out of their way to insist that the Risen Christ was not a vision, not an hallucination, not even a spirit, but a real person.  They insist that the tomb was empty and that the Risen Christ had a real body which still bore the marks of the nails and the spear thrust in his side.

But this story goes a step further.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to point out a shoal of fish to a party of fishermen.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to kindle a charcoal fire on the seashore.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to cook a meal and to share it out.  And yet, as this story has it, the Risen Christ did all these things.  When John tells how Jesus came back to his disciples when the doors were shut, he says:  “He showed them his hands and his side” (John 20:20). 

Ignatius, when writing to the Church at Smyrna, relates an even more definite tradition about that.  He says:  “I know and believe that he was in the flesh even after the resurrection, and when he came to Peter and his company, he said to them:  ‘Take, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon.’ And straightway they touched him, and they believed, for they were firmly convinced of his flesh and blood. . . .  And after his resurrection he ate and drank with them as one in the flesh.”

The first and simplest aim of this story is to make quite clear the reality of the resurrection.  The Risen Lord was not a vision, nor the figment of someone’s excited imagination, nor the appearance of a spirit or a ghost; it was Jesus who had conquered death and come back.

There is a second great truth symbolized here.  In the Fourth Gospel everything is meaningful, and it is therefore hardly possible that John gives the definite number one hundred and fifty-three for the fishes without meaning something by it.  It has indeed been suggested that the fishes were counted simply because the catch had to be shared out between the various partners and the crew of the boat, and that the number was recorded simply because it was so exceptionally large.  But when we remember John’s way of putting hidden meanings in his gospel for those who have eyes to see, we must think that there is more to it than that.

Many ingenious suggestions have been made.

(i)  Cyril of Alexandria said that the number 153 is made up of three things.  First, there is 100; and that represents “the fullness of the Gentiles.”  100, he says, is the fullest number.  The shepherd’s full flock is 100 (Matthew 18:12).  The seed’s full fertility is 100-fold.  So the 100 stands for the fullness of the Gentiles who will be gathered in to Christ.  Second, there is the 50; and the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel who will be gathered in.  Third, there is the 3; and the 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

(ii)  Augustine has another ingenious explanation.  he says that 10 is the number of the Law, for there are ten commandments; 7 is the number of grace, for the gifts of the Spirit are sevenfold.

“Thou the anointing Spirit art, Who dost thy sevenfold gifts impart.”

Now 7+10 makes 17; and 153 is the sum of all the figures, 1+2+3+4 . . ., up to 17.  Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.

(iii)  The simplest of the explanations is that given by Jerome.  He said that in the sea there are 153 different kinds of fishes; and that the catch is one which includes every kind of fish; and that therefore the number symbolizes the fact that some day all men of all nations will be gathered together to Jesus Christ.

We may note a further point.  This great catch of fishes was gathered into the net, and the net held them all and was not broken.  The net stands for the Church; and there is room in the Church for all men of all nations.  Even if they all come in, she is big enough to hold them all.

Here John is telling us in his own vivid yet subtle way of the universality of the Church.  There is no kind of exclusiveness in her, no kind of colour bar or selectiveness.  The embrace of the Church is as universal as the love of God in Jesus Christ.  It will lead us on the next great reason why this chapter was added to the gospel if we note that it was Peter who drew the net to land (John 21:11).

    It is interesting that at least seven of the 12 disciples were probably fishermen. Why did Jesus call so many fishermen to follow Him? For one thing, fishermen are courageous, and Jesus needs brave people to follow Him. They are also dedicated to one thing and cannot easily be distracted. Fishermen do not quit! (We are thinking, of course, of professional fishermen, not idle people on vacation!) They know how to take orders, and they know how to work together.

    The Lord had instructed His disciples to meet Him in Galilee, which helps to explain why they were at the Sea of Galilee, or Sea of Tiberias (Matt. 26:32 and 28:7-10; Mark 16:7).

  After His resurrection, our Lord was sometimes not recognized (John 20:14; Luke 24:16); so it was that His disciples did not recognize Him when, at dawning, He appeared on the shore.

   They toiled all night and caught nothing, and certainly Peter must have remembered a similar occasion two years earlier when Jesus had called him into full-time discipleship (Luke 5:1-11).

    It was time for Jesus to take over the situation, just as He did when He called Peter into discipleship. He told them where to cast the net; they obeyed, and they caught 153 fish! The diference between success and failure was the width of the ship! We are never that from success when we permit Jesus to give the orders, and we are usually closer to success than we realize.

   In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it.

   While Peter must have rejoiced in his restoration and apostleship, realize how shocking it must have been for this open discussion of his coming death to have come out!

   The day would come when another would take charge of Peter — and kill him. Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside-down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

   Jesus “showed himself alive aflcer his passion by many proofs, appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things conceming the kingdom of God” according to Acts 1.3.

    Here in Galilee is one of those occasions. He had commanded the disciples through the women (Matt. 28:7, ]0; Mk. 16:7), to go into Galilee. They did not go immediately and Jesus appears to them in company twice in Jerusalem over a seven day period (cf. Jn. 20). Now they have arrived in Galilee and have resumed their former occupations as they wait for the Lord’s promised appearance here.

   John’s use of the name “sea of Tiberias” is another indication that he intended his gospel account to be read by readers all over the Roman world. “Tiberias” is the Roman name for the sea of Galilee.

    Why did Peter and these other six disciples go fishing! Some say they had lost faith and interest in continuing as disciples of jesus and simply had returned to their former occupations. Those who make this interpretation generally base it on a questionable exegesis of the question Jesus asked Peter, “Lovest thou me more than these. “‘ (Jn. 21:15).

   I prefer the view that the disciples were merely occupying the time while they waited for the Lord in plying their trade as fishermen. Some of them (Peter at least) would need to provide some sort of financial support for their families. Men of the sea, active, hardworking, industrious men could not remain inactive while they waited for Jesus to come.

    R. C. Foster said: “Jesus did not condemn them for going fishing, but directed them to a miraculous catch. Peter is no more to be condemned for seeking food by this accustomed trade than Paul for supporting himself by tentmaking while he preached as opportunity offered. Peter and the rest were here in Galilee in obedience to the express, repeated command of Jesus. Having come to Galiiee, they could do nathing for their Master except wait His coming and further commands. To supply themselves with food by a means that was honorable and available was simple common-sense.”

  Fishermen had an honorable place in society. They supplied one of the most important items in the ordinary diet. They also had the teputation of being unusually pious. There were those who used hooks  I to fish in the days of Jesus for archeologists have B found copper, brass and iron hooks df that period. But mast of the commercial fishing was done with nets. The first type of net was the “throwing” type, a round one of perhaps twelve feet in diameter, with leads all around the edge, and it was designed to catch fish by dropping over them.

   The second type was the “seine” type which was bringing in their catch. The disciples probably used both types of nets. But it would seem they were using the seine type net this night.

   The fishing trade required large investments to commence. The nets were expensive and needed a great deal of maintenance. The boats would be even 1 more expensive and need even more maintenance.

    When the fish were caught they had to be separated. Some fish were worth more than others on the market. Also for the Jewish fishermen there would be the unclean fish they were not allowed to sell-those without scales and fins.

    “The fisherman’s life strengthens his character: it is work that insists upon courage and firmness, as well as patience; and it is clear that those freshwater sailors, the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee stodd out from all the other workers who are mentioned in the Gospel. They seem to have been men of  strong and ardent minds, open, hearty, enthusiastic in spirits–‘Sons of thunder, as Christ called two of them … Even today one may see the Galilean fishermen skipping for joy at a good catch; and under the fierce sun they may be heard chanting at the top of  their voices.

   “It is understandable that for the work He meant to undertake, Christ should have called upon these strong, brave, spirited men and their loyalty. He said to them, ‘Come and follow me; I will make you into fishers of men.’ And Simon and Andrew and then James and John, left their nets on the ground.”

   They fished all flight and caught nothing. It was a big sea. They had probably put their net into the sea over and over again in many different places. They were tired and they had spent a frustrating day and night. in the darkness of the early dawn they looked toward the shore and saw a man standing there. The darkness, the distance and a probable mist arising from the surface of the sea kept them from recognizing Jesus.

    Jesus then called out from the shore, “Lads, you don’t have anything to eat do you!” The Greek word paidia may be translated “lads, boys, children.” Jesus stated the question as if He expected a “No” answer. He wanted to focus their attention on the fruitlessness of their night’s labor in order to emphasize the more the rmraculous nature of what was about to happen. This He did to build their faith in Him and to demonstrate the divine assistance they would have during their labors in His name.

   So Jesus instructed them, “Cast your net on the right side of the boat and you will catch fish.” Still not recognizing Him as their Master, thinking perhaps He was one of the local fishermen with a knowledge of where the fishing was currently the best, they followed His instruaions. To their wonderment the net became so full of fish they were unable to haul it into the boat and eventually the net, which seemed ready to burst at any moment, was towed to shore behind the boat.

   What examples for us to follow as we seek to “catch fish” for Jesus Christ!

   We are indeed “fishers of men,” and there are “fish” all around us. If we obey His directions, we will catch the fish.

   John, the beloved disciple (cf. 13:23), then recognized Jesus and told Peter, “It is the Lord!” Perhaps John began to recognize Him when He called out from the shore and then at the miraculous draught of fishes could restrain himself no longer and forgot the fish and pointed toward shore and cried out to Peter.

   It was John who first realized that the stranger on the shore was their own Lord and Master.  It was John who leaned on the Lord’s breast at the table (John 13:23) and who stood by the cross when his Lord suffered and died (John 19:26). It is love that recognizes the Lord and shares that good news with others: “it is the Lord!”

   Impetuous Peter was not about to wait until the boat reached the shore. He grabbed his outer tunic  (he had probably taken off all his clothing but his undergarments), wrapped it around himself and jumped into the sea and started making for the shore.

   Whether he swam or whether it was shallow enough for him to wade ashore we do not know. The disciples were only about 100 yards off shore m the boat.

   R. C. Foster notes that the Greek language here indicates Peter fastened the  girdle” and tucked the tunic up into his girdle before leaping into the water.

   This may indicate he was intending to wade ashore without getting all his clothing wet. Peter may have been impetuous but his impetuosity at this particular instance is an example we all might well follow. Would that all His disciples were so eager to be near Him and to come to Him.

    This may indicate he was intending to wade ashore without getting all his clothing wet. Peter may have been impetuous but his impetuosity at this particular instance is an example we all might well follow. Would that all His disciples were so eager to be near Him and to come to Him.

    Practically all the commentators show the interesting parallels between this experience on the sea of Galilee and the one some three years before as recorded in Matt. 4:18-22; Mk. 1:16-20; Lk. 5:1-11.

   In both instances they toiled all night and caught nothing; in each case they had gone fishing of their own volition; in both they were commanded by Jesus to make another effort; in the first the nets broke; in this one the net seemed ready to break momentarily; in both Peter exexhibited his impetuosity; m both Jesus gives them a solemn commission to evangelite.

    Why did Peter act so impulsively! Who knows! It was just his nature, it seems, to act this way. What would you have done considering all his recent experiences if you had been Peter!

   Perhaps you too would have leaped into the water and hurried to meet the resurrected Lord. These disciples were real men–not robots or the idealistic characters of fiction. Some of them were as different in personality and temperament as some of us today!

   Now in verse eight we find an example of the Greek idiom which is not altogether familiar to the English language. We find John shifting from the regular noun to the diminutive form using both forms to describe the same thing. In 21.6 he speaks of the ploion (boat) and in 21.8 he speaks of the same boat only this time it is ploiarion (little boat). John does the same thing in 6: 17-20 and 6:22.

   Peter went wading on ahead. The other disciples came slowly in the boat hauling the catch of fish which were still very precariously enclosed within the overtaxed net.

   To their amazement, when they stepped out on shore they found the Master had a fire going, was broiling fish and preparing bread for a morning meal.

* We are Shepherds—Love Him (John 21:9-18)

    “When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread. {10} Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.” {11} Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. {12} Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?” They knew it was the Lord. {13} Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. {14} This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead. {15} When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” {16} Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” {17} The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. {18} I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.””

   Jesus met His disciples on the beach where He had already prepared breakfast for them. This entire scene must have stirred Peter’s memory and touched his conscience.

    Surely he was recalling that first catch of fish (Luke 5:1-11)and perhaps even the feeding of the 5,000 with bread and fish (John 6). It was at the close of the latter event that Peter had given his clear-cut witness of faith in Jesus Christ (John 6:66-71). The “fire of coals” would certainly remind him of the fire at which he denied the Lord (John 18:18). It is good for us to remember the past; we may have something to confess.

     Three “invitations” stand out in John’s Gospel: (‘Come and see ” (John 1:39); ‘Come and drink” (John 7:37); and “Come and dine ” (John 21:12). How loving of Jesus to feed Peter before He dealt with his spiritual needs. He gave Peter opportunity to dry off, get warm, satisfy his hunger, and enjoy personal fellowship.

   This is a good example for us to follow as we care for God’s people. Certainly the spiritual is more important than the physical, but caring for the physical can prepare the way for spiritual ministry. Our Lord does not so emphasize “the soul” that He neglects the body.

   Some suggest that Peter and his Lord had already met privately and taken care of Peter’s sins (Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5), but since Peter had denied the Lord publicly, it was important that there be a public restoration.

   We do not know that for certain, but sin should be dealt with only to the extent that it is known. Private sins should be confessed in private, public sins in public. Since Peter had denied his Lord three times, Jesus asked him three personal questions. He also encouraged him by giving a threefold commission that restored Peter to his ministry.

   The key issue is Peter’s love for the Lord Jesus, and that should be a key matter with us today. But what did the Lord mean by “more than these”? Was He asking, “Do you love Me more than you love these other men?” Not likely, because this had never been a problem among the disciples .

   They all loved the Lord Jesus supremely, even though they did not always obey Him completely. Perhaps Jesus meant, “Do you love Me more than you love these boats and nets and fish?” Again, this is not likely, for there is no evidence that Peter ever desired to go back permanently into the fishing business. Fishing did not seem to compete with the Saviour’s love.

   The question probably meant, “Do you love Me–as you claimed–more than these other disciples love Me?” Peter had boasted of his love for Christ and had even contrasted it with that of the other men. “I will lay down my life for Thy sake! ” (John 13:37) “Though all men shall be offended because of` Thee, yet will I never be offended!” (Matt. 26:33).

   There is more than a hint in these boastful statements that Peter believed that he loved the Lord more than did the other disciples.

  Foster lists three reasons why he believes Jesus means “do you love Me mote than these other disciples,” instead of “things–i.e., things representing your worldly vocation such as nets and boats and fish.” (a) There was nothing wrong with fishing per se, that is, Jesus did not condemn Peter for fishing and accuse him of loving Him less’ for fishing; (b) The three-fold question parallels the three-fold denial; (c) If Peter had understood Jesus to mean he was questioning whether he planned to desert his Master and go back to his old fishing trade, it seems incredible that Peter would not have answered immediately and precisely, “You know that I love you more than these things.

   It is more in keeping with the humility Peter must have felt when asked that he did not even so much as say,”You know that I love you more than these other men.” He had fallen into that prideful trap before.

   Two Greek verbs are used in an interesting interplay upon the word love in this section. Jesus uses the verb agapao in His first two inquiries and the verb phileo in the third question. Peter replies with phileo in all three answers.

   There are some commentators who are dogmatic in their assertions that agapao always means the “higher, spiritual devotion, not an impulse from the feelings, but more intellectually oriented love” while phileo always refers to the lower type of love “intimate, personal affection among human beings, brotherly love.

   This is not borne out by the New Testament usage of the two words, a. Both words are used of God’s love for man (agapao: Jn. 3:16; 14:23; 17:23; I Jn. 14:10-19) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; Rev. 3:19) b. Both words are used of God’s love for the Son (agapao: Jn. 3:35; 10:17; 15:3; 17:23-26) (phileo: Jn. 5:20). c.

   Both verbs are used of the love of men for Jesus (agapao: Jn. 8:42; 14:15, 21, 23, 24, 28; 21:15-16) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; 21:15-16; Matt. 10:37; ICor. 16:22). d. Both verbs are used   of the love of men for other men (dgapao: Jn. 13:34-35; 15:12, 17; I Jn. 2:10; 3:10; 4:7, 20) phileo: John 15:19).

   The text now under consideration seems to indicate that the words were, as the Arndt and Gingrich Lexicon says, “used interchangeably.”

    R. C. Trench, in his Synonyms of the New Testament puts it this way: “…there is often a difference between them, well worthy to have noted and reproduced, if this had lain within the compass of our language, being very nearly equivalent to that between ‘diligo’ and amo’ in the Latin … In that threefold ‘Lovest thou Me!’ which the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, agapas me; at this moment, when all the pulses in the heart of the now penitent Apostle are beating with a passionate affection toward his Lord, this word on that Lord’s lips sounds far too cold…He therefore in his answer substitutes for the agapas of Christ the word of a more personal love,  philo se.

   Foster says “it  is clear there is some difference and the use of both words in John 21 would indicate there is some different shade of meaning indicated. The fact that when we are commanded to love our enemies agapao is used, suggests the shade of meaning that we are not commanded to make a confidants or an intimate personal friend of an enemy–this might not be possible. But we are to treat all, even our enemies, with kindness and generous regard.”

   We will make Peter say something he certainly did not intend to say if we insist on a decisive and immutable distinction between the two words. We would have Peter replying to the Lord, “You know I love you Lord, but I do not love you with the highest devotion which man should have toward God (agapao); I only love you as a close personal friend (phileo), with a lower type of love.

   For Peter this was the right word. It expressed the deep, warm, heartfelt affection of this impetuous man. There does seem to be a decisive difference in the two words, but not as pronounced a difference as some commentators insist upon.”

   Why did Jesus use agapao when asking the first two questions, “Lovest thou me!” and then use phileo when He asked the third time? Most commentators believe Jesus was mildly rebuking Peter by questioning whether Peter even had the lowest type of love for Him. But Peter, by using phileo in each of his answers was using a word by which he meant to affirm both his lofty devotion toward God whom he revered but had never seen, and his personal love for Jesus whom he has seen and recognizes as God’s Son, just as Thomas had (Jn. 20:28).

 As we quoted Dr. Trench above, for Peter the word agapaojust did not fully describe his feelings so he used phileo and the Master simply used Peter’s own word of feeling as the basis for His final challenge.

   We believe there is some relationship between the charge Jesus made to Peter (“Feed my sheep”) and the question He asked (“Lovest thou me!”).

    If Peter loves the Master, Peter will feed the Master’s lambs. Whatever is done for the lambs is done for the Master (cf Matt. 25:31-46; Acts 9:1-6). Is this not why Jesus used the word agapaoas if to say, “Peter, do you love me!” “You say you love me, then love my lambs and feed them.”

   Peter’s personal, warm and affectionate love for Jesus is well and good, but this love for Jesus must be directed toward His flock “at large” as well or it isn’t even phileo love for Jesus (and this is why Jesus changed to Peter’s terminology in the last challenge.

   Jesus did not doubt Peter’s love for Him–He was challenging, preparing and commissioning Peter to go and love the Master’s lambs. This was not simply a reconciliation between Master and disciple for this had already occurred in the first appearance of Jesus to Peter in Luke 24:34.

   It was not to restore Peter to his apostleship among the select eleven for as Foster says, “the angel made it plain in the first message after the resurrection that Jesus did not consider that Peter had forfeited his apostleship (Mark 16:7).

     It was to challenge Peter, to strengthen him (to make him firmer in his love by reminding him of the humiliation of denial three times), to instruct him that lovmg Christ means to feed His sheep, and to confirm his place of leadership among the eleven. Jesus also elicited these confessions of love from Peter to prepare him for the prophecy of his death about to be made.

    There certainly are great principles for all followers of Christ to learn from this private intercourse between Jesus and Peter. Those who have dedicated themselves to “feed the flock” (whether evangelists or elders) must love Christ above all else and before all others. Love for Christ, deep, personal affection is the only force that will motivate and fortify His servants against the many disappointments and dangers in “feeding the flock.”

   We may also learn that love is expressed by obedient service (cf. II Cor. 8:5-8; 8:24; 9:13). Love is notjust desire; love is the desire to give–to spend and be spent for another.

    There is an interesting play of synonyms for “feed” in this context. In verses 15 and 17 Jesus used the word base which means “feed; do the part of a herdsman and provide the flock food.” In verse 16 He used the word pojmaine which means “shepherd the flock, protect, care for, lead the flock. “

    This is the commission of the Chief Shepherd to the under-shepherds to give themselves to the ministry of feeding, Protecting, guiding and leading the flock of God (6: Jn. to; Ads 20:18-38; I Pet. 5:1-11, etc.). The important food for the nock is the spiritual food. Peter was called and charged to carry out this great task and he eventually laid down his life for the sheep.

    It is also interesting to note the way Jesus used synonyms for sheep and lambs. In verse 16 and 17 the word plobatia (sheep) is used. In verse 15 He used the word arnia which is a diminutive meaning “little lambs.” The “little lambs” are mentioned first. The unsophisticated ones, the weak ones, the young ones must be tenderly nurtured.

    The older ones, even the experienced ones, must also be cared for and fed. We must all grow up together in stature into the full measure of godliness in Christ (cf Eph. 4:11-17).

    In verse 18 Jesus culminates his charge to Peter to “feed the lambs” with the revelation that Peter shall lay down his life for the flock. The figure of speech used by Jesus was vivid. The Jews, in walking or running, gathered up (girded) the long folds of their outer garments and fashioned them about their waists like belts, that their progress might not be impeded. The figure then expresses the freedom to go as one pleases unimpeded and unfettered.

  In fact Peter had just so “girded” himself and made his way to Jesus on the shore unfettered and unrestramed. But m his later years it shall not be so. Solemnly Jesus told him that he would stretch forth his hands to be fettered and bound and he would be led according to the will of another.

   Most commentators believe this “stretchmg forth of the hands” indicates Peter was told he would die by crucifixion. This is highly probable since Peter’s Master was put to death in this way and it was a common form of Roman execution administered upon non-citizen “malefactors.

    Works by Eusebius and Tertullian relate the traditional manner of Peter’s death to be crucifixion head downward. Whatever the manner of death it was to glorify God. Peter was to be among the first martyrs (from the Greek maturos). Marturia means to “testify or bear witness.”

    Peter’s life and death in faith bore witness to the glory of God. Just as the death of the first recorded Christian martyr, Stephen (Acts 7.54n), glorified God and was instrumental to some degree in the conversion of the great apostle Paul, the death of Peter for the sake of Christ and the church was undoubtedly a great testimony to the power of the word of God and instrumental in the conversion of many other people. “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints” (Rev. 14:13).

    Now after speaking this Jesus admonished again, “Follow me.” One commentator thinks Jesus began after this admonition to draw apart from the discipies to vanish from their company until His next appearance, and that Peter may have taken Jesus literally and began to withdraw from the group and walk after Jesus. This seems the most explanation for Peter turning to see another disciple “following.

    There can be no doubt that this other disciple who followed was John the beloved (cf our notes on John 13:23). Both Peter and John (and James) were of the mner circle” three, and Peter was involved in the incident at the supper where the “other” disciple is described in the same way.

   Foster says, “Follow me in the light of the preceding context seems to mean ‘follow me in my example of dying on a cross.’ But the succeeding context seems to indicate that Jesus was leading Peter off to a little distance from the group and that John followed–or perhaps He was leading all of the disciples hence.

  It may be that both the spintual and the literal are meant to be understood by the apostles.

   The main point is Peter’s question about the “other” disciple and the Lord’s answer to Peter. Peter, having been challenged, commissioned and having had his destiny revealed to him, said, “Lord what about him! ” Peter had missed the mark again!

 He had allowed his natural mind to take over again. He was out of focus. He was not focused on what Jesus had sought to emphasize. He was worrying about “times and seasons.

    Jesus replied, as He had before to His own mother, and as He would to the disciples later, “It is none of your business to know this …. if it is My will that John remain alive even until I come again in contrast to your death before I come, it is My affair and nor yours. The destiny of this other disciple is minor; the major raskfor you is to follow me. “ (cf, our notes on Jn. 2:1-5; also cf. Acts 1:6-8).

   If a man is going to be a soldier, he must have a soldier’s training. Sighing after happiness; brooding over the life we’ve missed–these are all out of place with the the Christian soldier.

   Men are not coddled and indulged when they are trained as soliders. Orders are given and no questions are solicited. Immediate and implicit obedience is called for.

   The Lord will tell us all we have need to lo know. We are His friends. What would be detrimental to us He will withhold (cf. our notes on Jn. 15:1216). We are not to know times or seasons, but to go to the ends of the earth witnessing.

   Some disciples misunderstood the point of Jesus’ reply to Peter. The word was spread among the brethren that Jesus had said John would not die.

    Barnes points out that first, the words of Jesus might easily be misunderstood and second, the false ‘rumor might gain credence when it was seen that John survived all the other apostles. So John, writing this gospel record in the twilight of life, deemed it this rumor and so said simply, “Jesus did not say that the other disciple would not die-Jesus said,’If it is my will that the other disciple remain until I come, it is none of your affair, Peter.

   We believe it is significant that John repeated precisely what Jesus said and offered no interpretation. John learned the lesson Jesus intended. His disciples need not know all-but all they need to know is revealed.

   The primary thing the disciples of Jesus need to do is to love and live the revealed teachings of their Master, leaving times and seasons to the wisdom and will ofa loving Father.

   There are many Christians who need to be, as Hendriksen says, turned from curiosity to their calling. It seems there were many brethren in John’s day in the same curious frame of mind. They are majoring in miners.

   We like the condusion given by Mr. Barclay: “Some would say that John was the great one, for his flights of thought went higher than those of any either man. Some would say that Paul was the great one for he fared to the ends of the earth for Christ. But this chapter says that Peter, too, had his place…to each Jesus had given his function. It was Peter’s function to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for Christ It was John’s fUnction to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace.

   That did not make them rivals and competitors in honor and prestige; that did not make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ. Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him. As Jesus said to Peter, “Never mind the task that is given to someone else. Your job is to follow       me.

    And that is what He still says to each of us. Our glory is never in comparison with men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity has been allotted to us.

   In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it. The other men were certainly listening “over Peter’s shoulder” and benefiting from the conversation, for they too had failed the Lord after boasting of their devotion. Peter had already confessed his sin and been forgiven. Now he was being restored to apostleship and leadership.

   The image, however, changes from that of the fisherman to that of the shepherd. Peter was to minister both as an evangelist (catching the fish) and a minister (shepherding the flock). It is unfortunate when we divorce these two because they should go together. Ministers ought to evangelize (2 Tim. 4:5) and then shepherd the people they have won so that they mature in the Lord.

   Jesus gave three admonitions to Peter: “Feed My lambs,” “Shepherd My sheep,” and “Feed My sheep.” Both the lambs and the more mature sheep need feeding and leading, and that is the task of the spiritual shepherd.

    It is an awesome responsibility to be a shepherd of God’s flock! (I Peter 5:2) There are enemies that want to destroy the flock, and the shepherd must be alert and courageous (Acts 20:28-35). By nature, sheep are ignorant and defenseless, and they need the protection and guidance ofthe shepherd.

   While it is true that the Holy Spirit equips people to serve as shepherds, and gives these people to churches (Eph. 4: 1 Iff), it is also true that each individual Christian must help to care for the flock. Each of us has a gift or gifts from the Lord, and we should use what He has given us to help protect and perfect the flock. Sheep are prone to wander, and we must look after each other and encourage each other.

   Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd (John 10:11), the Great Shepherd (Heb. 13:20-21), and the Chief Shepherd (I Peter 5:4). Ministers are ”under-shepherds” who must obey Him as they minister to the flock. The most important thing we can do is to love Jesus Christ. If he truly loves Jesus Christ, the minister will also love His sheep and tenderly care for them.

    The Greek word for “sheep” at the end of John 21:17 means “dear sheep.” Our Lord’s sheep are dear to Him and He wants His ministers to love them and care for them personally and lovingly. (See Ezek. 34 for God’s indictment of unfaithful shepherds, the leaders of Judah.)

   A person who loves the flock will serve it faithfully, no matter what the cost.

    How the fish were obtained by Jesus we are not told. We are neither told that He obtained them in a supernatural way or a natural way. Most commentators believe He supplied them supernaturally. The recent events and the excitement of the present hour would lead one to think this also must have come about in some supernatural way.

 In their excitement and haste to meet the Lord they had forgotten their net full of fish strainmg on the tow rope still tied to the side of the boat and being lashed about by the waves of the surf. Jesus directed them, Bring of the fish which you have now taken. Perhaps Jesus had another reason for such directions than His concern that the miraculous catch might be lost by neglect.

    Perhaps He wanted to re-emphasize the magnitude of the miracle. This we believe is all the significance there is to the number–153 of fish caught. The number is given simply to signify the marvelousness of it all.

    They had fished all night and caught nothing. Jesus merely said, Cast your net on the right side of the boat, and in one cast they caught one hundred fifty-three large fish. So many the net was about to break.

    Many commentators, both ancient and modem, are, we believe, too taken up with allegorizing, symbolizing and spiritualizing numbers.

   For example Cyril of Alexandria said the 100 represents the “fulness of the Gentiles”; the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel which will be saved: 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

   Augustine, according to Barclay, explains it this way: 10 is the number for the Law (10 commandments); 7 is the number of grace (7 gifts of the Spirit); 7 plus 10 equals 17, 153 is the sum of all the figures, I plus 2 plus 3 plus 3 … and up to 17. Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.”

   Whether the number has a mystical meaing or not, it most certainly points out that the one who wrote the Fourth Gospel was an eyewitness for he knew every detail even to the number and size of the fish that morning.

    The amazing thing to the fishermen was that such an enonnous catch could be contained in the net without the net breaking.

   Jesus bids them, “Come, have breakfast.” So overwhelmed with His majesty and awed with His omnipotence now not one of them dared interrogate Him. They all knew! There were no doubts, no questionings in their minds and hearts now. Perhaps the events of the night had so awed them that they stood off in reverential fear. None dared to say, Is it really you, Lord!

   In fact, the indication is that they did not even dare to come close to the fire and feed themselves at His invitation. It seems that Jesus had to take the bread and the fish and “come” toward them and give it to them.

   The main point to get from this section is exactly the point the disciples got and the one Jesus intended: a dramatic and awe-inspiring demonstration of the omnipotence and omniscience of Jesus Christ, the resurrected Lord of heaven and earth.

    Verse 14 must, of course, be understood as denominating the third appearance to the disciples (apostles) being gathered together in a body. He appeared at least a third time to other disciples (both women and men) before this but this is His third appearance to His specially called disciples-apostles.

We Are Disciples–Follow Him (John 21:19-25)

   “Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!” {20} Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”) {21} When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?” {22} Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” {23} Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?” {24} This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. {25} Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”

  Jesus had just spoken about Peter’s life and ministry, and now He talks about Peter’s death. This must have been a shock to Peter, to have the Lord discuss his death in such an open manner.

   No doubt Peter was rejoicing that he had been restored to fellowship and apostleship. Why bring up martyrdom?

   The first time Jesus spoke about His own death, Peter had opposed it (Matt. 16:2 Iff). Peter had even used his sword in the Garden in a futile attempt to protect his Lord. Yet Peter had boasted he would die for the Lord Jesus! But when the pressure was on, Peter failed miserably. (You and I probably would have done worse!) Anyone who yields himself to serve the Lord must honestly confront this matter of death.

   When a person has settled the matter of death, then he is ready to live and to serve! Our Lord’s own death is a repeated theme in John’s Gospel: He knew that His “hour” would come, and He was prepared to obey the Father’s will. We as His followers must yield ourselves–just as He yielded Himself for us–and be “livmg sacrifices” (Rom. 12:1-2) who are “ready to be offered” (2 Tim. 4:6-8) if it is the will of God.

    Earlier that morning, Peter had “girded himself’ and hurried to shore to meet Jesus (John 21:7). The day would come when another would take charge of Peter–and kill him (see 2 Peter 1:13-14).

   Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

   But Peter’s death would not be a tragedy, it would glorifl God! The death of Lazants glorified God (John 11:4, 40) and so did the death of Jesus (John 12:23ff). Paul’s great concern was that he glorify God, whether by life or by death (Phil 1:20-21). This should be our desire as well.

   Our Lord’s words, “Follow Me!” must have brought new joy and love to Peter’s heart. Literally, Jesus said, “Keep on following Me.” Immediately, Peter began to follow Jesus, just as he had done before his great denial.

      However, for a moment Peter took his eyes off the Lord Jesus, a mistake he had made at least two other times. After that first great catch of fish, Peter took his eyes off his Lord and looked at himself: “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord!” (Luke 5:8)

   When he was walking an the stormy sea with Jesus, Peter looked away from the Lord and began to look at the wind and waves; and immediately he began to sink (Matt. 14:30). It is dangerous to look at the circumstances instead of looking to the Lord.

   Why did Peter look away from his Lord and start to look back? He heard somebody walking behind him. It was the Apostle John who was also following Jesus Christ.

     Peter did a foolish thing and asked Jesus, “What shall this man do?” In other words, “Lord, you just told me what will happen to me; now, what will happen to John? “

   The Lord rebuked Peter and reminded him that his job was to follow, not to meddle into the lives of other believers. Beware when you get your eyes off the Lord and start to look at other Christians! “Looking unto Jesus” should be the aim and practice of every believer (Heb. 12:1-2). To be distracted by ourselves, our circumstances, or by other Christians, is to disobey the Lord and possibly get detoured out of the will of God. Keep your eyes of faith on Him and on Him alone.

   This does not mean that we ignore others, because we do have the responsibility of caring for one another (Phil. 2:1-4).

   Rather, it means that we must not permit our curiosity about others to distract us from following the Lord. God has His plan for us; He also has plans for our Christian friends and associates. How He works in their lives is His business. Our business is to follow Him as He leads us (see Rom. 14:1-13).

    Jesus did not say that John would live until His return, but that is the way some of the misguided believers understood it. More problems are caused by confused saints than by lost sinners! Misinterpreting the Word of God only creates misunderstanding about God’s people and God’s plans for His people.

   However, there is a somewhat enigmatic quality to what the Lord said about John. Jesus did not say that John would live until He retwned, nor did He say that John would die before He returned. As it was, John lived the longest of all the disciples and did witness the Lord’s retum when he saw the visions that he recorded in the Book of Revelation.

   As John came to the close of his book, he affirmed again the credibility of his witness. (Remember, witness is a key theme in the Gospel of John. The word is used forty-seven times.) John witnessed these events himself and wrote them for us as he was led by the Holy Spirit. He could have included so much more, but he wrote only what the Spirit told him to write.

   The book ends with Peter and John together following Jesus, and He led them right into the Book of Acts!

   What an exciting thing it was to receive the power of the Spirit and to bear witness of Jesus Christ! Had they not trusted Him, been transformed by Him, and followed Him, they would have remained successful fishermen on the Sea of Galilee; and the world would never have heard ofthem.

    Jesus Christ is transforming lives today. Wherever He finds a believer who is willing to yield to His will, listen to His Word, and follow His way, He begins to transform that believer and accomplish remarkable things in that life. He also begins to do wonderful things through that life.

    Peter and John have been off the scene (except for their books) for centuries, but you and I are still here. We are taking His place and taking their place. What a responsibility! What a privilege!

   We can succeed only as we permit Him to transform us.

This passage makes it quite clear that John must have lived to a very old age; he must have lived on until the report went round that he was going to go on living until Jesus came again.  Now, just as the previous passage assigned to Peter his place in the scheme of things, this one assigns to John his place.  It was his function to be pre-eminently the witness to Christ.  Again, people in the early Church must have made their comparisons.  They must have pointed out how Paul went away to the ends of the earth.  They must have pointed out how Peter went here and there shepherding his people.  And then they may have wondered what was the function of John who had lived on in Ephesus until he was so old that he was past all activity.  Here is the answer:  Paul might be the pioneer of Christ, Peter might be the shepherd of Christ, but John was the witness of Christ.  He was the man who was able to say:  “I saw these things, and I know that they are true.”

To this day the final argument for Christianity is Christian experience.  To this day the Christian is the man who can say:  “I know Jesus Christ, and I know that these things are true.”

So, at the end, this gospel takes two of the great figures of the Church, Peter and John.  To each Jesus had given his function.  It was Peter’s to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for him.  It was John’s to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace.  That did not make them rivals in honour and prestige, nor make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ.

Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him.  As Jesus said to Peter:  “Never mind the task that is given to someone else.  Your job is to follow me.”  That is what he still says to each one of us.  Our glory is never in comparison with other men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity he has allotted to us.

In this last chapter the writer of the Fourth Gospel has set before the Church for whom he wrote certain great truths.  He has reminded them of the reality of the Resurrection; he has reminded them of the universality of the Church; he has reminded them that Peter and John are not competitors in honour, but that Peter is the great shepherd and John the great witness.  Now he comes to the end; and he comes there thinking once again of the splendour of Jesus Christ.  Whatever we know of Christ, we have only grasped a fragment of him.  Whatever the wonders we have experienced, they are as nothing to the wonders which we may yet experience.  Human categories are powerless to describe Christ, and human books are inadequate to hold him.  And so John ends with the innumerable triumphs the inexhaustible power, and the limitless grace of Jesus Christ.

———————————————————

   We hesitate to comment on these last two verses inasmuch as there is good manuscript evidence to show that it was not a part of the onginal.

   The Sinaiticus manuscript (350 A.D.-othenwise known as Aleph), gives evidence that verses 24 and 25 were added and the original Aleph manuscript was subjected to inspection by ultra-violet process and it was found that these verses were not included in the Sinaiticus coder when it was first written but were added later.

  The Bodmer II Papyrus (P66) omits these two verses (Bodmer II dates about 250 A.D.). It is reported that one of the best manuscripts of John found just recently, designated (P75), also omits these two verses (this manuscript also dates sometime between 200-300 A.D.)

  The latest revision of the Greek text by Nestle in  its critical apparatus notes that Aleph omits verse 25. Perhaps more manuscript evidence will be forthcoming soon to establish either the omission or the inclusion of these verses. Until then, we will make comments, with the reservatons stated above, on these two verses.

   Foster thinks that the elders of the church at Ephesus, where John probably resided when he wrote the Fourth Gospel, added verses 24 and 25.

    Hendricksen is of the same opinion and so is Westcott. Their argument is based upon the change of person which they say indicates a change of authorship.

    Macknight, however, in his “Harmony of The Gospels, ” says it is agreeable to John’s manner (cf Jn. 19:-5) to speak of himself in the third person (cf also I Jn. 5:18 and III Jn. 12). Macknight then believes John himself to be the author of these two concluding verses.

   Whoever authored them they are a strong affirmation of the reliability of his record. If it is by the Ephesian elders they probably were endowed with the supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit to “discern the spirits” and were adding their verification to the record for the benefit of the churches in which the record would be read.

   Verse 25 is hyperbolic. It is a common figure of speech of the people of that area. One has only to read the Prophets to see this. This exaggeration serves to express the great magnitude and importance of the words and deeds of Jesus which were recorded.

   Scripture itself testifies that there were things said and done by Jesus not recorded in the books about His life (the Gospels). In Acts 1:1-4 we are told that Jesus appeared to the disciples and spoke concerning the kingdom of God over a period of 40 days. Some of these things are recorded, some are not.

   In Acts 20:35 we have recorded a statement of Jesus not to be found in any of the Gospel accounts.

 There are many spurious apocryphal gospels and other accounts which purport to be records of deeds and sayings of Jesus. They are so utterly out of harmony with the tenor of the inspired accounts and the historical evidence is so definitely against their canonicity that they are completely unreliable.

    The main point is that John has recorded enough that men might come to believe and love Jesus Christ and become heirs of salvation in His name (Jn. 20:30-31).

    If men will not believe on the basis of what has been written, they will not believe even if someone would rise from the dead (ci. Lk. 16:31).

   John has written enough. The omnipotence, omniscience, compassion, love and glory of Jesus Christ has been recounted with factuality, emotion and a moral penetration that is able to capture the volition of man.

   Anything less would be insufficient-anything more would be redundant. Let us remember the admonition of this same apostle when he wrote the Revelation he received on Patmos (Rev. 22:18-20).

   We say, “Amen” to Lenski when he closes his commentary with, “Soli Deo Gloria”–Glory to God alone” is our prayer for this commentary.

   Turn right now, without letting another moment go by, and reread the Prologue, John 1:1-18. After these hours of soul-gripping study of John’s Gospel can you not say with all that is in you, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us” (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth!”

NOTE ON THE DATE OF THE CRUCIFIXION

There is one great problem in the fourth gospel which we did not take note of at all when we were studying it.  Here we can note it only very briefly, for it is really an unsolved problem on which the literature is immense.

It is quite certain that the fourth gospel and the other three give different dates for the Crucifixion, and take different views of what the last meal together was.

In the Synoptic gospels it is clear that the Last Supper was the Passover and that Jesus was crucified on Passover Day.  It must be remembered that the Jewish day began at 6 p.m. on what to us is the day before.  The Passover fell on 15th Nisan; but 15th Nisan began on what to us is 14th Nisan at 6 p.m.  Mark seems to be quite clear; he says:  “And on the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the passover?”  Jesus gives them instructions.  Then Mark goes on:  “And they prepared the passover, and when it was evening he came with the twelve.”  (Mark 14:12-17.)  Undoubtedly Mark wished to show the Last Supper as a Passover meal and that Jesus was crucified on Passover day; and Matthew and Luke follow Mark.

On the other hand John is quite clear that Jesus was crucified on the day before the passover.  He begins his story of the last meal:  “Now before the feast of the Passover . . .”  (John 13:1).  When Judas left the upper room, they thought he had gone to prepare for the Passover (John 13:29).  The Jews would not enter the judgment hall lest they should become unclean and be prevented from eating the Passover (John 18:28).  The judgment is during the preparation for the Passover (John 19:14).

There is here a contradiction for which there is no compromise solution.  Either the Synoptic gospels are correct or John is.  Scholars are much divided.  But it seems most likely that the Synoptics are correct.  John was always looking for hidden meanings.  In his story Jesus is crucified as somewhere near the sixth hour (John 19:14).  It was just then that in the Temple the Passover lambs were being killed.  By far the likeliest thing is that John dated things in order that Jesus would be crucified at exactly the same time as the Passover lambs were being killed, so that he might be seen as the great Passover Lamb who saved his people and took away the sins of the world.  It seems that the Synoptic gospels are right in fact, while John is right in truth; and John was always more interested in eternal truth than in mere historic fact. There is no full explanation of this obvious discrepancy; but this seems to us the best.

“Transformed To A New Life” John 21:1-25

    Gone fishing.

    How many times have you wanted to hang that sign on your door? Maybe when there’s a lull in business. Maybe when job pressures hem you in and you feel trapped.

   Maybe those were some of the disciples’ thoughts after Jesus died. Perhaps that’s why they took the day off and went fishing. The ministry, fbr all practical purposes, had shut down.

   For three years these fishermen learned from Jesus, observing how He calmed storms, how He walked on water, how He cast His saving net into humanity’s sea.

    But now, in the wake of death, all was calm, and the disciples returned to their old vocation — back to Galilee and their nets.

   The purpose of this epilogue is to show how the belief which the disciples had achieved should be applied. The witness of the risen Lord to His followers had been completed, and they were ready to undertake the responsibilities of discipleship.

    Consequently, the last chapter of the gospel opens the door to the future and shows how belief should be translated into terms of daily activity.

  It seems also apparent that John did not want to end his gospel without telling his readers that Peter was restored to his apostleship. He also wanted to refute the foolish rumor that had spread among the people that Peter would live until the return of the Lord (21:23).

   The average reader would conclude that John completed his book with the dramatic testimony of Thomas (John 20:28-31), and the reader would wonder why John added another chapter.

   The main reason is the Apostle Peter, John’s close associate in ministry (Acts 3:1). Apart from the information in this chapter, we would wonder why Peter was so prominent in the first twelve chapters of the Book of Acts.

   I think John may have had another purpose in mind: he wanted to teach us how to relate to the risen Christ. During the forty days between His resurrection and ascension, our Lord appeared and disappeared at will, visiting with the disciples and preparing them for the coming of the Spirit and their future ministries (Acts 1:1-9).

   They never knew when He would appear, so they had to stay alert! The fact that He may return for His people today ought to keep us on our toes! It was an important time for the disciples because they were about to take His place in the world and begin to carry the message to others.

   Besides, Jesus had trained these men for something besides fishing. The manifestation of Jesus was, then, a call to a new reality.

* We are fishers of men—obey Him (20:1-8)

   “Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias[1]. It happened this way: {2} Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. {3} “I’m going out to fish,” Simon Peter told them, and they said, “We’ll go with you.” So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing. {4} Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus. {5} He called out to them, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?” “No,” they answered. {6} He said, “Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some.” When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish. {7} Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, “It is the Lord,” he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water. {8} The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards[2].”

It was certainly someone who knew the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee who wrote this story.  Night-time was the best for fishing.  W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book describes night fishing:  “There are certain kinds of fishing always carried on at night.  It is a beautiful sight.  With blazing torch, the boat glides over the flashing sea, and the men stand gazing keenly into it until their prey is sighted, when, quick as lightning, they fling their net or fly their spear; and often you see the tired fishermen come sullenly into harbour in the morning, having toiled all night in vain.”

The catch here is not described as a miracle, and it is not meant to be taken as one.  The description is of something which still frequently happens on the lake.  Remember that the boat was only about a hundred yards from land.  H. V. Morton describes how he saw two men fishing on the shores of the lake.  One had waded out from the shore and was casting a bell net into the water.  “But time after time the net came up empty.  It was a beautiful sight to see him casting.  Each time the neatly folded net belled out in the air and fell so precisely on the water that the small lead weights hit the lake at the same moment making a thin circular splash.  While he was waiting for another cast, Abdul shouted to him from the bank to fling to the left, which he instantly did.  This time he was successful….  The he drew up the net and we could see the fish struggling in it….It happens very often that the man with the hand-net must rely on the advice of someone on shore, who tells him to cast either to the left or the right, because in the clear water he can often see a shoal of fish invisible to the man in the water.”  Jesus was acting as guide to his fishermen friends, just as people still do today.

It may be that it was because it was the grey dark that they did not recognize Jesus.  But the eyes of the disciple whom Jesus loved were sharp.  He knew it was the Lord; and when Peter realized who it was he leaped into the water.  He was not actually naked.  He was girt with a loin cloth as the fisher always was when he plied his trade.  Not it was the Jewish law that to offer greeting was a religious act, and to carry out a religious act a man must be clothed; so Peter, before he set out to come to Jesus, put on his fisherman’s tunic, for he wished to be the first to greet his Lord.

Now we come to the first great reason why this strange chapter was added to the already finished gospel.  It was to demonstrate once and for all the reality of the Resurrection.  There were many who said that the appearances of the Risen Christ were nothing more than visions which the disciples had.  Many would admit the reality of the visions but insist that they were still only visions.  Some would go further and say that they were not visions but hallucinations.  The gospels go far out of their way to insist that the Risen Christ was not a vision, not an hallucination, not even a spirit, but a real person.  They insist that the tomb was empty and that the Risen Christ had a real body which still bore the marks of the nails and the spear thrust in his side.

But this story goes a step further.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to point out a shoal of fish to a party of fishermen.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to kindle a charcoal fire on the seashore.  A vision or a spirit would not be likely to cook a meal and to share it out.  And yet, as this story has it, the Risen Christ did all these things.  When John tells how Jesus came back to his disciples when the doors were shut, he says:  “He showed them his hands and his side” (John 20:20). 

Ignatius, when writing to the Church at Smyrna, relates an even more definite tradition about that.  He says:  “I know and believe that he was in the flesh even after the resurrection, and when he came to Peter and his company, he said to them:  ‘Take, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon.’ And straightway they touched him, and they believed, for they were firmly convinced of his flesh and blood. . . .  And after his resurrection he ate and drank with them as one in the flesh.”

The first and simplest aim of this story is to make quite clear the reality of the resurrection.  The Risen Lord was not a vision, nor the figment of someone’s excited imagination, nor the appearance of a spirit or a ghost; it was Jesus who had conquered death and come back.

There is a second great truth symbolized here.  In the Fourth Gospel everything is meaningful, and it is therefore hardly possible that John gives the definite number one hundred and fifty-three for the fishes without meaning something by it.  It has indeed been suggested that the fishes were counted simply because the catch had to be shared out between the various partners and the crew of the boat, and that the number was recorded simply because it was so exceptionally large.  But when we remember John’s way of putting hidden meanings in his gospel for those who have eyes to see, we must think that there is more to it than that.

Many ingenious suggestions have been made.

(i)  Cyril of Alexandria said that the number 153 is made up of three things.  First, there is 100; and that represents “the fullness of the Gentiles.”  100, he says, is the fullest number.  The shepherd’s full flock is 100 (Matthew 18:12).  The seed’s full fertility is 100-fold.  So the 100 stands for the fullness of the Gentiles who will be gathered in to Christ.  Second, there is the 50; and the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel who will be gathered in.  Third, there is the 3; and the 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

(ii)  Augustine has another ingenious explanation.  he says that 10 is the number of the Law, for there are ten commandments; 7 is the number of grace, for the gifts of the Spirit are sevenfold.

“Thou the anointing Spirit art, Who dost thy sevenfold gifts impart.”

Now 7+10 makes 17; and 153 is the sum of all the figures, 1+2+3+4 . . ., up to 17.  Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.

(iii)  The simplest of the explanations is that given by Jerome.  He said that in the sea there are 153 different kinds of fishes; and that the catch is one which includes every kind of fish; and that therefore the number symbolizes the fact that some day all men of all nations will be gathered together to Jesus Christ.

We may note a further point.  This great catch of fishes was gathered into the net, and the net held them all and was not broken.  The net stands for the Church; and there is room in the Church for all men of all nations.  Even if they all come in, she is big enough to hold them all.

Here John is telling us in his own vivid yet subtle way of the universality of the Church.  There is no kind of exclusiveness in her, no kind of colour bar or selectiveness.  The embrace of the Church is as universal as the love of God in Jesus Christ.  It will lead us on the next great reason why this chapter was added to the gospel if we note that it was Peter who drew the net to land (John 21:11).

    It is interesting that at least seven of the 12 disciples were probably fishermen. Why did Jesus call so many fishermen to follow Him? For one thing, fishermen are courageous, and Jesus needs brave people to follow Him. They are also dedicated to one thing and cannot easily be distracted. Fishermen do not quit! (We are thinking, of course, of professional fishermen, not idle people on vacation!) They know how to take orders, and they know how to work together.

    The Lord had instructed His disciples to meet Him in Galilee, which helps to explain why they were at the Sea of Galilee, or Sea of Tiberias (Matt. 26:32 and 28:7-10; Mark 16:7).

  After His resurrection, our Lord was sometimes not recognized (John 20:14; Luke 24:16); so it was that His disciples did not recognize Him when, at dawning, He appeared on the shore.

   They toiled all night and caught nothing, and certainly Peter must have remembered a similar occasion two years earlier when Jesus had called him into full-time discipleship (Luke 5:1-11).

    It was time for Jesus to take over the situation, just as He did when He called Peter into discipleship. He told them where to cast the net; they obeyed, and they caught 153 fish! The diference between success and failure was the width of the ship! We are never that from success when we permit Jesus to give the orders, and we are usually closer to success than we realize.

   In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it.

   While Peter must have rejoiced in his restoration and apostleship, realize how shocking it must have been for this open discussion of his coming death to have come out!

   The day would come when another would take charge of Peter — and kill him. Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside-down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

   Jesus “showed himself alive aflcer his passion by many proofs, appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things conceming the kingdom of God” according to Acts 1.3.

    Here in Galilee is one of those occasions. He had commanded the disciples through the women (Matt. 28:7, ]0; Mk. 16:7), to go into Galilee. They did not go immediately and Jesus appears to them in company twice in Jerusalem over a seven day period (cf. Jn. 20). Now they have arrived in Galilee and have resumed their former occupations as they wait for the Lord’s promised appearance here.

   John’s use of the name “sea of Tiberias” is another indication that he intended his gospel account to be read by readers all over the Roman world. “Tiberias” is the Roman name for the sea of Galilee.

    Why did Peter and these other six disciples go fishing! Some say they had lost faith and interest in continuing as disciples of jesus and simply had returned to their former occupations. Those who make this interpretation generally base it on a questionable exegesis of the question Jesus asked Peter, “Lovest thou me more than these. “‘ (Jn. 21:15).

   I prefer the view that the disciples were merely occupying the time while they waited for the Lord in plying their trade as fishermen. Some of them (Peter at least) would need to provide some sort of financial support for their families. Men of the sea, active, hardworking, industrious men could not remain inactive while they waited for Jesus to come.

    R. C. Foster said: “Jesus did not condemn them for going fishing, but directed them to a miraculous catch. Peter is no more to be condemned for seeking food by this accustomed trade than Paul for supporting himself by tentmaking while he preached as opportunity offered. Peter and the rest were here in Galilee in obedience to the express, repeated command of Jesus. Having come to Galiiee, they could do nathing for their Master except wait His coming and further commands. To supply themselves with food by a means that was honorable and available was simple common-sense.”

  Fishermen had an honorable place in society. They supplied one of the most important items in the ordinary diet. They also had the teputation of being unusually pious. There were those who used hooks  I to fish in the days of Jesus for archeologists have B found copper, brass and iron hooks df that period. But mast of the commercial fishing was done with nets. The first type of net was the “throwing” type, a round one of perhaps twelve feet in diameter, with leads all around the edge, and it was designed to catch fish by dropping over them.

   The second type was the “seine” type which was bringing in their catch. The disciples probably used both types of nets. But it would seem they were using the seine type net this night.

   The fishing trade required large investments to commence. The nets were expensive and needed a great deal of maintenance. The boats would be even 1 more expensive and need even more maintenance.

    When the fish were caught they had to be separated. Some fish were worth more than others on the market. Also for the Jewish fishermen there would be the unclean fish they were not allowed to sell-those without scales and fins.

    “The fisherman’s life strengthens his character: it is work that insists upon courage and firmness, as well as patience; and it is clear that those freshwater sailors, the fishermen of the Sea of Galilee stodd out from all the other workers who are mentioned in the Gospel. They seem to have been men of  strong and ardent minds, open, hearty, enthusiastic in spirits–‘Sons of thunder, as Christ called two of them … Even today one may see the Galilean fishermen skipping for joy at a good catch; and under the fierce sun they may be heard chanting at the top of  their voices.

   “It is understandable that for the work He meant to undertake, Christ should have called upon these strong, brave, spirited men and their loyalty. He said to them, ‘Come and follow me; I will make you into fishers of men.’ And Simon and Andrew and then James and John, left their nets on the ground.”

   They fished all flight and caught nothing. It was a big sea. They had probably put their net into the sea over and over again in many different places. They were tired and they had spent a frustrating day and night. in the darkness of the early dawn they looked toward the shore and saw a man standing there. The darkness, the distance and a probable mist arising from the surface of the sea kept them from recognizing Jesus.

    Jesus then called out from the shore, “Lads, you don’t have anything to eat do you!” The Greek word paidia may be translated “lads, boys, children.” Jesus stated the question as if He expected a “No” answer. He wanted to focus their attention on the fruitlessness of their night’s labor in order to emphasize the more the rmraculous nature of what was about to happen. This He did to build their faith in Him and to demonstrate the divine assistance they would have during their labors in His name.

   So Jesus instructed them, “Cast your net on the right side of the boat and you will catch fish.” Still not recognizing Him as their Master, thinking perhaps He was one of the local fishermen with a knowledge of where the fishing was currently the best, they followed His instruaions. To their wonderment the net became so full of fish they were unable to haul it into the boat and eventually the net, which seemed ready to burst at any moment, was towed to shore behind the boat.

   What examples for us to follow as we seek to “catch fish” for Jesus Christ!

   We are indeed “fishers of men,” and there are “fish” all around us. If we obey His directions, we will catch the fish.

   John, the beloved disciple (cf. 13:23), then recognized Jesus and told Peter, “It is the Lord!” Perhaps John began to recognize Him when He called out from the shore and then at the miraculous draught of fishes could restrain himself no longer and forgot the fish and pointed toward shore and cried out to Peter.

   It was John who first realized that the stranger on the shore was their own Lord and Master.  It was John who leaned on the Lord’s breast at the table (John 13:23) and who stood by the cross when his Lord suffered and died (John 19:26). It is love that recognizes the Lord and shares that good news with others: “it is the Lord!”

   Impetuous Peter was not about to wait until the boat reached the shore. He grabbed his outer tunic  (he had probably taken off all his clothing but his undergarments), wrapped it around himself and jumped into the sea and started making for the shore.

   Whether he swam or whether it was shallow enough for him to wade ashore we do not know. The disciples were only about 100 yards off shore m the boat.

   R. C. Foster notes that the Greek language here indicates Peter fastened the  girdle” and tucked the tunic up into his girdle before leaping into the water.

   This may indicate he was intending to wade ashore without getting all his clothing wet. Peter may have been impetuous but his impetuosity at this particular instance is an example we all might well follow. Would that all His disciples were so eager to be near Him and to come to Him.

    This may indicate he was intending to wade ashore without getting all his clothing wet. Peter may have been impetuous but his impetuosity at this particular instance is an example we all might well follow. Would that all His disciples were so eager to be near Him and to come to Him.

    Practically all the commentators show the interesting parallels between this experience on the sea of Galilee and the one some three years before as recorded in Matt. 4:18-22; Mk. 1:16-20; Lk. 5:1-11.

   In both instances they toiled all night and caught nothing; in each case they had gone fishing of their own volition; in both they were commanded by Jesus to make another effort; in the first the nets broke; in this one the net seemed ready to break momentarily; in both Peter exexhibited his impetuosity; m both Jesus gives them a solemn commission to evangelite.

    Why did Peter act so impulsively! Who knows! It was just his nature, it seems, to act this way. What would you have done considering all his recent experiences if you had been Peter!

   Perhaps you too would have leaped into the water and hurried to meet the resurrected Lord. These disciples were real men–not robots or the idealistic characters of fiction. Some of them were as different in personality and temperament as some of us today!

   Now in verse eight we find an example of the Greek idiom which is not altogether familiar to the English language. We find John shifting from the regular noun to the diminutive form using both forms to describe the same thing. In 21.6 he speaks of the ploion (boat) and in 21.8 he speaks of the same boat only this time it is ploiarion (little boat). John does the same thing in 6: 17-20 and 6:22.

   Peter went wading on ahead. The other disciples came slowly in the boat hauling the catch of fish which were still very precariously enclosed within the overtaxed net.

   To their amazement, when they stepped out on shore they found the Master had a fire going, was broiling fish and preparing bread for a morning meal.

* We are Shepherds—Love Him (John 21:9-18)

    “When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread. {10} Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.” {11} Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. {12} Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?” They knew it was the Lord. {13} Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. {14} This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead. {15} When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” {16} Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” {17} The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. {18} I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.””

   Jesus met His disciples on the beach where He had already prepared breakfast for them. This entire scene must have stirred Peter’s memory and touched his conscience.

    Surely he was recalling that first catch of fish (Luke 5:1-11)and perhaps even the feeding of the 5,000 with bread and fish (John 6). It was at the close of the latter event that Peter had given his clear-cut witness of faith in Jesus Christ (John 6:66-71). The “fire of coals” would certainly remind him of the fire at which he denied the Lord (John 18:18). It is good for us to remember the past; we may have something to confess.

     Three “invitations” stand out in John’s Gospel: (‘Come and see ” (John 1:39); ‘Come and drink” (John 7:37); and “Come and dine ” (John 21:12). How loving of Jesus to feed Peter before He dealt with his spiritual needs. He gave Peter opportunity to dry off, get warm, satisfy his hunger, and enjoy personal fellowship.

   This is a good example for us to follow as we care for God’s people. Certainly the spiritual is more important than the physical, but caring for the physical can prepare the way for spiritual ministry. Our Lord does not so emphasize “the soul” that He neglects the body.

   Some suggest that Peter and his Lord had already met privately and taken care of Peter’s sins (Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5), but since Peter had denied the Lord publicly, it was important that there be a public restoration.

   We do not know that for certain, but sin should be dealt with only to the extent that it is known. Private sins should be confessed in private, public sins in public. Since Peter had denied his Lord three times, Jesus asked him three personal questions. He also encouraged him by giving a threefold commission that restored Peter to his ministry.

