087. Chapter 28 - At the Feast of Tabernacles
Chapter 28 - At the Feast of Tabernacles
John 7:11-52 The Excited Capital The failure of Jesus to attend the preceding Passover and His absence at the Feast of Tabernacles during the opening days caused excited discussion among the multitudes, which were on fire with expectation. They did not discuss the situation openly for fear that the leaders seeking to kill Jesus would turn on them. But the undercurrent was so strong it could not be silenced. This was the same sort of situation which prevailed preceding the final Passover (John 11:56, John 11:57). The discussion now seems not to have been whether He was the Christ, but whether He was a good man. Those who sided with the Pharisees and Sadducees argued that He could not be called a good man because He led the people astray (from the teaching of the scribes and their traditions). The King Comes
Suddenly in the midst of the feast Jesus appeared in the temple and taught the multitudes. The majesty and profound character of His teaching caused a wave of discussion to arise as to the source of His learning. To those who believed, it was plain that His miraculous power was from God. His enemies had charged that His mysterious power over demons was from the devil. They would like to have claimed that His learning was from men. But they could not. They knew that He had never studied in the University of Jerusalem. They could readily ascertain whether He had ever attended the synagogue at Nazareth to receive instruction from the scribe there. John uses the term the Jews to mean the hostile Jews. The fact that they found themselves forced to face this issue is significant: “How knoweth this man letters, never having learned” (John 7:15). This indicates clearly that Jesus had never attended school in His youth to secure instruction from men. When someone shows marked ability in intellectual leadership today, the first question asked is, “Where did he go to college?” And he will be found extolling the praises of some learned professors under whom he has studied and to whom he is indebted. How ridiculous it would have been for Jesus to have said, “You should not be surprised at my learning. I had a very able scribe teach me in the synagogue at Nazareth.” Yet this is the concept which is constantly being spread abroad today. See how contradictory it is to the answer Jesus actually gave: “My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me.” Not from men, but from God is His answer. From God The decision as to whether the teaching of Christ was from men or from God is not hard for those who are willing to hear and to see. Only those who close their hearts find it too difficult: “If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from myself.” “The will to believe,” the earnest desire of the person to obey God, puts the mind in a receptive state to be illumined. Being willing to obey God, the Christian becomes more godlike and hence understands better the teachings of Christ, which are God-given. It is thus that a Christian grows “in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18). For the Glory of God
Jesus pointed out that the one who speaks on his own authority things which he claims to have originated is seeking his own glory. The fact that Jesus continually sought the glory of God, who is true, proves that Jesus is true (John 7:18). Sadler applies this to the Bible and the way in which the writers refuse to glorify themselves: “To understand this teaching we have only to apply it to the Bible in general: in this book man is constantly humbled; therefore this book is from God. It is the argument which of all others most directly reaches the conscience” (Com. on John, p. 191).
Jesus now brought out into the open the covert attack that He was a breaker of the law of Moses. This is a continuation of the controversy that followed His healing of the lame man at the pool of Bethsaida during His former visit to the capital. He pointed out the hypocrisy of their charge of lawbreaking against Him, while they were guilty of breaking the elemental law against murder by their plots to kill Him. The reasons for bringing their plots to kill Him out into the open are: (1) to warn His disciples how near His death was; (2) to warn His enemies and try to save them from their terrible purpose; (3) to let all men know that He knew of their plots so that men would be able to understand the gospel; the Jews did not thwart God by killing Jesus, but “him, being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay” (Acts 2:23). The Jewish leaders followed their own traditions rather than the law of God and sought their own glory rather than God’s; their plots to kill Jesus furnished ready proof. The Debate
“The multitude answered, Thou hast a demon: who seeketh to kill thee” (John 7:20). John records that this rejoinder was from the multitude rather than the scribes. But the hypocritical leaders may have incited those who led in this rebuttal. Many in the crowd who had come from a distance might have been in the dark as to what the situation was really like. This statement is noteworthy in light of the attack that John’s Gospel contradicts the Synoptics in that John says nothing about demon possession. But here is a charge that Jesus was demon possessed. This is similar to the Pharisees’ charge that Jesus was in league with the devil. In His reply Jesus brought up the evidence of the miracle worked in their midst when He had healed the lame man (John 5:1-47). Eighteen months had elapsed since Jesus had worked this miracle, but it still filled the people with awe. His miracles at the capital had been few compared with the many in Galilee, but the reports of prodigious miracles in Galilee would have kept fresh in their midst the healing of the lame man in Jerusalem. Jesus now advanced a further defense of His having healed the man on the sabbath. He cited the collision between the law of circumcising a male child on the eighth day and the law not to work on the sabbath. He showed that they carried out the law of circumcision on the sabbath and yet objected to His healing on the sabbath. They held that the command for circumcision was more important than the law to keep the sabbath. Jesus responded that the law of mercy by which He had healed the man on the sabbath was more important than the law not to work on the sabbath.
“Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). “Do not judge me by mere hearsay that I broke the sabbath by healing a man on that day, but judge righteous judgment. Take into consideration that it was not for my selfish advantage, but to relieve human suffering and bring faith to men’s hearts as they hear the gospel that they may be saved.” By the example of the scribes themselves one law supersedes another. The law of mercy is above the law of rest on the sabbath day. The Uncertain Multitude
John distinguishes between “the multitude” in John 7:20 and “them of Jerusalem” in John 7:25. The former refers to Jews from all over the nation and the world, many of whom may not have been informed as to the tense situation at the capital. The latter refers to permanent residents of the city who understood the situation, but who differed in their estimate of Jesus. Some of these residents were inclined to take a favorable attitude toward Jesus, but were still puzzled over the final question as to whether He was the Christ. It is clear from their remarks that the chief priests and the leading Pharisees of the Sanhedrin had not accepted the challenge of Jesus’ sudden appearance in the temple and had not come forth to confront Him. They evidently were following the same method they had used in the provinces of sending out skilled subordinates to carry on the public struggle, the heckling, the whispering, the inciting of the crowds. Men placed at key points in the crowd could have suggested such a hostile comment as “thou hast a demon” and have had some others willing to repeat the charge (John 7:20).
“Is not this he whom they seek to kill? And lo, he speaketh openly, and they say nothing unto him. Can it be that the rulers indeed know that this is the Christ?” The rulers refers to the famous national leaders, but John shows, before this chapter is complete, that the Sanhedrin was not unanimous in its opposition to Jesus. “Some of them of Jerusalem” were amazed that the leaders who had threatened so much, did nothing now. And Jesus had not come with an army or even any considerable group of supporters. A Supernatural Messiah
These people were not themselves convinced that Jesus was the Christ: “Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when the Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is” (John 7:27). This seems to refer to the glorious prediction of Daniel 7:13 (Matthew 26:64) that the Messiah would be a supernatural Messiah coming on the clouds of heaven. This raises again the interesting problem as to how far the Jews of the first century understood the predictions of the Old Testament that the Messiah would be divine. The issue is what conception of a supernatural Messiah would be held among thoughtful Jews after more than two years of self-revelation of His divine Person and repeated charges of blasphemy against Him for claiming to be God.
If they were basing their assertion on such passages as this from Daniel, it is hard to see how they could have reconciled this prediction with the very plain declaration of Micah 5:2 that the Christ would be born in Bethlehem. The Pharisees used Micah 5:2 against Nicodemus in the Sanhedrin debate at the close of this chapter. But their argument was purely on the assumption that Jesus was from Nazareth. Were they also using Micah 5:2 against these whisperings among the multitude that no one would know whence the Messiah had come? Part of the veiling of the Messianic predictions in the Old Testament is the fact that they refer to the first and second comings of Christ and that the predictions do not make clear whether the reference is to the first or the second coming — the first, born in Bethlehem; the second, coming on the clouds of heaven out of the unseen.
