John 5

David Lipscomb Commentary On John Chapter Five A MIRACLE AND A IN Joh_5:1-47AN MAN MADE WHOLEJoh_5:1-91 After these things there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.—This feast is generally regarded as the Passover feast, although it is nowhere said to be so, and there is nothing so determining. If this be a Passover feast, it makes certain that the public ministry of Jesus lasted three and a half years. Without this there is no certainty about this. The attendance at the Passover feasts is the clearest indication of the time of his public ministry. John tells of his attendance at the feasts in Jerusalem, and of his teaching and work there much more fully than do the other gospel writers. 2 Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate—It is thought that this is the gate through which the sheep for sacrifice were generally brought. a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda,—This pool and its qualities are not mentioned by any other writer of the Bible. Its identity and locality have not been fixed with certainty. Whether there was real curative property in the waters is not certain. Among the superstitious people imagination is so active that reputation for healing is frequently kept up for centuries when the imagination does all that is done for them. The record here gives no intimation that Jesus thought the healing 3 In these lay a multitude of them that were sick, blind, halt, withered.—The sick would remain waiting for the moving of the waters. Multitudes were attracted to try the efficacy of the water in healing the diseases. The fourth verse is left out of the American Revised Version. It is thought by many that it was an intermittent spring, rising and flowing at regular times, then ceasing. Such springs are known in different parts of the world. It would not be difficult to give currency to the idea that an angel did this. 4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool, and troubled the water—whether the miracle actually occurred as stated, or that the people had a tradition on which they relied, is immaterial as far as the work of Jesus is concerned. That some periodical disturbance of the water took place need not be disputed. Jesus did not make any controversy about the doctrine of “Transmigration of souls” (Matthew 14:2), but healed the blind man independently of it. The writer does not show Jesus as even referring to the question of this agitation of the pool, therefore I shall comment on the remaining verses in their order. 5 And a certain man was there, who had been thirty and eight years in his infirmity.—The long affliction indicates the incurable nature and little probability of relief. 6 When Jesus saw him lying, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case,—Jesus knew either by inquiry or from his superhuman power of knowing things. The context does not show the source of this knowledge. His helplessness appealed to the Master. he saith unto him, Wouldest thou be made whole?—Jesus doubtless knew he wished to be healed and asked this question by way of introduction to the sufferer. 7 The sick man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.—This answer shows that something like the condition described in verse 4, in the Common Version, was supposed to exist. His poverty and his complete helplessness prevented his securing the benefit, whether real or supposed, of water. 8 Jesus saith unto him, Arise, take up thy bed, and walk.—Such a case especially commended itself to Jesus. 9 And straightway the man was made whole, and took up his bed and walked. Now it was the sabbath on that day.—The man made the effort to obey Jesus. Jesus supplied the power and he was relieved of the infirmity. God’ s help always comes to those receiving it in the effort to obey him. JESUS ACCUSED OF SABBATH Joh_5:10-1810 So the Jews said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath, and it is not lawful for thee to take up thy bed.—It was contrary to the law of Moses to carry any burden on the Sabbath. The Jews raised the question of observing the Sabbath — first as to the healed man carrying his bed, and afterwards as to the sinfulness of healing on the Sabbath (John 5:16). (See Nehemiah 13:19; Jeremiah 17:21.) 11 But he answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk.—The man wisely concluded that God was with one who could heal as he had been healed, and if he could heal he had authority to so far control him as to authorize him to carry his bed home. 12 They asked him, Who is the man that said unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk?—They were somewhat incredu¬lous about the healing and asked who had done it. It is a lit¬tle singular that the man did not find out when Jesus healed him who he was, but it was done quickly and brought great surprise to the healed man and Jesus quickly passed from his presence. 13 But he that was healed knew not who it was; for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multitude being in the place.—The man had to tell them he did not know who had wrought the great cure by his word as he had gone away. 14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing befall thee.–Jesus on meeting him in the temple warned him if he sinned again greater evil would come upon him. This seems to imply that this evil had come upon him as the result of his sin. The Jews believed this, yet Jesus told his disciples (John 9:2-3) that neither the blind man nor his parents had sinned to bring on his blindness. 15 The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him whole.—On their meeting in the temple, Jesus made himself known to the healed man, and he seems to have sought the inquiring Jews at once and told them it was Jesus. 16 And for this cause the Jews persecuted Jesus, because he did these things on the sabbath.—The persecution of Jesus for what they claimed as breaking the Sabbath began here and it resulted in the effort to slay him. 17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh even until now, and I work.—Jesus justified his healing the man on the ground that his Father worketh hitherto or unto now, and following his example he works. It seems that “ on the sabbath” is implied as the charge was for working on the Sabbath. In what sense he meant to say that God worked till that time is not clear. It is certain that he did it through all the opera¬tions of the natural universe, and it seems probable that Jesus referred to this working. The point of Jesus was that God worked on the Sabbath and that he had the same right to set aside, if need be, the Sabbath law as God had done. 18 For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only brake the sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.—This claim to have the right to do what God did placed himself on an equality with God and more infuriated the Jews so they now sought to kill him. [They did not undertake to put him to death at once, but began preparing the way for his death. More than two years later he was condemned to death for the claim of being the Son of God.] JESUS ASSERTS HIS POWERJoh_5:19-2919 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner.—Jesus dis¬avowed any authority or power to do anything save as the Father leads and enables him to do. He doubtless referred to his healing the impotent man. He could have done this only by the power of God. His effort was to show that God worked with and through him. [In answering them Jesus re¬tracts nothing, but reasserts his Sonship by asserting that the power of the Son comes from the Father.] 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth: and greater works than these will he show him, that ye may marvel.—He insists that God loves him, reveals his own works to the Son, enables him to do what God does, and he promises that God will enable him to do even greater works than he had yet done in their presence. [This future work would be greater than the miracle just per¬formed.] 21 For as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will.—This verse explains the greater works promised in the preceding verse— the power to quicken the dead into life. [He gives his Father the credit of being the fountain of all life and that he can raise the dead to life and that he himself possesses the same power through the Father.] 22 For neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son;—God Has committed the work of judging and quickening the world to his Son. He gave his authority and power into the hands of the Son. 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.—The Father committing his authority and judgment to the Son and so empowering the Son to speak and act for him demands that the Son should receive the honor that the Father does. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father that sent him.—The only method of approach to the Father is through the Son and so he who rejects the Son rejects the Father. 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment,—The emphasis is laid on the truth that hearing Jesus and believing in God through the words of Jesus would bring them to everlasting life. but hath passed out of death into life.—In accepting Christ and his word as our rule and guide we pass out of a state of condemnation into one of life— a state that leads to eternal life or life beyond the grave. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.—The knowledge of the resurrection was but slightly known. So Jesus plainly declares that the time was now coming that all the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who heard that voice would live. [We take it that the reference is primarily to those spiritually dead. It will also be true of those in the graves at the res¬urrection. (Verse 28.) Jesus demonstrated his power to give life by raising Lazarus.] 26 For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself:—That life would be be¬stowed by the Son of God, since God had given the same power to the Son to make alive as he possessed. 27 and he gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is a son of man.—He gave him power to execute judgment alike upon the godly and upon the ungodly. This must be executed in harmony with the laws that God committed to his hands. 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice,—He more directly points out that all good and bad shall come forth from the grave. 29 and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the res-urrection of judgment.—They that have done good or kept the laws will be raised to life eternal. They that have done evil to a condemnation of eternal death or banishment from the presence of God. [Jesus makes it clear that there is a judgment beyond the grave, and that there is also a general resurrection.] THE OF THESE CLAIMSJoh_5:30-4030 I can of myself do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is righteous; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.—While to Jesus had been com¬mitted the work of judging the world, he is careful that all should understand that he and his Father are one because he sought to enforce no will of his own; but his Father’ s will and in doing this the Father was with him. 31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.—If he alone bears witness of himself, the witness is not to be ac¬cepted as true. This was also the law of Moses. Every charge was to be established in the mouth of two or three wit¬nesses. (Numbers 35:30; Deuteronomy 19:15.) That it does not mean the testimony is false is seen by a comparison with 8: 14. 32 It is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.—In compliance with the law requiring two witnesses to prove a thing, Jesus announces that another beareth witness of him than himself, and Jesus knew that the testimony of this witness is true. 33 Ye have sent unto John, and he hath borne witness unto the truth.—These people had nearly all been baptized of John. They had gone to him as a teacher, and he had borne witness that Jesus is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world (John 1:36). 34 But the witness which I receive is not from man:—While he presents John as a witness in whom they believed, who bore testimony for him, Jesus referred to God as witness¬ing in behalf of Jesus. howbeit I say these things, that ye may be saved.—He re¬fers to these witnesses that they might believe in Jesus and be saved. 35 He was the lamp that burneth and shineth; and ye were willing to rejoice for a season in his light.—John was a teacher sent from God who taught the will of God and these Jews had followed him for a time. 36 But the witness which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father hath given me to accomplish, the very works that I do, bear witness of me,—The works that Jesus did attracted the attention of the world and made the best men believe on him. Nicodemus said, “ No one can do these signs that thou doest, except God be with him.” (John 3:2.) All that Jesus did and suffered in his mission on earth was what his Father had given him to do. The miracles he wrought, and his own triumph over death and resurrection from the dead, were the especial works that substantiated his claim to be the Son of God. He “ was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” The kingdom in its unorganized elements— the head, laws, and subjects— in embryo was among [the works he was to accomplish], that the Father hath sent me.—The works that God .did through Jesus testified that Jesus was of God. The object of miracles was to prove that the person who wrought the mira¬cles was from God and spake by the power of God. 37 And the Father that sent me, he hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his form.—When God spake, they refused to hear his voice, and they had not seen him. 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you:—[Proof of this fact was they did believe the testimony of John whom he had sent.] for whom he sent, him ye believe not.—[The preaching of John bore witness of him.] 39 Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;—The Jews claimed to believe and read the scriptures of the Old Testament, and thought that through them eternal life would be gained, yet they foretold of Jesus. He presents two witnesses, the works or miracles of Jesus and the fulfillment of prophecies found in the Old Testament concerning him. [The scriptures that they searched contained the testimony of Christ. All the prophets had borne witness of him. The one of whom the scriptures spoke was light and life, yet they refused to come to him that they might have life.] 40 and ye will not come to me, that ye may have life.—Not-withstanding these testimonies they refused to believe in him and come to him as his disciples. Jesus keeps it distinctly before them that through him alone they could receive spiritual life. [They rejected the light their own scriptures contained. “ Search” implies painstaking, exhaustive examination.] CAUSE OF JEWISH John 5:41-4741 I receive not glory from men.—Jesus did not rest his claims to glory on the testimony or witness of men. 42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in yourselves.—But their disbelief in him and his works proved that they did not have the love of God in them. “ For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:3.) Only those who keep the commandments of God love him according to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. [He read their hearts and knew them.] 43 I am come in my Father’ s name, and ye receive me not:—Jesus came as the representative of his Father to stand in the place and do the work of his Father. This is the meaning of coming in the name of another, to take his place, do his work, and to work for and in place of another. To act for and in the name of another is to ignore self and selfish ends and to act in behalf of him whom he represents. Jesus acted in the name of and for his Father. if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.—These Jews rejected Jesus, but if another was to come act¬ing in his own name for himself, him they would receive. [They rejected Jesus, their only hope, but would accept with pleasure a deceiver. Their history shows that they did this.] 44 How can ye believe, who receive glory one of another, and the glory that cometh from the only God ye seek not?—One seeking the applause and praise of men and who does not seek the honor and praise of God cannot believe in Christ. His example of seeking the honor from God and not that from men would be so at war with their hearts and practices that they would not believe him as their teacher and exemplar. [Their seeking human glory and honor caused their unbelief in Jesus. They did not possess that lowly spirit needful for belief in Christ. ] Whenever a church or a preacher sets out to be respectable and influential by its worldly possessions and surroundings, or when a preacher is intent on using his posi¬tion as a preacher to gain worldly position or influence, they bid farewell to true usefulness to the world and would do well to cease to be churches or preachers of Christ. The honor of the world is incompatible with honor from God, and he who seeks one will forfeit the other. The rich and fashionable and those who are unwilling to sacrifice to Christ substitute money for personal service and sacrifice. Under this spirit money has displaced self-sacrific¬ing devotion as the chief factor in spreading the gospel. Those who rely on money seek those who have money and the poor are neglected. This spirit must be set aside or the churches overloaded with money will die. Indeed, the money helps to kill them. It is utterly impossible for one who de¬pends on money for social standing and respectability and en¬joyment to be a true Christian.

