The Gospel of John had an evangelistic purpose, and therefore, the author’s intention was to prove the Messiahship of Yeshua. This goal becomes evident in John 20:31: but these are written, that ye may believe that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name. Evidently, the apostle’s goal in writing his Gospel was to reach the lost. Who the lost were cannot be determined with certainty; however, it seems that the Jews portrayed in his account were outsiders to the church, meaning unbelievers. However, there are other verses which portray certain Gentiles as if they were believers. If one takes these two rather distinct groups into consideration, a twofold goal of the Gospel comes into view. On one hand, he wanted to provide for the church a tool for evangelism. On the other hand, he wanted to strengthen the faith of those who already believed.
While Luke emphasized the humanity of the Messiah, Yochanan the apostle emphasized His deity. Luke was concerned with showing Yeshua to be fully human; the apostle’s concern was to show that He was fully God. By the time he wrote his Gospel, Matthew, Mark, and Luke already had a wide circulation. While the three Gospels preceding his were written to specific ethnic audiences (Jews, Romans, and Greeks), his Gospel was written for the church at large and to unbelievers, so that they could be convinced that Yeshua was the Messiah (Jn. 20:30-31). He concentrated on adding those details the other three Gospel writers had left out. A large body of material in his Gospel is not found in Matthew, Mark, or Luke. While Mark was mostly interested in what Yeshua did, Yochanan was more interested in what the Messiah said and taught. There are sermons and discourses in his Gospel not found in the other narratives.
While the apostle’s main theme was Yeshua the Messiah, the Son of God, he interwove two sub-themes with his Gospel. The first sub-theme is the conflict of light and darkness. Yochanan used those very terms, “light” and “darkness,” as well as “night” and “day.” He sometimes made statements that seem to be irrelevant unless this sub-theme is recognized. For example, he recorded that after the Messiah identified Judas as the betrayer at the last Passover, Judas left. The apostle added, and it was night (Jn. 13:30). Obviously, it was night; Passover is always observed at night, never in the daytime. It seems to be an irrelevant statement—except it is part of the apostle’s sub-theme on the conflict of light and darkness. Yochanan was not just making a statement of fact, that it was night outside. That was obvious. The point is that Judas himself was “of the night” and “of the darkness.” The deed he was about to do was not a deed “of the light” or “of the day.”
The second sub-theme in the Gospel of John is that the Messiah came for the purpose of being the Father’s revealer. That explains why the apostle spent much more time on what Yeshua said and taught rather than on what He did. In all of His sermons, discourses, and teachings, He revealed the nature of the Father to man.
Another aspect of the Gospel of John is that it records things in sevens, specifically, seven signs Yeshua performed, seven discourses He gave, and seven “I Am” statements He made.
John 1:1-18
John 1:1-18 comprise the introduction to Yochanan’s Gospel. The opening words of verse 1 are: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Greek term translated into English as “Word” is Logos. The apostle used this term as a title or a name, and he seemed to assume that the reader would understand the significance of it. Therefore, the usage of “Logos” in this way must have been a familiar concept in the first century. There are three possible sources for it: Greek philosophy, the writings of Philo, or rabbinic theology regarding the concept of the Memra.
Because Yochanan the apostle used the word Logos, many commentaries on his Gospel begin with a discourse on what the term meant in Greek philosophy. In Greek philosophy, the Logos had two aspects: the aspect of reason and the aspect of speech. Having said this, the commentaries then try to show that the author revealed how the Messiah came to fulfill the goals of Greek philosophy in both of these areas: By reason, Yeshua was the very idea of God, and by speech, He was the very expression of God. What these commentators forget is that by profession Yochanan the apostle was not a Greek philosopher, but a Jewish fisherman.
The second possible source for the term Logos is in the writings of Philo. This Hellenistic Jewish philosopher lived in Alexandria, Egypt, and was a contemporary of both Yeshua and His apostle Yochanan. Philo was well versed in Greek philosophy and used it to interpret the Jewish Scriptures, employing an allegorical approach. The essence of the Logos in Philo’s writings can be summarized in five points:
✡ The Logos is the eikon, the image of God.
✡ It is close to Metatron, the angel closest to God in rabbinic angelology.
✡ It is the high priest acting as a mediator.
✡ It is the paraclete.
✡ It is not a person, but something shadowy and unreal.
As can be seen from the above list, there are similarities between the writings of Yochanan and Philo, but there are also strong points of dissimilarity, and this indicates that the apostle, a Galilean fisherman, was not influenced by the writings of Philo, the Alexandrian philosopher. The source for the apostle’s usage of the term Logos was not the writings of Philo. The Galilean fisherman simply did not travel in the same circles as the Alexandrian philosopher. To find the source of his Logos, we actually need look no further than the Judaism that he grew up with, the Judaism of the land of Israel. While this form of Judaism was varied, it was distinctive from the Hellenistic Judaism that Philo represented.
The apostle’s concept of the Logos shows that he was very familiar with the Aramaic translation and interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures called the Targumim. In the Targumim, the translators used the word Memra, and the Targumic usage of this term is where we find the source of Yochanan’s Logos. The Hebrew equivalent of the word Memra is Davar. Based upon this term, as it is used in the Hebrew Scriptures, the rabbis derived six specific theological truths about the Memra. The introduction of the Gospel of John refers to all six of these in some form or another.
The first truth about the Memra is that it was sometimes distinct from God, but other times the same as God. In all of their writings, the rabbis never tried to explain this obvious paradox. How is it possible for the Memra to be distinct from God, and yet at the same time be God? They taught both statements as being true and left it there. Yochanan the apostle did the same thing in the first verse of his Gospel. When he stated that the Logos was with God, he made Him distinct from God. Then he stated that the Logos was God, making Him the same as God. Like the rabbis, he did not try to explain the paradox at this point, but simply stated this as being true. Later in his writings, he explained these seemingly contradictory statements in terms of the Trinity. The One he wrote about is distinct from God because He is not God the Father, nor is He God the Holy Spirit, yet He is the same as God in that He is the second member of the Trinity—God the Son. Only in terms of this triunity can the rabbinic paradox be explained.
The second truth about the Memra is that it was the agent of creation. Whenever God created anything, He did so by means of His Memra, His Word. Everything that exists does so because of His Memra. Without the Memra, nothing that exists would exist. Therefore, the Memra was both there at and active in the beginning. This was derived from passages like Genesis 1, when God simply said, “Let there be”, an expression which in English contains three words, but in Hebrew only one. Whatever followed “Let there be” would immediately come into existence. John 1:3 states: All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that has been made. Here, Yochanan the apostle connected what is known about the Memra with his Logos. Everything was made through Him (the Logos), and without Him nothing would exist that now does exist. The Logos is the agent of creation, and this is stated both positively (All things were made through him) and negatively (without him was not anything made that has been made). The role of the Son in creation is also found in Colossians 1:16 and Hebrews 1:2.
The third theological truth about the Memra is that it was the agent of salvation. Throughout the history of the Hebrew Bible, God provided salvation by means of His Memra. Whether it was a physical salvation (such as the Exodus out of Egypt) or a spiritual salvation, He always saved by means of His Word. John 1:12 reads: But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name. The apostle’s point is that the One who is the Logos, or the Memra, is the agent of salvation, because those who believe on Him, those who receive Him, are the ones who receive their salvation.
The fourth theological truth about the Memra is that it was the means by which God became visible. From time to time throughout the history of the Hebrew Bible, God took on some kind of a visible form. When He did so, it was by means of His Memra, by means of His Word. In Christian theology, these visible manifestations are referred to as “theophanies.” The rabbis had a different term to describe the same thing. They called it Shechinah. The Shechinah was often connected with God’s glory, so the two words were frequently used together: the Shechinah glory of God. By way of definition, the Shechinah glory is the visible manifestation of God’s presence. Whenever the invisible God became visible, whenever the omnipresence of God was localized, this visible, localized presence was referred to as the Shechinah glory. Throughout Old Testament history, it came primarily in three forms: light, fire, or cloud, or some combination of the three. Another form by which God became visible was as the Angel of Jehovah. Whenever one of these visible manifestations occurred, it was by means of the Memra, by means of the Word.
John 1:14 states: And the Word became flesh. The Word, the Logos, that was in the beginning with God and who was God (Jn. 1:1) now, at a certain point of human history, took on visible form. However, what became visible was not intangible light, fire, or cloud. This time, God’s visible manifestation became very tangible flesh. By means of the incarnation, He became human, a man of flesh and bone. Then the Gospel of John tells us that this manifestation dwelled among us. The Greek word translated as dwelled literally means “to tabernacle,” and so the text literally reads, and the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us. As mentioned above, the Jews used the word Shechinah to describe the visible manifestations of God’s presence. In writing his Gospel, Yochanan the apostle did not use the regular Greek verb for “to dwell,” but the term skeinei, which literally means “to tabernacle.” The Hebrew Shechinah and the Greek skeinei are closely related. The origin of the word Shechinah goes back to Exodus 40, where the Shechinah glory, in the form of a cloud, took up residency within the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle. The Hebrew word for “tabernacle” is mishkan, which comes from the same Hebrew root as Shechinah. It took up residence in the Holy of Holies of the mishkan, the Tabernacle. For the next several centuries, it “tabernacled” with the people of Israel until the Shechinah glory reluctantly departed from Israel in four stages in the days of Ezekiel, as recorded in chapters 8-11 of his book. Now, after about six centuries of absence, the Shechinah glory had returned, not in the form of light, fire, or cloud, but in the form of flesh, and once again tabernacled among us, “tabernacled” with the people of Israel.
Like the rabbis, the Gospel writer quickly connected this with God’s glory: (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth (Jn. 1:14). Normally, the Shechinah glory exudes light, and thus has a brightness about it. However, the flesh of Yeshua’s physical body served as a veil that covered the brightness of His glory. When people looked upon Him, He looked no different than any other Jewish male of first-century Israel. Only one time during His public ministry, at the transfiguration, did the Shechinah glory shine through. It penetrated through the veil of His flesh, affecting His clothing, making His garments exceedingly white, and His face began to shine with the brightness of the sun. Three of His apostles saw the brightness of His glory on that occasion. Among them was Yochanan, who wrote as an eyewitness: we beheld his glory. Just as in rabbinic theology, the Memra was the means by which God took on visible form, the same is now true of the Logos. Yeshua was the visible manifestation of God’s presence.