Jesus’ Reply
“Ye both know me, and know whence I am; and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. I know him; because I am from him, and he sent me” (John 7:28, John 7:29). By His supernatural insight Jesus would have been able to know their perplexed arguments among themselves, although they may have stated their objection openly. Jesus replied to their objection that He could not be the Messiah because they knew whence Jesus was. In His reply He declared that while they knew He had been reared in Nazareth, they did not actually know whence He had come nor did they know who had sent Him. The mystery predicted in the Old Testament concerning the second coming attaches in a certain measure to this first coming, since Jesus had left heaven to come to earth. Augustine comments, “Ye both know me and know me not.” They knew His form and features and His home in Nazareth, but they did not know of His heavenly home or His deity. “He that sent me is true,” i.e., God is true (but the devil who is inspiring you to oppose me is false); “whom ye know not” (and for this reason you do not know me or whence I am). Thus Jesus affirmed His deity and silenced their objection, but He spoke in such profound statements that they could not comprehend the meaning.
Attempted Arrest
“They sought therefore to take him: and no man laid his hand on him, because his hour was not yet come” (John 7:30). When Jesus thus denounced and defied the wicked leaders in the temple itself, when the crowd became confused by Jesus’ boldness and the hesitation of the hierarchy, when Jesus affirmed His deity in such mysterious, majestic fashion, the chief priests and scribes were compelled to act. They sought refers to the national leaders, but whether they had now come openly into the picture or were remaining in secret and having others act for them is not completely clear. Since John 7:32 tells of their sending officers to arrest Jesus, we naturally conclude that this effort to seize Jesus in John 7:30 was the action of some of the subordinate leaders. They seem to have acted on the spur of the moment without the deliberate action indicated in their second attempt (John 7:32). But it was God’s will that His Son should not die yet, so men’s hearts failed them when they tried to arrest Him, and they dared not carry out their purpose. The Wavering Crowd
“Many believed on him….When the Christ shall come, will he do more signs than those which this man hath done?” (John 7:31). These thrilling declarations of Jesus in the very precincts of the temple, where the hierarchy could hear and learn immediately what He had said, began to sweep many of the crowd back to the view that He must be the Christ in spite of His not fulfilling their expectations in some directions. The miracles He had worked here on earlier visits (John 2:23; John 5:1.) and in Galilee caused the people still to marvel and meditate as to whether He might not be the Christ. This favorable movement of the crowd toward Jesus caused the Pharisees and Sadducees to send soldiers of the temple guard to arrest Him. Sadler remarks, “The same assertion of His intimate relationship to God which had provoked some to lay hands on Him, incited others of the people to believe on Him.” The Soldiers
It would seem no great task to arrest a lone man who was in the temple area. There must have been an impressive contingent of these temple guards. There were several things which held them back. Chief among these was the mysterious divine Person of Jesus which affected them in a manner which they themselves could not understand. Furthermore, they did not know whether He would suddenly turn on them His miraculous power and destroy them. Nor could they be sure just what the multitude might do if they undertook to arrest Jesus in their presence. This last consideration weighed heavily with the hierarchy when they finally did arrest Jesus. They were careful to achieve the arrest and trial secretly so that the people would not learn of it until they were informed Jesus had already been condemned to death and was awaiting execution.
Mysterious Teaching
“Yet a little while am I with you, and I go unto him that sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, ye cannot come” (John 7:33, John 7:34). This was addressed both to the multitude and to the detachment of temple guards seeking to arrest Him. The excitement must have been very intense as the crowd saw the soldiers come into the scene. But Jesus proceeded calmly with His teaching. He answered both the arguments in the people’s minds and the intent in the hearts of the soldiers. The people had argued that they knew whence He was, whereas the Christ would come from an unknown source. Jesus had replied that they both knew and did not know. He now added that He was about to leave them and just as they did not really know whence He was so they did not know where He was going, and they would not be able to follow Him there. This last appears to be directed especially at the soldiers, warning them that they would not be able to take Him nor to follow Him where He was going. It is the supreme joy of the Christian that he does know where Jesus has gone and that he can go where Jesus is. The precious assurances of the upper room echo with these promises. But Jesus was now speaking to those who were hostile and sought to destroy Him. The “little while” He is still with them refers to the six months from the Feast of Tabernacles to the final Passover and the ascension. Because they did not understand Jesus’ divine nature and purpose, they could not understand Him. Some commentators interpret Jesus’ statement as referring to the Jews seeking in vain for the help of the Messiah in the day of doom for the nation, when it was destroyed by the Romans. Others stumble at the thought, Did Jesus consign to utter despair those who were seeking to kill Him? Could they not hear and obey the gospel and be saved when the historic facts of man’s redemption had been achieved? But Jesus was speaking here to the crowd immediately in front of Him. The soldiers had been sent to arrest Him so that His enemies could destroy Him. He responded to their purpose by warning them that not only could they not take Him now, they could not even follow Him to destroy Him where He was going.
