John

Introduction

Though the writer of the gospel of John did not identify himself, it is widely accepted among scholars that Jesus' disciple John is the author. John was one of the relationally closest to Jesus of the twelve disciples as seen in the fact he was called the "beloved" (John 19:26-27; 20:2-9; 21:1, 20-25; Mark 14:17).

John's gospel is less interested in the miracles and instructional teachings of Jesus than it is in the conversations Jesus had with people who did not always understand or accept him. Unlike the other gospel writers, John omitted Jesus' genealogy, birth, baptism, temptation, exorcisms of demons, parables, transfiguration, institution of the Lord's Supper, agony in Gethsemane, and ascension. He instead focused on Jesus' ministry in Jerusalem, the Jewish feasts, Jesus' private conversations with individuals, and His preparation of His disciples (John 13–17). John's focus was on the deeper and more difficult things Jesus taught. It is as if the other gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—are for the new believer, while John takes the seasoned Christian deeper in his 400-level class.

John was clearly writing to a Jewish audience, for he has a heavy focus on the Jewish festivals and makes many First Testament allusions that he does not explain—explanations that would have been necessary for a Gentile audience to understand. Since John was a pastor over the church in Ephesus, located on the southern coast of Asia minor (modern Turkey) and founded by Paul (Acts 19:1-20), his audience would have been the Jews living outside of Israel in the Gentile world.

Some scholars date the gospel of John slightly before 70 AD because John described Jerusalem and Israel as they were before their Roman destruction (John 5:2). This may be a weak argument since John frequently used the Greek present tense to describe things in the past. Those who hold to this date note the absence in John of any reference to Jerusalem or the temple's destruction. If the temple had been destroyed at the time of John's writing his gospel, surely he would have mentioned such a major event, especially considering Jesus' prediction of its destruction (Matt. 24). However, there could have been many reasons John chose not to mention the destruction of Jerusalem if he had written after that event.

Most scholars believe that John wrote his gospel between 85 and 95 AD. Early church tradition holds that John wrote it when he was an older man. Perhaps John did not mention the destruction of the temple simply because, by the time he wrote, it had been fifteen to twenty-five years since its destruction, and it was now old news. Mostly likely its destruction was not important to his Jewish audience since none of them lived in Israel, nor, with a few exceptions, had they really interacted with the temple.^[1]

Setting

The First Testament ends with Israel's continual failure to live in obedience to Yahweh, enjoy His blessings in the Promised Land, or be a blessing to the world. As a result of their idolatry and lack of justice, Yahweh took them into exile under the oppression of foreign powers. Before and during their exile, Yahweh sent many prophets to foretell the coming of a Messiah who would restore Israel to the Promised Land, save them from their sins and rebellion, and establish the kingdom of Yahweh on earth. Eventually they returned from exile, but it was clear from their continued lack of obedience that the exile had not changed them. And though they had returned to the Promised Land, their exile was not over, for they were still under the oppression of foreign powers. Eventually Yahweh stopped sending His prophets to the people. Empire after empire continued to oppress them in the four hundred years between the First and Second Testaments (named by scholars the intertestamental period).^[2] By the time Rome came into power, many of the Jews had lost hope that anything would change and had made moral and religious compromises with Roman culture. But the faithful remnant awaited the promised Messiah and the restoration of Israel.

During the intertestamental period, a growing number of Jewish leaders became determined to never again allow the nation to come under the judgment of Yahweh and return to exile, so they focused on the sins had brought Yahweh's judgment. The main offense was their disregard for and violation of the Mosaic Covenant as revealed through the Torah (the first five books of the First Testament). And their main violation of the covenant was their idolatry, which came by the influence of the idolatrous foreign nations around them, with whom they had mixed and intermarried. So, these Jewish leaders began to emphasize, above all things, obedience to the Mosaic Law, worship of Yahweh alone, and ethnic purity as a nation. Obedience to the Law became so important that they created their own religious laws and rules around Yahweh's laws that were, over time, raised as equal to Yahweh's Law. Though they successfully removed all idolatry from the nation, they inadvertently began to elevate the Law and their authority to interpret it above their relationship with and true worship of Yahweh. They also became so focused on ethnic purity that they began to see themselves as superior ethnically and religiously to the nations around them and also to make it incredibly difficult for those of other nations to become part of the Jewish faith.

By the time of the Second Testament, the Jews believed that, because they as a people had been chosen by Yahweh and possessed the Torah and the covenant, they automatically had salvation and would automatically be included in the coming kingdom of Yahweh. The individual had only to maintain their standing as a religious Jew by abstaining from serious violations of the Law that would invalidate their religious birthright among Yahweh's chosen people. They believed that, when they had achieved and maintained these values as a nation, Yahweh would send the Messiah to deliver them politically and militarily from their foreign oppressor (Rome) and usher in the kingdom of Yahweh, where Israel would rise above all the nations and destroy or assimilate the surrounding nations. This is the world and culture Jesus entered as Yahweh's Messiah.

Purpose

At the end of his gospel, John specifically states his purpose for writing: "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (John 20:31). Unlike Matthew, Mark, and Luke, who wrote their gospels soon after the ascension of Jesus and were living in Israel, John wrote his gospel many years later to Jews outside of Israel who were disconnected from Israel, the temple, the Pharisees, and the events of Jesus' life. A big part of John's gospel is Jesus' putting the Jewish religious leaders on trial for their rejection of Himself as the Messiah. It could be that John was writing to warn the Jews scattered around the Gentile world, who were not part of the religious-political drama of Israel at the time of Jesus' ministry, to not make the same mistake that the Jews of Israel had made in rejecting Jesus, crucifying Him, and continuing to reject Jesus after His ascension as the twelve disciples continued proclaiming His name in Jerusalem. John wrote his gospel with more of a focus on the divinity of Jesus so that the scattered Jews would believe and receive eternal life, unlike the Jews in Israel, who had rejected Jesus.

Themes

Three major theological themes are developed throughout the book of John: the deity of Jesus, salvation, and polarities.

The Deity of Jesus

John more than the other gospels emphasizes the deity of Jesus throughout his book. His book begins with Jesus as the pre-incarnate Word over all creation (John 1:1-4). Throughout John's gospel Jesus is identified as the Son of God and Son of Man. This idea is clearer in John's gospel than in the other gospels. What John is most famous for is his record of Jesus' seven "I Am" statements that would make it clear to any Jew that Jesus was claiming to be God (John 6:35; 8:12; 10:7, 9; 10:11, 14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5). The name Yahweh is a form of the Hebrew word for "I Am." Yahweh declared this name to Moses when He appeared to him at the burning bush (Ex. 3:14).

Compared with the other gospels, John records more teachings of Jesus discussing His oneness with the Father and the nature of their relationship. This can be seen in Jesus' claim that the temple is His body (John 2:19-21); that Jesus, as the God-man, is the only human who can speak on heavenly things (John 3:13); that Jesus is always reflecting Yahweh in His character and deeds since He is one with the Father (John 5:16-47); that the Father has given Jesus all authority over life and death (John 6:25-59); and that Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:22-42; 14:5-14; 17). Jesus validated all His claims through His miracles of healing people, multiplying the bread and wine, walking on the water, resurrecting Lazarus, and, ultimately, rising from the dead Himself.

Salvation

All throughout the Bible belief/faith does not mean just having an intellectual acceptance of the existence of Yahweh. Belief/faith means knowing Yahweh intimately in a relationship, continually pursuing Him, and trusting and depending on Him for every aspect of your life. John continually makes this point through Jesus' teachings and by highlighting, more than the other gospels, the contrast between those who were attracted to and followed Jesus and those who truly believed and were committed to Him.

John uses many metaphors to communicate salvation: as living water that quenches one's thirst, as bread of life that sates one's hunger, and as light for those in darkness. All of these metaphors communicate the absolute necessity for spiritual life in Jesus.

Polarities

In all of John's writings, contrasting, polar ideas are a common theme. All throughout John's gospel is the contrast between light, representing the righteousness of Yahweh, and darkness, representing evil and rebellion. This can be seen in Jesus as the light coming into the darkness (John 1:4-5), in Nicodemus's going to Jesus at night (John 3:2), in Jesus' walking on the sea at night (John 6:17), in Judas and Peter's betraying Jesus at night (John 13:30; 18:27), and in the unbelieving and rebellious people's living in the darkness (John 3:19; 8:12; 9:4; 11:10; 12:35).

The themes contrasting those who truly believe and follow Jesus no matter the cost and those who do not believe and prefer to live in the darkness can be seen in every conversation Jesus has with people as He challenges them to truly believe in Him. Jesus' call to believe—and His challenge to those who claim they do—is more prominent in John's gospel than in the other gospels.

Other minor polarities of love and hate (John 12:25; 13:34-35; 15:18-25; 17:14) and of truth and deceit (John 1:14; 3:20-21; 8:39-47; 14:6; 17:17) show up in John's gospel. With these polarities John is making a strong distinction between the kingdom of Yahweh and the kingdom of humanity and the need for humans to choose which kingdom they want to be part of.

Structure

The gospel of John is divided into two major divisions. In the first division John focuses on revealing the nature of who Jesus is through His words and deeds (John 1:1–10:42), and it contains the bulk of Jesus' miracles, teaching, and conversations with others. The second division is the revealing of Jesus' nature and His mission through His upper room discourse and His death and resurrection (John 13:1–21:25).

There are seven "I Am" statements in the gospel of John. These serve as structural pillars that support the book's theological narrative of the deity of Jesus (John 6:35; 8:12; 10:7, 9; 10:11, 14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5). John systematically pairs these "I Am" statements with Jesus' miraculous signs and extended discourses to reveal Jesus' divinity and mission, while deliberately echoing the divine name of Yahweh revealed to Moses (Ex. 3:14).

There is also a smaller framework of six festivals that structure the narrative by marking the timeline of Jesus' ministry and providing the theological backdrop for His identity as the Messiah as spoken of in the First Testament.

There are some who also see a collection of seven signs in the gospel of John (John 2:1-11; 2:13-22; 4:46-54; 5:1-15; 6:1-15; 9:1-41; 11:1-44). This comes from John's specifically stating that turning the water into wine was the first sign Jesus performed (John 2:11) and His healing of the official's son was the second sign (John 4:54). However, there is no reason to see John as numbering Jesus' signs throughout his gospel. Jesus performed many other signs between these two numbered signs (John 2:23), and nowhere else in the gospel does John number the signs of Jesus.^[3] Likewise, Jesus performed many other miracles between the supposed seven signs of John's gospel that are not numbered.

Outline

I. Jesus' Self-Disclosure in Word and Deed (1:1–10:42)

The first division of John's gospel introduces Jesus as the eternal, divine Word who brings light and life to the world. Following this is testimony from John the Baptizer. Jesus began His public ministry with miraculous signs and theologically dense teachings that polarized His listeners and provoked intense conflict with the Jewish leaders over His identity, His authority, and His divine sonship.

A. Prologue: Jesus as the Word and Light (1:1-18)

This section is the theological prologue to the gospel of John, which establishes Jesus as the pre‑existent, divine Word of Life who created the universe. John declares that this Word became human (the incarnation), bringing light and truth into the darkness. The main emphasis of the prologue is that Christ is the ultimate revelation of the Father who offers those who believe in Him the right to become children of Yahweh. This can be seen in the chiastic parallelism below, where X is the center and focus.

1:1 Just as each gospel begins with a genealogy of Jesus, John also begins with a genealogy of sorts, where Jesus existed as the Word with and as God before all things came into existence. In John 1:1-4, the Word is the preincarnate Jesus Christ, for His incarnation is not introduced until John 1:9. For now, John calls the second member of the trinity the Word, for He will not receive the name Jesus until His incarnation (Luke 1:31; 2:21).

The phrase in the beginning echoes the opening phrase of the First Testament in Gen. 1:1, where the "beginning" (arche) refers to a time prior to creation and often bears the meaning of origin. John's use of "the beginning" links the preexistence of the "Word" (Christ) with the preexistence of Yahweh before the creation of the universe. Just as Yahweh has no origin in Gen. 1:1, so also the Word has no origin.

Similarly, just as the mention of the preexistent Yahweh in Gen. 1:1 is followed by the creation of the material universe, so the mention of the preexistent Word is followed by the incarnation of Jesus Christ into material flesh in John 1:14. This also points to the fact that the beginning of the gospel can be traced back to the beginning of the universe.

The Greek word logos can mean "word," speech," "thought," or "reason." The term Word is used by John to contextualize the gospel among his Hellenistic audience. The Greek Stoics understood logos to be the rational principle by which everything exists and flows from the pantheistic god force that sustains all things. John starts with Greek thinking as common ground, yet later John will claim that this Word has appeared in the actual flesh, which the Greeks would deny (John. 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

But ultimately John is linking the Word to Yahweh, the God of the First Testament. This can be seen, first, in His deliberate link to Gen. 1:1 with the phrase "in the beginning"; second, with his use of the terms light, darkness, and life, echoed from Genesis 1; third, to John's prologue's allusion to the wilderness wanderings of Jesus pitching His tent/dwelling on earth (John 1:14) and the giving of the law (John 1:17-18); and fourth, in John's adaptation of Isa. 55:9-11 as the basis for his Christological framework, which will be unpacked throughout the rest of the book.^[4]

John states that the Word was "with God" from the very beginning. The use of with does not communicate simple co-existence but rather an active and intimate relationship. It not only establishes a relationship between God and the Word, but it also distinguishes the two from each other.^[5] Yet, the phrase "was God" communicates the idea that "the Word continually was"^[6], placing the existence of the Word "outside of the limits of time and place, neither of which existed in the beginning."^[7] These two ideas communicate the distinction between God and the Word as well as their oneness as the same God, an idea that is found only in the trinity.

Some people, like Jehovah's Witnesses, claim that the phrase "was God" should be translated "was a God," meaning the Word is not the same as or one with Yahweh God. The argument is based on the Greek text having no definite article the before the word God (theos), meaning the Word was "a God," or another god, like an angel. But this is not legitimate for several reasons. First, John as a monotheistic Jew would not have referred to another as "a God." Second, if John had placed the definite article the before God (theos), this would have so equated the Word and God as one that it would negate the distinction he had already made in stating that the Word was with God. Third (which requires understanding the Greek), it is common in Greek syntax for the definite nominative predicate noun preceding a finite verb to be without the article.^[8] If John wanted to refer to Jesus as merely divine—as "a God"—he would have used the Greek word theios.^[9]

John intends that the whole of the gospel be read in light of this verse, for this is his concise statement that Yahweh and Jesus are the same God.^[10] For it is only through Jesus being God that He is even able to make possible the gospel of our salvation and our entrance into the kingdom of Yahweh as His children. It may be that John has Psalm 45 in mind as the First Testament authority to this ascription of deity to Jesus the Messiah, where Yahweh Himself is addressing the messianic king as God.

1:2 By stating "He was with God in the beginning," John is reiterating the first clause of John 1:1, bringing closure and preparing the reader for John 1:3.^[11] The pronoun he, used here for the first time of the Word, points backward to the Word and looks forward to Him as a human being in John 1:14.^[12]

1:3 Having shown that the Word is God in His essence, John now proves His deity through His deeds. John once again links back to Genesis 1, where Yahweh created the world through His spoken word, which is the Word. The Word was the agent of creation through which all things, without exception, came into existence. The Word is linked to Yahweh as fully God by the fact they are both responsible for creating the universe.

1:4-5 Throughout the Bible, life and light are universal religious symbols of flourishing and wisdom that only Yahweh provides. Throughout the gospel of John, life is tied specifically to the idea of salvation. In the Bible, the concept of light is bound up with the revelation and salvation of Yahweh. In the Bible, darkness can mean the absence of light (Gen. 1:2, 4), things that are shrouded in mystery, or sin and evil. For John, the "darkness" is not only the absence of light but is always used of sinful humanity estranged from Yahweh—spiritually blind, fallen, rebellious, evil, and dominated by Satan (John 3:19; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 John 1:5, 6; 2:8, 9, 11).^[13] John does not usually apply the concept of darkness directly to people. Rather, darkness refers to the evil environment or "sphere" in which people find themselves and the evil thinking and ideologies people adopt; for example, "They loved darkness rather than light" (John 3:19). Those who follow Jesus do not walk in darkness (John 8:12). Evil and the world's ideologies have overcome humanity and blinded them to the truth of Yahweh and thus lead them into doing evil as well.

John now introduces what will become a major theme of his gospel: the opposition of light and darkness. The Word as the creator of creation is the fullness and source of all life that sustains all creation, and everything finds its life in Him. The life of the Word is the light, which is the fullness of Yahweh's revelation of His being and salvation, that shines into the darkness of humanity. The Word is the only one who can bring salvation and flourishing to the sinful and estranged world. Unlike the world and humanity that have been overcome by the darkness, the Word as the light is so powerful and all-encompassing that it pierces the darkness and drives it away, like Yahweh's speaking the light into creation (Gen. 1:3-4). No matter how overwhelming the darkness is, it is so inferior to the light that it has no hope of preventing the arrival of the light or of overcoming it. The Greek word katalambanō is translated as "understood" by some, but "overcome" is a better translation, for, as mentioned earlier, John does not use darkness of people but rather as the sphere of evil. And unlike people, the sphere or ideas of evil cannot seek to understand anything, but they can overcome people.

1:6-8 The introduction of John serves to prepare the reader for the incarnation of the preincarnate Word in John 1:9. John as one "sent" by God is reminiscent of the First Testament descriptions of the prophets of Yahweh (2 Chron. 24:19; 25:15; Jer. 7:25; 25:4; 28:9; 35:15; 44:4; Ezek. 2:3). The purpose of John the Baptizer was to proclaim the coming of the incarnate Word so all humans will believe and have life. In no way is John, as a great prophet, to be confused with the light of the world. This description of John the Baptizer makes it clear that he was a man—in contrast to Jesus as God—and that John was sent by God to carry out a particular mission—in distinction from Jesus but in relation to Jesus.^[14]

1:9 Now that John has shown that the Word is Yahweh in His essence and by His deeds as creator, he goes on to describe the Word's entrance into His very creation by becoming a part of His creation through His incarnation. The word true means "real" or "genuine" and sometimes can carry the idea of ultimate self-disclosure. The Word is not a false light of the human saviors who have offered a false salvation throughout the generations of time; rather, the Word is the true light of Yahweh that offers light to all people by coming into the world.

The Greek word kosmos ("world") can mean the material created universe, as in John 11:9; 17:5, 24; 21:25. But for the majority of the time, in John's gospel kosmos is used in a negative way to refer to a sinful and rebellious humanity and to the sinful, anti-god order, systems, and ideologies that they have created in rebellion against their Maker (John 1:10; 7:7; 14:17, 22, 27, 30; 15:18-19; 16:8, 20, 33; 17:6, 9, 14).^[15] It is the realm of darkness that has overcome humanity and the world and the worldviews and institutions they create in that darkness. The "world" in John's gospel contains no believers, and those who come to faith are no longer in the world (John 15:19).^[16]

"The true light, who gives light (photizei) to everyone" has less of the idea of shining on everyone, as if it were a blessing of a flourishing life upon everyone; rather, it has the idea of shedding light upon, as in to make visible, to bring to light, to expose what is hidden in the darkness.^[17] The idea is that the coming of the Word as the light will expose the sinfulness and evil of the systems and ideologies of the world so that humans can come out of the darkness and into the light to receive the fullness of life that is found only in the Word.

1:10-11 Even though the world was created through the Word, the world did not recognize its own Maker when He entered it because it was blinded by the darkness and its own autonomy. The word recognized comes from the Greek aorist verb ginosko, which means "know," which does not carry of the idea of intellectual knowledge but rather of knowing someone intimately in a relational sense. Thus, the world's not recognizing the Word entails a willful refusal to accept or believe in the Word.^[18] Notice the parallel with "believe" in John 1:12. "The basic sin in John's gospel is the failure to know and believe in Jesus."^[19] "This refers first and foremost to a rejection of Jesus' claim of equality with God and His revelation of the Father through words and signs."^[20]

The phrase "who were His own" carries the idea of possession or belonging. "His own" are His own chosen people, the Jews. Not only did all the people of the world that He created not recognize Him, but even His own chosen covenant people did not receive Him (Isa. 65:2-3; Jer. 7:25-26). As people of the covenant, they should have been the very people who knew and recognized Him and received Him with open arms. The gravity of this rejection of the Word is that He is the originator of humanity, so they have a moral responsibility to Him. Their rejection then brings them under judgment. This rejection reaches its climax in John 12:37-41. "Two points receive special emphasis: one is the astonishing fact that the Word of God, true God as he is, took upon him human nature, and the other is the even more astonishing fact that when he did this, people would have nothing to do with him."^[21]

1:12-13 In contrast, to those who did receive and believe in His name He gave the right to be His true children. In the ancient world, a name communicated one's being and character. To "receive" Him means to entrust oneself to Him and confess Him in the fullness of His self-revelation of His being and name.

