John

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

It is likely that Jesus remained in Jerusalem for more than two months after the Feast of Tabernacles had ended, for we find Him there at the feast of dedication (John 10:21). He apparently departed not long after that (John 10:40) and did not return until Passover about four months later. It was Jesus’ custom to spend the night outside of Jerusalem in the Mount of Olives and then return to teach in the temple during the day (Luke 21:37-38). Unlike His many fellow Jews, He did not have a warm bed or even a roof over His head. No blanket, no pillow, no comfortable chair in the morning to sit and have breakfast. No, He slept outside on the ground.

3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

The scribes and Pharisees were constantly trying to trap Jesus into some act that would discredit Him before the people. Some of their attempts were very sly, such as whether the Jews should pay tribute to Caesar (Mat 22:17). By forcing Him to agree with one side, the other would become His enemy. But His answer on that occasion was so powerfully demonstrated that they went away without winning even a token point. Everyone marveled at His answer. However, their trap using the woman caught in adultery was even more difficult to escape and the way He defuses the situation is stunning.

     The Law commanded that adultery be punished by death, although it is unclear that it specified death by stoning (see Deut 22:22-24). It did require that the man be put to death along with the woman (Lev 20:10). Yet, in all the course of Israel’s long history, that law was only sparsely enforced. Many commentators believe that the Jews did not put to death adulterers in the time of Christ, first because the Romans did not allow them to carry out death sentences and second because adultery was rampant in the Jewish nation.

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

The Pharisees were not seeking truth and righteousness, they were just out to trap Jesus in His own words so that they had grounds to condemn Him: “Master, the Law of Moses required that this woman be stoned for her adultery, but what do You say?” Probably they thought He would not consent to her stoning and that would give them reason to accuse Him in the Sanhedrin of breaking the Law. After all, He seemed to select Sabbath days for times to heal the sick and maimed, and He disregarded some of the pharisaical laws of washing and uncleanness. On the other hand, if He consented to her stoning, they would be able to accuse Him before Herod, for the Jews were required to yield their judgments to the Roman courts to decide. Herod had the power to have someone put to death for making subversive statements such as these.

     While the Jews were right that Jesus would not favor stoning the woman, they failed to capitalize on His answer, which somehow allowed the woman to escape being stoned without Jesus having to actually speak against the Law. In fact, it is almost amusing to see the Pharisees fall in the very trap they had set for Jesus. They end up being the ones losing face instead of Him! When Jesus did not answer them immediately, they began pressing Him to respond, “Aha!” they thought, “We’ve got Him now, He doesn’t know what to say.” And then His answer, so calmly given but piercing to the heart, “Let the one among you which is without sin cast the first stone.” It took a little for the weight of His words to sink in, and then they began to feel the guilt and shame of their own sins.

     And yet, we may wonder why these hardened men could be so conscience-stricken that they would stop their arguments and voluntarily depart. After all, their own law said something not much different (see Deut 17:7). Perhaps Jesus helped them arrive quickly to that point by His writing on the ground. Maybe He began by writing the name of the eldest, followed by a particularly shocking sin and the names of various harlots. That man could not believe his eyes, and hurriedly left, and Jesus began writing the name of next eldest along with his sin. He too could not leave fast enough. I doubt the last ones even waited around to see their names written and their sins exposed.

10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

After the last accuser had left, Jesus stood up, and in life-changing words that still ring today He tells the woman, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more (compare John 5:14). The others had no grounds to condemn, being themselves sinners, and the One who did have authority to condemn chose to extend mercy instead of judgment. Go and sin no more. That is grace.

     The disciples and others who had been listening to Christ speak surely were astonished by what they had just seen. The Law (represented by the Pharisees) could not stand before Christ, the new and living way, for it was found powerless to rectify the situation in that it was weak in the flesh (Rom 8:3). The early church spoke of the “tyrants” of sin, Satan, the Law, etc which stood in accusation and of Mankind until the great work of Christ broke their hold upon us. These men are like those tyrants.

     This story parallels Mankind’s personal guilt before God, in that all except Christ have sinned and therefore cannot stand in condemnation of his fellow man. We may point to the Scriptures to warn others that no adulterer shall inherit the Kingdom of God (1Cor 6:9), and indeed that is a responsibility. However, no man has the authority himself to judge or condemn; he may only proclaim what the Bible has declared. Even this woman’s husband had no right to withhold forgiveness; in fact, he could have been one of the men who brought the woman before Christ and still he would have left without throwing a stone!

     Jesus forgave the woman of her sin, and we do not see that she even had to ask Him. Surely He knew her heart as completely as He knew the hearts of her accusers. He gave her a clean slate, an opportunity to start anew and follow a life of righteousness and purity. Perhaps no other passage in all the Bible gives more hope to those deeply lost in sin as does this one, although the salvation of the thief on the cross comes close. “Christ receiveth sinful men,” said the songwriter, and that is clearly in evidence here.  

     It is disappointing to read evangelical commentators (Barnes, Clarke, Gill, JFB, Poole) attempt to make this account a civil issue and not a moral one, so as not to break their respective churches’ unholy alliance with the civil authorities in punishments and executions of those who disobeyed the civil law. They do not even offer proofs for their blatantly wrong statements. JFB even dares to say that Jesus did not forgive the woman, He simply ignored her sin. That commentator continues, “[Jesus] meddles not with the magistrate’s office, nor acts the Judge in any sense.” I cannot imagine that an honest reader would arrive at such conclusion. Only great and irrational bias would do so.

12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

The comparison of light and darkness with Christ and evil is made at least five times in the book of John (John 1:9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35, 46). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says His people are the light of the world (Mat 5:14), although that would be in a secondary sense. See also Luke 2:32; 2Cor 4:4.

     Some commentators (see JFB) propose a time gap between verses 11-12 and place the following discourse in the evening, perhaps in connection with the festival of lights which is celebrated at the time of the feast of tabernacles. As the lights were being lit and the dark areas began to be illuminated, Jesus used the occasion to teach a spiritual truth.

     Who, other than the Son of God, would even dare or think to proclaim, “I am the light of the world.” Statements such as these should be carefully considered by skeptics and doubters, for it can only be absolutely true or very false. It is either the authentic claim of a true individual or wild words of a madman. The rest of Jesus’ life shows without doubt that He was no madman. Jesus is the light of life (John 1:4). The physical light that disperses darkness and allows us to see clearly is able to give us the light of understanding, but the spiritual light of Jesus is able to give us the light of eternal life!

13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true. 14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go. 15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man. 16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. 17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

Though the Jews manipulated it greatly, their Scripture required a matter to be established by the mouths of two or three witnesses (Deut 19:15). On that basis they accuse Jesus’ teaching and authority as invalid. Jesus points out that just because there is only one witness does not make the account untrue, and that His record is true. Jesus had already spoken clearly on this subject in John 5:30-39, in which He offered several witnesses to His identity: John the Baptist, His works of miracles and signs, and His Father’s Scriptures. Here in verses 17-18 He briefly repeats that topic.

     Ye judge after the flesh. They were judging Him in an earthly, physical manner when they should have been judging Him in a heavenly, spiritual way, by weighing His works and words against God’s standard. As He said in the previous chapter, Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment (John 7:24). Jesus’ judgments are always right because He knows completely the hearts and minds of men.

     I judge no man. This may align with passages like John 3:17; 12:47, but should not be taken to express the full truth of the subject. Other passages make it known that Jesus does judge both men and the world (John 5:22, 30; 9:39). And later in this same conversation Jesus tells them, I have many things to say and to judge of you (John 5:22). Read in the context, I think Jesus is saying that, unlike His adversaries, He judges no man after the manner of the flesh. He does judge, but His judgment is righteous and true, because it is based upon heavenly, spiritual values. The Jews’ outward, fleshly views cannot compare with Jesus’ judgment. 

     The witness of God the Father is also discussed in John 5:37.

19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

The KJV capitalizes the word Father, the translators apparently believing that the Jews had knowledge of Jesus’ heavenly Father. That is a very doubtful inference to make, for they claimed God was their Father too (John 8:41) and believed Him to be in heaven. It is much more likely that the Jews were referring to Jesus’ earthly father in the same derisive manner they had earlier (John 6:42). “Where is your father? Oh, he’s probably home in Galilee, working in his carpenter shop. That’s your star witness?” (John 6:42).

20 These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.

According to Josephus, the treasury was found in or near the court of women, so called because it was that part of the Temple open to all Jews (but not Gentiles). It was a large court that contained thirteen chests where people would place their money offerings. Being a large, public area, it is possible that Jesus went there frequently (see Mark 12:41-42; Luke 21:1-4). He appeared boldy in the temple, and it was not for lack of trying that the Jews could not arrest Him, but because His hour had not yet come.

21 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. 22 Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come. 23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

With these words Jesus foretold His death and ascension into heaven. Very similar instances upon this subject can be found in John 7:34; 13:33. They could not follow Him because they were of the world and He is from heaven; they would die in their sins and be estranged from God (John 3:31) because they would not believe in Him. In the previous occasion, the Jews wondered if they would not find Him because He was going to preach to the Gentiles, whom they counted as dogs (John 7:35). Now they apparently discern correctly that He is speaking of His death, but accuse Him of planning suicide, which according to the Jews meant eternal damnation in Hell. It was a serious charge, filled with venom and derision, yet Jesus does not become angry and simply observes that such wickedness is from beneath…of this world, and for this they would die in their sins. 

24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. 25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. 27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. 29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Throughout this chapter, the Jews are mocking and criticizing Christ, and their contempt grows into such anger that at last they will try to stone Him (John 8:59). The event that finally incensed them beyond control was Jesus’ proclamation, Before Abraham was, I AM (John 8:58), and they correctly connected His words with God’s answer to Moses: “My name is, I AM THAT I AM” (Ex 3:13-14). The listening Jews were already suspicious of Jesus because of what He says in the present passage: If ye believe not that I am [he] ye shall die in your sins…When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he] (v24, 28). The words in parentheses are not in the Greek text, although they could be implied (compare John 9:9). That His choice of words did arouse their suspiciones is confirmed by their response: Who art thou? Who makest thou thyself? (v25, 53).

     Three times in this discourse Jesus says, I am, and His intention is unmistakable. By using the name that God gave Himself, Jesus makes Himself out to be God. The Jews were outraged. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and other groups who do not believe that Jesus is God find themselves in the shocking position of taking up stones with the Jews to kill Jesus for proclaiming Himself to be the great I AM.

     I have many things to say and to judge of you. Meaning either that He would yet do so, or that while there was much He could judge of them He would refrain from so doing because He did and said only what the Father wanted Him to do and say (John 16:12). The book of Matthew devotes several chapters to Jesus’ pointed condemnation of the Pharisees and other religious leaders of the Jews. His judgments are true because they originate in heaven, with the Father, the One who sent Jesus into the world. The selfish and jealous Jews were so focused on protecting themselves and their positions of power that they would not open their minds to understand what Jesus was teaching. They were constantly a step behind in following His logic (see similar in John 7:27-29).

     When ye have lifted up the Son of man. This is an amazing prophecy which gives the manner of His death (John 3:14) and who was responsible. Yet the people listening wouldn’t understand until afterward, just as Jesus said. “Then shall ye know that I am, and that all I do and say originates with the Father.” Jesus’ identity would be confirmed when the Father raised Him from the dead (John 12:32; 14:10). Luke’s account of Jesus’ crucifixion seems especially written to identify and confirm that the Jews did recognize that Jesus was the Son of God when He was lifted up (Luke 23:44-48).

30 As he spake these words, many believed on him. 31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

In spite of His rejection by the Jewish authorities, many of the Jews did believe on Jesus. It was His manner and words that convinced them. The Jews criticized, questioned, slandered and ridiculed Jesus throughout His earthly ministry, but we never once see Him become angry or discomforted, and that unusual quality must have contributed greatly to confirming the belief of His followers. The normal response of man is to become defensive and agitated upon receiving slander, but Jesus calmly and easily parried every verbal thrust and then cut them to the heart with His own piercing truths. The Jews, and not this sole Man, were the ones who broke beneath the strain as the contents of their wicked hearts were revealed.

     Yet, hearing and believing as one-time events will not save: If ye continue in My word, then are ye My disciples indeed. This simple phrase contains a lot of important truths for every disciple of Christ. If ye (a condition implying voluntary, personal, responsible, individual choice) continue in(ongoing act of following and remaining faithful) My Word (the commandments and doctrine of Jesus Christ, the Son of God) then are ye My disciples indeed (genuine and certain followers of Christ). The one that claims to believe in Christ but does not follow His doctrine is a liar; we are able to recognize those who are disciples indeed in this way (1John 2:3-4). That is not a popular thought among many churches today, but it is the truth from the very mouth of Christ. “It is not our place to judge,” we commonly (and erroneously) hear. Making the foregoing observation is no judgment, its a statement of fact!

     The truth shall make you free. In the next verses we see the Jews taking offense at Jesus’ statement, but for the Christian it all makes sense. Jesus also said, I am the way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6), and in verse 36 He will make that connection clear, saying, If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. While Jesus is the Truth and He alone has the power to free, believing and continuing in the truth of His Word are essential and inseparable components of salvation. Yet, amazingly, some Christians attempt to divorce these two, and deny that the Word refers to His written doctrine. “Believe on Jesus Christ,” they say, “And not on His written Word. Jesus Christ is the Word, and to believe on the written Word is to worship it in the place of Christ.” The error in such thinking should be evident, but it continues to be preached by the educated, intellectual crowd because they are unwilling to accept the Scriptures as the true words of Jesus. Shockingly, their false statement makes the knowledge of Christ impossible, the Gospel of Christ to have no credible foundation, and the will of God a matter of personal, human determination. Christ and His plan for mankind is discovered almost exclusively in His doctrine as recorded in written Word of Life (John 1:17) which the Holy Spirit will help us to understand it (John 16:13).

33 They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? 34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. 35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. 36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

The Jews misunderstood Jesus again according to their familiar pattern of listening physically and literally when Jesus was speaking spiritually. The Greek word that the KJV translates servant is the same Greek word for slave, and in this context the better translation is slave. The one who lives in sin is a slave to sin and the Devil, as also the Apostle details in Rom 6:15-22 (and 2Pet 2:19). Christ has come to set us spiritually free fom that prison of death (Rom 8:2; 1Cor 15:57).

     The Jews professed to be Abraham’s seed, and in the literal sense they were (John 8:37); but not in the greater, spiritual sense (John 8:39; Gal 3:7). The Jews also claimed to have never been in bondage to any man, but they were either lying, ignorant, or following a flawed rationale, for in fact they had been in bondage more time than free! Egypt, Syria, Babylon, Phylistia and Rome had all brought Israel into servitude. Perhaps they were hoping to distract Jesus into a side-argument. If so, He did not take the bait.

    The servant abideth not in the house. A slave has no inheritance in a household, but the son belongs in the family line forever. In setting free the one who believes in Him, Jesus adopts him as a son such that he is a joint-heir with Christ in the future, heavenly blessings (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:5-6; 1John 3:1-2). Such a person is free indeed!

     The Greek manuscripts had no punctuation, but the KJV translators chose to capitalize the word son in verses 35-36, thus deciding for us how to read that verse. In my opinion, they are wrong in verse 35, where the word son does not refer to Jesus but to all those who become sons of God by adoption. The Son in verse 36 refers to Christ.

37 I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. 38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. 39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

The Jews were very proud that they were Abraham’s seed, and basically thought their election and salvation was set and sealed forever. Yet, while the Law did seem to privilege the Jews alone before God, exceptions had been made. Rahab and Ruth were not Jews, but they are even found in the lineage of Christ. John the Baptist told the prideful Jews, “Do not trust in the fact that you have Abraham as your father, for God is able to raise up children of Abraham from dead stones!” (Mat 3:9). Ishmael was the first blood child of Abraham, but he did not inherit the promise. Adoption is every bit as sure and legitimate a sonship as is to be a naturally born son. 

     I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye de that which ye have seen with your father. Essentially Jesus is saying, “Your father is not My Father,” to which the Jews say, Abraham is our father. And Jesus answers, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham. They caught His implication, but cannot overthrow its weight. Jesus is speaking God’s truth to them and living blamelessly before them, and they respond by trying to kill Him. They cannot be sons of Abraham, who loved the truth and lived it faithfully. No, they were simply doing the deeds of their father (v41). 

     In the third chapter to the Galatians the apostle Paul speaks at length concerning Abraham’s descendants as he tries to show the Jewish Christians the futility of keeping the Law of Moses. The real evidence that one is a child of Abraham is a spiritual consideration based on similar faith and obedience. Physical bloodlines do not matter; adoption is available.

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. 42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. This passage contains some of the harshest, most judgmental words in all of Scripture, and they are declared after the Jews profess to have God for their Father (v41). Until now in this chapter, Jesus’ critics have ben responding in very physical terms, but at last they enter into His spiritual speech, saying, “God is our father.” Jesus shows that cannot be, seeing that He came from God and spoke His truth to them (John 7:28-29), and yet they would not believe Him.

     We be not born of fornication. The thoughts of the Jews’ minds are unclear. Did they know the circumstances of Jesus’ birth, and were accusing Jesus of being born of fornication? Or were they simply standing proud upon their pure bloodlines to Abraham? Probably the latter is correct, for Jesus had just denied their Abrahamic descendency and implied that they were doing the deeds of [another] father. 

     If God were your Father, ye would love Me. Compare to v39, “If Abraham were your father, you would do the works of Abraham.” The two categories of men are very clearly defined: Those who love God and believed the words of the One he had sent, and those who love the lusts of the devil and do his deeds. They did not understand [His] speech because His Word had no place in them (v37), having been deceived by the father of lies and thus become his children.

     I proceeded forth and came from God. Some use this phrase to deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, saying that the Greek here makes reference to a natural, human birth. This is a strawman argument, as I have shown in the note on John 1:14, for we do not deny that Jesus was born naturally as a human.

     The devil was a murderer from the beginning and is the father of lies (1John 3:8), guilty of the death of every man, both physically and spiritually. Satan’s first sin was rebellion against God, and his second sin was lying to Eve, which led to the sentence of death upon every man (Rom 5:12).

45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. 46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? 47 He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. 48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?

The simple, factual words of Christ in verses 45-48 could not be countered by the Jews, and so they turn to personal attack, “You are nothing but a demon-possessed Samaritan,” they sneer. The importance of seeking, finding and following truth cannot be overstated, and by His miracles and signs Jesus supplied ample proof that His was speaking the words of God. Some men seek and find the truth, but do not have the fortitude to follow it. The Pharisees, however, were not even seeking. Their ears and hearts were shut; they could not hear Christ.

     Because I tell you the truth, ye believe Me not. The word is specific. They were children of their father, the liar, and they loved lies and untruth; therefore, because Jesus spoke the truth they rejected it. It is a very strong denunciation that goes to the root of the problem. They are not of God and thus not of the truth; they will not listen because He is speaking the truth, and they love lies.

     Which of you convinceth me of sin? None of them could come even close to proving that Jesus’ words were untrue. Why then would they not believe? Their best accusation was that He had broken the sabbath by working a miracle of healing upon it, but that charge He had overthrown easily. At the end of His life, they came up empty of accusations, and resorted to false witnesses in order to condemn Him.

     By calling Him a Samaritan, the Jews were accusing Him of being in a condition even worse than being born of fornication (v41), for the Samaritans had corrupted the history and commandments of the Scriptures. A Gentile was held in higher esteem (however slightly) than a Samaritan. Concerning their charge that He had a devil, see John 10:20-21.

49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me. 50 And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth. 51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. 52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

In another place Jesus addresses the absurdity of the claim that He was possessed of a devil. He was casting out Satan’s demons: how then can He be demon-possessed? Satan would never permit that his kingdom be torn down by his own servants. So when a stronger One comes and pushes his demons out, it must be of God (see Mat 12:24-29).

     Ye do dishonour Me, and My Father. Apparently a simple statement of fact, given without anger or bitterness (John 5:23). The Father deserves all glory and honor, and He will glorify the Son even though men do not (John 8:54; 7:18; 17:1).

      If a man keep My saying, he shall never see death. Spoken in the spiritual sense, not of the physical body but of the soul (Deut 30:19-20). The Jews however, again failed to appreciate His meaning, whether purposely or ignorantly does not matter. They again accuse Him of being demon-possessed for saying that He is able to keep men from dying, but are thinking physical death while He is speaking of spiritual death. See similar language in John 5:24; 6:50; 11:25. In the Revelation, John speaks of a second death, and that is the death no true Christian will ever see (Rev 2:11; 20:6; 20:14; 21:8).

53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? 54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: 55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

There is no way the Jews would believe that Jesus was the Son of God, it was far too much for them. His words were just too hard for them to accept, coming from a mere man. And we shouldn’t be too critical of them, for there are many today, even so-called Christians, who cannot accept that Jesus is God. Nevertheless, the following verses offer some strong and uncontestable proofs of His identity.

     God honors and glorifies Christ, and it is His praise that counts (see note v49). Jesus does only what the Father wants Him to do (John 8:28); He keeps His saying.

     Abraham rejoiced to see My day. They had thought to humiliate by accusing Him of giving Himself out to be greater than Abraham and the prophets, but Jesus will go far beyond that, saying that Abraham had rejoiced to see His day, and even that He was alive before Abraham (v58). In verse 56, however, Christ speaks in reference to who was the greater, Abraham or He Himself. And without doubt, Abraham did rejoice to see the future blessed days of Christ, although in shadows as from afar off (Heb 11:13). Abraham saw the voluntary sacrifice of Christ portrayed in Isaac, and he lived his entire life wandering as a pilgrim and stranger on the earth, desiring rather that heavenly country and no earthly city. I doubt there is a better OT example of a man who lived with an eye to those future, eternal blessings that can only be realized in knowing Christ.

     There is a subtle play on words here. Abraham rejoiced and was glad. Isaac’s name means “laughter.” I sincerely believe that Abraham could have understood that Isaac was a type of the Savior. He may have even thought that Isaac was the Savior, for he thought that God would raise him from the dead. The word rejoice in v56 means to jump for joy.  

57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

This passage should be read in connection with verses 24 and 28 (see notes there). Three times in this chapter Jesus proclaims to be the I AM. The only person who claimed for Himself that title is Jehovah-God (Ex 3:14). If the Jews were only suspicious of His intent in verses 24 and 28, they were absolutely certain upon hearing His words here. The fourth utterance of I AM is found in John 18:5-6 on Mount Olivet, when the Jews who had come to arrest Him fell to the ground upon hearing His words.

     Before Abraham was, I AM. They had kept their composure after being called the children of the devil (v44), but now they cannot contain their wrath, which certainly had been building up within them as this exchange has progressed. This is the second of three occasions in which the Jews attempt to kill Christ because He was making Himself to be God (John 5:18; 10:33). Stoning Him was supposedly a proper response according to the law of Lev 24:16.

     Jesus however, always evaded their grasp, this time going through the midst of them and so passed out of the temple. There is some controversy among commentators whether this was a true miracle or a simple physical exercise. It is an unimportant point, but for myself, it appears to be a miraculous deliverance. His hour was not yet come.

     The age of fifty was an important one in Jewish society, signaling the end of a man’s working life and the time at which his counsel was deemed to be worthy (Num 4:3). According to almost all scholars, Jesus was 30-35 years old at this time.

1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him. 2 Now the Jews’ feast of tabernacles was at hand.

The center of Jewry was the city of Jerusalem, but Jesus spent much of His ministry in Galilee, several days journey to the north. Both Jesus and John taught primarily outside of Jerusalem, apparently because of the wickedness and envy of the Jewish religious rulers. The previous chapter began around the time of the Passover (John 6:4), but then closes with no mention of it. Now the time of the feast of tabernacles is near. Had Jesus attended that year’s Passover? It is difficult to determine. Perhaps this verse implies that He did, but did not remain long and returned to Galilee because the Jewish rulers sought to kill Him (John 5:18). Alternatively, the statement that He would not walk in Jewry may indicate that He did not attend that year’s Passover, and instead remained in Galilee.

     This was the last feast of tabernacles that Jesus attended. His death would be only a few months later at the next scheduled feast in Jerusalem, the Passover. To my knowledge, this is the only NT reference to the feast of tabernacles, which took place within the third (and last) of the yearly convocations, the Feast of Ingathering in the seventh month. Tabernacles was a family occasion that consisted of living in tents, just as the children of Israel had done during their trek out of bondage. It ran from the 15th to the 21st (Lev 23:34), but the convocation for Ingathering really began on the 1st with a ceremonial blowing of Trumpets, which was followed by perhaps the most holy day in all in the Jewish calendar, the Day of Atonement on the 10th. The Ingathering convocation was finalized by a last gathering of the people on the 22nd, which may have been considered part of the Feast of Tabernacles (since it immediately followed Tabernacles), but was actually part of the larger festival of Ingathering. There were four additional mandatory “sabbaths” in the seventh month: the 1st (Trumpets), the 10th (Atonement), the 15th (Tabernacles) and the 22nd (Ingathering ends). Sometimes these mandatory sabbaths fell upon a regular Sabbath, and these were called high days in the time of Christ (John 19:31). All of these events were very sacred and are filled with symbolic meanings related to the final gathering of God’s people into the celestial kingdom (see my notes Zech 14:16-18 and Rev 14:1). I believe that John records these details of Jesus attending this last Feast of Tabernacles to call attention to the fact that Jesus fulfilled the symbolic details it contains. See Lev 23.

3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest. 4 For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world. 5 For neither did his brethren believe in him.