   The key issue is Peter’s love for the Lord Jesus, and that should be a key matter with us today. But what did the Lord mean by “more than these”? Was He asking, “Do you love Me more than you love these other men?” Not likely, because this had never been a problem among the disciples .

   They all loved the Lord Jesus supremely, even though they did not always obey Him completely. Perhaps Jesus meant, “Do you love Me more than you love these boats and nets and fish?” Again, this is not likely, for there is no evidence that Peter ever desired to go back permanently into the fishing business. Fishing did not seem to compete with the Saviour’s love.

   The question probably meant, “Do you love Me–as you claimed–more than these other disciples love Me?” Peter had boasted of his love for Christ and had even contrasted it with that of the other men. “I will lay down my life for Thy sake! ” (John 13:37) “Though all men shall be offended because of` Thee, yet will I never be offended!” (Matt. 26:33).

   There is more than a hint in these boastful statements that Peter believed that he loved the Lord more than did the other disciples.

  Foster lists three reasons why he believes Jesus means “do you love Me mote than these other disciples,” instead of “things–i.e., things representing your worldly vocation such as nets and boats and fish.” (a) There was nothing wrong with fishing per se, that is, Jesus did not condemn Peter for fishing and accuse him of loving Him less’ for fishing; (b) The three-fold question parallels the three-fold denial; (c) If Peter had understood Jesus to mean he was questioning whether he planned to desert his Master and go back to his old fishing trade, it seems incredible that Peter would not have answered immediately and precisely, “You know that I love you more than these things.

   It is more in keeping with the humility Peter must have felt when asked that he did not even so much as say,”You know that I love you more than these other men.” He had fallen into that prideful trap before.

   Two Greek verbs are used in an interesting interplay upon the word love in this section. Jesus uses the verb agapao in His first two inquiries and the verb phileo in the third question. Peter replies with phileo in all three answers.

   There are some commentators who are dogmatic in their assertions that agapao always means the “higher, spiritual devotion, not an impulse from the feelings, but more intellectually oriented love” while phileo always refers to the lower type of love “intimate, personal affection among human beings, brotherly love.

   This is not borne out by the New Testament usage of the two words, a. Both words are used of God’s love for man (agapao: Jn. 3:16; 14:23; 17:23; I Jn. 14:10-19) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; Rev. 3:19) b. Both words are used of God’s love for the Son (agapao: Jn. 3:35; 10:17; 15:3; 17:23-26) (phileo: Jn. 5:20). c.

   Both verbs are used of the love of men for Jesus (agapao: Jn. 8:42; 14:15, 21, 23, 24, 28; 21:15-16) (phileo: Jn. 16:27; 21:15-16; Matt. 10:37; ICor. 16:22). d. Both verbs are used   of the love of men for other men (dgapao: Jn. 13:34-35; 15:12, 17; I Jn. 2:10; 3:10; 4:7, 20) phileo: John 15:19).

   The text now under consideration seems to indicate that the words were, as the Arndt and Gingrich Lexicon says, “used interchangeably.”

    R. C. Trench, in his Synonyms of the New Testament puts it this way: “…there is often a difference between them, well worthy to have noted and reproduced, if this had lain within the compass of our language, being very nearly equivalent to that between ‘diligo’ and amo’ in the Latin … In that threefold ‘Lovest thou Me!’ which the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, agapas me; at this moment, when all the pulses in the heart of the now penitent Apostle are beating with a passionate affection toward his Lord, this word on that Lord’s lips sounds far too cold…He therefore in his answer substitutes for the agapas of Christ the word of a more personal love,  philo se.

   Foster says “it  is clear there is some difference and the use of both words in John 21 would indicate there is some different shade of meaning indicated. The fact that when we are commanded to love our enemies agapao is used, suggests the shade of meaning that we are not commanded to make a confidants or an intimate personal friend of an enemy–this might not be possible. But we are to treat all, even our enemies, with kindness and generous regard.”

   We will make Peter say something he certainly did not intend to say if we insist on a decisive and immutable distinction between the two words. We would have Peter replying to the Lord, “You know I love you Lord, but I do not love you with the highest devotion which man should have toward God (agapao); I only love you as a close personal friend (phileo), with a lower type of love.

   For Peter this was the right word. It expressed the deep, warm, heartfelt affection of this impetuous man. There does seem to be a decisive difference in the two words, but not as pronounced a difference as some commentators insist upon.”

   Why did Jesus use agapao when asking the first two questions, “Lovest thou me!” and then use phileo when He asked the third time? Most commentators believe Jesus was mildly rebuking Peter by questioning whether Peter even had the lowest type of love for Him. But Peter, by using phileo in each of his answers was using a word by which he meant to affirm both his lofty devotion toward God whom he revered but had never seen, and his personal love for Jesus whom he has seen and recognizes as God’s Son, just as Thomas had (Jn. 20:28).

 As we quoted Dr. Trench above, for Peter the word agapaojust did not fully describe his feelings so he used phileo and the Master simply used Peter’s own word of feeling as the basis for His final challenge.

   We believe there is some relationship between the charge Jesus made to Peter (“Feed my sheep”) and the question He asked (“Lovest thou me!”).

    If Peter loves the Master, Peter will feed the Master’s lambs. Whatever is done for the lambs is done for the Master (cf Matt. 25:31-46; Acts 9:1-6). Is this not why Jesus used the word agapaoas if to say, “Peter, do you love me!” “You say you love me, then love my lambs and feed them.”

   Peter’s personal, warm and affectionate love for Jesus is well and good, but this love for Jesus must be directed toward His flock “at large” as well or it isn’t even phileo love for Jesus (and this is why Jesus changed to Peter’s terminology in the last challenge.

   Jesus did not doubt Peter’s love for Him–He was challenging, preparing and commissioning Peter to go and love the Master’s lambs. This was not simply a reconciliation between Master and disciple for this had already occurred in the first appearance of Jesus to Peter in Luke 24:34.

   It was not to restore Peter to his apostleship among the select eleven for as Foster says, “the angel made it plain in the first message after the resurrection that Jesus did not consider that Peter had forfeited his apostleship (Mark 16:7).

     It was to challenge Peter, to strengthen him (to make him firmer in his love by reminding him of the humiliation of denial three times), to instruct him that lovmg Christ means to feed His sheep, and to confirm his place of leadership among the eleven. Jesus also elicited these confessions of love from Peter to prepare him for the prophecy of his death about to be made.

    There certainly are great principles for all followers of Christ to learn from this private intercourse between Jesus and Peter. Those who have dedicated themselves to “feed the flock” (whether evangelists or elders) must love Christ above all else and before all others. Love for Christ, deep, personal affection is the only force that will motivate and fortify His servants against the many disappointments and dangers in “feeding the flock.”

   We may also learn that love is expressed by obedient service (cf. II Cor. 8:5-8; 8:24; 9:13). Love is notjust desire; love is the desire to give–to spend and be spent for another.

    There is an interesting play of synonyms for “feed” in this context. In verses 15 and 17 Jesus used the word base which means “feed; do the part of a herdsman and provide the flock food.” In verse 16 He used the word pojmaine which means “shepherd the flock, protect, care for, lead the flock. “

    This is the commission of the Chief Shepherd to the under-shepherds to give themselves to the ministry of feeding, Protecting, guiding and leading the flock of God (6: Jn. to; Ads 20:18-38; I Pet. 5:1-11, etc.). The important food for the nock is the spiritual food. Peter was called and charged to carry out this great task and he eventually laid down his life for the sheep.

    It is also interesting to note the way Jesus used synonyms for sheep and lambs. In verse 16 and 17 the word plobatia (sheep) is used. In verse 15 He used the word arnia which is a diminutive meaning “little lambs.” The “little lambs” are mentioned first. The unsophisticated ones, the weak ones, the young ones must be tenderly nurtured.

    The older ones, even the experienced ones, must also be cared for and fed. We must all grow up together in stature into the full measure of godliness in Christ (cf Eph. 4:11-17).

    In verse 18 Jesus culminates his charge to Peter to “feed the lambs” with the revelation that Peter shall lay down his life for the flock. The figure of speech used by Jesus was vivid. The Jews, in walking or running, gathered up (girded) the long folds of their outer garments and fashioned them about their waists like belts, that their progress might not be impeded. The figure then expresses the freedom to go as one pleases unimpeded and unfettered.

  In fact Peter had just so “girded” himself and made his way to Jesus on the shore unfettered and unrestramed. But m his later years it shall not be so. Solemnly Jesus told him that he would stretch forth his hands to be fettered and bound and he would be led according to the will of another.

   Most commentators believe this “stretchmg forth of the hands” indicates Peter was told he would die by crucifixion. This is highly probable since Peter’s Master was put to death in this way and it was a common form of Roman execution administered upon non-citizen “malefactors.

    Works by Eusebius and Tertullian relate the traditional manner of Peter’s death to be crucifixion head downward. Whatever the manner of death it was to glorify God. Peter was to be among the first martyrs (from the Greek maturos). Marturia means to “testify or bear witness.”

    Peter’s life and death in faith bore witness to the glory of God. Just as the death of the first recorded Christian martyr, Stephen (Acts 7.54n), glorified God and was instrumental to some degree in the conversion of the great apostle Paul, the death of Peter for the sake of Christ and the church was undoubtedly a great testimony to the power of the word of God and instrumental in the conversion of many other people. “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints” (Rev. 14:13).

    Now after speaking this Jesus admonished again, “Follow me.” One commentator thinks Jesus began after this admonition to draw apart from the discipies to vanish from their company until His next appearance, and that Peter may have taken Jesus literally and began to withdraw from the group and walk after Jesus. This seems the most explanation for Peter turning to see another disciple “following.

    There can be no doubt that this other disciple who followed was John the beloved (cf our notes on John 13:23). Both Peter and John (and James) were of the mner circle” three, and Peter was involved in the incident at the supper where the “other” disciple is described in the same way.

   Foster says, “Follow me in the light of the preceding context seems to mean ‘follow me in my example of dying on a cross.’ But the succeeding context seems to indicate that Jesus was leading Peter off to a little distance from the group and that John followed–or perhaps He was leading all of the disciples hence.

  It may be that both the spintual and the literal are meant to be understood by the apostles.

   The main point is Peter’s question about the “other” disciple and the Lord’s answer to Peter. Peter, having been challenged, commissioned and having had his destiny revealed to him, said, “Lord what about him! ” Peter had missed the mark again!

 He had allowed his natural mind to take over again. He was out of focus. He was not focused on what Jesus had sought to emphasize. He was worrying about “times and seasons.

    Jesus replied, as He had before to His own mother, and as He would to the disciples later, “It is none of your business to know this …. if it is My will that John remain alive even until I come again in contrast to your death before I come, it is My affair and nor yours. The destiny of this other disciple is minor; the major raskfor you is to follow me. “ (cf, our notes on Jn. 2:1-5; also cf. Acts 1:6-8).

   If a man is going to be a soldier, he must have a soldier’s training. Sighing after happiness; brooding over the life we’ve missed–these are all out of place with the the Christian soldier.

   Men are not coddled and indulged when they are trained as soliders. Orders are given and no questions are solicited. Immediate and implicit obedience is called for.

   The Lord will tell us all we have need to lo know. We are His friends. What would be detrimental to us He will withhold (cf. our notes on Jn. 15:1216). We are not to know times or seasons, but to go to the ends of the earth witnessing.

   Some disciples misunderstood the point of Jesus’ reply to Peter. The word was spread among the brethren that Jesus had said John would not die.

    Barnes points out that first, the words of Jesus might easily be misunderstood and second, the false ‘rumor might gain credence when it was seen that John survived all the other apostles. So John, writing this gospel record in the twilight of life, deemed it this rumor and so said simply, “Jesus did not say that the other disciple would not die-Jesus said,’If it is my will that the other disciple remain until I come, it is none of your affair, Peter.

   We believe it is significant that John repeated precisely what Jesus said and offered no interpretation. John learned the lesson Jesus intended. His disciples need not know all-but all they need to know is revealed.

   The primary thing the disciples of Jesus need to do is to love and live the revealed teachings of their Master, leaving times and seasons to the wisdom and will ofa loving Father.

   There are many Christians who need to be, as Hendriksen says, turned from curiosity to their calling. It seems there were many brethren in John’s day in the same curious frame of mind. They are majoring in miners.

   We like the condusion given by Mr. Barclay: “Some would say that John was the great one, for his flights of thought went higher than those of any either man. Some would say that Paul was the great one for he fared to the ends of the earth for Christ. But this chapter says that Peter, too, had his place…to each Jesus had given his function. It was Peter’s function to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for Christ It was John’s fUnction to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace.

   That did not make them rivals and competitors in honor and prestige; that did not make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ. Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him. As Jesus said to Peter, “Never mind the task that is given to someone else. Your job is to follow       me.

    And that is what He still says to each of us. Our glory is never in comparison with men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity has been allotted to us.

   In spite of his faults and failures, Peter did indeed love the Lord, and he was not ashamed to admit it. The other men were certainly listening “over Peter’s shoulder” and benefiting from the conversation, for they too had failed the Lord after boasting of their devotion. Peter had already confessed his sin and been forgiven. Now he was being restored to apostleship and leadership.

   The image, however, changes from that of the fisherman to that of the shepherd. Peter was to minister both as an evangelist (catching the fish) and a minister (shepherding the flock). It is unfortunate when we divorce these two because they should go together. Ministers ought to evangelize (2 Tim. 4:5) and then shepherd the people they have won so that they mature in the Lord.

   Jesus gave three admonitions to Peter: “Feed My lambs,” “Shepherd My sheep,” and “Feed My sheep.” Both the lambs and the more mature sheep need feeding and leading, and that is the task of the spiritual shepherd.

    It is an awesome responsibility to be a shepherd of God’s flock! (I Peter 5:2) There are enemies that want to destroy the flock, and the shepherd must be alert and courageous (Acts 20:28-35). By nature, sheep are ignorant and defenseless, and they need the protection and guidance ofthe shepherd.

   While it is true that the Holy Spirit equips people to serve as shepherds, and gives these people to churches (Eph. 4: 1 Iff), it is also true that each individual Christian must help to care for the flock. Each of us has a gift or gifts from the Lord, and we should use what He has given us to help protect and perfect the flock. Sheep are prone to wander, and we must look after each other and encourage each other.

   Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd (John 10:11), the Great Shepherd (Heb. 13:20-21), and the Chief Shepherd (I Peter 5:4). Ministers are ”under-shepherds” who must obey Him as they minister to the flock. The most important thing we can do is to love Jesus Christ. If he truly loves Jesus Christ, the minister will also love His sheep and tenderly care for them.

    The Greek word for “sheep” at the end of John 21:17 means “dear sheep.” Our Lord’s sheep are dear to Him and He wants His ministers to love them and care for them personally and lovingly. (See Ezek. 34 for God’s indictment of unfaithful shepherds, the leaders of Judah.)

   A person who loves the flock will serve it faithfully, no matter what the cost.

    How the fish were obtained by Jesus we are not told. We are neither told that He obtained them in a supernatural way or a natural way. Most commentators believe He supplied them supernaturally. The recent events and the excitement of the present hour would lead one to think this also must have come about in some supernatural way.

 In their excitement and haste to meet the Lord they had forgotten their net full of fish strainmg on the tow rope still tied to the side of the boat and being lashed about by the waves of the surf. Jesus directed them, Bring of the fish which you have now taken. Perhaps Jesus had another reason for such directions than His concern that the miraculous catch might be lost by neglect.

    Perhaps He wanted to re-emphasize the magnitude of the miracle. This we believe is all the significance there is to the number–153 of fish caught. The number is given simply to signify the marvelousness of it all.

    They had fished all night and caught nothing. Jesus merely said, Cast your net on the right side of the boat, and in one cast they caught one hundred fifty-three large fish. So many the net was about to break.

    Many commentators, both ancient and modem, are, we believe, too taken up with allegorizing, symbolizing and spiritualizing numbers.

   For example Cyril of Alexandria said the 100 represents the “fulness of the Gentiles”; the 50 stands for the remnant of Israel which will be saved: 3 stands for the Trinity to whose glory all things are done.

   Augustine, according to Barclay, explains it this way: 10 is the number for the Law (10 commandments); 7 is the number of grace (7 gifts of the Spirit); 7 plus 10 equals 17, 153 is the sum of all the figures, I plus 2 plus 3 plus 3 … and up to 17. Thus 153 stands for all those who either by Law or by grace have been moved to come to Jesus Christ.”

   Whether the number has a mystical meaing or not, it most certainly points out that the one who wrote the Fourth Gospel was an eyewitness for he knew every detail even to the number and size of the fish that morning.

    The amazing thing to the fishermen was that such an enonnous catch could be contained in the net without the net breaking.

   Jesus bids them, “Come, have breakfast.” So overwhelmed with His majesty and awed with His omnipotence now not one of them dared interrogate Him. They all knew! There were no doubts, no questionings in their minds and hearts now. Perhaps the events of the night had so awed them that they stood off in reverential fear. None dared to say, Is it really you, Lord!

   In fact, the indication is that they did not even dare to come close to the fire and feed themselves at His invitation. It seems that Jesus had to take the bread and the fish and “come” toward them and give it to them.

   The main point to get from this section is exactly the point the disciples got and the one Jesus intended: a dramatic and awe-inspiring demonstration of the omnipotence and omniscience of Jesus Christ, the resurrected Lord of heaven and earth.

    Verse 14 must, of course, be understood as denominating the third appearance to the disciples (apostles) being gathered together in a body. He appeared at least a third time to other disciples (both women and men) before this but this is His third appearance to His specially called disciples-apostles.

We Are Disciples–Follow Him (John 21:19-25)

   “Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!” {20} Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”) {21} When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?” {22} Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.” {23} Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?” {24} This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. {25} Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”

  Jesus had just spoken about Peter’s life and ministry, and now He talks about Peter’s death. This must have been a shock to Peter, to have the Lord discuss his death in such an open manner.

   No doubt Peter was rejoicing that he had been restored to fellowship and apostleship. Why bring up martyrdom?

   The first time Jesus spoke about His own death, Peter had opposed it (Matt. 16:2 Iff). Peter had even used his sword in the Garden in a futile attempt to protect his Lord. Yet Peter had boasted he would die for the Lord Jesus! But when the pressure was on, Peter failed miserably. (You and I probably would have done worse!) Anyone who yields himself to serve the Lord must honestly confront this matter of death.

   When a person has settled the matter of death, then he is ready to live and to serve! Our Lord’s own death is a repeated theme in John’s Gospel: He knew that His “hour” would come, and He was prepared to obey the Father’s will. We as His followers must yield ourselves–just as He yielded Himself for us–and be “livmg sacrifices” (Rom. 12:1-2) who are “ready to be offered” (2 Tim. 4:6-8) if it is the will of God.

    Earlier that morning, Peter had “girded himself’ and hurried to shore to meet Jesus (John 21:7). The day would come when another would take charge of Peter–and kill him (see 2 Peter 1:13-14).

   Tradition tells us that Peter was indeed crucified, but that he asked to be crucified upside down, because he was not worthy to die exactly as his Master had died.

   But Peter’s death would not be a tragedy, it would glorifl God! The death of Lazants glorified God (John 11:4, 40) and so did the death of Jesus (John 12:23ff). Paul’s great concern was that he glorify God, whether by life or by death (Phil 1:20-21). This should be our desire as well.

   Our Lord’s words, “Follow Me!” must have brought new joy and love to Peter’s heart. Literally, Jesus said, “Keep on following Me.” Immediately, Peter began to follow Jesus, just as he had done before his great denial.

      However, for a moment Peter took his eyes off the Lord Jesus, a mistake he had made at least two other times. After that first great catch of fish, Peter took his eyes off his Lord and looked at himself: “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord!” (Luke 5:8)

   When he was walking an the stormy sea with Jesus, Peter looked away from the Lord and began to look at the wind and waves; and immediately he began to sink (Matt. 14:30). It is dangerous to look at the circumstances instead of looking to the Lord.

   Why did Peter look away from his Lord and start to look back? He heard somebody walking behind him. It was the Apostle John who was also following Jesus Christ.

     Peter did a foolish thing and asked Jesus, “What shall this man do?” In other words, “Lord, you just told me what will happen to me; now, what will happen to John? “

   The Lord rebuked Peter and reminded him that his job was to follow, not to meddle into the lives of other believers. Beware when you get your eyes off the Lord and start to look at other Christians! “Looking unto Jesus” should be the aim and practice of every believer (Heb. 12:1-2). To be distracted by ourselves, our circumstances, or by other Christians, is to disobey the Lord and possibly get detoured out of the will of God. Keep your eyes of faith on Him and on Him alone.

   This does not mean that we ignore others, because we do have the responsibility of caring for one another (Phil. 2:1-4).

   Rather, it means that we must not permit our curiosity about others to distract us from following the Lord. God has His plan for us; He also has plans for our Christian friends and associates. How He works in their lives is His business. Our business is to follow Him as He leads us (see Rom. 14:1-13).

    Jesus did not say that John would live until His return, but that is the way some of the misguided believers understood it. More problems are caused by confused saints than by lost sinners! Misinterpreting the Word of God only creates misunderstanding about God’s people and God’s plans for His people.

   However, there is a somewhat enigmatic quality to what the Lord said about John. Jesus did not say that John would live until He retwned, nor did He say that John would die before He returned. As it was, John lived the longest of all the disciples and did witness the Lord’s retum when he saw the visions that he recorded in the Book of Revelation.

   As John came to the close of his book, he affirmed again the credibility of his witness. (Remember, witness is a key theme in the Gospel of John. The word is used forty-seven times.) John witnessed these events himself and wrote them for us as he was led by the Holy Spirit. He could have included so much more, but he wrote only what the Spirit told him to write.

   The book ends with Peter and John together following Jesus, and He led them right into the Book of Acts!

   What an exciting thing it was to receive the power of the Spirit and to bear witness of Jesus Christ! Had they not trusted Him, been transformed by Him, and followed Him, they would have remained successful fishermen on the Sea of Galilee; and the world would never have heard ofthem.

    Jesus Christ is transforming lives today. Wherever He finds a believer who is willing to yield to His will, listen to His Word, and follow His way, He begins to transform that believer and accomplish remarkable things in that life. He also begins to do wonderful things through that life.

    Peter and John have been off the scene (except for their books) for centuries, but you and I are still here. We are taking His place and taking their place. What a responsibility! What a privilege!

   We can succeed only as we permit Him to transform us.

This passage makes it quite clear that John must have lived to a very old age; he must have lived on until the report went round that he was going to go on living until Jesus came again.  Now, just as the previous passage assigned to Peter his place in the scheme of things, this one assigns to John his place.  It was his function to be pre-eminently the witness to Christ.  Again, people in the early Church must have made their comparisons.  They must have pointed out how Paul went away to the ends of the earth.  They must have pointed out how Peter went here and there shepherding his people.  And then they may have wondered what was the function of John who had lived on in Ephesus until he was so old that he was past all activity.  Here is the answer:  Paul might be the pioneer of Christ, Peter might be the shepherd of Christ, but John was the witness of Christ.  He was the man who was able to say:  “I saw these things, and I know that they are true.”

To this day the final argument for Christianity is Christian experience.  To this day the Christian is the man who can say:  “I know Jesus Christ, and I know that these things are true.”

So, at the end, this gospel takes two of the great figures of the Church, Peter and John.  To each Jesus had given his function.  It was Peter’s to shepherd the sheep of Christ, and in the end to die for him.  It was John’s to witness to the story of Christ, and to live to a great old age and to come to the end in peace.  That did not make them rivals in honour and prestige, nor make the one greater or less than the other; it made them both servants of Christ.

Let a man serve Christ where Christ has set him.  As Jesus said to Peter:  “Never mind the task that is given to someone else.  Your job is to follow me.”  That is what he still says to each one of us.  Our glory is never in comparison with other men; our glory is the service of Christ in whatever capacity he has allotted to us.

In this last chapter the writer of the Fourth Gospel has set before the Church for whom he wrote certain great truths.  He has reminded them of the reality of the Resurrection; he has reminded them of the universality of the Church; he has reminded them that Peter and John are not competitors in honour, but that Peter is the great shepherd and John the great witness.  Now he comes to the end; and he comes there thinking once again of the splendour of Jesus Christ.  Whatever we know of Christ, we have only grasped a fragment of him.  Whatever the wonders we have experienced, they are as nothing to the wonders which we may yet experience.  Human categories are powerless to describe Christ, and human books are inadequate to hold him.  And so John ends with the innumerable triumphs the inexhaustible power, and the limitless grace of Jesus Christ.

———————————————————

   We hesitate to comment on these last two verses inasmuch as there is good manuscript evidence to show that it was not a part of the onginal.

   The Sinaiticus manuscript (350 A.D.-othenwise known as Aleph), gives evidence that verses 24 and 25 were added and the original Aleph manuscript was subjected to inspection by ultra-violet process and it was found that these verses were not included in the Sinaiticus coder when it was first written but were added later.

  The Bodmer II Papyrus (P66) omits these two verses (Bodmer II dates about 250 A.D.). It is reported that one of the best manuscripts of John found just recently, designated (P75), also omits these two verses (this manuscript also dates sometime between 200-300 A.D.)

  The latest revision of the Greek text by Nestle in  its critical apparatus notes that Aleph omits verse 25. Perhaps more manuscript evidence will be forthcoming soon to establish either the omission or the inclusion of these verses. Until then, we will make comments, with the reservatons stated above, on these two verses.

   Foster thinks that the elders of the church at Ephesus, where John probably resided when he wrote the Fourth Gospel, added verses 24 and 25.

    Hendricksen is of the same opinion and so is Westcott. Their argument is based upon the change of person which they say indicates a change of authorship.

    Macknight, however, in his “Harmony of The Gospels, ” says it is agreeable to John’s manner (cf Jn. 19:-5) to speak of himself in the third person (cf also I Jn. 5:18 and III Jn. 12). Macknight then believes John himself to be the author of these two concluding verses.

   Whoever authored them they are a strong affirmation of the reliability of his record. If it is by the Ephesian elders they probably were endowed with the supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit to “discern the spirits” and were adding their verification to the record for the benefit of the churches in which the record would be read.

   Verse 25 is hyperbolic. It is a common figure of speech of the people of that area. One has only to read the Prophets to see this. This exaggeration serves to express the great magnitude and importance of the words and deeds of Jesus which were recorded.

   Scripture itself testifies that there were things said and done by Jesus not recorded in the books about His life (the Gospels). In Acts 1:1-4 we are told that Jesus appeared to the disciples and spoke concerning the kingdom of God over a period of 40 days. Some of these things are recorded, some are not.

   In Acts 20:35 we have recorded a statement of Jesus not to be found in any of the Gospel accounts.

 There are many spurious apocryphal gospels and other accounts which purport to be records of deeds and sayings of Jesus. They are so utterly out of harmony with the tenor of the inspired accounts and the historical evidence is so definitely against their canonicity that they are completely unreliable.

    The main point is that John has recorded enough that men might come to believe and love Jesus Christ and become heirs of salvation in His name (Jn. 20:30-31).

    If men will not believe on the basis of what has been written, they will not believe even if someone would rise from the dead (ci. Lk. 16:31).

   John has written enough. The omnipotence, omniscience, compassion, love and glory of Jesus Christ has been recounted with factuality, emotion and a moral penetration that is able to capture the volition of man.

   Anything less would be insufficient-anything more would be redundant. Let us remember the admonition of this same apostle when he wrote the Revelation he received on Patmos (Rev. 22:18-20).

   We say, “Amen” to Lenski when he closes his commentary with, “Soli Deo Gloria”–Glory to God alone” is our prayer for this commentary.

   Turn right now, without letting another moment go by, and reread the Prologue, John 1:1-18. After these hours of soul-gripping study of John’s Gospel can you not say with all that is in you, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us” (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth!”

NOTE ON THE DATE OF THE CRUCIFIXION

There is one great problem in the fourth gospel which we did not take note of at all when we were studying it.  Here we can note it only very briefly, for it is really an unsolved problem on which the literature is immense.

It is quite certain that the fourth gospel and the other three give different dates for the Crucifixion, and take different views of what the last meal together was.

In the Synoptic gospels it is clear that the Last Supper was the Passover and that Jesus was crucified on Passover Day.  It must be remembered that the Jewish day began at 6 p.m. on what to us is the day before.  The Passover fell on 15th Nisan; but 15th Nisan began on what to us is 14th Nisan at 6 p.m.  Mark seems to be quite clear; he says:  “And on the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the passover?”  Jesus gives them instructions.  Then Mark goes on:  “And they prepared the passover, and when it was evening he came with the twelve.”  (Mark 14:12-17.)  Undoubtedly Mark wished to show the Last Supper as a Passover meal and that Jesus was crucified on Passover day; and Matthew and Luke follow Mark.

On the other hand John is quite clear that Jesus was crucified on the day before the passover.  He begins his story of the last meal:  “Now before the feast of the Passover . . .”  (John 13:1).  When Judas left the upper room, they thought he had gone to prepare for the Passover (John 13:29).  The Jews would not enter the judgment hall lest they should become unclean and be prevented from eating the Passover (John 18:28).  The judgment is during the preparation for the Passover (John 19:14).

There is here a contradiction for which there is no compromise solution.  Either the Synoptic gospels are correct or John is.  Scholars are much divided.  But it seems most likely that the Synoptics are correct.  John was always looking for hidden meanings.  In his story Jesus is crucified as somewhere near the sixth hour (John 19:14).  It was just then that in the Temple the Passover lambs were being killed.  By far the likeliest thing is that John dated things in order that Jesus would be crucified at exactly the same time as the Passover lambs were being killed, so that he might be seen as the great Passover Lamb who saved his people and took away the sins of the world.  It seems that the Synoptic gospels are right in fact, while John is right in truth; and John was always more interested in eternal truth than in mere historic fact. There is no full explanation of this obvious discrepancy; but this seems to us the best.

    “My Lord and my God!” This might well be the theme of this chapter. It records the climactic “sign” of a book filled with records of lesser “signs.” And, as John adds in his postscript, Jesus did many other “signs” in the presence of His followers but John and the other gospel writers have witnessed and recorded enough supernatural signs to lead men to believe in His diety (cf Jn. 20:30–1).

   The physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead, as He Himself foretold, was the apex of all His signs. This is the one event in the life of Jesus Christ which gives credence, meaning anh relevance to all else He said or did!

   One is tempted to wax eloquent for page upon page concerning this event but we believe Dr. Merrill C. Tenney, Dean of the Graduate School, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois, has summarized it so well we prefer to quote from his book, “The Reality of the Resurrection” here:

“… the resurrection of Christ… marks the intersection of the temporal and eternal worlds,

of material existence and spiritual life. Because the event is supernatural, it expresses the essence

of God’s revelation, because it is historical it is a genuine part of human experience. The resurrection

is a permanent witness to the love, power holiness, and redemptive purpose of God and is also a fact

which must be accepted as art of history. It cannot be dismissed as a speculative venture of the intellect

which is possibly, but not necessarily, true. For this reason the resurrection is perpetually relevant to the intellectual and spiritual problems of the would. The eventprovides afoundationfor faith; its imagery

contains the framework for a new life … By this one great fact all theology can he integrated.

Revelation, incarnation, redemption, sanctification,  and eschatology teach their fullest development

in the demonstration of the divine triumph over death.”

   We feel compelled to repeat here some quotations by famous men showing their convictions conceming the resurrection of Jesus.

 — Warfield said, “The resurrection of Christ is a fact,  an external occurence within within the cognitance of man, to be established by other testimonies and yet which is the cardinal doctrine of our system: on it all other doctrines hang.”

  — Lyndhurst (famous British jurist) said, “I know  pretty well what evidence is; and, I tell you, such evidence as that for the Resurrection has never broken down yet.”

   — William Lyon Phelps (Yale) said, “Our faith in God, in Christ, in life itself, is based on the resurrection; for as Paul said, if Christ be not risen from the dead then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.”

   — Theodosus Harnack said, “Where you stand with regard to the fact of the Resurrection is in my eyes no longer Christian theology. To me Christianity stands or falls with the Resurrection.”

   —   Tenney said, “The resurrection demands the attention of those who contemplate the basic problems of death and life, for it has thrust into them a new factor which must be included in evaluating the whole of human exrperience. Any attempt to explain the process of history will be incomplete without it. The resurrection is permanently relevant to any scheme of thought.

    John omits some of the appearances of the resurrected Jesus. Even the Synoptics do not include them all.  Acts and the epistles (esp. I Corinthians  15) include a few of the appearances omitted by the gospels.

   In fact, Acts 1:3 informs us that He “also showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God” by which we realize many of the appearances Jesus made to His disciples may not be recorded at all!

    Generally speaking the Gospels record the facts of His resurrection; the Epistles show the theological and experiential implications of it; and Acts records the results or fruits of it.

   When I was in college I once traveled with a group of students to work in a youth meeting in another state. As we drove through the night to reach our destination, we passed the long hours by taking turns telling about our own journeys of faith.

   Some in the car had grown up in Christian homes, while others were the only Christians in their families. Some had struggled long with doubt, and others had not. Some had only recently made the commitment to trust Jesus Christ with their lives, and others had been Christians for more than ten years.

   As we shared our stories, the one statement which made the greatest impression on me was made by a girl who had lost her faith in a high school biology class. Intimidated by a teacher who ridiculed her faith in God, she had decided to reread the Gospels to give faith one more opportunity. She wondered, “Is this real, or is this just a nice story someone made up? Did a man named Jesus ever live? If He did, was He really the Son of God?”

   For long months she wrestled with these questions. Finally, she arrived at a simple yet profound conclusion. The validity of the gospel message hinges, she realized, on the Resurrection. If Jesus rose from the dead, then it is all true: He did perform miracles, and He is the Son of God. If He did not rise from the dead, then it is only a myth or a terrible fraud.

   My friend was right. The claims of the Gospels (in our case the Gospel of John) stand or fall based on the truth of Jesus’ resurrection. Paul said it this way: … “[God] promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord”(Romans 1:2-4).

   Now, as we come to the climax of John–this Gospel of belief–we face the story of Jesus’ resurrection. This is no small issue, for everything is at stake!

   The presentation of the Resurrection in John is straightforward and is organized around four different appearances of the risen Lord:

• The resurrection and Magdalene (1-18)
• The resurrection and the disciples in the upper room (19-24)
• The resurrection and Thomas (24-29)
• The resurrection and us (30-31)

   Each one introduces something new into the picture. At the beginning of chapter 20 we may think of ourselves as spectators watching others handle the questions concerning the Resurrection. By the end of the chapter, however, we will find that we ourselves are at the center of the picture, having to decide what we will do with Jesus!

——————————————————

   If the gospel of John were an ordinary biography, there would be no chapter 20. Most biographies end with the death and burial of a subject.

    The time is Sunday morning, and we’re at the tomb the Pharisees went to such lengths to secure. This is where we’ll begin dusting for fingerprints, because something is awry: the seal is broken … the stone is rolled away.

     The tomb is empty! 

     The resurrection is an essential part of the gospel message (1 Cor. 15:1-8) and a key doctrine in the Christian faith. It proves that Jesus is the Son of God (Acts 2:32-36) and that His atoning work on the cross has been completed and is effective (Rom. 4:24-25).

   The empty cross and the empty tomb are God’s “receipts” telling us that the debt has been paid!

   From the very beginning, the enemies of the Lord tried to deny the historic fact of the Resurrection:

   – the Jewish leaders claimed that the Lord’s body had been stolen

     – yet, it had been sealed by an official Roman seal and guarded by Roman soldiers

   – His disciples did not believe that He was to be raised from the dead…it was His enemies who remembered His words (Matt. 27:62-66)

   – perhaps the disciples had “visions” of the risen Lord and interpreted them as evidences for the Resurrection

   – did they go to the wrong tomb?

   But wherever people were confronted with the reality of His resurrection, their lives were transformed!

    “Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.”

   Our Lord rested in the tomb on the Sabbath and arose from the dead on the first day of the week. Many people sincerely call Sunday “the Christian Sabbath,” but Sunday is not the Sabbath Day.

   There were at least five resurrection appearances of our Lord on that first day of the week:

   – Mary Magdalene                

   – the other women (Matt. 28)

   – Peter (1 Cor. 15:5)          

   – Luke (Luke 24)

   – two Emmaus disciples (Luke 24)

    – other disciples, Thomas (John 20)

   The Sabbath was over when Jesus arose from the dead (Mark 16:1). He arose on the first day of the week (Matt. 28:1).

   The change from the seventh day to the first day was not effected by some church decree; it was brought about from the beginning by the faith and witness of the first believers. Besides, there is no evidence in Scripture that God ever gave the original Sabbath command to the Gentiles, or that it was repeated for the first century church to obey.

   Some women had come to the tomb to finish what Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus had hastily begun.  Mary Magdalene had gone ahead, it seems, and noticed that the stone had been moved.

   “So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”

   Her use of the pronoun “we” showed that the other women had also come to see the situation. It is significant that the first witnesses of the resurrection of Christ were believing women; among the Jews of that day, the testimony of women was not held in high regard.

   Mary Magdalene either did not hear the angel’s message or she did not even stay to enter the tomb with the other women but ran to tell Peter and John immediately upon seeing the stone rolled away.

   Mary sobs out the dread picture as she surmised it from just seeing the tomb’s entrance violated: — “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we know not where they have hid him.”

   “So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. {4} Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. {5} He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. {6} Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, {7} as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. {8} Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. {9} (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)”

   This text has long been used for fun to show that John was a faster runner than Peter, but Peter, so impetuous, went into the tomb first. John did bend over and peer inside, to see the empty tomb and the strips of linen still there.

   For certain, grave robbers would not have carefully unwrapped the corpse and then left the graveclothes neatly behind. Note: John did see and believe!

   Why the women do not meet Peter and John we are not told. McGarvey harmonizes: ‘They have scarcely left the spot, when the swiftfooted John bounds up to the open door, stoops down and looks with eagerness into the vacant tomb.

   The impetuous Peter follows hard after rushes put his companion into the sepulchre, and gazes around. They both for a moment look thoughtfully at the napkin lying here and the linen clothes lying yonder, then they solemnly walk away.

    Mary evidently did not hear what the other women heard from the angels. Considering the hateful viciousness of the enemies of Jesus she may have surmized that these enemies had stolen the body in order to desecrate it even more or to use it to capture His followers.

   The fact that the grave clothes were so orderly laid aside was a sign of lack of haste. The very fact that the linen bandages were there at all infers that the body was not taken by grave robbers in haste for they would have little need to lay aside the cloths in such a manner.

  What did the disciple John believe after entering the tomb and observing the neatly placed grave cloths? Did what he saw there satisfy him entirely! Was he so credulous a person that in this moment he wanted so desperately to believe he was able from the empty tomb and the linen cloths to come to a “resurrection faith” without any further evidence!

   We know this is not so for the disciples were incredulous-they would not believe at brst. They were hard-headed men who refused to believe that He was raised from the dead, except on more evidence than the report of the women (cf Luke 24:11,

   Thomas was more stubborn than all the rest requiring to see the nail prints in the Master’s hands before believing. There does seem, however, to be a spark of faith ignited in the heart of John here. Westcott puts it this way, “The use of the word (believed) … points to the calm patient acceptance of a mystery as yet in part inexplicable with full confidence in the divine love … indicating something still to be more fully shown, and the apostle waited in trustful expectation for the interpretation.”                

   Whatever the faint glimmer of hope within the  apostle’s breast it was not built upon any knowledge  of the Old Testament prophecies and promises con-  ceming the resurrection of the Messiah (20:9) or any  no reason for stealing the body. It seems strange  that the disciples did not remember all the many  prophecies Jesus Himself had made concerning His                            resurrection!

   The women believed on this basis (cf Luke 24:1- 11). Perhaps the disciples were too busy with seek-  ing places in the kingdom when Jesus made His   prophecies to remember them or their Jewish preju-  dices as to the nature of the Messiah caused them to  misunderstand or count His prophecies of no signifi-  cance.

   There may have been hope (cf Luke 24:19-21) but  they would not believe until they had actual concrete. The talk of the women seemed to them an  “idle tale” (Lk. 24:11). So, with the body of the Master gone they could hope but they could do little  else by remaining at the empty tomb so they returned  to their dwelling in Jerusalem.

   While we are thinking about the empty tomb let us consider some of the attempts of the skeptics to     supply an answer to the fact of the empty tomb. One  thing is certain, the tomb was empty. The record  states that even the enemies of Jesus testified to His  certain death and the empty tomb.

   As Wilbur Smith puts it, “Something happened to the body of Jesus when it was taken down from the    cross. The New Testament testifies that it was  in a tomb … On Sunday morning, for one  reason or another, that tomb was empty, as everyone  admits–Christian, unbeliever, disciple, scoffer, Jew  and Gentile, conservative, and modemist.” Notice which here what the historical record witnesses as to the  empty tomb: (a) The women testify to it being   empty; (b) Peter and John found the tomb empty; (c)  The guards appointed to watch the tomb came and reported the tomb was empty; (d) The Sanhedrin did   not even so much as question the story of the  soldiers or go and see for themselves but concocted  a lie that the soldiers were to repet in order to offer   an explanation for the empty tomb!              

   Consider this first attempt by the enemies of  Christ to explain the absence of His body from the tomb: (a) It was a story spread by bribery; (b) It was ridiculous–how could the soldiers know what happened to the body if they were asleep! (c) The disciples would not steal the body–they would not want to risk further antagonism of the Roman soldiers and other authorities and they had absolutely no reason for stealing the body and furthermore their subsequent lives makes such an allegedly diabolical plot unthinkable!

   In considering the other attempts to explain the empty tomb we have borrowed from both A. Dale Crain’s essay and “Therefore Stand” by Wilbur Smith.

   There is a theory that the body of Jesus was stolen by His friends (Joseph, Nicodemus and the disciples). There is positively no evidence that this was done. If His friends did remove the body, why did the Sanhedrin have to bribe the soldiers to tell it.

    Another skeptical theory is that the enemies of Jesus stole the body. But what is the motive for this!! Certainly there could be no greater help to the cause of His enemies than to keep the body in the tomb! Furthermore, if they had removed it and hidden it, why did they not produce His body when the apostles began to preach His resurrection in the very courts of the temple!! That would have stopped Christianity for good!

   There is a theory that the women went to the wrong tomb. Could anyone forget within a few short hours where a precious loved one had been buried! If the women went to the wrong tomb then the angels were in the wrong tomb and Peter and John went to the wrong tomb!

  Furthermore, this was not one tomb among many in a public burial ground but was in a garden, belonging to a rich man, hewn out of solid rock, near the place of His crucifixion, with guards and a Roman seal upon it! And the women didn’t know which one it was–or forgot” This is so ridiculous a theory that even many skeptics ridicule it!

   Another theory is called the “Swoon Theory. According to this theory Jesus did not actually die, but merely fainted away and was revived by the coolness of the damp tomb and rose up and rolled away the stone Himself. How could anyone who had endured physically what Jesus had endured revive Himself in some seventy-two hours enough to roll away a stone which possibly five women could not

move! !

    He had been beaten to he point of fainting with the Roman scourge; He had not had rest for two nights; He had been crucified and left to hang for six hours; His side had been pierced and a great amount of His blood had flowed from the gaping wound; He had been wrapped and bound in grave cloths.

   This theory makes the record a complete and deliberate contradiction and lie for the record says that even Pilate was satisfied that Jesus was dead. If Christ did merely swoon then the apostles are liars and Christ is the greatest fraud the world has, ever known.

   There is a theory called the “Vision Theory” which explains the resurrection as a supernatural but ephemeral vision given to the apostles and women and others.

   If the appearances of Christ were not bodily appearances why do the gospel writers make it so plain that Christ showed the nail prints in His hands and the wound in His side –why did He eat with the disciples!!

    There is the “Optical Illusion” theory which says that a ghost-like appearance of Jesus was produced in some natural way. This would not explain the empty tomb at all. Futhermore, Jesus made enough appearances, both night and day, to enough people, in such dose proximity to the subjects that it would be impossible to defraud all those to whom He appeared!

   Finally, there is the “Hallucination” theory which relegates the claimed appearances to the realm of subjective apparitions of the imagination. Still, we have the record of the empty tomb-was that a hailucmation, too!!

   Paul claims that He appeared to  over five hundred people at once-are we then to  suppose over five hundred identical, individual, subjective hallucinations!

    Besides the Lord made varied appearances over a period of forty days in many widely separated places to all types of people (even to one of His enemies, Saul of Tarsus). The empty tomb makes the hallucination theory an absurdity.

    The factual and historical evidence for the empty tomb is so overwhelming that skeptical scholars are baffled as to how to explain this phenomenon.

   One skeptic has said, “The empty tomb must be thought out on doctrinal, not historical or critical grounds. The relevance of the resurrection and its meaning may be theological, but the facts surrounding the resurrection such as the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus are strictly historical matters. The people are real people; the places are geographically  definite, the enemies were not mythical beings.

John used three different Greek words for “seeing” in these verses:

  – in verse 5 the verb simply means “to glance in, to look in”

  – in verse 6, the word means “to look carefully, to observe”

  – in verse 8 it means “to perceive with intelligent comprehension”

  It seems incredible that the followers of Jesus did not expect Him to come out of the tomb alive. After all, He had told them many times that He would be raised from the dead.

    While all the pieces of this puzzling event hadn’t fallen into place yet, these two disciples saw enough to get a clear picture:

– the missing piece was the resurrected Christ

– the first sighting of Him occurred early Sunday moning(vs. 11-17)

– the second, that evening (vs. 19-23)

– the third, eight days later (vs. 26-29)

– the people who saw Him were Mary Magdalene (vs. 11,18)

– the disciples (vs. 19, 26)

– and Thomas (vs. 26-28)

   “Then the disciples went back to their homes, {11} but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb {12} and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot. {13} They asked her, “Woman, why are you crying?” “They have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I don’t know where they have put him.” {14} At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. {15} “Woman,” he said, “why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” {16} Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). {17} Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'”

      Peter and John have left the garden. Mary Magdalene has returned to the garden tomb alone. She evidently did not meet the other women and hear from them what the angels have said concerning His resurrection.

  Now that she has time to contemplate the awfulness of her suspicions she bursts into tears. “They” have taken his body. Just who she suspects we do not know—perhaps she thinks the Jews have taken His body. She stoops and looks in the tomb to confirm her suspicions.

    For the first time she sees the angels and they begin to converse with her about her sorrow. Mary is still persuaded that the body of Jesus has been taken. As she is answering the angels there is perhaps a sound in the garden which causes her to turn and see the figure of a man approaching.

    The light was still dim and there may have been an early morning fog and Mary’s eyes were blurred with tears. She did not recognite the man. He began to ask her her reason for being in the garden. He wanted to know the reason for her sorrow.

   What other man would be there at that hour and be questioning her as to her presence except the gardener. Supposing him to be the gardener she assumed he would know if the body had been removed and so she questions him.

    Jesus must have deliberately concealed Himself from her initially, as He would later do when He walked with the Emmaus disciples in Luke 24:1332. All He had to do was to speak her name, and she immediately recognized Him.

    Jesus spoke her name. It would be in that gentle but firm tone which she knew so well. Startled and surprised with joy and relief, she immediately recognizes Him and cries out, “Rabboni!” The word means “Teacher,” or “Great Teacher.” It is a title of profund respect among the Hebrews.

   Only seven great leaders of the Jews have ever been given the title.(among whom were Gamaliel I and Gamaliel II). As she cried out “Great Teacher,’ she made a movement as if to fall at His feet and cling to Him. The Greek word hapfesthai is used of that clinging to the knees or feet which was adopted by suppliants.

    Jesus forbade her doing so saying, “Do not hold to me.” Why did Jesus forbid her to do so! Not because it was indecent; nor because she wanted to test the reality of His resurrection for He did not forbid Thomas such a test; nor because her doing so would in some mystic way disturb the process of glorifica-lion, but because He wanted Mary (and the other disciples later) to understand that this was not His permanent return to visible fellowship with His disciples.

   He had promised His disciples to “return in a little while” (Jn. 16:16) and perhaps Mary felt that the little while was over and He was now to be visibly with them forevermore. Hendriksen paraphrases thusly, “Do not think, Mary, that by grasping hold of me so firmly you can keep me always with you. That uninterruptible fellowship for which you yearn must wait until I have ascended to be forever with the Father.

   Before the visible fellowship is restored Jesus must ascend to the Father for His High priestly work (“the little while”) (6. also Acts 3:19-26).

   Then Jesus commissions Mary Magdalene to go and tell the disciples, not specifically of His resurrection as the angels commissioned the other women, but Mary is to tell them that Jesus is ascending (present tense) unto the Father. Although He will yet appear for forty days He is in the act of ascending to the Father.

   Jesus now calls the disciples by a new name. He has called them “children,” “sheep,” “disciples, “friends,” “branches,” and other names but now He calls them “brothers!”

   This new relationship has a significant bearing on His commission to Mary. She is to tellthe “brothers” that Jesus, the elder brather, is going up to be with Hir Father and their Father, His God and their God! (cf Heb. 2:5-18).

    And so Mary, went with all speed, to tell the disciples as they mourned and wept (cf Mk. 16:10-11) just what Jesus had told her to tell. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her they would not believe it. The words seemed as an idle tale to them (cf. Lk. 24:9-11).

    Mary loved her Lord and had come early to the garden to express that love. When she looked into the tomb and saw two men in white, she was not disturbed. She was, however, determined to find the body of Jesus.

  But Jesus gave her clear instructions, which she observed: “Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.

    We are likely to seek and find, when we seek with affection, and seek in tears. But many believers  complain of the clouds and darkness they are under, which are methods of grace for humbling their souls, mortifying their sins, and endearing Christ to them.   

   See how Mary’s heart was in earnest to find Jesus. Christ’s way of making himself known to his people is by his word; his word applied to their souls, speaking to them in particular. It might be read, Is it my Master? See with what pleasure those who love Jesus speak of his authority over them. He forbids her to expect that his bodily presence look further, than the present state of things.

   Observe the relation to God, from union with Christ. We, partaking of a Divine nature, Christ’s Father is our Father; and he, partaking of the human nature, our God is his God. Christ’s ascension into heaven, there to plead for us, is likewise an unspeakable comfort.

   Let them not think this earth is to be their home and rest; their eye and aim, and earnest desires, must be upon another world, and this ever upon their hearts, I ascend, therefore I must seek the things which are above. And let those who know the word of Christ, endeavour that others should get good from their knowledge.

    Mark 16:9-11 gives us some added information about the disciples:  “…Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared firstto Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.  {10} She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning andweeping. {11} When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.”

* THE POWER OF THE RESURRECTION (20:19-31)

    Between the appearance to the women and the appearance to the ten disciples in the upper room in Jerusalem, Jesus appeared to two of His disciples on the road to Emmaus. These two disciples were despondent at the death of Jesus because all their glorious Messianic hopes had died, they thought, with Him there on Golgotha’s brow.

   They had heard rumors that He was alive–His tomb was empty–but they had not seen Him. Perhaps these disciples were going to Emmaus to rest, get away from all the uproar in Jerusalem and to think over the events of the last few days.

    Emmaus was probably only 7 or 8 miles from Jerusalem. Jesus met them or overtook them and walked on with them to Emmaus but they did not recognize Him … “their eyes were hidden.”

   Barnes notes that it was not some miraculous veiling of their own eyes that occurred but that He appeared to them in a form they were not used to seeing (cf Mark 16:12) and they were not expecting to see Him anyway and they simply did not recognite Him as He walked and talked with them.

   As He began to remind them of the Old Testament Messianic prophecies and apply them to Himself, their hearts began to “burn within them.” And then, as they were eating with Him, the familiarity of it all opened their eyes and they recognized Him. And they arose that very hour and hurried back to Jerusalem to report to the rest of that little band of despondent disciples.

    Just who these two disciples are we are not certain. One was Cleopas and the other sems to be most probably, Peter. There are some commentators who believe the second disciple was Luke because of the fact that only Luke records the event and his record has the flavor of that of an eyewitness.

   Just how Jesus vanished out of their sight is not certain either. The account seems to indicate that it was a miraculous “vanishing.” This would be in keeping with His miraculous entrance into a room which had the doors shut to outsiders.

   In John 20:19 we notice a special emphasis on “the first day of the week.” The first day of the week, being the day of Christ’s resurrection, is the chief of days, the day of Christian worship (cf Matt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; Lk. 24:1; Jn. 20:1; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10).

    Abruptly, John cuts to another scene:  (John 20:19-21)  “On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” {20} After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord. {21} Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.””

     Luke 24:37  tells us that “They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost.”

   Yet, as He spoke to them, they became calm and responded with a familiar reaction: they saw and believed.

   The appearance of Jesus in their midst where they were gathered on that evening that must have been beyond natural for the disciples were “terrified and frightened.”

   John seems to record that the doors were “fastened” to show some significant difference regarding the properties of the risen body of Jesus. The idiom of the Greek indicates that the Lord’s appearance in their midst was with breath taking suddenness and completely unexpected.

   They had “fastened’. the doors on account of their fear of the Jews.Their Master had been slain and there may have been word rumored that the Sanhedrin was looking now for the disciples of the Nazarene to condemn them also.

    Jesus was suddenly in their midst, speaking in a calm and soothing manner, “Peace be unto you.’ It was a familiar phrase for He had used it often in addressing His disciples.

    The disciples were terrified believing they were beholding one who had retumed from the unseen realm of the dead–a spirit, Luke tells us. But immediately Jesus held forth His hands and showed His feet which were pierced with the prints of the nails. He commands, “handle me, and see!”

 To dispel their doubts and fears He bids them prove to themselves beyond any doubt that the One in their midst is the same One with whom they walked and talked the last three years.

    This is one of the unique features of the revelation of Jehovah-God, whether that revelation be in the Old Testamemt, in the Incarnate Word, or in that revelation given by the apostles-the invitation, yea, the command, to test and prove the credibility and authenticity and divine nature of such a revelation.

    No other religion has ever been so insistent, that its claims be tested and verified and none has ever offered such undisputable evidence, for such verification. The disciples were not asked to place their trust in some mystic philosophy, nor in imaginative man-made gods–they were given evidence for d~e supematurnalness of Christ. The resurrection of Christ was not only His spirit but His body also.

    But how, if Christ was resurrected in a body, was He able to be suddenly in their midst if the doors were “fastened.” We like the conclusion given by Hendriksen, “Scripture gives no answer. Some day we will understand.”

    Our test here in John does not say whether they ‘handled’ Him or not. Luke (Luke 24:41) seems to indicate that they did not but ‘still disbelieved for joy and wondered’ until He ate the broiled fish with them. then they were glad and rejoiced.

   How did our Lord transform His disciples’ fear into courage? For one thing, He came to them. It is remarkable that these men were actually afraid. The women had reported to them that Jesus was alive, and the two Emmaus disciples had added their personal witness.

    But His first word to them was the traditional greeting “Shalom — peace. And not only did Jesus come to them, but He reassured them. He showed them His wounded hands and side and gave them opportunity to discover that it was indeed their Master, and that He was not a phantom.

   But the wounds meant more than identification; they also were evidence that the price for salvation had been paid and man indeed could  have “peace with God.”

   There is more than a command here—there is also a warnaing and a promise. Jesus as the Great Apostle, was sent to preach the will of God and to be persecuted and suffer for His glory, even so the apostles were sent to preach and be persecuted for His glory. they were to “fellowship His sufferings” (Phil. 3:10). There is also the promise of victory. they would also know “the power of His resurrection” (Phil. 3:10). they were to receive a divine commission and they were to be given divine credentials through the power to work miracles (Heb. 2:4).

   And verse 21 tells us also that He commissioned them: “As my Father has sent Me, even so I send you.” It must have given the men great joy to realize that, in spite of their many failures, their Lord was entrusting them with His Word and His work! He also enabled them with the Holy Spirit:  “And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. {23} If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.””

   This was the first day of the week, and this day is afterwards often mentioned by the sacred writers; for it was evidently set apart as the Christian sabbath, in remembrance of Christ’s resurrection.

   The disciples had shut the doors for fear of the Jews; and when they had no such expectation, Jesus himself came and stood in the midst of them, having miraculously, though silently, opened the doors.

   It is a comfort to Christ’s disciples, when their assemblies can only be held in private, that no doors can shut out Christ’s presence. When He manifests his love to believers by the comforts of his Spirit, he assures them that because he lives, they shall live also. A sight of Christ will gladden the heart of a disciple at any time; and the more we see of Jesus, the more we shall rejoice.

   After this, Christ directed the apostles to declare the only method by which sin would be forgiven. This power did not exist at all in the apostles as a power to give judgment, but only as a power to declare the character of those whom God would accept or reject in the day of judgment.

   They have clearly laid down the marks whereby a child of God may be discerned and be distinguished from a false professor; and according to what they have declared shall every case be decided in the day of judgment. When we assemble in Christ’s name, especially on his holy day, he will meet with us, and speak peace to us.

   The disciples of Christ should endeavour to build up one another in their most holy faith, both by repeating what they have heard to those that were absent, and by making known what they have experienced.

   Verse 23 has long been a problem. The Roman Catholic Church has used this verse to teach that the so-called successors of the apostles (the popes and priests) have the authority to forgive men of their sins.  Such  a  doctrine  is  technically  called “absolution.”

    Not even the apostles themselves had any authority of their own to gtant absolution-the forgiveness of sins. One need only to turn to Acts 8:14-24 to find one example of an apostle being asked to grant absolution in the case of a man confessing his ‘sin. The answer of the apostle Peter is, “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy heart shall be forgiven thee.”

    This passage in John 20:23 does not grant the apostles the power of absolution. The verbs apheontai (they are forgiven) and kekratentai (they are retained) of this verse are in the perfect tense in the Creek. Now the perfect tease means “an action having been completed in past time with a cantinuing result.”

    Literally translated verse 23 would read, “whosoever sins ye forgive, they have already been forgiven them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they have already been retained.”

   It is very interesting indeed that in the other two instances where Jesus similarly commissioned the disciples (Matt. 16:19; Mart. 18:18) the verbs are also in the perfect tense! There the verbs are dedemena (has already been bound) and lelumena (has already been loosed).

    In founding the church, declaring the will of God and preaching the gospel of repentance and remission of sins by the blood of Christ and men’s obedience to the gospel, the apostles merely declared on what terms, and to what people God extended fargiveness of sins.

    Whatever they preached on earth had already been decided in heaven. Only God can forgive sins. The apostles and all who have preached since are merely heralds of the covenant which has already been ratified, once for all, in heaven.

    The apostles were given here by Jesus a symbolic prophecy of the special baptism of the Holy Spirit when He “breathed.”

   The literal baptism of the Spirit would come upon them on the day of Pentecost and would empower them with miraculous power in order to confirm the already-ratified message which they were to preach afterward. The Holy Spirit did not give them any inherent authority to grant absolution of sin.

    By his statement, Thomas limited the Holy One of Israel, when he would be convinced by his own method or not at all. He might justly have been left in his unbelief, after rejecting such abundant proofs. The fears and sorrows of the disciples are often lengthened, to punish their negligence.

   Before discussing Thomas’ doubt, we need to realize that Jesus never rebuked him for his doubt; He rebuked him for unbelief. The verb in verse 25 means that the disciples “kept saying to him” that they had seen the Lord Jesus Christ alive.

    “Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. {25} So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.” {26} A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” {27} Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” {28} Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” {29} Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.””

     Thomas has been tagged the rationalist of the apostles. Also called Didymus (which means “twin”) he has been tagged with the surname “doubting.” I prefer to call him the “Palestinian Missourian. While doubt can be harmful and even sinful, Thomas can also be admired for wanting some facts before belief.

  Thomas was absent at the first meeting together of the disciples. Why he was absent we are not told. Perhaps he was inveseigating further the reports of the women about the empty tomb. Immediately after the Lord’s appearance to the “Twelve” (ten disciples in all) that first Sunday night, they went as a body and found Thomas and told him excitedly, ‘We have seen the Lord!” (v. 24). But for some reason, known only to Thomas, he could not satisfy the despondent longing of his own heart with just their testimony-he had to see for himself.

    If it is fair to characterize Thomas from two previous statements of his (Jn. 11:16; 14:5), we may think of him as one who tends to be pessimistic-to see the dark side. It was not that Thomas was a confirmed agnostic or skeptic–he believed readily enough when there was enough evidence to sweep away his natural inclination to despondency.