It is equally impossible for one seeking earthly honor and greatness, whether he seeks it in the pulpit or in the political field or the legal forum, to be an earnest and true child of God and an effective worker in saving souls. The spirit of seeking and looking to wealth and worldly honor is so antagonistic to the spirit of Jesus he asks : “ How can ye believe, who receive glory one of another?” It is much easier to get the common people to do active service in the church of God than it is to get the rich, the educated, those who pride themselves on their worldly respectability. 45 Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, on whom ye have set your hope.—They claimed to believe in Moses as their teacher and ruler. They so vitiated his law that they would fall under his condemnation and Moses in whom they claimed to believe would be their accuser. 46 For if ye believed Moses, ye would believe me; for he wrote of me.—Moses prophesied of Christ, and those who properly understand Moses must believe in Christ. The fact that they did not receive Christ who was the end to which the law led was evidence that they did not believe in Moses or his writings. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?—To fail to understand and believe in the writings of Moses would lead to a rejection of Christ. In this chapter the teaching of Christ [is that he regarded the Pentateuch a genuine composition of Moses. Critics who claim that these books are frauds ought to learn a lesson from Jesus]. The Jews claimed to believe in Moses, yet Moses pointed to Christ and without Christ the writings of Moses are meaningless. [ Each proves the other to be true, and no one can accept the one and at the same time reject the other.] Verse 1 Like practically all of John, this chapter is a narrative of proof that Jesus is equal to God. Here, the proof is that of the healing of a long-time cripple at the pool of Bethesda on a sabbath day; following which, Jesus gave an organized testimony of his oneness with God and of his being the Messiah. Discounting his own witness to that effect, for the moment only, he appealed to the witness of the Father himself, the witness of his mighty works, and the testimony of the sacred Scriptures. This sign is the third in the great series of seven. THE THIRD SIGNAfter these things there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. (John 5:1) So much depends upon the meaning of “a feast of the Jews” in this verse that controversy has raged over it for centuries, the importance of it lying in this, that if the Passover is meant, then the ministry of Christ would be calculated at about three and one-half years; but if some lesser feast was meant then his ministry could be calculated as much shorter. The feast of the Jews … is the reading of many ancient manuscripts (English Revised Version, margin), which, if allowed, would make this almost certainly the Passover. Without further attention to the extensive arguments of scholars on this, we shall construe it as a reference to the Passover, primarily because this would favor the longer ministry of Christ, and because it was the only feast of the Jews having sufficient importance to have demanded the presence of Jesus so soon after he had left Judaea. It is considered no great difficulty that John would have called so important a feast “a feast,” since, writing so long afterward, he might quite accurately have so described it. The most convincing argument to this writer is by Trench: If this feast of the Jews was a Passover, then St. John will make mention of four Passovers, namely, this one, and in John 2:13; John 6:4, and the last. Thus, we shall arrive at the three and one half years, the half of a “week of years” for the length of Christ’s ministry, which many, not altogether unreasonably, have thought they found designated beforehand for it in the prophecies (Daniel 9:27).[1]There are many things in the New Testament which cannot be determined except in the light of the Old Testament, as in the case of the piercing of Jesus’ feet. Certainly, light from the Old Testament on the question before us is more dependable than fallible human opinion. ENDNOTE: [1] Richard C. Trench, Notes on the Miracles (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1943), p. 264.

Verse 2 Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porches.There is … The present tense in this has led to the supposition that John was written before the destruction of Jerusalem; but it may be explained (1) by the pool’s still being there after the ruin of the city, or (2) by the apostle’s vivid memory of it leading to his use of the present tense, speaking of it as what he was actually seeing in retrospect. By the sheep gate … The word “gate” is not in the text and was supplied by the translators. The gate was near the temple and was the portal through which the animals were brought to the sacrifices. Having five porches … These were colonnaded areas, partially open, under which people could take refuge from rain or strong sunlight. They were ornamental, making this a highly decorated and popular pool; but, for all its reputation, it had not cured the cripple. Hunter tells us that “In 1931-1932, excavators laid bare 100 yards north of the temple what is almost certainly the long lost pool of Bethesda."[2] Hunter’s thoughts on why this healing at Bethesda was made one of John’s seven signs are interesting: Possibly because it involved his favorite symbol of water. The water of the pool, though it seemed to offer healing (newness of life), had yet failed to cure a man crippled for thirty-eight years. In the light of the Prologue and the preceding chapters (the water and wine of Cana, the new water which Jesus offered the woman of Samaria), we are perhaps meant to think of “the law given through Moses” and its failure to give life. Over against it, in this miracle, stands the life-giving word of Christ.[3]Of John’s seven signs, the third and the sixth occurred at the pools of Bethesda and Siloam; the first was changing water into wine; and the fifth was walking on the water. In addition, John’s “born of water” and “living water” of chapters three and four, make it clear that the apostle did remarkably stress “water” in his Gospel. There is also the “blood and water” of the crucifixion (John 19:34). [2] A. M. Hunter, The Gospel according to John (Cambridge University Press, 1965), p. 56. [3] Ibid.