Apparently Jesus’ brethren urged Him to go to Judea and work His miracles there because they didn’t want to be associated with Him, and wished to be rid of Him. The word brethren likely includes His brothers and sisters, His uncles, cousins and wider relatives. Note that they wished Him to depart hence and go into the very place that the Jews sought to kill Him. Maybe they were part of the earthly-minded crowd who had wished to make Him their king after He had miraculously fed them (John 6:15), and maybe they were simply soul-hardened apostates. They were certainly not God-seekers, but selfish, coarse, loud, violent men which filled the Jewish race at that time. Not all of Jesus’ family disbelieved. Some of His disciples were relatives, and the Apostle James was a close relative, some think a brother and others a cousin (Gal 1:19).

     Many people – the rich, the poor, the powerful, the scribe, the ordinary cititzen – were offended by Him. He wasn’t the Messiah they wanted. The rich were offended at His poverty and the poor wanted a King that would give them food, the powerful wanted a savior from the Romans and the scholar wanted affirmation of the Law. Above all, the ordinary citizen wanted a Messiah to make them proud: a hard-talking, sword-wielding hero whose tongue and courage would unite the nation to new heights. And yet, there were many true wisemen among all those groups that saw the matter clearly and their hearts were drawn to Him for altogether different reasons. Here was a Man like none other; it was never so seen in Israel (Mat 9:33).

6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready. 7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. 8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.

The Jews had been plotting to kill Jesus practically from the beginning and so Jesus had to keep a low profile. His time of ministry was not complete, so He will not antagonize the Jews too much. It was foreshadowed by the OT law that He be offered on the day of the Passover.

     While it may appear that Jesus was not entirely truthful with His brethren, it is most likely a matter of translation. True, Jesus did wish to keep secret His plans to later attend the feast, but He did not lie about it. “Go up to the feast without Me,” He tells His brethren, “I’m not going yet because My time is not full come.” His words do leave room for Him to attend later.

     Your time is alway ready. For every person, the right time is now, the day of salvation is today (2Cor 6:2; Heb 3:13).

9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. 10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

By not traveling with His family to the feast of tabernacles, Jesus could go unobserved to Jerusalem. The feast lasted a whole week, so He could leave several days after His family and still arrive in time for some of the activities. The last day of the feast was the most important. Where were the twelve disciples? Did they go up to Jerusalem without Him, or did He make known to them His plan to attend secretly?

11 Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he? 12 And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people. 13 Howbeit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.

Jesus avoided much publicity by not arriving on the expected day, which lowered even more the false impressions of the crowds that He was supposed to become their literal king. The wondering and speculation among the people concerning Him continued, although everyone spoke carefully. They knew that the Jewish leaders were very critical of Him. Some thought He was a good man, and others thought He was nothing but a deceiver. They waffled back and forth between the two options, for, upon seeing Him work a miracle they would cry, Of a truth this is that prophet that should come into the world (John 6:14), only to later say disappointedly, This is an hard saying, who can hear it? (John 6:60).

     While the people (v12) refers to the general populace, the Jews (v11,13) may particularly indicate the Jewish religious rulers, as that word is often used with that meaning. Anyone who had a good opinion of Jesus guarded his words carefully for fear of being excommunicated from the synagogue (John 9:22).

14 Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught. 15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

Jesus delayed His public presentation in Jerusalem until about the midst of the feast. According to Lev 23:39-43, the feast of tabernacles lasted seven days, and was followed by a sabbath on the eighth day. Perhaps there is a parallel here to Dan 9:26-27, which foretells Messiah being cut off…in the midst of the week.

     Jesus had been brought up to be a carpenter and had never studied letters, so how did He learn to read, the people wondered? Nor had He attended the Jewish schools that taught boys the Law, and yet from an early age Jesus amazed the doctors of the law in the temple by His learning and insight (Luke 2:46-47). Those who He had grown up with were also astonished at His wisdom and works (Mat 13:54). Above all, the people were surprised at His interpretation of the Scriptures, which He seemed to know better than anyone else (Mat 7:29) even though He had no education (see Mal 3:1).

16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. 17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. 18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.

Jesus had the power to speak of things He had never been taught because His doctrine was not His own, it was God’s, who also had sent Him into the world to reveal the will of the Godhead unto mankind (John 12:49). The man who would sincerely follow the will of God must recognize that Christ’s doctrine originates in God. Jesus never worked a miracle to magnify Himself before men, nor did His doctrine draw attention to Himself in the earthly sense. Always His purpose was to point mankind to the true and righteous source of His teaching, the heaven of heavens of God the Father. The one who follows God’s will hath the witness in himself (1John 5:10), he knows that the doctrine is correct and true.

19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me? 20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?

By means of direct dictation from God, Moses gave the Law to the Jews. Yet history shows that they were unable to keep its holy precepts, some because of rebellion, others due to personal apathy, and still more by changing its meaning. So now, Jesus points out, is it not in keeping with your history that you reject Him who has brought God’s message directly to you in person, as God speaking to you face to face? (Deut 18:18).

     The multitude immediately professed ignorance of any nefarious plan to kill Jesus, but just a few verses later we read that those who lived in Jerusalem did indeed know that the chief rulers were seeking to kill Him (John 7:25). The feast of the tabernacles drew Jews from even the far reaches of the Roman Empire and some of these were apparently unaware that His life was in danger.

21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel. 22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. 23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day? 24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The one work to which Jesus makes reference is almost certainly His healing of the impotent man on the sabbath day at the pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem (John 5:1-15). The Jews had criticized Him for healing on the sabbath and had purposed to kill Him (John 5:16). This miracle apparently had taken place at the Passover a year and a half before (John 5:1), but it was still fresh in their minds and was probably a major part of the arguments for those who were defending Him (John 7:11-12). See note on John 6:4 for alternate ideas of the timing.

     Jesus points out that the even the Jews recognize that the Law of the Sabbath is superseded by the ordinance of circumcision on the eighth day. Thus, the Sabbath law, which commanded that no work was to be done upon it, was ignored and the rite of circumcision performed upon the Sabbath day if the eighth day happened to fall upon a Sabbath. The Jews would work on the Sabbath to pull an animal out of a pit (Mat 12:11), but would not allow an infirm person to be healed. What poor judgment! Instead of judging rightly, they were judging superficially. Jesus’ statement to judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment should not have been new to the Jews, for their own Scriptures taught the same (Deut 1:16-17).

25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill? 26 But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ? 27 Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.

The common Jew in Jerusalem was not ignorant of the fact that the chief rulers were filled with envy on account of Christ (Mat 27:18), and that they had been plotting to kill Him for at least two years now (John 5:18). But now some of them were confused, for He was speaking openly before all, with no opposition from the scribes and elders. It was as if they were condoning His teaching; had they changed their minds? Had the rulers decided that He was the very Christ after all? Why did they not arrest Him?

     When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is. Apparently, such was the thinking of those Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah, and they based their rejection of Him on the rabbinic idea that the Messiah would come shrouded in mystery as concerning His origin. They taught that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem (Mat 2:5-6; John 7:42), but that His genealogy would be unknown (which was their interpretation of Is 53:8, who shall declare His generation?).Their interpretation was not so badly in error, yet they failed to recognize it accurately described Jesus of Nazareth, for truly His generation is unknowable, having been born of a virgin with no true earthly father. They also failed to investigate His early life and so were unaware that He had been born in Bethlehem. They knew that He had lived from childhood in Nazareth of Galilee, and simply thought that He had been born there.

     On the other hand, if the rulers really thought Jesus was the Messiah, why were they rejecting Him? Would they really cast aside the One they had been waiting so long to receive? Tough questions.

28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. 29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.

They all knew the man Jesus, and His father Joseph, His family and His home, but few knew His real Father and His real home. He had tried to tell them of His real identity and origin, but nobody would believe Him (John 6:35-42). Jesus knew the Father even as the Father knew Jesus (John 10:15), but such statements the Jews considered blasphemous. Yet Jesus performed works that even the Pharisees acknowledged were only possible to be done by the hand of God (John 3:2). They refused to accept His testimony concerning His identity. 

30 Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come. 31 And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done? 32 The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him.

The rulers sought to take Him but without success. After another meeting to discuss the situation, the Pharisees and chief priests sent officers to apprehend him. But again they were destined to fail, because His hour was not yet come. They returned empty-handed. This time their excuse should have been a warning to these plotting men. “Why haven’t you brought Him to us yet?” the chief rulers demanded, to which the officers replied, Never man spake like this man (John 7:45-46).  

33 Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me. 34 Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come. 35 Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles? 36 What manner of saying is this that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come?

Here is another cryptic saying of Christ that caused more hand-wringing and controversy, but it made sense after His death and resurrection. Many of Jesus’ teachings were given with thought of His coming Kingdom, and the establishing of that Kingdom would be a task for the disciples. His words were laying the preliminary groundwork that would later become important, faith-building doctrine. Having the advantage of many years of history to our benefit, this particular riddle does not seem that difficult, but other parables were not so easily seen, even during the first centuries after Christ.

     Ye shall seek Me, and shall not find Me. While the first meaning is to His physical departure by death, there is also a spiritual intention. The Messiah was then present in their very midst, but He would be available to the Jews for a limited period. Shortly, He would return unto Him that sent Me. They would wish for Him, seek Him; but they had missed their opportunity. They would not find the Messiah. A similar statement is found in Luke 17:22. There is a day of salvation appointed for all men. Do not too throw away your opportunity (Is 55:6; Pro 1:28-29).

     What manner of saying is this…? The questions of this group of doubting Jews seem to originate in a prior decision to reject Him (as in v27). They were simply looking for more reasons to scoff at Him, “Is He going to teach the Gentiles!?” A prominent part of Jesus’ teaching was that He was the Son of God sent to earth by the Father, and I find it difficult to believe that they sincerely did not understand when He said, A little while I am with you, and then I go unto Him that sent Me. Like many do today when challenged, they were clouding the situation with supposed doubts and fictitious misunderstanding.

     The book of John contains at least ten highly figurative statements of Jesus in various levels of difficulty. In some cases and circumstances, it is hard to fault the Jews for not understanding. Here is a list of literally difficult, but spiritually simple, statements in the book of John: John 2:19-21; 3:3-4; 6:42-44; 6:51-52; 7:34-35; 7:37-39; 8:21-22; 8:32-33; 8:52-53; 12:34; 16:16-18.

37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

The last, great day of the Feast of Tabernacles was a holy convocation (Lev 23:34-36) to a special, mandatory “sabbath” upon the 22nd day of the seventh month, which was the eighth day of the Feast. This day marked the end of the Jewish religious calendar’s sacrifices and ceremonies as prescribed by the Law of Moses. The next year’s calendar would begin anew about 6 months later with the Festival of Unleavened Bread (see note on John 7:2). At this solemn assembly an offering by fire was made unto the Lord (Lev 23:36). In typology, the eighth day represents resurrection and seems to point to Jesus’ resurrection on the eighth day of Unleavened Bread, but why then the solemn assembly and the offering by fire? Perhaps it illustrates an important point concerning Jesus’ death and resurrection that isn’t much discussed, which is that without the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, the sacrificial atonement could not have been completed. How could Christ offer living water to those who believe if He is dead?

    We should note that the post-exilic Jews added to the Law of Moses the feasts of Hannukah and Purim. Both are celebrated in the six month gap between Tabernacles and Unleavened Bread. Hannukah is mentioned in John 10:22, where it is called the feast of dedication, which was an 8-day commemoration of the re-dedication of the temple by Judas Maccabeus about 190 years earlier.

    Jesus’ cry for all men to come unto Him and drink is again based in figurative language that He does not explain, although this time John does provide the meaning. Water is used often in figurative contexts to describe cleansing from sin (Eph 5:26; Heb 10:22; John 3:5), but we cannot confine that meaning to this passage. Truly, inner cleansing is first necessary, but then those living, cleansing waters will flow from the belly of the the man into all the world by the work of the Holy Spirit. The living water is the witness of the Spirit and the Word in the heart of the believer, which is the seal of our salvation (Is 12:3; Eph 1:13). Study also passages such as Is 44:3; Acts 2:17; Is 32:15.

     As the Scripture hath said. The passage John has in mind is not easily determined, for there is nothing in the Old Testament that contains the idea of “rivers of living water flowing from the belly of he that believes.” However, a part is based on Isaiah 55:1, Ho everyone that thirsteth come ye to the waters, which John also loosely quotes in Rev 22:17. Clearly the figure illustrates the spread of the Gospel through the work of the Holy Spirit by means of human witness and preaching. See a similar analogy in Ezekiel 47:1-12, where the waters do not proceed from the belly, but from under the altar. The Greek word for belly (koilia) is used figuratively of the inner part of a man (Rom 16:18; Rev 10:9-10). It appears often in the Septuagint.

40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. 41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? 42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? 43 So there was a division among the people because of him.

Throughout this chapter, the confusion and division of the people over Jesus is constantly evident (John 7:12, 26, 31, 43). There was much contention and mis-information. Some said He was the Prophet, which was a reference to Moses’ prophecy in Deut 18:18-19 (see also John 6:14), while others believed He was the Christ, for apparently the Jews did not take Moses’ words to describe the Messiah although it clearly does. Then there were the unbelieving group, which included most of the Jewish rulers, and they repeated a popular objection, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? (John 1:46). See note on v25.

44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him. 45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? 46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. 47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? 48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? 49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.

Though the Jewish officers, priests, Pharisees and virtually all other religious sects of the Jews were united in their quest to destroy Jesus (Ps 2:2-3), they could not seem to lay their hands on Him (Ps 2:4). Attempts were made to arrest Him, and perhaps secretly kill Him, but their plans continued to be thwarted.

     Never man spake like this man. How true! And even more striking since it was not said by His friends. I believe that Jesus’ powerful words were accompanied by the eyes and demeanor of a man with more than human authority. How else to envision a whole company of men fleeing from the temple at the sight of one man with only a whip! Likewise at this occasion, the men sent to arrest Him were afraid to do so, not because of His imposing physical strength, but because never man spake like this man! In contrast, when Paul was found worshipping in the temple they immediately grabbed him and would have killed him then and there except for the intervention of Roman soldiers (Acts 21:30-31).

     This people who knoweth not the law are cursed. While many of the common people believed on Jesus, very few of the Jewish rulers did, which according to their version is because THEY knew and kept the Law, but the people were ignorant and cursed. This idea apparently comes from Deut 27:26, see also Gal 3:10.

50 Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,) 51 Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth? 52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. 53 And every man went unto his own house.

Only one cool head remained, it seems, but even his question was roughly cast out of hand. They had blamed the people for not knowing the Law, but when Nicodemus gently asked if the Law allows a person to be judged, sentenced and killed without trial, they erupted in anger and did not even attempt to answer the question. And Nicodemus was right, the Mosaic Law had quite specific rules for judging wrongdoers, and they were being completely ignored. See Ex 23:1; Deut 1:17; 19:15.Out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. Which is an amazing fact. Here was a Man with incredible wisdom and power with no background.

1 After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias.

All four Gospels have the account of Jesus feeding five thousand men with only five loaves and two fish (Mat 14:14-21; Mark 6:32-44; Luke 9:10-17). Matthew and Mark record two occasions, the second at which He fed 4000 men (Mat 15:30-38; Mark 8:1-9). As his custom, John supplies a few details which the other accounts do not, chiefly Jesus’ conversation with Philip and Andrew. The sea of Galilee was also called Gennesaret (Mat 14:34; Luke 5:1), which derives from the Hebrew Chinnereth (Num 34:11). Only John calls it the sea of Tiberias (John 21:1), probably because Herod Antipas had built the town of Tiberias on its shores in honor of Tiberius the Roman Caesar who ruled at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 3:1; John 6:23, see Josephus).

2 And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased. 3 And Jesus went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples.

Jesus didn’t go purposeless up into this mountain, for He often went to pray (Mat 14:23; Luke 9:28). Luke says He went up into this mountain with His disciples upon receiving the news that Herod had beheaded John the Baptist in prison (Luke 9:9-12; Mat 14:10-13). In my opinion, Jesus gives an example for working missionaries who are ever surrounded by others and their needs, that periodically a time should be made for rest and revitalization (Mark 6:31).

4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.

John mentions at least three, and possibly four, Passovers in his Gospel (John 2:13; 5:1; 6:4; 13:1). Most commentators believe the feast in John 5:1 refers to the Passover, though some think it may have been Pentecost (see below). If it be Passover, then a full year passed between the healing of the cripple in the pool of Bethesda in chapter five and the feeding of the five thousand in chapter six. John does not directly say whether Jesus went to Jerusalem for this feast or if He passed the time in Galilee. Jesus’ continuing actions in Bethsaida and Capernaum recorded in this chapter imply that He did not attend that year’s Passover and stayed in Galilee because of the Jews’ plot to kill Him (see John 7:1-2).  

     Alternatively, is it possible that the phrase, was nigh, simply means it was about the time of Passover and that actually the Passover had just concluded? For if the standard idea is correct that the previous chapter relates events of the Passover, then a whole year has gone by without John noting a single detail in the life of Jesus. Moreover, in the next chapter Jesus is again in Jerusalem, this time for the feast of Tabernacles, when He reminds the people His healing the impotent man as recorded in chapter five (John 7:20-24). Would He have expected them to remember that event so vividly if it had taken place a year and a half earlier? It would have been still fresh in their minds if the feasts of chapters 5-6 are the same Passover of just 6 months prior. Also, would the Jews be wondering why He had not appeared at Tabernacles (John 7:11-12), when He apparently had not even attended that year’s Passover? 

     A third possibility is that the feast of chapter 5 was not the Passover, but a different feast, such as Pentecost or Ingathering, which could significantly shorten the time between Jesus’ healing the impotent man on the Sabbath and His clash with the Jews. These ideas could be used to argue against the belief that Jesus’ ministry lasted 3-1/2 years.

5 When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? 6 And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do.

The other Gospels do not record this conversation. The feeding of the five thousand took place near Bethsaida (Luke 9:10), which was the hometown of Peter, Andrew and Philip (John 1:44). Perhaps that is why Jesus asked them where they could buy food, since they were most familiar with that region.

7 Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little.

Moses felt as Philip when God promised to feed the children of Israel meat for one whole month (Num 11:21-23).

8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, saith unto him, 9 There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?

This minor detail provokes some questions: How did Andrew know about this lad and his lunch? Had the boy offered to share? He was probably from a poor family, for well-to-do families typically used wheat instead of barley for their bread. What a story this boy had to tell, “Jesus used my lunch to feed five thousand people!” Another question: How is it that only one lad had gone to this meeting prepared? And how were the rest of that great multitude expecting to eat? The answer may help us understand Jesus’ words to them in John 6:26. 

10 And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. 11 And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would. 12 When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost. 13 Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten.

While the miracle of feeding 5000 men with just 5 loaves of bread and two fish has much merit simply as a demonstration of God’s power, there is also a typological lesson to be seen in the details. Bread is type of the Word, of Christ Himself: I am the living bread which came down from heaven, if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever, and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world (John 6:51). His bread is freely available to all, abundantly sufficient forever and divinely provided. It originates miraculously, but He uses the disciples to spread it to others. It is free to all, but He does not force it upon anyone; in order to gain it, one must personally accept it, take it and eat it (Rev 10:9-10). Five loaves of bread. Five is the number of God’s grace to man. Two small fishes. Two is the number of God’s choice. Twelve fragments left over. Twelve is the number of the elect of God (see note on Rev 22:21).

     On several occasions, food was miraculously multiplied in the Old Testament. Elisha was involved in a miracle that resulted in fragments of food being left over (2King 4:42-44).

14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

The Jewish idea of their coming Messiah included God’s promise to Moses, that He would raise up a Prophet in Israel who would speak the complete words of the Lord directly to the people. Whosoever would not hearken unto His words spoken in the name of the Lord, it would be required of him (Deut 18:18-19). This obviously was a true prophecy of the Messiah and some of the Jews did recognize Jesus by it, however, it was not until after His resurrection that the disciples’ eyes were opened, and then they were bold to identify Him as that Prophet (Acts 3:22-23; 7:37). See John 1:21,25.

15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone. 16 And when even was now come, his disciples went down unto the sea, 17 And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them.

The Jews’ flawed concept of the Christ is what led them to attempt this action. It was high time, they thought, that He asserted Himself as their physical Savior and King. Even His relatives and disciples thought He should show Himself to the world (John 7:4; Luke 24:21). Throughout His ministry Jesus had to evade these attempts to politicize His mission (see note Mat 15:21). From the parallel account in Mat 14:22-23, it appears that in order to avoid being forcibly made king, Jesus divided the company, sending His disciples by boat to the other side of the Sea of Galilee while He remained on shore with the multitude. After retiring alone for the night, Jesus then followed the disciples by walking on the water. His late-night departure went unnoticed by the multitude, which awoke confused. Jesus was nowhere to be seen, but there was no missing boat to indicate that He had secretly left (Mat 15:22-25).

     Over the sea toward Capernaum. Mark however, says that Bethsaida was their destination (Mark 6:45). The two towns are not far apart (five miles?), and clearly the feeding of the five thousand took place outside the city in a desert place, perhaps between the two towns such that one witness could differ from the other and both still be right.

18 And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew. 19 So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid. 20 But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid. 21 Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately the ship was at the land whither they went.

The sudden wind made the voyage slower and allowed Jesus to overtake them by walking (Mat 14:24). From whence came this contrary wind? Some say it came from Satan, but could it not have been ordained by Christ? Notice that by a miracle of conveyance the ship was immediately at destination after Jesus had entered the ship.

     The disciples had traveled about 3 miles and were right in the middle of the sea when they saw Jesus walking on the water, moving as if He was going to pass them on the side (Mark 6:48). Only Matthew reports Peter’s attempt to also walk on water, which took place at this time (Mat 14:25-30).

22 The day following, when the people which stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone; 23 (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks:) 24 When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. 25 And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?

Jesus had successfully thwarted the multitude’s attempts to make Him a king the day before, but now they found Him once again. They were baffled by how He could have arrived before them and was already with His disciples, for no ships had left Tiberias after the disciples had departed, and they had seen the disciples ship leave without Him. Jesus, however, did not explain to them what had happened. That was information only for His disciples.    

26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

The multitude sought Jesus because they recognized that He was able to entirely supply their earthly needs: He had healed the sick among them, He had provided food in the desert. Surely He could also deliver them from their enemies and work any miracle that might be required. In short, they sought Him not because they saw His miracles as evidence of divine authority but for selfish reasons involving their physical needs and comforts. And even today, many people seek Him for the same wrong motives! When life is going well, they have no need of Christ, but when health fails, marriages are struggling, or money troubles arise, it is then that they seek Christ.

27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

Like the woman at the well, the multitude wished for an easier life (John 4:15) in which they didn’t have to work for their food. Jesus doubly reprimands them: “It is right that you labor for your meat (2Thes 3:10), above all however, seek that meat which endures unto everlasting life.” He speaks metaphorically of meat as a symbol of Himself and later says, Whoso eateth My flesh…hath eternal life…for My flesh is meat indeed (John 6:54-55). Those who partake of what Christ offers spiritually will live forever spiritually (see John 6:55; 4:14).

    For Him hath God the Father sealed. “God has confirmed with His own seal that the Son of Man is the Messiah” (John 3:33; 4:26). A king’s seal was used to mark ownership and also to confirm/attest to authenticity (ex. Esther 8:8; Dan 6:17; Mat 27:66; Jer 32:10-14). God sent His Son to the world and placed His seal upon Him so that all might know and believe in Him. That seal is, of course, a figurative one, and represents His miracles, His authoritative teaching (John 7:46), His perfect grace and truth. God has shown by many infallible proofs (Acts 1:3) that Jesus is the true God and eternal life (1John 5:20). See also John 3:33.

28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

There is an easily missed connection between Jesus’ admonition and the people’s response; the words labour and work are the same in the Greek. Jesus says, “Work to attain that meat which endures unto everlasting life.”

     “What is the work of God that we might do it?”, the people ask.

     “The work of God is to believe on Him whom He hath sent.” This is first a reference to that basic step of saving faith, which is a mental affirmation that Jesus is the Son of God, and salvation is only by His divine forgiveness. Before obedience to the words of Christ (Mat 7:24-25), one must know, believe and accept His words. The Greek word for believe (pisteuo) is the verb form of faith (pistis). See note on Mat 14:31.

30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? 31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. 32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. 34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

The people’s questions expose their shallow hearts, and give reason to Jesus’ stern words. They had seen the sick miraculously healed, the demons cast out and bread multiplied without end. Yet they dared to ask, “What sign will you work that will make us believe in You?”

     Our fathers did eat… bread from heaven. They seem to be insinuating that Jesus should continue to provide them with free food (v34) because Moses had given their forefathers food in the desert for forty years. “Provide us with food like Moses did, and then we will believe in You,” is their challenge. Jesus refuses to be drawn into that conversation, and instead uses Moses to teach them new truths that point them to the Father, who was the true provider of that wilderness manna, and who now had sent the true bread from heaven, the Son of man. 

     In these verses Jesus speaks in highly figurative language. I am the bread of life: he that cometh to Me shall never hunger. He is speaking of spiritual bread, spiritual hunger and spiritual life. The contrast between the true bread and that physical manna is clear. Both manna and the true bread had come from God out of heaven, but the manna had not satisfied their hunger for more than a day, much less endure unto everlasting life.

     There are many additional parallels between physical bread and Jesus, the bread of life. The following are from John Gill’s commentary:

1. Bread is made from a grain of wheat, which must first fall into the ground and die before it can bring forth fruit (Joh 12:24).
2. To prepare bread, the wheat grains must be threshed and ground into flour, which express the sufferings of Christ.
3. The flour must be mixed with oil and kneaded together to form a dough that is then baked in the fire. Oil and fire are types of the Spirit.
4. Bread is a vital part of maintaining life; Jesus is that true bread which maintains spiritual life as long as He is “eaten” daily.
5. Unleavened bread, which was eaten on the day of the passover, typifies Christ’s perfection and sinlessness.
6. The shewbread placed daily in the holy place typifies His continual intercession, ever available, ever efficacious but only for priests (Re 1:6).
7. The meat offerings (actually bread, not flesh) involved in the sacrifices express man’s knowledge and acceptance of the Bread.
8. The manna, or natural bread from heaven, is yet an additional type of that True Bread from heaven. It was round, sweet, white, small (Ex 16:31), which may be natural symbols of Christ’s spiritual attributes – eternal, pure, true, all-sufficient, useful.    