    Actually, Thomas was no more a “doubter” than the other ten disciples-he was just not at the right place at the right time. The other ten disciples were filled with the same despondent doubt (even though they had the testimony of the women and the two back from Emmaus) until Jesus appeared to them that hrst Sunday evening. Thomas simply demands the same evidence which was necessary for the other ten to overcome their doubts.

    Foster says, “The gradual development of their faith and the fact that fear, doubt, misunderstanding and the obstinate insistence upon absolutely indubitable evidence caused them to be slow to believe but it adds to the power of their testimony as witnesses.

    The disciples have not left Jerusalem and gone into Galilee as the resurrected Lord has commanded them through the women (6. Lk. 24:3-8; Mark 16:2-8). and another week has elapsed according to 20:26. As Hendriksen points out John a employing the inclusive method of time-computation.” Thus “after eight days” would be the next Sunday evening when the disciples had gathered together again-probably in the same place as on the previous Sunday evening. Again the doors were “fastened.” But again Jesus appeared suddenly and stood in the midst ofthem. Again He calmed their beating hearts with, “Peace be unto you.”

    It is worthy of note that Jesus has, in all His appearances at this time, appeared only on the first day of the week. There can be little doubt that He did it: to especially consecrate and dedicate this day in the minds of the apostles. We notice also that the disciples have not yet come to that boldness and courageousness of faith which they later knew (Acts 4:13; 4:19-20; 5:29). They still have the doors “shut” for fear ofthe Jews.

    Jesus does not waste any time but gets immediately to the point of this appearance. He commands Thomas to come forward and “touch and see and believe.”

   The question is always asked, “Did Thomas actually touch His hands!” In all probability he did, but we simply do not know, though verse 29 givesusahint.  (cf. Lk. 24:39; I Jn. 1:1-4). Jesus’ response of verse 29 is profound, however. Jesus wants us to rely on Him –~ithout having to feel, see, or prove anything. Thomas’ belief came about not from touching but from seeing!

 There is no possibility of hallucination or extreme ciedulity here! Either Thomas actually saw and “handled” the resurrected body of the crucified Jesus of Natareth (as well as the women and the other disciples) or the writers of the gospel accounts are the most dastardly deceivers and frauds the world has ever known.

    There are just two attematives. either the evidence is overwhelmingly sufficient to call forth faith and surrender to the divine, omnipotent, omniscient, resurrected Lord Jesus–or-the gospel writers deliberately lied and duped millions of their contemporaries and the gospels then are not morally worthy of consideration for they are lies.

   Only two alternatives are worthy of honest men: let us hear no more that the gospels are untrustworthy historically speaking but may form the basis for morality and social action —this is neither reasonable nor morally upright.

    There was no question lingering in the mind of Thomas. He was of an “honest and good heart.” Once the evidence was sufficient he surrendered his mind and heart to the demands of the fact.

    It is as AIexander Campbdl has written, facts are moral, they demand a decision. Facts are the basis of faith and faith is the motivating force of feeling. The facts caused Thomas to trust (and have faith) and thus leading to the emotion of his heart and soul poured out in “My Lord and My God!”

   There must be no doubters among the men upon whom Jesus is to thrust the responsibility of establishing the church and preaching the gospel in the face of the whole world against it! There must not be the slightest hesitancy, question, or problem about His victory over death and Satan.

    There must be absolute and abiding conviction on the part of each one commissioned to this great task.

     Furthermore, Jesus appeared to Thomas out of His love for Thomas. God desires to give every man enough opportunity to know of Christ’s victory over death and Satan, but now the responsibility to present the facts to every man is upon those who are His disciples.

    Jesus will not appear to men again until He comes to judge the world. Then those who pierced Him will see Him–but then it will be too late !

   R. C. Foster notes, “John opens his gospel with a profound statement concerning Jesus as the incamation of God. He closes his gospel with this great declaration of Thomas which is a result of actual experience and association. Thomas sums up in one dramatic explanation the message of the entire gospel. The disciple who doubted the most gives at last the final statement of his faith. Thomas hails Jesus as God and Jesus accepts the identification as Thomas worshipped Him.”

    Why does Jesus pronounce this last “beatitude” of blessing upon those who believe without having seen! Faith which results from seeing is good; but faith  which  results  from  hearing   is  more excellent. If men had to verify every basis of life or every statement of history to their own senses before they acted, virtually nothing would ever be accomplished!

    We could not all personally and minutely verify everything we accept as fact and allow as motivating principles in our lives. The faith of multitudes through the centuries has ested, not upon their own personal sensory perceptions, but upon the testimony of competent witnesses.

    We do not accept the fact that Washington was the first President of the United States of America on the basis of our own sight, but of the testimony of accredited witnesses.

 Another matter to be considered here is the weight of the accumulation of testimony over against the possibilities of our own senses being deceived. It is no wonder Jesus said, “blessed are they who, though not seeing, are yet believing.”

   Doubt says “I cannot believe There are too many problems.” Unbelief says, “I will not believe unless you give me evidence I ask for.”

   Jesus’ response of verse 29 is profound, however.  Jesus wants us to rely on Him –without having to feel, see, or prove anything. Thomas’ belief came about not from touching but from seeing!

   “My Lord and My God” is the last of the testimonies that John records to the deity of Jesus Christ. The others are:

   – John the Baptist (1:34)           

   – Nathanael (1:49)

   – Jesus Himself (5:25 & 10:36)      

   – Peter (6:69)

   – healed blind man (9:35)           

   – Martha (11:27)

   – John himself (20:30-31)

   That one day in seven should be religiously observed, was an appointment from the beginning. And that, in the kingdom of the Messiah, the first day of the week should be that solemn day, was pointed out, in that Christ on that day once and again met his disciples in a religious assembly.

   The religious observance of that day has come down to us through every age of the church. There is not an unbelieving word in our tongues, nor thought in our minds, but it is known to the Lord Jesus; and he was pleased to accommodate himself even to Thomas, rather than leave him in his unbelief.

   We ought thus to bear with the weak, Romans 15:1,2. This warning is given to all. If we are faithless, we are Christless and graceless, hopeless and joyless. Thomas was ashamed of his unbelief, and cried out, My Lord and my God. He spoke with affection, as one that took hold of Christ with all his might; “My Lord and my God.”

   Sound and sincere believers, though slow and weak, shall be graciously accepted of the Lord Jesus. It is the duty of those who read and hear the gospel, to believe, to embrace the doctrine of Christ, and that record concerning him, 1 John 5:11.

   This leads to the two reasons for John’s gospel:    “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. {31} But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

   This is the climax of the Fourth Gospel–not the conclusion, but the climax. Chapter Twenty-one is the conclusion in the form of an epilogue.

   It is quite dear from John’s statement here in vv. 30-31 and from just a cursory reading of the other gospel accounts that none of the gospels ever set out to give, nor claimed to give, a full account of the life of Jesus. What they have recorded, however, is historically and factually accurate. The brevity of the accounts in no way denies their historicity !

   But why are the gospel records so brief! Would it not be to our advantage to know every detail of Jesus’ life as a youngster and a growing man! It is also quite clear that the gospels are not intended to be complete biographies of Jesus’ life.

    I like the statement of R. C. Foster in his Life of Christ Syllabus: ‘”The narratives of the life of Christ are condensed in order to be the more effective. They are sufficient for the purpose of presenting adequate evidence, extensive enough to challenge a life-time of study, and yet not so voluminous as to overwheln the reader with a mass of unnecessary records. The brevity of the scriptures is one of the foremost proofs of their divine inspiration. Contrast the gospel narratives with any biography in print, whether of Napoleon, Lincaln, or any other famous person!”

    The purpose of John has been all along to show that Jesus of Nazareth is the Incarnate Word–the Very Son of God, co-equal with the Father–indeed Immanuel, God with us! This was John’s stated purpose in his Prologue (1:1-18).

    These climactic verses show us that from start to finish the Fourth Gospel is a book of signs that Jesus is the Son of God. This is the first purpose of the book.

    If the deity of Christ be established and told in a vivid and captivating way then men will be led to believe in Him and gain eternal life. This is the stated second purpose of the gospel record: to bring men to faith and salvation in obedience to the will of Christ.

 The purpose of the gospel record has just been vividly betrayed in the experience of Thomas: he has been brought to a complete faith in the deity of Jesus and commits his life unto Him.

 The Fourth Gospel began with the unfolding of the mystery of life which has its source in the Word. It closes with the offer of life to all who will accept Jesus.  It is worthy of note that John uses the present tense of the verb pisteuo (believe) and so literally it means to “believe and eep.on believing.

    Hendriksen says, “Note: continue to believe. Remember Cerinthus, who was trymg to undermine the faith of the Church in the deity of Christ! That faith must be strengthened. The enemy must be reputed.”

   It may be that John had m mind, writing his gospel toward the end of the first century, a refirtatian and defense against Gnosticism. But the use of pisteuo in the present tense is so common an idiom of the New Testament writers simply to state the nature of saving faith that it seems beside the point to connect it with a refirtation of Gnosticism.

    Whatever the case, John climaxes his gospel with his version of the good confession. But, as Foster suggests, it now includes the profounder meaning of the crucified and risen Christ, and of the Son of God who has given final proof of His claims.

   There were other signs and proofs of our Lord’s resurrection, but these were committed to writing, that all might believe that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the Saviour of sinners, and the Son of God; that, by this faith, they might obtain eternal life, by his mercy, truth, and power. May we believe that Jesus is the Christ, and believing may we have life through his name.

   The signs that John selected are described in this book are proof of the deity of Christ. They are important. Sinners are not saved today by seeing miracles but by believing that Jesus performed miracles. There was no need for John to describe every miracle that our Lord performed; in fact, he supposed that a complete record could never be recorded. Either Jesus was a madman, or He was deluded, or He was all that He claimed to be. He claimed to be God come in the flesh, the Son of God, the Savior of the world. That is what He is!

   

No one of the gospels deals at length with the crucifixion of Christ, and no two of them coincide exactly in the narration of detail. The greatest number of variants from the common tradition occur in this gospel, but the distinctive element is not an accident.

   The aspects which John contain were selected carefully for the purpose of concluding the main theme: belief versus unbelief. What happened is important, certainly, but also why it happened is vital, if we hope to go to heaven.

In their accounts of our Lord’s crucifixion and death, Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the so-called Synoptic Gospels), all mention Simon of Cyrene. They describe the mockery of Jesus by the crowd, by the Jewish religious leaders, and by the two robbers who were crucified beside our Lord. They tell us about the three hours of darkness, and Matthew and Mark record the cry of our Lord, “My God, My God, Why hast Thou forsaken Me?” The Synoptic Gospels refer to the women who kept their vigil at the cross, as close to their Lord as they could get. In the Synoptics, we read of the curtain of the temple being torn in two, from top to bottom, and of the soldiers casting lots for our Lord’s garments.

Each Gospel has its own unique contribution to the overall picture of what took place when our Lord suffered and died on the cross of Calvary. Matthew gets our attention with his account of the earthquake, which followed our Lord’s death, so that the tombs of some in the vicinity of Jerusalem were opened, and these resurrected folks made appearances in Jerusalem (Matthew 27:52-54). Mark informs us that Simon of Cyrene is the father of Alexander and Rufus (15:21). Luke has his own story to tell of Jesus on the road to Calvary, of His prayer that God forgive those who were crucifying Him (23:34), of the Lord’s conversation with one of the two thieves who believed, and a record of the Lord’s words, “Father, into Your hands I commit my spirit!” (23:46). Perhaps Luke’s most unique contribution is his account of the people leaving the scene of our Lord’s execution, “beating their breasts” (23:48).

John’s Gospel is truly unique in its portrayal of our Lord’s death. John may have been the only Gospel writer to have been an eye-witness of the crucifixion (see 19:35). John omits much that is recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, including:

Any reference to Simon of Cyrene
Everything but a brief reference to the two others being crucified beside Jesus
The mockery of the crowd, the Jewish religious leaders, and the two thieves
The cry, “My God, My God, Why have you forsaken Me?”
The three hours of darkness
The torn veil of the temple
The testimony of the centurion

John’s material in our text can be summarized in this way:

Verses 17-22:           Yet another “sign” in John: The “King of the Jews”
Verses 23-27     Lottery and loyalty: four men and four women, at the foot of the cross
Verses 28-30     Two statements: “I thirst.”; “It is finished!”
Verses 31-37     No bones broken, but a pierced side

   The narrative of the crucifixion may be divided into six paragraphs, each of which contains a unit of action taken from the scene as a whole:

* THE ACT OF THE CRUCIFIXION (19:17-18)

   “Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). {18} Here they crucified him, and with him two others–one on each side and Jesus in the middle.”

   The crucifixion was mentioned in the fewest possible words. John, who alone of all the disciples witnessed it, said the least about it. The paragraph merely states the act, the place, and the fact that two others shared the same fate as Jesus.

   The reticence of the writer indicates that he did not lay great value upon stressing the physical suffering. Besides, in a day when crucifixion was still a current method of execution, it would have been too familiar to need description and too horrible a thought to deserve elaboration.

   Cicero said of crucifixion: “It was the most cruel and shameful of all punishments. Let it never come near the body of a Roman citizen; nay, not even near his thoughts or ears, and ears.”

   It was reserved for the lowest kind of criminals, particularly those who promoted insurrection. It had its origin among the Persians and Phoenicians, but it was the Romans who made special use of it.

   It was the custom for the condemned man to carry at least part of the cross, usually the crossbeam, and sometimes the whole cross. There’s a savage irony in making a man carry the implement on which he was to suffer and die, but think of the example given to us today (Luke 9:23). The walk was about a mile long.

John’s statement that Jesus “went out, carrying His own cross” (verse 17) does not contradict the account of the Synoptics, which inform us that Simon of Cyrene[1] carried our Lord’s cross to Calvary. Jesus must have taken up His cross in Jerusalem and carried it as far as outside the city. Then, at some stage of the journey to Golgotha, it must have become evident that Jesus could no longer bear the weight of His cross. He appears to have been beaten more than the two others who were crucified. It may also have been a matter of time. Time was now short, and there was pressure to get on quickly with the crucifixion. If someone were to carry our Lord’s cross for Him, they would get to Golgotha more quickly. Simon of Cyrene was on his way to Jerusalem from out in the country and was drafted to carry our Lord’s cross for Him. One cannot help but wonder what impact his encounter with Jesus made on Simon’s life. The fact that Mark mentions that he was the father of Alexander and Rufus (15:21) makes one wonder if he and his sons did not come to faith, so that those who read Mark’s Gospel would recognize these two sons as fellow-saints.

In one verse (17), John takes us from the judgment seat of Pilate to the “Place of the Skull.” John does not belabor the process of crucifixion, though we know it was the most cruel form of execution devised by man.[2] The two robbers (whom Luke calls “criminals”) are crucified with our Lord, one on His left, and the other to His right. It seems significant that Jesus was placed in the center. Surely He was the focus of this event, as everyone seemed to know, and as those who passed by could figure out for themselves.

John chooses to expand his account concerning the written notice that was attached to the cross above the head of our Lord. The other Gospels mention it, but it is John who gives us the most detail and the greatest insight here. Indicating the charges for which the condemned was crucified was common practice. In this way, those who witnessed the crucifixion would be warned by seeing that Rome took this particular offense seriously. We do not know whether the two men beside Jesus had notices above their heads, but we are told by every Gospel that the charges against Jesus (with slight variations) were written out: “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.”

The place where Jesus was crucified outside Jerusalem was not far from the city and was close to the road. Many Jews—a number of whom were pilgrims—were on their way to or from Jerusalem and therefore passed by the cross of our Lord. Messianic hopes ran high, especially at Passover, and so the words written above the head of Jesus caught the attention of those passing by. The words were written in Aramaic, the language of the Jews of Palestine, Latin, the language of the Romans, and Greek, the common language of the day in that part of the world. It would have been difficult to pass by that way and not look upon Jesus, and to read the notice above His head. Many of those who saw the sign paused to ponder its meaning, making Jesus the center of attention.

This notoriety and publicity upset the Jewish religious leaders. They did not wish for Jesus’ claims to be advertised publicly. They especially did not like the inference of Pilate’s wording, which may have been intended as a barb for those who wanted Jesus crucified. Pilate’s words almost implied that Jesus’ claim to be the “King of the Jews” was true. Seeking to remedy the situation, the Jews appealed to Pilate, urging him to modify the words posted on the cross of Jesus. They wanted the notice to indicate only that Jesus claimed to be “King of the Jews,” the inference being that His claim was false. These Jews were highly skilled in debating over words and their meaning,[3] but they did not win this battle of the wills. Pilate had had just about enough of them for one day; he was not going to let them tell him what to do this time. Pilate’s words would stand as they were written. And that was the end of this discussion.

Is it not interesting that both Caiaphas and Pilate find themselves unwittingly bearing witness to the fact that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, the King of Israel? Not long before, Caiaphas, as the high priest, spoke prophetically about our Lord’s substitutionary death (John 11:47-52). And now, here in our text, Pilate refers to Jesus as “the King of the Jews.” Neither of these powerful men had any intention of giving glory to God, but both of them spoke (or wrote, in Pilate’s case) of Jesus in a way that was prophetic. If God can speak through a dumb animal (i.e., Balaam’s donkey, Numbers 22:28-30), He can surely speak through men who do not even believe in Him. It may have been out of spite for the Jews that Pilate wrote what he did, but what he wrote was true, and in so doing, Pilate called attention to Jesus as Israel’s Messiah, the “King of the Jews.”

For the wrath of man shall praise You; With a remnant of wrath You will gird Yourself (Psalm 76:10, NASB).

   Golgotha: a Hebrew or Aramaic word meaning “skull.” Calvaria (Calvary) was the Latin word, which also meant “skull.” That He was crucified with two notorious thieves only added to the shame, and it also fulfilled Isaiah 53:12: “He was numbered with the transgressors.” He was treated like a common criminal.

* THE PLACING OF THE TITLE ON THE CROSS (19:19-22)

   “Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. {20} Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek. {21} The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews.” {22} Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.””

   Here are some remarkable circumstances of Jesus’ death, more fully related than before. Pilate would not gratify the chief priests by allowing the writing to be altered; which was doubtless owing to a secret power of God upon his heart, that this statement of our Lord’s character and authority might continue. Many things done by the Roman soldiers were fulfilments of the prophecies of the Old Testament.

    The title had a two-fold significance: First, an inscription was usually hung over the crucified criminals in order to inform the public of the reason for their execution. In this instance, it was used by Pilate as the vehicle for a sarcastic thrust at the Jews. He was exhibiting this man, condemned to a criminal’s death at the demand of His own national rulers, as their king.

   Second, it was an ironic statement of truth. Though the concept of the kingdom of God is much less prominent in John than in Matthew, the author put himself on record concerning the nature of the kingdom by quoting Jesus’ own words.

   The fact that it was written in three languages shows that our Lord was crucified in a place where many people and nations met, a cosmopolitan place.

   It was in:

– Greek: read in all cultured circles in the world    since it was the language of literature and culture

   – Latin: for the Roman soldiers, the language of law and power

   – Hebrew: the language of the Jews, the language of rebellion

* THE DIVISION OF GARMENTS (19:23-24)

   “When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. {24} “Let’s not tear it,” they said to one another. “Let’s decide by lot who will get it.” This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said, “They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.” So this is what the soldiers did.”

It is John’s Gospel which most emphatically underscores the fulfillment of prophecy in the events surrounding our Lord’s death. Three times in our text John specifically informs his readers that prophecy has been fulfilled (verses 24, 36 and 37). When our Lord’s garments are divided according to lot, John informs us that this fulfills the prophecy of Psalm 22:18: “They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots” (NKJV).

Translators have a choice to make at verse 25. They must decide just how many women John is referring to here. As you can see, the translators of the NET Bible (like most others) have opted to identify four women, though the mere movement of a comma could reduce this number to three. I believe that John does mean to specify four women here. There are a number of reasons for doing so, which we shall not belabor at this point. I am inclined to read verses 23-27 in a way that contrasts the four soldiers at the foot of the cross with the four saintly women who are also standing by their Lord.

The four men John focuses on are all Roman soldiers. It has fallen to their lot to carry out the crucifixion of Jesus and the two robbers. They appear to be oblivious to the suffering of the three men hanging on their crosses. According to Luke (23:36), the soldiers joined in with the others who mocked Jesus, virtually daring Him to come down from the cross to save Himself. John characterizes these four soldiers using this one scene. As Jesus hung there, beaten and bleeding, the solders were down on their knees. They weren’t praying; they were casting lots. They were, so to speak, rolling the dice to see which one of them would get the one-piece tunic. I can almost see one of the men shaking the dice in the palm of his hand, saying, “Com’ on, snake eyes …Yes! It’s mine!”

It almost sounds as if these soldiers were bored. Perhaps they had carried out this duty so many times they were just mechanically doing their job. There was nothing new or unexpected here, not yet, that is.[4] From experience, these soldiers must have felt they knew almost exactly what would happen over the next few hours. Their ears very likely tuned out every moan and cry. They may have learned not to even look at their victims. If there is going to be any excitement for them at all, it will be in the casting of lots to see who wins the garments the dying men will leave behind. I cannot think of any way John could have better captured the cold-heartedness of these four men than by seizing upon this moment in time as they huddle together on the ground, casting lots for our Lord’s garments. They see nothing to gain from Jesus but some item of clothing. In today’s terms, they would look upon Jesus as the source of a baseball cap, an Izod shirt, a pair of Haggar slacks, or maybe—if they are lucky—a pair of Nike shoes. That’s all Jesus was to them—a chance to win a piece of clothing. As He hung there on that cross, shedding His precious blood for guilty sinners, all they could think about was our Lord’s tunic. When Jesus was “rolling away the burden of our sins” (as the hymn celebrates), they were rolling the dice.

Yet, let us not be too quick to judge these soldiers. They are no different, in heart, than many today. They ignore the atoning work of Jesus and look to Him only to meet their material needs—not the need for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of eternal life—but for their physical needs. Even we who name the name of Christ as Savior and Lord all too often only look to Him to care for our material needs. Our prayers sound more like shopping lists than serious petitions for our spiritual needs and those of others.

In stark contrast to the four male dice-rolling soldiers are the four dedicated women John identifies by name. The soldiers seem to have no appreciation for who Jesus is. They may never have seen Him before. They have no compassion on Him, even though He is suffering beyond words. These four women linger as close to the cross as they can get. They are among those women who followed Jesus, supporting Him from their own means (Mark 15:40-41; Luke 8:1-3). They did not look upon His death as a means of gaining some of His possessions (as was the case with the soldiers), but as the greatest loss they had ever suffered. Was it one of these women who gave Jesus the seamless garment for which the soldiers gambled?

Recently, I had to go to the doctor for my annual physical examination. You all know what that is like. They hand you something that seems little bigger, and probably thinner, than a paper towel. You sort of wrap it around yourself, and then desperately attempt to hold the thing together, struggling to preserve what little dignity remains. My experience at the doctor’s office helped me appreciate something I had not thought of before, which William Hendriksen called to my attention in his commentary on John:

“The clear implication of the passage which we are studying must not escape us. It is this: Jesus bore for us the curse of nakedness in order to deliver us from it! Cf. Gen. 3:9-11, 21; then II Cor. 5:4; Rev. 7:12, 13. Surely if what Ham did to his father Noah is singled out for special mention because of its reprehensible character, what the soldiers did when they disrobed Jesus and then divided his garments among themselves, casting lots, should cause us to pause with horror.”[5]

Hanging upon that cross, our Lord was almost naked as He bore our punishment for sin. After man first sinned, nakedness became shameful (see Genesis 9:20-27; 2 Samuel 10:1-5; Isaiah 20:4). Can you imagine the humiliation our Lord endured as He hung upon that cross, half-naked, with hundreds of people looking on? It is no wonder that David wrote of our Lord: “For dogs have surrounded Me; The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me. They pierced My hands and My feet; I can count all My bones. They look and stare at Me” (Psalm 22:16-17, NKJV, emphasis mine). Our Lord bore the curse of nakedness for us, so that we might be clothed in His righteousness.

It was as Jesus was hanging there, half-naked, on that cross that He made arrangements for the care of His mother: “So when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, look, here is your son!’ He then said to his disciple, ‘Look, here is your mother!’ From that very time the disciple took her into his own home” (John 19:26-27).

Once again we come upon “the other disciple,” whom we can reasonably assume to be John. Much is made of this text, too much by some. As D. A. Carson notes, Roman Catholicism seeks to find here a mandate for the veneration of Mary. This is a view which Carson rejects as contrary to the text and to the tenor of John’s Gospel:

Roman Catholic exegesis has tended not so much to see Mary coming under the care of the beloved disciple, as the reverse; and if the beloved disciple is also taken as an idealization of all true disciples, the way is cleared to think of Mary as the mother of the church.[6]

… the Fourth Gospel focuses on the exclusiveness of the Son, the finality of his cross-work, the promise of the Paraclete as the definitive aid to the believers after Jesus has been glorified, and correspondingly de-emphasizes Mary by giving her almost no part to play in the narrative, and by reporting a rebuke, however gentle, that Jesus administered to her (2:4). With such themes lying on the surface of the text, it is most natural to see in vv. 26-27 an expression of Jesus’ love and care for his mother, a thoughtful provision for her needs at the hour of supreme devastation. … To argue, then, that this scene is symbolic of a continuing role for Mary as the church comes under her care is without adequate contextual control. It is so anachronistic an interpretation that [it] is difficult to imagine how it could have gained such sway apart from the developments of centuries of later traditions.[7]

The common Protestant interpretation of this incident is that Jesus, knowing He was about to die and to return to the Father, made arrangements for the long-term care of His mother.[8] This “long-term” element does raise some questions in my mind. We are told in Scripture that it is the responsibility of the immediate family to look after their own:

3 Honor widows who are truly in need. 4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn to fulfill their duty toward their own household and so repay their parents what is owed them. For this is what pleases God (1 Timothy 5:3-4).

Why, then, would Jesus assign the responsibility of caring for His mother to John, who is not one of her sons? The answer most would give is that none of her other sons were believers (see John 7:5). This is true, of course, but not for long. We know that within days or weeks, James, Jesus’ half-brother, will come to faith and eventually become a prominent leader in the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19). Why would Jesus assign the long-term care of Mary to John, knowing that James, her son, will soon come to faith?

I would suggest that our problems are solved if we see Jesus providing here for Mary’s short-term care. Surely we would agree that Jesus knew James was one of the elect. If James is one of our Lord’s “sheep,” then Jesus would know it and would not act in a way that was contrary to this knowledge. I would suggest to you that Jesus was providing for the care of His mother for the next few days or weeks. We know that John immediately began to care for Mary, because he tells us so in verse 27 (“from that very time”—literally, “from that hour”). There are those who believe that John (or his family) may have actually owned a home in Jerusalem. This could explain why John (“the other disciple”) was known to the high priest and to the servant girl at the gate (18:16). Mary, like the disciples, could have been in danger and would certainly need to be looked after for a while. John would have been the one most able and willing to carry out this task.

The next few days were going to be pure agony. We do not know for certain that Mary’s other sons were present in Jerusalem (though we would expect so—see John 7:1-9), but if they were, can you imagine what kind of comfort these unbelieving sons would have been to their believing mother?[9] I can almost hear James trying to comfort Mary after the death of Jesus: “Mom, you know I told Jesus to give up His insane talk about being the Messiah. He must have been out of His mind. And now, all of this foolishness was for nothing, except to shame us.” I believe that Jesus assigned John to care for Mary because he was the one closest to the heart of our Lord, and because he was the first disciple to believe (see John 20:8). He also seems to have had the means to do so. Who better to look after Mary in the next dark and difficult days than John?

    This was not an exceptional deed of brutality. In any case of crucifixion, the garments of the victim became the property of the soldiers detailed for execution.

   The usual dress of a Jew consisted of five parts: the head dress, the shoes, the outer garment or toga, the girdle, and the chit on (or tunic here called “coat”), a kind of shirt which fit somewhat closely to the body, and reached from the neck to the ankles.

   The importance of the incident was that the soldiers gambled for the seamless tunic just as the prophetic psalm (Psalms 22:18: “They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing”) had predicted. They did this in the presence of the greatest event in history to their day!

    Three times in this narrative the fulfillment of scripture was mentioned, as if to make sure that the reader would understand that the event was connected with the Old Testament (vs. 24, 28, 36).

* THE PROVISION FOR JESUS’ MOTHER (19:25-27)

   “Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. {26} When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” {27} and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.”

    While we often overlook this group of women, and think only of Mary, the mother of Jesus, we needed to be reminded that it took courage to stand there in the midst of such hatred and ridicule…but their being there must have encouraged our Lord.

   The two paragraphs concerning Jesus’ mother and the completion of His task contain all of the words that Jesus spoke from the cross as John reported them. They represent the thought and action of Jesus in the last hour of His earthly life.  Each was significant because it denoted a different relation of Jesus to His work.

   The utterance concerning His mother marked the discharge of His human obligations. Even at the cross, with the destiny of His person and calling at stake, He was not unmindful of His duty to His family.

    All things therein written shall be fulfilled. Christ tenderly provided for his mother at his death. Sometimes, when God removes one comfort from us, he raises up another for us, where we looked not for it. Christ’s example teaches all men to honour their parents in life and death; to provide for their wants, and to promote their comfort by every means in their power.

* THE FINAL CRIES FROM THE CROSS (19:28-30)

   “Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” {29} A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. {30} When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

I am amazed at the words of verse 28. Jesus knew that everything was completed. He was no helpless victim, powerless, and therefore subject to the whims of those who had arrested Him. Jesus was aware of every Scripture that spoke of His atoning death as the promised Messiah. In the last few weeks especially, Jesus has been orchestrating events so that His death would perfectly fulfill all these prophecies. In the final moments of His life, Jesus takes note of the fact that every prophetic detail has been arranged for so that He now may proceed to complete His mission, in a way that fulfills the remaining prophecies concerning His death.

Jesus utters the words, “I am thirsty,” which prompts one of those standing nearby to dip a sponge into sour wine and convey it to the lips of our Lord. This is not the same offer of wine that was made as the crucifixion began (Matthew 27:34; Mark 15:23). The “wine” that Jesus refused at the outset of His crucifixion was mixed with a narcotic-like pain killer.[10] Jesus refused this because He insisted on drinking the “cup of God’s wrath” to the full (John 18:11). The “wine” Jesus now accepts is a cheap wine. It did not deaden any of His pain. Our Lord’s thirst and His partaking of this “wine” seems to have served a two-fold purpose. First, it fulfilled Scripture:

My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And My tongue clings to My jaws; You have brought Me to the dust of death (Psalm 22:15, NKJV).

I am weary with my crying; My throat is dry; My eyes fail while I wait for my God (Psalm 69:3, NKJV).

They also gave me gall for my food, And for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink (Psalm 69:21, NKJV).

While there is considerable discussion about John’s reference to the “branch of hyssop” that was used to lift the sponge to our Lord’s lips,[11] we can hardly fail to see the significance of the hyssop in relation to the blood of the Passover lamb: “And you shall take a bunch of hyssop, dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin. And none of you shall go out of the door of his house until morning” (Exodus 12:22, NKJV).

Second, it would seem as though the vinegar-like wine served to help clear the throat of our Lord, so that He could end His life triumphantly, with a shout. So far as John informs us, the “shout” is not, “It is completed,” but rather as Luke informs us, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46). These two statements must have come in close proximity to each other, however. The words that John records were no doubt spoken first, and then were followed by the words that Luke records. John simply tells us that Jesus “said,” “It is completed.” Jesus declares that His work is completed, and then He gives up His Spirit.

It really has been completed, hasn’t it? Everything for which John has been preparing us in this Gospel has now been accomplished by our Lord. John 1 declares that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, who called the world into being. He is the One sent to earth by the Father, in order to reveal Him to men. He is the One who “came unto His own place and to His own people,” and yet those who were “His own”—the Jews—rejected Him. He was “lifted up” so that He could draw all men unto Himself (3:13-18). He came to do His Father’s will (4:34) and has now completed it. He came to declare His Father’s Word, and He has proclaimed it (8:26-28, 38; 12:49-50; 14:10). He came to glorify the Father, and on the cross, He has done that (12:23, 28, 41; 13:32; 17:1, 4). It truly is finished; His task has been completed.

And because all of His prerequisite work has been completed, our Lord can now die. His life is not taken away from Him; He voluntarily gives it up, just as He had indicated earlier:

14 “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me— 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves me—because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. 18 No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This is the commandment I received from my Father” (John 10:14-18).

Jesus gave up His spirit; it was not taken from Him. In fact, Pilate will be surprised to hear that Jesus has died so soon (Mark 15:44). The soldiers had to hasten the death of the two thieves, but not that of our Lord. Even the timing of His death was indicative of His sovereign control over all things. Because Jesus died when He did, His legs would not be broken, thus fulfilling yet another prophecy as we shall see in the next verses.

   Our Lord knew what was going on; He was fully in control as He obeyed the Father’s will. “I thirst” betokened Jesus’ deep participation in human suffering.  He endured the terrible thirst that accompanied crucifixion as a token of His voluntary sharing in all human woe.

   The vinegar which was given to Him was the cheap sour wine which the common soldiers drank, sharp in taste and astringent in quality. Paradoxical enough, He who had offered to all men the water of life died thirsting.

   Especially observe the dying word wherewith Jesus breathed out his soul:

   It is finished; that is, the counsels of the Father concerning his sufferings were now fulfilled.

   It is finished; all the types and prophecies of the Old Testament, which pointed at the sufferings of the Messiah, were accomplished.

   It is finished; the ceremonial law is abolished; the substance is now come, and all the shadows are done away.

   It is finished; an end is made of transgression by bringing in an everlasting righteousness. His sufferings were now finished, both those of his soul, and those of his body.

   It is finished; the work of man’s redemption and salvation is now completed. His life was not taken from him by force, but freely given up.

–   We see the evidence of Christ’s humanity

    Jesus was in every way God, but was also in every way man. He was not a Divine man, nor a humanized God; He was both God and man.

– We see the intensity of Christ’s sufferings

   We need to remember Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, as He was in such prayerful agony that His sweat was like great drops of blood.

   Myrrh was given at the time when one was nailed to the cross as a mild analgesic, and it’s felt that Jesus refused it (though, remember, it was one of the three gifts at His birth!)

– We see our Lord’s deep reverence for the scriptures

   Jesus knew His scripture, and He knew Psalm 69 had talked of His thirst on the cross.

– We see the Savior’s submission to the Father’s will

   Jesus had the power to do whatever He wanted on this earth … He’d turned water to wine; He’d healed the disease and demon possessed; He’d even raised some from the dead! But He never once performed a miracle for His own benefit, or comfort. When He was hungry, His disciples went and found food for themselves.

   He made seven statements while He was on the cross; they are known as the “seven sayings from the cross.”

   First, He thought of others: those who crucified Him (Luke 23:34), the believing thief (Luke 23:39-43), and His mother (here).

   The central word had to do with His relationship with the Father ..Matthew 27:45-49.

   The last three statements focused on Himself: His body (John 19:28- 29), His soul (John 19:30), and His spirit (Luke 23:46).

   “It is finished” marked the achievement of perfection. Jesus died with a consciousness that His work was done, and that there was nothing left for Him to accomplish. The cry should not be interpreted as the last gasp of a defeated martyr, but as a shout of triumphant victory!

   The Greek word was “tetestai” and means “it is finished, it stands finished, and it always will be finished!”

   Jesus had spoken often of finishing the work God had sent Him to do: John 4:34: “My food,” said Jesus, “is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.”

What was finished?

– God’s will concerning atonement:

   Hebrews 10:5-10: “Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me….”First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them” (although the law required them to be made). {9} Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. {10} And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

– God’s will concerning the scriptures

   At the moment these words were uttered, anyone could have dug deeply into the Old Testament scrolls, made an exhaustive search into all prophecies, and all would have been found fulfilled!

– God’s will concerning the law

    Those under the law could be “redeemed” only by another fulfilling its requirements and suffering its curse. Our sins could be taken away only by their being blotted out by the precious blood of Christ. The demands of justice must be met.

   The requirements of God’s holiness must be satisfied. The awful debt we incurred must be paid.

   Galatians 4:4-5: “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, {5} to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.”

   Romans 7:12 (“So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good”) tells us the law was holy, just, and good. The problem did not rest with the law, but with man.

– God’s will concerning the devil

   Christ defeated Satan at the cross. He destroyed “him that had the power of death…” (Heb. 2:14).

   1 Corinthians 2:8 (“None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory”) is a vital verse here. The devil did not understand what he was doing in crucifying Christ. Think of the effect the resurrection had on the apostles and first century Christians!

* THE LEGS BROKEN AND THE PIERCING WITH THE SPEAR (19:31-37)

   Two groups of people were involved in our Lord’s burial: the Roman soldiers and the Jewish believers.

   “Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. {32} The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. {33} But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. {34} Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. {35} The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. {36} These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,” {37} and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.””

John chooses not to repeat much of what the other Gospels have recorded. Verses 31-37 are unique to John’s Gospel. They describe what football fans know as the “two-minute offense.” This is the offensive plan implemented by the team which is behind when there are two minutes or less left on the clock. Everything is hurried up, or designed to stop the clock. The quarterback may call the next two plays so that they can skip the huddle. The quarterback throws the ball rather than runs it so the clock will stop if it is an incomplete pass. The team will also use its time-outs strategically. All of this is done because there is little time left in the game.

The Jews were now in their “two-minute offense.” Time was running out for them. They had been forced to go through the formalities of a trial and to obtain Pilate’s cooperation in the crucifixion of Jesus. They were still under great time constraints because this was the day of preparation; they must be done with this crucifixion by evening so they could begin to observe the Sabbath by evening. Normally, death by crucifixion would take much longer, and this was no problem to Rome. While the Romans liked to leave the bodies of those crucified exposed for some time, to serve as a warning to all, the Jews could not allow these bodies to remain exposed after nightfall. The men would have to die more quickly than normal so that their bodies could be taken down.[12]

Rome had a solution for this situation.[13] A heavy hammer was used to crush the bones of the victims’ legs. This would make it impossible for those being crucified to push up with their legs in order to facilitate the breathing process. Once their leg bones were broken, the victims died within a short time. The soldiers therefore set out to break the legs of all three. For some reason, they started on the outside, waiting to deal with Jesus last. (Is it possible that having seen and heard the events of that day—such as the three hours of darkness—they were now reluctant to do further bodily harm to Jesus?) When they came to Him, it was apparent that He was already dead. There was no need to break His legs.

One of the soldiers must have wanted to make absolutely sure that Jesus was dead, so he thrust his spear into our Lord’s side. Immediately, both blood and water gushed out, a fact to which John gives special significance. There have been many interesting attempts to explain the spiritual significance of this fact. For example, some have seen the “water” to be a symbol of Christian baptism, while the “blood” is said to symbolize communion. This is a very difficult connection to prove, and it seems forced to me.

Others have gone to considerable effort to show that this was a natural phenomena,[14] as though it were necessary to prove that what happened to Jesus happens to others as well. In other words, they wish to show that this is humanly possible. I remember when I was studying the Book of Jonah, several commentators referred to other historical accounts of men being swallowed by fish and surviving. That such things could, in fact, happen was construed as proof that, in Jonah’s case, it did happen. I would have been content to believe in Jonah’s miraculous rescue, whether or not it had ever happened to anyone else before. Why do we work so hard to prove that things which are supernatural are natural?

Perhaps the “water and blood” that poured from our Lord’s wound was a normal phenomena, something that one should expect in a death such as our Lord’s. But I am perfectly content for this phenomena to be absolutely unique. Was His birth not unique? Why should His death not be unique in some respects as well? As I read John’s words in verse 35, he seems to make a point of the fact that “blood and water” came from the wound that was inflicted by the thrust of the soldier’s spear. Might John not have been referring to this as something unique, and therefore most noteworthy? Does he not seem to employ this as yet another “sign” that points to the deity of our Lord and the truth of the Gospel? “And the person who saw it has testified (and his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth), so that you also may believe” (verse 35). May this not have been one of the factors that the centurion took into account, which contributed to his astonishment at the way Jesus died? “When the centurion, who stood in front of him, saw that he breathed no more, he said, ‘Truly, this man was God’s Son!’” (Mark 15:39).

Already in John’s day, there were those seeking sophisticated alternative explanations for the death and resurrection of our Lord. One of these was known as docetism, the view that Jesus did not come in “flesh and blood,” but as some kind of spirit being. John’s description of our Lord’s death, especially of the “blood and water,” shows the folly of denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh (see 1 John 4:2). There were also those who contended that, although Jesus was truly “flesh and blood,” He did not actually die; He just “swooned” and was revived by the cool temperature in the tomb. This account of the spear thrust into the side of our Lord deals a death blow to swoon theories and to docetism.

Once again, John wishes us to see that the things which took place at Calvary were the very things God had prophesied.[15] Jesus, by giving up His life earlier than expected, was spared from having His legs broken. John sees in this a fulfillment of prophecy. Though the Old Testament text that is fulfilled is not indicated, very likely it comes from Exodus 12 or Psalm 34:20, or both:

43 And the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner shall eat it. 44 But every man’s servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then he may eat it. 45 A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat it. 46 In one house it shall be eaten; you shall not carry any of the flesh outside the house, nor shall you break one of its bones” (Exodus 12:43-46, NKJV; see also Numbers 9:12).

He guards all his bones; Not one of them is broken (Psalm 34:20, NKJV).

The other fulfilled prophecy, referred to by John in verse 37, is from Zechariah 12:10:

“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn” (Zechariah 12:10, NKJV).

The piercing of the side of our Lord was prophetically necessary, since Zechariah 12:10 refers to the Messiah. And so what John describes is what Zechariah foretold. Everything was truly going according to God’s plan. Not one prophecy failed to be fulfilled.

All of this, mind you, happened in spite of the norm, and in spite of the Jews’ request. The Jews, alarmed by how long the execution was taking, were desperate to get this over with so that they could get on with “worshipping God.” They requested of Pilate that he have the legs of all three men broken, which was a common practice. Had things gone as everyone expected, the legs of our Lord would have been broken as well. But the Jews did not get their way. The soldiers broke the legs of the other two, but seeing that Jesus was already dead (because, we are told, Jesus gave up His spirit—verse 30) they chose not to go to the trouble of breaking the legs of a dead man. Instead, perhaps at a whim, one soldier thrusts his spear into the Savior’s side. The result is that two prophecies are fulfilled in one stroke. The legs of Jesus are not broken, and the side of Jesus is pierced. Even in death, our Lord perfectly fulfilled the Scriptures.

   John is the only gospel who includes these two events. The removal of the body from the cross was requested by the Jews, since leaving the bodies publicly suspended would be a breach of the Mosaic Law and would defile the Passover.

   In accordance with the Roman custom, the executioners broke the legs of the victims prior to their removal from the cross.

   The purpose of this cruel deed was twofold: 1. The shock and the pain would hasten death 2. If the victim survived, he would be crippled permanently and would be unable to engage in any further activities against the government

   This episode was mentioned due to its importance as evidence for the actuality of Jesus’ death. These Roman soldiers were experts in this deed and could tell the difference between death and a coma induced by pain and exhaustion.

   It is remarkable that they did not do what they were commanded to do: break His legs — and they did do what they were not supposed to do: pierce His side. In both matters, they fulfilled the very Word of God!

   Also, the piercing of His side with the resulting flow of blood (crassamentum) and water (serum) is certain proof that death had already taken place, since only blood would flow from a living body.

   If Jesus had not really died, it could not be said that He had risen from the dead; and if He were a phantom (as some by this time believed), then death and resurrection would both be meaningless.

    A trial was made whether Jesus was dead. He died in less time than persons crucified commonly did. It showed that he had laid down his life of himself. The spear broke up the very fountains of life; no human body could survive such a wound. But its being so solemnly attested, shows there was something peculiar in it.

   The blood and water that flowed out, signified those two great benefits which all believers partake of through Christ, justification and sanctification; blood for atonement, water for purification. They both flow from the pierced side of our Redeemer. To Christ crucified we owe merit for our justification, and Spirit and grace for our sanctification.

   Let this silence the fears of weak Christians, and encourage their hopes; there came both water and blood out of Jesus’ pierced side, both to justify and sanctify them. The Scripture was fulfilled, in Pilate’s not allowing his legs to be broken, Psalms 34:20. There was a type of this in the paschal lamb, Exodus 12:46.

   May we ever look to Him, whom, by our sins, we have ignorantly and heedlessly pierced, nay, sometimes against convictions and mercies; and who shed from his wounded side both water and blood, that we might be justified and sanctified in his name.

    “Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jews. With Pilate’s permission, he came and took the body away. {39} He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. {40} Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. {41} At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. {42} Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.”

   Joseph of Arimathea was a disciple of Christ in secret. Disciples should openly own themselves; yet some, who in lesser trials have been fearful, in greater have been courageous.

   When God has work to do, he can find out such as are proper to do it. The embalming was done by Nicodemus, a secret friend to Christ, though not his constant follower.

   That grace which at first is like a bruised reed, may afterward resemble a strong cedar. Hereby these two rich men showed the value they had for Christ’s person and doctrine, and that it was not lessened by the reproach of the cross.

   We must do our duty as the present day and opportunity are, and leave it to God to fulfil his promises in his own way and his own time.

   The grave of Jesus was appointed with the wicked, as was the case of those who suffered as criminals; but he was with the rich in his death, as prophesied, Isaiah 53:9; these two circumstances it was very unlikely should ever be united in the same person.

   He was buried in a new sepulchre; therefore it could not be said that it was not he, but some other that rose. We also are here taught not to be particular as to the place of our burial. He was buried in the sepulchre next at hand. Here is the Sun of Righteousness set for a while, to rise again in greater glory, and then to set no more.

   The eagerness of these men to claim the body of Jesus is little short of surprising since by so doing they openly declared themselves as sympathizers with His cause.

   The burial itself is important to the argument of John since it added one more witness to the reality of Jesus’ death.

   The Jews did not embalm as the Egyptians did, by removing the soft organs of the body, and by drying the muscular tissues with preservatives.

   The corpse was washed (Acts 9:37), and swathed in bandage-like wrappings from armpits to feet, in the folds of which spices were placed (Matt. 27:59, Luke 23:53), and a cloth was wound around the head.

* BELIEF VS. UNBELIEF

   A careful consideration of the groups of people present at the crucifixion shows that the cross became the dividing line between belief and unbelief.

– Unbelief was at its height, since it had achieved its objective in destroying Jesus

   On this were the Jewish high priests and rulers, Pilate, and the soldiers of the execution squad. Each represented some class of person:

– Chief priests and Jews

   They possessed the bitter and implacable unbelief of organized religionists who were actuated by jealousy, prejudice, and self-interest. Their religion had lost its spontaneity and had become ritual which was defended rather than lived.

– Pilate

   Embodied the unbelief of political expediency which was accompanied by no particular religious convictions, or by no convictions at all.

   He might have listened to Jesus more carefully had not his standing with Caesar been at stake, for he held no malicious grudge against Him. He might even have released Him if it had been expedient for his own interests.

– The soldiers

   They were a picture of callousness and indifference of unbelief. Jesus meant less to them than He did to Pilate; He was only an incident in a day’s work, and a rather unimportant one at that. His sufferings and death evoked no interest from them.

* Belief was at its lowest ebb, for it had been unable to stem the hostile tide that swept Jesus to His death

   On this side were the women, including Jesus’ mother, the beloved disciple, and possibly Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, who appeared later at the burial.

CONCLUSION

   The story of Jesus is not told to provide entertainment. It is told to create a living, life-chanigng faith in the hearts of those who hear it. It requires a response.

   John’s question is unescapable: will you step out in faith and be identified with the One who died for you? Jesus died for you. What are you going to do about it?

One of the most striking things about the accounts of our Lord’s death in the Gospels is the absence of sensationalism. The physical suffering of our Lord was designed to be as great as men could devise. Many are those who attempt to expand upon the New Testament’s account of our Lord’s death, so we can appreciate more fully the physical torture He endured for us.

I do not in any way desire to minimize the physical suffering of our Lord on the cross, but neither do I wish to make more of it than the Gospels do. Why isn’t there more emphasis on the physical pain that our Lord endured? I would suggest several answers. First, the physical suffering of our Lord was but a small part of what He endured at Calvary. To put it differently, our Lord’s physical pain was the suffering which men were able to impose upon Him. But the great suffering which our Lord endured at Calvary was the spiritual suffering our Lord experienced at the hand of God. Our Lord became sin for us, and He suffered in our place to save us from our sins. Our Lord suffered the eternal wrath of God. Compared to this suffering, our Lord’s physical suffering was but a drop in the bucket.

Second, there is really no way we can fathom God’s wrath. If you are like me, you have tried to imagine what heaven will be like. No matter how hard we try, no matter how far we let our imaginations go, our minds fall far short of grasping the wonders of heaven: “But just as it is written, ‘Things that no eye has seen, or ear heard, or mind imagined, are the things God has prepared for those who love him’” (1 Corinthians 2:9).

If our minds cannot begin to fathom the good things God has in store for His children, why would we think that our minds would be able to comprehend the horror of God’s wrath, which will come upon those who have rebelled against Him? God has graciously kept us from understanding what would only horrify us. As Jesus Himself said, “So then, do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Today has enough trouble of its own” (Matthew 6:34).

Third—and here I can be justly criticized for speculation—I wonder if knowing how much our Lord suffered might cause us needless suffering. I am a husband, a father, and a grandfather. I must tell you that I don’t like to suffer, but it is even more painful for me to watch one of those close to me, one whom I dearly love, suffer. I think, at times, that my suffering—vicariously through the pain of a loved one—is greater than the actual suffering which is experienced. If the purpose of our Lord’s suffering was to suffer in our behalf, to suffer instead of us, then why would He graphically describe His own immense suffering for us? Would this not cause us great agony? What I am trying to say here is that God was gracious in not telling us any more than He did, because it would cause us to suffer. We need not suffer for those sins for which He suffered and died.

Perhaps this helps to explain the three hours of darkness, which John chooses not to mention. It is my opinion that God “turned out the lights” so that no one would be able to see the bulk of the spiritual suffering our Lord endured at the Father’s hand. Do you remember in the Book of Exodus, when Moses asked God to see His glory (Exodus 33:18)? God allowed Moses to see a portion of His glory, but not the totality of it. God covered Moses with His hand, so that he would not die beholding His unveiled glory. I wonder if God did not do something similar with the darkness, as our Lord suffered on the cross. Would men have survived if they beheld the wrath of God being poured out in full measure upon the Son? How good God is to keep us from knowing any more of the suffering of the Son than He has revealed, than He wants us to know.

The cross is a great revealer of truth. The cross is the measure of the magnitude of our sin. When we read of what took place at the cross, we almost tremble at the way men mocked God, knowing that had we been alive then, we would have joined them, apart from the grace of God. The cross reveals to us the dreadfulness of our sins. It is just such sin that required the cross to cure it. If the price of the cure is also the measure of the magnitude of the disease, sin is a horrible malady. The cross is the measure of God’s hatred of sin. The cross is also the measure of God’s love and grace, poured out upon those whom He saves.

The cross, as terrible as it is, is a wondrous and even beautiful thing, for the Christian. We sing that song, “The Old Rugged Cross,” with gratitude and wonder. We sing that we “love that old cross …”, and so we do, or rather, we love Him who died on it. And every week, in our church at least, we gather to celebrate, once again, the sacrifice which our Lord made on our behalf, through the shedding of His precious blood. No matter how many times I read the accounts of our Lord’s death, I am always struck with wonder, gratitude, and praise. I am reminded of the words of a hymn that is not in our hymnal, but should be, “Jesus, keep me near the cross …” So it should be.

I am sure that the events which occurred at the cross had a great impact on those who witnessed the death of our Lord. The centurion was convinced from what he saw that Jesus was the Son of God. Some of those who heard Peter preach at Pentecost may well have witnessed our Lord’s death at Calvary. Luke (23:48) tells us that the multitudes, when they beheld this sight, went away beating their breasts. It was a horrible day for those who thought it might be entertaining. I wonder how many of these folks were later saved.

If you are a Christian, you should be stirred in your soul every time you read of our Lord’s death. We should never tire of remembering Him and His death, as our Lord commanded (see Luke 22:19; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:23ff.). We should take every temptation to sin seriously, knowing what our sin cost Him at Calvary. We should never cease to preach Christ crucified, for this is what the gospel is all about.

Is it possible that someone is reading these words who has not yet grasped the fact that the death of Jesus Christ is no mere historical fact, unrelated to men and women today? The death of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross was His full and final payment for the penalty of our sin. It is on the basis of His death and resurrection that the offer of salvation is made to all. Those who trust in the work of Jesus at Calvary are saved. Have you received the gift of salvation, which was purchased at Calvary? If not, I urge you to acknowledge your sin, and to own up to the fact that His suffering at Calvary is what you deserve. Receive the gift of the forgiveness of your sins, trusting that He has paid the penalty for your sin.

As I think of the picture of the cross which John has painted for us, I remember the crowds as they taunted and mocked the Lord Jesus Christ. I hear their words ringing in my ears, “We have no king, but Caesar!” (19:15), and “His blood be upon us and our children!” (Matthew 27:25). These are the most horrifying words imaginable. Not many years later, Jerusalem will pay a heavy price for the Jews’ part in the rejection and crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

Thirty years later, on this very spot, judgment was pronounced against some of the best citizens of Jerusalem. Of the 3,600 victims of the governor’s fury, not a few were scourged and crucified! Judas died in a loathsome suicide, the house of Annas was destroyed some years later, Caiaphas was deposed a year after the crucifixion, and Pilate was soon after banished to Gaul and there died in suicide. When Jerusalem fell, her wretched citizens were crucified around her walls until, in the historian’s grim language, ‘space was wanting for the crosses, and crosses for the bodies.’ The horrors of the siege of Jerusalem are unpar­alleled in history.[16]

As I have reflected on our text, I have asked myself this question: “What is the unique contribution which the Gospel of John makes to the description of our Lord’s death on the cross of Calvary?” In the Synoptic Gospels, we read a great deal concerning the mockery of the crowds, of the Jewish religious leaders, of the Roman soldiers, and even of the two thieves. But John passes these matters by. Why? I think there is a good reason, one that makes a lot of sense once you stop to think about it—John wants our Lord Jesus to be central and preeminent in his account of the death of the Savior at Calvary. Jesus is center stage in John, as He ought to be. Calvary is about a cross, the cross of Jesus Christ. It is He alone, through His cross, who saves sinners. Let us never lose this focus.

---

[1] “…  the second-century gnostic heretic Basilides in his commentary on John argues that Simon the Cyrene took Jesus’ place and died on the cross in his stead—the common view of Muslims to this day.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 609.

[2] “Crucifixion was regarded as a very shameful thing, and the writers of antiquity apparently did not care to dwell on it; they certainly shrank from recording details. The words of Cicero are often quoted, when he spoke of crucifixion as ‘that most cruel and disgusting penalty.’ We should perhaps notice also the words of the Jewish writer Josephus who spoke of it as ‘the most wretched of deaths.’” Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), vol. 4, p. 655.

“And it was painful. The Roman philosopher Seneca speaks of the very slow and painful way the crucified died and asks whether anyone would willingly die in this way: ‘Can anyone be found who would prefer wasting away in pain dying limb by limb, or letting out his life drop by drop, rather than expiring once for all? Can any man be found willing to be fastened to the accursed tree, long sickly, already deformed, swelling with ugly weals on shoulders and chest, and drawing the breath of life amid long-drawn-out agony? He would have many excuses for dying even before mounting the cross’ (cited from Martin Hengel, Crucifixion [London, 1977], pp. 30-31.” Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John, IV, p. 655.

[3] Legalists (then or now) always seem inclined to haggle over words (see Acts 18:15; 1 Timothy 6:4). There are times when words and their technical meanings are important, but let us not forget that those who wish to debate the technical meaning of words sometimes do so to avoid or deny the clear meaning of these words (see, for example, Luke 10:29). Those of us who take pride in our ability to probe the “deep meanings” of words should be cautioned.

[4] Something changed all this, as we can see from the statement of the centurion (Matthew 27:54; Mark 15:39). The three hours of darkness must have had an impact on them all, not to mention the unusual way in which Jesus died, followed by the violent earthquake of Matthew 27:51ff.

[5] William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 2, p. 420.

[6] D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 617.

[7] D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, pp. 617-618.

[8] “As William Barclay says, ‘There is something infinitely moving in the fact that Jesus in the agony of the Cross, in the moment when the salvation of the world hung in the balance, thought of the loneliness of His mother in the days when He was taken away. Jesus never forgot the duties that lay to His hand.’ Earlier in this Gospel we are told that Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him (7:5), and we may fairly infer that they were out of sympathy with Mary. So it was important that there should be somebody who would look after her when Jesus was no longer there.” Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), vol. 4, p. 665. Morris does not emphasize the “long-term” element here, but it seems to be implied.

[9] See Psalm 69:8.

[10] “It is good to know that it was customary for a drug to be offered to the crucified so that some of the pain was mitigated. We read of the custom in Sanh. 43a, ‘When one is led out to execution, he is given a goblet of wine containing a grain of frankincense, in order to benumb his senses, for it is written, Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto the bitter in soul. And it has also been taught: The noble women in Jerusalem used to donate and bring it’ (Soncino edn., pp. 279ff.).” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 814, fn. 72.

[11] See Morris, The Gospel According to John, pp. 813-814, fn. 71.

[12] What irony we see here. The Jews zealously seek to keep the law regarding the defilement of the land through the exposure of dead bodies, and yet they are in the process of killing the Son of God. Is this not a case of “straining a gnat and swallowing a camel” (see Matthew 23:24)?

[13] “Stripped naked and beaten to pulpy weakness …, the victim could hang in the hot sun for hours, even days. To breathe, it was necessary to push with the legs and pull with the arms to keep the chest cavity open and functioning. Terrible muscle spasm wracked the entire body; but since collapse meant asphyxiation, the strain went on and on. This is also why the seducula … prolonged life and agony: it partially supported the body’s weight, and therefore encouraged the victim to fight on.” Carson, The Gospel According to John, p. 610.

[14] Morris, for example, includes this footnote in his commentary on John: “This was argued by William Stroud, M.D., in his book, Treatise on the Physical Cause of the Death of Christ (London, 1847). He maintained that rupture of the heart may be caused by great mental agony and that it ‘is usually attended with immediate death, and with an effusion into the pericardium (the capsule containing the heart) of the blood previously circulating through that organ; which when thus extravasated, although scarcely in any other case, separates into its constitutent parts, so as to present the appearance commonly termed blood and water’ (op. cit., 2^nd edn., 1871, pp. 74f.). This view was accepted by Sir Alexander Simpson (Expositor 8, xi, 1916, pp. 334ff.) who said that he had examined several cases ‘in which the pericardial bag was greatly distended and the blood had separated into clot and watery serum’ (op. cit., p. 336). It has been urged against it that John does not tell us whether it was the left or right side that was pierced. We cannot be certain that the spear was thrust into the region of the heart. Tasker cites a paper by a medical man, J. L. Cameron, arguing that the passage indicates a flow of blood from the heart and great blood vessels adjacent, and water from the acutely dilated stomach. Dodd refers us to a study by Raymond Schmittlein which sees traumatic shock as the fundamental cause of death (HTFG, p. 136).” Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 819, fn. 88.

[15] “Dr. J. P. Free in his excellent book, Archaeology and Bible History, p. 284, calls attention to the fact that according to Canon Liddon there are three hundred thirty-two distinct prophecies in the Old Testament which have been literally fulfilled in Christ, …” William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 2, p. 430.

[16] Shepard, The Christ of the Gospels  (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1939), p. 592.

    

Melodies bring a smile to your face, and others bring a tear to your eye. Some remind you of the best days of your life, and some bring back heartbreaks.

   This is something we know and expect from songs, but we should also expect it from passages in the Bible. They, too, have their own particular moods.

   Our text  for this study is one of the most distressing and painful passages in the Scriptures.

   For seventeen chapters, we have read the story of Jesus’ life and ministry. John reported what Jesus said and did, arranging his story so that it would produce faith in hearts of the readers. At the beginning of chapter 18, Jesus was moving decisively toward the cross, the stated goal and purpose of His life.

   This emotionally difficult section tells of three trials which took place in the hours before Jesus’ crucifixion: the trials of Jesus, Peter, and Pilate. These trials are woven together like a three-strand rope, together containing God’s message about His Son and the importance of belief in Him.