Verse 3 In these lay a multitude of them that were sick, blind, halt, and withered.In these … that is, in the five porches of the pool. This pool was a popular health resort similar to such places all over the world, from Hot Springs, Arkansas, and Mineral Wells, Texas, to Bath in Somerset, England, where the father of King Lear was reputed to have been healed of leprosy.[4]Waiting for the moving of the water: for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water entered in was made whole, with whatsoever disease he was holden.Upon what would appear to be sufficient critical grounds, these words have been removed from the English Revised Version (1885); but it is well that they have been retained in the margin, because they explain the common conviction regarding the pool which resulted in its popularity. It would be no great thing to stumble at if indeed it was part of John’s Gospel. Whatever healing ever occurred there would thus have been attributed to the power of an angel of the Lord, and what would be so unreasonable about that? The healing qualities of the waters at Hot Springs, for example; are they any less of God and his angels, merely because our chemists have analyzed them? Is there not here a tracing back to their true source phenomena which men are so ready to ascribe to secondary sources? Is not all healing of God; and do not the Scriptures teach that God’s angels are servants sent forth to do service for them that shall be the heirs of salvation? (Hebrews 1:14). The spurious nature of the words here cited, however, is not to be denied. They were probably added by some scribe at a very early date to explain what was meant by the cripple’s having no one to help him get into the water at the propitious moment. If there had been any virtue in the waters of the pool, it seems highly incredible that they should have been efficacious only at indeterminate intervals, only for such a short while, and, even then, only for the person who got into them first. The cripple of this narrative had surely found them without any value to himself. ENDNOTE: [4] Encyclopedia Britannica (Chicago: William Benton, 1961), Vol. 3, p. 203.

Verse 5 And a certain man was there, who had been thirty and eight years in his infirmity.The text does not say that he had been at the pool so long, but that his disease was of such lengthy duration. The Lord’s attribution of his condition to the man’s sin suggests that he had acquired the malady in his youth.

Verse 6 When Jesus saw him lying, and knew that he had been a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wouldest thou be made whole?The omniscience of Jesus is again evident. The Lord did not need to inquire concerning the man’s condition, its cause, or its duration, but knew all that inherently. Wouldest thou be made whole …? This was an offer of the Lord to heal the man, but the form of the question implied that the desire to be made whole was prerequisite to his healing. There was a recognition here of the fact, known to every physician, that certain persons, long invalid, finding it more satisfactory to rely totally upon the services of others than to assume any burden themselves, do not really desire to get well. What is true physically is likewise true spiritually, that the will to be made whole sometimes subsides or disappears from the heart of the sinner. Regarding this, Howard noted that: His real difficulty lies precisely here (and so it is with us). We hear his promises, and our hearts run out to claim them; and we believe that we mean what we say. Yet this has happened time on time, and with some of us far longer than thirty-eight years, and this is all that has come of it. And why? Because we really do not want what we say we want and think that we want. “Men often mistake their imagination for their heart; and they believe they are converted as soon as they think of being converted."[5]ENDNOTE: [5] W. F. Howard, Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon Press, 1952), p. 541.

Verse 7 The sick man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled to put me into the pool; but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.The sick man was not offended by the Lord’s question, and his reply bears the interpretation that it was not want of will but want of ability that had frustrated him until that time.

Verse 8 Jesus saith unto him, Arise, take up they bed and walk.The bed was likely a type of portable pallet, much like a camp bed, or the bedroll that cowboys carried on their saddles; but even so mild a burden could not have been lifted and carried by an invalid. This sign, like all the others, was accomplished by fiat; there was no “mumbo jumbo,” waving of the arms, or shoutings and incantations. Jesus commanded, and it was done.

Verse 9 And straightway the man was made whole, and took up his bed and walked.Every soul has the power to do what Jesus commands, granted only that there is the will to obey him. The man was made whole at a word from Jesus; and the man’s response was prompt and obedient. What if he had said, “Look, Lord, I do feel a lot better; and, later on, if I still feel this way, I’ll try to do what you said”? Who can doubt that such a response would have forfeited his blessing? Now it was the sabbath on that day. So the Jews said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath, and it is not lawful for thee to take up thy bed.Christ had chosen deliberately to do such a deed on the sabbath as a platform from which to call attention to his authority and power, and also for the purpose of exposing the ridiculous extensions and additions to God’s sabbath regulations which had been so mercilessly bound upon the people by their priests. Regarding the question if Jesus did or did not break the sabbath, it must be answered unequivocally that he did not break it. There are three legitimate grounds upon which all alleged guilt of Jesus in breaking the sabbath is totally removed. Thus: (1) It was well known among the Jews that a prophet might, for cause, set aside the sabbath; as the Prophet like unto Moses, Jesus had every right to do so; (2) as God incarnate, Christ had total authority, even referring to himself once as “Lord of the sabbath” (Matthew 12:8); and (3) the Lord’s actions often referred to as breaking the sabbath, such as this man’s carrying his bed, constituted no violation whatever of God’s true law regarding sabbath observance, but only violated the hair-splitting interpretations of it so dear to the Pharisees. Strong disagreement is registered here with that school of expositors who make the Lord’s actions, here or anywhere else a violation of God’s sabbath laws. See a full discussion of this in my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 12. As Barnes said: The Jews extended the obligation of the sabbath beyond what was intended … observed it superstitiously, and Jesus took every opportunity to convince them of their error … This method he took to show them what the law of God really permitted on that day, and that works of necessity and mercy were lawful.[6]Also, Hendriksen, quoting Jeremiah 17:19-27 and Nehemiah 13:15, usually cited by those who would make this cripple’s carrying his pallet a violation of the sabbath, noted that: In these passages, the reference is 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 that he was carrying to the market-place in order to sell it at a profit, they were making a caricature of the law of God.[7]The divine law also permitted the securing of one’s property as Barnes noted in the above reference; and the carrying of his bed was necessary to that. If he had walked off and left it, it would have deprived him of it; and the Master’s blessing would have been partially nullified. But, as Jesus noted on another occasion, the healing and rescue of a beast which had fallen into a ditch was freely allowed by those hypocrites as legitimate on the sabbath day; but the Christ of glory they accused of breaking the sabbath by healing a man, born in the image of God, on the sabbath day! Their error was great indeed, but it is no greater than that of modern commentators who denominate the Lord a sabbath-breaker, basing their allegation on the testimony of those hypocrites who first accused him of it! Not a jot or a tittle of the law did Jesus ever break. The Jews … who accused Jesus here were the Sanhedrinists, the ruling hierarchy of priests, including the Pharisees and the Sadducees, as well as all the leading persons of that class in the city. The words should not be read racially, for that is not the way John used them. [6] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1954), p. 227. [7] William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1961), p. 193.

Verse 11 But he answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up, thy bed and walk.There is a sharp distinction between the question of the priests who spoke only of the man’s taking up his bed, but saying nothing of his being healed, and this answer of the healed man which confronted them dramatically with the wonder itself, namely, that he, a cripple for thirty-eight years, had been endowed with the power to do such a thing. With that clear understanding which belongs to all unsophisticated persons, the former cripple had already made the deduction that one with the authority to heal him surely had the power also to command him to take up his bed and walk. What a shame that the priests were so self-blinded that they could not see so plain a thing as that.

Verse 12 They asked him, Who is the man that said unto thee, Take up thy bed and walk?An astounding wonder had occurred in the presence of a multitude; but those priests were not concerned with it. One of their petty little hair-splitting regulations had been violated, and that was all they cared about. Therefore, they ignored the healing and inquired only of him who had commanded to take up and walk. How nearly incredible it seems that such obduracy should have been in them that were the rulers of Israel.