     In the rest of the chapter, Jesus answers the Jewish multitude’s hardness of heart with true yet difficult to understand parables (John 6:60,66). It was His way of purging the real seekers from the self-seekers (Mat 13:13).     

36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

The multitude was no different than their forefathers who had seen the Lord’s miracles and yet were barred from the promised land because of their unbelief (Heb 4:11). Not that they doubted the veracity of the miracles, but that it did not produce in them the faith that saves. Like the Pharisees of the previous chapter who believed in God, they did not act in obedience and love of God (John 5:40-42; 8:47).

     Some in that multitude did believe and follow Christ. All that come to Him are accepted; not one will be disappointed or cast out. Regardless of prior sins and rebellions, Jesus will always accept the one who comes to Him in true humility and repentance. The Father and the Son work together to effect salvation (John 6:44).

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The will of God was to redeem mankind from Satan’s clutches, to give them the spiritual food that nourishes the soul unto everlasting life. That was the reason Jesus came down from heaven. But most of the Pharisees and the multitude were not interested in spiritual life. They were far too short-sighted. The present physical life and their own selfish, temporal desires were more important.  

     I should lose nothing. This is a sincere promise to all who trust in Christ, that salvation is sure to everyone who believes in Him (John 18:9; 17:12). Not one person will be forgotten or overlooked as happens occasionally in human relationships. But should raise it up again at the last day. Another promise. Every soul which has died in Christ will be resurrected at the last trump, and that this is an infallible word is affirmed by repetition, being repeated three times in the next few verses (v40, 44, 54).

     Every one which seeth the Son and believeth on Him. The multitude had seen the Son’s miracles and heard His doctrine, but they did not believe unto life-changing faith in Him. This same multitude sits in many churches today, seeing and hearing of Christ, but not believing to the point of obeying His commandments and living by His laws.

41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. 42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? 43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. 44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

The Jews would not believe Jesus’ testimony, that He had come down from heaven and that His Father was God. Perhaps if He had looked and dressed as a god they would have believed Him, and perhaps if He would have provided them with miracle food every day as they had wished they would have followed Him – but that is not the way God works with Mankind. He wants to develop faith and love in every human soul. And if any person doubt that constant miracles tend to develop unbelief rather than faith, we offer the children of Israel in the desert as evidence.

     “Isn’t this Jesus the Nazarene, whose father and mother we know personally? How can He say that He came down from heaven?” (Mat 13:55). While it may have been a hard saying for them to accept, why didn’t they ask the same questions when He had healed their sick ones and fed 5000 of them with only a boy’s lunch? For then they should have been able to believe His testimony, for no man is able to work such miracles.

     “I am not surprised that some of you do not believe Me,” Jesus says, “For unless the Father’s teaching draws a man to Me, that man cannot believe.” The next twenty verses explain what He means and He concludes by repeating it, saying, Therefore I said unto you, that no man can come unto Me, except it were given unto him of my Father (John 6:65). While Calvinists use this verse to support their idea of limited atonement, there is another way to understand this passage such that it does not contradict the many verses which teach that salvation is open to all: Come…whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely (Rev 22:17). If any man thirst, let him come unto Me (John 7:37).

     Except the Father…draw him. Later, John uses the same word to affirm that by His death Jesus would draw all men (John 12:32). The Spirit of God works in all the world to draw every man unto a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, but not all will hear, believe and repent. The call is more effectual in some hearts than in others, not because God works harder in certain persons (Rom 2:11), but because some hearts have better prepared themselves (Mat 13:23).

     They shall be all taught of God. Jesus uses a prophecy from the Jews’ Scripture to support His claim to be the Son of God come down from heaven. And while that prophecy (Is 54:13) seems a little indirect, none of the Pharisees disputed Jesus’ interpretation. I doubt it had crossed their minds that it would be so literally fulfilled – the Son of God, and thus God Himself, was standing before them and teaching them the truth of the Father and His will.

46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

This fact has been stated in various parts of the Scripture (Mat 11:27; John 1:18; 1John 4:12), yet John also records Jesus saying, he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father (John 14:6-10; 8:19). These verses cannot be reconciled without a correct understanding of the tri-une nature of God.  

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

See John 3:16-18; 3:36; 5:24; 11:25; Acts 16:31.

48 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

The bread of life. See note on John 6:35. Manna was a form of bread too. Both are symbols of the spiritual sustenance that is found only in Christ. the true bread (John 6:32) is Christ, that His flesh, which He has given for the life of the world (John 6:51). All who eat of this bread shall live for ever. Of course, Jesus does not mean that literally, physically we will live forever, so neither should we expect that He means to say that we must literally eat His flesh. 

     All those who ate the manna in the wilderness died, but those who eat the Bread from heaven will not die. Clearly Jesus is speaking of spiritual death when He says that the man who eats the true bread will not die, but what about those who ate the manna and died? Did He mean their physical death or their spiritual death? It does not seem right that He would draw a unlike comparison by saying the Jews had died physically but those who partake of His bread would not die spiritually. More probably He spoke of spiritual death in both cases, for the children of Israel who ate that wilderness manna all died without seeing the promised land on account of their unbelief (Heb 3:8-11, 17-19).

     I am the living bread which came down from heaven (v51). The Christian apologist rightly points out that statements such as these could only be said by a complete maniac or by a true witness. There is no middle ground here – Christ was either entirely truthful, or He was the biggest liar this world has ever seen, for no man in all history has dared to make such claims. And no man has ever been able to back up His words with doctrine and miracles that only God can do.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

The Jews’ reaction to Jesus’ words would be normal for the natural man, “How can He give us His flesh to eat?” Nicodemus, a Pharisee and Jewish ruler, was equally stumped when Jesus told him that in order to be saved a man must be born again (John 3:4, 9). Even His close disciples did not understand what He meant by saying they must eat His flesh (see v60). Yet if anyone should have been able to understand, it would be the Jews, for while Jesus’ words are deeply symbolical, they are rooted in the Jewish Old Covenant sacrificial system instituted by God through Moses, the man who had provided their forefathers with manna.

     Jesus did not answer the Jews’ question of how they could eat His flesh, and instead strengthened His statement: Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you. To the natural Jewish mind, this would be heretical in the extreme. Hadn’t Moses taught that drinking blood was unlawful and punishable by permanent excommunication from Israel? (Lev 17:10). Those who had pre-disposed themselves against Jesus Christ could think of nothing other than a natural meaning, but the honest listener with knowledge of the OT sacrifices might have been able to see the meaning behind this so evidently figurative language.

     To eat of something is to become one with it, to identify with it in a spiritual sense. David wrote that a taste of God’s Word was sweeter than honey (Ps 34:8; 19:10), and when God told Ezekiel (Eze 3:1-4) to eat a scroll he was agreeing and identifying with His message (see also Rev 10:9-10). Yet even more relevant in this context is the OT commandment that the priests eat a portion of the sin-offering meat they sacrificed to God, which made them spiritually one with that sacrifice, or as Paul says it, partakers of the altar (1Cor 10:18). The solemnity and importance of that command is seen in Lev 10:16-17, where Moses was angry with the sons of Aaron for not eating the sacrificial meat upon the deaths of Nadab and Abihu. Thus, to eat the flesh of the Son of man is to identify and trust in the sacrificial death of Christ, that His broken body is worthy and able to give eternal life. This truth His hearers would not be able to understand until after His death and resurrection.

     However, the most important analogy of eating is certainly the Passover. Jesus, the Lamb of God (John 1:29, 36), was the true Passover lamb. Just as that passover lamb was to be eaten by every member of the Jewish community, so too the Christian community must eat Jesus, for He alone gives spiritual life to every man (John 1:4).

     To drink His blood is a further symbol of appropriating Christ’s atoning sacrifice on our behalf and it too has symbolic significance that is deeply rooted in the Law. There was nothing so sacred in all the OT as blood. In fact, any man who ate blood was to be cut off from Israel. God explains why: For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul (Lev 17:10-11). If we are ashamed of the precious blood of Christ, there is no remission for sins. To drink His blood is to accept it to be effective for the saving of our souls (Heb 13:20; 1John 1:7).

      All of this brings to mind Jesus’ words that not one jot nor tittle of the Law would remain unfulfilled (Mat 5:18; Luke 16:17). These small details of the Mosaic sacrificial system were ordained by God to foreshadow events and concepts that were fulfilled in the New Covenant. Those physical and symbolic acts point to the spiritual reality fulfilled by Christ, that salvation and spiritual sustenance is found only in Him.

     Of course, the two principles of eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood are forever illustrated in the Communion service, the bread representing His flesh and the cup representing His shed blood (1Cor 11:24-26; Mat 26:26-28). But some, most notably the Catholics and even Martin Luther, have fallen into the same error as the Jews who could not think other than literally and teach that the emblems of communion actually become in some way the literal body and blood of Christ. Some say that even the early church writers expressed a similar belief, yet it is difficult to imagine taking this type of language so literally. Being born again, drinking from a well that gives water which makes you never again thirsty, and eating Christ’s flesh; these are naturally understood in a figurative sense with symbolic meanings.

58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. 59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. 60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? 61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? 62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

Jesus had preached a very similar message to the Samaritan woman (John 4:14), in which He emphasized that spiritual life is only found in Christ, who is the real bread from heaven. Those who find Him and abide in Him are eating and drinking the spiritual food He offers, and they only shall live for ever, another figurative expression that speaks of the spiritual state of the human soul being eternally with God in heaven. Those who reject Christ shall perish forever in the Lake of Fire.

     The people who heard Jesus could not accept His radical teaching, and even His disciples were offended by His words. It wasn’t that they didn’t understand, it was that believing Him would mean rejecting their entire tradition. The thought of His Father being God, that He had descended from heaven, that He was greater than Moses – it was all too much for them. As for eating blood, could there be a more offensive act against the Jewish religion?

     Jesus answers, “If this teaching offends you, what will you do when you see the Son ascend up to heaven again?” Most of those listening did not see His ascension (Luke 24:50-51), but surely if they had, they would have believed. However, Jesus did not permit the unbelieving that privilege.

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

Jesus’ words are spirit and life to all those who believe, but some did not, including the son of perdition, Judas Iscariot. The words of Christ in this difficult passage must be understood spiritually, and they must take root in the spiritual part of man. They are not intended literally in the flesh, for it is the spiritual part of man that is redeemed, not the fleshly part. That is not to say that the flesh does not matter to God, but that the flesh cannot effect redemption, neither can flesh and blood inherit eternal life (1Cor 15:50).

     No man can come unto Me except it were given him of my Father. This statement He had made earlier in this chapter (John 6:44) as a way of excluding those who did not accept Him. See note on that verse.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. 67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? 68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus apparently offended quite a few of His followers by the strong words in this chapter, but He did not try to win them back. It appears that He was testing His disciples to see which ones had totally given themselves to Him. The twelve Apostles, though perhaps a little shaken by His teaching, were unmoved. They were convinced that He was the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

     Will ye also go away? Surely Jesus has asked this of many other half-hearted seekers down through history. So, so many are offended by Jesus, either His identity, His teaching, His commandments or some other detail. May we say with Peter, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

     Four types of people, or four responses, jump out in this chapter: the Jews rejected, Peter found it hard but stayed firm, Judas seemed to believe yet guarded his offense for the day. The fourth response came later, which is to change and re-invent Jesus’ words so that they aren’t so hard.

70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? 71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

Jesus chose Judas Iscariot knowing that he would betray Him. Jesus will not lose even one of his sheep (John 6:39; 17:12).

1 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

Many scholars believe that this feast was the Passover, although on other occasions John always names it (see John 2:13; 6:4; 13:1). Some manuscripts read, “the feast,” and that would more clearly indicate the Passover. The length of Jesus’ ministry has been calculated by John’s record of these 4 Passovers (see note John 6:4). Since He was crucified at the fourth Passover, His ministry was longer than 3 years but shorter than four. That, of course, corresponds with Daniel’s famous 70 week prophecy, which says that the Messiah would be cut off in the middle of the 70th week (Dan 9:27).

     Besides the Passover, the feasts of Pentecost and Tabernacles were also festivals at which all males were called to attend in Jerusalem, and it is possible that this feast was actually Pentecost, for John seems to make it a point to show that Jesus attended every one of the feasts at Jerusalem in the last year of His life, and even the non-Mosaic feast of dedication (John 10:22). This does not necessarily militate against the idea of a 3-1/2 year ministry, for there is other support for that belief.  

2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches. 3 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.

These particulars are difficult to corroborate by other sources, yet they certainly add validity to the account, and there is no reason to doubt that there was such a pool in Jerusalem. The word “market” is not found in the original, and most newer versions read, “sheep gate.” The Greek word (probatikos) is found only here in the NT, but in the Septuagint is found in Neh 3:1, 32; 12:39, where it is rendered “sheep gate.”

     As in many of John’s writings, there may be a lesson in symbolism in this account of healing that goes well beyond a simple reading. The book of John records seven miracles during the life of Jesus, followed by the great sign of His resurrection, the eighth in sequence. Each of the seven miraces illustrate a new area of power that the Son of man controlled. In this case Jesus shows that He is Lord of the Sabbath (Luke 6:5), and therefore equal with God (v18).

• Bethesda means, “house of mercy.”
• five is the number of grace.
• water is a symbol of the cleansing, life-giving Word.
• the great multitude of impotent folk – sinful, fallen mankind.
• 38 years – there remained yet 2 years until Jesus’ death; forty is the number of proving and testing.
• the long wait under the OC for healing is at last realized when Jesus heals in the New Kingdom.
• many sick people lay in the porches, but only one was healed; few are those that find salvation (Mat 7:13-14).
• the invalid who Jesus healed had no man to help him (Acts 8:31). Jesus is the Man who came to save the sinner.
• Jesus tells the man to rise and walk. The new birth is a resurrection, and walking in Christ must follow.
• waiting for the movement of the water – the empowering work of the Holy Spirit.
• Healing on the sabbath – the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath, and His earthly work closed its significance forever.  

     While this chapter has many other blessings for the Christian student, it is primarily dedicated to showing in various ways that Jesus truly is the Son of God, fully invested with all power and authority, and worthy of all human honor and worship.

4 For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. 5 And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years.

This verse, which explains the crippled man’s remark about the water being troubled at times (see v7), is not found in the NIV and other versions that are based on the Nestle Greek text. It is unclear if this was simply a superstition of the people, or if an angel really did enter the water. Also unknown is how often this had happened, although it seems to have been very infrequent since the impotent man had apparently been there 38 years. 

6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

As in the case of the Samaritan woman in the previous chapter, the impotent man did not know who Jesus was, nor did he have any idea of His power (v13), for Jesus’ reputation had not yet reached its peak. He did not recognize that Jesus was asking, “Do you want Me to heal you?”

7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me. 8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.

As far as I am aware, the Scriptures never record an instance of Jesus healing a person without his consent or knowledge. The invitation to salvation is for all, but only those who answer in the affirmative will be saved. The impotent man’s answer matches man’s response to Christ’s invitation: “Yes, I want to be saved, but it is impossible since I have no man to help me.” It is then that Jesus, the only One who can help, gives the healing invitation: “Rise, and walk.”

     Jesus speaks under His own authority, and therefore proves Himself to be God. We find this to be true again and again in the Gospels, as Jesus heals in a variety of ways and always in His own name and by His own power. He proves His Godship by actions, and not by words. Any madman or imposter can stand on the street and proclaim himself to be God, but only the true Son of God can work miracles to back up such claim. The Pharisees, of course, were not slow to catch this fact (see John 10:33).

9 And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath. 10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed.

It is indeed astounding that the Jews could completely ignore the obvious and stunning sight of this long-crippled man suddenly walking around, and notice instead that he was carrying his bed on the sabbath day. No wonder Jesus said they were prone to strain out a gnat but swallow a camel (Mat 23:24).

     Jesus could have said simply, “Rise and walk.” By adding, “Take up thy bed,” He authorized the crippled man to break the Jews’ man-made sabbath law. The Law itself did not prohibit the carrying of a bed on the Sabbath, it simply said that one should not work on that day (Ex 20:10), and the Jews had very strictly and precisely interpreted that command to include things carried, even down to addressing the very important possibility of carrying a fig on the Sabbath.

     Yet I do not believe that Jesus, by healing on the Sabbath and commanding the man to carry his bed on the Sabbath, was teaching His disciples to disregard the Pharisees’ rules, for on other occasions He cautioned them to obey their laws while not following their hypocritical example (Mat 23:2-7). Rather, Jesus was here demonstrating his authority over the Sabbath day (Mat 12:8), and essentially making Himself to be the Son of God, a fact that they were not slow to grasp (see v18).

11 He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk.

By his answer the healed man explains that, in his judgment, since Jesus had the power to heal him by the spoken word then he also had the authority to change the law of the Sabbath. He therefore responds to the Jews’ charge that he was breaking the Sabbath law by saying, “the Man who healed me told me to take my bed and walk.”

12 Then asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk? 13 And he that was healed wist not who it was: for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multitude being in that place. 14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee. 15 The man departed, and told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole.

Again the Pharisees miss the big picture and focus on a detail. Rather than inquire more about this Man with the power to heal by the spoken word, they ask, “Who told you to take up your bed and walk?” They wished to punish Him as well for instructing the cripple to carry his bed on the Sabbath. Their argument seems to have been that Jesus should choose a different day to conduct healings (Luke 13:10-17).

     But Jesus had slipped away into the crowd and disappeared, apparently knowing that this was too early in His ministry for an open clash with the jealous and corrupt Jewish leaders. Later, the Jews did find out that it was Jesus who had allowed these things to happen on the Sabbath, and they therefore sought to slay Him (v16).

     Sin no more (John 8:11), lest a worse thing come unto thee. While Jesus clearly ties this man’s sickness to sin, on another occasion He teaches that calamities happen to everyone (Luke 13:1-5). The worse thing that results from sin is hell, which does not last just 38 years, but for eternity.

16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.

The Jews persecuted Jesus, meaning that they slandered Him to the people, spoke evil of Him, and pronounced Him to be a follower of Satan (Mat 12:24).

17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

Jesus intends more with this statement than what is noticed at a single glance, and the Pharisees caught it immediately. They criticized Him because He had done these things on the sabbath (v16). Jesus answers that with, “My Father has been continuously working to the present day (sabbaths included!), and I too am working every day.”  

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

The Jews understood Jesus to be making Himself to be equal with God by authorizing the man to carry his bed on the Sabbath, by healing in His own name, by saying that God was His father, and by saying that His work was God’s work. The Greek here is stronger – “God was His own Father,” such that His nature and God’s were one and the same. Jesus did not deny that, but embraces it even more in the next few verses, even while keeping His own identity separate from His Father’s identity. The Son does nothing but what the Father does; the Father shows the Son all that He does; the Son judges all things; the Father has life in Himself, so does the Son; the Son gives life to whomsoever He will; the Son does the will of the Father; the Father has sent the Son; the word of the Son gives life; the word of the Father abides in those who have eternal life.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

A clearer example of Jesus being God can hardly be imagined, and yet the Arians cannot see it. The Son can do nothing of Himself. Jesus cannot act on His own; but rather, everything He does is as God does, for whatever the Father does, that does also the Son! The Father and the Son are of the same nature; the Son is God manifested in the flesh (1Tim 3:16).

20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

The greater works that the Father would do through the Son is apparently His death and resurrection, and the resulting gift of eternal life which would be made available to all who believe on Christ.

     The Father loveth (phileo) the Son. Or, the Father is companion and friend of the Son, and shows Him all things. The previous verse maintains that the acts of Jesus and God are one. Now we learn that the knowledge and will of Jesus and God are one, for the Father communicates and shares all with the Son.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

The Father wakens the dead and gives them life. What greater act of power and authority can be imagined than to bring the dead back to life? If the Son can do what only the Father can do, what can we say except that He must be God? This passage of Scripture, when read for what it really says, crushes absolutely the false and heretical idea that Jesus is not God.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

In order to correctly understand the intent of this verse, it should be read in conjunction with the previous one. Jesus gives life to those whom He will, which necessarily requires that He be judge of good and the evil. Those He judges to be worthy, He will give eternal life. The statement does not intend to mean the Father cannot judge, but rather that the Son can judge too. 

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

The Father and the Son are deserving of the same honor from man, again making them equal. We are called to honor our parents in a certain way (Eph 6:2), and earthly rulers in another way (1Pet 2:17), and God on a separate level (1Tim 1:17).

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

The book of John is filled with statements concerning the resurrection of man (John 3:18; 6:40; 8:51; 11:25). Here it is viewed as a present condition, although true only in the spiritual sense, for the resurrection of the body is an event that awaits the last day (John 6:54). See similar term in 1John 3:14.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Jesus is here speaking about the first resurrection, or spiritual awakening of the sinful and dead heart of a man. Every soul of man is born into this world spiritually alive and remains so until he sins, at which moment he spiritually dies just as Adam did (Gen 2:17). See James 1:13-15; Rom 7:9-11; 3:23, which describe the first death that is implied by the second death of Rev 2:11; 20:6; 21:8. Those who have part in the first resurrection will not experience the second death, which is another term for Hell (Rev 20:14).

     Jesus’ words recall Ezekiel’s vivid prophecy of the whole house of Israel as a valley filled with dry bones. Upon hearing the word of the Lord, those dead bones began to shake and come together, and sinews grew upon them and skin covered them. Then a wind (or Spirit) breathed upon those bodies and they became alive (Eze 37). The hour had come for the fulfillment of this prophecy, as multitudes of seeking Jews would hear the Word of the Lord directly from His Son. The revivification of those dead bodies would take place at Pentecost, when as a rushing mighty wind the Spirit entered into those who had responded (Acts 2:2).

     Dispensationalism tries to put verse 25 at the Second Coming, but that attempt is entirely impossible to reconcile with the New Testament. Moreover, Jesus says the hour NOW IS when the dead shall be made alive, and that such have passed from death unto life (v24). He is speaking of a spiritual resurrection, which is another NT term similar to being born again.

26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

Because He is the Son of man. Even in His earthly body, the Son has life in Himself just as the Father does.

28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

These verses complete the topic of the resurrection began in verse 25, but notice there are two points in time and two sets of people. Verse 25 describes an hour then present (even until now) in which only those who believe are resurrected, but verse 28 describes a future hour in which all are resurrected. The two resurrections correspond exactly with John’s Apocalypse (see note, v25). Second, notice that the first resurrection concerns only those who believe, and the rest continue spiritually dead in their trespasses and sins during this life. The event of the second resurrection, which will take place at the last day, will see ALL resurrected, the spiritually alive and the spiritually dead, the first group will enter into everlasting life, but the last will rise again only to be judged and sent into eternal damnation.

     There is a thought-provoking passage in Daniel 12:1-4 which I believe correlates with this topic in describing Jesus’ victory over Satan and death. When Jesus rose from the dead, He delivered the souls of the OT saints from Sheol (Hades) and took them with Him to Paradise as He ascended to heaven (Luke 23:43). That was not a resurrection in the same sense as the two resurrections we explain above, yet it was a monumental event in the redemption schedule, an event that took place not without some visible evidences (see Mat 27:50-53).

30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

Repeating verse 19, Jesus affirms the oneness of He and the Father in will and purpose. Jesus did not seek to follow His own desires and nothing in order to gain personal fame and glory.

31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. 32 There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true. 33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. 34 But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved.

Jesus says, “If I support myself only by my own testimony, I have given invalid witness.” Which is simply a statement acknowledging that He would be committing the error of circular reasoning, a commonly recognized law of logic, if He were to give testimony about Himself. If, for example, Jesus had said to all, “I am God,” He would be standing on His own verbal witness. There is no validity there, no proof of truth; anybody could say it. It does not mean that His witness would be false, but that it would be invalid on the grounds of being insufficient evidence (see John 8:14).

     It is notable that Jesus never verbally claimed to be God (and neither did He deny it); however, His actions are valid evidences of His identity. The book of John appears to center around these proofs, for the miracles of Jesus are selected from various categories, such as power over nature, human sickness, deformities and death, the right to forgive sins, the ability to know what others are thinking, and to minutely know the future. These witnesses are valid, and Jesus shows that He expected them to believe Him because of them (John 5:36).

     But there was one man that did give verbal witness to Jesus’ identity, who by his high standing among all the people was an impeachable witness with every reason to resent Jesus, for it would mean his own decrease (John 3:30). That witness was John the Baptist (John 1:15, 29-37), and he did not hesitate to testify that Jesus was the Son of God that would take away the sin of the world. But I receive not testimony from man. Not that Jesus needed John’s testimony to validate His identity and ministry, but He gives it as another reason that they should believe on Him and thus be saved. Of course, God the Father bears witness of Jesus too, both by voice (Mat 3:17) and by His written Word (John 5:37-39).

35 He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.

The Pharisees accepted John’s message for awhile, but when they saw the multitudes that were following John instead of them, they began to be jealous of him, and eventually rejected him entirely. We may infer much concerning John the Baptist and the Jews from Mat 21:25-26.

     John was a shining light, Jesus was the Light of the world (John 1:7-9; 8:12). Many commentators have noted that the Greek words for light are different. While there is some merit to that distinction, it is not conclusive, for when Jesus reminds all of His people, Ye are the light of the world (Mat 5:14), He used the word that John applied to Himself. Light is a common symbol for spiritual life in the Scriptures.

36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

Jesus’ miracles bear witness to His authenticity, for they were things that only God could do (heal the sick, raise the dead, forgive sins, command the wind).