   These final chapters of John have generally been called “The Period Of Consummation” which covers the close of Jesus’ life.

    It is so named because its content revealed the consummation of the tension of belief and unbelief:

   – unbelief reached its deepest infamy in the rejection and crucifixion of Jesus

   – belief reached its highest achievement in the action of the disciples at the time of the resurrection and afterward.

   – man will do his worst, and God will respond with His very best!

   The earthly work of Jesus was completed by these events. His statement in  17:4: “I have brought you glory on earth by completing the work you gave me to do” shows that He regarded His death as the apex of His career and the fulfillment of His commission.

   Simeon the aged prophet told Mary, the mother of Jesus, some 33 years before of this night: Luke 2:34-35: “Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, {35} so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed.  And a sword will pierce your own soul too.”

   In other words, Jesus was born to be a “sign spoken against” or a spectacle, which was about to begin. He will be betrayed by one of His closest friends. He will be arrested, mocked, ridiculed, falsely and illegally tried and condemned.

   And He will also be denied by the one closest to Him and the same one who swore that he would never let Him down.

   Then, declared innocent at first, Jesus will, because of political expediency, be given over to His murderers. But through it all it was not the Son of God on trial — it was mankind on trial that black night.

   A comparison of the accusation of the priests… “He made himself the Son of God” (19:7) with Thomas’ confession, “My Lord and my God” (20:28) illustrates well the respective climaxes of unbelief and belief. In this period the plot of Judas reached its conclusion.

   John added to the final days of Jesus’ life the following accounts not given in the synoptics:

   – the trial before Annas (18:12-24)

   – some detail about the hearing before Pilate

   – the committal of Mary to the beloved disciple (19:25-27)

   – the four last words from the cross

   – the visit of Peter and the other disciples to the tomb (20:3-10)

   – the interview with Mary Magdalene (20:11-18)

   – the remarks of Thomas (20:24-29)             

    – the appearance to the seven disciples at Galilee (21:1-24)

John omitted:

   – the agony in Gethsemane          

   – the rending of the veil

   – the group of women at the tomb

   – the walk to Emmaus

   – the great commission

   – the ascension

   Definite reason cannot be given for the inclusion or omission of each of these items, but the principle of selectivity which the author gave in his key to the gospel was doubtless applied.

   The choice may have been governed by the desire to use fresh material, or it was connected with the principle of relevancy to the central theme of “belief and unbelief.”

Throughout the Gospel of John, our Lord claims to have “come down” from heaven, sent by the Father to reveal Him to men. He further claims that He will return to the Father in heaven. The Son of God does not have His beginnings in Bethlehem. Indeed, He has no beginning. And so when He took on human flesh at His incarnation, He was Lord at His birth. Is this not what Matthew and Luke tell us in their description of our Lord’s birth? And so it is at Christmas time that we must remind ourselves that the Lord Jesus was, even in the cradle, the sovereign Son of God. He was Lord at His birth, no matter how certain appearances may seem to contradict this reality.

That phrase from “Silent Night” came to my mind as I was preparing this message. Jesus was, is, and will always be Lord. The more I have studied the events leading up to the crucifixion of our Lord, the more convinced I have become that Jesus was in control of all that took place in the final hours of His life. And so I have chosen to title this lesson, “Jesus, Lord at Thy Death.” How easy this is to forget. In truth, it could be the epitaph for chapters 18-20.

In chapter 18, John’s Gospel describes the betrayal, arrest, and initial appearances of our Lord before Annas and Pilate. Never before have I appreciated how much earlier events paved the way for this crucial moment in history. We should recall that Jesus not only foretold His death, but also indicated that He would die by crucifixion (3:14; 8:28; 12:34), after having been betrayed by one of His own disciples (13:18, 21). The Jewish religious leaders were committed to our Lord’s death as well, but they were determined that He would die at a different time (not during the feast) and in a different way (stoning). Earlier events set the stage for our Lord’s death in precisely the way He had indicated. Let me briefly review some of the ways our Lord had prepared for this moment.

Early in John (not to mention the other Gospels—see Luke 4:28-29), the Jews had determined to put Jesus to death:

16 Now because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish authorities began persecuting him. 17 So Jesus told them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason the Jewish authorities were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God (John 5:16-18).

Several things serve as the catalyst to solidify the Jewish leaders’ resolve to kill Jesus. These events set the scene for what we will read in chapters 18 and 19. Most of these watershed events happen in (or near) Jerusalem. First, there is the failed attempt of the Jewish leaders to arrest Jesus in John 7.[1] It was a humiliating defeat when the temple police came back empty-handed, not because Jesus was nowhere to be found, but because the officers who were sent to arrest Jesus were so impressed by what they heard Him say (7:45-46). In chapter 8, our Lord’s words were more than the Jews could bear:

58 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!” 59 Then they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out from the temple area (John 8:58-59).

In John 9, we read of our Lord’s healing of the man born blind. Once healed, this fellow made the adversaries of Jesus look so foolish that they put him out of the synagogue. Yet they were not able to score any points against Jesus. Once again, their opposition to Jesus was thwarted. In chapter 10, Jesus again claims to be one with the Father, so that another unsuccessful attempt is made to stone Him (10:30-31). When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, that was the “straw that broke the camel’s back.” The Jews not only resolved to put Jesus to death, they determined to kill Lazarus as well:

47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. 48 If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation.” 49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.” 51 (Now he did not say this on his own, but because he was high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.) 53 So from that day they planned together to kill him. … 57 (Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given orders that anyone who knew where Jesus was should report it, so that they could arrest him.) (John 11:47-53, 57).

10 So the chief priests planned to kill Lazarus too, 11 for on account of him many of the Jewish people from Jerusalem were going away and believing in Jesus (John 12:10-11).

The triumphal entry of Jesus must have thrown the Jewish leaders into a panic. It looked as though their fears that everyone would follow Jesus (11:48) had come to pass. What a welcome event it must have been to have Judas come to them, offering to hand Jesus over to them (John 12:1-8; Mark 14:10-11). These Jewish leaders had looked bad the last time they attempted to arrest Jesus (John 7), and so they were determined to do it right the next time. They knew that they dare not attempt to arrest Jesus during the feast of the Passover:

3 Then the chief priests and the elders of the people met together in the palace of the high priest, who was named Caiaphas. 4 They planned to arrest Jesus by treachery and kill him. 5 But they said, “Not during the feast, so that there will not be a riot among the people” (Matthew 26:3-5).

1 Two days before the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the chief priests and the experts in the law were looking for a way to arrest him by treachery and kill him. 2 For they said, “Not during the feast, so there will not be a riot among the people” (Mark 14:1-2).

They did not want to try to take Jesus into custody in public, nor during the feast, lest the crowds riot. The population of Jerusalem had swollen considerably during the feast, due to all the pilgrims who came to celebrate Passover. Since messianic hopes ran very high at this time, Rome was very much on alert during this religious holiday. Pilate, who normally lived in Caesarea, would remain in Jerusalem, along with a sizeable army, lest a riot break out. To attempt to arrest Jesus during the feast would be foolish, and the religious leaders were determined not to make fools of themselves one more time.

But Jesus was in control, forcing His adversaries to act in a way that was contrary to their plan. He carefully arranged for the place where He and His disciples would eat the Passover. No one but Peter and John knew the location in advance (Luke 22:8ff.). Once they gathered in the Upper Room for the Passover celebration, Jesus took Judas by surprise. First, He indicated that one of the twelve would betray Him (John 13:21). When pressed by John to tell him who this disciple was, Jesus designated Judas by passing him the bread (John 13:26). In Matthew 26:25, Judas asked Jesus if it was he, hoping no doubt that Jesus would indicate otherwise. Jesus informed Judas that it was, indeed, he who was His betrayer.

Can you imagine the panic Judas must have experienced at this moment? Judas had hoped to find an occasion to betray Jesus secretly, and not during the feast. He intended to keep his dealings with the Jewish religious leaders a secret. That way he could arrange for our Lord’s arrest in a way that caught Jesus and the eleven off guard. But when Jesus identified Judas as the betrayer, this traitor was certain that all of the disciples would soon know this as well, and when this happened, his opportunity to hand Jesus over was gone.

When Jesus gave Judas a reason to leave, I can almost see him bolting for the door. He could hardly have gotten out of there fast enough. He’s been discovered. His window of opportunity is now exceedingly small. Whether the Jewish religious leaders liked it or not, the only time Judas would be able to hand Jesus over to them was during the next few hours of that night.

Judas would be reasonably confident of knowing where Jesus could be found in the next few hours because the Master has followed a consistent pattern while in Jerusalem (Luke 21:37; 22:39). While Jesus and His disciples finished the meal and talked together, Judas was frantically setting in motion the sequence of events leading to his betrayal of Jesus. I doubt very much that the Jewish leaders were happy with the timing, but they must have realized it was their only chance, so they had to hastily arrange for enough armed men to see to it that Jesus did not get away from them this time. Given the holiday season and the shortness of time, they found it necessary to request the assistance of Rome; a sizeable force of soldiers was dispatched to accompany the religious authorities, the temple police, and the crowd that had gathered.

Judas may have first led this arresting force to the Upper Room, where he had left Jesus. Unknown to Judas, Jesus would have already left with His disciples (14:31). Perhaps they went next to another place or two until they reached the Garden of Gethsemane, where Jesus and His disciples seemed to camp out each night. All of this frantic search for Jesus took place as Jesus was teaching His disciples, praying for them (John 17), and then agonizing in prayer in the Garden. As Jesus was concluding His prayer, Judas and the mob that accompanied him were arriving. It is here that our story takes up. My point in this lengthy introduction is to demonstrate that Jesus had perfectly prepared everything for this moment. Jesus was in charge, as is evident in the events that led up to this confrontation, and it will shortly be evident that He was still in charge even as they placed Him under arrest, bound Him, and led Him away.

* THE BETRAYAL (18:1-11)

   The Kidron Valley is located east of Jerusalem, between the city wall and the Mount of Olives; and the garden is on the western slope of Olivet.

   Jesus often went to this garden with His disciples, no doubt to rest, meditate, and pray (Luke 22:39). Jerusalem was filled with pilgrims attending the Passover, and Jesus would want to get away from the crowded city to a private place. He knew that Judas would come for Him and He was ready.

   While these words related directly to His going to meet the party that had come to capture Him, it was indicative of His entire attitude.

   He went to the garden with full knowledge that Judas had gone to bargain with the priests for His betrayal and would look for him in this familiar rendezvous.

   The warning of Jesus to Judas at the Passover supper, (John 13:27: “As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. “What you are about to do, do quickly,” Jesus told him”) forced Judas to do immediately what he had not planned to do until after the feast was over.

   Matthew 26:5 (“But not during the Feast,” they said, “or there may be a riot among the people”) shows us that the priests had no intention of arresting Jesus during the feast, lest there be a popular tumult … but the opportunity that he could be in their hands couldn’t be passed off.

   Judas had lived with Jesus for three years … yet he knew very little about Him. He actually brought a company of temple guards, armed with swords and clubs (Matt. 26:55).

   A Roman cohort (band) was 600 men!

From the Synoptic Gospels, we know what the plan was. Judas had prearranged a signal by which he would positively identify Jesus. When Judas kissed Jesus, the arresting officers would know that He was their man, and they would then seize Him. We know from the other Gospels that Judas did indeed kiss Jesus. John, however, leaves the kiss of Judas out of his account, and I think I know why. It was both unnecessary and irrelevant. The only purpose it serves is to reveal the character of Judas. How fitting that our Lord’s betrayer should do so with a kiss. He used the token of love and affection as the means to hand Jesus over to His adversaries.

John leaves the kiss of Judas out because things do not go according to the prearranged plan of Judas and the Jews. Jesus would not attempt to elude them or to conceal His identity. Jesus would not attempt to avoid His arrest, illegal though it might be. Instead of our Lord’s identity being revealed deceitfully by the kiss of Judas, our Lord identified Himself. Judas had nothing to contribute other than to indicate the place where Jesus could be found. As Judas, the Jews, and the Roman soldiers arrived, it was Jesus who took change, bringing to pass the events that followed.[2]

Do the Jewish authorities or the Roman soldiers think they are in control? They are not! Is Jesus a helpless victim? Far from it! John tells us in verse 4 that Jesus “knew everything that was going to happen to Him,” and this is why He stepped forward and asked them, “Who are you looking for?” Did the Jews think that Jesus would run and seek to hide from them? Did they expect to conduct a manhunt that night? Did they wonder how they would identify Jesus for sure? Jesus stepped forward and asked who it was they were seeking, and then when they gave His name, He identified Himself as the One they were looking for.

When Jesus identified Himself there was a spontaneous and seemingly involuntary reaction on the part of those standing in front of Him. If you look at the New American Standard Bible, you will see that in both verse 5 and verse 6 the statement, “I am He” has the He italicized. This is the translators’ way of indicating that this word is not actually found in the Greek manuscripts. It is a word the translators have supplied for clarity. Literally, then, Jesus responded, “I Am.” There are some who would understand what happened next in this manner. The chief priests, their servants, the temple police, and the Roman soldiers all surrounded Jesus. When Jesus asked who they were seeking, and He responded, “I Am,” the people suddenly realized the significance of this statement and fell involuntarily before Jesus, out of fear.

I am inclined to understand these words just a little differently. The Jewish religious leaders expected trouble when they set out to arrest Jesus. This is why they brought a large crowd with them, equipped with weapons ranging from clubs to swords. They also carried torches along so they could hunt Jesus down if He sought to escape them and avoid arrest. They had a pre-arranged signal, so that Judas could indicate who Jesus was, and to make sure there would be no mistake when they seized Him. But instead of the scenario they had pictured in their minds, it was completely different. Jesus did not flee from them; He boldly walked right up to them. Then He asked who they were seeking. When they indicated they were seeking “Jesus of Nazareth,” Jesus identified Himself as the One they were seeking. Jesus responded, “I Am (He),” but I do not believe that they grasp the full significance of these words.[3] They were disarmed (so to speak) by our Lord’s boldness, and those nearest Jesus stepped backward. I think it was a comic scene, where their feet got all tangled up, and they all fell down together. If the Jewish officials and the temple police were trying to maintain an aura of authority, it was no longer possible. I’m sure that they jumped to their feet and recovered as quickly as possible, but the damage was already done. The authorities were rattled, as we shall soon see.

This was all for a purpose. By throwing the authorities off balance (pardon the pun), Jesus was now able to make a request that they might not have otherwise granted—the release of His disciples. Think about this for a moment. If one of the charges against Jesus was that He was a revolutionary, then His disciples would have been, in present day terms, terrorists. Do you think that under normal circumstances the authorities would have intended to let Jesus’ disciples just walk away? I don’t think so. But Jesus had them so rattled they didn’t attempt to arrest anyone else. Jesus had twice asked them who they were seeking, and twice they answered, “Jesus the Nazarene.” It was as if Jesus had asked them if they had an arrest warrant, and if so, whose name was on the warrant. Only His name was on the arrest warrant, as it were. So Jesus reasons that if the warrant is only for His arrest, surely His disciples must be free to leave.[4] And so they did.

John points out that in securing the release of His disciples, Jesus was once again fulfilling the prophecy He Himself had spoken earlier. This “prophecy” appears to be the words our Lord had spoken only moments earlier:

“When I was with them I kept them safe and watched over them in your name that you have given me. Not one of them was lost except the one destined for destruction, so that the scripture could be fulfilled” (John 17:12).

The point of this remark is that Jesus is doing exactly what He promised He would do. Jesus is bringing about future events, just as He foretold them. At every step of the way, Jesus was fulfilling prophecy, some of which was His own words. If Jesus’ disciples were not doing very well at taking care of Him, Jesus was doing an excellent job of taking care of them.

– The Surrender Was Conscious

   “So Judas came to the grove, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons. {4} Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?””

   Between the dismissal of Judas from the upper room and the actual arrest in the garden, at least two hours must have elapsed. In that time Jesus could have left Jerusalem and have been well on His way across the river to Perea, or to some hiding place where the Jewish leaders could not have found Him.

   Judas’ betrayal would have recoiled on himself, since he would have failed to produce Jesus, and undoubtedly, the priest would have wreaked the vengeance of their disappointment on him. At one stroke Jesus could have saved Himself and could have dispensed of the traitor.

   Why should He have gone deliberately to the place where Judas would surely look for Him, and wait until the traitor came to capture Him? Furthermore, when the mob with Judas at its head finally arrived, Jesus walked boldly out to meet it.

   His complete calm, determined resolution, sublime majesty, and commanding manner and courage frightened the would-be captors so that they shrank back from Him and fell on the ground!

   This was foretold in Psalms 27:2: “When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall.”

   One writer said, correctly: “They were caught, instead of catching Him.”

   The kiss was the basest act of treachery recorded anywhere! It was a sign of affection and devotion. When people today pretend to know and love the Lord, they are committing the sin of Judas.

– The Surrender was Vicarious.

    “”I told you that I am he,” Jesus answered. “If you are looking for me, then let these men go.” {9} This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I have not lost one of those you gave me.””

   Verse 9 seems to be John’s own parenthetical insertion into the narrative here as John is writing the account years later to show that what Jesus had prophesied in 6:39, 10:28, and 17:12 was in part fulfilled in this very incident.

   He gave Himself in the place of the disciples all of whom made good their escape. The essence of the atonement was illustrated by this act of Jesus, who purchased their security by His sacrifice.

– The Surrender was Loving.

   “Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) {11} Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?””

Here is another scene that for all its apparent intensity is really quite comical. You will recall these words from the Gospel of Luke: “So they said, ‘Look, Lord, here are two swords.’ Then he told them, ‘It is enough.’ … 49 When those who were around him saw what was about to happen, they said, ‘Lord, should we strike with the sword?’” (Luke 22:38, 49).

Jesus was here informing His disciples that things had now changed from the time that He had sent them out two-by-two. Then Jesus was popular and those who taught in His name were welcomed and shown hospitality. Now, Jesus indicates, His disciples will be hated by those who have rejected Him as the promised Messiah. Thinking that they have gotten the point, the disciples inform Jesus that they have two swords in their possession. When the authorities drew near to arrest Jesus, someone had that second sword, and the question was asked, “Shall we strike with the sword?” (Luke 22:49).

Before Jesus could answer—perhaps even before the question was raised—Peter had already drawn his sword and lopped off the ear of Malchus, a servant of the high priest. I think we would all agree that Peter would have admitted that he “missed.” Surely he was attempting to remove the head of Malchus. Only John tells us that it was Peter who wielded the sword, removing at least a portion of the servant’s ear. It is also John alone who tells us the name of the man whose ear was severed by Peter’s sword.

John does not inform us that Jesus restored the servant’s ear; only Luke does this (22:51). To John, this detail is not important. It does cause me to chuckle a bit, as I ponder how this “ear incident” may have played itself out. The Jews felt it was absolutely essential for them to have “backup,” so they arranged for Roman soldiers to accompany them. The Roman soldiers were probably standing by (I think at a distance, but close enough to act quickly and decisively), ready to intervene if necessary, but not unless it was called for. Can you imagine what the normal reaction would have been, once Peter had his sword out and was lopping off the ear of the man nearest to him? This was like striking a match in a room filled with gasoline fumes. How quickly and easily both Jewish and Roman arms could have been employed, so that the situation would have gotten completely out of control.

But before anything like this happened, Jesus intervened. It looks like Peter got in only one stroke of his sword before Jesus rebuked him. Our Lord’s words stopped Peter in his tracks: “But Jesus said to Peter, ‘Put your sword back into its sheath! Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me?’” (John 18:11).

Jesus is in the middle of securing the release of His disciples when Peter draws his sword. One wonders if any of the Jewish authorities sought to protest the disciples’ release. Someone might have said, “Wait a minute. We can’t let these men go; just a moment ago, one of these Galileans assaulted one of us with his sword. He even cut off this man’s ear.” I can almost hear the Roman commander respond, “Which ear? So far as I can see this man has two ears.” The commander then goes over to Malchus and inspects both of his ears more closely. “I don’t see any missing ear, nor any blood; not even a scar. Let’s turn these men loose and take Jesus into custody. He’s the one we were told to arrest.” I know it was an intense moment, but there must have been some humor in what took place. Few, if any, were laughing at the time, however.

What John communicates to us is that Jesus is still in complete control. Even at the moment when our Lord was being taken into custody and His hands were being bound, His “hands were not tied” in the sense that He was powerless to act. Jesus’ words to Peter in Matthew 27 make this abundantly clear:

52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back in its place! For all who take hold of the sword will die by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot call on my Father, and that he would send me more than twelve legions of angels right now? 54 How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?” (Matthew 26:52-54)

The only reason this crowd could lead Jesus away was because it was the will of the Father, and of the Son. Jesus acted in such a way as to stop a massacre and to secure the release of His disciples. Jesus was in complete control.

I am reminded of the joke that is sometimes told of the airplane full of passengers headed for some destination when the first engine catches fire and is shut down. The pilot’s voice booms over the intercom: “This is your pilot speaking. We have lost one engine, but there is no reason to be concerned. We have three more engines, and everything is under control.” A few moments later, the pilot announces that a second engine has failed, but there is still no reason for concern. They still have two engines left. Then, after the third and the fourth engines fail, the pilot’s voice is again broadcast throughout the passenger compartment: “Ladies and Gentlemen, if you look out your windows to the left, you will see four parachutes. This is your pilot and crew. We do not wish you to be alarmed, however, because this plane is flying on auto pilot, and everything is under control … control … control …” It was not like that with Jesus. Even though they were leading Him away with His hands bound, He was in control.

It seems as though Peter can do nothing right. Here he is, trying so hard to prove to Jesus that he will follow Him to the very end, even unto death. And he is right in one sense. He is willing to die. It is he alone who draws the sword and seeks to prevent the arrest of his Master. But in so doing, he is wrong; in fact, he is resisting the plans and purposes of God. His use of his sword would appear to endanger the lives of the Lord and all the disciples. It implied the opposite of what our Lord would later claim before Pilate, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would fight to prevent me being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But now my kingdom is not from here” (John 18:36). Peter endeavors to save the Lord’s life when He is committed to voluntarily giving up His life in order to provide “the way” to the Father. Jesus is about to “drink the cup” which His Father has given Him, and Peter would (so to speak) thrust it out of His hands.

   Peter, in a fit of loyal zeal, drew a sword and cut off the ear of Malchus, a servant of the high priest. the probability is that in nervous haste he struck three inches wide of his original aim! Certainly, it was not Peter’s intention to damage only an ear!

   Peter’s sword symbolizes rebellion against the will of God. He made every mistake possible:

– fought the wrong people         

– had the wrong motive

– used the wrong weapon

– accomplished the wrong result

   Besides: Jesus didn’t need Peter’s protection! He could have summoned legions of angels had He wanted to Be delivered (Matthew 26:52-54: “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. {53} Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? {54} But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”)

The reason for His command and the refusal of this courageous act is varied:

   – The cup which the Father had given Him, He must drink, and Peter’s deed is at variance with this determination of His to do so

   – Jesus must be able to say to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world…” (18:36) and if He allows them to fight with carnal weapons He cannot so answer

   – It is worthy of note in passing that this record, which not only gives the name of the servant but tells it was his right ear, certainly is the record of one who was an eyewitness!

   Luke records a rebuke of Peter and also the healing of the ear by Jesus, which was motivated by love.

In this lesson which deals with the arrest of our Lord, I have sought to help you view the cross of our Lord through John’s “eyes,” as conveyed by the entire Gospel of John.

In these two chapters (18 and 19), John is setting out to present “The Cross of Jesus Christ, from the Divine Point of View.” Many are those who would like to paint a picture of Jesus as a helpless victim, a man whose plans went astray, and who was put to death because He lost control of the situation. Such people fail to grasp the sovereignty of God, and some would go so far as to deny the deity of Jesus Christ. Jesus was very much in control. This is the message which John has been giving us from the very beginning. He does not begin his Gospel with the birth of our Lord (as do Matthew and Luke), but with the birth of this world. And there, at the beginning of creation, is our Lord. He is not “created” there; He is the Creator. He does not come into being then; He calls the whole creation into being. To this, the Apostle Paul would say a hearty “Amen!”:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, 16 for all things in heaven and on earth were created by him—all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers—all things were created through him and for him. 17 He himself is before all things and all things are held together in him (Colossians 1:15-17).

This theme of the deity of Jesus Christ, and of His control over all things, is constantly reiterated and reinforced in John’s Gospel. In chapter 2, Jesus creates wine out of water, something that we could reasonably expect from the Creator. He likewise goes up to Jerusalem, where He cleanses the temple, His “Father’s house.” In chapter 3, Jesus speaks to Nicodemus about the necessity of His death on a cross. In chapter 5, Jesus heals the paralytic, claiming that in so doing, He is doing the work of His Father in Heaven. The Jews do not miss the point. Much to their dismay, they grasp His claim to be equal with God. In chapter 6, Jesus feeds the 5,000 and claims to be the “bread from heaven,” bread which gives men eternal life. In chapter 7, the Jewish religious leaders send the temple police to arrest Jesus, but these men return empty-handed, explaining that they have never heard anyone speak like Jesus. In chapter 8, Jesus claims to have existed before Abraham, speaking of Himself as “I Am.” In chapter 9, Jesus restores sight to a blind man, something unheard of in Judaism. In chapter 10, Jesus claims that He has the authority to lay down His own life, and that He likewise has the authority to take it up again. He makes it very clear that His life will not be taken from Him, but that He will give it up voluntarily:

14 “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me— 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves me—because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. 18 No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This is the commandment I received from my Father” (John 10:14-18).

Jesus also claims the power and authority to keep every one of His sheep:

27 My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; no one will snatch them from my hand. 29 My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one can snatch them from my Father’s hand. 30 The Father and I are one” (John 10:27-30).

We should not be surprised, then, that when we come to the arrest, trial, and crucifixion of our Lord, John makes it very clear that Jesus is the One who is in control—not the Roman soldiers, not the Jewish religious leaders, not the mob, not Judas, and certainly not the disciples. Jesus is in control. And so it is that He confronts those who seek to arrest Him. So it is that they fall down before Him. So it is also that Jesus prevents a massacre and secures the release of His disciples. Jesus is able to bring about His death at just the right time, and in just the right manner, even though the Jews wanted to stone Him at some time other than during Passover. Jesus is Lord at His death, just as He was Lord at His birth.

Jesus is always Lord, as He is Lord at this very moment. I think many of us who profess to be Christians need to be reminded of this fact daily. Does our world seem chaotic and out of control? When governments topple, when leaders die or are removed from office, when Y2K fears send some into a state of panic, we need to be reminded that our Lord is employing “all things” to bring about His perfect plan.

If this is so, then the words of our Lord to Peter most certainly apply to us also: “Put your sword back into its sheath! Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me?” (verse 11). Peter mistakenly supposed he was furthering the cause of Christ by taking up the sword. Jesus told him to put it away. The kingdom of God is not furthered, nor the kingdom of Satan defeated, by our taking up arms. There is a militant branch of professing Christianity today which does not seem to understand or accept what our Lord is saying to us here. If He is in control, we need not seek to further His work with the sword, or with any other fleshly weapons. The warfare we are to wage is spiritual, not fleshly. I am not calling for every Christian to rid his home of every firearm. I am saying that we dare not put our trust in our guns, or in our gold, but only in our God. I am saying that God’s purposes are not dependent upon fleshly weapons or defenses. Indeed, without knowing it, Peter was seeking to prevent what God had purposed for the Son—His innocent suffering, so that guilty sinners might be saved.

It is an amazing thing to read the first verses of John 18 and to realize that Jesus made no effort to save Himself, while at the same time He was saving His disciples. He saved their physical lives by His deeds and words in the Garden where He was arrested; He saved their spiritual lives (and ours) by His death at Calvary. Peter momentarily put his trust in his sword, rather than in his Shepherd. Only Jesus can save anyone from their sins, and from divine condemnation. Have you trusted in Him for the forgiveness of your sins? He is the Good Shepherd, who laid down His life for His sheep. May God grant that you are one of His sheep, and that you will rejoice in His salvation, and in His sovereignty. What peace there is in knowing that the Good Shepherd is the Sovereign Son of God, whose promises and purposes always come to pass.

In a day when there is much chaos and danger around us, how good it is to know Him Who is in control.

Did Jesus Take the Fifth Amendment?  (John 18:12-27)

Let’s be honest. When someone exercises his Fifth Amendment right not to testify against himself, aren’t you inclined to think he is guilty? We ask ourselves, “Why would someone who is innocent be unwilling to tell the truth?” You may even wonder why there should be a Fifth Amendment. In our text, Jesus exercises what today would be known as His Fifth Amendment right not to testify against Himself. His interrogation helps us to understand why the Fifth Amendment is so important to every American. Once we understand why Jesus refused to respond to the questions put to Him, we will better understand what took place on the cross of Calvary.

In our text, both Jesus and Peter are questioned. Jesus is questioned by Annas, the most powerful religious leader in the land; Peter is questioned by servants and bystanders. Jesus keeps silent, but Peter speaks out. Jesus stands fast; Peter folds. In order to understand what is taking place at this time, I have summarized the contribution of each of the Gospels in the chart attached at the end of this lesson.[5]

The story of Peter’s failure begins sometime before his actual denials. Several contributing factors play a part in Peter’s failure which we should keep in mind as we read our text. First, there are our Lord’s predictions of Peter’s failure. In Matthew and Mark, Jesus tells His disciples that they will all fall away. Peter protests, seeking to assure Jesus that even though all the rest may fall away, he most certainly will not (Matthew 26:31-35; Mark 14:26-31). In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus informs Peter of Satan’s opposition, and of his failure, but assures Peter that He has prayed for him. He then instructs Peter to minister to his brethren after his restoration (Luke 22:31-34). In John’s Gospel (13:31-38), Jesus tells His disciples that He is going away, and that they cannot follow Him there. Peter asks Jesus why he cannot follow, assuring Jesus that he is willing to lay down his life for Him. Jesus then predicts Peter’s three denials.

Until now, I have always assumed that Jesus predicted Peter’s denials only once. When I consider all four of the Gospels, however, it appears that more than one prediction of Peter’s failure is made, and that not all of these predictions are made on the same occasion. I must confess I am tempted to say there may be as many as three separate predictions of Peter’s failure. How ironic, if this is true.

We then come to the prayer of our Lord in the Garden of Gethsemane. In Matthew (26:40-41), Mark (14:32-43), and Luke (22:39-46), Jesus exhorts His three disciples (especially Peter) to pray that they (he) not enter into temptation. You will recall that Jesus returns to His disciples, only to find them sleeping. When He awakens them, He once again urges them to pray. Three times Jesus went off to pray, after urging His disciples to pray with and for Him. At least twice, Jesus asked them to pray that they not enter into temptation (see Luke 22:40, 46). Could it be that Jesus warned Peter three times that he would fall, and then urged him to pray (three times) that he would not fall? If not three times, at least it was more than once.

We should not be shocked that Peter denied his Lord three times. Indeed, when all of the Gospels are taken into account, it would appear that Peter denied Jesus to more than three people, on three different occasions. Mark’s Gospel includes a very significant addition to the other accounts. Here, Jesus predicts that the rooster will crow twice before Peter denies Him thrice (14:30). Mark then informs us that the rooster did crow a first (14:68), and a second (14:72) time. This means that before Peter denied his Lord the last time, he was actually warned, though it would appear he completely missed this warning. Peter’s denials fulfilled our Lord’s prophecies of his fall, a warning which Jesus may have repeated three times. We all know that in John 21 Jesus will restore Peter to fellowship by means of a three-step process.

 

The Unique Contribution of Each Gospel

As we compare the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, we see that each Gospel makes a unique contribution. In Matthew, Peter is given two reasons why he should put down the sword: (1) Jesus does not need to be defended by Peter; He could summon more than twelve legions of angels to rescue Him if He chose to do so; and, (2) Jesus must fulfill the Scriptures by His arrest and crucifixion. Mark tells us that the rooster crowed twice, not just once. Luke reports the presence of an angel, who ministered to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. In Luke, we find our Lord’s disclosure of Satan’s role in Peter’s failure, along with the assurance of our Lord’s intercession on his behalf, resulting in Peter’s restoration and future ministry. We are told that there are two swords in the disciples’ possession, one of which we know to be Peter’s. We also find the disciple’s question to Jesus, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” In Luke’s Gospel, we are told that Jesus restores the ear which Peter cut off. We also are informed of our Lord’s soul-stirring look at Peter, who had just denied Him.

John’s Gospel omits the prayer of our Lord in Gethsemane, recorded in all three of the Synoptic Gospels. John also makes no mention of Peter’s tears of remorse, after having denied his Lord. John’s Gospel is unique in recording our Lord’s “hearing” before Annas, former high priest, and the real power behind Caiaphas. John’s account of Peter’s denials incorporates a break between his first denial (18:15-18) and the last two (verses 25-27). John alternates between the interrogation of our Lord by Annas and the interrogation of Peter by those in the courtyard. It would seem that his purpose is to contrast these two questionings. John’s Gospel also mentions “the other disciple,” who many (including me) believe to be John himself. Only John’s Gospel records the restoration of Peter (John 21), though Paul mentions a private appearance of the risen Lord to Peter in 1 Corinthians 15:5.

Since I have pointed out the distinctive contributions of each Gospel based upon a comparison of all four accounts, let me go on to say a word about some apparent discrepancies in these accounts. Both Matthew and Mark tell us of Peter’s denials before: (1) a slave girl; (2) a slave girl;[6] and (3) bystanders. John’s record of Peter’s denials involves: (1) a slave girl; (2) those warming themselves by the fire; and, (3) the slave who was a relative of Malchus. Critics and skeptics leap on this apparent discrepancy, claiming that the Bible is in error here because it contradicts itself. Such reasoning is not only foolish, it fails to grasp the dynamic nature of this event and the way each writer chooses to focus upon it.

Take, for example, the different accounts of the anointing of the feet of our Lord in the Gospels.[7] There are discrepancies in the three parallel accounts of Matthew, Mark, and John, but none of these are without a reasonable explanation. In Matthew and Mark, a number of the disciples are unhappy with the “waste” of the perfume that is poured out on the feet of Jesus, and so they grumble among themselves. In John’s Gospel, we are told that Judas is the one who objects. There is no real conflict here. As our Lord’s feet were being anointed, Judas realized that he could have pilfered some or all of the proceeds had this perfume been sold instead of “wasted on Jesus” (as Judas would have reasoned). He was upset, and verbalized this to his fellow-disciples. Agreeing with Judas, they also began to grumble among themselves. John tells us how the grumbling started; Matthew and Mark describe how it spread.

In our text, John is seeking to show how the Lord’s prediction of Peter’s three-fold denial was fulfilled. There were three separate incidents, each of which included a denial of our Lord by Peter. But at least one denial was made to more than just one person (see Matthew 26:70) and may have been reiterated several times. In Peter’s second denial, one can see how the identification of Peter as a disciple of Jesus may have started with the slave girl, and then was taken up by those who stood nearby. Peter made his denial to the slave girl first, and then to the others who took up the question she initially raised. Matthew and Mark seem to have focused on the woman who initiated this confrontation, while John calls our attention to all those who joined in. While Matthew and Mark have the bystanders in the second denial, John has bystanders in the last denial. The order of the denials is not necessarily chronological. Precise chronological sequencing does not seem to be important to the Gospel writers, which was also true of other writings in those days. The fact is that Peter denied his Lord three times, just as Jesus said he would.

* THE TRIAL BEFORE ANNAS (18:12-27)

   “Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him {13} and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. {14} Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people.”

Jesus has just agonized in prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, and He is now making His way to meet the mob Judas is guiding in His direction. John does not even mention Judas’ kiss of betrayal. It was not this kiss that gave away Jesus’ identity; our Lord identified Himself to those who had come to arrest Him. Jesus acted with full authority, and it “disarmed” those surrounding Him, psychologically, if not literally. Twice Jesus asked who it was they sought (to arrest), and twice they named Him alone. Jesus then responded that if they had come only for Him, then His disciples should be released. It was at this crucial moment that Peter drew his sword and severed the ear of the high priest’s servant. Jesus immediately brought the situation under control by rebuking Peter and instructing him to holster his sword. Jesus was fully committed to “drink the cup that His Father had given Him” (18:11). Jesus was determined to be “lifted up” on a cross, thus providing the way of salvation that He and the Old Testament prophets had promised.

The Roman soldiers (mentioned only by John) may have kept their distance, unwilling to involve themselves in this arrest unless trouble broke out. Now, officers (the Jewish temple police?) place Jesus under arrest and tie His hands (as though this could restrain the Son of God!). Jesus is now led away to stand before Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas (verse 14). Only John mentions this “hearing” before Annas. The Synoptic Gospels focus on the subsequent hearings before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. John’s only reference to Caiaphas is a passing one, reminding the reader that this fellow is the same man whose words were recorded earlier in John 11:  

46 But some of them went to the Pharisees and reported to them what Jesus had done. 47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. 48 If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation.” 49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.” 51 (Now he did not say this on his own, but because he was high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.) 53 So from that day they planned together to kill him (John 11:46-53).

John wants us to know that Caiaphas, before whom our Lord will stand trial, is a judge who has already made up his mind about Jesus. Caiaphas, by whom Jesus would be condemned to die, was a man who had already determined that Jesus must die. This is not going to be a just trial. That much is clear already. And so John tells us the only thing about Caiaphas that really matters – that his mind is already made up.

In recent weeks, a young man was preparing to stand trial for his role in the death of a mentally challenged young woman. Before the trial commenced, the judge made a statement to the effect that this young man was “not the brightest apple that had ever fallen off the tree.” Immediately, this defendant’s lawyers seized on this statement and had the judge disqualified, claiming that he was biased against their client. A new judge was quickly appointed. Surely we can see that Caiaphas was biased, having concluded that Jesus must not only be found guilty, but must be put to death—for being too popular with the people.

Why does John virtually ignore Caiaphas and focus instead on Annas? First of all, I believe that John dwells on Annas because he is the real power, the driving force, behind the condemnation of Jesus. Annas was not the high priest at this time; Caiaphas was, as John informs us in 11:49. Annas had been the high priest from A.D. 6 to A.D. 15. He was then deposed by the Roman prefect Valerius Gratius, according to Josephus. This did not mean that he was stripped of all his authority, however. In the years that followed, he succeeded in arranging for the appointment of each of his five sons as the high priest, followed by his son-in-law, Caiaphas.[8] Annas was the real power so far as the office of high priest was concerned, and those who officially held the title of high priest were mere figureheads.

It is very likely that Annas and his family were the owners of the Temple Bazaar, which would explain a great deal:

It is probable that it was Annas who had established, for reasons of personal gain, the traffic of the bazaar within the Temple courts which Jesus had so sternly denounced.[9]

‘If the stalls in the Temple which Jesus had overturned really were the property of Annas and his family, no doubt Annas used his position to arrange that Jesus should be brought to him first, that he might gloat over the downfall of the presumptuous Galilaean’[10]

   The trial before Annas took place at his private lodgings. He was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who had been high priest between the years 7 to 14, and following him at intervals, five of his sons and his son-in-law held the office.

   Ever since the Romans had occupied Palestine the high priests no longer held office for life as the Old Testament law legislated. They were not appointed by the Romans as they saw fit.

   He wielded a powerful influence, and was regarded as high priest emeritus. In this case he was consulted that he might render a preliminary opinion to establish the nature of the accusations which should be ratified by the Sanhedrin in a formal meeting on the following morning.

   Hendriksen said of Annas: “He was very proud, exceedingly ambitious, and fabulously wealthy. His family was notoriouis for its greed. The main source of his wealth seems to have been a goodly share of the proceeds from the price of sacrificial animals, which were sold in the Court of the Gentiles. By him the house of prayer had been turned into a den of robbers.

   Even the Talmud declares: “Woe to the family of Annas! Woe to the serpent-like hisses! (probably the whisperings of Annas and the members of his family, seeking to bribe and influence the judges).”

   The reason that John makes the parenthetical notice of verse 14 is because of the significance of his statement that it was expedient for one man to die for the whole nation (John 11:49-52). He’d been planning for the death of Christ for a long time and he and his father-in-law were two of a kind.

   “Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. {20} “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. {21} Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.” {22} When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded. {23} “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” {24} Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest.”

All but two of our Lord’s disciples fled for their lives (Matthew 26:56; Mark 14:50). Peter and “another disciple” have followed Jesus to the palace of Annas. We will probably not go wrong if we assume that the “other disciple” is John, although we cannot be certain. The “other disciple” is said to have been acquainted with the high priest.[11] We are not told how this came to pass, but we have no reason to doubt it. It would appear that John’s father had a fairly successful fishing business, and this may be the way John’s life intersected that of the high priest.[12]

John’s acquaintance with the high priest got him into the courtyard of Annas, while Peter remained at the entrance. John came back to where Peter was waiting and spoke to the slave girl, who was the doorkeeper. He no doubt indicated to this girl that Peter was with him, and that it was okay to let him into the courtyard also. The doorkeeper allows Peter to enter, but perhaps with some hesitation. She seems to have recognized John (the “other disciple”) as an acquaintance of the high priest. She also must have known that John was a disciple of Jesus (note the “too” in verse 17). It was a risky thing for any disciple of Jesus to be seen in public at this time, and even more dangerous to be seen in close proximity to Jesus and to the officers who arrested Him. A disciple of Jesus who was recognized as such could be arrested, simply for being one of His disciples. A disciple who lingered in the area where Jesus was being held might trigger suspicions that there was a plot to bring about our Lord’s escape.

And so when John came back to the doorway of the courtyard and instructed the slave girl to let Peter enter, this young woman may have had some reservations. Something causes her to phrase the question she asks in a way that supposes Peter will deny being one of our Lord’s disciples. Thus, this slave girl asks Peter, “You’re not one of this man’s disciples too, are you?” (verse 17). Perhaps without even thinking, Peter gave her the answer she seemed to expect: “I am not!”[13] It happened so quickly that Peter may hardly have realized how much trouble two words[14] could cause. The slave girl seems to accept Peter’s denial, at least for the moment. John goes on in verse 18 to describe the setting more fully. It was obviously cold that night, and there was a charcoal fire burning in the courtyard. Warming themselves around this fire were some of the slaves and some officers. Peter was there by the fire with them, warming himself.

The term “officers” is the same one used in 18:3 for the “officers” who came out with the chief priests and Pharisees to arrest Jesus. It is these “officers” who bound Jesus and took Him into custody (18:12). The term “slaves” is the same term found in 18:10, in referring to the high priest’s “slave.” Peter now finds himself in a very awkward (not to mention dangerous) situation. He is right back where he was a few hours before – surrounded by those who arrested Jesus, and who could just as easily arrest him now.

I have heard some of the sermons that Peter’s presence at this charcoal fire has inspired, and I’m not altogether convinced by some of the “lessons” that are extracted from this text. Peter, we are told, was warming himself by the enemy’s fire. This is supposed to warn us about getting too friendly with the world. Is Peter so wrong to be where he is? I’m not so sure. First, let’s give Peter credit for putting himself in harm’s way by being there in the courtyard of Annas’ palace. Peter’s use of his sword a little earlier that night had drawn attention to himself. Some of those standing around the fire may have been involved in the arrest of our Lord. If so, they would have been much more likely to recognize Peter as the fellow who severed the ear of Malchus. (Malchus himself may have been close by, for he was a servant of the high priest.) This courtyard was a dangerous place for Peter to be. Let us not think of Peter as a coward for being there.[15] And so far as the enemy’s fire is concerned, let us not require that Peter stand somewhere else on that bone-chilling evening, shivering in the cold. I believe that John is simply setting the scene for Peter’s next denial, which is taken up in verses 25-27. These same people who are standing around the charcoal fire in verse 18 are those who will begin to question Peter about his relationship to Jesus in verses 25-27.

It is interesting to observe the providential hand of God in all of this. What were the chances that any of our Lord’s disciples would avoid arrest, and later be allowed to stand in the courtyard of the high priest as Jesus is being questioned? God had orchestrated matters so that John (or one of the disciples) was personally acquainted with the high priest and, on the basis of this relationship, was allowed to enter the high priest’s courtyard and to bring Peter along with him. It is here, in this courtyard, that our Lord’s prophecies about Peter’s denials are fulfilled. Once again, God’s providential hand is evident in the life of our Lord, so that every prophecy pertaining to Him is fulfilled exactly.

* THREE JEWISH (Religious) and THREE ROMAN (Civil) TRIALS

  Because John does not include all the trials of Jesus, I will list them here for your knowledge, though time will likely not allow you to discuss them in any detail:

– Jewish trials: religious in nature.

a. First trial (John 12:12-24). 

He stood before Annas.

b. Second trial (Matt. 26:57-66). 

Before Caiaphas, the high priest, and the Sanhedrin quickly condemned Him, with the help of false witnesses and much false evidence … he was mocked and beaten.

c. Third trial (Matt. 27:102).

The Sanhedrin pronounced its verdict: guilty of blasphemy! But the Sanhedrin did not have the  legal right to put anyone to death … the Roman government had to decide that issue.

– Roman trials (civil in nature):

d. Fourth trial (Matt. 27:11-14).

Pilate, Judea’s governor, presided. Jesus offered no defense, not even to a single charge, and Pilate was amazed by it.

   Most people do not take note of Pilate’s wife and her message to him: Matt. 27:19: “While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent  man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.”

e. Fifth trial (Luke 23:8-12).

Herod Antipas, the governor of Galilee, presided. Since Jesus was a Galilean, Pilate used this opportunity to send him out of his sight.

   Luke tells us that the governor had wanted to meet Jesus for a long time, since he’d heard about him … and he hoped to see him perform some miracles.

   It’s interesting here, also, to note that Jesus brought Herod and Pilate together as friends, though before these events they had been enemies!

f. Sixth trial (John 18:39—19:16).

   Pilate, again in charge, pronounced the verdict: guilty of treason, but he washed his hands of the whole affair (in his mind) and gave Jesus to His enemies. He granted them the go-ahead to crucify the One they hated.

REGULATIONS IN FORCE WHEN A QUORUM (23) OF THE SANHEDRIN WENT TO TRIAL

   The Jews took their legal instruction from the Mosaic Law as interpreted for them in the Talmud. Judged according to this scale, the trials were weighed and found wanting.

1.  All arrests for a capital cime must be made in broad daylight and all criminal cases must be tried during the daytime and completed during the daytime (this one was conducted at night).

2. Criminal cases could not be transacted during the Passover season (Luke 22:1-5)

3. Arrest for a criminal crime may not be made based on information by the offender’s follower — for if the accused were a criminal, so were his followers.

4. Only if a verdict of not guuilty could a case be finished on the day it was begun. If someone was accused of a capital offense, those who were to render verdicts were to return to their homes for 2 days and nights, eating only light food, drinking only light wines, and sleeping well. Then they were to return and hear again the testimony against the accusedand cast their vote.

5 . In regard to witnesses, all evidence had to be guaranteed by two witnesses, seperately examined, and having no contact with each other. False witnessing was punishable by death.

6. All were considered innocent and that evidence was to be given first, before the evidence for is guilt was given.

7. The Sanhedrin must vote one at a time, the younger men first, so as not to be influenced by the older men on the council.  In the third trial, they all voted simultaneously.

The words, “While this was happening,” are significant. They inform us that the interrogation of Peter (by the slave girl) and the interrogation of our Lord are taking place simultaneously. John chooses to alternate between one interrogation and the other in order to place our Lord’s responses in juxtaposition to those of Peter. Peter fails, while our Lord stands fast.

The nature of the questions asked by Annas is revealing: “The high priest therefore questioned Jesus about His disciples and about His teaching” (John 18:19). It was obvious, even to Pilate, that the real issue behind the trial of Jesus is that of jealousy. The Jewish religious leaders are jealous of our Lord’s prestige, popularity, and power (Matthew 27:18). The religious leaders have become greatly distressed by the tremendous influence of this Galilean. Annas therefore questions Jesus about His disciples. He seems to care more about the number of those following Jesus than about the content of His teaching. If George Gallup had lived in those days, Annas would have employed him full-time as a pollster. Here was a man who cared a great deal about public opinion, not because he cared about what the people thought, but because he cared about his power and position (see 11:48).

Jesus carefully avoided any reference to His disciples,[16] probably in order to protect them. There was no need to question Jesus concerning His teaching. He had spoken publicly, for all to hear and judge His words (verse 20). He did not have two teachings – one for His disciples and another for public consumption.[17]

There is an important legal issue here, however, because this hearing is illegal:

“Barclay says: ‘One curious feature of legal procedure in the Sanhedrin was that the man involved was held to be absolutely innocent, and, indeed, not even on trial, until the evidence of the witnesses had been stated and confirmed. The argument about the case could only begin when the testimony of the witnesses was given and confirmed. That is the point of the conversation between Jesus and Annas in John 18:19-21. Jesus in that incident was reminding Annas that he had no right to ask him anything until the evidence of witnesses had been taken and found to agree’ (op. cit., p. 58).”[18]

It was because His interrogation was illegal that Jesus responded to Annas, “Why do you question Me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them; behold these know what I said” (John 18:21). In Jewish justice, as in our own system, no one can be compelled to testify against himself. Annas was seeking to compel Jesus to testify against Himself. Jesus rightly refused to respond to this kind of questioning. One of the officers who stood by considered the response of Jesus to be insolent, and so he struck Him (verse 22).

This slap explains why the Fifth Amendment (or some counterpart) is important. The officer who struck Jesus is probably acting out of habit. If there is no such thing as a Fifth Amendment right, then a person can be compelled to testify against himself. If the person refuses to cooperate by giving the kind of “testimony” the “examiners” are seeking, then force is applied, until the testimony conforms to what the interrogators want. When Fifth Amendment rights do not exist, or are violated, “interrogation” becomes synonymous with physical abuse and torture. This is precisely what we see in the New Testament (see Acts 22:24, 29), and today.

Some have accused Jesus of not following His own instruction to “turn the other cheek” here. May I suggest that the actions of Jesus here are an excellent commentary on His teaching in the Sermon on the Mount. There Jesus taught that one should never lash back or seek to retaliate for personal insults. But here, it was not a matter of insult so much as a question of obeying the law. Jesus would not allow this injustice to go unnoticed. He is putting this matter on record. It was not a matter of personal feelings in this situation, but one of principle. We see Paul conducting himself in a similar fashion in Acts 16.

I believe there is another reason John records our Lord’s response to Annas. Annas is the most powerful religious leader in Jerusalem at the time. Annas supposes that he is in charge, and that by using (or abusing) his authority, he can force Jesus to testify against Himself, thereby making a case for Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. In this whole exchange, Annas gets absolutely nothing from Jesus. Jesus rightly refuses to answer Annas’ questions and thereby assist this corrupt religious leader in making a case against Him. Even beyond this, as this interview comes to a conclusion, we find that while Annas has not been able to indict Jesus for any wrongdoing, Jesus has instead indicted the high priest, for wrongfully conducting this trial and for allowing the guard to strike Him. Once again, Jesus has turned the tables (pardon the pun)[19] on the high priest.

John’s account of the Jewish segment of Jesus’ trials is selective and condensed. Jesus was brought before Annas, no doubt the leader of the Jewish opposition to our Lord. This was no trial at all, but a mere ‘fishing expedition’ by which the “high priest” had hoped to gather evidence for the trial to come. As Jesus was led away to stand before Caiaphas—the official high priest—Annas must have felt extremely frustrated. All he got out of Jesus was a rebuke for his abuse of power and for breaking Jewish law in his handling of this case.

* THE THREE DENIALS OF PETER (18:15-18, 25-27)

   “Simon Peter and another disciple were following Jesus. Because this disciple was known to the high priest, he went with Jesus into the high priest’s courtyard, {16} but Peter had to wait outside at the door. The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the girl on duty there and brought Peter in. {17} “You are not one of his disciples, are you?” the girl at the door asked Peter. He replied, “I am not.” {18} It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself. {19} Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. {20} “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. {21} Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.” {22} When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded. {23} “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” {24} Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest. {25} As Simon Peter stood warming himself, he was asked, “You are not one of his disciples, are you?” He denied it, saying, “I am not.” {26} One of the high priest’s servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him, “Didn’t I see you with him in the olive grove?” {27} Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow.”

Peter’s three denials (harmonized through the four gospels)

FIRST DENIAL       SECOND      THIRD

Matthew 26:69-70        26:71-71        26:73-74

Mark 14:66-68            14:69-70a        4:70b-72

Luke 22:56-57               22:58            22:59-60

John 18:15-18               18:25            18:26-27

The spotlight shifts back to Peter. Annas has been grilling Jesus, hoping to compel Him to incriminate Himself. Jesus has not only refused to do this, He has indicted Annas for violating the law. (How humiliating for an expert in the law to be indicted for law-breaking, and particularly by one you are seeking to indict!) Peter, on the other hand, is not doing so well. His first denial in verse 17 does not seem to have alarmed Peter, nor to have laid to rest questions concerning his allegiance. And so John takes us back to where he left us in verse 18 —to the charcoal fire, where a number of slaves and officers are warming themselves.

The words of the slave girl now seem to be taken up by those standing nearby, who may have heard her begin to question Peter: “You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?” (verse 25). They, too, indicate by the form of their question that they expect a negative answer. Peter has already committed himself, and now he finds it necessary to reiterate his denial. Were he to change his answer, this would raise other questions, questions like, “Why did you lie to the doorkeeper earlier? What are you trying to hide? What are you doing here?”

One of the high priest’s slaves—and a relative of Malchus—knows better. He must have been standing very close to Malchus (and thus to Peter) when Peter drew his sword and severed the slave’s ear. He was there in the Garden of Gethsemane when the arrest was made. He knew that Peter was there, too, with Jesus. Peter was a disciple of Jesus! This man was sure of it. The form of the question now changes. Unlike the first two questions, which expected Peter to answer in the negative, this fellow asks in a way that informs Peter he expects a response in the affirmative.[20] It would therefore be correct to read this man’s question in this way: “I did see you there in the orchard with him, didn’t I?” Peter decides to stick to his story, and so he denies his relationship to Jesus for the third time. Immediately thereafter, the rooster crows.

How gracious John is here in dealing with Peter’s failure. You will remember that these men are both fishermen; they have already worked together (Luke 22:8), and they will work together very closely in the Book of Acts (3:1, 3, 11; 4:13, 19; 8:14). John does not tell us that Peter found it necessary to underscore his lie with cursing (see Matthew 26:73), that Jesus looked at Peter from a distance (Luke 22:61), or that after the rooster crowed Peter went out and wept bitterly (Matthew 26:74-75). The Synoptic Gospels supply all of these details. I believe John’s purpose in recording the denials of Peter is not to make Peter look bad, but rather to contrast Peter’s testimony with that of Jesus and show how Jesus’ words of prophecy are, once again, fulfilled exactly.

   Matthew tells us that Peter began to swear (26:74). One writer said: “He was on trial, so he put himself under an oath to convince his accusers that he was telling the truth.” At that point, the cock began to crow.

   Luke (22:32) tells us that Jesus immediately looked Peter squarely between his eyes — and into his soul!

   The following ideas have been placed with the “look of the Master:”

– His look was a talisman dissolving the spell in which Peter was held.  Peter was so engrossed in his scheming to rescue Jesus that he needed to be brought to himself again.

– The look of Christ was a mirror in which Peter saw himself. He saw what Christ thought of him. His past confessions and professions of courage and “I will fight to death with you” came rushing back upon his mind.

– It was a rescuing look. Had it been an angry look he saw on Jesus’ face when their eyes met, Peter’s fate might have been the same as Judas’. In that look of an instant Peter saw forgiveness and unutterable love.

   We’re not sure that Peter saw this in one look … but what he did see was enough to cause him to go out and weep bitterly.

Conclusion

There are many lessons to be learned from our text. Let me highlight a few.

First, Peter’s failure here is Elijah-like. I have heard a number of sermons on Elijah, and especially about his “failure” as described in 1 Kings 19. Many of the attempts to explain the reasons for Elijah’s failure in this text are based upon physical factors. We are told that Elijah had not eaten properly and had not gotten enough rest. (What a great text to make a pitch for a paid vacation to Hawaii!) I believe that Elijah’s hunger and fatigue are the result of his failure, not its cause. I believe Elijah was angry with God because he made a gallant effort to save the nation, and God did not bless this effort with success. Let me explain.

God did not instruct Elijah to confront Ahab and Jezebel and the false prophets by arranging for a contest on Mount Carmel. God told Elijah to announce to Ahab that the rains would stop (1 Kings 17:1-2), and then in the third year of the famine, God ordered Elijah to announce to Ahab that it would rain (1 Kings 18:1). The contest on Mount Carmel seems to have been Elijah’s inspiration. God graciously answered Elijah’s request that fire come down from heaven and consume his offering, but this dramatic display of God’s power did not bring about the repentance of Ahab and Jezebel, or the nation Israel. When Jezebel threatened to kill him, Elijah knew that he had not succeeded in turning the nation to God. He was angry and disappointed. He had made a valiant effort to turn the nation around, and God had not blessed it with success. As a result, Elijah attempted to turn in his badge and quit. He wanted to resign as a prophet, and even to resign from life.

God does graciously provide Elijah with a good meal and some much-needed sleep, but this is not the solution to his problem. In chapter 19, God instructs Elijah through what He does and says to him on Mount Horeb (19:8ff.). He teaches Elijah that He does not restrict Himself to speaking and acting only through spectacular means—the great wind, the earthquake, or the fire. He also speaks through the gentle breeze and the still small voice. God did not need Elijah to do something spectacular, like challenging the false prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel. God simply asked Elijah to speak to the king, and then to pray for rain. God would later bring about great changes in the nation, but this would not be through Elijah; this would come about through others such as Hazael, Jehu, and Elisha (19:15-18).

I see Peter’s failure in our text as being very similar to that of Elijah. Peter had made some bold claims about his loyalty to Jesus. By his use of his sword and his presence in the courtyard of Annas, Peter acted with bravery and heroism. It is my opinion that just as Elijah expected God to bless his contest on Mount Carmel with success, Peter expected our Lord to bless his bravery when he drew his sword, taking on not only the temple police and a Jewish mob, but the Roman army as well. As he sat there in that courtyard and saw how things were going, it must have suddenly dawned on Peter that Jesus was not going to rescue Himself. Jesus was letting all of this happen without making any effort to defend Himself. Peter courageously attempted to save Jesus from arrest, and yet all he got in return from Jesus was a rebuke. I believe Peter’s failure is his reaction to our Lord’s refusal to applaud or to grant success to his acts of heroism.

Have you ever attempted to do something “for God” that you thought was really commendable, only to have your efforts miserably fail? How often Christians look at a situation and think that God is in trouble, and that He desperately needs our help. And when we are in such crisis situations, we are tempted to act in a way that is inconsistent with God’s will and His word. And so we act impulsively, presuming that God will bless, that He must bless. And when He allows us to fall flat on our faces, we are angry and hurt, and this is the time when we are tempted to give it all up and to deny Him. Let us beware of assuming that we know better than God how He should work in a given situation. Let us beware of assuming that God is obliged to bless our efforts, no matter how heroic they appear, when our efforts are contrary to His plan.

Second, let us bear in mind that Peter’s failure is little different from that of the other disciples. It is very easy to cast stones at Peter for his denials, but let us keep in mind that all of the disciples forsook our Lord. In one sense, we may have to concede that Peter and John are the “best of a bad bunch.” These two men chose to risk following Jesus and being near Him during His trials before Annas, Caiaphas, and the Jewish Sanhedrin. Lest we feel a little smug when we read of Peter’s denials, let me ask how many opportunities you and I have had to “stand up and testify of our faith in Jesus Christ,” and yet we have chosen to remain silent? We are not that different from Peter.

Third, in spite of how wrong Peter was to deny his Lord, it appears as though God providentially used his denials for good. We know that “God causes all things to work together for good …” (Romans 8:28). We know that what men intend for evil, God can use for good (see Genesis 50:20). I believe that God used Peter’s denial for good, in spite of the fact that it was sin. The normal course of events would have been for the disciples of our Lord to have been arrested, and perhaps crucified, along with Jesus. John portrays the release of the eleven disciples not only as the fulfillment of our Lord’s own words, but also as a miracle, proof of the Savior’s sovereignty. Peter’s denials may have been instrumental in putting the Jewish religious leaders’ minds to rest regarding any ongoing threat that the disciples of Jesus may have posed. After all, if only a few hours after Jesus’ arrest His most loyal follower denies Him, then they may very well feel justified in assuming that the “Jesus movement” is as good as dead. From Peter’s actions and words, they may have felt it was better to let the disciples live than to attempt to arrest and execute them. If the leading disciple has already given up, then surely the others are soon to follow, or so it seems.

