“Open our eyes, Lord, we want to see Jesus, To reach out and touch Him, and say that we love Him. Open our eyes, Lord, and help us to listen. Open our eyes, Lord, we want to see Jesus.”

The cover of an issue of U.S. News and World Report asked the question “Who was Jesus?” Inside it reported on some academic discussions about the identity of the one we call “Lord.”

Listen to some of their confusing conclusions: “In just the past two years, Jesus has been depicted variously as a magician and healer, as a religious and social revolutionary and as a radical peasant philosopher. One author has even theorized that Jesus was the leader of the Dead Sea Scrolls community in Qumran, that he survived the Crucifixion and went on to marry twice and father three children.”

Newsweek magazine ran a similar cover story, this one on “The Death of Jesus.” One of the articles focused on a group of seventy-seven liberal scholars known as the “Jesus Seminar.” These people meet twice a year to talk about their opinions regarding who Jesus was and what He actually did.

One of their most curious practices is that of voting about the authenticity of specific passages in the Gospels. Every person is given four beads; when it is time to vote, they simply drop in the appropriate beads. Red beads mean they believe Jesus certainly said or did what the text says. Pink beads indicate that they think Jesus said or did something close to what the text describes. Gray beads signify their doubt that Jesus said or did what the text relates, and black beads represent their certainty that Jesus never thought or did anything like what the text declares.

The following conclusions by the majority in the “Jesus Seminar” are shocking and, I believe, blasphemous! “This “historical” Jesus performed no miracles, but he did have a healer’s touch, a gift for alleviating emotional ills through acceptance and love. He called for an utterly egalitarian Kingdom of God—not on some day of judgment, but in the here and now. He wanted people to experience God directly, unimpeded by hierarchy of temple or state. The authorities executed him, almost casually, after he caused a disturbance in Jerusalem during Passover. Jesus lived on in the hearts of followers old and new, but he did not physically rise from the dead. Taken down from the cross, his body was probably buried in a shallow grave–and may have been eaten by dogs.’”

The identity of Jesus is a topic of discussion not only in scholarly circles today, but also in homes, at coffee shops, and on street corners all around the world!

Some hold that He was “a nice man.” Others believe that He was “an outstanding teacher.” Still others contend that He was “the wisest man who ever lived.” Most people in the world have some opinion of who Jesus of Nazareth really was.

What are we to make of this discussion? While I disagree strongly with the conclusions expressed in the above-mentioned news magazines and am deeply concerned with many popular notions about Jesus, I am fascinated by the fact that 2,000+ years after He lived on the earth, people are still asking about Jesus. The good news for us is that the Gospel of John begins with a definite answer to the question.

——————

Strategic to John’s background and setting is the fact that according to tradition John was aware of the Synoptic Gospels.

Apparently, he wrote his Gospel in order to make a unique contribution to the record of the Lord’s life (a spiritual Gospel) and, in part, to be supplementary as well as complementary to Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

The Gospel’s unique characteristics reinforce this purpose: First, John supplied a large amount of unique material not recorded in the other Gospels. Second, he often supplied information that helps the understanding of the events in the Synoptics.

For example, while the Synoptics begin with Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, they imply that Jesus had a ministry prior to that (for example, Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14). John supplies the answer with information on Jesus’ prior ministry in Judea (chapter 3) and Samaria (chapter 4).

Second, In Mark 6:45, after the feeding of the five thousand, Jesus compelled his disciples to cross the Sea of Galilee to Bethsaida. John recorded the reason: The people were about to make Jesus king because of His miraculous multiplying of food, and He was avoiding their ill-motivated efforts (John 6:26).

Third, John is the most theological of the Gospels, containing, for example, a heavily theological prologue (1:1–18), larger amounts of didactic and discourse material in proportion to narrative (for example, 3:13–17), and the largest amount of teaching on the Holy Spirit (for example, 14:16–17, 26; 16:7–14).

Although John was aware of the Synoptics and fashioned his Gospel with them in mind, he did not depend upon them for information. Rather, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he utilized his own memory as an eyewitness in composing the Gospel (1:14; 19:35; 21:24).

John’s Gospel is the only one of the four to contain a precise statement regarding the author’s purpose (20:30–31). He declares, “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (20:31).

Thus John had two primary purposes: evangelistic and apologetic. Reinforcing the evangelistic purpose is the fact that the word “believe” occurs approximately 100 times in the Gospel (the Synoptics use the term less than half as much).

John composed his Gospel to provide reasons for saving faith and, as a result, to assure readers that they would receive the divine gift of eternal life (1:12).

The apologetic purpose is closely related to the evangelistic purpose. John wrote to convince his readers of Jesus’ true identity as the incarnate God-Man whose divine and human natures were perfectly united into one person who was the prophesied Christ (“Messiah”) and Savior of the world (for example, 1:41; 3:16; 4:25–26; 8:58).

He organized his whole Gospel around eight “signs” or proofs that reinforce Jesus’ true identity, leading to faith.

The first half of his work revolves around seven miraculous signs selected to reveal Christ’s person and engender belief. There are also 7 “I AM” statements and 7 “Witnesses”…we’ll look at each of them as we reach them.

Because John composed his record in a clear and simple style, one might tend to underestimate the depth of this Gospel. Since John’s Gospel is a “spiritual” Gospel, the truths he conveys are profound. The reader must prayerfully and meticulously explore the book in order to discover the vast richness of the spiritual treasures that the apostle, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (14:26; 16:13), has lovingly deposited in his Gospel.

Special features: Of the eight miracles recorded, six are unique (among the Gospels) to John, as is the “Upper Room Discourse” (chapters 14–17).

Over 90 percent of John is unique to his Gospel—John does not contain a genealogy or any record of Jesus’ birth, childhood, temptation, transfiguration, appointment of the disciples, nor any account of Jesus’ parables, ascension, or great commission.

Although John wrote the prologue with the simplest vocabulary in the New Testament, the truths that the prologue conveys are the most profound. The prologue features six basic truths about Christ as the Son of God:

• The eternal Christ (vv. 1–3)
• The incarnate Christ (vv. 4–5)
• The forerunner of Christ (vv. 6–8)
• The unrecognized Christ (vv. 9–11), that is, His rejection
• The omnipotent Christ (vv. 12–13)
• The glorious Christ (vv. 14–18), that is, His deity.^[1]

Aside from the prologue, this first chapter records the events of only four days of Jesus’ ministry. Appropriately, it begins with the words, “In the beginning,” for a number of important beginnings appear in it, such as:

• The beginning of all things, John 1:3.
• The beginning of the recognition of Jesus as the Son of God, John 1:34.
• The beginning of Jesus’ disciples, John 1:41.
• The beginning of the apostleship, John 1:41f.
• The beginning of the use of the title, Son of Man, John 1:51.
• The beginning of Jesus’ public ministry.^[2]

It was not long before the Christian church was confronted with a very basic problem.  It had begun in Judaism.  In the beginning all its members had been Jews.  By human descent Jesus was a Jew, and, to all intents and purposes, except for brief visits to the districts of Tyre and Sidon, and to the Decapolis, he was never outside Palestine.

Christianity began among the Jews; and therefore inevitably it in spoke in the Jewish language and used Jewish categories of thought.

But although it was cradled in Judaism, it very soon went out into the wider world.  Within 30 years of Jesus’s death it had travelled all over Asia Minor and Greece and had arrived in Rome.  By A.D. 60 there must have been a 100,000 Greeks in the church for every Jew who was a Christian.

Jewish ideas were completely strange to the Greeks.  One outstanding example, the Greeks had never heard of the Messiah.  The very center of Jewish expectation, the coming of the Messiah, was an idea that was quite alien to the Greeks.

The very category in which the Jewish Christians conceived and presented Jesus meant nothing to them.  Here then was the problem-how was Christianity to be presented to the Greek world?

AUTHOR

The Gospel of John was written around a.d. 85–95 by a Jewish disciple who was chosen by Jesus Christ to share in His earthly ministry. He was the son of Zebedee and Salome and was the brother of James, whom Jesus had also called to be one of the twelve disciples. Jesus referred to the two brothers, John and James, as “sons of thunder.” (Mark 3:17) Along with Peter, these two brothers served as prominent leaders of the early Jerusalem church.^[3]

When Jesus and the Twelve were rebuffed by a Samaritan village, these rough fishermen suggested calling down fire from heaven to destroy the whole village. Jesus had to calm down the outspoken brothers and explain that vengeance was not his way (Luke 9:52–56).