Being the children of God is not exclusive to nor applied to all the Jews simply by their being descendants of Abraham (Matt. 3:8-9). It is a right that is bestowed on those who have faith in Yahweh and His son Jesus Christ.^[22] The word translated "right" refers to the legitimate claim of becoming a child of Yahweh, a privilege that has been made available to all humans through Jesus Christ. This means that sinful people, though created by Yahweh, are not Yahweh's children unless they put their faith in Him and His son.^[23] The believers of the First Testament did not call Yahweh "Father." The privilege of being Yahweh's children is stated in John 1:12 and 1 John 3:1-2. The focus is on "becoming" Yahweh's children, which requires a change of status based on faith.^[24] John is very careful to distinguish between believers who become children and Jesus who is the unique Son of God.^[25]

One is not a biological child of God by natural birth or the desire of humans, but one becomes a child of God by a change in their spiritual status, based on their faith, that then leads to the indwelling of the Spirit and a transformation of their nature (Rom. 12:1-4). This idea will be picked up by Jesus in His conversation with Nicodemus (John 3). The Word is the only one who has the authority to grant this right and privilege to humans by His exclusive and unique relationship to Yahweh the Father. These verses are the climax of John's prologue, for they are the reason for the Word's incarnation into the world.

1:14 Rather than using the Greek words anthropos ("man") or soma ("body"), John uses the crude term sarx ("flesh"), which refers to all human beings in existence as distinct from Yahweh. John does not convey the evil sense that is common in Pauline usage. For John it refers to the physical nature in its weakness rather than in its sinfulness.^[26] The Word as the most powerful divine being was born into human frailty.

The Greek word egeneto, which has the idea of "made" or "born," is not the idea John is communicating, and so it is rendered "became" in English translations. But it also does not mean "changed into," as in becoming human and ceasing to be God. Nor does it mean the Word appeared human, took on humanity, or assumed or adopted the form of a body. There is no room for dualism, where Jesus has two different forms distinct from each other.^[27] Rather, the Word became a human in nature, with a physical body and human emotions all part of also being the eternal Son of God, remaining fully God, without His godhood being lost or diluted by His humanity (Heb. 1:1-4). The early church fathers stated that Jesus is fully God and fully human, where the two natures are not distinct from each other nor mingled together to become something else.

The word dwelling comes from the Greek word skenoo, which means to "pitch one's tent and dwell in it." For the Jews this would call to mind the Hebrew word skene, the "tabernacle" where Yahweh dwelt with the Israelites before the temple was built (Ex. 25:9), which was also the called the "tent of meeting" (Ex. 33:7).^[28] The word skenoo is also connected to the Hebrew word sakan, which means "to dwell," and is sometimes used of Yahweh's dwelling with Israel in the First Testament (Ex. 25:8; 29:46; Zech. 2:13). There, His presence was displayed physically in the pillar of cloud and fire (Ex. 13:21–22; Deut. 5:24) and was referred to by the Jews as the Shekinah Glory of Yahweh. In the First Testament, Yahweh tabernacled/dwelled with Israel in the physical manifestation of the cloud and fire, but now the fullness of the Son of God and glory of Yahweh (Heb. 1:1-4 tabernacled/dwelled in the fullness of human flesh as the God-man among His creation. What Yahweh desires the most is relationship, and Jesus is the fullness of making that happen in every sense of existence by becoming human. The Word, as the glory of Yahweh, became human and set up His tent and tabernacled among us as one of us yet also as fully God.

"John's message is that the incarnation represents an event of equal importance with creation. Since the world—including God's chosen people (1:10-11)—is dark, fallen, and sinful, humanity's need is for spiritual rebirth (1:13; cf. 3:3, 5), available only through the preexistent, enfleshed Word (cf. 1:29, 36)."^[29] This runs contrary to both the Jews, who saw Yahweh as completely distinct from humans and a merger of the two as blasphemy, and the Greek Gnostics, who saw God's becoming human inconceivable because matter was inferior and evil.

John testified that he and the other followers of Jesus saw with their own eyes the glory of Jesus (Luke 9:28-36; 1 John 1:1-4) and that this glory is the one and only Son of God. Some older translation have "only begotten Son" (KJV) as if His beginning began with His birth. But this contradicts the point that John already made about Jesus being the preexistent Word (John. 1:1-5) and is not the true meaning of the Greek word. The word monogenes is used in the First Testament as "only child" (Judg. 11:34). Being the only child makes the child irreplaceable, as a special value to the parents to carry on who they are (Luke. 7:12; 8:42; 9:38). The LXX (Greek translation of the First Testament) uses the Greek word agapetos meaning "beloved" instead of monogenes (Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; Amos 8:10; Jer. 6:26; Zech. 12:10).^[30] In Gen. 22:2, 12, and 16 Isaac is referred to as Abraham's "only son" even though Abraham had fathered Ishmael before Isaac (Gen. 16; 21). Isaac was unique because he would receive the firstborn title of headship over the tribe, but more importantly, he was chosen by Yahweh to continue the covenant and its blessings. Of Isaac's two sons, it was Jacob who received the firstborn title even though Esau was born first (Gen. 25:19-34). And of Jacob's twelve sons, it was Judah, the fourth born, who received the firstborn title (Gen. 49). David was the youngest and received the firstborn title (1 Sam. 16). In the First Testament, David and Israel are called Yahweh's "firstborn" or "only" son (Ps. 89:27). So monogenes has nothing to do with birth or being begotten but rather carries the meaning of "unique" or "one-of-a-kind" son par excellence (John 1:18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). This is similar to Jesus as God's "beloved son."

The word grace (charis) is used by Paul to mean "God's unmerited favor," and in John's writings, in conjunction with truth (aletheia) it alludes to the First Testament phrase "loving-kindness" (Hebrew, hesed) and "truth" (Hebrew, emet) (Ex. 34:6; cf. 33:18-19).^[31] This coupled expression refers to Yahweh's covenant faithfulness to His people, which found its ultimate expression of lovingkindness and truth in Yahweh's sending Jesus Christ, His unique Son.

1:15 This verse is a parenthetical statement that begins to bring both a conclusion to the prologue and a transition to the ministry of John the Baptizer. The final prophet of the Old Covenant proclaimed that this Jesus, the incarnate Word, was the one whom the First Testament spoke of as coming to fulfill the covenant promises of Yahweh. By declaring that Jesus is greater than and surpasses himself, John the Baptizer is not only passing the baton to Jesus but also declaring that Jesus brings a greater covenant (Heb. 8–10).

1:16-17 The Greek phrase charin anti charitos is most commonly translated as "grace upon grace" (ESV, RSV, NET). From the context it is clear that the two graces are, first, the Mosaic Covenant and, second, Jesus Christ (John 1:17). The relationship between these two hinges on the force of the preposition anti. The majority of translators see it as meaning "upon" or "in addition to," meaning the Mosaic Covenant was the first act of Yahweh's grace to humanity and the coming of Jesus the second, added onto or heaped upon the first. Yahweh had continually added more and more grace upon His covenant people through the Mosaic Covenant and Jesus. Thus, the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant are seen as complementary in this context.

The first problem with this understanding is that it does not fit the context of the passage, where John 1:17 clearly contrasts the giving of the Law through Moses with the truth that came through Jesus. The word for communicates that John 1:17 is the reason or explanation for the statement made in John 1:16. Therefore, if the Law and Jesus are contrasted in John 1:17, then they should be seen as contrasting in John 1:16.

The most normal Greek preposition to use for the idea of upon is epi, not anti. The only place those who take this view cite is found in the Greek philosopher Philo's work De Post. Caini, p. 145. But Philo speaks of "graces," not "grace." In the context, Philo does not believe there is an accumulation of graces, one upon another, but a substitution of graces, one kind of grace replacing another kind of grace.^[32]

The most convincing way to understand anti is as "instead of," which is the most common way it is used, especially in the LXX (NIV), meaning that in the fullness of Jesus Christ the believers have received a greater grace than the previous grace of the Mosaic Covenant. This also fits the context of John 1:17.^[33]

One argument against this view is that grace did not come from Moses. Yet this completely ignores that the First Testament constantly talks about the Mosaic Covenant as a gift from Yahweh (Deut. 4:5-8; Ps. 119), and Paul himself called the Law holy, righteous, and good (Rom. 7:12, 16). And this objection ignores the context. Another argument against this view is that John's gospel is opposed to the Law. But this is based on two instances in which Jesus says, "your Law" (John 8:17; 10:34), thus speaking against their interpretation and abuses of the Mosaic Law. ^[34]

The point is that in the past Yahweh had graciously offered guidance, order, and life through His gift of the Mosaic Covenant, which is holy, righteous, and good, but now He has given a greater gift of grace through the truth of His Son Jesus Christ. This is the way John the Baptizer, the representative of the Mosaic Covenant, proclaimed that Jesus was superior to himself (John 1:15). In addition, the author John states that Jesus' ministry is superior to that of Moses, just as it is superior to that of Jacob (John 4:12) and Abraham (John 8:53). This is the whole argument of the epistle of Hebrews—that Jesus is superior to the angels (Heb. 1–2), Moses (Heb. 3), sabbath (Heb. 4), priesthood (Heb. 4–8), tabernacle (Heb. 9), and sacrifices (Heb. 9–10) of the Mosaic Covenant.

1:18 John finishes the prologue by reminding his readers that no one has ever seen Yahweh in His fullness. Even Moses, who experienced more of Yahweh than anyone else, was not able to step into the fullness of His glory (Ex. 33:20). The only one who ever has seen Yahweh in His fullness is the Son of God, who did not go into the presence of Yahweh but is Himself God. This idea will be picked up again in John 3:13 with Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus. The Greek phrase eis ton kolpon is an idiom literally translated as "in the Father's lap," communicating the idea of the closest intimacy anyone could have with another. It portrays the devoted care of a parent to their child (Num. 11:12; Ruth 4:16; 2 Sam. 12:3; 1 Kgs. 3:20; 17:19; Prov. 8:30; Lam. 2:12). This is the relationship the Father and the Son have with each other as God. The importance of this concluding statement in the prologue is that only Word-Jesus, the God-man, can make Yahweh known to humanity. He is the only one who knows Yahweh, since He is God, and the only one who can accurately reveal Yahweh to humanity, since He is human. This is the point Jesus will make in John 14:9—that anyone who has seen and knows Him has also seen and knows Yahweh, because He is God.

B. Prelude to Jesus' Public Ministry (1:19-51)

This section features John the Baptizer's identifying himself as the forerunner of the Messiah and declaring Jesus as the Lamb of God. As Jesus began calling His first disciples, they experienced divine revelation, recognizing Him as the Son of God, King of Israel, and the ultimate fulfillment of First Testament prophecy.

1:19-23 When John the Baptizer began his ministry, he looked and sounded like a First Testament prophet, and many thought he might be the Messiah. It was the responsibility of the Jewish priesthood to investigate him and determine whether he was. John was quick to deny that he was the Messiah, a prophet, or Elijah. Deut. 18:14-22 told of a day when a prophet like Moses would come to lead the people. And Mal. 4:5-6 told of the coming of Elijah, which would usher in the coming of the Messiah. In identifying himself, John the Baptizer quoted Isa. 40:3, stating that he was the one who was to prepare the hearts of the people for the coming of the Messiah.

1:24-28 The priests then asked why, if he was not the Messiah, he was baptizing people. In other words, if he was not the Messiah, to whom were the people pledging themselves and giving their lives to follow? John told them that he was baptizing them with water, which was a Jewish custom of cleansing (Ps. 51:2, 7; Ezek. 26:25; Zech. 13:1). He then answered that the Messiah who was coming after him was far greater than he. The duty of untying of one's sandals was considered so degrading that it was the job of the master's slave to do it. John did not really answer their question until the next day (John 1:29).

John's ministry focused on Bethany on the eastern side of the Jordan River. This Bethany is most likely not the city of Bethany, which was located not on the eastern side of the Jordan but in the region of Batanea in the northeast part of Israel. This region was known as Bashan in the First Testament.^[35] This is therefore a variant spelling of Batanea that John chose in order to have Jesus' ministry begin in the region of Bethany and end in the city of Bethany (John 12:1).

1:29-31 Other than focusing on the ministry of John the Baptizer, like the other gospels, the author focuses on the Christological exchange between John and Jesus. The next day John saw Jesus and declared Him to be the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. He is not just the lamb of God but the Lamb par excellence that was specially provided by Yahweh. This imagery is rooted in Isa. 53:7, and John most likely did not understand the full significance of what he had declared Jesus to be. He spoke better than he realized. Jews did not understand this passage to refer to the dying of the messiah but to a chosen servant of Yahweh who would suffer in a way that fell short of actual death on behalf of Israel.^[36] What would have been theologically jarring to the Jews is that this Jewish Messiah would not suffer just for Israel but for the sins of the entire Gentile pagan world (John 3:17; 1 John 2:2). John did not know Jesus was the Messiah until he saw the sign of the Holy Spirit coming down on Jesus. But the reason he was baptizing was to prepare for the coming of the Messiah, Jesus.

1:32-34 Unlike the experience of the First Testament prophets, the Spirit did not just come down on Jesus but remained on Him. Twice John the Baptizer mentioned the Spirit ‘remaining' on Jesus (John 1:32-33). This description of the Spirit's relationship to Jesus communicates permanence.^[37] John baptized merely with water, in a symbolic sense for the cleansing of sin, but Jesus would baptize people with the Holy Spirit. This means that through His death and resurrection people would, for the first time, be able to truly be cleansed of their sins so that they could receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2). John's identifying Jesus as the chosen One alludes to Isa. 42:1.

1:35-42 The next day John again identified Jesus as the Lamb of God but this time only to his own disciples. These two disciples immediately began to follow Jesus, which would not have been an abandonment of John, for according to John himself this was the purpose of his ministry—to prepare the Jews to follow the Messiah when He came, and then he would decrease in prominence. By asking the disciples what they wanted, Jesus was drawing out their verbal confession of why they were following Him. Their following Him and sleeping where He slept shows their commitment to become His followers. At once they began to seek others they knew so those could follow Jesus as well. Immediately upon Jesus' being identified as the Messiah, people were beginning to follow Him. The unusual omission of the other disciple's name means it is most likely the author John since he never refers to himself by name in his gospel.^[38]

John is the only Second Testament author who uses the title Messiah. The Greek word messias is a transliteration of the Hebrew/Aramaic word meaning "anointed one." Christos is the Greek word equivalent. In the First Testament, "anointed" is used to refer to the kings of Israel (1 Sam. 16:6; 2 Sam. 1:14), prophets (Ps. 105:15), the high priests (Lev. 4:3), and others who were set apart by Yahweh. Yahweh often renamed people in order to indicate their special calling. Simon, which means "to hear," was changed to Cephas, which in Hebrew means "rock." In Greek it became Peter, which is not a proper name but probably more of a nickname. The changing of his name emphasizes the man he would one day become as transformed by the Holy Spirit.^[39] But the focus is on Jesus, who knows people so well that He makes them what He calls them to be.^[40]

1:43-49 More people became Jesus' disciples, but John lingers on Nathanael more than any of the others. Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew, although John never describes him as such. Nathanael was skeptical of the Messiah's coming from Nazareth, which was a very small and insignificant village. It is never mentioned in the First Testament or the prophecies connected to the Messiah. It probably seemed unlikely that the long-awaited, anointed king of Israel, who would free the Jews from their foreign oppression, would come from such an insignificant village.

1:47-48 Jesus' pointing out the lack of deceit is contrasted with the deception of Jacob, the original Israel when he was renamed by Yahweh. The Israelites were characterized throughout the First Testament as deceitful when they claimed to be the chosen people of Yahweh but worshiped idols. Jesus' point is that there were still Israelites of godly character left in Israel.

On the surface, Jesus' stating that He saw Nathanael sitting under the fig tree reveals His prophetic knowledge of others, showing He is not just another rabbi but has come from Yahweh. But the reference to the fig tree is rooted in the First Testament, where the fig tree is sometimes used as a symbol of home and prosperity in the coming kingdom of Yahweh (1 Kgs. 4:25; Isa. 36:16; Mic. 4:4; Zech. 3:10). In rabbinic literature it is a place of meditation on the Scriptures and prayer. Jesus wording here echoes Zech. 3:1, which alludes to 1 Kgs. 4:25. Jesus was signaling that the time spoken of in Zech. 3:10 was at hand.

1:59-52 Nathanael's response was belief that Jesus was the Son of God, which is a title used of the Messiah in the First Testament (2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7) making Jesus the king of the Jews. But because of the political and military overtones, Jesus was reluctant to use the title, for it would give the false impression of His ministry. His kingdom was "not of this world."^[41]

Jesus states that because of Nathanael's faith he is going to see greater things than just the coming of the Messiah. To see "heaven open" is to see visions of the spiritual realm and sometimes heaven itself or the divine council of Yahweh. This idea gave birth to the popular genre of apocalyptic literature, where people wrote what they had seen in a vision of the spiritual realm, like the book of Daniel and Enoch. The phrase "angels of God ascending and descending" is a reference to Gen. 28:12, where Jacob at Bethel ("house of God") had a vision of angels of God ascending and descending a stairway to heaven. Jesus was saying in John 1:51 that He was the "new Bethel," the place where Yahweh was going to reveal Himself, where heaven and earth were going to meet, where Yahweh and humanity were going to meet.^[42]

Jesus' referring to Himself as the Son of Man is from Dan. 7:13-14. This passage portrays a human figure who approaches the throne of Yahweh and is riding the clouds. The fact that He approaches the throne without dying communicates that He is a sinless human. As well, the only beings that ride clouds are Yahweh and angels. This figure is portrayed as being both human and divine. In Daniel, Yahweh then hands this Son of Man all authority, power, and honor over all of creation. Jesus claimed to be this Son of Man and proved this claim and appointment of Yahweh by doing what only Yahweh could do—forgiving sins and healing people—which Yahweh would not have allowed Him to do if His claims were false (Luke 5:21-26). Throughout His ministry Jesus continually claimed and validated His claim to be the God-man who sits at the right hand of Yahweh and rules over creation (Luke 20:42; 22:69).

C. Jesus Turns the Water into Wine (2:1-12)

In this section Jesus revealed Himself to be the Messiah to His closest followers by making the wine abundant at a wedding, which fulfilled messianic promises of the First Testament. The insignificant town of Cana became the place of Jesus' first miracle.

2:1-5 There, days after Nathanael had become a disciple, Jesus took His disciples to the wedding of one of His family members in Cana. Cana was about nine miles north of Nazareth in Galilee and was a very small and unimportant town in Israel. John never mentioned Jesus' mother, Mary, by name, perhaps to avoid confusing her with other Marys in his story.

Weddings were normally at least seven days long with a celebration of dancing, food, and wine. The wine of the ancient Near East was alcohol, not grape juice. There were three types of wine in the Greco-Roman world. The first was new wine, which was freshly pressed grape juice that began to ferment within hours and was thus alcoholic. Because it was considered inferior to aged wine, it was rarely consumed. The second was the standard wine, which was diluted with water to between one-third and one-tenth, leaving it with less alcohol than a modern American beer. Undiluted wine, about the strength of wine today, was viewed as "strong drink" and was viewed with disapproval.^[43] The master of the banquet used the Greek word methysko ("drank freely"), not meaning consuming too much liquid but referring to inebriation. The third was undiluted wine, about the same strength as wine today. It was viewed as "strong drink" and was regarded with disapproval or condemnation.

Running out of wine would have been incredibly shameful and in an honor-shame culture would have socially marked the family for decades to come. There is some evidence in Jewish records that a lawsuit could have been brought against the groom.^[44] Here, the running out of wine might also be symbolic of the barrenness of Judaism.^[45] Prophetic expectations describe the messianic age as a time when wine would flow freely (Gen. 49:8-12; Jer. 31:12-14; Hos. 14:7; Amos 9:13-14; 1 Enoch 10:19; Matt. 22:1-14).

When Mary reported the wine problem to Jesus, it may have been because she had some responsibility for organizing the wedding. She did not go to Jesus because she knew He was God or because she expected Him to do a miracle. She went to Him because as the firstborn son He may have had some authority in the tribe and had shown Himself over the years to be competent and resourceful.

Jesus' referring to his mother as "woman" would not have been seen as insulting in their culture. The use of woman would have communicated respect for her that carried some emotional distance, such as when people in the southern United States address a woman as ma'am.

Jesus' question, "Why do you involve me?" was a rebuke of his mother, though mostly likely a gentle rebuke. Jesus was inferring that human affairs did not dictate the timing and direction of His ministry. This is further communicated in His statement "my hour has not come." For the gospel writers, Jesus' "hour" always refers to the cross. Jesus knew that when He began His ministry, it would immediately start the countdown to His death. Mary simply wanted the wedding to end without embarrassment. But Jesus knew that, because of who He is, His actions carried a much deeper meaning than what His mother realized in bringing this mundane request to Him.

But knowing her son and His character, she shook off the gentle rebuke and commanded the servants to do whatever He instructed. Obviously moved by His compassion for the bride and groom, Jesus decided to act but did it behind the scenes, in a discreet way that only His disciples would witness, in order to control the coming of His hour.

2:6-8 The Greek text says the jars held 2 or 3 metretes. A metrete is about 10 gallons (39–40 liters), so each jar held 20–30 gallons (80–120 liters), making the total volume of the six jars about 120–180 gallons (480–720 liters). These jars would have contained the Jewish ceremonial washing water for purification rituals performed at the beginning of sacrifices at the temple or at festivals and weddings. This was sacred water that was not allowed to be used for common purposes. Jesus would have known that commanding the servants to fill the jars in order to use them for a purpose other than ritual purification would have temporarily defiled them. But the gospels have continually shown that Jesus as God always makes things clean, and His work is never defiling. Likewise, Jesus understood that the purpose of the Law was to benefit people and meet their needs. Jesus then commanded the servants to draw out the water for the master of the banquet, who would have been like a wedding coordinator. John intentionally delayed the reveal of what Jesus had done in order to build the suspense and anticipation for the coming miracle and its significance.

