Meditations on the Life of Jesus – A Contemporary Application[1]
(by James R. Hughes)
All four of the Gospels provide an account of the life of Jesus, and each opens by placing Jesus within his historical context. The Gospel of John, however, begins not at a later point in his life (e.g., at the time of his conception or at the beginning of his teaching ministry) but rather at the beginning. John sets the stage for the words and work of Jesus by presenting him first as the eternal God through whom all created things came into existence and then as the ultimate and complete revelation of God as the Word in a human nature (Heb 1.1-4; Col 1.15-20).
The Beginning – John starts his account at the point when everything created began—time and history, and the universe of space, matter and life. He takes us back to a point ‘before’ (it is necessary for us to use a temporal term because of our finite understanding) creation when God existed in eternity (Ps 90.2; Prov 8.23; 1 Cor 2.7). He wants us to understand that the Word was present at creation (Gen 1.1). However, the Word was not created before the rest of creation. He was, he did not become. There was never a time when the Word was not. He shares a continuous, timeless, existence with God and is therefore not part of the creation (i.e., not a created being). Rather, he is the one who created the physical realm (3) and creates a new spiritual reality (4).
The Word – When John calls Jesus the ‘Word’ he points to an attribute of God (i.e., wisdom), but he means more. He informs us that Jesus is the living communication or revelation of the God who communicates. The Word is the faithful and true (v.17; 14.6) witness of the mind of God. This tells us that communication and self-revelation are an essential part of God’s nature (i.e., it is necessary for God to communicate).
With God – The Word did not just exist in eternity—he was with God. This tells us that there are (at least) two persons existing eternally who comprise the divine nature—God (i.e., God the Father; see 2 Cor 13.14) and the Word (i.e., the Son, the second person of the Trinity). These two, however, do not exist independently. The Greek word translated ‘with’ is not the common word; and means literally “towards” and suggests “in the company of.” By his choice of word John tells us that there is a special face-to-face relationship between the Father and the Son. Since nothing can be before (Ex 20.3), or face-to-face with, God (except the true God) this means that the Word is fully God. He is co-existent with the Father—in essence, presence, and purpose. There is no disunity in the divine nature.
God was the Word – John leaves no doubt. He tells us explicitly that Jesus, the Word, is God. The Word is not a god; that would be polytheism and an abomination (Dt 6.4). Nor is he just endowed with divine attributes. The word order in the Greek is emphatic: “God was the Word.” This speaks of more than just a relationship such as when we say that “an apple is a fruit.” It speaks of identity, in which the Word is absolutely and fully God—in essence, attributes, and character. In just ten words (in English; eleven in Greek) John tells us that the Father and Jesus are separate persons but one God.
The Trinity (i.e., three persons in the divine nature) is not yet introduced to us by John. We learn of the Holy Spirit (the third person in the Trinity) later (see 32-34). But in his opening words, John makes it clear that although God is one, he is not a single person. To Jews this would have been a staggering concept; to Gentiles foolishness. We are finite creatures and cannot fully grasp the concept of the Trinity. But we must not err on either side—by making the members of the Trinity nothing more than modes of God’s existence or by thinking of Jesus as less than the Father.
He Was – John adds (2) another key point when he refers to the Word as ‘he’ and not as ‘it.’ The Word is a person, not a concept or attribute. This tells us that God has (is) personality and that Jesus is a distinct person in the divine nature.
At no time in the history of the written word has anyone ever before or since said so much with so few, and such simple, words. The opening two sentences of the Gospel of John teach very profound truths that are almost beyond our comprehension. But thankfully we can learn from these words that Jesus is:
Augustine in the City of God (book 10, chapter 29) says that he often heard the holy old man Simplicianus, who was bishop of the Church in Milan, tell of a certain Platonic philosopher who said that “this passage [Jn 1.1-5] should be inscribed in letters of gold and set up in the most prominent place in every church.” We learn in this passage that Jesus is:
Creator – Through him all things were created (Col 1.16, 17). Nothing, that was created is excluded, including angels (both the sinless and fallen ones); the universe (time, space, matter and energy); animals and plants; and man. Only God himself is excluded (compare 1 Cor 15.25-28). It is clear from the parallel between Genesis 1.1-3 and John 1.1-5 that John is equating the Word (Jesus) with God. Jesus is the Son, the second person in the Divine nature, but he is not less than the Father. The order in the Trinity is not temporal or causal, or one of superiority—it is logical.
Starting with matter, time, and chance (naturalism) men are unable to answer the eternal questions such as: Why does anything exist at all? Why are we here? What is right and wrong? Why do bad things happen? What happens to us at death? Yet for about the past 150 years men have challenged the fact that God, in Jesus, created all things and have instead believed the myth of evolution. They would rather live in painful ignorance than profess the truth.
We must start where Genesis and John start—first with God (in the beginning God/Word), then move to the fact of creation … then we can present the law and sin … and then we can offer salvation. It is a tragedy that so many in the Church compromise with the world and reject the explicit facts about God the creator. Their attempts to reach pagan unbelievers are severely hindered because they refuse to stand with Paul on the rock of truth (Acts 17.24) that presents Jesus first as the creator and lawgiver, and then as the saviour.
God – John seems to repeat himself in the second part of verse 3. But by recasting the message in the negative (“not one thing which became”) he focuses on some profound realities. Jesus is: 1) Infinite—because he is not part of the ‘something that came into existence,’ 2) Eternal—since everything other than God came into being with time (in the beginning), 3) All Wise (Prov 8.22-36)—because only a person with all wisdom can create perfectly (Gen 1.31), and 4) All Powerful—since nothing created came into existence without him. Whoever has these attributes must be equal to God (Heb 3.4). Therefore Jesus is God.
Life-Giver – Jesus is credited with having life in himself. This does not mean just that he is alive. Men and woman are alive, but man had life breathed into him and he became a living being. But John tells us that Jesus is self-existent—no one breathed life into him. He had life in himself. John tells us again that Jesus is truly God, for only God exists without becoming.
What kind of life does Jesus have in himself? The following dimensions, at least, can be considered: 1) Existence—God exists as the “I Am” (Ex 3.14), 2) Eternal—he has always existed (Ps 90.1, 2), 3) Spiritual—God is Spirit (Jn 4.24), 4) Rational—as a member in the Divine nature he communicates with the other persons in the Trinity (e.g., “Let us create …”), wills to action, and formulated the order and design of the created cosmos, 5) Divine—a nature that is not shared with any part of the creation, and 6) Human—Jesus became a man and took upon himself a human nature.
Because he has life in himself, the implication is that he is a life-giver. Contrary to the popular teachings of evolution, that which has no life cannot give life; in other words, inanimate matter cannot spontaneously bring about life. Nor can derived life create life. We have derived life—we do not have life in ourselves—and thus cannot give life. Men will never be able to create life (either in the form of artificial intelligence or in a test tube).
Just as God gave a kind of life (physical) to the animals and another kind to man (Gen 1.27, 2.7; Acts 17.25), so he grants eternal life in Heaven to everyone who believes in Jesus and repents of his sins.
Light-Giver – Throughout the Bible light is a symbol for God (Ex 3.2; Ps 76.4; 89.15; 104.2; 1 Tim 6.15, 16; Rev 4.5). He is the source of physical light (Gen 1.3; Rev 21.23) and spiritual light, in salvation from sin (Ps 118.27; Is 9.2; Mt 4.16, 17). As the light-giver, Jesus also gives the light of true wisdom and understanding (Ps 19.8; 43.3; 119.105) and quality to our lives in a renewed meaning and purpose (Ps 36.9; 56.13).
We have barely scratched the surface of this part of John’s prologue and the profound concepts that are communicated in it. Without doubt, Simplicianus, was right—these letters should be inscribed in gold!
The Pre-Existent Word (Part 3) – Appearance of the Logos
(In Eternity and Time, Jn 1.5a)
The opening five verses of John’s Gospel contain three themes that John develops later: life[2], light[3], and darkness[4]. We will consider the contrast between light and darkness today and the impotence of natural human intellectual abilities and spiritual darkness in our next meditation.
Living Light – We noticed previously that Jesus appeared on earth as the light-giver (1.4). In the Bible light is a symbol for God. As God the Creator, Jesus is the source of physical light; and as the Saviour, he is the source of spiritual light. He also is the source of light in the sense of true wisdom, and the provider of a renewed meaning and purpose for our lives. But the light is not just concepts or ideas. False religions present ideas and feelings as inner ‘light’. But Christianity is different—it presents the light as a living person.
Sustained Shining – The light from Jesus ‘shines’ continuously. The form of the word used by John gives the idea of a present, continuing, reality. This sets up a contrast with the past tense (‘was’) used previously (4) when the Word was said to be the light of men. John expands on his previous statement to make sure that we don’t misunderstand him. Since he is writing his Gospel after the death and resurrection of Jesus he wants us to know that the glory of Jesus continues to shine on the earth.
This teaches us that the Word is a living subsistence. He is the source of light, salvation and eternal life, for all mankind—past, present, and future. As the light shone in the person of Christ while he was on earth, it continues to shine today—through the Holy Spirit, the Church, and individual Christians (Mt 5.14-16; Eph 5.8) living out their calling to present the truth about Jesus by word and works. Those who have met Jesus in salvation shine with a permanent afterglow. They reflect the light they receive from Jesus, much like Moses’ face shone after he came down from the mountain after his visit with God (Ex 34.29-35).
Dispelling Darkness – What is the purpose and nature of light? Why do people ask us to turn on a light? Light’s purpose is to dispel darkness. Light by its nature floods out darkness and makes itself known. Light can be stopped or hidden by solid objects, but not by darkness. Light overcomes darkness; darkness alone cannot overcome light.
When we compare Genesis 1.1-3 with John 1.1-5 we see that John connects the appearance of Jesus with the creation of physical light on the first day. In the verse we are addressing, John speaks of darkness as ‘not understanding.’ By personifying light and darkness we understand him to be referring to spiritual realities. Just as God dispelled the physical darkness with light, so he dispels spiritual darkness with light. The light of Jesus clearly reveals our sin and guilt.
Jesus’ appearance on earth dispelled the darkness that has engulfed the earth since the time of Adam’s first sin. This does not mean that God’s light had never appeared on earth before—it had, for example, at Mt. Sinai in the Ten Commandments. But with the appearance of Jesus in human form, Light came into the world in a way never seen before.
As the image of God (Col 1.15) Jesus shone with the glory of God (Jn 1.14). As the Word of God (Jn 1.1; Mt 4.15-17) Jesus enlightened men’s hearts and minds with eternal light. The shadows of the OT types and figures of the ceremonial economy were also dispelled (Col 2.16, 17; Heb 8.5; 10.1), and we now have their full meaning revealed in Jesus. And at sunrise on the day of Jesus’ resurrection the darkness of death was conquered forever.
Prior to the appearance of Jesus, God’s light was seen only in the distance. There were sporadic flashes of ‘lightning’ at significant points in history through revelation and miracle. But with the appearance of Christ, the anointed one, the whole earth was flooded with the glorious light of God. John summarizes the purpose of the Gospel by showing that Jesus, as the Light, came to dispel spiritual darkness and to reveal the glory of Christ.
When John says that the light “shines in the darkness” he is informing us that it is dark where man dwells. From birth he lives in the land of spiritual darkness. His conscience and will, since the Fall, are in darkness. The light of nature shines, but not brightly enough to dispel the darkness (Rom 1.19, 20). The appearance of the Word is needed to overcome the darkness. When we pray “Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth” we tell God that we desire to see the Light shining in all spheres of life (family, government, arts, business, education, science, courts), both extensively and intensively.
The Pre-Existent Word (Part 4) – Antithesis of the LogosIn our previous meditation we considered the contrast between light and darkness. Today we will look specifically at the darkness. First we have to determine what the darkness is that John speaks of. Since he uses the word ‘understood’ he is probably not speaking of physical darkness. Although nature can be personified in poetry (e.g., Ps 19.1, 2, 4) John is not speaking of natural darkness; he is speaking of human intellectual and spiritual darkness.
Elsewhere John uses ‘darkness’ as the antithesis of three things:
Every use of the word ‘darkness’ in John’s writings can be considered as the antithesis of the Logos—Jesus Christ. He is God (Jn 1.1, 2), as the God-man he reveals truth—a key attribute of God’s character (Jn 1.14; 14.6), and he lived a perfect life without any sin (Jn 1.29; 8.46; 1 Jn 1.7; 3.5).
Men from conception and birth exist in a state of rebellion against God. They do not want to retain their innate knowledge of God (Rom 1.21), they suppress truth (Rom 1.18), and they desire to do every kind of evil (Rom 1. 28, 29). This is the darkness John is speaking about.
Because men exist (by nature) in intellectual and spiritual darkness, all human attempts to find light fail miserably. Darkness permeates all of their systems and every aspect of their existence, including:
All of man’s systems are mere imitations of God’s perfect order. The light of nature shines in the spiritual darkness, but it is not enough to dispel man’s dependence on his faulty systems (Rom 1.19, 20). Without the work of the Holy Spirit who enlightens the minds and changes the hearts of men and women, they will not receive the truth; so they remain in darkness and cannot understand the light.
The Greek word used in John 1.5 can be translated as ‘understand’ or ‘comprehend’. But it can also be translated as ‘found’ (Acts 25.25), ‘caught’ (Jn 8.3), ‘grasp’ (Eph 3.18), or ‘overtake’ (Jn 12.35). A possible translation for John 1.5b is: “and the darkness has not overcome it.” Darkness is impotent, passively, because it cannot comprehend the light. But it is also weak in an active way—its attempts at overpowering the light are useless.
Darkness therefore is no threat to the light. The darkness can never engulf, eclipse, or extinguish the light. The darkness has tried, and failed, many times. For example:
This is a great encouragement to those who are walking in the light (i.e., those who are Christians). We can be confident that darkness will never overpower the light. So our purpose, in Christ, is to shine brighter and brighter like the stars on a Muskoka night (Dan 12.3; Php 2.15), until the morning star (Rev 22.16), the Sun/Son of Righteousness, arises. The light of the Bible, the Church, and Christ’s reign over the nations will grow brighter and brighter until that glorious day when Jesus returns from Heaven to be revealed in all the glory of his eternal and infinite light.
The Conception of Jesus (Part 1)The life of Jesus did not begin with his birth.
As God, Jesus’ personality existed with a divine nature from all eternity. But as a man, there was a specific point when his human life began. This occurred when Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit in Mary. We have all heard many times of the virgin birth. But it would be more appropriate to speak first of the virgin conception.
If Jesus was not a person until birth, what was the significance of the virgin conception? Why was it that the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary at Jesus’ conception? If human life does not begin until 24 weeks after conception or at birth, then why was it necessary for the Holy Spirit to be involved before one of these points?
On this subject Jonathan Edwards said: “To be the son of woman, is to receive being in both soul and body, in consequence of a conception in her womb. ... It is agreeable to a law of nature, that where a perfect human body is conceived in the womb of a woman ... a human soul should come into being: and conception may as properly be the cause whence it is derived. ... The soul being so much the principal part of man, a derivation of the soul by conception, is the chief thing implied in a man’s being the son of a woman.” (Works 2.509)
If life begins at a point other than conception, the Holy Spirit could have taken the product of conception of any woman and man, and at the point at which life supposedly begins he could have overshadowed that collection of cells and breathed into it the life of Jesus.
But the reality is that the Holy Spirit had to act at the moment of conception. A person comes into existence at that moment; and if naturally conceived, that person is immediately endowed with a sinful nature. In the case of Jesus, his pre-existent personality took on a human nature at conception and his spirit was in his human body while it was developing.
I know that for most people who are pro-abortion, this wouldn’t be much of an argument because they don’t believe in Jesus. But a person who professes to be a Christian should believe that a person exists from the moment of conception.
Since life begins at conception, abortion cannot be acceptable to a Christian. No man (or woman) has the right to remove the life of another except in self-defense or for a capital crime.
Why are there still Christians who accept abortion as an alternative? If we really believe that abortion is the destruction of human being with a personality, then why are we not doing more to stop it? What can we do?
The Conception of Jesus (Part 2)With the conception of his human nature, Jesus became man and yet continued to be God. He now has two natures, yet he is only one person. He is not a god possessing a human body. He is not two personalities in one body. He is one person with two natures—truly and fully God and at the same time truly and fully a man.
At the heart of Christianity are some profound miracles. The virgin conception and the resurrection of Christ are two of the most prominent. These defy explanation through ordinary means, but we can understand them. But the fact that Jesus has two natures not only defies explanation; it is also impossible for us to comprehend!
We can understand the idea of two natures, but only to a limited extent. For example, an insect can have the nature of a caterpillar or the nature of a butterfly at different times. But it is much more difficult for us to understand how Jesus can have both a human nature and a divine nature at the same time. Can you imagine being a man and a dog at the same time—not a man possessing a dog’s body but being a man and a dog at the same time?
Why is it so important that we emphasize this truth about Jesus? Because, if he is not God, then he is only a man. But no mere man can pay the debt of sin owed to God—the debt is infinite! If Jesus is not God, then there is no solution to the problem of sin. And, if he is not man, then a man has not paid the debt for sin. Only a man could pay man’s debt. If Jesus is not man, then there is no solution to the problem of sin.
Men reject this doctrine. For example in a review of The Myth of God Incarnate we read: “Christian tradition holds that Christ is the second Person of the Trinity, who became God in human flesh. The seven theologians [authors of the essays in the book] consider this belief ‘a mythological or poetic way of expressing [Jesus’] significance for us,’ not literal truth. The old doctrine was formulated to express faith in Jesus within a Greco-Roman culture, the authors contend, but in modern times it just will not do.” (Time 1977/08/15)
Jesus is the central point of contact for the supernatural with the creation. He is where God meets man. This presents the greatest challenge to our age—belief in the God-man! Men may believe in the supernatural and God. They may believe that a man named Jesus walked the earth 2000 years ago. But if they don’t believe that Jesus is God and man, they believe essentially nothing.
Why do men reject either his divine nature or his human nature (or both)? Because, if they believe that he is truly God, then they have to reckon with his teachings and have to acknowledge that he has a right to demand obedience. They don’t want Jesus as their Lord. And if they believe that he is truly man, then they have to reckon with his death on the cross and confess that they cannot solve the problem of sin themselves. They don’t want Jesus as their saviour.
Jesus is both God and man, both Lord and Saviour. Every Person who comes to Jesus must deal with the pride that keeps him from believing that Jesus is both God and man. Pride does not want Jesus to be King. Pride does not want Jesus to be a sacrifice. Have we dealt with our pride and with the God-man, the Lord and Saviour of mankind?
The Announcement to JosephWe cannot understand how God became man, but we can consider what the Holy Spirit teaches us about the announcement of the incarnation to Joseph:
Annulled Agreement (18-19) – At this time Joseph and Mary were engaged but not married. In Jewish custom, engagement was more formal than today. Couples who were pledged in marriage lived apart for a year to provide assurance that the bride was not pregnant through an unfaithful relationship.
Joseph probably did not discover Mary’s pregnancy as she began to show. We can believe that Mary, full of faith in Gabriel’s announcement and a morally upright woman, told Joseph that she was pregnant—immediately after the announcement that the Holy Spirit would come upon her (Lk 1.35). She did not worry about what shame might be associated with being thought pregnant by another man. She trusted God to work out all things (Lk 1.38).
Joseph appears to have had difficulty believing Mary’s account, and he must have been devastated when he was told of her pregnancy. Nevertheless he thought about ending their marriage agreement quietly. Do not consider this a selfish act on Joseph’s part. In his cultural context, as a righteous Jew, it would have been ‘impossible’ for him to marry a woman who was pregnant by another man. He showed his love and concern for Mary by proposing, in his mind, to end the marriage contract quietly. She would then have been treated as a single woman who had been promiscuous rather than as an adulteress who could have been stoned to death (Dt 22.23-24).
Angelic Appearance (20-21) – Before he could act on his idea, an angel appeared to him in a dream and convinced him that the pregnancy of Mary really was from the Holy Spirit. God worked to: 1) protect the honorable institution of marriage that he established in the Garden, 2) save the reputation of the woman he had highly favoured (Lk 1.28), 3) ensure that Jesus was not considered the son of a promiscuous woman, and 4) provide for Jesus to be adopted into the kingly line of David (Lk 3.23).
God graciously comforted Joseph when he was distressed and perplexed through the dream. Its message informed Joseph of the following:
Accomplished Announcement (22-23) – Most translations of this passage end the angel’s statement after verse 21. This is likely correct since Matthew refers to the fulfillment of prophecy many times (e.g., 2.15, 17, 23; 3.15; 4.14; 5.17; 8.17; 12.17; 13.14, 35; 21.4; 27.9). In the original Greek there are no quotation marks as we have in English; so it is possible that the angel quoted from Isaiah (7.14). In either case, Matthew’s account confirms:
Affectionate Acquiescence (24-25) – The dream confirmed Mary’s account. Like her, Joseph did not concern himself with the misunderstanding and gossip that would arise from Mary’s pregnancy, but acquiesced in the will of God. He broke tradition and immediately ended the betrothal in marriage. He did what was best for Mary and began to care for her as a husband. Contrary to the teachings of Jerome and the Roman Catholic Church, we believe that the Bible teaches that Joseph and Mary had other children together (Mt 13.55, 56). We do not accept the supposed ‘perpetual virginity’ of Mary. But Joseph did not exercise his marital rights until the holy child was born.
Let us, like Joseph, act in the will of God obediently and without delay as we receive Jesus as our lord and saviour.
Mary Visits ElizabethWhile Paul was in prison in Caesarea for over two years (Acts 24.27), Luke, who had accompanied him to Judea, would have had an opportunity to do original research into the background for his gospel. He probably looked up Mary, and she told him of the events recorded here. This account provides a touching, human, moment from her life; but the Holy Spirit moved Luke to include this account in Scripture, not because of what it tells us about Mary but because of what it teaches about Jesus.
Seclusion – Shortly after the conception of Jesus, it appears that Mary went into seclusion, like her cousin Elizabeth had after her conception (Lk 1.24). Mary chose to leave Nazareth for a time and go to the home of Elizabeth in the hilly region south of Jerusalem, probably near Hebron, a town that had been designated for the priests (Josh 21.10, 11). It was appropriate that Mary and Elizabeth be brought together by the Holy Spirit at this time:
Salvation – At Mary’s greeting, John (he had been named; Lk 1.13) leaped in Elizabeth ’s womb. This was not an ordinary sensation a mother feels when her baby moves, nor was it like the jostling of Jacob and Esau in Rebecca (Gen 25.22), even though the Greek version of the OT uses the same word as Luke. John’s leap was neither natural nor a sign of the conflict between two nations (Israel/Edom) representing good and evil. John’s leap resulted from his being filled with the Holy Spirit (Lk 1.15); it was a sign of universal joy because salvation had come to the world (Is 35.6; Ps 98.8, 9; 114.6).
Service – Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit for the prophetic task of proclaiming a blessing from God, since her husband was still mute (Lk 1.20). Her blessing was given in a loud voice, indicating that it was from God (Dt 5.22; 1 Ki 8.55; Jn 7.37; Rev 21.3). It consisted of two parts: a blessing on Mary herself, and a blessing on Jesus in the womb of Mary.
We are not to understand Mary’s blessing to be in the future. Her blessing was not, ofr example, that she would become recognized as a mediatrix between men and Jesus, as many Roman Catholics believe. Her blessing was in the call to service for God. She was blessed in that she was the vessel through whom the human nature of Jesus Christ came into the world.
The blessing Elizabeth pronounced on Jesus probably relates to his call to serve as Saviour (Mt 1.21; Ps 96.2), as well as in his exaltation as Sovereign.
Sovereign – Elizabeth ’s own son, to be born in about three months, was a child of destiny. Yet, he would be overshadowed by the son of Mary. She did not envy Mary for being chosen to bring the Messiah into the world (the desire of every Jewish woman) or the role Mary’s son would play. Instead she rejoiced with Mary that the Messiah had arrived. She considers herself honoured that the mother of the Messiah would come to stay with her for the period of her seclusion. It was not that Elizabeth considered Mary to have special status in herself. During the Middle Ages a belief developed that gave Mary special status—she was viewed as being without sin. This belief is not correct. Mary was nothing more than a humble woman who was honoured by God by being commissioned to bear his son.
Notice that Elizabeth refers to the child in Mary’s womb as “my Lord.” She believed personally that Jesus was her Saviour and her Sovereign. Elizabeth refers to the Messiah as ‘Lord’ and appears to use the word in the same way that David uses it in Psalm 110.1. Elizabeth understood that the Son of David would be the eternal Sovereign.
Submission – Although the NIV and NKJV have Elizabeth calling Mary ‘blessed’ (45) for believing what the Lord, through the angel, had told her would be accomplished, the Greek uses a different word (from that used in 42) that can be translated as ‘happy’. Mary was not skeptical about what Gabriel had reported to her. Because she accepted his words as God’s, she could rejoice and be happy. This reminds us that, to the extent we believe and accept the word of God, we will be happy in the Lord. The single biggest failure in the Church today is that Christians don’t really believe what God says in his Word, and thus in general are not happy in the Lord.
Mary’ Song of JoyMary offered up this prayer-psalm after she had been greeted by Elizabeth and had heard her words of blessing. It is a rich tapestry of OT quotations and allusions that stands as a masterpiece to God’s grace. In it we learn of:
Praise (46, 47) – Mary refers to God at least 15 times in this Psalm and uses the following names and titles: LORD, God, Saviour, Mighty One. For Mary the name of God is holy (49) and worthy of all praise, blessing, and glory. When we pray “hallowed be your name,” we offer God the same praise. We are not suggesting that God’s awesome splendour can be enhanced in any way. Rather we are reflecting his glory and asking him to make it known throughout the inhabited world. Mary shows us how we should pray. The focus of our prayers should be first on rendering praise to God. With God as the controlling context for our prayers we can consider three aspects of God’s care: 1) his provision in our personal circumstances, 2) his universal providences, and 3) his particular promises for the Church.
Provision (47-49) – Mary knew the state of her own heart and confessed her need of God as her saviour. This corrects the mistaken belief that Mary was without any sin—for only a sinner needs a saviour. She rejoiced first in the spiritual provisions from God and then in the physical provisions. God sees the humble state of his servants and provides “every good and perfect gift” (James 1.17). The humble state of God’s children is both subjective and objective. They have humble, repentant, hearts and are blessed accordingly (Mt 5.3-8). They also are in a low state in the eyes of the world because of rejection and ridicule for the sake of Christ (Mt 5.10-12).
It is true that Mary was blessed in a special way because she was given the privilege of bringing the human nature of Jesus into the world. But there was nothing special in Mary that caused God to bless her—rather she became special because she was blessed. God’s blessing encompasses all the gifts he gives his children. Each person who has repented of his sins and received Jesus as his saviour, is blessed by God (Mt 5.3-10; 25.34). No one of us, if we have been saved by Jesus, has any reason to complain. Instead we should be full of thanksgiving and praise for all the provisions that we have from God—in this life and stored up in eternity (Mt 6.20; Col 1.5; 2 Tim 4.8).
Providence (50-53) – Mary looks beyond herself to find additional reasons for praise. She acknowledges that God is Sovereign over the kings and nations of the earth. No president or prime minister, dictator or terrorist, works of his own accord. Each is under the superintending providence of God who works out all things for the good of his people (Rom 8.28). We can rely upon God. What he has done is what he will do. He has performed mighty deeds as he has ruled the world. He will do the same again every day.
We enjoy reading a story about a poor boy who wins the hand of the princess, or of a girl who is oppressed by her step-sisters and becomes the prince’s bride. This reversal of fortunes stirs our spirits. How much more should we rejoice when we see God’s mercy poured out on rebels who have asked for pardon and, in addition to being granted pardon, have been given status by the King? Mary reminds us that it does not matter what our station is in this life, if we fear God he will provide for us forever.
Promise (54-55) – God is faithful to his covenant promises even when we break his holy law. Over and over again the Bible tells us that God fulfilled the promises that he had made to Abraham, Israel, Moses, or David. Mary’s particular focus was on the promise of a redeemer that was made to her Jewish ancestors. She knew that the child conceived in her was the promised Messiah. Those promises are ours also: 1) because the promise to Abraham was a promise to all nations (Gen 22.18), and 2) because God promised our first parents Adam and Eve, in the midst of the curse on the woman, that he would send a redeemer who would conquer sin and death (Gen 3.15).
Psalms (46, 56) – Note that this prayer-psalm is one of the few portions of the Bible written by a woman (see also Judges 5). Did Mary spontaneously voice it right after Elizabeth greeted her, or did she compose it during the time she stayed with Elizabeth (until the birth of John)? We cannot determine which, but in either case the presence of the Magnificat in the Bible shows us how saturated our minds should be in the Bible, and especially the Psalms. Mary, as a young Jewish woman, would have had less formal training in the Scriptures than a typical Jewish male. Yet she shows a remarkable understanding of the teachings of the OT as she skillfully weaves this magnificent composition.
Rejoice with Mary in the character of God who: is the personal saviour (46, 47), blesses his people (48), and performs miracles (49); and who is: holy (49), merciful (50), powerful (51), just (51), sovereign (52), compassionate (53), and faithful (54, 55). Hallelujah!
The Genealogy of JesusYou might think that a list of names would not have much to tell us. But the Holy Spirit included all genealogies in the Bible for a teaching purpose. The genealogy of Jesus, in particular, can teach us a lot. From it we can learn of:
Accuracy – The ancient people from before the Flood until the time of Christ often kept complete records of their ancestors. Extensive ancient genealogical records are found in societies from the Middle East, Northern Europe and the Orient. It is amazing to consider that these records were handed down for over 4,000 years. In many societies the records were probably kept for the wrong reasons (e.g., ancestor worship), and in other societies the recorders could not have given a succinct reason for keeping the records. There are a number of evidences that this ancient practice was ultimately under the direction of God’s providence—for the purpose of demonstrating the origin of the Messiah:
Ancestors – Jews reckon a person to be Jewish through the mother. Luke writes his account of the birth of Jesus from the perspective of Jesus’ mother, Mary. It also appears that his genealogy provides the account of Mary’s descent. Matthew, in contrast, writes from Joseph’s perspective and seems to trace Joseph’s lineage. If this interpretation is correct, then it reminds us that Jesus was qualified as the Messiah through Mary his blood relative and also through Joseph (since he was the oldest legal heir).
Adam – Luke’s genealogy follows the line of descent back to Adam. Jesus is declared to be a son of Adam, a member of the human race. This proclaims the universal offer of salvation to all people—Jews and Gentiles (Lk 2.32).
Abraham – Matthew’s account starts with Abraham. This reminds us that Jesus is the mediator of the covenant that would bring blessing to all nations on earth (Gen 12.3).
Adoption – Some scholars believe that both genealogical accounts trace the line of Joseph (Mt 1.14; Lk 3.23). If this is the case, Matthew’s account gives the royal descent of Joseph, whereas Luke’s account provides the natural descent. This interpretation could help explain the convergence/divergence that occurs around Shealtiel and Zerubbabel (Mt 1.12; Lk 3.27). Under this scenario Jesus obtains his position as the Messiah through adoption. In the ancient world adoption provided status as absolutely as did biological descent. The adoption of Jesus into the line of David and Joseph validates our adoption into God’s household through faith in Jesus Christ.
Accomplishment – God promised that David’s kingdom would be perpetual (1 Ki 11.36; 2 Ki 8.19). In Jesus this promise is fulfilled in an unexpected way—the final king in David’s line is an eternal king. Matthew’s account focuses on the realization of this eternal kingdom. His Gospel is the only one that uses the phrase ‘kingdom of heaven,’ which he uses 32 times. To focus attention on the glory of the Messiah’s kingdom he groups the genealogy into three sets of fourteen names: the first set leads from Abraham to the foundation of David’s kingdom, the second set covers the decline of the kingdom to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, and the third set recounts the names of a kingdom in obscurity. With the birth of Christ, the kingdom bursts forth gloriously in its new, eternal form. To achieve his stylistic structure Matthew had to drop three names from the record of the kings. The missing names are the son (Ahaziah), grandson (Joash), and great-grandson (Amaziah) of wicked Athaliah who brought the idolatry of Ahab into the house of David. God punished this wickedness to the fourth generation (Ex 34.7). This serves as a witness to the purity of Christ’s eternal kingdom in which no idolaters are permitted (Rev 22.15).
Aliens – The exclusion of idolaters from the Kingdom of Heaven does not mean that repentant sinners are forever shut out. In Matthew’s account four women are mentioned: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba (the wife of Uriah). Three of these women were adulteresses and two (Rahab, Ruth) were foreigners from excluded nations (Dt 7.1-3, 23.3). The inclusion of these names teaches us that Jesus came to earth to bring sinners into his kingdom.
Anointed – These genealogies are not just a list of names. They focus all of history on Jesus Christ (the anointed;Messiah) and give us hope for eternity.
The Birth of JesusWe have reached, and passed, the year 2001. 2001 years from what?
Almost everywhere in the world business, schools, the military and so on, operate on the Gregorian Calendar which calculates all dates from the birth of Jesus. The world does not use the Jewish Calendar which dates everything from their calculation of when creation occurred (3761 B.C.), nor does it use the Muslim calendar which dates everything from Mohammed’s flight from Mecca on July 16 th, 622 .
At the centre of history is Jesus Christ. All of history before him, counted down to his first coming. This is the reason that all dates prior to his coming are rendered with B.C., which means ‘Before Christ’. Since then all dates have been rendered with A.D., which means ‘annoDomini’ (the Latin for ‘in the year of the Lord’).
If you ever get a chance to read historical anthropology or palaeontology articles, you will notice that many of them no longer refer to the past using the modifier B.C. Instead, you will notice that they often use B.P., which means ‘Before the Present’. In the thinking of modern ‘scientists’, Jesus is no longer the measure or the focal point of history. He is of no current consequence. What instead is the focal point? It is the present. Man—not just any man, but ‘Modern Man’—becomes the measure of all things. All of time is measured relative to the present. Is this pride or not?
In Star Trek—the Next Generation dates are given in the captain’s log as ‘star Date’. Yet when dates are used in the dialogue, reference is made to the 24 th century. Even science fiction cannot get away from measuring time from the birth of Christ.
But B.P. will not win out, nor will ‘star Date’—even if they survive in the backwaters of the pagan materialistic culture. The Jewish calendar continues to survive in a ghetto, and the Moslem calendar is still kicking. But Jesus Christ the Lord of the Universe will not be relegated to obsolescence. In spite of their rebellion against him, men every day and everywhere on earth will complete monetary transactions, send messages via satellite, or watch the news, while a reminder of Jesus’ birth slaps them in the face.
Next time you write a letter, fill in a form, deposit a coin in a Coke machine or ... whatever, stop for a moment. Pause as you write down a date, or take time to look at the year inscribed on your coins. Think about what the year means. Think about why this particular year. Think about the year of the Lord.
Witnesses to the Birth of JesusAngels and shepherds, the heavenly and the earthly, two extremes, two worlds, but a common response and one example for us.
The angels saw the birth of their Lord. They knew him in Heaven before he became a man. They were the heralds of his purpose for coming to earth. They announced his conception, and then they were the first witnesses to his birth.
A baby was born. His mother wrapped him in cloths and set him in a manger. The angels looked over Joseph’s shoulder. They saw Jesus and were filled with wonder at the plan God was working out. Then what did they do? Their response was twofold: they went and told the world what they had seen, and they worshipped God.
They went out and found the first people they could tell. The doors in town were bolted shut, the shutters in the country hamlets were drawn tight, everyone was fast asleep. Almost everyone! On the hillside nearby were a few shepherds keeping watch over their flocks. The angels had to tell someone, anyone, about the most amazing birth. They found the shepherds awake, and they made their announcement.
They could not contain their amazement—it burst through. The heavens opened, and there appeared a great company of angels worshipping God. Rarely in history has Heaven been opened to the eyes of men, but this was one time that Heaven could not be kept shut. It burst at the seams with the volume of the rejoicing.
The shepherds didn’t waste any time. It isn’t often that angels appear to men. They hurried to find Mary and Joseph and the baby. And they also looked at their Lord. Then what did they do? Their response was twofold: they also went and told the world what they had seen, and they worshipped God.
They hurried off just as the angels had done and found the first people they could. They spread the word about Jesus. And then they returned praising God for all the things they had heard and seen. The rational creatures of the universe are called to see Jesus—to look at him and to look to him. The angels saw, and they went out and told others what they had seen—and they worshipped. The shepherds saw, and they went out and told others what they had seen—and they worshipped.
The order of events is interesting for us to consider: see Jesus and believe, confess with the mouth to those nearby, and then worship. We also have seen Jesus, but what is our response? It saddens me when I see that the Church and most of us who call ourselves Christians do not have this spontaneous desire to rush out and tell others about him whom we have seen. It saddens me when I see so little in our ‘worship’ services which can be called ‘praising and glorifying’.
Have you seen Jesus? Then there are two things you should do to follow the example given here: announce Jesus and praise God.
Circumcision of JesusThis is a simple verse, but one which is loaded with information about how God is fulfilling his Covenant. In it we find the circumcision of Jesus on the eighth day as a sign that Jesus came to fulfil the law: to keep it completely in all its exhaustive detail—all aspects of the law, moral, civil, and ceremonial. His circumcision as a child (like his Baptism as an adult) indicated that he was under the obligations of the Covenant which God made with his people: “I will be your God and you will be my people.” But it is only Jesus who has kept all the Covenant regulations. All the rest of us (whether or not we have the sign of the Covenant upon us through Baptism) break the Covenant.
Jesus came to keep the law so that he could become a perfect sacrifice. But why did God ask for a sacrifice? Actually, God didn’t want a sacrifice. He wanted obedience. But where there is disobedience—sin—his justice demands that there also be punishment.
Since any (all) sin is lethal, everyone deserves the punishment of eternal death. The result would have been the total extermination of the human race. But God is not only a God of justice, but also a God of love; so he planned that a person who had not sinned could act as a substitute for sinners and receive their punishment, and thus free them from eternal death. Jesus offered his perfect life as a perfect substitute for his own people.