Just before that incident, John had told Jesus that he had tried to stop a man from driving out demons “because he is not one of us.” Jesus had explained that he didn’t have an exclusive club, “for whoever is not against you is for you” (Luke 9:49–50).

One might predict that someone with a personality like John’s would self-destruct. Certainly this person would die in a fight or in a clash with the Roman government. At the very least, he would be discarded by the church as self-seeking and power-hungry.

But such was not the case. Instead, John was transformed into someone who was strong but gentle, straightforward but loving, courageous but humble.

There is no dramatic event to account for John’s transformation—it must have come from being with Jesus, being accepted, loved, and affirmed by the Lord, and then being filled with the Holy Spirit.

So overwhelmed was John by Jesus that he did not mention himself by name in the Gospel that bears his name. Instead, he wrote of himself as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:20, 24). What a humble change for one who, at first, had wanted power and recognition.

John stands as a great example of Christ’s power to transform lives. Christ can change anyone—no one is beyond hope. Jesus accepted John as he was, a Son of Thunder, and changed him into what he would become, the apostle of love.

This book has been called “the greatest book in the world” and the “greatest love story ever told.” It’s the book on which many feed their minds, nourish their hearts, and rest their souls.

The Gospel of John is of particular interest because of its unique approach—very different from the approach of the other three Gospels: Matthew, Mark, and Luke (sometimes called the “Synoptic Gospels”). Over 90% of the material in John’s Gospel is unique to John, not to be found in the other three Gospels.

Clement of Alexandria (190-200 A. D.) said John knew that the other Gospel writers had given the historical data of Christ’s life and he (John) was “urged by his friends and inspired by the Spirit” to “compose a spiritual gospel.” John’s Gospel lends itself to both the profound and the plain. He expounds upon the deepest recesses of the infinite Mind in the simplest language.

John’s gospel attains its stature based, in small part, to its theme as depicted on stain-glass windows.  The gospel writers are depicted in certain ways: Matthew: a lion    Mark: a man            Luke: an ox       John: an eagle.

It is said that Matthew saw Jesus as Messiah and the Lion of the tribe of Judah.  He wrote to the Jews and was interested in establishing the regal rights of Jesus as King of the Jews.

Mark was the plainest, straight-forward, most human of the gospel writers. He was writing to the Romans and wanted to show Jesus as a servant. What Mark had his eye on was the humanity of Jesus, which would appeal to a practical Roman citizen.

Luke saw Jesus as the great servant of man and universal sacrifice for all mankind. He was writing primarily to a Greek audiences and focused on his humanity. He traced His genealogy all the way back to Adam.

John, however, shows Jesus depicted as an eagle. The eagle, of all living creatures, alone can look straight into the sun and not be dazzled. John’s account, then, stressed the deity of Jesus and His unique relationship with the Father.

Of the four authors of the New Testament Gospels, two (Mark and especially Luke) were not present with our Lord as one of His 12 disciples. Matthew was not one of the inner three. And so while Matthew can write about our Lord’s ministry from the perspective of one of the nine “outside” disciples.

It is only John who can describe certain critical events from the perspective of one of the inner three. Each Gospel thus has its own purpose, its own perspective, its own audience, and its own unique contribution.

John of all writers has the most penetrating gaze into eternal mysteries and eternal truths, and into the very mind of God. Many people find themselves closer to God and to Jesus Christ in John’s gospel than in any other book in the world.

John writes with a simple, straight-forward style. Seldom will we find a word over three syllables: most are one or two. He is also a writer fond of contrasts: light and dark; life and death; Spirit and flesh.

A story may jump from sadness to ecstasy, from stormy conflict to the sweetest calm, from a crisis of doubt to concrete assurance.

John also does not use a “running video camera” to record the life of Jesus. Rather, he uses a more selective snapshot approach; thus, the gospel reads more like a thematic scrapbook of Christ’s life than a meticulously chronicled documentary.

(John will show us Jesus in a very personal dialogue with a person, and then he “pulls back” and let’s us see the reaction/result of that ‘time with Jesus.’

John’s ministry. John was a Palestinian and a Galilean. He was not from Jerusalem, but from the country. This is why John shows such familiarity in his writing with the geography of the area and perhaps why John singles out the system of religious leaders who were in control in Jerusalem.

Many believe that John was first a disciple of John the Baptist. His mentor pointed him to Jesus when Jesus passed by. Then Jesus and John spent the day together (1:35–39).

At that time, John must have become a part-time disciple, for later we find him back fishing with his brother, James, and their father, Zebedee. But the next time Jesus called them, John and James left everything, father and boat included, and followed him.

This was after Jesus had turned water into wine (2:1–11), had cleared the temple the first time (2:12–25), and had been visited by Nicodemus at night (3:1–21). It was also after Herod had imprisoned John the Baptist (Luke 3:19–20), Jesus had spoken with the woman at the well (4:1–26), and Jesus had been rejected at Nazareth (Luke 4:16–30).

John has a different account on the scene of Jesus’s ministry. In the other three gospels, the main scene of His ministry is Galilee and Jesus does not reach Jerusalem until the last week of His life. In John, the scene is Jerusalem and Judea, with only occasional withdrawals to Galilee (John 2:1-13, 4:35-5:1, 6:1-7:14). And John is surely right!

The other gospels show Jesus mourning over Jerusalem as the last week came in (Matthew 23:37; Luke 13:34).  It is clear that Jesus could not have said that unless he had paid repeated visits and made repeated appeals to it.

He gives specialized information on Palestine and Jerusalem: he tells us: how long it took to build the temple (2:20); that Jews and Samaritans had constant quarrels (4:9); he provides a picture of the low Jewish view of women (4:9); he shows us the Jews and the Sabbath and tells us that Cana is in Galilee (2:1).

John also has a different duration of Jesus’ ministry. The other three gospels imply that His ministry lasted only one year, as there is only one Passover Feast. In John there are three Passovers:

• one of the cleansing of the Temple (2:13)
• one near the feeding of the 5,000 (6:4)
• the last when Jesus went to the cross

This would put His ministry closer to three years.

As a member of the Twelve, John was an eyewitness to the miracles, an “ear-witness” to the parables and confrontations with the Pharisees and other leaders, and a student of Jesus’ special words of instruction.

John was at the Last Supper and in the Garden of Gethsemane. And he was the only one of the Twelve at the cross. John also saw the empty tomb and was in the upper room, on the beach, and at the Ascension.

We have not seen the last of John when we reach the end of the Gospels, for (apart from the Apostle Paul) John and Peter are the dominant apostles in the Book of Acts.

John is one of the disciples gathered in the upper room (1:13). He accompanies Peter on his way to the temple at the hour of prayer and thus participates in the healing of the lame man (3:1ff.).

John and Peter are arrested and instructed to cease preaching Christ by the Sadducees, but they refuse, insisting they must obey God rather than man by preaching that Jesus has been raised from the dead (Acts 4:1-22).

When the Gospel is proclaimed in Samaria and many come to faith, Peter and John are sent there, and when they lay their hands on these new believers they receive the Holy Spirit, just as the apostles did at Pentecost (Acts 8:14-17).

James, the brother of John, was killed by Herod, who intended to kill Peter as well, but God delivered Peter so that he could continue to preach the Gospel (Acts 12:1ff.).

In Galatians 2:9, Paul refers to John as one of the “reputed pillars” of the church in Jerusalem. John is, of course, the author of the First, Second and Third John and of the Book of Revelation.

This one who once “leaned on Jesus’ chest” in the Gospel of John is also the one who “fell as a dead man” at the feet of his resurrected and glorified Lord in the Book of Revelation (1:17).

When John wrote his epistles to Gentile congregations (1 John), “the chosen lady” (2 John ), and Gaius (3 John), he simply identified himself as “the elder.” So it is thought that John must have been the only surviving apostle at that time.

John provides a powerful example of a lifetime of service to Christ. As a young man, John left his fishing nets to follow the Savior. For three intense years he watched Jesus live and love, and listened to him teach and preach.

John saw Jesus crucified and then risen!

John’s life was changed dramatically, from an impetuous, hot-tempered youth, to a loving and wise man of God. Through it all, John remained faithful, so that at the end of his life, he continued to bear strong witness to the truth and power of the gospel.

How strong is your commitment to Christ? Will it last through the years? The true test of an athlete is not in the start but the finish. So too with faithfulness to Christ—how will you finish that race?