Verse 13 But he that was healed knew not who it was; for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multitude being in the place.We may not suppose that the cured man merely walked away without inquiring of the one who had healed him, for the initiative in their being separated is here attributed to Jesus. Due to the great throng, it was easy for Jesus just to disappear in the crowd. The man picked up his roll, looked around, but Jesus was nowhere to be seen.

Verse 14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and saith unto him, Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a worse thing befall thee.This explains the reason for Jesus’ disappearance. He wanted a private interview with that man, sparing him the humiliation of having his sinful life exposed before all, a thing that would have been far less effective in the former cripple’s case than what happened privately in the temple. Perhaps the man had gone there to praise God for his healing, but this is not stated. Sin no more … This shows that sin was connected with the infirmity which had so long debilitated the cripple. There is indeed a connection between sin and suffering. In fact all human sorrows and sufferings, even death itself, head up at last in the fountainhead of the sin of Adam. This is far from teaching that all sickness or suffering is specifically related to the sin of the sufferer. Jesus himself stressed (John 9:3) that the blindness of the man he healed was not related to either his or his parents’ sins. Nevertheless, an incredible amount of the world’s woe is merely the sins af men returned at last upon their own heads. Trench expressed it thus: As some eagle pierced with a shaft leathered from its own wing, so many a sufferer, even in this present time, sees and is compelled to acknowledge that his own sin fledged the arrow, which has pierced him and brought him down.[8]Lest a worse thing befall thee … What could be worse than being an invalid for thirty-eight years? The fate of unbelievers is worse. Also, there is a temporal application as well; because there is no condition of human wretchedness so bad that further sin might not aggravate and increase it. ENDNOTE: [8] Richard C. Trench, op. cit., p. 276.

Verse 15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him whole.What is to be made of this? Can it be that a man so blessed of the Lord would deliberately have identified him to his bitterest enemies with any view of helping them in their persecution of the Saviour? Against such a view is the fact that he spoke of Jesus’ making him “whole,” a word the Pharisees did not wish to hear. He might have hoped to encourage a better attitude of the priests toward Jesus; but whatever his purpose was in this identification, the immediate result was an intensification of the efforts against Jesus.

Verse 16 And for this cause the Jew’s persecuted Jesus, because he did these things on the sabbath.Those zealots who had made the word of God of none effect by their tradition were adamant in their refusal to allow the slightest possibility of any error on their own part. Their foolish and unscriptural sabbath regulations were so dear to them that they would crucify the Christ of glory rather than yield on the tiniest iota of their conceited interpretations. Note: John did not say here that Jesus broke the sabbath but that he “did these things,” a far different thing from breaking the sabbath.

Verse 17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh even until now, and I work.My Father … Jesus here, as usually, affirmed the unique relationship between himself and God. He taught the disciples to pray “Our Father,” but many times used “My Father” in his own reference to God. Jesus’ argument here is that such an interpretation as the priests insisted upon would make God himself a sabbath-breaker! Does God not heal on the sabbath? Is not the maintenance of the universe a work of God going on every second of time, sabbath days and all? These are the implications of Jesus’ words, “My Father worketh hitherto.” Also, it should be noted that Jesus here, by the use of the first person possessive, “My Father,” and by his statement that he also works (on the sabbath day) claimed equality with God, a claim made more dogmatically later on in the interview, but clearly visible here also. And I work … By this, Jesus affirmed that he was doing exactly what God was doing. The Father had never ceased to work in the support and maintenance of all things, and therefore the Lord was in full character with the Father when he healed a man on the sabbath day. Furthermore, no sabbath regulation of any divine sanction had ever forbidden such an act.

Verse 18 For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God.He not only broke the sabbath … is the allegation of the priests, not the statement of the apostle John. See under preceding verse. Making himself equal to God … How strange it is that some can read the New Testament and then deny that Jesus claimed to be God. Even his enemies knew full well the implication of his words. Also, it was exactly upon this claim, which they construed as blasphemy, that they based their demands of Pilate that he be crucified (John 19:7). These two verses (John 5:17-18) are among the most important in Scripture, especially as they relate to the heresy of Arius (died 336 A.D.) and Sabellius (circa 230 A.D.), the former teaching that Christ was a created being, and the latter affirming that God, the Holy Spirit, and Christ are identical, and that Jesus was not God come in the flesh. As Trench wrote: Other passages may contain as important witness against Arian, other against the Sabellian, departure from the truth; but this upon both sides plants the pillars of the faith.[9]This open break between Jesus and the ruling hierarchy was sharp and irrevocable; and, fittingly, Jesus spoke upon this occasion at some length to his enemies in a vain effort to persuade them of the truth of his words and of his claim to be the Messiah. The rest of this chapter is taken up with this overwhelming testimony of the Lord Jesus concerning himself. ENDNOTE: [9] Ibid., p. 280.

Verse 19 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for whatsoever things he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner.In the words of Hovey, the action of Jesus here was: To convince his foes, if they will suffer themselves to be convinced that his action has been in harmony with the will of God. In doing this, he is not called upon to emphasize his personal distinction from the Father (that was admitted by his accusers), or to insist directly on his equality with the Father (for to do that would be to confirm their impression that he was a blasphemer), but rather, without denying either of these, to convince them, if possible, of his absolute unity with the Father in action.[10]All the actions of Jesus were in complete harmony with God’s will; neither is the Son of God capable of doing anything contrary to it. The Son can do nothing of himself … This stresses the obvious truth that no mere man could have healed the cripple, demanding the deduction that Jesus displayed the power of God in doing so great a wonder. But what he seeth the Father doing … The divine insight of Jesus Christ is evident in this. He was not an observer, merely, of mortal deeds alone; but he beheld supernaturally all the works of God. These the Son also doeth in like manner … Jesus’ actions were in full harmony with God’s actions, not only regarding their quality, but with reference to the manner of their being done. Jesus’ words here are nearly the equivalent to the deduction of Nicodemus, “No man can do the signs which thou doest except God be with him” (John 3:2). ENDNOTE: [10] Alvah Hovey, Commentary on John (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1885), p. 135.

Verse 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth; and greater works than these will he show him, that ye may marvel.The Father loveth the Son … This fact should have been known to the priests, for God had so declared it vocally at Jesus’ baptism. And showeth him all things that himself doeth … It would be difficult to imagine a more powerful claim to deity than this. As Barnes wrote: From apostles, prophets, and philosophers, no small part of the doings of God are concealed. From the Son, nothing is hid. And, as God shows him all that is done, he must be possessed of omniscience, for to no finite mind could be imparted a knowledge of all the works of God.[11]Greater works … By this, Jesus meant that the Pharisees had by no means seen the exhaustion of his mighty powers. In the very next verse, he indicated that he would even raise the dead. ENDNOTE: [11] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 230.

Verse 21 For as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will.By this bold word Jesus sought to compel his foes to make a deduction which they should already have made, namely, that a being with the power to do what Jesus had just done possessed also the power to raise the dead. These words of Christ were fulfilled in the raising of Lazarus; and, in context: these words amount to a promise that Jesus would indeed raise the dead before the very eyes of his enemies. These words also have a spiritual application that Jesus stressed a little later (John 5:25).

Verse 22 For neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all judgment unto the Son.This is not a contradiction of Joh 1:17 f; for, in that place, the thing refuted by Christ was the false expectation that the Messiah would execute a military and political judgment against the Gentiles; and, with reference to that kind of judgment, Jesus came not to judge but to save. The judgment in view here is the eternal judgment, which God has made the exclusive province of the Son of God, all judgment having been placed in his hands. Here Christ plainly told his enemies that they were in the presence of the Judge who would judge them in the last day.

Verse 23 That all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.No stronger statement of the deity of Christ appears in Scripture. How is God honored? By the soul’s purest adoration and worship. That is the way Christ should be honored. These words are equivalent to Jesus’ saying, “I am God and am entitled to all the honor belonging to the Father?”