The fifth theological truth about the Memra is that it was the means by which God signed His covenants. In the Hebrew Bible, God made eight specific covenants. Three were made with humanity in general. These are the Edenic Covenant, the Adamic Covenant, and the Noahic Covenant. Five were made specifically with the Jewish people. These are the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, the Land Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the New Covenant. All eight covenants were signed and sealed by means of His Memra, by means of His Word.
The Gospel of John hints at this fact in verse 17: For the law was given through Mosheh; grace and truth came through Yeshua the Messiah. Biblically, human history can be described in terms of ages, or dispensations, and these dispensations correspond with God’s covenants. The age, or dispensation, of the law was based upon the Mosaic Covenant, which was signed and sealed by the Shechinah glory, described in Exodus 24:1-18. The new age, or dispensation, of grace is based upon the New Covenant, which was signed and sealed by the shedding of Messiah’s blood when He died on the cross. One of the many things He accomplished through His death was the signing and sealing of the New Covenant (Lk. 22:20; Heb. 8:1–10:18). In that sense, He is also a covenant-signer.
The sixth theological truth about the Memra is that it was the agent of revelation. Whenever God revealed Himself, He did so by means of the Memra, by means of the Word. Whatever we know about Him, we know because the Memra chose to reveal it. This is based upon many passages that say, “The Word of the Lord came to this or that prophet.”
John 1:18 states: No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared <him>. The fact that the Messiah came to reveal the Father to mankind is one of the Gospel’s two sub-themes. It is through His teachings that the Messiah revealed the nature of God, and as previously mentioned, Yochanan the apostle focused his attention on this teaching rather than on Yeshua’s actions. Because of that sub-theme, he is the only one who recorded the event where a disciple asked the Messiah, show us the Father (Jn. 14:8), to which Yeshua replied: He that has seen me has seen the Father (Jn. 14:9). Everything true about the divine nature of the Father is true of the divine nature of the Son. To know the Son is to know the Father. Hebrews 1:1-3 makes the same point: In the past, God had revealed Himself in many different ways; in these last days, He revealed Himself by means of the Son, the Logos, the agent of revelation.
The opening verses of the Gospel of John do not argue that Yeshua came to fulfill the goals of Greek philosophy, but that He came to fulfill the Jewish messianic hope. The six things the rabbis had been teaching about the Memra are true of Yeshua of Nazareth.
The origin of the rabbinic concept of the Memra is in the way the Old Testament used the noun Davar. This Hebrew noun, which in Aramaic is Memra, has dual meaning: It denotes what is spoken and what is done. God spoke and through words brought the universe into being. In Genesis 15:1, the Word of God is personified as a revealer. God revealed Himself to Abraham by means of His Word. Psalm 33:4-6 describes the Word of God as the agent of creation. In Psalm 147:15, the Word runs very swiftly, thus being personified, and it accomplishes things. In Isaiah 9:8, the Lord sent a word into Yaakov; the Word is something God can send, and therefore, it is distinct from God. Isaiah 55:10-11 pictures the Word coming and going. In Isaiah 45:23, the Word goes out in righteousness. According to Ezekiel 1:3, the Word came expressly to the prophet. These examples show that the Word is sometimes identified with God, but is distinct from God; it is the agent of creation and a revealer in some visible form, as in Genesis 15, etc. From such Old Testament passages, the rabbis developed their concept of the Memra.
With all this in mind, the first verses of the Gospel of John can be summarized in four simple points:
The Word—the Davar, the Memra, the Logos—came in visible form.
Sadly, the world in general failed to recognize Him.
Even more tragically, His own Jewish people failed to recognize Him as well.
Those individual Jews and Gentiles who did recognize Him are the ones who became the children of the Shechinah light and received their salvation from Him who is the agent of salvation.
Three additional things should be noted regarding the introduction of the Gospel of John. In verses 4-9, the apostle introduced one of his sub-themes: the conflict between light and darkness. In Yeshua, the Word was life, and the life was the light of men (Jn. 1:4). It is a light that shines in the darkness, and the darkness apprehended it not (Jn. 1:5). It was the true light, even the light which lights every man (Jn. 1:9). Thus, the Messiah is both the source of life and the source of light. In passages such as Isaiah 42:6 and 49:5-6, the Hebrew Bible connected the Messiah with salvation light.
A second phrase in the Gospel’s introductory text which demands special attention is only begotten (Jn. 1:18). Certain cultic groups that deny the deity of the Son often use this verse to show that Yeshua has an origin. They claim that being called the only begotten Son means that He could not have eternally co-existed with God. This is an example of interpreting Jewish literature with a Gentile mindset. The term only begotten is translated from a single Greek word meaning “unique”, “one of a kind”, or “one and only”. It does not necessarily emphasize origin; it can emphasize uniqueness. A good example is Genesis 22:2, where God told Abraham to offer up Isaac: Take now your son, your only son. This was no idle request. However, Isaac was not Abraham’s only son. He had another son, Ishmael, and later on, he was blessed with six more sons. Therefore, in this case, the word only cannot mean origin. So in what way was Isaac Abraham’s only son? In the sense of uniqueness, not origin. Isaac was the covenantal son, as the Abrahamic Covenant would be sustained only through him, not through Ishmael or any of his brothers. He was uniquely Abraham’s only son in that he alone was his father’s covenantal son. The Messiah is not the only one referred to as “son of God.” Angels are called “sons of God” (e.g., Job 1:6, 38:7), Israel is called “the son of God” (e.g., Ex. 4:22; Hos. 11:1), and believers are called “sons of God” (e.g., Rom. 8:14; Gal. 4:6). However, Yeshua is uniquely the Son of God because of His eternal preexistence. As long as the Father existed, He existed. He was in the beginning with God, and God existed for eternity past.
Cultic groups also try to deny the deity of the Messiah on the basis of John 1:1: and the Word was God. In the Greek text, there is no definite article before “God,” so they claim that it simply means “a god.” Their point is that Yeshua is not the God, but was simply a god, in the same sense that all human beings can become a god. Therefore, Yeshua does not share the eternal deity of God the Father. However, in John 1:18, there is a clear reference to God the Father: No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared <him>. Obviously, the word God in verse 18 is a reference to God the Father, because the Son is mentioned in the next phrase, and He is distinct from this God. In the Greek text, there is no article before God here, either. Yet those who translate verse 1 as “a god” do not translate verse 18 to read, “No man has seen a god.” To be consistent with their view of Greek grammar, they would have needed to translate it this way, but it contradicts their argument. The lack of the definite article does not mean “a god.” It simply emphasizes the nature of the thing described. The nature of the Father is that He is divine. The nature of the Son, or the Word, is that He is divine. The text reads correctly as all translations have rendered it: the Word was God. Therefore, all that is true of the divine nature of the Father is also true of the divine nature of the Son.
John’s Gospel Chpt 1:19-34
19 And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews (Sanhedrin, religious body over Israel) sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”
This was an official delegation sent by the Sanhedrin, and priests and Levites were generally Sadducees. The Pharisees initiated this stage of interrogation (24)
Why would they send to ask John who he is?
Explain the two stages of investigation of any movement that had Messianic overtones. Observation and interrogation.
20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” 21 And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.”
Why did they ask if he was Elijah? – read Malachi 4:5-6
Why did they ask if he was the prophet? – read Deuteronomy 18:15-18
22 So they said to him, “Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”
23 He said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as the prophet Isaiah said.”
Look at Isaiah 40:3 & Malachi 3:1 both speaking about the one who would be a forerunner to Jesus – John the Baptist
Have a look back at John 1 verses 6-8
What was John claiming to be? Messiah’s forerunner
John denied being three things. First, he denied being the Messiah: I am not the Messiah (Jn. 1:20). Second, he denied being Elijah the prophet. Though he had come in the spirit and power of Elijah, which was his first correlation to the prophet, he denied being Elijah himself, I am not (Jn. 1:21). Third, he denied being the prophet (Jn. 1:21), meaning the prophet “like unto Moses” of Deuteronomy 18:15-18. Rabbis view that prophet and Messiah as being two different personalities.
24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25 They asked him, “Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”
Look at Luke 3:3 and Matthew 3:1-2 to see why he was baptising.
26 John answered them, “I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, 27 even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.”
What does this show us? Messiah was already present
28 These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
By calling Him the Lamb of God, Yochanan identified Yeshua with two Old Testament concepts: Lamb of God concept found in Exodus 12:3 and onwards and Isaiah 53:7
30 This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’
How can Messiah be both after John and before John?
As to His humanity, Yeshua was after Yochanan, for He was six months younger. As to His deity, He was eternal. Therefore, He preceded Yochanan.
31 I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.”
Matthew 3:16 and Luke 3:22 gives the account of how Jesus was identified as the Messiah
32 And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him.
In verse 32, the baptizer went on to show how he could be certain that this was the Messianic Person. At the baptism, when the Spirit descended in the form of a dove upon Yeshua, this certified once and for all to Yochanan that He was the Messianic King.
33 I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’
34 And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”
35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!”
Next day after John had identified Jesus as the Lamb of God
37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus.
Two followers of the John the Baptizer—John, the son of Zebedee, and Andrew (v40)—turned to follow Jesus
38 Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, “What are you seeking?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?”
Jesus asked what, not who are you seeking.
In the days of Jesus, rabbis had disciples whom they would train and then ordain. A number of them had rabbinic schools around the Jerusalem area.
John had introduced Jesus as the Messiah, but his disciples addressed Him as “rabbi,” the title of highest respect given by the Jews to those who were prepared to interpret the Mosaic law to them – they expected that the Messiah would be able to perfectly interpret the law for them, and so they revealed a desire to submit themselves to His teaching.
When they asked, Rabbi, where are you staying?, it was more than just idle curiosity. The important thing to notice is that the disciples desired an opportunity for uninterrupted conversation with Jesus. John and Andrew wanted to become Jesus’s disciples and subject themselves to His authority
39 He said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.
This was such a major turning point in John’s life that he specifically made note of the time, about the tenth hour. If he was using Jewish time, it would have been 4:00 p.m. If he was using Roman time, it would have been 10:00 a.m. This is the John who became one of the apostles and wrote the Gospel of John
40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother.
41 He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ).
Andrew had a brother named Peter, who became the third member of the group
42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John. You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter).
Shimon was his Hebrew name, Cephas was his Aramaic name, and Peter was his Greek name. The day ended with three disciples gained.
43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.”