This is why he was given the name Jesus. The Hebrew word Joshua is the same as the Greek name Jesus, and both mean saviour. The name Jesus is his personal name (in modern terms, his first name). As was often the practice in the Middle East (and especially in the Bible) the names that were given to people had significance beyond just being an identifier. As we are told by Matthew, he was named Jesus “because he will save his people from their sins.” (Mt 1.21)
Notice that he was given this name by the angel before he was conceived. With the invention of ultra-sound scanning of the uterus it is possible for parents to know the gender of their child and name him or her before birth. But have you ever heard of any of your friends naming a child before he or she was conceived!? Like Isaac, Jesus was announced by angels and was named before he was conceived. And like Isaac, he was the seed of the promise, the heir to the Covenant.
As the heir of the Covenant, he was circumcised on the eighth day. This was in keeping with the commands given to Abraham and Moses. But why the eighth day? Is it possible that this was typical of the new Sabbath which would come with the New Covenant Mediator—Jesus? The seventh day was the Old Covenant Sabbath. But it was on the eighth day that Jesus rose from the dead and removed (cut away) sin and death forever.
Today the New Covenant Sabbath is the Lord’s Day. It is on the Lord’s Day (Sunday) that you are called in a special way to turn to Jesus, the perfect law keeper, your saviour.
Jesus Presented at the TempleHere we see Jesus, who came to observe and keep the law perfectly, being presented in accordance with the requirements of the Ceremonial Law. But there is a surprise in store for his parents. At the temple they are met by two believers who were looking for their Messiah to come.
They were looking for the Messiah (Hebrew word for anointed), just as a believer today looks for the same person. They looked forward to the coming of the Messiah. We look back to the coming of Christ (Greek word for anointed). Both the believing Jews and Gentiles before the coming of Christ and the believing Jews and Gentiles after his coming look to the same person and the same events—his birth as the prophet/king and his death as our priest/sacrifice.
Believers before the coming of Jesus to earth, looked forward in expectation for their salvation. We look back in thankfulness for our salvation. One Lord, one Saviour, for all men—Jew and Gentile.
The Jews at this point in history had been waiting for a long time for their Messiah. They had not heard a word from a prophet of God for almost four hundred years. It seemed as if the heavens had gone silent. People may have been asking “where is this coming that was promised.” True religion was being subjected to pressures from Greek culture, Roman rule, unbelief among the Jewish leaders and falsehood among the popular religious movements of the day.
But there were some, like Simeon and Anna, who were looking for the consolation and the redemption of Israel . They probably did not have a complete understanding of what they were waiting for. They may have been looking forward to the establishment of an earthly kingdom as did many of their neighbours and friends. But one thing stood out about their expectation: they really believed that God was faithful to his promises—his Messiah, the anointed one, the Christ, was coming!
Believers today are in somewhat similar circumstances. It has been a long time since the promise of the coming of Christ was given—almost 2000 years. “Where is this promised coming,” some say, “What is keeping him? Do you really believe that he is going to come?” In addition, true religion is being subjected to pressures from North American culture—too much government, unbelief among the leaders in the Church, and falsehood among many popular religious movements of our day. It is not a happy situation in which to be a believer waiting for our Messiah to come.
This is where we need to learn a lesson from the faith and patience of Simeon and Anna. They were faithful in their day. They were waiting with expectation. They looked forward to a better kingdom (the consolation of Israel).
Are you a Simeon or Anna waiting for the coming of your Lord? And, do you understand that you cannot put your hope in anything in this decaying universe? Are you looking forward to the establishment of a better kingdom? He will come!
Visit of the MagiJesus was probably a few months old when the Magi began looking for him, although we are not told in the Bible what his age was at this time. We do know, however, that the Magi did not show up at the inn on the night of his birth—contrary to almost all popular portrayals of the ‘Christmas’ story.
We are told in the account in Matthew that the Magi saw his star appear when he was born and then followed the star from their homeland to Jerusalem to enquire about his birth. This journey would have taken at least two weeks, and possibly longer than a month. When they were directed to Bethlehem they followed the star until it stopped over the house (not the inn) where Jesus lived with his parents.
The Magi (Greek word for an astronomer/astrologer who interprets dreams) probably lived in the region of what today we call Iraq . They were likely aware of the Hebrew Scriptures and the specific prophecy in the book of Numbers that had been delivered by one of their own forefathers—Balaam. Balaam had been a famous fortune teller in that region. Other of his prophecies, beyond those given in the Bible, were recorded for his disciples. Recently some of these prophecies have been discovered in Aramaic texts found near the Jordan River .
Balaam had made a specific prophecy (under the direction of God) about a star which would come in the future out of Israel : “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a sceptre will rise out of Israel ...” (Num 24.17). The Magi who probably lived in the same land as Balaam, were students of ancient writings, and they followed the same disciplines as did Balaam. They watched the sky and read from the events among the stars and planets. Although the celestial objects were given by God as signs for people on the earth (Gen 1.14) they are generally misread by people who believe that they control the ‘fates’.
When a new star appeared in the East, the Magi were led by God to interpret this sign as the fulfilment of the prophecy which Balaam had given. Various explanations for this star have been given. “Of all the explanations for the star, most scientists favour the ‘conjunction’ theory—a close pairing of planets that gives the appearance of a single bright star. Astronomers have zeroed in on the triple conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn and the Venus-Jupiter conjunction, both thought to have taken place at the time of Christ’s birth, as possible Star of Bethlehem candidates.” (Fred Schaff, “Continuum”, Omni, January 1992.) Others suggest the ‘star’ was a supernova which for a brief period would be brighter then the other stars, and then would gradually dim. Apparently, Chinese astronomers did record an exploding star about the time of the birth of Christ. But I believe, as the Revell Bible Dictionary says, that “Whatever the case, Matthew’s Gospel indicates that the guiding star was a supernatural phenomenon, prompted by God.” (Italics added.)
It seems that Jesus and his parents stayed in Bethlehem after his birth and did not return to Nazareth once the census had been completed. No reason for this is given, although since Joseph (and probably Mary) were from the tribe of Judah, they may have had relatives in Bethlehem, and may have been visiting with them. Whatever detained them, it was clearly by the providence of God that they stayed. And thus when the Magi (sometimes referred to as the ‘three kings’, although we do not know the exact number of them) arrived and they fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: “Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn.” (Is 60.3)
The Magi/kings were looking for the Messiah/Christ who was born to be King of kings, and their king. Thus, the nations came to his light. And since that great event, Gentiles from all nations on earth have been streaming into Zion . You as a gentile, have come to Zion, to the City of the Great King. What do we offer as a gift to him? What he desires is our love and obedience. He delights to be worshipped in Spirit and in Truth.
Escape into Egypt
(Bethlehem and Egypt, around 4 B.C. Mt 2.13-18)
God’s purposes stand firm. His plans cannot be diverted. His goals cannot be missed. He rules the universe. He rules over the nations of the earth. He is the supreme sovereign!
Thus, we are not to understand this passage as pointing to an event that was outside of God’s plan. It was not that God overheard the plotting of Herod, was shocked and surprised, and then decided that Jesus had better be moved to a safer locale. The point of the quotation from Hosea (11.1) in verse 15 (of Mt 2) is to remind us that even the escape to Egypt was within the careful plan of God laid down before creation. Man is not controlling history. God is!
Herod proudly considered himself to be “King of the Jews.” But he was hated by them. Even though he lavished great sums of money on the re-construction of the Temple and married Mariamne, a daughter of a Jewish priest, the Jews could not tolerate an Edomite ruling over them. They also hated him for having wiped out the Hasmonean (Jewish) family who had ruled in Judea before him, and for his obeisance to Rome . And their hatred increased when he murdered his own children, born to him through Mariamne. He did everything he could, militarily, politically, economically, and criminally, to entrench his reign. Nothing was going to get in his way. Or so he thought!
Then the Magi came seeking the true King of the Jews. It was no surprise that Herod sought to destroy even that little one. He would do anything to preserve his throne and power. The slaughter of the infants was for the sake of self—Jesus was a threat to his luxury and status. (I couldn’t help noticing the similarity with our society. It does something similar with abortion. Thousands of little ones are slaughtered for the sake of self and the preservation of luxury and status.) Note the irony: the petty earthly king kills his subjects to protect his life and status. Christ in contrast, who is the true eternal king, gives up his own life and status to save the lives of his subjects.
This scene, unfolding on earth, reflects a raging battle in the spiritual realm. Herod, a vile man, was acting as a minion of Satan. The battle was between Satan and Christ. Satan tried again to snuff out the Messiah. He had tried with Cain’s murder of Abel, with Esau’s threat to Jacob, with Judah ’s sons dying childless, and with Athaliah’s assassination of Judah ’s royal family. In each case, God intervened in a most interesting way and worked events to ensure that the line from Adam to the Messiah would not be broken. And in Bethlehem also, God was in control—Jesus was in Egypt ! Herod the Proud was outwitted by the Magi and by God. Note a second irony: it was shortly after this slaughter of the children that Herod himself died. He could not keep death from coming. He could not protect his reign!
Friedrich Nietzsche writes on behalf of Satan and Herod: “For the old Gods came to an end long ago. And verily it was a good and joyful end of Gods! That came to pass when, by a God himself, the most ungodly word was uttered, the word: ‘there is but one God! Thou shalt have no other gods before me’. ... An old grim beard of a God, a jealous one, forgot himself thus. And then all the Gods laughed and shook on their chairs and cried: ‘Is godliness not just that there are Gods, but no God?’ Whoever hath ears let him hear. Thus spake Zarathustra. ... Dead are all Gods; now we will that superman live.” (Thus Spake Zarathustra)
In contrast, R. C. Sproul presents the Biblical balance: “The irony of humanism, which seeks the deification of man, is that it has its origin not in the creed of the ancient agnostic philosopher Protaforas, Homo mensura (‘Man is the measure of all things’), but in the promise of a serpent, Sicut erat dei [you will be like God]. Humanism was not invented by man, but by a snake who suggested that the quest for autonomy might be a good idea. The promise of the serpent was not fulfilled. Adam and Eve did not become gods. Autonomy was not found. ... The quest for autonomy, however did not cease. It continues even to this day, east and west of Eden ” (If There’s a God Why are there Atheists?)
The account of the escape into Egypt reminds us that no one—no matter how he sets up himself, no matter how much he entrenches his position, no matter what actions he takes—can thwart the plans of God.
Return to Nazareth
(Egypt and Nazareth, around 3 B.C. Mt 2.19-23; Lk 2.39)
Why is there more than one Gospel? When we read the Synoptic (from synopsis) Gospels we find that the three writers (Matthew, Mark and Luke) give us very similar accounts of the life of Jesus. But when we look closely, we find that each writer adds a bit to Jesus’ history, and in total we have a more complete picture of his life on earth.
So it is with the entire Bible. Many parts present similar truths, and all parts add a bit more to our knowledge and understanding of God and how he acts in history. The similar parts in the legal, historical, prophetical, and poetic portions of the OT all add more information to the total revelation about God. If we only pay attention to one part of the Bible, we can become unbalanced in our understanding of God or in our application of his principles for life.
Thus the Bible, in its entirety, teaches us that there is often more than one side to any story and that we should not listen to only one side. If we do, we will probably be getting only part of the truth.
This principle is illustrated by the account of the return to Nazareth . In this account, written by Matthew, we have a practical example of how important it is for us to take into account all of the Bible. Matthew tells us that Jesus was taken to Nazareth by Joseph and Mary and that in this manner God fulfilled a number of the prophecies of Isaiah. Isaiah 9.1 tells us that “ Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea” (that is Nazareth) would be blessed by the coming of the Messiah, and Isaiah 11.1 tells us that the Messiah would be the righteous Branch (the Hebrew word for branch is nezer in which you can hear a similar sound to ‘Nazarene’).
If you read the Bible selectively like most people did in Jesus’ day, and continue to do today, then you will miss the power of what Matthew is telling us. He is explaining how it was that the Messiah came from Nazareth to fulfil precisely the OT. The Jews, generally, didn’t understand this. With Nathaniel they asked: “ Nazareth ! can anything good come from there?” They did understand that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5.2 and Mt 2.4, 5) but they didn’t connect him with Egypt (Hosea 11.1 and Mt 2.13-18) or with Nazareth . They read selectively!
Too many people today claim to be New Testament Christians. What they are really saying is that they are not Whole Bible Christians. There are large numbers of Christians today who will tell you that we don’t have to observe the Law and that it certainly doesn’t apply to the civil government, because after all, it was given to the Jews and so doesn’t apply to us. Then there are others who will tell you that many of Paul’s instructions (for example, regarding women’s roles in the Church and home, or about sexual morality) are only intended for the situation in which they were written. They have value only as historical statements, and we don’t really have to observe them. Others will tell you that the Bible isn’t a science book and we can ignore it (especially Gen. chapters 1-11) when it contradicts the ‘facts’.
In this line of thinking, John Henry Newman said: “Experience proves surely that the Bible does not answer a purpose for which it was never intended. It may be accidentally the means of the conversion of individuals; but a book, after all, cannot make a stand against the wild living intellect of man.” (Apologia pro Vita Sua)
In contrast, the Westminster Confession of Faith says: “The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” (I.VI)
We are taught by this example from Matthew, the importance of seeking to understand and apply every portion of the Bible to our lives. A Roman census, an Edomite murder threat, and a Nazarite carpenter all work together to bring to fulfilment the total promise of a son who would be from Bethlehem, Egypt and Nazareth . Listen to every side of a story before you come to a conclusion. Listen and apply all of Scripture in your life!
Growth and Early Life of JesusThere is a parallel to the first clause of this verse, “and the child grew and became strong”, in the identical words used by Luke to describe the growth of John the Baptist (1.80). This points to a key theme which Luke communicates in his Gospel—the humanity of Jesus Christ. Luke shows more than any of the other Gospels that Jesus is truly a man—a humble man, a human like us. It is his Gospel which:
Luke wishes to demonstrate that Jesus is the man of men. He is with us in our weaknesses (e.g., a helpless infant, a man subject to physical needs and a man able to be tempted) and with us in our strengths (he grew and became strong just like his cousin).
As a child he grew—he wasn’t created as an adult, as was Adam. He had to go through the stages of dependency that we all must go through. This was truly an act of humility for the one who in his divine nature created the universe. But it points to more than his act of humility—it provides a sign of his solidarity with us.
Thus, this verse confronts us with the humanity of Jesus. Yet, some in the early Greek Church (e.g., Marcion, Cyril, Eutyches) denied his true humanity. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 grappled with the human and divine natures of Christ and stated clearly that Jesus is truly God and truly man. It is this confession that we hold today: “Following the holy fathers we confess the Son our Lord Jesus Christ to be one and the same, and with one voice we all teach that he is perfect in deity, perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, with a rational soul and body, co-essential with the Father according to his deity and co-essential with us according to his manhood, in all things like us, apart from sin.” (Confession of Chalcedon)
There are still cults today, such as Christian Science and Spiritualism (based on the ancient Gnostic heresy), which deny the humanity of Jesus. Those who hold to the Reformed confessions disavow these cults. Yet there are many today in these churches who deny indirectly the humanity of Christ, by undermining the humanity of man. They look with scorn on emotion (Jesus wept—do you think he ever laughed?), they disregard the creative talents God has given to men, they accept some form of mechanistic evolution, and they show little concern for the unborn which are being slaughtered by the thousands.
Jesus is a true man. But we must not forget that he didn’t grow up as any normal child. His growth was not identical to John’s or to yours and mine. His growth was under ideal conditions. He didn’t inherit or acquire personality or moral defects, and God overshadowed his life in an extra-ordinary way to ensure that he would be kept from sin and would mature into the one who could proclaim the kingdom with wisdom and a final authority.
A lesson that we can draw from this verse is that Jesus has gone before us. He has experienced life as a man in all of its difficulties. He truly knows what it is like to be a child subject to parental authority. He knows what teenagers go through as they grow from youth to adulthood. He knows the challenges of hard work and sleepless nights. He knows our struggles with temptation and what it means to face death. May we, like him grow and become strong.
Jesus’ First Passover in JerusalemThis passage shows us what kind of historian Luke is. He is not content just to give the public account of the life of Jesus. As a true biographer he goes into detail about the family, birth, and childhood of his subject, Jesus. Here he records an incident from the life of Jesus during his late boyhood (at the age of twelve), when he went on his first annual pilgrimage to the temple in Jerusalem .
When a boy in Jewish society reached the age of thirteen he was considered to be a man. At that point he was expected to take his place in society and the synagogue. He was also expected to observe all of the Ceremonial Laws given to the Jews by Moses. As his thirteenth birthday approaches we find Jesus preparing to take his step into manhood, and we see him placing himself under complete obedience to the Ceremonial Law.
We should note that there were no ‘teenage’ years in Jewish society. A boy became a man, not a teenager. He was expected to take his place as a responsible adult, and to obey the Law. This says a lot about our society. We indulge teenagers and treat them as if they are big kids. We don’t expect much in the way of responsible behaviour (consider, for example, the concept of Juvenile Court), and we let them drift through years of rebellion and indifference. It would be wise for the Church and society to look at Jesus at the age of twelve speaking with the teachers in the temple and preparing to become a man.
In this passage we find the first recorded words of Jesus. These are given in response to his mother’s question and statement. Note that Jesus responds with a question. This is a technique that we see Jesus use a lot later during his public ministry. In his question, he refers to his Father’s house. By this he makes an indirect statement about his deity. It is appropriate that Luke follows verse 2.40, where he makes explicit reference to Jesus’ humanity, with Jesus’ own words where he reminds his parents, and us, of his divinity.
We are not told when Jesus came to a conscious realization of his dual nature and that he was in fact the one and only son of God, who was born of a virgin. We don’t know whether his mother told him of it, or if the Holy Spirit communicated it directly to him, or if in some way the veil over his divine nature was lifted temporarily. But we see here that by the time he was twelve he was conscious of who he was and what his mission was.
His statement reminds us that one of the reasons he came to this earth was to be in his Father’s house. This obviously means that he was to attend worship services at the Temple and was to be attentive to the teaching provided there. But it means more than this. He came to be both the priest and the sacrifice. He came to earth to undertake the work of Salvation.
This provides us with an example. If we are brothers or sisters of Jesus then we also should have as one of our purposes in life to be in our Father’s house. This means that we should serve the Father by worshipping him in the ‘temple’ among fellow Christians and that we should be attentive to the teaching. But it also means we should make the mission of the Kingdom one of our personal priorities.
This does not mean that we are to do nothing else but evangelize and witness. But it does mean that we are to live our lives so that in everything we do we can lead people to the priest and the sacrifice.
Our purpose in life is not to be that defined by Epicurus a Greek philosopher who lived from 341-270 B.C.: “Pleasure is the beginning and the end of living happily. ... It is impossible to live pleasurably without living wisely, well, and justly, and impossible to live wisely, well, and justly without living pleasurably.’ (Diogenes Laertius)
Rather, our purpose in life is to be that defined by the Westminster Shorter Catechism: “What is man’s primary purpose? Man’s primary purpose is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.” (Question 1)
Jesus’ Growth to AdulthoodThe period of Jesus’ life from the age of 12 until he was about 30 are called the silent years. We don’t know much about what Jesus did during these years but we can determine from Luke 2.51-52 (and some other verses) a few things about Jesus’ life during this period:
Minister – Zechariah and his wife were descended from Aaron in the tribe of Levi. Of course, Zechariah and Elizabeth were not sinless; but they were sincere in their belief in God, trusting in the coming Messiah, and devout in their life of obedience (Dt 6.1-3). As a priest, Zechariah was set apart as a symbol of God’s holiness and of God’s holy people. To keep the priestly line pure, without mixture, he had married a Levite, symbolizing that Christians are to marry only in the Lord (1 Cor 7.39; 2 Cor 6.14). It is fitting that the prophetic spokesman who would announce the coming of the Messiah would be born to this couple who were set apart from the world.
Mercy – Elizabeth was barren, and both she and Zechariah were too old to have children naturally. God reaches down in mercy and picks as his instruments of mercy those who naturally have no power or ability. He chooses the weak things of the world to shame the strong (1 Cor 1.27). The selection of this barren couple places John in a special class along with Isaac, Joseph, Samson, and Samuel. This tells us that something important is going to happen in God’s redemptive plan. After 400 years of silence, the heavens have opened and God is going to work the ‘impossible’ (Gen 18.14; Mt 19.26). God does not perform miracles for no reason. He performs them to signal significant events, or to validate the ministry of key individuals. God’s selection of this couple points to the significance of John and the events surrounding his ministry, but it also reminds us that God does the ‘impossible’ by selecting barren sinners for his kingdom. In God’s mercy there is hope for the world.
Method – God revealed his plans for John in the temple. This is where he had chosen to make his name and glory known (1 Ki 9.3). These events probably took place on the Sabbath, since there was a crowd of assembled worshippers. Also, we note that the angel appeared at the time when incense and prayers were being offered up (Ps 141.2; Rev 5.8; 8.3, 4). God honours his temple, his day, and the prayers of his people. So it is today. It is through the work of the Church (the living temple) and the preaching of the word on the Lord’s Day (the Christian Sabbath), supported by the prayers of God’s people, that Christ the Savior is announced.
Messenger – In this instance the ‘preacher’ was an angel from Heaven. God uses many means for declaring his presence and will, including the heavens, small voices, a ball or tongues of fire, and dreams. At times he sends angels (angelos in Greek means messenger) to make announcements. Only two angels are mentioned by name in the Bible (Gabriel and Michael). It is possible that Gabriel, along with Michael, is an archangel, and among the highest rank. He may be one of the Seraphim (radiant ones) that may have a human form, but have six wings (Is 6.2). Gabriel appeared to Daniel (Dan 8.16; 9.21) and also announced the birth of Jesus to Mary. Gabriel’s announcement to Daniel relates to the coming of the Messiah (Christ) in the last days. His announcements about John and Jesus tell us that the prophecies are being fulfilled—the last days have arrived.
Message – Gabriel reassures Zechariah (who was gripped with fear) with the words “do not be afraid.” This is a common message from God, occurring over sixty times in the Bible (e.g., Gen 15.1; Jn 14.27). Those who are favored by God do not need to be afraid of his awesome majesty or of the radiance of his spiritual messengers. Instead, they can listen to his announcements with joy; for everything is under his control and their prayers are heard. Gabriel told Zechariah that his son was to be named John, which means ‘God is gracious.’ John signifies the grace of God that comes through salvation in Christ to those who seek God (Mal 1.9).
Marked – John was set apart by God for the great task of announcing the coming of the Messiah. To prepare him for his mission, he was marked in two ways: 1) he was filled with the Holy Spirit from (lit.) his mother’s womb (he was double-born—born spiritually before he was born physically), and 2) he was a Nazarite (Num 6.1-12) who did not drink wine or any other fermented drink. He was a joy and a delight to his parents who had the honour of having a son who was great in the sight of the Lord. John’s life, as well as his message, pointed to Christ. Jesus would also be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb, and be a Nazarite.
John was the fulfillment of hope for his parents. The announcement of his birth also pointed to the fulfillment of hope for Israel and the nations of the world. The announcement about John prepared the way for the Messiah.
John’s MissionWe saw that the announcement of John’s birth fulfilled the hope of his parents, and that he was marked as the one who would prepare the way for the Messiah (Lk 1.5-15). As we consider further the announcement of his birth, we note his:
Mission – John was to be given a multifold glorious task:
Mark – Zechariah asked for a sign that would prove to him that what the angel said about John would come true. His request appears to be in accord with biblical practice (Gn 15.8; Judges 6.36; 2 Ki 20.8); and, at times God himself gives signs (Ex 3.12; Is 7.11; Mk 16.20). Why then is Zechariah punished (20) for asking for a sign? Because God does not approve of our asking for signs (Mt 16.4). Even though God tolerated these requests during the period of his unfolding revelation, Jesus said: “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (Jn 20.29). Zechariah should have believed that God could provide him and Elizabeth with a son in their old age because he had ample evidence in the OT (from Sarah to Hannah).
By striking Zechariah deaf (Lk 1.62), God indicates that we are not to ask for miraculous signs. Rather, we should be like Mary who did not ask for a sign but humbly accepted the angel’s explanation (Lk 1.38), even when faced with a miracle that had never been heard of before.
God opened the final era of redemptive history with a sign. He sent his messenger to silence a priest in the Temple . This indicates that the era of the Aaronic priesthood and sacrificial system was at an end—to be replaced by a greater priesthood (Heb 7, 8), and the greatest sacrifice—Christ.
Miracle – As he had promised, God worked a miracle: Elizabeth became pregnant, even while too old to bear children and while disgraced with barrenness in the eyes of her neighbors (25). This is God’s way; he works the ‘impossible’ and removes disgrace. This miracle was a foreshadow of greater miracles to come: First, the miracle of the virgin conception of the Son of God to remove disgrace from his enslaved people. Second, the miracle of the gift of salvation, through the death of Jesus on the cross, to remove our disgrace in sin. And third, the miracle of God’s conquering death forever, through the resurrection, to remove ultimately the disgrace of decay from the created realm (Rom 8.21).
Messiah – The events recorded here are rooted in history. They occurred in a real country, in real time, to real people. This tells us that the arrival of the Messiah would not be a mystical vision lost in the mists of ancient myth, but would be documented by credible eye-witnesses (Lk 1.2). Their record tells us that Herod was king of Judea (Lk 1.5). This means that an Edomite, a usurper, was on the throne in the kingdom of David . The scepter had temporarily departed from Judah (Gen 49.10). But it was time now for the Messiah, David’s son, to come as the true King of the Jews (Lk 23.38); to live, die, and arise gloriously and thereby to dethrone Satan.
John’s BirthChildbirth – God showed how great his mercy is by providing a son for Zechariah and Elizabeth. By fulfilling his promise to this couple, who were beyond human hope, God directs our attention to the promise of another birth that was about to be fulfilled. The Messiah was first promised 4,000 years before these events (Gen 3.15). Now, God was about to show the real greatness of his mercy by sending his Son, the saviour of the world.
At the birth of a child, neighbours and relatives assemble to celebrate with the parents. At John’s extra-ordinary birth there was a greater degree of celebration than usual. But we must not stop with the celebration over a mere human. We must look forward three months to the birth of the God-man. At his birth the entire host of Heaven rejoiced (Lk 2.13).
Circumcision – On the eighth day (Lev 12.3) after John’s birth Zechariah and Elizabeth brought him to be circumcised. We are reminded of their obedience as they place their child under the sign of the Covenant. Scrupulous obedience to God’s Law is not something that people like to hear about today. They claim that such a requirement is legalistic and contrary to the ‘law of love.’ But, instead, we see in this observance an example of the general principle that when parents keep the ‘least’ commands (Mt 5.19) in the Law, they set an example for their covenant children and can trust that the Lord’s hand will be on them (66).
Called – When God gave Abram the covenant-sign of circumcision he also gave him a new name—Abraham (Gen 17). Jewish parents followed this example and announced the name of their son, at the time of circumcision. The friends attending the circumcision expected that one of their customs would also apply—the naming of the first-born son after the father. However, Zechariah and Elizabeth followed the instruction of the angel (Lk 1.13) and called their son John, which is derived from the Hebrew for ‘Jehovah is gracious.’ It is significant that we see God overruling the traditions of men (Mk 7.8), while making a powerful statement about his work of redemption through grace. The sign of the covenant—Baptism—is placed on covenant children, as it was on John. When, in God’s grace, the child is born-again (Jn 3.3) he is given a new name (Rev 3.12).
Completion – The angel had told Zechariah that he would be unable to speak until the day that the foretold events were completed (Lk 1.20). This promise was fulfilled despite the lack of belief on Zechariah’s part. In the ancient world people scoffed at Noah’s prophecy about a flood that would cover the world; and they laughed at the prophecy that God would send his Son into the world. Today, the scoffers are still with us. They ridicule the idea that God will judge the world by his Son. Let us understand the completion of the prophecy to Zechariah and pay attention. It teaches us not to despise the promises of God. If we do, we will be silenced; not for nine months—but forever (Rom 3.19).
Curiosity – The neighbours and relatives were astonished at the change of practice. It was strange to them that John was not named after his father. But the miraculous restoration of Zechariah’s speech and hearing (they had to make signs to him to ask the child’s name, 63) confirmed that their practice was not essential and that the child’s God-given name was John.
Both the naming of the child and the miraculous sign filled the people with awe, and the events that happened that day were talked about throughout the hill country near Jerusalem (i.e., near Bethlehem). Three months later there would be another child born in the same region who would not be named after his human father, but rather would be given the name Jesus, announced by an angel (Mt 1.21). The events around the birth of this child would also fill the people with awe, and his birth would become the talk of the whole region (Lk 2.17, 18). John, even in his birth, prepared the way for Jesus, the Messiah (Lk 1.76; 3.3). His birth directs us to Jesus.
Confirmation – These events confirmed that John was an unusual child, and they raised questions about his future. Many people probably were asking, even at this early stage, if he was the Messiah, the Prophet, or Elijah who was to come (Jn 1.19-24). It is possible that the memory of these events led the people of Jerusalem to go out to the wild regions of the Jordan to hear his preaching and to be baptized by him (Mt 3.5, 6). It is also quite likely that when Luke did his research in preparation for writing his gospel account he spoke with people who, reflecting back on the events surrounding the birth of John, were able to confirm that “the Lord’s hand was with him.”
John’s birth points to the Messiah and prepares the way for his coming. It also assures us that God cares for his own. Even from their infancy, God is preparing his children, called by his name, for their work in his kingdom.
Zechariah’s PsalmThe Psalms were often written to commemorate deliverances from physical or spiritual danger, and to pour out thankfulness for God’s mercies. For many centuries the Holy Spirit had not empowered men to compose new Psalms. Now, on the eve of the greatest act of redemptive history, God breaks about 400 years of silence, opens the mouth of a deaf-mute, and breathes into him a prophetic utterance that anticipates a great victory. This Psalm is no mere human composition; it is the work of the Holy Spirit (67) who teaches us to reflect on the marvel of God’s salvation:
Redeemer (68-70) – As we review God’s work of redemption we can cry with Zechariah: “Blessed be God, praise him!” We have the advantage of the complete revelation of God. We have the eye-witness accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus in the Bible. We know with certainty that Christ abolished the curse of sin and death on the Cross. Zechariah had nothing more than what appeared to be obscure prophecies. But without seeing with the physical eye, he saw with the spiritual eye of faith. To him, the words of the ancient prophecies were more real than what we might watch on a live news broadcast. He knew the promises from the first one given in the midst of a curse in the Garden (Gen 3.15) to the last one that promised the messenger (Mal 4.5, 6). Zechariah trusted these promises so fully that he treated them as completed (68, 69) thirty years before they would be fulfilled, and even months before the miraculous incarnation of Jesus Christ had actually taken place.
The kingly redeemer from the line of David has come (Ps 132.17). He has shown his power, like a wild ox rushing with thrusting horns (Ps 92.10). He has come to redeem his people. He has come to redeem us, if we trust him. Why do we not trust the promises of God as Zechariah did?
Rescue (71-74) – The salvation that Jesus provides rescues us from our enemies. The historical context implies that Zechariah was thinking of a rescue from Roman oppression. He was likely hoping that the Messiah would lead his people to freedom, like Moses led the Israelites from Egypt . But just as the rescue from Egypt, as a figure, points to salvation from sin; so the rescue mentioned in this Psalm can be thought of in a spiritual sense.
God the Father has enacted an eternal, holy covenant of grace with the Son. This covenant has been re-stated with human mediators (i.e., Adam, Noah, Moses, Abraham, David). Because God remembers his covenant (Lev 26.42) he not only protects his people from earthly enemies as they travel through this life (Ps 91), but also delivers them from Satan and sin (Mt 6.13), the consequences of sin, and death (Ps 23.4; 1 Cor 15.54, 55).
Righteousness (74-75) – The reason that God rescues us is not so that we can live another day in sin (Rom 6.1, 2). The reason is so that we can serve God without abject fear, in holiness and righteousness. We do not serve to be saved. We have been saved to serve (Eph 2.10). We must live out our lives on this earth, before the Holy God, offering service to him out of thankful obeisance and reverential love.
Ready (76-77) – Zechariah changes the focus of his Psalm at this point, from the work of the Messiah to the herald of the Messiah. He clearly understood the message of Gabriel (Lk 1.15-17) about John. He knew that God’s time had arrived and that his son would be a prophet to prepare the way an to make ready a people for coming of the Messiah (Is 40.3, 4; Mal 3.1). It is no different today. A herald must still go out to prepare the way for Christ. Gospel preachers (Rom 10.14-15) call people to repent of their sins and present to them the way of salvation through the forgiveness of sin.
Rising (78-79) – When the gospel is preached, and believed, a light shines into hearts of darkness. People who have lived with no hope or joy, ruled by ‘chance’, as products of chaos, wake-up to the glory of God’s light. Over and over again, the Holy Spirit takes people from a path of despair and disaster and turns their lives around. A junkie becomes a joyous worshiper, a pan-handler becomes a deacon, a wanton wastrel bows in prayer, a ‘self-realized’ materialist becomes a servant of Christ, a proud anti-theist studies his Bible. The Light of Truth leads people from death to life, from wandering to purposeful direction, from greed to selfless service. This is the result of the Gospel John was born to preach. Men seek for signs of God’s power. If they looked, they would see them in God’s mercy in the miracle of salvation!
Reason (80) – John’s parents were beyond normal child-bearing age at his birth. It is possible that he was orphaned, and entrusted to the community of Essenes near the Dead Sea . There he prepared for his mission. Though the son of a priest, he never served in the Temple . But as the herald of the New Covenant he shows us how all believers are to serve God as priests (1 Pet 2.9) by giving the reason for the hope they have in Christ (1 Pet 3.15).
John’s MinistryContext – The Gospel writers place John’s ministry into both an historical and a Biblical context. By naming the civil and religious rulers at the time John began his ministry, Luke reminds us that the Jews were subject to the pagan government of the Romans and that it was time for the Messiah to come to establish his eternal kingdom. He also informs us that there were two corrupt high priests. The Romans had deposed Annas and replaced him with his son-in-law, Caiaphas. The Jews recognized both men as high priest, rather than just one as God required. It was time for the Messiah to come and cleanse his Church.
Luke dates the arrival of the Messiah’s messenger from the beginning of the reign of the Roman emperor (Tiberius Caesar). Thus, the arrival of the King of kings was established relative to the reign of an earthly monarch. But Christ would gain the supremacy over earthly thrones (Ps 110.1). Now, every memorable event, the induction of all rulers, and every economic transaction, are dated from the birth of the eternal King.
The arrival of John was also placed in its Biblical context. By the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the writers blended two OT passages (Mal 3.1, Is 40.3-5) to declare John to be the ultimate fulfillment of the prophecies. The choice of the passage from Isaiah is significant. Isaiah wrote about God’s plans to smooth the way for his exiled people by using a contemporary metaphor. In the ancient world servants would prepare the road before a king traveled along it. John prepared the way for Jesus in two ways: he prepared the people’s hearts (Lk 1.17) for the arrival of the King, and he showed them the way, through Jesus, to return to God from exile in sin.
John appeared in clothes made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt; and his food was locusts and wild honey. We are told these things so that we can place John in the correct historical-biblical context—as a prophet (Zech 13.4) and as the final OT prophet (Lk 16.16) who came in the spirit of Elijah (2 Kings 1.8) to announce the arrival of the Messiah (Lk 7.24-28).
Cleansing – In this context, and in those days, John came proclaiming, as a herald, the message of repentance and forgiveness of sins. The response of his hearers was sealed with baptism. Ceremonial washing was practiced by the Jews (Jn 2.6) and was applied to new converts, but John’s use of it as a sign for the cancellation of the debt of sin was an innovation. His use of baptism pointed to the coming cleansing of the nations that would be provided by the Messiah (Is 52.15; Num 8.7). This is why we are told that ‘everyone’ went out to John to confess his or her sins and be baptized; and why Luke, a Gentile writing to Gentiles, includes the prophecy: “all mankind [will] see God’s salvation.” (3.6) The Gospel writers are using hyperbole to point to the universal application of Christ’s life, teaching, and death on the cross, to all nations (Lk 2.31, 32; Mt 28.18-20).
Conversion – John announced the arrival of the universal kingdom that was foretold in the OT (Dn 2.34, 35). Admission to this kingdom would not be through human lineage or natural birth, but through eternal lineage (Jn 1.13) and spiritual birth (Jn 3.3). The Jews thought that as descendants of Abraham they would automatically be granted entrance into Messiah’s kingdom. John, however, made it clear—admission to the kingdom requires a change of mind and heart through conversion that results in repentance.
Covenant – The reason John gave for calling the people to repentance was that the “kingdom of heaven is near.” Heaven’s rule was about to be extended directly to the earth as the Messiah began his work of subduing his enemies and establishing his universal reign.
John’s message about the kingdom was not a surprise; it was a prevailing theme of OT prophecy. The people were expecting God’s kingdom to appear and were waiting for him to save them from the oppressive weight of foreign rulers. But the kingdom came in an unexpected way; in a new covenant administration that requires repentance and heart-obedience (Jer 31.33, 34; Mt 5.27-30). This change of heart results in a true righteousness that must surpass a mere outward religious observance (Mt 5.20).
We are in the last days, the era of the New Covenant that was initiated with the arrival of the one whom John announced and that will reach its glorious climax with his second coming. Luke omits the line: “the glory of the Lord will be revealed” (Is 40.5). This may be because at the commencement of Jesus’ ministry it was not yet time for him to reveal his glory. His glory would be shown later; for example, in Cana (Jn 2.11), at the transfiguration (Lk 9.31), and at the ascension (Lk 24.26). We expect the glory of Jesus to be revealed fully on the last day when he returns to earth to establish the final phase of his eternal reign (Col 3.4). The Kingdom of Heaven is near!