Fourth, Peter’s failure here is typical of the way men usually fail. Peter had been repeatedly warned about his denial. Even when told by the Lord Jesus that he would fail, Peter confidently affirmed his loyalty, even to death. I believe Peter meant what he said. But in spite of Peter’s resolve, he did fail. How did this happen? How did Peter fail to see this coming? I think we must say that, at the time, Peter did not see his actions for what they were. He did not realize what he was doing until after the rooster crowed and the Lord looked him in the eye.

Peter’s failure was progressive. He failed by degrees over a period of time. Each step in his failure led to the next. And yet each step, in and of itself, did not seem so terrible. As I look through the Bible, and at the failures of men today, it seems quite evident that those sins which appear to have happened “suddenly” and “unexpectedly” usually have come about much more gradually. Take David’s sin with Bathsheba, for example. It may appear that David acted on impulse, and indeed he did. But David was not supposed to be sleeping late in his palace. David was supposed to be out in the field with his men, at war. David should have been with Uriah, in the battlefield, and not with Uriah’s wife, in his bedroom. Peter’s fall took place a step at a time, and each step, in and of itself, did not seem so terrible—until it was too late.

I am reminded of the warnings to the naïve in the Book of Proverbs. Time and time again, we are exhorted to consider the path we are on. There are only two paths: the path which leads to life, and the path which leads to death. Satan (portrayed by the seductress in Proverbs) has a way of camouflaging the path of sin, which leads to death, so that it appears to offer us what we really want. Those who are wise will heed the warnings of Scripture and consider the destination of the path they are on. Peter was on the wrong path, and he went his way—step by step—until he found himself denying the One he loved, the One he said he would never deny, and never intended to deny. Let us beware of those small steps we take in the wrong direction, and let us give heed to where they will lead us. In the Scriptures, the false path is clearly labeled, as is the path of life.

Fifth, this text gives us insight into the unique contribution of the Gospel of John. When studying a book of the Bible, it is always profitable to ask and to answer the question, “What is the unique contribution of this book to the overall message of the Bible?” In the case of one of the Gospels, this is a more obvious question because there are four different accounts of the same subject matter, covering the same period of time. Why did the Spirit of God find it important for us to have the Gospel of John, in addition to the Synoptic Gospels? Our text has helped me to identify some of the unique contributions of the Book of John to the teachings of Scripture.

The entire Gospel of John is about “witnesses” and “testimony.” In chapter 1, Jesus is introduced, not as a babe in the manger (as with Matthew and Luke), but as the Logos, the word made flesh. Jesus is the supreme witness, the full and final testimony of God to men:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The Word was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. 5 And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it. … 14 Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 15 John testified about him and cried out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’” 16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. The only One, himself God, who is in the presence of the Father, has made God known (John 1:1-5, 14-18).

Repeatedly in this Gospel, Jesus claims to have spoken the words the Father has given Him to reveal to men:

11 “I tell you the solemn truth, we speak about what we know and testify about what we have seen, but you people do not accept our testimony. … 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for he does not give the Spirit sparingly” (John 3:11, 34).

“If anyone wants to do God’s will, he will know about my teaching, whether it is from God or whether I speak from my own authority” (John 7:17).

28 Then Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing on my own initiative, but I speak just what the Father taught me. 29 And the one who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, because I always do those things that please him” (John 8:28-29).

“I am telling you the things I have seen while with my Father, but you are practicing the things you have heard from your father” (John 8:38).

49 “For I have not spoken from my own authority, but the Father himself who sent me has commanded me what I should say and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is eternal life. Thus the things I say, I say just as the Father has told me” (John 12:49-50).

“The person who does not love me does not obey my words. And the word you hear is not mine, but the Father’s who sent me” (John 14:24).

8 “Because I have given them the words you have given me. They accepted them and really understand that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me. … 14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them, because they do not belong to the world just as I do not belong to the world” (John 17:8, 14).

If John’s Gospel is about the witness of Jesus, then I must take note of the fact that in John’s Gospel, there is no account of our Lord’s baptism. There is no account of our Lord’s transfiguration. There is no “Great Confession” from the lips of Peter. And the one time that the Father audibly bears witness to the Son it is regarding His death:

27 “Now my soul is greatly distressed. And what should I say? ‘Father, deliver me from this hour’? No, but for this very reason I have come to this hour. 28 Father, glorify your name.” Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.” 29 The crowd that stood there and heard the voice said that it had thundered. Others said that an angel had spoken to him. 30 Jesus said, “This voice has not come for my benefit but for yours. 31 Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 (Now he said this to indicate clearly what kind of death he was going to die.) (John 12:27-33)

The great confession in John is not that of Peter, nor that of any man, though there are many confessions that Jesus is the Son of God. The “great confession” in John is the confession of our Lord Himself:

13 I charge you before God who gives life to all things and Christ Jesus who made his good confession before Pontius Pilate, 14 to keep this command without fault or failure until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 that the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, will reveal at the right time. 16 He alone possesses immortality and lives in unapproachable light, whom no human has ever seen or is able to see. To him be honor and eternal power! Amen (1 Timothy 6:13-16, emphasis mine).

In the Gospel of John, the great witness is our Lord Jesus Himself. And the “great confession” is made by our Lord, not Peter. Indeed, one could say that John has structured his argument in such as way as to place the “great confession” of our Lord alongside the “great denial” of Peter. The question put to Peter is, “Are you His disciple?” to which Peter responds, “I am not.” The question put to Jesus is, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And our Lord’s answer is, “Yes, I am.”[21]

I was troubled by the fact that in the Gospels Jesus says very little in response to the questions which He is asked. In effect, Jesus takes the Fifth Amendment. How can Jesus bear testimony to Himself as the Messiah by keeping silent? And then I remembered the prophecy of Isaiah: “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, And as a sheep before its shearers is silent, So He opened not His mouth” (Isaiah 53:7, NKJV).

Legally, Jesus was not required to defend Himself, just as He was not required to offer testimony against Himself. Biblically, Jesus had to remain silent in order to fulfill prophecy. Our Lord’s purpose was not to defend Himself and avoid the cross; it was to give His life as a ransom for many. Jesus kept quiet because it was the Father’s will for Him to die on that cross, bearing the guilt and punishment for sinners like you and me.

Looking at it another way, Jesus made His “great confession,” not by speaking words in His defense, but by His deeds. From the very beginning, Jesus came to this earth to die in the sinner’s place. In John, Jesus repeatedly speaks of His death on the cross (see John 3:14-16; 8:28; 12:34). His death on the cross of Calvary was our Lord’s “great confession.” This was, as it were, God’s final word (see Hebrews 1:1-2; 2:1-4). After His resurrection and ascension, and the coming of the Holy Spirit, the testimony of the apostles was about the cross of Christ.

The question John’s Gospel poses to its readers is this: “How do you stand in relation to Jesus as the promised Messiah, the King of the Jews?” There is no more important question in all the world. Your eternal destiny is determined by your answer to this question. As we read this text about the trial of our Lord, it is no longer Jesus who is on trial, nor the Jewish religious leaders, nor Annas, nor Pilate, nor Peter—it is you who are on trial. When Jesus Christ comes again, and you stand before the judgment bar of God, He will want to know only one thing from you: “What have you done with My Son?” This is the question you must answer. John tells you what your answer should be:

32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the two men who had been crucified with Jesus, first the one and then the other. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and blood and water flowed out immediately. 35 And the person who saw it has testified (and his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth), so that you also may believe. 36 For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not a bone of his will be broken.” 37 And again another scripture says, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced” (John 19:32-37, emphasis mine).

30 Now Jesus performed many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples that are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30-31, emphasis mine).

EVENT	MATTHEW	MARK	LUKE	JOHN
Prediction of Peter’s Denial	26:30-35 Sang hymn, going out to Mount of Olives (30). Jesus: “All will fall away.” Peter: “Even if all fall away, not me.” Jesus: “Peter, you will deny me three times.” Peter: “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you.”	14:26-31 Sang hymn, going out to Mount of Olives (26). Jesus: “You will all fall away …” (27). Peter: “Even if they all fall away, I will not.” (29) Jesus: “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times” (30). Peter (emphatically): “Even if I must die, I will not deny you” (31).	22:31-34 Dispute over who is greatest (24). Peter informed of Satan’s opposition and Lord’s intercession. He will fail, but will be restored—strengthen brethren (31-32). Peter is ready to go to prison with Jesus and die (33). Jesus foretells Peter’s denial (34). Jesus’ statement about buying a sword (36).	13:31-38 In the upper room. Jesus has told of His departure; they can’t follow (33). Peter asks why he can’t follow. He will lay down his life for Jesus (37). Jesus predicts Peter’s denial 3 times, before rooster crows (38).
Peter in Gethsemane	26:40-41 Jesus took three with Him, told of His anguish, asked them to watch with Him. “Pray that you will not come to time of testing.”	14:32-42 Jesus to the three: “I am deeply grieved, even to point of death. Remain here and stay alert with me” (34). “Peter, why are you sleeping?” (37). Pray not to come into temptation (38).	22:39-46 To all: “Pray that you may not fall into temptation” (40). Angel appears to Jesus (43). Jesus rebukes, “pray not to enter temptation” (46).	No Gethsemane scene
Cutting off of man’s ear	26:51-54 An unnamed disciple cuts off ear of the slave of the high priest. Jesus orders him to put back his sword, for two reasons: (1) He could call more than 12 legions of angels, and (2) The Scriptures must be fulfilled.	14:43-52 Bystander cut off ear of high priest’s slave (47). Jesus rebukes those arresting Him for coming with arms, as if after a robber (48-49). Disciples flee, including one young man who they tried to arrest, but ran off naked (50-52).	“Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” (49). One of them struck the high priest’s slave, cutting off his right ear (50). Jesus: “Stop this!” Jesus heals the ear (51).	18:8-11 Jesus is securing the release of disciples (8-9). Peter pulls his sword, cuts off right ear of Malchus, the high priest’s slave (10). Jesus orders Peter to put up sword. He must fulfill the Father’s purpose (11).
Peter’s denials	26:57-75 Jesus taken to Caiaphas (26:57). Peter was following Jesus at a distance (58). He sat with officers while Jesus was questioned (59-67). Slave girl: “You were with Jesus the Galilean, too” (69). Peter: “I don’t know what you’re talking about!” (70). Another slave girl: “This man was with Jesus of Nazareth” (71). Peter (with an oath): “I do not know the man!” (72). Those standing there: “You really are one of them too, because your accent shows it clearly” (73). Peter: Began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” (74). Rooster crowed, Peter remembered, wept bitterly (74-75).	14:43-65 Jesus led “to the high priest” (14:53). Peter followed from a distance (66-72). Peter in the courtyard. One of high priest’s slave girls: “You also were with that Nazarene, Jesus” (67). Peter: “I don’t know or understand what you are talking about” (68). ROOSTER CROWS FIRST TIME (68). Slave girl: “This man is one of them” (69). Peter denied it again (70). Bystanders: “Truly you are one of them, for you are also a Galilean” (70). Peter cursed and swore: “I do not know this man you are talking about!” (71). Rooster crows second time, Peter remembers, weeps.	22:54-62 Jesus taken to “the high priest’s house.” Peter follows at a distance, sits among them (54-55). Slave girl: “This man was with him, too!” (56). Peter: “Woman, I don’t know him!” (57). Later, someone else: “You are one of them too!” Peter: “Mister, I am not!” (58). Still another insisted, “Certainly this man was with him too; for he too is a Galilean!” (59). Peter: “Mister, I do not know what you are talking about!” Rooster crowed while he was still speaking (60). The Lord turned and looked at Peter, he re-membered, and went out, weeping bitterly (61-62).	18:13-27 Jesus brought to Annas (13), then sent to Caiaphas (24). Peter and another disciple follow Jesus and are in the inner courtyard (15-16). Slave girl/doorkeeper (to whom other disciple had spoken): “You’re not one of this man’s disciples too, are you?” Peter: “I am not!” (17). Jesus interrogated by Annas, sent to Caiaphas (18-24). Those warming themselves by the fire: “You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?” (18, 25). Peter: “I am not!” (25). High priest’s slave (relative of the former earless one): “Did I not see you in the orchard with him?” (26). Peter denied it, rooster crowed (27). No mention of weeping.

This is not the first time I have preached on the death of our Lord, although this is the first time I have preached through the Gospel of John. I must admit that in doing so, I have come to realize that I have been mistaken in some of my assumptions. John’s Gospel has forced me to take a second look at the way I view our Lord’s death. It was my assumption that the Jews really wanted to crucify Jesus, and that they wished to enlist the assistance of the Roman government to do so. It was my opinion that God allowed the Jews to gain the upper hand for a short period of time, so that Jesus would die on a Roman cross. John’s Gospel calls some of these assumptions into question.

I also assumed that the Jews got exactly what they wanted, and when Jesus died on that Roman cross, they were jubilant. There was a measure of rejoicing on the part of those who appeared to prevail over Jesus at the cross (see John 16:20), but we must also take Luke’s words into account when he informs us that, seeing what had happened at the cross, the multitudes went away “beating their breasts” (Luke 23:48). Those who crucified Jesus did not get everything they wanted. They wanted to stone Jesus, but they had to settle for crucifixion. They wanted to kill Jesus themselves, and yet they had to involve Rome. Annas wanted to compel Jesus to incriminate Himself, and instead, Jesus indicted the high priest for wrong-doing. Pilate wanted to find a way to make the “Jesus crisis” go away, but he did not succeed. Strange as it may seem, at the cross of Calvary, it was only our Lord who got His way.

My goal in this lesson is to focus on the “big picture” of our Lord’s trial before Pilate. Once this picture is clear in our minds, the details will be more easily grasped. I shall attempt to set the scene by concentrating on four statements found in our text. The first is a statement by the Jews in verse 31: “We cannot legally put anyone to death.” The second is the question raised by Pilate in verse 38: “What is truth?” The third is the declaration of our Lord in verse 37: “You [rightly or correctly] say that I am a King.” The final statement is made by John in verse 32: “This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke, indicating what kind of death he was going to die.”

Before we turn to these four statements, I want to call your attention to a summary[22] of the sequence of events which occurred from the time the Jews decided that Jesus must be put to death, to the time when Jesus rose from the dead. This summary not only reminds us of the final events of our Lord’s life, it also points out the unique contributions of each of the Gospels. Allow me to call your attention to some of the unique contributions of each of the four Gospels.

MATTHEW. Matthew’s Gospel has several unique contributions. It is Matthew’s account that includes an account of the suicide of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus and handed Him over to the Jewish religious leaders. This story is inserted into Matthew’s report of our Lord’s arrest. Matthew 27 begins with Jesus being brought to Pilate by the chief priests and elders of Israel (verses 1-2). Verses 3-10 then contain an account of Judas’ suicide. Then, at verse 11, the account of Jesus’ trial before Pilate continues. It seems to me that Matthew wants his readers to know that in the midst of our Lord’s trials, the one who turned Jesus over to the authorities has already come to regret his treachery. The testimony of Judas is added to that of others, including Pilate: “Jesus is innocent!”

Matthew also records the intervention of Pilate’s wife, who had a sleepless night and therefore warned her husband not to be a part of the execution of Jesus, since He was an innocent man. Actually, she did not refer to Jesus merely as innocent, but as righteous (27:19, NAB). Matthew is the one who includes an account of Pilate washing his hands (27:24), a symbolic gesture intended to indicate that he did not approve of the crucifixion of Jesus. This does not release him from his guilt for taking part in the death of Jesus. He gave Jesus over to the Jews to put to death, and he facilitated their plans by having Roman soldiers conduct the crucifixion. And this Pilate did, knowing that Jesus was innocent. Finally, Matthew records that incredible statement of the Jews: “Let his blood be on us and on our children!” (27:25).

MARK.Mark has the distinction of being the shortest account of Jesus’ trial before Pilate, a mere 20 verses long. Mark makes no unique contribution here, although he does join Matthew in telling us that Pilate had figured out that the Jews had turned Jesus over to him out of envy (Mark 15:10; see also Matthew 27:18).

LUKE. Luke’s account is only 25 verses long. Luke alone informs us that Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, who declared Jesus innocent as well, and then returned Him to Pilate (23:6-12). We also learn that these two men were at odds with each other, and that they were somehow reconciled in the midst of their mutual dealings with Jesus.

JOHN. John has the longest and most detailed account of our Lord’s hearing before Pilate. In John, we see an increasing sense of awe and dread on the part of Pilate. We are also told of his cynical remark, “What is truth?” (verse 38). But perhaps the most interesting contribution John makes is his record of the conversation which occurred between Pilate and Jesus. In the other Gospels, Jesus says almost nothing, either to the Jews, to Pilate, or to Herod. In John’s account, Jesus and Pilate do have a conversation of sorts. There is no contradiction here, however. When Jesus refuses to speak, it is (1) because the law does not require Him to testify against Himself, and (2) because He refuses to defend Himself. Jesus would not interact with Herod because he was merely hoping to see some miracle. If Jesus had defended Himself by speaking or performing miracles, it could have prevented His death. When Jesus refused to speak, it was when He was in the presence of the Jews. When Jesus did speak with Pilate, it was inside his residence, where the Jews would not enter. The conversation was not of His guilt or innocence, but about His identity and His mission. We might say that it was evangelistic.

* THE INTERVIEW WITH PILATE (18:28-19:16).

   The trial before Pilate is given more space in John than in any one of the other gospels, in spite of certain omissions from his narative.

   John’s portrayal of this incident was designed to bring the personalities of the two into sharp relief.

   As we read this, we’ll see quickly that Pilate was on trial here, not Jesus! Pilate was seeking any loophole possible that would please all sides. He was afraid of the crowd, at least three times announcing that Jesus was not guilty of any crime (Luke 23:14; 23:22; John 19:4, 6). Yet, he refused to release Him!

   The first impression given of Pilate was his reluctance to take part in the action. He likely had been forewarned, since he was surprisingly available at this unseasonably hour.

   The trial with Pilate revolved around four key questions:

1. “What is the accusation?” (18:28-32).

    “Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. {29} So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?” {30} “If he were not a criminal,” they replied, “we would not have handed him over to you.” {31} Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” “But we have no right to execute anyone,” the Jews objected. {32} This happened so that the words Jesus had spoken indicating the kind of death he was going to die would be fulfilled.”

   Action in criminal cases was subject to Pilate as the ruling Roman governor, since Rome had divested the Jewish Sanhedrin of the authority to inflict capital punishment. His initial question was a part of the usual legal routine.

   Formal complaint had to be lodged before he could proceed with the case. It was also plain to Pilate that these Jewish rulers were trying to embroil him in their religious wranglings…his question in verse 29 tells us he did not intend to become a mere tool in their hands.

Luke 23:2 lists three ‘official charges:’

– He led the nation astray.

   Of course, He had not subverted the nation, either politically or religiously. He had publicly denounced the Pharisees and their hypocritical religious system. He had blessed the nation and brought them new hope. The fact that some of the militant Jews saw in Him a potential king (John 6:15) was not our Lord’s fault, and He fled from all such political demonstrations.

– He opposed paying tribute to Caesar.

He taught just the opposite in Matthew 22:21.

– He claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and King.

He did claim to be King but not in a political sense. Even His own disciples did not fully understand these truths until after His resurrection (Acts 1:1-8)

   Had the Sanhedrin possessed the right to execute Jesus, they undoubtedly would have stoned Him to death, for stoning was prescribed by the law (Lev. 20:27). Crucifixion was the Roman method which Jesus had foretold.

The Jews: “We Cannot Legally Put Anyone to Death.” (18:31)

The Jewish religious leaders appear to have incorrectly assessed the situation. They may have assumed that since Pilate had provided Roman soldiers to assist in the arrest of Jesus, he was giving them a “blank check” to deal with Jesus as they saw fit. Their appearance before Pilate early on this morning does not look like a humble petition being made by the religious leaders of a subject nation. The Jewish leaders boldly arrive at Pilate’s home in the early hours of the morning, with Jesus in their custody (verse 28). It may have been at the very first signs of light. Their arrival at this early hour could almost be characterized as “cruel and unusual.” They further insult Pilate by refusing to enter his residence. In their minds, to do so would be to defile themselves by entering the house of a Gentile. Consequently, they virtually force Pilate to come outside to speak with them. Such actions would not be unusual, if it were Pilate demanding such things of the Jews, but for the Jews to act this way toward Pilate is nothing less than insulting.

Pilate’s response to their demands caught the religious leaders off guard. They seem to have expected Pilate to “rubber stamp” their indictment of Jesus and to quickly authorize His execution. Instead, Pilate required them to declare formal charges against Jesus, charges that they had not been able to establish, even though they worked at this all night long (see Matthew 26:59-60; Mark 14:57-59). Before the Jews, Jesus had confessed that He was “guilty” of being the Son of God. They reasoned that this “confession” made Him guilty of blasphemy, and that because of this, Jesus must be put to death (Matthew 26:62-65, Mark 14:64). However, they were not able to substantiate any charges that would make Jesus worthy of death under Roman law. As they stand before Pilate, they find themselves in a real bind. They believe Jesus is guilty of blasphemy, and deserving of death, but they do not have any solid evidence that Jesus is guilty of any capital offense under Roman law; thus, they are hard pressed to convince Pilate that Jesus really should be put to death.

It wasn’t that the Jews never put anyone to death without Rome’s consent. We know from the account of the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7 that the Jews were more than willing to put someone to death, without permission from Rome. Stephen’s death was different, however. It did not occur during the feast, and it would seem that Rome was not even aware of what took place. It was very different with Jesus and with Pilate. The words of the Jews in our text mean something like this: “We really want to kill Jesus ourselves, by stoning, but we can’t get away with that at the moment—not now anyway, during the feast, while all of your Roman soldiers are ‘on alert’ and watching us like a hawk.” If they could kill Jesus without Rome’s help, and even without Rome’s permission, they would gladly do so. But they are powerless to do so now, and they know it. Their words convey a feigned submission to Roman authority, but this is all hypocrisy, as Acts 7 underscores, and as Pilate surely knows.

This is not just a matter of obtaining Rome’s permission. The Jewish religious leaders are unwittingly revealing their inability to accomplish what they have attempted on many occasions. They do not seem to realize that they are (to use God’s words to Saul), “kicking against the goads” (Acts 9:5, KJV). I have not attempted to count all of the times that attempts to kill Jesus are recorded in the Gospels, but they are numerous. One of the first attempts came in our Lord’s hometown of Nazareth (Luke 4:28-29). When we come to the fifth chapter of John, we read of the Jews’ desire to put Jesus to death, and John makes it very clear that this is not the first time the Jews wanted to kill Jesus. Here, John is telling us that they strengthened their (already existing) resolve to put Jesus to death (John 5:18). And so we often find references to the Jews’ intent to put Jesus (and even Lazarus—12:10) to death (7:1, 19, 25; 8:37, 40, 59; 10:31; 11:8, 16, 47-53, 57). Yet all of these efforts were thwarted, because it was not yet “His time” (see 7:30). It never seems to have occurred to them that they were seeking to accomplish that which God’s purposes and prophecies made impossible.[23]

It must have been their fumbled attempt to arrest Jesus in John 7 that convinced the Jewish religious leaders they needed all the help they could get if they were to arrest and execute Jesus. Officers were dispatched to apprehend Jesus. It was not that He was hard to find, because He was teaching openly in the Temple. The officers dispatched to arrest Jesus did not take Him into custody and bring Him to the chief priests and Pharisees because they had never heard anyone speak as He did (7:46). It is my opinion that from that time on, the religious leaders vowed they would not make the same mistake again. Did they seek to employ Roman soldiers in this final attempt to arrest Jesus because they felt confident these soldiers would not be favorably impressed with the words of a Jew (as the temple police had been)? Many failed attempts to stone Jesus may have led them to conclude that they must go about this legally, so that the power of Rome could be enlisted in their efforts to be rid of Jesus. It never seems to occur to these Jews that their words to Pilate were a confession of failure on their part and also an admission that our Lord was really in control.

John’s Explanation (18:32)

This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke indicating what kind of death he was going to die (verse 32).

These words from the author of this Gospel are John’s explanation of what he has just described. The Jews had brought Jesus to Pilate, hoping that he would grant His execution. If they got what they really wanted, it would have been for Pilate to have handed Jesus over to them, so that they could stone Him. This would have been much quicker than crucifying Jesus, and it is something the Jews could have done for themselves. I think it is what they would have most enjoyed. And, to cap matters off, it would have looked more “legal,” so far as Old Testament law was concerned. Those guilty of blasphemy were to be stoned:

“‘And whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes the name of the Lord, he shall be put to death’” (Leviticus 24:16, NKJV).

The Jews did not get exactly what they wanted, but they did finally have Jesus in custody, and they are well on their way to getting rid of Jesus—or so they think.

Pilate certainly does not get what he wants. He wants this whole thing to just “go away.” Jesus makes him uneasy—which is an understatement. There is something going on here which Pilate does not fully grasp, but what he does grasp, he does not like. He wants to avoid angering the Jewish leaders one more time, and yet he really does not wish to give in to their demands. He does not like the idea of crucifying an innocent man, either. But Pilate does not get what he wants. He tries to avoid taking responsibility for his actions, but he nevertheless hands Jesus over to be crucified, knowing that He is innocent, indeed, that He is a righteous man.

At this moment in time—when one might wrongly conclude that things have “gotten out of hand”—John reminds us that everything he has been describing is taking place in accordance with the divine plan. It is not just that the Old Testament prophecies concerning Messiah’s death are being fulfilled; our Lord’s own words, by which He indicated how He would die, are being fulfilled. It was not enough that Jesus should die. It was not enough that He should die during Passover, as the Passover Lamb. It was also necessary that Jesus should die as He had indicated—by being lifted up on a Roman cross:

17 As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve aside privately and said to them on the way, 18 “We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the experts in the law; they will condemn him to death, 19 and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged severely and crucified. And on the third day, he will be raised!” (Matthew 20:17-19)

14 “Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life” (John 3:14-15).

32 “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 (Now he said this to indicate clearly what kind of death he was going to die.) 34 Then the crowd responded, “We have heard from the law that the Christ will remain forever. How can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?” (John 12:32-34)

Although I have said it before, I must say it again—Jesus was Lord at His death. As we view the arrest, the trial and crucifixion of our Lord through John’s eyes, we should be overwhelmed with this truth. Jesus was not a helpless victim, who was overcome by His adversaries. Jesus was not only the sinless Son of God, He was the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe (see John 1). He was and is the Sovereign God, who does what He has purposed and promised to do. Every event which John describes is something which God purposed to accomplish. Many of these things were prophesied, not merely by the Old Testament prophets, but by our Lord Himself. Jesus was in complete control as the officers bound Him and led Him away from the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus was in control when He stood before Annas, before Caiaphas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate and Herod.

The irony is that the Jews and Pilate appear to be sitting in the judge’s seat, and that it is Jesus who is on trial. In one sense, of course, this is true. But in the ultimate sense, it is not Jesus who is on trial but the Jews and Pilate. And both of them fail the test. Both rejected Jesus as the Son of God, as the King of the Jews. It is possible that as you hear this message and the claims of Christ, you may somehow take the same posture as Pilate. You may think that you are giving Jesus a “hearing,” but that you haven’t yet decided in His favor. I can say to you with absolute certainty that there will be a day when you will stand before Him as your judge. The only means God has provided for your salvation is the shed blood of Jesus Christ. Those who trust in His death, burial, and resurrection for their salvation will enter into His kingdom. Those who do not receive His gift of salvation, brought about by His death, burial, and resurrection, will suffer eternal judgment. Trust Him today.

14 “Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” 16 For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. 19 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God (John 3:14-21).

His shed blood will either cleanse you from all sin, or it will be on your hands for all eternity.

2. “Are you the king of the Jews?” (18:33-38).

    “Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” {34} “Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?” {35} “Am I a Jew?” Pilate replied. “It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?” {36} Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.” {37} “You are a king, then!” said Pilate. Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” {38} “What is truth?” Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him.”

   The question asking Jesus if he was king of the Jews is recorded by each of the Gospel writers. Messianic expectations always ran high at Passover season, and it would be easy for a Jewish pretender to incite the people into a riot or a rebellion against Rome.  Pilate no doubt felt himself on safe ground when he asked about Christ’s kingship.

   However, he was not prepared for the answer! Jesus was not evading the issue; He was forcing Pilate to clarify the matter for his own sake. Pilate explodes with indignation when Jesus answers him the way he does (vs. 34).  His contempt for the Jews and his impatience with Jesus come to the surface.

   Jesus proceeds to explain that His kingdom was not of this world. Pilate’s anger subsided into baffled curisoity (vs. 37). He was well acquainted with royalty, but could not classify Jesus with any king he knew.

   Pilate pronounced the prisoner innocent of any crime, but notice two things:

– Jesus tells Pilate why He was upon the earth

Pilate asked the most important question in the world, “What is truth?” yet never went further to seek to identify it

Jesus: “You Are Right in Saying I Am a King” (18:37)

The Jewish religious leaders took issue with Jesus in slightly different terms:[24]

66 When day came, the council of the elders of the people gathered together, both the chief priests and the experts in the law. Then they led Jesus away to their council 67 and said, “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe; 68 and if I ask you, you will not answer. 69 But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” 70 So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” He answered them, “You say that I am.” 71 Then they said, “Why do we need further testimony? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips!” (Luke 22:66-71)

They were interested in His claim to be the Son of God, or as John expresses it in his Gospel, His claim to be equal with God (5:18; 10:33, 36). I don’t think Pilate really cared about such matters. His concern was much more pragmatic: Was Jesus claiming to be Israel’s king? Our Lord’s answer to the Jews and to Pilate was a very clear, “Yes, I am!”

And they all said, “Are You the Son of God, then?” And He said to them, “Yes, I am” (Luke 22:70, NAB).

They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?” He replied, “You are right in saying I am” (NIV).

Then they all said, “Are You then the Son of God?” So He said to them, “You rightly say that I am” (NKJV).

Literally, Jesus responded, “You say that I am,” but that was the equivalent to His saying, “Yes, I am.” And so we see the translations cited above indicate this affirmation on the part of our Lord.

It was not the safest thing for Jesus to say. To tell Pilate that He was the King of the Jews was to risk being condemned for high treason (which, of course, He was). To admit to the Jews that He was the Son of God was to convince them that Jesus was guilty of blasphemy (for which they excused their initiative in putting Jesus to death). In both cases, the penalty for such offenses (if proven guilty) was death. The fact is that Jesus is not only “the way” and “the life,” He is also “the truth.” Jesus cannot lie about anything, and especially not about His identity. This is why I view our Lord’s statement to Pilate as the “great confession” in the Gospel of John. Peter’s “great confession,” recorded in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20), is not found in John. It is Jesus Himself who is the true witness in John. “You say that I am a King. I have been born and have come into the world for this reason—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice” (John 18:37).

There are those who seek to convince us that Jesus never claimed to be God, that He never said He was the promised Messiah. Such people seem not to have read the Gospels, or at least to have read them very carefully. At the time when such a confession would likely lead to His death, Jesus testified that He was the Son of God and the King of the Jews. Jesus claims to be God and acknowledges that He is the One whom God has appointed to rule over the whole earth. Jesus is the Son of God, the Savior of the world, and the King of the Jews. There may be those who reject Jesus as the Son of God and King of the Jews, but none should deny that this is who Jesus claimed to be. This is our Lord’s “great confession.” Thus, to reject Jesus as the Son of God is to reject His testimony as well.

 

Pilate: “What Is Truth?” (18:38)

It might be helpful to remind ourselves of the political situation at this point in time. Rome had succeeded in gaining dominance as a world power, and had divided its subject territories into provinces for administration. Syria was one of these Roman provinces, of which Palestine was a part. Herod the Great once ruled over all five areas of Palestine, but when he died, his territory was divided among his three sons. Due to misrule, Archelaus (who governed Judea and Samaria) was removed and replaced by one known as “the Governor of Judea.” Pontius Pilate was the “Governor of Judea” at the time of our Lord’s crucifixion. At the same time, Herod Antipas[25] ruled over Galilee and Perea. We know from Luke 23:12 that Herod and Pilate had been adversaries until the trials of our Lord.

Rome chose to give its subject provinces a fair degree of freedom, so long as they were submissive and cooperative. This meant that the Jews were allowed to govern themselves by making and enforcing laws, and by trying and punishing law-breakers. Rome could intervene at any time, at its discretion, but under normal conditions, they would not do so. The one exception came in the area of capital punishment. There was too much risk of abuse here, and so (in theory, at least) any execution required Roman permission and was normally carried out by crucifixion, at the hands of Roman soldiers.

Normally, Pilate would reside at his palace in Caesarea. During the Passover season, the population of Jerusalem would swell considerably. Pilgrims came from afar to celebrate this feast, and there was a very high level of messianic expectation and enthusiasm. Consequently, the chance of some kind of uprising was considered much greater at this time. Therefore, a sizeable force of Roman soldiers would be stationed in Jerusalem or nearby, and Pilate himself would temporarily reside in Jerusalem. Because of the season, Pilate must bear the burden of responsibility for dealing with the Jews and for determining the fate (humanly speaking, of course) of Jesus.

Until 1961, there was no archaeological proof of the existence of Pontius Pilate.[26] In the summer of 1961, Italian archaeologists were excavating an ancient theater at Caesarea, the Mediterranean port which served as the Roman capital of Palestine.[27] They unearthed a stone that bore a partial inscription, bearing the name of Pontius Pilate. It refers to the presentation of “the Tiberieum” to the Caesareans. The “Tiberieum” was apparently some kind of public structure named after the Roman emperor Tiberius.

Nevertheless, the name of Pontius Pilate has been well known to many over the centuries. His name has been repeated by countless Catholics and others reciting the Apostles’ Creed. It begins,

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ,
His only Son, our Lord: Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.

Readers of the New Testament are familiar with Pilate, who is not portrayed in a very favorable light. Luke’s Gospel informs us that Pilate was governor when John the Baptist commenced his ministry (Luke 3:1-2). Later in Luke, we read of his abusive and blasphemous treatment of the Galileans: “Now there were some present on that occasion who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices” (Luke 13:1).[28]

What we know of Pilate from history is not very flattering either. He made several major mistakes,[29] which set the scene for what takes place in our text. Normally, when Roman governors arrived in Jerusalem, they removed their standards (a pole with a Roman eagle or an image of the emperor mounted on the top) because of the Jews’ disdain for such images.[30] In spite of his awareness of these Jewish scruples and past Roman practice, Pilate’s troops marched into Jerusalem carrying medallions with the emperor’s image or bust among their standards. This precipitated a protest demonstration by the Jews lasting five days, and eventually, Pilate was forced to give in to public pressure by removing the standards.

A second incident occurred when Pilate later constructed an aqueduct to convey water from cisterns near Bethlehem to Jerusalem. This provoked a riot, not because of the aqueduct itself, but because Pilate funded the project with funds he took from the temple. Roman troops had to be used to put down the riot, and Pilate warned them not to use their swords. His instructions were not carried out properly, and there was bloodshed. Paul Maier enumerates some good reasons why Pilate’s actions may not have been as evil or as foolish as they seemed,[31] but this did not prevent the riot or the resulting bloodshed. It was yet another black eye for Pilate’s administration.

The straw which broke the proverbial “camel’s back” seems to have occurred when Pilate set up several golden shields at his headquarters in Jerusalem. These shields had no images, but only an inscription of dedication to Tiberius. Nevertheless, the people protested strongly, backed up by Herod Antipas and his brothers. This time, Pilate refused to back down. In other places like Alexandria, shields were tolerated by the Jews. This was Jerusalem, however, and this was a “golden” opportunity for Herod to make Pilate look bad to Tiberias. Herod wrote a letter of official protest to the emperor, who ordered Pilate to have the shields sent to Caesarea, warning him about offending the Jews by violating their customs.

All of this is to say that Pilate was none too popular with the Jews at this point in time. I doubt very much that he cared either, because his actions toward the Jews seem to indicate that he held a great disdain for them. You can imagine, then, how Pilate must have responded to the knock on his palace door early that fateful morning. “He who blesses his friend with a loud voice, rising early in the morning, It will be counted a curse to him” (Proverbs 27:14).

The Jews are in a hurry, and they need to dispense with the legal formalities as quickly as possible if they are to have this whole horrible thing finished by sunset (so that they can “worship God” at this Passover). They have been up all night with Jesus, preparing for this moment. Now, they demand to see Pilate, but they also refuse to “defile themselves” by entering into the dwelling of this Gentile pagan (18:28). And then, when Pilate asks them to indicate what formal charges they wish to press against Jesus, they are unable to articulate any charges which would make Him worthy of the death penalty. Instead, they come up with a pious sounding version of “trust me”: “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you” (verse 30).

Pilate is already impatient with them. If this is the way they want to go about this matter, then let them deal with Jesus according to their own law. Pilate does not yet seem to grasp that they will be content with nothing less than the death penalty. They now reveal this to him: “We cannot legally put anyone to death” (verse 31). Pilate is (as we would say in Texas) “caught between a rock and a hard place.” He is undoubtedly angry with these Jews for disturbing and insulting him, as they have done, and yet he does not wish to get into trouble with the Jews again, since he appears to be on “thin ice” with Rome at the moment. He hopes to be able to resolve this crisis in a way that does not anger the Jews, and yet does not give them what they demand.

Pilate takes Jesus aside privately—into his quarters—where the Jews will not enter, lest they defile themselves. He asks Jesus this question: “Are you the King of the Jews?” (verse 33). We know from Luke’s Gospel that this charge was made against Jesus (Luke 23:3). Pilate is virtually forced to explore this charge further, and so he asks Jesus directly whether or not He is the “King of the Jews.” Jesus does not keep quiet, as He does before the Jews and Herod. Neither does Jesus deny the charge. Jesus is not seeking to defend Himself, but rather to probe the heart of Pilate. Does Pilate ask this for his own benefit, or is he simply doing so because he is forced to follow up on the charge of the Jews that He is a revolutionary, claiming to be the “King of the Jews”?

Pilate’s response to Jesus’ question is negative: “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?” (verse 35). Pilate assumes that the real issues are Jewish, and thus that they do not really involve him. Jesus is a Jew. If He claims to be the “King of the Jews” that has nothing to do with Pilate, unless, of course, Jesus is actively seeking to overthrow Roman rule—otherwise, this a really a matter between Jesus and His Jewish countrymen. You will recall that this same approach was later employed by Gallio:

12 Now while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews attacked Paul together and brought him before the judgment seat, 13 saying, “This man is persuading people to worship God in a way contrary to the law.” 14 But just as Paul was about to speak, Gallio said to the Jews, “If it were a matter of some crime or serious piece of villainy, I would have been justified in accepting the complaint of you Jews; 15 but since it concerns points of disagreement about words and names and your own law, settle it yourselves. I will not be a judge of these things.” 16 Then he had them forced away from the judgment seat (Acts 18:12-16).

This approach just does not work for Pilate. He seems to suspect that whatever Jesus did, it was not as serious as the Jews represented it to be. On the other hand, the intensity of their accusations would incline one to suppose that Jesus had done something pretty awful to get these folks so worked up. And so Pilate asks Jesus, in effect, “What have you done wrong to make these folks so angry?” In Pilate’s mind, there had to be some wrong-doing on Jesus’ part. How else could one explain the hostility of the Jews? As the case drags on, Pilate begins to see things for what they are. Those who so vehemently oppose Jesus are jealous of Him (Matthew 27:18; Mark 15:10).

Jesus does not deny that He is the “King of the Jews,” but He does explain to Pilate that this is no threat whatsoever to him, or to Roman rule. Jesus’ kingdom is “not from this world.” If it were, then His servants would fight to resist His arrest (as Peter had attempted to do, momentarily, before being stopped short by Jesus). His kingdom is not from earth. Pilate had nothing to worry about.

Pilate was listening carefully to what Jesus said. He drew the correct inference: “So then, you really are a King!” Jesus replies in a way that clearly indicates this is true: “You say that I am a King …” In more contemporary terminology, we would say, “You said it!” The Lord’s meaning is therefore something like this: “You are absolutely right that I am a King!” His “kingdom” is centered around revelation, not revolution; around truth, not treason. Jesus was a teacher, not a traitor. This was the purpose for His incarnation; this was His mission in life—to testify to the truth. And everyone who embraces Him as the promised Messiah (who “belongs to the truth”) listens to His voice.

Here is the challenge to Pilate—to accept Jesus’ teaching as the truth. Pilate’s response is tragic. It is phrased as a question, but it is really an admission of complete cynicism. He does not ask, “What is the truth?” Such a question would indicate that Pilate believes in truth but does not know what the truth is. The question, “What is truth?”, is a completely different matter. It is as though Pilate had said, “Truth? You don’t mean to tell me that you believe there is such a thing as truth, do you? Truth is whatever you want it to be.” I am sure Pilate had heard many who claimed to know the truth, and who were willing to reveal it to him (for a price of some kind). But here, it is as though Pilate has finally come to the point of giving up so far as ever knowing anything to be absolutely true.

I heard Josh McDowell speaking on the radio the other day, and he was describing the same attitude on the part of many college students today. He said that he has spoken on hundreds of college campuses over the years. In the past, students would argue with him as to whether or not the teachings of the Bible were true. They believed there was such a thing as truth; they just weren’t sure what the truth was. Today, McDowell said, when he goes onto a college campus, there is cynicism as to whether anyone can ever know anything to be absolutely true.

There is a very important principle to be learned from our text, one that is just as relevant for today as it was for Pilate 2,000 years ago: “WHENEVER ONE LOSES FAITH IN THE FACT THAT THERE IS ABSOLUTE TRUTH, THERE IS ONLY ONE STANDARD BY WHICH THAT PERSON’S ACTIONS CAN BE MEASURED: POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.” Jesus claims to be the source of truth. Pilate has come to doubt that there is such a thing as absolute truth. And so Pilate’s actions are guided by the principle of political correctness. He does not do what is right. He has already come to the realization that Jesus is innocent. And if this is not enough, Pilate’s wife will send him the message that Jesus is much more than innocent, He is righteous: “While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent him a message, saying, ‘Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for last night I suffered greatly in a dream because of Him’” (Matthew 27:19, NAB).[32]

And so it is that Pilate opts to do what is “politically correct,” even though it is morally wrong. Pilate decides to act out of expedience, handing Jesus over to those who are crying for His blood. Today, we are watching the very same thing happen before our very eyes. No longer are our leaders acting out of principle; all too many are acting out of pure pragmatism.

Sequence of Events

Jews’ decision to kill Jesus, but not before the feast—Matthew 26:1-5; Mark 14:1-2; Luke 22:1-2; John 11:45-53 (a different occasion and time—the resurrection of Lazarus).

Judas’ decision to betray Jesus after anointing—Matthew 26:6-16; Mark 14:3-11; Luke 22:3-6 (Satan enters Judas, who makes deal to betray, but no account of anointing here); John 12:1-8 (no account of Judas’ decision to betray here).

Passover Meal

Preparations—Matthew 26:17-19; Mark 14:12-16; Luke 22:7-12 (Peter and John are the two sent); not in John.

Prediction of Judas’ betrayal (Matthew 26:21-25, where Jesus lets Judas know that it is he—Mark 14:17-21; Luke 22:21-23 (followed by dispute about who was to be regarded as greatest, vv. 24-30); John 13:11, 18-30.

Bread and cup—Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-20; not in John.

Prediction of Peter’s denial—Matthew 26:31-25; Mark 14:26-31; Luke 22:31-34 (different from Matthew and Mark, then followed by need to take money and sword, 35-38); John 13:34-38.

Upper Room Discourse—(only in John 13-16), and High Priestly prayer (only in John 17).

Gethsemane—Matthew 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42; Luke 29:39-46; John (virtually not there, see 18:1-2).

Jesus is betrayed by Judas and arrested—Matthew 26:47-56; Mark 14:43-52 (including naked escapee); Luke 22:47-53 (Jesus heals ear); John 18:2-11 (Peter named as the swordsman, also Malchus).

Jesus brought before Annas—John 18:12-27.

Jesus brought before Caiaphas and Sanhedrin—Matthew 26:57-68 (great confession of Jesus obtained; blasphemy claimed and verdict pronounced); Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54-63 (intertwined account of Jesus before the high priest, and Peter’s denial; then, when day comes, Jesus is brought before the council and condemned—verses 66-71; great confession, condemned); John 18:24, 28 (not really dealt with in John).

Peter’s denials—Matthew 26:69-75 (all in one paragraph); Mark 14:66-72; Luke (see above); in John (Peter’s denials are split between first denial, in verses 15-18, and the second and third in verses 25-27).

Jesus brought before Pilate, handed over for crucifixion—Matthew 27:1-2, 11-31; Mark 15:1-20; Luke 23:1-5 (sent to Herod, verses 6-12, and then back to Pilate, who caves in and turns an innocent man over to this mob to crucify Him, verses 13-25); John 18:28–19:16 (certainly the most detailed account).

Judas’ suicide—(Only in Matthew 27:3-10).

Jesus’ crucifixion—Matthew 27:32-44; Mark 15:21-32; Luke 23:26-43; John 19:27.

Jesus’ death—Matthew 27:45-56; Mark 15:33-41; Luke 23:44-46; John 19:28-37.

Jesus’ burial—Matthew 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:47-56; John 19:38-42.

Guard posted at tomb—Matthew 27:62-66.

Resurrection—Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-12; John 19:1-9.

Guards’ story concocted—Matthew 28:11-15.

I read a very different interpretation of John’s account of the trial of our Lord before Pilate. This account was written by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin. His book is entitled, Jewish Literacy: The Most Important Things to Know About the Jewish Religion, Its People, and Its History.[33] As I cite his words below, I would remind you that I do not agree with his conclusions. I include them so that you will see how some in Judaism view the words of the Gospel writers, like John. Again I would caution you that these are not the words of a Christian, committed to the inerrancy of the Word of God:

Concerning Jesus’ executioner, Pontius Pilate, we have a considerable body of data that contradicts the largely sympathetic portrayal of him in the New Testament. Even among the long line of cruel procurators who ruled Judea, Pilate stood out as a notoriously vicious man. He eventually was replaced after murdering a group of Samaritans: The Romans realized that keeping him in power would only provoke continual rebellions. The gentle, kind-hearted Pilate of the New Testament—who in his ‘heart of hearts’ really did not want to harm Jesus—is fictional. Like most fictions, the story was created with a purpose. When the New Testament was written, Christianity was banned by Roman law. The Romans, well aware that they had executed Christianity’s founder—indeed the reference to Jesus’ crucifixion by the Roman historian Tacitus is among the earliest allusions to him outside the New Testament—had no reason to rescind their anti-Christian legislation. Christianity’s only hope for gaining legitimacy was to ‘prove’ to Rome that its crucifixion of Jesus had been a terrible error, and had only come about because the Jews forced Pilate to do it. Thus, the New Testament depicts Pilate as wishing to spare Jesus from punishment, only to be stymied by a large Jewish mob yelling, ‘Crucify him.’ The account ignores one simple fact. Pilate’s power in Judea was absolute.[34] Had he wanted to absolve Jesus, he would have done so: He certainly would not have allowed a mob of Jews, whom he detested, to force him into killing someone whom he admired.[35]

While I strongly differ with Rabbi Telushkin in most of his conclusions, I did find a couple of his other statements most interesting and informative:

Crucifixion itself, a Roman form of execution, was forbidden by Jewish law because it was torture. Some 50,000 to 100,000 Jews were themselves crucified by the Romans in the first century. How ironic, therefore, that Jews have historically been associated with the cross as the ones who brought about Jesus’ crucifixion (see Christ-killer).[36]

My understanding of Jesus has been largely shaped by Hyam Maccoby, Revolution in Judaea.[37]

Most statements attributed to Jesus in the New Testament conform to Jewish teachings. This is, of course, not surprising, since Jesus generally practiced *Pharisaic (rabbinic) Judaism. However, at least three innovative teachings ascribed to Jesus diametrically oppose Jewish teachings.

1. Jesus forgives all sins …

2. Jesus’ attitude toward evil people: …

3. Jesus’ claim that people can come to God only through him: …[38]

I could not help but see a relationship between Pilate according to John, Pilate according to Rabbi Telushkin, and Burl Cain at the Angola State Prison. Rabbi Telushkin wants us to view Pilate as a cruel and heartless Roman governor, who due to his own hatred and political ambitions, put Jesus to death. By his version, the Jewish religious leaders hardly played a role in the death of Christ. To Telushkin, John’s Gospel is a myth, fabricated to make the Jews look bad, and the Roman governor look good, with the hope of shaming Rome into protecting Christianity. Telushkin views John’s description of Pilate as making this cruel and vindictive governor appear to be as kind and merciful toward Jesus as Burl Cain was toward Antonio James. The fact is that John does no such thing. John’s account of the trial and crucifixion of our Lord depicts the sin and guilt of Pilate, the Roman soldiers, the Jews, and even (to some degree) the disciples—especially Peter. The purpose of this lesson is to consider the condemnation of Jesus as John portrays it, so that we see the guilt of Jews and Gentiles alike. No one but our Lord comes out of this looking good.[39]

3. “Shall I release the King of the Jews?” (18:39-19:7).

   “But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?” {40} They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in a rebellion.”

   (John 19:1-7)  “Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. {2} The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe {3} and went up to him again and again, saying, “Hail, king of the Jews!” And they struck him in the face. {4} Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, “Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him.” {5} When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, “Here is the man!” {6} As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “Crucify! Crucify!” But Pilate answered, “You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” {7} The Jews insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.””

The Jewish religious leaders brought Jesus to Pilate’s residence, rudely summoned the governor at a most uncivilized hour, and then refused to enter his residence, lest they defile themselves! This forced Pilate to come out to them. This is hardly the way for a subject people to treat their Roman governor. Pilate asks the Jews to state their formal charges against Jesus, and they have no direct answer, only the evasion, “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.” This is the equivalent to, “Don’t ask questions, just trust us.”

I find it very difficult to believe that Pilate is as ignorant and uninformed about Jesus as he lets on to these Jews. I believe there must have been the equivalent of what I would call “the Jesus file” in Pilate’s possession. Think about it for a minute. Today, the CIA, the FBI, and who knows how many other federal agencies make it their business to keep track of any person or group that seeks the overthrow of our government. The identity and activities of every known enemy, as well as all those even suspected, are closely monitored, and all of this information is kept on file. So each possible enemy of the state would have his or her own file, containing all kinds of information concerning their statements and their activities.

Do you think it reasonable that Rome would not have kept a “file” on Jesus in that day? It may not have been a file, as such, but I am virtually certain that Pilate kept track of anyone who was popular and had a following among the Jews. Such people had the potential of leading the Jews in rebellion against Rome. Every time Jesus made an appearance in Jerusalem, there was some kind of commotion or disturbance. Surely Pilate was aware of this and kept track of Jesus’ activities. When the Jews brought Jesus before Pilate, it is difficult to believe that He was unknown to the governor, at least by reputation. Pilate no doubt knew what Jesus had claimed, and how the Jewish leaders reacted to Him and His teaching.[40] But Pilate is initially playing out this trial “by the book,” and so he insists that they declare formal charges against Jesus.

When they fail to come up with a suitable charge against Jesus, Pilate instructs them to handle this matter themselves, according to their law. Why are they troubling him with such matters?  They could handle the problem, except for the fact that they have already decided upon the penalty. Those who could not articulate the crime had already determined the punishment.  They were forced to admit it—the reason they brought Jesus to Pilate was because they wanted Him put to death, and according to Roman law, the Jews could not execute anyone. Only Rome could do this, and that is what they are asking Pilate to do, even without a formal charge.

Unwittingly, the Jews were fulfilling prophecy: “This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke indicating what kind of death he was going to die” (verse 32). Old Testament prophecies (such as Psalm 22, for example) had hinted that the Messiah would die by crucifixion. Stoning was the penalty the Old Testament law prescribed for blasphemy, but Jesus Himself had indicated that He would die by being “lifted up” (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32). From eternity past, it had been determined that Jesus would die by crucifixion. Though the Jews often tried to stone Jesus, this was not the way He must die. And so the words of the Jews to Pilate, indicating that Jesus must die, and that they could not execute Him, meant that Jesus must die the “Roman way,” by crucifixion, and not by the “Jewish way” of stoning.

John does not record all the accusations that the Jews had made against Jesus, but Luke’s Gospel indicates that Jesus was accused of several offenses:

1 Then the whole group of them rose up and brought Jesus before Pilate. 2 They began to accuse him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation, forbidding us to pay the tribute tax to Caesar and claiming that he himself is Christ, a king” (Luke 23:1-2).

Only one of these charges seems to interest Pilate—the charge that Jesus claimed to be Christ, a king. Was Jesus a threat to his throne? Would He attempt to overthrow Roman rule? If this were the case, Pilate could not ignore it, not just for Caesar’s sake, but for his own.

And so Pilate goes back inside, into his own residence, away from the clamoring crowd outside. He summoned Jesus to him and asked, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus does answer Pilate’s question, as we see in verse 37, but first He probes Pilate concerning his interest in such matters: “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or have others said it to you about me?” (verse 34). In other words, is Pilate asking for himself, personally, or is he merely interrogating Him? Does Pilate really have an interest in Jesus’ identity? Does he care about such things? It would surely appear that Jesus was gently probing Pilate, testing for any spiritual interest on his part. Our Lord knew who His sheep were (John 10:14, 26-27; 13:18), but even so He sought to encourage Pilate to seek Him.

Pilate’s answer effectively shuts off this line of conversation: “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?” (verse 35). First of all, his answer informs Jesus that he is not really interested in pursuing the spiritual issues that are involved here. Second, Pilate’s response reveals that he does not think that he, as a Gentile, has any part in what this Jew is doing. All he wishes to know is why Jesus has managed to get the Jews so worked up. What kind of trouble was Jesus stirring up? The people who had gathered outside were certainly agitated about something Jesus had said or done, so just what was it He did to provoke them? He must have done something very wrong.

Jesus would not deny that He was the King of the Jews, for this was the truth. Instead, He assured Pilate that His “kingdom” was of no immediate political threat to him. “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would fight to prevent me being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But now my kingdom is not from here” (verses 36-37). This is why Jesus would not allow Peter to continue fighting against those who were seeking to arrest Jesus.

Pilate did not miss the meaning of our Lord’s words, which were clear enough for him: “You are a king, then?” (verse 37). Jesus answers, “You say that I am a king” (verse 38). I believe the NIV rightly captures the sense of our Lord’s words with the rendering, “You are right in saying I am a king.” This closely resembles the translations of the NKJV and the NASB, which have the reputation of being more literal.[41] Our Lord’s response informs Pilate that he is right to understand Him to mean that He is the King of the Jews. But Jesus wants it to be clear that His purpose in coming is revelation, not revolution. He has come to testify to the truth. Those who belong to the truth pay attention to His words.

Pilate’s answer, which we looked at more closely in our last lesson, reveals his cynical attitude: “What is truth?” He had sat in judgment on countless occasions. In Pilate’s mind, he had heard every explanation, every excuse, every justification known to man. He had come to doubt that anyone really spoke the truth. Worse yet, it would seem, he seems to have come to the conclusion that there was no such thing as truth.

Several years ago, I received a traffic ticket for making what was alleged to be an illegal turn. I did it in front of a police officer, as he was giving a ticket to another driver. I knew he saw what I was doing, and yet it never occurred to me that I was doing anything wrong. In fact, I wasn’t. I pled my case, and the judge threw it out, along with several other tickets for the same “offense.” But while I was waiting for my chance to play Perry Mason, I had to listen to some other drivers as they attempted to justify their actions to the judge. The person who was just before me was a young fellow, who owned a high performance automobile and was cited for speeding. He tried to convince the judge that his car would not idle slow enough to allow him to drive it 35 miles per hour. The judge was unimpressed. Pilate must have heard many such explanations.

 

Pilate Confronts the Crowd (18:38b-40)

When he had said this he went back outside to the Jewish religious leaders and said, “I find no reason for an accusation against him. 39 But it is your custom that I release one prisoner for you at the Passover. So do you want me to release for you the king of the Jews?” 40 Then they shouted back, “Not this man, but Barabbas!” (Now Barabbas was a revolutionary.)

Inside his private quarters, and apart from the clamor of the Jews, Pilate interrogates Jesus. Jesus’ claim to be the King of the Jews explains, at least in part, the animosity of the Jewish religious leaders. They have no intention of relinquishing their authority. But whatever threat Jesus poses to them, Pilate seems confident that Jesus is not a threat to him. He returns, intending to announce his “not guilty” verdict to the Jews who are waiting outside. He declares that the charges against Jesus are ill-founded, and thus he has concluded that Jesus does not deserve to die.

At this point, Pilate seems to have an inspiration. Perhaps they would settle for a victory in principle. Pilate could appease them by declaring Jesus guilty, and then graciously releasing Him to them, as was his custom at Passover. In this way, Jesus would not be put to death, but He would have been declared guilty. It was a sort of compromise, which gave both sides (the Jews and Pilate) a token victory. The Jews could boast that Pilate had declared Jesus guilty; Pilate could be at ease that he had not crucified an innocent man. And so he put the matter before the Jews. Should he release Jesus to them on this Passover?

If Pilate expected this ploy to work, he had greatly underestimated how determined the Jews were to kill Jesus. They shouted back, “Not this man, but Barabbas!” (verse 40). In John’s Gospel, the name “Barabbas” seems to appear out of nowhere, mentioned first by the Jews. One senses that some orchestration has already occurred behind the scenes. John tells us, parenthetically, that Barabbas was a revolutionary. The Synoptic Gospels provide us with some very helpful additional details at this point. Luke’s account seems to confirm our suspicions that the Jews were the first ones to think of Barabbas.

18 But they all shouted out together, “Take this man away! Release Barabbas for us!” 19 (He was a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city, and for murder). 20 Pilate addressed them once again because he wanted to release Jesus. 21 But they kept on shouting out, “Crucify, crucify him!” (Luke 23:18-20)

Even Mark’s account leaves room for the view that the idea of releasing Barabbas originated with the Jews, rather than Pilate.

6 During the feast it was customary to release a prisoner to them, whom they requested. 7 A man named Barabbas was imprisoned with rebels who had committed murder in a riot. 8 Then the crowd came up and asked Pilate to carry out the custom for them. 9 So Pilate asked them, “Do you want the king of the Jews released to you?” 10 (For he knew that the chief priests had handed him over because of envy.) 11 But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have him release Barabbas for them instead. 12 So Pilate spoke to them again, “Then what do you want me to do with the one you call king of the Jews?” 13 They shouted back, “Crucify him!” 14 Pilate asked them, “Why, what has he done wrong?” But they shouted more insistently, “Crucify him!” 15 Because he wanted to satisfy the crowd Pilate released Barabbas for them. Then he had Jesus flogged and handed over to be crucified (Mark 15:6-15).

Mark first informs us that Pilate would, at Passover, release one prisoner to the Jews, whomever they requested. In other words, this was a matter requiring Jewish initiative. (Surely Pilate was not eager to release anyone whom he had imprisoned.) Mark then goes on to tell us about Barabbas, and what a menace he was to society. When the Jews approached Pilate, to request the release of a prisoner, he leaped at the chance to release Jesus in this way, but they immediately rejected this proposal, insisting rather that Barabbas be released to them. I do not think that all of this happened spontaneously, but rather that it was planned by the Jewish leaders, and then the crowds were persuaded by their leaders to carry out this plan. It may have appeared spontaneous to Pilate. It was probably designed to look this way. But from the beginning, the Jews sought to gain the release of Barabbas, knowing that Pilate’s desire was to release Jesus. In my opinion, they were skillfully removing this option.