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

We find a similar passage in John 8:14-18. How does the Father bear witness of Jesus? First by an audible voice from heaven (Mark 1:11). But perhaps the most powerful way He testifies of Christ is an internal recognition and conviction by the proofs He has provided in His creation, His written Word, and the mighty works of His Son – all are worthy of full confidence and truth (1John 5:9-10). In particular the Scriptures (v39), authored by God the Father, identify the Son of God and testify of His mission and message. The Apostles preached Christ by showing how He was foretold by God in His holy Word (see for example Acts 13:33-38). 

     Ye have neither heard His voice nor seen His shape. Did not the Jews in the wilderness hear the voice of God speaking (Ex 20:19) and Moses see His shape? (Ex 33:22-23). Maybe, but here Jesus is speaking to the present audience of Jews, as is evident by the next verses. The point He is making concerns their rejection of Him, and the reason they do not believe His works and accept His message is because they have not seen nor heard the Father, nor do they have His Word within them. They do not even accept the testimony of the Scriptures which they all hold in reverence.

39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

While the Old Testament has many prophecies and descriptions of the coming Messiah, the Jews religious leaders did not recognize Him when He came. They had the Scriptures in their hands, read it daily, even memorized much of it – why didn’t they identify Him? Put simply, they didn’t want Him. First, He was not the Messiah they had constructed in their minds. They envisioned a powerful physical ruler who would deliver them from the Romans and reinstate the Jews as credible kingdom (see my note on Mat 28:7). Second, the Jewish leaders formed an exclusive and jealous group who ruled the people by deceit and fear. Jesus would not conform to their methods and so they refused Him. They loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:43). We see their worry in John 11:47-53; 12:19.

     Today, many professing Christians condemn these Jews for their hardened hearts and for rejecting Jesus. Yet they do not recognize that they themselves are doing the same thing! They don’t want the Jesus of the Gospels, and envision a different Savior that will deliver them from every earthly woe and will never hold them to keeping His Word. They refuse Jesus and clamor for Barrabas.  

40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

It has ever been throughout history that men have stumbled at “coming to Jesus of Nazareth.” There is something about Him and His message that the intellectuals, the elites, the famous, and the powerful, have found distasteful – the Jewish scribes and Pharisees were simply the first to do so. On the other hand, the simple, meek, sincere, and honest men of earth have embraced Him and found eternal life.

41 I receive not honour from men. 42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 43 I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

Read this in context to get the sense. Jesus says that in spite of His credentials and mighty works, men are not honoring Him as they should, and that is because they do not have the love of God in them (John 8:42).  See John 12:43.

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye  trust. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Those Jews who did not accept Christ stood condemned by their own Scriptures, which prophesied of Jesus in many instances and ways. They wholly believed that the writings of Moses were God-inspired, yet failed to see that those very Scriptures testified that Jesus was the Christ. From their own mouths they confessed to be Moses’ disciples (John 9:28-29) but, Jesus says, Moses…wrote of Me. One of the Jews favorite prophecies of the Messiah came from Moses: I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him (Deut 18:18, compare to Acts 7:37). And as God directly dictated, it was Moses who recorded the many statutes, festivals, offerings, rituals, and sacrifices, many of which illustrate and parallel details of Christ’s person and mission (Luke 24:27).

     We are incredulous that these Jews did not believe Jesus’ words and miracles, and that they failed to see Him portrayed in their own holy Word. Yet today their are countless religious men and women, many of them professing Christians, who disbelieve large portions of Jesus’ teaching. The fact is that unless a person is willing to believe, he will never change his mind, in spite of direct evidences and outright miraculous proofs. It is often the case that a person becomes willing to believe only after his very foundations are shaken and exposed, and God is in the business of doing just that.

1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) 3 He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.

The Pharisees were apparently jealous and angry that Jesus was even more popular among the people than John the Baptist. Rather than provoke them before the correct time, Jesus left Judea and returned to His home region of Galilee. Many believe this corresponds in time with Mat 4:12 and Luke 4:14.

     Why Jesus did not perform baptisms Himself we are not told. The Apostle Paul, though an eminent evangelist, likewise did not baptize (1Cor 1:14-17), and the reason he gives is that his God-ordained mission was to preach the Gospel, and not to perform baptisms. Jesus’ mission was to proclaim to Mankind that the Kingdom of God had come unto them (Mat 4:17), and that each must enter it to be saved.

4 And he must needs go through Samaria.

The region of Samaria, which used to be part of ancient Israel (the lands of Manasseh and Ephraim), lay between the region of Judea with its capitol city of Jerusalem and the region of Galilee, the northernmost area of Israel. Most travelers between the two regions would pass through Samaria, though some say that the strictest Jews would go around Samaria by crossing the Jordan River and travelling through Perea until north of Samaria, where they must re-cross the Jordan to enter Galilee. Though they were related peoples, the Jews and Samaritans were in constant friction due to religious differences. See note on verse 9.

5 Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. 6 Now Jacob’s well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.

Sychar is the Shechem of the OT, which was a very ancient city with a storied history in the Bible (Gen 12:6; Josh 21:21; Judges 9; 1Kings 12:25). Joseph’s bones were carried from Egypt and buried in Shechem (Josh 24:32), at the parcel of land Jacob had given to Joseph before his death (Gen 33:18-20). However, Jacob’s well at Shechem is not mentioned in the Scriptures, nor in the ancient Jewish writings, so it was probably based upon oral tradition.

     The sixth hour in Jewish time would be midday.

7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink. 8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)

Jesus sent His disciples into the city to buy food while He rested at the well, but the real reason did not go with them was because He had an appointment there. Was the well a busy place, with many people coming and going, or was Jesus alone until this woman appeared? Either way, Jesus knew the heart of this woman, and He knew these people of Samaria were open to His message. He had been sent to the house of Israel, and the Samaritans were part Israelite (Mat 15:24). Jesus did not polish over their religious system’s shortcomings (verse 22), yet did not treat them as Gentiles either.

     Jesus used the well as a natural means of talking to the Samaritan woman. He got her attention by asking a favor of her, “Give me a drink.” The Samaritan probably knew He was a Jew because of His manner of dress, and she was surely surprised that He would even talk to her, much less ask a favor of her.  

9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

The Samaritans were part-Jew, and had their own system of worship centered at a temple in Mount Gerizim (Mt Ebal). Their history apparently began in the time of king Jeroboam, when the Assyrians took the ten tribes of Israel into captivity. Some lower-class Jews were allowed to stay in the land, and some Assyrians were transplanted there (2Kings 17:24). The resulting mixed society grew, and asserted themselves when the two tribes attempted to rebuild Jerusalem after their own captivity in Babylon. Sanballat, one of their leaders, tried very hard to discourage the Babylonian Jews from rebuilding, but without success. The Jews did not much appreciate the Samaritans, and were known to not accept the slightest gift or favor from a Samaritan.

10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. 11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? 12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?

The Scriptures use the term living water in figurative reference to God, and by extension to His Word and Holy Spirit (Jer 2:13; Zech 14:8; John 7:37-39; Rev 7:17), but literally it signified running water, such as a stream or fountain. The woman did not immediately perceive that Jesus was speaking about a spiritual source of life, but neither did that eminent Pharisee Nicodemus perceive that Jesus was speaking spiritually when He said, Ye must be born again (John 3:3-4).

     The physical characteristics of water compare well with the tri-une God, for it exists in three forms (steam, liquid, ice) and yet its essence is the same: 2 molecules of hydrogen and one molecule of oxygen.

13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: 14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Just as physical life requires a continuous supply of food and water, spiritual life requires a continuous supply of God’s Word and His Spirit. The Apostle John develops this analogy perhaps more than any other writer of the Scriptures (see John 4:32; 7:37-39; 6:32-35; Rev 10:9).

15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. 16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.

Did Jesus ask the woman to bring her husband because it was the proper thing to do, or because He wanted to demonstrate His power? Maybe both. The marriage bond is far better representative of God’s grace when both parties belong to Christ (2Cor 6:14), and evangelistic efforts should always attempt to reach both husband and wife. Clearly, however, Jesus chose His question in order to reveal Himself, to show her that He knew the facts of her life completely.

17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: 18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. 19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.

In the Jewish religion, and apparently also among the Samaritans, divorce was lawful and common for any cause that the husband deemed valid, however, the woman was not allowed to divorce her husband. There is thus no direct condemnation in having more than one husband, but five husbands? This strongly indicates a moral deficiency in the woman, which feeling is even confirmed by the fact that she currently has a man which is not her lawful husband. Jesus doesn’t directly call her an adulterer, but they both know that she is. 

20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. 21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

The religion of the Samaritans rejected the writings of the Prophets, and accepted only the five books of Moses. The Jews worshipped in Jerusalem, at Mount Zion, while the Samaritans worshipped at Mount Ebal. How different is Jesus’ command from that of Deut 16:5-6, which required the Jews to worship only in Jerusalem.

     Upon hearing Jesus reveal the secrets of her life, the woman changes the subject and attempts to open an argument about which religion was correct. But Jesus will not be so easily sidetracked, and instead shows the woman her personal responsibility to worship the Father.

     Jesus proclaims that the chosen year for salvation has come (Is 61:2), in which Judaism is declared obsolete and the worshippers at Mount Ebal are revealed to be imposters. Salvation is of the Jews, simply means that God revealed Himself to the Jews under the Old Covenant and promised that a Deliverer would arise among them that would bless all nations of the world – the New Covenant. No prophet arose from Samaria.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

The hour long promised now is, the new worship system composed under the New Covenant was even then being proclaimed. The true worshippers (intimating the many false varieties) shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth. There is a wealth of meaning in this simple statement, and it is critical that we understand it, for the next verse declares its importance and necessity.

     There are three essential determinations that must be correctly made in order to fulfill Jesus’ teaching in this passage:

• What is meant by worship, that is, what does it include and exclude?
• What does it mean to worship in spirit, that is, does it refer to the Holy Spirit, or an attitude in man?
• What does it mean to worship in truth.     

     Worship is commonly taken to refer to an act of adulation and praise that is usually practiced in public. In the Jewish religion, this was observed at the temple in Jerusalem, and included many rituals and sacrifices. However, Jesus’ words in this passage imply that such worship is no longer acceptable, but that true worshippers will worship God in a different manner. By denying that there is a designated place to worship God, Jesus is teaching the much greater truth that, in effect, each person is in constant worship, in every time and act of life. He is either worshipping God, or he is bowed at the altar of Self. Furthermore, it is Christ and Satan who are influencing which one we will worship. The true worshippers will follow the Spirit and obey the Truth, which is my basic understanding of this passage. It cannot apply only to the Sunday morning worship service.

     Worship the Father in spirit. I think this primarily refers to the Holy Spirit of God (Eph 6:18), which was given to the Christian as a guide, to convict, to teach, and to reveal Christ’s will (John 16:13), and which lives in the heart of every true believer (Rom 8:9). Therefore the statement, God is a Spirit. As we have already said, worshipping God is more than an act of the human spirit, for it includes every decision and action that the worshipper makes.

     To worship the Father in truth implies sincerity and honesty on the part of the worshipper, and accuracy in following the rules. One cannot please God by worshipping in a way He has not designated, no matter how sincere the heart may be in that worship. Many Muslims and Buddhists are sincere and devoted in their worship, yet since they are not worshipping truthfully, it counts for nothing to God.

     In truth implies a simple heart intent on following God, a heart without hypocrisy and without conditions. A heart that refuses to invent excuses for not doing what the Word of God asks. It stands in contrast to the worship of the Samaritans, who Jesus said didn’t even understand what they were worshipping.

25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. 26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. 27 And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her?

The Samaritans did believe in a coming Messiah based on the Pentateuch (Deut 18:18), even though they didn’t worship in Jerusalem with the Jews. Upon the woman’s statement of belief, Jesus directly tells her that He is the promised Messiah. It is one of the few times Jesus verbally confesses to be the Christ. At this juncture, the disciples returned from their food search in the city, and they are amazed to see the two talking, not because she was a woman, but because she was a Samaritan.

28 The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, 29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ? 30 Then they went out of the city, and came unto him.

The woman’s testimony to the men in the city that the Christ was outside their walls was well received. Jesus stayed in that town for two days, and many believed on Him. After the door of salvation was opened to the Gentiles, these surely were eager to follow Jesus, and remember how He had taken the time to stop in their town. Yet, it was their openness and willingness that had brought Him there!

31 In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat. 32 But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of. 33 Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat?

Again Jesus confuses His disciples by speaking in figurative language instead of literal. Usually, He explained the meaning to those who were sincerely seeking to know the truth, but allowed those who did not want to hear Him to misunderstand.

34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

God had sent Jesus to the world as the Redeemer (John 3:16; 17:4). Verses like these are misconstrued by the some to mean that Jesus is not God. However, the clearest verses to show that Jesus is God are found in this same book, so the correct conclusion is that Jesus, while fully God in person, is not God the Father. The doctrine of the Trinity is non-intuitive, much like Physics’ theory of relativity, which states that time is not a constant, but changes relative to the speed of the observer. See Col 1:15, John 1:14.

35 Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. 36 And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.

Some think that Jesus is saying that the harvest was four months away, but more likely He refers to the fact that there are four months between seed-time and harvest, which seems to have been a Jewish saying (v37). Speaking spiritually, Jesus saw that the harvest was already ripe and even then being gathered into the barns, although there can be no doubt that He spoke this in anticipation of the great sowing and reaping that His disciples would accomplish after His death, as well as the evangelistic efforts throughout the Gospel Age. Jesus uses the harvest as an analogy to salvation on several other occasions too (Mark 4:3-20; Luke 10:2; Mat 13:24-43; 20:1-16).

37 And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and another reapeth. 38 I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours.

Jesus is the first and greatest Sower in the Kingdom of Heaven, but after Him were many more, such as the Apostle Paul, who planted the seed which Apollos later watered (1Cor 3:6-8). The reference to other men’s labor in preparing the world for the Kingdom probably means the prophets of the Old Testament, and also John the Baptist and Christ Himself. At this point in time, the disciples of Jesus, and even the 12 Apostles, had done virtually nothing to advance the Kingdom of Christ. They were simply witnesses of the glory that they would later proclaim to the world. 

39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. 40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. 41 And many more believed because of his own word; 42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

Unlike the hard-hearted Jews, the Samaritans did not need to see the healings, signs and wonders before believing that Jesus was the Christ John 4:48. They believed on Him because of His own word. Jesus stayed 2 days in Sychar, maybe that is why He was later accused of being a Samaritan? (John 8:48).

     This account could be considered a preliminary fulfillment of OT the prophecies announcing that when the Messiah came, the tribes of Israel would reunite and the Gentiles would be converted.

43 Now after two days he departed thence, and went into Galilee. 44 For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country. 45 Then when he was come into Galilee, the Galilaeans received him, having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast: for they also went unto the feast.

Jesus and His disciples leave Samaria and continue to their destination, the region of Galilee. Verse 44 seems to be given as an explanation of why He chose not to go to His hometown Nazareth and instead came again to Cana; He knew that no prophet is well-received by his own acquaintances, and His own had already rejected Him. Jesus’ own family did not believe that He was the Messiah until after His resurrection. Luke apparently records the circumstances of this rejection, which led Jesus to testify that a prophet is not accepted by his own people (Luke 4:14-30).

46 So Jesus came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum. 47 When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judaea into Galilee, he went unto him, and besought him that he would come down, and heal his son: for he was at the point of death.

The word for nobleman is used elsewhere in connection with a king (Acts 12:20-21; James 2:8). This man may have been Herod’s regional representative in Galilee, and thus a well-known and important figure. It took an impressive amount of humility for him to come to Jesus and ask for healing, and it shows that his son’s sickness was very severe. Jesus was his last hope.

48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

Jesus may have made this remark in order to contrast His reception in Samaria to that of the Galileans (v45). The Samaritans had believed because of His own words (v41), but the Jews ever required a sign (1Cor 1:22), and even then would refuse to believe (John 6:30; Mark 8:11; Mat 12:39). Obviously, the farthest thing from this nobleman’s mind was to test Jesus by asking him for a miracle of healing; he simply did not want his son to die, and his last hope was that this Man was able to heal. However, Jesus used the occasion for His own motives, and His statement remains relevant for every reader of this Gospel. Jesus’ miracles were largely done to demonstrate that He was the Messiah, the Son of God (John 20:31).

49 The nobleman saith unto him, Sir, come down ere my child die. 50 Jesus saith unto him, Go thy way; thy son liveth. And the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his way. 51 And as he was now going down, his servants met him, and told him, saying, Thy son liveth. 52 Then enquired he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him. 53 So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house.

The people had no idea of the power of the Messiah because they did not recognize Him as the Son of God as yet. The nobleman thought that Jesus would need to be present to heal. Nevertheless, the level of his faith was up to the task, and when Jesus told him that his son would live, the man believed the word and went his way.

     Apparently the nobleman’s home was distant enough that it was the next day before he met his servants. Cana and Capernaum were about a day’s journey apart. The servants came with the glad tidings that the man’s son was alive and improving, and by comparing times, they recognized that the fever had left at the same hour Jesus had spoken the word. 

     The seventh hour in Roman time would be 7 PM, in Jewish time it would be 1 PM.

54 This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee.

This is the second miracle that Jesus worked in Galilee, not the second miracle of His ministry. He had worked many other signs and wonders in Jerusalem and Judaea (John 2:23).

1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

None of the other Gospels mention this night meeting, nor the miracle at Cana, nor His meeting with the Samaritan woman in the next chapter. One purpose of John’s Gospel seems to have been to supply some details that the other Gospels had not included.

     Nicodemus was a member of the Sanhedrin, which was a council of men that composed the highest authority in Judaism. The Herods were civil rulers, kings under the control of Rome. The seventy men of the Sanhedrin were formally under Herod’s authority, but they held a lot of power. He apparently did become a Christian sometime after Jesus’ resurrection, and that is how John was able to include his testimony.

     Like the Apostle Paul, Nicodemus was a sincere and righteous man, a Pharisee who was truly seeking to serve God. He acknowledged that it was impossible for a man to work miracles as Jesus did except by the power of God, and yet he balked at whole-heartedly accepting Jesus. He was just too controversial, too divisive, too radical. Things haven’t changed much, have they? Many are quite willing to acknowledge the Jesus of their making, but the real Jesus they cannot accept. The one who teaches the complete sacrifice of self, the importance of doing good, complete non-resistance, etc.

     Nicodemus also appears to have been a cautious man, even to the point of being timid. He comes to Jesus by night, apparently so that nobody would know. He only indirectly defended Jesus when He was being discussed in the Sanhedrim, without revealing any of his own feelings or motives (John 7:50-52). Only after Jesus’ death did he show his real opinion of the Nazarene, when he and Joseph of Arimathea took care of His body (John 19:38-39). On the other hand, Nicodemus appears to have been the only Jewish leader who did not condemn Jesus, so his stance was certainly a difficult one.

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?

How concise and clear! It is essential to be born again in order to enter the Kingdom. Nicodemus professed to not understand. Like the Jews of the previous chapter, he was unable to think spiritually. That should not have been the case, for the OT is filled with figurativisms and spiritualisms.

     The NT uses the image of being born again (a new birth), on several occasions (Rom 6:4; 2Cor 5:17; 1Pet 1:23; 1John 4:7; 5:4,18). Being born again means to believe and trust in Jesus Christ (1John 5:1); not a false or man-made version of Him, but the true Savior of the world, Jesus the Nazarene. A man must be born again in order to enter the lineage of Christ, the second Adam. In the NT, believe and faith, are the same Greek word, and yet, study will prove that belief and faith is more than simple mouth profession. A true man of faith will obey the voice of his Master, and do whatever His revealed will asks. Being born again is a spiritual term which essentially means that the Spirit of God has entered that person, to live and direct his life, both by daily decisions and long-term commitments. That does not imply the Spirit takes complete control of the Christian’s life, for the flesh continues to war against the Spirit (Gal 5:17). But it does mean that the Christian has new wisdom and strength which will help him fulfill the will of God (1Cor 1:30; 2:7,13).

     According to Barnes, the Jews would use the expression, “born again” in reference to Gentile proselytes to Judaism, and he concludes that Nicodemus was shocked that Jesus would say “every man”, including the Jews, must be born again. Yet I do not see this expressed in Nicodemus’ response. He rather seems confused by what Jesus means by being born again, and thinks He is speaking literally. The natural man cannot understand spiritual things because they must be discerned spiritually (1Cor 2:14), and here Nicodemus and his fellow Jews utterly failed.

     He cannot see the Kingdom of God. The word “see” is often used to mean “to experience” (John 3:36; 8:51; Mat 5:8; Luke 3:6).

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Salvation must be of water and the Spirit. But what does Jesus mean by being born of water? The literal meaning makes no sense, so He was either speaking in metonymy (substituting water for baptism) or in symbolism (water is a well-known symbol of the Word of God). Perhaps both meanings are valid. The Scriptures are plain that baptism is a necessary act of submission to Christ’s body (Acts 2:38; 1Pet 3:21; Heb 10:22; 1Cor 10:1-2), yet the Church is purified and cleansed with the washing of water by the Word (Eph 5:26). James describes a sinner seeing himself in the mirror of God’s Word and washing himself (James 1:22-25). See also 1John 5:6-8, where the Word is Jesus Christ and water is the Word. Therefore, to be born again…of water signifies a spiritual cleansing or purification (John 15:3). A man must first recognize, by the Word, his sinfulness, and having done so repents and petitions forgiveness; then the Spirit will come and dwell with him. That man is born again and has gained entrance into the Kingdom of God. See also 1Peter 1:22.

     The idea of being born again of water and Spirit was predicted by Ezekiel, although there is no indication that Nicodemus related Jesus’ words with Ezekiel’s famous prophecy of the Spirit making a valley filled with dry bones come to life (Eze 37). Immediately preceding that chapter, we read these prophetic words: Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them (Eze 36:25-27). Although this is an OT passage, the new birth cannot be more clearly described!

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The Apostle Paul expands on this theme in Rom 8:5-10. A basic law of true science is that “like begets like.” A chicken begets a chicken, and a man begets a man. Unliving things cannot beget living ones, neither can physical life beget spiritual life. Humans are the children of Adam, who was physically and spiritually alive when at his birth, but then died, first spiritually upon committing sin against God’s commandments, and then physically at the end of his life. So it is with every offspring and child of the first (physically natured) Adam. However, those who are born again will inherit the Kingdom of God, and that birth can only be effected by the second (spiritually natured) Adam. Those who continue dead in trespasses and sin will not see God, but will instead experience eternal damnation. This agrees with the first and second deaths, and the first and second resurrections, of Revelation (Rev 2:11; 20:5-6,14).

     Like begets like, the fleshly begets flesh and the spiritual begets the spiritual. The need for a spiritually natured Savior that can give eternal life (v16) is evident, and arianism is dealt another blow.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. 8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Jesus likens the new birth experience to the wind, which moves invisibly, without means for man to control it. Yet man can see its effects, and hear the sounds that are produced when it comes in contact with solid matter. He that is born again, has the Kingdom of God within him (Luke 17:20-21). There is no visible evidence of the Spirit at the new birth, pentecostal belief notwithstanding. Instead, we see the effects that are produced by the Spirit: a changed life, a new perspective, the fruits of the Spirit growing in a person, a new creature! The Spirit works and moves invisibly, and His mission is to help and assist Mankind to recognize, honor and glorify Christ. The Spirit never draws attention to Himself, but points Man to Christ, first by authoring the Word of God (2Pet 1:21), second by convicting Man of sin (John 16:7-8), which action requires the Word, so that we might know what is sin.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? 10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Nicodemus was an eminent Jew, a prominent leader in the Sanhedrim. But should he have been able to understand Jesus? This teaching was certainly not common knowledge among the teachers and scribes of Judaism. I think Jesus was saying that it should have been. Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the rest of the prophets had not been vague in foretelling of the day that Messiah would open a new fountain of salvation to all, it would be a New Covenant, and it would be spiritual in nature. The vast majority of the Jews, however, looked for a physical Messiah that would deliver them from Roman rule. 

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

We speak. Jesus apparently refers to the Trinity, for in the next verse He uses the singular in reference to the present conversation with Nicodemus. Jesus says He testifies of what He has seen, and alludes in v13 that He saw this in heaven! But what are the heavenly things that Jesus could not speak of? Like Nicodemus, I cannot understand.

     He that came down from heaven. This heaven must be that place wherein God dwells, and Jesus is saying that He is from that heaven. Does He speak of His ascension into heaven prophetically, or as an act already past? Either one is possible. The latter option goes well with the remainder of the verse, which states that the Son of man is in heaven. Thus, the implication is that Jesus had direct access to heaven, that He could ascend and descend at will, and that even at that present time was, in one sense, in heaven. The manuscripts from which the NIV/NASB versions are translated to not contain the final phrase.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

This is a powerful testimony in types and shadows of the Scripture, but it has been misinterpreted by some students of the Bible, who make the serpent to be a type of Christ. But never in all the Scripture is a serpent intended to be a representation of Christ, or anything good. It is always a symbol for Satan, and for his cunning nature to deceive and poison the truth of the Gospel.

     When one studies this type in its proper context in Num 21:4-9, the intention is not so obscure. The children of Israel had transgressed against the Lord by murmuring once again, and God allowed poisonous snakes to come among them and bite them. Many died from the snakes’ poison, and the Israelites came again to Moses and confessed their sin. God told Moses to make a brazen serpent and put it on a pole, and from then on, everyone who had been bitten by a snake would be able to look just once at the serpent on the pole and be healed.