John’s MessageJohn’s message was simple: “If you do not repent of your sins you will be sent to Hell. If you really have repented of your sins, your works will provide evidence of the change in your heart.” We can consider his message under two headings:
Coming Wrath – All people know that they must be prepared to face the wrath of God that will be fully revealed on the Day of Judgment. John asks, sarcastically, those who came out to see him: “Why are you fleeing from God’s wrath?” He knew that if they did not have Christ as their saviour they depended on false hopes to get through that Day—mere religion, their own works, or a supposed birthright. John speaks to each of these false hopes.
First, John rebuked any who came to him for baptism thinking that by just going through a religious ritual they could appease God’s wrath. Matthew tells us that among those who were baptized by John were those who were scrupulously pious (the Pharisees) and also those who made religion into a philosophical or intellectual exercise (the Sadducees). Neither approach to religion pleases God. Only a change of heart through conversion (belief in Jesus and repentance) is the religion that God accepts.
Second, he told them to produce fruit that was consistent with repentance. This means that their own ‘fruit’ (works) was not of a proper type or quality to be sufficient to please God. Since their fruit-tree produced only bad fruit, it was going to be cut down. Jesus also teaches that the Jews (as a nation) had their chance to receive himself as the Messiah while he was on earth. If they rejected him they would no longer be considered the people of God. Instead they would be cut down and the Kingdom given to the Gentiles who would produce fruit (Mt 8.11, 12; 21.33-46).
Third, he warned them not to delude themselves with the belief that their natural descent from Abraham provided them with citizenship papers for the kingdom of Heaven . God could raise up new spiritual descendants of Abraham. He would do this when he brought the Gentiles with ‘stony’ hearts into his kingdom by renewing their hearts.
John’s message also warns us. Our religious observances (e.g., attendance at worship or participating in the Lord’s Supper), our ‘good’ works and our membership in the Church are only dust if we have not believed in Jesus as our saviour and repented of our sins. If we are like many of those who went to John, we need to flee from the coming wrath (Zeph 1.14-16).
Convincing Works – John was a ‘Hell-fire’ preacher and it had results. Many of his hearers asked for instruction in the way of life. Once they had been baptized for repentance they were taught how to live in a way that was consistent with their repentance. This sequence foreshadows the fuller model that would be revealed by the Messiah (Mt. 28.19, 20).
John taught that works must follow true repentance. The Bible never teaches that we can be saved by our works, but it consistently teaches that our works will show if we are saved. By a person’s works we become convinced that a spirit of eternal life is present (Mt 7.15-20; James 2.17).
All three of the examples that John gives for how to show true repentance deal with money or possessions. This does not mean that controlling other types of sins is excluded from the fruits of repentance (compare Gal 5.19-26). Rather, it is clear that we all are prone to sin in the area of possessions and need instruction about how to use them rightly. It is especially so in this materialistic age where ‘success’ is measured by the size of our house, the brand of car we drive, or the number of mechanical or electronic devices we have. John’s challenge to our attitude about possessions can be summed up in three words: generous (Lk 3.11), honest (13), and content (14). True spirituality is practical spirituality.
John indirectly teaches two additional lessons (but not about revolution, pacifism, or socialism; as some suggest): 1) God requires personal obedience in whatever role he has placed us. This is why John guides the tax collectors and soldiers to righteous behaviour but does not tell them to leave their jobs. 2) God can save anyone, not just those who are religious. The tax collectors were notorious for their dishonesty, and soldiers were known for extortion. Yet, by God’s grace, sinners like them can also repent of their sins and come into the kingdom (Mt 3.2).
John presented the Gospel in simple terms: mankind has sinned and cannot please God without true repentance that is made evident by good works. If you are truly sorry (repentant) for your sins you will work hard at overcoming them and will try to replace each sin with a good work that pleases God.
John—Not the MessiahThe last portion of John’s message is a response to those who thought that he might be the Messiah (Christ). Because prophets had not been heard or seen in Israel for hundreds of years, when John appeared as a prophet with many disciples following him, people began to wonder who he was. There arose a general sense of anticipation (Lk 3.15) among the people that something important was about to happen. But John made it clear that he was not the Messiah; the one he came to announce, who would be greater than himself, was the Messiah. John, like all true prophets preached Christ, and did not claim for himself honor that was not his. False prophets and cult leaders claim to be anointed (Mt 24.24); but John showed, in three ways, that he was nothing compared with the Christ (Jn 3.27-30):
Sandals – John placed himself below even a slave when compared with the Messiah. Hebrew slaves were not expected to undo the sandal-straps of their masters. John didn’t consider himself worthy even to perform this task for the Messiah. It is sad to see many teachers/preachers in the Church who rather than being humble servants of Christ (Mt 20.26, 27) expect people to cater to them as if they were multi-billionaires. We need to be humbled by John’s attitude. He was given the honor of announcing Jesus Christ to the world. If he considered himself so unworthy that he couldn’t even untie shoe laces, should we not be more humble than we are?
Spirit – John baptized with water, but the Messiah would baptize with the Spirit (Acts 1.5). Pastors have the privilege of administering the sign of the Covenant and admitting believers, and their children, into the visible Church. Yet, as John’s contrast reminds us, water baptism is an outward sign that does not, of itself, confer grace. The powerful work of dispensing the grace of eternal life is the sole prerogative of Christ, through the pouring out of the Holy Spirit.
John appears to refer to fire as the sign of baptism with the Spirit (Mt 3.11), as an anticipation of the day of Pentecost (Acts 2.1-4). But he probably also uses this symbol as a reference to tell us that God was present in the Messiah. Fire accompanied many of the theophanic appearances of God in the OT economy (e.g., Gen 15.17; Ex 3.2; 13.21; 2 Chron 5.14; Ezek 1.4); so it validated Jesus as the Son of God. Fire is also a symbol of God’s judgment (Gen 3.24) and the purification of the world from sin (2 Pet 3.7). John’s reference points to the Jesus as the judge of the earth (Acts 17.31).
Sifting – John extends the theme of judgment with his next contrast—he came empty-handed; the Messiah would come with a winnowing fork (or shovel). Farmers used this implement to toss grain into the air. The grain fell to the ground, while the chaff was blown by the wind to the edge of the threshing floor. The chaff was later gathered and burned. This is a symbol for the final day of judgment in which the wheat (saints) will be gathered into God’s barn (Heaven) and separated from the chaff (reprobate sinners) that will be burned in Hell-fire (Mal 4.1).
A threshing floor often consisted of a large flat rock on an elevated site where the wind would blow strongly to clear away the chaff. It is note- worthy that the Temple was built on Araunah’s threshing floor where the sword of the angel ceased executing judgment (2 Sam 24). It may be that the choice of this site serves as a symbol for the visible Church. If so, the Church is Christ’s threshing floor on which he separates mankind (Mt 16.18-19). There is a day of judgment coming when the threshing floor will be purged, and the wheat and chaff shall be separated forever. We must not lose sight of the fact that John announced the coming of the Messiah in terms of salvation (Lk 3.6) and in terms of eternal judgment.
We are told that John exhorted the people and preached continually (per the Greek verb tense) the good news of salvation to them. But, other than his announcement of the Messiah, we are told very little about the contents of his sermons. He was a preacher of righteousness and of judgment like Isaiah or Jeremiah, but little of his message is recorded. This is consistent with his position as the forerunner of the Messiah. It was no longer necessary to hear the voice of a mere man when the living Word was now on the earth. As John himself would say later: “He must become greater; I must become less.” (Jn 3.30)
We consider it disappointing when God calls home ‘prematurely’ a great teacher such as a Gillespie, McCheyne, or Bahnsen. What then should we think about the loss of this humble preacher—John. He likely spent only a single year preaching before he was confined to a jail cell for two years. But his life and early death should be an encouragement for us. Once he had finished his role as the Messiah’s messenger he was taken into glory.
John and the Word IncarnateJohn, in this part of his Gospel presents seven contrasts—most between John the Baptist (representing the OT prophets) and Jesus the greatest prophet—that essentially cover the complete spectrum of Biblical doctrine:
Creator vs Creature – John emphasized the deity of Jesus, the Word (Jn 1.1-5). Now, with the words “There (be)came a man…” he emphasizes the difference between the Messiah and John. Jesus has a human nature and is a man (1 Tim 2.5) but he is more than a mere man; he is the God-man. While Jesus was John the Baptist became. John may be reinforcing the creator/creature distinction that is taught in Genesis 1.
Light vs Light Bearer – John 1.1 reminds us of the opening words of Genesis. In the same way, John may be reminding us that light (Gen 1.2) can exist without a light-bearer (Gen 1.14). The lights (sun, moon, and stars) were created to act as markers between light and darkness. So, in the spiritual realm, John was sent to mark the true light and to direct men out of the darkness of sin and eternal judgment to the true light.
Without the light-energy that God created, the universe would be in total darkness. In the same way, without the light of his word, the world would be in total intellectual and spiritual darkness (Jn 3.18-21) . Without God’s verbal revelation man would be ignorant of his place and meaning in God’s created order and without hope for salvation from sin. Man cannot develop a cohesive philosophy about anything (existence, causation, or purpose) starting with man or nature; all of his attempts result in futility (Rom 1.21).
Knowing vs Acknowledging – All people know that God is the creator through the revelation of nature. But because they are in spiritual darkness they suppress that truth and refuse to ‘know’ (acknowledge) it (Rom 1.18-21). As a result, they reject Jesus who created the cosmos (Jn 1.10). The Jews accepted John as a prophet (Mk 11.32). But when he pointed them to the Messiah promised in the Scriptures, they rejected him as the revelation sent by God (Is 53.1). John may be using irony (11). He does not say that that the Jews did not know who Jesus was, rather that they would not receive him. They acknowledged John, but refused to acknowledge Jesus.
Spiritual vs Natural Birth – Even though the Jews collectively rejected the Messiah, all is not hopeless. There is a way of bringing light into the darkness—every individual who receives Jesus is born again (Jn 3.3). We are born again by believing the verbal revelation from God about Jesus and believing that he is the living revelation of the character of God in human form (14). John tells us, as Jesus taught Nicodemus (Jn 3), that spiritual birth is not the result of a natural process but the result of a divine process; and is truly a miracle. God acts immediately, through the Holy Spirit, to bring to life a spiritually dead person and adopts him into his household.
Invisible vs Visible – God’s essential nature cannot be seen directly by anyone other than God himself (18; Jn 6.46) since he is spirit (Jn 4.24; 1 Tim 1.17), and the light of his visible glory would immediately blind any person (1 Tim 6.16) without a miraculous intervention on God’s part (such as with Moses, Isaiah or in the Tabernacle). Yet, men can see God clearly, in Jesus. Through the incarnation[5] God, in Jesus, dwelt temporarily on earth, and continues to be visible to the saints in Heaven. It is a mistake to think that when men look at Jesus they see only a man. They see God revealing his nature. John names grace and truth as attributes that summarize the revelation of God in Jesus, rather than the splendor of miracles. He does this to show the purpose of the Word—to give us the revelation of salvation.
Greater vs Lesser – Jesus was born after John the Baptist, and his ministry began about a year later. Yet John says that Jesus was before him. He speaks of Jesus’ pre-existence and superiority, thus reinforcing the message of the Gospel of John—Jesus is both eternal and God (Jn 1.1-2). John was a great prophet (Mt 11.11) and the equal of Moses and Elijah, but he was only a messenger sent to announce the greatest prophet, the living Word, Jesus.
Grace vs Law – Not only is Jesus superior to John, but also to Moses (Heb 3.1-6), the revered prophet of the Jews. Moses could only announce God’s requirements (the Law) and provide ‘grace’ in the OT ceremonial figures. Jesus taught the true application of God’s Law (Mt 5-7) and, as the fullness of God (Col 1.19), was able to keep the Law perfectly and overcome its curse. So he is able to dispense grace upon grace. God’s favour toward his people comes as one blessing after another, like waves washing upon the shore: the blessing of salvation (Tit 2.11), removal of the curse and terror of punishment under the Law (Rom 5.20, 21), and his eternal love (2 Jn 3).
Jesus began his public ministry with an ‘explosion’ as Heaven was ‘torn open’. In this ‘explosion’ he was anointed (baptized) as were the prophets, priests, and kings who preceded him. But his anointing was unique because it consisted of two parts and used different elements. He was baptized with water and with the Spirit.
Oil was the common single element used for anointing throughout the years. Why then was Jesus anointed with both water and the Spirit? I think that these two elements were used in the baptism to provide the following contrasts:
To show his unique and complete innocence he was also baptized by the Holy Spirit coming in the form of a dove—the sign of gentleness, purity, and guilelessness (see Mt 10.16). Is it any wonder that the world uses the dove as its symbol of peace? It was the sign of peace for Noah and here for Christ.
His anointing by the Holy Spirit also showed the completion of the old era, the era of the prophets. John was the last of the prophets in the OT model. Jesus brought in the new prophetic age, in which he is the supreme prophet. The Holy Spirit came to equip Jesus for his prophetic office (compare, Judges 3.10; 6.34; 11.29; 14.6; 19; 1 Sam 16.13) and to announce the commencement of Christ’s public ministry (Jn 1.31; Acts 1.21-22; 10.37-38). The Holy Spirit replaced the oil of anointing.
Jesus walked on the edge between two worlds as the God-man. His baptism provides us with three lessons. It:
As Jesus came up from the water, he was praying. He was communicating with his Father, and his Father answered him in an extraordinary way. He spoke not through the written word or through an inner voice, but in a voice from Heaven which all present could hear.
It is a rare and special event when a voice comes from Heaven, the abode of God. For a voice from Heaven is the voice of God. In the OT God’s voice came from Heaven at very significant points in the history of redemption; for example, at creation (Gen 1.3, 6, etc.), when the Ten Commandments were given on Mt Sinai (Ex 19.19; Dt 4.33, 36), or at the commissioning of a great prophet like Ezekiel (Ezek 1.25, 28; 2.1, 2).
But this time the voice from Heaven told the people that a greater than Moses and a greater than Ezekiel was in their midst. It told of one who was the God-man. It came to communicate to us an unfathomable mystery, the mystery of the Trinity. Until this time the tri-unity of God was revealed only in dark shadows. There are only a few hints in the OT of the nature of the Godhead. But on this day, beside the Jordan, Heaven was opened and the Trinity shone forth, with the voice of God the Father, with the bodily presence of God the Son, and with the blessing of God the Holy Spirit poured out on the Son. We now say with the Athanasian Creed: “And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.”
In this manifestation of the Trinity, the relationship among the persons of the Trinity was communicated more fully than ever before. The Godhead was revealed to us as being a relationship of
This voice also came as a multifold sign to the Son:
Someday a voice from Heaven will ring out one last time over this earth. It will call out to those who have placed their hope in Jesus. It will be the voice of the father saying: “well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness.”
This voice will communicate to us an unfathomable mystery. It will tell of a relationship between us and God, of a family connection. It will tell us that he is pleased to become forever our father, and it will tell us that we will be forever the brothers and sisters of Jesus his son.
This voice will also be to us a sign—a sign that our prayers have been heard, that one phase of our work has ended and another has begun, that we will be eternally blessed, and that all the promises of Scripture will be fulfilled completely for us. Praise God!
Jesus’ Temptation in the DesertGod himself does not tempt anyone. This is what the Bible teaches. He does, however, lead us into the way of temptation to test the sincerity of our faith in him. This is why we are to pray the words: “Lead us not into temptation.”
But when temptation does come your way, remember that this is not unique to your situation. Everyone of us is led into temptation, and so was Jesus. We are told that the Holy Spirit himself led Jesus into the Judean desert to be tempted by the Devil.
Have you seen pictures of this desert? The pictures show how lonely a place it is. But the pictures cannot give us a true indication of the experience of Jesus. The night sounds of the lions and jackals that inhabited that place are almost gone. The desert is a safer place today. Again, we cannot grasp his experience fully. A healthy stranger today who was left in the Judean desert could walk to safety in less than eight hours from almost any remote spot.
We cannot really understand the situation of Jesus because nothing near the severity of his temptation has faced us. Do not misread these verses. He was not tempted just three times. He was tempted by Satan himself, the great Tempter, for 40 days! The temptations of which we read are only the last three. Again, we cannot understand what it was like, for Jesus had had nothing to eat for 40 days. You and I have never gone without food for that long. Add this to the loneliness—the fearful sounds at night and the constant harassment by the devil. Here you have a grim picture.
While in this state, Jesus was tempted with the three great temptations. One addressed his hunger, another his fear, and a third his loneliness. Succumbing to the first temptation would provide pleasure, the second power and the third, popularity—he could take a shortcut to world dominion, avoiding the cross, by worshipping Satan rather than God.
The temptations came in the form of questions. This is the same technique that Satan used with our first parents. And this is how he continues to tempt us today. He challenges our belief system and faith by asking questions. He does not doubt the truthfulness of the things he asks. He knows they are true. He wants us to doubt them: “Did God really say ...”, “If you are a Christian ...”
Notice how Jesus responded! In each instance he quoted from the Bible. And notice that it is from the Old Testament, from the Law books given through Moses, that he quoted (all of Jesus’ quotations are from Deuteronomy). How many Christians today would run to the OT Mosaic law to fight temptation? OT? Moses? Law? What relevance do they have for the Christian living in the NT age of grace? Jesus tells us. The Law is the vaccination against temptation. It is the Moral Law of God that shows us what sin is, it is the Law which reminds us to obey, and it is the Law which challenges us to obey. Christ defeated Satan with a weapon that is at every Christian’s disposal—the Word, the Sword of the Spirit (Eph 6.17). Every true Christian (Jew or Gentile) lives on the words that come from the mouth of God.
Jesus showed in this temptation experience what kind of Messiah he really is. He went to this temptation to demonstrate that sin can be defeated. His forty days in the desert remind us of Israel ’s forty years in the desert, which God tells us was a test of their obedience (compare Dt 8.1-5). The Israelites were given food from Heaven, their clothes did not wear out and they had the company of a vast multitude. They really did not have any needs, yet they failed the test and sinned often against God.
Jesus, in contrast, did not use his eternal powers to satisfy his own needs or to win a large following. He struggled patiently with temptation and he resisted it to the end. The failure of mankind in the desert has become the triumph of the new man—in the desert. He demonstrated that he was qualified to be our saviour and model.
We can have confidence that we can overcome temptation through Jesus’ help (Heb 2.18; 4.14-16). He has faced real temptation and has conquered temptation and sin, and so can we!
The Witness of John—to HimselfThe Jews of Jerusalem (probably the Sanhedrin) sent priests and Levites to ask John who he was. In their opinion he was an unauthorized teacher. This is typical of the Church hierarchy in every age—they feel threatened by ‘unauthorized’ teachers and persecute or harass anyone proclaiming the truth, whom they have not authorized through their system of initiation. Well-documented examples include the persecution of the Lollards sent out by Wycliffe and the imprisonment of John Bunyan for preaching without a licence from the established Church of England .
But John was quick to confess that he wasn’t really a teacher in their model. His answers are a string of denials. He gives the Jews no positive statement to put in their report about who he was. Notice the sharpness and the curtness of his responses. He told them that he wasn’t the Christ, Elijah returned from the dead as the Jews were expecting, or the prophet who was to come in the likeness of Moses (Dt 18.15, 18). He said that he was just a voice, not the Word.
The rabbis of that day were primarily concerned with setting out rules for men to follow (compare Luke 11.46) and not with helping them find salvation. John wasn’t a teacher in this sense; so his answer was correct. His primary purpose was not to teach ethics but to point men to Jesus; secondarily, to call them to repentance; and then, thirdly, to point out the way of righteousness.
Is it possible that this provides a lesson in balance for us? Should we follow this example in our discussions with those who do not know Jesus? Should we start with all the exact conditions of the law? Or should we point them to Jesus, call them to repentance for their sin, and, only then, educate them in the details of holiness? It seems to take time and gentle persuasion for an ex-pagan to gain a Biblical perspective and come to understand all that God expects of him. We may be too harsh on new-born Christians if we expect them to have an immediate full-orbed understanding of all aspects of the Lordship of Jesus Christ, Sabbath keeping, Reformed worship, etc.
Even as John tells the Jews what he was not, there is irony in his words. For Jesus tells us what he really was. He tells us that John came in the spirit of Elijah to fulfil the prophecy of Malachi 4.5 (compare Lk 1.17) and that he was not just a prophet, but more than a prophet (Lk 7.26).
Today there are some ministers who would want you to consider them to be a ‘Christ’ or ‘Prophet’ or ‘Moses’. They want to be considered as the ones anointed to be great spokesmen for God. The life of John provides a lesson here. John does not take any of these titles to himself. He does not usurp the place of Jesus who is the Christ and the great Prophet like Moses. Instead, John humbly points sinners to Jesus. Notice that he says that he was unworthy to unlace/untie the sandals of Jesus. This was a job the rabbis, the teachers of the law, gave only to their servants. John tells us that he was less than even a servant of the rabbis. Where is John’s attitude in the Church today?
This lesson doesn’t apply only to the leaders of the Church—it also applies to everyone who sits in the pews. It tells each of us what he should be like. We live in a desert—the great desert of materialistic humanism. We are not anointed as prophets. And yet, just like John, we can be voices calling in the desert, setting forth the way and calling people to the Lord. The imagery of Isaiah quoted by John shows one preparing a roadway by clearing away the obstacles. This should be our devotion in life—clearing away the obstacles of tradition, legalism, inconsistency, and parochialism which keep people from being directed to Jesus.
The Witness of John—to Jesus the Lamb of GodThe next day, after John had denied that he was the Christ or Elijah, or the Prophet (like Moses) who was to come, he saw Jesus coming toward him and said to those who were with him at the river: “Look, the lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”
This expression of John is one that has been used a lot in sermons, hymns, and Christian writings over the centuries. It will often be heard at communion or in sermons preached during the period called Easter. I am sure that whenever preachers or writers use this expression, they use it thinking that they and we know what it means. But do they, and do we?
Considering how often it is used today outside of the Bible, it is surprising to discover that this expression occurs only twice in the Bible: here (in verse 29) and in verse 36 where John (the following day) refers to Christ who was passing by. The expression ‘lamb of God’ does not appear in the OT; so we cannot turn there for an explanation. Nor, apparently, is it found in any other Jewish writing known to scholars.
It is true that Paul refers to Christ as “our Passover lamb” (1 Cor 5.7), and that Peter refers to him as a lamb without defect (1 Pet 1.19), and also that the Revelation tells us that John saw the Lamb in Heaven. But John the Baptist alone, in the Biblical record, refers to Jesus as the ‘lamb of God’.
Other expressions are used far more frequently in the Bible to refer to Jesus. These include: Son of God, Lord, Messiah, Son of Man. We can find the meaning of these expressions by comparing Scripture with Scripture. But we have no direct usage’s with which to compare John’s words. So then, what does ‘lamb of God’ mean? What did John want to tell those who were listening to him (and to tell us) when he used these words?
He could have been thinking of a lamb led to slaughter (e.g., Is 53.7 or Jer 11.19), but in this context there is nothing to indicate that the lamb was to be a sacrificial lamb to take away sin. The image in Isaiah is of a helpless animal being led away for shearing or for any kind of slaughter (not ceremonial or sacrificial). The image of a sheep is also used in the Isaiah passage to refer to those who went astray in sin (53.6). So we must be careful not to impose meaning on a passage which is not clearly there.
John could have been alluding to the experience of Abraham and Isaac (Gen 22). Isaac asked about the missing lamb for the sacrifice. Abraham replied (prophetically) that God himself would provide the lamb. This account teaches a total consecration and obedience, and may hint at the divine initiative in providing a substitute. But again, there is nothing in the context which speaks of a covering or removal of sin. And the lamb of God of whom John spoke was to take away sin.
Could John be telling us that Jesus was to be the Passover lamb? Possibly. But would John have understood this from the OT, since the Passover lamb was not sacrificed to take away sin as were some of the sacrifices in the Levitical system. In the OT, the Passover lamb seems to have been a sign or token of covering or protection, but not of the removal of sin.
Possibly he was thinking of a cleansing- or trespass-offering which could be a lamb (e.g., Lev 14.10, 24). This is certainly a strong possibility, but again the direct indication of removal of sin (as in the case of the scapegoat) is not given in the context.
Where the image of a lamb taking away sin comes from is not clear. There is no clear OT example, nor is it clear that John had a single OT example in mind. This leads me to think that John was speaking as a true prophet. He gave new revelation from Heaven. He was telling his hearers, and showing us, that Jesus was the culmination of many different symbols used in the OT. John’s revelation was of a composite image, evoking memories of several OT passages: the Messiah would be a perfect lamb without blemish and with no guilt of his own, who would be led to the slaughter to be a substitute for us (as the ram was for Isaac). This slaughter was to take place at the Passover, but it would do more than protect us from God’s wrath—it would actually remove sin forever.
The Jews were looking for a Messiah who would come to set up an earthly kingdom and redeem them from foreign control. What a strange announcement of their Messiah this must have seemed: “Behold the lamb of God.” But Jesus came for a different purpose—he came to be a special sacrifice and to redeem the world from the dominion of sin, and thereby to set up an eternal kingdom. On the Lord’s Day, the memorial of the resurrection, let us behold Jesus the Lamb of God who takes away our sin!
The Witness of John—to JesusJohn saw Jesus coming toward him and announced (like a herald before a king) the presence of the anointed one. But before Jesus could take up his throne, he first had to be anointed as a perfect sacrificial lamb, without blemish and with no guilt of his own. John in his pronouncement indicated that this ‘lamb’ would be led to the slaughter to be a substitute for us (as the ram was for Isaac). This slaughter would take place at the time of the Passover, but it would do more than protect us from God’s wrath: it would actually remove sin forever.
John then spoke of the greatness of the one who was approaching, saying that he surpassed him because he was before him. Jesus was born after John, and his ministry began after John’s. How then could Jesus, who came after John, be before him? The word ‘before’ can have a temporal meaning (i.e., before in time) and can refer to an order of precedence (i.e., one above another). It is not immediately clear which John means here. Notice that John uses an expression similar to that which Jesus himself used later in his ministry (Jn 8.58). Even so, with the use of the word ‘surpass’, it seems that John is speaking of the importance of Jesus rather than of his eternal nature.
John says that he did not know Jesus. What does he mean? It is likely, although they were probably cousins, that John did not know Jesus personally before this time. It is also likely that John wasn’t entirely sure that Jesus was the only one who was to come (the prophet, priest and king). There seemed to be doubt in his mind even after his own ministry had drawn to an end (Lk 7.19). But there does not seem to be any doubt in his mind that Jesus was to be the promised saviour—the ‘son of God’, ‘God with us’. He tells his hearers that it was the sign from Heaven that had convinced him of this. He knew who Jesus was because he had seen the Spirit (as a dove) come from Heaven and descend on Jesus. This special sign had authenticated Jesus’ ministry.
We are 2,000 years removed from this event, but on the reliable account of an eye witness we are expected to listen to him and look to the Lamb of God who takes away our sin. Look to Jesus, your only saviour!
John also gives the reason for his baptism: “that he might be revealed to Israel .” John’s Baptism is called a ‘baptism of repentance’ (Luke 3.3) since he called for repentance from those who came to hear his preaching. But he himself emphasizes the objective aspect of his baptism (the revelation of Jesus) over the subjective aspect (repentance on the part of his hearers). This declaration of John provides guidance for us.
Much is said today about what is considered to be politically correct language and behaviour (e.g., Christless ‘prayer’, acceptance of homosexuality as ‘normal’ and the minimization of gender distinctions). According to our pluralistic culture, religion (at least Christianity!) is to be kept behind closed doors and is not to be brought into business, schools, politics, science, or entertainment. Religion is to be a subjective personal experience. Sadly, the modern evangelical Church has swallowed this lure and is now being reeled in by paganism. It has accepted the ‘party line’ and agrees that Jesus has not been crowned Lord of the nations.
There is no question that Christianity has a subjective aspect to it. You personally must be born again. Without this you are not a Christian. But Christianity is more than the personal experience of scattered believers. It is the proclamation that Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords, and that at his name every knee must bow. John’s comment about his baptism teaches us that the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ to the world should be among our primary objectives as one of his congregations.
For a second time John announced the coming of the Lamb of God. This time, two of his own disciples heard the announcement and began to follow Jesus. Think how you would feel in a situation like this, if you had been a teacher building a following and suddenly some of your followers went off after another teacher. John displayed a good example of that spirit of humility which should be displayed in all of us (Phil 2.3, 4), for he could say: “he must become greater; I must become less.” (Jn 3.30) He shows us what true greatness really is—it is the ability to put aside our own selfish desires in order to point people to the Saviour.
There is no indication that Jesus personally called these disciples. This account is not speaking of the calling of the Apostles (e.g., Mk 1.16-20) because that event occurred after John was put into prison (Mk 1.14), although it is probably not a coincidence that these first disciples happen to be included among those who later became Apostles, since they show their willingness to accept the Messiah upon first encounter. Was this the way it was for you on your first encounter with Jesus—a willingness to accept him as the anointed king?
It appears that these disciples followed Jesus of their own desire. They believed immediately that he was the Messiah when he was displayed to them by the proclamation of John. We should consider how hard and cold so many are who attend evangelical churches for years, who hear the same proclamation “Look, the Lamb of God,” and yet go on following worldly teachers. Make sure that this hardness is not found in your heart when you hear Jesus proclaimed to you today!
The word ‘follow’ in the Greek is in a tense which means a complete and total following. It wasn’t as if they walked along with Jesus for a little while, to return to John later. They went over completely to Jesus, committing themselves to him. Notice also that they called Jesus ‘Rabbi’, which to the Jewish mind meant more than just a teacher. To us, a teacher is just one from whom we can learn something and then forget the person who taught us. But a Rabbi was much more. An equivalent concept, popular in the late 20 th century, was embodied in the term guru. We need to learn from the example of these disciples and follow Jesus, not just to learn a few more theological facts but to learn to live like him. Jesus should become our ‘guru’, and we should become totally committed to his teaching and way of life.
Jesus turned and asked the two disciples of John what they wanted. They asked him where he was staying. This seems to be a funny question to ask. But they were asking more than where he was going to sleep for the night. They were probably enquiring about the location of his school. They wanted to attach themselves to his academy. His academy today is the Church. Disciples of Jesus today have a similar obligation to ask “where are you staying” and to seek out the congregation which is most faithful in teaching everything he has commanded.
Jesus responded to their request by saying ‘Come and you will see’. He probably wasn’t just telling them that they would see the house in which he would sleep. Jesus often used expressions like this to refer to spiritual sight. He may have intended this statement to have a double meaning. The second meaning could be something like: ‘come with me, follow me, and you will be given insight into spiritual things.” Whether or not he actually meant the statement that way, this is in fact what happened. The disciples went with him about 10:00 a.m. (by Roman reckoning, or possibly 4:00 p.m. by Jewish reckoning) and then spent the remainder of the day, and probably much of the night, learning spiritual truths from him. It was the next day, after having listened to the teaching of Jesus, that Andrew went in search of his brother. It is Jesus alone who can give us the spiritual sight that we need!
Jesus’ First Disciples (Part 2)Andrew was one of the two disciples of John the Baptist who followed Jesus after John had declared that Jesus was the Lamb of God. The Apostle John (the one who wrote this account) was probably the other disciple. These two spent an evening learning from Jesus and discovering that he was the Messiah promised to Israel . The next morning the first thing that Andrew did was find his brother Simon and tell him that they had found the Messiah (Christ). Then he brought Simon to Jesus. This account provides us with an example of how we should begin in our personal proclamation of Jesus Christ. The mission field for everyone of us should begin with our own relatives, then it should extend to our neighbours and surrounding community, and then to the ends of the earth.
John tells us that Andrew went in search of Simon Peter. When he wrote the Gospel he was looking back a number of years and referred to Simon by the name which would be familiar to his readers. In the historical account Simon had not yet been named Peter, but this was the name by which he was known to the Church. His new name had become so intimately associated with him that he was probably not well known as Simon, and John had to clarify the account by telling his readers who this Simon was.
What’s in a name? Not much, according to Juliet standing at the garden window and speaking of Romeo. But this is not how God sees it. A name is more than just a label for a person. It is more than an arbitrary number like a Social Insurance Number. A name summarizes the essence of the person. God himself shows the importance of his own name when he speaks to Moses out of the burning bush and reveals himself by his special name—Jehovah. He also tells us how important his name is when he says that we are not to misuse his name (Ex 20.7).
But it is not just the name of God that is important. The names of his people are also important. He showed this when he gave Abram, Sarai and Jacob their new names. These names were given in special circumstances. In Abraham’s case it was when the covenant of circumcision was given (Gen 17), and in Israel ’s case his name was given to him when he wrestled with God (Gen 32). A new relationship, a new life, a new name!
Jesus put himself in the place of the covenant making God when he continued this tradition by giving Simon a new name. He also indicated that the calling of the first disciples was a significant event in the history of redemption—as significant as the calling of Abraham.
It is worthy of note that the name which Jesus gave to Simon was Cephas (in the Aramaic), or Peter (in the Greek). You have probably heard that this name means ‘rock’. Jesus knew the character of Peter, or at least what it would become. He knew him to be a rock. Is there irony in this? During Christ’s ministry on earth, Peter seems to be, among the disciples, the one who is the least like a rock. His apparent impulsiveness and unstable character, and his denial of Jesus, are anything but rock-like. Yet it was Peter who made the profound confession that Jesus was the Christ, and he is the one who became a pillar of the Jerusalem Church . Jesus knew what he was going to do with Peter. The naming of Peter teaches us that we should not judge a person (especially a fellow believer) exclusively by his present character.
Just like Peter, each believer will be given a new name: “To him who overcomes ... I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.” (Rev 2.17) Each of has been brought into a new relationship and given a new life, and given a new name. Just like Simon, God is perfecting his work within each one of us, to make us Peters in his Church. So, each of us must continue to work together and accept the fact that the character of our brothers and sisters will not be perfect (but is being perfected) until we all reach glory.
The Calling of Philip and NathanielHave you heard the latest Newfie joke? No, I am not going to tell a joke here. But my question makes a point by way of comparison. If you'd lived in Judea in 27 A.D. you might have heard jokes like “How many Galileans does it take to grind grain?” Those living in Galilee in Jesus’ day were thought of like many in Canada today think of those from Newfoundland, or Americans think of those from the Appalachians or Ozarks (hillbillies) or some in the Scottish lowlands think of people from the Hebrides .
The Jews in the south looked down on those from the north and despised the province of fishermen and sheep farmers with the distinct accent (Mt 26.73). The ‘cultural elite’ of the south couldn’t imagine that anything of significance could come out of the ‘ Newfoundland ’ of Israel .
This is probably one reason for why Nathaniel says: “ Nazareth ! Can anything good come out of Nazareth ?” [Note the irony: Nathaniel himself was a Galilean, and yet Jesus declared him to be ‘good’ (2.47)]. He may have been conditioned by years of rivalry among the various settlements in Galilee . He probably also expected that the Messiah would come from Judea (Bethlehem of David) and was surprised to hear that he was from the north.
The surprise of Nathaniel provides us with at least two lessons:
Nathaniel’s reaction is recorded in the context of Jesus calling two additional disciples. On the way north to Galilee Jesus found Philip. I don’t think that this means that he stumbled onto him in an accidental meeting. Rather, it seems more likely that this was a deliberate and personal action from Jesus, just as later Philip went and found Nathaniel (45). It seems that Philip was not a total stranger to Jesus, for the family of Jesus appears to have been known to Philip and Nathaniel since Philip refers to Jesus as from Nazareth, and as the son of Joseph (45) as if to identify which particular Jesus (a fairly common name in its Hebrew form ‘Joshua’) he was speaking of.
Joseph of course was the legal father of Jesus, and it is quite likely that he was known to those in Bethsaida . The two villages were about 30 km apart (about the distance across Metropolitan Toronto) and undoubtedly had some communication with each other. Joseph may have travelled to Bethsaida on the Sea of Galilee to carry on trade, and Jesus may have gone with him during the years of his youth.
Whether or not Jesus was known personally to Philip and Nathaniel, it appears that this is the first instance during the earthly ministry of Jesus where he fulfils the prophecy of Ezekiel: “For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search for my sheep ...” (34.11)
Philip in turn went and found Nathaniel. This is the second example of evangelism beginning at home with a relative (compare 2.41). It provides a lesson for us. We, as parents, must ensure that we are adequately encouraging our children to come to believe in Jesus, and all of us must be presenting Jesus to those in our families who do not know Christ. Jesus took the initiative, and so did Philip. So also should we.
And notice how Philip presented Christ (the Messiah). He didn’t try to convince Nathaniel by argument. Philip’s response to Nathaniel’s question was a simple statement: “Come and see.” This should be a key to our way of leading our relatives and friends to Jesus. We should tell them: “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law [the Prophet], and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” And then we should invite them to come and see.
Where would you take your relatives and friends to see Jesus? You can’t take them to meet him in body, as he is currently in Heaven. But your life should be a signpost to unbelievers, pointing them to Christ. Can they come and see Jesus living in us and in the body of believers in our congregation?
The Introduction of Nathaniel to Jesus (Part 1)Jesus saw Nathaniel approaching and said: “Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.” This is Jesus’ testimony to a man—a man like Job who was righteous, or like David who was dear to the heart of God, or like Enoch who walked with God. But the words of Jesus must not be misunderstood. He is not saying that Nathaniel was without sin; rather, he is saying that Nathaniel had a principle of eternal life indwelling him. He had been possessed by the Holy Spirit and was a true believer.
Why does Jesus use the adjective ‘true’? If he had just said ‘Israelite’ this would have added nothing. Almost everyone around him was an Israelite. He used the word ‘true’ because he was speaking of the heart of Nathaniel out of which proceeded the faith by which he believed in the one and only God and in his one and only son the Messiah, who was to save Israel . Paul tells us that not all those who are descended from Israel are Israelites (Rom 9.6). So Nathaniel was more than just an outward Jew, with the sign of circumcision. He was a true Jew.
Does the adjective ‘true’ apply to us? I know that today there are very few people who go to church just for appearance’s sake. But I also know that we live in an age of tremendous shallowness. Without doubt there are some (possibly many) of the people who make their plodding way to their pew every Sunday who in their hearts are nothing more than false Christians. Why anyone would put on such a pretence I cannot understand, but I have to accept it as a fact. There are probably hypocrites and ‘pharisees’ in every assembly of believers—and, possibly, even in our congregation. Our personal prayer should be that each one of us would be a true Israelite.