2:9-10 The emphasis on only the servants, Jesus' mother, and His disciples knowing where the wine had come from shows that this was a private miracle that would become public knowledge only as the word was spread by a few people. The master of the banquet assumed that this was the doing of the bridegroom and praised him for the quality and generosity of the wine. Typically, the host would bring out the cheaper, more diluted wine toward the end of the wedding ceremony to save money, since at that point the guests would be too inebriated to tell the difference. Not only had Jesus saved the bridegroom and bride from social shame, but He had elevated them even higher within their honor-shame culture. It is in Jesus' humanity that Yahweh's glory is revealed. Jesus fills up the depleted resources of Judaism.

2:11-12 As mentioned previously, the abundance of wine flowing in the land was a prophetic sign of the coming Messianic age (Gen. 49:8-12; Jer. 31:12-14; Hos. 14:7; Amos 9:13-14; 1 Enoch 10:19; Matt. 22:1-14). In the First Testament, wine was symbolic of the abundance and joy of life. Jacob described the coming Messiah as one who tied his kingship to wine/abundant joy (with the donkey as a symbol for kingship), while His persona and character would be characterized by wine/abundant joy (Gen. 49:8-12). The author emphasizes the point that this was the first of the signs Jesus performed in His life, thus launching His ministry and the new messianic age.

But the deeper significance of this sign is that Jesus took the ceremonial water, which was used for the cleansing of sin, a responsibility of the priest, and turned it into wine, a symbol of the coming messianic king (Gen. 49:8-12). Kingship and priesthood were never joined together in the First Testament except in portrayal of the coming Messiah (Ps. 110; Zech. 4:1-14; 6:9-15). But He also did this miracle at a wedding, alluding to His being the coming bridegroom of Israel promised in the First Testament (Ps. 45; Isa. 54:5; 62:4-5; Hosea 2:19-20).

After this miracle, Jesus and His disciples and family went down to Capernaum. Cana was located at a higher elevation than Capernaum, though Capernaum was about 13 miles northeast of Cana. Jesus' mother is not mentioned again until John 19:25-27, and His brothers are mentioned only here and in John 7:3-9.

D. Jesus Overturns the Temple Courtyard (2:13-25)

In this section Jesus traveled to Jerusalem for Passover and found the temple courts filled with merchants and money changers. Angered by the commercialization of his Father's house, He drove out the animals and traders, which brought Him into conflict with Jewish leaders for the first time. It is here that Jesus first spoke of His death and resurrection by connecting the destruction and rebuilding of the temple with His body.

John narrates a temple courtyard clearing at the beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 2:13-22), while the other gospel writers narrate a temple courtyard clearing at the end of His ministry (Matt. 21:12-17; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-48). Some scholars believe that John rearranged the narratives more topically than chronologically, placing the clearing of the temple courtyard narrative at the beginning of his gospel. Scholars who argue this view dislike doublets, believing the instances to be falsely duplicated in some way. They also argue that there is no way the temple authorities would have allowed Jesus to enter the temple precincts again at the end of His life if He had cleared the temple courtyard at the beginning of His ministry.

However, many events in our life happen repeatedly, and just because an event is repeated does not automatically make it a mistake, nor does it mean the author intentionally rearranged the material. Second, scholars do not give consistent or reasonable answers for why John moved the temple courtyard clearing narrative to the beginning of Jesus' ministry.^[46] Thematically and topically it actually fits better at the end of Jesus' life, for it sets the political stage for the religious leaders' increased desire to kill Jesus and put Him on trial. Third, Jesus may have been able to re-enter the temple precincts again at the end of His life because it had been a few years since the instance at the beginning of His ministry, because the temple authorities could not be on the guard all the time, and because they feared the people if they prevented Jesus from entering the temple precincts.^[47]

The original temple built by Solomon was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The temple was rebuilt by Zerubbabel in 515 BC. Herod I renovated the temple in 20–19 BC and the courtyard and Temple Mount from 19 to 11 BC. But there were continued renovations all the way to 63–64 AD. The temple and its courtyards sat atop a constructed stone platform known as the Temple Mount, which was the highest point in Jerusalem. The entire enclosure was about 35 acres (1,500,000 square feet or 140,000 square meters), measuring about 1,500 x 1,000 feet. In the center of the Temple Mount was the temple itself with the priestly, men's, and women's courtyards in enclosed walls. The Gentiles were forbidden from entering the inner walled-in courtyard of the temple. The vast majority of the Temple Mount surrounding the temple was the Court of the Gentiles, open to Jews and Gentiles. It was in the Court of the Gentiles that the selling of animals for sacrifices and the money changers had been set up. It was here that Jesus drove the merchants out.^[48]

Israel was a temple-state government, which means the religious institution acted as the primary political, economic, and administrative authorities. The Jerusalem temple was a symbol of national and religious identity. It was the heart and the symbol of the political and religious authority of the Jewish leaders. Both the First Testament and second temple Jewish literature express the Jewish expectation of the establishment of a new temple for the messianic age.

2:13-17 This is the first of three Passovers John mentions in His gospel (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55). The Passover was one of the three annual pilgrimage feasts that the Jews were to celebrate in Jerusalem (Deut. 16:16). The animal merchants and the money changers were the two groups Jesus targeted when He drove out the people. Three times a year the Jews had to pilgrimage to the temple and make sacrifices to Yahweh. For some this meant a long journey with an animal that had to remain unblemished and undefiled for sacrifice. Therefore, in the temple precincts there were animal merchants who would sell travelers unblemished animals for sacrifices. Likewise, many Jews from other parts of the Roman Empire did not have the currency required for the temple tax, or their coins had graven images on them. So the money changers exchanged those coins for ones acceptable for the temple tax.

In the other gospels, when Jesus cleared the temple courtyard at the end of His life, His primary rebuke was against their corruption and for cheating the people (Matt. 21:13; Luke 19:46). But here, at the beginning of Jesus' ministry, He rebukes them for turning His Father's house into a market. Jesus' primary issue was not the existence of the merchants and money changers but that they had disrupted the Gentiles' worship in the only place that was open to them and that the merchants and money changers should not have even been there. Their practice was insensitive to the Gentiles and showed discrimination.^[49] It also robbed the Gentiles of pure worship. It was not a place of quiet meditation or of voices of praise; rather, it was filled with the yelling and clamor of a market or stock exchange. Jesus' actions were forceful, but they were not cruel. They reflected His zealous righteousness for pure worship of Yahweh in the temple for all people. The temple as a place where Gentile worship was obstructed ran contrary to the vision of the First Testament, in which all the nations would be welcomed into Israel and into the temple (1 Kgs. 8:41-43; Isa. 56:7). Jesus' actions allude to the prophecy in Zech. 14:21, which says, "on that day there will no longer be merchants in the house of Yahweh Almighty."

For Jesus, it is not "God's temple" but "My Father's House." The Jews did not refer to Yahweh as Father, for this was too intimate and violated the holy transcendence of Yahweh. Here, Jesus shows that He has a greater intimacy with Yahweh because He is the Son of God.

The disciples recalled Psalm 69:9, the context being the psalmist's lament that He is surrounded by wicked people who seek him harm, yet he has a zeal for the house/tabernacle of Yahweh and will trust in Yahweh for the day He rebuilds Judah as Yahweh intended it to be.

2:18-22 The Jews responded to Jesus' actions and words with wanting a sign to prove that He had the authority to do what He did. Jesus' action was a challenge to the authority of the religious leaders, who maintained the temple precincts, and to that of Yahweh, whose house He had rearranged. Their desire for a sign is valid, for many prophets of the First Testament were expected to and did give signs to validate their authority as one representing Yahweh. However, they did not reflect on or determine whether His actions were just, for they were not interested in pure worship. Their request for a sign shows that they were not truly sure of His identity.

Jesus' response was more symbolic and deeper than they had the ears to hear (Mark 4:32). They could not comprehend how one man could tear down a temple, let alone rebuild it when it had taken them forty-six years to accomplish what they had with the temple. John adds the deeper meaning, that the temple Jesus was speaking of was His own body. The disciples did not even understand what Jesus had meant until the indwelling of the Spirit (Acts 2). The significance of this is that Jesus was connecting the temple with His body, saying that they were one and the same. Therefore, the temple as His Father's house was also His house. Jesus will build the significance of this in His upper room discourse (John 13–16). The ultimate sign that He would give for His identity and authority would be His own death and resurrection. The only other use of the Greek word soma ("body") in John's gospel is of Jesus' dead body (John 19:38, 49), intentionally linking these two events.

2:23-25 These verses are transitional into the Nicodemus narrative. Until Jesus gave His ultimate sign, He did many signs that revealed who He was, and many who had the ears to hear responded with belief in Him. Though the people believed (episteusan), Jesus did not trust/believe (episteun) them because, as God, He knew the true darkness and fickleness of the hearts of humans (John. 1:5, 10-11). This prepares the reader for the later, massive unbelief of the people, His family, and even His disciples (John 6:60-71; 7:1-9; 12:37-43). The seeing of signs does not necessarily lead to belief.  These verses also set the reader up for Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus, who was such a person—who "believed" based on the signs of Jesus but was not trusted by Jesus.

E. Jesus Teaches Nicodemus About the Kingdom (3:1-36)

In this section Jesus made clear people's need for spiritual rebirth to enter the kingdom of Yahweh. Jesus emphasized His divine origin and sacrificial mission of bringing eternal life to those who believe in Him. In Jesus' dialogue with Nicodemus, Nicodemus's contributions were significant in the beginning but decrease as the conversation continued until Jesus was the only one speaking.

3:1-2 The description of Nicodemus as a Pharisee, a man, and a member of the Jewish ruling class is redundant. Pharisees were a preeminent sect within the ruling class of Judaism. Calling him a man may indicate that he is to be included among "all people," whose hearts were known by Jesus (John 2:24-25).^[50] The fact that Nicodemus was a Pharisee coming to talk to Jesus may show that he was part of a group that was more willing to listen to Jesus. His use of we shows that he is likely speaking on behalf of this more "open" group of Pharisees than he was of just himself. Although John focuses on Jesus and Nicodemus, there may have been disciples of both teachers present.

The reason Nicodemus came at night is not given. Perhaps he did not want to be seen in public with Jesus. But John's mentioning that Nicodemus came at night shows that his intentions were not noble (John 9:4; 11:10; 13:30; 19:39; 21:3), for in John's gospel nothing good happens at night or in the darkness. As mentioned previously, darkness is the evil environment or "sphere" in which people find themselves and represents the evil thinking and ideologies that people adopt. Night is the moral or spiritual darkness (John 3:2; 9:4; 11:10; 13:30). Another idea John may have in mind is that Nicodemus came from the darkness to the light but did not fully understand that Jesus was the Light.

Nicodemus addressed Jesus as rabbi ("teacher"), a title of respect. However, this title also indicated the extent of his faith, for he did not address Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God, or his Lord. Nicodemus's use of we means that he not speaking to his own personal interests and desire to follow Jesus.^[51] Jesus' later response to Nicodemus in John 3:11-12 shows that Jesus was addressing the group behind Nicodemus.

Nicodemus and the group he represented acknowledged that only Yahweh could be the power behind Jesus' signs, but for Nicodemus the signs simply meant Jesus was a great teacher sent from God; he had failed to grasp the messianic implications of the miraculous signs. His implied question is "Who are you, then?" More than a teacher from God? A prophet? The Messiah? These verses show that Nicodemus was such a man who "believed" based on the signs of Jesus but was not trusted by Jesus (John 2:23-25).

3:3 The point of Nicodemus's question was to assess who Jesus was through His signs, not His message, so Jesus did not answer Nicodemus's words but his thoughts. In Jewish thinking, the Messiah would come performing signs that would usher in the kingdom of Yahweh on earth. And the Jews believed that all Jews would be admitted unless they were guilty of apostasy or extreme wickedness (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1). Yet Jesus stated that no one can see the kingdom of Yahweh unless they are born again.

The Greek word anothen can mean either "from above" or "again." Based on the context, it should be understood as "from above." This is how Jesus defines it when He says that this new birth from above can come only through the Holy Spirit, who comes from "above" (John 3:12-13). ^[52] And John means "from above" with the other occurrences of anothen. Nicodemus believed he could see something of who Jesus is in His miracles, yet Jesus insisted that no one can experience the salvation of Yahweh and see His kingdom unless one is born from above.^[53]

If the kingdom of Yahweh comes from above in heaven, then one would have to be reborn/transformed by Yahweh from above in heaven to participate in His kingdom. This is what the prophets spoke of—humans having hard hearts that need to be circumcised/transformed (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; 9:25-26) by the Holy Spirit, who comes from above and is poured out on all kinds of people of faith, transforming them and giving them hearts that would desire and be able to know and obey Yahweh in a brand new way (Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 11:19-20; 36:25-27; Joel 2:28-32; Rom. 2:28-29; 12:1-2). This makes the believer into a "new creature" in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15). Being a Jew did not grant one entrance into the kingdom of Yahweh; rather, faith in Yahweh leads to the spiritual regeneration of the individual. The person who is spiritually dead had to be made spiritually alive to enter the physical and spiritual kingdom of Yahweh (Rom. 8:1-11).

3:4 Nicodemus took Jesus literally and understood anothen to mean "born again" because he was so spiritually blind (coming at night) he could think only with an earthly understanding (Mark 4:32). Thus he saw Jesus' statement as ridiculous, because no human could re-enter their mother's womb, and what purpose would that serve? But Jesus was speaking of things of Yahweh and the Holy Spirit, not of earthly things.

3:5 In response to Nicodemus's misunderstanding, Jesus restated His challenge in a slightly different way. This time "no one can see the kingdom of God" is replaced by "no one can enter the kingdom of God." Jesus' response reiterates the born "from above" understanding when He defines being born "from above" as being born of water and spirit. There are several ways to understand what the water and spirit refer to.^[54]

The first view is that the water is the amniotic fluid of the womb, a natural human birth, and the spirit is the Holy Spirit, a supernatural birth. Natural birth is not enough; one must also have a spiritual birth. The problem with this view is that there are no ancient sources that picture natural birth from "the water." Moreover, the expression "water and spirit" is used in parallel with "born from above," meaning this is a reference to one birth, not two.

The second view is that it refers to Christian baptism with the coming of the Holy Spirit, the water referring to the physical ritual that signifies the indwelling and regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Yet this idea is never mentioned again in John's gospel, and this understanding has no relevance to the historical Nicodemus. Jesus will rebuke Nicodemus for not understanding these things, showing that the meaning of "water and spirit" must be rooted in his culture, not in a practice that comes after Pentecost (Acts 2).

The third view, a variation on the second view, is that the water is John the Baptizer's baptism of repentance. In this view, Jesus is saying that if Nicodemus thought John's baptism was enough, he also had to be baptized by the Holy Spirit. But John was not so influential, especially among the Pharisees, that Nicodemus would have been baptized by John or that the mere mention of water would have made Nicodemus immediately think of John. Ritual water washing had been a part of the daily life of Judaism for thousands of years, as prescribed by the Mosaic Covenant. This would mean Jesus was making John's water baptism a necessity for salvation and entrance into the kingdom of Yahweh.

The fourth, and most likely accurate, view is that throughout the First Testament the spirit was seen as Yahweh's principle of life, even in creation (Gen. 1:2; 2:7; 6:3; Job 34:14), and that it would one day be poured out like water on humankind (Joel. 2:28), resulting in blessing and righteousness (Isa. 32:15-20; 44:3; Ezek. 39:29) and in inner cleansing and renewal for Yahweh's covenant people (Ezek. 11:19-20; 36:26-27). Whenever water is used figuratively, it continually refers to cleansing and renewal, especially when it is paired with spirit (Num. 19:17-19; Ps. 51:9-10; Isa. 32:15; 44:3-5; 55:1-3; Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Ezek. 36:25-27; 47:9; Joel 2:28-29; Zech. 14:8). In Ezek. 36:25-27 the water and spirit are directly linked, which leads to the valley of dry bones being rebirthed from the spirit above. This event gives new life to Israel to enter the kingdom of Yahweh in Ezek. 37, which is reminiscent of the "new heart" (Jer. 31:31-34). This fits with how Jesus used "water and spirit" in parallel with "from above." Also, Jesus criticized Nicodemus for not understanding these principles, which were so clearly seen in the First Testament. As a teacher of the Law, Nicodemus should have already understood this concept.

3:6-8 Jesus continued by making the point that natural, fleshly human birth can produce only people who belong to the earthly family; it cannot produce spiritually alive children of Yahweh. Jesus maintained that even if it were possible for a person to literally, physically be born a second time, this second birth would accomplish nothing, for it would still only be physical.^[55] Though the First Testament never speaks directly of the spirit giving birth to spirit, it does state and promise that Yahweh, who is spirit, will "put a new spirit" in His people (Ezek. 36:25-27). Humans need a spiritual birth to be able to participate in the kingdom of Yahweh.

Jesus expressed disbelief that Nicodemus was surprised by this concept and that he did not already have an understanding of what Jesus was talking about. The "you" in "you must be born from above" has a plural meaning—that this requirement was for all the religious leaders, not just Nicodemus. Despite their knowledge and standing as religious leaders, they could not enter the kingdom of Yahweh without being born from above.

Jesus then connected the idea of the spirit with the wind in order to illustrate His point. Both the Hebrew word ruach and the Greek word pneuma can mean "breath," "wind," or "spirit." Just like the wind, the spirit's origin is not known and cannot be understood nor controlled by humans, but anyone can witness the effects of both. Despite its inability to be fully understood, spiritual birth is real. And just like Jesus the Light, who was not understood by the darkness, the people of the new birth cannot be understood nor controlled by those who are not the children of Yahweh.

3:9-12 From this point on, Nicodemus does not speak, nor is he mentioned again. It is only Jesus' monologue from here. Nicodemus's second question reveals his growing lack of understanding and exasperation. Jesus' response is not one of probing but is a strong rebuke of disbelief. Jesus expected Nicodemus, as a highly educated religious leader and responsible for the spiritual life of the Jewish people, to grasp this concept.

At the beginning of the conversation, Nicodemus came with his credentials of the group he represented with his use of "we" (John 3:2) and espousing his understanding. Now Jesus sarcastically mimics the plural "we" used by Nicodemus. For Jesus, "we" refers to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, who have been revealing themselves and the plan of redemption to the Jewish people, yet Nicodemus and the religious leaders did not have the ears to hear (Mark 4:32). The "you" here is also plural. The issue that was the most reprehensible was not their lack of understanding but their failure to believe. With exasperation of His own, Jesus declared that if Nicodemus had been stumbling over elementary ideas, then how in the world was he going to understand the deeper spiritual concepts of the kingdom of Yahweh.

3:13 In the Greek this verse begins with the word kai ("For no one"), which links it to the previous verse by providing the explanation for Jesus' ability to speak authoritatively on heavenly things. John is not saying that Jesus had ascended into heaven before He had currently descended to earth, for this did not happen. Judaism had many stories of First Testament figures who had gone up into heaven and received special insight into Yahweh's ways. The Greek ei me, often translated "except" communicates that that He is the exception to all these figures.^[56] The point is that no one has ever ascended into heaven and remained there so as to speak authoritatively about heavenly things. Only He as the Son of Man (God-man) can speak authoritatively about heavenly things because only He has come from heaven since He is God (Dan. 7:13-14; John 1:9, 14).

In Judaism, many stories had arisen of First Testament figures, like Enoch and Moses, having ascended into heaven to receive special insight into Yahweh's ways and plans. Jesus insisted that this was not true, for only He has been to heaven, so only He can speak of its wisdom because it is His home. Here His heavenly origin sets Jesus apart from the rest of humanity.^[57]

3:14-15 Jesus now moves from explanation (John 3:13) to a narrative example from Num. 21:4‑9. In this First Testament narrative, Yahweh sent serpents to bite the Israelites in judgment for yet another rebellion against Him, despite how many times He had, in His mercy, saved them and provided for them. The only way they could be healed was by looking upon a bronzed serpent that had been "lifted up" on a pole. Serpents were symbols of chaos and, sometimes, evil, and bronze was symbolic of judgment. So only when the people stopped embracing the chaos and evil of the world and instead put their faith in Yahweh—the only one who could save them by judging and impaling the chaos and evil—could they be saved.

In the same way, Jesus would take upon Himself the chaos, evil, and sin of the world and be "lifted up," impaled, and judged so that those who place their faith in Him and His substitutionary sacrifice could be saved. The Greek word hypsoo ("lifted up") in John always has the combined connotation of the cross and exaltation (John 8:28; 12:32, 34). Jesus would be "lifted up" on the cross and then "lifted up" into heaven in His return to the glory from which He came. The difference between the serpent and Jesus is that the people looked at the serpent as an illustration of Yahweh's judgment, but with Jesus, people put their faith in Jesus and receive eternal life in Him. The "in Him" puts Jesus in a completely different category from the serpent (John 5:26; 12:25).^[58] Jesus brings His teaching on "born from above" to an end by making the point that faith in Him and His work on the cross is the only way one can receive the spirit (Acts 2), be born from above, and enter the kingdom of Yahweh. Jesus was challenging Nicodemus to turn to Him for new birth through the Spirit in the same way the Israelites had turned to the impaled serpent for physical life.

