John 5

-8 1 3 2 -9 1 0 0 0 0 13 96 -9 2 0 0 2 0 1 RVStyle2 7 StyleNameNormal textFontNameArialUnicode Size Standard StyleNameDefaultFontNameTahomaUnicode Size Standard StyleNameJumpFontNameTahomaStylefsUnderlineColorclBlue HoverColorclMaroonHoverEffects rvheUnderlineUnicode Jump Size Standard StyleNameHeading - Module name SizeDoubleFontNameTahomaColorclMaroonUnicode SizeStandard StyleName"Heading small - Module descriptionFontNameTahomaColorclMaroonUnicode Size Standard StyleNameHeading - LinkFontNameTahomaColorclNavy HoverColorclPurpleUnicode Jump Size Standard StyleNameDefaultFontNameTahomaStylefsUnderlineColorclBlueUnicode Jump Size Standard StyleNameDefaultFontNameTahomaColorclBlue HoverColorclMaroonNextStyleNoUnicode Jump Size -9 2 0 0 2 0 2 RVStyle2 jBiDiModervbdLeftToRightTabs StyleNameCentered Alignment rvaCenterTabsStandardTabs-9 2 0 0 2 0 4 RVStyle2 -9 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 28 2 8 0 0 CHAPTER V) ) 5:1 18) 5 1 After these things there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now in Jerusalem by the sheep-gate there is a pool, called in Hebrew Bethzatha, which has five porticoes. 3 In these lay a crowd of invalids, blind, lame, shriveled up. 5 Now there was a certain man there who had been afflicted with his illness for thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw this man lying there, and when he knew that he had been in that condition for a long time, he said to him, Do you want to get well? 7 The sick man answered him, Sir, I have no one to��109�� put me into the pool when the water is disturbed; and while I am coming, another steps down ahead of me. 8 Jesus said to him, Get up, pick up your mat and walk. 9 All at once the man was healed, and he picked up his mat and was walking.) That day was sabbath. 10 So the Jews were saying to the healed man, It is sabbath; it is against the law for you to carry your mat. 11 But he answered them, The man who healed me, it was he who said to me, Pick up your mat and walk. 12 They asked him, Who is the man that said to you, Pick up (your mat) and walk? 13 Now the healed man did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped out of the crowd that was in that place.) 14 After these things Jesus came across him in the temple, and said to him, See here, you have been healed. No longer continue in sin, or something worse may happen to you. ��110�� 15 The man went back and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him. 16 And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the sabbath. 17 But he answered them, My Father is working until now, and I too am working. 18 So for this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him, because not only did he break the sabbath, but he also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.) ) 5:1. The phrase after these things (���p �����, which occurs in 3:22; 5:1, 14; 6:1; 7:1; 13:7; 19:38; and 21:1) does not necessarily indicate a long time afterward (in 19:38 that cannot even be the meaning). It is, however, distinguished from the expression after this (���p �����, which is found in 2:12; 11:7, 11; 19:28 and in all these passages refers to events that occurred shortly afterward) in being more indefinite. It simply gives no hint with respect to the length of the period which elapsed since the events took place that were last recorded.) Hence, we do not know just when the great miracle on which our attention is fixed in this chapter occurred. We do know that it was when there was a feast of the Jews; but this indication, too, is rather indefinite.

To which feast does the author refer?) In discussing this question the following Table of Jewish Festivals which require consideration in this connection may be helpful. The names of the months are, of course, approximate; i.e., they do not correspond exactly to those of the Jewish religious calendar. The period covered extends from Christ s baptism to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.) MARCH APRIL MAY OCTOBER DECEMBER ) During the Year 26 a.d. ) Dedication ) During the Year 27 a.d. ) Purim Passover) 2:13, 23 Pentecost Tabernacles Dedication) cf. 4:35 ) During the Year 28 a.d. ) Purim Passover) 5:1? Pentecost Tabernacles Dedication ) During the Year 29 a.d. ) Purim Passover) 6:4 Pentecost Tabernacles) 7:2, 37 Dedication) 10:22, 23 ) During the Year 30 a.d. ) Purim Passover) 12:1; 13:1; 19:14 Pentecost) 7 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.*?id=44.2.1|AUTODETECT|” Acts 2:1) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 1 15 2 8 0 0 ) ) By glancing at this Table it is immediately obvious that the feast indicated in 5:1 cannot belong to the year 26 a.d. or even to the year 27 a.d., for 4:35 already carried us to December of 27 a.d.) It has been suggested that the Passover mentioned in 6:4 is that of 28 a.d., and that, accordingly, the feast of 5:1 is Purim of that year.) Against this view we present the following objections:) (1) Having left Judea for the reason stated in 4:1 3, 43, 44, Jesus would not have returned to that region so soon afterward unless it would be for the purpose of attending one of the three pilgrim feasts.) (2) Purim was not a pilgrim feast. It was celebrated in the local synagogues where for that occasion the book of Esther was read amid great joy.) (3) The Passover mentioned in 6:4 carries us to the close of the Great Galilean Ministry. Now if that Passover occurred in 28 a.d. this entire lengthy ministry, during which so very many events occurred, would be crowded into a period of four months. This will never do.) Now if the feast of 5:1 was not Purim of 28 a.d., and if (as is clear from 6:1: after these things) it cannot be the Passover of 6:4, then the latter must be dated in the year 29 a.d.) We arrive at the conclusion, therefore, that the feast of 5:1, if it was one of the three Jewish pilgrim feasts,��111�� must have been either Passover or Pentecost or Tabernacles of the year 28 a.d.) Of these three the term feast of the Jews (5:1) is used elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel to indicate either Passover (6:4) or feast of Tabernacles (7:2). In both cases, moreover, the original has the definite article preceding the noun feast. Accordingly, the omission of that article here in 5:1 according to the best textual evidence, does not decide the question either way.) We conclude, therefore, by stating as our opinion that this unnamed feast a. was one of the three pilgrim feasts; b. must be dated in the year 28 a.d.; and c. was, in all probability, either Passover or feast of Tabernacles (without ruling out the possibility that it was Pentecost).

In favor of the Passover two additional arguments are sometimes presented: 1. this is supported by the tradition of Ireneus, and 2. this was the only feast which the Israelites were required to attend. However, the evidence is not entirely conclusive.) We read that it was Jesus who attended the feast: And Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Nothing is said in this entire chapter with reference to his disciples. But this does not prove that they did not accompany him. It is possible that here as elsewhere (e.g., in 3:22 cf. 4:2) the entire group went up, though the name of the leader alone is mentioned. (Anent the expression he went up to Jerusalem see 2:13.)) 2. Now in Jerusalem by the sheep-gate there is a pool, called in Hebrew Bethzatha, which has five porticoes.

Not far from the sheep-gate (St. Stephen s?), probably called thus because through it many sheep were led for the purpose of being sacrificed in the near-by temple-court, there was a pool. Popularly, this pool is known as Bethesda (house of mercy), but the reading Bethzatha (Aramaic: house of the olive-tree?) has better textual attestation.) After much guess-work with respect to the identity of this pool, its site has finally been established to the satisfaction of most scholars. The pool (or, in reality, the reservoir which formed it) was laid bare in the year 1888 in connection with the repair of the church of St. Anne, in n.e. Jerusalem.