How can you be known to God as a true Israelite? It is not purely by showing up in this place of assembly on Sunday mornings. It is by being seen by God under your ‘fig tree’ day by day. The fig tree provided a quiet, shady spot. It was there that people in the middle east often went for their time of quiet reflection and religious meditation. Today, some would call this time ‘private devotions’ or ‘quiet time’. It is here that true religion begins—behind the closed door, meeting with God in a time of prayer and Bible reading. It is not public religion, but private, which must come first. But it is not here that true religion ends! True religion goes out to find Jesus and to follow him, just as Nathaniel did.
Notice that when Nathaniel first approached Jesus there may have been some doubt about whom he was coming to see. He doesn’t seem to be even a little surprised when Jesus referred to him as being without falsehood. There was no false humility on his part. He knew that he was a true believer and accepted the words that he was ‘faultless’ as a true statement of his standing before God. He just wanted to know how Jesus knew his standing. To this point, he approached Jesus as he would have any man.
But Jesus, without giving a direct answer, shows Nathaniel that he wasn’t dealing with a mere man. Jesus doesn’t tell him that he could read the hearts of men. Rather, he tells him that he had seen him in prayer. This could not have been discerned by mere human knowledge. The divine nature shows through. Here was one who could not be described by mere human terms.
At this, Nathaniel changes his attitude to Jesus. The very fact that he now addresses Jesus as Rabbi (Teacher) indicates a new respect. Those who were teachers in the first century Jewish context were those who, it was believed, had special authority and insight from God. They were the ones who, it was expected, proclaimed truth and were to be heeded. Nathaniel’s new respect for Jesus is shown further by his declaration that Jesus is the Son of God and the King of Israel.
It is interesting that these words were used at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry as a public confession by a disciple. Although John had declared him to be the lamb of God and Peter called him the Messiah when he spoke to his brother, Nathaniel’s words appear to be the first public confession from a heart of belief. There is an unexpected irony in his words. Very similar words are used among the last public statements about Jesus before his death. Pilate questioned him with respect to the term ‘son of God’ (Lk 22.70), and the ones passing by the cross mocked him with these words (Mt 27.40). And to compound the abuse, above his cross were the words ‘King of the Jews’ (Israel). From Nathaniel’s confession from the heart, to the words of scorn as he faces the infinite weight of God’s wrath against sin, Jesus is the Son of God, the King!
Nathaniel acknowledged Jesus as the Son of God, the King. So must each one of us. It is from the secret room of prayer that we must come forth to make a public confession of who Jesus is. We must do this now, or we will be forced to make it before his judgment throne (Phil 2.10, 11). I hope that, for you, true religion does not end in secret. I hope that you will come forward and acknowledge Jesus as your own King!
The Introduction of Nathaniel to Jesus (Part 2)Jesus spoke to Nathaniel about his belief that Jesus was the Son of God, the King of Israel. His confession resulted from Jesus’ seeing him under the fig tree. Nathaniel knew that Jesus probably did not see him with physical eyes, as his tree of meditation was likely hidden from the searching eyes of strangers. Nathaniel realized that it was by an extraordinary sight that Jesus had seen him. He knew that he had just been a witness of a ‘minor’ miracle. In similar manner, Jesus sees you today. His all-seeing eyes see all that you do. To what extent do his eyes see you in private worship and meditation under your ‘fig tree’? How often do they find you there? Does the knowledge of Jesus’ all-seeing eyes encourage you to believe in him?
But if Nathaniel thought that this sight was something amazing, Jesus assures him that he would see even greater things. This also can be your assurance.
What did Nathaniel see that was greater? He saw many great miracles as he accompanied Jesus during his ministry, beginning with the changing of the water into wine (see the next meditation). He saw greater things in the death of Jesus on the cross, the resurrection on the third day, the ascension, and the growth of the church through the Mediterranean world. Finally, he saw the greatest things of all as he was ushered into Heaven by angels at his death.
Notice that the NIV footnote says that the word ‘you’ in the Greek is in the plural. Jesus is speaking in general to those present with Nathaniel and to all those who believe that he is the Son of God, the King of the Jews. Is Jesus speaking directly to you with these words? You yourself will see even greater things. You weren’t present to witness the ministry of Jesus or his resurrection. But if you are a believer, you will see him. And even now there are great things for you to see.
Jesus says that Heaven will be opened and the angels will be seen ascending and descending. Have you seen Heaven opened and the angels going up and down? Think about this question before you answer. Jesus saw Nathaniel with non-physical sight, and so he is probably referring to non-physical sight when he says that you also will see. Are you among the spiritual seed of Jacob (Gen 28.14), the true Israel ? If so, then the promise of the stairway to Heaven that Jacob saw in his dream (Gen 28.12), is for you. With the eye of faith have you seen Heaven opened and the angels going up and down?
Consider some of the ways in which you can see Heaven opened today:
Heaven has been opened for us by the Son of Man. Heaven was closed to us by the man, Adam, and has been opened again by the Son of Man, Jesus, the second Adam. In the Hebrew, adam is the word for man as well as being the name of the first man. Jesus can be understood as calling himself the Son of Adam. Jesus uses the self-designation Son of Man more than any other, I believe, to remind us that he is the promised seed of the woman who was to come to crush the head of Satan, and then to take his place as the one of whom Daniel speaks (7.13), who is given all authority, glory and sovereign power over all the nations of the earth, and whom all peoples worship.
Stephen saw Heaven open as he was dying. He looked through the eye of faith. Do you see beyond this life into eternity? A major failure of men today is to be so caught up with the here-and-now and to miss the there-and- then. Heaven is open now! Will it be open to you when you die?
Jesus’ First Miracle: Water Becomes WineMary, the mother of Jesus, was probably assisting at a week-long wedding feast of one of her relatives. We can infer this since she ‘was there’ and had authority over the servants. Jesus and his disciples were invited to this wedding. And, as we are told, it was on the very day that he came that they ran out of wine. This was no coincidence. It was planned by God to be the first event by which Jesus would demonstrate that he was the Messiah.
Jesus had not yet performed any miracles (11); so why did Mary approach him looking for a solution to the problem? It is possible that she believed he would have an answer since he had demonstrated wisdom over the years (Lk 2.52) and since she knew he was special because of the words of the angel (which she had treasured in her heart) and because of the miracle of her conception. She knew he was the Messiah and may have expected that one who was greater than Abraham, Moses, Elijah and David could solve this ‘simple’ problem.
Social convention held that one should not run out of wine at a wedding feast, and it permitted those invited to the feast to file a law suit against the host for failure to show hospitality. It is possible that Mary thought that Jesus would find a means of resolving the problem, or that he would speak wise words (as Solomon did about the prostitute’s baby) which would satisfy the guests and resolve the problem. Jesus did not do what she expected—he did more!
He turned to her and addressed her politely as ‘woman’ (there is nothing harsh about this word in the Greek (compare Mt 15.28; Lk 13.12; Jn 4.21; etc.). The NIV adds ‘dear’ to soften the apparent harshness of the English word. In his choice of this word there is profound significance:
Since he showed that he was the Messiah, why then did he say that his time had not yet come? Because his primary purpose in coming to earth was to go to the cross and provide payment to God for sin, not to act as a judge on earth (at this time), or to resolve problems and perform miracles, or even to teach the correct interpretation of the law. These were incidental aspects of his road to the cross. His time did not come during much of his ministry (compare Jn 7.6, 8, 30; 8.20). His time finally came in the last week of his life (compare Jn 12.23, 27; 13.1; 16.32; 17.1). With these words he was not speaking of his revelation of himself to Israel but of his purchasing redemption from sin.
So then why did he perform the miracle? The answer lies in three areas:
We can apply this parable in action to our own situation:
First Cleansing of the Temple at the Passover
(Jerusalem, Spring 27 A.D. Jn 2.12-17)
After turning the water into wine, Jesus stayed for a few days in Capernaum and then went down to Jerusalem for the Passover. He went down since all Jewish males were expected to go, if physically possible, to celebrate the Passover in the Temple where God made his presence known (Dt 16.16).
Since many of these men would have to travel from distant cities, it was common that they would carry money and buy their sacrificial offerings once they had arrived in Jerusalem . This is the reason that the merchants were selling cattle, sheep and doves, and changing money in the Temple courts. They were able to ‘justify’ their actions by the need. But the reality is that they were there not to help the pilgrims but to make money.
When Jesus arrived he made a whip and drove them from the Temple court, saying: “How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!” There are likely a number of reasons why he took this action. Each has a lesson for us:
How effective was this cleansing of the Temple ? From a human perspective, not very! This was the first time Jesus cleared out the merchants and their wares from the Temple, but it was not the last. In less than three years we see him back in the Temple (Mt 21.12-17) taking the very same action.
We who pride ourselves in being Reformed in doctrine, worship, and discipline need to learn a lesson from this. Just like in the Temple, wrong practices and motives can creep into the life of the Church very quickly. One of the principles of the great Reformation was that the Church must be reformed and always reforming. The Church will never be perfect while on this earth. But this offers us no excuse for not taking the responsibility to be continually making sure that all that goes on in the Church, or in the name of the Church, will bring glory to Christ.
This is not just a message to the ‘evangelical’ churches, but is also one to our own. It is important for us, in this congregation, to look regularly at every practice that we have and assess it against Scripture. If our practices cannot be supported by direct warrant from God, or if we are failing to practice what he has required, then we should change our practices. If we don’t, Jesus will make a whip and cast us out of his Church.
Jesus performed this cleansing because a zeal for God’s house consumed him (Ps 69.9). Does zeal for doing things in a Biblically-right manner consume us? How willing would we be to stand for truth in a situation like this? Do we have this kind of passion for what we believe to be true? Too quickly we say things like: “But you can’t change this, it has been done this way for too long,” or “What difference does it make—we can’t have much impact when we are such a small congregation?” or “That isn’t how it’s done around here.”
What we need is more believers who are willing to fight for what they believe is Biblical, even to the point of upsetting the complacent Christians of our day. Randal Terry founder of Operation Rescue is an example of this spirit of zeal. We may not agree with his means, but we cannot deny that he is consumed with zeal for the cause of life. What would it take to see some of us consumed with a zeal like Jesus displayed? Who will show real zeal for the work of Christ and his Church?
The Jews Demand a Sign
(Jerusalem, Spring 27 A.D. Jn 2.18-22)
The Jewish leaders realized that what Jesus had done in cleansing the Temple was a messianic action. So they did not claim that his actions were wrong. They knew that he had in fact done the right thing, whether or not they liked it. They also knew that the outer court of the Temple was not a place for the merchants to make money, but instead was to be kept as a place of prayer for the Gentiles. Rather than question him about the rightness of his action, they wanted to know who had given him the authority to do it. With their messianic expectations, they realized that God could and would provide signs and do miracles when the Messiah had come. So if a person such as Jesus was acting as if he were the Messiah, then they expected him to prove that he was the Messiah (compare 1 Cor 1.22). This is why they asked for a sign.
I don’t think that we should read into their question anything more than curiosity and an honest request. In this verse, the NIV may have over translated the Greek word for ‘asked’ by using the word ‘demanded’. Jesus had not yet challenged the position of the Jewish leaders or accused anyone of being a hypocrite. At this point the Jews in Jerusalem were unaware of who he was and were seriously wondering by what authority he had performed this messianic action, and if he just might be the Messiah.
What they did not know was that just prior to this he had turned water into wine to provide a sign of his authority. This miracle showed that he had power over the elements of nature. But, more importantly, it was a sign with respect to his authority over the Church. It was a sign that he would strip away the generations of tradition imposed on the Church by the elders and would replace it with the fresh energy of the Gospel. In the cleansing of the Temple, he again demonstrated his authority over the Church.
Jesus didn’t have to give anyone a sign. But since they asked, he agreed to give one. But notice the nature of this sign—it is a future sign, similar to the signs given to Moses (Ex 3.12) and Ahaz (Is 7.14). This is a peculiar way in which to give a sign. What people want is a sign now. Are you like some people who are reported to say: “If God shows me now by a sign that he is there, I will believe in him.” You are not to tempt God. You have in the Bible many signs projected and fulfilled. Do you believe them?
The sign he gave was: “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” As he gave the sign he may have been pointing to his own body, but the Jews missed this. They assumed that he was referring to the physical temple around them and did not realize that he was speaking of his body. They were blinded by their preconceived notions of reality. They thought it was absurd that any one would claim that he could build in three days what had taken over forty six years to build (this rebuilding project was started by Herod the Great before Jesus was born and was on-going almost to the time the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.).
There is irony in this—the very person who spoke these words was the same one who created the entire universe in six days. He certainly could build the Temple in three! But it was the temple of his body of which he spoke. We can derive a number of lessons from this sign:
It is sad to see that at the end of Jesus’ life the crowds mock him with his very own words and repeat them as a charge to accuse him while he is on the cross (Mt 26.60, 61; Mt 27.40; Mk 14.56-59; Mk 15.29). It is amazing how they could remember these words but miss his words about sin and repentance and the need for belief in him. But his disciples came to believe (compare Jn 14.26), and so should we.
Early BelieversJohn tells us that during the Passover feast Jesus performed miracles. But he does not tell us what they were. Thus it is clear that all of his miracles are not recorded in the Bible. In fact, John tells us later that there were many other things that Jesus did that he had not written about in his account of the life of Jesus (Jn 20.30). From this we can derive three lessons for ourselves:
John says that many believed in Jesus because of the miracles. This is not a wrong reason for believing in him, but it is not the best reason. It is better to believe without having seen (Jn 20.29) and because of his words alone (Jn 14.11). He is truth personified, and we should believe the truth. We are not to look for evidences but are to accept his words in the Bible as truth.
Note that John says that many believed, in contrast with an earlier statement indicating that men did not believe (Jn 1.10). This shows that although some people will not believe the message of salvation, many will. Jesus began here to fill Heaven with a multitude that no one can number. At times we may despair at the apparent ineffectiveness of the Church and of the Gospel. But we must not! Jesus is building his Church, and many will be saved!
John says that they believed in his name (compare Jn 1.12). This means that they believed in him. In the Bible, a name often stands in the place of the person. This is why it is so wrong to misuse God’s name (Ex 20.7). It is not just his name that is being blasphemed, it is also his very person. Do you hold sacred his name and believe in it? Do you believe in his person (as God-man), his holy life’s work, his death and resurrection, and his visible return?
You do!? But will he entrust himself to you? Why would he not entrust himself to those early believers? What does John mean? It seems that Jesus knew that men, even true believers, could be fickle. Peter proved this later when he denied Jesus, even after he had confessed truly and had spoken with great passion about being ready to go to death for the cause of the kingdom. You know your own heart. How willing are you to speak out for Jesus?
His hesitation to entrust himself to them shows that the motives of the early believers were probably tinged with much selfishness. They wanted physical healing and eternal salvation. They were believers, but their hearts and minds had not yet been educated to be useful as servants in Gospel-proclamation. They were ‘Heaven bound’ but not yet ‘Heaven profound’.
The training of the disciples took three years of careful preparation. The early Church applied this discipline in its catechumen classes. Young Christians are often very excited and quick to speak about their salvation experience, and they have a lot of energy and exuberance. As a result, some leaders in the Church often rush to give them opportunities to teach. But Paul says that we are not to bring them into teaching and leadership positions too quickly (1 Tim 5.22). Although there must be a balance in this. In the Presbyterian and Reformed churches there may be a tendency to hold back opportunities for service from the people far too long. This can quickly turn excited new Christians into ‘dead’ pew-fillers.
Jesus does not need the witness of any man today. The Bible (his word) alone can act as a testimony to him, and many are saved through reading it. This is one of the reasons why the Bible societies put such an emphasis on getting the Bible into people’s hands. But even though he does not need man’s testimony, he desires it today. Jesus has chosen to build his Church through the testimony of men. He uses this testimony to bring men to salvation and to educate them in the foundations of the truth.
Are you interested in Jesus only for personal salvation, or have you matured to be of service? Does Jesus entrust his testimony of himself to you?
Nicodemus was a Pharisee and a member of the ruling council (Sanhedrin); yet, surprisingly, he was interested in learning more about Jesus and appears to have become a believer (Jn 19.39). Some people make statements such as: “Not many scientists, or philosophers, or ... (substitute almost any group) ... believe in Jesus.” But what does this statement say? It appears that the majority of people (at least 90% of the population of the world at present, and at least 75% of the population of most countries) do not believe in Jesus. Therefore, most people do not believe. But the fact that so many educated, or uneducated, groups of people do not believe in Jesus does not prove a thing, other than that John’s words about Jesus are true (Jn 1.5, 10).
It is interesting that not all of the Pharisees were against Jesus. By the grace of God, some did believe. The Pharisees of all people may have had the farthest distance to travel when they came to believe. A blatant sinner such as a prostitute, drunkard, cocaine addict, homosexual, or murderer may find it easier to come to believe in Jesus than a person who is outwardly quite moral. Those who are involved in the most wicked sins are often aware that they are sinners and are breaking the law of God. They may be more willing to come to Jesus than a ‘pharisee’ because they have given up on their own righteousness. Charles Colson, who came to believe through his prison experience, tells of many who in their desperate state were open to salvation provided by Christ. It is the self-righteous of the world who are far from seeing their need of Christ or of repentance and faith in Jesus.
A Pharisee was one who practised all the outward aspects of the law carefully. But often his heart was not right with God. However, do not dismiss all Pharisees as unbelievers. There were probably some over the years from the time of Ezra to that of Christ who, with honest sincerity, were looking for the coming of the Messiah and were truly repentant of their sins before God and were therefore Christians. But in general, the Pharisees were only interested in outward rites and were not interested in religion of the heart. I fear that today there are many in the Church who are following in the footsteps of the majority of the Pharisees. You find them in every denomination—Roman Catholic, Pentecostal, Baptist, Dutch Reformed, United Church, Anglican, and among Presbyterian.
The modern ‘pharisees’ are not necessarily as strict about their outward adherence to the law of God (for example, they may not care about keeping the fourth commandment), but they are just as sincere in their (false) belief that their outward life before God will be sufficient to bring them safely through the Judgment Day and make them right with God.
The reality is that there is no heart-religion in a pharisee. Heart religion is what God is looking for. He is looking for a heart that has been turned from stone to flesh. God is looking for hearts that are full of love to him. Jonathan Edwards, in his work A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections, asks: “Who will deny that true religion consists, in a great measure, in vigorous and lively acting’s of the inclination and will of the soul, or the fervent exercises of the heart?”
A key challenge of this meditation is for us to examine our hearts and to make sure that we are not functional pharisees. We will not be in Heaven if we go through this life assuming that our outward walk will pass the final test of the great Judgment Day conducted by the holy Judge.
Notice that Nicodemus came to Jesus at night. He may have come at that time to talk privately with Jesus, who during the day was surrounded by crowds. But it is more likely that he came at night because he was timid. (He did speak up in the Sanhedrin, Jn 7.50-52, but is it not recorded that he spoke in defense of Jesus at his trial.) I think that this may point to the biggest failing with most Christians. They are timid about coming to Jesus in the daylight and before the watching world. I don’t mean that they are afraid to let people know that they go to Church. But they are afraid of being seen truly in the company of Jesus.
When a fellow Christian asks them questions like: “What has God been teaching you lately?”, “How did you grow spiritually today?”, or “How are you growing closer to Jesus?”, they squirm. In addition, there is a hesitation on the part of many Christians (myself included!) to speak at all times as a member of Jesus’ household. It is far easier to ‘come to Jesus by night’ than to challenge an unbeliever who is blaspheming God or committing other open sins. There is a tendency to ‘come to Jesus by night’ by skirting around moral issues, e.g., mentioning the social unsuitableness of certain actions or the personal consequences which may result, instead of speaking out about the holiness of God and his law, and the absolutes of God’s law which make actions ultimately right or wrong. Let us pray that each one of us will be ‘daytime Christians’!
Nicodemus Comes for an Interview with Jesus (Part 2)Nicodemus addressed Jesus as teacher. First, he called him Rabbi (teacher) and then he confessed him to be a teacher from God. In turn, the great Teacher referred to Nicodemus as a teacher. In the midst of their dialogue about the most important teaching of all (the new birth), a great contrast is set before us: between the teachings of men and those of God, the doctrines of men and the doctrines of God, and the ‘light’ of men and that of God (e.g., Mt 15.9).
The confession of Nicodemus makes it clear that he had an appreciation for who Jesus really was—the teacher sent from God. As we have noted previously, Jesus did not come to earth specifically to perform miracles so that he could provide temporal advantages to the recipients. His miracles were performed as signs which pointed to who he was. We can see from the words of Nicodemus that Jesus had demonstrated that he was the promised Messiah who was to be the great prophet (Dt 18.15; Jn 6.14) who would explain all things (Jn 4.25). Nicodemus understood this to be the purpose of Jesus’ coming to earth, and he did not go to Jesus for temporal healing. He knew that Jesus was the teacher from God. In this, he had a profound understanding. Let us be like Nicodemus and accept Jesus as the teacher.
But if a person is referred to as a teacher, you may ask: “What does he teach?” So, what does Jesus teach? Why is he the teacher? How does he differ from other teachers and from other ‘prophets’ who have arisen at many points in history? What is the great contrast that is set up in the dialogue with Nicodemus? Jesus is a unique teacher for the following reasons:
Message - The message of Jesus is like no other before or after it. The message comes across clearly as being absolutely unique. All other religions on earth have man, man’s worth, and man’s works as the focus of their message, and place man at the centre of their plans for ‘salvation’. But the Bible, as Jesus’ message—from “In the beginning ...” to “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.”—is totally different. The theme is not man, but God—God’s worth and God’s works!
All other religions and philosophies, and science based on these views, have nothing more than relative ‘truth’. What today is ‘true’ may tomorrow be nothing more than a myth. In contrast, the message of Jesus is (to quote Dr. Francis Schaeffer) ‘true truth’. The truth of the Bible is not that of:
The truth of Jesus is not just facts, such as the fact of the events of 1066, 1215, 1688, or 1867. The Bible is fact, but it is much more. Truth is ultimately based on God and his character, and is final, unchangeable, perfect and eternal. God is truth (Jn 16.13; 1 Jn 5.6). Yet this truth is knowable by proximate, changeable, defective, finite creatures (men). To know Jesus is to know truth. To read the Bible is to read truth. Read it!
Method - His method was not like that of other teachers. He was masterful with the probing question. He did this better than Socrates (after whom this method is named). In the use of stories and parables he has no rival. Most ‘teachers’ (religious and secular) today seem to believe that effective learning is based on the Medieval Scholastic model—where an expert stands in front of passive learners and communicates knowledge. Jesus used questions, dialogue, problem setting, stories, imagery, sensory language, concrete examples, points of contact, and energy like no other teacher before or since. Emulate his example!
Measure - He taught with an authority that astounded his hearers (Mk 1.22, 27). Other teachers speak at best with a delegated authority. But the author of truth, the author of Scripture—the only God—could do nothing less than speak on his own absolute authority, and his words are not suggestions or good advice. They are moral absolutes. To ignore his authority is to court eternal condemnation. What other teacher has this authority? Hear him!
Means - The teaching of Jesus is like none other because of the application supplied by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16.8-15). All sincere teachers desire to have their students internalize their teachings and to apply what they have learned. What other teacher can claim the provision of the Holy Spirit beyond measure? We need the Holy Spirit to apply the teachings of the master. Ask for the Holy Spirit!
Who is your teacher? Is it Jesus? You can have no better.
Nicodemus and the New Birth (Part 1)Jesus skips the formalities of an academic setting with Nicodemus and moves quickly to deal with an important point—the new birth. He tells him that he is telling the truth. Why would he say this? And why does he need to repeat this point? He says: amen, amen (Greek), or truly, truly, or verily verily (KJV), or most assuredly (NKJV), or I tell you the truth (NIV). Why this emphasis on his words which will follow? Clearly it is not because the truthfulness of Jesus’ words could ever be questioned.
In the previous meditation I pointed out that one aspect of Jesus’ uniqueness as a teacher was the absolute truthfulness of his message. Here, it is as if Jesus uses this expression to set up a distinction between his teachings and those of the Pharisees. Their teaching is presented as truth, but his teaching is true truth.
The use of the repeated word ‘truth’ may be a form of the Hebrew way of speaking. When a Hebrew speaker or writer wanted to emphasize a point (a form of the superlative) he would often repeat the word he wished to emphasize. Where we would use an adjective, a Hebrew writer or speaker would often repeat his word. For example in Ex 21.12 the Hebrew says ‘to die he must die’, repeating the word die. English translations (e.g., KJV, NKJV, NIV) give the sense as ‘he shall surely be put to death’. Or in Exodus 22.5 ‘to repay he must repay’ is translated as ‘he must [surely] make restitution’.
Jesus is warning Nicodemus that what he is going to say is of extraordinary importance. What can be more important than the subject of the new birth? No one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again (or ‘reborn from above’). Jesus’ use of see in this instance means to enter or experience the kingdom (see v5), not just to have a vision of it. He is speaking of becoming a subject of the realm of God and experiencing the power of the kingdom.
But what does born again mean? These words do not appear in the OT (the closest parallels seem to be in passages such as Jer 31.31-34; Ezek 36.26-27; Joel 2.28-32). What Jesus says does not seem to be clear to Nicodemus who asks: “How can this be?” or more precisely “How can a man be born when he is old?” What Jesus says would not be clear to us either if we did not have the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit to make it clear.
Nicodemus considered purely in physical terms what Jesus said. It seems that he did not understand (at this point) what Jesus was saying, because he was unwilling to let himself believe the full implication of its message. If he believed, he would have to become like a new born child and learn a new teaching from a new teacher. So he put up a false front to avoid having to face the reality of what was being said by the great Teacher. Not liking the direction of the conversation, he chose to misunderstand so that he did not have to apply the message to himself. He was much like homosexuals, evolutionists and others today who choose (Rom 1.18-23) to misunderstand the Bible so that they can think that the Bible does not have moral implications for their lives, and so try to excuse themselves.
So Jesus goes on to explain that the new birth comes with “water and the Spirit.” This at first does not seem to make his teaching any clearer, and in fact needs some explanation. So he explains his figure of speech by contrasting physical birth as being of one kind (flesh gives birth to flesh) and spiritual birth as being of a different kind (from the Holy Spirit).
Jesus is not speaking to mystify. Rather, he is speaking to enlighten and teach. He uses figures of speech to clarify, and make concrete, difficult concepts. Jesus expected to be understood by Nicodemus (see verse 10), just as he expected to be understood when he used a similar figure of speech later in reference to bread and wine as being his body and blood. His figures of speech are clear. But at times men choose to misunderstand them rather than accept them.
The contrast which Jesus sets up between physical and spiritual birth is, by the way, clear evidence against the Theory of Evolution. Since kind gives birth to kind (compare Gen 1.21, 24), there can be no evolution from the lesser to the greater. One cannot expect a sinful man to evolve somehow into a spiritual man (even though both are men), any more than one can expect a lemur-like creature to evolve into a man. The new birth is the creation a new kind of man, in the same way that the creation of Adam brought into existence a uniquely new kind of creation, totally distinct from the animals.
Jesus seems to be referring to baptism when he mentions being born of water. In the next meditation we will look at the meaning of the new birth coming with water and the Spirit. For now, think about the meeting of Nicodemus with the Teacher. What did Jesus feel must be communicated? The truth about the new birth! You know what Jesus means when he says: “You must be born again (7).” Without the new birth you will not see the kingdom of Heaven !
Nicodemus and the New Birth (Part 2)In speaking of the new birth, Jesus sets up a contrast between being born of flesh and being born of the Spirit. He says that the spiritual birth comes with Spirit and water, whereas physical birth comes with flesh and blood. It is here that Jesus clarifies for Nicodemus his point about the new birth. He is speaking of spiritual birth, not physical birth.
The new birth comes with “water and the Spirit.” This is probably a reference to the baptism of repentance as taught by John the Baptist, since at this point in Jesus’ ministry he had not initiated any other form of baptism. A Pharisee such as Nicodemus would have known of various Jewish washings (‘baptisms’); but he would have also been aware of John’s baptism, as all the people in Jerusalem had gone out to John at the Jordan (Mark 1.5). Water baptism for the Christian continues to be a symbol of repentance and entry into the experience of living with, for, and through God, as a subject in his kingdom. It is a sign of spiritual cleansing from sin and of starting life over (a new birth) in the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is probably speaking of the miracle of starting all over again, just like God did after the flood and will do again when he restores creation after the Judgment Day (2 Pet 3.13). The lesser miracle (being born again physically) is hard for us to understand. But the greater miracle—a complete reworking of character, the making of a completely new person—is really impossible for us to understand. Yet, most people seem to take conversion for granted. They seem to think it is something common and not extraordinary, and a process over which any person has control and can bring about on his own under his own power. They claim that by the power of their own wills they can bring about this change of character.
The new birth is radical. It is not achieved through human effort and works (e.g., law-keeping by a Pharisee like Nicodemus, or ‘good works’ performed by us). It is not a person just vowing to be better, or even of actually improving himself. It is the creation of a new person by God. The new birth is not brought about by more law-keeping but by the very power of God.
Upon conversion a person is re-created. His personality becomes substantially different, and yet at the same time his new personality is fully concordant with his previous one. His knowledge and unique personality traits are the same as they were before. Yet he is a different person. We can intellectually understand what it means to be born with a new body, but the idea of becoming a new person is so far from our experience that we cannot fully understand how it comes about or what it really means.
This is why Jesus provides an analogy between the wind and the work of the Holy Spirit. We don’t know where the wind starts from and where it ends. But we certainly can hear it and see its impact. In a similar way we cannot understand the work of conversion in the new birth brought about by the Holy Spirit, but we can see its impact as a sinner is brought to salvation.
The metaphor used by Jesus is developed around a play on words. In Greek (and Hebrew) the word for wind and for spirit is one word. It is as if Jesus says: “The Spirit breathes where he pleases.” And this is the ultimate truth about the new birth. It is the work of the Holy Spirit from beginning to end. It is a sovereign work, where and when he chooses.
Jesus says that we are not to be surprised at the need for a new spiritual birth. The kingdom of Heaven is a spiritual kingdom, and those in it must be born spiritually (i.e., of the Spirit). This does not mean that Heaven is (or will be) filled only with spirits. Paul in 1 Cor 15 makes it clear that the glorified body in Heaven is a true physical body. And don’t forget that Jesus has a physical body which exists now in Heaven. So also a number of saints (Gen 5.24; 2 Kings 2.11; Mt 27.52, 53) already have their physical glorified bodies as tokens for us of the promised resurrection.
Nicodemus still does not seem to understand; so Jesus rebukes him, a teacher of Israel, for being unable to discern. He has revealed his meaning to the simple but has hidden it from the worldly wise. But he has not hidden the message from us, any more than the message was ‘hidden’ from Nicodemus. The message is very clear—the only way into the kingdom (Heaven) is to be born again. Jesus addresses this lesson to Nicodemus, but when he says: “You must be born again” (7), he uses the plural form of you. This makes it very clear that his instruction applies not only to Nicodemus but to all mankind—to you and me. We are all under the must. There is no other way!
Are you guilty of choosing to misinterpret this lesson so that you can think that you do not have to believe? Don’t think this way, for you must be born again!
Witnesses to Jesus as the TruthJesus alerts Nicodemus to the fact that what he is about to say is of great importance by prefacing his remarks with the words: “I tell you the truth.” But this time (compare 3) he turns from the truth of the message (about the new birth) to the truthfulness of the messenger. He emphasizes his own truth-fullness. Not only is what he says true truth, but he is Truth (Jn 14.6).
He presents himself as a reliable witness who can speak and testify to what he knows and has seen (13). Nothing can be more reliable than a witness who knows exactly what has happened and who has seen it with his own eyes. There is no appeal to circumstantial evidence or second-hand knowledge. This is why he uses the word we to confirm his reliability. But how does this confirm his reliability? Why does he use it? Whom is he including?
Here it is not the royal-we. The context won’t support this since he refers to himself in the first person a few words before and again immediately following in verse 12. Nor is he including his disciples. They were probably with him (John recorded what he had heard in the interview) and probably could have spoken about their experience of the new birth, but they are not mentioned as being present. Nor is he speaking generically: “a person (like a teacher) speaks about what he knows and what he has seen and learned.”
To understand what Jesus is saying it is necessary to look at the near context, at similar teachings of John, and at the larger context of the Hebrew Scriptures. The immediate context points back to the Holy Spirit (8) and forward to the Father (17). It is Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the Father who speak and testify that Jesus is the Truth. The whole Trinity joins in witnessing that Jesus is the Truth (compare also Jn 8.13-18 and 1 Jn 5.6-9). The greater context of Scripture teaches that a solitary witness is not sufficient to validate truth in a criminal proceeding (Dt 17.16; 19.15). Jesus in effect says: “My truthfulness is on trial, and I will bring three witnesses to it: myself, the Holy Spirit and the Father.”
In saying we, Jesus equates himself with God. For a Pharisee, such as Nicodemus, this would be a far greater challenge than the teaching of the new Birth. Jesus was either speaking a great blasphemy or he is the Truth!
The Jews, especially the Pharisees, as a class rejected Jesus. They would not accept him as their saviour, nor as their Lord. It is no different today. Most people continue to reject the testimony of Jesus, of the Apostles, and of modern Christians. Even though the Apostles knew the Truth and had seen him, their account is rejected as a myth by most men. Men did not believe the witness of the Messiah who was in their midst. Now they reject the eye-witness account (in the Bible) of the Apostles. Is it any wonder that men reject the evidence of the new birth given by Christians today?
This rejection does not surprise Jesus, but it saddens him (Mt 23.37). He is not surprised that men won’t believe spiritual/heavenly things, since they show that they cannot believe earthly things (12). What are these earthly things that are not believed? In this context, he refers to flesh giving birth to flesh (6) and the origin and destination of the wind (8).
Do you find this strange? Why does Jesus use the word believe instead of understand? After all, men at that time didn’t have our ‘advanced’ science; so how could they understand such things as the origin of the species or the nature of weather currents? But the problem is not really one of understanding, it is one of belief! Jesus does not rebuke Nicodemus for a faulty view of science or misunderstanding nature. Jesus teaches that in spite of their supposed science, the Jews did not believe in the one behind nature.
The words he spoke to Nicodemus he speaks just as powerfully to our ‘scientific’ age. Men today think that they have all the answers. They think that their theories of evolution (there are many conflicting ones!) explain how “flesh gives birth to flesh,” and they think that with their models they can explain how the currents of air produce the winds. To them Jesus says: “But still you people do not accept our testimony.”
As men learn more about God’s creation, they move farther from him. Yet, science should lead us to God (Job 40, 41; Ps 8, 19). The problem is not one of knowledge; it is one of belief. Men won’t believe in God when they see his amazing works in the natural realm. So why will they believe in his work in the supernatural realm. The irony is that people will believe in the supernatural, except when it comes to what God teaches.
What do you believe about God’s work in creation and in governing the natural events? But more importantly what do you believe about his work in the heavenly and spiritual realm, especially in the new birth?
A Lesson on Descending and AscendingIn Isaiah (14.12-13) we read that the Morning Star (Lucifer?) wanted to ascend into Heaven and raise his throne on the sacred mountain above the stars (angels? saints?) of God. Sinful men, like their father the Devil, want to ascend into Heaven on their own terms to displace God.
Adam wanted to be like God and know the difference between good and evil. He tried to put himself in God’s place. Later men built a high tower at Babel to reach to Heaven and challenge God’s authority. The rich young ruler wanted to earn his way to Heaven with his observance of the works of the law and so displace God’s work of grace. Nietzsche declared God dead so that he could set up man as Superman. Marx declared Heaven as nothing more than an opiate so that he could set up heaven on earth in a communist ‘utopia’. And Carl Sagan, in the introduction to Stephen Hawking’s book A Brief History of Time declares God useless: “This is a book about God ... or perhaps about the absence of God... [and about] a universe with no edge in space, no beginning or end in time, and nothing for a creator to do.”
The self-deception of man is amazing. He will believe and do anything to suppress the fact that there is a God in Heaven. He will believe and do anything in his attempt to move God from control over his life. And he will believe and do anything to ignore the only one who came down from Heaven—the only one who can tell us reliably about the cause and consequences of sin, about the solution (the cross) to the problem of sin, and about the reality of the new birth. No one else has gone, or can go, into Heaven to find out about these things and report them to us.
It is the Son of Man, the Son of Adam, the second Adam, who brings the message. No mere man or angel can. Why not? Isn’t the message just words? Couldn’t it be brought by a prophet or an angel? The message is not just words! The message and the messenger are one. Jesus is the living Word—message and messenger. Man poisoned by sin can’t be trusted as a messenger. The angels are not human and can’t come as the living message. Only Jesus (the God-man) can be both messenger and message.
His words to Nicodemus give the first recorded reference to his awareness of his pre-existence in Heaven before his incarnation, and his first recorded prophecy about his crucifixion. In these is irony: he is speaking to a Jewish teacher of the law, a member of the Sanhedrin, one who would be aware that his statements were both blasphemous and accursed, if not true. But they are true. He can tell us about the heavenly and the spiritual things.
In contrast, an earthly teacher like Nicodemus can’t help us. No man can give us the answers we need for dealing with the problem of sin. Men are of the earth, earthly (1 Cor 15.47; Jn 8.38). They cannot raise themselves up to the heights of Heaven (Prov 30.4) to find the answers. Only Jesus is of Heaven (heavenly) and is able to bring the message. His authority, information source, and message are all unique. This is the reason why he can speak as one with authority—not like the teachers of the Law (e.g., Nicodemus). He knows everything, accurately, about which he speaks.
Not only are his authority, information source, and message unique. His purpose is. Notice that he tells us of his purpose—to be lifted up. With this image he refers to his death on the cross. Moses lifted up the serpent (Num 21) to present a vicarious substitute for those dying from the curse brought by the serpents. So Jesus himself (the second Adam) was lifted up as a sacrifice on the cross to provide a substitute for those dying from the curse brought by the first Adam (a stepchild of the Serpent).