The Jews divided time into this present age and the age to come. The Jews used the adjective eternal to refer to life in the coming age. It is an eschatological concept of the future kingdom of Yahweh (John 6:40, 54). "Eternal life" is thought of as never coming to an end, so it came to mean "everlasting" or "eternal." But the more significant and important thing about eternal life is not its quantity but its quality. Eternal life is not about living forever but about life in and with Christ forever. That life includes the earthly but goes beyond and includes the spiritual life of dwelling with Yahweh and Christ.^[59]

Nicodemus's participation ends in John 3:9, and there is no mention of his response to Jesus' teaching on this night. In the narrative he literally fades back into the darkness. The word believe is never used of Nicodemus, and his lack of response to Jesus' words reveals him to be an unbeliever; there is little progression in the way he is characterized in John's gospel. Just because Nicodemus later demands that Jesus get a fair trial (John 7:50-51) and gives Jesus a proper burial (John 19:39) does not mean he came to believe in Jesus; rather, it shows only that he was a moral Jew and a decent man who desired to do the right thing.^[60] He was much like the Pharisee Gamaliel, who was open to Paul's gospel but never believed (Acts 5:34-36).

3:16 In John 3:16-21, John as the author gives his explanatory reflection on the point Jesus was making to Nicodemus. These verses are the explanation for why Jesus came from above and was willing to be "lifted up" on the cross: to give humans who live in the darkness the choice to be "born from above" and enter the kingdom of Yahweh.

God's love is not restricted to the Jewish people but extends to the entire world—the sinful, rebellious world that did not recognize nor receive Him (John 1:10-11).^[61] God's love is to be admired, not because the world is so big but because the world is so wicked. It is so wicked that later John forbids that Christians love the world or anything in it (1 John 2:15-17). There is no contradiction here, for "Christians are not to love the world with the selfish love of participation; God loves the world with the self-less, costly love of redemption."^[62]

God's love is so great that He gave His one and only, one-of-a-kind, living Son to die on the cross for the sins of the world. "The Greek construction puts some emphasis on the actuality of the gift: it is not ‘God loved enough to give,' but ‘God loved so that he gave.' His love is not a vague, sentimental feeling, but a love that costs. God gave what was most dear to him."^[63]

This Son, the Word, left the light of heaven and came from above to enter the darkness and allow it to swallow His light at the cross (Matt. 27:45). Every individual person in the world has the choice to leave the darkness and receive the light and enter the kingdom of Yahweh into eternal life. The choice is either to perish in sin or to live eternally with Yahweh. There is no middle ground. Since perish is contrasted with eternal, then perishing is eternal as well.

3:17-18 When one rejects the salvific gift of God, judgment results. However, even though the result of unbelief is judgment, judgment is not Yahweh's desire, nor was it the purpose for the incarnation of the Word. Not believing in the Son whom God sent is the same as self-condemnation.^[64] God is not to blame, but rather the believer. The repetition of this idea emphasizes the intentions of Yahweh and the choice and responsibility of people. God's desire to the save all the lost trapped in the darkness is the mission of the Son (Matt. 9:13; 15:24; Mark 1:38; Luke 4:18, 43). "God maintains the same stance toward the world after the resurrection that He had before: He pronounces terrifying condemnation on the grounds of the world's sin, while still loving the world so much that the gift He gave to the world, the gift of His Son, remains the world's only hope."^[65]

3:19-21 While in the other gospels it is Jesus who is on trial, in John's gospel it is the Jews and the world who are on trial.^[66] The world is on trial because the Word that created all things and all humans has come into the world of darkness to reveal its light of salvation to those who are lost in the darkness. But the vast majority of people responded by turning away from the light and crawling back into the darkness. The people of the darkness do not come to the light because their deeds are evil and they fear that their wicked deeds, which they love and do not want to give up, will be exposed.

In contrast, whoever desires and responds (Mark 4:32) to the truth comes into the light so that their wicked deeds may be exposed and they may repent. But those who have faith in Jesus are not condemned, because condemnation is not why He came; rather, they are forgiven and receive eternal life. The point of these verses is to help people see the imminent danger they are in and the necessity of being "born from above" to have eternal life with Yahweh and the Son. John 3:19-21 "is one of the most important sections in the gospel of John for understanding the light/darkness polarization in Johannine theology and also for understanding John's gospel itself."^[67]

3:22-26 John now turns his attention back to John the Baptizer, whose baptism ministry was still going. This raises the question of the relationship between the ministry of John the Baptizer and the ministry of Jesus. Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus evidently happened in Jerusalem (John 2:23). Jerusalem was a city in the region of Judea, which was in the southern part of the country of Israel. After His conversation with Nicodemus, Jesus went out into the Judean countryside. Jesus engaged in a baptizing ministry similar to that of John's. At this point, Jesus had not yet called all the twelve disciples to Himself. The rest would be called to Him after John the Baptizers' imprisonment (Mark 1:14). The exact location of Aenon ("springs") near Salim is unknown today. The best evidence seems to point to a site just south of Scythopolis (First Testament Beth-shan).

It is not clear who the "certain Jew" was. However, this not a representative of the Jewish authorities for John always makes it clear when it is the religious leaders and what their issue is. The dispute was over religious ceremonial washing, but it is not clear what they were disputing. Whatever it was about this dispute led John's disciples to become jealous of the growing popularity of Jesus' baptisms.

3:27-30 John's response continued to affirm the superiority of Jesus as the Messiah over himself. John truly saw himself as a humble servant of Yahweh, content to be in charge of what Yahweh had given him. Israel as the bride belonged only to Jesus, and John—as the "best man"—had no desire to take the bride; he was truly filled with joy to see the bridegroom come for the bride. These verses continue to show that the First Testament prophet of the Old Covenant not only approved of Jesus as the prophet of the New Covenant but was passing the baton to Him. This is the One the prophets spoke of.

3:31-36 John, the gospel writer, returns to the point Jesus made in John 3:13 about His coming from above. The Word, who comes from heaven, can speak authoritatively concerning the things of Yahweh, but humans, who are born on and to the earth, can speak only of earthly things. Being God and coming from above makes the Word superior to all earthly things, even though He has become flesh and dwelt on the earth (John 1:14). His humanity must not cause one to mistake Him for another earthly human in origin. He testifies to what He has seen—all the things of Yahweh and heaven—yet those of the earth did not accept His testimony as authoritative or valid during His lifetime.

But those of John's readers who do accept Jesus' testimony embrace the truth of Yahweh. To the believers, Jesus, as the representative of Yahweh, gives the Holy Spirit without limit so that they can be "born from above" and enter the kingdom of Yahweh (John 3:3, 5). The Father in heaven loves fully His unique and only Son and has given Him all authority over all things (Dan. 7:13-14; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 1:1-4; Rev. 5:5-10). Yahweh has given all humans a choice to either believe in Yahweh's Son and receive eternal life or to reject Yahweh's Son and come under the wrath of Yahweh. This is a fitting climax to the chapter as it lays out only two options—genuine faith or defiant disobedience—and thus brings to the forefront the looming judgment humanity is under. Yet Yahweh so loved the world that He sent His Son to warn humanity of the impending judgment and provide a means for them to repent and enter the kingdom of Yahweh for all eternity (John 3:16-17).

F. Jesus' Encounter with the Samaritan Woman and the Royal Official (4:1-54)

In this section Jesus' journeyed through Samaria, where He broke cultural barriers to offer "living water" to an ostracized woman at Jacob's well and revealed Himself as the Messiah.

His conversations with Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman are set up in parallel, seen in His extended one-on-one conversation concerning His identity as the one the First Testament spoke of and with the metaphor of water. Yet they are contrasted with each other in that Nicodemus was a respected, high-ranking, highly educated Jewish man, whereas the Samaritan woman was a despised, culturally insignificant, uneducated foreign woman. Yet despite Nicodemus being viewed as the one who, by being a Jew, would automatically be received into the kingdom of Yahweh, it was not he but the woman who responded with belief in Jesus as the one from above. She also talked to Jesus during the day and in the light, while Nicodemus went to talk to Jesus at night. Her belief was also reflected in the fact that Jesus' and the woman's contributions to the conversation were more balanced compared to the conversation with Nicodemus.

4:1-6 Jesus' ministry had been growing to the point that the Pharisees began to take notice of His following. So, Jesus moved to the Galilee region in the north, removed far from the center of the religious leaders influence so as to control the clock on His death and resurrection.

The most direct route to Galilee in the far north was through Samaria, directly north of Judea. However, the Jews despised the Samaritans so much that they refused to travel through their region. Instead, they would cross the Jordan River in the east, travel around Samaria, and then cross back over the Jordan beyond Samaria. The reason for this prejudice was hundreds of years old. After the Assyrian Empire had sacked the ten tribes in the north of Israel and deported them in 722 BC, the Assyrians deported people from other nations into Israel (2 Kgs. 17). The Assyrians renamed this region Samaria. Over time, the poor Israelites who had been left behind began to intermarry with these foreigners. Later, in 586 BC, the Babylonian Empire took the tribe Judah into exile (2 Kgs. 24). When the people of Judea began to return to Israel in 536 BC, the people of Samaria wanted to help the Judeans rebuild the temple, but they were rejected since they were not ethnically pure Jews. So around 400 BC the people of Samaria built their own temple on Mount Gerizim. The Jews rejected this temple as a violation of the Mosaic Covenant, and in 112 BC the Hasmonean dynasty, the Jewish ruling family over Judea, destroyed the Samaritans' temple. Despite this, Mount Gerizim remained a holy place of worship. When the Romans came, Samaria and Judea were united under Roman rule. The Samaritans saw only the Torah (first five books of the First Testament) as authoritative. The Jews believed that the Samaritans were perpetually unclean, meaning everything they touched, including a jar of water, was unclean. Most Jews did not eat or drink with Samaritans.^[68]

Jesus did not care about any of this ethnic purity or prejudice, so He took His disciples right up through Samaria. The site of Sychar is fairly certain because of unbroken tradition and the presence of a water source. It was very near the First Testament city Shechem, Joseph's burial site, near the base of Mounts Ebal and Gerizim (Gen. 33:19; 48:22; Josh. 24:32). Jacob's well was a convenient stop for pilgrims traveling between Jerusalem and Galilee.

4:7-9 A Samaritan woman came to the well at noon, which would have been out of the norm, since the women of the village would come in groups during the morning to gather the day's water in jars and carry it back to town. Her coming at noon in the heat of the day was most likely a response to the other women's ridicule around her sinful lifestyle.

Jesus' initiating the conversation with the woman would have been seen culturally as flirtatious and highly inappropriate, for men did not speak to another woman without the woman's father, husband, or son being present. To highlight this cultural taboo, John made it clear that Jesus was alone, for the disciples had gone into town to buy food. Not only that, but, as the woman pointed out, it was also surprising that He as a Jewish man was talking to her, a Samaritan woman.

4:10-12 Once again, Jesus did not answer the specific question she asked but instead responded with His own statement. Her surprise should not have been at His asking her for water but that the Son of God was standing before her with the desire and ability to offer her the living water of eternal life. This image of living water goes back to Num. 20:8-11, where Yahweh opened up a mountain (rock) and poured out a river of water for His people in the wilderness. The prophets developed this further with the promise that the Holy Spirit would one day be poured out on Yahweh's people (Isa. 1:16-18; 13:3; Ezek. 36:25-27; 47:9-10; Zech. 14:8).

Like Nicodemus, the woman took Jesus literally and with an earthly understanding. Her question was whether Jesus could provide a better well than the one provided by Jacob, where they were currently sitting. Was Jesus greater than Jacob—the father of the twelve tribes of Israel, the people of Yahweh?

4:13-15 Jesus made it clear that He was not speaking of physical water but of eternal life. Water can quench the thirst only for a while, but His gift of salvation can quench, for all eternity, humanity's thirst for contentment, satisfaction, and peace. This water will not only come from Him but will indwell the believers and become a spring/well in them, flowing out to others. The repeated reference to thirst indicates that Jesus was ministering to a deeply felt and acute human need. This is why the Scriptures use it as a metaphor for spiritual desire (Ps. 42:2; 63:1; 143:6; Isa. 55:1; Matt. 5:6).^[69]

The woman continued to misunderstand Jesus, interpreting His offer of water in a physical and earthly way. But unlike Nicodemus she continued in her desire to understand the water Jesus was talking about.^[70]

4:16-18 Jesus' asking her to get her husband served two purposes. First, it is what would have been expected of a man speaking to a woman about theology.

"Some (though by no means all) Jewish thought held that for a rabbi to talk much with a woman, even his own wife, was at best a waste of time and at worst a diversion from the study of Torah, and therefore potentially a great evil that could lead to Gehenna, hell (Pirke Aboth 1:5). Some rabbis went as far as to suggest that to provide their daughters with a knowledge of the Torah was as inappropriate as to teach them lechery, i.e., to sell them into prostitution (Mishnah Sotah 3:4; the same passage provides the alternate view)."^[71]

However, Jesus knew that she had no husband and never intended that she go and get the man she was with, yet He would continue to speak to her about theological issues, showing again that he did not care about illogical cultural customs.

His second reason was to highlight her lifestyle of sin, rooted in her relational brokenness, to draw out her spiritual need for the eternal life He was offering her.

Her answer, "I have no husband," seems designed to end the conversation at this point. She was no longer anonymous in her sin to this man. Her answer, though technically true, was also misleading, keeping herself unexposed. All the shame and isolation she felt with the villagers had now returned. Jesus exposed her even more as He revealed that He knew her better than she realized. The Greek word aner can mean "husband" or "man," meaning that none of the men she had been with, including the current one she was living with, had ever been her husbands, thus she was living in fornication. The emphasis on "your" husband could imply that the man she was currently with was a husband to another woman.^[72]

Now her sin was out in the open with this Jewish rabbi. Jewish rabbis looked down on having more than three marriages in a lifetime, and common law marriage was not accepted in either culture. Jesus had shown Himself to be different from other Jewish rabbis; now that He knew her sin, the question was how different He truly was.

4:19-20 At this point, the woman realized that Jesus must be a prophet of Yahweh, for He knew, as one outside of her community, things only Yahweh could know about her. Without seeing any miracles, she has a deeper understanding of Jesus' identity than what Nicodemus ever had, even with all of his theological training.

Then she switched the topic back to theology, which was less shameful than a discussion of her lifestyle. This Jewish rabbi had shown Himself to be so different from any other Jew, so if He was a prophet of Yahweh, she wanted to know the correct location to worship Yahweh: Jerusalem or Mount Gerizim.

4:21-24 Jesus told her that a day would be coming (which He will bring) when this question would be irrelevant, for physical temples and locations would no longer matter. John has already shown that Jesus' body is the true temple (John 2:19-21), an idea Jesus would develop more at the last supper (John 13–16). Yet Jesus made it clear here that the Samaritan understanding was lacking compared to that of the Jews and that Jesus would work out His salvation through the Jews and not the Samaritans. Jesus was saying that the object of the Samaritans' worship was unknown to them. They were outside the stream of Yahweh's revelation so that what they worshiped was not truth.^[73]

True worship was not physical or earthly but rather was done through the spirit. Jesus' referring to Yahweh as spirit does not mean the Holy Spirit, rather that Yahweh was a spiritual being (Isa. 31:3; Ezek. 11:19-20; 36:26-27), not a material being, and so cannot be constrained to a physical location (1 Kgs. 8:27; Isa. 66:1-2; Acts 17:24). The terms spirit and truth joined together refer to the Holy Spirit (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; 1 John 4:6; 5:6; 2 Thess. 2:13). True worship is not found in a physical location or a certain physical manner—such as while kneeling or with eyes closed and hands raised—but is a matter of the spirit and heart. The combination "spirit and truth" points to the need for complete sincerity in one's approach to Yahweh.^[74]

Though Jesus declared that salvation is through the Jews, He did not allow it to be a barrier to the other nations. For that was the very point of salvation coming through the Jews to the other nations. That the Jews did not understand this mission was why they were under the judgment of Yahweh. Just as the Jews were lacking in experiential and spiritual knowledge of true salvation (John 3), so the Samaritans were lacking in an understanding of true worship.^[75] Jesus had cleared the temple of the Jews in Jerusalem and replaced it with His body, and now He had discredited Mount Gerizim as an illegitimate place of worship, declaring Himself to be the only true source of life. Through His incarnation, Jesus had become the true Israel, which would make the Jewish nation obsolete as the place of salvation and true worship. His death, tearing down the temple, and His resurrection, rebuilding it, would allow for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2) and thus true worship. And with Holy Spirit's indwelling a person everywhere they go and every day they live, they can truly worship Yahweh.

4:25-26 Unlike the Jews, who were looking for a royal and conquering Messiah from the house of David, the Samaritans were looking for a teaching Messiah.^[76] Jesus revealed Himself to the Samaritan woman in the way she would understand and receive Him. Jesus affirmed her declaration of knowledge by stating, "I am He." Even with her ignorance of theology, compared to Nicodemus she understood enough and more than Nicodemus (Mark 4:32) that her understanding of Jesus' identity progressed from recognizing Him as a Jew, then a prophet, then the Messiah to prompting her to be His witness—all in one conversation with Him.^[77]

4:27-30 When the disciples returned, they were shocked to see Jesus' total disregard for cultural piety. Perhaps they were hesitant to call Jesus out in the presence of the woman, though there were many other occasions they were not bashful (Matt. 19:13).

By leaving her water jar behind, she showed that the joy she had experienced in her encounter with Jesus was greater than the water she had gone out to get. Symbolically it shows that she had exchanged the earthly water for the living water of Jesus. She had come to believe that Jesus is the greater Jacob who provides a better spring. Unlike Nicodemus, she returned to her people to proclaim Jesus as the Messiah. In the gospels, leaving one's occupation to go and witness is a sign of true discipleship. What is so amazing is that she went to the very people she had tried to avoid by coming to the well at noon. The joy of Jesus had replaced her shame.

4:32-38 The disciples, after accomplishing the task they had gone to town to do, now urged Jesus to eat. But just as Jesus had living water that would forever quench a person's thirst, Jesus had spiritual food that would sustain Him, the satisfaction of carrying out the will of the Father.

The saying "four more months and then the harvest" seems to have been a common proverb (Matt. 9:37-38; 16:2-3). Jesus may have been saying something like, "You have come to understand that there is a gap between sowing and harvesting, but in spiritual matters there is not always a gap. I have just sown the seed—the Samaritan woman—and now here comes the harvest," as He pointed to the townspeople coming out to meet Him (John 3:30, 40-41).^[78] Doing the will of the Father that led to the people believing was Jesus' true sustaining food. The disciples now got to also experience this sustaining spiritual food as they had the privilege of reaping a harvest they had not sown.

4:39-42 The Samaritans heard Jesus' words and urged Him to stay with them many days, and many believed in Him. This was a far greater response in belief than what had occurred among the Jews thus far. After hearing Jesus speak, they began to proclaim Him as the Savior of the world. Jesus had come not just for the Jews, but He had also come for the whole world (John 3:16). It was the Samaritan townspeople who completed the progression faith, moving from the woman's declaring Jesus to be the Messiah to their declaring Jesus to be the Savior of the world. Typical of many stories in the Bible, the foreigners, minorities, and outcasts demonstrated a greater faith in Yahweh than the Jews did.

4:43-45 After two days in Samaria, Jesus entered Galilee, where the Galileans welcomed Him. In contrast to this welcoming, Jesus made the point that a prophet has no honor in his own country. In His own country, the Jews had not honored Him nor received Him like the Samaritans had (John 1:11; 2:18, 20, 22, 23-25; 3:10; 4:1-3). The Jews' reception of Jesus was shallow, and they were mostly interested in Him just doing miracles for them (John 4:48). In the gospel of Luke Jesus made the same point about His hometown Nazareth, where they were more interested in His miracles than in His identity as the Son of God (Luke 4:34-34).

4:46-48 Jesus then returned to Cana, where a royal official had come to Him from Cana asking Jesus to heal his son. The official appealed to Jesus to make the thirteen-mile trip from Cana to Capernaum to heal his son. He believed that Jesus could heal people, but there was no indication that he believed Jesus to be more than a healer.

Jesus rebuked the entire crowd—using the plural "you"—for seeking miracles for their own physical benefit rather than embracing Him as the Son of God and following Him. Jesus implied that the man believed in Him only as a healer but not as his Savior. The royal official was not interested in Christology or fulfilled prophecy; he was interested only in the well-being of his child. In John's gospel, too much interest in the raw miracles is spiritually dangerous (John 2:23-25; 6:26). Miracles cannot compel genuine faith for those who are not willing to listen (John 11:45-46). But miracles can encourage faith for those who are genuinely skeptical as a validation to Jesus' claims (John 10:38; 14:11).^[79]

4:49-50 The official showed little interest in Jesus' rebuke since his little boy was about to die. He desperately appealed again for Jesus to come to Capernaum quickly. Most likely out of compassion Jesus responded with a willingness to heal the official's son. But He did not go to Capernaum as the official had requested; instead, He simply announced that He had healed the son. Remarkably, the official believed Jesus without any hesitation. He progressed from seeking Jesus out as a healer based merely on His reputation to trusting Jesus' authoritative word without seeing a miracle or requiring validation. When he returned home, his trust in Jesus had been validated, and he and his entire household believed.