Another day passed (Jn. 1:43). Before leaving Judea for Galilee, Yeshua Himself found Philip. When He called him to discipleship, Philip followed, the fourth disciple was gained.
Philip recruited the fifth disciple, Nathanael
44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.
45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
Nazareth was in the area north of Jerusalem called Galilee. Nathanael himself was a fellow Galilean, but he held a low view of people from Nazareth
46 Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip said to him, “Come and see.”
The whole idea of a Messiah coming from a place like Nazareth was a bit preposterous. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but He grew up in Nazareth and bore that stigma (Matt. 2:19–23). To be called “a Nazarene” (Acts 24:5) meant to be looked down on and rejected However, Philip did not argue the case but simply said, Come and see
47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!”
Then another strange conversation took place—strange, that is, unless one understands the Jewish frame of reference behind it. Yeshua saw Nathanael coming, and before Nathanael could ask any questions, Yeshua referred to him not by name, but by description: Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!
48 Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”
Nathaniel asked, “How can you know what I am really like?” From Nathanael’s perspective, it was the first time the two had met. Yeshua answered: Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you (Jn. 1:48b).
49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
Notice Nathanael’s response: Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Yisrael (Jn. 1:49). That would appear to be a strange conclusion. Just because of Yeshua’s simple statement about seeing Nathanael under a fig tree, he declared Him to be the Messiah. Why would Nathanael come to such a strong conclusion based upon so little?
To understand the conversation, it must be taken in context. Yeshua did not call Nathanael by name, but by a title, an Israelite indeed, and then He added, in whom is no guile. Yeshua was making a contrast between this Israelite and Jacob, the first person to be called Israel. Church teaching has often portrayed the patriarch’s life as one of guile, but this is not supported by the book of Genesis. Jacob was guilty of only one act of guile—deceiving his father—and that was done at his mother’s insistence and over Jacob’s personal objections.
Because of this one act of guile, he had to flee from his father’s household to the land of Haran, where he spent the next twenty years of his life.
So in contrast to the first Israel, who committed one act of guile, this Israel, a descendant of the first one, is characterized as lacking guile. That is the first point which needs to be understood.
50 Jesus answered him, “Because I said to you, ‘I saw you under the fig tree,’ do you believe? You will see greater things than these.”
The next point concerns Yeshua’s statement: When you were under the fig tree, I saw you. Yeshua is not merely talking about having seen Nathanael under the fig tree; that could have been incidental. The question is, what did Yeshua see Nathanael doing under the fig tree?
In those days, when it was impossible for everyone to have a written copy of the Scriptures, the Jewish people spent a lot of their time memorizing them, and then they would meditate upon what they had learned. The rabbis said that the best place to meditate upon Scripture was under a fig tree.
Nathanael did not conclude that Yeshua was the Messiah based upon the fact that He happened to have seen him under a fig tree. Rather, Yeshua’s comments (an Israelite indeed; in whom is no guile! and, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you) made Nathanael realize that this man knew the exact passage of Scripture upon which he had been meditating.
51 And he said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”
Yeshua knew his very thoughts! This comes out clearly in the closing verse, in which Yeshua said to him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man (Jn. 1:51). Genesis 28:12 is the only passage in the Hebrew Scriptures which speaks about angels ascending and descending. The passage records the content of a dream that Jacob had: And behold, a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven. And behold, the angels of God ascending and descending on it. When did Jacob have this dream? On his first night away from home, after he had committed his one act of guile by deceiving his father.
In other words, this shows that Nathanael’s conclusion was correct: Yeshua had known the exact passage of Scripture he had been contemplating. Therefore, Yeshua had to be the Messianic King.
Tuesday 26 Oct 21
2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
The Jewish wedding system of that day was comprised of two parts: After the wedding ceremony would come the wedding feast, which lasted for seven days. A smaller group would be invited to the wedding ceremony and a much larger group to the wedding feast. When Yeshua went to the wedding feast in Cana, He took with Him the five disciples He had gathered so far.
A terrible thing happened, something which must never happen at a Jewish wedding feast: The host ran out of wine! For some reason, Miriam, the mother of Yeshua, felt He must intervene in the situation: When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” (Jn. 2:3). Exactly why she felt He had to do something is not known. Perhaps the implication is that because He had brought five guests, they had run out of wine?
Yeshua responded to her by saying: “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” (Jn. 2:4). Normally, the phrase, Mine (or My) hour has not yet come is a reference to His coming death. In this case and in this context, it means that He was not yet ready to go public with His miracles, because the place to go public would have been Jerusalem, not little Cana.
Still, He did what Miriam asked Him to, but quietly, and for the most part, no one realized that a miracle had taken place. When Yeshua said to her, Woman, what does this have to do with me?? He was conveying that she no longer had parental authority over Him. At some point, a child must move from obeying the parents to honoring the parents. The point is that whatever He did would not be out of obedience, but rather out of honor.
Miriam instructed the servants to do whatever He requested: Now there were six stone water jars there for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. (Jn. 2:6). Each of these pots could hold about twenty gallons of liquid, and they usually contained water used for purification purposes, such as the washing of hands prior to eating. Yeshua instructed the servants to fill all of these large pots with water. However, when they poured from them again, what came out was not water, but wine—in fact, high quality wine, which reversed the procedure of that day.
7 Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And he said to them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the feast.” So, they took it. 9 When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom 10 and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now.”
Because the wedding feast lasted seven days, the host would serve the good wine at the beginning. Then after people had had some wine and their taste buds were not quite as attuned, the lesser quality wine would be served. The wine Yeshua made was of higher quality than that served at the beginning of the feast. In the Hebrew Bible, wine was the symbol of joy (Ps. 104:15), and the psalmist praised God for making wine that makes glad the heart of man.
By stating, This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, (Jn. 2:11), the Gospel writer declared categorically that this was the first miracle actually performed by Yeshua. This disproves all the pseudo-gospels that record miracles He supposedly performed when He was a baby, a child, or a teenager. Yochanan makes it clear that this is the beginning of his signs; thus, this was His first miracle.
There were two results of this miracle (Jn. 2:11): first, He manifested his glory, because this showed His power to create; second, his disciples believed on him. What they had believed earlier about Yeshua had now been confirmed.
12 After this he went down to Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for a few days.
From Cana, Yeshua, His mother, His half-brothers, and His disciples went on a family journey to Capernaum, where they stayed there for a few days. Later, this city became His ministry headquarters.
13 The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. 15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. 16 And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” 17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.”
18 So the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?” 19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 20 The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” 21 But he was speaking about the temple of his body. 22 When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.
During the course of Yeshua’s public ministry, four Passover feasts are mentioned, which shows that His ministry spanned a period of three years. Verse 13 records the events surrounding the first of these feasts. His baptism had happened anywhere from four to six months earlier.
13 The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
Yeshua came up to Jerusalem and went public by proclaiming His Messiahship and performing His first miracles.
It was a good time to go public because at Passover, hundreds of thousands of Jewish pilgrims came to Jerusalem from all over the country and from all parts of the world. In fact, sometimes the numbers were in the millions. Because there were so many people gathered in Jerusalem for the observance of the Passover, word would have spread rather quickly in Jewish communities both inside and outside the land, and inside and outside the Roman Empire, that a man named Yeshua of Nazareth was claiming to be the Messianic King.
The action in this passage primarily takes place in the Temple compound, parts of which were still under construction, but the Temple building itself had long been completed. Upon arrival in Jerusalem, Yeshua observed two groups of people in the Temple compound (Jn. 2:14). First were those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, which were sacrificial animals, and second were the money-changers sitting there. What Yeshua observed is also recorded in some detail in Pharisaic writings, and the Pharisees did not like what was going on either. All of this was the business venture of one man, the former high priest, Annas. Annas and his family essentially took firm control of the Temple compound and turned it into a private family business. The Pharisees referred to it as “the Bazaar of the Sons of Annas.” Annas was a Sadducee. Josephus described him as being a hoarder of money, very rich, and despoiling the common priests by open violence. Rabbinic writings state that he made his sons the treasurers and his sons-in-law the assistant treasurers.
Yeshua cleansed the Temple twice, on the first and fourth Passovers of His public ministry. According to the Mosaic Law, a person had every right to bring his own sacrificial animal for the offering on the Passover or any other festival or Sabbath occasion. However, because the animal had to be without spot, and without blemish (Ex. 12:5; Lev. 22:18-20), a priest would have to inspect the sacrifice prior to the slaughter in order to ensure it met the standards of the law. The problem was that the whole procedure had become corrupt. It had been turned into a very profitable business for the high priest and his family. If a person brought his own sacrifice, the priests appointed to inspect the animals would invariably find some spot or blemish. So, with his sacrifice disqualified, the owner had two options. The first option was to go home and get another animal, which was fine if he lived near Jerusalem, but not so fine if the journey home was long. The second option was more convenient. In the Temple compound, there was an area of stalls where the oxen, sheep, and doves which had passed inspection were sold. Of course, these were sold at highly inflated prices, and the money went into the private coffers of Annas and his family.
It was during Passover that everyone had to pay the annual half-shekel Temple tax. However, because Roman coinage was imprinted with an image of Caesar, it could not be used to pay the Temple tax. The money had to be exchanged by the money-changers (Jn. 2:14), and there was a service charge with each exchange. The service charge also went to the family of Annas. And so Yeshua’s accusations against Annas were true. He had made His Father’s house a house of trade. Verse 17 adds that when He said this, His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me (a reference to Ps. 69:9), meaning, “My zeal for your house will be the cause of my destruction.” Overthrowing the moneychangers and driving out the animals and the vendors caused Annas and the other Sadducees to develop animosity against Yeshua. Three years later, at His trial, it was Annas who stood in front of Yeshua as His first judge, and Caiaphas, Annas’ son-in-law, was His second judge.
When asked by what authority He cleansed the Temple compound, Yeshua gave a cryptic answer: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (Jn. 2:19). The religious leaders misunderstood what He was saying. They assumed He was talking about the building, the Temple itself. However, as Yochanan pointed out, Yeshua was using the Temple as a symbol of His body. Three years later, the religious leaders took this statement out of context and used it against Yeshua, at the second stage of the religious trial.
This passage records the first time the leadership demanded Yeshua show them a sign to authenticate His actions and His words. It would not be the last. It seems the religious leaders had recognized that Yeshua’s actions of cleansing the Temple, and thereby exercising authority over it, constituted a messianic work. This passage also recorded the first declaration of His coming death and resurrection, albeit in cryptic terminology.