The application of the substitute could be obtained by looking at the raised serpent. The Jews understood that there was no power in the serpent to cure them and that they were to look beyond the serpent to God. In the apocryphal book Wisdom the author recounts the events of Num 21 and says: “For he that turned to it was not healed by that which he saw, but by the saviour of men.” (Wisdom 16.7, Douay Version)
Jesus says that he must be lifted up—must! This was the only way God had of redeeming man (see also 12.32). God would not have subjected his son to torture if there had been any other way to pay the debt of sin. It had to be the one who came down from Heaven who would be lifted up again to Heaven, first on the cross and then on the clouds. This reminds us of the seriousness of sin and the importance of what he did for us.
Do you want to be lifted up to Heaven? The only way is to believe in the one lifted up as a sacrifice. Like the wandering Jews you must look to what was lifted up to obtain the benefits of the sacrifice. But you don’t need to look beyond the cross to God. Jesus is the instrument of salvation and the saviour.
Jesus’ Teaching on the Love of GodWe now come to one of the best known verses in the Bible. I have been trying to move through the narrative account of Jesus’ life a passage, or at least a few verses, at a time. But occasionally we need to pause and think about some of the key verses. John 3.16 is certainly one on which we should pause and reflect in detail to see God’s purpose in redemption.
Don’t pass over these words because they are so familiar. Grasp their deep meaning. First, what does it mean for God to ‘so love’ the world?
It speaks of the measure of a love that crosses a greater distance than any we can imagine. God vs man. Creator vs creature. Infinite vs finite. All knowing and wise vs ignorant. Holy vs sinful. There is not a thing that we can do to cross this gulf. Can you, a man, become God? Can you, a creature, cease to be created? Can you escape your finiteness? Can you purge your ignorance and know all? Can you wash away your sin? Consider the chasm! Can you cross it? Be humbled!
A chasm that can’t be crossed is not the end of the message, else there would be nothing but despair, hopelessness, helplessness. The abyss can be crossed! But don’t you try to cross it, starting from this side. Greater men than you and I will ever be have tried and have failed.
In the late 1400s, a monk named Martin Luther tried very hard to cross the valley of death. He wrote of that attempt: “I was a good monk, and I kept the rule of my order so strictly that I may say that if ever a monk got to heaven by his monkery it was I. All my brothers in the monastery who knew me will bear me out. If I had kept on any longer, I should have killed myself with vigils, prayers, reading, and other work.” By God’s grace he came to see the foolishness of trying to earn his way to Heaven. God showed him that he could not cross from Hell to Heaven on his own.
Scripture starts with God (Gen 1.1). All meaning and motion must start with God. To start anywhere else is futile. To start with man is foolish! The starting point, the mover, must be God: “For God so loved ...” The mover is God. Thank God that he took the initiative.
From God to man. Not from man to God. It must begin with God. The crossing must begin on his side. What is the means of crossing the gulf? John the Apostle tells us. It was love which crossed the infinite chasm. God is love. It was God who loved. He loved first. He took the initiative in love. The source of the incarnation, the appearance of Jesus as a man in human nature, is the great love of God.
But is it just love? No, it is not. It is so love. Jesus did not say: “Since God loved the world, therefore ...” He said: “For, or since, God so loved ...” It is important that you understand this.
By God’s grace, love has not been entirely wiped out by the sin of Adam. Men and women continue to love. But a mother’s love for her child is not so love. It might cost her a few nights’ sleep or even many days of tears. But so love is far more costly. The distance between God and man is infinite. The love needed to cross it must also be infinite.
The means of crossing the chasm has been provided by God. At infinite cost, he sent his one and only son, truly God and truly man, to die an undeserved death. This is so love. Infinite love, infinitely costly love.
Why did God cross the gulf? Because he is love. But that isn’t a complete answer. God is not love in the abstract. Love must have an object and be practical. When we say that “God is love,” we imply that in his nature there are persons who love one another. Love is not like knowledge that can exist in one person without reference to another. Love is sharing with another, caring for another, doing for another.
Why did God cross the chasm? Because he loved the world. The object of his love is external to himself. The motive for his crossing the chasm was to show his love for the world—mankind from every walk of life, every language group, and every nation on earth (Rev 5.9; 7.9).
Jesus Christ did not come into this world to save righteous Jews. He came to die on the cross as a substitute for sinners from every nation. This was to fulfil the promise made to Abraham which said that one of his descendants would bring a great blessing to all nations. Jesus is the saviour of the world. Not of the natural descendants of Abraham only, and not of the Jew only. Christianity is the religion of the world. “For God so loved the world.” Don’t ridicule if you don’t understand. But come to understand. Look into the infinite and believe!
Jesus’ Relationship with the FatherEvery child in Sunday School learns John 3.16. There is nothing complex about it. You don’t have to be a scholar to understand it. Here the Bible speaks of a very valuable gift that God gave to men. Men as enemies of God deserve Hell. But instead of cursing all mankind, God gave a saviour.
Yet the meaning of this verse is very profound, especially the words: “He [God] gave his one and only son.” (NIV) This clause speaks of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son, the uniqueness of the Son, the infinite value of the gift which God gave to rebellious sinners, and what you must believe concerning God the Father and Jesus.
John tells us that in the Godhead there is one who is the Father and one who is the Son. Just as we expect that attributes of a father will be displayed in a son among mankind, so we should not be surprised to find this in the Godhead. For example: the Father is infinite, so is the Son; the Father is eternal, so is the Son; the Father knows all and is all wise, so is the Son; the Father is the truth, so is Jesus—he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
The Son, Jesus Christ, is truly God, as much as is God the Father. He is not God the Father, but he is God. He is not a created god or a second-class member of the Godhead. In every respect he is God, equal in power and glory with the Father.
Why then is he a son? It is impossible for us to come to a complete understanding of the nature of God. But from what he tells us in the Bible we can derive some reasons why Jesus is a son. He is a son because:
Many of us memorized this verse with the words only begotten. The NIV translators choose to translate this verse using one and only. The Greek word that underlies the translation is used nine times in the NT. In the NIV it is translated as only or one and only. In the NKJV it is sometimes translated the same way (Lk 7.12; 8.42; 9.38), but not in the five occurrences in John’s writings (all refer to Jesus) or in Heb 11.17.
In case you think that the translation one and only, in John 3.16, is some form of innovation of a modern scholar consider William Tyndale’s translation of the NT, which was published around 1530: “For God so loveth the world, that he hath given his only son, that none that believe in him, should perish: but should have everlasting life.”
Jesus Christ is the one and only son of God. This does not mean that God does not have other sons. He does. But these sons are his by adoption, not by eternal sonship and nature. Jesus as a Son stands in a unique relationship with the father. His being the one and only son means that he:
God gave his son. To what end? To what purpose? To live and to die. To live a life of obedience. Jesus Christ obeyed the law of God exactly, completely, fully, absolutely. Not one defect, slip, or mishap ... no trespass, no iniquity, no sin. He came to live, to obey, and to be a perfect sacrifice. And he came to die, to repay God the Father for the debt of our sin.
What love! What mercy! God gave his Son, his One and only son, so that we could become adopted into his household and be sons and daughters of the Great King. What is your response to this great offer of privilege?
Jesus Promises Eternal Life through Belief in HimMany of your neighbours, if asked, would tell you that it really doesn’t matter what you believe since, as many will claim, the here-and-now is all there is to life. Even most who believe in a hereafter will claim that the only thing that matters is that you have led a good life or that you have searched for truth. With these ideas they are fooling themselves into eternal death. Doing religious acts as required by Islam, or searching for truth and enlightenment as in Hinduism, will melt in the furnace of Hell.
What you believe matters more than anything else! But you must not believe in works. You must not believe in faith. Belief must not be placed in intellectual effort, or in an abstract faith. These will get you no nearer Heaven than you are now. Your belief must be in a person—in him.
Christianity is belief in a person. This person is not a myth, a moral idea, a creation of some pious thinker, or a mystery. Two thousand years ago this person, Jesus Christ, walked into history and was baptized at the edge of the river Jordan . Do you know this Jesus? Do you believe in him? A real person, a real man—the God-man—the Lord Jesus Christ.
Christianity is belief in a person. Who is this person? Do you know him? Do you believe in him? What excuse do you give today? Do you say: “I'm not bad enough to need salvation.” “I don’t need your answers.” “I don’t even have any questions.” “I'm able to take care of myself, thanks—and, anyway, God wouldn’t be so cruel as to cast me into Hell.”
Are you a whoever? Did John say that all those who are Jews would be saved. Did he say that all those who go to church, or those who were born on July 1 st, or those who were born with one blue eye and one green eye would be saved? Of course not! Yet these are almost as good as the 1001 excuses which you will hear concerning why people won’t believe. You yourself must believe. I cannot believe for you. Your mother and father cannot believe for you. The person sitting in the pew next to you cannot believe for you. Only you can believe in him. Do you believe in him?
The Bible is clear. It says whoever will. That means anyone who wills. That means you, if you will believe in Jesus!
You must believe in him. You must believe that he is the one who came down from Heaven to be born, to walk the dusty road to the Jordan, and then three years later to walk again as he headed toward the cross. You must believe that his flesh was torn with barbs and whips and nails, that he died and his body was laid in a tomb, that three days later he arose, and that he walked the dusty roads again as he travelled toward Emmaus.
Heaven is not reached by abstract belief, but only by belief in him. Salvation is not obtained by works of obedience but by belief in him. Every one is not saved, but whoever believes in him is. You must believe because:
Simply, you should believe because you want to have eternal life!
Eternal life—what is it? Verses 15 and 16 are the first verses in which Jesus mentions eternal life in his teaching. He may have had Dan 12.2 in mind when he taught this (just as he seems to have taken his self-designation Son of Man from Daniel). But what does he mean by eternal life? Other references in the OT may help us understand his teaching: (Psalm 16.11 ‘eternal pleasures at your right hand’, Psalm 21.6 ‘eternal blessings’, Isaiah 45.17 ‘everlasting salvation’, and Isaiah 51.11 ‘everlasting joy’).
Everlasting life is not just eternal existence, but life eternal! A very high quality of life in fellowship with God. It is not just quantity (i.e., forever) that Jesus is speaking of, but the quality. It is not just endless existence, but abundant, overflowing life. We are walking dead, but there is LIFE!
There is one event which I can tell you without any doubt, hesitation, or question will go down in the records of Heaven as the most significant event in history. You know what this event is, although you may have chosen to ignore the significance of this event for yourself. What is this event? John tells us in the third chapter of his account of the life of Jesus. He says: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall never perish but have eternal life.”
Unbelief: A Present CondemnationWe considered in the previous meditation the importance of our having a proper belief if we are to obtain eternal life. And we noted that the only belief that will bring us through death and into Heaven is belief in him—Jesus Christ.
But to believe in Jesus is the last thing that people think is the most important thing they must do. If they think at all about eternity or Heaven, they base their world-and-life view on their understanding of the love of God and assume that God will not cast them into Hell. “After all,” they say, “God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but to save the world.” Men in general, if they believe anything about the next life, believe that God will take all ‘decent’ folk into Heaven.
But there is a serious flaw in their belief system. The belief-system of sinful men is like that of a man who has a metre-stick that is 10 cm short. He goes around measuring everything by his standard and assumes that all his measurements are okay. His belief is placed in his own ruler and not in the standard metre in Paris . So it is with sinners—they place their belief in the wrong system. They believe in their own views about how God should work, rather than in what he actually says they must believe in.
What God does say is that “whoever does not believe [in Jesus] stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only son.” Use the standard measure of God to define true belief!
Notice that if you do not believe in Jesus, you are already condemned—not “will be condemned.” Your judgment is not pending, if you do not believe in Jesus. It has already been declared; it is a present reality. The verdict has already been stated: GUILTY! The verdict is that you are in darkness and you are evil (19). The only way to escape the verdict (and the subsequent eternal punishment) is to believe in him.
The Day of Judgment will not bring about your condemnation if you stay in unbelief. Rather, it will be the public declaration of the fact that you were condemned in this life, because you refused to believe in Jesus. On that Day, Jesus will say: “Depart from me, you who are cursed ...” (Mt 25.41).
Jesus tells us the reason that men will not believe in him. It is because they love darkness instead of light. The teaching of Paul in the last half of Romans 1 is very similar. Men choose to, and want to, do evil. This is a startling statement. Men think that they want to do good. But both Jesus and Paul tell us that men don’t want to do good. They want to do evil.
Men and women do ‘good’ not to please God but for self-preservation, ego gratification, potential reward, or for some other selfish reason. Their very ‘good’ is evil. There is no thought of doing anything for God’s glory. This is why they are condemned and why God gives them over to all kinds of depravity, darkness, and destruction (Rom 1.24, 26, 28).
Note that men choose to continue doing evil. They “will not come into the light.” Even though the Bible is very clear that God’s sovereignty extends to declaring one man evil and another righteous (see Rom 9, for example), the Bible is also very clear that men are responsible for their continuing depravity. The Biblical balance is one that is difficult for us to maintain. Do not make the mistake of going to one extreme or the other—on the one side is fatalism; on the other, is ‘free will’. God is sovereign, but men are not puppets. They are responsible creatures. Men are not morally free, but they are held accountable for every one of their actions.
The reason they will not come to the light through belief in Jesus is because they don’t want their deeds exposed. Exposed to whom? Other men or God? Evil men don’t care if their evil is known by other men, as long as it doesn’t result in an uncomfortable situation. For example, they don’t care if people know about their thievery as long as they are able to stay free, and they boast of their sexual conquests, so long as their spouse doesn’t find out. Ultimately, it is not exposure to men that concerns them but, rather, exposure to God.
Do you see irony in this? Men love evil, and they love to do evil; but they don’t want to be seen by God as being evil. Why not? Because in their inner hearts they really do know what God commands and what he requires. But they will not admit that they must be subject to him. Paul tells us (Rom 1) that they suppress this knowledge as deeply as possible, even removing this knowledge from their conscious minds. And so they are condemned!
In contrast, whoever believes in Jesus is not condemned but is saved from sin. But this belief must be more than intellectual acknowledgement of the person of Jesus. It must be living by the Truth—living for Jesus and by Jesus. Live by the Truth! Believe in Jesus!
Jesus with his disciples (see 4.2) was baptizing in the Judean countryside (approximately where the Dead Sea caves are located today), and John was continuing to baptize nearby. Jesus has just presented himself as the great Teacher (Prophet). Now Jesus provides an accompanying sign—the washing of repentance—and shows that, like John, he is a prophet who came to declare repentance from sin. Thus John’s words at this point have added significance, as he tells the Jews that Jesus is the greater Prophet.
For context, we are told that an argument arose between a Jew and John’s disciples over ceremonial washing. Jews in this area (Qumran) were very interested in the ‘right’ way to baptize. Things don’t change, do they? There is still a lot discussion, maybe too much, today over the ‘right’ way to baptize. To make the form of baptism a distinctive may be to put an emphasis in the wrong place. Let’s make sure our main focus is not on the form of baptism, but on what baptism really means.
The people used this argument as an opportunity to compare John with Jesus; and thus said that ‘everyone’ was going to Jesus, implying that Jesus was performing the baptisms ‘right’. The people had two wrong ideas: 1) not everyone had gone over to Jesus (23), and 2) the baptism of Jesus was likely the same Baptism as John’s, rather than the baptism which would be instituted later to signify covenant admission to the Church.
This gave John an opportunity to testify again about the one to whom he had previously testified, (see Jn 1.7, 29-34) and to show what kind of prophet John really was (Mt 11.11), and how godly he was. John’s testimony about the Messiah is important for us both in its message and in its example:
Our attitude should be like that of a faithful friend of the bridegroom, who is proud to see his best friend being married to a beautiful bride. Our joy should be like that of the angels in Heaven who rejoice when a sinner comes to repentance. We should never be envious when others in the Church appear to be more successful in bringing sinners into the Kingdom, or when other congregations of the Church appear to be flourishing. We should be very careful about accusing them of false theology (often this is a cover for envy). Rather, our joy should be complete, because the Bride of Christ is being made perfect.
Let us heed the testimony of John the Baptist—and apply it in our lives.
John’s Second Testimony About Jesus (Part 2)At this point (31) some interpreters attribute the rest of the words in the chapter to John the Apostle rather than to John the Baptist. I believe that the NIV and NKJV are correct in attributing the quotation to John the Baptist. Thus John the Baptist continues to contrast the Messiah’s work with his own and tells us that Jesus, the Christ (Messiah), is:
Notice how few words John uses while he teaches the Jews—yet what a sermon he preaches! Does it stir you even a little to honour Christ?
Two events trigger the departure of Jesus from Judea and his return to his home territory in Galilee : Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John the Baptist (Jn 4.3), and he heard that John had been put into prison (Mt 4.12).
The Pharisees had looked into the ministry of John (Jn 1.19-24) and may have been threatened by his prophetic activities. It was not they who had put John into prison; it was Herod. But they probably did not object to his imprisonment and were likely pleased that he was out of the way. Jesus knew that the Pharisees were interested in silencing a true prophet of God. They did not want anyone around who could challenge their interpretations of Scripture or their positions of authority. Jesus knew that just as they had taken an interest in what John was doing, so they would be very interested in determining what he himself was doing.
To this point the Pharisees in Jerusalem in Jesus’ ministry had offered no public challenge to Jesus, nor had they taken any action against him, nor indicated that they planned to. But Jesus knew their hearts—he knew that they would shortly become outspoken in their opposition. Their attitude to John was enough of an indication of where they would take matters as Jesus gained a following. Jesus short-circuited any action on their part by removing himself from their immediate reach. He was going to avoid direct conflict with them until it was the appropriate time—his time.
Jesus may have also been thinking that Herod would take action against him, as he had against John. Herod apparently feared a revolution led by John and did not like being rebuked for having an adulterous marriage (Mt 14.3, 4; Mk 6.17, 18). Jesus as a ‘second John’ would have been as much of a threat, and Herod would take action to remove the ‘embarrassment’.
The action of Jesus to avoid a potential confrontation and conflict indicates that there are times when it is proper for us to leave a situation of persecution or to avoid potential persecution (compare Mt 24.15-21). There have been times in history when people have not avoided martyrdom when they could have. Instead, they have sought persecution as a badge of honour. This is a distortion of the nature of our call to obedience. Many of the Reformers, Puritans, and Covenanters avoided persecution when it was possible, and fled from their enemies. We are not to be fatalistic about persecution, nor to seek it. Conversely, we are not to be cowards when we are unable to avoid it. We are to face it in the power of the Holy Spirit.
But those who torment and persecute Christians, or threaten to, will face judgment from God. Their judgment will begin, in this life, with their rejection by God. This is what we see happened to the Pharisees.
Notice that we are told that Jesus had to go through Samaria to reach Galilee . He did not have to go through that province because that was the only way to reach Galilee . Jews generally avoided going through Samaria on their way to Galilee because they despised the Samaritans. They would instead cross the Jordan near Jericho and go up the eastern side of the river and around the Sea of Galilee . This was a slightly longer route than the direct route up the western side of the Jordan, but it avoided contact with the Samaritans. The necessity was not in the route but in the reason.
Why did Jesus have to go through Samaria ? It seems that there are two reasons, which are really just one but seen from different viewpoints: he had to go through Samaria because the time of the Jews was coming to an end. They were being rejected by God, and he had to go to begin opening the Gospel to non-Jews. Guided by the Spirit, Jesus went through Samaria .
John uses a word in the Greek which is translated into English left. But it has a stronger meaning than other words which can be translated as left. The particular word John uses can be translated abandoned, left behind, forsook, neglected, and divorced (see, for example: Mk 14.50; Rom 1.27). John seems to tell us by his choice of this word the same thing that Jesus’ action indicates—the rejection of the Jews has begun. The immediate cause of their rejection is the attitude of the Pharisees to John and Jesus, who are both prophets from God.
Jesus’ departure from their territory and his going into Samaria is a sign to both Jew and Gentile of what is going to come (Mt 21.43; Mt 28.19; Acts 1.8). Jesus shows that the Gospel will be taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles. He shows this by starting with a ‘half-Jew’—a Samaritan woman (Jn 4.5-42). We should thank God that, in the Spirit, Jesus had to go through Samaria and had to take the Gospel to us Gentiles.
An Object Lesson: Living WaterAs Jesus left Jerusalem he moved his dealings from one social class (represented by the Pharisee Nicodemus) to the opposite end of the spectrum in the eyes of the Jews (represented by a Samaritan woman). Jesus shows, by speaking with the woman, that he is not a respecter of persons and that the Gospel is truly for everyone—for every social class, race and tribe, and for both male and female (Gal 3.28). Also, in dealing with her he fulfilled the words of God spoken to Abraham—a promise that all nations would be his spiritual inheritance.
How does Jesus approach the Samaritan woman and find an opening for the Gospel? He does at least four things to reach her:
The water Jesus offers is different from physical water. It is living water springing (jumping, as the word is used in Acts 3.8) up into eternal life (14). This water is a gift from God (not from Jacob)—a gift of God’s grace through Christ. The word used for gift (10) is found only here in the Gospels. This seems to indicate that a special meaning is associated with the word. In this case, it appears not to be Christ himself who is the gift. Rather, it appears that the gift is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (compare: Acts 2.38; 10.45; Rom 5.15; Eph 3.7; Heb 6.4). We are told by John explicitly (Jn 7.38, 39) that the Holy Spirit is the living water (see also Jer 2.13; 17.13; Acts 1.4, 5; 2.38). The Holy Spirit is the gift of living water, given by both the Father and Christ to those who believe in Jesus.
The woman at the well thinks that Jesus is speaking about natural water and, probably, about some form of fountain of youth. But she takes an important step and asks for a drink (15). Jesus is getting through. So he will now open to her the truth. Has Jesus brought his message to you? Do you understand what he is speaking about? Are you indwelt by the Holy Spirit? Are you drinking from the fountain of eternal life?
Challenge and EvasionNotice how Jesus engages the Samaritan woman. First, he attracts her attention by discussing his own thirst and her recurring thirst. Then he moves the discussion from a temporal setting to a spiritual plane. At this point he is ready to move the discussion to the next stage of engagement—the woman’s own spiritual condition. As we review the interplay between the two, note how Jesus presents truth on two distinct levels.
Jesus begins by confronting her with her personal sin. He asks her to call the man with whom she should share the living water. He uses this to show her that she is a sinner. She is typical of people today. Many of your neighbours have sinned just like this woman. They have been involved in one sexual relationship after another. Like Jesus, we should look for ways to challenge our neighbours with their sins so that they will start to look beyond their physical existence and face the reality of moral absolutes.
The number of men she has slept with isn’t her favourite topic; so she tries to move the light of interrogation from herself. She chooses to move to a topic which she thinks is more abstract, will not have any direct bearing on herself, and might put Jesus, as a Jew, on the defensive. Her behaviour is similar to the behaviour of non-belligerent people when they are drawn into serious discussions about spiritual matters. When confronted by their own sin they find a way to change the subject to another topic on a more philosophical level which they think will put us on the defensive.
She puts forward her own form of worship—sacrifices on Mount Gerizim—as the form acceptable to God. This is the tendency of us all. We want to determine the form of worship that we will give to God, whether it is through a false religion or by unauthorized innovations in Christian worship. Jesus refused to be drawn into the traditional argument between Jew and Samaritan about the proper site for sacrifices. Instead, he took the discussion to another level. He confronted her with the real issue in worship—the authority for defining worship. The Samaritans thought they worshipped the true God, but Jesus shows her that they worshipped in the wrong way. He says in essence that worship isn’t valid unless it is spiritual (guided by the Spirit) and true (defined by the spirit).
Both our attitude in worship and the form of worship are important! Good intentions and unauthorized forms are knocked down with one blow. Men can only be mistaken when guided by their own ideas about what is acceptable to God. We must worship with all our heart in the way that God has defined. Ironically, Jesus deals with the question of location. The proper location for worship has been defined. Our worship must be in Heaven—our hearts must be there, and the form must be that defined by Heaven.
Jesus uses the topic of worship as an opportunity to confront the woman about the real condition of her heart before God. Feeling the heat once more, she tries again to move the light of God’s eye away from herself. She attempts to move the discussion even further away to what she thinks is the distant promise of a Prophet (Dt 18.18) who might be able to give a response to the things that Jesus is speaking about. At this point in the discussion, he leads the woman to the Messiah. He presents himself to her. Until the time of his trial, there may be only one other instance where he speaks so plainly. Don’t miss the opportunity to introduce Jesus to your neighbours when the conversation leads to him.
His approach and dealings with the woman provide an effective model (but not the only one) for how we can make the Gospel known to our neighbours. Jesus doesn’t tell her outright that she is a sinner. Rather, he challenges her in such a way that she comes face-to-face with her sin. Also, he doesn’t let her escape the fact that she has sinned against man and God. Then, when she sees her standing before God, he presents the solution—belief in the Messiah, Jesus Christ.
Underneath the three challenges that Jesus placed before the woman is the strategy of his approach to her. Notice that the first challenge is with respect to a sin from the second portion of the Ten Commandments, which deals with our relationship to our neighbours. The second challenge deals with the subject matter of the first portion of the Ten Commandments—our relationship with God and his worship. In his third challenge he confronts the woman with the living truth about himself as the Messiah.
Not only are we to challenge people about their sins in human relationships; we are to challenge them about their relationship to God. It is in this area that most Christians fail. They somehow believe that a pagan or heathen is not obligated to keep the first four commandments. This is one of the biggest myths of our pluralistic and multicultural society. Challenge your neighbours to see their sin and then present Jesus to them.
Harvest Pending, Harvest PresentAt the moment that Jesus was declaring to the woman that he was the Messiah the disciples returned from their grocery shopping. They were surprised to find him talking with a woman. A ‘normal’ Rabbi would not have been seen talking with her in a public place (a women was regarded by most Rabbis as inferior), especially since she was a despised foreigner and a woman of questionable morals. But they did not question him about his behaviour. They had been with him for a few months and knew that he did not do anything just to be conventional. In fact, he would go contrary to convention if it was not Biblical.
Notice that Jesus treated this woman with respect and as an equal (as a fellow human). Today you will often hear people say that Christianity is anti-women. To the contrary! Every false religion—including the religion of secular humanism—twists and perverts the role of women. Christianity alone frees women to fulfil their God-given role. But men and women warped by sin are unwilling to accept God’s role definitions and, with the sanction of their false religions, go to one extreme (destroying all distinctions) or the other (oppressing women).
Jesus undoubtedly saw the disciples’ surprise, but he was not about to challenge them regarding their views about women. His actions alone were enough of a challenge for them. Instead, he turned their attention to far more important matters: the contrast between the physical and temporal, and the spiritual and eternal—the purpose of his mission.
The woman had left her water jar and gone back into the town to tell the people that she had met the Christ. The implication of her action is that she had come out for natural water and, abandoning this, had returned to the village with living spiritual water. Likewise, when the disciples brought natural food, Jesus abandoned this to turn their attention to the spiritual food that is far more important.
As is so often the case (e.g., the new birth, the rebuilding of the temple in three days, the kingdom of Heaven) in Jesus’ ministry, he is misunderstood. The disciples think that someone has brought him food from the nearby village. But Jesus is speaking of his priorities—his mission and purpose. His hunger and his food are to do the will of God. His priority is to finish the work (Jn 19.30) which the Father has sent him to do (see also Jn 5.30; 6.38; 9.4; 12.49, 50; 14.31; etc.).
As Jesus is speaking to the disciples, the people from the village are making their way toward him. Jesus knew what was happening back at the village, for he uses the coming crowd as an opportunity to continue the training of the Twelve. He reminds them and us that we are to stay focused on our primary purpose in life—to serve God and to enjoy serving him. He directs their attention to the coming harvest. The disciples likely think that he is referring to the nearby grain fields which were ripening and were about ready for harvest. But it appears that Jesus is again using a metaphor and is speaking of the people of the village coming out to meet him. They are the living harvest—the result of drinking spiritual water and eating spiritual bread.
To direct their attention to the pending harvest he uses a proverb—four months more and then the harvest. Most people say, “What’s the rush, the seed has been planted, we have to wait for God to work?’ This may be the case in the natural realm, but it is not always the case in the spiritual realm. The seed can be sown, and a few moments later a harvest can be gathered in. There is no necessity to wait. In contrast, there should be a sense of urgency. It is always the time to bring in the spiritual harvest:
Many of the Samaritans believed because of the woman’s testimony. The seed sown by the prophets and Jesus brought forth fruit. But look beyond their teachings and see what a simple testimony of a true believer can accomplish. We may think that we can’t evangelize or preach. We may think that we don’t have the training or the gifts to be useful in reaching dying sinners with the Gospel. It may be that people won’t listen to us, but the woman’s example does teach us that we don’t have to be great prophets or systematic theologians to make the Gospel real to our neighbours. We only have to be prepared to speak of the hope that is in us and be able to tell about what Jesus has done to, and for, us.
The Samaritans asked (urged) Jesus to stay with them, and he stayed two days. This is something unheard of—that a Jew would be invited to stay with Samaritans, and that he in turn would accept. This shows us how quickly and thoroughly the truth of the Gospel can change hearts and lives. It is only the Gospel that can truly turn enemies into friends.
Men want peace—in Rwanda, Croatia, N. Ireland, Pakistan, etc. Consider the 50+ conflicts in the world today—how many of them have religious differences compounding the problem? Years ago John Lennon sang a song entitled Imagine and said that in his dream-world of peace and harmony there would be no religion. In their dreams men think that religion is the problem—the cause of discord. They are right, religion is the problem—false religion which puts man and his efforts on centre stage is the problem. But what Lennon and the most of mankind won’t face is the reality that the only way to real peace is by inviting Jesus into our homes and asking him to stay with us.
But lest we point the finger too quickly at Islam or Sikhism, let’s look more closely. Why is there ‘fighting’ in the Church? Why is the Church so fragmented today? Why can’t one group of Reformed Christians join with another group? Is it because we have lost the enthusiasm for the pure truth? Jesus’ prayer was that all believers would be one (Jn 17.21). This will not happen until we, like the Samaritans, give up our inconsequential differences and seek truly to have Jesus dwelling with us.
As Jesus taught in their town, many more became believers. They believed his words and in him as a person. Christianity is belief in something concrete and specific. It is not a general belief, or an abstract belief, or a feeling. It is both belief in the teachings of Christ and belief in Christ himself. It is not possible to believe in Jesus unless you understand his teachings. Christianity is a religion of the mind and the heart.
Notice that they first believed because of the words of the woman (42), and then their belief was reinforced by what they themselves learned from Jesus. This is how it often is today. Many first come to believe on the witness of the one who presents simply the Gospel to them. Then their belief is strengthened as they come to learn more from, and about, Jesus. This is a good pattern for evangelism: we are to present the Gospel to our friends and then to bring them into the Church for continuing education and development as disciples of Jesus.
Their confession: “We know that this man really is the Saviour of the world” indicates their own personal belief. But it has a second application. Remember, these words were not spoken by Jews. Jews in general believed, based on the prophecies in Isaiah and elsewhere, that Gentiles would come into the Kingdom of God . But this belief wasn’t a daily reality to them—it was abstract and distant. As far as the Jews were concerned, those who believed from the nations would become Jews in order to be saved. They missed the point of the prophecies—Jesus really is the saviour of the world (not only of Jews). The Gentiles as Gentiles would come to the Messiah (e.g., Is 56.1-8; Mt 28.19; Rom 11; Rev 7.9). No longer would a Gentile have to become a Jew to inherit with Israel . The confession of the Samaritans is far more than a personal confession. It is a confirmation of the great promise of history, first made to Eve and repeated to Abraham and to the prophets: “In your seed all nations on earth will be blessed” (e.g., Gen 18.18).
The Samaritans as a hybrid-people were among the first fruits of this promise. Soon to come would be Canaanites (e.g., the Syrophoenician woman), local Greeks and Romans, Ethiopians, and people from Asia Minor and Europe . Then the Gospel would go to the ends of the earth.
Do you really believe that the mixed multitude in our city today can be saved? Most of them are Gentiles just like us. They may have a false religion like the Samaritans, but they can be saved. Of Jesus let it be said by everyone of us: “This man really is the Saviour of the world.”
After two days of teaching in Samaria, Jesus returned home to Galilee . The reception in Sychar had been so positive that he probably could have stayed longer. But in contrast to the initial interest which had resulted in many conversions, his subsequent preaching and teaching would probably not have been as fruitful. The hardened hearts of the remainder of the population would not have been as responsive; so it was time for him to move on. He could not concentrate his energies on this village when the initial focus of his ministry was to the House of Israel (Mt 15.24).
When he arrived in Galilee, the inhabitants welcomed him. But their motives were not pure. It was because of what he had done, not because of who he was. Their acceptance was really a subtle form of rejection. It would be shown where their hearts were when his teachings became even a bit ‘objectionable’ (Jn 6.66). Jesus performed miracles as signs of his office as the Messiah, and to demonstrate that he was the Son of God. His works were a sign (Jn 10.38) that what he taught was credible. He did not perform miracles to attract attention per se but to set the stage for his preaching ministry. This teaches us at least two things:
The bulk of Jesus’ ministry was conducted in his home country. He began this phase of his work in the town where he had lived for almost 30 years. He demonstrated the principle that ministry should start at home. And in a similar way our Gospel proclamation is to start in our own homes and among our neighbours. We don’t have to go to the ends of the earth to be ambassadors of the Kingdom.
Where is ‘home’? It is in our families, places of work, school or neighbourhood, working with a little-league team, or attending a home-and-school meeting. ‘Home’ is among the folk who know us as we really are. In some ways it is very hard for us to be ‘missionaries’ among those who know us well, and easier to present the Gospel in a far-off land. In some ways it is harder for us to be truly open about the Gospel with unbelievers with whom we interact daily than it is to tell a stranger about Jesus.
It was in this difficult setting that Jesus began to preach, especially and distinctly, the need for repentance because the kingdom of Heaven was near. This message had some key points which we should note and apply:
The Gospel writers give us a summary of the content of the message that Jesus proclaimed. We will see later that he used various means to apply his message to his hearers. His message was that man has sinned and needs to repent of his sin and believe in Jesus the Saviour-King. It should also be the theme of the message to our neighbours and the witness of our lives.
Faith Based on Trust, Not SightThis account sets before us a contrast between a faith based on trust in the word of God and a ‘faith’ based on sight. ‘Faith’ based on sight isn’t faith. It may be belief (see Jn 14.11; 20.29), but it isn’t faith. We are told in Hebrews that “faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Notice the last portion of this verse: “what we do not see.” Thomas said: “Unless I see the nail marks ... I will not believe ...” Jesus replied to Thomas: “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Faith is not based on sight; it is based on trust. This was a great stumbling block for the Jews. Most of them would not believe in Jesus just because his teachings and proclamations were true. They said that they would not believe unless he showed them that he was the Prophet by performing signs from Heaven. This is why Jesus says in verse 48 that these people (he uses the plural of you) would not believe unless they saw “miraculous signs and wonders.” He is speaking here of the Jews, not the royal official.
The royal official heard that Jesus had returned to Galilee, and he went and begged him to heal his son. Jesus response was a simple statement: “You may go. Your son will live.” He took Jesus at his word and departed. He didn’t say, “But how will I know?” He wasn’t like the Jews who asked for signs before they would believe. He simply believed. Then he went on his way. Notice the degree of his faith. If I understand the account correctly, it appears that his belief was so strong that he was content to rest his animal for the night and to stay over in Cana . He then returned to Capernaum—a distance of about 30 kms—the next morning.
While he was on his way, he met one of his servants who gave him the news that his son was healed. He determined from the servant the hour of the healing, and he discovered that it was exactly when Jesus had said that his son would live. The royal official did not ask for a sign. But nevertheless he was given a sign. But the sign came after he had believed. His response to showed that his faith was strengthened even more (53).
Notice also that the man was persistent with his request that Jesus would come and heal his son (47, 49). If a man can make such an appeal for the healing of his child, why is it that we are not willing to make such an earnest appeal for the salvation of those whom we love? And, more to the point, why is it that most men and women are not willing to present before God a persistent appeal for the eternal security of their own souls?
“Sight” (material evidences) is the great stumbling block for the vast majority of men and women today. When they are pushed to the wall of ultimate logic—which shows clearly that there must be a God, or there can be no meaning to anything—they respond by saying: “If God will show me that he is really there, then I will believe.” But for most people this is nothing more than a convenient escape from facing spiritual realities. They wouldn’t believe in God, or Jesus, even if someone came back from the dead (Lk 16.31). The request to see a sign is nothing more than an excuse!
People make many excuses for why they will not believe in Jesus. In their hearts they will not come to believe in him because of pride, autonomy, or some other self-interest. Trust means giving up our own cherished notions about reality and self. It means that we are willing to believe God and Jesus based on what they say and not just on what we can see, touch, and feel. This is what made the response of the royal official pleasing to Jesus. His belief was through faith, not sight. He accepted the words of Jesus at face value without asking for any physical evidence.
We can live in only one of two kingdoms of belief: 1) the purely material realm where everything is based on chance motions of electrons and where there can be no such thing as truth, morality, beauty, love or meaning, or 2) the kingdom of truth, which proclaims that there is a God of order and moral absolutes behind the created spiritual and physical realities.
Are we willing to take Jesus at his word? Do we really believe everything that God says in the Bible? Do we believe it because it is the word of God? Or do we look for signs before we will believe? If you are like the royal official, you will believe and look forward to the fulfillment of your belief. Like him, you will see your faith tested by a ‘night’ before you awaken to the dawn of new day. On that day, your faith will be rewarded in glory.
Like the royal official from Herod’s court, we should be willing to accept the truth about Jesus and God from the teachings recorded in the Bible. We should not be like the Jews who wanted signs and wonders before they would even give thought to believing. Let your faith be exhibited through trust in Jesus and not conditioned on the sight of things in this physical realm.