John concludes by stating this was the second sign Jesus had performed. John is not including the signs performed in Judea (John 2:23). This is the second sign Jesus performed in Galilee, specifically Cana. As mentioned in the structure of the book, there is no reason to see John as numbering Jesus' signs throughout his gospel. For there were many other signs Jesus performed between these two numbered signs (John 2:23). And second, nowhere else in the gospel does John number the signs of Jesus.^[80]

G. Jesus Heals on the Sabbath (5:1-47)

This section begins with Jesus' miraculous healing of an invalid at the Pool of Bethesda on the Sabbath. This sparked an intense conflict with the Jewish religious leaders. In response, Jesus delivered a revelational discourse that defended His equality with God the Father, His authority over life and judgment, and His right to work on the Sabbath. He concluded by offering multiple testimonies—including John the Baptizer, His own miraculous works, and the Scriptures themselves—to prove His messianic identity and rebuked the religious leaders for their deliberate unbelief.

5:1-5 Most scholars believe that "some time later" infers that up to a year and a half may have passed since the previous chapter. This means from this point that the teachings and works of Jesus have been clearly revealed and demonstrated to the Jewish people and religious leaders. John repeatedly ties his narrative to various religious festivals. This is the only one that is not identified more precisely. Most scholars believe this incident occurred during the Feast of Tabernacles. It is also unclear where the Sheep Gate was located, though it was apparently a small opening in the northern wall of the Temple Mount where sheep were brought and washed before being taken to the temple for sacrifice. It also was where the invalids lay in hopes of being healed.^[81] The upper class and those wishing to remain clean would have avoided this area, yet Jesus walks right to the pool area with all the lower class and the unclean. The twin pools were fed by the large reservoirs of Solomon's pools, and they may have also been fed by a spring. This may explain the periodic stirring of the water.

5:6-9a Jesus' question, "Do you want to get well?" seems to point to an obvious answer, but Jesus often asked these types of questions to draw out people's faith. Here, most importantly, His question would focus the man's attention on Himself so that Jesus, the source of the healing, would be clear to the man. The man's answer was one of total desperation, for there was no one to help him, and all his hopes were resting on superstition. His answer makes it clear that he could not see past the water as his hope for healing. Jesus' instructions to pick up his mat and walk were meant to require a physical act to demonstrate his faith in Jesus' authority to heal.

5:9b-13 It is not until after the healing that John reveals that the healing took place on the Sabbath. It was not the Mosaic Law that forbade the carrying of a mat on the Sabbath but the Pharisees' interpretation that made this act a violation (Ex. 31:12-17; Jer. 17:21-27; Neh. 13:15-19).

Since Jesus gave the command, He would have been guilty of enticing someone else to violate the Law. The man obeyed Jesus because anyone with the authority to heal has the authority to interpret the Law. The Pharisees were so tunnel visioned on adherence to the Law that they could not see the miracle nor celebrate the healing of the very real human who was in front of them.

5:14-15 Jesus' statement, "See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you," implies that sometimes sickness is the result of sin, known as the Retribution Principle. The Jewish leaders of Jesus' day believed that suffering was always the direct result of sin. Rabbinic literature states, "There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity" (b. Sabb. 55a, with reference to Ezek. 18:20). However, several places in the First Testament clearly show this principle is not true (2 Sam. 4:4; 1 Kgs. 14:4; 2 Kgs. 13:14). And Jesus Himself rejected this principle (John 9:3; Luke 13:1-5). Yet Jesus did acknowledge that sin could lead to suffering. Here, "something worse" most likely does not refer to physical suffering but to eternal judgment for sin (John 5:22-30).

Not once did the man ever show any sign of gratitude to Jesus for the healing. His only response was to report Jesus to the authorities. He is a representative of unbelief even after experiencing a miracle.

5:16-18 As a result of the Jesus' supposed violations of the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to question and persecute Him. Over the next several verses Jesus defended Himself against the charges that He was a Sabbath-breaker and a blasphemer who claimed to be equal with Yahweh. Jesus' response in John 5:17 becomes the foundation for His argument in the rest of the chapter.

Jesus began His argument with an idea that the Pharisees would have agreed with: that the Father has always been at His work to this day. The question the rabbis had was "If Yahweh rested on the seventh day of creation (Gen. 2:1-3), then who sustains the universe?" The consensus among the rabbis was that Yahweh's work continued beyond the first Sabbath, but this does not amount to Yahweh's breaking the Sabbath. Since the entire universe is His domain, then He cannot be charged with transporting an object from one place to another, a breaking of their Sabbath regulations. Yahweh lifts nothing to a height greater than Himself.^[82]

Jesus could have argued against their false interpretation of the Law. Instead, Jesus placed His work on the Sabbath on the same level as that of Yahweh, the Creator of the universe, for He is the Word. Thus, Jesus had no reason to attack their faulty interpretation of the Law, as His interpretation was automatically greater than theirs because His authority was greater than theirs. He skipped right over their first charge against Him by pulling rank and leaned directly into their second charge against Him.

At this point it was very clear to the religious leaders that Jesus was claiming to be equal with God. Jesus was challenging the fundamental distinction between the holy, infinite God and the finite human because He was God incarnate.

5:19 Jesus' argument against the second charge was that He could not be guilty of blasphemy, for Jesus did not see Himself as equal to Yahweh as another god or as a competing god but as Yahweh Himself. It is this distinction Jesus had to make clear to the Pharisees. Jesus contended that everything He, the Son, does He is able to do because He first saw the Father do it. Jesus made it clear that though He is equal with Yahweh in His essence, He is functionally subordinate to Him as a son is to his father.^[83] The Father and Son's relationship preserves distinction of roles in the midst of their unity.^[84] Jesus did not assert independence from Yahweh but dependence upon Him. Jesus is simultaneously equal and coeternal with the Father and subordinate to the Father.^[85]

The first for clause (John 5:19b) states that it is impossible for the Son to take any independent, self‑determined action that would set Him over or against the Father as another God, for all the Son does is both coexistent and limitless with all the Father does.^[86]

5:20 The second for clause explains the basis for the Son's dependence; the Father loves the Son, which is expressed in His complete self-disclosure to the Son of everything that He is and does.^[87] Two important truths follow from this. First, the Son by His obedience is revealing the Father to humans by doing the will of the Father and doing the same deeds as the Father. Second, this revelation of the nature and character of the Father utterly depends not on the Father's love of humans, but on the Father's love for the Son and on the love of the Son for the Father.^[88]

5:21 The third for clause gives an example of the Son doing what the Father can do, raising the dead. The rabbis believed that giving life (birth), raising the dead, and controlling the storm were the sole prerogatives of Yahweh. Jesus was saying that He can do what only Yahweh can do. Though Elijah and Elisha were used by Yahweh to raise the dead, Jesus made the bold claim that He Himself had the authority and power to give life "to whom he is pleased to give it."

5:22-23 The fourth for clause ("moreover") states that not only has the Father given all power over life to the Son, but He has also given all power over judgment and death to the Son. According to the First Testament, judgment over creation and humanity was the exclusive prerogative of Yahweh (Gen. 18:25; Judg. 11:27; Ps. 2:2). The Jews believed that they would stand before Yahweh on Judgment Day, but now Jesus was telling them that He serves as the eschatological judge with both the power to give life and condemn the guilty. But even this is too narrow, for John 3:16-17 shows that He came also to bring redemption and wholeness. The revelation is not merely revelatory and judicial; it is also atoning (John 1:29; 6:51; 11:49-52; 12:23-24).^[89]

The reason and result of the Son's subordinately obeying and reflecting the nature and character of Yahweh are so that all of humanity may honor the Son in the same way the Father is honored. And since the Father and Son are so intrinsically connected, whoever does not honor the Son is not honoring the Father, no matter how much they might claim they were (Pharisees). They will thus come under the judgment of the Son, who has all authority and power over life and death. Whatever functional subordination is stressed in this section, it guarantees, as we have seen, that the Son does everything the Father does.

5:24-27 Jesus made it clear that a person had to not just hear but also believe the words that come from the One who sent Him and are spoken through Him. Those who believe will no longer be under the penalty of death but will receive eternal life. Jesus' statement—that the time has come and will come that the dead will hear not just the Father's words but His words and come back to life—is an allusion to the valley of dry bones in Ezekiel 37. Ezekiel 37 is a metaphor for both the end of exile, marked by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and for the future eschatological resurrection of the believers. Both of these events will be executed by Jesus' Word as the Son of God.

The reason Jesus will be able to grant resurrection life is that the Father, who has life in Himself, has granted Jesus to have life in Himself. Jesus has not just been given the right to grant life, but He has been given the ability to have life itself within Himself. He is the source of eternal life. Jesus has this authority because He is the Son of man—the God-man (Dan. 7:13-14).

5:28-29 First-century Judaism held no consensus as to whether everyone—or just the righteous—would be raised from the dead. Jesus stated that all humans will be raised physically from the grave when He gives the command, and they will be judged according to their works. Jesus is not promoting a works-based salvation but is affirming that the life a person lives is "the test of the faith they profess."^[90] True faith leads to a changed life that produces good fruit (John 15:5-8; Gal. 5:22-23; James 2:18-20).

5:30 Here Jesus switched from referring to Himself in the third person to the first person, which continues through the remainder of the chapter. Once again Jesus reiterated that He does only as the Father has commanded, and He judges in alignment with the Father's will because He desires to please the Father because He loves the Father.

5:31-35 Jesus was not saying that whatever He claimed about Himself must therefore be false but that an individual's self-claims are insufficient without the support of other testimonies and evidence to those claims, as prescribed by the Mosaic Law (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15).^[91] Jesus' reference to "another" was not John the Baptizer, for He did not need John's testimony (John 5:34). Rather, Jesus was referring to God the Father, who provides the only authoritative testimony when it comes to Jesus' claim of being the Son of God (John 5:36-37).

Before speaking of the Father's testimony, Jesus spoke about John's testimony, which the Jews probably thought Jesus was referring to. The Jews probably sent delegations to investigate John's ministry and to question him about his identifying Jesus as the Messiah. Though John did testify truthfully to Jesus' being the Messiah, and who was the light that Yahweh sent (Ps. 132:17), and though Jesus did accept John's testimony as valid, it was not the testimony Jesus was speaking of.

5:36-38 The weightier testimony was that of the Father's miraculous works, done through Jesus, and the fruit they had produced in the lives of those who had encountered His deeds. Only Yahweh has the authority and power over creation to do the miracles Jesus was doing. If Jesus had been claiming falsely to be God—a serious violation of Yahweh's Covenant given through Moses—then Yahweh would never have given Jesus the authority and power to do the works of Yahweh. Therefore, by granting Jesus the authority and power to do the works of Yahweh, Yahweh had testified that Jesus was speaking correctly about Himself being the Son of Man (God-man) and being one with the Father.

Jesus then stated that the "religious leaders" had never heard the voice of Yahweh, nor seen Him, nor did His word dwell in their hearts, for they did not truly believe in His unique and only Son whom He had sent. If the religious leaders had truly known and believed in Yahweh, then they would have recognized and received His Son, Jesus Christ. Their rejection of Jesus revealed the true nature of their hearts and their lack of faith in Yahweh.

5:39-40 The prominent Jewish rabbi Hillel affirmed that the more a person studies the words of the Law, the more he has gained life, and Hillel's diligence in the studying of Scriptures was legendary. By contrast, Jesus insisted there is nothing intrinsically life-giving about studying the Scriptures, if a person fails to discern their true content and purpose (Rom. 7:10; Gal. 3:21). The Scriptures, rightly understood, point away from themselves to Jesus.^[92] Yet the religious leaders had failed to ascertain the true message of the Scriptures despite all of their study.

5:41-44 Jesus had already said He does not accept human testimony (John 5:34). Here He added that He does not accept human glory. He does not mean the worship and honor due Him as God but the wrongful desire to be honored and glorified, which the false prophets, who came in their own name, sought and demanded of their followers (Jer. 14:14-15; 23:25; 29:9, 25, 31). If Jesus stooped to become the kind of Messiah they wanted, then He could attract their praise. This was what was true of the Pharisees, who did not have a love for Yahweh, and it was their self-love that caused them to reject Him.

They so desperately needed the praise and honor of others that they were willing to accept other false leaders and honor them, knowing this was the game necessary for them to play in order to get the honor they also wanted. But they should have sought the honor of Yahweh instead. "The Jews worked out their pattern of religion and tried to fit God into it. They did not seek first the way of God and then try to model their religious practices on it. They succumbed to the perennial temptation of religious people."^[93] In contrast, Jesus was so secure in the Father's love for Him (John 5:20) and so loved the world more than His own life (John 3:16) that He did not need to play their game, which also meant He was not accepted into their social circles. For the religious leaders, merely studying and debating the Scriptures brought them self-advancement. But for Jesus, it was knowing Yahweh and doing His will that brought Him glory and exaltation.

5:45-47 Jesus had been given the authority to judge all of humanity and thus would be their judge (John 5:22, 24, 27, 30). But the religious leaders accepted the authority of Moses over that of Jesus, whom they had rejected. So, for the sake of argument, Jesus made it clear that even if Moses were the true authority over Jesus, then even Moses' words would accuse them. For Moses knew that the true purpose of the Law was not a means of salvation in itself but instead pointed to humanity and creation's need for Jesus as their true Savior. If they had truly understood the message of Moses, then they would have accepted Jesus. They had pinned their hopes on Moses, not the one whom Moses was writing about.

The summary of Jesus' argument in this chapter is that He (the Son) and the Father are one and the same being. Jesus is one with the Father, but He always submits to the will of the Father and does the works of the Father because of their love for each other. This is evidenced by the fact that Jesus so perfectly reflected the character and works of the Father in His own life and works. Therefore, if the religious leaders had truly known the Father, then they would have recognized and received Jesus as the Son of God, who is Yahweh and comes from Yahweh. Even Moses and the Scriptures, which they revered so highly, point to Jesus as the Son of God. Yet the religious leaders had failed to understand this because they were seeking to glorify themselves more than glorifying Yahweh, which they could have done by seeking to know Him and doing His will as the Son does. Their rejection of Jesus and their failure to understand the Scriptures and Moses will be held against them when Jesus judges and condemns them in the final days. But those who believe in Him will be resurrected into eternal life, for only He has authority over life and death.

H. Jesus as the Bread of Life During Passover (6:1-71)

In this section Jesus miraculously fed 5,000 men and walked on water. When the crowds pursued Him for more free food, Jesus declared that He is the "bread of life." The prophets predicted that Jesus as the Messiah would bring salvation to the world (John 6:45 referring to Isa. 54:13). Yet after hearing Jesus' "bread of life discourse," the majority of the Jews, even many of His own disciples, walked away from Him. This marked a watershed moment in Jesus' ministry.

6:1-4 Most scholars believe that "some time after these things" means that as much as six months may have passed after the events of the previous chapter. The "other side" often referred to the east side of the Sea of Galilee. The east side was the more sparsely populated side of the lake, where fewer Jews and more Gentiles lived. John's readers knew this lake as the Sea of Tiberias. Tiberias was the chief city on its western coast. Herod Antipas had founded it in 20 AD and had named it in honor of the current Roman emperor who ruled from 15 to 35 AD.

A great crowd of Jews followed Jesus to the other side because of the miracle they saw Him do. Based on the previous chapter and the events that follow, John has made it clear that the majority of the people were following Him because of what He could do for them physically, not because they believed in Him.

Jesus, like other Jewish rabbis, often sat when He taught. The top of the hill allowed for His voice to project to the people.

This is the second of three Passovers mentioned by John. The Passover, which primarily focused on bread, wine, and the sacrificial lamb, provides the background for the feeding of the multitude and Jesus' claim to be the "bread of life."

6:5-9 Luke's gospel has the disciples just coming back from their own ministry of preaching and healing in the name of Jesus (Luke 9:1-6). Jesus commanded His disciples to feed the crowd because He knew they should be able to do it after the miracles they had just done. However, they lacked faith and complained about how little they had, for they could see only how much money it would cost to feed this many people. Two hundred denarii was about eight months' wage. The only food they could find was from a boy with five barley loaves and two fish, which were probably pickled fish.

6:10-15 Jesus merely gave thanks to Yahweh for what they had and then multiplied the bread and fish. This multiplication of bread connects Jesus to Yahweh's provision of bread for Israel in the wilderness (Ex. 16), and the twelve baskets left over connects to the twelve loaves of bread on the priestly table of showbread in the tabernacle (Ex 25:23-30). An abundance of grain in the land was also one of the signs of the coming Messiah (Joel 2:19, 24; Jer. 31:12).

When the people saw this great prophetic sign, they assumed He was the long-awaited prophet Moses spoke of (Deut. 18:15-19). But Jesus knew they wanted a political and military deliverer and that they would try to make Him king, which was not what He was there to do at that time. That would have sped up the clock to His death, so He left in order to control the timing of His death, which was why He had come.

6:16-21 For reasons John does not give, Jesus sent the disciples back across the lake while He stayed behind to pray. Darkness had set in, and the disciples began to row the seven miles to Capernaum on the western side of the lake. Night was (and still is) a harbinger of danger, for darkness is the abode of evil and chaos. Jesus' absence cast another foreboding cloud over the disciples. During the night a storm came upon the lake, so severe that it threatened to take the lives of these experienced fishermen. The Sea of Galilee lies about 600 feet below sea level and is surrounded by mountains on all sides. When strong cool winds come rushing down from the southeastern mountains and displace the warm, moist air of the lake, it churns up the water into a sudden and violent storm.^[94] Even power boats today will not go out in these winds. In the ancient world, the raging sea was a symbol of chaos and even demonic activity and was wrapped up in superstitious beliefs. The First Testament consistently makes the point that only Yahweh has the power to control the sea/chaos.

In the middle of the most chaotic time and place, Jesus came to them, walking on the water. The Greek word peripatounta ("walking") describes Jesus' effortless moving over the sea. Earlier in His ministry, Jesus had already calmed the storm (Luke 8:22-25), and now He was standing unharmed on the chaotic waters. In the ancient Near East, the pagan gods were often portrayed as standing on the waters, relaying a propaganda message of their ability to subdue the chaos of creation. In Gen. 1:2 Yahweh's spirit hovers over the chaotic waters like a mother bird and subdues the chaos of creation in order to bring life, light, and goodness to creation. In the ancient Near East, Jesus' actions here were the ultimate God claim of total sovereignty over chaos (Ps. 77:16; 19).

Matthew and Mark's gospels (Matt. 14:46; Mark 6:49) state that the disciples thought Jesus was an apparition coming up out of the sea for them. Creatures from the sea were seen as evil and chaotic (Dan. 7:1-8). Yet in the middle of absolute chaos, death, and fear, Jesus walked calmly above the sea, assured them that He was with them, and then quieted the storm/chaos around them. Jesus demonstrated that He could do what only Yahweh can do—because He is God. Yahweh's absolute sovereign ability to subdue the chaos is a prominent theme throughout the Bible.

6:22-24 The next day the people on the eastern side of the Sea of Galilee realized that Jesus was no longer with them, so they sailed across the Sea of Galilee to find Jesus in Capernaum.

6:25-29 Jesus called out their true motivations for seeking Him out. They saw His signs, but they were not interested in the deeper meaning and significance of the signs. Rather, they wanted more of the food Jesus could miraculously produce for them. Like His discussion concerning the water of life with the woman at the well, Jesus pushed the people deeper to seek out and work for the spiritual bread that would give them eternal life. Jesus was rebuking their purely materialistic notions of the kingdom of Yahweh. Just as Yahweh provided the bread for the Israelites in the wilderness (Ex. 16), only the Son of Man can provide them spiritual bread, for the Father had approved of Him. Jesus' response to their question of what work He was speaking of was telling them to believe that He was the Son of Man sent by Yahweh.

6:30-33 The people's asking for a sign was insulting because Jesus had already done many signs over the last couple of years, yet they wanted more proof and miracles. Quoting Ex. 16:4 the people pointed out that Yahweh took care of the original Israelites by providing them with bread, and they wanted to know what Jesus would do to provide for them. The Jewish expectation was that, when the Messiah came, He would renew the miracle of the manna.

Though the people acknowledged that the bread came from heaven, Jesus knew that among the religious leaders far too much attention had been given to Moses—and far too little to Yahweh, the ultimate supplier of the bread from heaven. Both the bread and the people of the wilderness generation perished over time. The bread's chief function was to serve as a type for the true bread to come one day. "Bread from heaven" points to Jesus' heavenly origin.  Similarly, as true and important as the Law of Moses was, it was meant to be replaced by that which it pointed towards.

6:34-36 The people, still thinking literally and physically, asked Jesus to give them every day the bread He spoke of, suggesting that the bread needed to be given again and again. "I am the bread of life" is the first of Jesus' seven "I Am" statements. This statement was meant to correct their purely physical understanding of what He had said previously, as they believed they needed to keep eating the bread He provided, like the Israelites in the wilderness had. He was stating that He was the fulfillment of the First Testament messianic expectations (Isa. 49:10; 55:1). As the "bread," He would be the source of their sustenance and life, and after believing Him, they would not need anything else to sustain them spiritually and relationally. The bread Yahweh provided in the wilderness was physical, meant to teach the people that He could meet their physical needs without failure. This pointed toward Jesus as the one who would meet their spiritual needs without failure, for He too is God. Yet no matter how they had witnessed Jesus' reflecting the character and deeds of Yahweh, they still did not believe in Him.