A faded fresco on the wall pictures an angel troubling the water. It appears, therefore, that by the early church this pool was viewed as Bethzatha. In the time of our Lord it had five porticos or covered colonnades where the sick could rest, protected from inclement weather.��112��) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.3.3|AUTODETECT|” 3. Now in these five porticoes or wards lay a crowd of invalids of every description; particularly, blind, lame, and shriveled up; i.e., withered or paralyzed 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.3.3|AUTODETECT|” Mark 3:3) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.6.6|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.6.6|AUTODETECT|” Luke 6:6) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ). Apparently the sick man whom Jesus cured was one of these withered ones. It is worthy of note that not only cripples and paralytics but also blind people sought healing at this pool. Did any blind person ever receive his sight at the Pool of Bethzatha, or was it thus, that the benefit which the lame man received caused the blind man to imagine that for him too there might be a cure?) 1 7 2 8 0 0 After 5:3 of the A.R.V., the A.V. has the following: Verse 3 b: & waiting for the moving of the water. Verse 4: For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water; whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. ) None of the best and most ancient manuscripts have these words which, accordingly, have not been retained in the A.R.V.��113�� On the other hand, Tertullian (about 145 220 a.d.) already shows that he knows this passage; for he states:) An angel, by his intervention, was wont to stir the pool at Bethsaida. They who were complaining of ill health used to watch for him; for whoever was the first to descend into these waters, after his washing ceased to complain (On Baptism V).) The following, it would seem to us, is a reasonable position with respect to the entire story and particularly with reference to the words that are omitted in the best ancient manuscripts and also in the A.R.V.:) (1) It is probably much more difficult to explain how it came about that these words were omitted from all the best manuscripts if they were really a part of the original text than to account for the manner in which they may have crept into the text (e.g., as a marginal gloss which was intended as an explanation of the disturbance of the water, mentioned in 4:7, and which ascribed this troubling to the periodic visit of an angel).) (2) On the basis of the text as it is found in the best manuscripts and in the A.R.V. (hence; with 4:3b and 4 omitted) there is no necessity to believe that the agitation that occurred in the water was actually due to any supernatural cause. Also, the idea that whoever, after such a disturbance, was the first man to step into the pool was healed is not presented here as being necessarily the belief of the author of the Fourth Gospel nor as the teaching of the Holy Spirit but as the implied opinion of the sick man (4:7b).) (3) On the other hand, it is certainly true that the possibility of supernatural, angelic activity must not be ruled out. It should never be forgotten that an interpolation from the margin into the text may be correct. In the days of our Lord s earthly ministry angels come into prominence again and again, and unusual powers and energies play an important role.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.10|AUTODETECT|” (4) It must be stressed, however, that the miracle which occurs here when this sick man is cured is ascribed not to any medicinal virtue inherent in this particular pool, nor to any angelic activity, but to the power and the love of Jesus! In fact, when the Lord heals this man he does not even make any use of the pool 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.10|AUTODETECT|” II Kings 5:10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.14|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.14|AUTODETECT|” 14) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ). And it is on this miracle that we should place all the emphasis; not on the question whether or not miracles were constantly taking place at this pool.) 1 1 2 8 0 0 5. Now there was a certain man there, i.e., among the invalids there was one man who more than any other attracted the attention of Jesus. He was the man who had been afflicted with his illness for thirty-eight years. This, of course, does not mean that he had been here at this pool for that length of time. The reason why John has selected this miracle for inclusion in his Gospel has already been stated (see pp. 33 35).) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.8.3|AUTODETECT|” 6. When Jesus saw this man lying there, and when he knew that he had been in that condition for a long time. Jesus saw this man; undoubtedly he looked upon him with an eye of sympathy 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.8.3|AUTODETECT|” Mark 8:3) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.10.21|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.10.21|AUTODETECT|” 10:21) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ), probing his very soul. The Lord knew that the invalid had been in that lamentable condition for a long time. Where did Jesus obtain this knowledge? There are three possibilities, none of which should be ruled out in this connection:) 1 11 2 8 0 0 (1) Someone may have given him this information in a perfectly natural and human manner. In that case we should translate, And when he was informed.& ) (2) The Father may have revealed it to him.) (3) Christ s divine nature may have imparted this knowledge to his human nature in a manner which we do not understand.) Knowing, then, that this man had been in this condition for a long time, Jesus addressed him. He said to him, Do you want to get well? Does this question imply that the soul of this man had actually descended to that morbid state where he had lost the very will to be cured? Whether or not this was the case, in all probability these words were spoken in order to bring him to an open acknowledgment of his deep misery and of his inability to deliver himself from it; so that, in turn, this confession might cause the miraculous recovery to stand out in bolder relief. The question of Jesus also contains a promise of help.) 7.

The sick man answered him, Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is disturbed; and while I am coming, another steps down ahead of me.) It seems that the rule at this pool was, Everyone for himself, No one had ever helped this invalid whose power of locomotion, due to his physical affliction, was very limited. He was never able to proceed fast enough: someone always stepped down into the pool ahead of him. And if, in this connection, it be remarked that today matters are different there would be someone to help: an attendant or a nurse , it should not be forgotten that such improved present-day conditions, wherever they occur, can be largely traced back to the influence of the loving and sympathetic heart of Christ, as revealed in Scripture, including the present chapter.) As has already been remarked, the cause of the water s disturbance may have been supernatural or natural. If natural, then it would seem that the sudden bubbling up was caused by an intermittent spring by which the pool was fed. In general it may be stated that it is never uncommon for people, afflicted with various illnesses, to gather around mineral springs. Think of the springs around Tiberias or, in our own country, of the waters of Hot Springs, Arkansas, which long before the Spaniards arrived were already being credited with healing virtues.) 8.

When the sick man complained, in utter hopelessness, that someone always stepped down into the pool ahead of him, did the light of sympathy and encouragement that was shining in the eyes of the Lord revive hope to some extent, especially in view of the question which Jesus had asked: Do you want to get well? Did it occur to the invalid that, perhaps at the next disturbance of the water-surface, this stranger might be willing to put him into the pool? What a welcome surprise he received when suddenly the Healer addresses him in never-to-be-forgotten words: Jesus said to him, Get up, pick up your mat, and walk.��114�� What a challenge this was to a man who had just now confessed his own complete inability! The mat to which Jesus refers (���������, cf. the Latin grabatus) was a camp-bed, pallet, pad, or thin mattress. The man was told to pick this up and to start walking.) 9a. All at once the man was healed.

He obeyed and was healed all at once (�P����). The very fact that the author of the Fourth Gospel, in contrast with Mark, seldom uses the expression all at once, straightway, or instantly (also in 6:21 and 18:27; for �P��� see 13:30, 32; 19:34) indicates that he wishes to place special stress on this sudden and complete character of the cure. Once more the glory of the Son of God stands revealed. This recovery is neither gradual nor partial; nor, we may well add, was the sickness faked (as some, nevertheless, have supposed). All so-called faith-healers should make a close study of this wonderful account. At the word of Jesus new strength and vigor surged through this man s whole body; and he picked up his mat and was walking!) 9b, 10.

That day was sabbath. So the Jews were saying to the healed man.) The day on which Jesus healed this man was a sabbath. So a controversy develops between Jesus and the Jews (for the specific meaning of this term in the Fourth Gospel see on 1:19). The Pharisees had superimposed upon the law of God their own hair-splitting distinctions and rabbinical restrictions. This was true particularly with reference to the sabbath, as has been shown in connection with 3:1. Instead of looking upon it as a day of special consecration unto works of gratitude for the salvation which God had given, they viewed it as a day of cessation from all (common) work with a view to the salvation which man must merit.

For them the sabbath meant idleness; for Christ it meant work. Nevertheless, for them it constituted hardship; for him, rest. As they saw it, man was made for the sabbath; as he knew it, the sabbath was made for man.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.20.10|AUTODETECT|” Hence, the Jews said to the healed man, It is sabbath; it is against the law for you to carry your mat. They referred, undoubtedly, to ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.20.10|AUTODETECT|” Ex. 20:10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.17.19-24.17.27|AUTODETECT|” and more specifically to ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.17.19-24.17.27|AUTODETECT|” Jer. 17:19 27) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=16.13.15|AUTODETECT|” ( Thus said Jehovah, Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on the sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the sabbath day.& ) and to ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=16.13.15|AUTODETECT|” Neh. 13:15) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ( In those days saw I in Judah some men treading winepresses on the sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses therewith; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the sabbath day: and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals ). In these passages the reference is, however, clearly to that type of burden-bearing which was connected with the performance of ordinary labor for gain, with trading and marketing. By forbidding a cured man to pick up his mat as if that were comparable to a burden which he was carrying to the marketplace in order to sell it at a profit! they were making a caricature of the law of God.) 1 15 2 8 0 0 11. The reply of the cured one was to the point. He answered them, The man who healed me, it was he who said to me, Pick up your mat and walk. His reasoning was as follows: one who performs so glorious a deed instantaneously granting complete recovery to a shriveled up individual whose body had been in that atrophied condition for thirty-eight years! has a right even on the sabbath to tell that healed person what to do.) 12. They asked him, Who is the man (i.e., the fellow, in a tone of derision) that said to you, Pick up and walk? They do not ask, Who healed you?