Beginning the Galilean Ministry—Opposition at NazarethAfter his commission through baptism and after his initiation trial—the temptation in the wilderness—Jesus went back to Nazareth his home town (where he was brought up, not where he was born) to launch his public ministry. It was the Sabbath, and he went into the synagogue as was his custom. Here he read a prophetic passage (Is 61.1, 2) which announced his coming. He applied it to himself, only to be rejected by his own people.
This account teaches us a number of things:
Although we aren’t told in the Bible how synagogue worship developed or was instituted, there are hints that it was established by the “school of the prophets” and was well-established by the time of the Babylonian captivity and the return from captivity under Ezra. Some people argue that synagogue worship did not have Divine sanction and that therefore this gives us a warrant for establishing our own forms of worship. However, they don’t know for certain that there was no Divine warrant given in OT times but just not recorded. They also miss the point that Christ sanctioned this form of worship by habitually practising it. His very practice of it proves that it had Divine warrant, or he would not have participated in it. It is important not to miss this point because our form of worship is based upon synagogue worship, and we believe that men don’t have a right to create new forms of worship without warrant.
Do you honour Jesus as the prophet of God, or is he without honour in your eyes?
A New Headquarters in CapernaumJesus was rejected in his home town of Nazareth; so he moved on and took up residence in Capernaum . Mark (2.1) tells us that Jesus considered this to be his new home. He stayed in the general vicinity of Capernaum (with a few trips to Judea to visit Jerusalem) for about two years. During this time he taught the crowds and trained a group of permanent disciples from which he would later select a core of twelve Apostles.
Capernaum was at this time the major centre of the Galilean province and a cosmopolitan town. It had a full-time tax office (Mt 9.9), a garrison for Roman soldiers (Mt 8.5-13), and a synagogue built by a gentile (Lk 7.5). The city had plenty of fresh water, was inhabited by an industrious labour force which included fishermen, and (based on archaeological evidence) it appears that the city was prosperous. The city was destroyed sometime around 700 A.D., probably by Moslems.
Matthew tells us that Jesus’ settlement in this area fulfilled a prophecy of Isaiah (9.1). The prophet spoke of a special blessing which would be given to the land that was allocated by Joshua to Zebulun and Naphtali as their inheritance. The blessing was to come to the people living on the north and west shores of the sea of Galilee and along the west bank of the north portion of the Jordan . In addition, according to Isaiah, the area to realize the blessing was to be a Gentile area. Capernaum, where Jesus settled fulfills, completely Isaiah’s prophecy. It was a Roman colony, occupied by Gentiles, and was located in the midst of the former territory of Naphtali on the northwest shore of the sea of Galilee.
One of Matthew’s objectives in writing his Gospel was to show clearly how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the OT. He continually reminds us of the prophecies that are being fulfilled through the life of Christ. It is good for us to remember that Jesus’ setting up of his headquarters in Capernaum did not occur by chance. This provides two simple but very important lessons for us: 1) it provides clear evidence that the Bible is the word of God—no other writing can so accurately predict events 600 years in the future, and 2) it reminds us that God is in control of all events—his plan is always being worked out in every detail. Nothing is out of control.
The blessing for the Gentiles is the light of salvation. Don’t think that Gentiles weren’t saved before. Gentiles were saved outside of Israel (e.g., Melchizedek, Job, Naaman, Queen of Sheba) or by becoming Jews (e.g., Rahab, Ruth). The point of the prophecy is that through Christ the Gospel would be opened expansively to Gentiles. No longer would the message be heard only in dim observance of Jewish ceremonies and hidden in Hebrew. Rather, the ceremonies would be replaced with the light of Reality (Christ), and the Word would become available in a thousand tongues (Acts 2).
The people living in darkness would see the great light. The darkness that the Gentiles lived in was superstition and paganism. The native religion of this region at the time of Jesus may have been a form of Zoroastrianism which includes sacred writings, a twisted perversion of the sacrificial system of the ancient Near East, and a hierarchy of gods. There would also have been some observance of the mythical religions of Greece and Rome and many who believed in astrology and the zodiac.
Men claim that they aren’t pagans. But our city is filled with pagans who, for the most part, live as atheists but have a mystical religion not much different from that of ancient pagans. The primary god in the pantheon of modern society is ‘chance’. The lesser gods are the ‘fates’ ruled by the stars (zodiac), nature (e.g., Gia), and environment (i.e., the psycho-social background of each person). The pagans of today also have sacred writings including the works of Plato, Darwin, Dewey, Freud, Mead, Keynes, McLean, and the horoscope. R. C. Sproul points out that the primary god of the pagans is no god: “Chance exercises absolutely no influence ... chance can do nothing because it is nothing. It is no thing. ... It is merely a mental construct. It has no power because it has no being. It is nothing.” (Chosen by God, p. 193) Chance is no more a god than the useless idols of Psalm 115.
The light of the Gospel came in Jesus Christ (Is 42.6, 7 49.6; Jn 1.4, 5, 9). It is the only truth which can dispel the darkness for those living in the land of the shadow of death. Jesus placed himself in the heart of darkness—spiritual darkness—in Capernaum and presented the clear, clean light of truth. The Church (and we in this city) are placed in the land of the shadow of death to present the light of truth.
The light shone in the area of Capernaum for a few centuries, but night fell again. In Jerome’s day, the ‘Nazaraeans’ were neither faithful Jews nor Christians—religious syncretism prevailed. As we see from Romans 1 and 2, God will not tolerate a society which does not honour him and which embraces paganism. How long will it be until God turns off the light in our city?
Call of the First Four DisciplesIf you have not studied in detail the history of the disciples of Jesus, you might find it surprising that it was almost a year after the beginning of his public ministry that Jesus selected from his followers and hearers a small group who would become known as the Disciples or Apostles. Most people confuse this formal call of the Disciples with the original response of followers of Jesus (e.g., Jn 1.35-51).
There was a group of people (probably a few hundred adults and children) who assembled regularly to listen to Jesus’ teaching while he lived in Capernaum, and who believed that he was the Messiah. In general, these people went about their daily business and came together on the Sabbath or at other times when Jesus was teaching. None were yet part of Jesus’ core- ministry team. The evidence for there being a larger group of followers than the Twelve is given in such passages as Luke 10.1 where Jesus sends out seventy-two followers, and Acts 1.21-22 where an Apostle is chosen to replace Judas. Using our Presbyterian terminology, we could say that Jesus as a Teacher-Pastor had started a new congregation but that additional elders had not yet been ordained in the congregation.
Luke tells us that the calling of the first elders for Jesus’ congregation occurred one day when he was teaching beside the Sea of Galilee (also called Lake Gennesaret, Sea of Tiberias, and Sea of Kinnereth). Simon Peter, Andrew, James, and John were among this group of followers in the congregation of Jesus. They continued to work in their fishing business but seem to have been regular pupils at Jesus’ teaching sessions.
On this particular day, Jesus was teaching in the morning as the fishermen were cleaning up from the night’s work. After he had finished teaching for the day, he asked Peter to do something which seemed rather strange. He asked him to put out again to fish in the middle of the day. Peter was surprised at this request. Fishermen know that the best time to catch fish is early in the morning. Peter and his men hadn’t been successful; so why would they hope to find fish now with the sun high overhead? But he obeyed anyway.
Jesus used the surprise on their part to provide them with a concrete object lesson in faith. The lesson certainly made its point, for Peter realized how weak his faith had been and acknowledged that his doubt had been sinful. But Jesus didn’t perform this miracle to demonstrate his power or increase the disciples’ belief in himself, although both of these ends are certainly supported by the miracle. The faith that Jesus was focusing on with this lesson was not faith (belief) in him per se, but rather, he was teaching them to have faith in him as the one who would build his Church (Mt 16.18).
He was preparing the disciples for their call to become church organizers. Just as the disciples brought in overflowing nets of fish from an ‘empty’ sea, so they would bring in overflowing churches from an empty (vain) culture. This is a lesson that we also need to learn. We need to confess our sin often for doubting that Jesus can fill the nets. We look around at the empty sea of humanity and say: “What can God do!?” We really don’t believe that God can bring about radical change, at what appears to be a most unlikely time, and fill the churches to overflowing. We need to pray for the kind of faith that believes that Jesus is building his Church.
It was after this lesson in applied faith that Jesus gave the call to the four fishermen who became his first Disciples. They became the core of his full-time ministry team. It appears that after this call they took up a more permanent residence with Jesus, or at least devoted themselves to full-time training for evangelism and teaching. It also appears that they left their fishing business until after the crucifixion. They returned then to their former occupations for a short time (during their period of perplexity and confusion) until after the ascension of Christ and the Day of Pentecost.
We must understand that their calling was not a ‘cold call’. There were a number of experiences in their background which prepared them for the call to be fishers of men—evangelists (Lk 5.10). They had been at the baptism of Jesus and knew that he was the Messiah (Jn 1.41), they had been members of his congregation for about a year and had heard his teachings, and now they had a specific lesson to strengthen their faith.
Nevertheless they followed when he said: “Come, follow me.” They were obedient to the call and immediately left their nets, boats, fathers, and hired men. They took discipleship seriously. We may not all be called to full-time evangelism, but we are called to be full-time disciples. We cannot be just followers of Jesus—we must be his disciples! How long will we remain in his congregation hearing great teaching without becoming his disciples, willing to work with him as he builds his Church?
Healing a DemoniacHere we find Jesus teaching in the synagogue. Although he had not attended formal rabbinical training, he seems to be taking advantage of a custom that allowed visiting teachers to participate in the service if they were invited by the synagogue leaders. Paul, although a trained rabbi, also takes advantage of this custom when he goes to new cities (see Acts 13.15; 14.1; 17.1; 18.4). But Jesus did not need the training of men. He came with training from Heaven, and in his own authority.
The teachers of the law based their instruction (rightly) on Scripture, but they also appealed to tradition and to the writings and sayings of previous generations. As a result, there were various opinions among the rabbis (like denominations in the Church today). These rabbis often interpreted Scripture incorrectly, because they misunderstood God’s grace and the true requirements of his laws. They had added so much to the basic counsels of God that their interpretations were often self-contradictory, and they confused the people. But Jesus came with his own authority and cleared away all the cobwebs of rabbinic interpretation. Compare his words in the Sermon on the Mount, where he says: “You have heard that it was said [by the rabbis] ... But I tell you.”
Notice that Mark says that Jesus taught with authority, and Luke tells us that his message had authority. Jesus teaches truth, and he is Truth. Preachers today can teach with authority. But their message cannot have more than a derived authority. Jesus’ message had authority, because he was its author. He didn’t quote human authorities. We must never forget that Jesus is the final authority. Modern ethics and morality are based on individual opinion or crowd opinion—a vote of the majority, or opinion polls. But opinion can never make something absolute. We must make sure that our morality is based on the word of Christ in Scripture, and not on what we or the crowd think.
It is in the context of this display of authoritative teaching that a demon comes onto the scene. In God’s providence, this demon comes to challenge the authority of Christ. But in the very act of a challenge the demon reinforces Jesus’ authority. The demon digs a pit and falls into it!
The cry of the demon has three points. Each is an attempt to trip up Jesus and to make him look like a fool instead of the final authority.
In each statement, Satan is the accuser:
Jesus did not even bother to give an answer to the demon. He just told the demon to be quiet. A demon has no right to demand from God anything. A demon cannot bring God to account. Scripture tells us not to answer a fool according to his folly (Prov 26.4). Demons are the worst of moral fools. There was no reason for Jesus to give an answer.
Jesus demonstrated on whose side he really was—God’s—as he commanded the demon to get out of the man. This showed that his authority as a teacher could not be challenged by men, angels, or demons. What kind of authority does Jesus have? Even the demons obey him. This is the one in whom we trust. He has the ultimate authority. Believe him, trust him, accept his teaching—it has authority.
HealingsThe scene changes to Peter’s house. Jesus and his disciples probably went there directly from the Synagogue after the Sabbath service to take part in the traditional afternoon fellowship meal. It is on this Sabbath afternoon that Jesus heals Peter’s mother-in-law. We should understand the purpose of this healing in its context. It follows directly after the events in the Synagogue where Jesus demonstrated his authority. We must not think of this healing as some kind of preferential treatment for Peter’s family. The purpose of the healing seems to be to demonstrate Jesus’ Divine authority which has just been declared. By healing on the Sabbath he breaks Jewish tradition and interpretation of the law and teaches that it is valid to perform works of mercy on the Sabbath. He shows that he is Lord of the Law and of the Sabbath.
It is important to observe what is happening. Notice that the people of the town, hearing of the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law, waited until after sunset (i.e., until after the Sabbath was over) to bring their sick to Jesus. It was a Jewish tradition that a person was not to carry a burden of any kind on the Sabbath. But notice also in Luke’s account that there is a hint that the people walked on the edge of the Jewish interpretation of the law. They began to carry their sick while the sun was setting.
We can learn two things from these events:
We should also note that there is another example of how these two principles are to be applied. It was Peter’s mother-in-law whom Jesus healed. It is clear that Peter was married (see also 1 Cor 9.5). Celibacy was not a requirement for an Apostle of Christ. Forbidding clergy or anyone else to marry is wrong (1 Tim 4.3). The Church over the centuries has misunderstood God’s intention (e.g., 1 Cor 7.1) and has set invalid boundaries. Then it has put people into a situation where they are burdened with rules and walk too close to the edge, and even cross the boundary, of God’s Law (e.g., by committing sexual sins). By observing the proper balance—God’s Laws, not man’s laws and additions—we will not have too much law or too little.
Jesus’ miracles were performed primarily for didactic (teaching) purposes—to declare his Lordship. Each writer provides a different perspective on the scene. By this they help us understand the purpose of the miracles.
Matthew’s focus is on the kingship of Christ. He says that what Jesus did was touch (with kingly authority) her [Peter’s mother-in-law], and she was healed. Mark considers Jesus’ life and ministry from the perspective of his suffering, humiliation, and servanthood. He tells us that he took her hand (with priestly care) and helped her up. Luke’s focus is on Jesus as an historical teacher. As a doctor he provides details about the fever and tells us that with a (prophetic) rebuke Jesus healed her.
Although each writer has his own focus, there are two additional lessons that all three accounts teach us:
Through these healings Jesus continued to rebuke the demons because they wanted to lead the people astray and have them set him up as an earth-bound king and healer. But with his victory over Satan through the resurrection, the demons have been silenced. Now we who have been healed of our spiritual infirmities need to declare him as the Prophet, Priest and King.
Prayer, Healing, Teaching and PreachingThe next day, after showing his Lordship over the Sabbath by casting out a demon and by performing a healing miracle, he went out to pray very early in the morning in a solitary place. This action of Jesus provides a few lessons for us:
Simon and his companions went looking for Jesus because a crowd was seeking him. Why did they go looking for him? Why do we go looking for him? Because of what he can do for us, or because of who he is? It is not wrong to seek Jesus for what he can do for us—forgive our sins and teach us. But it is better to seek him because of who he is—to worship and honour him.
The people were looking for him primarily because they were seeking healings. But as Matthew tells us, his ministry consisted of three parts: teaching, preaching, and healing. As we have noted before, the healings were secondary. What they signified was primary—the message of salvation. His primary purpose was to preach the good news of the Kingdom of God, which in various contexts means: the eternal kingship of God, the rule of God, the personal presence of God in Jesus, a spiritual domain, and a coming eternal realm.
So, beside healing, he taught and preached the kingdom in the synagogues and open air, depending on the day of the week and locale.
The root word, in the Greek, for teaching is didasko, which has been brought into English as ‘didactic’. In English, didactics is the science of systematic instruction. The word in NT Greek appears to have a somewhat similar meaning—systematic instruction in doctrine and Apostolic tradition. Teaching is not specifically preaching in the NT sense, although teaching and preaching are very closely aligned and often occur at the same time and in the same context (e.g., Acts 15.35, 1 Tim 4.13; 5.17). Preaching in the NT sense is the proclamation of the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ, and is a translation of words such as, euangelion, euangelizo, kerygma, and kerysso. We often make a distinction today between types of preaching by adding a qualification—‘evangelistic preaching‘ and ‘doctrinal preaching’. This is necessary because we use the word ‘preaching’ today to mean both teaching and gospel proclamation.
You may be thinking that this distinction is not worth much consideration. But it appears that the Church does not fill its commission from Jesus unless it provides a balanced diet of teaching and preaching. Too much preaching (gospel proclamation) will produce hearers with little understanding of what God requires of us by way of obedience. Too much systematic teaching without the gospel will leave us dry without an appreciation of the great work accomplished on the cross.
It is significant that Jesus began his first tour of teaching and preaching with prayer. Let us pray for the ministry of teaching and preaching.
Healing (Cleansing) a LeperIn the past few meditations we have considered a number of healings in succession: a demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, and then some general healings. Now we find Jesus healing a leper—again on the Sabbath. In the next meditation we will consider his healing of a paralytic. Why is it that after the general healings, Jesus performed these two specific healings? It appears that he wanted to demonstrate through these healings that he was the Messiah. Healing people of their fevers, muscular pains, etc., was an amazing thing, but the result was really incidental. Jesus’ purpose was much greater than healing the illnesses of people who in a few years would die.
Temporal healings are a sign of what Jesus does in the spiritual realm—he removes the curse of sin, including spiritual blindness, spiritual paralysis, and the guilt of spiritual leprosy (total depravity). He is the Messiah, and he wanted to demonstrate through the healings that he was fulfilling the prophecies of the OT (for example: Is 35.56-6; Jer 30.17; 33.6; Zeph 3.19). Jesus shows through temporal works applied to the flesh that he can provide eternal spiritual-healing.
Notice how the gospel writers give us different details to fill in the picture. The full picture shows that a man covered with leprosy came to Jesus and knelt before him with his face to the ground and begged him saying: “Lord (sir, master) if you are willing you can make me clean.” The request of the leper teaches clearly that it is not ultimately the faith of the recipient that is required for healing but, rather, the will of God. The leper probably had very little knowledge about Jesus; yet he understood the facts about healing.
Why is it that the ‘faith healers’ of every age continue to emphasize the faith of the recipients and are quick to ignore the will of God? The folks who flock after today’s healers should test the healers. When the healer says to the invalid: “if you believe, you will be healed,” the invalid should respond as did the leper: “If you are willing, you can make me whole.” This would quickly demonstrate the unreality of their ‘ministry’ and place an authenticating seal on the ministry of Jesus.
In the request of the leper, there is a lesson about the way of salvation. It is not our faith that saves us. It is God’s work and willingness that save us. Our faith is the instrument for applying the healing, much like saliva was used by Jesus to heal a blind man.
Jesus showed compassion for the leper and reached out and touched him with his hand. This leper had been cut off from human company, and all who saw him would avoid even looking at him. Yet Jesus came along and not only looked at him and spoke with him but also touched him. He brought upon himself the ritual defilement (Lev 13.45 -46; Lev 5.2) that came from touching something unclean. For Jesus, ceremonial considerations were over-ridden by his compassion.
As our Priest, Jesus does the same for us. He overlooked his absolute holiness and took upon himself a human nature with its weakness and temptations. From conception and birth we are outcast—nothing to look at, spiritually polluted, foul and unclean. But Jesus reaches out his hand and touches us with the Holy Spirit, and draws us into his bosom.
Jesus then ordered the healed man not to tell anyone about the healing, and sent him on his way. What is the reason for this? It is often said that Jesus gave these instructions because it was not his purpose to be seen as a miracle worker. He did not want to be distracted from his teaching ministry. Although this is true, there is a more explicit reason given in this account. It seems that the ex-leper was to tell the priests so that they in turn would receive Jesus as the Messiah. Jesus says that the ex-leper’s appearing before the priests was to be “a testimony to them.” If the priests knew their history (2 Ki 5.1-14), they would realize that a greater than Elisha had come—who could only be the Messiah.
The man disobeyed Jesus. We can try to excuse the man for his excitement. But he did disobey, even if he thought he had a valid reason. This is an example of letting “the end justify the means.” Notice the result of this man’s disobedience. Mark tells us that Jesus could no longer enter a town openly. People came for healing rather than for teaching, and probably more opposition arose from the Jewish leaders (Lk 5.17). This provides a clear lesson—how easy it is to spoil the work of Christ by our disobedience, even when we think that the end is good. We can’t pick and choose which commands we wish to obey.
The lessons from this portion of Jesus’ life are:
Jesus returned to Capernaum from the outlying regions of Galilee where he had healed a leper. When the people heard that he was at home, they crowded into the house. Do you think that this was a good thing? What was their motive for being there—for temporal or spiritual healing?
In the previous meditation, we noted that Jesus ordered the healed leper not to tell anyone except the priests about his healing. He told him to go to the priests because this was required in the Law, and so that the priests might receive Jesus as the Messiah. In addition, Jesus gave this instruction because he did not want to be viewed as a miracle-worker and healer, and thus to be distracted from his teaching ministry.
As we noted, the man disobeyed; and now we find Jesus and a crowd assembled primarily for healing, not teaching. In the crowd were some Pharisees. This is the fist time in the life of Jesus that the Pharisees are mentioned in the Galilean context. From the ex-leper’s talking, the opposition has begun in Galilee; and it will continue to grow.
Even though he wanted to be preaching and teaching, he had compassion on the sick and was healing people. For this reason, four men brought a paralytic on a mat. Because the entrance was blocked by the crowd, the four went up onto the flat roof and removed the floor used for drying foods and other household activities, and lowered the man in front of Jesus.
It is at this point that Jesus reminds his hearers that he was on earth primarily to proclaim the coming of the Eternal Kingdom, and not to heal. We are told that when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man: “Your sins are forgiven.” This isn’t what the four men expected. They had brought their friend to be healed of his paralysis. But Jesus spoke of healing (forgiveness) of their sins.
Notice also in passing: it isn’t only the faith of the crippled man that is of importance but also the faith of the carriers. This presents a real challenge to modern “faith healers.” Do they ask the person who drove the cripple to the auditorium about his faith before they perform a ‘healing’?
Doesn’t it seem strange that Jesus forgave the paralytic’s sin when this was not what he was expecting. He hadn’t hoped for this, nor did his companions carry him to Jesus for this reason. This twist of events shows us that Jesus wanted to focus attention on his work of salvation.
The Pharisees and teachers were thinking to themselves that Jesus blasphemed since only God can forgive sins. In their opinion he blasphemed—not by using God’s name in vain but by claiming to be equal with God through his words and actions.
Jesus’ divine nature came through, and he knew what was in their hearts. So he challenged them with questions. First, he asked why they were thinking these things (it must have been a shock to them to see that Jesus knew even their thoughts) and then asked a rhetorical question, to compare the difficulty of forgiving sins with commanding a crippled man to walk. On the surface, the expected answer seems to be that it is easier to tell someone that his sins are forgiven.
But it may be that the expected answer is not the immediately obvious one. Is it really easier to forgive sins than to heal the lame? Surprisingly, it is easier to heal the lame! From a human perspective, we find it difficult (though possible) to forgive a person, but impossible to heal a cripple. But from God’s perspective, it is the opposite. It is not difficult for God to heal. After all, he created the entire universe in six days. He created Adam from dust. It is no challenge for him to heal a man’s legs.
But what about God’s forgiving sin? Sin is an infinite affront to God’s character and Godhood. To forgive sin is impossible without the debt being paid. It was difficult (using a human term) for God to forgive sin. He had to show great love to unrepentant rebels by sending his son to die. Do not underestimate the difficulty God the Father faced when his son cried out: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
For man, providing physical healing is difficult. For God, providing spiritual healing is difficult. Jesus uses the difficulty of one to illustrate the difficulty of the other.
At least the people realized that the healing was from God, even if they rejected the Healer. And they praised him. Can we learn a lesson from this? We need to believe in Jesus as the Spiritual Healer and praise him, when he provides eternal healing from sin.
The Calling of Matthew the Tax CollectorWe know from elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Lk 3.12, 13) and from other historical documents that tax collectors were prone to exact more taxes than the Romans wanted collected. In general, men in this trade were dishonest and had no scruples (see Jesus’ reference, which places tax collectors in a bad light, in Mt 5.46). The Romans had vague tariff rates relating to the trans-shipment of goods, and a tax collector could levy tariffs based on his own interpretation of the rules. Usually the interpretation would be to his benefit and he would skim off the difference.
It appears that Levi became rich from this practice. One evidence is that we find him holding a feast in his home (e.g., Lk 5.29). A second is the location of his tax-booth. It was in a prime location for collecting tariffs on merchant goods in transit by sea (Mk 2.13-14) and on the main highway from Damascus to the Mediterranean—the “way of the sea” (Is 9.1). Both the feast and the location of his booth seem to indicate that he made more money from being a tax collector than the basic clerk’s wages would have supplied.
Tax collectors were, as a group, despised—primarily because they were on contract to the Roman Government, but also because they collected more money than they should have. Because of their compliance with Rome, they were usually excommunicated from the synagogues. To compound matters, Levi may have been a Levite (this suggestion is based on his given name). If he was a Levite, he was not living as one who served the temple.
Consider someone working in a gambling casino or bingo hall. We might despise him for his chosen profession. It might be hard for us to see how he could be brought to Christ. But the fact that Jesus called Levi teaches us that God can bring anyone to faith and repentance.
Notice that both Mark and Luke refer to Matthew by the name Levi. Yet he refers to himself by his name Matthew in his own Gospel. Jesus may have given him the name Matthew as his apostolic name just as he gave Peter his new name. Matthew means Gift of the LORD. Is he not a fitting example of someone saved by grace? He had experienced grace and he wants us to know it.
Don’t think that his formal calling was a sudden thing. Many people think that Jesus just walked into town and went up to the booth and told Levi to follow. The reality is that Jesus had been in Capernaum for three to six months teaching in the synagogue and in homes. It is also likely that Levi had heard the preaching of John the Baptist and may have been among the tax collectors who had gone out to see him (Lk 3.12, 13). Just as others whom Jesus called as Apostles were at the Jordan, Levi probably also had been there. It appears that a qualification for one who would be an Apostle was that he had been with Jesus from John’s Baptism (see Acts 1.22).
Levi’s heart had been prepared by Jesus’ teaching and the witness of the miracles. When Jesus called, he followed. Notice that the command of Jesus is “follow me” not “believe in me.” I think that by this point Levi was a believer in Jesus as the Messiah. He had not yet made the formal commitment to break with his former life, but at his call, he became a true disciple and he became a Matthew.
Jesus broke the tradition of the Rabbis by calling this social outcast. In so doing he shows us that he does not go by the outward appearance. In contrast are we quick to judge by outward appearances? Are we quick to make assumptions about who should or should not be part of our congregation, based on our traditions?
We have noted previously that the word follow in the Greek can mean more than just walking behind someone. It can mean going over completely to Jesus, committing entirely to him, and becoming a disciple. This is what Matthew did. He left everything (Lk 5.28) and followed Jesus. He left his occupation and the income from it—never to return to them. By this Jesus shows that his saving and calling are without return.
The Apostles took discipleship seriously, they gave up their old ways of life—whether considered honourable (e.g., fishermen) or dishonourable (e.g., a Roman tax collector or a zealot)—and committed themselves wholly to the Lord Jesus. We may, or may not, have to give up our careers at this time to follow Jesus, but we must be ready to do so if he calls us.
Please note in passing that this tax collector became the author of a gospel. As you read his account notice how often there is an emphasis on ethics and law (e.g., the Sermon on the Mount). Levi as a conniving law-compromiser came as Matthew to understand what Biblical Law really means, and he wants you to understand this with him.
The Banquet at Matthew's HouseAfter becoming a permanent disciple of Jesus, Matthew held a great feast at his house and invited his associates to come and meet Jesus. But outside stood the Pharisees, being critical. This living parable provides us with a number of lessons about salvation:
Don’t, however, carry the analogy too far. Although eating together is a sign of fellowship with like-minded individuals, Jesus is found eating with the despised folk (the outcasts from synagogue and society), many of whom probably had not put their faith in him. Why did Jesus eat and drink with tax collectors and ‘sinners’? To fellowship with them? No, rather to be among them as a witness. How can we follow Jesus’ example? Matthew’s actions do not teach us that we should invite every kind of sinner to the Lord’s Supper. But they do teach us that a meal (such as our monthly fellowship lunches) is a place to which we can invite our neighbours and friends so that they can learn more about Jesus.
Jesus’ eating with the outcasts upset the Pharisees. It was contrary to their tradition to eat with anyone who, in their opinion, was not an upright citizen. How can we cross the cultural divide in our generation and city? Jesus as the Son of God knew how best to reach the outcasts. We need to ask him to show us how we can reach the ‘unreachables’ in our city.
But there was something more notable about them than their outward sins, and it provides another reason for putting the word in quotes. The Pharisees outside Matthew’s house were also sinners because of their self-righteousness and rejection of Jesus.
But recognition of our state before God is not enough. Jesus came not to call the righteous but sinners. The guests in Matthew’s house knew that they were sinners and because of this knowledge were on their way to becoming righteous, and so they came to meet Jesus. A person who really understands that he is a sinner will come to Jesus. Often it is the ones who are most ‘down and out’ who realize their need for salvation. The outwardly ‘good’ have no time for Jesus. Self righteousness is the greatest form of blindness.
Some of John’s disciples and the Pharisees came to Jesus with a question about fasting. They asked him why they had to fast but his disciples did not. Why did they question him about fasting? What did God require? The only regular fast appointed by God in the OT was the Day of Atonement (Lev 16.29-31; 23.27-32). It appears that four other fasts were added around the time of the Jewish captivity in Babylon (see Zech 7.1-7; 8.19). By Jesus’ day, it seems that the Pharisees were fasting twice a week (e.g., Lk 18.12).
Of course there were occasional fasts proclaimed for various reasons (e.g., 1 Sam 7.6; Neh 9.1; Est 4.16), and individuals often fasted to “afflict the soul” in repentance, to suppress their personal will, to facilitate grieving, or to obtain guidance and help from God. Fasting sometimes included total abstinence from all food and other proper pleasures, and at other times it meant a restriction of food (e.g., a small amount of bread and water).
Notice that this dispute about fasting follows a feast—the banquet at Matthew’s house. It is possible that Matthew held his banquet on either a Monday or a Thursday which had become the traditional fast-days of the Pharisees, and thus the feast on this particular day seemed to be out-of-line with the prevailing thinking about ‘holiness’.
Jesus often did not provide a straight answer to questions. In this instance he answers indirectly because he may not want to challenge the Pharisees’ notions about fasting with John’s disciples present. For John’s disciples, fasting may have been a matter of true faith and repentance, whereas for most of the Pharisees it was nothing more than an outward ritual. If he challenged their ritual he may have discouraged John’s disciples who were heading in the right direction through faith. Later in the same year, after another visit from John’s disciples, Jesus did challenge the Pharisees directly on their attitude to his eating and drinking (see Mt 11.2-19; Luke 7.24-35). In that instance he contrasted his ministry and life with that of John, which included fasting. He rebuked them for not accepting either ministry.
Jesus assumed that his followers would fast (Mt 6.16-18). He does not speak against fasting in the passages we are considering today. He only speaks about the right time to fast. He showed by example that there is a proper time to fast. The Apostles showed by their example that fasting is proper at special times (e.g., Acts 13.2-3; 14.23). Proper fasting is one of the neglected aspects of worship in our hedonistic age. I expect that we all need to think seriously about how we should apply fasting in our lives.
When is the right time to fast? Jesus says that the guests of the bridegroom don’t fast (mourn) while he is with them. He implies that while he is present with his people it is like the time of a wedding week. A wedding is a joyous occasion—a time for feasting, not for fasting.
A time will come when Jesus, the bridegroom, will be taken from their presence. Then it will be the right time for his disciples to fast. When would this be? When he went to the cross as a sacrifice for sin—when he became the atoning sacrifice. This took place on the final Day of Atonement when Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial system. All of the fasting of the Jews had pointed as a sign to that day when Christ would pay the penalty for sin. But his hearers did not understand this.
So when should we fast? In one sense Christ is always with us (e.g., Mt 28.20). But there are times when we drift away from Christ. It is when we are out of his presence, and are far from him, that we should be humbled with real fasting and confession of our sins. When else should we fast? When we desire to have a special measure of God’s grace poured out on us; for example, when we are going to undertake a particularly difficult venture for his kingdom or face extreme difficulties. It is at these times that we should seek the Lord with fasting.
Jesus concludes this dispute about fasting with three illustrations:
These illustrations teach essentially the same thing as the object lesson of turning water into wine. A new order has come, the old ceremonial system has passed away in Christ. The Pharisees did not accept this new order. But we, under the new order, are to worship Christ in Spirit and in Truth, fasting not by the ‘letter of the law’ but to refresh his presence in our lives.
Jesus went from Capernaum to Jerusalem to attend one of the feasts. It was probably the Feast of Tabernacles (also called the Feast of Ingathering or Feast of Booths). This feast was not based on myths like a pagan harvest festival; it came from God. Sincere Jews understood that this thanksgiving- feast signified that Israel ’s life rested upon redemption supplied by God. God took the initiative to supply forgiveness from sin.
The same is taught by the actions of Christ. In the Gospel of John the events at the pool take place one year after Jesus met the Samaritan woman. At harvest time Jesus gathered in the Samaritans. Here also he performs a miracle as a sign of the ingathering of helpless sinners.
This miracle has an added significance—it was performed on the Sabbath. This, however, is not the first time that Jesus healed on the Sabbath. For example, after a Synagogue service (Mk 1.29-34) Jesus provided healing for Peter’s mother-in-law. But this is the first time that he performed a healing-miracle in Jerusalem . His previous miracles were all performed in Galilee .
It is evident that Jesus uses this miracle on the Sabbath as a means of establishing his authority as the Messiah. It provides a challenge for the Jewish hierarchy and is the first of a series of controversies about the Sabbath. Later in his ministry there will be others (Jn 9.13-34; Lk 13.10-21; 14.1-24). It is interesting to note that Jesus seems to use the observance of the Sabbath as a benchmark for truth. He gives teachings related to the other nine commandments, but it is only over the fourth commandment that there seems to be such heated controversy.
The Sabbath also is a benchmark-commandment for our generation. Anyone who calls for a proper observance of the Sabbath is challenged even by people in the Church, just as Jesus was. The Jews seem to have made the Sabbath the most important of the Ten Commandments and had placed a ‘straight-jacket’ around its observance. In contrast, most of the Church has thrown out this Commandment. We must make sure that our thinking about the Sabbath is Scriptural and conforms to Jesus’ practice.
Jesus went to the pool (Bethesda) near the Sheep Gate. The pool was surrounded with a courtyard of four colonnades. A fifth colonnade divided the pool into two sections. The water from this pool was used in a pouring- ceremony (Jn 7.37; Zech 14.17; 1 Sam 7.6) and was believed to have special healing power. Whether it did or not, the fact is that many people were waiting in the colonnades believing that by remaining there, there was a chance that they would be healed.
Jesus approached one man who had been there for thirty-eight years and asked him if he wanted to be healed. This man had never been able to get to the water first when it was stirred because he had no one to help him get to the pool. Notice that the man does not ask Jesus to heal him. He didn’t know who Jesus was, or that he could heal him. (Contrast this man with Blind Bartimaeus who had heard of Jesus and called out [Mk 10.46-52].) The man explained that he couldn’t make it to the water on his own in time to be first. Notice also that in this account no mention is made of faith or belief on the part of the man. All that is mentioned is his need.
It is significant that as Jesus began his public ministry in Jerusalem he took the initiative. This is how it is with salvation in general—God goes looking for the lost (Mt 18.10-14). Adam was in great need after his sin, but as God was walking through the garden he did not hear Adam call out: “Lord save me!” Rather God went looking for Adam in his need—“[Adam,] where are you?” Today, men are not calling out to God for salvation. But God still goes looking for them, and he sends his people to help find the lost (Mt 28.19-20).
Why are we told about the healing of only this man? Many others who needed healing were around the pool. Jesus’ purpose was not to heal but to teach. The person he chose to heal was one of the most needy present. He had been there half a lifetime and had almost lost hope. Jesus saves the hopeless and helpless—which is all of us. The man was helpless—no action on his part could bring him healing. And so it is with us—we have no hope. God takes the initiative and goes looking for us. We need to respond to his call and thank him as we respond.
Then Jesus commanded him to pick up his mat and walk. John makes special reference to the fact that this took place on the Sabbath. The Sabbath is a day of physical rest and the sign of God’s provision of eternal rest in eternity. It is a sign of physical and spiritual healing.
The ‘Problem of Evil’Jesus continued to show that God’s general grace provides benefits to men even when they don’t know the source of their blessings, and don’t thank him for their blessings (Rom 1.21). The man who was healed did not know who Jesus was because Jesus didn’t tell him, nor did he tell him that his sins were forgiven (as he did, for example, with another paralytic [Mt 9.1-2]). So the man was unaware that the one who had healed him was the Christ or that his healing was the work of God.
Not everyone whom Jesus healed came to salvation. For example, there is no record that nine of the ten lepers (Lk 17.11-19) whom Jesus healed ever came to give thanks to God or that Jesus offered them the Kingdom of Heaven . We are not told that the man who was healed by the pool thanked Jesus. Nevertheless, he may have been truly thankful since we are told that Jesus found him later in the temple (14). He may have been there praising God for his physical ‘salvation.’
When Jesus found him in the temple, he used this encounter as the opportunity for spiritual instruction. Every physical infirmity is not the result of a specific sin (Jn 9.1-3), although sin in general is the root cause of all evil in this world. But some infirmities are directly related to sinful practices (e.g., the destruction of a liver through alcohol addiction, or AIDS acquired by a homosexual). It may be that this man’s lameness was the result of a particular sin. So Jesus told this man to stop sinning or something worse would happen to him.
From the human perspective, what could have been more serious or worse than having been handicapped for thirty-eight years and lying by the side of a pool waiting for healing? The world looks at this kind of affliction and says: “How terrible!” and then presents Christians with the so-called ‘Problem of Evil.’ Men say: “If God is all-good and all-powerful, why does he allow bad things like this to happen?” Men argue that God is either not really totally good or, if he is, is not all-powerful.
But in saying these things men choose to ignore some very important truths:
Thank God that Jesus found this man in the temple and offered him the message of life. He also offers it to each of us today.