     Clearly, the snakes were representatives of Satan, and their poison represents sin and death. The pole represents the Cross, and just one look at it will result in life! But the serpent on the pole represents Satan, who was the true loser at that crucial event at Calvary. The snake was to be made not of gold or silver, but of brass, which is a common type for judgment and punishment (Lev 26:19; Deut 28:23). Again, brass is always found in contexts of sin, like the brazen altar for sin in the temple. The intention of the type is to demonstrate that Satan was defeated by Jesus at the Cross (Heb 2:14), and now there is life for a look, for recognizing and understanding that the power of sin has been broken, and a remedy for its poison has been found. The brazen serpent on a pole should remind us that Satan has been cast out (John 12:31), his house has been spoiled (Mat 12:29). That accuser of the brethren can no longer stand in condemnation against us (Rev 12:10), for Christ has conquered and defeated him.

     In this passage, Jesus draws a parallel only with being lifted up (see also John 8:28; 12:32-34), which is clearly a reference to His crucifixion. In his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Justin Martyr writes: “For tell me, was it not God who commanded by Moses that no image or likeness of anything which was in heaven above or which was on the earth should be made, and yet who caused the brazen serpent to be made by Moses in the wilderness, and set it up for a sign by which those bitten by serpents were saved? Yet is He free from unrighteousness. For by this, as I previously remarked, He proclaimed the mystery, by which He declared that He would break the power of the serpent which occasioned the transgression of Adam, and [would bring] to them that believe on Him [who was foreshadowed] by this sign, i.e., Him who was to be crucified, salvation from the fangs of the serpent, which are wicked deeds, idolatries, and other unrighteous acts. Unless the matter be so understood, give me a reason why Moses set up the brazen serpent for a sign, and bade those that were bitten gaze at it, and the wounded were healed; and this, too, when he had himself commanded that no likeness of anything whatsoever should be made.”

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

There is not a more concise definition of salvation in all of Scripture: authored by God, based in Love, through Jesus Christ, contingent upon faith, resulting in eternal life. Each point is a sermon by itself. A similar verse is found in Rom 8:32, and Abraham and Isaac demonstrated the same in type (Gen 22:16). It is also prophetically presented in the messianic twenty-second Psalm (Ps 22:20).

     Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, a statement that is repeated several times in the book of John. While that term elsewhere describes the divine origin of the Son in the Father, in this verse it connects definitely with Jesus Christ being begotten as a human son of God, the last Adam. The fully divine Son of God was born with all the physical attributes of a man. The Scripture reveals this in Luke 1:35, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. No other man was so begotten by God. Jesus the man is absolutely unique in that His father was the Holy Spirit. See note for John 1:14.

     Astoundingly, this beautiful verse has been used to support the false doctrine of non-eternal hell. We answer with 2Cor 4:4 and 1Cor 15:18. Their logic proceeds like this: If God gives everlasting life to those whom He saves, and the rest are destined to perish, then a place of eternal punishment cannot be. They ignore passages like Mark 9:43-50, and Rev 20:10-15, which clearly warn of a place of everlasting torment. How dangerous it is to teach that eternal punishment does not exist! John 3:16 was never intended to teach about hell, and those who make it do so are wresting the Scriptures to their own destruction (2Pet 3:16). Rather, this verse, and the whole context, has for its subject the salvation that is found in Jesus Christ, and the word perish must be read in that context. JW’s, Adventists, and Mormons are all part of this group, but an increasing number of evangelicals, like the present-day “emergent church” movement, have been eager to join them.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Although He had every right to come and condemn Mankind for their trespasses and sins, Jesus came to save the  people of the world by offering Himself as their Deliverer by dying on the Cross as the sin-bearer. Because Jesus came, all the world has been given an opportunity to have their sins forgiven and be saved. Because of Jesus, we are able to know the will of God as revealed in His spoken Word, recorded for our benefit in the Holy Scriptures. While His first coming was for salvation and not condemnation, His second coming does involve judgment and condemnation (Rom 2:16; Mat 25:31-32; John 12:48).

     He who refuses the salvation which is in Christ is condemned already. That is, while each wicked man will not be finally condemned until he stands before the judgment seat of God at the end of the age, his rejection of Christ means that he stands condemned before the time. The same is true of Satan, who was defeated at the Cross of Calvary, and his power and authority greatly restricted; and yet he walks about as a roaring lion meantime. At the Great Consummation, all those who work iniquity will be cast into the Lake of Fire.

     The Scriptures often make it seem as if there is power in the name of Christ, rather than in Christ the person, and nowhere do we see this more than in the writings of the Apostle John. We pray in the name of Christ for that reason.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

The Light that came into the world is Christ (John 1:7-8; 8:12; 9:5). There are many constructive parallels between light as a euphemism for good and darkness as a euphemism for evil, and many Scriptures use these as figures of the same. He that doeth truth cometh to the light. A true seeker of God and righteousness will want the light, for that is how he learns the truth about himself and his deeds. An evil doer, or any rebellious man for that matter, will avoid coming to the light because he doesn’t want to know the truth. See also Mat 6:22-23; Luke 11:34-36; 1John 1:5-7.

22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. 23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. 24 For John was not yet cast into prison.

John the Baptist had testified that Jesus was the Messiah a few months earlier when he was baptizing on the east side of Jordan (John 1:28). Now their paths cross again, this time on the west side of Jordan somewhere in the countryside near Jerusalem, where Jesus had attended the Passover and met with Nicodemus. Judaea refers to Jerusalem and the surrounding area. Being prior to the full entrance of the Kingdom, the baptisms of John and Jesus were similar, a baptism unto repentance. Baptism into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Mat 28:19) would wait until after the resurrection of Christ.

     There was much water there. Immersionists like to use this phrase to support their idea that baptism must be by completely submerging the body in water. If that were true, surely the Scriptures would state that requirement. They do not. The fact that verses like this one have been mustered to support immersion shows just how tenuous that doctrine is. Establishing a church mandate based entirely upon inference is poor exegesis of the Scriptures. Besides, the question is not whether John was baptizing by immersion, but if baptism is expected to be an immersion-only event. Other passages imply that it was not always by immersion. For examples, read the accounts of Cornelius and the jailor in Acts 10:47; 16:33.

     Multitudes came to be baptized by John the Baptist (Mark 1:5), and running water was not plentiful in Judaea. The unknown site of Aenon had enough to supply drinking water for man and beast, and still have plenty for baptizing. For those who envision these baptisms were by immersion, a waist-deep pool in a creek would be sufficient water. Jesus also was baptizing (John 3:22), however, He did not actually perform the baptisms. His disciples did (John 4:1-2).

     Again, the debate between immersionists and other forms of baptism is really not an argument over the manner in which Jesus and John performed their baptisms, but the manner in which the Church of Christ should perform baptisms. These Jewish baptisms, which likely were performed by some form of dipping or immersion, do not conclusively frame the correct Christian mode of baptism. The Apostle Paul was baptized in a house, and it is highly unlikely that his baptism was by immersion. As we have already said, if the mode of baptism is of any importance, it would be clearly stated in the Scriptures.

     For John was not yet cast into prison. This seems given in order to correct the implication of the Synoptics that Jesus’ ministry did not begin until after John was imprisoned by Herod (see Mat 4:11-13). Otherwise, the statement is unnecessary. See note on John 2:1. 

25 Then there arose a question between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purifying. 26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

John the Beloved places a lot of weight on the testimony of John the Baptist (see chapter 1), which we would expect to be true seeing that the Apostle of Christ had begun as a disciple of John the Baptist. However, when the Baptist testified that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah of God, John the Beloved became a follow of Jesus (see note for John 1:40).

     In this scene, which extends to the end of the chapter, John the Baptist will once again defer to Jesus Christ. It all began by a disagreement between some Jews and the disciples of John. The dispute is about purifying, the meaning of which is not clear. Perhaps baptism itself is intended, because both the disciples of John and Jesus were baptizing. Which was the true one, the most authoritative? John’s men came and put the question directly to him. What about the man you testified about? Now He is baptizing too, and not just a few!    

27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. 28 Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.

John’s answer is an incredibly humble admission, and reveals his commitment both to God and his mission. It reminds me of Jonathan the son of Saul, who chose to give up his own claim to throne of Israel because he knew that God had not called him, but David, to be the next king.

     By “a man,” John is making reference to himself in answer to the question of the previous verse that many were now going to listen to Jesus speak instead of coming to hear his own preaching. John says that he will not teach one bit more than what heaven has entrusted him to teach, and he knows that the ministry of Jesus the Messiah must increase at the expense of his own message of repentance. All authority comes from above (John 19:11; 6:65).

     John recognized that he was sent before the Christ. The Greek word Christos is the Hebrew equivalent of the Messiah.

29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

Jesus is the Bridegroom (Mat 9:15) and John the Baptist is the friend of the bridegroom, the best man of the wedding. They are not in competition, but stand in mutual support of the same cause. Nevertheless, there is only one Groom (2Cor 11:2). At the marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven, Christ and His Church will be united in holy and eternal matrimony (Rev 19:4-9).

30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

This aspect of self-deference on the part of John the Baptist is highly commendable and very rare. Many men in authority and held in honor in the public eye do not have the fortitude to recognize their God-ordained seat and its limits. Jealousy and hatred is the usual feelings of those who see a rival in any person who the public may elevate. Saul hated David and Herod was jealous of Jesus’ fame as a baby king. John the Baptist was not such a man.

31 He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all. 32 And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.

These verses express the same concept given in Jesus’ meeting with Nicodemus (John 3:11-13). John’s point is clear and true: Jesus is the greater One because He came down from heaven, and that makes Him above all. Every other person is earthly because they have originated on the earth (John 8:23). Furthermore, if Jesus has come down from heaven, then it behooves every person to listen to His testimony! He speaks about what He has seen and known of the heavenly and spiritual realm, truths concerning God and His purposes for creating the universe and His intended will for mankind (see v34). Yet how hard it is for an earthly man to accept these things! See John 3:12.

33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.

While this is true of every person, it appears that John the Baptist is referring to himself. John did believe and accept that Jesus is the Christ of God sent from heaven, and he so testified to all. Thus, John attested that God is true, he “set his seal” to that fact. Today we might say, “I believe my testimony is true, and I will sign my name to it.”

34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. 35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.

Jesus knows all about God and heaven, and He was sent from heaven to tell us. Unlike men, who receive the Spirit in measure, Jesus is a member of the unfathomable trinity. He is God; He is the Holy Spirit. Compare Eph 4:7 to Is 42:1.

36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

The wrath of God abideth on him. And it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Heb 10:31). Believe on the Son – that He is God and Savior, and that He is willing and able to forgive and redeem a man from his sins. This act of faith requires a man to humble himself and confess his sinfulness and his inability to save himself. In the gospel of John, eternal life and everlasting death are metaphors for the condition of a man’s soul. The souls of those that believe on the Son are made alive and will never perish; the souls of those who reject the Son are dead and shall never see life. When physical death takes either a believer or an unbeliever, the state of that soul will eternally remain unchanged; the believer will be forever with Christ in heaven and the unbeliever will be forever in Gehenna, with the wrath of God abiding upon him.

1 After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed he himself. 2 There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples. 3 Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately; and that night they caught nothing.

The last chapter of John completes his account of Christ’s triple post-resurrection manifestation to His disciples that began in John 20:19. Given the wording in John 21:14, it is likely that the testimony of these three appearings are intended to form sure evidence that Jesus Christ did rise from the dead, and the details in each are convincing and spectacular. At His first manifestation, Jesus materialized before the Apostles in a closed room; He spoke with them and imparted to them the Holy Spirit by His breath. At the second, He invited Thomas to feel the marks on His body left by the nails and spear at His crucifixion. Now at His third manifestation, Jesus demonstrates that His power over nature and His infinite wisdom and insight are undiminished. The account seems to be especially tuned to reconfirming Peter’s worthiness and usefulness, both on a personal level and in the company of the rest of the disciples (Luke 22:32). The dialogue has particularly benefited the churches of the Kingdom down through history.

     The setting is the sea of Tiberias, or lake of Galilee (John 6:1), back in Jesus’ home territory. He had instructed His disciples to return there and wait for Him (Mat 28:10, 16). Perhaps the Apostles were in Bethsaida, which appears to have been the hometown of Peter, Andrew, James, John and Philip (John 1:44; Luke 5:10). The seven fishermen were Peter, James, John, Thomas, Nathanael and two other disciples, perhaps Andrew and Philip. The other four Apostles were probably there too, but did not go fishing (see full list at Mat 10:2). The previous weeks had been emotionally stressful, with much waiting and wondering about their future. They had seen Jesus twice now, on consecutive Sunday evenings (John 21:14), but they lacked full direction as yet concerning Christ’s plan for His Church. Peter, the most impulsive and energetic of the Eleven, was restless and anxious to do something. He had a fishing boat (Luke 5:3) and at least four of the Apostles were fishermen by trade.

     I can just imagine Peter announcing, “I’m tired of sitting around just talking. Let’s do something! I’m going fishing. Who is coming with me?” Most were eager to go. While it would not be unusual or incorrect for the Apostles to go fishing, Jesus used this occasion to call them away from that trade when He asked Peter, “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these? (John 21:15). Then feed My sheep.” Three times Jesus calls Peter to a higher work than fishing, a spiritual work to build the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. I wonder if Peter ever went fishing again.

     Many commentators opine that Jesus was essentially blessing the Apostles for this fishing expedition, for it was their natural line of work. On the contrary, I see it rather to be a call to leave it forever. Like Elisha who left his plowing when Elijah cast his mantle upon him (1Kings 19:19-20), the Apostles were called to a higher, special ministry in which fishing was of lesser importance. The Apostle Paul did continue his manual labor, but for reasons of evangelism and testimony. In the previously cited chapter of 1Kings, God gently reprimanded Elijah twice, What doest thou here, Elijah? Here, Jesus is asking the same of the Apostles.

     There is some evidence that this third manifestation of Jesus to the Apostles happened on Sunday, just as the two former ones had. First, the timing is right. The journey from Jerusalem to Bethsaida typically took 3-4 days, and since travel was forbidden on the Sabbath, they probably arrived in Galilee on Thursday or Friday. The fishing trip was at night, but it could not have been Friday night, for that was the beginning of the Sabbath’s no-work mandate. Saturday night, however, was free for work, and would fit Peter’s feelings of restlessness and inaction. Second, the purpose is right. Here, early on Sunday morning, Jesus performed the first post-resurrection Communion service that would help form the early church’s tradition of assembling together every Sunday to celebrate the Eucharist. The meeting coincided with the very hour of His resurrection two weeks prior.

4 But when the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore: but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus. 5 Then Jesus saith unto them, Children, have ye any meat? They answered him, No. 6 And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes. 7 Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher’s coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea. 8 And the other disciples came in a little ship; (for they were not far from land, but as it were two hundred cubits,) dragging the net with fishes.

The men fished all night long without catching a single fish, but at the break of dawn, the disciples an unknown Man on the shore told them they would catch fish if they threw in the net on the right side of the vessel. They obeyed and immediately encountered a beautiful catch of fish. Many of these men were part of similar fishing miracle especially associated with Jesus’ initial call to Peter to be fishers of men (Luke 5:2-11; Mat 4:18-22) and surely they were immediately reminded of that earlier occasion.

     “It is the Lord!” John exclaimed.

     Peter did not wait for more talk or further confirmation. He grabbed his coat, jumped off the boat and swam to shore. Forgotten was his enthusiasm for fishing as well as the huge haul of fish in the nets; the others would have to take care of them, he was going to see Jesus. Jesus’ previous two appearings were in public, but here Jesus had a few private moments with Peter alone, and I can imagine that Peter was glad for them. Not long removed from his deeply humbling experience of denying that he even knew Jesus, Peter was certainly anxious to show his loyalty to Christ.

9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. 10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now caught. 11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken. 12 Jesus saith unto them, Come and dine. And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. 13 Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise.

What transpired in those minutes that Jesus and Peter were alone on the beach? Did they discuss Peter’s denial the night of Christ’s betrayal? There were so many questions, both of the past and of the future. The next book says that Jesus told His disciples of the thing pertaining to the Kingdom of God during the forty days between His resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). I think one purpose of Christ in this meeting was to formally restore Peter into approved fellowship in the presence of the Apostles after that he had denied Jesus during the night of His betrayal. Peter and Jesus are the two primary characters in this last chapter and Peter’s three confessions of love for Christ parallel those earlier three denials.   

     Apparently at His creative command, Jesus had fish cooking over a bed of coals with bread ready to be served by the time the rest of the disciples arrived at shore in the boat. Also at His command, they added some of the freshly caught fish to the grill.

     Come and dine, Jesus said to them. The scene is storybook-like. Early in the calm of morning on the shores of Lake Galilee, with the sun’s rays just lightening the waters; a freshly grilled breakfast ready to eat, and brothers and loved ones to share it. Jesus Himself served the bread and fish, presumably in much the same manner He had at the Last Supper. Interestingly, the disciples did not recognize Him by His features, but not one of them doubted it was Him; each one knowing that it was the Lord. This is without doubt the first post-resurrection Communion service in the Christian Church.

     The Apostles counted one hundred and fifty three fish, a number with no prior symbolic significance in the Scriptures. The general story however, does create an interesting analogy. On an earlier occasion, Jesus had told these same Apostles that He would make them fishers of men (Mat 4:18-22), and here the miraculous catch of fish predicts the imminent harvest of souls that the Apostles would be instrumental in effecting (Mat 13:47-50). The unbroken net speaks of the ability and power of the Gospel to save all who entrust their souls to it. The conversion of the Gentiles is expressed by the barrenness of the sea until the spoken Word of Christ to cast out from the right side of the vessel, where a great quantity of fish is immediately encountered. Peter is named as the one who drew the net to land, the very Apostle that Christ appointed to open the door to the Gentiles (Mat 16:18-19) by way of Cornelius and a vision of unclean animals (Acts 10:10-17).

14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.

See note on John 21:1.

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Three times Jesus asked Peter, Lovest thou Me? And each time following Peter’s affirmation, He then says, Feed my sheep. Whether taken as a command or a request, the interchange concords one last time with a primary theme of John’s Gospel: the proof of a Christian’s fidelity is manifested by his love for Christ which in turn is evidenced by how well he keeps Christ’s words (John 8:51; 13:35; 14:15; 14:21; 15:10). Obedience is proof of love, and love is proof of identity. This life is a test of our love, and how well we do in that test will determine our eternity.

     More than these. As He said these words, one can imagine Jesus sweeping with His hand to encompass the freshly caught fish, Peter’s boat and nets, his friends and the lake of Galilee. The words are ever so true for each man, woman and child who professes to be a Christ-follower. Jesus asks, Lovest thou Me more than these? And then motions with His arm to take in all that is most near to our hearts. For the farmer it might be his farm, for the young person, it might be sports, hunting, or a multitude of other diversions. For the wife it may be her household, her garden, and so much more. It bears repeating: this life is a test to show how much we love Christ.

     We have heard it often said that this life is a test of our faith, but that is the first step. For the mature Christian, it is a test of love, and that love is demonstrated by our actions. Faith, hope and love abide forever, but the greatest of these is love (1Cor 13:13).

17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

There is an interesting change in the Greek word for “love” in Jesus’ last question. The first two times Jesus asked, “Simon, do you agapao Me?” And Peter responded, “Yes Lord, you know that I phileo you.” Then Jesus asked, “Simon, do you phileo Me?” While the two words are virtually interchangeable, they do have individual connotations that shade their meanings. Agape is the general word for love, while phileo is a close love between brothers. Agape includes that love which is one-sided, sacrificial, obligatory, yet proved by actions; phileo is communion and friendship, each one knowing the other’s thoughts and desires. Some commentators say that agape is the highest form of love. If so, then phileo is the deepest form of love. For while agape is a love that acts in spite of the feelings of the other, phileo love is a shared, dedicated and strong bond of affection that is not easily broken.   

     The Greek also varies on the words “feed” and “sheep,” with the latter being noted also in the English. In the first and last instances, Jesus said, “Bosko My lambs/sheep,” but the middle question is, “Poimaino My sheep.” The first describes imparting nourishment (Mat 8:33; Luke 15:15), and the second is to care for, lead and guide (Mat 2:6; Acts 20:28; 1Cor 9:7; 1Pet 5:2; Rev 2:27; 7:17; 12:5; 19:15). The Septuagint uses this verb in Psalms 23:1, The Lord tends (poimaino) me as a shepherd.

     There are also many beautiful analogies of sheep and lambs to Christ’s followers, John 10:1-16 for example. Outside of this Gospel, see Is 40:11; Jer 3:15; Ezek 34:2-10; Acts 20:28; 1Pet 5:4.

18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.

For many people, this ominous foretelling of death by execution would have been intimidating, even to making them hide in fear of the future and thus result in being of little use to the Kingdom of Christ. But not the new Peter. The Jews imprisoned Peter on several occasions and at least twice an angel came to release him at night. By next morning’s light, he was already out preaching the name of Christ again! In 2Peter 1:14, Peter may have referred to this very occasion when he writes that Jesus had shown him that he must soon die.

     According to early church writers (see Dionysius and Irenaeus, ca 170), Peter was crucified in Rome perhaps 35 years later and several years before the fall of Jerusalem. John’s Gospel was almost certainly written after the destruction of Jerusalem, perhaps 10-15 years after Peter’s death. Tradition says that Peter was bold in death, and at his request was crucified upside-down because he felt it would be self-exalting to be crucified in the same manner as His Savior.

20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? 21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

What was Peter’s thought in asking Jesus about his close friend, John? Was his question motivated by jealousy? curiosity? rivalry? Being an impulsive person, Peter was probably just curious. Jesus had foretold his future, now he wished to know John’s future. Jesus’ answer is instructive, as He basically said to Peter, “What I have planned for John does not concern you; it is matter between he and I. Forget about that and you follow Me.”

     As John grew older and one by one his fellow Apostles died (each one by martyrdom), the brethren in the churches of Christ began to believe that he would not die until Jesus returned. This recorded detail provides important data for several controversies concerning this era. First, the conversation strongly suggests that John wrote this particular chapter. Having heard this saying among the churches, John wished to set the record straight: Jesus had not directly said he would survive until the Lord returned. Second, it supports a later date for the writing of this Gospel, certainly years after Peter and others had died. Peter probably died around A.D. 65 and John around A.D. 95, being about 90 years of age. Third, it is another proof that many in the early church believed that Christ would return very soon. Perhaps the terrible events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem were motivational to that belief.

24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

     The similarity between the last two verses of this chapter and the previous one (John 20:30-31) have caused some to speculate that John chapter 21 was a later addition to this gospel. That similarity however, is the only grounds for the idea, and every other evidence is against it. To give a a third account of Jesus’ appearance to His disciples is quite logical (John 21:14), and the story demonstrates an eye-witness’ attention to details. Additionally, Christ’s words of prophecy to Peter and John bear no marks of being added later. There is every reason to believe that this chapter is authentic.

     His testimony is true. The book of John is a treatise intended to convince the Jews and the rest of the world that Jesus the Nazarene was the Messiah promised of old to the patriarchs of the Old Testament. Written by an unlearned fisherman (Acts 4:13), it records many of the difficult sayings and teachings of Jesus Christ that have amazed the world’s greatest philosophers and thinkers. As others have pointed out, many of Jesus’ proclamations could come from the mind of only two persons: either a lying fool or the true Son of God. “I am the Way, the Truth, the Life…He that eateth My flesh dwelleth in Me and I in him” (etc). John’s Gospel best records the spiritual aspects of historical Christianity, and it defies logic to believe that these thoughts were original with him. No, John was simply a holy man who wrote as he was moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pet 1:21).

The Gospel of John describes the resurrection of Jesus in greater detail than the Synoptics, however, it gives only his and Mary’s perspectives. Correlating the Gospel accounts (Mark 16:1-2; Mat 28:1; Luke 23:54-56; John 20:1; Luke 24:1), it appears that the women watched His burial on the preparation and returned to their homes to rest on the Sabbath according to the commandment. At the setting of the sun on the sabbath, they were free to buy and prepare the spices and ointments. Then, early in the morning, they set out for the tomb. This conforms to the Traditionalist view of a Friday crucifixion-Sunday morning resurrection, which believes Mary left for the tomb while it was dark and arrived at sunrise.

1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

     Advocates for a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion propose that Jesus rose from the dead during the night, and not on Sunday morning (see note Mat 12:40). They cite this verse as proof; Mary cometh…when it was yet dark unto the sepulchre. However, there is good reason to question that translation, as the Greek verb translated cometh (erchomai) means both “to come AND to go.” Thus, Mary went early to the tomb; she left for the tomb while it was dark. Agreeing with that translation is the NIV, “While it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb.” Certainly the original does not require an arrival at the tomb before daylight, although it could be translated that way. This is a very common Greek word with a wide range of translations (accompany, appear, bring, come, enter, fall out, go, grow, pass). Study the same verb used twice in verses 3-4, where Peter and John started for the tomb, but Peter arrived first.  

     Scriptural support for the traditional view that Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday at sunrise is very strong. All of the Gospels record the women arriving early in the morning at the tomb and finding it empty, and Mark states it plainly: Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week (Mark 16:9). Since each of the Four describe the women coming to the tomb at daybreak, and by all appearances His resurrection had just occurred (John 20:17; Mat 28:11-13), Mark’s early the first day pinpoints the resurrection at sunrise on Sunday. Granted, there were no eyewitnesses of Jesus actually rising from the dead, but a night-time resurrection has no solid footing. 