They are not at all interested in this man s glorious recovery. They are interested only in their hair-splitting man-made regulations. In their great zeal for the maintenance of the latter they even forget to see the utterly ridiculous character of their complaint: they do not seem to realize that, after all, it was only a mat (see p. 192) that the man was carrying. Hence, they omit even this word. As they saw it, the sin which the man was committing was this, a. that he had picked up something, anything, it hardly mattered what it was, and b. that he was walking away with it! They are logical, however, when they attempt to trace the awful deed to the one who had commanded it to be done.) 13.

Now the healed man did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped out of the crowd that was in that place. The healed man had not learned the identity of his Benefactor, for immediately after performing the miracle Jesus had slipped away from the crowd of sabbath-sick-visitors. Was it in order to avoid a public demonstration that Jesus had slipped away? Or, perhaps, in order that he might face the religious leaders themselves rather than their followers? Or, as others have thought, in order that he might give this healed person an opportunity to be strengthened in his convictions by being compelled to express them without help from anyone? Whatever may have been the reason or combination of reasons, the fact remains that the healed man was unable to point out who it was that had changed his sadness to gladness.) 14.

After these things Jesus came across him in the temple, and said to him, See here, you have been healed. No longer continue in sin, or something worse may happen to you.) On the phrase after these things see on 5:1. Jesus came across the healed man in the temple; probably in the court of the Gentiles. Whether this meeting occurred the same day or the next day or still later cannot be established from the text. Neither is there anything in the text or context that indicates the purpose for which the healed man had gone to the temple. There were many reasons strictly or not so strictly religious why Jews, in great numbers, would enter the house of God and spend a while there.

Hence, it is not at all certain that the man s presence in the temple at this particular occasion was in order to bring a thank-offering to God for his recovery.) On the other hand, the reason why Jesus continued to work with him would seem to be far more obvious. In the entire account of the healing of this man (5:1 13) nothing at all was said with respect to a change in his spiritual condition. His body had been healed. So it is no wonder that the Healer now restores the soul.) Jesus, accordingly, addresses him in these words, See here, you have been healed. No longer continue in sin, or something worse may happen to you. In our interpretation of this passage we disagree with those commentators and there are many! who draw the conclusion that the Lord meant to say, More than thirty-eight years ago you committed a sin.

As a result, you became physically deformed and paralyzed. Now I warn you not to sin again, or something worse may happen to you. On the contrary, the present tense of the verb (������ �������), so that we translate, No longer continue in sin, rather shows that Jesus is referring not to what supposedly happened more than thirty-eight years ago but to the present condition of the man.��115�� Right now he was in the state of being unreconciled with God. Jesus knew this. Hence, he warns him not to continue in this condition. Otherwise there is in store for him something worse than the physical illness from which so recently he had been delivered.

Is it not probable that by something worse Jesus meant to indicate eternal punishment? From this it is clear that the account does not contain a single word with reference to the cause of the man s physical illness. This explanation also harmonizes with the words of Christ in 9:3.) 15. With gratitude in his heart the man went back and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him. However, we note an interesting difference between the question of the Jewish religious leaders, and the answer given by the man. They had asked, Who is the man that said to you, Pick up and walk ?

But he answered, It is Jesus who healed me. He places the emphasis where it belongs; namely, on the healing, in which the Jews had shown so little interest.) 16. So intense is the anger of the Jewish authorities when their attention is fixed upon Jesus that they determine in their hearts to persecute him even unto death. And for this reason the Jews were persecuting. The verb refers to continued hostile activity. It became more and more definite and determined until it finally nailed Christ to the cross.

On the progressive character of this persecution see p. 236. The reason for the hatred is stated in these words: because he was doing these things (healing the man and telling him to pick up and walk) on the sabbath.) 17. Did the Jews at this moment begin to address Jesus personally, accusing him of violating the sabbath? Or did the Lord, reading their hearts, address them first? Either way, in defence Jesus points out that in performing this work of mercy on the sabbath he had acted in conformity with the example of his own Father (note my Father; and see on 1:14, the nature of Christ s sonship) and in conformity with the mandate which he had received from him. Do the Jews really mean to say that the essence of the sabbath is idleness, and that all work on that day is wrong?

But then would they not be accusing God himself of sabbath-violation? If up to this very moment the Father of Jesus is carrying on the work of preservation and redemption, how should not the Son, who stands in the closest possible relation to him (5:19 23), do the same? In the final analysis, Father and Son are engaged in one task. Hence, we read: But he answered them, My Father is working until now, and I too am working.) 18. So, for this reason (��p �����, just as in 4:16) the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; i.e., they were already determined to bring him to death because not only did he break the Sabbath, (in their estimation he was a sabbath-violator), but now this determination became even more intense, active, and energetic; the added reason being: but he also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.) By the words, he also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God, the author once more brings into clear view the purpose of his Gospel. That purpose was to strengthen believers so that they might continue to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing they might continue to have life in his name (20:30, 31).) In addition to his stand with respect to the sabbath it was his claim of being equal with God that nailed Christ to the cross.

When the Jewish authorities heard Jesus call God my (own) Father, they did not do what many moderns have done. They did not try to tone down the character of Christ s sonship. They immediately understood that Jesus claimed for himself deity in the highest possible sense of that term. That claim was either the most wicked blasphemy, to be punished with death; or else, it was the most glorious truth, to be accepted by faith. The very character of the sign which Jesus had just now performed should have caused these religious leaders to adopt the latter alternative. Instead, they chose the former.) Synthesis of 5:1 18) See the Outline on p. 68.

The Son of God Rejected in Judea, as a Result of Healing the Man at Bethzatha on the Sabbath, and of Claiming Equality with God.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.9.1|AUTODETECT|” For fully eight months Jesus had been carrying on his teaching and healing ministry in Jerusalem and Judea. Then, after a stay of only two days in Samaria, he had entered Galilee. Here, too, he had already performed many miracles, one of them being the cure of the courtier s son, a very remarkable sign, especially in view of the fact that it was performed at a distance of about sixteen miles from the abode of the sick child. The Great Galilean Ministry had already been in progress for at least four months. During the course of this ministry the Lord was fulfilling the prophecy of ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.9.1|AUTODETECT|” Isa. 9:1) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 , In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulum and the land of Naphtali; but in the latter time hath he made it glorious, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations. ) 1 11 2 8 0 0 Galilee was full of excitement and enthusiasm, but not of true, saving faith. Now it was during the course of this work in the northern province that Jesus decided to attend one of the three pilgrim feasts in Jerusalem. This was during the year 28 a.d. In Jerusalem he visited the pool of Bethzatha, where he healed a man who had been in his paralytic condition for thirty-eight years.) It was on the sabbath that Jesus said to this sick man, Get up, pick up your mat, and walk. The man obeyed and instantly received complete physical recovery. Spiritually also the Lord provided for him, by warning him as he met him in the temple, No longer continue to sin, or something worse may happen to you. ) When the Jewish authorities saw the man carrying his mat on the sabbath, in obedience to Christ s command, they criticized both him and his Benefactor.