Verse 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.Heareth my word and believeth him that sent me … Hearing and believing Christ’s word are equivalent to believing God who sent him. Believing Jesus is believing God! Thus, here is another skillful advocacy of his deity. Hath eternal life … This focuses upon the true mission of our Lord’s coming into the world, to bring men eternal life. The Pharisees, had they been the type of persons who are interested in such a blessing, might have been convinced by such a promise; but they were too busy with their earthly concerns to pay any attention to the great hope held out in these words. Eternal life is here spoken of as a present possession of the recipient; but that present possession must be understood as a title deed in the form of God’s own promise of a state of bliss following the resurrection of the dead. Such an inheritance, though in a sense only prospective, creates such a profound change in the life of the possessor, coloring his entire life, transforming even sorrows and hardships, and providing the motivation of a higher life-style - so vast a change, in fact, that, in the sense intended here, the believer truly HAS eternal life. Cometh not into judgment … This is the secret of how eternal life is made available to human beings. The great corollary underlying the promise of eternal life is that so great a blessing is inseparable from absolute perfection and holiness. It is inconceivable that God would perpetuate throughout eternity anything imperfect or unholy; and this clause furnishes the clue to the manner in which absolute perfection and holiness can become actual qualifies of them that are destined to eternal life. If people should come into judgment in their own names, standing in their righteousness alone, pleading their own identity and worthiness, none shall be able to stand. Every person who ever lived will fail in such a judgment as that - hence the profound promise of Jesus here that the saved “cometh not into judgment!” How can this be? Will not God judge of all men? Yes, of course; but those who believe and are baptized into Christ, and continue to be united with him, being found at last “in him” those persons shall not come into judgment in their own identity at all, but AS CHRIST! No one shall ever be saved upon the basis of his own personal merit or righteousness; but in Christ, and as Christ, all who are truly united with the Lord shall be saved, the grounds of their justification and redemption being nothing less than the perfect faith and obedience of the Son of God himself. See full discussion of this in my Commentary on Romans, pp. 108-111. But hath passed out of death into life … Not having perfect identity with Christ, in Christ, and as Christ is a state of death; because, apart from Christ, the entire race of men is in a state of utmost condemnation. On the other hand, eternal life is in Christ. Thus, the soul that receives Jesus Christ as Lord passes out of death into life.

Verse 25 Verily, verily, The hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.The three verses, of which this is the center, are among the most instructive in the whole word of God. There can be nothing less than the first resurrection, as the contrast of it with the final resurrection in the next verse proves. This is a spiritual rekindling of life, and that a physical resurrection from the grave. Significantly, the Lord announced that the spiritual resurrection was then in progress, that the Son of God is the author of it, that his word is the means of it, and that as his word was received or rejected men would or would not have a part in it. What a terrible warning to those foes who at that very moment were rejecting his word, not allowing even for a moment his true interpretation of God’s sabbath law, but plotting to maintain their own ridiculous interpretations. Further, by rejecting Jesus’ word in such a subordinate area as the sabbath regulations, the priests were light years away from receiving the profound teachings recorded in this paragraph.

They would remain in a state of spiritual death, and the voice of the Lord of life would sound in vain upon the stopped ears of that evil company. Jesus saw all that; and the thought must have come to him: “Very well, my voice calling men to spiritual resurrection you will not hear; but I shall speak again on another occasion (that of the final judgment), and then you will hear!” In fact, such is the thought expressed later ( John 5:28).

Verse 26 For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself.The Pharisees had already decided to kill Jesus (John 5:18) and were diligently seeking some means of carrying out their plans; and, in that context, these words carry the weight of Joh 10:17-18, where Jesus plainly said they would not be able to murder him, but that he would lay down his own life and take it up again. Jesus affirmed here that the Son is co-equal with God in the possession of life in himself.

Verse 27 And he gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is a Son of man.Authority … is the great word with reference to Christ. None of the apostles failed to be impressed with it. Matthew summarized it in Jesus own words as “all authority in heaven and upon earth” (Matthew 28:18). Because he is a Son of man … God would not judge the intelligent creation whom he fashioned in his own image, until first he himself had become a man in the person of the Son, in order that his judgment would therefore be more merciful, righteous, and just.

Verse 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment.In John 5:21, earlier, Jesus had claimed power to raise the dead; but his statement there fell a little short of declaring emphatically that he would indeed do so (although it was clearly implied). These words, however, dogmatically declare that Christ will raise all of the dead on earth, that the dead of all the ages will respond to his voice, and that Christ will judge them and assign the eternal destiny for both the good and the evil. In John 5:20, Jesus had said “that ye may marvel,” in his words with the priests; but that was not a reference to the final judgment in view here, being rather a prophecy of the raising of Lazarus. Come forth … These are the words addressed to Lazarus (John 11:43) and show that Jesus had fully decided this early in his ministry to perform just such a wonder, in order to confront the unbelieving hierarchy in Jerusalem with a sign so absolutely beyond the power of any man that their unbelief of it would be utterly inexcusable. The sign when it came should not have been understood as an isolated wonder; because any power that could raise a man dead and buried four days can only be identified with God. Jesus made certain that even his enemies would have every opportunity to understand such an awesome sign in its proper relevance to his own eternal power and Godhead. The priestly community in Jerusalem ignored and belittled the healing of a man crippled for thirty-eight years; and, if Christ’s miracles had terminated there, infidelity might have contrived some plausible basis of unbelief. Therefore Christ hurled a challenge in the face of his enemies by promising to raise the dead to life again; but even that, when it occurred, did not convince them, for their error was not a matter of intelligence or reason, but the error of a wicked heart. Resurrection of judgment … For discussion of the eternal judgment and the final punishment of the wicked, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 12:41-42; Matthew 25:29-41. In the teachings of Christ, one great assize is always in view. There will be a simultaneous judgment of all creation at a time already appointed, when absolute justice tempered with mercy for those in Christ shall be executed upon all. That Jesus referred to such a judgment here is implicit in the mention of the general resurrection that shall accompany it, as well as in the statement of the diverse destinies of the good and the bad. Such a concept is inherent in two indisputable facts of the spiritual world: (1) the eternal righteousness of God, and (2) the immortality of the soul.

Given those two basic conceptions, and the necessity of judgment, reward, and punishment is demanded. Mortal life alone cannot provide adequate rewards for the righteous, nor deserved punishment for the wicked. Even such a thing as sanity on man’s part must depend finally upon the assurance that God is righteous and that he will do what is right for every soul ever born on earth, and that even so small a thing as a cup of cold water given in the name of Jesus shall not lose its reward - and that means judgment. These verses contain a tremendous witness of himself, spoken by Jesus in such a way as to demand their acceptance by men; but the Master saw that the Sanhedrinists and their followers were adamant in their rejection of all that he was declaring, despite the signs he did. Such a rejection Jesus met by a change of tactic, and thus he at once marshaled other witnesses upon his own behalf.

Verse 30 I can of myself do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is righteous; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.Here Jesus changed his approach to the closed minds of the priests, still trying to induce them to believe. I can of myself do nothing … These words have a double application: (1) I see that nothing I can say will have any weight with you, and (2) my signs should be interpreted by you as revealing that myself alone, apart from God, could never have done such a thing as cure the invalid. My judgment is righteous … is the equivalent of “My witness of myself is absolutely true, because I am doing the will of God who sent me.” If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true … This means, “But you are rejecting my witness of myself because I am the one witnessing.” It is as if Jesus had said, “Oh yes, I read what you are thinking, namely, that if I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.” Thus this verse is a line of the conversation which the Pharisees did not utter, but which Jesus read out of their hearts. Without for a moment yielding any of the authority of his own witness, the Lord immediately marshaled other witnesses. It is as if he said, “Well, all right, since you reject my witness because I gave it, we shall call other witnesses. The first to be called was God himself. See under John 8:13.

Verse 32 It is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness he witnesseth of me is true.God was here referred to as “another witness,” thus revealing a personal distinction between Jesus Christ and God. Equal to God, Jesus is; the same person as God, Jesus is not.

Verse 33 Ye have sent unto John, and he hath borne witness unto the truth.This has led some to suppose that the witness in the preceding verse is John the Baptist and not the Father; but the very next words of Christ reveal that this reference to John is parenthetical, introduced for possible benefit to Jesus’ hearers, but not as that witness of himself needed or received in this context, because it was “from men.” Ye have sent unto John … refers to the deputation (John 1:19) sent out by the priests and to the positive witness of Christ which was borne by the great herald (John 1:19-35; John 3:23-36). The hierarchy should have believed John’s witness: (1) that Jesus is the Christ; (2) that Jesus is the Messiah; (3) that Jesus is the Bridegroom; and (4) that Jesus is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Also John declared that “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36). This passing reference to John’s witness, however, is parenthetical.

Verse 34 But the witness which I receive is not from man: howbeit I say these things that ye might be saved.From man … Thus John the Baptist was not the witness Christ here called on his own behalf. The Saviour did not appeal to human testimony at all. That ye might be saved … This explains the reason for the parenthetical statement regarding John, whose witness was indeed mighty and should have been received by the priests. The witness of the great Herald was for the benefit of Israel, and for that purpose Jesus repeated it here; but his office of Messiah rested upon more solid testimony than that of any man.