 ^[1] John MacArthur, John: Jesus—The Word, the Messiah, the Son of God, MacArthur Bible Studies (Nashville, TN: W Publishing Group, 2000), 6.

^[2] James B. Coffman, Commentary on John, The James Burton Coffman Commentaries (A. C. U. Press, 1984), Jn 1.

^[3] Practical Christianity Foundation, John: The Word Made Flesh, The Easy-To-Read Commentary Series (Green Key Books, 2004), 1.

We Americans live in a country that was founded on a revolution and in which defiance of government authority is viewed as a basic constitutional right. The question here: what is the proper relationship of Christian citizens toward their government?

Christians must live as good citizens by submitting to human government.

“Submit” (2:13) is a dirty word to Americans, but it is a favorite with Peter. In fact, it dominates much of the rest of this epistle (it occurs in 2:13, 18; 3:1, 5, 22; 5:5; the concept is implicit in 4:12-19).

It is a military word, meaning to put oneself under another in rank. Submission is an attitude of respect that results in obedience to authority and positive good deeds. While there are exceptions, we need to be careful not to run to the exceptions, but to make sure that our normal posture toward government is that of submission.

As Christian citizens, we should submit to the authority vested in human government. The word translated “ordinance” in our Authorized Version simply means “creation or institution.” It does not refer to each individual law, but to the institutions that make and enforce the laws. It is possible to submit to the institutions and still disobey the laws.

For example, when Daniel and his three friends refused to obey the king’s dietary regulations, they disobeyed the law; but the way that they did it proved that they honored the king and respected the authorities (Dan. 1).

They were not rebels; they were careful not to embarrass the official in charge or get him into trouble; and yet they stood their ground. They glorified God and, at the same time, honored the authority of the king.

Peter and the other Apostles faced a similar challenge shortly after Pentecost (Acts 4–5). The Jewish council commanded them to stop preaching in the name of Jesus, but Peter and his associates refused to obey (see Acts 4:19; 5:29).

They did not cause a rebellion or in any way question or deny the authority of the council. They submitted to the institution but they refused to stop preaching. They showed respect to their leaders even though these men were opposed to the Gospel.

It is important that we respect the office even though we cannot respect the man or woman in the office. As much as possible, we should seek to cooperate with the government and obey the law; but we must never allow the law to make us violate our conscience or disobey God’s Word.

Unfortunately, some zealous but ignorant Christians use these differences as opportunities for conflict and loud sermons about “freedom” and “separation of church and state.”

When a local church constructs and furnishes a building, there is a local code that must be obeyed. The government has no right to control the pulpit or the business meeting, but it has every right to control matters that relate to safety and operation.

If the law requires a certain number of exits, or fire extinguishers, or emergency lights, the church must comply. The state is not persecuting when it sets up the code, nor is the church compromising when it obeys the code.^[1]

Those to whom Peter wrote lived with a government and society that was not favorable toward the Christian faith. Both Peter and Paul were executed at the hands of the Roman tyrant Nero. It was not until the fourth century, under Constantine, that Christianity was afforded official legitimacy and protection by the government.

I want to look first at the purpose of human government; then at the meaning of submission to government; at the reason for submission to government; and, finally, at the limits of submission to government.

1. The purpose of human government: To promote justice and peace in society.

The government should promote justice and peace by upholding law and order and by maintaining reasonable national defense.

Peter writes (2:14) that kings and governors are “for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.”

This points to the power of the state to use capital punishment, as well as lesser punishment, to bring about justice for all. The Old Testament often talks about the role of the king in promoting justice and righteousness in society.

The government does this (in part) by legislating morality. Don’t let anybody sell you the idea that we shouldn’t legislate morality. That is precisely what the government does, and rightly so.

Laws against murder and theft are moral and biblical. Laws against racial discrimination reflect the biblical teaching that God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34; Deut. 10:17).

Laws should protect citizens from sin (for example, pornography and prostitution laws, drug laws, etc.). The fact that something is illegal will restrain many who otherwise may be tempted to engage in the particular activity.

The real debate is, which morality should we legislate? Laws against abortion, laws protecting the handicapped and the elderly, laws against pornography and child abuse, and many other such issues, can be argued for on the grounds of basic human rights, apart from Christianity.

Most unbelievers recognize the inherent “rightness” of the Golden Rule. We can use this biblical ethical standard as the basis for legislating proper morality in our democratic, pluralistic country.

Although Peter doesn’t touch on it specifically, a result of promoting justice will be promoting peace and order in society.

1 Timothy 2:1-2 states that we should pray for kings and those in authority “in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.”

For us to live a quiet and tranquil life, the government must maintain adequate national defense so that we are not overrun by some totalitarian power that would rob us of our peace and liberty. And internally the government should not interfere with religious liberty, within the bounds of human safety and rights. Thus government should promote justice and peace in society.

2. The meaning of submission to government. Submission means obedience to the laws of the state.

The basic meaning of the word “submit” is “obey.” Christians must obey the laws of their government unless those laws force them to disobey God. “Kings” we can apply to federal laws; “governors” we can apply to state and local laws. To give practical examples, we need to pay our taxes and comply with traffic laws

Submission means showing respect to governmental authorities.

You can obey with a rotten attitude. But Peter says that we are to “honor all men,” and specifies, “Honor the king” (2:17).

But what if he’s a scoundrel? Even if we can’t respect a leader because he is corrupt or immoral, we should respect his office.

Again, this isn’t an American tradition. We make jokes about our political leaders, portraying them as buffoons or idiots. Political satire is accepted fare. I confess that some of the things politicians do invite satire!

Jesus called Herod a fox, so there may be some basis for taking a swipe at certain political leaders. But we need to be careful to promote respect for government authorities. Since God ordained government authority, to despise such authority is to despise God Himself.

C. Submission means positive good deeds.

“That by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men” (2:15).

“To silence” means, literally, to muzzle. The idea is that by our active good deeds, we take away the basis for criticism of Christianity from those who oppose it.

When Christians live like that in the midst of a pagan culture, it is a powerful testimony. On the other hand, when professing Christians disrespect authority, when they disobey the law, or when they just withdraw from society and live unto themselves without doing good deeds, it leaves a bad taste in the mouths of those who are prone to criticize Christianity.

When Israel was sent into exile in Babylon, their situation was parallel to that of Christians today, in that they were strangers and aliens in a foreign land, looking to be restored to their promised land.

God told Jeremiah (29:5-6) to tell the exiles to build houses there, plant gardens, take wives and raise children. Then He added, “And seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare” (lit., “peace”).

That’s good counsel for Christians who are exiled as strangers and aliens in this wicked world: Build houses, live in them, plant gardens, raise families, seek and pray for the welfare of the cities where we live.

Buy property, work to improve the schools, help out in community projects, be good citizens. Submitting to government means that we obey the law, respect authorities, and do good deeds in our communities.

3. The reason for submission to government: For the Lord’s sake.

“Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake” (2:13). There are at least two ideas inherent in this phrase:

A. Since God ordains civil government, by submitting to it, we submit to Him.

Remember, both Paul and Peter wrote when the debauched, godless Nero was on the throne. Daniel lived under the ruthless Nebuchadnezzar. Since both rulers obviously fell far short of the ideal, we must conclude that we cannot make exceptions to the biblical principle of obedience to government authority based on how bad the ruler may be.

Peter wrote (2:16), “Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God.”

True freedom is living righteously in submission to God. Anything less means that we’re enslaved to sin.

B. Since Christians are identified with God, our submission to government bears witness for God.

When it comes to politics, we need to remember that while God uses civil government to accomplish His purposes (thus it is proper for Christians to serve in political leadership and be involved in the political process), evangelism is His primary means of dealing with world problems and bringing lasting change. If we get sidetracked into winning political victories for our cause, but do not win men and women to Christ, we ultimately fail.

We are to love even our enemies, of course. But Peter singles out our love for the Christian brotherhood because if Christians fight among themselves, the watching world shrugs its shoulders and says, “Why become a Christian? They’re no different than anyone else.”

4. The limits of submission to government: When honoring the government violates the fear of God.

Peter differentiates between God and the king: “Fear God, honor the king.”

The emperor deserves appropriate honor, but he is not on the same level with God. If he violates his responsibility which has been given to him by God, then the believer is responsible to confront that violation (Dan. 5:18-28) and, if it comes down to it, to obey God rather than men (Acts 4:19-20; 5:29).

He demotes the emperor and his government from being absolutely sovereign, in that he (and it) are creations, not the Creator. But he also gives dignity to each ruler and government, in that he is created by God, and thus worthy of our honor.