The Jews Try to Kill JesusJesus told the healed man to carry his mat. The Jews told him that it was wrong for him to do so. They believed that it was wrong because of their mis-interpretation of the Law’s instructions against carrying loads on the Sabbath (e.g., Num 15.32-36; Jer 17.21-27, Neh 13.15-22).
When they saw the man carrying his load, they wanted to know who had commanded him to ‘break’ the Sabbath. They eventually found that it was Jesus. Although they claimed ignorance about the origin of Jesus, it is clear that they knew that he was more than a mere man—they acknowledged that he had healed the man so that he could walk again (11).
In this confrontation is the challenge which man has faced since the Garden of Eden. Will we obey God’s commands or man’s? Satan asked Adam and Eve: “Did God really say ...?” As they persecuted Jesus for healing on the Sabbath the Jews asked essentially the same thing: “Did Jesus really say ...?” Nothing has changed in thousands of years. If God said it, men question it and replace it with their own commands.
Man’s existence today seems to be premised on the will to disobey God. If God says something, men do exactly the opposite. We are like children who do the opposite of their parents’ wishes. For example, think of how the world responds to God’s prohibition against homosexuality, adultery, and divorce. Lest we become self-righteous, the Church plays the same ‘doubting game’. For example, even when Christians hear solid, logical arguments about Sabbath-keeping, the propriety of capital punishment, or the merits of exclusive Psalm-singing in worship, they respond “Did God really say ...?”; and they go and do what they want to do.
We must assess seriously how committed we are to God. Are we really trying to please him, or are we living for self-gratification? If we are concerned about doing what is right—what God requires—then we will constantly try to understand what he says in the Bible about how we should live. We will stop looking for ways to excuse ourselves from obedience. The Church would be far stronger today if all Christians made it their goal to please God.
The Jews wanted to know who was challenging them: “Who is this fellow? Who is it who can reinterpret Moses?” The man found out and told them, and they became angry in their self-righteousness. So Jesus confronted them by telling them that he worked just like his Father. God does not cease on the Sabbath from his work of governing and preserving his creation. Jesus used this as his justification for working on the Sabbath. But he implies that the kind of work that he was doing was the same as what his Father does—works of mercy. The kind of work which we can do on the Sabbath is to be similar to that which God does and Jesus did while on earth—work that proclaims the Gospel of the Kingdom and work that provides for the safety and survival of men.
The Sabbath was not set aside for us to do as we please (e.g., Is 58.13-14), although it was given to us for our well-being. We achieve this well-being through worship of God, meditation on God’s work and revelation, and physical rest - not through pursuing our worldly pleasures and business.
To support his interpretation of the Sabbath law, Jesus stated that he stood in a special relationship to God—he called God “My Father.” The Jews could have accepted his saying “our Father,” but they understood by the expression he used that he was claiming equality with God. They would not have challenged him if he had claimed to be some kind of pagan god or just a human miracle-worker—they would have dismissed him as lunatic. The problem, as far as they were concerned, was that this man claimed to be the very Jehovah who gave the Sabbath to man and defined its bounds.
Jesus cared for doing what was right on the Sabbath. For example, it was his regular practice to attend the synagogue. But he also cared for lost sinners and thus healed and saved them, regardless of the day of the week. In contrast, the Jewish leaders claimed to care about the proper observance of the Sabbath, but they were all talk and outward show (Is 29.13). The true spirit of their hearts was shown by their attitude toward the healed man and toward his healer. There was no rejoicing among them over the man who had been healed and they went out of their way to find opportunities to persecute Jesus. They cared only that their law had been broken.
We should care for the things God cares about, and in the same proportion. We are to keep the Sabbath holy. But as Jesus has shown us, we are not to neglect the weightier matters of love and mercy. It is not Sabbath-keeping or mercy that God wants—it is Sabbath-keeping and mercy.
The Son’s Equality with the FatherHow would you react if someone claimed that he was God? You would dismiss him as liar or a ‘nut’. This is how the Jews dismissed Jesus when he claimed to be God. There is, however, a difference between his claim and that of someone today. A person today could make the claim, but it would be false, and he could not prove it. Jesus made the claim and he substantiated it by miracles. The Jews chose to ignore this evidence. Much of the world continues to ignore the evidence as it is recorded in the Bible, and most men continue to dismiss his claims.
The Jews didn’t accept his miracles as evidence that he is God and so they persecuted him (16). But he replied to their scepticism by answering it with an emphatic declaration of the truth about himself. But in his declaration he didn’t use the words “I am God.” It is not that he cared that such a bald statement would have upset them. Rather he chose to use an approach which would add to the revelation about God.
To this point in history God had not revealed fully that, while there is only one God, there are three persons in the Trinity. If Jesus had claimed to be God, the Jews would have thought he was claiming to be the Father. His tactic was to declare his divinity through an explanation of the relationship between the Son and the Father. By describing aspects of this relationship he declared that he is God—not a created god, not a lesser god, not a man endowed with divinity, but a person equal in power and majesty with the Father. This is a tremendous claim. It was too much for the Jews!
He declares his divinity through the illustration of his relationship with the father in the following ways:
In each of these statements Jesus declared his equality with the Father, and each time the Jews dismissed him as a heretic. They knew that he was making himself equal with God (v18), and they would not accept it.
Jesus declared himself to be God by showing his relationship with the Father. As God he has a claim on us. A day is coming when we all will be called back to life to appear before the great Judge. We must have settled out-of-court with Jesus and “crossed over from death to life,” or “rise to be condemned.” Don’t dismiss his divine rights as the Jews did.
The Son is Life and He Gives LifeIn the previous meditation we considered how the Son shows his equality with the Father. Today I wish to explore in more detail one aspect of their equality—in Jesus, like in the Father, is life which he himself gives.
A common question of children is: ‘Who created God?’ The answer is as difficult for us to understand as it is for them - no one created God. God is the creator (Gen 1.1). Thus he is both eternal and self-existent (Ex 3.14).
The difficulty with getting our minds around this aspect of God’s being is not so much a problem of understanding his eternal existence. We can obtain a limited understanding of how God could have existed forever because we can think of extending time, which is a familiar concept to us, into the infinite past. Of course we really don’t come close, for true infinity is not just the addition of one second to another - it transcends time altogether. But our approximation of infinity is enough for us to feel comfortable with the concept of infinity.
It is the realm of self-existence that really boggles our finite minds. We have nothing in our spatial-temporal experience which comes close to approx-imating the concept of self-existence. In fact, we can only define self-existence in negative terms: God did not create himself, nor was he created by anyone.
It is ironic that even though the keenest philosophical minds have had difficulty understanding the concept of self-existence, modern man is quick to accept the myth that the universe is self-existent. Men realize that if they don’t declare the universe to be self-existent, they are left with only two other possibilities:
Men in blind faith believe the myth that the universe is self-existent, and that chance working on matter through time created life. At the same time they deny the possibility of there being a God who is self-existent.
They also deny this divine attribute to Jesus. Jesus says (26) that “as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.” Jesus is claiming that he also is self-existent. Jesus declares the same thing elsewhere when he says “before Abraham was born I am!” (Jn 8.58; compare with Ex 3.14)
Do not misunderstand his words. Jesus is not saying that he is a created god. A self-existent being cannot be created—that would present a logical impossibility. Jesus speaks (26) in terms of his office as the Mediator and the role he has been granted by the Father. Notice that he refers to himself as the Son of Man (27)—this is his self-designation as the Mediator. As the God-man he has been given the authority to be the life giver.
The Jews (and the Greeks, when being intellectually honest) understood that it is God alone who can give life to creatures (e.g., Gen 2.7; Dt 30.20; Job 10.12; 33.4; Ps 36.9; Acts 17.28). So, Jesus says (26) that the Father has delegated to the Son the right to be the author of life.
The Father gives the essence of life and Jesus claims this right also. As the author of life’s essence, his authority, extends to two other dimensions:
Men in their pride think that some day they will create life either from proteins or from silicon chips. Many are eager in this hope, because they think they can dismiss God. But God alone is the author of life. Let us turn to the one who alone gives life—eternal life now and at the resurrection.
Testimonies to the SonAfter claiming equality with the Father, Jesus continues his discourse with the Jews. Logically, he moves on to consider the question of who, or what, supports his claim. You will notice that there are witnesses that Jesus calls to defend his claim, and others he rejects. Who and what are they?
It is the same today. Men hear the ‘voice’ of God (e.g., in the heavens [Ps 19.1]) and are blind to their maker. Notice that Jesus says that they did not understand because they did not believe (38). This reminds us that all the evidence in the world will not convince a person to believe in Christ. You cannot argue someone into the Kingdom. It is only when the Holy Spirit changes his heart that a man will come to believe the evidence (e.g., your life and words) that you present.
Weigh the evidence of the witnesses. It is overwhelming. Jesus is the Anointed Son of God sent by the Father to save his people from their sins. How many witnesses will it take to convince us of this truth? Piling evidence on top of evidence will not provide any more truth. It is time to appeal to God the Holy Spirit to open our hearts so that we might believe.
Controversy about Picking Grain on the SabbathAmong congregations or families that believe that the Lord’s Day is the Christian Sabbath what do you often find is their emphasis? Do you find that there often is an emphasis on what we should not do rather than on what we should do? It seems that both children and adults rarely ask what God expects from us on this day. Instead, we seem to begin our consideration of the Sabbath with a negative focus.
The Pharisees of Jesus’ day seemed to be of the same mindset. They were caught up with the negative aspects of the Sabbath and focused on what should not be done rather than on why the Sabbath was ordained by God and what its value is to us. Their negative attitude is displayed by their reaction to what they saw Jesus and his disciples doing.
As Jesus and his disciples walked along, probably heading to the synagogue meeting (Mt12.9), they passed through some grain fields and picked heads of ripe barley or wheat. As they continued, they rubbed the kernels in their hands to remove the chaff and then ate the grain. Taking the grain was not wrong, as God had made provision for this as a means of caring for the poor (Dt 23.25). The Jews did not react to their taking the grain. They reacted because their tradition taught that what Jesus’ disciples did was equivalent to reaping, threshing, and winnowing, and therefore was work (Ex 34.21). So they told Jesus that his disciples were acting unlawfully on the Sabbath.
How does Jesus respond to their charge? Note that he does not start his challenge with the proclamation he used in the Sermon on the Mount: “You have heard that it was said ... but I tell you ...” He isn’t ready at this point in his ministry to present himself as the final prophet. He is still validating his ministry through sign-gifts. But he gives a hint of what is to come shortly when he declares himself greater than the temple and Lord of the Sabbath (i.e., the one with authority to interpret how it is to be observed). He begins his challenge of the Pharisees by pointing to the Scriptures and asks them how they understand what is taught there.
He points them to two examples of godly men. Their actions appear to be examples of ‘breaking’ the ceremonial Law. The two examples he uses are:
Jesus points out in these examples that godly men did something that in general was ‘unlawful’. But he is not denying the importance of the Law, nor is he undermining the principles taught by the Law. Rather, he is showing that there are circumstances where we may be required to act in a way that is ‘beside’ the Law. We learn from this passage that:
The multiplication of negative laws by the Pharisees made the Sabbath a burden for the people. Let us remember the purpose of the Sabbath and look for opportunities to use it for God’s glory and our benefit in spiritual, mental, and physical refreshment. Let it be a delight and joy, not a burden.
Healing a Man’s shrivelled Hand on the SabbathLeaving the grain fields, Jesus and his disciples went to the Synagogue where they were confronted by the Pharisees and others who were looking for a way to accuse Jesus of doing something unlawful. In the Synagogue was a man with a shrivelled hand who the Pharisees thought they could use as a means of trapping Jesus in sin or a contradiction. A Pharisee doesn’t care about helping those in need; he cares only about how to apply his strict definition of ‘holiness’.
The Pharisees asked Jesus if it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath. Their rabbinic teaching said that it was unlawful to heal someone unless it was necessary to save his life. Notice how Jesus uses their own teaching to confound them (Mk 3.4). Jesus had already healed on the Sabbath (e.g., Mk 1.29-34; Jn 5.1-9); and although the Pharisees did not seem to be around at those times, they had undoubtedly heard about the healings.
They knew that Jesus could heal - the question wasn’t could he, but would he heal on the Sabbath? They wanted to know if he was a ‘moral’ healer. They were looking for ‘inconsistencies’ in his teaching or practice so that they didn’t need to heed him. Men are the same today. His teaching demands a response, so men use any means they can to deflect the moral challenge of it. If they can find some ‘problem’ in the Bible, then they can claim it faulty and think that they don’t need to adhere to it. It is better, from their perspective, to find fault with God and his word than with themselves.
In the grain fields, Jesus demonstrated the justice of doing works of necessity on the Sabbath. Now he must show the justice of doing works of mercy. In the previous case, he responded by using scriptural examples as the base for his defense. In this case, he uses an example from everyday life. Jesus used different means at different times to present truth.
His example is that of rescuing a sheep that has fallen into a pit. Today if he were speaking to a ‘pharisee,’ he might ask him if he would help a stranded woman fix a flat tire. You must realize that he was dealing with people who had drawn incredibly tight boundaries around what was lawful to perform on the Sabbath. We don’t find this problem too often today, since most people in the Church have removed all boundaries from around the Sabbath. But the attitude of the Pharisees still plagues the Church. Modern ‘pharisees’ draw boundaries in other places, making laws where God does not. We need to guard that we don’t place the rules of men on the level of God’s Law.
Notice that Jesus answers a question with a question. He asks the Pharisees to compare the value of an animal with that of a man. (This is a good question for men today. Many in our culture place the value of a baby seal, whales, or even trees, above the value of an unborn human.) He then asks them whether or not it is lawful to do good or evil on the Sabbath. As Jesus does so often, he places them in an impossible situation. They cannot answer without condemning themselves. He knew that in their wicked hearts they were rationalising why it was okay to rescue an animal but not to heal a man, or why it was ‘proper’ not to help the man.
Having silenced them with his questions, he performs a miracle to answer their question. He had asked the man to stand at the front of the synagogue, and he now commands him to stretch out his hand, and he heals it. Notice that the man’s hand was ‘completely restored’. What Jesus does is not by half measure, nor is it done in secret.
Jesus did not answer the Pharisees’ question with words, but he did show them the foolishness of their position through words. He then went on to demonstrate by action a proper way of observing a holy Sabbath. Here we see the living Word - Word in action. God also works this way in Salvation. The crucifixion was visibly public, and it demonstrated God’s love for us (Rom 5.8). We also are to demonstrate our words with action (Jas 2.14-26).
Instead of being pleased that the man was healed, or accepting the rebuke of Jesus, the Pharisees went out of the Synagogue in a huff, plotting how they could kill him. What an irony! They refused to accept his doing good on the Sabbath and plotted evil on the very steps of the Synagogue. At times, the heart of the Pharisee pumps in all of us. It is easy for us to make ‘rules’ for others to follow, easy to be angry when we don’t get our own way in the Church, and hard to accept a rebuke. Do we then set out to ‘get even’ as the Pharisees did? Watch out for this kind of heart, it pumps black blood.
Jesus has shown us that God desires mercy not ‘sacrifice’ (Hos 6.6). He has shown us how to keep the Sabbath holy with works of necessity and mercy.
With Crowds by the SeaJesus was aware that the Pharisees were plotting to kill him because he had healed on the Sabbath; so he left the populated regions of Galilee and went into the countryside. Beside moving away from the threats of the Pharisees, Jesus may have also left the town (probably Capernaum) for practical reasons. Excavations at Capernaum have shown that the Synagogue there held 130-150 people. It is possible that the crowd that assembled to see Jesus was around 10,000 people. Likely, no meeting hall or theatre in Capernaum could have held an assembly of that size.
News of his work had spread throughout Galilee and to regions beyond. People came from a distance to see the ‘miracle worker’. They were crowding him, pushing forward to touch him so that they could be healed (Mk 3.10). To avoid being pushed into the lake, Jesus told his disciples to prepare a boat in which he could sit. It is not necessary for Jesus to touch a person to heal him. It is possible that he taught the people from the boat (e.g., Mk 4.1, 2), but he may have only provided healing from the boat.
Besides healing the people of their diseases, he cast out evil (unclean) spirits. The people possessed by the demons fell down before him and declared his relationship to the Father: “You are the Son of God.” Jesus warned them (the people and the evil spirits) not to tell who he was. The time for revealing his identity still had not come. The publicity about his healing hindered his teaching and attracted antagonism from the Pharisees.
We have noted previously that Jesus’ primary purpose in coming to earth was to go to the cross to pay the debt of sin for his people. Other purposes included announcing the Kingdom, and teaching. To provide healing for the sick was not his main purpose in coming to the earth. The miracles were performed to demonstrate that he had come from God. This is what Matthew shows by quoting from Isaiah (42.1-4). From this passage we learn that Jesus is the:
Matthew, in his Gospel, continually shows how Jesus fulfilled the OT prophecies. He reminds us that the earthly life of Jesus was like no other. “The Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.” (Lk 19.10) You and I are lost, without Jesus. Go out to meet him and receive him.
Choosing the TwelveWe are about two and a half years into Jesus’ ministry on earth. He has been followed by a great number of disciples since his baptism. From this large group of followers (at least seventy-two, see Luke 10.1) he called his disciples to him (Lk 6.13) and from theses he selected twelve Apostles.
It appears that Jesus is at this point ready to commission some of these followers to as the founders of the NT Church (compare Eph 2.19-20). This isn’t stated, but notice that the Sermon on the Mount (Lk 6.17 and following) and other extensive teaching portions of his ministry follow their appointment. This seems to show that Jesus selected the twelve for a special commission as teachers, and that they were to communicate his teaching to build the NT Church. We note their appointment was:
The special office of Apostle ended in the 1 st century. But just as there were other leaders then who were “sent ones” (e.g., Barnabas, James, Jesus’ brother, Timothy, Titus, etc.), so there are “sent ones” today in the Church. We can learn much about the calling of Church leaders today from Jesus’ appointment of the Twelve.
Large crowds continued to follow Jesus around Galilee . Soon after the appointment of the twelve Apostles, we find him in a rural area on a plateau on a hillside. As he was standing among the people he healed their sick. He then sat down, as the custom was of Jewish Rabbis (Mk 4.1; 9.35), and began to teach them. The particular teaching that he gave that day has become known as the Sermon on the Mount.
It seems that we are to find in the actions of Jesus on the hill a deliberate object-lesson. He positions himself as the second, but greater, Moses. We can note some of the similarities and differences between the two to see how Jesus is the fulfilment of Moses, who was the foreshadow:
Here the similarity ends.
The Sermon is an exposition of the Law given through Moses. Jesus teaches his disciples how that Law is to be applied by Christians, not how it is annulled. He teaches the hearers, and us, what he means when he summarizes the Law in the ‘new commandment’ - to love God and our neighbours with all our heart.
This Sermon is the first example of Jesus’ teaching recorded in the Bible. Both Matthew and Luke give reports. The differences between their accounts seem to indicate that Jesus taught more than either records. We will be blessed by studying what Matthew remembered and by comparing it with what was reported to Luke (Lk 1.2) by other eye-witnesses.
Although the Sermon was directed specifically to Jesus’ Apostles and his other disciples (Mt 5.2; Lk 6.20), it was given in the hearing of a crowd; so they were indirectly included (see Mt 7.28; Lk 7.1). The Sermon applies to all of us. It presents a picture of what the Kingdom of Heaven is like and how we are intended to live in it. It shows us how a Christian, whose life is ruled by the Spirit, will interact with his neighbours and walk faithfully before his God. It is a lesson in ethics.
We will find that it contains two of the key elements of a Covenant:
Jesus will contrast a proper interpretation of the Law with Jewish traditions (Mt 5.21-48) and will illustrate the importance of practising his teachings (Mt 7.24-27). We should listen to his instruction and live our lives in his presence, with obedience to his Law.
Blessings and CursesCompare Matthew’s account of the Sermon on the Mount with Luke’s and you will notice that after Luke records the Beatitudes he lists some corresponding curses. The opening of the Sermon reminds us of the blessings and curses in the covenant which God made with Israel (Dt 28). Jesus as the greater Moses (Heb 3.1-6) teaches in this Sermon how the covenants of the OT are to be properly understood by Christians.
The Sermon is part of this covenant. It includes a primary record of the covenant obligations. It also opens with blessings and curses. If you observe the covenant obligations, you will be blessed, if you do not keep the obligations, you will be cursed. But notice a key difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. The Old states first the obligations and then the blessings and curses. The New starts with the blessings and curses, and follows with the obligations. Why is there this difference?
Under the New Covenant the emphasis is reversed, because you must be before you can do. The stipulations of the Old Covenant demonstrated that man cannot obey the Law and be saved. Jesus obeyed it on our behalf, and now we can obey the Law – but only after we have become new creatures.
The fact that the blessings and the curses appear before the stipulations demonstrates that man needs a saviour. Man in his state of sin cannot do anything that will please God, and he can never do anything which will provide payment to cover his sin.
Jesus does not begin his teaching ministry by demanding obedience. He first describes the type of person who will be blessed and the type who will be cursed. Who is the person who will be blessed? The one who is a member of a special realm - an eternal, spiritual, and heavenly kingdom. The man who is cursed is the one who is not a member of this kingdom. How is citizenship in this kingdom obtained? Not by works of righteousness, but by displaying a character that is righteous - one that is right with God.
The remainder of the Sermon, which follows the blessings and the curses, is a commentary on the OT Law. It shows what kind of obedience is expected from a member of the Kingdom of Heaven - that is, the fruit that a righteous person will bear. But we cannot begin with the fruit; we have to start with the tree. For if the tree is not righteous, it cannot bring forth righteous fruit (Lk 6.43-45).
So we should begin where Jesus begins, with the character of the Christian. This character must proceed his conduct and must permeate every pore. The Christian must, in other words, not only hunger and thirst after righteousness but must also be in poverty of spirit; mourn over his sin; and be merciful, pure in heart, and a peacemaker.
These are spiritual attributes which cannot be obtained by a man steeped in sin. These are attributes of a different kind than the attributes of the world, and are not a matter of degree. The only way that a man can display the character of the Christian is to be a Christian, converted by the grace of God. Therefore, before we consider the Covenant obligations, we should ensure that we are right with God - by receiving his Son Jesus as our Saviour.
Conditions for Blessing (Part 1)The Beatitudes are named for the blessings of the Christian life. But before we can have the blessings we need to meet the conditions. These conditions do not describe what we must do to earn the blessings; they define those who are truly Christians. They are the descriptive spiritual attributes of the person who is already in the Kingdom of Heaven . If you are not a Christian, you cannot perform some Herculean task to endow yourself with them. But you can ask God to empty you of sin and self and change your heart. If you are a Christian, you will display the attributes that Jesus defines by his life and in his teaching. Ask God to strengthen you and make you more like Christ, so that you will be:
Poor of Spirit - You cannot be part of the Kingdom unless you believe that you are poor before God - poor because you are finite and he is infinite, and poor because you are a sinner and he is the Holy One. It is humility before God. This is not a weakness, false humility, or a lack of courage. It is knowing God, being utterly dependent on him like Jesus was (Jn 5.19), and using every gift and talent he gives you for his glory. To be filled with the Spirit we must be emptied of ourselves.
Mourning over Sin - The world’s philosophy can be summed up with one icon: J . Pleasure, worldly happiness, and a hatred of the doctrine of sin are the essence of existence for most men. The Christian, in contrast, mourns over things the world thinks will bring happiness - satisfying covetous and lustful desires, and believing the “health-and-wealth” superstitions of our age. This does not mean that he is a dour crank full of false piety. He is a realist, hating the weight of sin (Rom 8.23; Heb 12.1) that drags down himself, the Church and our nation.
Meek - Meekness has nothing to do with weakness or being lazy or flabby. It is being humble with men, being obedient to lawful authority, and showing respect for others. It is not looking for honour or a position of respect, asserting yourself, seeking prominence, or wanting respect from others. It is not worrying about what others think of you.
Hungering for Righteousness - Men of our age hunger for food, drugs, sex, alcohol, entertainment ... none of these will satisfy our deep need for meaning and a purpose in life. The only thing that will satisfy is being right with God and wanting to be like Him in holiness. Really to live, we must desire to be free of sin - its guilt, power, and curse. We must love his people, worship, and law, not a passing experience or the latest fad. We must want to be holy as God is holy.
Merciful - Those who seek to do the will of God, will follow his example of showing kindness to those who do not deserve it. A Christian will work to relieve misery and will not repay evil with evil. Since we have received mercy we will be quick to dispense it.
Pure in Heart - Men tell us that man’s problems arise from his social environment or from a lack of education. Adam in Paradise had a perfect environment and the best education possible. What makes men think they can provide better? God tells us that the problem is with our heart. Out of the heart comes evil or good. Good comes only from a pure heart, not just in outward actions. Before we do we must be. Purity of heart is not just believing a set of doctrines; it is bringing the mind, faith, will, and emotions into conformity with God’s holiness.
A Peacemaker - Jesus is not speaking of those who forge treaties among nations, of those who appease or compromise, or of Nobel Peace Prize winners. He is speaking of a peace that overcomes sin. It isn’t war, it is sin, that is the ultimate problem. A peacemaker is, first, one who has made peace with God. His primary concern is the glory of God. A peacemaker is, second, one who lives a co-operative self-sacrificing life modelled after Jesus who made peace through his blood (Heb 13.20; 1 Jn 1.7).
Persecuted - This is not a description of Christian character, but of the Christian situation. A true peacemaker will not be honoured by the world; he will be persecuted. Those who are righteous and live godly lives will be persecuted (2 Tim 3.12). A Christian is not nosy, bossy, objectionable, self-righteousness, or fanatical. Yet he will be hated by the world because he is like Jesus (Jn 15.18-20). Christians are not to seek martyrdom or to be persecuted. And they are not to die for a political cause. Instead, they are to live righteous, holy lives to please God. They are to live with their hearts already in Heaven.
Conditions for Blessing (Part 2)When Jesus began to teach about the nature of the Kingdom, he started by listing the attributes which define a citizen of the Kingdom - a Christian. These are the attributes of living faith. Jesus did not teach in the Beatitudes the way to become a Christian, he taught the way a Christian will live - not the way to Christ, rather the way from Christ.
Jesus taught the same thing his brother James, about thirty years later, would teach: “faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” (James 2.17) One dimension of salvation is the act of justification which is applied to us by faith alone - faith unaccompanied by works. But another dimension of salvation is the process of sanctification, by which we work out our salvation (Phil 2.12). From this perspective, faith alone is nothing - an un-applied faith is not true faith. Belief alone - belief in God, in facts about God, and that what God says is true - is not true faith. The demons in Hell believe these things (James 2.19) but it doesn’t mean that they live a life which responds to belief. True faith is displayed with evidences as it has an impact in our lives.
The evidence of true faith is the set of attributes that Jesus lists in the Beatitudes. Just as light is made up of the seven colours of the rainbow, so a Christian is defined by the entire set of attributes that Jesus lists. Of course, you and I display the attributes in varying degrees because of the remnants of sin still inhabiting our natures. If one of the colours of the rainbow is filtered out, there will not be a pure white light. In like manner, if one of the Christian attributes is polluted by sin we will not display the pure white light of Jesus Christ. We need to ensure that the full spectrum of our lives shines forth pure and bright.
You will notice that Jesus lists the attributes in a deliberate order, mirroring the logical, but not necessary chronological, process of salvation. The attributes of the Christian life build upon one-another. He starts with poverty of spirit. Without knowing our poverty in sin, it is impossible for us to mourn over it. Once we are truly sorry about having broken God’s holy law, we can see ourselves in a proper light and be humbled before God and our fellow men.
It is impossible for us to see that we are totally depraved without the Holy Spirit showing us our poverty. But if this is impossible, it is harder still for us to confess our sins and swallow our pride. Of course, literally, nothing can be more difficult than something that is impossible. The point is that we cannot mourn over sin and display a spirit of humility until we have been set right with God and have come to understand our total poverty before his infinite holiness.
Our age is one of self-reliance and self-confidence. We do not want to accept a doctrine which would cause us to be devalued. But the reality is that all our own spiritual wealth (self-righteousness) is absolutely worthless (Is 64.6). Do you really believe this about your own abilities and works? You must start at the root and ask God to show you your sin so that you can confess it. Once you have been emptied of self, you are ready to move on in the Christian life.
The first three attributes define the emptiness of our souls as we are born sons and daughters of Adam. Once we have measured the vast emptiness we can seek to fill it. It is then that we begin to hunger and thirst after righteousness. As we begin to seek God’s righteousness, we move from an inward focus to an outward focus - we move from considering our condition to considering God and his laws.
As our emptiness is filled we begin to over-flow with righteousness, and we have an impact on those around us - both a positive and a negative impact. The positive impact that we have is a direct result of each of the internal changes that have taken place. We are merciful only because we have seen our own poverty and the mercy we have been shown by God. We are pure in heart as a result of mourning over sin. And, we can be peacemakers only if we are truly humble.
The other impact that flows from a righteous life is negative. To the extent that we live righteous lives, to that extent we will confront our friends and neighbours with their sin. They will react against the challenge to their self righteousness, just as we did before we were brought to see our poverty. Thank God that he has shown you your poverty of soul and he has filled it with his righteousness.
The Blessings of the Covenant (Part 1)Remember that the Beatitudes do not provide a list of things that you must do to earn your salvation. Rather, Jesus describes the attributes of a living faith - he shows what a Christian will be like, to a greater or lesser extent, as he lives out the Christian life. It is to the degree that we live as consistent Christians, loving and obeying the law of God, that we experience the blessings of the Christian life.
There is a three-fold cause-and-effect relationship that results in blessings in the Christian life. The first, and ultimate, cause is the gift of salvation that we receive from the Holy Spirit, and is the greatest blessing. It means that we are saved from the guilt and curse of sin and will reside in Heaven for all eternity. The assurance of this blessing is written in indelible ink in the record books of Heaven and cannot be erased.
The other two categories of blessing are the result of living as a Christian. They are determined by how much we desire to obey Jesus and by how much we actually do obey him. When we strive to serve God we can expect additional, and increased, blessings in two areas: 1) as we live out our lives on this earth, and 2) as we fulfil them in eternity.
There seems to be much confusion about the blessings that flow from living the Christian life. There are some who think that the primary blessings are material, such as increased financial resources or a life without illness. These blessings may be the result of living a sincere Christian life. For example, Moses tells us (Dt 28.3-14) that Covenant keepers will be blessed with large and healthy families and that the “LORD will open the storehouse of his bounty.” Malachi tells us similarly that those who are faithful to God will be blessed (Mal 3.10-12).
As much as we may like material blessings, they are really secondary. In this life there are many sincere Christians who gain very few material blessings. Are they in some way inferior Christians? If this were the case, we would have trouble explaining why God allows many wicked men and women to prosper materially. The measure of a true Christian life is not that of the world: “he who has the most toys has won the game.”
What are the primary blessings of the Christian life both now and in eternity? Jesus tells us that they are:
Of all these blessings, only the renovated earth is physical. What does it take to teach us to stop seeking material objects and experiences, and to begin storing up treasures in Heaven? Why do we doubt Jesus when he tells us that the best blessings are those which we take into eternity? “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Mt 6.21)
The Blessings of the Covenant (Part 2)There are many things that men born in sin find hard to believe. One of the most difficult is that nothing in this world will make them happy. Most men are fooled by the attraction of wealth, some by power, and others by pleasure. But, at honest moments, men without Christ in their lives sometimes confess that the things of this world have not really made them happy. Occasionally they will admit that there is an emptiness that has not been filled by all their possessions, pleasures or experiences.
In the Beatitudes Jesus tells us what makes a man truly happy. It certainly isn’t wealth, power, or pleasure - it is instead the attributes that he lists as conditions for blessing, such as being poor in spirit or being merciful.
The Greek word translated ‘blessed’ can be translated ‘happy’. Happiness is the subjective, inner state that results from being blessed. But the best translation of the Greek word, in this context, is ‘blessed’ since it shows that there is an objective reality on which our eternal happiness is based.
It is the objective reality of being blessed by God, and understanding that one is blessed, that is missing in our culture. Men hide from God, and neither seek blessings from him nor give thanks for those they do have (Rom 1.21). They emphasize feelings over truth and say: “if it feels good, do it” instead of “do what is right.” They claim that each man should be true to himself and his own standards, and reject even the possibility that there are absolutes outside of man which govern his behaviour. They attribute their prosperity to their own efforts, never giving a thought to God and his providential dealings with them. Feelings and self, rather than beliefs and God, are key marks of our age.
Although there are many -isms or ‘beliefs’ filling the feeling-based thoughts of contemporary man, they can all be collapsed into two basic views of reality, or world-and-life-views:
All non-Christian philosophies and -isms can be distilled to one single factor - man’s opinion. Only Christianity is based on an objective standard - God and his Law. In all other systems man is the measure.
Notice that the Beatitudes teach us the failure of both classes of -isms. The first three deal with our hearts before God (being poor in spirit, mourning over sin, and being meek before him). These remind us that God alone is worthy of worship and that we are to live for God. The fifth through seventh show us that we are to live out the truth of our faith - living from God. These two sets of Beatitudes are the opposites of paganism and moralism. We can view these as sides of a triangle. At the top point of the triangle is the fourth Beatitude. The pinnacle of true religion is a hunger and thirst for righteousness. At the bottom of the triangle is the result of a life lived for God, and from God - a life marked by confrontation with the systems of paganism and moralism, a life marked by persecution.
In the Beatitudes Jesus teaches the same thing that we find in the rest of the Bible, because it is the core message of God’s covenant with man - we are to love the LORD and obey him. Who is a covenant keeper? He is one who seeks to be holy as God is holy (hungering and thirsting after righteousness). He is one who worships God correctly with a proper understanding of his position before God, and who lives out his life in service to God.
The Jewish audience of the Sermon on the Mount would have understood that Jesus was not teaching a new religious paradigm, but that he was expounding the Covenant as it is properly to be understood.
A question we must ask ourselves is: do we understand what Jesus is teaching? Do we have a heart that is focused on loving and worshipping God? Do we as a witness to our love for God live out our lives in obedience to all his commands? If we are Christians, then we will understand what Jesus is teaching and will be truly blessed. To the measure we are blessed by God to that measure we will be truly happy.
The Blessings of the Covenant (Part 3)God has dealt with mankind, from creation, through a number of Covenant formulations. The first was made with Adam. Subsequent formulations include the covenants with Moses, Abraham, and David. In each there is a statement of obligations and consequences of obedience or disobedience. In a previous meditation we noted that the Jewish audience listening to the Sermon on the Mount would have understood Jesus to be restating the Covenant obligation of Law-keeping and the blessings that result from it, or the curses that result from disobedience.
In the New Covenant, Jesus (as the mediator) expounds the obligations of the Covenant in the Sermon on the Mount. What he teaches does not provide a new kind of covenant but only a new, and final, form for the Covenant. In essence, there is one Covenant. All of the covenant administrations emphasize one or another aspect of that one Covenant.
In general, each covenant administration also has promises associated with it. These are often given in the context of the blessings that will result from obeying the covenant obligations. This is what we find in the Sermon on the Mount. In each of the Beatitudes, Jesus’ audience would have heard a restatement of an OT promise. Let’s consider each of the blessings and see how it applies the spiritual reality of a promise from the OT economy.
Do you see the blessings of the Sermon on the Mount as spiritual ones? Do you understand their eternal, spiritual nature? Consider each blessing again with its eternal fulfilment for all believers:
What promises! Is your hope placed in Jesus who gives us Heaven?
The Curses of the CovenantWhat do Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal mean to you? These hills are located in central Israel . Between Ebal (to the north) and Gerizim (to the south) is a valley. At the eastern end of this valley was located a Cannanite town called Shechem. Abraham built an altar there after God had promised him the land in a covenant (Gen 12.6-7), and Jacob buried the strange gods (Gen 35.1-4) and raised an altar to God (Gen 33.20). Later Joshua called the elders there to give them their final charge (Josh 24.1), and they buried the bones of Joseph there (Josh 24.32). This is also where Jesus met with a woman at the well (Jn 4.5-6). When the woman pointed to “this mountain” (Jn 4.20), she was pointing to Mount Gerizim .
Moses told the people that when they came into the land they were to write a copy of the Law on plastered stones (Dt 27.1-4; Josh 8.32) and to set them up on Ebal. He also ordered them to read the Law publicly and then to pronounce a series of blessings and curses (Dt 11.26-30; Josh 8.34-35) – the blessings from Gerizim and the curses from Ebal.
The Law was set up in the heart of Cannanite territory as a reminder that God rules over all people (Jew and Gentile). It was set up on the hill of cursing to remind all observers that they would be cursed if they disobeyed the law (Dt 11.29).
The Law was read in the natural amphitheater formed by the hills. Joshua may have read a few lines and then the priests repeated them as a form of amplification system. The blessings and curses would have thundered through the valley. The impact of the voices like thunder (Rev 6.1), on the people in Shechem, would have been overwhelming. The account would have swept through all the nearby nations. Gerizim and Mount Ebal stand as visible reminders of the blessings and the curses of the Covenant.
Our nations have rejected the Covenant, and the Law of God is being removed from public places. The Law cannot be posted in a government building or read in a public forum. This shows the degree of moral deterioration which has overtaken our civilization. In our ‘enlightened’ society God’s Law cannot be posted lest it offend those with another religion. The reality is that modern ‘ Cannanites’ do not want God’s moral obligations restricting their pagan practices. How desperately we need the public posting and reading of the Law of God today!
As the mediator of the New Covenant, Jesus took his place on a mountain and proclaimed the Law. This included an enumeration of the blessings and the curses (Lk 6.24-26). When we read the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, we often miss the parallel account in Luke. Even if we did not have the account of the curses in Luke, we could infer it – because when a blessing is given for obedience, a curse is implied for disobedience.
But Jesus did not skip the curses. He proclaimed them along with the blessings, just as they were declared 1,500 years before, at the time of Joshua. What are the curses that are the result of disobedience to the Law of God? They are the consequences of not receiving Jesus as saviour, and continuing to disobey him. All the curses associated with disobedience are summarized by Jesus under four categories of temporal ‘blessing’:
If we rebel against the Covenant and despise the righteous requirements of God’s Law, we will be cursed. Our age is not unique. God will judge us as he did the Canannites. Heed the curses for they will be heard again!