Verse 35 He was the lamp which burneth and shineth; and ye were willing to rejoice for a season in his light.He was … suggests that at this time John had already been cast into prison. Ye were willing … shows that what willingness they had shown at first no longer existed. There is a subtle but powerful argument here which meant, “Look, you wrongfully changed your position regarding John the Baptist.” Lamp … light … A lamp in not a light, but the bearer of light; but we may not make too much of this metaphor, since Jesus himself is called the “Lamp” of the eternal city by this same author (Revelation 21:23).

Verse 36 But the witness that I have is greater than that of John; for the works the Father hath given me to accomplish, the very works that I do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.John performed no miracle; and there was a strong opinion within the very group Jesus was addressing, an opinion stated by Nicodemus that “We know that no man can do the signs thou doest, except God be with him” (John 3:2). Also, God had spoken out of heaven in broad open daylight in the presence of thousands saying, “This is my beloved Son.” The works of Jesus, empowered by God, were the most fantastically powerful deeds ever done on earth, nor has there ever been any successful denial that such world-shaking signs were literally and actually done by him. Feeding a multitude, walking on the sea, raising the dead again, and again, and again - all men, like Nicodemus, should know that only God could have done such things.

Verse 37 And the Father that sent me, he hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his form.Another phase of the Father’s witness regarded the Son of God himself, standing bodily before their eyes. His very presence on earth was a witness from God. Here was the Seed of woman, promised from the gates of Paradise; here was one whose birth was announced by the angels of God, one whom the sword of Herod could not slay, one whose life was sinless, perfect, and beautiful, one who spake as never man spoke, one whose questions as a twelve-year-old confounded the mightiest doctors of religion, and one whose delivery into the world had been since the days of Abraham the sole purpose of God’s patient forbearance with the chosen people. Jesus’ very person, in the full glory of his perfection, was truly the Father’s witness of himself. Ye have neither heard his voice … seen his form … How blind they were and deaf, that, in the presence of Christ himself, they could hear nothing but the voice of their own prejudice and see nothing but a contradiction of their picayune sabbath rules. How insensitive are all who will not believe in Jesus!

Verse 38 And ye have not this word abiding in you: for whom he sent, ye believe not.In the chapter heading, mention was made of the three witnesses of Christ presented here; but, in the ultimate sense, they are but one witness, that of God. Its three phases are: (1) the works given of the Father to Jesus, (2) the person of the Son himself, and (3) the sacred Scriptures themselves also of God. This verse introduces the third phase of the Father’s witness, that of the Holy Scriptures.

Verse 39 Ye search the Scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me.Ye search the Scriptures … is not a command for his hearers so to do, but a recognition of their familiarity with the Old Testament. The significance of this is seen in the preceding verse, where it was stated that these learned leaders did not have God’s word in them at all, in spite of the fact that they were in a sense familiar with it. If they had known God’s word, they would have recognized and received the true Word of God in Jesus Christ. God’s holy revelation, however the Jewish rulers might have been familiar with the syllables of it, simply had no place at all in their hearts. For a full study of the witness of the Jewish Scriptures to the Lord Jesus Christ, see my Commentary on Romans, p. 106. KNOWING THE AND YET NOT KNOWING THEMThe paradox of knowing the Scriptures and yet not knowing them still exists; and it is therefore imperative for all men to take heed to know the word of the Lord truly. Knowing the common traditions with reference to it is not enough. Simply knowing what is written without believing cannot avail. Familiarity with sacred words may exist in a foul and degenerate heart. Those people to whom Jesus spoke these teachings had perverted their knowledge of the word of God in such a manner as to remove all true knowledge of it. And how had they done so?

1. They had made the word of God of none effect by their traditions; and a perfect example of that was in the episode here under study, these men having substituted their own petty and ridiculous rules in the place of God’s true sabbath law.
2. They had also changed the meaning of the words God had given them. God had promised a Messiah whose paradoxical qualities of glory and humiliation should have been sufficient to identify him when he came; but the hierarchy promptly projected two Messiahs, making one of them the lowly and suffering priest, and the other the mighty conqueror who would chase the Romans and restore the Solomonic empire.
3. They rejected out of hand many of the plainest prophecies, especially those projecting the call of the Gentiles to salvation (Romans 9:25-29). No exhaustive treatment of so vast a subject is in order here; but this is enough to show that true knowledge of God’s word is a far different thing from familiarity with Scriptural texts. There are one-third of one thousand (!) specific promises in the Old Testament pointing to the unerring identification of Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ of glory; but these searchers (!) disbelieved, perverted, and rejected the last one of them. In spite of that, the Old Testament still bears witness of Jesus Christ across centuries and millenniums of time; and those Old Testament Scriptures are far more than enough to convince any unbiased person who will take the trouble to know them, that Jesus Christ is indeed the Christ and Saviour of all the world.

Verse 40 And ye will not come to me that ye may have life.Spoken with infinite sorrow, these words are the summary of the interview thus far. No doubt, as he said on another occasion, he marveled at their unbelief; but there was an excellent underlying reason for the unbelief before him, and Christ moved at once to a withering attack upon their consummate wickedness.

Verse 41 I receive not glory from men. But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in yourselves.Here the Lord dealt with the reason for this clash with the leaders. First, he disposed of the reason which they would probably have given, and which Jesus knew to be in their hearts. If asked to explain the conflict, they might have responded in the manner suggested by Hendriksen: He is irked because we criticized him for breaking the sabbath and for implying that he is equal to God; if we had only praised him for what he did to the man in the pool, he would have been satisfied.[12]To their evil thoughts, Jesus replied that he would not even receive as valid the praise of any unbeliever. He revealed that he was not the slightest concerned with getting glory from men. The trouble was not the wounded vanity of Jesus but the lack of the love of God in the hearts of wicked men. Ye have not the love of God in yourselves … This lack of the love of God in their hearts was the inherent cause of their rejection of Jesus. It was the same thing that caused many af them not to confess him, even though they believed on him (John 12:42); and even after they were absolutely certain that he was the long-awaited Messiah, they would not obey him: because “They loved the glory that is of men more than the glory that is of God.” ENDNOTE: [12] William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 210.

Verse 43 I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him will ye receive.The very oneness of Jesus with God was repugnant to men who did not love God, and it is still true. Jesus’ life of humility, purity, justice, love, and meekness infuriated and disgusted the proud, arrogant, selfish and lustful rulers of Israel. He was an unbearable contradiction of their life-style, and they hated him to death. If another shall come in his own name … such a person would be like themselves, full of pride, arrogance, and conceit; and such a leader would be acceptable to them, as being like them and one of them. Jesus was not thus, but demanded of the noblest of them (as in the case of Nicodemus) an utterly new life. Scores of pretenders to Messianic glory have arisen since Christ; and, as Hovey noted: The Jews who were ready to imbrue their hands in the blood of Christ, were just the men to be blinded by the flatteries and taken by the schemes of audacious pretenders to Messianic dignity.[13]Also, it should be noted that Jesus’ prophecy of false Messiahs was literally fulfilled. This prophecy was fulfilled over and over again. One false Messiah was Theudas; another was Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:36-37). Then came Barkochba (132-135 A.D.) …. There have been several score of others since their day …. All of these presented themselves without proper credentials; they came “in their own name”[14]Worldly and unspiritual men have no trouble entering into the plans and affections of men of the world. [13] Alvah Hovey, op. cit., p. 143. [14] William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 210.

Verse 44 How can ye believe, who receive glory one of another, and the glory that cometh from the only God ye seek not?This says that the Sanhedrinists could not believe in Jesus because it would have made them unpopular with their peer group. They were primarily in love with themselves; and their society was founded upon mutual flattery, mutual deceit, and mutual glory reflected among themselves. The Saviour of all men was “persona non grata” in such a society. Exactly the same blight rests upon Christianity today in the destructive and sinful theology which has been received and promulgated in some high intellectual circles. Think of the unpopularity that would descend upon any of the radical critics who might openly confess that the Bible is nothing less than the word of God. Of this very Gospel, throughout the first third of the present century, there were few notable exceptions among the so-called higher critics who dared to support the opinion that John was written in the first century. Why? It was popular to ascribe it to a falsarius in the second or third century; and what scholar was there who desired to be unpopular among the “leading lights” of his age? Many of such cowards, who probably knew better, are now in their graves; and it turns out from the discovery of the Rylands fragment and from other discoveries of archaeology that the book of John was, after all, certainly written before the end of the first century.