If it comes to a tug of war between God and government, we must follow God. If the government forces us to disobey God, we first appeal to the government, if possible.

If we have opportunity, we confront the government with its wrong. But if all that fails, we disobey the government and submit to our punishment.

^[1] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 405.

Matthew paired the healing of the centurion’s servant with the cleansing of the leper to show their similarities. Likewise, Luke pairs it with the raising of the widow’s son. In both accounts a precious “child” is raised up when an unlikely candidate receives the Lord’s attention.

This is the first of three people Jesus raised from the dead. The other two were Jairus’s daughter (Mt 9:18–26; Mk 5:22–43; Lk 8:49–56) and Jesus’ friend Lazarus (Jn 11). As Elijah raised a widow’s son (1 Kgs 17:17–24; cf. Elisha, 2 Kgs 4:32–37), so also does Jesus. Thus, Jesus’ ministry looks like the great prophet Elijah’s.

Lk 7:11–13 11 Soon afterward, Jesus went to a town called Nain, and his disciples and a large crowd went along with him. 12 As he approached the town gate, a dead person was being carried out—the only son of his mother, and she was a widow. And a large crowd from the town was with her. 13 When the Lord saw her, his heart went out to her and he said, “Don’t cry.”

The raising of this widow’s son at Nain took place shortly after the healing of the centurion’s servant, likely on the very next day. The little village of Nain (“The Pleasant”) is about twenty-five miles southeast of Capernaum just over the hill from Shunem where Elisha raised the son of the Shunammite woman. Surely this was a significant memory for the local residents. The only thing that remains of Nain today are the tombs just outside the city, cut into the sides of the hills. The people of Nain are heading toward one such tomb this particular afternoon.

This poor woman has lost both her husband and her son. She is now left without adequate financial support. The whole village must feel for her. A large crowd follows the funeral procession out of the city. It is met by another large crowd going into the city. The first, according to Galilean funeral customs, was led by the woman with her outer garment torn in grief (Jer. Moed. K. 83 d). The second crowd, having traveled all day from Capernaum, was led by Jesus. It seems somewhat awkward and almost inappropriate to have this traffic jam interfere with the funeral.

Jewish funerals were often surrounded by elaborate rituals such as a trumpet signal to announce the death, melancholy flutes, and the plaintive tinkle of cymbals. Even the poorest Jews were expected to provide at least two flute players and one mourning woman (Kethub. iv. 4). The body would have its hair cut and nails trimmed. It would be washed, anointed and wrapped in linen. Then it would be placed face up on a wickerwork bier with the arms folded across the chest.

Friends and family would carry the body through the town, taking turns so that as many people as possible could share the honor of carrying the dead. The people of Nain would have joined the procession as it passed them “for it was deemed like mocking one’s Creator not to follow the dead to his last resting-place” (Edersheim, I:556). If a person was unable to follow, they would at least stand up while the procession passed. Funerals were treated with the greatest reverence partially out of reverence for God and partially due to Jewish superstitions such as the idea that “the spirit of the dead hovered about the unburied remains” (Edersheim, I:554).

Jesus experiences the human emotions of the event and was not left untouched. He hurt for the woman (splanchnizomai). He says to her, literally, “Stop crying.” These words, in this situation, would normally be harshly insensitive. But no doubt, Jesus’ tone and demeanor assure her of better things.

Lk 7:14–17 14 Then he went up and touched the coffin, and those carrying it stood still. He said, “Young man, I say to you, get up!” 15 The dead man sat up and began to talk and Jesus gave him back to his mother.
16 They were all filled with awe and praised God. “A great prophet has appeared among us,” they said. “God has come to help his people.” 17 This news about Jesus spread throughout Judea and the surrounding country.

Under normal circumstances, no Jew would do what Jesus just did. There was no greater defilement for the Jew than touching a dead body (Num 19:11, 16). But do the rules apply when the corpse comes back to life? Needless to say, there was no rabbinic regulation to cover such a circumstance. The pallbearers are so shocked that they just stop in their tracks.

At Jesus’ command, the young man sits up and begins to talk. Morticians can tell some eerie stories about a body sitting up or moving due to gases in the corpse. But none can tell of any talking. Couldn’t our imaginations run wild with what he said? “Where am I? What do you guys think you’re doing?!” Or perhaps he said, “Boy, that was a good nap. I have never felt better!”

The crowd’s reaction is classic. It is the typical response to one of Jesus’ miracles. They are filled with awe, literally, “Fear seized them all.” That makes sense. Now their fear gives way to praise. They realize that Jesus is a great prophet with power rivaling even Elijah. Through him God has paid them a visit. That is, God has come to care for their needs. This declaration is thick with Messianic implications (Mt 1:23; Lk 1:68, 78; 19:44; Ps 8:4; Isa 29:6; Zeph 2:7; Acts 15:14; Heb 2:6). And the news spread throughout the Jewish territory.

What does a scientific society do with this passage? Can we actually accept it as a historical event? It seems that aside from a preconceived prejudice against miracles, there is no literary, historical, or theological reason to reject the reality of this event. There is good reason, however, to accept Luke’s testimony of Jesus’ power to raise the dead (Edersheim, I:558–560):

1. It is not reasonable to view this story as exaggeration, nor is it possible to explain it by natural causes. Thus, we are left with two options. Either it is true or it is a designed fiction.
2. Although Luke alone records the raising of the widow’s son at Nain, the other three Gospels also record Jesus raising someone from the dead. So Luke is not alone in his witness to Jesus’ power over death.
3. There was no Jewish expectation for the Messiah to raise people from the dead. Therefore, there is no clear motive to invent such a story.
4. While this event looks a lot like Elijah and the widow of Zarephath (1 Kgs 17:8–24, esp. vv. 10 & 23 LXX),109 there are enough differences to conclude that the account of Jesus’ raising the widow’s son is not based on Elijah raising the widow’s son.
5. Had such a story been invented, an insignificant place like Nain would probably not have been chosen as the setting for such a notable miracle.
6. The event took place in the presence of two great crowds. In Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 4:3, Quadratus claims that some of these witnesses were still alive and could testify before the Emperor.
7. Raisings were not unknown to the early church, and were, in fact, an integral part of the faith for which the Apostles were willing to die (cf. Mt 10:8; Acts 9:40; 20:9–10).

More information

(7:11-17) Introduction—Resurrection, The: the most phenomenal event in all history is the resurrection of the dead. It may be the fact of Jesus Himself being resurrected, or the promise of believers someday being raised, or of Jesus raising the dead—some men just have enormous difficulty believing such claims. Luke knew this, so he wanted to help unbelieving minds. In this event Luke shared the great compassion and power of Jesus to raise the dead.

1. Jesus entered Nain—many were present to witness the conquest of death (v.11).
2. The great compassion of Jesus: He was touched (v.12-13).
3. The great power of Jesus (v.14-15).
4. The great fear of the people (v.16-17).

(7:11) Jesus Christ, Following—Seeking, Reasons: Jesus entered Nain. This is the only time this city is named in the Bible. It was only about six miles from Nazareth and a day’s journey from Capernaum. Note two facts.

1. It is the same area where Elisha raised the son of the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:18-37). Therefore, it became an area where the great compassion and power of God had been manifested.
2. Many were present to witness the great conquest of death. There were many of His disciples present, and there were multitudes of other people, those who did not believe. The unbelievers were following Him for any number of reasons:

curiosity  neighborly fellowship  a belief in His ethics  a need for help  admiration

a desire for something to do being impressed with His teaching thinking Him to be a great prophet

We can only marvel at the providence of God when we see Jesus meet that funeral procession just as it was heading for the burial ground. He lived on a divine timetable as He obeyed the will of His Father (John 11:9; 13:1). The sympathetic Saviour always gives help when we need it most (Heb. 4:16).

What a contrast between the crowd that was following Jesus and the crowd following the widow and her dead son. Jesus and His disciples were rejoicing in the blessing of the Lord, but the widow and her friends were lamenting the death of her only son. Jesus was heading for the city while the mourners were heading for the cemetery.

Spiritually speaking, each of us is in one of these two crowds. If you have trusted Christ, you are going to the city (Heb. 11:10, 13-16; 12:22). If you are “dead in sin,” you are already in the cemetery and under the condemnation of God (John 3:36; Eph. 2:1-3). You need to trust Jesus Christ and be raised from the dead (John 5:24; Eph. 2:4-10).