By the time the cleansing of the Temple happened, the Temple compound had been under construction for 46 years. Later, in A.D. 67 (only three years before its total destruction by the Romans), the Bazaar of the Sons of Annas was destroyed by a mob, showing the depth of the Jewish indignation against this practice.
23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. 24 But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people 25 and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man.
After Yeshua had very publicly proclaimed Himself to be the Messiah by taking control of His Father’s house, He began authenticating this by performing miracles. The one miracle He had performed up to this point was done rather quietly, and only a few people knew it had taken place. However, the next miracles were very public. For the first half of His ministry, the purpose of these public, authenticating miracles was to bring Israel to the point of decision: Would they accept Him as their Messiah, or would they reject Him? Later, the purpose for His miracles would change; but initially, they were to authenticate both His person and His message. As to His person, they were to prove that He was the Jewish Messiah. As to His message, they were to validate that He was offering to Israel the kingdom of the Jewish prophets. If Israel was willing to accept Him as the Messianic King, they would see the kingdom established in their day. Their acceptance of Yeshua as the long-awaited Messiah is the prerequisite for the establishment of the kingdom (Mt. 23:39).
There was a positive response to the first public miracles: many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing (Jn. 2:23). But while many put their trust in Him, Yeshua did not entrust Himself to them, for He recognized the nature of man. As the Apostle Yochanan developed the deity of the Son in his Gospel, he pointed out two things about Yeshua’s omniscience. Negatively, and needed no one to bear witness about man, and positively, for he himself knew what was in man (Jn. 2:25).
3:1 – Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews
If one identifies himself as a Pharisee, it says that he is identifying himself with a particular set of theological doctrines – An important teaching of Pharisaic Judaism was the belief that all Israel has a share in the age to come. This meant that anyone born a Jew automatically had the right to enter the kingdom of God
A descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would have automatic entry into the kingdom by virtue of God’s election of Israel as a nation
2 – the same came unto him by night, and said to him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that thou doest, except God be with him.
Nicodemus came to Yeshua by night the timing of his visit might indicate an element of secrecy, if not fear, on Nicodemus’ part or it might be nothing more than a matter of convenience. Yeshua was quite busy during the day and was surrounded by crowds, making a private conversation impossible
3 – Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Unless Nicodemus experienced the new birth, he would not see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus was stumped: 4 – How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?
Nicodemus’ questions have frequently been misunderstood. They are often interpreted to mean that he did not know what Yeshua meant by that term, Except one be born anew
His question was not: How is one born again? His question was: How is one born again when he is old? If his problem were only the new birth, what difference would age make? Why would it matter whether he was a child, a teenager, a young man, or an old man? He did know something about the term because it was commonly used in Pharisaic writings. What he did not understand is how one could experience this once he had reached a certain age in life and a certain status in Jewish society.
The reason for his lack of understanding is that in Pharisaic Judaism there were six different ways in which a person could be born anew. All six ways pertained to the realm of the physical, the realm of being born of water only. They involved certain rites of passage.
Gentile Conversion – To Be Crowned King – Bar Mitzvah at 13 – Marriage 16-20 yrs old (had to be married to be member of the Sanhedrin, a ruler of the Jews) – Ordination (being a leading Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin, also had to be an ordained rabbi at age 30) – Becoming the Head of a Yeshiva – Yeshua addressed him: Are you the teacher of Yisrael? (Jn. 3:10).
the teacher meant that he was a head of one of the rabbinic academies in the greater Jerusalem area. He attained this position around the age of fifty, so at that age, he was born again for the fourth and final time
That was the reason he asked the question the way he did: How can a man be born when he is old? (Jn. 3:4). His point was that he had used up all his options. As far as he could see, there was no other way of being born again except the way he suggested: to re-enter his mother’s womb and become a fetus. He would have to be born physically, be born of water, once more and start the process all over.
5 – Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
In Pharisaic writings, the phrase to be born of water was used to refer to physical birth. It meant that anyone who was born physically was born of water, and to be born physically as a Jew was sufficient to enter the kingdom of God
When Yeshua declared that one must be born of both water and Spirit, He rejected the Pharisaic fundamental teaching that all Israel automatically have a share in the age to come. Merely being born of water was insufficient. One had to be born of both water and the Spirit. One must have two kinds of birth, a physical birth and a spiritual birth, to qualify for the kingdom. To be born of water was to be born of the flesh
6 – That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit
To be born of the Spirit means the Holy Spirit regenerates the dead human spirit to become alive to God. That is the kind of new birth which is absolutely essential for the entry into the kingdom
[7 – Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born anew. 8The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.]
The next question that would logically come to Nicodemus’ mind was:9 – How can these things be? How are you born again spiritually?
10 – Jesus answered and said unto him, Are you the teacher of Israel, and understand not these things?
Jesus answered that Nicodemus, as the teacher of Israel (the Gr. has the article “the”), ought to know. The Old Testament prophets spoke of the new Age with its working of the Spirit (Isa. 32:15; Ezek. 36:25–27; Joel 2:28–29). The nation’s outstanding teacher ought to understand how God by His sovereign grace can give someone a new heart (1 Sam. 10:6; Jer. 31:33).
11 – Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that which we know, and bear witness of that which we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
Jesus, like the prophets, spoke to the nation about divine themes but the Jews rejected His witness
12 – If I told you earthly things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you heavenly things?
Since Nicodemus could not grasp the basic teaching of regeneration which Jesus presented in earthly analogies, how could he understand and believe the more abstract heavenly matters such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Jesus’ coming glorification?
13 – And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven.
No one has ever gone into heaven and then come back to earth, to be able to give clear teaching about divine matters. The one exception is Jesus who is the Son of Man (cf. 1:50–51; Dan. 7:13; Matt. 26:64).
To answer the question how can these things be Jesus now gives further explanation
14 – And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up;
There are two steps to this process of being born spiritually
The first step is the one God had to take, which was to send His Son. Through Him, God provided salvation for all; but the fact that salvation was provided for all, by itself, does not save anyone. Therefore, the second step is the necessary human responsibility, that whosoever believes may in him have eternal life (Jn. 3:15).
Background to this is that Moses raised a bronze snake on a pole as a cure for a punishment due to disobedience (cf. Num. 21:4–9). So Jesus would be lifted up on a cross for people’s sin, so that a look of faith gives eternal life to those doomed to die.
Probably the most famous verse in this Gospel is verse 16, which repeats the same two steps. First, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son (Jn. 3:16a). The first step is finished. God has done all He needed to do to provide salvation for all. The provision of salvation for the whole world was based on the love of God. The fact that God provided salvation for all, by itself, will not save anyone.
The second step is, that whosoever believes on him shall not perish, but have eternal life (Jn. 3:16b). Perish does not mean annihilation but rather a final destiny of “ruin” in hell apart from God who is life, truth, and joy. Eternal life is a new quality of life, which a believer has now as a present possession and will possess forever
Until Nicodemus came to believe that Jesus is the Messianic Son of God, the Messianic King, he would neither see nor enter God’s kingdom.
17 – For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him.
God’s purpose in sending His Son is salvation (to save), not damnation (to condemn). God does not delight in the death of the wicked (Ezek. 18:23, 32). He desires that everyone be saved
18 – He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God
The means of salvation is believing in the finished work of Jesus on the cross. But people who reject the light of the Jesus are in the dark (1:5; 8:12) and are therefore already under God’s judgment. They stand condemned. They are like those sinful, dying Israelites who willfully rejected the divine remedy, the serpent on the pole (Num. 21:4–9). A believer in Christ, on the other hand, is under “no condemnation” (Rom. 8:1); he “will not be condemned”
19 – And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil.
Men love darkness not for its own sake but because of what it hides. They want to continue undisturbed in their evil deeds. A believer is also a sinner (though a redeemed one), but he confesses his sin and responds to God (cf. 1 John 1:6–7).
20 – For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should be reproved.
Why will sinners not come into the “light of life”? Because they love the darkness! They want to persist in their evil deeds, and this keeps them from coming to the light; for the closer the sinner gets to the light, the more his sins are exposed. It is not “intellectual problems” that keep people from trusting Christ; it is the moral and spiritual blindness that keeps them loving the darkness and hating the light.
Just as natural light shows up what is otherwise unseen, so Christ the Light exposes people’s deeds as “evil.” Yet everyone who does evil hates the light (as well as loves darkness, 3:19).
21 – But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.
Jesus is like a magnet. His people are drawn to Him and welcome His revelation. Though the light rebukes their sin, they respond in repentance and faith. They live by the truth (cf. 2 John 1–2, 4; 3 John 1, 4). By regeneration they live differently than their former lives of darkness. Their new lives are by faith in Jesus and His Word. And the Spirit, working in their lives, gives them new power, goals, and interests
22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing. Jesus wasn’t actually baptising He was overseeing His disciples as they were baptising (4:2)
23 John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because water was plentiful there, and people were coming and being baptized
John baptised at the southern end of the Jordan river just before it emptied into the Dead Sea. During most of the year, the water was deep enough for immersion, but towards the end of the dry season, before the rains came, the river sometimes got too shallow for that purpose
24 (for John had not yet been put in prison). Until John the Baptist was arrested by Herod and put into prison, his ministry overlapped that of the Lord Jesus.
25 Now a discussion arose between some of John’s disciples and a Jew over purification.
It appears that some of John’s disciples started the argument. It began on doctrinal grounds—the matter of purifying—but soon moved to personal grounds. The matter of purifying was important to the Jews (Mark 7:1–23). Under the Old Testament Law, it was necessary for them to keep themselves ceremonially clean if they were to serve God and please Him. Unfortunately, the Pharisees added so many extra traditions to the Law that the observing of it became a burden.
26 And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness—look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him.”
Although his disciples were jealous for Yochanan’s sake, the baptizer pointed out that this was the way it had to be (Jn. 3:27-30), because Yeshua was the Messiah.
John did not want anyone to follow him; his ministry was to point to the Lamb of God and urge people to trust Him. But when two popular preachers are involved in similar work, it is easy for both friends and enemies to get caught up in competition and comparison.
27 John answered, “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven. God is sovereign in bestowing His blessings on one’s ministry. If Jesus’ movement was expanding, then it must have been in the will of God
28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.’