But what of those whose voices so stridently opposed such a view only a few years ago? This is another warning against subscribing to any view of sacred things purely upon the basis of the reputation of its advocates. As Hengstenberg said: Receiving honor from man has a deep place in our theology. This theology is extremely anxious not to break with the spirit of the age, but to be in accord with it. This is the worm which is gnawing it, the curse which is resting upon it.[15]ENDNOTE: [15] Alvah Hovey, op. cit., p. 143.

Verse 45 Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, on whom ye have set your hope.Our Lord here emphasized his true character as the judge of all men, declining any function of the prosecuting attorney. Christ is eternally the Advocate in the presence of the Father; but he is not the accuser of men; he is their defender, provided only that they will come unto him and rely upon his righteousness to save them. Tragically, the Jews Christ addressed were trusting for salvation in the law of Moses, blissfully ignorant of the law’s total ineffectiveness to save anyone. Any person, breaking the tiniest of its regulations, was in total condemnation without recourse. It provided no means of forgiveness, no indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and there was a continual remembrance of sin in it; and the foolish notion of the leaders of Israel that their strictness in keeping some of the law’s externals could entitle them to eternal life is among the most pathetic delusions of all time.

Verse 46 For if ye believed Moses, ye would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?How strange that those leaders, thinking so strongly that they had eternal life through Moses, were actually unbelievers of the writings of the great lawgiver. Such is the deceptiveness of sin, that persons who truly imagine themselves to be believers are in fact no such thing! It is possible that Christ had in mind here the great prophecies of Gen 3:15 and Deuteronomy 18:15-19; but there were many prophecies in “Moses,” a word signifying the entire Pentateuch, regarding Christ. As Hovey said: “This is a perfectly clear testimony on the part of Christ to a Messianic element in the Pentateuch, as well as to the Mosaic authorship of the same."[16]The significance of the testimony of Christ here is great. God is the author of the Old Testament, no less than of the New Testament; and there is no way by which a true believer in Christ can avoid full acceptance of God’s word as revealed in the Old Testament. It is true now, as it was then, that if men will not believe Moses, they will not believe Christ either. THIS Jesus’ words here addressed to his enemies are among the most profound and instructive in holy writ. There is a perfection of detail, a perfect fitting together of diverse and complicated elements, a subtle and far-reaching connection with all that came afterward in John, a relevance to the situation wherein the words were spoken, and such an amazing applicability of every word to the problem confronted, and such an overpowering logic and unity of the whole passage, that any notion of such a passage’s having been produced by an impostor is absolutely untenable. Philip Schaff said of this passage: This discourse is truly wonderful for depth and simplicity and boldness. As uttered by the holy Son, it must have astounded “the Jews,” holding them spellbound with awe. It is so characteristic, grand, pointed, and telling, that the idea of an invention is preposterous.[17]Likewise, Godet wrote: The principal theme is exactly pertinent to the occasion. The secondary ideas subordinate themselves logically to this theme. Not a detail is inconsistent with the whole; and the application is solemn and impressive, as it ought to be, in such a situation. It stamps the whole discourse with the seal of reality.[18]After such a presentation of the truth to Jesus’ enemies, one may only marvel that hardened men could have continued in their rejection of the Holy Saviour and have gone forward with their plans to murder him (John 5:18). In this chapter, there is a subtle but magnificent progression toward the climax of raising Lazarus from the dead. It is revealed herein that Christ had in mind to do “greater things” than healing the invalid (John 5:30), a clear prediction of raising the dead. Jesus declared the fact of his having life in himself, spoke of himself as the source and authority of the spiritual resurrection, and flatly announced himself as the causative force of the final resurrection of all the dead. And, in all of this magnificent progression beginning with the healing of the invalid, and then moving steadily and logically from that event: (1) to the promise of “greater works,” (2) to the promise that his foes would marvel at it, (3) to the teaching of a great spiritual resurrection, (4) and to the announcement of himself as having authority and power over the final resurrection and judgment of the last day - in all of these things, there is a dramatic and constant movement toward the tomb of Lazarus and the event af Jesus’ raising him from the dead, and of which event this chapter is a necessary prelude. Allegations to the effect that there is no progression in John are grounded in a lack of perception. [16] Ibid., p. 144. [17] Ibid. [18] Ibid.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For John 51. Why did Jesus go up to Jerusalem? 2. Describe the pool found there. 3. What is antecedent of “ these” in verse three? 4. Who were lying there ? 5. What were they waiting for ? 6. Tell who would be the favored party. 7. What certain man was there ? 8. Repeat the question Jesus asked him. 9. What was his explanation? 10. Tell what Jesus did. 11. What complaint did the Jews make? 12. State the defense he made. 13. What did they ask him? 14. Why could he not answer them ? 15. Where did he see him next? 16. Tell what admonition he gave the man. 17. What report did he then make? 18. How did they then treat Jesus? 19. With whom did Jesus work? 20. What increased the anger of the Jews? 21. State the dependence of the Son on the Father. 22. How did the Father show love for the Son? 23. What was destined to cause the Jews to marvel? 24. Tell what both the Father and Son do. 25. Tell what the Son only does. 26. State the purpose of this. 27. What must we do for both or for neither? 28. Who will escape condemnation? 29. What voice was the dead to hear? 30. At that voice what will they do? 31. When was this to be? 32. What authority is given to the Son? 33. From where does the Son procure life? 34. Tell what hour was to come. 35. What will they do when they hear ? 36. To what two destinies will they come forth ? 37. How could Christ not do anything? 38. What justifies his judgment? 39. In what will was he interested? 40. How many witnesses necessary for truth? 41. State the two in this case. 42. What third party gave additional testimony 43. Was Christ dependent on his testimony? 44. Tell what honor Jesus bestowed on John. 45. How had he been received ? 46. What greater witness did Jesus have? 47. Tell what was proved by this testimony. 48. What had these people not seen ? 49. State what did not abide in them. 50. What indicated this? 51. Why did they search the scriptures? 52. And yet what testimony did they overlook ? 53. Why should they come to Christ? 54. Tell what Jesus did not receive. 55. Of what did he accuse these Jews? 56. In what name had Jesus come? 57. Yet whom would they prefer to receive? 58. Tell what was hindering their belief. 59. Who had accused them before Christ? 60. In what way did he condemn them?

John 5:1

1 This feast was the Passover, and the second one that Jesus attended after his baptism. The next one is recorded in chapter 6:4.

John 5:2

2 Sheep market is from the Greek word , which Thayer defines, “the sheep-gate.” The Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) uses the same word, and Donnegan defines it, “Pertaining to sheep, or to cattle, especially sheep.” This spot is mentioned in Nehemiah 3:1; Nehemiah 3:32. Porch is from STOA, which the lexicon of Thayer defines, “a portico, a covered colonnade where people can stand or walk, protected from the weather and the heat of the sun.”

John 5:3-4

4 The greater part of this paragraph is omitted from some translations, on the ground that some early Greek manuscripts do not contain it. I have consulted the information that is available to me, with the result that the subject is left in an indefinite state. Perhaps it is because there is little evidence of importance on the controversy. Various kinds of miracles were performed in ancient times, and the one described in this passage would not be entirely out of line with the Lord’s manner of doing things. However, whether -the miracle actually occurred as stated, or that the people had a tradition on which they relied, is immaterial as far as the work of Jesus is concerned. That some periodical disturbance of the water took place need not be disputed.

Jesus did not make any controversy about the doctrine of “Transmigration of souls” (Matthew 14:2), but healed the blind man independently of it. The writer does not show Jesus as even referring to the question of this agitation of the pool, therefore I shall comment on the remaining verses in their order.

John 5:5

5 This man’s case was chronic, for he had been afflicted 38 years.

John 5:6

6 Of course Jesus knew the history of the case, but his approach to the patient was made in the spirit of a sympathetic well-wisher. The patient did not know the identity of Jesus (verse 13) until sometime afterward.

John 5:7

7 The impotent (weak or feeble) man had confidence in the curative properties of the water, whatever was the basis of that belief. He explained to Jesus why he was compelled to lie there from time to time, not getting any relief from his illness.

John 5:8

8 Jesus made no reference to the proposition in connection with the pool, but bade the man not only to arise, but to carry his bed as he walked.