One was alive but destined to die, the other dead but destined to live. The term only begotten as applied to Jesus means “unique,” “the only one of its kind.” Jesus is not a “son” in the same sense that I am, having been brought into existence by conception and birth. Since Jesus is eternal God, He has always existed. The title Son of God declares Christ’s divine nature and His relationship to the Father, to whom the Son has willingly subjected Himself from all eternity. All the Persons of the Godhead are equal, but in the “economy” of the Trinity, each has a specific place to fill and task to fulfill.

Jesus, “the Man of Sorrows,” could easily identify with the widow’s heartache. Not only was she in sorrow, but she was now left alone in a society that did not have resources to care for widows. What would happen to her? Jesus felt the pain that sin and death have brought into this world, and He did something about it.

Jesus faced death, “the last enemy” (1 Cor. 15:26). When you consider the pain and grief that it causes in this world, death is indeed an enemy, and only Jesus Christ can give us victory (see 1 Cor. 15:51-58; Heb. 2:14-15). Jesus had only to speak the word and the boy was raised to life and health.

The boy gave two evidences of life: he sat up and he spoke. He was lying on an open stretcher, not in a closed coffin; so it was easy for him to sit up. We are not told what he said, but it must have been interesting! What an act of tenderness it was for Jesus to take the boy and give him to his rejoicing mother. The whole scene reminds us of what will happen when the Lord returns, and we are reunited with our loved ones who have gone to glory (1 Thes. 4:13-18).

The response of the people was to glorify God and identify Jesus with the Prophet the Jews had been waiting for (Deut. 18:15; John 1:21; Acts 3:22-23). It did not take long for the report of this miracle to spread. People were even more enthusiastic to see Jesus, and great crowds followed Him (Luke 8:4, 19, 42).

(7:12-13) Compassion: the great compassion of Jesus is seen in that He was touched. Note four points.

1. Jesus was touched by death. Apparently, the sight of death always touched Him. The fact that men die is what brought Him to earth. Probably the whole scene of sin and death flashed across His mind—the scene of…

• man’s sin and death (Romans 5:12; Romans 6:23; Hebrews 9:27).
•  the great cost of sin and death, that is, His own death in bearing the sins and death of the world (1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:1-2).

2. Jesus was touched by a broken heart, the broken heart of the mother. Note her situation. She was a widow, apparently somewhat up in years with only one child, a grown son. He had just died, and now she was all alone in the world—a world that was harsh and rough on women, offering them little chance for earning a living and little help on a permanent basis. Hereafter, the woman would be without any permanent companion, provider, or protector; and there was no one to carry on the family line. The family name would die out with her death. She was broken-hearted, full of hurt and pain, without understanding and hope. Jesus saw all this and He was touched and moved with compassion.
3. Jesus was touched by a loving and caring woman, a woman who was much beloved. Note that “many people of the city was with her.” This indicates that she had been a woman who loved and cared for others throughout the years. Therefore, others loved and cared for her. She was a beloved person. Jesus is always touched and moved to help those who have helped others (Luke 6:38).

Now note a fact: in this particular need, no one asked Jesus for help. He initiated the help Himself, acted purely out of His own compassion. Why did He not always do this? The woman seemed to be the difference. Her life was apparently so filled with love and care for others that she just stood out as a glorious example of what love for God is all about (Matthew 22:38-39; John 13:34-35; 1 John 4:7).

4. The Lord saw and had compassion and assured the woman. Note three striking facts.
5. It was “the Lord” who saw her. This is the first time Luke uses the title “the Lord” by itself and it is striking. The point Luke is making is that “the Lord,” the Sovereign Power of the universe, saw this woman who was utterly heartbroken. “The Lord” of all power actually saw her.
6. It was “the Lord” who had compassion upon her. The fact is shocking, for the sovereign power of the universe actually felt compassion for a simple woman. He was not just the sovereign power of a vast universe who was way off in outer space someplace, unattached and disinterested in this earth and its inhabitants. Contrariwise, He was vitally interested, interested enough to be looking and seeing; and He was concerned about what He saw, full of compassion for the heartbroken (see note—^ Luke 7:13).
7. It was “the Lord” who spoke and gave assurance. Again, the fact was shocking, for the sovereign power of the universe actually spoke and gave assurance to a simple woman. Luke is definitely stressing the staggering thought: “the Lord,” the sovereign majesty of the universe speaks to men, and His Word gives great assurance. The Lord is vitally interested in the affairs of men, even in the plight of a simple woman.

In this passage, as in the one immediately preceding, once again Luke the doctor speaks.  In verse 10 the word we translated completely cured is the technical medical term for sound in wind and limb.  In verse 15 the word used for sitting up is the technical term for a patient sitting up in bed.

Nain was a day’s journey from Capernaum and lay between Endor and Shunem, where Elisha, as the old story runs, raised another mother’s son (2 Kings 4:18-37).  To this day, ten minutes’ walk from Nain on the road to Endor there is a cemetery of rock tombs in which the dead are laid.

In many ways this is the loveliest story in all the gospels.

(i)  It tells of the pathos and the poignancy of human life.  The funeral procession would be headed by the band of professional mourners with their flutes and their cymbals, uttering in a kind of frenzy their shrill cries of grief.  There is all the ageless sorrow of the world in the austere and simple sentence, “He was his mother’s only son and she was a widow.”

“Never morning wore to evening But some heart did break.”

In Shelley’s Adonais, his lament for Keats, he writes, “As long as skies are blue, and fields are green, Evening must usher night, night urge the morrow, Month follow month with woe, and year wake year to sorrow.”

(ii)  To the pathos of human life, Luke adds the compassion of Christ.  Jesus was moved to the depths of his heart.  There is no stronger word in the Greek language for sympathy and again and again in the gospel story it is used of Jesus (Matthew 14:14; 15:32; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 8:2).

To the ancient world this must have been a staggering thing.  The noblest faith in antiquity was Stoicism.  The Stoics believed that the primary characteristic of God was apathy, incapability of feeling.  This was their argument.  If someone can make another sad or sorry, glad or joyful, it means that, at least for the moment, he can influence that other person.  If he can influence him that means that, at least for the moment, he is greater than he.  Now, no one can be greater than God; therefore, no one can influence God; therefore, in the nature of things, God must be incapable of feeling.

Here men were presented with the amazing conception of one who was the Son of God being moved to the depths of his being.

“In ev’ry pang that rends the heart. The Man of sorrows has a part.”

For many that is the most precious thing about the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

(iii)  To the compassion of Jesus, Luke adds the power of Jesus.  He went up and touched the bier.  It was not a coffin, for coffins were not used in the east.  Very often long wicker-work baskets were used for carrying the body to the grave.  It was a dramatic moment.  As one great commentator says, “Jesus claimed as his own what death had seized as his prey.”

It may well be that here we have a miracle of diagnosis; that Jesus with those keen eyes of his saw that the lad was in a cataleptic trance and saved him from being buried alive, as so many were in Palestine.  It does not matter; the fact remains that Jesus claimed for life a lad who had been marked for death.  Jesus is not only the Lord of life; he is the Lord of death who himself triumphed over the grave and who has promised that, because he lives, we shall live also (John 14:19).

(7:14-15) Jesus Christ, Power—Resurrection, The: the great power of Jesus. Three surprising acts are seen here.

1. The power of Jesus to by-pass traditional beliefs. The people of that day believed that a person became polluted by touching a corpse. The person became ceremonially unclean, unacceptable to God. By touching the bier or body Jesus was showing that He possessed the right and power to override religious laws and beliefs. He was the Sovereign Power even over religious beliefs and over death and life.
2. The power of Jesus to stop the death processional. Note the pallbearers stopped; they “stood still.” They obeyed His touch.
3. The power of Jesus to raise the dead. It was the command, the simple yet powerful Word of Jesus that raised the dead.

(7:16-17) Jesus Christ, Response—God, Fear of: the great fear of the people. The word “fear” (phobos) means a fear of reverence and of awe. Seeing the dead man sit up and speak struck the fear of God in their hearts.

1. They glorified God (edoxazon ton theon). The tense is imperfect active, “they began to glorify God” and continued to glorify God.
2. They believed Jesus to be a great prophet.
3. They acknowledged that God was dealing with them. There was a widespread revival going on throughout all Israel. The message of John the Baptist had been heard by multitudes, and Jesus was affecting the lives of scores of people. The people felt that God was now visiting and dealing with Israel once again.
4. They bore witness everywhere.