John also reminded his disciples that they were forgetting part of his teaching. For he had clearly taught that he was not the promised Messiah but was only sent ahead by God to do a work of preparation for the Messiah
29 The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is now complete. 30 He must increase, but I must decrease.”
In his explanation, Yochanan mentioned three elements: the bride, the bridegroom, and the friend of the bridegroom. The motif here is the Jewish wedding system. The groom is the Messiah, and the bride is the church. Yochanan, as an Old Testament saint, has nothing to do with the bride, the church, and therefore he cannot be the bridegroom, the Messiah. He identifies himself as the friend of the bridegroom, and this is the relationship of all Old Testament saints to the Messiah. Once the bridegroom and bride had been brought together, the work of the best man, the friend was completed
Therefore, Jesus must become greater and John must become less. This was the divine order. John willingly and with joy accepted Jesus’ growing popularity as God’s plan
31 He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all.
Since Jesus has come from heaven, His words surpass those of any religious teacher. Each human teacher is limited by his earthly boundaries (he belongs to the earth and is from the earth). But the Logos from heaven is above all; He is preeminent
32 He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony.
What Jesus spoke came from His previous vision of and communion with the Father in heaven (cf. 1:1, 14). Yet in spite of this clear reliable witness, mankind as a whole has rejected His message
33 Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true.
The message of Jesus has not been universally rejected as verse 32 by itself might indicate. One who receives it gives his attestation or certification to the fact that God is truthful (cf. v. 21). To reject this testimony is to call God a liar
34 For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure.
Jesus gives the perfect truth of God as He speaks the words of God, because as John stated that Yeshua was not given the Spirit by measure (Jn. 3:34). As prophesied in Isaiah 11:1-5, the Messiah had the sevenfold fullness of the Holy Spirit. Believers receive the Spirit in measure (I Cor. 12), not based upon spirituality, but upon the tasks God has given them to perform and where He places them in the church. That is why all believers have spiritual gifts, but not all have the same spiritual gifts or the same number of gifts. Each one receives the gifts necessary for them to perform the specific task that God wants performed in the body. So each one receives a measure of the Spirit for that purpose, but the Messiah received the Spirit without measure. The Old Testament prophets had the Spirit only for limited times and for limited purposes.
35 The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.
The relationship between the Son and the Father is one of loving intimacy and complete confidence. The Son is endowed with all authority to accomplish the Father’s purposes
36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.
Eternal life – The believer possesses that life right now! It is the life of God in the believer. The opposite of eternal life is eternal death, the wrath of God. A person does not have to die and go to hell to be under the wrath of God. “He that believeth not is condemned already” (John 3:18). The verdict has already been given, but the sentence has not yet been executed. Why? Because God is patient and long-suffering and continues to call sinners to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).
Man has only two options: trust in the Son or reject the Son (cf. vv. 16, 18). Unbelief is ignorance but it is also willful disobedience to clear light. There can be no neutrality when it comes to the witness of Jesus Christ: we either trust Him or we reject Him. God’s wrath is mentioned only here in the Fourth Gospel (but cf. Rev. 6:16–17; 11:18; 14:10; 16:19; 19:15). “Wrath,” God’s necessary righteous reaction against evil, remains (menei) on the unbeliever. This wrath is future but it also exists now
Jesus and the Woman of Samaria
4 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John the Pharisees were beginning to take note of Him so he leaves Judea
View of the Pharisees has been that they were a Jewish sect or party whose members voluntarily took upon themselves a strict regimen of laws pertaining to purity, sabbath observance, prayer, and tithing. The Pharisees restricted their dealings with the “people of the land,” whom the Pharisees considered lax in observance of the law. Many of the Pharisees were scribes also, though most were not, scribes and Pharisees. A Pharisee was usually a layman without scribal education, whereas a scribe was trained in rabbinic law and had official status. The Pharisees and scribes observed and perpetuated an oral tradition of laws handed down from the former teachers and wise men of Israel. This oral law, or Halakah, was highly venerated by the Pharisees and scribes.
2(although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), 3 he left Judea and departed again for Galilee.
4 And he had to pass through Samaria. This was the shortest route from Judea to Galilee but not the only way. The other route was through Perea, east of the Jordan River. In Jesus’ day the Jews, because of their animosity for the Samaritans, normally took the eastern route in order to avoid Samaria.
Where it says he had to pass it means that it was necessary because it is part of God’s divine plan. Luke 4:14 adds: Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee. This was the plan of God because He had to pass through Samaria for the encounter with the Samaritan woman. Samaria” in New Testament times was a region in the middle of Palestine, with Judea to the south and Galilee to the north.
5 So he came to a town of Samaria called Sychar, near the field that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. Who are Jacob and Joseph?
6 Jacob’s well was there; so Jesus, wearied as he was from his journey, was sitting beside the well. It was about the sixth hour.
According to verse 8, He had sent His disciples into town to purchase food. In the meantime, He sat by the well of Sychar to rest. Sixth hour – midday
7 A woman from Samaria came to draw water. Jesus said to her, “Give me a drink.” 8 (For his disciples had gone away into the city to buy food.)
The normal prejudices of the day prohibited public conversation between men and women, between Jews and Samaritans, and especially between strangers. A Jewish Rabbi would rather go thirsty than violate these proprieties.
9 The Samaritan woman said to him, “How is it that you, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a woman of Samaria?” (For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.)
She referred to Him as a Jew (Jn. 4:9). Coming from a Samaritan, that was probably not a compliment
John’s comment that the Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans did not mean that they had no contact with them. Rather, Jewish law forbade Jews to be benefited in any way by Samaritans. The term no dealings meant that there were to be no acts that would obligate a Jew to a Samaritan; therefore, Jews were forbidden to give anything gratis, meaning without charge to a Samaritan. They were also forbidden to receive anything free, meaning without payment from a Samaritan. Therefore, the Samaritan woman was surprised by Yeshua’s request for some water without an offer to pay, because it obligated Him to her in some measure.
The conflict with the Samaritans began with the Jewish return from the Babylonian Captivity. When the Jews returned from the Babylonian Captivity and began rebuilding the Temple, the Samaritans, who were then living in the territory of what had been the Northern Kingdom of Israel, wished to help. However, they were not allowed because of their racial and religious heritage. Racially, they were descendants of Gentiles who had been forced by the Assyrian Empire to settle in the territory of Israel and who then intermarried with the local Jewish population that had been left behind. Furthermore, there was a religious issue which caused separation. The Samaritans had brought into the land of Israel the worship of the various gods of the countries from which they came. To solve a problem they were facing, they adopted Jehovah as the God of the land, but without repudiating the idolatry of the other gods. As a result, their religious system was syncretistic.
Although by the first century, the Samaritans were monotheistic, their origins could not be forgotten. Because their heritage, both racially and religiously, was not accepted by the Jews, they were not allowed to participate in the rebuilding of the Temple. As a result, the Samaritans changed two things.
First, they made Mount Gerizim their holy mountain and no longer looked to Jerusalem as their place of worship. Mount Gerizim was one of the two mountains overshadowing Shechem and Sychar. Second, in reaction to the Jews’ refusal to let them participate in the rebuilding of the Temple, the Samaritans went through the five books of Moses and eliminated all references to Jerusalem. For example, the offering of Isaac (Gen. 22) took place on Mount Moriah, but in the Samaritan version of the book of Genesis, the location has been changed to Mount Gerizim.
The Samaritans, of course, had equal animosity toward the Jews, if not more so. Frequently, they would stop Jews from passing through Samaria as they went toward Jerusalem. However, they never stopped any Jews coming from Jerusalem, as Yeshua was doing in the passage studied here. They liked to see Jews leaving Jerusalem, going by way of their holy mount, Mount Gerizim. Since Yeshua was passing through Samaria away from Jerusalem, they had no objections. Later, however, when He was heading towards the city and wanted to pass through their territory, the Samaritans stopped Him. In fact, there are records of Samaritans killing Jews who passed through Samaria to get to the city of Jerusalem.
The Samaritan woman’s question shows she was obviously taken aback by Yeshua’s request. He responded to her question with an answer meant to further pique her curiosity and to create in her a thirst for eternal life
Jesus is going to reveal to the woman a new kind of life (Jn. 4:10-14).
10 Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.”
Three things should have provoked her thinking: (1) Who is He? (2) What is the gift of God? (3) What is living water?
What was this living water? Normally, living water is running water, water that is active, moving, the opposite of stagnant, but it will soon become apparent that this is not what Yeshua was offering her. The woman’s response shows that she was puzzled by this statement.
11 The woman said to him, “Sir, you have nothing to draw water with, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water?
However, Jesus was speaking in spiritual terms; He was offering spiritual living water, He was offering the Holy Spirit (Jer. 2:13; Zech. 14:8; John 7:38–39). Have a look at John 7:38-39
12 Are you greater than our father Jacob? He gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did his sons and his livestock.”
She questioned Yeshua as to His motivation, but she also revealed some things about Samaritan theology. After all, no one was greater than Jacob, the one who had been responsible for that particular well. According to Samaritan theology, Jacob himself had drunk of this water at some time, leading to another question, “Was Jesus claiming to be greater than Jacob?”
Yeshua began to move again from the physical to the spiritual in verses
13 Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again,
14 but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
He pointed out that everyone who drinks of the water from this well will eventually get thirsty again. However, the water Jesus offered would bring permanent satisfaction, not from physical thirst, but from spiritual thirst, because having this inner well means having eternal life.
Her response indicated that she still did not quite understand the issue in verse
15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw water.”
It is important to note here that before anyone really understands their need for a savior, they first need to see themselves as God sees them: as sinners. In the case of this woman, this has not yet happened, for she is still thinking in literal terms. But Yeshua had already set the stage for the issue of her need for eternal life.
After pointing out her need and creating an interest, but before He showed her how this need could be met, Jesus proceeded to point out her sin in verses
16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come here.”
17 The woman answered him, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You are right in saying, ‘I have no husband’; 18 for you have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband. What you have said is true.”
She had been married five times and, apparently, been divorced five times. Now she is living with a man as his mistress, not being legally married to him, and is, therefore, living in a state of immorality. By pointing out her sin, He had just proved to her that He was greater than Jacob after all.
The Samaritan woman wished to change the discussion because she was not comfortable discussing her sin. She reverted to a tactic typically used by unbelievers: she raised a point of theology. When a believer points out an unbeliever’s sin, he becomes uncomfortable. Suddenly, he prefers to talk theology and often asks silly questions such as “Well, where did Cain get his wife?” as if that has any relevance whatsoever to his own spiritual needs.