Jesus, however, answered, My Father is working until now, and I too am working. The religious leaders at Jerusalem therefore instigated a plot to put Jesus to death, and this for two reasons: a. sabbath-violation, b. blasphemy (making himself equal with God).) ) 5:19 30) 19 Jesus answered and said to them, I most solemnly assure you, the Son can do nothing whatever of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and has shown him all that he himself is doing, and greater works than these will he show him, in order that you may be amazed. 21 For even as the Father raises the dead and imparts life to them, so also the Son imparts life to whom he wills. 22 For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, 23 in order that all may honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.) 24 I most solemnly assure you,��116�� he who hears my word and believes him who sent me has everlasting life, and does not come into condemnation, but has passed out of death into life. 25 I most solemnly assure you,��116�� the hour is coming yea, has already arrived! when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted to the Son also to have life in himself, 27 and he gave him authority to function as Judge, because he is the Son of man. 28 Stop being surprised about this, for��117�� the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out: those who have done good, for the resurrection of life, and those who have practised evil, for the resurrection of condemnation. 30 I can do nothing whatever of myself; as I hear I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of him who sent me. ) ) 5:19. Instead of in any way seeking to moderate his earlier statement (verse 17) which had aroused the anger of the Jews, Jesus strengthens it by means of a. the majestic introductory formula I most solemnly assure you (see on 1:5) and b. the rest of the contents of verses 19 23. The passage under discussion may be paraphrased as follows.) Do you Jews accuse me of transgressing the Father s sabbath-ordinance and of blaspheming his name by claiming equality with him? The charge is absurd, for in that case the will of the Son would be separate (not merely distinct) from the will of the Father and would even oppose the latter.

But as a matter of fact the Son can do nothing whatever (�P ������� & ������ & �����) of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing; for here, indeed, is the perfect pattern of that which is so often seen on earth; namely, that whatever he (the Father) does that the Son does likewise (here, indeed, there is flawless correspondence).) 20, 21. I have a right to say this, for (���), being myself the Son, I know that the Father loves (�����; see comments on 21:15 17) the Son, and has shown him all that he himself is (constantly) doing in working out his eternal plan of redemption. The performance of miracles e.g., the healing of this man at the Pool also belongs to the working out of this eternal plan; and greater works than these wonders of healing the sick will he (the Father) show him (the Son) namely, bringing to life those who are dead, and pronouncing judgment with reference to all in order that you, already astonished because of the miracle at the Pool, may really be amazed. For even as the Father raises the dead and imparts life to them (both to those spiritually dead, and to those physically dead, the latter in the day of judgment) so also the Son, for he is equally sovereign, imparts life to whom he wills.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.25.31|AUTODETECT|” 22, 23. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that is, the Father never acts alone (in separation from the Son) in pronouncing judgment, but has committed all judgment to the Son (both for the present, in the sense of 3:18b, 19; and with respect to the future, in the sense of ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.25.31|AUTODETECT|” Matt. 25:31) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ff). Thus, the Father always works through the Son, in order that all may honor the Son even as they honor the Father; that is, in order that those two persons who are equal in essence (5:17, 18) and in works (5:19 22) may also be equal in honor. You unbelieving Jews, who have determined in your hearts to put the Son to death (5:18) should not imagine that you can honor the Father: he who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.) 1 21 2 8 0 0 24 30. Quickening the dead and pronouncing judgment were the two greater works which the Father had assigned to the Son (see verses 20b, 21, 22 above). As the terms to judge and judgment are used in verses 24, 27, 29, we refer to our explanation of 3:17 19 for further comment. In the present paragraph we are told:) a. How the Son performs this work at present in the spiritual sphere (verses 24, 25); and) c. How he is going to accomplish this task in the future in the physical realm (verses 28, 29).

Between these two passages there is one which shows) b. How it is to be explained that the Son is able to carry out this double assignment (quickening the dead and pronouncing judgment) in the present and in the future, and this in both spheres (verses 26, 27).) d. The closing passage (verse 30), on the basis of a, b, and c, reaffirms the Son s perfect unity with the One who sent him.) Subdivisions a. and c. (verses 24, 25 and verses 28, 29) are clearly distinguished by the words the hour is coming, yea, has already arrived of verse 25, and the words the hour is coming of verse 28. The first passage, accordingly, deals with the first resurrection; namely, that of the soul; the second subdivision describes the second resurrection; namely, that of the body. We meet exactly the same sequence of events in another work by the same author (John); namely, in the book of Revelation, where the former is discussed in 20:4 6; the latter in 20:11 ff.��118�� Note the parallel:) Fourth Gospel Revelation ) A. First Resurrection A.

First Resurrection ) I most solemnly assure you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me has everlasting life & has passed out of death into life. I most solemnly assure you, the hour is coming yea, has already arrived! when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. & and I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded & and such as worshiped not the beast, neither his image, and received not the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.& This is the first resurrection. ) & and (he) does not come into condemnation. (For the solemn introductory formula see on 1:51.) Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection: over these the second death has no power. ) B. Second Resurrection) (unto judgment) B. Second Resurrection) (unto judgment) ) Stop being surprised about this, for the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and will come out: those who have done good, for the resurrection of life, and those who have practised evil, for the resurrection of condemnation. And I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it.& And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne; and books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of the things which were written in the books, according to their works: And the sea gave up the dead that were in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.& And if any was not found in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire. ) ) ) On the basis of this comparison a few conclusions are warranted:) 1. Though it is often maintained that the Fourth Gospel contains no teaching with reference to the last things, this is not true, as the present paragraph shows.

See also 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48; 14:3, 28; 15:18 ff.; 16:1 ff.; 16:19 ff.��119��) 2. The first resurrection has nothing to do with the body; it concerns the soul. As soon as the word of Christ is accepted by faith one has everlasting life (on this see 1:4; 3:16) and has passed out of death into life ; and what else is this but the first resurrection, which, though beginning here on earth, culminates in the life of the soul with Christ in heaven? In the passage from Revelation it is especially the latter phase of this first resurrection which receives the emphasis.) 3. One who takes part in the first resurrection (i.e., one who has embraced Christ by a living faith) need not fear the coming day of judgment. In the language of the Fourth Gospel he does not come into condemnation (�0� ������); in the language of Revelation over these the second death (in which the sentence of condemnation is executed) has no power. ) 4.