The people of Israel were greatly blessed. They had the Lord God for their King, a wonderful land for their home, and a holy law for their guide, and yet they faced some of the same problems that society faces today. But human nature being what it is, nations will always have to deal with “man’s inhumanity to man,” because the heart of every problem is still the problem of the heart.

Laws are necessary to bring order to society, to restrain evil, and to help control behavior, but laws can never change the human heart. Only the grace of God can do that.

If this section of Scripture emphasizes anything, it’s that God holds human life precious and wants us to treat people fairly, for they are made in the image of God (Gen. 9:1-7).

God’s concept of justice and the value of life is illustrated by the provisions made for six cities of refuge to be designated after the conquest of Canaan.

Deuteronomy 4:41-43 (ESV)
⁴¹  Then Moses set apart three cities in the east beyond the Jordan,
⁴²  that the manslayer might flee there, anyone who kills his neighbor unintentionally, without being at enmity with him in time past; he may flee to one of these cities and save his life:
⁴³  Bezer in the wilderness on the tableland for the Reubenites, Ramoth in Gilead for the Gadites, and Golan in Bashan for the Manassites.

In the nomadic societies of Moses’ day, the possibility of an immediate blood revenge, carried out by the next of kin, sometimes prevented a proper trial. Jehovah’s concept of justice is first introduced in Exodus 21:12, 13: “He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. But if he did not lie in wait for him, but God let him fall into his hand, then I will appoint you a place to which he may flee.”

God’s wisdom is seen in His provisions for His creation. His provisions are realistic, for He knew offenses would come. He provided a way of escape for the innocent. The cities of refuge were provisions for justice. A regard for human life is far more important than a regard for private property.

God’s thoughtfulness for human life is impressive. No life was to be impatiently wasted. The entire nineteenth chapter deals with justice for the defenseless: justice for the unintentional killer (19:1–13), justice for the landowner (19:14), and justice for the accused (19:15–21).

THE PROVISION OF THE CITIES

Deuteronomy 19:1-13 (ESV)
¹  “When the LORD your God cuts off the nations whose land the LORD your God is giving you, and you dispossess them and dwell in their cities and in their houses,
²  you shall set apart three cities for yourselves in the land that the LORD your God is giving you to possess.
³  You shall measure the distances and divide into three parts the area of the land that the LORD your God gives you as a possession, so that any manslayer can flee to them.

 

The Quaker poet John Greenleaf Whittier called justice “the hope of all who suffer, the dread of all who wrong.” That’s the ideal, but it isn’t always achieved in real life. Without justice, society would fall apart, anarchy would take over, and it wouldn’t be safe for people to leave their homes. Israel didn’t have the elaborate police system we have today, so locating and punishing guilty criminals depended primarily on the elders and the judges. By singling out the “cities of refuge,” the Lord promoted justice in the land.

The cities of refuge were part of the distribution of the Promised Land among the twelve tribes of Israel. Only one tribe, the Levites, was not given land to develop. Instead, they were to be the priests of the Lord and the overseers of the tabernacle and all its rites and furnishings. Only the Levites could carry and set up the tabernacle (Numbers 2:5-13).

As the Levites were to have no territorial domain allocated to them like the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, they were to be distributed throughout the land in certain cities appropriated to their use. Part of their inheritance consisted of forty-eight cities spread throughout the land (Numbers 35:6-7). Of these forty-eight cities, six were designated as cities of refuge. The cities were Kedesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan (Joshua 20:7-8).

The Mosaic Law stated that anyone who committed a murder was to be put to death (Exodus 21:14). But for unintentional deaths, God set aside these cities to which the murderer could flee for refuge (Exodus 21:13). He would be safe from the avenger—the family member charged with avenging the victim’s death (Numbers 35:19)—until the case could go to trial.

The congregation would judge to find if the attacker acted unintentionally. If he did, he would return to the city of refuge and live there safely until the death of the high priest who was in office at the time of the trial, at which point he could return to his property. If the attacker left the city of refuge before the death of the high priest, however, the avenger would have the right to kill him (Numbers 35:24-28).

After Jehovah had cut off the enemies of Israel in Canaan and Israel was living in the cities and houses of the former inhabitants, Moses stipulated: You shall set aside three cities for yourself in the midst of your land, which the Lord your God gives you to possess. You shall prepare the roads for yourself, and divide into three parts the territory of your land, which the Lord your God will give you as a possession, so that any manslayer may flee there (19:2, 3).

The first three cities were to be set apart in the midst of the land. They were to be within easy reach so that anyone who killed a man would be able to flee to them for temporary protection. Moses specified that these cities were to be equally spaced geographically. The land was to be divided into three parts, and the cities were to be placed in each area.

No part of the land would be more than thirty miles from one of these cities. They were to build roads to make them accessible for those in need of immediate sanctuary. It is emphasized that the Israelites should take care that a slayer who killed ignorantly was within easy reach of a city of refuge (19:3, 6).

Kedesh in Naphtali, Shechem in Ephraim, and Hebron in Judah were set apart in Canaan as the first cities of refuge (Joshua 20:7). Provision was made in the law for more cities of refuge as Israel acquired more territory.

⁴  “This is the provision for the manslayer, who by fleeing there may save his life. If anyone kills his neighbor unintentionally without having hated him in the past—
⁵  as when someone goes into the forest with his neighbor to cut wood, and his hand swings the axe to cut down a tree, and the head slips from the handle and strikes his neighbor so that he dies—he may flee to one of these cities and live,
⁶  lest the avenger of blood in hot anger pursue the manslayer and overtake him, because the way is long, and strike him fatally, though the man did not deserve to die, since he had not hated his neighbor in the past.
⁷  Therefore I command you, You shall set apart three cities.
⁸  And if the LORD your God enlarges your territory, as he has sworn to your fathers, and gives you all the land that he promised to give to your fathers—
⁹  provided you are careful to keep all this commandment, which I command you today, by loving the LORD your God and by walking ever in his ways—then you shall add three other cities to these three,
¹⁰  As Israel’s territory was enlarged with the destruction of the two Amorite kings, three other cities were to be added to those found in Canaan. In 4:41–43, in a parenthetical statement, Moses, while Israel was on the plains of Moab, set apart three cities of refuge on the east side: “Bezer in the wilderness on the plateau for the Reubenites, and Ramoth in Gilead for the Gadites, and Golan in Bashan for the Manassites.”

THE PURPOSE OF THE CITIES

Moses revealed the primary purpose for the cities of refuge in these words: lest innocent blood be shed in your land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance, and so the guilt of bloodshed be upon you.
¹¹  “But if anyone hates his neighbor and lies in wait for him and attacks him and strikes him fatally so that he dies, and he flees into one of these cities,
¹²  then the elders of his city shall send and take him from there, and hand him over to the avenger of blood, so that he may die.
¹³  Your eye shall not pity him, but you shall purge the guilt of innocent blood from Israel, so that it may be well with you.

These sanctuaries were in no way to be an interference with the proper procedure of justice. The word “manslayer” or “slayer,” in 19:3, refers to intentional or unintentional killings. The term “manslayer” is the participle of the verb rasah, which seems to denote anti-social killing rather than killing in war or in the administration of justice.

The word “murder” does not seem to be an accurate translation, since rasah covers both cases of murder and of accidental killing. The cities of refuge would be open to either for temporary safety. They were not appointed to provide permanent asylum for the intentional manslayer, but they did assure that every man who killed his neighbor might find protection until the time of his trial.

The manslayer who fled to the city would live as one who killed his neighbor unintentionally or ignorantly and without any previous feelings of hatred toward his neighbor. To illustrate the difference between a willful murder and an unintentional murder, Moses gives an example in 19:5: As when a man goes into the forest with his friend to cut wood, and his hand swings the axe to cut down the tree, and the iron head slips off the handle and strikes his friend so that he dies—he may flee to one of these cities and live.

THE PROTECTION OF THE CITIES

Murder was one of several capital crimes in Israel. Others were idolatry and sorcery (Lev. 20:1-6), blasphemy (24:10-16), violating the Sabbath (Num. 15:32-36), willful and repeated disobedience to parents (Deut. 21:18-21; Ex. 21:15, 17), kidnapping (Ex. 21:16), bestiality (22:19), homosexuality (Lev. 20:13), adultery, and the rape of an engaged maiden (Deut. 22:22-27).

Israel was a theocracy and her laws were God’s laws. To break the law was to sin against the Lord and defile the land, and the people needed to understand the seriousness of such actions. In 1972, the United States Supreme Court declared capital punishment unconstitutional but then reinstated it in 1976. Capital punishment may not restrain every would-be murderer from taking a life, but it does magnify the preciousness of human life as well as honor the law.