19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.”
Calling Him a prophet in verse 19, was a major step for her. In Samaritan theology, the next prophet after Moses would be the Messiah. That is why the Samaritans have only the Five Books of Moses as their Scriptures; they rejected the Prophets and the Writings. Even the Five Books of Moses had to be adjusted to avoid any reference to Jerusalem. So when she said: “I perceive that you are a prophet,” she indicated that she already suspected that He might be the Messiah.
When she said this mountain in verse 20, she was referring specifically to Mount Gerizim. In retaliation for not being allowed to help in the rebuilding of the Temple on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, the Samaritans built their own temple on Mount Gerizim. Where Genesis says that Abraham took Isaac to Mount Moriah, the Samaritan Torah reads that Abraham took Isaac to Mount Gerizim.
Yeshua did not ignore her question; He dealt with the theological issue and then went back to the main point
21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him.
Jesus stated that the Samaritan theology on Mount Gerizim was totally wrong, and the Jewish theology about Jerusalem was correct. Samaritans worshipped what they did not know, but Jews worshipped what they did know. Under the Mosaic Law, wherever the Tabernacle or Temple stood was the proper place to worship. Initially, when they came into the Land, it was Shiloh. Ultimately, it became the City of Jerusalem, which remained the center of worship right up to the time of Yeshua’s first-coming ministry. So on this issue, the Jews were correct and the Samaritans were wrong. Jesus went on to say that a time was coming when worship would no longer be limited to one specific geographical place because, eventually, a day would come when people would be able to worship God anywhere, without having to travel to a specific place. That day came, of course, with the Messiah’s death.
Yeshua returned to the real issue: her need to have eternal life; her need to have the living water; and her need to recognize true worship
24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
The time was coming when, as a result of His work, there would be no central place of worship; neither Jerusalem nor Gerizim. True worship was going to be in spirit and truth. Thus, Jesus prophesied of this present age, the Dispensation of Grace, when one can worship God corporately anywhere in the world. That was not true under the Dispensation of Law. It will not be true in the Millennial Kingdom, because there will again be a centralized location to worship, the Millennial Temple.
The City of Jerusalem will again become the center of world-wide worship, and Gentiles will make pilgrimages to Jerusalem to worship in that city (Zech. 14:16–21). Many prophets emphasized that Jerusalem will be the center of worship in the Kingdom, but there is no localized proper place to worship for this present age. So Yeshua brought the woman right back to the issue of what constitutes proper worship: in spirit and truth.
Finally, He revealed the true content of faith: what it is that she must believe in verses 25–26
25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.”
He clearly identified Himself as being the Messiah, although this Samaritan woman had already been a bit suspicious of that by calling Him a prophet earlier.
07 December
27 Just then his disciples came back. They marveled that he was talking with a woman, but no one said, “What do you seek?” or, “Why are you talking with her?”
They marvelled not only because she was a Samaritan, but because she was also a woman. This went contrary to Jewish practices. In rabbinic law, this just was not done. The risk a Jewish man took when he spoke to a Samaritan woman was even greater. Female Samaritans were viewed as being unclean from the cradle to the grave.
28 So the woman left her water jar and went away into town and said to the people, 29 “Come, see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ?” 30 They went out of the town and were coming to him.
She went proclaiming to the inhabitants of the city that she had met a man who had told her everything that she had ever done. He could read her mind! He could see exactly who she was, and what she was. Her conclusion was, “Could this possibly be the Messiah!” The inhabitants of the city came out to see Him.
Verses 31–38 record Yeshua’s conversation with His disciples. The disciples offered Him some of the fresh food they obtained in the city and urged Him to eat in verses 31–34:
31 Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, saying, “Rabbi, eat.” 32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat that you do not know about.” 33 So the disciples said to one another, “Has anyone brought him something to eat?” 34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work.
Here again, Yeshua moved from the physical to the spiritual by saying that He had already had some meat. His discussion with the Samaritan woman had brought her to saving faith. He had indeed done the work the Father had given Him, and that was His meat. He knows that man does not live by bread alone, but “by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord” (Deut. 8:3). His priority is spiritual, not material. It is the Father’s work which must be done
35 Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months, then comes the harvest’? Look, I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see that the fields are white for harvest.
This is a reference to the four-month interval between the spring and fall festivals, mentioned in Leviticus 23:22. It pictures the Church Age and is symbolic of the obligation of the Church to do the work of gospel evangelism. In the spiritual realm there is no long wait. Jesus has come so now it is the day of opportunity. All that is needed is spiritual vision and perception. If the disciples would look around, they would see people with spiritual hunger. The Samaritans in their white garments coming from the village (v. 30) may have visually suggested a wheat field ripe for harvest. We plant the seed of God’s Word in the hearts of people who hear it, and we seek to cultivate that seed by our love and prayers. In due time, that seed may bear fruit to the glory of God.
No doubt the disciples had said, as they approached the city of Sychar, “There can be no harvest here! These people despise us Jews and would have no use for our message.” But just the opposite was true: the harvest was ready and only needed faithful workers to claim it. For some reason, when it comes to witnessing for Christ, it is always the wrong time and the wrong place! It takes faith to sow the seed, and we must do it even when the circumstances look discouraging.
Jesus taught them the principle of evangelism and salvation in verses 36–38:
36 Already the one who reaps is receiving wages and gathering fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together. 37 For here the saying holds true, ‘One sows and another reaps.’ 38 I sent you to reap that for which you did not labor. Others have labored, and you have entered into their labor.”
The principle of evangelism comes in two basic steps: One sows, and another reaps. Both should rejoice together that the fruit of eternal life has been produced. Applying it to the disciples, Yeshua stated: I sent you to reap that for which you did not labor (Jn. 4:38). Applying it to the apostles, they were already in the process of reaping because John. 4:1–4 states that Jesus was gaining more disciples than John the Baptist. The disciples of Yeshua were baptizing these new followers and were at the end of the process for Others have labored, and you have entered into their labor they were reaping what others had sown before them. This included John the Baptist, who had preceded the first-coming ministry of the Messiah.
After Yeshua had taught them the principle of sowing and reaping, the disciples saw this principle in action in verses 39–42.
39 Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.”
In verse 39, the woman did the sowing, but Jesus did the reaping. In fact, the woman fit both categories—sometimes sowing, and sometimes reaping, sometimes doing both. Many Samaritans believed because she had shared the gospel with them. So, she was both the sower and the reaper among some of the Samaritans.
40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them, and he stayed there two days.
In verse 40, Yeshua stayed there for two days in order to reap the harvest that came as a result of the Samaritan woman’s response to His claims.
41 And many more believed because of his word. 42 They said to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.”
In verses 41–42, many more believed because of his word. Here she was the sower, while He was the reaper. Some were convinced that He was Saviour of the world because of what they heard Him say, not because of what she said
43 After the two days he departed for Galilee. 44 (For Jesus himself had testified that a prophet has no honor in his own hometown.) 45 So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him, having seen all that he had done in Jerusalem at the feast. For they too had gone to the feast.
After spending two more days in Samaria, Yeshua finally arrived in Galilee. Upon His arrival, many of the Galileans believed on Him, because they had seen all the things He had done in Jerusalem at the first Passover of His public ministry. This was the result of His first public ministry in Judah.
[Apparently Jesus had detected in Judea (His own country) the increasing hostility of the religious leaders, though the real opposition would not yet appear for some months. Our Lord was really never identified with Judea even though He had been born in Bethlehem. He was known as the Prophet from Galilee (Matt. 21:11; John 7:52). Jesus knew that the public response to His ministry in Jerusalem had been insincere and shallow (John 2:23–25), and that it was not honoring to Him at all.]
Jesus Heals an Official’s Son
46 So he came again to Cana in Galilee, where he had made the water wine.
This is the second of the seven signs Yeshua performed that Yochanan recorded in his Gospel. It is also Yeshua’s second visit to Cana, the first being when He changed the water into wine.
And at Capernaum there was an official (a nobleman) whose son was ill.
A nobleman was a king’s officer, and by calling him so, Yochanan showed that he was a government official of Herod Antipas. He could have been a Gentile or a Jew, possibly he was a Jew because Jesus included him among the people who desire signs and wonders (48).
Apostle Paul says that Jews are always looking for signs (1 Cor 1:22)
47 When this man heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went to him and asked him to come down and heal his son, for he was at the point of death.
This man had faith, for the distance from Capernaum to Cana was about 35 kilometres and virtually all uphill. Capernaum sits on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee about 180 meters below sea level, whereas Cana of Galilee sits about 460 meters above sea level.
The phrase come down was geographically accurate, since Capernaum, as just discussed, sits much lower in altitude than Cana of Galilee. Yeshua responded to him by saying,
48 So Jesus said to him, “Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe.”
He challenged the nobleman’s motive for seeking Him out. Did he believe in Him? Did he have faith, or did he need convincing? Was he really just looking for a sign?
49 The official said to him, “Sir, come down before my child dies.” 50 Jesus said to him, “Go; your son will live.” The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and went on his way.
He was not asking for a sign. He did not need to be convinced. He already believed that Yeshua was who He claimed to be and therefore, could cure the child. He was only asking that Yeshua would go with him and heal his son before he died, perhaps assuming that His presence was necessary for the child to be healed, and that if the boy died meanwhile, it was too late. The man had true faith, evidenced by the fact that he trusted in Yeshua’s promise
51 As he was going down, his servants met him and told him that his son was recovering. 52 So he asked them the hour when he began to get better, and they said to him, “Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him.”
If Yochanan was using Roman time, the seventh hour would be 7:00 p.m. If he was using Jewish time, then the seventh hour was 1:00 p.m. The key word is “yesterday.” It shows that the man stayed overnight in Cana. He did not rush home to see if what Yeshua said was true. Yeshua asked the man to believe in His words without the evidence of a sign or His personal appearance at the bedside of the sick child. The man did, and he received his son back. Notice that the father thought the healing would be gradual because he asked his servants when did he begin to get better; but the servants reported a complete, instant recovery.
53 The father knew that was the hour when Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live.” And he himself believed, and all his household.
As a result, not only did he believe, but also his whole house. This man began with crisis faith. He was about to lose his son and he had no other recourse but the Lord Jesus Christ. The nobleman’s crisis faith became confident faith: he believed the Word and had peace in his heart. He was even able to delay his trip home, knowing that the boy was out of danger.