Persecuted for RighteousnessJesus expands on the blessing of persecution. How can it be a blessing to be persecuted? This seems to make no sense. From the world’s viewpoint persecution is a curse, not a blessing. But the logic of God is not the logic of men. Because sin pollutes our whole being we do not “think God’s thoughts after him” and are not able to understand spiritual things. We must believe what Jesus says – those who are persecuted because of righteousness are blessed and will receive a great reward in Heaven.
What does it mean to be persecuted because of righteousness? It is being hated for being a Christian or for proclaiming that the righteous demands of God’s laws apply to all men – whether or not they proclaim Christ as Lord. It is being excluded from the public forum because we reject wicked practices. For example, if a Christian organization speaks out against homosexuality, it won’t be allowed to use facilities which are funded with ‘public’ money. If Christians reject humanistic philosophies of education, they will be driven out of the public schools.
Persecution for the cause of Christ also comes in the form of jokes and innuendo in the media that label us as ‘fundamentalist’ or ‘the radical right’. It comes when godliness is called fanatical and when breaking God’s law is encouraged. For example, if a Christian defends capital punishment it is said that he is not compassionate. Or, if he dares to suggest that all stores should be closed on Sunday, he is called intolerant.
These are forms of persecution without physical abuse. But sometimes persecution comes in the form of property confiscation, imprisonment, beatings, and execution. In God’s Providence we are not, at this time, persecuted like the early martyrs, Reformers, Covenanters, Huguenots, and Puritans; or like many Christians today who suffer under Buddhist, Islamic, or Hindu oppression. But we all still must face persecution of one kind or another (Jn 16.33, Acts 14.22; 2 Tim 3.12). Christianity cannot be challenged rationally, so persecution will come in one of two forms—either with farce or force, scoffing or scourging, ridicule or repression—because there are really only two ways that pagans can persecute Christians.
The more Christ is displayed in the lives of Christians the more there will be persecution against them. There are many reasons that pagans hate Christians and persecute them. Some of these reasons are:
When we suffer because of righteousness we should not be concerned; rather, we should rejoice (Jas 1.2) because this persecution reminds us that we are:
Do you trust God in this? Do you believe Paul when he says “that in all things God works for the good of those who love him …” (Rom 8.28)?
Salt and Light (Part 1)Consider the flow of the opening of the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus first presents the attributes of Christian character in the Beatitudes. He follows this with the reality of persecution for those who live a righteous life. He reminds us that our reward is Heaven. If he left it there we could argue that Jesus is telling us that we are to live consistent Christian lives for his glory, accept the world’s persecution, and wait to be taken into Heaven.
But he does not stop there. After mentioning the hope of Heaven and reminding us that we share our persecution with the ancient prophets, he returns to consider the role of Christians in the present world. This tells us that the reason we must accept persecution on behalf of Christ is not to prepare us for Heaven but rather to prepare the world for judgment.
Trials and persecution do not prepare a Christian for Heaven. Rather Heaven is being prepared for Christ’s people (Mt 25.34; Jn 14.2; 1 Cor 2.9; Heb 11.16). A person is ready for Heaven at the moment of conversion; his name is written in Heaven (Heb 12.23), from all eternity; and he has been declared righteous (Rom 5.1, 2). It is true that God is continually perfecting our holiness throughout our lives. But if the final goal of the process of sanctification is to make us fit for Heaven, then it will fail. We will never be ‘good enough’ for Heaven through the lives we live on this earth. If God’s only objective was to make us holy, then the most effective means of accomplishing this would be to remove us from the world. At that moment we would be made completely holy.
Why do trials come upon Christians? They come so that as we persevere through them we can bring glory to God (e.g., Jn 9.3; 2 Cor 4.10) and help others (e.g., 2 Cor 1.3-4). It is as we live the Beatitudes, especially through persecution, that we bear witness to God before the world. This is why Jesus follows his instruction about Christian character with the statement that a Christian is the salt of the earth and light of the world.
We should not take salt and light as separate components. They need to be considered together. A Christian living the Beatitudes is both ‘salt’ and ‘light’. It seems that Jesus uses these metaphors because Christians:
Christ uses the salt of Christians to keep the world from becoming as rotten as it could. He uses the light of Christians to give direction in the darkness of sin and depravity. Christians are a witness to the world in two ways – they keep the world from going totally bad, and they show the world the way of good.
Christ left his disciples on the earth as his ambassadors. But it is not just the Apostles, theologians, seminary professors, or those ordained to Church offices who are salt and light. It is every Christian. Remember that Jesus was not teaching just his disciples in the Sermon on the Mount (see Mt 5.1 and 7.28). It is ordinary men, women and children who, as true believers in Christ living out the Beatitudes, are salt and light.
When you live consistently, showing that you care about God’s righteous requirements given in the Ten Commandments, when you display the character traits of the Christian which Jesus lists in the Beatitudes, and when you persevere through the trials which will inevitably come, then you will be salt and light in the world. You will act as a preservative among your family members, friends, and school or business associates; and you will point the way to Jesus, the light of the world.
You are the salt and light “of the world.” You have not been called out of the world. You have been sent into it as Christ’s witnesses until he comes again to complete his work with total victory and vindication.
Salt and Light (Part 2)Jesus teaches that Christians are the salt and the light of the world. By implication, the world of non-Christians is rotting and is in darkness. Non-Christians cannot preserve or enlighten the world. This seems contrary to evidence. Are not most philosophers, scientists, doctors, engineers, politicians, and businessmen non-Christians? Where does all the ‘success’ of the world come from, if not from non-Christians? Aren’t Christians, as a group, ineffective and generally inconsequential in the flow of history?
A superficial answer to these questions seems to undermine what Jesus teaches. But the truth lies deeper. The fact is, the non-Christian world is ‘successful’ (however you wish to define it) because it consumes Christian capital. No individual, or country, which lives consistently by its non-Christian religious or philosophical systems will be successful continually.
According to their philosophical principles life is nothing more than the vibration of molecules, there is no meaning to life beyond self-realization and self-fulfillment, and each individual is at the centre of his own moral universe - life is chance events working on chaotic matter and man is autonomous. This is the philosophy of the world of decay and darkness.
It is only as non-Christians live inconsistently with their professed beliefs and follow Biblical principles that they are successful. When people are honest, keep their vows, are respectful of other people’s property and life, and refrain from outward idolatry and foul practices they find that their lives are more fulfilled and they are more successful.
Jesus says that he is the way, the truth, the life (Jn 14.6). The world considers the unique claim of Christ and Christians to be vain. But in reality, it is the thinking of the world that is vanity and foolishness. It is only from Jesus, through his people who are salt and light, that the way of life is made known and truth is revealed. How are Christians the salt and light of the world? They are salt and light in two ways:
Jesus reminds us that the essence of being a Christian is to be salt and light. Salt cannot be anything other than salt. If it loses its essence, which is not possible, then it is no longer salt. It is the very nature of light to shine and dispel darkness. It cannot do, or be, anything else. If light is blocked, it is no longer giving light and is not fulfilling its purpose.
Lesson 1 : It is not enough for us to be right with God ourselves. We are expected to have an impact on the world. A false piety of many Christians teaches that once a person is saved he is to withdraw from the world and its institutions. Jesus, in contrast, impels us into the world. Christians are to declare Christ’s sovereignty over every aspect of life - politics, law, science, education, business, recreation, the arts, family, etc. Being the salt and light of the world leaves no room for keeping religion out of politics, God’s laws out of the courtroom, creation out of the classroom, morality behind closed doors, etc. Christ is Lord of all areas of Life!
Being salt and light is not a matter of absolutes only. There are areas of the world (e.g., Turkey, North Africa) where the salt and light of Christianity has been applied at times in the past and is almost entirely absent now. There are also areas where the effect of the salt and light of Christianity seems to be waning (e.g., Europe and to a great extent, NA).
Lesson 2 : To the degree that we are not acting as salt and light there will be decay and increasing darkness. The purpose of the Christian is to preserve and enlighten the sinful world. God leaves us on earth to stand out for his truth - to declare sin for what it is, to proclaim God’s holy laws, and to call men to repentance.
Christianity is the only true religion, the salt and light of the world.
Jesus Endorses the Old TestamentThe words of Jesus in Matthew 5.17 have been interpreted in a number of ways. This makes it difficult to know if we have the right interpretation. On one extreme there are some who argue that the word ‘fulfill’ means that Jesus completed all aspects of the OT, and therefore the OT laws do not apply to NT believers. This seems to present a contradiction with the fact that Jesus says he did not come to ‘abolish’ the Law.
There are others who say that since Jesus says that not a single stroke of the pen will disappear from the Law, this implies that all the details of the OT laws are binding on Christians today. It seems that there are at least two problems with this view: 1) at least some aspects of the OT law (e.g., the laws relating to sacrifices and excluded foods) are clearly not to be practiced by Christians - we could say that they have been abolished, and 2) Jesus says that the Law, with the Prophets, have been fulfilled in him.
To interpret this passage correctly we need to consider as a unit the fulfill-ment of the Law and the Prophets. In the way that the one is fulfilled the other is also fulfilled. It seems reasonable to conclude that Jesus fulfilled both the Law and the Prophets in, at least, the following ways:
The promise became reality - The promises of the Prophets became actual events in Christ. The Law, also, was realized in its totality in him:
The payment was realized - The debt of sin had to be paid. The Law and the Prophets anticipate this payment:
The purpose was revealed - The meaning of the prophecies and many of the laws (and the proper way to observe them) was often obscure to the people of God living before Christ. All the prophecies and laws in the OT (i.e., the entire OT) point to Christ. Jesus revealed through his life and teaching the full intent and meaning of both the Prophets and the Law:
Jesus makes an incredible claim … “I have come to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.” In this he places his seal of authority on the whole OT, endorsing it as the word of God. We cannot question the authority of the OT without questioning the authority of the Son of God himself.
He alerts his hearers, and us, to the context of his teaching. Everything he teaches is entirely consistent with the OT and contrary to the teaching of the legalistic Pharisees (Mt 5.21-48). Pay attention! The OT he endorses he will now apply. He shows us how to live as Christians in this world.
The Continuing Validity of the LawWe noted previously that Jesus endorses the OT and tells us that all of his life and teaching are consistent with it (17). He then makes a second pronouncement (18) and tells us that the OT has perpetual and universal application. Nothing in the OT is abolished by Christ’s having fulfilled it.
It is likely that Jesus is referring to the entire OT when he uses the word ‘Law’ (18). Jesus is teaching that the entire OT, even to the smallest letter, will continue to be valid until everything in history is brought to an end. His work in redemptive history does not end with the Resurrection; it ends with the Judgment. Everything will be accomplished only at his return in triumph. He teaches that the OT remains valid for all time. Therefore it applies to us today. This is consistent with what Paul tells Timothy about the usefulness of the OT (2 Tim 3.16, 17).
The OT is relevant for us today because it:
The Law, as a specific portion of God’s word, continues to be valid in the NT era and retains its validity in its entirety (18) and in its parts (18, 19). There is no part of the Law about which we can say “This is abolished or cancelled.” Jesus says specifically (17) that he did not come to abolish the “Law”. There is no room in Jesus’ statement for the idea that the OT is obsolete, has no application to us, or that we do not have to obey its commands. We are not to be NT Christians; we are to be Biblical (‘whole-Bible’) Christians.
But the fulfillment of the Law by Christ does have the effect of altering the specific way we are to keep many of the laws. And in other cases the specific observance of some of the laws has been set aside, or the form has been changed, because the righteousness they require is now experienced in a different manner.
This, of course, introduces serious difficulties for us today:
Since both Jesus and Paul teach that the entire OT applies to us, the difficulty is to determine how the laws apply. This is not simple. There is much disagreement in the Church on how to apply the OT laws.
Where is the right place in the spectrum of possibilities? Are we to apply only laws repeated in the NT by Jesus or the Apostles? Are governments today to apply only the last six Commandments? Are they to apply only nine of them, or all ten? Are we required to keep any specific OT laws, beside the Ten Commandments, even if they are not repeated in the NT?
We will be in danger if we assert a simple extreme such as “all the laws of the OT are set aside” and say that we are required to obey only the laws given in the NT by Jesus or the Apostles. The danger is illustrated by the fact that we would lose many of the specific laws relating to sexual morality given in Leviticus 18, because these are not repeated in the NT.
We will be in as much danger going to the other extreme: all the laws of the OT still apply in detail except entire classes that are explicitly changed in the NT, such as those that point to Christ’s redemptive work (e.g., the sacrifices). The danger of this extreme can be seen in laws that appear meaningless to apply in specific form in our context today (e.g., Dt 22.8). Following this course we would miss the general principles and carry over features specific to the Israelite context.
We must avoid extremes and affirm that there is both continuity and discontinuity between the OT and the NT. However, too many in the Church today do not recognize the continuity and see only the discontinuity. As a result, they use a ‘smorgasbord’ approach and let either their own opinions or majority opinion be the determining factor about which laws of God apply today. It is important that we try to approach the difficult subject of the applicability of the OT laws with principles derived from the Bible.
No simple ‘rules’ will make this problem disappear. However, in our next meditation we will consider some guidelines that may help us determine how to apply OT laws in our cultural context.
Guidelines for Applying the LawIn our previous meditation we noted that we must avoid extremes with respect to determining how OT laws apply today. We are to affirm that there is both continuity and discontinuity between the OT and the NT. No simple ‘rules’ will make this problem disappear. However, there are some guidelines that may help us determine how to apply OT laws today:
If we apply these guidelines when we consider which OT laws apply today, we should be able to obtain a proper balance between the continuity and discontinuity found between the OT and the NT.
Keeping the Least CommandmentsJesus endorses the OT and tells us that his life and teaching are consistent with it (17). He then tells us (18) that the OT has perpetual and universal application and that nothing in the OT is abolished by his having fulfilled it. Third, he informs us that we must keep the ‘letter’ of the Law (19). The ‘little’ laws of God as well as ‘big’ laws are to be obeyed. What are these ‘little’ or ‘least’ laws that we are to obey?
We must first determine what he means by ‘these commandments’ (19). Although he has taught the crowds prior to delivering the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Mt 4.23), we are not told the specific content of his teaching until now. So it seems unlikely that he is referring to any specific commandments he has given. Since he has just mentioned the OT (the Law and the Prophets), it seems reasonable to conclude that he is speaking of commandments that are found in the OT. In effect, he says that the OT commands remain normative for NT believers.
What are these commands? He does not tell his audience specifically which ones, but there are two indicators of how we are to understand the meaning of ‘these commandments.’ First, by referring to the entire OT in the preceding verses, it appears that he is speaking of the commands of the OT. Second, since he uses the word ‘least,’ he seems to be including more than summary commands or principles. He is teaching that the commands found in the OT – from the two sections of the Ten Commandments to the various detailed laws – are relevant for teaching us how to live as Christians. Paul says essentially the same thing (2 Tim 3.16) when he tells us that the OT has value for teaching us how to live a Christian life.
We considered in our previous meditation guidelines for determining which of the detailed OT laws continue to apply specifically today, and not just the principles that they represent. We saw that God has changed some of the specific forms by which his Law is applied and observed as he has dealt with men through increased revelation. But we should note, as Jesus teaches in verse 19, that at least some of the detailed (‘least’) OT laws apply today and not just the summary laws (e.g., the Ten Commandments) or the principles that they reveal.
Don’t misunderstand the place of the Law (detailed examples or summary principles) in the process of salvation or in the life of the Christian. As we noted when we considered the Beatitudes, Jesus teaches that law-keeping is not the source of our salvation but the fruit of it. He says that anyone who breaks any of the commands in the Law will be “called least in the kingdom of heaven.” He is speaking of those who are already in the kingdom. They have been saved by grace and not by law-keeping. But once saved, they are expected to keep the details of the Law meticulously.
There is an indication in Jesus’ teaching that law-keeping is not in vain. Jesus provides a hint that the rewards in Heaven will be greater for those who strive to keep the details of the Law (see also Mt 16.27; 25.14-30). Therefore, it is not enough for us to repent of our sins and then to drift along as Christians in a state of semi-obedience, attempting to cover over our sins with fits of passionate confession. Jesus wants us to strive for perfection in this life by obeying the Law. Perfection cannot be obtained. Nevertheless it is to be our goal. But our motive for striving for perfection is not for the rewards we may receive but rather because we want to please God who has given us our salvation. We should keep the Law for his glory and trust that the Righteous Judge will dispense rewards justly.
God is the God of law and order. He expects those in his kingdom to live by the rule of law. He expects also that each of us will teach others to do the same. We all have this responsibility – not just pastors, elders, or teachers. We are to teach others to keep the details of the Law through our example, personal encouragement, and verbal instruction. Jesus does not say that because we are to teach others to keep the Law specifically this gives us the right to sit in judgment of them if they don’t. In fact, he teaches exactly the opposite later in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 7.1-5). We have enough to do keeping the details of the Law ourselves without worrying about how well others are doing, and correcting them.
Jesus teaches in verse 19 how to apply the principles of the Law – by keeping the details found in the OT! Later in the Sermon on the Mount he will illustrate the correct way to keep the details as he interprets specific sample laws from the OT (e.g., divorce and oath-keeping).
His instruction presents a challenge for us. Many today say that since we are under grace and not under law (Rom 4.15) we do not need to keep any of the specific OT laws. But it is precisely because we are under grace that we are enabled to keep any of the details of the Law (Rom 4.16-18).
Excessive RighteousnessJesus endorses the OT in its entirety (Mt 5.17), and tells us that it has perpetual and universal application and that nothing in it is abolished by his having fulfilled the OT (18). Then he tells us that we must obey the ‘letter’ of the Law – the ‘little’ laws as well as the ‘big’ ones (19). Then he makes a fourth pronouncement about the Law (20) – our keeping of the law has to be more precise than that of the Pharisees.
What a challenge Jesus presents in verse 20! How is it possible to be more righteous than a Pharisee? Paul tells us that the best Pharisee was faultless with respect to his legalistic righteousness (Phil 3.5, 6). I know I can’t claim that perfection, can you? Yet, Jesus tells us that if our righteousness does not surpass that of the Pharisees we certainly will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Is there hope of salvation for anyone?
Imagine what Jesus’ hearers, sitting on the hillside, must have thought? They knew, in ways we never will, how hard it was to keep all aspects of the moral, ceremonial, and civil laws given in the OT. They knew also that even the Pharisees struggled with law-keeping, although most of the Pharisees probably would never admit to the struggle.
What does he mean? How can any mere human keep the Law more precisely than a Pharisee? How can our righteousness exceed theirs? We can understand his teaching by considering what he says in the preceding and following sections of the Sermon on the Mount. The preceding verses speak of the source of our righteousness; the following ones speak of the fruit of righteousness. Let’s consider these two aspects of righteousness:
Jesus speaks against self-righteousness in the Beatitudes (Mt 5.3-12). He teaches that law-keeping is not the means of salvation but the fruit of it. The only way that our righteousness can exceed that of the Pharisees is if it is not our righteousness. The only way to have true righteousness is when we are emptied of self-righteousness and pride, and hunger and thirst after true righteousness. The only way we can be more righteous than a Pharisee is to have the righteousness of Christ credited to us by God. This grace is applied (credited to our account) through faith in Jesus and through repentance of sins.
The measure of true, non-Pharisaical, obedience is the attitude of our hearts – the reason why we keep the Law. In the remainder of this Sermon Jesus teaches that it is not the outward observance that is the measure of law-keeping; it is the inward observance. True Christians desire to keep the Law in order to please God even if men don’t see it.
Jesus teaches in verse 20 that true obedience requires conformity to the entire will of God rather than just the observance of a minimal set of outward standards derived from the ‘letter’ of the commandments. The sad situation in much of the Church today is that we take a minimalist approach to the Law. We ask what is the least that we have to do; and we tend, with the Pharisees, to dismiss the importance of putting to death sin in our hearts (Rom 6.2; Col 3.5; 1 Peter 2.24).
The demands of law-keeping are no less for us today in the Church than they were for the people at the time of Jesus. They are greater. We have the complete revelation of God in the Bible, and we can understand fully not only what he requires of us but why. A Christian is called to keep the whole Law before man and before God.
The real measure of a Christian is how he stands before God in private. Do we keep the Law even when men aren’t watching? Holiness is the daily practice of law-keeping in our actions and in our hearts.
Heart and Walk ObedienceWhat Jesus endorses, he now applies. He endorses the OT (5.17-20), and tells us that it provides the abiding standard for the life of a Christian. In his teaching in the remainder of the Sermon on the Mount he uses examples to apply the OT Law to NT Christians.
We must be careful not to misunderstand the Sermon as many do. It is not:
The remainder of Matthew 5 provides a correct exposition of selected OT laws against the false interpretation of the Pharisees. Chapter 6 gives examples of how a Christian should walk before God (applications of the first four Commandments), and Chapter 7 shows how a Christian should walk before his neighbours (applications of the last six Commandments).
Jesus gives the proper interpretation of six OT laws that were misapplied by the Pharisees to illustrate how they, in particular, and men in every age find ways to twist and rationalize the keeping of God’s Law.
Jesus sets up two important contrasts:
We are to respect the wisdom of those of the past who have given much thought to the interpretation of the Bible. But we are not to appeal to the ‘fathers’ for a final interpretation of the Bible. Scripture alone is its own interpreter. When the fathers contradict Scripture, we are to follow the teachings of the Bible. This is a principle that was re-established during the Protestant Reformation. It continues to be a feature distinguishing Protestantism from Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. These traditions accept the interpretation of the fathers even when it contradicts Scripture. Jesus teaches that we must not accept the opinions of the elders over the written word of God.
But more importantly, by giving the correct application of the Law he teaches that he is the one who provides its true meaning and intent. This makes him greater than Moses who only delivered the Law (Dt 5.22). Jesus declares in the words “but I tell you” that his authority is unique. He is not just a teacher (one of the elders); his word has final authority – the authority of God. He places himself on God’s throne and declares that he is the one who proclaimed the Law to Moses.
As we look at how Jesus applies the Law, let us note that as the Supreme Lawgiver he teaches that we are not to obey the Law just outwardly for its own sake but also inwardly to please God and to bring him glory.
Heart-MurderAs Jesus began to apply the Law, he first addressed the 6 th Commandment: “You shall not murder.” This seems surprising. Probably none of his hearers had ever committed murder. It is the same in our society. Only a small fraction of the population has committed murder. It would seem that of all the Ten Commandments, this one would be the least likely to need attention by the Messiah. Why does Jesus start with this particular command? Why do we need to consider the topic?
It appears that Jesus starts with this command because it most clearly shows the distinction between actions and attitudes. Most people can claim never to have committed the act of murder, but no one can claim never to have hated another person. Jesus starts with this command to show clearly the intent and force of God’s Law – to teach us what God requires of us and to make us conscious of sin (Mt 22.37; Rom 2.18; 3.20).
Another important reason that Jesus starts with the command against murder may be because it is a particularly grievous sin. Murder destroys a man and attempts to destroy God. To murder a man, who is the image-bearer of God, is to deface the image of God.
The ‘fathers’ and the Pharisees reported the command correctly (Ex 20.13). The problem that Jesus addresses is their false interpretation and application. Their error is shown in the association of “not murder” and “judgment.” They made two mistakes:
They made their interpretation of the Law very narrow so that they could never be guilty of breaking the law against murder. Thus they could declare themselves righteous (e.g., Mk 10.19-20).
Jesus shows that the command applies to the thoughts and intentions of the heart. For out of the heart proceeds all manner of evil (Mt 15.18, 19).
By going to the ‘heart’ of the matter, Jesus shows that everyone is a murderer and has broken the Law of God. He illustrates the way in which we all break this command by focusing on two bad attitudes we all have:
Jesus includes anger and hatred in the definition of murder because in our hearts they are really the same as wishing a person dead. In most cases we are constrained from carrying out our wishes because God graciously stops us – by causing us to fear the consequences of the action or by helping us purge the wicked thoughts from our minds.
Jesus does not stop with a definition of murder. He shows us how we are to solve the problem of heart-murder. Each of the Commandments has prohibitions and implied requirements. Since we are commanded not to murder, we are also commanded to preserve the life of our neighbour and to further his welfare. This begins in our hearts.
Jesus speaks particularly to those who call themselves Christians. We must not come to the house of God to praise him or pray if we are harbouring anger or hatred against a brother or sister in the Church. God will not hear us (see Ps 66.18; Prov 15.8, 9; Mt 6.12). The way to have proper behaviour is first to have a proper attitude. When we have had a falling out with a brother the way to show that we have a proper attitude is to seek reconciliation with him before we dare present ourselves before God.
Jesus says that it is important not to persist in murder – being angry or hating a fellow human. We must ask God to cleanse us and to remove the bad attitudes from our hearts. The time to ask God to forgive us and to purify us is now! If you don’t settle matters with God quickly in this life, he will settle matters in eternity as the Eternal Judge. Hell is not the place to repent of heart-murder, it is too late.
Jesus’ teaching about murder is an indictment against us all. We all murder by mistreating, ridiculing, hating, fault-finding, criticizing, destroying reputations, gossiping, thinking evil—we have all committed heart-murder, and we all must repent quickly.
The Extreme Cure for Adultery in the HeartJesus uses the command against adultery as a second example from the Ten Commandments to dispel the Pharisee’s claim to self-righteousness (e.g., Mk 10.19-20) . Many of his hearers had not committed the actual act of adultery, just as they had not committed murder. So they felt they had kept the law perfectly. But by focusing on the explicit statement of the Command, they missed not only the wide application that is included under the summary statement but also the application to their hearts.
The tenth Commandment shows explicitly that the Commands apply to more than just outward actions. The command not to covet a neighbour’s wife provides an immediate comment on the command not to commit adultery. It shows that we must deal with the state of our hearts, if we are truly to obey God’s Law.
What is the state of our hearts? Some of us might honestly be able to say that we have never entertained the thought of committing adultery. But does that mean we have not broken the seventh Commandment? Far from it! We are just like the Pharisees. We think that if we define boundaries for the command we will be able to say that we have kept it. I don’t want to provide here a catalogue of the sinful thoughts that are included under the summary command. You can find such a list in the answer to the 139 th question in the Larger Catechism.
Instead we will consider a few contemporary examples of how we commit adultery. We commit adultery when we listen eagerly to the evening news to find out the details of sexual misconduct by a politician, watch a TV show with jokes based on sex acts, watch a movie that (implicitly or explicitly) endorses sex outside of marriage, or read in a novel the account of a sexual act. We don’t have to be at the beach watching bodies go by to entertain adulterous thoughts. Adulterous thoughts fill our culture from one end to the other, and none of us are immune from them.
The sin of adultery is not just an outward act; it is anything that pollutes our minds and hearts with thoughts that are impure and displeasing to God. It is out of the heart that all manner of evil proceeds (Mt 15.18, 19).
Why are these thoughts, in God’s eyes, the same as committing an act of adultery? Because we are to love God and to think about things that are pure (Phil 4.8). When we fill our minds with anything impure, we push out thoughts about God and his righteousness. We bring in other things and substitute them for God and holiness. This is spiritual adultery.
How does Jesus tell us to deal with adultery in the heart? He tells us to take extreme action – to cut out the offending sin. He uses a metaphor of removing body parts to show how serious sins of the heart are. Some reading this instruction of Jesus have misinterpreted him. He does not tell us to perform literal acts of self-mutilation. If he meant that we were actually to gouge out an eye or cut off a hand, then each of us would be half-blind and handless – since each of us has committed heart-adultery.
It is a serious mistake to think that Jesus would tell us to mutilate our bodies to avoid sin in the heart. We need to clean our hearts, not our bodies. Removing body parts will not change our wicked hearts.
How can we clean our hearts? Ultimately we cannot. Only the Holy Spirit can. But there are means to be used to clean our hearts of sin. We must:
These are some of the things that Jesus means for us to do when he says to gouge out an eye or cut off a hand.
He adds another sobering instruction. He tells us to consider the destiny of our souls. If we don’t clean out the sin in our hearts we will be thrown into Hell. It is easy to find ways to nourish sin in our hearts. It is hard to root it out. Ask God to dig out every sin before it is too late.
DivorceThe OT Law speaks about a man divorcing his wife by giving her a certificate of divorce (Dt 24.1). The Pharisees understood this to mean that for any cause (compare Mt 19.3) a man could write a certificate and send her away. But this is not what Moses taught. A man could only divorce his wife if he found “something indecent” about her. The word that is translated ‘indecent’ or ‘uncleanness’ is the same word that elsewhere (e.g., Lev 18.6-17; 20.11, 17, 20, 21) describes indecent or dishonourable sexual relations. The only reason that a man could divorce his wife was if he found that she had committed adultery.
Some interpreters of the passage in Deuteronomy conclude that Moses is talking about something other than adultery. They argue that the OT punishment for adultery was death (Lev 20.10), and therefore divorce wouldn’t be required since the adulterers would be dead. The punishment for an adulterer was death only if there were witnesses who could testify (Dt 22.22). No one was to be put to death without the evidence of two or three witnesses (Dt 17.6). But there are circumstances when adultery occurs without witnesses. This is one reason why God instituted a test for unfaithfulness (Num 5.11-31). In these circumstances divorce is permitted.
Jesus does not correct Moses by saying that the only ground for divorce is marital unfaithfulness (fornication/adultery) . Jesus endorses Moses since Moses also said that the only ground for issuing a certificate of divorce was marital unfaithfulness. Jesus endorses this part of the Law outside the Ten Commandments to show that the “least” commands (Mt 5.19) in the Law as well as the “greatest” commands – the details as well as the summary – apply to all men in all generations.
Some professing Christians think that they can live a life that pleases Jesus through some mystical ‘love.’ Love for Jesus is not shown by waving hands in the air or mouthing spiritual-sounding words. But if we ask how we show our love for Jesus, it becomes difficult to define love without reference to specific commands and obedience to them. Love is shown by obeying his commands (Jn 14.15), including those that deal with divorce.
Divorce is permitted only in the case of marital unfaithfulness (Mt 5.32; 19.9). Some people think that 1 Corinthians 7.12-15 teaches that divorce is also permitted when an unbeliever deserts a marriage because his partner has become a Christian. But Paul does not mention divorce as the solution. Rather it appears that the unbeliever who has deserted the marriage is viewed as being ‘dead.’ Divorce is unnecessary when a former marriage partner is dead. The believer is not bound and is free to remarry.
The only legitimate cause for divorce is marital unfaithfulness. But the Church has been infected with the thinking of the Pharisees. Professing Christians are almost as likely today to divorce as are non-Christians. The excuse used by the Pharisees was that Moses permitted it. Today the Church doesn’t attempt to defend its disobedience by misapplying God’s Law. It just ignores it. God says that he hates divorce (Mal 2.16); and although (for marital unfaithfulness) he permits divorce because our hearts are hard (Mt 19.8) it is not required, nor is it ideal. The ideal action is for us to forgive as God forgives, and not to tear apart what he has joined together (Mt 19.6).
Marriage is an institution established by God at creation. It is a covenantal relationship (Mal 2.14) between a man and a woman that represents the covenant between God and his Church, or Christ and his bride (Eph 5.25-28). Divorce breaks the covenant. That is one reason why God hates it.
Marriage is social behaviour: divorce is anti-social behaviour. Marriage brings together in covenant: divorce separates in covenant breaking. Jesus places his teaching about divorce after his teaching about adultery. Divorce is the outcome of the lust of a heart that pursues its desires. Divorce is a result of the selfishness that permeates our hearts.
We need to apply two lessons we can derive from these considerations about divorce. We can apply one lesson in a direct sense and the other in a typical sense. First, we must stand firm on what the Law teaches and speak out against divorce in every illegitimate case where divorce is not an option (e.g., abuse, incompatibility, or ‘growing apart’). This will be hard, and men will scoff at us for defending God’s law.
Second, we should also consider spiritual adultery and divorce. If we are married to Jesus through belief, we must not commit spiritual adultery or seek to break the marriage covenant through divorce. “Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate (Mt 19.6).”
Lawful Oaths and VowsDuring jury selection proceedings in a Canadian criminal court, I noted how often the name of God was used when the potential jurors were asked to swear an oath to tell the truth. For many people the action seemed to be a formality. Nevertheless most people, regardless of their religious background, put their hand on the Bible and swore to tell the truth. Out of the forty people who were called before the judge only two people refused to take the oath. One affirmed that he would tell the truth, and the other, a Jehovah’s Witness, refused to either take the oath or make an affirmation.
During this court proceeding four different attitudes to taking oaths were displayed. We can examine each approach by considering what Jesus teaches in this section of the Sermon on the Mount:
We should note that Jesus’ teaching about oaths follows his teaching on divorce. A person who divorces his or her spouse (except for adultery) breaks an oath. Jesus also condemns this casual attitude to taking oaths in which people take them about as seriously as their commitment to brushing their teeth – nothing more than a ritual with no permanent obligation on their behaviour.
A person in a court today who agrees to tell the truth, but will not swear by God, puts himself in the place of God and is an idolater.
God shows us that it is valid to take an oath in the right context. He took an oath in his own name (Heb 6.16, 17); and the writer of Hebrews justifies taking oaths, in general. Jesus also justifies oaths. It was only when God’s name was invoked in an oath that he answered (Mt 26.63-4). Paul also justified oaths by his own words (2 Cor 1.23).
God is not inconsistent. He gave instructions for oath taking in the OT (Num 30.1, 2) which still apply today. This is the reason that the Westminster Confession of Faith (chapter 22) says that it is a sin to refuse to take a lawful oath.
Taking oaths is a serious matter for serious times. In all other settings we are not to use oaths or invoke the name of God casually. Instead, as Jesus teaches (37), our words are to be truthful at all times.
Among the great tragedies of our age is the departure of truthfulness from private and public settings. The word of presidents, business leaders, co-workers, and friends cannot be trusted. Vows are broken as casually as disposable tissues are tossed in the garbage. Jesus condemns our generation along with all the people sitting at his feet on a mountain-side in Galilee sometime in the early fall of 28 A.D.
James, Jesus’ brother, may have been among those who heard Jesus teach. Reflecting on the Sermon, he writes 20 years later about the importance of controlling the tongue (e.g., James 3.1-12). Jesus and James teach that our ‘Yes’ must be ‘Yes’ and our ‘No,’ ‘No,’ and that we must keep our vows.
Restraining RetaliationThe Biblical principle of justice is that punishment should equal the crime. For example, to deal with theft, the Biblical model requires, in general, a double re-payment. The first part restores the property to its owner; the second provides the actual punishment. In the case of personal injury or murder an equitable punishment matches the crime and reproduces the effect of the crime, only in reverse (e.g., Ex 21.23-25; Lev 24.20, 21).
Jesus quotes this principle and then appears to overturn it. But is that what he does? Is he teaching that punishment should no longer fit the crime? Is he teaching that criminals should no longer be punished? Is he advocating, as some suggest, an extreme form of pacifism? If Jesus is teaching these things then his Apostles contradict him (e.g., Rom 13.1-4; 1 Pet 2.13, 14).
To understand this instruction it is important to recall the context. First, he taught in the Sermon on the Mount how true believers are to live the Christian life. His address is to those who are poor in spirit, meek, merciful, and pure in heart; and who hunger and thirst for righteousness. Second, he endorsed the OT Law and did not come to abolish it (Mt 5.17-19). Third, he overthrew the Pharisees’ abuses of the Law (Mt 5.20).
Jesus is not dealing with governing authorities who have been established by God to punish wrongdoers (Rom 13.1-4). He is dealing with the corruption of the Pharisees who had twisted God’s law to make it into an excuse for personal retaliation. They also ignored the fact that the duty to punish was under the jurisdiction of the governing authorities, not individuals. They twisted God’s law and made it their ‘duty’ to get even.
Jesus teaches us not to use God’s Law as our personal ‘hammer’ for striking anyone who offends us. He also teaches us not to take matters into our own hands through personal vindictiveness and retaliation but to leave place for God’s wrath (Rom 12.17-21) that is exercised in this life through the governing authorities, and ultimately at the final Judgment.
Jesus in this section of the Sermon is restraining personal retaliation, the spirit of revenge, and the tendency to lawlessness that infects us all.
The intent of God’s law is that civil order be maintained and that criminals be punished. Jesus does not abolish this intent. We are to lock our cars, discipline employees who steal company property, and punish criminals. But in personal relationships Christians are to display the fruit of a righteousness that surpasses that of the Pharisees (Mt 5.20), by:
Forgiving Insults – Jesus certainly includes personal physical injuries in his first example. But these are in fact quite rare. He includes all general ‘injuries’ to our character, role, and pride. People may slight us, challenge our authority or responsibility, treat us as stupid, or say things that hurt us, but we are to forget these injuries and not look for ways to get even. Two of the biggest problems in the Church are an unwillingness to forgive and holding grudges. By showing a truly forgiving spirit, by “turning the other cheek,” we show through our lives that we have been forgiven by God and are willing to forgive others (Mt 6.13).
Avoiding Unjust Law Suites – The second example Jesus uses deals with unjust law suites. He uses a cloak as an example since the Law (Dt 24.10.13) had specific protective provisions in this area. People often use legal procedures to gain unwarranted advantage over others. There are many examples today of absurd litigation. Obviously Christians are not to rush to court at every provocation (1 Cor 6.1-11), but we are also not to overreact when someone takes proceedings against us (for example by counter suing). We are to let the situation unfold and trust that the judges, and ultimately God, will vindicate us.
Giving More than Required – We are going to be placed in situations where we are required to do things that we feel are unfair. Jesus uses the practice of Roman soldiers who could ask anyone passing by to carry a burden between milestones along the highway (e.g., Mt 27.32). Our boss may ask us to do something that we feel is someone else’s job or he might assign us a dull task. Jesus says that we are to do the assigned work, not insisting that it is beneath us or appealing to privilege. We are also to go beyond the request and do our work exceptionally well.
Christians are to have a generous attitude that shows concern for others (Mt 5.42; Dt 15.7