The cities of refuge offered protection “lest the avenger of blood pursue the manslayer in the heat of his anger, and overtake him, . . .” (19:6).

The avenger was the nearest male relative, the one responsible for redeeming a relative’s property (Leviticus 25:25), for marrying a relative’s widow and rearing children in the name of the deceased (Ruth 3:12, 13; 4:5–10), and for avenging the death of a relative (Numbers 35:19).

The kinsman was directed by law to pursue the manslayer and to seek the payment of life for life. It was not a feat which would be lightly undertaken. In fact, it was one of those duties which a person would shirk if he could.

It would take an individual who had courage and self-denial to fulfill this part of the Mosaic code.

This rough ministry of justice which was fulfilled by the avenger was needed in the early days. It strengthened the family ties. It fostered a spirit of brotherhood. It was a shield for the weak and defenseless.

Vengeance under the law seems dreadful to many of us because we live in an organized system of public justice. But if we were translated to some uncivilized country where each one is forced to fight for his own family, we would regard it less painfully. We must recognize it as a necessary assertion of judgment. “‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Romans 12:19) seems dreadful only to those who have not appreciated the need of a good and somewhat reliable civil justice.

This divine law of vengeance, through the avenger, was perfect in the sense that there was and could be no appeal. If one man had slain another, the presumption was that it had been maliciously done, and prompt vengeance was prepared for him. He needed to make a serious flight from the sudden reprisal that could come even “though he was not deserving of death” (19:6).

Immediately after the death of the friend, the slayer could be killed in a hasty decision while “the avenger of blood pursue[d] . . . in the heat of his anger” (19:6).

He had to bid a hasty adieu to his family and travel quickly for the nearest refuge city. He had to constantly be on guard because behind every bush and rock the avenger might be lurking in ambush.

The cities of refuge were Levitical cities which would give further security for the manslayer (Numbers 35:6). There would be men who knew the law and could apply it objectively.

The manslayer was able to come to the gate of the city and explain his case to the elders of that city. If the elders were satisfied that the death was unintentional, he would be provided with lodging, and they would not turn him over to the avenger of blood. There he would be protected from the relatives of the deceased who would otherwise seek revenge. If granted asylum, he would be expected to stay there.

If he were found elsewhere, the avenger of blood would be allowed to kill him. The manslayer lived in lonely exile until the death of the high priest. Upon the death of the high priest he could, if he chose, return to his own home (Numbers 35:25–28). The milder sentence, however, was preferable to a violent death. The opportunity was afforded of examining himself and of being penitent for his sins.

THE PRACTICE OF THE CITIES

The fugitive might yet be handed over to the executioner even though he arrived at the city. What the city of refuge gave was an opportunity for full investigation. It safeguarded a suspected man if he was innocent of a greater crime. It taught men to draw a clear line between unintentional injury and premeditated murder. It shielded the innocent from useless and needless death.

Trial of the escaped manslayer was provided, and the guilty were turned over to the avenger. God did not intend to provide protection for the one who killed out of greed, hate, or jealousy. A willful murderer was not granted asylum, but was surrendered to the elders of the slain man’s hometown. They were responsible for the final decision (9:12). The elders were in a position to decide the guilt of the man without being emotionally involved or influenced by a sense of loss. If the elders found him guilty, they delivered him to the kinsman who would exact blood revenge. The avenger of blood was the divine instrument designated by the law to carry out the death penalty.

CONCLUSION: OUR PROVISIONS IN CHRIST

The sojourn in the city of refuge corresponds spiritually to those who have taken themselves to Jesus under a sense of their sin and blood guiltiness to find under His wings protection from condemnation (Romans 8:1). If the manslayer had left the city of refuge, he would have still been liable to the avenger.

Likewise, one must abide in Christ or still be liable for his transgressions. “Life in Christ” is indicated by the sojourn in the city of refuge. But liberty through the death of Christ is indicated by the release at the death of the high priest (Hebrews 4:14–16; 6:18–20).

It takes many relations to bring out the truth as it is in Jesus. He is our avenger, as we have seen: “‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.”

He is our city of refuge. He is our high priest whose death secures the return from exile. While cities of refuge protected only the innocent or unintentional killer, Christ provides salvation for the penitent, even though guilty. Judgment is not removed.

There will be a day of reckoning and destruction of the wicked. There is a way of escape in Christ, to whom we flee in refuge. He is within reach of us all. As there was an equal number of cities on each side of the Jordan, so there is equal salvation to Jew and Gentile, bound and free. Each must avail himself of this escape. “Be saved from this perverse generation!” (Acts 2:40).

The cities of refuge can be seen as types of Christ, in whom sinners find a refuge from the destroyer of our souls. Just as a person could seek refuge in the cities set up for that purpose, we flee to Christ for refuge:

Hebrews 6:18 (ESV) so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

God confirmed his promise with an oath (6:17), because these two things are unchangeable. Why are they unchangeable? Because it is impossible for God to lie. God provides us security because of his own character. Patience is our part whereby we hold on to his promise with confidence.

The phrase “we who have fled to him for refuge” pictures a person who fled to one of the cities of refuge that provided protection for someone who accidentally killed another (Numbers 35). Christians also have fled for safety to the place of security and protection from the punishment against them. Christ provides the safest place, the hope we count on, the encouragement we need.

6:19-20 We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure.

We run to Christ to escape the danger we are in from the curse and condemnation of the law, from the wrath of God, and from an eternity in hell. Only Christ provides refuge from these things, and it is to Him alone that we must run. Just as the cities were open to all who fled to them for safety, it is Christ who provides safety to all who come to Him for refuge from sin and its punishment.

For the Christian, “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble” (Psalms 46:1). The first word in the verse directs us to the infinite, all-wise, all-powerful, all-loving, all holy, and just being. It is emphatically declared that, for troubled times, God is our refuge, our strength, and our help.

Who else can always be called on to understand and sustain in times of trouble? Is God a source of comfort for your troubles? Can you, with confidence, call Him to your aid? Or, due to your present state of rebellion and disobedience, is He your enemy?

What must you do to enlist Him on your side in order to assist you with your troubles? The Son of God said, “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavyladen, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart; and you shall find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My load is light”

 

9:19 For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more of them.

In our text today, Paul asserted that he was free to yield certain rights in matters that did not compromise the gospel message. In such a way, he could vary the style of his message or other minor matters, becoming a slave to his audience so that [he] might win more of them.

Paul’s goals were to glorify God and to bring people to Christ. Thus he stayed free of any philosophical position or material entanglement that might sidetrack him while he strictly disciplined himself to carry out his goals.

By being a slave to all, Paul was communicating the heart of his mission strategy. He had a willingness to accommodate and adjust to different settings. When with Jews, he ate kosher food; when with Gentiles, he ate regular food. In Philippi, he accepted support; in other places, he did not.

Was Paul a chameleon, merely adapting to each environment? In some ways, he was; but his principles were higher than self-protection. He wanted people of all cultures and backgrounds to listen to the gospel. Whenever missionaries go to another culture, they should consciously embrace and adapt to every element in that culture that doesn’t hinder the gospel or violate biblical ethics.

9:20    To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.

Paul never compromised the doctrines of Scripture, never changed God’s Word in order to make it more palatable to people in any given place. He never went against God’s law or his own conscience. In matters that did not violate any principle of God’s Word, however, Paul was willing to become like his audience in order to win them to Christ. Three groups are mentioned in these verses: Jews, Gentiles, and those with weak consciences. By saying, to the Jews I became like a Jew, Paul was stating that, when necessary, he conformed his life to the practices of those under the law even though he himself was no longer under the law (because of his freedom in Christ; see Acts 16:3; 18:18; 21:20–26). If, however, Paul had gone into a Jewish synagogue to preach, all the while flouting the Jewish laws and showing no respect for their laws and customs because of his “freedom in Christ,” he would have offended the very people he had come to tell about Jesus Christ. But by adapting himself to them, by conforming to their regulations and restrictions (Paul had been a Pharisee), he had gained an audience so that he might win those under the law. Again, Paul was careful never to violate any of God’s commands in his attempts to serve his listeners. He never conceded that those regulations had to be kept in order for people to become believers, but he conformed to the laws to help the Jews come to Christ. The line was a difficult one to walk, for the book of Galatians records a time when Paul rebuked Peter for acting like a Jew among the Gentiles (see Galatians 2:11–21).