6:37-40 All those who truly know the Father and belong to Him, the Father has given to Jesus, and they will belong to Him. John 6:37b is a litotes, a figure of speech in which something is affirmed by negating its contrary. For example, "he was a man of no small means" means he was a wealthy man with a significant amount of money. When Jesus says, "Whoever comes to Me I will never drive away," many people take that to mean Jesus will certainly welcome them. But as a litotes, it is saying, "Whoever comes to Me I will certainly keep them in and preserve them.^[95]

What Jesus will not do is fail to recognize the ones who come to Him. What He will do is keep and preserve them.^[96] This idea sets the stage for the good shepherd discourse in John 10. Jesus had come to do the will of the Father and seek the lost, and He would not fail in that mission. And all those who come to Him He will never lose, for He will protect and preserve them in the same way the Father does. For the Father's will, and so also the Son's will, is that everyone who puts their faith in the Son will receive eternal life, and that cannot be lost because they now belong to the Son, who will lose none of them.

6:41-42 At this point some people began to reject Jesus' claims of coming from heaven, for all they could see was a man who had come from the lowly Joseph and Mary. The irony is that they did not know about the virgin birth through the Holy Spirit. Just as the Israelites had grumbled against Moses and Yahweh in the wilderness, so now the Jews grumbled against Yahweh's Son.

6:43-44 Jesus proceeded to emphasize the human inability to gain salvation apart from the Father's drawing them toward Himself, and that it is only He who can raise people from death, so there is no eternal life without Him. Ultimately, salvation does not depend on human desire but on the drawing of the Father through the Holy Spirit into faith in Jesus Christ. This seems to endorse the concept of predestination, but several things need to be kept in mind.^[97] First, John and Jesus make it clear that it is the responsibility of the individual to believe (John 3:16; 5:40; 6:35-37, 47). Second, Jesus also emphasizes that divine sovereignty plays a major role in salvation, and this is a constant theme in John's gospel. Third, the salvation of humanity is dependent upon Jesus' obedience in going to the cross—if He failed, everything would fall apart. Fourth, even though the Father has given sincere believers to Jesus, He must work to keep them in the fold. John holds all of these ideas in tension and does not apologize or try to explain them.

6:45-46 Jesus' coming fulfills the words of the prophets, who told of a day when Yahweh Himself would come and teach them directly. Jesus' statement is a paraphrase of Isa. 54:13 (Jer. 31:34). The rabbis taught that to learn the Torah was to be taught by God Himself, and the rabbis prided themselves on being avid students of the Scriptures. Now Jesus stated that the reason they refused to come to Him was because they were unwilling to learn from God.^[98] All those who have truly heard from and learned from the Father would come to Jesus to learn from Him, for they would recognize their teacher Yahweh. Once again, Jesus emphasizes that He is the only one who has ever seen the Father, so He is the only one who can speak to who the Father is and reflect Him in His own life.

6:47-59 Jesus repeats that eternal life is found only in Him as the true bread of life. By referring to the Israelites of the wilderness generation as your ancestors, Jesus was distancing Himself from His Jewish opponents and identified them with the unbelieving generation of the wilderness. The contrast Jesus emphasized was between those who ate the bread of the wilderness but still died and those who eat of His bread and will thus live eternally.

Then Jesus took the metaphor of His being the bread of life further and said that the bread is His flesh and that one must eat it in order to receive eternal life. John uses the Greek word sarx ("flesh") rather than soma ("body"), soma being the term used everywhere else in the gospels when the Lord's Supper is clearly in view. This means neither Jesus nor John is making any direct reference to the Lord's Supper.^[99] This is not saying the bread and wine are literally the body and blood of Jesus at the Lord's Supper, nor is this how we are to view the Lord's Supper. John 6 is not about the Lord's Supper (communion); rather, the Lord's Supper is about John 6.

This is a reference back to the Word becoming sarx ("flesh") in John 1:14. The point is that it is only in believing that Jesus' becoming incarnate and dying a physical death and being raised in the flesh can there ever be atonement for sin and the pouring out of eternal life. Jesus went on to emphatically make the point that His flesh and blood are real and physical and that only through Him could a person have the spiritual food and drink that grant eternal life.

This language of metaphorical consumption is not uncommon. We devour books, drink in lectures, swallow stories, ruminate on ideas, chew on a matter, and eat our own words. Elsewhere Jesus stated that Pharisees devour the widow's property (Luke 20:47), and Paul said the Galatians were devouring each other (Gal. 5:15). Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and John were all commanded by Yahweh to consume the word of Yahweh written on a scroll (Ezek. 3:3; Jer. 15:16; Rev. 10:8–11). This metaphor communicates that one is to be so connected to Jesus that He becomes a part of them and they a part of Him (John 6:57).

6:60 There are several things that offended the Jewish audience.^[100] First, they were more interested in food (John 6:26), a political messiah (John 6:14-15), and manipulative miracles (John 6:30-31) than in the spiritual realities to which the feeding miracle pointed. Second, they were unwilling to relinquish their own power and authority and take the first steps toward genuine faith (John 6:41-46). Third, they were offended by Jesus' claims of being superior to Moses, uniquely sent by Yahweh, and authorized to give life. Fourth, they were repulsed by the extended metaphor of eating Jesus' flesh.

6:61-63 Jesus then turned to His disciples, which in this scene were more than just the twelve, and asked if they were offended and going to leave as well. He pointed to ascension after His death and resurrection as further evidence of His claims. The Greek preserves the condition but no conclusion, so it is possible to understand the argument in one of two ways. Either Jesus' ascension will make the offense even greater, or Jesus' ascension will reduce or remove the offense.^[101] Jesus warned them that the Spirit gives real life (Gen. 1:2; Ezek. 37:14; John 3:6), whereas the flesh provides nothing of comparable importance. His words dealt with spiritual realities and resulted in spiritual life. Furthermore, they were words that came from Yahweh's Spirit and thus were extremely important.

6:64-65 Jesus recognized that some of His disciples did not believe in Him. This was a tragic irony, for they had personally experienced His miracles and had given up everything to follow Him from place to place, but they did not believe Him. They were like the Israelites in the wilderness who followed Yahweh out of Egypt, experienced His miracles, and agreed to the Mosaic Covenant but died in the wilderness because they did not believe (Heb. 3:7­–4:13).

Again Jesus expressed His belief that a person's ability to come to Him ultimately rested in the sovereign will of Yahweh (John 6:37, 44). Thus, He did not view His disciples' unbelief as an indication that He had failed, but neither did He present the importance of belief in Himself as something His disciples could take or leave. It meant the difference between life and death for them, and He urged them to believe in Him.

6:66-71 At this point most of His followers left Him. Only the twelve stayed on with Him. Jesus' question to the twelve was more for their sake than His, for they needed to articulate a response more than He needed to hear it. Though Peter most certainly did not understand everything Jesus was saying, he and the other disciples understood enough to know that Jesus was truly the bread of life and the only source of eternal life. They sought Jesus for more than just miracles. But Jesus knew that one of them, Judas, not only did not believe but had given himself over to the Devil in order to actively give Jesus over to death.

I. Jesus Goes to the Festival of Tabernacles (7:1–8:59)

In this section, Jesus traveled to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles, sparking intense debate and escalating hostility. He publicly declared His divine origin, invited people to receive "living water," and proclaimed Himself as the "light of the world." Despite repeated plots to arrest and stone Him, Jesus continued teaching that He and the Father are one, culminating in the ultimate assertion of His eternal divinity before the angry crowds. The section also prepares the reader for the subsequent presentation of Jesus' ministry in Jerusalem that happened at the Feast of Tabernacles.

This section is highly repetitive, showing the religious leaders did not get what Jesus was saying, nor were they willing to listen to or accept what He was saying. John uses their lack of understanding along with Jesus' teachings to make the point that it was not Jesus but ultimately the world that was on trial.

7:1-5 Because of the people's increasing rejection of Jesus, especially in Judea, the center of Jewish political power, Jesus stayed away from Judea and returned to Galilee. The Feast of Tabernacles was a seven-day celebration during which the Jews lived in tents to remember Yahweh's provision for them as they wandered in the wilderness for forty years (Lev. 23:42-43; Matt. 17:4). Each day the Jews would pour out water as a libation offering to Yahweh (Num. 28:7; Isa. 12:3). On the eighth day, they returned to their homes with a great feast and celebration that anticipated the coming kingdom of Yahweh (Zech. 14:16-19).

According to the Mosaic Law, the Feast of Tabernacles was one of three festivals where Jewish men were required to journey to the temple in Jerusalem, so Jesus as an obedient rabbi would have been expected to journey to Jerusalem in the region of Judea. 

Jesus' siblings were at this point unbelievers (Mark 3:21, 31-35), and, seeing Jesus' unwillingness to go to Judea, they condescendingly reminded Him that He should go to Jerusalem, especially as a self-proclaimed rabbi. They accused Jesus of being arrogant and seeking attention, so He should go to Jerusalem and do His miracles and really show off. If He was truly the Messiah, then His following should not be dwindling, so maybe more miracles would grow His ministry.

7:6-7 Jesus' response was "my time is not yet here," meaning the cross. The brothers' words reveal their misunderstanding of Jesus' ministry, for it was not Jesus' failure to show Himself that impeded the reception of His message but the world's sinful rejection of their Creator.^[102] For Jesus, it was not about gaining a following but about going to the cross to atone for the sins of the world. Jesus' only concern around the size of His following was how much it would increase the political leaders' rejection of Him and speed up His journey to the cross before His appointed time.

They thought about popularity, so anytime was right for them to perform in order to get more, because they thought like the world and pursued the things of the world. When a person is aligned with the world, the world cannot hate them, because they are a part of it. But the world hated Jesus because He was in alignment with His Father in Heaven. The thinking of Jesus' brothers was more in alignment with Satan during his temptation of Jesus.

7:8-13 Jesus did not mean He was not going at all—for Yahweh had commanded through the Law that He was to journey to the temple for the festival each year—rather, He would not go with them at their appointed time. Because Jerusalem was many miles away for most Jews living in Israel, communities would travel together in communal celebration and for safety in numbers. Jesus, to control the coming hour that He must die, chose to stay behind just long enough to go with only His disciples and not to stir up public attention. The wisdom in this is revealed when He did not show up "on time," and many people looking for Him could not find Him, either to follow Him or to attack Him. If Jesus had gone publicly with the other pilgrims, they might have forced a premature "triumphal entry" upon Him.

7:14-19 Halfway through the festival Jesus decided to step into the public arena and teach in the temple courtyards. The crowds were amazed by His understanding and authority. In the second temple period of Judaism, rabbis never spoke with their own authority or understanding; rather, they always appealed to previous rabbis so as not to communicate arrogance. Jesus, however, not only did not do this, but He blatantly spoke with His own authority and understanding by frequently prefacing His teaching with statements like, "You have heard that it was said, but I tell you," "I tell you the truth," and "Truly, truly, I say to you…."

But Jesus made it clear that His authority came from the Father: "My teaching is not my own." The difference is that His authority did not come from fallible humans but from the infallible God and Creator of the universe. The test of His claim is that those already doing the will of the Father would recognize the truth of Jesus' teaching, for they would see that they were in alignment with the wisdom of Yahweh.

But those who speak with only their individual understanding and authority do so only for their own glory and gain. This is what Jesus' brothers assumed of Him because that was their character. But the true believer thinks only of the glory of Yahweh and so speaks for the gain of the Father and for people coming into an intimate relationship with the Father.

The crowds and the religious leaders claimed to be those who sought the glory of Yahweh, yet in their hearts they were blatantly seeking to violate Yahweh's will as spoken through the Mosaic Law by their plotting to kill Jesus.

7:21-24 The crowds responded with complete disbelief and complete ignorance of their religious leaders' plot to kill Jesus. They accused Him of being demon possessed, mostly likely pointing to both His delusional claims to godhood and His paranoia.

The "one man" probably refers to the invalid in John 5. Jesus' point was that He had healed one man on the Sabbath, and they became indignant, but they decided it was acceptable to circumcise boys on the Sabbath because Moses said it was acceptable—even though Moses wasn't the one who gave them circumcision. According to the covenant Yahweh made with Abraham, each infant boy had to be circumcised eight days after his birth to be part of the covenant (Gen. 17:9-14; Lev. 12:3). The religious rabbis determined that even though circumcision was work, and thus would be a violation of the Sabbath, it was permissible because it was a direct command from Yahweh. Yet in their minds it was not acceptable to make a man whole again on the Sabbath. The rabbis had exalted Moses so high over the years that they spoke of him as the author of the Law even though he was technically only the relay from Yahweh to the people.

Jesus was not saying they were all breaking the law since they sanctioned circumcision on the Sabbath. For if that were true, then He would be admitting that He was a law breaker as well. Rather, His argument was that their interpretation of what was work and, most importantly, the purpose of the Sabbath was wrong. The Law was not meant to be a rigid list of legalistic rules but rather to be a teacher and to provide examples of what it meant to love Yahweh and love others. They had missed the whole point. In pointing out the fallacy of their thinking around circumcision on the Sabbath and Moses as the author of circumcision, He showed that their theological understanding was askew.

7:25-27 There were some who did understand that their religious leaders had rejected Jesus as the Messiah and were plotting against Jesus. But they too rejected Jesus as the Messiah because they knew He had come from Nazareth, and thus His origins were known. The rabbis believed that the origins of the Messiah would be unknown. The irony here is that they did not know Jesus had come from Bethlehem, not Nazareth, and that the prophet Malachi had specifically stated the origin of the Messiah as Bethlehem (Micah 5:2).

7:28-31 Jesus stood in the middle of the temple courtyard and declared to everyone that by now they should all know, by His words and deeds, that He was the Messianic Son of God. At this point, they were without excuse. The Jews prided themselves in knowing the one true God, unlike the pagans (Rom. 2:17-19), yet now Jesus was claiming that they did not know God because they did not know or receive Him as Yahweh's Son.

At this, many Jews tried to seize Jesus in order to kill Him, but somehow He escaped them because it was not His God-ordained time to die. Once again, the crowd was divided over His identity. Others rightfully concluded that He must be the Messiah, for how could any other person do more miraculous works than Jesus had done?

7:32-36 Hearing Jesus' comments and seeing that some in the crowd were ready to crown Jesus, the Pharisees and priests sent the temple guard to arrest Jesus. The priests came from the Sadducees, meaning these opposing political parties had found a common enemy against whom they could band together. But Jesus addressed them directly, with the implication, "Do you really want to do this?" For He would only be with them a little longer because He would soon die and then ascend into heaven. When they sought Him out for rescue, presumably to escape the judgment that would come, they would not be able to find Him. The people were greatly confused at His comments and assumed He was going to go to the Jewish communities beyond Israel in order to teach them.

7:37-44 The Feast of Tabernacles was associated with an abundance of rainfall. On the first day of the feast, Zechariah 14:16-17 was read aloud, sometimes coupled with Isaiah 12:3. On the last day, water was poured out as an offering to Yahweh, and torches were lit. On this day, Jesus stood in the temple courtyard and declared in a loud voice that He was the water of life and that all those who were thirsty should come and drink from Him, for only He could make the rivers flow abundantly in the land. The water was a metaphor for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, which had not yet come because Jesus had not yet died and been resurrected (Joel 2:28-32; Ezek. 37). Once again, the people were confused, divided, and ignorant of Jesus' origins. During this time, many of the Jews believed that the awaited prophet and Messiah would be two different people.

7:45-52 The temple guards were unwilling to arrest Jesus because they were so impressed with His words. The Pharisees revealed their hubris, for, unlike these dumb people and temple guards, they as wise leaders knew better and were not deceived by Jesus.

Nothing here states that Nicodemus was a believer. When he spoke, it was not to defend Jesus directly but to raise a procedural point, which, if observed, would work in Jesus' favor. The only thing we can be sure of is that he was interested in true justice within the Law. Ironically, they showed their ignorance and for the third time revealed that they were unaware that Jesus did not come from Galilee even though He had lived there.

7:53–8:11 This section is not contained in the earliest and best Hebrew manuscripts and was almost certainly not an original part of the Gospel of John. Among modern scholars and textual critics, it is a foregone conclusion that this section is not original but represents a later addition to the text. This is not saying the Gospel of John has a false section in it but that the Gospel of John, as written by John, never had this section in it; he did not write it. The evidence for the non-Johannine origin of this section is overwhelming.^[103]

First, none of the Hebrew manuscripts have this section in it. There is not even enough space in the best and oldest manuscripts for this to have been part of it and then lost. The first time it appears is in one Greek manuscript written in the 400s AD, long after John's death. Then it spread very slowly to other Greek manuscripts over several hundred years.

Second, the earliest church fathers never quote it, cite it, or allude to it any way, which is highly unusual if it had been written by John, for they have commented on every passage in the Bible.

Third, it abruptly breaks the flow from John 7:52 to 8:12. The story reads more fluidly with Jesus speaking to the people in the temple courts about His identity before and after this section. This story has nothing to do with the context of what has been happening or what happens after it. Likewise, this topic of adultery is never addressed anywhere else in John, nor does it fit the context.

Fourth, the style and vocabulary of this section are completely different from the style and vocabulary of John everywhere else in the book, in 1–3 John, and Revelation. In fact, this section uses fourteen words that John never used anywhere else in his writings.

Though the story does fit the character of what Jesus might have done, that does not mean it happened. Never telling the readers what Jesus mysteriously wrote in the dirt does not fit John's style and feels more like the idea of a secret mystery religion.

8:12 "I am the light of the world" is Jesus' second "I Am" statement in John. Together with His discussion of bread/manna and water, this may be part of a larger wilderness theme in which He is alluding to Yahweh's presence with the Israelites in the pillar of fire.^[104] And just like the Israelites of the wilderness, the Jews of Jesus' day were also rejecting and rebelling against Him as God's Son (John 1:1-5, 9-13). As the light of the world, there is no darkness in Jesus; therefore, whoever is in Christ will no longer be a part of the darkness of the world (1 John 1:5-7). Being the light of the world does not mean Jesus would universally give light to all of humanity.^[105] Rather, His point is that He is the true light that has come into the world of darkness so that the people may see the true light, leave the darkness, and by faith come into the light to be with the Father and Himself (John 3:16). Being in the light does not mean just living an ethical life of good behavior; rather, it means surrendering one's life to the Father (Luke 9:23; Heb. 12:9; James 4:7; 1 Pet. 2:13) in order to be transformed (Rom. 12:1-2) into a person who is light/good, thinks light/good, and acts light/good with no desire to be a part of the darkness/selfishness (Rom. 8:7; 10:3).

8:13-20 Once again, the Pharisees accused Jesus of speaking only from His own authority, but Jesus had already addressed this when He said His Father was a witness to His testimony because His words and deeds aligned with the Father. Jesus made this point again, adding that His own testimony about Himself is valid because He does have authority. Jesus was not testifying to Himself as an ordinary human but as the Son of God. The problem was not with Jesus' identity or testimony but with their lack of knowledge of who the Father is. If they had known the Father, they would have been able to recognize and accept the Father's testimony and His own Son.

Jesus was putting the Pharisees on trial for walking in the darkness and rejecting the light, but He had not come to give a final judgment. Rather, He had come to reveal Himself as the life and light of the world so that they might move out of darkness and into the light and receive eternal life with the Father and Himself (John 3:16-17). However, a time will come when Jesus returns to judge those who rejected the light and remained in the darkness, and when that day comes, His judgment will be true because He is the light and the truth (John 1:14, 17; 3:21).

Once again, in their ignorance the Pharisees demanded that Jesus tell them who this father of His is who gave Him the authority to speak like He was. They were thinking of Jesus' lowly human father, Joseph. And once again, Jesus gave them the same answer: they would not have to ask this question if they truly knew Yahweh.

8:21-24 Jesus warned them that He was going away, meaning to the cross, and they would not be able to follow Him, for they could not become the sacrifice that He was meant to be. And because they would reject Him, they would die with their sins unrepented and unatoned. They were of this world, the world of darkness below, while Jesus is from above, in heaven. Therefore, they would die in their sins, so it would be better for them to accept the evidence He had presented of who He is and to believe so that they could live in the kingdom of Yahweh.

8:25-30 The frustration in Jesus' answer is apparent, for they refused to accept the evidence for His claims. The irony here is that, later, when the people crucified Jesus as a criminal, they were actually lifting Him up into His exaltation. It would be in His resurrection that they would realize who He truly is. Though the majority were hostile to Jesus, many did put their faith in Him.

8:31-32 To those who believed, Jesus issued the warning that true faith means perseverance no matter the cost. For Jesus, truth is not solely intellectual but is demonstrated in practice, in a life centered on Him.^[106] A life like this is absorbed in the teachings of Jesus and continually draws on them for shaping it and for living.

"Jesus would not let Himself be reduced to the level of a merely a political messiah (6:14, 15). It is not that his claims have no bearing on questions of social justice, but that the pursuit of social justice alone will always prove vain and ephemeral unless the deeper enslavement is recognized and handled. In Jesus' view, Caesar himself is a slave."^[107]

John has already introduced the concept of fickle faith (John 2:23; 6:60) that wants only to see miracles and turns out to be untrustworthy (John 2:24-25). Jesus was never interested in multiplying the numbers of His followers if they were not genuine believers who would persevere, so He insisted on forcing would-be disciples to count the cost (Luke 9:57-62).^[108] Only faith in Him and in the truth of who He is could set them free from their bondage to sin. Holding to the teachings of Jesus (John 8:31) not only establishes faith that is genuine, but it also has its own authenticating power.