     Besides Mark’s clear testimony and the universal belief of the early church that Jesus rose from the dead early on Sunday morning, there is a notable objection to a night resurrection, which is that it does not conform to the typological prophecies. At first light of this very Sunday and in accordance to the Mosaic law, the priests were observing the wave offering of firstfruits (Lev 23:5-14) as part of the Passover/Unleavened Bread convocation. The fixing of the exact day upon which this ceremony was to be observed is unique among the OT ceremonies, for it does not happen on a set date (ie, the 17th day of the first month) but on a particular day (the first Sunday) within a feast (Unleavened Bread): On the morrow after the sabbath (Lev 23:11). Although instituted by Moses at God’s command more than a thousand years earlier, it perfectly matches the details of Jesus’ death (see note on Mat 26:2). Very probably Noah’s Ark came to rest on land in the new world on this exact day (see note on Gen 8:4). Many of the monumental events in the life of the Messiah correspond with a ceremony, a feast or an offering in the OT Law. The week of His death has multiple links to these typological ceremonies. On the 10th day of the month Jesus entered Jerusalem mounted on a donkey, the same day that each family was to select a perfect lamb for the Passover (Ex 12:3); they observed the lamb four days looking for imperfections and blemishes (Ex 12:6), the same days that the scribes and Pharisees sought without success to find a blemish in Jesus’ life and teaching; then on that lurid day of His betrayal, Jews everywhere were carefully cleaning and removing from their homes any spot of leaven; and later at the very moment He hung dying on the cross the Passover lambs were being slain in the temple; finally, on the day that His body rested in the tomb all Judaism was observing the holy high day sabbath; and at the very hour of His resurrection the priests were waving the offering of Firstfruits before the Lord (a type of resurrection, 1Cor 15:20); furthermore, on the exact day of the coming of the Holy Spirit the OT ceremony of Pentecost was being celebrated. More details could be given, but the point is this: the careful typology in the OT law is precisely fulfilled in a Sunday resurrection at sunrise.    

     When it was yet dark, Mary and the other women went to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus. They determined to go early, before decay would have time to begin. The disciples were still in their homes, perhaps fearful of what might happen if they ventured out to see the tomb (John 20:19). Yet these faithful women were prepared. He might be dead, but He was not forgotten. Mark says the women had obtained and prepared sweet spices the night before (after sundown so as not to profane the sabbath), and left early in the morning to anoint His body (Mark 16:1). Very possibly the women did not travel together to the tomb, but coming from several homes arrived in separate companies and perhaps at slightly different times. We know that Mary and Martha lived in Bethany, which was outside the walls of Jerusalem. They were apparently unaware that the chief priests had installed a guard at the tomb the day before, but they did wonder who would roll back the stone (Mark 16:3). On arrival they were shocked to discover the tomb was already open!

     Of the actual resurrection, one can imagine seeing the first rays of the sun touching that huge stone and the angel rolling it back for all to see that it was empty! Jesus rose again the third day according to the Scriptures (1Cor 15:4, Hos 6:2), a time pre-figured in Abraham’s receiving Isaac back from the dead on the third day (Gen 22:4).

2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

While John gives only Mary’s account, there were quite a few women involved in witnessing Jesus’ resurrection (Luke 24:10). We know that there were at least three Marys, Joanna, Salome and probably Martha. Reconstructing the exact order of all the women’s experiences on this tumultuous day is difficult. Probably they went in various groups of women to the tomb and they separated after discovering He was gone. The disciples were in hiding for fear of the Jews (John 20:19), but the women do not seem to have felt threatened. Following is a possible reconstruction of events at Jesus’ resurrection:

1. Jesus is hastily buried Friday evening by Joseph and Nicodemus. Many of the women who saw His crucifixion also witness His burial and make plans to return as soon as possible to anoint His body more carefully.
2. The women left their homes while it was still dark so they would arrive at first light on Sunday. They were unsure how they would move the stone.
3. Unknown to them, Jesus had just risen from the grave. The keepers had fled in terror.
4. Arriving at the tomb, the women see that the stone is rolled away and that the tomb is empty.
5. Mary Magdalene, thinking the body had been stolen, leaves the group and immediately runs to tell Peter and John.
6. The other women continue at the tomb, much perplexed and wondering at what might have happened. They may have explored the tomb further, for it was usual that these tombs had numerous niches to hold the bodies of the whole family. Suddenly two angels appear and one speaks to them, explaining that Jesus had risen from the dead and that they should go and tell the disciples.
7. The women leave the tomb and run to tell the disciples, but they do not meet Mary, Peter and John, either because they took a different route or because the disciples had not all spent the night at the same place.
8. Meanwhile, Peter and John run to the tomb, followed by Mary Magdalene. The two men examine the tomb carefully, seeing the grave clothes but no body. They do not see any angels. They leave the tomb wondering what it all meant.
9. Mary remains at the tomb alone, weeping. She stoops down and looks into the tomb where, behold, two angels appear right beside the place Jesus’ body had lain. Suddenly Jesus speaks from behind her and Mary becomes the first to see the risen Lord (Mark 16:9). She runs off again to the disciples, and some of them have a hard time believing her story.
10. The other women are still en route to tell the disciples their story of seeing two angels at the tomb, so are unaware that Peter and John have already been told and are at the tomb. As they are going, Jesus suddenly appears and greets them. Many manuscripts do not have the first part of Mat 28:9, And as they went to tell His disciples (see NASB, NIV). It is possible then, that Jesus did not appear to these women until later.

     Another reconstruction has Mary Magdalene coming earlier and alone to the tomb. Seeing the empty tomb she runs to tell the disciples. John and Peter run to the tomb to see for themselves, and Mary followed them. They also see that the tomb is empty and leave wondering about it all while Mary stays at the tomb, distraught and weeping. Jesus then appears to Mary first, who runs back to tell the disciples what had happened. Meanwhile, the other women arrive at the tomb and find it empty. An angel announces to them that Jesus has risen from the dead. Not knowing that Mary, John and Peter have already been to the tomb, these women run to tell the news. On the way Jesus meets them and they worship Him.

3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. 4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. 5 And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in. 6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, 7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. 8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.

After hearing Mary’s shocking news, Peter and John ran as fast as they could to the tomb. They started out together, but the sense that something had happened was so urgent upon John that he could not be content with Peter’s slower pace. He ran ahead of Peter and arrived alone to the sepulchre. Stooping down, he looked into the tomb and saw the linen clothes, but no body. Peter arrived a little later, but he did not stop at the door. Pushing past John, he entered boldly into the sepulchre and his eyes took in the stunning scene: the linen cloths that had wrapped His body were lying empty, still in the same shape as if His body were there (so it seems). Likewise the head piece lay by itself, wrapped together as if still enveloping His head. John entered the tomb too, and he saw and believed, which apparently means that the disciples did not agree with Mary’s idea that someone had stolen His body (v2), but that He had risen from the dead.

9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. 10 Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

It was at this moment that the light of recognition hit John and probably Peter too, although the two do not seem to have discussed it then. Suddenly the weight of His earlier words became clear, that He would be killed by the Jews but would rise again the third day (Mark 8:31; Mat 20:17-19; Luke 9:22; John 10:17-18) The import of it all seems to have so stunned the disciples that they left the tomb as if in a trance, speechless, trying to fathom it all and wondering what it all meant (Luke 24:12).

11 But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre, 12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. 13 And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him. 14 And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. 15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. 16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

Meanwhile, Mary Magdalene was left at the tomb to struggle with her own feelings. She still thought that unknown men had removed His body from the sepulchre. The suddenness of His arrest and death were still very real to her and this new atrocity only added to her overcome emotions. Her deep sadness was changed to unbelievable joy when Jesus revealed Himself to her and Mary became the first person to see Him alive, risen from the dead (Mark 16:9). Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning (Ps 30:5; Is 61:3).

     John’s description of this event in all its details is stirring and culminates in the incredible scene of Mary recognizing Jesus first by the manner in which He spoke her name, much as He had earlier described in the parable of the Good Shepherd who calleth His own sheep by name (John 10:3). One can almost imagine Jesus standing there with a twinkle in His eye, planning this little surprise. Just one word, her own name, but comfortingly and tenderly spoken. Her first sense of incredulity and shock was immediately replaced with total joy and amazement. Rabboni, she said, apparently in reverence and wonder.

17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. 18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

When Jesus appeared to the disciples later that evening, He did not warn them to avoid touching Him, and a week later He even invited Thomas to touch Him. Yet to Mary, He says not to touch Him. The reason He gives is clear enough: He had just risen from the dead; but why would that be cause for avoiding to touch Him? The implication is that He must first ascend to the Father, and then His body would be fully restored. A later company of women are described as holding Him by the feet (Mat 28:9). Was His body somehow different at this point? And what happened to make it touchable? The questions are as thought-provoking as they are impossible to answer.

     Aside from the physical question of touching Christ’s un-ascended body, Jesus’ words to Mary seem to indicate that a part of His mission was not yet complete. He hadn’t had time to go to the Father yet. Many believe (as I) that a great battle took place in the spiritual realm when Jesus died and rose from the dead. Satan and his hosts were unexpectedly and crushingly defeated (Heb 2:14-15) and their place in heaven was wrested from them (Rev 12:7-10). The risen Christ descended into Hades and freed those Old Covenant souls held captive by the Devil (1Pet 4:6; Zec 9:11) and ascended with them into heaven (Mat 12:29). See my note on Eph 4:8-10 and Mat 27:53. It is probable that this war and the spoiling of Satan’s house did not take place until after Christ’s resurrection, for it was at that moment Satan knew he had been tricked into killing the Son of God, and it was then that the power of sin and death was broken.

     Jesus would ascend to My Father and your Father, although the two cases of fatherhood are quite different. Men are sons of God only by adoption, Jesus is the son of God by nature.

19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.

At evening on the same Sunday of His resurrection, Jesus appeared for the first time to His disciples, who had assembled together behind closed doors in order to not be noticed by the Jews. They had gathered to discuss that day’s shocking events, of Peter and John finding the tomb empty and the women’s stunning reports of having seen Him alive. The way Jesus appeared in the room implies a miracle, either of passing through the closed door or simply materializing in their midst.

     Peace be unto you (see John 14:27). One week later Jesus used the same greeting when He reappeared to the disciples. Almost all the epistles begin with a similar greeting of peace. The wounds the soldiers had inflicted upon Jesus had left scars and these Jesus showed unto His disciples. Thomas was one disciple who was not present and when the others described this scene, he famously professed to not believe Jesus had risen from the dead, unless he himself saw and felt those marks. I cannot think of another time that Jesus’ healing power left a scar or mark on the person. It is a mark of identity, accomplishment, victory.

     The Gospel of Luke describes this scene as well, and says that Jesus also ate in the disciples’ presence (Luke 24:36-43).

21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

Jesus’ first words to His disciple send them on a mission, just as the Father had sent Him on a mission. All Christians are sent forth to be ambassadors for Christ, to evangelize the world and to extend the Kingdom, to go into all the world (Mark 16:15; Mat 28:19-20). As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. Jesus’ message becomes the Christian’s message, and His mission becomes our mission. While certainly it is true that every Christian is a missionary whether he lives at home or abroad, Jesus’ command is clear: Go ye into all the world. Jesus left His home and worked tirelessly and sacrificially to spread the Gospel; He asks the same of His disciples (Mark 10:29-30; John 17:18).

     The words of the songwriter come to mind, Jesus saying, “My house is full, but My fields are empty. Who will go and work for Me today? It seems that all My children want to stay around My table, but no-one wants to work in My fields.” Yes, the harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few (Luke 10:2). 

     To be sent forth as Jesus was sent implies that Christ’s laborers should expect to experience similar difficulties and sufferings that He endured. Certainly that was true of the Apostles. Each one died a martyr’s death except for John the Beloved. The Greek word for sent is apestelken, a verb form of apostolos (Apostle), but send is translated from a completely different Greek word (pempo).

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

Jesus had told His disciples that He must leave them, but promised to give them the Holy Spirit forever (John 14:26; 16:7). Now, with His breath as a physical marker of this spiritual action, Jesus imparts the Spirit to them. By this it appears that the Apostles received the presence of the Holy Spirit several weeks before the tongues of fire fell upon the general population of disciples at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-6). That agrees with Luke 24:49.

     Jesus breathing the breath of spiritual life into the Apostles forms a distinct parallel to God breathing into Adam the breath of physical life in Gen 2:7. The scene matches the symbolism that the Apostle Paul makes with the first and last Adam (1Cor 15:45). God imparted physical life to Man at the creation of the world; Jesus imparted spiritual life at the creation of the New Covenant. The Greek word here translated breathed is found in only four occasions in the Greek Scriptures (Gen 2:7; 1Kgs 17:21; Job 4:21; John 20:22). It was intended to be linked with that event.

     Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them. Reading carefully, Jesus is not giving the Apostles the power to forgive sins, but confirming that God will accompany the disciples in their evangelistic efforts and will remit the sins of those for whom the disciples effectively intercede. Two verses help clarify this point. The first comes in a similar context, when Jesus commissioned the seventy disciples to evangelism: And whosoever shall not receive you…shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorraha in the day of judgment than for that city (Mat 10:14-15). The second is found in Jesus’ words to Peter in relation to church authority: Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mat 16:19). The fundamental action is the same in both examples – a divine work is effected and confirmed in heaven which has been petitioned for, and announced, by the disciples of the Kingdom.

     Under no conceivable exception (judicial, decretal, proxy, etc), would it be possible for a human being to forgive sins committed against Almighty God. His justice and wisdom do not permit that He give a limited-in-knowledge human mind the authority to remit sins. Indeed, the Scriptures repeat that no man has the right to judge another because he is a sinner himself (see note Rom 2:1). Instead, the saints of the Kingdom are charged to proclaim the acceptable terms by which God will forgive those who have sinned against Him, and that is the mandate of this verse under a two-fold truth: 1) Go proclaim to the world the availability of forgiveness for sins, and 2) Have all confidence that Christ will assuredly uphold His promises.

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

Doubting Thomas, he has been famously called. However, his profession of doubt seems to be based more on a melancholic and pessimistic personality than upon a critical, doubting of the other Apostle’s testimony. This we saw earlier when Jesus determined to return to Jerusalem in spite of their warnings that the Jews were trying to kill Him. Thomas said, Let us also go that we may die with Him. In spite of these tendencies, Thomas was a remarkable, dedicated and successful Apostle for Christ (see our note on John 11:16).

     Agreeing with this assessment, Robert Bruce writes: “The skepticism of Thomas was, we think, mainly a matter of temperament, and had little in common with the doubt of men of rationalistic proclivities, who are inveterately incredulous respecting the supernatural, and stumble at every thing savoring of the miraculous. It has been customary to call Thomas the Rationalist among the twelve, and it has even been supposed that he had belonged to the sect of the Sadducees before he joined the society of Jesus. On mature consideration, we are constrained to say that we see very little foundation for such a view of this disciple’s character, while we certainly do not grudge modern doubters any comfort they may derive from it. We are quite well aware that among the sincere, and even the spiritually-minded, there are men whose minds are so constituted that they find it very difficult to believe in the supernatural and the miraculous: so difficult, that it is a question whether, if they had been in Thomas’s place, the freest handling and the minutest inspection of the wounds in the risen Saviour’s body would have availed to draw forth from them an expression of unhesitating faith in the reality of His resurrection. Nor do we see any reason à priori for asserting that no disciple of Jesus could have been a person of such a cast of mind. All we say is, there is no evidence that Thomas, as a matter of fact, was a man of this stamp. Nowhere in the Gospel history do we discover any unreadiness on his part to believe in the supernatural or the miraculous as such. We do not find, e.g. that he was skeptical about the raising of Lazarus: we are only told that, when Jesus proposed to visit the afflicted family in Bethany, he regarded the journey as fraught with danger to his beloved Master and to them all, and said, “Let us also go, that we may die with Him.” Then, as now, he showed Himself not so much the Rationalist as the man of gloomy temperament, prone to look upon the dark side of things, living in the pensive moonlight rather than in the cheerful sunlight. His doubt did not spring out of his system of thought, but out of the state of his feelings” (my underline).

26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

After eight days, meaning exactly one week later, on Sunday again. On the night of His betrayal, the disciples were puzzled how Jesus would manifest Himself to them but not to the world (John 14:22). Jesus’ answer involved a spiritual manifestation which the world would not see, yet in a literal and physical way Jesus did manifest Himself only to the believers after His resurrection, and only in sporadic occasions.  

27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Thomas had missed a huge blessing by not being present on the previous Lord’s day meeting, but the next time he was in attendance. These were the first Sunday meetings of the Church, and so as yet they were unofficial gatherings of the believers. Thomas did not know their importance; nonetheless, it is to question why he was absent the first time. Given his moody temperament, was he somewhere alone and feeling sorry for himself? The church worship service is especially encouraging for such people.

     While Thomas had professed disbelief, it was not a strong, stubborn decision to reject the facts, or he would not have hung around a whole week with the Apostles! The whole account makes good evidence for doubters, skeptics and waverers today. If it be difficult for someone to believe that a man might rise from the dead, here is one more proof of Jesus’ resurrection. The Apostles were not a bunch of gullible men who had been unfortunately deceived into believing a lie! Indeed, they were so convinced of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead that every one except for John died for that belief.

29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

The disciples who saw Jesus before and after His resurrection had the clearest proof that He is the Christ, the Son of God. Many, many more have believed because of their testimony. We were not there to see Jesus hanging dead upon the tree, only to see Him alive about 40 hours later. We believe by faith; not a blind, irrational faith, but a faith based upon unbiased and irrefutable testimonies and facts confirmed in our own experience with the Savior. Frankly, this type of faith is more firmly established than seeing with the eyes! Trickery might deceive the eyes once in a while, but it cannot deceive these many infallible proofs (Acts 1:3). Thomas saw and heard Jesus face to face, and his hands even handled His flesh. He could not but believe that it was the same Jesus he had known and followed for 3-1/2 years. Blessed are they that believe on Christ although they have not such emphatic proof!

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

A major purpose of John’s gospel is herein stated: These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The signs and teachings of Jesus are intended to bring mankind to a saving knowledge of His holy name, and are recorded such that even the most skeptical rationalist must confess that the general facts of the case are incontrovertible. Those who reject them anyway do so in spite of the evidence, not because of the evidence. They do not want to be accountable to a God who has given commandment concerning how Mankind should live. These people begin their inquiry already set in mind that they will not believe, and are content to find a detail which they find contradictory and upon that they hang their faith in disbelieving! See also John 21:25; Acts 1:3.

1 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. 2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe, 3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.

The other Gospels say that Jesus was scourged after Pilate had condemned Him to death. The difference may be due to the witnesses’ perception. Scourging was the usual procedure before a crucifixion, and the impression was probably strong that Pilate had decided to have Jesus crucified. John’s gospel however, shows that Pilate was still harboring hope that he could release Jesus after scourging and humiliating him. After all, Jesus had not done any great harm to these people, and surely if they saw Him beaten and suffering they would be content with His release. But Pilate under-estimated the power of envy and guilt! The chief priests and the mob of self-righteous Jews would stop at nothing less than His death.

     While Rome had good laws regarding trials, justice, punishments and executions, the rulers and judges were often very cruel and overstepped their bounds in consideration for the public good. Legally Pilate had little right to scourge Jesus. No witnesses had proven that Jesus was plotting sedition, and in his own judgment Pilate says he found no fault in the man. A Roman scourging was not a simple whipping, it was a very cruel and painful punishment that occasionally resulted in death. The whip was made of several thin cords that had tiny bits of sharp metal and bones tied to it. And while the Jews were restricted to 40 lashes by the Mosaic law, the Romans had no such limit. It was common to see the back of the victim torn open and bleeding by the harsh whip. If a person did survive the scourging, his back would be deeply scarred for life.

     The Roman soldiers also humiliated Jesus by mocking Him for being the King of the Jews. They put a crown on His head, gave Him a sceptre and put a royal robe upon Him. However, the crown was made of thorns and the sceptre was a bare stick of wood, but the purple robe was apparently a real royal robe from Herod (Luke 23:11, see also note for Matthew 27:28-30). Their mock obeisance was cruel and painful. “Hail thou king of the Jews,” they would say, and then smite Him on the face with an open hand, take the reed out of His hand and hit Him on the head with it, and spit on Him. Truly prophesied Isaiah of this time: He was despised and rejected of men…He was oppressed and He was afflicted…His visage was so marred more than any man…He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. 

4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. 5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!

Again Pilate had to leave the Praetorium to converse with the Jewish multitude, who refused to enter on account of becoming unclean (John 18:28). This interpretation of uncleanness must have been another of the Pharisees’ strict and erroneous interpretations of the Mosaic law, for their is no obvious reason why entering a Gentile court would violate the Law.

     Behold the Man! The scene and Pilate’s words say to Jews, “Is this the man you think threatens the power of Rome? Look at Him! A beaten, bloody laughing-stock!” However, Pilate was greatly mistaken in thinking that he could provoke some sympathy in the Jewish multitude. The chief priests incited the fickle crowd against Him that just a few days earlier, had probably participated in welcoming Him into Jerusalem as a great prophet (Mat 21:8-11). Now nobody wanted to be associated with Him.

6 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.

This is truly an amazing scene. Pilate again tried mightily to avoid being responsible for the death of Christ and even told the Jews to take Jesus and crucify Him themselves. But the Jewish rulers didn’t want to crucify Him either! They probably feared the wrath of the people, for many had believed on Him. Right now though, they had the upper hand in the multitude and they took full advantage of that to pressure Pilate. Throughout the book of John we see three factions in the Jewish multitude: those who believed in Christ, those who didn’t, and those who were undecided and would support one side or the other for a time. Right now, the against-Jesus faction was strongest and the undecideds went with them.

     I find no fault in Him. Three times Pilate said it (John 18:38; John 19:4), but the chief rulers and priests over-ruled him by instigating the mob to chant, Crucify Him, Crucify Him. Pilate continued trying to placate the crowd, but could not do so.

7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. 8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid; 9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.

When Pilate heard that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus because He claimed to be the Son of God, he was the more afraid. Pilate knew that the Jewish rulers were ruthless men and wicked; profligate liars and filled with envy. Example one: they had brought Jesus to Pilate under the serious charge of sedition against Rome and of inciting the people to rebellion, but now their real reason for hating Him comes to light. If Pilate was a normal Roman, who believed in the wrath “of the gods,” he was seriously worried. Here was a man who claimed to be a god, and if he happened to be right, what retribution might Pilate expect to receive? 

     By our law He ought to die because He made Himself the Son of God. There is no exact OT law that says this, so apparently the Jews were using references such as Lev 24:14-16, which demanded death for all those who blaspheme the name of the Lord. Notably though, the execution was to be stoning, and by the whole congregation. 

     Pilate took Jesus back into the Praetorium and questioned Him for the third time that day. In asking, Whence art thou, Pilate was probing His origin. Is Jesus divine? or only a man? Jesus had already told Pilate that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), so this time He did not even answer (Is 53:7).

10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? 11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. 12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

By this time, Pilate must have felt himself to be on trial instead of Jesus, and in a very real sense he was. Yet, while Pilate did wish to release Jesus, the criteria that ruled him was not simple justice but the much more irrational court of popular opinion. The final straw was when the Jews began shouting that if Pilate did not crucify Jesus then he was not Caesar’s friend. Pilate was very conscious of the fact that he was a ruler in Jerusalem only at the whim of Caesar. What if the Jews’ accusation against him got back to Rome? He would have to do some serious explaining. See our note on John 18:29.

     Pilate pressured Jesus to answer his questions. “Don’t you know that I have the power to have you freed or crucified?” Was he speaking arrogantly, or was he incredulous that Jesus would not care to defend Himself? 

     “On the contrary, except it be first granted from above, you have no power at all against Me,” Jesus said, and again Pilate is certain of His innocence. Jesus’ word are true, all earthly authority is contingent upon divine will. Though both Jews and Greeks were complicit and guilty in the death of Jesus Christ, the greater sin fell upon the Jews, for rejected Him while possessing full knowledge of His innocent life.

     From thenceforth Pilate sought to release Him. Better to translate, “Pilate tried even harder to release Him.” Pilate had been looking for a way to acquit Jesus from the beginning, for he knew that for envy the Jews had delivered Him up (Mark 15:10). However, he lacked the personal fortitude to stand up to the Jews. A contrasting account in the book of Acts has Paul brought by the Jews before the Roman judgment-seat of Gallio for insurrection, but that Roman governor had the Jews cast out (Acts 18:12-17).

13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.

     For at least the third time that day, Pilate went of the Praetorium unto the Jewish mob and tried to reason with the people concerning Jesus. The Jews would not enter, so Pilate had to go out unto them. Although exactness is uncertain, it seems that Herod’s palace, the Jewish temple and Gabbatha were adjacent each other upon the temple mount. Gabbatha was a large, stone-paved open court where Pilate argued with the Jews over Jesus. Whether Pilate had his normal judgment seat (bema) brought out of the Praetorium, or if he used some stationary seat in that place is unclear.

     There are three notable places in which Jesus experienced great suffering during the last 18 hours of His life, and all three have strange, Hebrew (Aramaic) names. First, it was Gethsemane, where His soul was exceedingly sorrow, even to the point of death (Mat 26:38). Those words are strange, for the soul never dies. I believe this suffering describes the beginning of Jesus’ work in “bearing our sins.” It was more than a physical suffering, it was an agony of the soul which brought forth sweat like drops of blood falling to the ground (Luke 22:44). At the second place, Gabbatha, Jesus suffered the greatest in body. It was here that He was humiliated in the sight of all: beaten, mocked, scourged, spat upon and derided until Pilate finally said, Behold the Man! Here it was that the Jews rejected in finality their King, saying, Away with Him, crucify Him. Here was fulfilled Isaiah’s prophetic words, He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (Is 3:3). The third site was Golgotha, where they crucified Him and continued to mock His holy name. At Golgotha the iniquity poured out upon Jesus reached its full measure, until finally He cried out, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me? Then He commended His spirit to the Father and gave up the ghost (Luke 23:46).

     These three place names have Hebrew origins: Gethsemane comes from the hebrew gath, which is usually translated, “winepress,” and shemen, which is commonly translated “oil.” A notable prophecy of Jesus speaks of Him treading the winefat (gath) alone (Is 63:1-3; Joel 3:13). Gabbatha seems to derive from the Hebrew gab, which also has a corresponding messianic prophecy: The plowers plowed upon My back, they made long their furrows (Ps 129:3). Golgotha (Heb, gulgoleth), which means a skull, does not have an OT link (John 19:17). These three places of suffering began when Jesus crossed the brook Cedron (John 18:1), another Hebrew place name with great symbolic meaning.