I realize that one could interpret these texts differently, so that releasing Barabbas is initially Pilate’s idea, but I am inclined to see it the other way. To me, Mark and Luke imply that the people first brought up the name of Barabbas. The Jews could see that Pilate did not want to put Jesus to death. They knew from his own lips that he wanted to release Him. The Jews made one last, desperate, move. It was the custom for Pilate to release one man before the Passover, as a gesture of goodwill. The Jews could see that Pilate was about to release Jesus. What if they beat him to the punch, asking for the release of Barabbas, instead? Regardless of who first raised the name of Barabbas,[42] the Gospels agree as to how wicked and violent Barabbas was. He really did deserve to die! He was a robber (John 18:40), and a revolutionary who was guilty of murder (Mark 15:7-8; Luke 23:18-19). Matthew sums it up by calling Barabbas “notorious” (Matthew 27:16).

Pilate is obliged to release someone to the Jews. The Jews have made it clear that it must not be Jesus. They have asked, instead, for Pilate to release Barabbas. As dangerous as Barabbas is, they do not consider him as great a threat as Jesus to the well-being of their nation. In their minds, Jesus is worse than a robber, a revolutionary, and a murderer. They want Jesus executed, and Barabbas released.

Isn’t it interesting that Barabbas is substituted for Jesus, and Jesus for Barabbas? Jesus, the Prince of Peace, dies in the place of a revolutionary, intent on overthrowing Roman rule. Jesus, who restores the dead to life, is put to death in the place of a murderer. Jesus, who instructed Peter to put away his sword, and who restored the ear of Malchus, is portrayed as a greater threat to Roman rule than Barabbas. When man rebels against God, he always seems to substitute something for God. The heathen worship the creature, rather than the Creator (Romans 1:18-23).

   The fact that Herod had found nothing worthy of death encourged Pilate to confront the Jewish leaders and seek to release the prisoner.

   Pilate sought to release Jesus in accordance with the annual custom of pardoning a prisoner at the Passover, then tried to placate the priests with a halfway punishment and a sentimental presentation (19:5).

   Barabbas was a robber (18:40), a notorious prisoner (Matt. 27:16), an insurrectionist and a murderer (Luke 23:19). Who could possibly want that kind of a prisoner turned loose!

Pilate Under Pressure
(19:1-7)

1 Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged severely. 2 The soldiers braided a crown of thorns and put it on his head, and they clothed him in a purple robe. 3 They came up to him again and again and said, “Hail, King of the Jews!” And they struck him repeatedly in the face. 4 Again Pilate went out and said to the Jewish religious leaders, “Look, I am bringing him out to you, so that you may know that I find no reason for an accusation against him.” 5 So Jesus came outside, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Look, here is the man!” 6 When the chief priests and their officers saw him, they shouted out, “Crucify him! Crucify him!” Pilate said, “You take him and crucify him! For I find no reason for an accusation against him!” 7 The Jewish religious leaders replied, “We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he claimed to be the Son of God!”

Have you ever heard a child say something like this: “When I grow up, I’m going to be the President of the United States, and then I can do whatever I want!” What a tempting thought—to be a person so powerful you can have your way. The fact is, it isn’t true. Pilate is proof of this. In the introduction to this lesson, I quoted from the words of Rabbi Telushkin, who contends that John deliberately distorted the facts about Pilate. According to Telushkin, John painted a picture of Pilate as a kind and compassionate man, who really cared about Jesus, and who wanted to keep Him out of harm’s way, but was forced by the Jews to crucify Him.

That is not the picture we find in any of the Gospels, including John! We know that Pilate was a cruel and harsh governor. He did not care for the Jews; indeed, he seems to have despised them. It was not out of the kindness of his heart that he sought to spare the life of Jesus. It was out of self-interest, pure and simple, that he sought to release Jesus. It is not a tender-hearted man that we see here, which makes the point even more dramatic. Pilate is a cruel despot, who seems to take pleasure in offending the Jews. He has no concern for Jesus. He does not wish to make yet another politically incorrect blunder, for which he must give account to Caesar. And he does not wish to be pushed around by these troublesome Jews. He believes that he has no other choice but to give in to their demands, try as he had to persuade them otherwise.

I’ve watched men run their businesses like tyrants, only to go home and cower before their wives, and even their children. It does not make them any less tyrannical; it only accentuates the “power” of those who are able to push them around. Telushkin tries very hard to get the Jews off the hook, and to make Rome and Pilate the real villains in the story of Jesus’ condemnation and execution. It just isn’t true. These Jews (especially the leaders) have taken a very hard-line stance with Pilate. Even though they are a subject people, they would rather risk the wrath of Pilate and of Rome than to allow Jesus to remain alive and free. For them, it is “all or nothing.” They brought Jesus to Pilate to be condemned and to be put to death, and they will settle for nothing less. They “pull all the stops” in their effort to force Pilate to act as they wish. They do not intend to allow Pilate to release Jesus, and they virtually demand the release of the notorious Barabbas.

Pilate has Jesus severely beaten, and orders Him to be brought out for the crowd to look upon Him, wearing the clothing of a king. Is Pilate trying to inspire pity for Jesus on the part of the Jews?[43] Or is he attempting to convince them that their fears of such a “king” are groundless? Does this beaten and bloody fellow really look like a king? Can such a fellow really pose a threat to these Jewish leaders? Pilate has Jesus brought out before them with the words, “Behold the man” (verse 5). Unwittingly, perhaps, Pilate has said more than he knows. The study notes on verse 5 in the NET Bible inform us,

Pilate may have meant no more than something like ‘Here is the accused!’ or in a contemptuous way, ‘Here is your king!’ Others have taken Pilate’s statement as intended to evoke pity from Jesus’ accusers: ‘Look at this poor fellow!’ (Jesus would certainly not have looked very impressive after the scourging). For the evangelist, however, Pilate’s words constituted an unconscious allusion to Zech 6:12, ‘Look here is the man whose name is the Branch.’ In this case Pilate (unknowingly and ironically) presented Jesus to the nation under a messianic title!

Like a teacher trying to gain control of an unruly class, Pilate is attempting to gain control over this situation, which has by now gotten quite out of hand (see Matthew 27:24). As he brought Jesus out for the Jews to behold this bloody and beaten king, Pilate informed them once again that he found no basis for condemning Him. The Jews cried out, demanding that Pilate crucify Jesus: “Crucify him! Crucify him!” Pilate saw that there was no way he could change their minds. And at this point, when his position and power were on thin ice with Rome, he sensed that he did not dare to anger these Jews once again. And so he responded, “You take him and crucify him! For I find no reason for an accusation against him!” (verse 6). The Jews quickly responded, “We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he claimed to be the Son of God!”

4. “Where did you come from?” (19:8-16).

   The Romans and Greeks had numerous myths about the gods coming to earth as men (note Acts 14:8-13), so it is likely that Pilate responded to the phrase “Son of God” with these stories in mind.

   “When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, {9} and he went back inside the palace. “Where do you come from?” he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. {10} “Do you refuse to speak to me?” Pilate said. “Don’t you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?” {11} Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.” {12} From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, “If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.” {13} When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge’s seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). {14} It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour. “Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews. {15} But they shouted, “Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!” “Shall I crucify your king?” Pilate asked. “We have no king but Caesar,” the chief priests answered. {16} Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus.”

   Why did Jesus not answer Pilate’s question? Because He had already answered it (John 18:36-37). It is a basic spiritual principle that God does not reveal new truth to us if we fail to act upon the truth we already know. Furthermore, Pilate had already made it clear that he was not personally interested in spiritual truth.

   Of course, our Lord’s silence before both Herod and Pilate was a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:7. Peter later used this as an example of suffering Christians to follow (1 Peter 2:18-23).

   Jesus then spoke His last words to Pilate, words that reveal His faith in the Father and His surrender to His will:

    “Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.” {12} From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, “If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.” {13} When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge’s seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). {14} It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour. “Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews. {15} But they shouted, “Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!” “Shall I crucify your king?” Pilate asked. “We have no king but Caesar,” the chief priests answered. {16} Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus.”

   The “preparation” refers to the preparation for the Sabbath which would begin at sundown that day (Friday). Being the Passover Sabbath, it was an especially holy day. The religious leaders were more concerned about their traditions than they were knowing the truth and obeying the will of God.

   Pilate was uneasy throughout this entire proceeding.  He made at  least four trips between the outer court where he met the Jews (18:28) and the inner chamber or hall where he took Jesus for questioning:

– 18:29: Pilate went out to meet the delegation and prisoner

– 18:33: Pilate went in and called Jesus for consultation

– 18:38: Pilate went out again to report his verdict

– 19:1: (inference) Pilate went in again to order the scourging

– 19:4: Pilate went out again to present Jesus

– 19:9: Pilate went back again to question Jesus further

– 19:13: Pilate brought Jesus out again for the final verdict

   From the human standpoint, the trial of Jesus was the greatest crime and tragedy in history. From the divine viewpoint, it was the fulfillment of prophecy and the accomplishment of the will of God.

   The fact that God had planned all of this did not absolve the participants of their responsibility. In fact, at Pentecost, Peter put both ideas together in one statement:  (Acts 2:23)  “This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.”

Now, the real reason for the animosity of the Jews toward Jesus is out in the open. Jesus is not merely claiming to be the “King of the Jews,” He is claiming to be the Son of God.[44] Pilate was uneasy before, but now he is truly afraid. It was one thing for him to condemn an innocent man. It was even worse to condemn the Jewish Messiah. But to crucify the Son of God—that was an entirely different matter. The stakes in this very risky competition could hardly get any higher than this! I don’t think that Pilate believed these claims were true; it was just that he was not certain that they were false. Pilate was caught in the middle, between a highly agitated and committed group of Jews, and a man whom he now understood was claiming to be more than a king, but that He was the Son of God.

It was time for yet another conference behind closed doors, back in Pilate’s residence, away from the chaotic scene outside. Pilate asked Jesus, “Where do you come from?” Throughout His ministry (and throughout the Book of John), the answer to this question was given: Jesus came down to earth from the Father in heaven (John 3:13, 31; 6:38, 41-42, 50-51, 58). But this was not the time to be speaking of such things. Regardless of where Jesus came from, the issue was about His guilt or innocence under the law. The issue was whether or not Pilate would give in to the pressure being applied by the Jews. Although Jesus had spoken to Pilate earlier, He now keeps silent. (Can you imagine what Pilate might have thought or done had Jesus told him He had come down from heaven?)

Pilate is amazed, and baffled. He resorted to the only thing that seemed to work for him—his authority. Did Jesus not understand what he, as governor, could do? Pilate let Jesus know that His life was in his hands. He had the power to release Jesus, or to crucify Him. Now this ought to strike terror into His heart, or so Pilate must have thought. But it didn’t. The reason it didn’t is because Pilate’s power and authority were both limited and delegated. It was Jesus who was “Lord” here, as elsewhere. Pilate may have been a powerful man, but he was not sovereign. Jesus has one last thing to say to Pilate, something which seems to have caused Pilate’s knees to begin to meet each other. How amazing it is that Pilate’s most calculated words seem to have no impact on Jesus, but our Lord’s words strike terror into the heart of a man who loved to terrorize others: “You would have no authority over me at all, unless it was given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of greater sin.”

Verse 11 has always been a difficult verse for me to understand. Why does Jesus speak to Pilate about his authority over Him? What do these words about Pilate’s authority over Him mean? Who is “the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate”? Why would Jesus bother to mention this individual’s sin to Pilate? And why is Pilate so distressed by our Lord’s words? Let’s seek to answer these questions by looking once more at our Lord’s statements.

“You would have no authority over me at all, unless it was given to you from above.”  As indicated previously in footnote 14, I am inclined to favor the rendering of the New King James Version which reads, “Jesus answered, ‘You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.’” When Jesus added perfect humanity to His undiminished deity at the incarnation, He submitted Himself to human authority—to His parents, as well as to religious and political leaders. He therefore did not challenge Pilate’s authority to try Him, and to release or crucify Him. He would fully agree with the truth that is stated later by the Apostle Paul:

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except by God’s appointment, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God. 2 So the person who resists such authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will incur judgment 3 (for rulers cause no fear for good conduct but for bad). Do you desire not to fear authority? Do good and you will receive its commendation, 4 for it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be in fear; for it does not bear the sword in vain. It is God’s servant to administer retribution on the wrongdoer (Romans 13:1-4).

I think Jesus goes beyond stating a general principle here. It was true that Pilate’s authority to rule was God-given, and that he would have to give account for his stewardship in this matter. I believe the words Jesus spoke to Pilate were more pointed. Pilate is trying to frighten Jesus into speaking. “Don’t you know who I am, and the power I possess? Don’t you know what I can do to you if you don’t cooperate? Your fate is in my hands.” Our Lord’s answer might be paraphrased this way: “I understand that you have certain power and authority, but you should understand that yours is a God-given authority. If you are trying to instill fear in Me, it won’t work, because you do not have the power to harm Me unless it is the will of God for Me, as indeed it is.” Pilate is issuing a threat, and Jesus’ response informs Pilate that his threat is an empty one. Pilate cannot do anything to Jesus that he wants; he can only do to Jesus what God wants. Pilate is not free to harm our Lord unless this is God’s will. And since it is God’s will, Pilate is surely not sovereign, as he wishes to imply. He cannot do whatever he chooses to Jesus.

Who is “the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate”? After qualifying Pilate’s power in relation to Himself, Jesus adds, “Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of greater sin.” Who is this person who has “handed Jesus over” to Pilate? Notice in the first place that Jesus uses the singular, not the plural. He speaks of one person “handing Him over,” and not a group of people. He can hardly be speaking of the Jews, or even of the Jewish religious leaders here. He cannot mean the Sanhedrin, who tried Jesus and condemned Him. He can hardly be referring to Annas alone, or to Caiaphas alone, since there are many Jewish leaders who have played a part in Jesus’ arrest, trial, and condemnation, leading up to this moment before Pilate.

John’s expression, “handed over,” is used 11 times previously in this Gospel (6:64, 71; 12:4; 13:2, 11, 21; 18:2, 5, 30, 35, 36). In its first 8 occurrences (6:64–18:5), this verb is consistently rendered “betray” by the NASB, and in each case, it clearly is used in reference to Judas. The next 3 instances of this verb (18:30, 35, 36) are found in the context of Jesus’ trials, after His betrayal and arrest, and thus they are rendered “handed over” by the NASB. I would have to conclude that when this verb is used here, it must be referring to Judas.

My conclusion is hardly new or novel. But why would Jesus mention Judas to Pilate? And why would Jesus’ reference to Judas strike such fear into the heart of Pilate? From Matthew’s Gospel, it would seem that Judas may already have died by his own hand (Matthew 27:3-10). Is it possible that Pilate knew about Judas’ role in all this, and also that Judas had already killed himself? That might give Pilate pause for thought!

Look once more at what Jesus said to Pilate: “You would have no authority over me at all, unless it was given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of greater sin.” Jesus has pointed out that Judas was guilty of a great sin. Judas is now dead, by suicide. While Judas may be guilty of greater sin, Jesus implies that Pilate will also be guilty, of a somewhat lesser sin. Now we begin to see why Pilate is getting more and more uneasy about condemning Jesus, and why he wants so much to release Him. Pilate seeks to instill fear in Jesus, by trying to impress Him with his authority. Instead, Jesus instills fear in Pilate, by reminding this governor where his power comes from, and by indicating that any harm done to Him is God’s will. Even though the death of Christ is God’s will, it will also be the result of Pilate’s sin, for which he must some day give account. No wonder Pilate is getting nervous!

This may be a very important point. Pilate seems to have been involved in the arrest of Jesus from the early stages. Judas’ role in this matter must have been known to Pilate. How else would Roman soldiers have been dispatched, along with Judas and the arresting party (see John 18:3, 12)? This may also help to explain why the Jews brought Jesus to Pilate, expecting him to pronounce Jesus guilty, without formal charges.[45] Pilate may well have sought to rationalize his role in this whole affair by trying to convince himself that he was not to blame for the outcome of this matter. After all, wasn’t this the doing of Judas? Hadn’t he made the deal with the Jewish leaders and set up the arrest of Jesus? Wasn’t it really Judas who had handed Jesus over for trial? Our Lord’s words send Pilate a very disturbing message: “Judas bears the guilt for his great sin, Pilate, but you will bear the guilt of your sin, too, even if it is a lesser sin.” The guilt of one man in the betrayal and crucifixion of Jesus does not absolve the other guilty parties of their guilt.

Pilate must now go back out to the hostile Jewish mob, which is demanding the release of Barabbas and the death of Jesus. Pilate earlier was convinced that Jesus must have done something terribly wrong to provoke the wrath of these Jews. Then he realized that Jesus was innocent. Now, he is aware that Jesus could be far more than an innocent man; He may be the Son of God. And so he goes out to face the crowd, intent on convincing them that Jesus must be released. The crowd will have none of this talk! In desperation, they finally play their trump card: If Pilate releases Jesus, he proves that he is no friend of Caesar.[46] And, the inference is that they will see to it that Caesar hears about this. Jesus has claimed to be a king; let Caesar hear about Pilate turning such a fellow loose in Jerusalem.

Pilate has been out-maneuvered, and he knows it. And so he has Jesus brought outside, and then he sits down on the judgment seat called Gabbatha, to render his verdict. Time is marching on, and time is of the essence, not so much for Pilate as for the Jews. It is the day of preparation for the Passover. The crucifixion must be over by nightfall, and it was already almost noon. Was it out of malice that he said to the Jews, “Look, here is your king!”? Their response was predictable. They shouted out, “Away with him! Crucify him!” Pilate then asked them, “Shall I crucify your king?” This was a foregone conclusion, wasn’t it? Why does Pilate go through all these seemingly needless motions? I think this is his attempt to endear himself to these folks (who had just threatened to destroy his career by registering their complaint with Caesar) by seemingly bowing to their will. They know they have this governor by the throat (or, “over a barrel,” as we would say), and that they have won. And so Pilate gives Jesus over to them to be crucified.

The words of the Jews are chilling. In response to Pilate’s question, “Shall I crucify your king?” the high priests reply, “We have no king except Caesar!” This statement is matched by the equally sobering words recorded in Matthew: “Let his blood be on us and on our children!” (Matthew 27:25). In one final act of rebellion against God, the Jewish religious leaders have seemingly renounced all Messianic hope, placing their faith and hope in Caesar, rather than in Jesus, the Christ (the Messiah). They have exchanged Jesus Barabbas for Jesus of Nazareth, and Caesar for Christ. What a horrible bargain they have made!

Conclusion

The great question which is still hotly debated today is, “Who was guilty for the death of Jesus Christ?” We can see from our text that Judas was certainly guilty. We know as well that Pilate was guilty. He was not a kind-hearted man, eager to release Jesus. He was a cruel and calculating tyrant, who sought to release Jesus for his own self-serving reasons, and not out of justice or compassion. He wanted to release Jesus because the Jews wanted to kill Him. This governor, though one of the meanest, most powerful men in history, was powerless to save Jesus from death, even though he sought to do so.

Pilate was guilty for condemning Jesus to death, but he does not bear the guilt alone. The Jews were guilty as well. They were the ones who sought to execute Jesus, even though they could not even legally condemn Him for wrong-doing. They were the ones who pressured and threatened Pilate, so that he finally gave in to their demands and handed Jesus over for crucifixion. As hard as some may work to excuse the Jews for what they did, they too were guilty for the death of our Lord.

The point is that both Jews and Gentiles are responsible for rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, and for nailing Him to the cross. All men are guilty before God. If we had been there that day, we also would have cried out, “Away with Him! Crucify Him!” John’s account makes the guilt of all those present evident, both Jews and Gentiles. At the same time, as our Lord had indicated to Pilate, His death was the plan and purpose of God—His means for providing salvation for lost men:

23 When they were released, Peter and John went to their fellow believers and reported everything the high priests and the elders had said to them. 24 When they heard this, they raised their voices to God with one mind and said, “Master of all, you who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything that is in them, 25 who said by the Holy Spirit through your servant David our forefather, ‘Why do the nations rage, And the peoples plot foolish things? 26 The kings of the earth stood together, And the rulers assembled together, Against the Lord and against his Christ,’ 27 For both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, assembled together in this city against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, 28 to do as much as your power and your plan had decided beforehand would happen (Acts 4:23-28).

For the last 2,000 years, the question has not changed; only those who must decide have changed. John’s Gospel puts before us the assertion that Jesus is indeed who He claimed to be—the Son of God, who came to this earth as the God-man, by adding perfect humanity to His undiminished deity. He came to reveal God to men, and to be rejected by His own people, the Jews, and also by the Gentiles. He was crucified, buried, and raised from the dead. He shed His blood for the salvation of all who trust in Him. And so as you read the words of our text, the decision you must make is virtually the same as that which faced Pilate: Who do you believe Jesus to be, and what will you do with Him? The answer of the Bible is this: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31).

THE TRIAL OF PETER

   The second trial that night was the personal spiritual trial of Peter. We pick up his story as Jesus was washing the disciples’ feet. Peter, true to his nature, reacted impetuously, at first forbidding Jesus to wash his feet and then asking Jesus to wash his entire body (13:6-9).

   Later, when Jesus told the disciples that He was going where they could not follow, Peter insisted that nothing could keep him from following his Master. “Lord,” he asked, “why can I not follow You right now? I will lay down my life for You” (13:37).

   Jesus then prophesied, “Will you lay down your life for Me? Truly, truly, I say to you, a cock shall not crow, until you deny Me three times” (13:38). Peter could not imagine what he would say and do within the next few hours.

   Later that night, in the garden, Peter was ready to fight the soldiers who came to arrest Jesus (18:10). Taking a sword, he struck a man named Malchus, a slave of the high priest. Although Peter probably intended to cut off the slave’s head, he only struck a glancing blow and cut off the man’s right ear.

   As quickly as the fight started, it stopped; Jesus told Peter to put up his sword. At this point in the story, Peter appeared to be the boldest and bravest of the disciples.

   Peter’s personal trial intensified when Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest. John explained that Peter was actually inside the courtyard when the following events occurred (18:15, 16). A slave girl who attended the door asked Peter as he entered, “You are not also one of this man’s disciples, are you?” (18:17). He answered, “I am not.” The man who, only a short time earlier, had been ready to fight the band of soldiers sent to arrest Jesus, was now intimidated by a single slave girl!

   The night was cold, so the slaves and soldiers built a charcoal fire by which to warm themselves. Peter was standing with these people around the fire, warming himself, when one of them said, “You are not also one of His disciples, are you?” (18:25). For the second time, Peter denied any connection with Jesus, saying, “I am not.”

   While Peter was still swallowing the bitterness of his second denial, another slave spoke up, this one an eyewitness to the events in the garden and a relative of the man Peter had cut with his sword. “Did I not see you in the garden with Him?” (18:26) the man asked. John recorded that “Peter therefore denied it again; and immediately a cock crowed” (18:27). While Jesus was tried and found innocent, Peter was tried and found to be a coward.

   The Gospels should always be read on three different levels. At the first level is the question of what happened in Jesus’ life. At the second level is the issue of what the Gospel writer intended for the early church to learn from his retelling of the story. On the third level, we should ask what this Gospelmeans for our lives today.

   A “first level” reading of Peter’s trial tells us that Peter denied Jesus three times.

   A “second level” reading brings us to a message which has been presented several times already’ in this Gospel, namely that Christians must be willing to demonstrate their faith publicly, even when doing so may bring severe persecution.

   Our “third level” reading calls us to be bold in our faith and to confess our commitment to Jesus, even though the world may ridicule or hurt us.

   A good friend of mine went to Africa as a missionary in 1995. He loves the Lord and has a tremendous commitment to share the gospel with others. By virtue of being a foreign missionary, he stands out as a zealous Christian. In one of his early work reports, he wrote about his plane flight to Africa:

  “… one man who sat next to me on the airplane to Uganda last Spring said something which

has stuck with me like a shadow. After I explained that we were coming to Uganda to preach about Jesus Christ,

the European man said to me, “Excuse me,but don’t they already have gods in Africa.” I didn’t know

how to respond, so I said nothing.

    What bothered my friend about that experience, I think, was that he felt like Peter on the night of Jesus’ arrest. I, too, know what it is like to be intimidated into silence. John’s Gospel tells the story of Peter’s trial as a warning to us about the conspiring forces in our world that cause us to do the unthinkable: to deny our Lord!

CONCLUSION

   The three trials we have considered describe the gospel and our response to it. Jesus was tried and found innocent. You and I, like Peter and Pilate, are now on trial ourselves. The question for us is “Will we stand up for the One who died for us?” When the pressure is on, will we be strong enough to say, “I am a disciple of Jesus the Nazarene”? We cannot avoid making a decision about Him. What will you do with Jesus?

JOHN 18 in review

Jesus left the place of prayer for His meeting with His enemies. “The brook Kidron” reminds us of King David, who was exiled from his throne by the rebellion of his own friends and family and passed through that same body of water (see 2 Sam. 15).

I. The Arrest (18:1-14)

Jesus deliberately met Judas and his band, for He knew what was about to happen. (See 13:1-3 and 6:6. Jesus always knew what He would do, for He always knew the will of the Father.) It is interesting to note that the arrest took place in a garden. Christ, the Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), met the enemy in a garden and triumphed, while the first Adam met the enemy in a garden and failed. Adam hid himself, but Christ openly revealed Himself. As you meditate on these two garden scenes, see what other contrasts you can find.

Judas stood with the enemy. “And being let go, they went to their own company” (Acts 4:23). People will always go where their hearts are; Judas had Satan in his heart and so stood with Satan’s crowd. Sad to say, Peter mixed with this same crowd! Note how Jesus stunned them when He used the divine name, “I AM!” (The word “he” in v. 6 is not in the original Gk. manuscripts.) The same name that saves believers (17:6) condemns the lost.

In v. 8, Jesus warned His disciples to go away, lest they fall into trouble. He had already told them they would scatter (16:32), but Peter preferred to remain and fight—and got into danger because of it. Some have suggested that Peter’s sin was not that he “followed afar off,” but that he followed at all! He should have obeyed the Word and departed.

Verse 9 refers back to 17:12, where Christ spoke of the disciples’ salvation. Here He is talking about their physical protection. Thus, Christ keeps us in two ways: He preserves our souls in salvation and keeps our bodies, sealing them by His Spirit, until the day of redemption (Eph. 1:13-14).

In using the sword, Peter was definitely disobeying Christ. Christ does not need our protection; the weapons we are to use to fight Satan are spiritual ones (2 Cor. 10:4-6; Eph. 6). Peter used the wrong weapon, had the wrong motive, acted under the wrong orders, and accomplished the wrong result!

How gracious of Jesus to heal Malchus (Luke 22:51) and thus protect Peter from harm. Otherwise there might have been another cross on Calvary, and Peter would have been crucified before God’s time had come (John 21:18-19).

II. The Denial (18:15-27)

The narrative focuses on Peter now, and we see his sad decline. In the Upper Room, Peter had boasted three times that he would remain true to Christ (Matt. 26:33, 35; John 13:37). In the Garden, he had gone to sleep three times (Mark 14:32-41) when he should have been praying. Then he denied the Lord three times, and in John 21 had to confess his love for Christ three times! In the Upper Room Peter fell into the snare of the devil (Luke 22:31-34); in the Garden he yielded to the weakness of the flesh; and now in the priest’s courtyard, he would surrender to the pressures of the world. How important it is to watch and pray!

We do not know who the unnamed disciple was in v. 15. It may have been Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea; it is not likely that John (often called “that other disciple”—20:3) would have been on friendly terms with the high priest. See Acts 4:1-3. Whoever he was, this disciple led Peter into a sin by opening the door for him!

Verse 18 says “it was cold,” so Peter sat by the fire, but Luke 22:44 states that Christ had been sweating as He prayed that night! Peter was cold both physically and spiritually and had to warm himself at the enemy’s fire. He had “walked in the counsel of the ungodly” and was now “standing in the way of sinners.” He would soon “sit in the seat of the scornful” (see Ps. 1:1). While Christ was suffering, Peter was warming himself, not sharing Christ’s sufferings at all.

---

[1] Verses 30-32, 45-53.

[2] This is not to suggest that Jesus did not orchestrate the events prior to their arrival. I have already dealt with this in the introduction to this lesson.

[3] Compare our Lord’s words which He cried out on the cross, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46), the people standing by who heard it had no idea that Jesus was citing the words of Psalm 22:1. They thought Jesus was crying out for Elijah (verse 47).

[4] Rome may have required the equivalent of an arrest warrant from the Jewish authorities. Only our Lord seems to have been named. While the Jews would have been tempted to arrest everyone there (especially after Peter’s use of his sword), they felt powerless to do so in the light of their interchange with Jesus, which underscored the fact that they had been authorized to arrest only Jesus.

[5] In this chart, important topics are highlighted in bold type; contributions unique to that one Gospel are in bold type and underscored.      

[6] In Matthew, it appears to be a different slave girl (26:71); in Mark (14:69), the wording would allow for the same slave girl, or a different one.

[7] As you may recall from Lesson 27 (John 12:1-8), I understand that Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8 all refer to the same incident, while Luke 7:36-48 describes another anointing. 

[8] Originally, the high priest held the office for his lifetime, but under Roman rule the high priest was appointed whenever the Roman ruler saw fit. The Jews may have refused to accept anyone but Annas as the true high priest, which would explain his powerful role in the nation, and in the death of Jesus.

[9] James S. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ (Nashville: Abington, 1978), p. 196.

[10] William Barclay, Crucified and Crowned (London, 1961), p. 61, as cited by Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 749, fn. 27.

[11] “The other disciple had the advantage of being known to the high priest, and it seems agreed that the word known means more than casual acquaintance. It seems to indicate that the man belonged to the high priest’s circle.” Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), IV, p. 613.

[12] Some have conjectured that John came to Jerusalem, where he sold fish to the high priest’s family. That would explain John’s words here, perhaps. It could also be as simple as the high priest owning a vacation cottage on the Sea of Galilee, where John met and befriended one his sons, and thereby became known to the family. John does not wish to elaborate on such matters. He only tells us that the “other disciple” and the high priest were somehow acquainted.

[13] I may be making too much of too little, but there is not a great deal of difference between our Lord’s “I am’s” (see for example, John 14:6; 15:1, 5; 18:5-6, 8) and Peter’s “I am not’s.”

[14] In the Greek text, the expression translated, “I am not” is only two words.

[15] “‘No one should wonder that he followed, or cry him up for his manliness. But the wonder was that matter of Peter, that being in such fear, he came even as far as the hall, when the others had retreated. His coming thither was caused by love, his not entering within by distress and fear’ (LXXXIII. 2; p. 308).” Chrysostom, cited in Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. 751, fn. 29.

[16] Note our Lord’s repeated use of the personal pronoun “I,” focusing on His own actions, and thereby diverting attention from His disciples.

[17] This is not to deny the fact that Jesus veiled His teaching due to the rejection of His words (cf. Mark 4:1‑25, 33‑34). The point here is that there was no duplicity in His teaching. He taught His disciples in much more depth and detail than the masses, but His teaching was consistent. He had no hidden agenda.

[18] Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 755, fn. 40.

[19] Remember the temple cleansing and the overturned tables of the money changers.

[20] This staggering and sudden thrust expects an affirmative answer by the use of ouk, not mh as in verses 17 and 25, but Peter’s previous denials with the knowledge that he was observed by a kinsman of Malchus, whom he had tried to kill (verse 10), drove him to the third flat denial that he knew Jesus, this time with cursing and swearing (Mark 14:71; Matthew 26:74). Peter was in dire peril now of arrest himself for attempt to kill. Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931), vol. V, p. 290.

[21] Luke 22:70; see also 23:3; Matthew 26:64; 27:11.

[22] See “Sequence of Events” summary at the end of this lesson.

[23] The thought seems to have occurred to Gamaliel later on, as we can infer from his words of warning in Acts 5:33-39.

[24] Although the terms differ, the issue is really the same for both Pilate and the religious leaders. Both are concerned about their power and positions. Both are concerned that Jesus might cause their downfall (see John 11:47-48).

[25] J. Sidlow Baxter writes, “He was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace, a Samaritan woman. Half Idumean and half Samaritan, there was not a drop of Jewish blood in his veins; and ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’ seemed a fitting domain for such a prince.” J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore the Book (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, [six volumes in one] 1960), vol. 5. p. 65.

[26] Reference to Pontius Pilatus by Tacitus in The Annals of Imperial Rome, Book XV, chapter 47: “… neither human resources, nor imperial generosity, nor appeasement of the gods, eliminated the sinister suspicion that the fire had been deliberately started. To stop the rumor, NERO, made scapegoats—and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved CHRISTIANS (as they were popularly called). Their originator, CHRIST, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the Procurator of Judaea, PONTIUS PILATUS (governor from 26 to 36 A.D.) But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out again, not just in Judaea (where the mischief had started) but even in Rome. All degraded and shameful practices collect and flourish in the capital. First, NERO had the self-admitted Christians arrested. Then, on their information, large numbers of others were condemned—not so much for starting fires as because of their hatred for the human race. Their deaths were made amusing. Dressed in wild animals’ skins, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be set on fire after dark as illumination. … Despite their guilt as Christians, and the ruthless punishment it deserved, the victims were pitied. For it was felt that they were being sacrificed to one man’s brutality rather than to the national interest.”

[27] This information comes from Paul L. Maier, In the Fullness of Time (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1991), pp. 145ff.

[28] A study note in the NET Bible reads, “This is an event that otherwise is unattested, though several events similar to it are noted in Josephus (Jewish War 2.169-74; 2.175-77; Antiquities 13.372; 18.55-59; 18.60-62; 18.85-87). It would have caused a major furor.” The NET Bible (Dallas, TX: Biblical Studies Press), 1998.

[29] These are outlined by Maier on pages 148-153.

[30] This disdain was based upon their understanding of Exodus 20:4-5, which prohibited the use of engraved images.

[31] Maier, pp. 148-149.

[32] I am aware that the NET Bible renders it differently (“innocent”). Technically, the term can be rendered either “righteous” or “innocent,” but here it seems to me that “innocent” does not go quite far enough. Perhaps there is a two-fold meaning (not uncommon for John). She may have referred to Jesus as “innocent” when we know that He was really “righteous.”

³ Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Literacy: The Most Important Things to Know About the Jewish Religion, Its People, and Its History (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1991).

[34] Is this not precisely the point Pilate tries to make with Jesus, and which Jesus challenged so forcefully that it instilled even greater fear in Pilate? This we shall discuss shortly, when we come to John 19:10-11.

[35] Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Literacy, p. 127. Rabbi Telushkin’s conclusions fall short of the facts in a number of areas. He tries very hard to pin the death of our Lord on Rome, rather than upon the Jews. Throughout the Gospel of John, the term “the Jews” is employed to show that it was, in fact, the Jews to whom Jesus came and presented Himself as their Messiah, and it was these same Jews who rejected Him, and who orchestrated His death. The Romans share in the guilt of the rejection and crucifixion of Jesus, but the guilt of the Jews is emphasized in John’s Gospel. Further, Telushkin states that Christianity was banned by Roman law. This was not the case. Christianity was viewed as a faction of Judaism. The Jews sought to isolate Christianity from Judaism in Acts chapter 18, but this effort failed miserably. The decision of Gallio (Acts 18:12-17) that Christianity was, in fact, Jewish assured the protection of the church for some time to come, and Paul’s protection under Roman law demonstrates this, as we see in later chapters of the Book of Acts. One would be hard pressed to conclude from the New Testament that the Gospels portray Pilate in a favorable and sympathetic light. In our previous chapter, we have already shown the cruelty of Pilate. It is true that the more information Pilate obtained from and about Jesus, the more uneasy he was about putting Him to death, but this in no way suggests that he felt kindly towards Jesus. Pilate was concerned with only one thing—protecting his interests and promoting his own agenda.

[36] Telushkin, pp. 127-128.

[37] Telushkin, p. 129.

[38] Telushkin, pp. 128-129.

[39] If anyone looks “good” at all, it would be the women who faithfully stood by their Lord at the cross.

[40] For example, we read in Matthew 27:18 and Mark 15:10 that Pilate knew the religious leaders had delivered Jesus to him “out of envy.” This would seem to be information he had discerned or obtained before this trial.

[41] “You say correctly that I am a king” (NASB); “You say rightly that I am a king” (NJKV).

[42] It is interesting that some manuscripts refer to Barabbas as “Jesus Barabbas,” and thus the question of Pilate, as rendered by the NET Bible: “Whom do you want me to release for you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the Christ?” (Matthew 27:17).

[43] The parallel accounts have a slightly different emphasis. There, it does not seem as though Pilate beats Jesus in order to appease the Jews, and to turn them from their plans to have Him crucified. There it would seem that Jesus is beaten by the Romans soldiers, out of sight of the Jews, for the amusement of the soldiers, and in preparation for His crucifixion. If they can beat the life out of Jesus, so that He is already half-dead before He is placed on the cross, the whole process will go more quickly. When we read that our Lord’s cross was taken up by Simon of Cyrene, it does seem as though our Lord has little strength left. The beatings (He was beaten several times) would surely account for much of this.

[44] See Matthew 26:63-64; 27:40, 43; Luke 22:69-70.

[45] As suggested earlier, the “trial” of our Lord before the Jewish Sanhedrin may have been a formality, to salve their consciences, and to silence the objections of members like Nicodemus (see John 7:50-51).

[46] The NET Bible has a very helpful study note here, which I quote in part: “… Pilate was of the equestrian order, that is, of lower nobility as opposed to senatorial rank. As such he would have been eligible to receive such an honor. It also appears that the powerful Sejanus was his patron in Rome, and Sejanus held considerable influence with Tiberius. Tacitus (Annals 6.8) quotes Marcus Terentius in his defense before the Senate as saying that close friendship with Sejanus “was in every case a powerful recommendation to the Emperor’s friendship.” Thus it is possible that Pilate held this honor. Therefore it appears that the Jewish authorities were putting a good deal of psychological pressure on Pilate to convict Jesus. They had, in effect, finally specified the charge against Jesus as treason: “Everyone who makes himself to be king opposes Caesar.” If Pilate now failed to convict Jesus the Jewish authorities could complain to Rome that Pilate had released a traitor. This possibility carried more weight with Pilate than might at first be evident: (1) Pilate’s record as governor was not entirely above reproach; (2) Tiberius, who lived away from Rome as a virtual recluse on the island of Capri, was known for his suspicious nature, especially toward rivals or those who posed a political threat; and (3) worst of all, Pilate’s patron in Rome, Sejanus, had recently come under suspicion of plotting to seize the imperial succession for himself. Sejanus was deposed in October of AD 31. It may have been to Sejanus that Pilate owed his appointment in Judea. Pilate was now in a very delicate position. The Jewish authorities may have known something of this and deliberately used it as leverage against him. Whether or not they knew just how potent their veiled threat was, it had the desired effect. Pilate went directly to the judgment seat to pronounce his judgment.”

  

A possible theme for this chapter is: “The mission of Jesus Christ and of His followers on earth, unto the glory of God.” This is a prayer from the very heart of God in the flesh!

   The prayer itself was probably spoken after the little party had left the room where the last supper was eaten, and before they crossed the Kidron Valley to the Mount of Olives.

   “After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: “Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. {2} For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. {3} Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”

   In Luke 11:1, the disciples said to Jesus, “Lord, teach us to pray!” It reminds us that we must learn  to pray.

  While praying is as natural to the Christian as breathing is to a mammal, even breathing must be studied and practiced if it is to be correct.

   Singers and public speakers work on their breathing so that they get the most out of their voice and don’t injure it. The fact that we have been praying since childhood is no guarantee that we really know how to pray effectively.

– Posture is not important.

We don’t know if our Lord was kneeling or standing, but we do know that He lifted up His eyes to heaven. The important thing is the posture of the heart. It is much easier to bow the knees than to bow the heart in submission to God. While the outward posture ã‚á‚î‚ be evidence of the inward spiritual attitude, it is now always so.

– We pray to the Father.

The biblical pattern for prayers is to the Father, in the name of the Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit.

   Jesus addressed His Father six times in this prayer…there’s nothing wrong with saying “Father” several times in a prayer! It is not a “bad habit that needs to be cured!”

   We address the Father because prayer is based on sonship.  And it is more than an obligation of the Father to listen…it’s delight when His children fellowship with Him and share their needs.

   Matthew 7:11: “If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!”

   The Father’s heart reaches out in love to His own, and He longs to share good things with them. And the better we know our Father, the easier it is to pray in His will.

– We must yield to the Father’s will.

   A storm passed over the Florida coast and left a great deal of wreckage behind. The next day, as the men were cleaning up their little town, one man said: “I’m not ashamed to admit that I prayed during that storm last night.” One of his friends replied, “Yes, I’m sure the Lord heard many new voices last night.”

   Prayer is not like those little red boxes we see in buildings and occasionally on street corners, marked “use only in emergency.”

   I enjoy sharing good things with my children, but if they only spoke to me when they were in trouble or in need of something, our relationship would quickly deteriorate. Unless we do the will of God, our living will negate our praying.

   Phillip Brooks said: “The purpose of prayer is not to get man’s will done in heaven, but to get God’s will done on earth.”

   If we want to pray in the will of God then we must live in the will of God. Prayer is not something that we do; it is something that we are. It is the highest and deepest expression of the inner person.

– The glory of God should be our primary concern.

   The word “glory” is used in one form or another eight times in this prayer. What does it mean?

   In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word translated “glory” meant “weight, that which is important and honorable.” In the New Testament, the Greek word translated “glory” means “opinion, fame.”

   Theologians tell us that the “glory of God” is the sum total of all that He is, the manifestation of His character. The glory of God is not an attribute of God, but rather is an attribute of all His attributes! He is glorious in wisdom and power, glorious in His mighty works, and glorious in the grace He bestows upon us.

   This prayer teaches us to put God’s concerns before our own!

– We must pray in faith.

   Suppose the Master had looked at His situation through human eyes alone. Could He have prayed the way He did? Suppose He looked back on His years of ministry and evaluated that ministry from a human point of view. It would have looked like a failure! He had very few followers, and His own nation had rejected Him. Humanly speaking, His work had failed.

   Yet, He prayed “I glorified Thee on the earth, having accomplished the work which you gave me to do.”

   By faith, He would be that “grain of wheat” planted in the ground, and He would produce much fruit (John 12:24).

   – Peter was about to deny Him three times

   – Judas at that very hour was with the Jewish council and selling the Master like a common slave

   – Peter, James, and John would go to sleep in the Garden when they should have been encouraging their Lord

   – Yet, He knew this small band of men would be sent into the world to share the gospel message

   -And he knew they would succeed!

* Before we leave these first three verses, let’s make some quick comments:

– The idea of giving is important in this prayer. “Give” in one form or another is used 17 times in our Lord’s prayer and 76 times in the gospel of John.

– Three remarkable gifts are mentioned in these verses.

1. The Father gave the Son authority.

   We’re introduced here to the mysterious inner workings of the Trinity, the plans that were made “before the world was” (vs. 5).

   Authority is the right to act, to exercise power. God gave Christ the authority to do what He did on earth. He also gave Him the authority to judge.

2. The Father gives people to the Son.

   God decided that His Son would live, die, and be raised…and those who would respond to this “gospel” in faith would receive eternal life through faith.

3. The Son gives eternal life to those who are given to Him.

   The word “life” is used 36 times in this gospel. In fact, John wrote so that sinners might trust Christ and receive eternal life…and know they have received it!

   There are five special blessings that belong to those who have been given to the Son by the Father:

   – Eternal life (vs. 2)

   – Knowledge of the Father (vs. 6-7)

   – Christ’s intercession on their behalf (vs. 9)

   – Divine protection in this world (vs. 11-12)

   – Eternal glory (vs. 24)

   What is the earliest recollection that you can bring back from the deep mine of your memory? I have a faint remembrance of my mother going to the hospital for surgery and my grandmother coming to care for us children, but the picture is quite dim.

   The oldest written text the historians can lay their hands on is dated about 3500 B.C., and was found on some clay tablets unearthed in Iraq in 1952.

   But the Bible takes us back beyond time and into eternity. Why? Because we can never really understand what is going on “in time” unless we know what happened “before the world was.”

   If you and I did not believe that God was on His throne, working out His perfect will, we would sink in the storms of life.

   All of which takes us to the opening verses of our text for today:

* What happened “before the world was” (John 17:4-5)

   “I have brought you glory on earth by completing the work you gave me to do. {5} And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.”

   Several facts emerge to help us discover the answer to the question:

– Jesus existed as eternal God.

   Of course, all three members of the Godhead existed; but our special focus of attention in John 17 is the Lord Jesus Christ.

   The gospel of John begins with a declaration of the deity of Christ: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. {2} He was with God in the beginning.”

   It is worth noting that six different persons in this gospel bear witness that Jesus is the Son of God:

   ­ John the Baptist: (John 1:34: “I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”)

   ­ Nathaniel: (John 1:49: “Then Nathaniel declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.“)

   ­ Peter (John 6:69: “We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.“)

   ­ The healed blind man (John 9:35-38: “Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and when he found him, he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” {36} “Who is he, sir?” the man asked. “Tell me so that I may believe in him.” {37} Jesus said, “You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you.” {38} Then the man said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshipped him.”)

   ­ Martha (John 11:27: “Yes, Lord,” she told him, “I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who was to come into the world.”)

   ­ Thomas (John 20:28: “Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”)

   The Samaritans called Him “the Savior of the world” in John 4:42, a title that could only belong to Deity. And our Lord Himself affirmed His eternality in John 8:58: “I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

2. Jesus shared the Father’s glory.

  John 1:14:  “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

    John 17:22:  “I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one:”

     John 17:24: “”Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.”

    Hebrews 1:3:  “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.”

   While the verses clearly state this fact, we need to realize one more amazing fact: those who have trusted Jesus possess this glory now and will see God’s glory and share it in heaven one day!

3. Jesus was beloved of the Father.

   “God is love” (1 John 4:8)…and before God poured His love out on mankind, the Persons of the Godhead expressed their perfect love to one another in a glorious communion.

   The Scriptures especially point out the Father’s love for the Son: Matthew 3:17: “And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

   Matthew 17:5: “While he was still speaking, a bright cloud enveloped them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!”

   And think of what it meant when the Son left the bosom of the Father and came to earth to be hated!

   John 3:16 (“”For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life”). takes on new depth of meaning when you try to comprehend the eternal love of the Father and the Son!

4. The Father established His eternal purpose.

   No verses better teach this principle than Ephesians 3:10-12:  “His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, {11} according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord. {12} In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence.”

   That God has an “eternal purpose” for all things is both scriptural and logical. If God is God at all, He is sovereign. He cannot work independently of His own nature, for then He would cease to be God, something that is impossible.

  His ultimate purpose is to bring glory to His name…and will do this by uniting “all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10). And it’s to be done through us, the church.

5. The Son covenanted to die for sinners.

   This, of course, is a part of God’s eternal plan.

   Luke 22:21-23:  “But the hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table. {22} The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed, but woe to that man who betrays him.” {23} They began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this.”

   Ephesians 1:4:  “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love”

   2 Timothy 1:9:   “…who has saved us and called us to a holy life–not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time…”

The lessons we can learn from our text are many. Let me highlight a few and suggest some implications of these eternal truths.

First, there are lessons to be learned regarding prayer. While our Lord prayed often, we have only a few recorded prayers. I would point out that even the “longer” prayers are relatively short. Jesus warned about “lengthy” prayers, prayers extended because there was the false assumption that “longer was better.” It is not wrong to pray lengthy prayers, but it is not always necessary either. The prayers of our Lord are all different. They do not have a “boiler plate” form, in which He merely fills in the blanks. There is no one style of prayer, and not even one consistent posture for prayer. What is consistent is our Lord’s submission to the will of His Father, and His constant desire to bring glory to the Father. There are times when our Lord’s prayers are private, just as there are times when His prayers are public. There are times when others can benefit (be edified) by hearing our prayers. There are other times when our prayers need to be absolutely private (as, for example, when we confess our secret sins). Also, prayer is an essential companion and counterpart to the proclamation of God’s truth.

The principle lesson should undoubtedly come from the primary theme of our text, and that is the glory of God. It is not only the dominant theme of our text, it is the dominant purpose of history. We are all familiar with Romans 8:28: “And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28).

We know from this text and others that God uses every circumstance to produce that which is for the ultimate good of His saints. Nothing will ever come into our lives that does not will work together for our good.

The same is true for God’s glory. God employs all creation, every human being, every circumstance, to bring glory to Himself. He uses the rebellion of sinful men to glorify Himself:

Surely the wrath of man shall praise You; With the remainder of wrath You shall gird Yourself (Psalm 76:10, NKJV).

For the scripture says to Pharaoh: “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may demonstrate my power in you, and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth” (Romans 9:17).

Is it any wonder, then, that the glory of God should be the ultimate goal of every Christian?

So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God (1 Corinthians 10:31).

11 And in this regard we pray for you always, that our God will make you worthy of his calling and fulfill by his power your every desire for goodness and work of faith, 12 that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thessalonians 1:11-12).

My confident hope is that I will in no way be ashamed but that with complete boldness, even now as always, Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or death (Philippians 1:20).

Whoever speaks, let it be with God’s words. Whoever serves, do so with the strength that God supplies, so that in everything God will be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong the glory and the power forever and ever. Amen (1 Peter 4:11).

One of the most joyful wedding ceremonies I have ever performed I conducted for a couple who attends our church. These two lovely people had been dating for some time, and they wanted to be certain that it was God’s will for them to marry. We spent a good deal of time talking through some biblical issues. One evening we were all sitting in our living room, and the fellow turned to me and said, “You know, Bob, I’ve decided that whether we should get married or not depends on the answer to one simple question: ‘Will our marriage glorify God?’” He could not have said anything more true, and more encouraging to me than that. They did get married, and I was privileged to conduct the ceremony.

It is popular among young Christians today to wear a bracelet which has the letters “WWJD” on it. The letters stand for, “What would Jesus do?” That’s not a bad question. From our text and others, we can always safely say, “Jesus would do what brings glory to the Father.” Do you agonize over some decision in your life? Are you seeking to know the will of God in some particular matter? I would suggest that your first response should be that you ask this simple question: “Will it glorify God?” The answer to that question will provide you with much of the guidance you may be seeking.

Christmas is just a few days away. The Lord Jesus came to this earth to glorify God. This He accomplished by His life, by His death, and by His resurrection from the dead. At His birth, the angels who appeared to the shepherds praised God, saying, “Glory to God in the highest. …” That is what Christmas should be for us—a time when we ponder the gift of our Lord, who came to die for our sins, and then to proclaim with hearts filled with joy and gratitude, “Glory to God in the highest.” Often, the glory of God is overlooked or neglected because of our focus on other things—namely, what we hope to gain from Christmas. Let this Christmas season be a time when we seek, first and foremost, to glorify God. And let this be the pattern for the rest of the year. The glory of God is never contrary to our “good”; indeed, the glory of God is the Christian’s highest good. Let it be so for each of us.

In the days of our Lord, there were no printing presses, no Bible concordance programs on CD ROM, no Internet web sites from which to download good Bible study materials. In Old and New Testament times, books were exceedingly rare. One had to copy a book by hand, rather than reproduce another copy by a mere push of a button. Much learning took place by means of discipleship. A disciple followed his chosen “master” around, serving him, listening to him, and learning from him. This is the way our Lord taught, or “discipled,” His disciples. They accompanied Him virtually everywhere He went. They listened and asked many questions, and they learned. Jesus sometimes sent them out two-by-two, which gave them an opportunity to put their teaching and training into practice.

By the time we come to John 17, the discipleship program which our Lord had designed for His disciples was virtually complete. Jesus was ready to return to His Father, leaving His disciples behind. Chapter 17 is our Lord’s “High Priestly Prayer.” The portion of that prayer which we will study in this message is specifically focused on those eleven disciples who remained with Jesus, and who overheard this prayer as they were making their way to the Garden of Gethsemane.

It is not an easy prayer to expound, and reading the commentaries tends to confirm this assessment. As I have agonized in my attempts to trace the argument of our text, I found it helpful to create a grid which traces the development of this chapter by means of several themes or dimensions.

Grid for the Study of John 17

Time	Eternity Past	Christ’s Earthly Ministry	The Future
Place	Jesus in heaven with the Father	Jesus on earth with His disciples	Jesus in heaven, with disciples remaining behind
Relationship	Father and Son	Son and disciples	Father, Son, disciples, and believers in the Son
Function	The Father is known by the Son	The Son reveals the Father to His disciples	Disciples make the Son known to the world
Possession	Believers belong to Father	Believers given to and possessed by the Son	Believers entrusted to Father’s keeping
Mission	Father’s plan to send His Son to earth	Son accomplishes His mission on earth	Son sends His disciples into the world

It is also beneficial to remind ourselves of the structure of John 17, and of our text, verses 6-19.

The Structure of John 17

Verses 1-5	Jesus and the Father
Verses 6-19	Jesus and His disciples
Verses 20-26	Jesus and future generations of believers

The Structure of John 17:6-19

Verses 6-10	Jesus and His earthly mission: mission accomplished
Verses 11-19	Jesus’ return to heaven—His prayers for the disciples who remain

* THE DYNAMICS OF DISCIPLESHIP (17:6-8).

   Discipleship is a popular topic in the church these days. It seems just about everybody is talking about discipling somebody. The word that is translated disciple in our New Testament   is used 264 times, and it is found exclusively in the four gospels and in Acts.

   In the New Testament days, a ‘disciple’ was someone who bound himself to a teacher in order to learn both the theory and the practice of the subject or trade. Perhaps our closest modern equivalent would be an ‘apprentice.’

   A true disciple was not simply a student who learned from books…he was also a doer who watched his teacher, obeyed him, and learned from actual practice…he wanted to be like his teacher.

   In the verses for this section, our Lord outlined the stages in the experience of His disciples:

1. They belonged to the Father (vs. 6)

   “”I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word.”

     It seems obvious that they belonged to the Father first of all by creation. Paul reminded the Greek philosophers in Acts 17:28 that it is in God that we “live and move and exist.”

   We need God because we are the creatures and He is the Creator. When man refused to acknowledge his creature dependence on God, he began to magnify himself as God (remember Romans 1:18-32)? Mankind today worships and serves the creature, not the Creator; and this helps to explain why the world is in such a mess. Man is playing God, and he is not able to do the job!

   The disciples also belonged to the Father through their belonging to the Jewish nation. They were the sons of the covenant; they were born into that one nation on the face of the earth that God had chosen for Himself.

2. The Father gave the Word to the Son (vs. 7-8)

   “Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. {8} For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me.”

   Two other verses from John speak to this idea:

   John 7:16: “Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me.”

   John 12:49: “For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.”

   Statements like these help us to understand but in a small measure the intimate fellowship that existed between the Father and the Son when Jesus was ministering on earth. It explains why our Lord rose early in the morning for prayer, and why He often withdrew from the crowds.

   The Father gave the words to the Son, just the words that the disciples (and the other people) needed to hear. What did the Son do with these words?

3. The Son gave the words to the disciples (vs. 8).

    It is the Word of God that reveals the Person of God to us. While God does reveal Himself in nature and in the workings of divine providence in the world, He is more fully and clearly revealed in the Word which He has given us through His Son.

   And while He was upon the earth, He gave his “seal of approval” on the Bible. He quoted from Old Testament scriptures often and promised the Holy Spirit would assist in the writings of the Gospels in John 14:26: “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.”

Verses 6-8 summarize the ministry of our Lord from the time of His coming to the moment He is speaking, only minutes from His arrest. In verses 11-19, Jesus concentrates on the time following His arrival. From our Lord’s words in verses 6-10, we see His estimate of what His ministry has brought about in His disciples:

They belonged to the Father in eternity past.	verse 6
They were given to Jesus by the Father.	verse 6
They have obeyed the Father’s word.	verse 6
They understand all that Jesus was given came from the Father.	verse 7
They have accepted the teaching Jesus has given them from the Father.	verse 8
His disciples now understand and believe Jesus was sent into the world by the Father.	verse 8

Verses 9 and 10 set forth the basis of our Lord’s prayer for His disciples:

He is praying for His disciples because they are believers.	verse 9
He is praying for those who belonged to the Father, and now belong to Him.	verse 9
He is praying for those whom He and the Father possess together.	verse 10
He is praying for them because He is glorified by them.	verse 10

The things which have been accomplished in the lives of His disciples are those things which our Lord has Himself accomplished. And so it is in verses 6-10 that we also find our Lord summing up the ministry which He has performed in the lives of His disciples:

1. He has revealed the Father to them—verse 6.
2. He has given them His Word—verses 7-8.
3. He has been glorified by them—verse 10.

It would be easy to spend a great deal of time on the details of these verses, but time will not permit, and it would hinder us from following the flow of the argument of these verses. I am seeking to convey the “big picture” here, and I think it can be summarized in two words: “Mission accomplished.”

Notice that virtually everything Jesus claims to have accomplished is described in the past tense. We realize that some of these “accomplished” items are not yet “realized.” We also know that these words will prove to be true. Is it not wonderfully encouraging to realize that even before His disciples have become what they will be, our Lord can speak confidently about them, as though they have already attained their destiny? This is because our destiny is ultimately in His hands:

28 And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. 29 Because those whom God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those God predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified (Romans 8:28-30).

For I am sure of this very thing, that the one who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6).

23 Now may the God of peace make you completely holy and may your spirit and soul and body be kept entirely blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 He who calls you is trustworthy, and he will in fact do this (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24).

Because of this, in fact, I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, because I know the one in whom my faith is set and I am convinced that he is able to protect until that day what has been entrusted to me (2 Timothy 1:12).

1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, we must get rid of every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and run with endurance the race set out for us, 2 keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith. For the joy set out for him he endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:1-2).

24 Now to the one who is able to keep you from falling, and to cause you to stand, rejoicing, without blemish before his glorious presence, 25 to the only God our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, power, and authority, before all time and now and for all eternity. Amen (Jude 1:24-25).

What an encouragement it is to know that He is not only the one who sought us and saved us, but He is also the One who keeps us, and who perfects us! We will most certainly become what He has purposed and promised, and so it is that He can speak of our future as though it were already realized.

The emphasis of verses 6-10 is that Jesus has accomplished all that the Father sent Him to do, in terms of equipping the disciples for their “mission.” Jesus has revealed the Father to them and given the Word of the Father to them. He has told them all that they need to know,[1] and thus His earthly mission of making disciples of them has been completed. Of course, His atoning work on the cross of Calvary still lay ahead, but that too is as good as done. Jesus is now free to leave and to return to the Father because He has accomplished all that the Father gave Him to do.

One can hardly estimate the benefits we have gained because our Lord was able to speak these words. On the one hand, the completion of His mission means that He has defeated Satan, and that He has accomplished the salvation of all those the Father has given Him. It means that He can return to the Father in heaven, so that the Spirit can be sent into the world in a new and better way. It is the basis for our mission and ministry. It is the basis of our security and our ultimate perfection (which takes place in heaven, not here on earth—1 John 3:2).

The apostle Paul desired to “finish well” in his life and ministry. We can see for ourselves the kind of disqualification which Paul dreaded and sought to avoid:

24 Do you not know that all the runners in a stadium compete, but only one receives the prize? So run to win. 25 Each competitor must exercise self-control in everything. They do it to receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one. 26 So I do not run uncertainly or box like one who hits only air. 27 Instead I subdue my body and make it my slave, so that after preaching to others I myself will not be disqualified (1 Corinthians 9:24-27).

As Paul approaches the time of his departure, he can rejoice, knowing he has finished well and that the work God had given him to do has been accomplished:

6 For I am already being poured out as an offering and the time for me to depart is at hand. 7 I have competed well; I have finished the race; I have kept the faith. 8 Finally the crown of righteousness is reserved for me. The Lord, the righteous Judge, will award it to me in that day; and not to me only, but also to all who have set their affection on his appearing (2 Timothy 4:6-8).

Men do not always “finish well.” In the secular world, it is seldom so. This past week, we have witnessed the impeachment of our President by the House of Representatives. We have also seen the resignation of the next Speaker of the House of Representatives. What dramatic examples these are of being disqualified! We who have come to know Jesus as our Savior should dread disqualification and should desire to finish well. How thankful we can be that He who is the “author and perfecter of our faith” finished well.

* THE WORD

– is a gift from God

– generates faith (Romans 10:17: “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.”)

– it reveals Christ to us (John 5:39: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life.  These are the Scriptures that testify about me”).

4. The disciples received the word and believed.

    The Word of God is like seed, and it must be received into the “soil” of the heart if it is to take root and produce fruit (Luke 8:4-15).

   God prepares the heart for the Word: Acts 16:14-15: “One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. {15} When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us.”