Whither? Among the Gentiles?
“Whither will this man go that we shall not find him? will he go unto the Dispersion among the Greeks, and teach the Greeks? What is this word that he said, “Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me; and where I am, ye cannot come?” (John 7:35, John 7:36). The Dispersion refers to the immense Jewish population scattered all over the Roman world. If He went among these Jews, then soldiers of the hierarchy might readily have pursued Him, for the Sanhedrin had authority over the religious affairs of all the Jews. But if He went among the Greeks (the word is used of Gentiles in general), it would have been more difficult to discover His whereabouts and to take Him. They were still far from understanding the mysterious depth of His meaning as He referred to heaven and eternity. The question naturally arises as to why they should speculate about His going afar to teach the Greeks; had Jesus spoken sufficiently of His world-wide mission to the Gentiles, and had He helped Gentiles enough for them to be reflecting that since the Jewish leaders had rejected Him, He might go to foreign nations? It may be that they were simply taking up any conceivable course open to Him. But the charge made later that He was a Samaritan raises the similar question as to whether they had learned of His swift journey just now through Samaria and His former preaching as Sychar. Thus they might have known of the trip through Phoenicia and His miracle performed there for the Syro-Phoenician woman, as well as earlier for the centurion of Capernaum. Passages such as Isaiah 60:3, “And the Gentiles shall come to thy light” might have suggested it. The Climax
“The last day, the great day of the feast….” Just as the final day of a revival meeting is calculated to be the greatest in attendance and enthusiasm so was the climax of these feasts. The law provided that this last (eighth) day of the feast should be a great day with a solemn convocation of all the people. “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.” The universality and majestic assurance of divine power in this invitation were as great here in the temple to the thousands as to the Samaritan woman by Jacob’s well. “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, from within him shall flow rivers of living water.” Three interpretations are suggested: (1) “Let him that believeth on me, come to me and drink as the scripture saith” (various passages in Isaiah would fit, such as Isaiah 55:1). (2) “He that believeth on me as the scripture hath revealed” would be similar to the usage of Paul, “Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3). He would be referring His hearers to what the Old Testament actually predicted that Messiah would be and do. (3) “As the scripture hath said, from within him….”Connecting the citation with what follows rather than what precedes, we meet the difficulty of finding any passage in the Old Testament where it is affirmed that the person who believes on the Messiah shall himself become the source of living water for others. Perhaps it refers to all the passages in general which predict the glorious Messianic age; the ground which has been dry and barren shall become fertile (Isaiah 35:6, Isaiah 35:7; Proverbs 18:4) if these be taken in the figurative sense of the spiritual blessings of the Messianic age. The Holy Spirit
“But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39). “And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” cried Peter on the day of Pentecost in naming the blessings to be gained by salvation in Christ. The comforting gift of the Holy Spirit, whom all Christians receive at baptism to guide and sustain them, had not yet been given. “Jesus was not yet glorified.” Salvation of a lost world was to be achieved by His death, burial, and resurrection. This had not yet occurred. The bestowal of the comforting gift of the Holy Spirit was dependent upon acceptance of God’s terms for man’s redemption. All this must wait for the proclamation of the full gospel message. The Spirit had been bestowed upon Old Testament prophets, upon John the Baptist, and upon the twelve apostles as they were sent forth two by two, but He had not been given in the sense that all Christians in the church are to receive the comforting gift of His presence and help. The Ascension
It is interesting to observe the reference which John makes to Jesus’ return to heaven in the ascension. He does not describe the ascension at the close of his Gospel, but ends with the appearance to the seven apostles by the Sea of Galilee. In the most intimate and incidental way, however, he introduces into the declarations of Jesus references to His ascension. The word yet is important. Jesus had not yet ascended when He made this statement, but John was familiar with the final day when Jesus did ascend from the Mount of Olives.