14 And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

The Jews did not name the days of the week; instead they called them, “first day,” “second day,” etc (John 20:1). However, the sixth and seventh days were special, and so came to have be named: the preparation, and the sabbath. (John 19:42; Mark 15:42; Mat 27:62; Luke 23:54). Since the sabbath (Saturday) had very restrictive laws for every life activity, it was important that preparations be made on Friday. By all evidences Jesus was crucified on Friday, remained in the grave on the Sabbath and rose at first light on Sunday. The sabbath this particular year was a high day, meaning that it fell on 15 Nisan, which was a mandatory holy festival day, and making it even more holy (John 19:31). 15 Nisan marked the first day of Unleavened Bread, which in the NT is sometimes called the Passover, although technically it was its own feast. On the 15th Nisan, the people were to gather in a holy convocation and no servile work was permitted (Ex 12:14-16; Lev 23).

     Those who propose that Jesus died on the day after the Passover lamb was killed must explain two major flaws in that idea: 1) why the Jews refused to enter the Praetorium so that they could eat the Passover when they already had, and 2) why they were there at all, for the 15th Nisan was always a holy, convocatory day before the Lord. On the other hand, all doubts vanish when we recognize that the high sabbath 15th Nisan was the next day, which Joseph of Arimathea did not want to violate (John 19:38-42). John’s details are impeccably given, and they prove that Jesus died on the 14th Nisan, at the same time that the Passover lamb was slain in the temple.

     In spite of the clear evidence for a Friday crucifixion, some advocate a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion because of Mat 12:40, where Jesus foretold that He would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Yet that is no solution unless one also changes the time of the resurrection from Sunday morning at first light to sometime during the night before. This is a very doubtful idea, especially given the exactly prescribed ceremony of Firstfruits (a type of the resurrection) that was waved before the Lord at first light on the first Sunday of Passover week. The better interpretation of Mat 12:40 leaves the crucifixion and resurrection exactly where they appear in the Gospel accounts, and counts the time Jesus was in the heart of the earth to have begun in the Garden of Gethsemane. See our notes there. 

     The sixth hour. Bible critics have made much of this apparent contradiction to Mark that Jesus was crucified the third hour (Mark 15:25), but there are several ways to reconcile the accounts. The simplest explanation is that John notes the Roman time, which seems logical since he wrote after the fall of Jerusalem to a mixed audience of Jews and Gentiles. The Romans marked the hours of the day from midnight as we do. To them however, the sixth hour included the whole hour between 6:00-7:00AM, which gives ample time for Jesus to be crucified at the third hour, which in Jewish time would be 9:00AM (the Jews counted 12 hours from daylight to sundown). A point against this idea is that John does not appear to have used Roman time elsewhere in his Gospel (John 1:39; 4:6; 4:52). Another explanation is that John simply gives the general time at which Jesus was crucified as about the sixth hour, which would agree with the Synoptics that from the sixth to the ninth hour (12:00-3:00pm) Jesus hung upon the cross (Mat 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). With the absence of watches in that era, time was not very precise, and it was common to generalize using the expressions “third hour” for the morning hours, “sixth hour” for the noon-time hours, and “ninth hour” for the evening hours. This creates some overlap time, allowing for both John’s sixth hour and Mark’s third hour to be true. The overlap time would need to be around 11:00am, which is consistent with the probable time-frame of Jesus’ last day. But again, this idea doesn’t easily match with John’s giving of time elsewhere in his Gospel. A third explanation is that a copyist error in an early manuscript changed the Greek symbol for “three” to “six.” Bible commentators from a very early date have made this a popular explanation, and some ancient manuscripts do read “third” instead of “sixth.”

     Behold your King. This is the third time that Pilate says concerning Jesus, Behold (ide).

15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. 16 Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.

Rome did not allow the Jews to have their own ruler. By presenting Jesus as the King of the Jews, Pilate was hoping to change the multitude’s mind about crucifying Him. But the crowd was wildly against Him and constant in their demands that He be crucified. Pilate realized that he was loosing control of the situation, and that a tumult was imminent. He knew Jesus was innocent, yet to keep the peace he gave the order to have Him crucified. First however, he ceremonially washed his hands in an attempt to avoid the guilt of condemning an innocent man (Mat 27:24), and the Jews vocally accepted their willingness to be guilty of His death (Mat 27:25). Pilate’s grandiose theatrics did nothing to free him personally from being complicit in the death of the Son of God, for it was in his full power to protect Jesus from the rabid multitude. He gave in to the Jews because he could not stand up for Truth in the face of public opinion.

     How often in this world have leaders, both civil and religious, bowed to similar pressure! Kings, judges, generals, bishops and ministers have a history of taking the easy path that the people want instead of the right path of truth. Today it is called being “political correct.” Luke says that Pilate gave sentence…and delivered Jesus to their will (Luke 23:24-25). The court of public opinion does not follow Truth.

17 And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: 18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.

Like Isaac, who carried the wood for his own sacrifice, Jesus began the ignominious walk to Golgotha carrying His own cross. As they were going, the soldiers compelled another man to carry the cross, for Jesus was apparently quite weakened by the scourging and lack of sleep (Mat 27:24). Simon the Cyrenian (Libya) was just arriving in Jerusalem from the country and the mob was just exiting that city going to the crucifixion (Mark 15:21). Perhaps he became a Christian through this experience, for his name is recorded in the Gospels along with his two sons.

     Golgotha, or Calvary (Luke 23:33), was a very visible place not far outside the city walls and apparently positioned beside the main path into the city (John 19:20). See our notes at v13 for its etymology.

     John does not relate the testimonies of the two thieves (Mark 15:27-28) crucified on either side of Jesus, but does note them (see Luke 23:39-43). It was a fulfillment of prophecy, for Isaiah 53:12 says Christ was numbered with the transgressors.

19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. 21 Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews. 22 Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

Apparently as a final reproach against the injustice of the Jewish rulers, Pilate had a sign put on the cross of Christ: JESUS THE NAZARENE, KING OF THE JEWS. This greatly concerned the chief priests, who feared that their ugly deed would begin to stink among the people. They had wanted Jesus to be publicly crucified in order to eternally shame Him before all, but now that publicity was working against them. Virtually all who entered and left the city saw the title, and so the rulers hasten again to Pilate to get him to change the wording. This time however and without feeling the pressure of the riotous multitude, Pilate refused to listen.

     Hebrew, Greek and Latin were the most common languages spoken in Jerusalem. The Hebrew spoken in that day was probably a dialect of the original language of the Jews. Because of that, the Old Testament had been translated into Greek (the Septuagint) about 200 B.C., for many Jews spoke the Greek language, including Christ and the Apostles. Latin (Rhomaisti), was the language of the Romans. See Luke 23:38.

23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. 24 They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

The soldiers who crucified Christ were allowed to take His garments for themselves, a fact that all the Gospels record (Mat 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34) in fulfillment of Ps 22:18. Evidently there were four soldiers at the cross, but Jesus wore five garments. So they stripped Him naked and divided his clothes among themselves, casting lots for His coat (chiton). The five pieces of clothing were probably: 1) the chiton, which many think was an undergarment robe that reached to the ankles, 2) an outer robe or tunic, 3) a girdle around the waist, 4) a turban or kerchief wound upon the head, 5) sandals. Instead of the kerchief, some think the fifth article of clothing was a shawl/coat for the upper body, which they see implied in John’s description of the Last Supper, when Jesus laid aside His outer garments (plural) and girded Himself with a towel in order to wash the disciples’ feet (John 13:4-5). See Edersheim’s “Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.”

     The one-piece garment is described as the reason the soldiers decided to cast lots, yet it gives rise to an interesting subject, for it seems to be vey much like the special robe worn by the High Priest (Ex 28:32, see note for Ex 28:6). On the Day of Atonement, the High Priest was to take off his special garb and dress himself in holy garments of fine linen: a robe, undergarment, girdle and mitre (Lev 16:4). While not specifically mentioned, he probably wore sandals too.

25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

While some think there are four women here named, it is more likely that there are just three, all named Mary: Jesus’ mother, His mother’s sister which was the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. There were many other faithful women at the cross (Mat 27:55), including Salome (Mark 15:40) and surely Martha and Mary (John 11:1). Except for John the Beloved, we have no record that any of His disciples were at Calvary.

     His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, is probably the same person Mark calls, Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses (Mark 15:40). It may seem unlikely that two sisters be named Mary, but in an age when re-marriage and naming one’s children after relatives was common, it would not have been so unusual. Cleophas and Alphaeus may be the same name (see Mat 10:3), making James the Less and Joses to be cousins of Jesus, which is supported by verses such as Mat 13:55; 1Cor 9:5; Gal 1:19; James 1:1). Likely then, it was James the Less who wrote the epistle bearing his name. Comparing the accounts in Matthew and Mark, it may be that Salome (Mark 15:40) was the mother of Zebedee’s children (Mat 27:56), who famously asked that her sons be granted the highest seats in Christ’s reign (Mark 3:17; Mat 20:20). Mary Magdalene was a woman who followed Jesus after He had cast out of her seven devils (Mark 16:9; Luke 8:2). She became the first to see Christ risen from the grave (John 20:11-18).

     Jesus’ mother apparently did not have a home and means of support. Joseph was probably dead by now, and she may not have had another son, for it is thought that Jesus’ brethren were of Joseph and not Mary (Mat 13:55). Behold thy mother. In His last minutes Jesus provided for His mother’s physical needs in a unique way.

28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. 29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.

John does not record the supernatural darkness that obscured Golgotha for three (symbolically significant) hours (Mat 27:45), nor the contrasting confessions of the two thieves crucified with Him (Luke 23:39-43), nor the wicked and sacrilegious taunting He received by the watching crowd (Mark 15:31; Ps 22:7-8). Those events had now taken place and Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, breathed His last and gave up the ghost (pneuma, spirit). As Luke says, He commended His spirit (pneuma) unto the Father and expired (Luke 23:46; Mat 27:50). To my mind, soul (psuche) would be the more natural-sounding word, and yet, did Jesus have a soul in the same sense that humans do? (see 1Cor 15:45). However, Acts 2:31 suggests that Jesus’ soul briefly went to Hades, where He liberated the waiting souls of the righteous dead and led them to Paradise where they will wait in peace for the end of age and the final judgment (Mark 3:27; Zec 9:11; Mat 27:53; Eph 4:8; Rev 6:9; 1Pet 3:19). Although it does not seem likely, perhaps by spirit Jesus simply meant His physical life. Of course, Jesus was never contaminated by any sin, so His spirit was free to go directly to be with the Father. I’ve never been able to fully grasp the difference between a man’s spirit and soul (see note John 1:9).   

     I thirst. John points out one last prophetic detail at Jesus’ death. David had written, They gave Me also gall for My meat; and in My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink (Ps 69:21). These three words in the Septuagint are identical to those in the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ death. Luke leaves the impression that the soldiers gave Him vinegar in a mocking gesture (Luke 23:36), while Matthew records that Jesus was offered something to drink on two occasions, the first was the gall, a drugged wine to help deaden the pain and which Jesus refused (Mat 27:34). The second was a common vinegar drink (Mat 27:48).

     The soldiers dipped a sponge in the vinegar and lifted it to His mouth using a branch of hyssop, which was a small aromatic plant with medicinal qualities that was used on three important OT religious occasions: at the first Passover to apply the blood of the sacrificial lamb to the doorposts (Ex 12:22), at the Red Heifer Sacrifice where hyssop was thrown into the sacrificial fire (Num 19), and at the ceremonial cleansing of a leprous person where hyssop was dipped in blood and sprinkled upon the leper (Lev 14). Aside from two incidental mentions of the word in 1Kings 4:33 and Psalms 51:7, these are the only times hyssop is found in the OT.

     I do not believe it coincidental that hyssop was named in use at the Cross, which is reinforced by the fact that in all three OT cases two other ingredients were present, forming a trilogy of symbolic elements: cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. The only variation in the three is that at the first Passover, the scarlet was real blood sprinkled by a sprig of hyssop upon doorposts of which the wood is obviously unnamed. These three elements seem to pre-figure unique aspects in the death of Christ, for the real varieties were there present: the wooden cross, the branch of hyssop, and the blood of the sacrifice victim. In OT typology, wood is a representation of the humanity of Christ, and scarlet is a type of sin and blood (Is 1:18), but also of royalty and grandeur (Mat 27:28; Rev 18:16). Hyssop seems to symbolize submission, self-denial and sacrifice, especially in view of its use at the Red Heifer sacrifice. It was a simple, unassuming plant with important uses in the Old Covenant. Jesus laid aside His heavenly robes and denied His own human desires in bearing the sins of the world and thus performing the will of the Father. In Gethsemane He prayed, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt (Mat 25:39). Paul writes that He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death (Php 2:8).

     Vinegar upon hyssop. Bitter trials patiently endured by self denial and sacrifice.

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

It is finished. These last words are filled with such meaning! It is a meaning which only sincere seekers can fully appreciate. It is finished, signfies that the work, or mission for which He had been sent had been fully completed according to plan. He may as well have said, “The atonement has been made!” At least two actions were hereby completed: 1) The act that justifies God in forgiving the sins of Mankind, for every pardon or forgiveness requires that the forgiver suffer the wrong instead of the guilty party, 2) the finishing, or fulfillment of the prophecies and requirements of the Old Testament.

     It is finished. The words bring to mind the secrets of the angel Gabriel to Daniel, concerning the Messiah. Seventy weeks had been decreed to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy (Dan 9:24). It seems to be in this sense that Jesus is said to die in the end of the world (Heb 9:26), for the Church Age is the final era (1John 2:18; Heb 1:2).

     Jesus died shortly after the ninth hour which was about 3:00PM (Mat 27:46). The twelfth hour (about 6:00PM) was considered to be the end of the Jewish day. So Jesus died at the same time that thousands upon thousands of Passover lambs were being slain at the temple (Lev 23:5).

31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

The next day was the Sabbath, but it was also the first day of Unleavened Bread, which began on the 15th Nisan shortly after the Passover lamb was eaten on the evening of the 14th Nisan. Only an hour or two of time separated the Passover meal from the beginning of the holy festival day, the 15th Nisan, which began at sundown. On this particular year, the 15th Nisan fell upon Saturday, the normal Jewish sabbath: for that sabbath (saturday) was an high day (a holy festival day). Friday was known as the preparation because of the strict laws regarding manual labor on Saturday. Some have tried to deny that the Jews called Friday “the preparation,” but the evidence is strongly in favor. See Clement of Alexandria’s Stromata (Bk 7 Ch12), Clarke’s citation of Josephus, and Volume 1 of the Ante-Nicene Fathers page 40, as well as my notes on John 13:1, Mat 26:17.

     That sabbath day was an high day. There are three possible interpretations, two of which lead to the same conclusion. 1) a high day refers to one of the seven festival days of holy convocation in the Jewish calendar, this particular one being the first of Unleavened Bread; 2) a high day occurs when one of these seven holy days coincide with a regular sabbath day; 3) the high day refers to one of the seven holy days, which were also called sabbaths. This last option allows the idea that there were two “sabbath” days in a row: the 15 Nisan holy day sabbath on Friday, followed by the normal sabbath on Saturday. The only ones who wish for this option are those who advance a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion (see note Mat 12:40), yet their argument is weakly supported, if at all. The seven festival days are never called the sabbath in the OT Scriptures, and do not appear to be so called in any ancient writings. The KJV does read sabbath in Lev 23:24, but in the Greek and Hebrew versions the word is different. A holy convocation of the congregation to the Temple was required on these special holy days, and normal work was not permitted (Ex 12:16). Nevertheless, comparing the commandments in Lev 23, there was a distinction in the prohibition of work on the sabbath and on these holy days. Commentator Gill details the differences that the Jewish tradition had developed, which involve the idea of servile work, such as manufacturing or harvesting. The chief point to be appreciated is that the seven holy festival days were neither called nor considered to be the sabbath, which fixes Friday as the day of Jesus’ death. On this all the Gospels are emphatically unanimous (Mat 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:42).    

     Commentators Barnes, Clarke, JFB, Gill and others agree that John’s statement, that sabbath day was an high day, signifies the concurrence of the regular sabbath with the holy festival day of 15 Nisan. However, they seem to advocate that Jesus was crucified the day following the killing of the Passover lambs. Those two positions are emphatically incompatible. The Passover lamb was to be killed on the 14th Nisan and if Jesus was crucified the day following, He would have died upon this high day sabbath. Recognizing the error, Poole tries to make the high day sabbath fall upon the second day of Unleavened Bread, but he succeeds only to fall into another grave problem, for the first day of Unleavened bread was the mandatory 15 Nisan holy convocation festival day, and perhaps the most holy day in all the Jewish calendar. Following Poole’s idea, Jesus would have been crucified upon that very day! All the Jewish worries about becoming unclean by entering Pilate’s court makes no sense in that scenario. The only logical and believable option is that Jesus died on preparation Friday, 14 Nisan, at the very moment the Passover lambs were slain. His body was removed before the sabbath, 15 Nisan, began. He rose again at first light on Sunday morning, 16 Nisan, at the very moment that the priests were waving their Firstfruits offerings before the Lord according to the OT Law which stated that it be waved on the morrow after the first sabbath to fall within the feast of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:11).   

     The Law forbade the Jews to allow a hanged man’s body to remain on the tree overnight (Deut 21:22-23), but that does not seem to be the Jewish leaders’ concern. After all, the Romans were the ones who had executed Him. Their reason for removing the bodies was so that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the (high day) sabbath. How this might violate the sabbath law is unclear. Perhaps it was not a matter of Law, but that the scribes and Pharisees finally realized that they had erred in demanding Jesus’ execution and did not wish to have the ugly spectacle of a righteous man hanging in the sight of all for several days. That many did feel such remorse is clear from Luke 23:47-48, and certainly it is true that no man has died accompanied by such miraculous signs. The whole city was abuzz concerning what it all meant (Luke 24:18-19).

32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. 33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

John alone records this detail of soldiers coming to break the legs of the crucified men, for it was not uncommon for crucified men to remain alive for several days. Breaking the legs with a club would hasten death, perhaps by asphyxiation, perhaps by the brutal act itself. Some sources say the legs were broken at the thighs and apparently even accompanied by spear thrusts. By not breaking Jesus’ legs, a detail in the typology of the Passover lamb is fulfilled, for the Jews were commanded not to break any bone of it (Num 9:12). See verse 36.

     Crucifixion was one of the cruelest, humiliating deaths ever invented. Greek writers like Cicero lamented its use as barbaric and inhumane. The victim would hang defenseless and completely naked, exposed to abuse both verbally and physically. With the hands and feet immobilized, sometimes animals and birds would prey on the victim. And above all, there was no respite from the intense pain. While Jesus suffered greatly in the body as a human being, surely He suffered even more for being God!

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. 35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

Perhaps to be sure that Jesus was truly dead, a soldier pierced His side with a spear, fulfilling yet another prophecy, this one in Zech 12:10. This is another strong proof that Jesus is truly God, for in that passage God says, They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced. See verse 37.

     Water issuing forth from Jesus’ pierced side was surely an unexpected sight, yet John affirms that he is telling the truth and that he saw it with his own eyes. Many commentators eloquate why and how water might be found in His body cavity, but they do so without cause. Jesus’ death was accompanied by many supernatural signs and fulfillments, and this is just another. The symbolic significance of water flowing from Jesus’ side are manifold, and John himself makes brief mention of them in both his Gospel (John 3:5) and Epistle (1John 5:6).

     The whole scene seems to be foreshadowed in God taking a rib from Adam’s side and forming his female companion. In fact, the Greek word for side (pleura) is the same word used in Gen 2:21-22 (LXX). From Christ’s pierced side a trickle of water began that grew into a brook and then a wide stream (Eze 47:1-12), rivers of living water giving spiritual life to all those who drink from it (John 4:14; 7:38). Eve was formed from Adam’s side, but the Bride of Christ came from Christ’s side.

36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. 37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

The first prophecy John quotes comes from Ex 12:46; Num 9:12, which detail the requirements for eating the sacrificial Passover lamb. These are not prophetic passages, nor do they obviously speak of the Messiah, so the Jews had no knowledge of their true meaning. In typology they are both prophetic and Messianic! Jesus is the true Lamb which takes away forever the sin of the world (John 1:29), and is the anti-typical Passover lamb. The analogy is stronger than metaphor, for John identifies Jesus as the Passover Lamb (1Cor 5:7). The symbolism was written by the hand of God a thousand years before, and for centuries the Jews unknowingly anticipated the reality by observing this tradition. Some belittle the figurative and symbolic meanings of the Scripture and elevate the literal, physical meanings to a superior importance. So doing, they risk becoming like the Pharisees, unable to appreciate the deeper, spiritual significance of the Scriptures. Yes the physical is important, but it is limited, temporal, transitory. The spiritual meaning is superior because it is eternal and comprehensive (2Cor 4:18).

     They shall look on Him whom they pierced. This OT quotation comes from the prophecies of Zechariah (Zech 12:10). It is interesting in that it quotes the Masoretic text which, in this particular verse, reads a little differently from the Septuagint (see v34). The highly messianic 22nd chapter of Psalms also speaks of the Messiah’s piercing (Ps 22:16). See also Rev 1:7.

38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus. 39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. 40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.

The disciples were in shock, scattered and afraid. Who would remove Jesus’ body from the cross and where would He be buried? If by the Jews, perhaps in a potter’s field; if by the Romans, probably thrown together with the two thieves upon a heap of other dead bodies. But God stirred up the spirits of two righteous men to boldly step forward when all others would not. All four Gospels describe Joseph of Arimathea taking the body of Jesus from the cross (Mat 27:57-60; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53). He was a rich man, influential and well-known, but respected to be an honorable and just person; a counsellor who had not consented with the majority in having Jesus put to death. Was he a member of the Sanhedrin with Nicodemus? Perhaps (Luke 23:51). The two men were apparently friends who were unwillingly borne along by the condemning Jewish rulers. Surely they watched the proceedings in horror, amazed at the unjust lengths the rabid scribes and Pharisees were willing to go in order to crucify the innocent Jesus. They observed the signs that accompanied Jesus’ death, and they knew that a great wrong had been committed. It seems to have driven both men to overcome all their prior fears, and they boldly went against their fellow Jews in caring for the body of Jesus. It is unlikely that they were allowed to remain members of the Sanhedrin, and they probably became open disciples of Jesus after this.

     The sight of these two influential and important men personally taking care of Jesus’ body is powerful, and the import should not be overlooked. While the world of Judaism sat with their families eating around the passover lamb table, these two men accepted a task which was the most defiling in all the OT law: touching a dead body (see Num 19). For that, they would become unclean for one week, and they must pass through several steps before the temple priests to recover the right to appear in the Congregation after the week was up. The whole Feast of Unleavened Bread was lost to them. Yet, in their hearts these men knew that something more important than Unleavened Bread and Someone greater than the Passover was here (Luke 11:31-32). With all due reverence and honor they cared for the body of Christ, and like Mary who is remembered all through Christendom for anointing the feet of Jesus (Mat 26:13), Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus are remembered for doing at last what they should have done at the first, confessing that this Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God.

     Jesus was a poor man, and nothing less than a poor man’s burial awaited Him when He died. But God was true to His Word, and Jesus made His grave…with the rich in His death (Is 53:9). With myrrh and aloes Joseph and Nicodemus perfumed His body, and that not just a little, but about an hundred pound weight. Then they wound His body with linen clothes and laid Him in a new tomb, the tomb that Joseph had prepared for himself (Mat 27:60), which happened to be nearby.

41 Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.

The beginning of Jesus’ greatest sorrow had begun in a different garden that same (jewish) day (John 18:1), and it would end in this unnamed garden on the third day.

     Jesus body was placed in a new tomb, which no dead body had ever occupied. The Gospels are careful to note this detail, but its significance is not easily ascertained. Perhaps it illustrates the uncommon death of this Man. All others before Him had died in sin; but this man was spotlessly innocent. The place of His grave was not contaminated by other dead bodies.

42 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

The preparation is the Jewish name for Friday, the day before the Sabbath. See note for John 19:31. It was unlawful for any work to be done on the Sabbath, so the men (and presumably their servants) had to work hastily to bury Jesus before night fell. The Sabbath began at sundown.

1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples.

The brook Kidron was a seasonal stream in a valley of the same name that separated the city of Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives. It was the scene for notable idolatry cleansings under Asa (2Chr 15:16), Josiah (2Kings 23:4-12) and Hezekiah (2Chr 30:14), who cast the ashes of those idols into this brook. Adding further meaning to its history, several Jewish writers describe a sanitary canal which carried the blood and uncleanness of the temple sacrifices directly into the Kidron, making its waters black and dirty (2Chr 29:16; Jer 31:40, see John Gill). Symbolically, the brook Kidron can be thought of as a type of guilt and sin, and for Jesus it marked the point at which He would give up His own will and begin to bear the sins of the world.

     The most impressive symbolic detail of the Kidron concerns king David, who crossed this very brook and ascended the Mount of Olives when Absalom, a type of Satan, coveted his throne and came against David with a great army. Betrayed by Ahithophel just as Jesus was betrayed by Judas, David voluntarily endured public humiliation by Shimei, who cursed him, threw stones at him and called him a son of belial; later however, Shimei would be killed for disobeying David’s command to not cross the Kidron again (1Kings 2:42-46). It was at the brook Kidron that David experienced a difficult parting, for he must go on alone with his chosen men, while the priests Zadok and Abiathar returned to Jerusalem with the Ark of the Covenant. In a way, Jesus had to leave behind the Ark of the Covenant too when He crossed the Kidron, for this was one task He must do alone, although surely the Father was watching intently. See my notes for other parallels in these accounts in 2Sam 15:1.