His confident faith became confirmed faith. Indeed, the boy had been completely healed! And the healing took place at the very time when Jesus spoke the Word. It was this fact that made a believer out of the nobleman and his household. He believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God; and he shared this faith with his family and they too believed
This is one of several miracles that Jesus performed at a distance.
54 This was now the second sign that Jesus did when he had come from Judea to Galilee.
Yochanan was not implying that this was only the second sign Yeshua had done up to this point in time, since he had already mentioned the many signs He had done in Jerusalem. Yochanan’s point is that this was the second sign He had done in Cana.
[Messiah’s Authority over the Sabbath
The Sabbath became a major observance in Pharisaic Judaism, especially after the Temple had been destroyed in A.D. 70. Its importance was so elevated that it was personified as the bride of Israel and as God’s queen. Today, at a certain point in the Friday-night synagogue service, the door is opened and the worshippers welcome the Sabbath in by singing Lecha Dodi, Likrat Kallah Shabbat, a song whose title can be translated as “Welcome my Beloved, Let us Greet Queen Sabbath.” When the question was raised as to why God created Israel, the answer was that God made Israel to honor the Sabbath. Therefore, Israel was made for the Sabbath.
To the one commandment Moses gave, Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy (Ex. 20:8), the Pharisees added approximately 1,500 additional rules and regulations. While the Messiah and the Pharisees debated over the authority of the Mishnah in general, one special area of debate was the proper way of observing the Sabbath. What does and what does not constitute Sabbath rest? Yeshua had three such conflicts in a row.]
21 December
This section contains the second of Yochanan’s seven discourses, the discourse on the works of God, and the third of his seven signs.
FYI This event takes place after Luke 5:39 – Luke only Gospel written in chronological order, all the rest are based on the various themes of the gospel writers.
The Healing at the Pool on the Sabbath – John 5
Read 5:1-9 first
5.:1 After this there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool, in Aramaic (Hebrew) called Bethesda (house or place of mercy), which has five roofed colonnades. 3 In these lay a multitude of invalids—blind, lame, and paralyzed.
Depending on which version you are reading, the second part of verse 3 and all of verse 4 might be omitted
[waiting for the moving of the waters; 4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.]
The earliest manuscripts omit these words which appear to be a late insertion to explain why the pool water was “stirred” (v. 7). People believed that an angel came and stirred it. According to local tradition, the first one in the water would be healed.
Now why would anybody, especially a man sick for so many years, remain in one place if nothing special were occurring? You would think that after thirty-eight years of nothing happening to anybody, the man would go elsewhere and stop hoping! It seems wisest for us to accept the fact that something extraordinary kept all these handicapped people at this pool, hoping for a cure.
Verse 1, Generally, when a feast is not specifically named in the Scriptures, it is a reference to the Passover. If this is the case, this is the second Passover of Messiah’s public ministry, His ministry is approximately a year-and-a-half old at this point. The Pool of Bethesda is a pool in the Moslem Quarter of the Old city that has been uncovered in recent times.
5 One man was there who had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had already been there a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be healed?” 7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me.” 8 Jesus said to him, “Get up, take up your bed, and walk.” 9 And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked. [Now that day was the Sabbath.]
Yeshua approached a man at the Pool of Bethesda. It is significant to note the procedure He used in this case.
First, He sought the man out. The man did not come to Him because he could not do so on his own, nor was he taken to Yeshua. It was Yeshua who saw the paralytic and purposefully approached him.
Second, the Messiah did not demand any faith on the part of the man. At that point in His public ministry, faith was not necessary for a miracle to be received because the purpose of His miracles was to authenticate His messianic claims and to get people to believe.
Third, there was no revelation of Yeshua’s Messiahship. Yeshua did not tell the man who He was. Later, when asked who healed him, the man did not know (v. 13). He did not know who Jesus was or who He claimed to be. There was no faith involved at that point. The paralytic could not believe that Yeshua was the Messiah because he didn’t even know who it was who had done the healing.
Yeshua went to the Pool of Bethesda and saw there a man who had been ailing with an infirmity for thirty-eight years. When He asked him “Do you want to be healed?” in verse 6, the man, of course, responded positively. 7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me.”
Yeshua told him to do something that went contrary to the Jewish practices of that day—He said “Get up, take up your bed, and walk” this is in verse 8.
Verse 9a says 9 And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked.
What Yeshua asked the man to do was a breach of the pharisaic interpretation of keeping the Law. By rabbinic law, one was not allowed to carry something out of a public place to a private place, or from a private place to a public place on the Sabbath. Asking the sick man to carry his bed and walk, then, was a breach of the Pharisaic tradition in keeping the Sabbath.
It is important to understand, however, that it did not violate the Mosaic commandment about the Sabbath, as Jesus kept those laws perfectly, down to every jot and tittle. But the rabbis added about 1,500 additional rules and regulations concerning the proper way to keep the Sabbath, including decrees that would forbid the ailing man from complying with Yeshua’s directive.
Why do you think Jesus told him to do this? Jesus, gave this directive, to convey the message that He simply did not accept the authority of Pharisaic tradition or interpretations.
John mentioned in verse 9b Now that day was the Sabbath.
The paralytic was healed immediately. That was his physical healing.
However, when he took up his bed as Yeshua had ordered him, he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of the Sabbath commandment: Nothing could be carried from a public to a private domain or from a private to a public domain.
The Sabbath had become a major observance in Pharisaic Judaism, to the point that it was personalized as the Bride of Israel, and as Jehovah’s Queen. What Jesus had asked the man to do was a breach of the pharisaic interpretation of keeping the Sabbath. Among the fifteen hundred Sabbath rules was one forbidding a person to carry a burden from a public place to a private place, or from a private place to a public place. While the Messiah and the Pharisees debated over the authority of the Mishnah in general, one specialized area of debate was on the proper way to observe the Sabbath.
Yeshua had three such conflicts with them in a row: the healing of a paralytic (Jn. 5); the controversy over the grain (Mat. 12:1–8; Mk. 2:23–28; Lk. 6:1–5); and the healing of a man with a withered hand (Mat. 12:9–14; Mk. 3:1–6; Lk. 6:6–11).
Notice the procedure in this case: First, Jesus sought out the man. Secondly, there was no demand for faith, as this event in the Book of John occurred before the events of Matthew 12. In other words, Messiah was still performing miracles and signs for the benefit of the masses, to lead them to belief, when the John 5 incident unfolds.
It is later, specifically in Matthew 12, that He began to perform miracles only for individuals who first professed faith. In the John 5 incident, in fact, there was certainly not even a revelation of who Yeshua was; there was no revelation of His Messiahship. In fact, as verse 13 points out, the man who was healed did not even know who Yeshua was. He had to go back to find out when someone asked him, “Who healed you?” He did not know, nor did he know who Jesus was or claimed to be. There was no faith involved. Yet, Messiah deliberately told the man to do what he did, because He knew it would raise the issue. He wanted to force the people—and leaders in particular—to make a decision concerning His messianic claims.
John 5:10-18
After the man’s physical healing at the Pool of Bethesda, he was quickly confronted by the Jews in verse 10:
10 So the Jews said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not lawful for you to take up your bed.”
Muscles long wasted were completely restored. Isaiah prophesied that in the days of the Messiah the lame would “leap like a deer” (Isa. 35:1–7). Here in Jerusalem was a public sign that the Messiah had come.
The man was questioned further by the Pharisaic Jews in verses 11–13: But he answered them, “The man who healed me, that man said to me, ‘Take up your bed, and walk.’ ”
In defense, the man responded that he was simply obeying the One who had healed him. The Jews’ rigid tradition (not the Old Testament) taught that if anyone carried anything from a public place to a private place on the Sabbath intentionally, he deserved death by stoning. In this case the man who was healed was in danger of losing his life.
12 They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Take up your bed and walk’?” 13 Now the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had withdrawn, as there was a crowd in the place.
The man’s response was that the Man who had healed him told him to do this. When he was asked, “Who healed you?” Again, he said he did not know, and had to go to learn the answer.
The spiritual healing of the man is recorded in verses 14–15: Afterward Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you.” 15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him.
Afterwards, Yeshua found the man again, this time in the Temple (Jn. 5:14a), where he was perhaps thanking God for his healing and participating in the Temple festivities of the feast. Jesus said: “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you.”
Here is the spiritual healing of the man at the Pool of Bethesda. At that point, he discovered who Yeshua was and informed the others in verse 15. The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him. He places the emphasis where it belongs; namely, on the healing, in which the Jews had shown so little interest.
Jesus’ healing of the man at the Pool of Bethesda led to two accusations by Israel’s leaders in verses 16–18: 16 And this was why the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath. 17 But Jesus answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I am working.” 18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
The first accusation was that He had healed someone on the Sabbath. This did not violate the Mosaic Law, but it did break Pharisaic Law, which forbade healing on the Sabbath day, except if there was a danger to life. As long as the man’s life was not endangered, he should not have been healed on this day. Yochanan stated that this was a key reason why the religious leaders persecuted Yeshua (Jn. 5:16). Rabbis were very specific about the healings that could or could not be done on the Sabbath.
When Yeshua answered, My Father works even until now, and I work (Jn. 5:17), He was claiming equality with God! Jesus also points out that in performing this work of mercy on the sabbath he had acted in conformity with the example of his own Father and in conformity with the mandate which he had received from him.
18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
The second accusation came in verse 18 when called God His own Father, thereby making Himself an equal with God. In other words, by claiming to be the Son of God, by claiming to have God as His unique Father, He was claiming equality with God. That is the way the Jewish audience understood Him. John once more brings into clear view the purpose of his Gospel. That purpose was to strengthen believers so that they might continue to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing they might continue to have life in his name
Often, cultic groups use these things to deny the deity of the Son, claiming that the Son is less than the Father. However, that is not true in Jewish reckoning, because the first-born son is considered equal to the father. So, this verse, like many others, has to be viewed against the backdrop of the Jewish mindset of the day. What did the people think Yeshua meant when they heard Him speak? When He said, My Father works . . . I work, they clearly understood that He was claiming to be equal with God, hence their strong reaction. There was no ambiguity to the Jewish mind. That claim was either the most wicked blasphemy, to be punished with death; or else, it was the most glorious truth, to be accepted by faith. The very character of the sign which Jesus had just now performed should have caused these religious leaders to adopt the latter alternative. Instead, they chose the former.
Yeshua then defends Himself against these accusations by making four specific points: First, He is doing the works of the Father in verses 19–21: So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.