Confused Discussion
“Some said...This is of a truth the prophet, Others said, This is the Christ.” The crowd was divided and confused. Some favored Christ, others stood with the hierarchy. Among those who looked with favor upon Christ were some who would go no further than apply the title prophet, although the prophet, suggests the prediction of Moses concerning Christ (Deuteronomy 18:15, Deuteronomy 18:18). An interesting variation in interpretation between the a.v. and the a.s.v. is seen in that the a.v. capitalizes Prophet, showing the translators thought it was a direct reference to the Messianic prediction of Moses. The a.s.v. , on the other hand, leaves it a small letter, prophet, with the evident thought that these are two different groups with different ideas; they are not both affirming Jesus is the Christ; but this first group is only calling Him a prophet like one of the Old Testament prophets. The definite article, the, is hard to explain under this interpretation. Both groups seem to be affirming that Jesus is the Christ; some, in a vague manner that hesitates to use more than the term prophet; others, boldly declaring He is the Christ. The Christ
“But some said, What, doth the Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the scripture said that the Christ cometh of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?” (John 7:41, John 7:42). The discussion among the crowd has now veered around from the idea that the Old Testament had declared the Messiah would come on the clouds of heaven, so that no man could tell whence He had come, to the very definite prediction of Micah 5:2. Since this is the very passage the scribes used against Nicodemus in the secret meeting of the Sanhedrin immediately after this, some of the scholars are evidently speaking up out of the crowd and offering this objection. That Jesus had been reared in Nazareth was well known. That He had been born in Bethlehem seems to have been unknown to most. If there were in the crowd those who had witnessed the miracles surrounding the birth in Bethlehem, either they were not sure of the identity of Jesus, or they kept silent. Jesus revealed Himself by word and deed, and allowed the facts of His miraculous birth to be made known later. The miracles accompanying His birth must have created a stir which would have been accentuated by the slaughter of the infants by Herod the Great, but this was more than thirty years before. Anyone who remembered these events would have been looking for the Christ to appear from Bethlehem. No one would connect these events with Nazareth. The flight to Egypt and the return to Nazareth were so secret that no connection would have remained in the minds of the people. Thus Jesus was left free to reveal Himself. For this purpose the Old Testament prophecies were not explicit. Jesus did not use His birth in Bethlehem as evidence. He did not need to do so as He furnished miraculous evidence to substantiate His claims. In due time the full gospel would be proclaimed and would assemble all the evidence.
Never Man So Spake The officers, instead of arresting Jesus, returned awe-stricken after they heard Him calmly affirm that He was going where they could not arrest Him, and that He Himself was the source of life. Even though some in the crowd were in favor of the hierarchy and willing to aid in His arrest, the soldiers dared not touch Him. They were awed by His personality and sublime words; they feared the results to themselves either by a miracle or by the violence of the multitude who were arguing in His favor. The answer of the soldiers to the accusing question of the chief priests and Pharisees is immortal: “Never man so spake.” They might logically have replied, “Why do you not go and arrest Him?” The weakness of the national leaders was manifest. They had not even gone with the soldiers to join in the act of arresting Him. They now rest on their claim to scholarship: “Are ye also led astray? Hath any of the rulers believed on him, or of the Pharisees? But this multitude that knoweth not the law are accursed” (John 7:47-49).
It is a curious thing that this very argument is so popular today; the intelligentsia no longer believe that Jesus is the Son of God or the Bible is the Word of God. The hypocritical leaders had been able to make this boast because they had the power to reward and punish and used their power to threaten any who would accept Christ. Nicodemus had lacked the courage to declare his faith, and others doubtless had faltered for fear. Hence the hierarchy was able to make its boast that none of the scholars or the rulers had believed on Christ.