The second resurrection is physical in character.��120�� It pertains to the great day of the consummation of all things. It is universal: all will be raised: both believers and unbelievers.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.25.46|AUTODETECT|” 5. Neither the Fourth Gospel nor Revelation teaches that a period of a thousand years will intervene between the physical resurrection of believers and the physical resurrection of unbelievers: the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and will come out. And I saw the dead, the great and the small & books were opened and another book was opened.& And the sea gave up the dead that were in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them. It is all as general as possible. Calvin is right when he remarks that here in John s Gospel (5:28) the expression all who are in the tombs will come out certainly does not imply that those who were devoured by wild beasts or were drowned or burned to death are excluded from the number of those who will arise. When that great hour arrives all arise and all are judged! See also ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.25.46|AUTODETECT|” Matt. 25:46) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.24.15|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.24.15|AUTODETECT|” Acts 24:15) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.5.10|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.5.10|AUTODETECT|” II Cor. 5:10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=53.1.7-53.1.10|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=53.1.7-53.1.10|AUTODETECT|” II Thess. 1:7 10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.22|AUTODETECT|” . No time-difference is indicated anywhere, not in John s writings, nor in Paul s. 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.22|AUTODETECT|” I Cor. 15:22) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.23|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.23|AUTODETECT|” 23) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=52.4.13-52.4.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=52.4.13-52.4.18|AUTODETECT|” I Thess. 4:13 18) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 teach nothing of the kind, as we have pointed out elsewhere.)��121��) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.12.2|AUTODETECT|” 6. Although as concerns time there is but one, universal physical resurrection, nevertheless, as concerns quality or character we may, indeed, speak of two future resurrections. 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.12.2|AUTODETECT|” Dan. 12:2) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 .) In other words, the one, universal resurrection has two phases, as is taught clearly both in the Fourth Gospel and in the Apocalypse. There is a resurrection of life, on the one hand (qualitative genitive: this resurrection is in harmony with the character of everlasting life; hence, is glorious, etc.), and a resurrection of condemnation, on the other hand (same genitive: this resurrection is in harmony with the idea of condemnation; hence, is unto shame and derision). Believers are raised in order to reign forever and ever with Christ, as to both body and soul (heretofore only as to the soul); unbelievers are cast into the lake of fire.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.24-43.5.30|AUTODETECT|” In addition to these remarks which are based on a comparison between the Gospel and the Revelation of John, the following points with reference to ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.24-43.5.30|AUTODETECT|” John 5:24 30) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 require attention:) 1 1 2 8 0 0 With respect to a. (verses 24, 25):) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.15.32|AUTODETECT|” Spiritual quickening does not occur apart from the word. Nevertheless, the mere hearing of the word is not enough; it must be accepted by faith: he who hears my word and believes. This faith must have as its object Jesus as the Son of God: believes him who sent me. Such a one has everlasting life. The idea that a sinner is by nature dead, so that when the great change takes place he actually passes out of death into life, is found not only here but also in ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.15.32|AUTODETECT|” Luke 15:32) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.2.1|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.2.1|AUTODETECT|” Eph. 2:1) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.5.14|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.5.14|AUTODETECT|” 5:14) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 . Regeneration and conversion are basic changes, radical transformations. They are not to be confused with moral improvements whereby, for example, a drunkard renounces the use of liquor. Of course, when the entire personality is regenerated, the morals too are changed.) 1 8 2 8 0 0 The expression the hour is coming, yea has already arrived refers to this entire new dispensation, which when Jesus spoke these words was both present and future. The Lord is thinking about the hosts of converts that will be drawn out of the darkness into the light, and out of death into life, from the realm of both Jew and Gentile until the day of his second coming. The dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. ) With respect to b. (verses 26, 27):) For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted to the Son also to have life in himself, and he gave him authority to function as judge, because he is the Son of man. Just as the Father is self-sufficient, having within himself eternal life, so also the Son has been given to have this life (inherent) in himself; and this explains the fact (note ���) that he is able to grant everlasting life to his elect. In passages of this nature it must be borne in mind that our Lord s mediatorial sonship in which he carries out his task on earth rests upon his eternal, intra-trinitarian sonship. When Jesus spoke these words, the Jews must have asked, Whence does this man derive the right to utter such language?

Is he actually going to judge? Jesus points out that this authority to judge (as well as the power to impart life) has been given to him because he is the Son of man. Moreover, the two ideas judging and Son of man always go together in Scripture. (On the title Son of man and its connection with the judgment see our comments on 12:34.) Many commentators suggest that the absence of the article before Son of man here in 5:27 (so that we have �1x� �������) is very significant. On the basis of this absence a host of interpretations of this verse have been offered; especially these two:) a. The authority to function as judge had to be given to Jesus because it is as man, and not as God, that he performs this task.) b. The authority to function as judge of men was given to him because he too is a man, thoroughly acquainted, therefore, with human thoughts, words, and actions.

In order to be a good judge one must share the nature of those who are to be judged.) But with all due respect for the ability of those commentators who base their whole exegesis of this passage on the omission of the article, we cannot go along with them in their conclusions. It is, indeed, very doubtful whether the absence of the article should be pressed. It is a well-known fact that official titles have a tendency to lose the article. It would, indeed, be very strange if in this one instance the title had a different meaning than it does in all the other cases. Besides, as was pointed out, the idea that the right to judge was given to him as (the) Son of man, in the messianic meaning of the term, renders excellent sense. It is an eminently scriptural thought, whereas this cannot be said with the same emphasis with respect to either of the other interpretations.) With respect to c. (verses 28, 29):) The idea of judgment (condemnation and acquittal; with consequent retribution and remuneration) did not take the Jews by surprise.

However, what did cause them to be filled with amazement was the claim of Jesus (verses 22 and 27) a claim utterly preposterous and intolerable, as they saw it that he himself had received the right to judge, and that men were being judged and were going to be judged on the basis of their attitude to him.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.52|AUTODETECT|” Therefore Jesus says, Stop being surprised about this, for (what I have affirmed is true, as will be shown by the fact that) the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and will come out.& The statement, all who are in the tombs will hear his voice would seem to indicate that instead of being in any sense secret or silent, the second coming is going to be public and audible (as well as visible). Cf. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.52|AUTODETECT|” I Cor. 15:52) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 .��122�� Note also that both in the spiritual and in the physical realm the voice of Christ is creative. If it were not, the dead would not be able to hear it! For further comments on this passage (verses 28, 29) we refer to what has already been said on pp. 199 202.) 1 18 2 8 0 0 With respect to d. (verse 30):) In this verse Jesus sums up the entire argument. He has arrived at the conclusion which was already stated at the beginning (see verse 19), but is now emphasized by the use of the pronoun, first person singular; namely that the Jews have no right to judge and condemn him as if what he had done to this man at the Pool on the sabbath (or, in general, as if whatever act he performed) were something for which he alone and not he and the Father was responsible. Says he, I can do nothing of myself. The Jews must know that in criticizing the Son of God they are opposing God himself. The Son as Mediator has received definite information (as to standards of judgment) from the Father. Moreover, inasmuch as his Mediatorial sonship rests upon his eternal sonship, it is clear that he himself desires to do the wholly righteous will of the Father, with whom he is united in essence: as I hear I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of him who sent me (��� ��������� ��; little if any difference between ����� and �������� in John s usage; see also on 1:6 and 3:34).) Synthesis of 5:19 30) See the Outline on p. 68.

The Son of God Rejected in Judea, as a Result of Healing the Man at Bathzatha on the Sabbath, and of Claiming Equality with God (continued).) In this section Jesus sets forth his claims with respect to his relation to the Father. He does this in answer to the unbelief and hatred of the Jews who are determined to put him to death. The Lord s defence may be summarized as follows:) 1. In attacking me, the Son, you are attacking the Father himself, for the Son does what he sees the Father doing; he judges as the Father judges. He cannot do otherwise. Neither does he desire to do otherwise.) 2.

Are you amazed because of this act of healing a sick man? This was, indeed, a great work, but greater works will follow: imparting life to those who are dead (yes, both to the spiritually dead and, at the last day, to those physically dead) and judging all men (both now and at the Return in glory).) 3. Do you question how it is possible for me a. to impart life and b. to pronounce and execute judgment? I can do the former because the Father has granted me to have life in myself (just as he also has life in himself); and the latter, in my capacity as Son of man.) 4. The proper reaction to my words and works is not base unbelief and hatred, nor even the attitude of mind that fails to rise above amazement, but faith which honors the Son even as it honors the Father.) 5. Those who exercise this faith do not come into condemnation but have even now passed out of death into life.

In the great day of judgment they together with all the dead will also arise physically. But though all will be raised, there will be a great difference in the quality or character of their resurrection: those who have done good will come out of their tombs for the resurrection of life ; those who have practised evil, for the resurrection of condemnation. Implication: Therefore, embrace by faith the Son of God! Cf. purpose of the Gospel (20:30, 31).) ) 5:31 47) 31 If I testify concerning myself, my testimony is not true.��123�� 32 It is another who testifies concerning me, and I know that the testimony which he bears concerning me is true. 33 You, on your part, have sent to John, and he has testified to the truth. 34 But I, on my part, do not accept (mere) human testimony, but I say these things in order that you may be saved. 35 He was the lamp burning and shining. And you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. 36 But I have testimony that surpasses that of John, for the works which the Father has given me to��124�� accomplish, these very works in which I am engaged testify concerning me that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me, he himself has testified concerning me. But his voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; 38 and you do not have his word abiding within you, because in the One whom he sent, in him you do not believe. 39 You are searching the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have everlasting life, and yet it is they that testify concerning me. 40 But you do not want to come to me in order that��125�� you may have life.) 41 Praise from men I do not accept, 42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God within you. 43 I have come in my Father s name, but you do not accept me.