   But we can harden our hearts against God’s word: Hebrews 3:7-14: “So, as the Holy Spirit says: “Today, if you hear his voice, {8} do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the desert, {9} where your fathers tested and tried me and for forty years saw what I did. {10} That is why I was angry with that generation, and I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my ways.’ {11} So I declared on oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.'” {12} See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. {13} But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. {14} We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.”

   If we ignore or neglect God’s Word, or if we treat it carelessly, we are admitting to God that He is not important in our lives.

5. The Disciples Kept the Word (vs. 6).

   The word here for “kept” can also mean “obey” or “guarded. “ Certainly, the disciples were consistent in their priority to the teachings of God. And they kept the Word because they loved Jesus Christ!

   John 14:23-24: “Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. {24} He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.”

   1 John 2:4-5: “The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. {5} But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him.”

6. The Disciples Shared the Word with Others.

   The Lord sent them into the world that they might win others through the lives. There is a church today because Christians have been faithful to share the Word down through the ages!

   2 Timothy 2:2: “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.”

   Suffice it to say now that a true disciple is not a reservoir but a gushing fountain, an artesian well of spiritual blessing. He does not live to get…he lives to give

   – What he receives from the Lord, he shares with others

   – And in sharing, he receives more

   John 8:31-32: “To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. {32} Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

   We are living in enemy territory, so, beware! The world system hates Christ while pretending to honor God. Satan prowls about as a roaring lion.

   The very atmosphere we breathe is poisoned with “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life” (1 John 2:16). The world system around us appeals to the flesh within us so that we fight a steady battle against temptation.

   How, then, can the dedicated Christian remain safe and secure in such a dangerous world? Our security is in Jesus Christ!

   These verses (beginning at verse nine) indicate and affirm this security.

    “I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. {10} All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. {11} I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name–the name you gave me–so that they may be one as we are one. {12} While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.”

   Jesus had great concerns for His disciples because they were remaining in the world even though He would no longer be in the world with them. While they would be in the world, they were not part of the world.

   Because of their mission, they were being sent into the world. Jesus’ prayer about their relationship with the world brings to mind the prayer of Elijah in 1 Kings 19:4. During a particularly discouraging time in his ministry, he had prayed that God would take his life and remove him from the world. God refused Elijah’s request and soon had him working in the world once again, as a prophet of God.

   Jesus’ prayer for His disciples describes for us our relationship with the world today. Although we are in the world, we are not of the world. As servants of God, our mission is to go into the world with His gospel.

   Our relationship with:the world is no simple matter, but Jesus’ prayer on the eve of His crucifixion goes a long way in making this difficult issue clearer.

   To be sure, He was praying for His disciples in these particular verses, but we today stand in a similar relationship to the Savior as the disciples did in that day.

   In this prayer, our Lord looked upon the work of redemption as something already finished. He was to leave the world and return to the Father in heaven, and there He would enter into His “unfinished work” of interceding for His church.

   Both the Father and the Son love us and are concerned for our welfare and spiritual success:

   – we pray to the Father through the authority of Christ

   – we come to the High Priest at the throne of grace

   – and He gives us “grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:16)

   We also need to realize that we are the Father’s gift to the Son. And eternal life is the Son’s love gift to all who believe on Him.

   But one point cannot be overlooked! The Son also prayed for unity  among His church:

   – “each one reach one” is a popular motto in the church

   – Christ took time to take care of individuals in need

   – but individuality is left when we become part of the “family”

   – We’re to be one! United!

   The Christian becomes a part of the Body of Christ, the church. And his life from then on must reflect this great fact!

   The spiritual unity of the church is an important theme in this prayer…it’s mentioned in verse 11 and also verses 21-23: “…that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. {22} I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: {23} I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

   There are several illustrations of this great truth given in scripture:

   – the Vine and the Branches (John 15:1-10)

   – the Body and the members (1 Cor. 12)

   – the stones in the Temple (1 Peter 2:4-10)

   Because we are related to Christ, we are related to each other! We belong to each other and we need each other.

Our text contains the last public prayer of our Lord before His arrest, trial, and crucifixion on the cross of Calvary. I find that this prayer becomes much more meaningful to me when I consider it in the light of two other events which are recorded for us in the New Testament. The first (and closest in time) is the prayer of our Lord in the Garden of Gethsemane, recorded in the Synoptic Gospels. It takes place only moments after the high priestly prayer is concluded. In His prayer in Gethsemane, we see the depth of our Lord’s agony, knowing that He is to “become sin for us” (2 Corinthians 5:21), to suffer the wrath of God for our sins, and not for His own.

The second event is that of our Lord arranging for someone to assume the responsibility of caring for His mother (John 19:25-27). I see from these two events that even in the midst of great personal agony, our Lord does not let His suffering keep Him from attending to the needs of those whom He loves. Thus, Jesus prays for His disciples and for those who will believe through them, before He prays that agonizing prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. And on the cross, Jesus sees to it that His mother is cared for. In both cases, Jesus is taking care of those He will leave behind. We can go even further with this, because our Lord’s agony itself is for the sake of others. It is by means of His death that Satan is defeated and the penalty for our sins is paid. Therefore our Lord’s high priestly prayer is typical of His love and concern for His own.

In the light of this, how dare we ever question God’s love and care for us. How many times have we found ourselves in some kind of pain or discomfort and cried out to God in our distress, thinking that He does not care (cf. Mark 4:38)? He cares enough to endure the agony of the cross. And even when the horrors of the cross are immediately before Him, Jesus cares enough to pray this prayer for His disciples. No wonder the writer to the Hebrews and the Apostle Peter can write,

5 Your conduct must be free from the love of money and you must be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you and I will never abandon you.” 6 So we can say with confidence, “The Lord is my helper, and I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?” (Hebrews 13:5-6)

6 Humble yourselves then under the mighty hand of God and he will exalt you in due time, 7 casting all your care on him, because he cares for you (1 Peter 5:6-7).

We would do well to ponder these words by D. A. Carson:

Would to God that the truths of these verses might burn themselves into our memories. It is a rare and holy privilege to observe the divine Son of God not only formulating his prayers but formulating the grounds for his petitions. These grounds reflect the essential unity of Father and Son, and reveal that Jesus’ prayers for his people trace their argument back to the inscrutable purposes of Deity. When the Son of God himself has offered prayers for his followers like these prayers, and when the prayers have been grounded as these prayers have been grounded, it is horrifying to remember that, in moments of weakness and doubt, we still rebelliously question the love of God for his own people. This passage ought rather to engender the deepest and most stable faith, the most adoring gratitude. The disciples of Jesus Christ are loved with a special love … which distinguishes them from the world.[2]

I am deeply indebted to D. A. Carson for reminding us that this prayer of our Lord teaches us what we should pray for:

The spiritual dimensions to this prayer are consistent and overwhelming. By contrast, we spend much more time today praying about our health, our projects, our decisions, our finances, our family, and even our games than we do praying about the danger of the evil one. Materialists at heart, we often discern only very, very dimly the spiritual struggle of which Paul (for instance) was so deeply aware (Eph. 6:10ff.). The Lord’s (model) prayer likewise teaches us to pray, ‘Deliver us from the evil one’ (most likely the correct rendering). Certainly the church will not produce many spiritual giants when it fails to discern its chief enemy.[3]

At the outset of this lesson, I pointed out that our text divides into two major sections: verses 6-10, which focus on the time our Lord has spent with the disciples up till the present moment, and verses 11-19, which address the disciples’ needs because of His departure. If you broaden the scope of your thinking to include verses 1-5 and 20-26, then you find that this prayer of our Lord covers every period of time, from eternity past to eternity future. Verses 1-5 look back in time, to the glory which our Lord had with His Father from eternity past. Verses 20-26 look forward in time, down through the ages of church history to the present moment for us. And, this last part of His prayer includes all those yet to be saved, until the time of His return. Thus the prayer encompasses all of time.

I would suggest to you that this is really the only vantage point from which we can rightly appraise our circumstances at the moment. Jesus could pray as He did because He knew not only the past, but the future. It goes far beyond this, as you know. He not only knows what the future holds, He controls the future. Our Lord manifests the calm certainty that only God can exhibit, because He is God, and because He sees the trials and tribulations of the moment from an eternal perspective.

I could not help but recall Psalm 73, in which Asaph complains to God about the prosperity of the wicked, and the suffering of the righteous. To Asaph, it looked like God had lost control, and as though God was not living up to His promise to prosper the righteous. It was only when the psalmist began to view his circumstances from a divine and eternal perspective that he saw things clearly, and began to think and to respond rightly to God.

I was struck by the structure of our Lord’s prayer in John 17. Jesus clearly separates and distinguishes between those who were our Lord’s disciples at the time (verses 6-19), and those who would later come to believe in Him through the witness of the disciples or others (verses 20-26). I take this distinction to imply that there is a substantial difference between His disciples (or apostles) and other Christians, who are saved at a later time. There are those who would teach that there are apostles today, just as much as there were apostles in New Testament times. At least some would maintain that these contemporary “apostles” speak for God, with greater authority than others. Jesus speaks of His disciples as a distinct group, a very restrictive group. The disciples themselves seem to concur with this, as can be seen by their insistence in Acts 1:12-26 that one who would replace Judas must have been present with Jesus. It would seem as though only two men met the requirements set down by the disciples for Judas’ replacement. We need to be careful about calling men apostles today, when Jesus seems to have restricted them to His day. The apostles of the first century church seem to be in a class of their own. Our Lord’s prayer appears to assume this distinction. I am reminded of the writer to the Hebrews, who also distinguishes the apostles from those who will believe because of the gospel that they proclaimed:

1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken through angels proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, 3 how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was first communicated through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, 4 while God confirmed their witness with signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will (Hebrews 2:1-4).

The “us” of verse 3 seems to be synonymous with the “those who believe in me through their testimony” of John 17:20. The “those who heard him” of verse 3 seems to be synonymous with “the disciples” for whom Jesus prays in verses 6-19.

Safe. What a wonderful assurance. Earlier in John, Jesus said, 27 “My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; no one will snatch them from my hand. 29 My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one can snatch them from my Father’s hand. 30 The Father and I are one” (John 10:27-30). Do you remember that song, “Safe am I”? “Safe am I; Safe am I, in the hollow of His hand.” And notice that the safety of the sheep is linked to the unity of the Father and the Son (10:30). Safety is His work. We are to abide, but He keeps us safe.

This safety that our Lord prays for is linked to the work He has given us to do. Do you remember how many times in John’s Gospel the Jews sought to kill Him? They could not lay a hand on Him until it was His time. He was “safe” from the opposition of the devil and from men. It did not keep Him from suffering, and from death. But it did keep Him from being prevented from fulfilling His mission. I would suggest to you that no one is ever more safe than the one who is pursuing God’s will, who is fulfilling their God-given mission. Blessed assurance!

This text weaves together two themes which might be considered antithetical. On the one hand, we find very clear indications that the outcome of the disciples’ lives is certain and secure. Jesus speaks of their future growth and ministry as though it were already accomplished. On the other hand, our Lord speaks of the opposition and resistance of Satan, who seeks to bring about their downfall, and ours. Our Lord’s intercession on behalf of His own, along with the Father’s “keeping” of those who are His, guarantees the future of the disciples, and, by extension, the future of all who trust in the Lord Jesus. Nevertheless, in chapter 15, Jesus teaches that abiding in Christ is something that every believer needs to work at, through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit, and through the provision of the Word of God.    

It is very clear from our Lord’s words in this passage that one of His major concerns is that there be unity among His disciples. One should not at all be surprised that Jesus saw this as a problem. Frequently in the Gospels, we read of the disciples arguing with one another about who was the greatest (cf. Luke 9:46ff.; 22:24ff.). It wasn’t just a matter of them getting along, either. It was a matter of them staying together. In 16:1, Jesus spoke of the possibility of them “falling away.” Later on in chapter 16, Jesus said, “Look, a time is coming—and has come—when you will be scattered, each one to his own home, and I will be left alone” (John 16:32a).

Indeed, this is precisely what happened. When Jesus was arrested, the disciples did not gather together for a prayer meeting; they all fled (Mark 14:50). Even after Jesus had risen from the dead and His tomb was found to be empty, the disciples “went back to their homes” (John 20:10). When it was apparent that Jesus had been raised from the dead, the disciples were seldom all together in one place, and in chapter 21, Peter sets out to go fishing, with only a partial gathering of the disciples (John 21:1-3). There was not the “unity” we would have hoped for until after our Lord’s departure (Acts 1:12-14; 2:1).

Christian unity is a very difficult issue. We should certainly say that there should never be division over matters like race or economic status (cf. Galatians 2:11-21; Ephesians 2:11-22; James 2:1-13). Neither should there be divisions over matters of personal conviction (Romans 14:1–15:6, esp. 15:6), or over material gain (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, esp. v. 7). We should, however, divide over immorality and open sin (Matthew 18:15-20; 1 Corinthians 5; 2 Thessalonians 3:10-15; Titus 3:10-11) and doctrinal heresy (Galatians 1:6-10; 1 Timothy 1:18-20; 2 John 1:7-11). It is actually those who teach heresy who divide the church, and thus should be put out to avoid divisions (Jude, especially verses 17-19; Titus 3:10-11). Let us be sure that we are not denying our unity in Christ when we refuse to be identified with those who trust in the shed blood of Jesus Christ alone for the forgiveness of their sins, even though they may be of a different theological persuasion or belong to a different denomination. If Christian unity is so important to our Lord, it should be important to us as well.

Verses 1-5 concern the Father and the Son. Verses 6-19 pertain to the Father, the Son, and the eleven disciples of our Lord. Verses 20-26 widen in focus, to include all those who will subsequently come to faith in Jesus Christ. We are tempted to say that these verses pertain to us, but of course they include a much broader group than that. They encompass the time from the moment Jesus spoke these words to the present—2,000-plus years now, and counting.

I believe it is worth noting that our Lord’s words are carefully chosen so that they can include a great multitude of believers over a considerable period of time. While His words allow for these things, they do not necessarily indicate or suggest them. The disciples were inclined to think that our Lord would commence His reign in their lifetime. Even after our Lord’s death and resurrection, they were still thinking in terms of the near future: “So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, ‘Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6).

Jesus does not wish to give them the false impression that His return is immediate, but neither does He intend to convey the fact that it is at least 2,000 years away, and for good reason:

45 “Who then is the faithful and wise slave, whom the master has put in charge of his household, to give the other slaves their food at the proper time? 46 That slave whom his master finds doing this when he returns will be blessed. 47 I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But if that evil slave says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he begins to beat his fellow slaves and to eat and drink with drunkards, 50 that slave’s master will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not foresee. 51 The master will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 24:45-51).

Our Lord desires us to conduct ourselves as though His return were imminent, even though it may not happen in our lifetime. The language of this text and others is sufficiently broad enough to allow for a long period of time before His return, but not specific enough to require a delay. I believe our Lord wants us to think in terms of “sooner,” rather than “later.”

Those who believe[4] are described as having come to faith through the testimony (literally “word”) of His disciples. Certainly there were those who came to faith apart from the disciples, people like the woman at the well (John 4), for example. What our Lord emphasizes is the fact that in the future, men will come to faith through the preaching of the gospel (Romans 1:16-17; 10:6-15). The gospel is declared, defined (e.g., Acts 15), enscripturated,[5] and defended (e.g., Galatians) by the apostles. Because it is through the Word of God that men are saved (see 1 Peter 2:22-25; James 1:21), subsequent believers can be said to have become believers through the word of the apostles.

Jesus does not petition the Father to save these people. Those who will come to faith have already been given to Him as a gift by the Father (see verses 2, 24). Our Lord prays that all those who believe may be one. This is not mere organizational unity; it is an organic and functional unity. It is the same kind of unity that the Father has with the Son. As the Father is “in” the Son, and the Son is “in” the Father, and thus the two are one, so all believers are “in” Christ. Because of their unity with the Son, they are also one with the Father, and one with each other.

This unity is both positional and practical. It is also supernatural. It is for the practical outworking of this supernatural unity that our Lord prays here. The unity of those who are believers in Jesus Christ should be visible to the unsaved world. As the world beholds this unity, they see the presence and the power of the resurrected Christ in His church. Put another way, as believers abide in Christ, Christ abides in them, and the fruit that is produced is a demonstration of our Lord’s presence and power. This is a testimony to the world that Jesus really was sent from the Father, and thus that He really is Who He claimed to be—the Son of God and the Savior of the world.

     * THE MAN WHO SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BORN (17:22).

   “While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.”

   There are some names that have made their way into the dictionary, names such as Jezebel, Benedict Arnold, Cassanova, and Brutus. And Judas Iscariot!

   To call someone a “Judas” would be to classify him with the most infamous traitor in human history. And consider the words of Jesus in Mark 14:21: “The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.”

   In all the lists of the names of the 12 disciples, Peter is always listed first and Judas last. And the New Testament tells us more about these two men than any of the others.

Much of verses 22 and 23 is a repetition of verses 20 and 21. In both places, Jesus prays for unity among believers. Again, in both places, this unity is based upon the unity that exists between the Father and the Son. Further, the purpose for demonstrating this unity is so that the world may know that the Father sent the Son. Two new elements are introduced, however, which are very significant. We shall therefore focus our attention on these new elements, which further expand upon the petition of verses 20 and 21.

The first additional element is that of the “glory” which the Father gave to the Son and the Son has given to believers in Him. What is the nature of this “glory”? It cannot be the glory which our Lord had with the Father before the foundation of the world, the glory which the Son set aside at His incarnation. This is the “glory” which our Lord has just requested from the Father: “And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created” (verse 5).

This is the glory which our Lord prays that His saints might behold, by coming to be with Him in heaven: “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, so that they may see my glory that you gave me because you loved me before the creation of the world” (verse 24).

How can our Lord speak of a “glory” He has already given to His own if He does not yet have it Himself? How can He speak of giving them the “glory” on earth which they can only behold in heaven? We must conclude, then, that the “glory” of which our Lord is speaking is not His “future glory,” but another “glory.”

We may begin by asking this question: If Jesus can say, ‘I have given them the glory that you gave me,’ then what is the nature of the glory which the Father gave the Son? The answer to that question is straightforward: the glory the Father gave the Son was the glory of the humility of the incarnation, culminating both in the glorification of the Son at the crucifixion and in the glory of his resurrected and exalted state. Believers have seen something of this glory, except for the glory Christ now enjoys; and that, too, they shall one day see, since Jesus prays to that end (17:24).[6]

     Jesus purposed to glorify the Father through His incarnation, earthly life and ministry, and through His death, resurrection and ascension. The earthly sufferings[7] of our Lord are part of His glory (John 12:23; 13:31-32; 17:1). And it is this glory—the glory of servanthood and of sacrificial service—which our Lord has given to His disciples. As Jesus was glorified by His coming to this earth, being rejected by men and put to death, so His disciples are also given the same glory, the glory of suffering for the sake of Christ:

7 Such trials show the proven character of your faith, which is much more valuable than gold—gold that is tested by fire, even though it is passing away—and will bring praise and glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed (1 Peter 1:7).

12 Dear friends, do not be astonished that a trial by fire is occurring among you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice in the degree that you have shared in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice and be glad. 14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory, who is the Spirit of God, rests upon you. 15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or thief or criminal or as a troublemaker. 16 But if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but glorify God that you bear such a name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin, starting with the house of God. And if it starts with us, what will be the fate of those who are disobedient to the gospel of God? 18 And if the righteous are barely saved, what will become of the ungodly and sinners? 19 So then let those who suffer according to the will of God entrust their souls to a faithful Creator as they do good (1 Peter 4:12-19).

Our Lord’s earthly glory through His sufferings was consummated in His death on the cross. No wonder He instructs His disciples to take up their cross: Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone wants to follow me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me” (Matthew 16:24; see also Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23). It was His glory to suffer and to die, and it is our privilege and glory as well, to “take up our cross,” whatever that may mean for us personally. This is the way that the Apostle Paul saw it:

20 My confident hope is that I will in no way be ashamed but that with complete boldness, even now as always, Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22 Now if I am to go on living in the body, this will mean productive work for me; yet I don’t know what I prefer: 23 I feel torn between the two, because I have a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far, 24 but it is more vital for your sake that I remain in the body. 25 And since I am sure of this, I know that I will remain and continue with all of you for the sake of your progress and joy in the faith, 26 so that because of me you may swell with pride in Christ Jesus, when I come back to you (Philippians 1:20-26).

This puts our suffering for Christ in a whole new light. It is for His glory. It is also for our good. But the words of our Lord’s prayer indicate that it is also our glory. No wonder Paul writes these words:

10 My aim is to know him, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings, and to be like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:10-11).

The second new element in our text has to do with the intended impact of the believers’ unity upon unbelievers. Jesus prays, “I in them and you in me—that they may be completely one, so that the world may know that you sent me, and you have loved them just as you have loved me” (verse 23, emphasis mine). The first half of the intended result of Christian unity is repeated from our Lord’s earlier words in verse 21. Christian unity will show the world that God the Father sent the Son. But here Jesus goes on to say that Christian unity is also intended as an expression of the Father’s love for those who trust in Jesus. This love which the Father has for Christians is the same love which He has for His Son. The Father loves the Son, and because Christians are “in the Son” by faith, the Father loves us just as He loves the Son.

The unity of the believers reflects the Father’s love. Let’s consider the relationship between unity and love for a moment. In Ephesians 5, Paul is instructing husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church (5:25). Having described how the Lord Jesus loved the church (5:26-27), Paul now instructs husbands to love their wives as their own bodies:

28 In the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one has ever hated his own body but he feeds it and takes care of it, just as Christ also does the church, 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be joined to his wife; and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is great—but I am actually speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless, each one of you must also love his own wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband (Ephesians 5:28-33).

Remember as well the command to love your neighbor as yourself (Leviticus 19:18, 34; Matthew 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27; Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:14; James 2:8). The assumption underlying all of this is that we do love ourselves. We love our own bodies. As members of the body of Christ, we are joined not only to our Lord, but to the Father, and to one another. Our unity should express itself in love toward one another. And since this is a divine love, it reveals God’s love to the world. Men should see God’s love in action, as Christians love one another, because they are one with one another, and with God.

This is a marvelous thought, but also an awesome responsibility. The standard for our love is incredibly high. It is not a merely human love, a love like that expressed by unbelievers. It is not just a romantic love, like we see portrayed on movie and television screens. It is the love of God for our Lord and for us, a love which will prompt one to lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).

   Let’s consider the different acts in the drama of the tragedy of Judas Iscariot:

1. The disciple.

   After a night of prayer, our Lord came down from the mountain and chose 12 men to become His disciples (Luke 6:12-16). Did Jesus know what Judas was like and what he would do? The indications are that He did: John 6:64: “Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.”

   John 2:24-25: “But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men.  {25} He did not need man’s testimony about man, for he knew what was in a man.”

   Then, why did He call him as a disciple? Because it was the will of God. Our Lord prayed all night before He called these men.

   But there have been some interesting (and wrong) responses to this choice:

– Some see Judas as a victim, saying he had to betray Jesus (outside his own choice) to fulfill prophecy.

   But this approach to the problem makes Judas a mere robot, a pawn of God’s omnipotent hand. It robs Judas of humanity and of responsibility, yet the Bible makes it clear that Judas was held responsible for what he did.

   In fact, even Judas admitted his personal guilt in Matthew 27:4: “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.” “What is that to us?” they replied.  “That’s your responsibility.”

– Another approach is that Judas was a victim of Satan.

   But this theory would make a devil out of God! James 1:13: “When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone.”

   That Satan was involved in the sin, no one can deny!  John 13:2 “The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus…As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. “What you are about to do, do quickly,” Jesus told him.”

   Luke 22:1-4: “Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover, was approaching, {2} and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. {3} Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. {4} And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus.”

   The idea was there long before Judas entered the upper room, for he had already contacted the Jewish leaders. And he’d already been a liar and a murderer (John 8:44: “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies”).

2. The thief.  

      Judas was the treasurer of the disciple band and one of his jobs was to distribute money to the poor (John 12:1-8 and 13:26-30). But John also makes it clear that Judas had been stealing money from that treasury:

   John 132:6: “He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.”

3. The traitor.

   Judas had listened to John the Baptist and submitted to John’s baptism, as seen in Acts 1:21-22: “Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, {22} beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

   And certainly our Lord must have done everything He could in the effort to rescue Judas…He made repeated warnings against the love of money and His denunciation of hypocrisy made no impact on him, either.

   And, in the upper room, Jesus certainly made one last effort!

4. The suicide.

   Judas did not repent of his sin, as seen in Matthew 27:3: “When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders.”

   Remorse and regret are not the same as repentance. But why suicide? Because Satan is a murderer (John 8:44) and a destroyer (Rev. 9:11).

   He comes first as the deceiving serpent but then turns into the destroying lion (1 Peter 5:8). He uses despair and guilt to drive people to self-destruction.

   We have learned that the “world” is an important concept in John 17. Jesus used the word 19 times, and He used it in three different connotations to mean (1) the material creation, as in verse 5; (2) people, as in verse 18, and (3) “the world system” opposed to God, as in verses 6, 14, and 15.

   The Christian has a unique position in life. He lives “in the world” physically, but he is not “of the world” spiritually. His resources do not come from the evil world system, but from the Lord.

   While he is “in the world,” he must live unlike the world because he must have a ministry to the people who are yet in the world. We are “in the world” to win people “out of the world,” and we live with the glorious expectation of being taken from this world when Jesus Christ returns!

   In other words, Christians are in enemy territory. Like an astronaut in space, or a diver at the bottom of the sea, the Christian is “out of his element.” And, like the astronaut and diver, the Christian must depend on outside resources if he is going to make it successfully.

     Jesus Christ provides for us the spiritual resources we need to overcome the world:

1. HIS JOY (17:13).

“I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them.”

   Jesus is often described as a “man of sorrows” and certainly He did experience a variety of emotions as He ministered upon the earth:

   – He had both deep sorrows and the highest joys

   – His heart was broken when He saw people destroying themselves with sin

   – His heart exulted as He saw God at work, saving the lost and making alive new!

   – He had the sorrow of the shepherd, seeking the lost

   – And He had the joy of the shepherd, bringing home the sheep that had been found

* Joy in life is not the absence of sorrow.

    The Arabs have a saying, “All sunshine makes a desert.” If God were to insulate us from sorrow, we would never grow or develop mature character. Heaven is  a place of all joy and no sorrow, and hell is a place of all sorrow and no joy. But this present life is a mingling of the two!

   The Christian who experiences the joy of Jesus Christ will not be interested in anything that the world has to offer. When two people fall in love, they are not attracted to anyone else because they are fully satisfied with each other. When a husband or wife starts to find greater joy elsewhere, then trouble begins.

   Christian joy is a deepening relationship with Jesus Christ, in which we learn more about Him and about ourselves. The more we learn about ourselves, the more we see our own needs. But the more we learn about Christ, the more we see how He fully meets those needs.

   This joy from Christ does not depend on accidentals or externals. It is something we experience within and the circumstances of the world around us cannot take it away.

2. HIS WORD (17:14).

   “I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world.”

   Twice in His prayer, our Lord mentions the gift of the Word (vs. 8 and 14). Since we are living in a deceived and a deceiving world, the possession of the truth of the Word is absolutely essential. It is not our word, but God’s Word, that overcomes the deceitfulness of this world system.

   – the material world was created by the Word of God (Psalm 33:6, 9)

   – the same Word that created the Universe is also sustaining it (2 Peter 3:7)

   – everything in the created world, except man, obeys the Word of God!

   – the Word exposes the world as it truly is

   – the Bible has nothing good to say about the world system

   1 Corinthians 1:18-24: “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. {19} For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.” {20} Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? {21} For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. {22} Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, {23} but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, {24} but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.”

   James 4:4: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”

   The Christian who gets friendly with the world (James 4:4) may find himself spotted by the world (James 1:26).

   * Not only does God’s Word reveal to us the true nature of the world system, but it also spells out our personal relationship to that system. A true believer will be hated by the world, not because he is offensive, but because he represents Jesus Christ.

   The sooner the Christian believes what the Bible says about the world and his relationship to it, the sooner he will start living in victory. It is impossible for the world system and the Christian to get along with each other! (2 Cor. 6:14–7:1).

3. OUR IDENTIFICATION WITH CHRIST (17:14b, 16).

   “…for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it.”

   In 1 John 4:17 John makes an astounding statement about Christians and their Lord …as He is, so also are we in this world.”

   Christ is in heaven and we are on earth, yet we are united in our shared life through the Spirit. Just as the deep-sea diver needs his lifetime above, so the Christian in the world needs a spiritual lifeline to heaven.  We are united to Christ: as He is in heaven, so are we in this world.

4. CHRIST’S INTERCESSION ON OUR BEHALF (17:15).

   “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.”

   Our Lord deliberately prayed that the Father would keep us in the world! Why? Because the world needs us…and we need the blessing that comes as we seek to represent Christ in the world.

   There are several false ideas in the mind of some Christians regarding their relationship to the world:

– One is isolation:

   This is the idea of going out of the world, which is the philosophy behind the monastic movement. Samuel Johnson once visited a convent in France and conversed with one of the members: “You are not here for love of virtue, but from fear of vice” he said.

   But the Catholics are not the only ones guilty here! Some well-meaning, conservative Christians also band together like babes in the woods and try to protect themselves, forsaking the inner city and isolating ourselves from reality, burying our heads in the sand, putting on blinders…and pretending that we will find ourselves in the safe and sane 50’s. Is this true?

   We are needed in the world! And it’s by fighting the battles that we grow!  Both Joseph and Daniel became great men of God while living in pagan societies.

    – Another idea is insulation.

   We go ahead and stay in the world, but we insulate ourselves from its problems and pains. The priest and Levite were willing to walk down the Jericho Road, but they were not willing to share the plight of the half-dead man at the side of the road. They were insulated.

   It is becoming more and more difficult for Christians to maintain compassion in this world simply because we are bombarded with so many emotional stimuli.

   We no longer hear of wars…we see the actual combat on TV.  Our newspapers are so filled with crime, violence and corruption that we bypass the front page and turn to the comics or the sports page–and sometimes the violence and crime are even worse there! We have desensitized ourselves! We are no longer our brother’s keeper!

    – A third idea…imitation.

   Some think the only way to “reach the world” is to be like the world. But history convinces us that it was when the church was the least like the world that it did the most to change the world!

* CHRISTIANS ARE SPECIAL (17:17-19)

   “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. {18} As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. {19} For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.”

  In both the Old and New Testament, the word “sanctify” means “to be separated from sin and devoted wholly to God.”

   – God sanctified the Sabbath Day for the Jews in Genesis 2:3; that is, He set it apart for His own purposes

   – He also sanctified the firstborn of man and beast in Exodus 13:2

   – The tabernacle and the Temple were sanctified because they were set apart by God’s presence (Ex. 25:8; 2 Chron. 20:8)

   – God sanctified the people of Israel as His own possession (Exodus 31:13)

   – He sanctified the priests to serve in His courts (Lev. 21:8)

   All saved people are also set apart for special service to God:

   – we’re called by His grace, saved by His blood, indwelt by His Spirit

   – Our body is the temple of God; therefore, it is not for rent or for sale!

   We have been set apart for special service so that Christ might send us into the world to share the message of the gospel (vs. 18).

   Some Christians boast about what they don’t do, but they have little to say about what they do accomplish! True sanctification is not only separation from sin; it is also devotion to God, being set apart for His exclusive use!

* CHRISTIANS UNITED-OR UNTIED? (17:20-24)

   “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, {21} that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. {22} I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: {23} I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. {24} “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.”

   All of us need to heed Joseph’s advice to his brothers, “Do not quarrel on the journey” (Genesis 45:24).

   Bible history and church history bear record to the sad fact that Christians do not always get along with each other. Even our Lord’s disciples argued with each other, and Jesus was right there with them!

   – our Lord’s prayer for unity cannot be fulfilled in some man-made organization

   – putting together all religious groups, regardless of what they profess to believe, will not solve the problem

   – disregarding doctrine and watering everything down to the least common denominator is not what Jesus had in mind

   – doctrine é‚ó‚ an essential part of unity: for there is not only “one Lord,” but there is also “one faith” (Eph. 4:5)

   – we’re to “contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3)

   Our Lord gives us every encouragement for spiritual unity by reminding us of the bonds that tie us together:

We trust the same Savior.

   “What do you think about the Christ, whose Son is He?” is still life’s most important question (Matt. 22:42). The way we answer that question determines where we spend eternity.

We bear the same witness to the world.

   Twice in this prayer, Jesus mentions the church’s witness to the lost world. We lived before the keen eyes of a watching world that is only too quick to detect hypocrisy and defects in the church.

   It is obvious that this unity is not simply “internal” and personal. It is big enough and strong enough for the world to see. When Christians love each other and bear witness together, the world will see it.

   Jesus assures us in this prayer that some will believe because of our witness (vs. 20). What an encouragement this statement must have been to Peter when he faced that crowd at Pentecost! And to Paul when he traveled to pagan cities with the gospel message!

We share the same glory.

   When Moses dedicated the tabernacle, and Solomon dedicated the Temple, the glory of God moved in. The presence of God’s glory made Israel a unique people. When God guided Israel in the wilderness, it was His glory that led the way. These 12 distinctive tribes were united by the glory of God.

   Each individual Christian is God’s temple, and the glory of God dwells in them. Christ has already given us the glory even though the full manifestation of this glory awaits the return of Christ (Rom. 8:19). The presence of God’s Spirit within marks a person as a true believer (Rom. 8:9).

We enjoy the same love.

   The Father loved the Son before the foundation of the world (vs. 24). The Father also loves His children even as He loved Christ. The motivation for unity is not only hope, but also love. Truth and love work together to build the body of Christ.

   It has well been said that truth without love is brutality (“I’m going to tell you the truth whether you like it or not!”), and love without truth is hypocrisy.

There are many lessons to be learned from our text. Let me conclude by pointing out a few.

First, Jesus informs us in our text that there are two glories. I have heard it said many times, and I know I have said it myself: “Suffering, then glory.” I believe there is much truth summed up in this statement.

7 But we have this treasure in clay jars, so that the extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us. 8 We are experiencing trouble on every side, but are not crushed; we are perplexed, but not driven to despair; 9 we are persecuted, but not abandoned; we are knocked down, but not destroyed; 10 always carrying around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our body. 11 For we who are alive are constantly being handed over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our mortal body. 12 As a result, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you. 13 But since we have the same spirit of faith as that shown in what has been written, “I believed; therefore I spoke,” we also believe, therefore we also speak. 14 We do so because we know that the one who raised up the Lord Jesus will also raise us up with Jesus and will bring us with you into his presence. 15 For all these things are for your sake, so that the grace that is including more and more people may cause thanksgiving to increase to the glory of God. 16 Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, our inner person is being renewed day by day. 17 For our momentary light suffering is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, 18 because we are not looking at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen; for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal (2 Corinthians 4:7-18, emphasis mine).

11 This saying is trustworthy: If we died with him, we will also live with him. 12 If we endure, we will also reign with him (2 Timothy 2:11-12a).

Like our Lord, we must suffer in this life, so that we many enter into the glories of heaven.

There are some Christians who seek to avoid the necessity of our earthly glory through suffering. They seem to believe that Jesus did all the suffering for us, leaving us with nothing but glory. In so doing, they deny a very clear biblical truth—that in His earthly suffering, our Lord gave us an example:

19 For this finds God’s favor, if because of conscience toward God someone endures hardships in suffering unjustly. 20 For what credit is it if you sin and are mistreated and endure it? But if you do good and suffer and so endure, this finds favor with God. 21 For to this you were called, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving an example for you to follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin nor was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was maligned, he did not answer back; when he suffered, he threatened no retaliation, but committed himself to God who judges justly. 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we may leave sin behind and live for righteousness. By his wounds you were healed. 25 For you were going astray like sheep but now you have turned back to the shepherd and guardian of your souls (1 Peter 2:19-25).

There are those who would tell us that if we but had enough faith, we would not need to suffer now, and that we may experience heaven’s glories now. They believe that on the cross, Jesus defeated all suffering and sickness and sorrow so that if we but claim His blessings by faith, we will obtain them in this life. It is these last words, “in this life,” which are troublesome. This is the ever-popular error of “realized eschatology,” the belief that what God has for us in heaven, He has for us now. Peter, along with the other apostles, sees it another way:

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy he gave us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 that is, into an inheritance imperishable, undefiled, and unfading. It is reserved in heaven for you, 5 who by God’s power are protected through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 This brings you great joy, although you may have to suffer for a short time in various trials. 7 Such trials show the proven character of your faith, which is much more valuable than gold—gold that is tested by fire, even though it is passing away—and will bring praise and glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. 8 You have not seen him, but you love him. You do not see him now but you believe in him, and so you rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy, 9 because you are attaining the goal of your faith—the salvation of your souls (1 Peter 1:3-9).

1 So, since Christ suffered in the flesh, you also arm yourselves with the same attitude, because the one who has suffered in the flesh has finished with sin, 2 in that he spends the rest of his time on earth concerned about the will of God and not human desires. 3 For the time that has passed was sufficient for you to do what the non-Christians desire. You lived then in debauchery, evil desires, drunkenness, carousing, boozing, and wanton idolatries. 4 So they are astonished when you do not rush with them into the same flood of wickedness, and they vilify you. … 12 Dear friends, do not be astonished that a trial by fire is occurring among you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice in the degree that you have shared in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice and be glad. 14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory, who is the Spirit of God, rests on you. 15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or thief or criminal or as a troublemaker. 16 But if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but glorify God that you bear such a name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin, starting with the house of God. And if it starts with us, what will be the fate of those who are disobedient to the gospel of God? 18 And if the righteous are barely saved, what will become of the ungodly and sinners? 19 So then let those who suffer according to the will of God entrust their souls to a faithful Creator as they do good (1 Peter 4:1-4, 12-19).

18 For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us. 19 For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility—not willingly but because of God who subjected it—in hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers together until now. 23 Not only this, but also we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, inwardly groan as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with endurance (Romans 8:18-25).

By our sufferings for His sake, we identify with our Lord and experience a deeper fellowship with Him:

8 More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things—indeed, I regard them as dung!—that I might gain Christ, 9 and be found in him, not because of having my own righteousness derived from the law, but because of having the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness—a righteousness from God that is based on Christ’s faithfulness. 10 My aim is to know him, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings, and to be like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:8-11).

In one sense, it is proper to speak of suffering, then glory. In another sense, it is not accurate, because it implies that suffering is not itself glory. Consider these words of D. A. Carson, who comments on our text:

… the text is telling us that our true glory is the way of the cross. That way is vindicated by the glory of triumph later; but already we have something of Jesus’ glory inasmuch as we, like him, are to endure the enmity of the world and walk as suffering servants. This is our glory, not our shame. W. Barclay comments, ‘We must never think of our cross as our penalty; we must think of it as our glory. … The harder the task we give a student, or a craftsman, or a surgeon, the more we honour him. …So when it is hard to be a Christian, we must regard it as our glory, as our honour given to us by God.’[8]

From our Lord’s words in our text, as well as from other texts in the Bible, we can safely say that there are at least two “glories.” There was, for our Lord, the glory of His humiliation at the incarnation and of His sacrificial service in His life and death on earth. But there is also His “future glory,” the glory that will be restored to Him, with interest, because of His obedient service and sacrifice (see Philippians 2:5-11). We should likewise look upon our earthly trials and difficulties as our present “glory,” while we anxiously await our future glory in heaven with Him.

This recognition that there are two glories solves what has been a real mystery for me. I have always been troubled by these words, written by Paul: “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:18, NASB).

In the light of our Lord’s words in John 17, I think I am finally beginning to understand Paul’s words above. Paul is writing about the great glory of the New Testament ministry which God has given him, the apostles, and us under the New Covenant, a ministry of the Spirit. He contrasts the glory of his apostolic ministry “in the Spirit” with the previous but inferior glory of Moses’ ministry “of the Law” under the Old Covenant. The ministry of Moses was glorious, but it was a “fading glory.” That is why he placed a veil over his “glowing” face. That glowing face grew dim over time, because that glory faded. Paul says that the glory of New Testament ministry is unfading. And every time the gospel is proclaimed, and people trust in Jesus as the Messiah, the veil is removed. With “unveiled face,” we are transformed from glory to glory. I think he is saying that we are being transformed from this present glory (of suffering for Christ’s sake) to the even greater glory of Heaven. We are being transformed from the earthly glory of suffering for Christ to the heavenly glory of reigning with Christ.

I wonder how many of us are really ready and willing to speak of suffering as glory. Jesus did. The apostles did. I think that tells us how our thinking should change in regard to suffering for Christ’s sake.

Second, Jesus’ words remind us of the importance of Christian unity. One can hardly overlook the emphasis which our Lord places on unity:

Seven times in this prayer Jesus prays ‘that they may all be one’ (vv. 11, 19; twice in 21, 22, 23, 24), and four of the seven are prayers that his followers may be one. It is clear that Jesus was very concerned with what they would be in the days ahead and that he was particularly concerned that they should be united. It is clear throughout the New Testament that unity among the believers is thought of as extremely important (which is natural enough following the last prayer of Jesus for them), and it is also clear that the early Christians found it difficult to maintain unity.[9]

This time Jesus prays that his followers may be ‘perfected into one,’ where the verb for ‘perfected’ is interesting. It derives from a root that conveys the idea of ‘end’ or ‘aim’; to reach that aim is to be perfected. The point of this verb in this place is that it draws attention to the truth that unity is a necessary part of the perfection at which Christians aim. When we become followers of Jesus we are not embarking on a quest for individual blessing and happiness. These good gifts may well come to us, but our aim is to realize our salvation in the fellowship of Christ’s people. We belong together in the church of God.

John Wesley reports that ‘a serious man’ once said to him, ‘The Bible knows nothing of solitary religion. Therefore a man must find companions or make them.’ This is an important aspect of New Testament Christianity. It is not a faith that can be lived out in solitude. Someone has defined religion as what a person does with his solitariness. This may fit some religions, but not Christianity. We who follow Christ must bear in mind that Christ was one with the Father and in that spirit he expects his followers to be one with him and one with each other.[10]

As I seek to take our Lord’s words literally and seriously, I come to the following conclusions:

1. To the degree that I practice “rugged individualism,” I violate Christian unity.
2. To the degree that I neglect or violate true Christian unity, I reflect badly on my Lord.
3. To the degree that I violate True Christian unity, I hinder the gospel.
4. To the degree that I violate true christian unity, I deny the gospel (see 1 Corinthians 12:12-14; Galatians 2:11-21; 3:26-29; Ephesians 2:11-22).
5. To the degree that I violate Christian unity, I hinder the praise of God (see Romans 15:5-13).

Having stressed the importance of Christian unity, I must also state what I do not mean to say. I do not mean that Christian unity is evidenced by uniformity, and that all Christians should look and think alike. If I understand 1 Corinthians 12 correctly, unity is best demonstrated in diversity, not in uniformity (or conformity). The importance of Christian unity is not a mandate for overlooking sin (see 1 Corinthians 5) or serious doctrinal error (1 Timothy 1:20; Titus 3:10-11).

It does seem to me that homogeneous grouping in churches does violence to the doctrine of Christian unity. From a purely secular, marketing mentality, “birds of a feather do flock together.” People do feel more comfortable around others who are just like them. But God has not called us to comfort. God has called us to conform to the image of His Son. What a testimony it is when a church has a mix of races, cultures, and social strata. Here is where the world can behold true Christian unity and stand in awe. Let us be careful not to compromise biblical standards or doctrine in an effort to appear formally united, but let us strive to practice that organic and functional unity which God intended for us to demonstrate, to His praise and glory, and to our good.

One more comment about Christian unity. Christian unity is not merely to be practiced in a particular church, or even in a particular city. The unity of which our Lord speaks is surely as wide as the world—it is a global unity. In the last few days, we have witnessed the terrible plight of many in Central America due to a disastrous hurricane. As members of the body of Christ, we are one with those Christians who are suffering in far away places. And it is because of this unity that we, along with many other churches, have contributed a substantial sum of money, sending it in care of a particular church in the disaster-torn area to minister to the saints (and through these saints, to others) there. We need to rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep, and minister to those in need, whether they are in our church or across the ocean. You will remember that one of the first ways the Gentile saints gave expression to their unity with their Jewish brethren was by sending a contribution to them in their time of need (see Acts 11:27-30; 1 Corinthians 16:1-4; 2 Corinthians 8 and 9).

Third, our Lord’s prayer in John 17 surely has something to teach us about prayer. Let me mention a few lessons on prayer from this, our Lord’s prayer.

1. Our Lord prays for Himself, that He will fulfill God’s mission and ministry.
2. Our Lord prays for others, because He loves them and cares for them.
3. The primary goal of our prayers, like His, should be the glory of God.
4. Since earthly suffering can be glory, our prayers should not be obsessed with the termination of our suffering, but with the realization of God’s purposes in our suffering, for His glory.
5. Our prayers should seek our protection from Satan, the evil one, who seeks to destroy us.
6. Our prayers should seek to gain a proper perspective of the present, in the light of eternity.
7. Our prayers should look to, and ask for, the time when we will dwell for all eternity with Him.
8. Our requests in prayer should include a request that demonstrates Christian unity through us, in every way possible.
9. Our prayers should recognize God’s provisions through His Word and His Spirit.

Finally, our Lord’s prayer reminds us that our faith should be proclaimed and practiced:

The truth of the gospel, announced without the demonstration of the power of the gospel in transformed and loving lives, is arid. It may be beautiful in the way that the badlands can be beautiful; but not much grows there. On the other hand, the demonstration of love within a believing community does not by itself proclaim the source or cause of that love. Attractive in its own right, like a luxuriant south sea island, nevertheless such love does not call forth disciplined obedience or informed belief, and cannot of itself call others to true faith. It is merely a place to rest. The multiplying witness Jesus has in mind is both propositional and exemplary, both confessional and demonstrative. It is a witness of word and of love.[11]

JOHN 17

Someone has aptly termed this chapter “The Holy of Holies of John’s Gospel.” We have the privilege of hearing the Son conversing with the Father. You could spend many weeks meditating on the truths in this chapter, but here we can only touch upon the highlights.

I. Christ Prays for Himself (17:1-5)

The great theme of these verses is that He has finished the work of salvation. Beginning at 2:4, John has often mentioned “the hour.” Use your concordance and trace the pattern of these verses for yourself. “I have finished the work”—the work of salvation—and because of this, “I have glorified Thee on the earth” (v. 4). Christ always looked upon the cross as a means of glorifying God (12:23). Paul also saw glory in the cross (Gal. 6:14).

Christ prays that the Father will give Him again the glory He laid aside when He came to earth to die (Phil. 2:1-12). The only time that His glory was revealed on earth was on the Mount of Transfiguration (John 1:14; 2 Peter 1:16-18). Note the “gives” in in v. 2: (1) The Father has given the Son authority over all mankind; (2) the Son gives eternal life to (3) those the Father has given the Son. One of the precious truths in John 17 is that each believer is God’s love gift to the Son! (John 6:37) This is a mystery we cannot explain, but we thank God for it! “The gifts and calling of God are without repentance” (Rom. 11:29). This means that our salvation is secure, for the Father will not take us from the Son!

“I have manifested Thy name” (v. 6)—this statement should be related to the “I AM” statements of Christ in John’s Gospel. God’s name is I AM (Ex. 3:13-14), and Christ reveals that God is to us whatever we need Him to be. To the hungry Christ says, “I am the Bread of Life.” To the lost He says, “I am the Way.” To the blind He says, “I am the Light of the World.”

II. Christ Prays for His Disciples (17:6-19)

The key thought here is sanctification, that is, the disciples’ relationship to the world. Jesus said, “I have given them Your word” (v. 14, NKJV), and in v. 17 He states that we are sanctified—set apart for God—through the Word. Sanctification does not mean sinless perfection, otherwise Christ could never say, “I sanctify Myself” (v. 19), for He had no sin. A sanctified Christian is someone who is daily growing in the Word and as a result is separated more and more from the world unto the Father.

Christ asked the Father to keep the disciples (v. 11). Verse 15 asks that they be kept from the evil one. Christ was physically with the disciples and was able to keep them together, united in heart and purpose, separated from the world. Now that He was going back to heaven, He asked the Father to keep them.

Christians are not of the world, but they are in the world to witness for Christ. We keep our lives clean through His Word. Christ has actually sent us into the world to take His place (v. 18). What a responsibility we have!

Bibliography of Cited Sources

Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. Vol. 1. Chicago: Moody, 1958.

Ash, Anthony L. The Gospel According to Luke. 2 Vols. Austin, TX: Sweet, 1972.

Barclay, William. The Gospel of Matthew. 2 Vols. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975.

Beasley-Murray, George R. John. Vol. 36: Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1987.

Blomberg, Craig L. Matthew. Vol 22: The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. Ed. by David S. Dockery, et al. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Brooks, James A. The New American Commentary: Mark. Nashville: Broadman, 1991.

Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John XII-XXI. New York: Doubleday, 1970.

Bruce, F.F. The Hard Sayings of Jesus. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1983.

Butler, Paul T. The Gospel of John, Vol. 1. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1961.

Carson, D.A. Matthew. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

__________. Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Crowther, Duane S. Atlas and Outline of the Life of Christ. Bountiful, UT: Horizon Publishers & Distributors, 1982.

Dodd, C.H. Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: University Press, 1955.

Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993.

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Foreman, Dale. Crucify Him: A Lawyer Looks at the Trial of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.

Foster, R.C. Studies in the Life of Christ. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1995.

Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992.

Guelich, Robert A. Mark 1-8:26. Vol. 34A: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1989.

Gundry, Robert H. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to John. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1953.

Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Gospel of Luke. Ed. by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991.

Lane, William L. The Gospel According to Mark. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lewis, Jack P. The Gospel According to Matthew. 2 Vols. Austin, TX: Sweet, 1976.

Liefeld, Walter L. Luke. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Linnemann, Eta. Is There a Synoptic Problem? Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992.

Longenecker, Richard N. Acts. Vol. 9: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

The Lost Books of the Bible. New York: Bell Publishing, 1979.

MacArthur, John. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16-23. Chicago: Moody, 1988.

Matthew-Mark. Vol. 8. The Broadman Bible Commentary. Ed. by Clifton J. Allen, et al. Nashville: Broadman, 1969.

McGarvey, J.W. and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel: Or A Harmony of the Four Gospels. Cincinnati: Standard, 1914.

Meserve, Albert D. The Olivet Discourse: A Study of Matthew 24. San Jose, CA: San Jose Bible College, 1970.

Morris, Leon. Expository Reflections on the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.

Mounce, Robert H. New International Biblical Commentary: Matthew. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991.

Nolland, John. Luke 1-9:20. Vol. 35A: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1989.

____________. Luke 18:35-24:53. Vol. 35C: Word Biblical Commentary. Ed. by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barder, John D.W. Watts, and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word, 1993.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. The Topical Josephus: Historical Accounts that Shed Light on the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Ryle, John C. Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: St. Matthew. Greenwood, SC: Attic Press, 1974.

Stott, John R.W. Christian Counter-Culture: The Message of the Sermon on the Mount. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1978.

Tenney, Merrill C. John. Vol. 9: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Walvoord, John F. Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come. Chicago: Moody, 1974.

Wenham, John. Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Accounts in Conflict? Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Wessel, Walter W. Mark. Vol. 8: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Westcott, Brooke F. The Gospel According to St. John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950.

Wiersbe, Warren, Be Series, Victor Books, A Division of Scripture Press Publications.

---

[1] I understand that our Lord has indicated earlier in this discourse that there were things He had not revealed to them, because they were not able to bear them at the time. The point here is that Jesus had revealed to them all that He needed to reveal before His death. Future instruction would, of course, come, both from our Lord (see Luke 24:13-49), and from the Holy Spirit (John 16:13).

[2] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 188.

[3] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus, pp. 191-192.

[4] It is interesting, and perhaps significant, that the verb rendered “believe” is in the present tense, rather than the future tense. Jesus is, of course, speaking of those who will come to faith at a future time, but the emphasis seems to be that those who become believers should keep on believing. Faith is not just a one-time event, but an ongoing process.

[5] It is the apostles who, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wrote the Gospels and the New Testament Epistles. These inspired authors include more than just the eleven disciples, and thus I am inclined to think of those referred to in verses 6-19 as being more than just the eleven. At least some others like Paul and Barnabas and James will also be called apostles (see Acts 14:4, 14; Galatians 1:19).

[6] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 197.

[7] I understand our Lord’s earthly sufferings to be plural, rather than merely singular (the cross). From texts like Philippians 2:5-7 and Hebrews 2:14-18; 6:7-9, it seems that our Lord’s entire life involved considerable suffering. Would you not consider it suffering to leave heaven and all of its glory to dwell in a fallen world, among sinful men?

[8] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 198.

[9] Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), vol. 4, p. 592.

[10] Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), vol. 4, p. 597.

[11] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 200.

Jesus was always very open and direct about the cost of discipleship with those who wished to follow Him:

23 Then he said to them all, “If anyone wants to come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. 24 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. 25 For what does it benefit a person if he gains the whole world but loses or forfeits himself? 26 For whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man be will ashamed of this one when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels (Luke 9:23-26, see also verses 57-62).

We know from the parable of the four soils (see Mark 4:1-20) that those who were surprised by their sufferings did stumble over them (4:17). Jesus does not want His disciples to be taken by surprise, and so He tells them about the difficulties which lie ahead for them as His disciples. These men will be rejected by their fellow-Jews, put out of the synagogue, and even put to death. And the irony of all this is that when their opponents do such things, they will actually suppose that they are serving God by their opposition to Christ and His disciples.[1]

Who better illustrates this than Saul, before his conversion?

“I persecuted this Way even to the point of death, tying up both men and women and putting them in prison” (Acts 22:4).

9 “Of course, I myself was convinced that it was necessary to do many things hostile to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. 10 And that is what I did in Jerusalem: not only did I lock up many of the saints in prisons by the authority I received from the chief priests, but I also cast my vote against them when they were sentenced to death. 11 I punished them often in all the synagogues and tried to force them to blaspheme. Because I was so furiously enraged at them, I went to persecute them even in foreign cities” (Acts 26:9-11; see also 1 Timothy 1:12-16).

Up to this moment in time, the disciples had not experienced anything like this kind of persecution in the time they had spent with Jesus. Jesus’ warnings here about future persecution are prophetic. His purpose in telling them these things now is so that when this persecution comes to pass, they will not be shocked, as though it were unexpected, but rather they will be able to remember that He had told them these things would happen to them. Thus, their faith will not be shaken (they won’t be “caused to stumble”), but will be strengthened.

   Before looking at the message of this chapter, we need to remember where it appears in this Gospel.

   Following twelve chapters of largely public ministry, chapters 13 through 17 are filled with intimate exchanges between Jesus and His twelve disciples. He was deeply concerned about them as His death approached.

   As a result, the teachings in these four chapters were largely devoted to preparing the disciples for His departure from them. By the beginning of our text, chapter 16, Jesus had washed their feet, Judas had left to betray Jesus, Jesus had told them He was “going away,” and He had warned them about the persecution that would come.

——————————————————

   Saying good-bye is never easy, whether it’s at an airport, a family reunion, or the deathbed of a loved one. The single, most important message Jesus wanted to communicate was that His presence would be replaced with that of the Holy Spirit.

   At that last supper Jesus ate with His disciples, He had many things to say. But mainly He wanted them to know two secrets — one about Himself and the other about themselves:

– The secret of His victorious life.

   Time and time again throughout the Upper Room discourse Jesus referred to the vital union He had with the Father. He wanted to impress upon the disciples that the Father was in Him and that He was in the Father.

– The secret of their victorious life.

Jesus’ relationship with the Father was to serve as an example to the disciples of their new relationship with the Spirit. Just as Jesus had a vital union with the Father, so the disciples were to have a vital union with the Holy Spirit.

   Having made clear that the hatred of the world was inevitable to the disciples if they followed Him, Jesus proceeded to make more vivid what that hatred would mean.

   Expulsion from the synagogue, as in the case of the blind man (9:22, 34), and even death would be their lot. Such treatment they were not to regard as abnormal! Saul of Tarsus’ murderous mission to Damascus is an example of this (Acts 9:1ff). Shocking as it was, it was justified by the Jews on the ground that the Christians were blasphemers and. therefore, worthy of death (Acts 6:13; 7:57).

   “”All this I have told you so that you will not go astray. {2} They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God. {3} They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me.”

   Chapter 15 closed with several positive reasons why persecution will occur, and the proper response by God’s children. We should rely on the Holy Spirit and also stand firm and boldly testify of our faith in Christ.

   Negatively, we should not stumble (16:1) and we shouldn’t forget (vs. 4). The Greek word for “stumble” is “skandalizo,” from which we get our word scandal. When you stumble, your walk is interrupted, and that is what the Lord is trying to prevent.

   And we are certainly guilty on occasion of remembering what we ought to forget and forgetting what we ought to remember!

   There is no reason for the Christian to stumble when the world stokes up the furnace of persecution. He should expect persecution, if only because his Lord told him it was coming.

   Furthermore, they must not stumble when this persecution comes from religious people who actually think they are serving God.

   For three years, Jesus had been with them to protect them from attack; but now He was about to leave them. He told them this earlier in the evening (13:33), and Peter had asked Him where He was going (13:36). However, Peter’s question revealed more concern about himself than about the Lord!

   “I have told you this, so that when the time comes you will remember that I warned you. I did not tell you this at first because I was with you. {5} “Now I am going to him who sent me, yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ {6} Because I have said these things, you are filled with grief. {7} But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.”

   The phrase “your good” or “advantage” means “profitable” in the original Greek language. It’s hard to imagine that Jesus’ absence could be profitable or advantageous for the disciples, but it’s true.

   The major reason, of course, is that the Holy Spirit might come to empower the church for life and witness.  As long as Jesus was on the earth, He was limited to being in one place at a time by His physical body. Also, the ascended Savior would be able to intercede for His people at the heavenly throne of grace.

   The Spirit would guide the apostles into all truth and the kingdom would not be established until the Lord returned to heaven and took His seat on David’s throne at the right hand of God (Acts 2:29-36).

   The Holy Spirit works through the people in whom He lives.  When the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost, He empowered Peter to preach; and the preaching of the Word brought conviction to those who heard.

   “When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt[1] in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: {9} in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; {10} in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; {11} and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.”

Earlier in His ministry, Jesus had warned the disciples generally about coming persecution, but there was no need then to be as specific as He is now. He was with them, then. He will not be with them physically when they undergo the persecution of which He now speaks. He will be with them “in spirit,” or, better yet, “in the Spirit.” The disciples appear to be in a state of emotional shock. They are overwhelmed with sadness. There seems to be nothing to say. Think of it. Jesus is going to leave them,[2] and when He does, they are not only going to be forsaken by their own people, they are going to hunted down by them as though they were criminals.

Jesus notes the fact that His disciples are not now asking Him where He is going. Earlier, Peter did ask (13:36), and Thomas came close to asking (14:5). It is not that they hadn’t asked; it is that they have stopped asking. It is as though the more they have asked, and the clearer Jesus’ meaning has become (He really was leaving them behind, and they could not accompany Him), the more the disciples have become distressed. And so they simply (as we would say) “clammed up.”

This is similar, I think, to the questions which Nicodemus was asking Jesus in John chapter 3. His questions and comments got shorter and shorter, and finally they just ceased. The more Jesus told him, the worse it seemed to get, and so Nicodemus, like the disciples, chose to keep quiet. Jesus seems to be calling their quietness to their attention, perhaps gently rebuking them by doing so. They were so caught up in their own sorrow and their own sense of loss that they did not wish to consider anything else, anything beyond themselves.

D. A. Carson challenges us to consider the lessons we should learn from our Lord’s gentle rebuke of His disciples for their silence:[3] they are too preoccupied with themselves, and with their own problems, and not focused upon their Lord. Is this not true of us as well? Are we so absorbed in our own lives, that we not only fail to “fix our eyes on Jesus,” but we also fail to see the needs of those about us?

Things are not nearly as bad as they seem to the disciples. Jesus assures them that what He is telling them is the truth. That is, He is assuring them that they will see His words of comfort come to pass in the future. Our Lord’s “going away” is not only necessary, it is to their advantage. It is not that Jesus is abandoning them when He goes away, and that He is sending the Holy Spirit as a kind of consolation gift. He must go away, or the Holy Spirit cannot come. And when the Spirit does come, the disciples will see that they could never have had it better.