9:21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.  As Paul conformed himself to the Jews, he also conformed to those not having the law, referring to Gentiles. Paul met them on their own turf, becoming like one not having the law. This did not mean that Paul had thrown aside all restraints and was living like a pagan in hopes of winning the pagans to Christ! As he explained, he always remembered that he was not free from God’s law but [was] under Christ’s law. Paul lived according to God’s law and his conscience, but he did not put undue constraints on his Gentile audiences. Unlike some false teachers of the day, called Judaizers, Paul did not require the Gentiles to follow the Jewish laws in order to become believers (see Acts 15:1–21). Instead, he spoke a message that would win those not having the law (see, for example, Acts 17:1–34).

9:22–23 To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some.  “The weak” refers to those with a weak conscience, a subject Paul had discussed in chapter 8. In that chapter, Paul had explained that believers who were free in Christ ought to set aside certain freedoms in the presence of another believer with a more sensitive conscience. Paul followed his own advice, saying that he became weak when with such people (meaning that he had set aside his freedoms and had lived by their restraints for a time) so that he might win the weak. The “weak” were already believers, but they needed to grow into a deeper knowledge of Christ and a deeper understanding of their freedom in Christ. Paul did this delicately, becoming as they were in order to gain their listening ears. He chose to become all things to all people (the Jews, the Gentiles, and those with weak consciences, 9:20–22) in order to save some. Paul never compromised the gospel truth, God’s law, or his own conscience; in other matters, however, Paul was willing to go to great lengths to meet people where they were. He had one focus:  I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.  Paul’s life focused on taking the gospel to an unbelieving world. He did not preach with pride, counting the numbers of converts; instead, he preached with love for the gospel and for people, so that in the end, he and all believers could share together in the blessings of knowing Christ.

First Corinthians 9 reveals several basic principles for effective ministry:

1. find common ground with others
2. avoid a know-it-all attitude
3. make others feel accepted
4. be sensitive to others’ needs and concerns
5. look for opportunities to tell about Christ.

Paul immediately practiced his strategy of identifying with his audience by using an athletic lesson. Because Corinth was the site of the Isthmian Games, Paul knew that the Corinthians would be able to understand that winning a race requires purpose and discipline.

Paul used this illustration to explain that the Christian life takes hard work, self-denial, and grueling preparation. As Christians, we are running toward our heavenly reward. The essential disciplines of prayer, Bible study, and worship equip us to run with vigor and stamina.

Don’t merely observe from the grandstand; don’t just jog a couple of laps each morning. Train diligently—your spiritual progress depends upon it.

He wanted every believer to run in such a way that you will win. In other words, every believer should be putting out the kind of effort for the reward of God’s kingdom that an athlete puts out to merely win a wreath. The athletes practiced strict self-control so as to win a prize that will fade away.

Believers, therefore, ought to willingly practice self-control with a focus on bringing others to Christ because they are running toward an eternal prize. They have all already “won”; the prize is not dependent on how they run the race. Because they already are assured of the prize, they should live for God with as much focus and enthusiasm as did the ancient runners at the games.

Paul pointed to the self-control of runners. They must make choices between good and bad. Christians’ choices are not always between good and bad. At times we must even give up something good in order to do what God wants. Each person’s special duties determine the discipline and denial that he or she must accept. Without a goal, discipline is nothing but self-punishment. With the goal of pleasing God, denial seems like nothing compared to the eternal, imperishable reward.

9:24–25 Remember that in a race everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize. You also must run in such a way that you will win. All athletes practice strict self-control. They do it to win a prize that will fade away, but we do it for an eternal prize.  Paul’s exhortations in the previous verses—for the believers to give up their own rights, to think of others first, to be wholehearted in their focus on bringing others to Christ—called upon the Christians to deny themselves as they looked forward to future reward. Paul compared this to a race, picturing the ancient “games.” The Olympics were already operating in Paul’s time. Second in popularity only to the Olympic games, the Isthmian games were celebrated every two years at Corinth. Athletes would come from all over Greece, and the winners of the games were accorded the highest honor. To get into the games, and especially to emerge as victors, required that each athlete prepare diligently with self-denial and dedication. Typically, for ten months prior to the games, the athletes-in-training denied themselves many ordinary pleasures in order to prepare and be in top condition for the competition. Each put forth his greatest effort during the contest, setting aside all else in order to win the prize. Everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize. The coveted prize, and the honor accorded with it, meant the world to these athletes. They would give up everything else in order to obtain it.

9:26–27 So I run straight to the goal with purpose in every step. I am not like a boxer who misses his punches. I discipline my body like an athlete, training it to do what it should. Otherwise, I fear that after preaching to others I myself might be disqualified.  Paul not only preached the gospel message and encouraged the believers to self-discipline and self-denial, he also practiced what he preached. He too had to live by the gospel, and he too practiced self-denial like the athletes just described. Paul did not run the race aimlessly, nor was he like a boxer who misses his punches. Instead, he kept his eyes focused on the goal, running straight for it, with purpose in every step. He did not allow himself to be sidetracked and he did not waste time becoming lazy. He kept on, disciplining and training his body. Paul pictured life as a battle. Believers must not become lazy—for Satan seeks to cause them to stumble, sin continues to buffet, and sorrow and pain are a daily reality (see Romans 7:14–25). Instead of being bound by their bodies, believers must diligently discipline themselves in their Christian lives in order to stay “in shape.”

SELF-CONTROL

Whatever happened to self-control? Many books and speakers guide wandering souls to self-fulfillment, self-satisfaction, and self-awareness. Not many tackle self-control.

Self-control requires an honest look at your strengths and weaknesses, with emphasis on the latter. It means building the will to say no when a powerful appetite inside you screams yes.

• No to friends or situations that will lead you away from Christ.
• No to casual sex, saving intimacy for marriage.
• No to laziness in favor of “can do” and “will do.”

Self-control is a long, steady course in learning attitudes that do not come naturally, and channeling natural appetites toward God’s purposes.

This passage describes the spiritual maturation process, the period of growth during believers’ lives on earth when they are living “in” the world while not being “of” it.

The time between a person’s acceptance of Christ in that burial in water in order to have sins forgiven….and his or her death is the only time when growth in Christ can occur. Paul wanted to grow diligently and receive a reward from Christ at his return.

WHY WE DON’T GIVE UP

Perseverance, persistence, the prize! Christ never promised us an easy way to live. These verses (9:26–27) remind us that we must have a purpose and a plan because times will be difficult and Satan will attack. We must be diligent, all the while remembering that we never run alone. God keeps his promises.

Reference	The Purpose	The Plan	The Prize
1 Corinthians 9:24–27	Run to get the prize. Run straight to the goal.	Deny yourself whatever is potentially harmful. Discipline your body, training it.	A crown that will last forever
Galatians 6:7–10	Don’t become weary in doing good. Don’t get discouraged and give up. Do good to everyone.	Sow to please the Spirit.	Reap eternal life.
Ephesians 6:10–20	Put on the full armor of God. Pray on all occasions.	Use all the pieces of God’s armor.	Holding your stance against the devil’s schemes
Philippians 3:12–14	Press on toward the day when you will be all God wants you to be.	Forget the past; strain toward the finish line ahead.	The prize for which God calls you heavenward
2 Timothy 2:1–13	Entrust these great truths to people who will teach them to others. Be strong in Christ’s grace, even when your faith is faltering.	Endure hardship like a soldier and don’t get involved in worldly affairs. Follow the Lord’s rules, as an athlete must do in order to win. Work hard, like a farmer who tends h crops for the harvest God always remain faithful to you and always carries out his promises.	You will live with Christ; you will reign with him.

Walk in My Shoes” by Victoria T Zicafoose

Walk in my shoes just one step, you will feel my pain and how I have silently wept.

Walk in my shoes just one foot, you will feel how I struggle every day to stay strong and be tough as wood.

Walk in my shoes, just one yard, you will feel my heart ache and be able to empathize how some days are truly hard.

Walk in my shoes, just one mile, you will feel the frustration I feel in having to keep a phony smile.

Walk in my shoes for a day, you will suffer the pain I feel, when the judgment you subtly pass is so obvious to me.

Walk in my shoes for a week, you will then come to realize how much respect you really have for me.

No need to walk any further, for you are able to step out of my shoes. You will now know all the struggles it takes to survive and all the stress that is juggled.

Before you judge me, just try a walk in my shoes, even if it is for a moment.

For you will never know when you will be wearing the same shoes too.