If another comes in his own name, him you will accept.��126�� 44 How can you believe, you who accept praise from one another, while the praise that comes from the only God you do not seek? 45 Do not think that I shall accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom you have set your hope. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me, since he wrote about me.��127�� 47 But if his writings you do not believe, how will you believe my words? ��128��) ) 5:31. Jesus has made majestic claims. But who is he to make them? It does not surprise us, therefore, that in the present paragraph the claims are supported by testimonies regarding himself. The Lord begins by saying, If I testify concerning myself, my testimony is not true.

Commentators agree, of course, that these words cannot be taken literally, as if he meant that what he said with reference to himself was not true to fact. If that were the correct interpretation, Jesus would cease to be the sinless One. Other attempts to explain these words are as follows:) 1. The meaning is, If I should be testifying concerning myself, my testimony would not be true. Objection: a glance at the form of these words in the original immediately shows that this cannot be correct, for we do not have a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence here, but one that belongs to group III B 1.) 2. What Jesus means is, If I present lone, unsupported testimony concerning myself, my testimony is not true.

But if that be the meaning here, then why should we not give the same interpretation to the same words in 8:14, Even though I do testify concerning myself, my testimony is true ? Jesus says nothing about lone, unsupported testimony.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.18.16|AUTODETECT|” 3. The word true has a different meaning here. The sense of the passage is, If I testify concerning myself, my testimony is not admissible in a court of law 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.18.16|AUTODETECT|” Matt. 18:16) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.13.1|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.13.1|AUTODETECT|” II Cor. 13:1) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=54.5.19|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=54.5.19|AUTODETECT|” I Tim. 5:19) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ). But this reasoning would imply that in 8:14 Jesus states that such testimony regarding oneself is admissible in a law-court. Hence, we would have a flat contradiction.) 1 4 2 8 0 0 The true solution, as we see it, will be found when we realize that Jesus is speaking the language of the people, the vernacular. One of the characteristics of this type of discourse is that it is marked by figures of speech, abbreviated expressions, allusions, overtones, implications which the hearers will immediately catch, etc. We should never lose sight of the fact that those to whom these words were addressed not only heard the actual words, but also saw our Lord s eyes, and took notice of his tone of voice and of the words on which he placed the accent. Bearing all this in mind, we believe that from a certain point of view the situation in which our Lord finds himself as he utters these words can be compared with that of someone who today is addressing a group of people who are not too friendly toward the speaker. Let us say that the latter is an enthusiastic Republican and that he is talking to a group of Democrats. He might address them as follows, If I tell you that Mr.

E. (Republican candidate for President) is the best man this country could ever elect as President, then, of course, I m a liar. The hearers would then immediately interpret his words to mean this: If I tell you that Mr. E is the best man the country could ever elect as President, then, of course, I m a liar in your estimation. ) The same, as we see it, holds with respect to our present passage (5:31). Jesus simply means, If I testify concerning myself, my testimony is not true in your estimation. In other words, You will then immediately raise the objection, You are testifying concerning yourself; hence, your testimony is not true. This interpretation is certainly supported by the fact that this very thing happened a little later, as indicated in 8:12, 13.

There Jesus is recorded as testifying concerning himself, and saying, I am the light of the world. Immediately the Pharisees shout their objection, You are testifying concerning yourself; your testimony is not true. ) 32, 33. Jesus continues, It is another who testifies concerning me, and I know that the testimony which he bears concerning me is true. Without in any way admitting that his own testimony with reference to himself would not be reliable, Jesus now introduces another witness, who is constantly bearing witness to him. Jesus by virtue of the fact that he is himself the Son of God knows that the testimony of this other one is true. He does not say, however, who this other witness is.

We know from verses 36, 37 that the reference is to the Father. Meanwhile the Jews, who did not know, are guessing, wondering whom Jesus has in mind. Is he referring, perhaps, to John the Baptist? Perceiving what is going on in the minds of his audience, Jesus continues, You, on your part, have sent to John, and he has testified to the truth. The reference is to the testimony of John which is found in 1:19 28, given to a delegation that had been sent to him. (See explanation on 1:19 28.) The Baptist s testimony to the truth, however, is found not only in that paragraph but also in 1:29 36 (see explanation), and in 3:22 36 (see explanation). In brief it amounted to this: I (John) am not the Christ; Jesus is the Christ; he is the Lamb of God who is taking away the sin of the world; it is upon him that I saw the Spirit descending and remaining; he is the Bridegroom; he is the One who came from above and is above all; he speaks the words of God, and is himself the Son of God. ) 34.

Why did Jesus mention this testimony of the Baptist? Was it because he needed it for himself? No! After all, he says, I, on my part, do not accept (mere) human testimony. So it was not at all his intention, on his own behalf and in his own defence, to appeal to the testimony of man and to rest his claim upon it. On the contrary, he said these things because this testimony regarding him was true, and in order that they might accept it, take it to heart, and be saved.

Says Jesus, I say these things in order that you may be saved.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=66.21.23|AUTODETECT|” 35. The Lord continues, He (John) was the lamp burning and shining. While Jesus calls himself the light (�� ���), he calls John, the lamp (A ������). A lamp must be lit, and its wick must be fed with oil; moreover, it illumines a very limited space. Though we believe that the choice of the word was intentional, nevertheless, it is doubtful whether the contrast between lamp and light is the idea which predominates in the mind of the Lord. After all, Jesus himself is also a lamp 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=66.21.23|AUTODETECT|” Rev. 21:23) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.6.20|AUTODETECT|” ). He is the lamp of the new Jerusalem. The emphasis in 5:35 is rather on the fact that the Baptist, as lamp, was burning and shining (for the latter term see on 1:5), so that, as a result, it attracted people! The context clearly shows that it was this characteristic of the lamp (rather than its contrast with Christ, the light, though this contrast is not excluded) which Jesus wishes to stress; for he continues, & and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. That was the point: just as a lamp attracts moths, so the Baptist attracted crowds of people. Did not even Herod Antipas hear him gladly 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.6.20|AUTODETECT|” Mk. 6:20) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ); that is, for a while? When Jesus says, He was a lamp & you were willing to rejoice, he is evidently referring, by implication, to the fact that the Baptist had been removed from the public scene, and was now in prison! The main purpose of his remark was, however, to point out that though thrill-seekers had been willing enough to rejoice for a while in the light of the Baptist s lamp; they had not been willing to accept his testimony regarding Christ unto salvation.) 1 1 2 8 0 0 36. Nevertheless, the remark of Jesus It is another who testifies concerning me (verse 32) did not have reference to John the Baptist. This is very clear from what follows, as Jesus continues, But I have testimony that surpasses that of John, for the works which the Father has given me to accomplish (5�� ��������; for this see on 4:34) these very works in which I am engaged testify concerning me that the Father has sent me. The Father s own testimony by means of the works of Christ certainly surpasses the indirect testimony given by John the Baptist. (On references to John the Baptist in this Gospel see pp. 32, 33.) The works in which Jesus is engaged are his miracles, including the healing of the man at the Pool. These works, to be sure, do not of themselves produce faith. They are never as important as are the words of our Lord.