By doing the works of the Father, or works that God does, He proves His equality with God. He has an equal relationship to the Father. What one does, so does the other in verse 19. His activity is not self-initiated. The Father directs and has sent the Son. The Son’s activity imitates the Father, and the Two always work together. If healing a man on the Sabbath was a sin, then the Father was to blame! Jesus did nothing “of Himself” but only that which the Father was doing.
When our Lord came to earth as man, He submitted Himself to the Father in everything. “Lo, I come to do Thy will, O God” (Heb. 10:9). He veiled His glory and laid aside the independent exercise of His divine attributes. In the wilderness, Satan tempted Him to use His divine powers for Himself; but He refused to act independently. He was totally dependent on the Father and the power of the Holy Spirit of God.
Furthermore, there is a love between the Father and the Son, and this love gives the Son the right to do these mighty works in verse 20. There is equal love between God the Father and God the Son. Their relationship is one of continuous love. The Son is not doing simply a part of God’s will; He has a full disclosure of all the Father’s works. The blind religious leaders could not see what Jesus was doing, because they did not know the Father or the Son. By the Father, the Son will do even more amazing works than physical healings.
Then, in verse 21, there is also equal power, and the Son shares the Father’s power to give life. As giving life is something that is a divine ability, this means He must also be divine. For Jesus to claim to have power to raise the dead was a blasphemous thing in the eyes of the Jewish leaders; they gave that power to God alone. John 5:21 certainly can mean much more than the physical raising of people from the dead, for certainly Jesus was referring to His gift of spiritual life to the spiritually dead
The second point in His defense is that the Son will judge all men in verses 22–23: For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
In the Old Testament, the final judgment was a prerogative of God. But if the Son is, indeed, the One who will judge, He must, therefore, be God Himself. This also means the Son has equal honour with the Father. To the orthodox Jew, Jehovah God was “the Judge of all the earth” (Gen. 18:25); and no one dared to apply that august title to himself. But Jesus did! By claiming to be the Judge, He claimed to be God.
Our Lord claimed equality in another area, namely, equal honor with the Father (John 5:23). if you do not honor the Son, you are not honoring the Father! The “religious” people who say that they worship God, but who deny the deity of Christ, have neither the Father nor the Son! Apart from Jesus Christ, we cannot know the Father, worship the Father, or serve the Father
His third point of His defense is that He has the power to provide eternal life in verse 24: Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
The ability to provide eternal life was something that the Old Testament said only God possessed. Therefore, if the Son can provide eternal life, He certainly is God Himself. “Eternal life” means that they can never die spiritually again, nor can they ever come into judgment, because there is no condemnation in Christ (Rom. 8:1). To hear His Word and believe means salvation; to reject His Word means condemnation
The fourth point in His defense is that He will bring about the resurrection of the dead in verses 25–29: Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.
According to the Old Testament, the resurrection from the dead is something that only God could do (Is. 26:19; Dan. 12:2; Hos. 13:14). If the Son is raising the dead, it means He must also be God. Two more observations must be made regarding these same verses. First, both His humanity and His deity are emphasized.
In verse 25, He refers to Himself as the Son of God, emphasizing His deity. And in verse 27, He refers to Himself as the Son of Man emphasizing His humanity. The second observation concerns Yeshua’s discussion of two kinds of resurrections in verse 29: the resurrection of life and the resurrection of judgment. The resurrection of life is the first resurrection, the resurrection of believers only. The second resurrection is the resurrection of unbelievers only to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire. Rev 20:5, 6
One last comment about these verses involves the phrase, shall hear his voice, in verse 28. In the Gospels, whenever the hearing of a voice is emphasized, it is always the voice of the Messiah.
THE FOURFOLD WITNESS TO HIS MESSIANIC CLAIMS—JOHN 5:30–47
After this four-point defense, Yeshua concludes by pointing out there is a fourfold witness to His messianic claims in verses 30–45. Keep in mind that under the Mosaic Law, a minimum of two witnesses was needed to establish a case; for extra measure, there would be three. But Jesus provided a fourfold witness to His Messianic claims, going beyond the demands of the Law.
The first witness was John the Baptist in verse 33–35
I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me. 31 If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true.
This is true from a pure legal standpoint for it wouldn’t be accepted by the Jewish authorities. It is pure common sense, for a court of law could never trust a biased self-witness, so Jesus needs to provide 2 or 3 other witnesses to back up what he is saying, that was a requirement of the Mosaic Law under which He lived
32 There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the testimony that he bears about me is true.
Now Jesus doesn’t name this witness, but we will see it is the Father in v 37
33 You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth.
Earlier we see the Sanhedrin-sent investigation recorded in 1:19–28, when priests and Levites interrogated John the Baptist. Jesus’ point is that “he has testified to the truth” in his witness of 1:23 that he was tasked by God to “make straight the way for the Lord” (from Isa 40:3), that he was “unworthy” even to loose Jesus’ sandals in 1:27, and that Jesus is “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” in 1:29 and “God’s Chosen One” in 1:34
34 Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved.
What Jesus is saying here is that he doesn’t need the witness of man to authenticate him. Neither he nor the Father needs human confirmation to establish their identity. They are “from above” rather than of earth and exist at a higher level. But the witness is for the benefit of those on earth who need to know the truth of Jesus, believe in Him and be saved. Remember that John the apostle said in 1:7 that John the Baptist came as a witness to the light that all might believe through his witness
35 He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light.
John was not the true light but he was a lamp that burned and gave light for a while. The Jews for a short time were stirred by and rejoiced in his ministry because they thought the Messianic Age was coming.
The second witness to His messianic claim was His works in verse 36
36 But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me.
John the Baptist was a great voice for God, but he actually didn’t do any miracles (10:41). So, Jesus’s testimony is greater than John because He is going to do the works His father sent him to do, John was only sent as a witness but the Son is greater and so the works of Jesus—His miracles, signs, and wonders—authenticated His Messianic claims and that God was with Him and worked through Him
The third witness to His messianic claims was God the Father in verses 37–38
37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen,
This is the witness of verse 32, God the Father bore witness of the Messiah audibly at His baptism when He declared from Heaven: This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased (Mat. 3:13–17). It was the witness of the Bat Kol, the voice of God, a concept that was viewed as authoritative among the Jews of that day.
They had never “heard his voice” like Moses did at Sinai (Exod 33:11) or like the prophets and especially Jesus had. The Jewish people rejected Moses and the prophets and Jesus. Nor had they ever “seen his form”, referring especially to the image of God in Jesus (1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known).
God has revealed both himself and Jesus, using both hearing and sight, and the Jews have rejected it all (1:11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him). You want to see God look at Jesus
38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent.
Jesus does not deny that in a sense the Jews have the word of God. What he does say is that they do not have this word in their hearts as an abiding possession, the reason being that they had not placed their confidence in the One whom the Father has sent for the Messianic task. They were not able to see, because they rejected Jesus and the veil of unbelief was lying upon the eyes of their hearts (2 Cor 3:15)
The fourth witness was the Scriptures in verse 39:
39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,
As He is fulfilling messianic prophecies, the Scriptures bear witness of His claims. the scribes and the rabbis went to great lengths to gain a deep understanding of the Scriptures and had developed an extensive oral tradition to help the people remain faithful to the Torah/law, but in actual fact it shrouded the truth of the scriptures. The scriptures are not what gives eternal life, but it is the one the scriptures spoke about and in this case, it was Jesus, the scriptures bore witness of him.
Because they did not understand Scripture, they then failed to understand Him as is pointed out in verses 40–44:
40 yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.
They sought eternal life in the wrong place, because the Messiah—the only basis for life—had come in fulfillment of the Scriptures. Since they have rejected Jesus Messiah, there is no hope for life.
41 I do not receive glory from people.
He has no need of human witnesses or of human approval, no need of praise or esteem from the people around him, for he has all the approval he needs from the father
42 But I know that you do not have the love of God within you.
If there was the love of God they would have received the one sent by God, his listeners turned a deaf ear to the truths he proclaimed. They have refused to accept God’s envoy, and that will have serious repercussions
43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
To insult or reject one’s ambassador is the same as rejecting him. Jesus comes with the authority of God while the liars appeal only to their own authority. Their desire was for acceptance and approval from sinful men while ignoring the favor and the will of the only God. True faith was impossible because they were seeking the wrong object: man, not God
44 How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?
Not only is it true that the Jews do not believe; they actually cannot believe either, because they are constantly seeking praise from men, not praise which comes down from God. For that reason, they did not love God, and sought the glory of men rather than the glory of God.
Therefore, the very Law of Moses on which they had set their hope condemned them in verse 45:
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope.
Again, and again the Jews would appeal to Moses and would boast, “We are disciples of Moses,” (9:28). Now Jesus tells them that Moses, the constant object of their hope, to whose scriptures they were always appealing, whose instructions they debated and analysed, would actually prove to be their accuser; the reason being that, in spite of all their boasting about being his followers, they, in reality, did not believe him.
Moses will produce the evidence against them. If they were truly followers of Moses, they would be followers of Jesus, for Moses prophesied of him.
With four witnesses such as these, the problem was not that there was a lack of testimony to His messianic claims.
The real problem, Yeshua said, was that they did not believe Moses in verses 46-47
46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”
Accusing the Pharisees of not believing in Moses seems to be a stretch. It would be like approaching an Ultra-Orthodox Jew and saying, “You do not believe in the Mosaic Law.” Who could be more zealous for this law? That might seem a strange accusation to make against Pharisees, but the fact is that the Pharisees believed Moses only the way they re-interpreted him in Pharisaic tradition. They did not believe Moses as “it is written,” whereas Yeshua fulfills the Law of Moses as it is written. Had they accepted Moses as it is written in the Torah, they would not have failed to recognize that He was the Messiah. in Deuteronomy 18:15 Moses prophesied that God would raise up a prophet like Moses from among his countrymen, that prophet was Jesus. The Samaritan woman at the well, recognised Jesus as that prophet but these Jewish leaders were blinded by their own lack of belief in the writings of Moses.
In all these ways, the healing of the man at the Pool of Bethesda provided an opportunity for Jesus the Messiah to proclaim His Messiahship, His divinity, and His unique Sonship relationship with God the Father
This work © 2025 David Simon (https://www.life-everlasting.net) is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-BC-ND 4.0)
This license requires that reusers give credit to the creator. It allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form and for noncommercial purposes only.