John 5:9

9 A nervous person might be induced to bestir himself momentarily, by the influence of suggestion. But it would require something more than “mind over matter” to enable a man who had been physically helpless for 38 years, not only to walk, but to carry a bed that was large enough to support a man. His recovery was complete and immediate, because that was what Jesus willed to be accomplished in this case. In that of the nobleman’s son (preceding chapter), Jesus only professed to start him on the road to recovery, which was done by causing the “temperature” to drop to normal. That feat was also immediate, for it was done the “same hour” that Jesus spoke the word.

John 5:10

0 The Jews were not candid enough to object to the curing of the impotent man, but pretended to be opposed to breaking the sabbath.

John 5:11

1 The man did not express any conclusion, but the facts he related implied one that could not be disputed. Anyone could tell a man to get up and carry his bed, but not everyone who might say that could enable the patient to do so. This combination of facts was the strongest kind of evidence that it was no ordinary person who had befriended the impotent man.

John 5:12

2 We are not told whether the Jews suspected who the man’s benefactor was, but it is reasonable to suppose they did, in view of their hatred for Him.

John 5:13

3After Jesus cured the weak man, He took advantage of the crowd to disappear. Hence the former victim of the affliction told the truth, if he stated he did not know who it was who told him to carry his bed.

John 5:14

4 Sin no more. We are not informed what sin the man had committed, that brought on him the chronic case of physical prostration. And it did not have to be a miraculous punishment, although God did sometimes send physical Judgments upon people in the days of miracles. But there are some sins of a moral nature, that can result in serious consequences to a man’s health. But if this man should be so ungrateful as to sin again, the Lord would not wait for nature to inflict a penalty upon him, but would send one Himself, that would be worse than the affliction he had this time.

John 5:15

5 The meeting of Jesus and the man in the temple, and the conversation which they had, revealed to the former impotent man who his benefactor was. He seems to have thought the Jews had asked him the question about the identity of his friend, for the sake of information. Now that he has learned who he was, he felt that he should give them the information he could not before.

John 5:16

6 The Jews evidently knew that Jesus was going about doing good to the people, and that he was likely the one who had healed the impotent man. But their envy of Him was made more bitter because the man had learned about the identity of his friend, and seemed to be interested in His work. The envy of the Jews became so active they had a desire to kill Him.

John 5:17

7 The Jews were so bitter against Jesus that they accused him of breaking the sabbath. Jesus made his reply by asserting his relation with God as his Father, and his cooperation with Him in the good work. The Jews made great claims of respect for God, and would never admit that He would violate the very day that he had declared to be holy. Now that Jesus claimed his work (even on the sab-bath) to be as a co-worker with God, it was more than they could stand.

John 5:18

8 A new cause for murderous hatred was furnished the Jews by the answer of Jesus. They pretended to be outraged at his claim of being the Son of God.

John 5:19

9 This verse expresses a situation that is generally true in principle. A dutiful son will logically imitate the actions of his father. Since God does not hesitate to bestow works of mercy on the unfortunate, even on the sabbath day, so the Son may properly do the same without being condemned as a breaker of the holy day.

John 5:20

0 On the principle set forth in the preceding verse, a loving and divine Father will take his Son into his confidence, and inform him of the great things that are being done through Providential benevolence. And there were to be still greater things done than the healing of an afflicted man on the sabbath day.

John 5:21

1 One of the works that are greater than healing a sick man, is that of raising a man from the dead. The Son was destined also to perform that great work of quickening the dead by the sound of his voice.

John 5:22

2 Hath committed all judgment unto the Son. This was said in prospect, looking to the time when the Son would complete the test. (See Matthew 28:18.)

John 5:23

3 Men are required to recognize the close relationship between the Father and the Son, in order to receive the favor of either of them.

John 5:24

4 The subject in the preceding verse is continued in this as to the close partnership between the Father and the Son. The passage adds the results for those who recognize that union, by showing a practical belief in the same. Death and life refers to spiritual matters, because all who refuse to accept God and Christ and obey their law will be condemned to everlasting death.

John 5:25

5 This passage pertains to the same death and life as that in the preceding verse. To hear the voice of the Son of God in the sense of this statement, means to heed and obey His requirements; a dead faith will not save.

John 5:26

6 A father transfers his characteristics to his offspring as an established rule. This relation between God and Christ is no exception to the rule, for Jesus is able to impart spiritual life to those who will accept it, because He is the Son of the life-giving God.

John 5:27

7 This inheritance that. Christ received from his Father, entitled him to be the executioner of the divine judgment upon the world.

John 5:28

8 Jesus passes from figurative and spiritual language, to literal or physical. The graves are the enclosures for the bodies of those who have died, through separation of soul and body. These dead shall be brought out of their graves literally by the call of Jesus on the day of the general resurrection.

John 5:29

9 There will be only one literal resurrection day, on which all of the dead will come forth. The fact of coming from the dead will not depend upon character or conduct, for the whole human family that has died will come forth. The hour that the voice of Christ calls is the one instant when the tremendous event will occur. But as to what will be awaiting them after coming to life again, that does depend on their conduct, as stated in this verse. This resurrection and what will follow is predicted in Daniel 12:2.

John 5:30

0 This is the same teaching as that in verse 19.

John 5:31

1 Bear witness of myself. This means if His testimony is by itself, and not in harmony with that of his Father. That is why Jesus always worked in harmony with God, so that their united efforts would verify each other.

John 5:32

2 Not only did God verify the Sonship of Christ (Matthew 3:17), but there was another among men who added his testimony to the divine witness, to be named soon.

John 5:33

3 John the Baptist was the other witness referred to above. The time the Jews sent to inquire of John is recorded in chapter 1:19-27.

John 5:34

4 I receive not testimony from man. This denotes that Jesus did not depend on human testimony for his authority. That ye might be saved. The standing of Jesus did not depend upon human testimony. However, the salvation of men does depend on their faith, and Jesus was willing to cite them to any truth that would strengthen their faith. The corroborating testimony of John was a help in that direction.

John 5:35

5 The Jews had once shown much admiration for the work of John. If they became cool toward that testimony, that would not weaken its truthfulness.

John 5:36

6 The works to which Jesus refers are those mentioned in chapter 20:30, 31. Had he been an impostor, he could not have performed these deeds.

John 5:37

7 No man in normal flesh ever saw the form or person of God, for to do so would mean his death (Exodus 33:20). But God wished human beings to have the testimony of Him, hence he furnished it by aiding the Son to perform the miraculous works.

John 5:38

8 The gist of this verse, is that all who will nourish the word of God in their hearts, will signify it by accepting that of His Son, whom he hath sent into the world in the form of human flesh.

John 5:39

9 As the King James translators word this verse, it sounds like a command or directive, telling the Jews to go and search the scriptures. Several other versions have the pronoun “ye” before the word “search,” and the inflection of the word in the Greek composition justifies it. The context also bears out that form of rendering. Jesus was showing the Jews another of their inconsistencies. They professed to have so much confidence in the Old Testament that they would search its pages to find the conditions on which they could obtain eternal life. And yet, that very document had told the Jews that a person like Christ was to come.

John 5:40

0 The one person that their Scriptures predicted should come into the world to save it, these Jews refused to accept that they might be saved.

John 5:41

1 This could not mean that no man honored Jesus, for even the “common people (the crowds) heard him gladly” (Mark 12:37). It denotes that Jesus was not depending on human support for his standing.

John 5:42

2 This accusation that Jesus made was logical, and based on the close relationship and attachment that God and his Son have for each other. If they loved God from the heart (and not merely from the lips), they would necessarily love his Son, which the Jews did not, or they would not be wanting to kill him.

John 5:43

3 It is hard to understand why false teachers can have more suc cess in leading people than the true. Perhaps it is because such characters are unscrupulous about the means they will use to put over their theories.

John 5:44

4 Those who receive honor from men are selfish, and also feel obligated to “return the favor” to the others. Such worldly-minded persons cannot have much respect for the testimony of God, which requires them to disown themselves.

John 5:45

5 The thought in this verse is that Jesus is not alone in condemning these Jews. The giver of the law of which they boasted to be followers, already accused them by his predictions. In Deuteronomy 18:18-20, Moses predicted that a prophet was to come among the Jews, and we know that was Christ. In that prophecy, a condemnation is uttered against the man who would not hearken to the words of that prophet.

John 5:46

6 When the Jews rejected Jesus it was the same as rejecting Moses.

John 5:47

7 Reasoning back the other direction, Jesus concludes they are bound to disbelieve his words, when they reject the words of their boasted lawgiver.