“This shows the evil of believing secretly, and not having the courage to confess our conviction.” Elijah was amazed to hear God say that there were seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. He had not known of their existence. They had not been helping him in his effort to save Israel. God rebuked Elijah for imagining that he was the only faithful soul left in Israel. But He still used Elijah as the leader in the midst of those who lacked the courage to speak out for God.
Nicodemus in the Lion’s Den The chief priests and scribes must at least have suspected Nicodemus, even though they were taken by surprise at his bold objection. Their sneer that none of the rulers or scholars had believed on Jesus may have been meant to further intimidate Nicodemus, as well as silence the soldiers. If so, it had the opposite effect. It was too much for the conscience of Nicodemus to remain silent under such a challenge. The point of law which he raised was devastating; the rulers had decreed the death of Jesus on the ground that He was a lawbreaker, yet they were breaking the law in condemning Him to death without a trial: “Doth our law judge a man, except it first hear from himself and know what he doeth?” (John 7:51). A legal vote in the Sanhedrin probably had not been attempted against Jesus, but they had a tacit agreement among themselves to put him to death. They had threatened with excommunication anyone who accepted Jesus as the Christ. They had tried to assassinate Jesus many times. They had just attempted to arrest Him, not to examine His claims, hear His teaching, or test His miracles, but to destroy Him. The objection Nicodemus interposed was not an open declaration of his discipleship, but it was a plain intimation. The leaders of the Sanhedrin turned on him with a snarl, “Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and see that out of Galilee ariseth no prophet” (John 7:52). The leaders silenced Nicodemus with the implied charge that he was a follower of Christ. At the same time they introduced the argument their subordinates had been using among the crowds that the Christ must come from Bethlehem and not from Galilee. Their charge that Nicodemus was a disciple immediately contradicted and nullified the argument that they had just used against the soldiers — that no scholar had accepted Christ. In their desperation as they were cornered in this heated argument, they had to abandon the position they had just taken in order to meet this new threat. From Galilee
Critics argue that this claim, “out of Galilee ariseth no prophet,” is not true, and therefore John’s narrative is incorrect. But if this is not true, then it is the scholars of the first century in Israel who are guilty of inaccuracy and not John. He merely records the current of the arguments in the Sanhedrin. Nicodemus evidently reported this scene to the disciples at a later time. Critics claim that four prophets are from Galilee: Elijah, Nahum, Hosea, and Jonah. Others have replied, saying that Elijah came from Gilead; Hosea, from Samaria; Jonah, from Gath-Hepher; and Nahum, from Elkosh. The latter two places cannot be identified, but it is highly improbable that they were located in Galilee. The scholars in the time of Christ confirm this conclusion by declaring that no prophet had arisen from Galilee. The capital mistake which the leaders made was assuming that Jesus had been born in Galilee. They had made no effort to learn the facts, even as they made no effort to weigh and judge fairly the teaching and miracles of Jesus to see whether they substantiated His claims. From the days of their furious controversy with John the Baptist and from the time that Jesus had denounced their corruption and hypocrisy in cleansing the temple, they had nothing but blind fury for Jesus.
Nicodemus might have quoted Isaiah 9:1, Isaiah 9:2, “Galilee of the nations, The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: They that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath light shined.” Matthew quotes this superb passage to show that the Old Testament did predict that the Christ would appear and begin to preach in Galilee (Matthew 4:14-16). The scholars were arguing on the basis of the birthplace of Christ, but their manner of statement left them wide open to attack, “out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.” The fact that other prophets had not been arising in Galilee made it the more impressive that Christ should have begun His ministry there. In the same manner the evidence of Micah 5:2 is made the more impressive by the fact that no famous person had been born in Bethlehem from David until Jesus. The hectic arguments and exciting events of the final day of the feast were now over as “they went every man to his own house.” This is one of relatively few places where a bad chapter division was made. The chapters and verses were worked out in the late Middle Ages. As a rule they are well done. Here, the a.v. divides John 7:53 and puts the first part of the verse as the conclusion of chapter 7 and the latter part as the opening of chapter 8. The a.s.v. places the entire John 7:53 as the opening of chapter 8.