8:33-38 The Jews were horrified by Jesus' accusing them of being slaves. The Jews were talking about their internal freedom as Jewish descendants of Abraham, since they were physically under the rule of Caesar and Rome (Matt. 8:12; Mark 2:17). They clearly believed they were already saved merely by being descendants of Abraham. Their inherent privilege was so strong that they could not even conceive of their own need for repentance from sin. True freedom, however, is not the liberty to do anything we want but the liberty to do what we ought in accordance with Yahweh's will. When we truly want to do and then also do what we ought, then this is what becomes pleasing to us, and this is true freedom, for we no longer resist what we were designed by Yahweh to do, and we no longer experience the guilt and consequence for not doing it.

Jesus made it clear that anyone who sins, which all the Jews believe they themselves did, is enslaved to sin (Rom. 6–7) regardless of ancestry or the Abrahamic Covenant. And as a slave to sin, they had no permanent place in the family and kingdom of Yahweh. There was no act or covenant of Yahweh in the First Testament that granted them salvation nor secured them in the kingdom of Yahweh. Only Jesus' covenant, which He would inaugurate in His death and resurrection, could do this because Jesus is the Son of God. As the Son, He has a permanent place in Yahweh's family and kingdom. Also, as the Son, He is God and sinless and therefore not a slave. Therefore, He is the only one who could set them free.

8:39-41a Jesus then stated that if they were true descendants of Abraham, then they would not be trying to kill Him, as God, because Abraham had genuine faith and did not oppose the things of Yahweh (Rom. 9:7; Gal. 4:21-31). Instead, they listened to the voice of and acted like their father, the Devil (1 John 3:7-10). As Jesus said, "You will know them by their fruit" (Matt. 7:16). The Jews were claiming, falsely, that Abraham was their father, while Jesus rightly claimed God as His Father.

8:41b-47 The Jews were angry that Jesus denied their relationship with Yahweh and Abraham, in essence accusing them of being illegitimate children. Jesus went back to His repeated line of reasoning—that His words and deeds mirrored the Father so perfectly that they, if they were truly God's children, should recognize Him as the Son. Jesus was incredibly frustrated with their refusal to see the evidence of His words and deeds or to process the logic of His reasoning. The fact that they could not and were unwilling to understand anything Jesus was saying or doing and that they were so hostile showed that their real father was the Devil. Children recognize and act like their true fathers.

Jesus did not ask whether anyone thought He was guilty of sin, for obviously they did. Rather, He asked whether anyone could prove Him guilty of sin. Jesus affirmed His absolute moral perfection and freedom from sin.^[109]

8:48-51 Whenever an irrational opponent cannot prove someone wrong with reason and evidence, they turn to slander to try to win the argument. The Jewish rabbis taught that a man who learned Scripture but did not study under a rabbi (like Jesus) was a pagan gentile, a Samaritan, or demon-possessed magician.^[110] They were accusing Jesus of not being a true Jew and of performing miracles by the power of the devil.

Jesus countered their accusation with the point that, if He were demon possessed, why would He honor His Father Yahweh? He had made this point earlier in His ministry when He asked them why, if He were working for the Devil, He would dedicate His ministry, teaching, and miracles to attacking the kingdom of the Devil. Also, their accusation assigned too much power to Satan, for what Jesus was able to do was on the same level as Yahweh. Would Yahweh grant Him the power to do such miracles if what Jesus said about Himself was a lie and a con? Everything Jesus had said had been for their benefit and their salvation, not for His own self-promotion. Finally, He declared that those who obey Him would live forever.

8:52-56 Once again, they threw His words back at Him, stating this was a lie, for everyone dies, even Abraham and the prophets. But they should have known about the resurrection because Abraham and the prophets did not receive the full promises of Yahweh before they died. Therefore, the only way Yahweh's promises can be true, and the only way they can receive His promises, is if they are resurrected (Heb. 11:8-12). And the kingdom of Yahweh is for the living, not the dead; therefore, they have to be resurrected.

Jesus again reiterated the point He had been making throughout their conversation but added that because Abraham truly knew Yahweh, he looked forward to the kingdom of Yahweh, and Abraham would have recognized Jesus if he were here now; therefore, Abraham looked forward to the day of Jesus' coming.

8:57-58 The Jews understood that Jesus was talking about Abraham as if He truly knew him, but since no one alive today could know Abraham, since he had been dead for hundreds of years, they accused Jesus of being a liar.

Jesus' response echoes Yahweh's self-identification to Moses in Ex. 3:14. By declaring "I Am," Yahweh was stating that He was the ultimate sovereign and eternal being over the universe. If Jesus had merely wanted to claim an existence before Abraham—i.e., that He was really old or had come back to life—then He would have said, "Before Abraham was, I was." Instead, He said, "Before Abraham was born, I Am (ego eimi)," which was a clear claim to deity. The fact that the Jews attempted to stone Jesus for blasphemy (Lev. 24:16) shows that they clearly understood this as such a claim. And the fact that Jesus did not try to correct their interpretation of what He said, and in the context of everything else He had said in this conversation, shows that He meant it as a claim to deity. But because it was not yet His time to die, He slipped away, and they failed to take His life.

J. Jesus Heals the Blind Man at the Festival of Tabernacles (9:1-41)

This section, Jesus healed on the Sabbath a man who had been born blind. The religious leaders rejected Jesus because He broke Sabbath rules. Through sharp questioning, the healed man gained spiritual faith, while the seeing Pharisees proved to be spiritually blind.

9:1-5 When Jesus and the disciples came across a blind man, the disciples saw the opportunity to understand whether the man was blind due to his parents' sin or his own sin. The people of the ancient world held to the retribution principle, the idea that the righteous will prosper, and the wicked will suffer. This meant any human who experienced tragedy or suffering did so as a direct result of sin in their life. Though it is true that some tragedies and suffering are the result of sin (Rom. 1:18-32; 1 Cor. 11:30), this is not always the case (2 Cor. 12:7; Gal. 4:13). Ecclesiastes and Job make this point. Jesus' response was a simplified one—that this is not always true, especially for this man. Jesus did not deny that suffering was, at times, the result of sin, but He did deny that suffering was always the result of sin. What is certain is that in this man's case, his blindness would be the means by which Jesus would demonstrate the works of Yahweh.

Jesus' saying that the night was coming was a proverbial statement communicating the idea that He did not have much longer to do the works of the Father, for His death was close at hand. Except for rare exceptions, like shepherds, no one did work in the night. It also links to the world's spiritual darkness apart from Jesus.

9:6-12 In the ancient world, people believed that the moisture of the gods created life and could magically heal. Some rabbis even taught that the saliva of the firstborn son could heal (b. B. Bat. 126b). By mixing His saliva with the soil, signifying the creation of Adam (Gen. 2:7), Jesus was clearly communicating with the language of their culture that He was God and that He was the firstborn of Yahweh because He is the Son of God.^[111] Yet saliva with mud was also considered unclean by the Jews (Lev. 15:8). But in the right circumstances saliva and mud in the hands of a priest ordained by Yahweh could also cleanse. Jesus commanded the man to cleanse himself in the pool of Shalom, water being a symbol of ceremonial cleansing. In the hands of the sanctified priests, what was unclean could become clean.

Everyone recognized the blind man, but because he could see for the first time, they were a little unsure, as they had never witnessed anything like this before. The man immediately responded to their confusion, telling everyone what Jesus had done.

9:13-16 The Pharisees began to interrogate the healed man, not because Jesus had healed him but because He had healed on the Sabbath. According to the Pharisees, healing was forbidden except in cases where life was in danger, so Jesus could have waited until the next day. So, since according to the religious leaders this was not a life-or-death situation, Jesus had violated the Law. Some did not believe Jesus had healed the man, since they viewed Him as a sinner due to His continuous violations of the Sabbath. When questioned further, the healed man declared Jesus to be a prophet.

9:17-23 Not trusting the man, the Pharisees brought in the parents to question them. The parents pointed out the obvious: he is our son, he was blind but now sees, and he is an adult—ask him. They also did not want to be dragged into a religious inquiry that could get them expelled from the synagogue, which would perpetually shame them and make it nearly impossible to survive. The Pharisees did not actually question the parents for more information but challenged the absurdity that their son could now see.

9:24-34 They then turned back to questioning the man, going over everything again because they could not accept the evidence. They knew Moses as a proven quantity, for he was chosen by Yahweh. But they did not know who Jesus really was. Because they believed Jesus was a sinner, and Yahweh does not listen to sinners, they did not understand how Jesus could do Yahweh's works.

The healed man sarcastically asked them whether they wanted to become Jesus' disciples since they kept asking him about Jesus. He then rebutted them, asking how they could not know who Jesus was or whom He came from when His healing of blindness is something only Yahweh can do. This uneducated, non-elite, and non-religious leader understood the evidence better than they did. The Pharisees then insulted him for his supposed sinful origins and threw him out of the synagogue.

9:35-41 When Jesus came across the healed man again, His questions were intended to connect Himself as the prophetic healer, whom the man knew experientially, with the prophesied Son of Man and Messiah, whom the man knew theologically. The man, who, unlike the Pharisees, was connected to Yahweh, immediately embraced that connection and began to worship Jesus. Jesus never told the man to desist, showing that He viewed Himself as God.

In one day and one miracle, the healed man progressed from calling Jesus a prophet (John 9:17) to defending Him against the Pharisees (John 9:25), inviting them to become Jesus' disciples (John 9:27), correcting their doctrine (John 9:34), and confessing Jesus as His lord and worshiping Him (John 9:38). Yet the Pharisees, knowing the Scriptures and observing Jesus for three years, could not get anywhere near the same point as the healed man, for they were the truly blind. Once again, the "culturally insignificant" revealed themselves to have a better understanding of Yahweh and more faith than the elite.

K. Jesus as the Good Shepherd at the Festival of Dedication (10:1-42)

In this section, Jesus taught that He is the Good Shepherd who protects His sheep and lays down His life for them. This is followed by His retreat across the Jordan, where many people came to believe in Him.

10:1-6 During the day, a shepherd would take his sheep out to graze, and at night he would gather them into a pen that kept them safe and contained. The pen may have been a courtyard surrounded by the outside walls of the houses of the families who put all their sheep in the same pen. There was only one gate, and the shepherds entrusted the watch of the pen to a gatekeeper. A thief would have to scale the wall, go through a part of the pen that had no wall, or bypass the gatekeeper; the effort involved showed they were evil people seeking to harm the community. During the night, all the sheep of all the families mingled together. In the morning, the first shepherd would call his sheep, and his sheep, and no others, would come out of the pen and follow him (Mark 4:32). Then the second shepherd would gather his sheep, and so on. Once trained, sheep never followed the voice of another person. They followed only the true shepherd.

This illustration alludes to Ezek. 34, where the people had been led astray by false shepherds, but Yahweh would one day come as their True Shepherd. It also alludes to Ezek. 37, where Yahweh would gather all the true chosen people from exile and rejoin the northern and southern kingdoms together under His messianic king, "David." The thieves in this illustration are represented as false shepherds who have attempted to mislead the chosen people of Yahweh with their self-proclaimed knowledge of Yahweh and the Law. The unbelieving sheep were led astray, but the true believers, like the disciples and the blind man, recognized Jesus as their shepherd when He came for them in the morning and called them out of the darkness (John 1:9-13).

10:7-10 Here, the gatekeeper, the shepherd, and the gate all merge into one. This is not an expansion of John 10:1-5, though it uses some of the metaphors found in those verses. "I am the gate" is the third "I Am" statement in John. Among both the Jews and the gentiles, people often thought of entering heaven by a gate. Jesus made the point that there is only one gate, one way in and out, and that He is that gate. He is the only true entrance into the kingdom of Yahweh. Just like the tabernacle had only one gate to enter the presence of Yahweh, and only with an animal sacrifice, so Jesus is that one entrance and the sacrifice granting our entrance into the kingdom of Yahweh. As well, Ezekiel had a vision of a new temple, where the prince/king sat in the entrance (Ezek. 44:1-4), and so Jesus is the new temple (John 2:19-22), and He sits in the entrance. All the other shepherds/gatekeepers (the religious leaders) were actually thieves, and they came only to kill and destroy God's chosen people. But the true believers hear and follow the true shepherd, who has come to give His people life to the fullest.

10:11-13 "I am the good shepherd" is Jesus' fourth "I Am" statement in John. Here, Jesus brought the imagery back to Himself as the shepherd whom the true sheep know and follow (Ezek. 34). Hired hands are only temporary workers who have not invested in the sheep nor cared for them as the shepherd who owns the sheep has. Therefore, they are never willing to sacrifice anything for the sheep because they are not paid enough. But the true shepherd is willing to sacrifice his own life for the sheep because he has invested everything in them and therefore loves them. The religious leaders were the hired hands who would care for the people only as far as it benefited themselves.

10:14-18 The other sheep are the gentiles, whom the religious leaders had most certainly rejected. There are gentiles who also recognize the voice of Jesus and are willing to come out of the darkness and follow Him, like the Samaritan woman (Eph. 2:11-22; 4:3-6). Jesus made the point that He seeks out all the sheep of the world so that whoever believes may have eternal life (John 3:16).

One of the reasons the Father loves Jesus is because Jesus loves the Father enough to obediently lay down His life for humanity, whom He loves so much. Jesus offered His life willingly, not by force or coercion. Jesus may be referring to the times the religious leaders had tried to kill Him and failed (John 5:18; 7:25; 8:59), proving that He is in control of His destiny as the Son of God. But more important than having the authority to lay down His life, He has the ability to resurrect Himself from the grave because He has power over life and death (John 5:21-26; 11:25).

10:19-21 Once again, the Jews who had heard Jesus speak were divided by belief and unbelief and accused Him of being demon possessed.

10:22-24 The Festival of Dedication is Hanukkah. It was not one of the seven festivals commanded by Yahweh in the Mosaic Covenant. It was a celebration of the cleansing and rededication of the temple. In 168 BC the Greek king Antiochus IV was oppressing the Jews and had desecrated the temple with an idol of Zeus and pig sacrifices. During that time, the Jewish family, the Hasmoneans, fought back and eventually retook the temple in 164 BC.  Solomon's Colonnade was a covered portico that went around the perimeter of the temple courtyard. While Jesus was teaching here, the Jews demanded of Him to tell them if He truly was the Messiah. Not once in public discourse had Jesus declared Himself to be the Messiah—only with the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:26).

10:25-30 Jesus was not referring to an explicit statement when He said He had already told them that He was the Messiah. What He was referring to were the many deeds He had done. But they continually missed what He was saying because they were not His sheep and did not know His or the Father's voice (Mark 4:32).

Jesus communicated the idea of the total security of His sheep's salvation because they belong to Him. When His sheep come to Him, they will never perish, no one can snatch them out of His hand no matter how powerful they are, and no one can snatch them out of His Father's hand. The reason is that their hands are one and the same because Jesus and the Father are one and the same (John 5:17-18; 10:33-38). His statement echoes the fundamental confession of Judaism, "Hear, O Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one" (Deut. 6:4). The word translated "one" is the Greek word hen, which is neuter, not masculine. This matters because Jesus did not say, "I and the Father are one person" (heis, masculine), rather that they are one thing, suggesting unity rather than personal identity. This means the Father and Son are distinct persons and yet are united in some profound way. This mutual indwelling strengthens the claim of an unusually intimate relationship. This verse is affirming that Jesus and the Father share the same divine nature while remaining distinct persons (John 1:1; 8:58; 20:28). John has already emphasized this point with the themes of Jesus being sent by the Father, Jesus perfectly revealing the Father, Jesus doing only what the Father does, the Father glorifying the Son, and the Son sharing glory with the Father before the world existed.

10:31-33 This interpretation of Jesus' statement was clear to His audience—as a claim that went beyond merely saying He agreed with Yahweh or represented Yahweh—for they immediately picked up stones to kill Him. Here Jesus sarcastically asked them for which of His good works they were going to kill Him. He wanted to expose the illogicality of their actions. The religious leaders answered that it was for blasphemy, an offense worthy of death according to the Mosaic Law. However, also according to the Mosaic Law they were not allowed to stone Him without a trial, and according to Roman law they were not allowed to execute anyone without Rome's approval lest they bring Rome's judgment upon themselves. This hypocritical disregard for both laws shows how impassionedly enraged they were. They were not motivated by the Law or logic but by their passions and desire for control. Again He escaped their attempt to kill Him because no one can take His life; only He can lay it down (John 10:18).

10:34-39 Jesus refuted their logic by quoting Ps. 82:6 and then extrapolating the implications of the psalm in relation to His own God claim. Whenever the Jewish people quoted a line from Scripture, they never intended to make a point from just the one verse; rather, they were using the quoted verse as a trigger to recall the context of the entire passage. The whole of Psalm 82 reads as follows:

"God [Yahweh] presides in the great assembly of god (El); He [Yahweh] renders judgment among the gods. He says, ‘How long will you defend the unjust and show partiality to the wicked? Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.'

The gods know nothing, they understand nothing. They walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

God said, ‘I thought, you are gods; you are all sons of the Most High. But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler.'

Rise up, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are your inheritance."

All throughout the centuries of Judaism, up to the time of the Second Temple period during which Jesus lived, the universal understanding of this psalm was that Yahweh (the first mention of God; 'elohim) is stepping into the assembly or pantheon of the pagan gods (the second mention of god; el) to render judgment among them for being corrupt in their rule over the nations and to demand that they rule with justice, especially in how they deal with the weak, fatherless, poor, and oppressed. If they do not, He will kill them, and they will die like humans. The Bible does acknowledge the existence of supernatural beings He created (1 Kgs. 22:19-22; Ps. 89:5-7), some of which went rogue and misled the nations. This is not much different from the existence of angels. But the Bible also affirms Yahweh's absolute uniqueness and sovereignty over all these beings, especially as their Creator (Ps. 89:5-7). This can be seen here by the fact that He will judge them and then destroy them.

After the destruction of the temple in 70 AD and the overwhelming force of the pagan Roman Empire, Jewish scholars placed an extreme emphasis on a strict absolute monotheism to distance themselves from surrounding polytheistic cultures. They began to view the idea of other "gods" standing in heaven with Yahweh as dangerously close to polytheism. Consequently, rabbis and sages adopted new, strictly non-supernatural interpretations. They began to interpret the Hebrew word 'elohim as "judges." In this view, Psalm 82 is a critique of corrupt human judges who were given God-like authority to judge the poor but abused that authority and were thus condemned by God. Another popular rabbinic interpretation suggested the 'elohim were the Israelites themselves at Mount Sinai. When they received the Mosaic Covenant, they were elevated and granted a sort of spiritual immortality, but because they later sinned (specifically with the golden calf), they forfeited this status and became mortal like "mere men."

The two main problems with seeing Ps. 82 as referring to human judges is, first, that the Hebrew word 'elohim always refers to any spiritual being that is not restricted to the material realm. It defines their substance or their dwelling place, not their essence or their attributes. The word is used of Yahweh (Gen. 1:1; Ps. 82:1a), the pagan gods of the nations (Ex. 12:12; 1 Kgs. 11:33), angels (Gen. 35:1-7; Job 1:6; 38:7), demons (Deut. 32:17), and spirits of the dead (1 Sam. 28:12-14). Second, Yahweh says that these 'elohim will die like humans. If they were already humans, then it is redundant to say they will die like humans.

When Christianity came along, Christians were divided between the two views (the 'elohim as gods or as judges). Over time, as our understanding of history and the Hebrew language grew, the overwhelming consensus among scholars, especially First Testament scholars, is that Ps. 82 is about Yahweh's condemnation of the pagan pantheon. Many Second Testament scholars, however, continue to hold to the judges view.

Jesus' audience, including the religious leaders, would also have taken the pantheon view of Ps. 82, and so it is in light of this view that Jesus quotes the passage. But no matter which view you take, Jesus' point is basically the same—that Scripture calls other spiritual beings "gods" ('elohim).

Jesus' argument is relatively straightforward: Scripture itself uses gods ('elohim) for a pantheon of lesser gods (view one) or for human judges (view two), and Scripture cannot be broken because it came from Yahweh, and the Jews were given and hold to the authority of the Scriptures, so calling someone "God's Son" cannot automatically be blasphemy.

However, Jesus was not simply saying that if the First Testament referred to a pantheon of lesser gods or to human judges as gods and it was not considered blasphemy, then the religious leaders should not object when Jesus applied this term to Himself. This does not really seem to fit the context, since, if that were the case, Jesus would not have been making any claim for "divinity" over and above any other being called a ‘god" ('elohim) because then He would not have been subject to the charge of blasphemy.

Notice that Jesus did not stop with just quoting Ps. 82. He immediately returned to pointing to the evidence of His deeds (John 10:37-38a) and to His larger claim that "the Father is in me, and I am in the Father" (John 10:38b). This goes beyond anything said of the beings called "gods" in Ps. 82. Jesus was using Ps. 82 to make the point that Scripture can apply the term gods to beings who received authority from Yahweh (lesser gods or human judges), so merely calling another being "god" is not inherently blasphemous. Thus, His claim to be the Son of God should be judged not based on calling Himself the Son of God but in light of His works and His unique calling from the Father.