Nevertheless, they must not be ignored. They should serve to strengthen faith. Also, they have evidential value, for there was truth in the remark of Nicodemus, No one can do these signs which you do unless God is with him. These signs were a seal of the Father s approval; specifically, of the fact that the Father had commissioned him (���������, see on 1:6; 3:34; cf. 5:30).) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.1.11|AUTODETECT|” 37. Jesus continues, And the Father who sent me, he himself has testified concerning me. There had been the voice from heaven at baptism 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=41.1.11|AUTODETECT|” Mark 1:11) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=62.5.9|AUTODETECT|” ) to which the Baptist alludes in 1:34. Then, there is also the witness of the Father in the hearts of believers 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=62.5.9|AUTODETECT|” I John 5:9) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=62.5.10|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=62.5.10|AUTODETECT|” 10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.4.4|AUTODETECT|” ). Nevertheless, here in this passage (5:37), as is clearly indicated by the immediately following context, it is especially the Father s testimony in the Old Testament Scriptures that is meant. The Father has testified; that is, though he bore witness in the past, this testimony has validity for all time to come: it is there to stay. Jesus adds a word of sharp rebuke, however. Says he, But his voice you have never heard; his form you have never seen. The voice of God is, of course, the Christ himself (5:19; 14:19, 24); the form of God, too, is the Christ 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.4.4|AUTODETECT|” II Cor. 4:4) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.37|AUTODETECT|” , �0��� likeness, image ��� ����; here in ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.37|AUTODETECT|” John 5:37) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 the term used is �6��� external form). The hostile Jews have failed to see in Jesus the voice and the form of God. They have failed through unbelief.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.3.15|AUTODETECT|” 38. That the reference in verse 37 is distinctly to the hostile attitude of the hearers is evident from the following verses (38 40). Jesus does not deny that in a sense the Jews have the word of God. What he does say is that they do not have this word in their hearts as an abiding possession, the reason being that they had not placed their confidence in the One commissioned unto his Messianic task by the Father you do not have his word abiding in you, because in the One whom he sent, in him, you do not believe. They were not able to see, because the veil of unbelief was lying upon the eyes of their hearts 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.3.15|AUTODETECT|” II Cor. 3:15) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ). On the One whom he sent see 3:34; cf. 1:6. What follows in verse 39 is very closely connected with this.) 1 4 2 8 0 0 39. Says Jesus, You are searching the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have everlasting life, and yet it is they that testify concerning me. Having read all the arguments of those who insist that the verb ������� must be read as an imperative, so that with the A.V. we must read Search the Scriptures, we cannot agree. We take the verb as a present indicative of continued action. Reasons:) a. This, as has been shown, is entirely in line with the preceding verse (you have the word, but you do not have it in your heart; so here: you search the scriptures, but you do not find the Christ in them);) b.

The imperative Search the Scriptures forms a strange introduction to the clause because you think. If the imperative is intended, we would have expected, because you have or because you will obtain everlasting life by searching. On the other hand, the sentence, You are searching the Scriptures because you think that in them you have everlasting life, makes excellent sense.) c. The succeeding context also clearly indicates that it is not at all the intention of Jesus to tell his opponents that their sin consists in this, that they do not search the Scriptures. On the contrary, he desires to rivet their attention upon this important truth: Though you have the books of Moses and though you have even set your hope on them, nevertheless, they will not profit you, will rather testify against you because you do not see me in them (see verses 45, 46).) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.24.32|AUTODETECT|” Jesus does not deny that in the Old Testament Scriptures men have everlasting life (for this see on 3:16). If the Jews think of their sacred writings as being potentially means of grace, they are right. What the Lord wishes to impress upon them, however, is this: You fail to see me revealed in these scriptures, and yet it is they that testify concerning me. This same truth the Christ in all the Scriptures! , which unlocks the mysteries of the Old Testament (as well as the New), and apart from which the Bible remains a closed book, is also emphasized in the following passages: ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.24.32|AUTODETECT|” Lk. 24:32) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.24.44|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.24.44|AUTODETECT|” 44) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.46|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.46|AUTODETECT|” John 5:46) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.18|AUTODETECT|” Acts 3:18) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.24|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.24|AUTODETECT|” 24) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.7.52|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.7.52|AUTODETECT|” 7:52) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.10.43|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.10.43|AUTODETECT|” 10:43) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.13.29|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.13.29|AUTODETECT|” 13:29) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.26.22|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.26.22|AUTODETECT|” 26:22) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.28.23|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.28.23|AUTODETECT|” 28:23) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=60.1.10|AUTODETECT|” ; and ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=60.1.10|AUTODETECT|” I Pet. 1:10) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 .) 1 3 2 8 0 0 40. Back of this blindness is the unwilling heart: You do not want to come to me in order that you may have life. In the light of this passage such expressions as you have never heard, you have never seen, you do not believe (5:37, 38) must be regarded as examples of litotes. The real meaning is: in your hardness of heart you have basely rejected the Son of God.) 41, 42. What was the reason for the clash between Jesus and the Jews? Their answer to this question would probably have been, He is irked because we criticized him for breaking the sabbath and for implying that he is equal with God; if we had only praised him because of what he did to the man at the Pool, he would have been satisfied. ) Jesus, who knew them thoroughly and was able to read their very hearts, answers by saying, Praise from men I do not accept.

He does not seek it, and is not even willing to receive as valid the praise of unbelievers. Then Jesus gives his own answer to the question respecting the reason for his controversy with the Jews. The real reason is not his yearning for praise but their lack of love toward God. Says the Lord, I know you (how did he know them? see on 5:6) that you do not have the love of God (that is the love for God, objective genitive, as the following context clearly shows) within you. Had there been this love in their hearts, they would, of course, have accepted the Father s testimony concerning his Son.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.5.36|AUTODETECT|” 43. It was easy for Jesus to prove that his statement You do not love God, was true. The proof consisted in this: I have come in my Father s name, but you do not accept me. Though he had come in the name of the Father i.e., not only at his behest, but definitely to reveal him by word and deed yet they had not accepted him. Here is another instance of litotes. They had stubbornly rejected him, and this in spite of all the powerful testimonies enumerated in 5:31 40. If another comes in his own name, him you will accept. This prophecy was fulfilled over and over again. One false Messiah was Theudas; and another, Judas of Galilee 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.5.36|AUTODETECT|” Acts 5:36) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.5.37|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.5.37|AUTODETECT|” 37) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.24.17|AUTODETECT|” ). Then came Barkochba (132 135 a.d.), whom such a distinguished rabbi as Akiba called The Star of Jacob 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.24.17|AUTODETECT|” Num. 24:17) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=53.2.8-53.2.10|AUTODETECT|” ). There have been several scores of others since their days. The last one will be the antichrist himself 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=53.2.8-53.2.10|AUTODETECT|” II Thess. 2:8 10) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 ). All of these present themselves without proper credentials: they come in their own name. Yet people yield their all to them. They lead many astray.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.2.29|AUTODETECT|” 44. Not only is it true that the Jews do not believe; they actually cannot believe either, inasmuch as they are constantly seeking praise from men, not praise which comes down from (����) God. Jesus voices this truth in the following words, How can you believe, you who accept praise from one another, while the praise that comes from the only God you do not seek? The very name Jew from Judah, meaning praised constantly reminds them of praise, glory, honor; but it is the wrong kind of honor, springing from the wrong source, which they are seeking. Cf. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.2.29|AUTODETECT|” Rom. 2:29) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 where Paul reminds his readers that a true Jew is one whose praise is not of men but of God.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.6.4|AUTODETECT|” These Jews whom Jesus is addressing may intone their petitions twice each day, addressing them to the Only God on the basis of ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.6.4|AUTODETECT|” Deut. 6:4) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.6.5|AUTODETECT|” , ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.6.5|AUTODETECT|” 5) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 yet they do not seek the praise that comes from the Only God, neither do they love him, as commanded in the Deuteronomy passage. Lack of love always has a blinding effect. It was not lack of evidence but lack of love which caused these men to reject the Christ.) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=38.3.1-38.3.5|AUTODETECT|” 45, 46. The Jews had listened to this sharp rebuke. Perhaps they drew the conclusion that the words recorded in 5:34, I say these things in order that you may be saved, were not true. Perhaps they were beginning to regard Jesus as an accuser, after the fashion of satan who stood at the right hand of the Angel of Jehovah in order that he might accuse Joshua, the highpriest, because of his filthy garments 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=38.3.1-38.3.5|AUTODETECT|” Zech. 3:1 5) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.*?id=1.3.15|AUTODETECT|” ). Nevertheless, that was not the purpose of Jesus (cf. 3:17). In fact, it was not even necessary. With words of terrible import the Lord flings this final challenge before his hostile audience, Do not think (or: do not be thinking �t �������, pres. imperative) that I shall accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom you have set your hope. Again and again the Jews would appeal to Moses and would boast, We are disciples of Moses, (9:28).