Here, Jesus speaks specifically of the Holy Spirit as their Advocate,[4] as they seek to proclaim the gospel to a world that hates them, a world that has crucified Jesus and would also like to kill them. I am reminded of one of my favorite scenes from the movie, “The Bear.” The “bear” is an awesome Grizzly, and he somewhat unwillingly adopts a young cub whose mother has been killed. In one of the final scenes, the baby Grizzly is being pursued by a mountain lion. Finally, the lion has the cub trapped. In desperation, the cub stands erect and sounds the most fierce “roar” he can produce. The mountain lion suddenly cowers and retreats. One wonders how this cub could produce such fear, from such a pathetic “roar.” Then the camera angle widens, so that we are now able to see Pappa Griz, standing some distance behind the cub, towering high above it and the mountain lion. Now we know why the mountain lion decided he had an appointment somewhere else, one which was so pressing he would have to skip lunch. I would contend that when we proclaim the gospel to a hostile world, we are no more awesome than that cub, but we have an Advocate—the Holy Spirit—who seconds what we say, and He is not so easily ignored.

Our Advocate has an agenda. There are certain things to which He will testify as being true, and these are spelled out in verses 8-11. He proves the world wrong with regard to sin, to righteousness, and to judgment. Let us take a closer look at each of these three elements of the Spirit’s convicting[5] work.

First, the Holy Spirit will prove the world wrong concerning sin. The most compelling evidence of a person’s sin is their rejection of Jesus as the Messiah. Jesus is the ultimate and final revelation of God to men (John 1:1-18; Hebrews 1:1-4). Thus, to reject Jesus as the promised Messiah is the ultimate sin. Those who have heard the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ, who have witnessed its truth and power, and in spite of this testimony, reject Jesus as God’s only provision for their salvation, have shown themselves to be guilty of sin:

1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken through angels proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, 3 how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was first communicated through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, 4 while God confirmed their witness with signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will (Hebrews 2:1-4).

It is on the basis of this rejection of Jesus that the Spirit proves men guilty of sin.[6]

This is consistent with the argument of Romans, chapters 1-3. All men have been given a certain knowledge about God and have turned from that knowledge, worshipping something other than the Creator. The Jews have received a higher revelation of God in the Law, and they stand condemned by it. And now that Jesus has come to the earth, fully revealing God, they have rejected Him. This is John’s indictment in the first part of John chapter 1. Jesus is God (1:1, 4), made known (verse 18) to men. Yet in spite of this revelation of God to His own people, they did not receive Him as God (1:5, 10-11). To reject Him who is the ultimate revelation of God is to be guilty of the ultimate sin.

Second, the Holy Spirit will prove the world wrong concerning righteousness, because Jesus is going to the Father and will be seen no longer. The Holy Spirit will prove the world wrong with regard to righteousness. The Jews felt they could justify the crucifixion of Jesus because they had condemned Jesus as a sinner, while at the same time deeming themselves to be righteous. To be convinced that Jesus was, indeed, righteous would be to prove the Jews wrong, and Jesus right. It is only when we see ourselves as sinners, deserving of God’s eternal wrath, and Jesus Christ as the righteous One, that we see our need to trust in Him for salvation.

The final proof of our Lord’s righteousness is His resurrection from the dead:

18 So then the Jewish leaders responded, “What sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” 19 Jesus replied, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 20 Then the Jewish leaders said to him, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 21 But Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the saying that Jesus had spoken (John 2:18-22).

22 “Israelite men, listen to these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man clearly demonstrated to you to be from God by powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed through him among you, just as you yourselves know— 23 this man, who was handed over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you executed by nailing him to a cross at the hands of Gentiles. 24 But God raised him up, having released him from the pains of death, because it was not possible for him to be held in its power”(Acts 2:22-24).

13 The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers, has glorified his servant Jesus, whom you handed over and rejected in the presence of Pilate when he had decided to release him. 14 But you rejected the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a man who was a murderer be given to you. 15 You killed the Originator of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this fact we are witnesses. 16 And on the basis of faith in Jesus’ name, his very name has made this man strong whom you see and know. The faith that is through Jesus has given him this complete health in the presence of you all. 17 And now, brothers, I know you acted in ignorance, as your rulers did too. 18 But the things God foretold long ago through all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he has fulfilled in this way” (Acts 3:13-18, emphasis mine).

39 We are witnesses of all the things he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a cross, 40 but God raised him up on the third day and caused him to be seen, 41 not by all the people, but by us, the witnesses God had already chosen, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42 He commanded us to preach to the people and to warn them that he is the one appointed by God as judge of the living and the dead. 43 About him all the prophets testify, that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name (Acts 10:39-43; see also 4:1-2, 33; 13:27-34).

1 From Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God 2 that he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, 3 concerning his Son who was a descendant of David with respect to the flesh, 4 who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 1:1-4, emphasis mine).

The point of these texts is that the resurrection of our Lord was witnessed by the apostles, and this was to be proclaimed as proof that Jesus is precisely who He claimed to be—the Son of God. The resurrection of Jesus from the dead was the Father’s sign of approval. It was the last and final sign, of which Jesus spoke (see Matthew 12:38-40). The enemies of our Lord remembered His prediction of His resurrection after His death, and took measures to insure that no one stole His body to give substance to His claims (see Matthew 27:62-66). The disciples were witnesses of His resurrection.[7] They testified to the fact that He was raised from the dead. They saw Jesus no more, because they saw Him after He had risen from the dead, and they watched as He ascended into heaven. The Holy Spirit uses the absence of Jesus (at a minimum, the absence of His body in the tomb) to underscore the witness of the apostles, that Jesus is the righteous One, the One who alone can save men from their sins.

Third, the Holy Spirit will prove the world wrong concerning judgment. The “judgment” of which the Holy Spirit will “prove the world to be worthy” is the future judgment of those who have refused to believe in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins. It is the judgment of which Jesus has spoken earlier in John:

21 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes. 22 Furthermore, the Father does not judge anyone, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all people may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 I tell you the solemn truth, the one who hears my message and believes the one who sent me has eternal life, and will not be condemned, but has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the solemn truth, a time is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and the ones who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in himself, thus he has granted the Son to have life in himself; 27 and he granted the Son authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation. 30 I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me” (John 5:21-30; see also 8:16, 26; 9:39).

It is the judgment of which the apostles spoke:

24 Some days later, when Felix arrived with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, he sent for Paul and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus. 25 While Paul was discussing righteousness, self-control, and the coming judgment, Felix became frightened and said, “Go away for now, and when I have an opportunity, I will send for you” (Acts 24:24-25).

The basis on which the Holy Spirit proves the world wrong, and thus worthy of that judgment which is yet to come, is the fact that Satan has already been judged. Jesus spoke of this judgment of Satan and linked it to the judgment of the world: “Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31).

Satan is the source of man’s sin and rebellion against God. He is the driving force behind all sin. When Jesus died on the cross of Calvary, He defeated Satan. If Satan has been condemned at the cross, then surely every other sinner’s judgment is certain as well. It is the reality of Satan’s defeat, and its consequences, which the Holy Spirit drives home to the world as proof that all sinners will be judged.

   Three specific functions of the Spirit convict the world through the Christian:

– Concerning sin.

The Spirit uses the faithful, loving Christian as a visual aid to convict the unbeliever (see 1 Cor. 7:12-14). If Jesus is the Son of God, as this Gospel declares Him to be, then rejection of Him is the greatest and most fatal sin of all. It is the deliberate refusal of God’s will.

   In order to define sin there must be a standard. There can be no transgression where there is no law, no darkness when there is no light, who sin where there is no holiness.

– Concerning righteousness.

The Christian should have a standard, or lifestyle, foreign to the unsaved person.  Since the world can no longer see the righteousness of Jesus, they can only see it reflected off us.

– Concerning judgment.

Whenever sin and righteousness meet there must be judgment.  When unsaved people see the Christian’s free and unfettered life, the Holy Spirit shows them that their ruler has no power over the saint.

   The key word in these verses is “convict,” which is a legal word that means to “bring to light, to expose, to refute, to convict and convince.” The world may think that it is judging Christians, but it is the Christians who are passing judgment on the world as they witness to Christ!

   The Holy Spirit convicts the world of one particular sin: the sin of unbelief. After all, it is unbelief that condemns the lost sinner (John 3:18-21).

   The Spirit also convicts the sinner of righteousness, not unrighteousness. Whose righteousness? The righteousness of Jesus Christ, the perfect Lamb of God.

Surely this text informs us that we should not expect the world to embrace Christians with open arms. The cross of Calvary assures us that the world does hate Him. Our Lord’s words should prepare us for opposition from the world as well. If the world hates us, then we surely should not love the world in the sense that we seek its approval, embrace its values, or attempt to find our identity with it:

Adulterers, do you not know that friendship with the world means hostility towards God? So whoever decides to be the world’s friend makes himself God’s enemy (James 4:4).

15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 16 because all that is in the world (the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the arrogance produced by material possessions) is not from the Father, but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away with all its desires, but the person who does the will of God remains forever (1 John 2:15-17).

Therefore do not be surprised, brothers and sisters, if the world hates you (1 John 3:13).

4 You are from God, little children, and have conquered them, because the One who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5 They are from the world; therefore they speak from the world’s perspective and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God; the person who knows God listens to us, but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit (1 John 4:4-6).

The Christian and the world are in an adversarial relationship. How, then, do we explain biblical texts like this one?

When a man’s ways please the LORD, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him (Proverbs 16:70, NKJV)

I believe we must view such texts in the light of other biblical texts, such as this exhortation from Paul in the Book of Romans:

16 Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty but associate with the lowly. Do not be conceited. 17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil; consider what is good before all people. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all people. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, dear friends, but give place to God’s wrath, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 Rather, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in doing this you will be heap burning coals on his head. 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good (Romans 12:16-21).

We are to endeavor to live in peace with others, including unbelievers, even those unbelievers who actively oppose and persecute us (see Acts 7:60). We are to live in peace with all men, as much as possible, to the degree that we are able (Romans 12:18). We have heard it said, “It takes two to tangle.” While this statement may not be totally accurate, it is certainly true that two hot-headed people will have more strife than a hothead who seeks to pick a fight with a Christian, who purposes to live in peace.

I saw this demonstrated this past week as my wife and I were driving on North Central Expressway. There was a fellow trying to merge into traffic from the access ramp. Since there was a lot of traffic, this was not an easy task. The fellow seeking to enter the freeway encountered another fellow who was already on the freeway, and who was not inclined to reduce his speed to let him into “his” lane. The man entering the traffic, turned on his turn signals, and then just started easing over into the lane he desired. The fellow who was already in that lane did not like the way this driver was forcing his way into traffic, and so he refused to slow down. It was apparent that both men were determined not to give in, and the result was a collision, one which could have been much worse. Had one of these drivers been a Christian, who purposed to live peaceably, there would have been no accident. And so it is true that Christians who live according to God’s Word may have less conflict than others. Having said this, those who abide in Christ, and who manifest Christ in their lives, should expect to be treated as Christ was by the world.

It is sad to say that all too often there is more animosity and hostility among Christians than there is between Christians and the unbelieving world. We should recall that Jesus commanded Christians to “love one another,” while He told us to expect the world to hate and to oppose us.

It seems as though Christians in America fail to grasp the fact that opposition and hostility from the world is the norm. We seem to have a sense of entitlement, a misguided expectation that our lives should be filled with blessings, yet be free from trials and tribulations. Listen to these words from the pen of D. A. Carson:

But are there no painful aspects to being a Christian? Is all happiness and light, though Christ himself was a man of sorrows who walked through the valley of the shadow of death? Do we participate only in his joy, but not in his tears? Does he alone bear the cross? Even to ask such questions is to show that much modern evangelicalism borders on the frivolous. We are so often taught to think that the Christian way brings blessings without buffetings, triumphs without trials, witness without weariness. We are encouraged to believe that Christians exude overcoming joy, and rarely face discouraging defeat; that they live in a realm of constant excitement, and never wrestle with boredom; that they love and are loved, and need not confront persecution, ostracism, hate, rejection; that they are self-confident and ebullient, and never taste terror, loneliness, doubt; that they are fulfilled and satisfied, but not as a result of self-denial and daily death. It is not so much that the promises are false, that they have no substance, as that they distort truth by promising a crown without a cross. We too easily want the fruitfulness of a well-kept vine-branch, but think little about the disciplined pruning performed by the divine ‘gardener.’[8]

From what our Lord has told us, we should recognize that evangelism is not just a difficult obligation; it is an impossible one! We have been commissioned to take the gospel to a world that is opposed to Jesus Christ, to His gospel, and to His disciples. How, then, can we ever expect to see anyone come to faith in Jesus Christ? We can expect them to come to faith in the same way we did—through the faithful proclamation of God’s Word, and through the supernatural ministry of the Holy Spirit, who illuminates the Word of God, and who effectually calls men to faith in Jesus Christ. Specifically, from our text, the Holy Spirit is the One who convinces men of their sin, of Christ’s righteousness, and of the judgment which is coming upon all who do not receive the gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ.

This text has much to say to each of us who believes in Jesus Christ, and who are commanded to proclaim the gospel to an unbelieving and hostile world. First, we are assured that God is working in and through us to win lost sinners to Himself. While we are to proclaim the gospel, it is the Holy Spirit who works from the inside out, to convince sinners of the truth of the gospel. Surely, since the Holy Spirit’s ministry pertains to the issues of sin, righteousness, and judgment, we know what our subject matter should be—these same topics. This certainly is the case with the apostles. Notice how Peter includes all three elements in his epistle:

4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but threw them into hell and locked them up in chains in utter darkness, to be kept until the judgment, 5 and if he did not spare the ancient world, but did protect Noah, a herald of righteousness, along with seven others, when God brought a flood on an ungodly world, 6 and if he turned to ashes the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah when he condemned them to destruction, having appointed them to serve as an example to future generations of the ungodly, 7 and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man in anguish over the debauched lifestyle of lawless men, 8 (for while he lived among them day after day, that righteous man was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard) 9 —if so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from their trials, and to reserve the unrighteous for punishment at the day of judgment, 10 especially those who indulge their fleshly desires and who despise authority (2 Peter 2:4-10).

Our text in John’s Gospel, which speaks both of the world’s hostility and the Spirit’s help, reminds me of the story of Elijah, when he confronted the false prophets of Israel. He alone withstood the 850 prophets on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18). After these prophets failed to call fire down from heaven, Elijah instructed that barrels of water be poured out on his altar, wood, and sacrifice. That way, if Elijah could call down fire to consume the offering, there would be no doubt that it was God who had done this great miracle. The hatred and opposition of the unbelieving world is like those barrels of water, which Elijah had poured on the altar. It only serves to show the power of God, manifested through the gospel, and empowered by His Spirit. If the world truly hates us because of Christ, then if men get saved, it will be apparent that this was God’s doing, and not the work of men.

This certainly means that we do not need to compromise or “water down” the gospel, thinking this will make it easier for unbelievers to embrace the gospel:

14 But thanks be to God who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ and who makes known through us the fragrance that consists of the knowledge of him in every place. 15 For we are a sweet aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing— 16 to the latter an odor from death to death, but to the former a fragrance from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? 17 For we are not like so many others, hucksters who peddle the word of God for profit; but we are speaking in Christ before God as persons of sincerity, as persons sent from God (2 Corinthians 2:14-17).

1 Therefore, since we have this ministry, just as God has shown us mercy, we do not become discouraged. 2 But we have rejected shameful hidden deeds, not behaving with deceptiveness or distorting the word of God, but by open proclamation of the truth, we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience before God. 3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this age has blinded the minds of those who do not believe so they would not see the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For we do not proclaim ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said “Let light shine out of darkness,” is the one who shined in our hearts to give us the light of the glorious knowledge of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:1-6).

I find it most interesting that the ministry of the Holy Spirit, as described in our text, deals with those things which cannot be seen. We cannot really see sin, righteousness, or judgment, but the Spirit of God proves the world wrong in these matters. It should not surprise us that these crucial things are “unseen” because faith deals with unseen things:

1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see. 2 For by it the people of old received God’s commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds were set in order at God’s command, so that the visible has its origin in the invisible (Hebrews 11:1-3).

Let me close by speaking a word to those who do not yet believe in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of their sins and the gift of eternal life. If you do not believe that you are a sinner, that Jesus Christ and His righteousness are your only hope for eternal life, and that as a sinner you are under divine condemnation and will stand in judgment before God in the future, then I simply encourage you to try to forget everything you have read in this message. Try to forget what the Bible teaches you about your sin, about the righteousness of Jesus Christ, and about the coming judgment of God on all sinners. But if what our Lord has said in John chapter 16 is true, then the Holy Spirit will bear witness to these truths from within your heart. Don’t try to debate these things with me; try to ignore the inner testimony of God’s Spirit. And if you cannot, then confess your sin, and turn in faith to Jesus Christ for the righteousness which He alone can give. The truths of our text are a great source of comfort to the Christian, and the cause for much consternation and conviction for the unbeliever.

     In John’s Gospel, as the time of our Lord’s death draws near, He seeks to prepare them for the future. The Upper Room Discourse contains a significant portion of our Lord’s preparatory teaching. As we read the things which Jesus told His disciples, it all makes sense to us. Of course, He was speaking of His crucifixion, death, resurrection, and return to the Father in heaven. But what is clear to us in retrospect was not at all clear to the disciples in prospect. They were confused and greatly distraught by Jesus’ words. They did not understand what He was talking about, and what they thought they understood, they did not like.

What a change a few days will make! Once the disciples see Jesus, raised from the dead, their sorrow turns to joy. When the Holy Spirit comes, our Lord’s teaching will seem obvious, and when compared to the events which will have occurred by then, they will see that Jesus foretold and fulfilled all this precisely. We must recall that when John writes this Gospel, he writes in retrospect, looking back on the events he is describing with understanding. But within the timeframe that John is writing about, the disciples are in a complete fog. They do not understand what is happening, or what Jesus is saying. And what they think they do understand, they don’t. What they think and say they grasp, they do not like.

Lest we suppose we are dealing only with matters of history, let me remind you that in many ways, our circumstances today are very similar to those of the disciples so many years ago. They were concerned with our Lord’s departure, as He had spoken of it to them. We are concerned about our Lord’s return, as He has described it as well, in His Word. Much of what our Lord has said of His return is unclear to us, just as much of what He said to them of His departure was unclear. Even with the Holy Spirit’s presence, our understanding of spiritual things is partial and imperfect: “For now we see in a mirror indirectly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part, then I will know fully, just as I have been fully known” (1 Corinthians 13:12).

I would say this is particularly true of “things to come”: “Dear friends, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. But we know that whenever it is revealed we will be like him, because we will see him just as he is” (1 John 3:2).

Just as Old Testament saints awaited the coming of the Messiah and the disciples looked forward to the departure of our Lord, so we wait for His final return and the consummation of all things. Our Lord’s words of instruction and comfort to His disciples apply to us on at least two levels. First, they speak of blessings which are future for the disciples, but which are present for us. Second, they instruct us how and why we should live in the present, in light of the certainty that His purposes and promises will be fulfilled. Therefore, let us heed the Lord’s words in our text, knowing that they are as important to us as they were to those men, so many years ago.

   The Spirit of God reveals the Savior in the Word and in this way glorifies Him:  “”I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. {13} But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. {14} He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you.”

   Three aspects of the Holy Spirit are marked in the three main verbs:

– He…will convict (vs. 8)

– He…shall guide (vs. 13)

– He…shall glorify (vs. 14)

   The first two are qualified by the temporal clause, “when He is come,” which indicates that these relate to the work of the Spirit in times as it affects the world and the disciples.

   The third aspect indicates the relation of the Spirit to Christ, who is the source of the Spirit’s teaching.

   Discussion about the Holy Spirit today is often confusing and divisive. While this passage does not say everything that can be said about the Holy Spirit, it does describe the Spirit’s mission: to lead the followers of Jesus into all truth.

   For Christians today, all truth is to be evaluated in light of what the Spirit revealed to the apostles when He guided them “into all the truth.” We are also to remember that the purpose of the Spirit is not to draw attention to Himself, but to glorify the Son. Every teaching about the Spirit must be consistent with these two truths.

While all Bible students do not agree on this point, it would seem that the Lord and His eleven disciples are no longer in the Upper Room. It appears to me that they have left, immediately after the question and answer discussion of chapters 13 and 14: “Get up, let us go from here” (John 14:31b).

I take it that the disciples are now winding their way through the narrow streets of Jerusalem, making their way toward the Mount of Olives and the Garden of Gethsemane.[9] Judas has long since left the group and is at this very moment making arrangements to hand Jesus over to the authorities (Jewish and Roman). Jesus can now speak freely and frankly, preparing His disciples for what lies ahead. He has spoken to them about the ministry of the Holy Spirit to the world (verses 8-11); now He speaks of the Spirit’s ministry to His disciples (16:12ff.).

Jesus has much more to say to them, but this is not the time to do so. I would like to suggest that we often wish God would tell us all that He is doing, or is about to do, at the time we wish to know it. And yet how gracious God is to withhold from us those things we do not need to know, those things which would only cause us needless anguish if we did know them. Jesus withheld information from His disciples for their own good. It was another manifestation of His grace not to tell them all they wanted to know. God is gracious, both in what He reveals, and in what He conceals. I wonder if this is how we view the “unknowns” in our life. “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29, NKJV).

We should also see from our text an example of the fact that God reveals truth to us progressively. Jesus had much to say to them, but not at that moment. Jesus will teach them after His resurrection and before His ascension (see Luke 24:13ff.), but most of the teaching will be done by the Holy Spirit, after our Lord’s departure. This is the subject of verses 13-16. While Jesus will be physically absent, the Holy Spirit will be present among and within them. The things which the Spirit teaches them are the things which Jesus will be teaching them. The reason Jesus can say this is that the truth which the Spirit is teaching is the truth which He hears from our Lord. The Spirit’s teaching comes from and glorifies the Lord Jesus (verses 3-4), just as our Lord’s teaching came from and glorified the Father (John 8:26, 40).

We should take note of the important fact that Jesus is speaking to His disciples here. He promises to reveal truth to them through the Spirit. He does not make a general statement, that new truth will be revealed to an indefinite number of people, over an indefinite period of time.[10] He informs them that He will reveal His truth to them. I believe that this promise of future revelation through the Holy Spirit is a promise that pertains to the New Testament apostles[11] and is not a promise which can be claimed by men today. By future revelation, I mean revelation which claims to be Scripture and which has authority as Scripture (i.e., the Bible). It seems clear to me that the apostles, through whom the New Testament Scriptures were given, were viewed as a distinct group, confined to New Testament times. Those who were to be regarded as true apostles were accredited by the “signs of a true apostle”:

1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken through angels proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, 3 how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was first communicated through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, 4 while God confirmed their witness with signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will (Hebrews 2:1-4).

16 For we did not follow cleverly concocted fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; no, we were eyewitnesses of his grandeur. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father, when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory: “This is my dear Son, in whom I am delighted.” 18 When this voice was conveyed from heaven, we ourselves heard it, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you do well if you recognize this: no prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination, 21 for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God (2 Peter 1:16-21).

Indeed, the signs of an apostle were performed among you with great perseverance by signs and wonders and powerful deeds (2 Corinthians 12:12).

A further observation should be noted. Jesus promises to reveal all truth to the apostles. We know that this does not mean that He will reveal all knowledge. How could the omniscience (all-knowing) of God be revealed to men? John makes clear that his Gospel, as all the others, is but a sampling of the things Jesus said and did: “This is the disciple who testifies about these things and has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. There are many other things that Jesus did. If every one of them were written down, I suppose the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” (John 21:24-25).

Jesus must therefore mean that all the truth which is necessary for the church will be revealed through the apostles, and that there will be no lack to be made up later on. The words of Paul seem to support this conclusion as well:

18 When they arrived, he said to them, “You yourselves know how I lived the whole time I was with you, from the first day I set foot in Asia, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears, and with the trials that happened to me because of the plots of the Jews. 20 You know that I did not hold back from proclaiming to you anything that would be helpful, and from teaching you publicly and from house to house, 21 testifying to both Jews and Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus. … 25 And now I know that none of you among whom I went around proclaiming the kingdom will see me again. 26 Therefore I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of you all. 27 For I did not hold back from announcing to you the whole purpose of God. 28 Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son. 29 I know that after I am gone fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Even from among your own group men will arise, teaching perversions of the truth to draw the disciples away after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that night and day for three years I did not stop warning each one of you with tears. 32 And now I entrust you to God and to the message of his grace. This message is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified” (Acts 20:18-21, 25-32).

In this text, Paul claims to have taught the Ephesians all the truth they needed to know. If they were taught all they needed to know, then there is no need for further revelation. Beyond this, Paul warns that false teachers will seek to convey “new truth,” which is nothing more than “man-made teaching” that appeals to fleshly desires and which will attract a following.

Peter’s words also imply a completeness concerning that which our Lord will reveal to and through His apostles:

3 I can pray this because his divine power has bestowed on us everything necessary for life and godliness through the rich knowledge of the one who called us by his own glory and excellence. 4 Through these things he has bestowed on us his precious and most magnificent promises, so that by means of what was promised you may become partakers of the divine nature, after escaping the worldly corruption that is produced by evil desire (2 Peter 1:3-4).

Leon Morris therefore issues a sober warning:

Believers should be very careful here, for from time to time through the history of the Christian church, people have arisen who have said that they had new revelations and they have led people astray. It is important for us to keep a firm hold on the truth that the definitive revelation has been given in Scripture. Christian teaching is the teaching God gave through Christ and Christ’s apostles. Nothing can claim to be authentic Christian teaching that does not agree with this.[12]

Allow me to point out one more observation. The revelation which our Lord promises the apostles is not only from Christ, it is Christ-centered: “He will glorify me, because he will receive from me what is mine and will tell it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; that is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what is mine and will tell it to you” (John 16:14-15).

The revelation which is promised is that truth which has come from the Father, to the Son, and through the Spirit. It is thus our Lord’s teaching. But it is not merely the teaching of (i.e. from) our Lord; it is the teaching concerning our Lord. False revelations are those which appeal to man’s fallen desires (2 Timothy 4:1-4; 2 Peter 2:18-22), which elevate men (Acts 20:30; 1 Corinthians 1:10ff.), and which draw men’s focus away from Christ (1 Corinthians 1:22-31; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:18-25). Any teaching which claims to be divine revelation and does not exalt Christ is false teaching. A preacher friend of mine used to say, “All false teaching is either the Bible plus, or the Bible minus.” False teaching either seeks to add to or to take away from Scripture. I think one can also say, “All false teaching is either Christ plus, or Christ minus.” Paul would say, “True teaching is Christ only.”[13]

* LET THERE BE JOY (16:16-33)

   This final section of the chapter concludes the Upper Room discourse and deals primarily with the emotions of the disciples. They were sorrowing, they were confused about some of Jesus’ teaching, and they were afraid.

   Jesus made many statements that we easily understand today, but which thoroughly confused His disciples at the time He made them. Such is the case in 16:16-22. Jesus told them that in the coming days they would not see Him, but that “after a while” they would see Him again (16:16, 17). The death, burial, and resurrection of Christ are subjects Christians constantly talk about and the events they remember and celebrate each Sunday as they observe the Lord’s Supper. However, this was an unthinkable idea before the cross. To the disciples it seemed that Jesus was speaking in impossible riddles.

   Jesus continued to prepare the disciples for His departure; because no matter how confused the disciples were on that night, Jesus knew they would be even more confused the next day when He was crucified. Therefore, He pressed on with His message concerning what was about to take place. He told them that they would weep while the world would rejoice; yet He said that in a short time, the world would weep while the disciples rejoiced (16:20-22). We can see that this is what took place in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, but the disciples were unable at that time to grasp this important truth.

   One of the recurring themes in this section is joy.  The 11 were certainly not experiencing much joy that night! But what Jesus said to them eventually made a difference in their lives, just as it can make a difference in our lives today.

   Tenderly and patiently, our Lord explained how His people can have joy in their lives.

– There is a Principle to Grasp (16:16-22).

   In the upper room, Jesus has mentioned impending sorrow and inevitable persecution several times. Now He wants to clarify that this isn’t the end of their relationship.

   “”In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.” {17} Some of his disciples said to one another, “What does he mean by saying, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me,’ and’ Because I am going to the Father’?” {18} They kept asking, “What does he mean by ‘a little while’? We don’t understand what he is saying.” {19} Jesus saw that they wanted to ask him about this, so he said to them, “Are you asking one another what I meant when I said, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me’? {20} I tell you the truth, you will weep and mourn while the world rejoices. You will grieve, but your grief will turn to joy.”

   The disciples would go through incredible pain and sorrow, but their grief would not last forever.

   To illustrate, Jesus draws a homespun analogy: 

   “A woman giving birth to a child has pain because her time has come; but when her baby is born she forgets the anguish because of her joy that a child is born into the world”

   No matter how intense, once that tiny, priceless life is laid in your arms, the pain is forgotten. The comparison is clear. “So with you: Now is your time of grief, but I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy.”

    The principle is simply this:  God brings joy to our lives, not by substitution, but by transformation. His illustration of the woman giving birth makes this clear. The same baby that caused the pain also caused the joy!

   Jesus did not say that the mother’s sorrow (pain) was replaced by joy, but that the sorrow was transformed into joy. Verse 16 talks about the soon-to-occur events in connection with His death and resurrection.

   Instead of asking Jesus to explain His words, the men began to discuss it among themselves, almost as though they were embarrassed to admit their ignorance.

– There is a Promise to Believe (16:23-28)

   Jesus continued to comfort and prepare the disciples by telling them how their situation would actually be better once He ascended to the Father.

   Although they could not understand how that could possibly be true, Jesus assured them that when He returned to heaven, unspeakable spiritual power would be released into the world: His blood that was about to be shed for the sins of the world and the Holy Spirit who was about to come and take His place were two forces that would bless the world in unimaginable ways!

   Jesus had spoken to them in figurative language, because that is all they were prepared for at the time. However, they would soon understand “plainly” what He had meant (16:25). He assured them that when thy asked in His name, they would receive the answers to their prayers (16:26-28).

   Just as a violent storm turns the desert into a bed of wildflowers, so the sorrowful storm to pass over the disciples would bloom joy in abundance. But this flower has deeper roots, as unearthed in verses 23-24: “In that day you will no longer ask me anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. {24} Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.”

  Having broached the subject of prayer, Jesus clarifies the issue of God’s accessibility: “”Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father. {26} In that day you will ask in my name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf.”

   There will come a time when the disciples will have direct access to the Father. And what will bring about this new relationship? Love! “No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. {28} I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.””

   The central theme of this section is prayer: “ask, and you will receive, and your joy may be full.” “That day” refers to the time after the coming of the Spirit.

   Jesus knew they wanted to ask Him some questions (vs. 19). He assured them that a day would soon come when they would not ask questions. Instead, they would pray to the Father and He would meet their needs.

   This was the promise they desperately needed to believe: that the Father loved them and would hear their requests and meet their needs. While Jesus was with them on earth, He met all their needs. Now He would return to the Father, but the Father would meet their needs.

   The purpose of Bible study is not simply to understand profound truth, but to get to know the Father better (vs. 25). If our reading and Bible study falls short of this, it does more harm than good.

   “Then Jesus’ disciples said, “Now you are speaking clearly and without figures of speech. {30} Now we can see that you know all things and that you do not even need to have anyone ask you questions. This makes us believe that you came from God.” {31} “You believe at last[1]!” Jesus answered. {32} “But a time is coming, and has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home. You will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is with me. {33} “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.””

   The disciples’ response to Jesus’ words of comfort was to confess their faith in Him. Again, we recognize the importance of the word “believe” in the Gospel of John. Belief in Jesus as God’s Son is the goal of this Gospel (20:30, 31). We are reminded that John used “believe” in many ways. In some verses it means that a person accepted a claim as true. In others it means that someone accepted Jesus as the Son of God.

   Sometimes it means “going public” with one’s faith in Jesus, while at other times it means “standing firm” in one’s commitment to follow Jesus. In 16:30 the disciples were saying that they accepted the claims of Jesus to be true; they believed that He “came from God.”

   Jesus challenged their statement of faith, for He knew that they were not yet prepared to sacrifice for their convictions (16:32). He told them that they would all leave Him alone. At this point, we see Jesus looking outside the events in the Gospel of John and challenging us in our claims to believe in Him today.

   Do we really believe? We say we trust that He is the Son of God, but will we stand up for Him when doing so may mean suffering? The Gospel of John is not just the story of the disciples’ faith; it is the story of our faith as well!

    If Jesus’ teachings in chapter 16 come together in one central theme, it must be the message of verse 33.

   All the warnings, all the predictions, all the promises were for the purpose of giving the disciples peace at the most tumultuous moment of their lives!

   Jesus never promised His disciples that their lives would be free from trouble, but He did promise them the peace of God even in the middle of trouble: “These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world” (16:33).

   “I” is emphasized here. In many ways the next twenty-four hours would cause the disciples to think that the world had won and that evil had triumphed. Jesus prepared them for this by confidently affirming that He had overcome the world. It is also significant that “have overcome” is, in Greek, in the perfect tense. Therefore, it carries the sense of “I have already overcome the world, and the result of My overcoming is alreay present!”

   While the cross would not literally take place until the next day, Jesus expressed His confident assurance to the disciples that all was going as planned, and that they would be blessed by the events that would shortly take place.

Jesus made a comment about the future, which His disciples found impossible to understand: “In a little while you will see me no longer; again after a little while, you will see me” (verse 16). No one seemed willing to address their questions to Jesus. Instead, they spoke among themselves. It would appear that this took place as the disciples wound their way through the narrow streets of Jerusalem, on their way to the Mount of Olives and the Garden of Gethsemane. How and why would they not see Jesus? To what period of time was Jesus referring by the expression, “a little while”? How and when would they see Jesus after a little while? What did He mean by saying He was “going to the Father”?[14]

Jesus overheard His disciples (although He would have known through His omniscience), and graciously began to explain His words to them, although they still didn’t understand. Jesus lets them know that He is answering the questions which they had just discussed among themselves. Soon, they will “weep and wail,” while the world will rejoice. The term “weep” is frequently employed for the mourning that occurs due to the death of someone (see Mark 5:39; Luke 7:13; 8:52; John 11:31, 33). Indeed it is used in Mark 16:10 for the disciples, who wept over the death of our Lord. Jesus is therefore telling His disciples that they will momentarily experience great sorrow over His death. At this same period of time, the unbelievers (the world) who have crucified Jesus will rejoice over His death. It will seem like their hour of triumph. At last, they are rid of Jesus, or so it appears. The disciples’ time of sorrow will be short, and then their sorrow will be turned to joy. How great the joy of the disciples was when they learned that Jesus had been raised from the dead (Luke 24:41, 52).[15]

It has been observed that Jesus does not tell His disciples that their sorrow will be replaced by joy, but rather that their sorrow will be turned into joy. There is a very significant difference. Many wish to have joy, but they want to have it without sorrow. If joy is sorrow which God has transformed into joy, then we must endure the sorrow to experience the joy. This truth is illustrated by our Lord’s words which follow in verse 21. What a blessing it is for a woman to be able to bear a child … and, what a pain! She must first endure the pains of childbirth before she can enjoy the pleasure of holding that child in her arms. The birth of a child comes only through the pain of childbirth. So it is with suffering and sorrow in the lives of our Lord’s disciples. There is a short time of pain, but that very pain is transformed into eternal joy. Paul describes it this way:

16 Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, our inner person is being renewed day by day. 17 For our momentary light suffering is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, 18 because we are not looking at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen; for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal (2 Corinthians 4:16-18).

As it is for a woman in childbirth, so it will be for the disciples. They will experience great sorrow because of the death of Jesus, but they will see Him again, raised from the dead. This will turn their sorrow into everlasting joy, a joy that no one will ever be able take away from them.

In 16:5, Jesus seems to mildly rebuke His disciples for not asking Him any more questions about where He is going. They did not ask for all the wrong reasons. They didn’t want Jesus to know they didn’t understand. They didn’t want to admit their ignorance. They didn’t want to look bad. But when they see Him again, raised from the dead, then they will not ask Him anything (16:23), because they will not need to. At that time, whatever they ask[16] the Father in the name of the Son will be given to them. Jesus commands them to pray in His name, assured that they will receive what they have requested, and in so doing, their joy will be made complete.

Consider the inference of these words. Christian joy is not to be found in having everything you’ve ever wanted. Joy is not the lack of want,[17] but rather in having needs so great that only God can fill them, and then in seeing Him provide for us in response to our prayers. The Father will give us what we have requested, so that we may experience great joy. In other words—words which we have heard before—joy is the result of abiding in Christ.

Though the disciples will experience great sorrow for the next few days, their hearts will rejoice when they see Jesus once again. This joy cannot be taken from them. The disciples were concerned because Jesus was going away, where they could not follow. They thought they were losing Him, but in truth they were gaining Him. His promise is that He will never leave them nor forsake them (Hebrews 13:5). Through the ministry of the Holy Spirit, our Lord will continue to dwell among them, in a more intimate and permanent way. Since their joy is in Him and He will never leave them, no one will ever be able to rob them of their joy in Him.

The disciples have not yet begun to enjoy the benefits of this new relationship. They have not yet petitioned the Father for their needs in the name of Jesus Christ. They are now encouraged to do so. Jesus assures them that when they make their requests in His name, the Father will provide for them, and in this they will experience an even greater joy than they have known up to this point in time. It is not getting worse for the disciples, as they fear; it is getting better and better.

Is this promise of our Lord’s presence, of answered prayers, and of permanent joy not ours, as well as the disciples who first heard Jesus speak of it? Why is it, then, that we find so many joyless Christians? I would suggest it may be because we are looking for joy in all the wrong places. It is His joy that we are to pursue (see John 15:11). This is not the “joy” that the world seeks. The world seeks for a “joy” that is rooted in the absence of trials and suffering, that delights in the promotion of self-interest, and often in the downfall of one’s rivals. First and foremost, our joy is knowing for certain that Jesus is alive, risen from the dead (see Matthew 28:8; Luke 24:41, 52). Our joy is in the abasement of self, in the exaltation of Jesus Christ (see John 3:29), and in sacrificial service (Philippians 2:17). Our joy is in the Lord, in His salvation, and His working in the lives of others (Acts 15:3; Romans 15:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:19-20; 1 John 1:4; 3 John 4).

If we abide in Him, what pleases Him pleases us; what grieves Him grieves us; what gives Him great joy becomes our joy as well. When false teachers come, they seek to turn us from Christ, and to the degree that they are able to do this, they rob us of our hope, our joy, our love, and all that comes from Him. No wonder Paul is so emphatic about the sufficiency and centrality of Christ:

1 For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you, and for those in Laodicea, and for as many as have not met me face to face. 2 My goal is that their hearts, having been knit together in love, may be encouraged, and that they may have all the riches of full assurance in their understanding of the knowledge of the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4 I say this so that no one will deceive you through arguments that sound reasonable. 5 For though I am absent from you in body, I am present with you in spirit, rejoicing to see the order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. 6 Therefore, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, 7 rooted and built up in him and firm in your faith just as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness. 8 Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in him all the fullness of deity lives in bodily form 10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head over every ruler and authority. 11 In him you also were circumcised—not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshy body, that is, through the circumcision done by Christ. 12 Having been united with him in baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead. 13 And even though you were dead in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he nonetheless made you alive with him, having forgiven all your transgressions. 14 He has destroyed what was against us, a certificate of indebtedness expressed in decrees opposed to us. He has taken it away by nailing it to the cross, 15 and disarming the rulers and authorities, he has made a public disgrace of them, triumphing over them by the cross (Colossians 2:1-15).

You can see that verses 25-33 are an interchange between Jesus and His disciples. In verses 25-28, Jesus makes His disciples a very encouraging promise. He knows that they are mystified about all that He has been saying to them about the future. He is speaking in vague terms so that they will not understand immediately, but also in order that they will understand in the future. They will soon look back and recall that the very things that had happened to them were the things Jesus foretold.

Jesus promises that a time is coming when His obscure speech will be replaced by very clear teaching. At that time, He will tell them plainly about the Father. At that time, they will ask in His name, and their petitions will be granted. He has already promised this, but here He indicates a substantial change. It is but another one of those “improvements” which the disciples are about to experience in the future, because of His going away. When they petition the Father in the name of the Son, they will not merely receive the answer to their prayers through the Son. They will receive the answers to their prayers directly from the Father. Jesus will have an intercessory ministry on our behalf, but His work on the cross will bring about a personal, intimate relationship between the Father and all who trust in His Son. No wonder the veil was torn asunder when Jesus died on the cross (Matthew 27:51). We now can come to God directly, because of the Son:

19 Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the fresh and living way that he inaugurated for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in the full assurance that faith brings, because we have had our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed in pure water. 23 And let us hold unwaveringly to the hope that we confess, for the one who made the promise is trustworthy. 24 And let us take thought of how to spur one another on to love and good works, 25 not abandoning our own meetings, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging each other, and even more so because you see the day drawing near (Hebrews 10:19-25).

The Father will personally attend to the prayers of Jesus’ disciples, because of His love for them, a love which is the same as His love for the Son (14:23; 17:26). He will do so because of the Son’s coming to this earth (to die for our sins) and because He has returned to the Father. These benefits are the fruit of our Lord’s coming and leaving. Once more, it is better for them that He should depart (John 16:7).

What incredible blessings Jesus promises His disciples! But they didn’t understand a thing He was saying, as John makes very clear by the words of verses 29 and 30. Paraphrased, the disciples seem to be saying:

“Why didn’t you say so sooner? Now we get it. Okay, it’s all clear to us now. You’re no longer speaking in riddles, but plainly. Now we see that You really do know everything, so that we don’t have to ask You any more questions, to help You clarify any points. And because we now see this clearly, we believe that You have truly come from God.”

Notice what they are saying here. They have not repeated any of the content of Jesus’ latest words. They have not told Him what they think He has just said, so that He can confirm the accuracy of their interpretations. They have only told Him that they understand, and because of this, they won’t need to question Him further. This is a very neat way of giving the impression you know something that you don’t and of explaining why you are not asking any questions.

No doubt they did believe that Jesus had come from God. I do doubt that they grasped what His return to the Father was all about, and I’m virtually certain they don’t have a clue as to what He has just told them. They are embarrassed at their ignorance, and they want to look good in His eyes. They want His approval, and at the same time, they want Him to think they understand everything He is saying so that He won’t be frustrated by their confusion. The simple fact is that no matter what they profess to grasp, they cannot and do not understand what Jesus has been telling them. He has, in fact, been telling them that they would not understand what He was saying to them, not now anyway.

Jesus patiently and lovingly deals with His disciples at this moment of ignorance and confusion. He did not expect them to understand. However, He does not allow their pretense to stand, unchallenged. He is the One who is all-knowing, and this includes His knowledge of what they claim to know, and yet do not. And so He says to them (loosely paraphrased):

“I know you really don’t understand, and the level of your present belief is far from impressive. Time will tell. There is a time coming, coming very soon, when you will all abandon Me and scatter, hiding out in your own homes. You will leave Me alone, but I won’t really be alone because the Father is with Me. The reason I have told you these things is not with the expectation that you would understand them immediately (as you have professed to do), but so that you may have great peace in the future, when you see how all these things of which I have spoken take, just as I said. You will then see that all things are under My control. You will see how this tribulation of mine was purposed to bring about great blessing for you. Thus, in the midst of your tribulations on My behalf, you will have courage, knowing that I have conquered the world.”

Jesus lets His disciples know that they have not put anything over on Him, that He knows full well that they still do not understand what He is saying, or what is about to take place. The belief they profess is not nearly as strong as they suppose. The events of the next few hours will prove this, for virtually every one of them will abandon Him. And when these traumatic days pass and the words of our Lord come to pass, then they will be greatly strengthened in their faith, and empowered to live courageously in a hostile world, knowing that Christ has won the victory over the world.

Conclusion

We need to exercise caution in the application of this passage because it applies directly to the eleven disciples, and indirectly to us. We are the benefactors of much that Jesus has foretold here, and which has subsequently come to pass. We will never face some of the things which the disciples did. We will never know the sense of loss and defeat that the disciples did when Jesus died on the cross of Calvary. Neither will we experience the relief and joy at seeing Jesus, raised from the dead (John 20:20). We will not be those through whom the gospel was defined and by whom the New Testament Scriptures were written. Nevertheless, while we are not apostles as these men were to become, we are His disciples, and thus this text applies to us as well.

We are able to read these words of our Lord in the light of their fulfillment. We can understand what completely confused the disciples. We will never know the bewilderment and apprehension that they did, simply because our Lord’s words were a puzzle to them at that moment in time. But we can identify with the disciples in this sense: there are things yet future for us, which are declared in Scripture, but which we do not fully understand. We live at a time when we do not yet “fully know” all that God has in store for us and for the future. We, too, “see through a glass darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:12), but then we will know (cf. 1 John 3:2).

Why did Jesus tell the disciples things that they could not understand at the moment? Why do the Scriptures contain many prophecies which we do not understand at the time? One reason is to remind us that we don’t fully understand. That is what it means to be a disciple. We are learners, who learn at His feet as we abide in Him. He knows. He is the Truth. And it is clear that He does not reveal everything we might wish to know at one time. He reveals what we need to know and conceals what we should not know (Deuteronomy 29:29). As these prophecies are fulfilled and we look back on our Lord’s words, we will see that He has done just as He said He would. This will be even further basis for praising Him.

While our Lord’s words will, in the future, be understood in all their particulars, they have a message for us now, in general. From what Jesus was telling the disciples, one should discern that He knows the future, indeed, that He controls the future. His life will not be taken from Him; He will lay it down, voluntarily, and He will take it up again (John 10:14-18). We know that what is yet to happen is not only for His glory, but for our good. We know that He will sustain us through our times of trial and tribulation, just as we know that He will bring us to glory. If we know that He is in control, and that His plans are for our good, why should we worry? We don’t need to know the details of what He has for us in the future. We need only to trust in Him who is in control of the past, the present, and the future.

We should be admonished by the puffed up claims of the disciples. The disciples claimed to fully understand Jesus, His ministry, and His message. They most certainly did not. We should be very careful about assuming that we “have it all together” in matters which we may not understand as well as we claim. The fundamentals should be clear to us, but there are many other things which we will only “know” clearly and completely “then.” We should especially be wary of those who would seek to teach us, claiming they have a full and complete grasp of God’s truth. The most brilliant scholars and students of Scripture that I know are still the best students, ever seeking to understand His Word better, and willing to listen to the insights of other students of Scripture. Those who know it all do not need to learn any more, they think. They need only to teach, and not to be taught.

This passage teaches us that those things which are most perplexing, and even most distressing, are often the things which God transforms into His richest blessings. In the Bible, some of man’s darkest moments were transformed into times of blessing. The curse of death which came because of Adam’s sin became the cure when Jesus Christ, the “last Adam,” died in the sinner’s place. Abraham and Sarah were as good as dead, humanly speaking, so far as child-bearing was concerned. They tried to figure out some way to produce a child on their own, which only led to trouble. Finally, God gave them a child in a miraculous way, glorifying Himself and bringing about good for Abraham and Sarah. Think of how difficult it must have been for Noah to have spent many years of his life preparing an ark, when he may not have even seen rain up to this point in time. Think of all the people in the Gospels who suffered from blindness, demon-possession, being lame, and leprosy. It was these suffering saints who experienced God’s gracious hand, and many of them came to saving faith. No wonder our Lord could say, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, because the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. Blessed are those who mourn, because they will be comforted” (Matthew 5:3-4).

In your darkest moments, when life makes no sense, and you have no idea what God is doing, you can rest in the simple fact that God is infinitely good, infinitely loving, and infinitely powerful. He can and will cause “all things to work together for good” to those who are His chosen, to those who trust in Him (see Romans 8:28). God delights in transforming those things which seem most threatening, most unpleasant, and most dreaded, into blessings. He took death and the fear and bondage it produces and defeated it on the cross (see Hebrews 2:14-15). Now, all that death can do is usher us into the presence of God (see 1 Corinthians 15:54-58; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Philippians 1:23).

If there is one thing that has most struck me from this text, it has been this realization: It is the cross of Jesus Christ which puts everything in focus. The disciples had no idea what was about to happen. They were completely perplexed about what Jesus was telling them. The cross was the goal of our Lord’s life and the means by which He fulfilled the Father’s (and His) purposes and promises. After the cross, the disciples understood what Jesus’ mission was all about. They understood what He had been teaching them. It is the cross which makes Jesus’ teachings clear. It is the cross which is the key to understanding all of the Bible, Old Testament or New. Take away the cross of Calvary, and the Bible makes no sense at all. It is from the vantage point of the cross that the message of the Bible becomes clear. Is this not what Paul was saying in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians?

7 But if the ministry that produced death, carved in letters on stone tablets, came with glory so that the Israelites could not keep their eyes fixed on the face of Moses because of the glory of his face (a glory that was fading away), 8 how much more glorious will the ministry of the Spirit be? 9 For if there was glory in the ministry that produced condemnation, how much more does the ministry that produces righteousness excel in glory! 10 For indeed, what had been glorious now has no glory because of the tremendously greater glory of what replaced it. 11 For if what was fading away came with glory, how much more has what remains come in glory. 12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we behave with great boldness, 13 and not like Moses who used to put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from staring at the end of the glory that was fading away. 14 But their minds were closed. For to this very day, the same veil remains when they hear the old covenant read. It has not been removed because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 But until this very day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their minds; 16 but whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom. 18 And we all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:7-17, emphasis mine).

The cross is the test of orthodoxy. Those who would turn us from the cross of Christ are false teachers, who should be avoided (see 1 Corinthians 1; Colossians 1 & 2). The cross of Christ is what removes the “veil” of blindness from the eyes of unbelieving Jews, and Gentiles too. Have you come to the cross? Have you trusted in Jesus Christ as the Holy One of God, who died on the cross of Calvary for your sins? Once having come to the cross by faith in Jesus Christ, we must always stay near the cross. It is the view from the cross which brings everything else into focus. This is why, in our church, we observe the Lord’s Table weekly. We must always, daily, come back to the cross. It is by means of the cross that Jesus saved us. It is by means of the cross that all of His promises will be fulfilled. It is the cross which should shape our perspective (we should take up our cross daily). It is in the light of the cross that the Scriptures become clear. No wonder the disciples could not yet grasp what Jesus was saying about the future. For them, at that moment, the cross was still future. How different it will soon be for them, as they look back from the cross and the empty tomb. How different it should be for us, looking ahead from the cross and the empty tomb!

These final verses show the disciples making a tremendous affirmation of faith:

   – first, they claimed to understand what He had been teaching them, although this claim was probably presumptuous, as their subsequent actions proved

   – they also affirmed their faith and assurance

   The final verse is the climax of the Upper Room message! In Christ, there is peace; in the world, there is tribulation. Every believer is either overcome or an overcomes.

   Although our circumstances may seem, at first, to be far removed from those of the disciples who first heard the comforting words in this chapter, is our world really so different?

   Like them, we face unexpected troubles, are tempted to lose confidence in God, claim that we believe only to see ourselves denying our confession of faith, and desperately yearn for peace in this often chaotic world.

   Jesus wanted the disciples to be prepared for the intense struggles they were about to face. Surely, His words serve the same purpose in our lives as they prepare us for whatever we may face tomorrow. “Expect trouble, and be prepared” is Jesus’ formula in John 16 for maintaining the peace of God in hard times.

   In June 1995 Captain Scott Francis O’Grady, a pilot in the United States Air Force, was shot down while flying a mission over Bosnia-Herzegovina. He was able to parachute safely to the ground, buthe knew that the people who had shot him down would come searching for him to take him prisoner.

   Putting into practice his years of intense Air Force survival training, O’Grady was able to remain hidden from the enemy soldiers for six days before he was finally rescued by Marines. During that time he survived by collecting rainwater to drink and eating bugs.

   When he was interviewed about his ordeal, O’Grady credited all of his survival training with saving his life. The Air Force had taught him to anticipate trouble, so he was ready when it came.

   Jesus does not want His disciples today to worry about all the terrible possibilities in life (Matthew 6:25-34), but He does M;ant us to know that trouble is part of the disciple’s life. Knowing this, we can be prepared, so that we will not be destroyed spiritually when trouble comes.

   This chapter suggests that many times we need to hear what we do not think we need to hear at the moment.

   People sometimes complain about a Bible class or a sermon, “It has nothing to do with where I am right now.” The truth is that we often need to hear lessons about “where we are not right now.”

   That is, we need to hear about where we may eventually be, to be prepared for situations we may face in the future. The disciples certainly did not enjoy what Jesus said in chapter 16, but Jesus knew that they needed to hear it. In the same way, we need to hear the complete message of the Scriptures.

---

[1] “Whether in the first century or in the twentieth, Christians have often discovered that the most dangerous oppression comes not from careless pagans but from zealous adherents to religious faith, and from other ideologues. A sermon was preached when Cranmer was burned at the stake. Christians have faced severe persecution performed in the name of Yahweh, in the name of Allah, in the name of Marx—and in the name of Jesus.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 531.

[2] Notice that Jesus does not merely say, “I am going away,” but rather, “I am going to the one who sent me. …” Once again, our Lord emphasizes that He was sent to earth by the Father, and that having completed His mission, He is returning to heaven, to be with His Father. How easy it would have been to dwell on His betrayal, cruel treatment by men, and the agony of His suffering on the cross of Calvary. Instead, He focuses on the “joy set before Him” (see Hebrews 12:2). All of this emphasizes the fact that He has accomplished the task which He was given.

[3] “Christians today need to meditate long on this rebuke. Some branches of Christendom stress the believer’s experience, the believer’s privilege, the believer’s blessings, the believer’s faith, the believer’s love, the believer’s conduct. … Of course true Christianity transforms the personality and can be richly described in the categories of personal experience: but who is more concerned to please Jesus and fulfill Jesus’ desires than to please himself and fulfill his own desires?

“Other branches of Christendom underline the importance of sacrifice and the need for service. … Of course it is true that biblical Christianity demands self-denial and thrusts believers out in sacrificial service and profound sympathy for the outcast; but is it not possible to become so enamored with the trappings of self-discipline and so occupied with the urgencies of injustice that activity displaces adoration and personal sacrifice dethrones a personal Savior?

“Still others tremble at the doctrinal declension which threatens to ravage Christianity from the inside. They see defection from a high view of Scripture as an evil of mind-numbing proportions, and warn against the syncretism which is surreptitiously intruding itself into the flaccid flanks of evangelicalism. Defenders of the truth, they scent heresy in the earliest stages and are quick to pounce on it and expose it. Of course, true Christianity is indeed a religion of the Book, and it boasts certain non-negotiable doctrines and exclusive claims—the denial of which places one outside the camp; but is it not possible to be orthodox and much concerned about correct formulations of the truth while all the time only minimally concerned to follow Jesus himself in a full-orbed and adoring manner?

 “The disciples in John 16 do not fall into precisely these errors of imbalance. Nevertheless their conduct has one thing in common with such deficient representations of Christianity; something other than Jesus himself and all that he is and says receives primary attention. The other things in question may be worthy, good, and even necessary: who, after all, would demean personal experience, sacrificial service, or firm commitment to truth? Yet if these good and essential things displace the centrality of Jesus Christ in our worship, empathy, and commitment, we come close to prostituting the good news of Jesus and following the disciples’ sorry example.” D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), pp. 136-137.

[4] “In John’s usage, the legal overtones are sharpest in 16:7-11, but there the Paraclete serves rather more as a prosecuting attorney than as counsel for the defence. NIV’s ‘Counsellor’ is not wrong, so long as ‘legal counsellor’ is understood, not ‘camp counsellor’ or ‘marriage counsellor’—and even so, the Paraclete’s ministry extends beyond the legal sphere. The same limitation afflicts ‘Advocate.’ AV’s ‘Comforter’ was not bad in Elizabethan English, when the verb ‘to comfort’ meant ‘to strengthen, give succour to, to encourage, to aid’ (from Latin confortare, ‘to strengthen’). In today’s ears, ‘Comforter’ sounds either like a quilt or like a do-gooder at a wake, and for most speakers of English should be abandoned.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), p. 499.

[5] “The verb occurs eighteen times in the New Testament (cf. Mt. 18:15; Lk. 3:19; Jn. 3:20; 8:46; 1 Cor. 14:24; Eph. 5:11, 13; 1 Tim. 5:20; 2 Tim. 4:2; Tit. 1:9, 13; 2:15; Heb. 12:5; Jas. 2:9; Jude 15, 22; Rev. 3:19). Arguably, in every instance the verb has to do with showing someone his sin, usually as a summons to repentance … The ‘exposure,’ then, is the exposure of one who does evil and who hates the light; it brings the shame that makes the evil person shrink from the light.” D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), pp. 534-535. [I would only add to this the fact that when the Holy Spirit convicts so as to effectively call the lost to faith in Christ, the exposure turns the convicted sinner to the light.]

[6] Though it is not in view here, I would understand that those who have never heard the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ would continue to be judged and condemned on the basis of their rejection of the knowledge of God in nature (see Romans 1:18ff.). Jesus is talking to His disciples, who will proclaim the gospel, and who will suffer persecution from the world for doing so. Thus, those who oppose them will be those who have heard the truth and have rejected it.

[7] See Acts 1:22.

[8] D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 114.

[9] “Are Jesus and his eleven disciples still making their way along narrow streets and paths toward the Kidron Valley? Are the men clumping together in little groups of various combinations as the confines of the way rearrange them again and again? Is this what prompts the questions to flit around the group? Perhaps so; it is difficult to be certain of the physical setting at this point.” D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), p. 156.

[10] In 1 Corinthians 2, Paul speaks of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, whereby He enables Christians to understand spiritual truth, but this is not the same as having the ability to reveal truth which is regarded as Scripture.

[11] It is self-evident that more than the twelve were known as “apostles” in the New Testament. It is also apparent that a number of the New Testament books were not written by one of these apostles, but by other New Testament “apostles” (e.g., Mark, Luke, Acts, Paul’s Epistles). In my opinion, all the New Testament authors should be viewed as “apostles,” and in a distinct category from anyone else, from that time on.

[12] Leon Morris, Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), vol. 3, p. 546.

[13] See Colossians 2:1-19.

[14] The disciples found themselves struggling to grasp what these words meant, not unlike the way we struggle to understand prophecies of “things to come” for us. At least they honestly admitted their ignorance.

[15] Some dispute the interpretation that Jesus is speaking of the disciples’ sorrow and their joy as being related to our Lord’s imminent death and resurrection. Carson forcefully defends the view that this is, indeed, what our Lord is saying:

“There are, however, several indications which argue strongly that the passage … refers simply to Jesus’ departure by the death of the cross and his return by resurrection. The following points should be noted: (1) Only John 16:16 adds the phrase ‘after a little while’ to the promise ‘you will see me.’ This is not accidental. (2) The picture of the disciples weeping and mourning while the world rejoices (16:20) fits only the period during which Jesus is in the grave. After the resurrection, John is careful to point out, the ‘disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord’ (20:20). Acts attests that the early Christians after Pentecost experienced great joy (Acts 13:52; cf. 5:41; 16:25). Only while Jesus’ body lay in the tomb were the disciples overwhelmed with grief. (3) The analogy of the woman giving birth likewise fits best into the sharp, short agony of the three-day period immediately ahead. (4) This interpretation fits best into the Farewell Discourse. Jesus’ departure and subsequent return at the parousia have already been treated, as also has his return by the Spirit; but so far Jesus has said nothing unambiguous about the three-day departure into death.” D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus, p. 158.

[16] It is important to note that in the NET Bible, the first word translated “ask” in verse 23 is erwtaw, while the second “ask” is a translation of the Greek word aitew. The NAB reflects the distinction in these verbs and their meaning by this rendering: “In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you” (emphasis mine). After our Lord’s resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit, the disciples will no longer need to question our Lord about the meaning of His words and the events which are taking place. They will, however, be constantly asking Him to provide for their every need.

[17] It may occur to someone that in Psalm 23:1 the psalmist says, “The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.” We must surely see that this is no “blank check,” assuring us that we can have whatever we want (athough Asaph at one time wrongly supposed so—see Psalm 73), whatever we ask for (see James 4:2-3 here), but rather we will never lack anything we truly need, anything which is for our good and His glory.