     Let us briefly envision the scenes of the previous chapters. Concluded the Communion and Feetwashing ceremonies in the upper room, Judas leaves the group and goes out into the night to finish his determination to betray Jesus to the Jews. Meanwhile, Jesus speaks tenderly and frankly to the Eleven, confirming that He must leave them and return unto the Father. Then they also pass out into the night, and begin to walk toward the Mount of Olives where He was wont to spend the nights (Luke 22:30), perhaps passing by the Temple one final time on the way (John 15:1). He assures the disciples of His love and that He would send the Comforter to them after His departure, and as the group leaves the city, walking slowly down into the Kidron valley, Jesus lifts up His eyes toward heaven and prays His final prayer before entering that spiritually dark hour which He had come to earth to fulfill. For when they cross over the brook Kidron and begin the ascent of the Mount of Olives with its dark garden of Gethsemane, it is then that Jesus gives up His own will to fulfill the purpose of the Godhead, and it is then that He begins to bear the sins of the world in His own body (1Pet 2:24; 2Cor 5:21). This literal hour of darkness at the brook Kidron signified the time He must be delivered up to wicked hands (Luke 22:53; Acts 2:23).

     John’s Gospel does not relate Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane, but does mention that He entered into a garden. See my notes in Mat 26:36-46 and the account there which describes those moments which I believe was the most difficult of His earthly life, and upon which He experienced His greatest temptation, and certainly His greatest anguish (also Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:39-46).

2 And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples. 3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.

According to the Synoptics, Judas had arrived at his decision to betray Jesus just a day or two before the Passover (Mat 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6). He had gone to the Pharisees and agreed that for thirty pieces of silver he would help them arrest Him when the multitude was not present. While the text does not directly say so, it appears that Judas’ decision to betray Christ was at least partially instigated by the bitterness he felt when Jesus rebuked him for criticizing Mary for being wasteful in anointing Him with expensive perfume, although sin had already been festering in his heart before. He had been overcome by greed and had been stealing from the disciples for some time (John 12:4-7).

     Jesus had arrived in Jerusalem about one week earlier to observe the Passover, and during that time He had been accustomed to leaving the city of Jerusalem each night to sleep on the Mount of Olives. Judas was aware of this practice and the chief priests and scribes had agreed that this would be the perfect spot to secretly arrest Him (Luke 22:6).

4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? 5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. 6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7 Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: 9 That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.

The other Gospels relate that Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss (Mat 26:48-49; Mark 14:45), which probably was the first act in their meeting. Then Jesus (although already knowing all things that should come upon Him), asked who they were looking for.

     “Jesus the Nazarene,” they answered.

     “I am [He].” Jesus said, and with that everyone fell backward to the ground. As in John 8:58, the “He” is not in the Greek, making His statement virtually identical to God’s OT title, I AM. No wonder then that the Jews fell back backward to the ground, as Eli did when he heard the words, the ark of God (1Sam 4:17-18). In the messianic Psalms 40, the writer prays that those who seek after his soul would be driven backward (Ps 40:14; 35:4). Clearly an invisible power was at work, for instead of moving forward to apprehend the One they had come to take, the men retreated and fell down. It was the same power that had earlier kept the Jewish officers from arresting Him (John 7:45-46), and had allowed Him to pass unharmed through the midst of them (Luke 4:29-30). That power was still most evidently available, but He chose to lay it down and submit Himself to their evil plans.

     Three times in these verses Jesus says, I AM (v5,6,8), and that matches exactly the pattern in the 8th chapter of John (v24, 28, 58). His authority is still intact, but has been voluntarily restrained. However, His words are not supplicatory but imperative when He tells His arrestors, Let these (indicating His disciples) go their way. And they obeyed.

10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus. 11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

Earlier that night Jesus had told His disciples that the time had come to sell their garments and buy swords (Luke 22:35-39), but clearly He was speaking figuratively of this moment for when Peter attempted to use the sword Jesus disarmed him and all earthly soldiers forever: Put up thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword (Mat 26:52). It is shocking to read the arguments of those who advocate the duty of Christians to take up the sword in self-defense and “just war,” when the entire tenor of the New Covenant is to peace, love and self-denial. Many just-war theorists use these verses to promote their ideas, interpreting short phrases in such way as to contradict the body of Scripture.

     The sword is a euphemism for conflict, antagonism, persecution and war, which Jesus says His disciples will suffer, not inflict on others (Mat 10:34-36). Of course, Peter was still living according to the lex talionis of the Old Covenant (Mat 5:38), and with admirable courage stood to defend His Master, even though they were greatly outnumbered. While the versions translate sword, the Greek word machaira typically means a knife used for a variety of daily tasks such as cutting meat, offering sacrifices, etc. It also served as a simple weapon for protection from thieves. There were only two knives among the entire group, and that is significant. Attempting to reconstruct a possible thrust or slash that would result in cutting off a man’s ear, I envision a horizontal slash aimed at the neck. But the servant anticipates the blow and ducks his head to the side; almost enough, but not quite. Jesus, however, stopped the action and healed the stricken man (Luke 22:51).

     The servant’s name was Malchus. While the other Gospels name neither Peter or Malchus, the book of John helps us to understand the pressure Peter felt later that night and led him to deny that he knew Jesus, for one of his accusers was a relative of this man he had tried to kill a few hours earlier (John 18:26). It is likely that Malchus later became a Christian, and for that we know his name. 

     The cup which My Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? The cup seems to typify suffering and self-denial (Mat 20:22; Mark 14:6; Luke 22:42).

12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, 13 And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.

The band and its captain may refer to Roman soldiers (see Acts 21:31). However, the arrest was a Jewish affair, organized and manned by the chief priests, elders and scribes. Although Caiaphas was the acting high priest, the multitude took Jesus instead to the house of Annas, who was Caiaphas’ father-in-law. Annas was a very influential person in Judea. Several of his sons had served as high priests, and Luke 3:2 indicates Annas was himself the high priest with Caiaphas. Perhaps Annas was the primary mediator of the secret pact Judas had made with the Jewish rulers, and so Jesus was first brought to his house. Or maybe Jesus was simply held there until the Sanhedrim could be hastily called to meet in the wee hours of the morning at the house of Caiaphas. Whatever the case, John alone tells us that Jesus went first to the house of Annas.

14 Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.

Concerning the occasion and background for this counsel, in which Caiaphas inadvertently prophesied that Jesus would die for the people, see John 11:47-53.

15 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. 16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter.

Peter and another disciple secretly followed Jesus, for the darkness of the night was sufficient to keep them from being discovered. Modern translations of verse 24 lead some to think that verses 15-23 took place in the house of Annas and not Caiaphas, but I think not. Jesus was taken first to Annas’ house (v13) and waited there while the members of the Sanhedrin were hastily called to assemble at the house of the high priest Caiaphas. Meanwhile, Peter was watching in the dark outside Annas’ house until Jesus was led forth, and then he followed Him to Caiaphas’ house (v15) where he was able to gain entrance with the help of another. By that time, it would probably have been around 3:00AM. 

     The alternative view is that verses 15-23 describe Jesus’ interrogation before Annas, and verses 24-27 describe His trial before the Sanhedrin in the house of Caiaphas. There are at least three strong arguments against that idea: 1) it requires Peter to deny Christ in both houses while warming himself before two different fires and facing the accusations of two separate female gatekeepers, 2) while Peter entered one of the two houses with the help of another, we are left to guess how he entered the other house, and 3) throughout these verses it is the high priest that questions Jesus. Caiaphas, not Annas, was the acting high priest (v24). The best counter-argument to these facts is the theory that the houses of Annas and Caiaphas were adjacent and shared the same courtyard. 

     When the two disciples arrived at the house of the high priest, they could not enter because of the damsel that kept the door. However, that other disciple knew the high priest, and by his word Peter was also allowed into the courtyard. There is some disagreement over who this other disciple was; many believe it was the Apostle John, writer of this Gospel, who is everywhere modest and reluctant to draw attention to himself by name. Others point out that usually John refers to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 20:2), which phrase does not appear here. They also doubt that John the young Galilean would be sufficiently acquainted with the Jewish high priest such that his staff would recognize him. However, the careful details in John’s Gospel at this night meeting make me believe that John was indeed this other disciple, for he and Peter were steadfast friends in everything, and we know that John was at the crucifixion. One supporting detail to the idea that John knew the high priest’s household is that he alone records the name of the high priest’s servant whose ear Peter had cut off.

17 Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man’s disciples? He saith, I am not. 18 And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself.

Peter’s first denial at the gate may have been a simple, flippant “No” to the gatekeeper quick question, “You’re not one of His disciples are you?” That would quickly allay her doubt. See also Mat 26:69; Mark 14:66; Luke 22:56. If, as I proposed in the previous note, Peter had been standing in the cold for several hours outside Annas’ house and then walked to Caiaphas’ house, it is no wonder he was drawn to the fire.

19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. 20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. 21 Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said.

Since John says that Caiaphas was the high priest (John 11:49; 18:13), these verses apparently present the same interrogation at the house of Caiaphas that the other Gospels describe. As is common in his Gospel, John relates a statement of Jesus that the others do not: “Why are you asking Me what I said? The standard procedure is to call witnesses that heard Me, in order to substantiate My ‘erroneous’ doctrine. There surely are many, for I ever spoke openly to the world.”

     The council eventually did bring witnesses, but only with great difficulty, for their testimonies did not agree. In the end, the Sanhedrin condemned Jesus to death on account of His own testimony that He is God (Mat 26:59-66; John 19:7).

22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? 23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?

Before this same council several years later, the Apostle Paul was also hit in the face (Acts 23:2). The Sanhedrin was a corrupt and unjust council of supposed religious leaders who used cruelty and false testimony to manufacture the decisions they wished to impose. Until this moment, Jesus had never once been physically abused during His ministry, but from now until the end, He would be mistreated and humiliated often. It is another sign of the sudden and striking change to that hour in which the powers of darkness were permitted to have their way with Him. Before, men were forbidden to touch Him by some unseen power (John 7:45-46), now He can only respond with words of wisdom, for He had laid down His God-powers (Php 2:7-8).

24 Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.

The translations of this verse that are based on the Textus Receptus (ie. KJV) indicate that Jesus had earlier been sent to Caiaphas, and so the events of the previous verses would have taken place there. Modern translations based on the Nestle text render the verse in the present tense (then Annas sent Him bound…), which makes the prior verses seem to take place at the house of Annas. For the arguments against the latter option, see the note for v15.

25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it, and said, I am not. 26 One of the servants of the high priest, being his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with him? 27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.

Peter was still warming himself when several others around the fire began to question him: Art not thou also one of His disciples? Perhaps the first denial was a flippant answer to a playful question, but this time he is forced into a corner by several accusers. Seeing those faces arraigned against him around the fire, Peter is completely intimidated and denied that he was a disciple of Jesus. A little later, yet a third person, this one a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, enters the scene and confronts Peter: Did not I see thee in the garden with Him? And once more Peter denied that it was he, whereupon the rooster immediately crowed. Luke records (Luke 22:56-62) that then the Lord turned and looked at Peter, who suddenly remembered Jesus’ words of just a few hours earlier: The cock shall not crow til thou hast denied Me thrice (John 13:38). Peter recalled his own over-confident boast that even though all others should forsake Christ, he would never do so (Mat 26:31-35), and thinking upon these things, he left the house and wept bitterly.

     Much has been written and many illustrations have been drawn from Peter’s high-profile denial, yet let us first emphasize the points concerning Christ, that Jesus knew the future exactly and that He was authoritatively involved in the high-stakes battle of the spirit world: The Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not (Luke 22:31-32). Peter was but a pawn in this battle; we are weak but He is strong. Rather than focus on Peter’s failure, let us take lesson from his overcoming faith. Judas denied too, and did not have the faith to repent unto salvation. If in his own strength Peter failed, being perhaps the strongest of the twelve in courage and determination, may we recognize that sufficient power to overcome our own trials of faith is available only in Christ.

 28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.

John does not describe the injustice and cruelty that Jesus suffered before the Sanhedrin, nor does he detail the sentence of death that they pronounced upon Him, all of which can be found in the Synoptics (Mat 26:63-68; Luke 22:63-71). Daylight was just breaking when Jesus was led bound unto the hall of judgment (praitorion), the Roman court of Jewish affairs in Jerusalem (Mark 15:16).

     In order to guard themselves from becoming ceremonially unclean and thereby excluded from eating the Passover, the Jews refused to enter the praetorium. The Passover lamb was to be slain that evening, and that also marked the beginning of the week-long Festival of Unleavened Bread in which the first day was the most holy festival day in all the Jewish calendar. This particular year, that day happened to fall upon the normal weekly sabbath, making it a high day sabbath (John 19:31). The hypocrisy of the Jewish leaders here is shockingly evident and almost unbelievable. They blatantly broke a multitude of their own rules of etiquette and justice in condemning Jesus to death in the dark of night, yet before the people they were piously righteous.

     According to the Mosaic law a person who became ceremonially unclean was to remain that way until evening, and that would have denied the Jewish rulers the right to eat the Passover lamb (Num 9:13). This verse highlights a fact that ought to put to rest all notions that the Jewish Passover had taken place the night before, and that therefore Jesus was crucified on the first day of Unleavened Bread. The ceremonial laws specified that the lamb be slain on the 14th Nisan and eaten that evening. The 15th Nisan was a mandatory holy day to the Lord, one of the two most sacred days in all the Jewish calendar. No servile work was permitted, and a holy convocation of all Jewish adults was observed in the temple on this day (see note John 13:1). It is inconceivable that the Jewish leaders would have crucified Jesus on 15 Nisan, and it would contradict their own decision to not arrest Him on that day (Mat 26:5). If instead Jesus was crucified on the Passover day (14 Nisan), all difficulties are removed and the details involved mesh with facts given. The 14th was not a holy day, and normal work and activities were permitted. A minor detail in Mark 15:21 is yet another supporting fact in this argument. As Jesus was walking out of the city to be crucified, Simon the Cyrenian was entering the city from out of the country. Jews came from hundreds of miles to Jerusalem to eat the Passover, and apparently Simon was one of them. If, as some say, this was after the Passover, Simon was breaking the Jew’s law which dictated that one could not travel more than 2000 cubits (about 1/2 mile) outside the city on the Sabbath. 

     The only reason some commentators propose that Jesus died on the 15 Nisan is because the Synoptics say that Jesus ate the Passover the night before He died. See our notes that reconcile the apparent differences.

29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? 30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee. 31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:

Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26-37, appointed by the Roman Emperor, Tiberius Caesar. Although his normal quarters were in Caesarea on the sea, Pilate’s garrison of Roman soldiers went periodically to Jerusalem to keep the peace and to quell any Jewish uprising. During the previous year’s passover, he had apparently angered Herod Antipas (20BC-AD39), tetrarch of the region of Galilee, by killing some Jews during their sacrifices (Luke 13:1; 23:12). According to Philo, a Jewish intellectual of Alexandria who lived ca 20BC-50AD, Pilate was a cruel man of ferocious passions who regularly executed persons without waiting for a trial. He was noted for obstinacy and selfish ambitions, but had very recently been sternly reprimanded by Tiberius for having installed some ceremonial shields in Herod’s Jerusalem palace. That had provoked outrage by the Jews, who saw it as a demotion of their customs and heritage. So at the time, Pilate found himself embroiled in a delicate situation both in Rome and Jerusalem. If the year of Jesus’ death was indeed 33 A.D., and the greatest evidences do favor that date, then Pilate was additionally concerned with Tiberius’ ongoing purge of anyone who seemed to have supported Sejanus in his emperoral ambitions. Pilate himself had probably been appointed by Sejanus. Historians call this period Tiberius’ “reign of terror,” which began in 31AD with the execution of Sejanus and ended in 34AD. 

     Pilate’s first clash of the day with the scribes and Pharisees concerning Jesus went poorly for the Jews, who could not come up with a believable accusation that would cause the Romans to execute Jesus. Sedition against the Roman government carried the death penalty, but Pilate was rightfully very suspicious. The Jews were ideologically and violently antagonistic to Roman rule in Jerusalem, why would they suddenly be so zealous for Rome as to turn in a seditious person on the eve of their holy week? The intention of the chief priests before Pilate is truly amazing. They didn’t want Pilate to judge Jesus (they had already done that), they just wanted Pilate to put Him to death.

     The real reason the Jewish rulers wanted Pilate to take responsibility of Jesus is revealed: they want Him publicly put to death. Virtually certain that the Jews had not brought Jesus to him because of plotting against Rome, Pilate tells the Jews to take Jesus and judge Him according to their law, a remarkably generous gesture on Pilate’s part. The Jews respond: But it is not lawful for us to put any man to death. Now, there are sufficient examples in history and the Scriptures (Acts 7:59; Mat 26:4) that convince us that the Jews would not have let this little detail restrain them from killing Jesus. Religious assassinations and stonings were commonplace in Jerusalem. However, the Jews wanted more than a simple murder; they wanted Jesus to be humiliated and executed in public as a common criminal and so forever eliminate Him from undermining them before the people, and to discourage any others who might try to continue His anti-Jewish doctrine. Public executions were the domain and right of the Roman government, so the Jews needed to get Rome to kill Jesus.

     While Pilate is to be commended in this instance for not simply rubber-stamping the envious and guilt-stricken Jewish leaders’ death sentence, he cannot escape the huge blot on his character record that has him standing in the annals of history forever trying to wash his hands from the guilt of participating in killing the Son of God. Yes, the greater sin would fall upon the Jews (John 19:11), but Pilate’s word alone could have set Jesus free. However, he was too weak to withstand the wrath and clamor of the Jewish people. Almost certainly those Jewish taunts about not being a friend of Caesar hint at his worry about recrimination from Rome. A further hint is seen in the fact that when the Jews refused to enter the Judgment Hall, Pilate then went out unto them. Yet later when the Jews tried to get him to change the title he had put upon Jesus’ cross, Pilate refused (John 19:20-22). He had had enough of the Jews’ pressures, but by then it was too late, and he seems to have wished that he would have had acted otherwise.

32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.

What death He should die. Jesus had prophesied in detail that He would be delivered up to the Romans to be publicly humiliated and executed by crucifixion: The Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify Him (Mat 20:18-19). His words were exactly fulfilled. According to Justin Martyr’s “Dialogue with Trypho,” a major stumbling-block the early Christians encountered in evangelizing the Jews was that Jesus had died by crucifixion. This manner of death was considered such a shameful disgrace that many could not accept Him as the Messiah. Even when the Christians explained carefully that the curse of sin which all mankind had incurred was carried by Christ (Gal 3:13), they were doubtful. Justin gave several fore-shadows of the crucifixion from the Jewish Scriptures, explaining that Moses’ lifted up hands formed a figure of the cross (Ex 17:11-12), and that Isaiah 65:2 likewise pictures God in the form of a cross. He saw in the horns of the unicorn (Ps 22:21) another signification of the death that the Messiah would die, for the three extremities of the cross appeared as horns, The brazen serpent lifted up on a pole also pre-figured Christ’s crucifixion, for it went contrary to the Law to ask the children of Israel to worship an image, and even more, the image of a serpent.

33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? 35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Now Pilate began to understand why the Jews had brought Jesus to him. They wanted Him shamed and put to death. He called for Jesus and, in the absence of the Jews (who would not enter the judgment hall), he interrogated Him: Art Thou the King of the Jews? His question sprang from the Jewish rulers’ charge that Jesus was secretly mounting an attempt against the Roman government, and that He was proclaiming Himself to be a King (Luke 23:1-2).

     Sayest thou this thing of thyself? Judging by this answer, Jesus had not been present when the Jews accused Him before Pilate outside the Praetorium, but His words are not those of a man in peril of death. In fact, Jesus’ answers will make Pilate more and more convinced of His innocence.

36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

The Kingdom proclaimed. Jesus’ words before Pilate have been called the good confession (1Tim 6:13), and they have been one of the pillars of the suffering, pilgrim churches of Christ down through history: My Kingdom is not of this world. When citizens of the Kingdom truly grasp the transcendental significance of that concept it will deeply affect their worldview, the purpose of being church and the very reasons for living (Luke 17:21). When you are buffeted by the trials and difficulties, think: My Kingdom is not of this world! When the enemy comes offering pleasures, ease and pomp, remember: My Kingdom is not of this world! When sadnesses, despairs and discouragements strike at the soul, repeat: My Kingdom is not from hence!

     The prophets foretold of a day in which the God of heaven would set up a Kingdom that would never be destroyed (Dan 2:44; 7:14). Pilate saw and heard the dawn of that Kingdom from the outside. To this end was [Christ] born, and for this cause came [He] into the world (v37). Jesus’ ministry began with a proclamation that the Kingdom of heaven was at hand (Mat 4:17), and it ended with its foundations of Truth fully established. By bearing witness to the truth, Jesus inaugurated the gospel of your salvation (Eph 1:13), and everyone who hears His voice is of the Truth.

     Thou sayest that I am a king, or, “it is as thou sayest.” An earthly kingdom must have a king, a country, a constitution and servants, and so too does the heavenly Kingdom of Christ.

38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.

After questioning Jesus, Pilate was sure of one thing: Jesus was no threat to Rome. Clearly the chief priests had lied to him; it was probably a matter of disputing about their laws, and for envy they wished Him killed (Mark 15:10). So it is with some bitterness that Pilate says, What is truth? He wasn’t expecting a response, he was just tired of lies and deception. Nevertheless, his question has rung down through the centuries in the halls of religion, philosophy, science, history and all other fields that human knowledge has pursued.

     In the most basic of meanings, truth is simply the real state of things. Truth can generally be proven or shown to be true, yet there are several foundational truths which cannot be proven at all. These are accepted to be true because they are so universally and consistently believed. It is impossible, for instance, to scientifically prove that the law of cause and effect is true. Yet it is so universally consistent that even evolutionists, who could wish ever so much that it were not true, accept it’s truthfulness. Sincerity is not enough; it has to be true! Seek the Truth with a sincere, honest heart and you will find it (Mat 7:7).

     Truth is discovered by either logic or by divine revelation, but divine revelation is the ultimate truth, and must supersede the truth of logic. Example: the logical truth that will result from human wisdom must say that Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead; but divine revelation says that He did. We believe divine revelation because the Spirit is truth (John 15:26), Jesus Christ is Truth (John 14:6), God’s Word is truth (John 17:17; Dan 10:21; 1Thes 2:13; 2Tim 2:15), and the Church of Jesus Christ is the pillar and ground of truth (1Tim 3:15). Truth discovered by man’s logic and wisdom may be flawed, but divinely revealed truth is infallible because it originates in the God (1Cor 1:25; 3:19) who is True (Deut 32:4). Jesus said, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6). So Truth is Christ and His Word, for the Scriptures make us wise unto salvation, prepared and equipped against every possible doctrine of deception (2Tim 3:15-17). Jesus used revealed truth to combat Satan during His great desert temptation, so possessing the truth of the Scriptures is key to standing firm before the wiles and schemes of the devil. The brethren are counseled to prove whether the words of church teachers are based in Truth by studying the Scriptures (Acts 17:11; 1Thes 5:21).

39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? 40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

One of the peculiar elements in the story of Jesus’ crucifixion is why Pilate tried so hard to be rid of any responsibility concerning Jesus’ death. The Romans were cruel and merciless as a rule, and the death of one more Jew was hardly a matter of much concern, even if He happened to be innocent. Yet Pilate was clearly unnerved by this Man who spoke so calmly and confidently, yet would not even defend Himself. And His odd assertion that He had been sent to earth as a King but not of this world? The more Pilate learned about Him, the more worried he became. Then, while still in the judgment hall with Jesus, he received a message from his wife: Have thou nothing to do with that just man for I have suffered many things in a dream this day because of Him (Mat 27:19). The Romans were notoriously superstitious, and were convinced that the gods predicted events by these types of omens.

     Pilate felt trapped. The Jews were practically out of their minds, threatening revolt and riot if he did not acquiesce to their demands that Jesus be executed. The Man was clearly innocent, but his job was to keep peace and order in Jerusalem, which was presently in a precarious state. The other Gospels even more clearly portray this fact. 

     Under these pressures Pilate went out to the Jewish crowd outside the Praetorium. I find in Him no fault at all, he told them. But the chief priests would not accept his answer and the gathering mob became even angrier in accusing Jesus of sedition and of stirring up the people. During this second encounter with the Jewish rulers, Pilate learned that Jesus was a Galilean and so had Him sent to Herod as recorded in Luke 23:1-15. However, the matter only worsened during the short time that Herod interviewed Jesus, and by the time Jesus returned to Pilate’s hall (perhaps an hour later) an even greater and more angry Jewish multitude was gathered outside the Roman hall.

     The multitude began clamoring that Pilate release a Passover prisoner to them (Mark 15:8), and Pilate, hoping and expecting that the Jewish population would not agree with their rulers concerning Jesus of Nazareth, responded by offering to release the King of the Jews instead of Barabbas (Mark 15:9-10). But the chief priests were able to move the multitude to ask that Barabbas be released and that Jesus be crucified (Mark 15:11-13). Luke’s parallel account gives a very similar record of events (Luke 23:16-25).

     The fact that all four gospels record the account of Barabbas being freed makes it likely that there is a deeper significance in that exchange. Now Barabbas was a robber, and had been cast into the Roman prison because of sedition and murder (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:25). The Jewish people rejected the good and righteous King and chose a robber and murderer as their king (Acts 3:13-14). These are striking figures of Satan! See John 8:44; 10:10. Physical Jews have ever since been characterized as seditious, robberous people. Yet let us be clear, not just the Jew but every Gentile who rejects and disregards the living Word is shouting with that rebellious crowd: Not this Man, but Barabbas! What terrible, awful choice. The parallel account says, And Pilate released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will (Luke 23:25).