Now Jesus tells them that Moses, the constant object of their hope, to whose scriptures they were always appealing, whose instructions they debated and analyzed with hair-splitting casuistry, would actually prove to be their accuser; the reason being that, in spite of all their boasting about being his followers, they, in reality, did not believe him: For if you believed Moses, you would believe me, since he wrote of me. Moses wrote of me, said Jesus. Here we refer first of all to the list of references given in our comments on 1:5 showing that Christ is, indeed, the heart of the writings of Moses and of the entire Old Testament. In the Pentateuch which, as to its essence, must be ascribed to the authorship of Moses, and this upon the testimony of no one less than Christ himself in this verse there are certain passages which very definitely refer to Christ; e.g., ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.3.15|AUTODETECT|” Gen. 3:15) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.9.26|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.9.26|AUTODETECT|” 9:26) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.22.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.22.18|AUTODETECT|” 22:18) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.49.10|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.49.10|AUTODETECT|” 49:10) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.24.17|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.24.17|AUTODETECT|” Num. 24:17) 1 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.18.15-5.18.18|AUTODETECT|” ; and ) 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.*?id=5.18.15-5.18.18|AUTODETECT|” Deut. 18:15 18) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 . But what Moses wrote about Christ is certainly not limited to these passages. The entire Pentateuch and not only the Pentateuch but the entire Old Testament points forward to the coming of Christ, and definitely prepares the way for his arrival. There are four lines which, running through the whole Old Testament, converge at Bethlehem and Calvary; namely, the historical, typological, psychological, and prophetical.) 1 5 2 8 0 0 By the historical preparation we mean that again and again the forces of evil direct their attack against the people of God, endeavoring to render impossible the fulfilment of God s promise with respect to the coming Christ; and that whenever the need is highest, help is nighest: man s extremity is God s opportunity. The Pentateuch and the rest of the books of the Old Testament are full of examples.) By the typological preparation we mean that the character of the coming Messiah and of salvation in him is pictured in types that are either material or personal. We think, for instance, of the water from the smitten rock, the manna, the Passover, the pillar of fire, the tabernacle with its furniture, the entire sacrificial ritual, the serpent lifted up; of Adam, Melchizedek, Joshua, David, Solomon, etc. The books of Moses are full of Christ-centered types.) The psychological preparation points to the fact that during the entire Old Dispensation certainly also in the books of Moses! one truth is brought home with increasing clarity; namely, that in his own strength man can never achieve true happiness and salvation. The bringing about of this conviction was one of the chief objectives of the giving of the law on Sinai. If ever man is to be saved, Another will have to save him.

That Other One is the Christ.) Finally, the prophetical preparation indicates that by means of direct prophecies the coming of Christ, his work, suffering, and consequent glory had been announced.) Truly, Moses wrote of me. Properly understood, whatever Moses wrote concerned the Christ!��129��) 1 1 2 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.16.31|AUTODETECT|” 47. Jesus concludes his address to the Jews with this rhetorical question, But if his writings you do not believe, how will you believe my words (�������, speech, discourse)? 7 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.16.31|AUTODETECT|” Luke 16:31) 1 1 -1 9 0 0 .) It has become fashionable to accept the position that in this verse a contrast is drawn between his and my, but not between writings and words. We are inclined, however, to agree with A. T. Robertson and others who see a contrast not only between the pronouns but also between the nouns: his writings is contrasted with my words. If Jesus actually intended to place merely the pronouns over against each other, then he would probably have caused the same noun (for example, teachings, words, commandments) to follow both pronouns; thus: But if his words you do not believe, how will you believe my words? By this device the intended contrast between his and my is immediately made clear.

But now in this conditional sentence, we have his writings in the protasis, and my words in the apodosis. Moreover, the contrast between these two concepts (each consisting of a noun and its modifier) makes good sense. As we see it, what Jesus meant was this: You Jews are always saying that nothing is as sacred as the written Torah (though in actual practice you often seem to esteem the oral law above the written). You place that written Law above everything else, certainly above any words which anyone might utter. Also, you regard Moses as your chief leader, and vie with one another in praising his memory. As you see it, no one living today could possibly compare with him.

Therefore, if his writings you do not believe, how will you believe my words? The chiastic sentence-structure of the original, which we have tried to reproduce in our translation, confirms the idea that this is, indeed, the contrast which Jesus intended. The question which Jesus asked was unanswerable. Deny the sacred writings, and all is lost. The Jews needed this lesson; so do we today.) 1 43 2 8 0 0 Synthesis of 5:31 47) See the Outline on p. 68. The Son of God Rejected in Judea, as a Result of Healing the Man at Bethzatha on the Sabbath, and of Claiming Equality with God (concluded).) The section on the Claims of Jesus is followed by this one which deals with his Witnesses. These may be summarized as follows:) (1) His witness concerning himself (5:31; cf. 8:14).) This is true, but its reliability is denied by the Jews.) (2) The witness of John the Baptist (5:33 35).) He testified to the truth concerning Christ, calling him the Lamb of God, the Son of God, etc. This testimony should be accepted by faith, unto salvation.) (3) The witness of his works (5:36).) These have evidential value, proving that Jesus was sent by the Father to accomplish his mediatorial task.) (4) The witness of the Father (5:37, 38).) He had testified by means of the voice from heaven but especially by means of:) (5) The witness of the Scriptures (5:39 47).) The Jews have been blinded by their lack of love for God, so that they cannot read these writings as they should be read. Hence, Moses, in whom they boast, will testify against them.) It is sometimes added that the Fourth Gospel proclaims two additional witnesses:) (6) The witness of individual believers (15:27).) (7) The witness of the Holy Spirit (14:16, 26; 15:26).) Here, however, we should exercise caution. As has been shown in the exegesis, these seven are hardly to be regarded as so many separate witnesses.

Rather, it is the Father who testifies by means of all the others.) ) ) 109 On 5�� see pp. 46, 48.) 110 Literally: in order that something worse may not happen to you. ) 111 It is hard to believe that at this time Jesus would have gone to Jerusalem to attend one of the lesser feasts, such as that of Wood-offering or even that of Trumpets, though these too are favored by some commentators.) 112 See J. Jeremias, Die Wiederentdeckung von Bethesda, G�ttingen, 1949. Also W.H.A.B., p. 99 and Plate XVII B.) A.R.V. American Standard Revised Version) A.V. Authorized Version (King James)) 113 See further on this subject A. T.

Robertson, An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, New York, 1925, pp. 154, 183, 209.) 114 Of the three imperatives the first is aoristic present; the second aorist; the third, continuative (durative) present: go on walking.) 115 Cf. F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., pp. 352, 353. We agree with him.) 116 On E�� in verses 24 and 25 see pp. 54 (also footnote 13), 57.) 117 On E�� in verse 28 see pp. 55, 58.) 118 See our More than Conquerors, sixth edition, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1952, pp. 231, 232.) 119 See on this subject W. F.

Howard, Christianity According to St. John, Philadelphia, 1946, pp. 106 128.) 120 M. Goguel, Le Quatri�me �vangile, Paris, 1924, vol. II, p. 536 is in error when he states: L eschatologie est, comme nous l avons vu, enti�rement spiritualis�e. ) 121 See our Lectures on the Last Things, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1951, pp. 31 49.) 122 See our Lectures on the Last Things, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1951, pp. 26, 33, 34.) 123 III B 1; see pp. 42, 44.) 124 On 5�� see pp. 46, 48.) 125 On 5�� see pp. 46, 47, 48.) 126 III A 1; see pp. 42, 43.) 127 II A; see p. 41.) 128 I B; see p. 40.) 129 We have written a summary of Old Testament History, which centers around that theme; see Bible Survey, third edition, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1949, pp. 79 130.) )