In other words, Jesus used Ps. 82 as a legal and scriptural defense against the charge of blasphemy. He did not claim to be identical to the "gods" of Ps. 82; rather, He was arguing that if that language can be used in Scripture about others acting under Yahweh's authority, then His own claim as the one "whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world" cannot be rejected on linguistic grounds alone. His claim that "the Father is in me, and I am in the Father," backed by His works, invited them to evaluate His identity on that basis. And given the evidence, Jesus deserved more so than any other being—a pantheon of lesser gods or human judges—to be called God. He is the Word incarnate, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world to save the world (John 10:36).

Basically, he was exhorting the Jews to not judge Him simply because He used the term god but to stay focused on His larger claims about His identity and the evidence He had given for those claims. This is why He called Himself the Son of God and why the Father had given Him the authority and power to act accordingly without judgment.

10:39-42 But they did not listen and proceeded to try to stone Him again. However, when Jesus crossed the Jordan River to the eastern side, where the people were not so radical in their Judaism, many saw His miracles and deeds and remembered the claims John the Baptizer had made about Him, and they believed in Jesus as the Son of God. In other words, they did exactly what Jesus had argued for in John 10:34-38 and concluded that He is the Son of God (Mark 4:32).

L. The Death and Resurrection of Lazarus (11:1-57)

In this section, Jesus resurrected Lazarus from the dead, a miracle Jesus used to declare Himself the resurrection and the life, the only true source of life. Jesus' resurrection of Lazarus accelerated the religious leaders' plot to kill Jesus. He also gave a His final call to the people to not reject the Light lest they come under Yahweh's judgment rather than experience eternal life in the kingdom of Yahweh.

These final two chapters of this division (John 11:1–12:50) transition the reader from the miracles and teachings of Jesus into His death and resurrection, the culmination of everything He taught and did. 

11:1-3 The name Lazarus is a shortened form of Eleazar, which means "whom God helps." The other gospel writers did not mention him, which is probably why John described him as the brother of Mary and Martha. The sisters appear in John's gospel for the first time here, but they also appear in all the other gospels (Matt. 26:6-12; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42). Mary is the Greek version of the Hebrew name Miriam, which may mean "beloved," and Martha is an Aramaic name, which means "lady." John's mention of Mary as the one who put perfume on Jesus' feet anticipates John 12:3. The fact that John mentioned this before telling the story means John expected his readers to have been familiar with the event.

The Bethany here is not the Bethany featured in John 1:28 and alluded to in John 10:40-42, which was the region of Batanea on the eastern side of the Jordan River. This Bethany was a village about two miles east of Jerusalem.

The title Lord was a term of respect and did not imply belief in Jesus' deity. Obviously Jesus had had a considerable amount of contact with Lazarus and his two sisters that they could appeal to Jesus' filial love for their brother when they urged Him to come. They also believed that Jesus could help their brother by healing him, meaning they believed in Jesus' miraculous abilities.

11:4-7 Jesus did not mean Lazarus would not die but that his death would not be final. It was not that the sickness occurred in order for Yahweh to be glorified, rather that it established an occasion for Yahweh to be glorified.^[112] John dispelled any doubt about Jesus' true love for this family. Jesus' delay did not show a lack of interest but divine purpose (John 2:4; 7:3-10). And His delay of two days did not bring about Lazarus's death. He delayed in order to not be manipulated and to reveal Yahweh's glory.

11:8-16 Jesus' decision to return to Jerusalem seemed foolish to the disciples, but they did not understand Yahweh's protection over Jesus. The Jews and the Romans commonly regarded the daylight as twelve hours of the day and the nighttime as the other twelve.^[113] Jesus spoke of the daylight metaphorically to represent the Father's will. Jesus was safe as long as He did the Father's will. And as long as the disciples continued to follow Jesus, the Light of the World, they would not stumble. In contrast, walking in the night depicts a person's behaving without divine illumination or authorization (1 John 1:6).

Sleep was a common First Testament metaphor for death (e.g., "so-and-so rested with his fathers"; Mark 5:39). However, the idea that people would wake from this sleep was not the common perception of the outcome of death. Thus the disciples' confusion was understandable, as was John's clarification of Jesus' meaning. Jesus said He was glad He was not there when Lazarus died because likely His love for Lazarus would have moved Him to heal Lazarus, but now that Lazarus was dead, Jesus could demonstrate the glory of Yahweh. Thomas, one of the twelve (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), though showing his commitment to Jesus, revealed how the disciples continued to misunderstand that Yahweh would protect them.

11:17-20 Jesus was in Batanea, a hundred miles from Bethany. A person could travel 20 to 30 miles in a day, making this about a four-day journey. The Jews believed that when a person died, their spirit hovered over the body for three days intending to re-enter, but it left when it saw the decomposing body, at which point death was irreversible (Leviticus Rabbah 18:1; SB 2.544).^[114] So Jesus' delay in arriving made it obvious to everyone that Lazarus was truly dead before Jesus resurrected Him.

11:21-24 There is no reason to see Martha's comment as a rebuke or accusation against Jesus. These are the words of a woman full of grief, who believed Jesus could have healed Lazarus. Her addressing Jesus as lord and confessing Him as the Messiah shows her love and commitment to Him. Like the disciples, Martha did not understand that Jesus was planning to resurrect Lazarus and so responded by proclaiming that she did believe in the final resurrection of all the believers.

11:25-27 "I am the resurrection and the life" is Jesus' fifth "I Am" statement in John. Mainstream Judaism believed in the resurrection, but Jesus was claiming that He alone was sanctioned by Yahweh to bring the resurrection at the coming of the kingdom of God. (John 5:21, 25-29; 6:39-40).^[115] For those who are in Christ, death will never have the final word.

Martha confessed that she did indeed believe that Jesus was the resurrection and the life. Her answer focused on His person, not just on the teachings of Judaism (John 20:28, 30-31). She correctly concluded that if Jesus was the One who would raise the dead, then He must be the Messiah.

11:28-31 Mary's physical response to Jesus was more emotional than Martha's, but her words were identical to Martha's. Mary met Jesus in a public place, whereas Martha had talked with Him privately, meaning Martha was freer to express herself. This probably accounts in part for Jesus' different responses to the two women.

The Jewish cultural custom was to hire professional mourners to verbally and publicly wail for the dead. Even a poor family was expected to hire at least two flute players and a professional wailing woman (Mishnah Ketuboth 4:4), and Mary and Martha were not poor.

The phrase deeply moved is the Greek word enebrimesato, which communicates the idea of angry outrage and an indignant attitude. The word troubled comes from the Greek word etaraxen, a strong verb that describes emotional turmoil (John 5:7; 12:27; 13:21; 14:1, 27). Jesus was either angry over sin, sickness, and death, or He was angry over the fact that they were wailing like pagans, with no hope.^[116]

Jesus' weeping clearly demonstrated His humanity. What is remarkable is that He knew that in the next few minutes He was going to raise Lazarus from the dead, but the loss of Lazarus and the grief of his loved ones moved Jesus emotionally. His quiet shedding of tears differed from the loud wailing of Mary and the mourners.

11:38-44 When the Jews of this time buried the dead, they laid the body on a linen sheet slightly wider than the body and twice the length of the body. The body was placed on the sheet with the feet near one end, while the long end of the sheet was pulled up over the head and back down to the feet. The feet were bound at the ankles, and the arms were tied to the body with linen strips. The face was bound with another cloth.^[117] The body was covered in spices to help reduce the smell, then it was laid in a tomb, and the tomb was sealed with a large stone. Sometimes the entrance to the tomb had a vertical or horizontal shaft. Over the next several months the body would begin to decompose, and when the flesh had rotted off, the family members would return and gather the bones into a stone box called an ossuary, about the size of the femur bone, and place the box in the tomb with all their other dead relatives.

Martha protested to the opening of the tomb due to the smell. Jesus gently challenged Martha's faith by reminding her of their previous exchange. Martha showed great faith in Jesus by having the stone rolled away.

Jesus' prayer was not a request for Lazarus' resurrection; rather, it was a prayer of thanksgiving for what the Father was about to do, which Jesus already knew about because of His relationship with the Father. His prayer drew in the onlookers and focused their attention on His intimate and dependent relationship with the Father and on the Son as God's agent in performing the miracle (John 5:19-47).

The same Word that spoke creation and human life into existence (John 1:1-5) now commanded life back into the body of Lazarus. Jesus drew Him out of the tomb as He had drawn man out of the soil and breathed life into him (Gen. 2:7). The power of Yahweh brought Lazarus up and out of the tomb, for his feet were bound, and Jesus commanded the onlookers to unbind them. This resurrection illustrates Jesus' ability to empower people with new life (John 14:6), which looks forward to the future and permanent resurrection of believers into Yahweh's future kingdom.

11:45-48 There were many who believed in Jesus after seeing the resurrection, for it was the most powerful validation of Jesus' claim to be the Son of God. Unfortunately, even this most powerful miracle failed to convince many. Some of these unbelievers went as far as reporting Jesus to the Pharisees so they could take action against Jesus.

The Sanhedrin was the supreme Jewish political council and highest court of justice in ancient Israel, much like the United States Congress. It was made up of three groups: the Sadducees, who allied themselves politically with Rome, the Pharisees, who were more conservative in their religious beliefs and opposed Rome, and the elders, who were wealthy landowners with mixed religious views. These groups gathered to plot the death of Jesus. Their conclusion was that this most recent miracle had put Jesus over the edge in popularity with the people such that it threatened their political power. It could even draw Rome's attention if the Sanhedrin could not deal with Jesus, and Rome would take away the little political power they had. In other words, they would either lose their power to Jesus by popular opinion or to Rome, who would take it away because they saw Jesus as a political disruption.

11:49-53 Caiaphas had received his office as high priest from the Romans in 18 AD. His father-in-law, Annas, had preceded him in the office, and Annas continued to exercise considerable influence. However, it was Caiaphas who had the official power at this time. Caiaphas viewed Jesus' death as a sacrifice that was necessary for the welfare of the nation, by which he meant its leaders. Jesus' sacrificial death was exactly Yahweh's intention, though for a different reason. Caiaphas viewed Jesus as a scapegoat whose sacrifice would guarantee the life of Israel's leaders. Yahweh viewed Jesus as a lamb who would die to guarantee the life of believers. Ironically, it did not save them from losing their power to the Romans, who dismantled the Sanhedrin when they destroyed the city in the war in 66–70 AD, just as Jesus had foretold. John emphasized that Caiaphas was unknowingly more correct than he realized. It was Caiaphas who initiated the official plan and committed to have Jesus crucified at the hands of the Romans.

11:54-57 Jesus, seeking to control the precise timing of His death, no longer moved around publicly until He determined it was time to move. At the next Passover, the one that would result in Jesus' death, many sought Jesus for different reasons.

M. Jesus' Entry into Jerusalem (12:1-50)

This section marks the transition from Jesus' public miracles and ministry to His impending suffering, crucifixion, and final public appeal.

12:1-3 John's reference to Lazarus identifies which of the two Bethanys is in view. It also shows that Lazarus was still alive, another testimony to the reality of the resurrection miracle that Jesus had performed. During their dinner, Mary anointed Jesus with a litre of ointment. This was a Greek measure equaling about eleven ounces and was a lavish amount to pour out on someone. The ointment was nard or spikenard, an imported Indian oil that came from the roots/spikes of the nard plant, giving it its name. It was pure ointment of a high quality as well as imported and thus very expensive.^[118] Matthew and Mark noted that the liquid was in an alabaster flask, the neck of which Mary broke to pour the oil on Jesus (Matt. 26:7; Mark 14:2).

The other gospel accounts state that she anointed Jesus' head (Matt. 26:7; Mark 14:3). Probably she anointed both His head and His feet. Perhaps Matthew and Mark mentioned Jesus' head to represent His being anointed as a king, whereas John mentioned Jesus' feet to emphasize Mary's humility in contrast to the Sanhedrin and the disciples' pride (John 13:1-17).^[119]

Using her hair instead of a towel to wipe Jesus' feet shows Mary's unusual devotion. Normally Jewish ladies never unbound their hair in public because loose hair was a sign of loose morals. Evidently Mary's love for Jesus overrode her sense of propriety.^[120]

12:4-8 Judas, as well as some other disciples who were present (Matt. 26:8; Mark 14:4), objected to what seemed to be an extravagant waste. Three hundred denarii were a full year's wages for a working man in that culture. With hindsight, John identified Judas's real motive for objecting (John 10:13). Judas's selfish materialism also explains why He was willing to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.

Though Mary viewed her anointing as an act of love, Jesus regarded it as an act of anointing His body for burial. Jesus was not encouraging the disciples to regard poverty as inevitable and, therefore, to avoid doing anything to help those in need. He was comparing the unique opportunity that His impending death presented with the continual need that the poverty of some will always present (Mark 14:7). This was an act of true worship, and without true devotion and connection to Yahweh, one cannot truly care for the poor.

12:9-11 To make the contrast between belief and unbelief even more striking, John returned from writing about Mary's love to the chief priests' hatred. The fact that they desired to kill a man who had just been raised from the dead further exposes their great evil and disregard for the deeds of Yahweh.

12:12-15 When Jesus finally entered Jerusalem, publicly and on a donkey, the people began to proclaim Him as king. The word hosanna was a Hebrew expression meaning "Save!" which became an exclamation of praise. The people quoted Ps. 118:25-26, and they blessed Jesus as king. Jesus' riding into Jerusalem on a donkey fulfilled the prophecy in Zech. 9:9-17 of the Messiah entering into Jerusalem as king after the exile.

The image of Jesus riding a wild donkey was not one of humbleness but of a royal and exalted king riding into his kingdom. This is reminiscent of when David placed his son Solomon on a mule to take him to the Gihon spring to be anointed as king over Israel (1 Kgs. 1:32-40). When Simon the Maccabee drove the Syrian forces out of Jerusalem in 141 BC, there were music and palm branches (1 Macc. 13:51). This also would be a fulfillment of Gen. 49:8-12 and Zech. 9:9. In fact, the people responded by praising Jesus and declaring Him king as he entered the city, and never once did Jesus correct them on their declaration (Matt. 21:1-11).

Jesus' entry into Jerusalem and then the temple (Luke 19:45-48) is a fulfillment of Ezek. 40-47. In Ezek. 10 Ezekiel saw the Glory of Yahweh departing the temple and Jerusalem eastward because of Judah's idolatry and lack of justice. This was followed by the destruction of the city and temple at the hands of the coming Babylonians. In Ezek. 40-47 Ezekiel had a vision of the temple/city rebuilt with multiple gates, the prince of Yahweh sitting in the gate (Ezek. 44:1‑3), a river flowing out of the southern side of the temple (Ezek. 47:1-12), and the Glory of Yahweh returning to the temple from the east (Ezek. 43:1-12). Yet when the Jews returned to Judah after the exile and rebuilt the temple, the Glory of Yahweh did not return—then or later (Ezra 3:7-13; 6:13-18). In Luke 9:28-36 Jesus revealed Himself to be the Glory of Yahweh and then headed toward Jerusalem. Now He entered Jerusalem and then the temple, coming from the east (Luke 19:28-48). In John 2:13-22 Jesus referred to the temple as His Father's house and then as His body, saying it would be torn down and rebuilt in three days, a reference to His death and resurrection. Jesus was now in the temple, calling it "my house" (Luke 19:46). Jesus was showing that He is the rebuilt temple of Ezekiel's vision and the return of the Glory of Yahweh. This will be further seen in His crucifixion.

12:16-19 The disciples did not understand any of this until Jesus ascended into heaven and the Holy Spirit indwelled them. The people's understanding of the coming Messiah was one of a political and military king who would defeat Rome and establish the kingdom of Yahweh over all the nations, bringing peace and prosperity to the land of Israel. They saw Jesus' riding into Jerusalem on a donkey as the sign that this day had come. Because Jesus' entrance into Jerusalem was packed with political imagery, which accelerated His popularity among the people, the religious leaders became even more afraid of Jesus as a threat to their power.

12:20-22 These Greeks were God-fearing Gentiles who worshipped Yahweh along with the Jews. They could participate in synagogue worship and the annual feasts, and they would have worshipped in the temple court of the Gentiles. They may have approached Philip and Andrew because of their Gentile names. The important revelation of this verse is that the disciples continued to bring people to Jesus, which was the responsibility of Jesus' disciples. Jesus did not respond to the direct request of the Gentiles but to the situation that their request represented.

12:23-28a Until now, the hour for His death and resurrection had not been near (John 2:4; 4:21, 23; 7:30; 8:20). Now it was near, and His obedience in this would bring His glorification. In rabbinic literature, the kernel of wheat is used repeatedly as a symbol of the final resurrection of the believers when the kingdom of Yahweh came. Jesus described His body as a kernel of wheat that someone sows in the ground. By dying He would produce a great harvest; His sacrificial death was necessary for the harvest. Jesus' death would result in eternal life for many other people.

Jesus then applied this principle in the illustration for His followers. Whoever wanted to follow Him must give up their lives. The love/hate contrast here reflects Semitic idiom, representing preference or choice rather than actual emotions of love and hate.^[121] Jesus was calling them to give up everything they had dedicated their life to and give themselves to Him—everything was to be sacrificed to Him and His will for them. This is the same commitment Yahweh expected of Israel in the Great Shema (Deut. 6:4-5). At this point, Jesus wanted them to pledge their lives and allegiance to Him and His mission. Nothing else is important.

Jesus' death troubled Him because it would involve being separated from His Father and bearing Yahweh's wrath for the sins of the world. Despite this, Jesus was committed to His Father's will.

12:28b-33 The Father answered Jesus' petition from heaven audibly. The gospels record only two other times when Yahweh spoke audibly: at Jesus' baptism (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:21-22) and at His transfiguration (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). Only John recorded this event. In all cases, the purpose of the audible voice was to authenticate Jesus as God's Son in a dramatic way. The people present could not understand the words clearly, but many of the spiritually sensitive understood that it came from heaven (Mark 4:32). Jesus explained that the heavenly voice was for the people's benefit, not His.

Jesus then stated three outcomes of His coming death and resurrection. First was the judgment of the world. The Jews thought they were judging Jesus when they decided to reject and kill Him, but really their decisions brought divine judgment on themselves.

Second was the casting out of the ruler of this world, who is Satan (John 14:30; 16:11; Matt. 4:8-9; Luke 4:6-7; 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:2; 6:12). The death of Jesus might appear to be a victory for Satan, but it brought his doom. Though the cross did not immediately destroy Satan or bring an end to his power to influence the world, it did rob him of his absolute enslaving hold over humanity that had kept humans in sin; now they are no longer under the condemnation of sin and are able to enter the kingdom of Yahweh.

A third outcome was reconciliation of humanity to God as He freed people from sin, so many would receive eternal life and come to Jesus. "All people" includes both Jews and Gentiles, as seen in the book of Acts.

12:34-36 The Jews of Jesus' day believed that when the Messiah came, He would establish His kingdom and rule on earth without end (2 Sam. 7:13; Ps. 61:6-7; 89:3-4, 35-37; Isa. 9:7; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; 7:13-14). Jesus' statements about going away contradicted their beliefs and, in their eyes, provided evidence that He was not the Messiah. They wanted to know the exact nature of this Son of Man He was claiming to be since His version did not match up with theirs.

Jesus did not answer their question directly but continued to emphasize that the light would only be with them a little longer and then would be gone, referring to Himself and His death. Jesus' point was that they were so blinded by their own understanding of what the Messiah should be that they had ignored the overwhelming evidence that He was the Messiah and the light of God. Because they would have Him, the light, just a little longer, they needed to step out of the darkness of their futile thinking and step into His light and join Yahweh in what He was doing. If they remained in the darkness, they would come under the judgment of Yahweh.^[122]

12:37-43 In the remainder of the chapter, John concludes Jesus' public ministry by making the point that despite everything Jesus had done and said, many still did not believe or step into the light. John quotes Isa. 53:1 to trigger the recall of the entire passage to show that their response fulfilled the prophecy of the Messiah's being rejected and killed by His own people. John then quotes Isa. 6:10, where Yahweh told Isaiah that the Jews of his day would not respond to his message, given to him by Yahweh, because their eyes were blind and their hearts were hard (Mark 4:32). Despite this, Isaiah was still to be faithful to his calling to preach Yahweh's message to the people so that they were without excuse when their judgment came. And so it was with Jesus. He continued to preach to the Jews as Isaiah had, for there is always a remnant of people who would come into the light (John 3:16).

Sadly, many who did believe were not willing to make their belief public because they feared how people would view them and what they would lose if they did voice their faith. In an honor-shame culture, people had much to lose within their community, and so the honor/praise of the community carried a lot of weight in what one did. Sin was so rooted in humanity that even when they believed, they struggled to act on it, thus our need for the Holy Spirit.

12:44-50 Jesus then cried to all reminding them that what they did with Him was the equivalent of what they would be doing with the Father, for they are one and the same. Jesus declared that His main purpose for coming was not to judge people of the world, like the religious leaders did, but to reveal the light and to save them. Then He warned that there would still be judgment, for the same message that brings life to those who believe will result in condemnation for those who reject it. The last day refers to the day unbelievers will stand before Yahweh in judgment, namely at the great white throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15). Yahweh's purpose in the incarnation was essentially positive; however, He wanted people to believe and experience salvation, not condemnation.