Third Appearance

John 21:14 This was now the third time that Jesus was revealed to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.

14 τοῦτο ἤδη τρίτον ἐφανερώθη Ἰησοῦς τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἐγερθεὶς ἐκ νεκρῶν.

As we finish out John, here we see Jesus appearing to the disciples and giving them a big catch of fish and a nice breakfast. Just after this verse Jesus reinstates Peter. Here I want to focus on this verse because of what it means.

This verse is one of those where we have to decide if we trust the Gospel accounts or not. If you trust the Gospels you cannot get around the fact of Jesus' resurrection. He appeared to them three separate times so that they would be sure that He really was alive. If it happened one time perhaps it was a fluke from their emotions. If it happened twice perhaps we could still come up with some plausible conspiracy theory. But here we see a third appearance. This leaves no doubt that Jesus really was raised from the dead.

As we find ourselves in the middle of Passion Week, it is important to consider this now. We're getting ready to celebrate Easter. This is when we remember what it is that makes Christianity unique. Anyone can celebrate some equivalent of Christmas because everyone who ever called himself a prophet has a birthday. But only Jesus has a resurrection day. 

This should be cause for immense celebration. Because Jesus lived a perfect life, suffered, died, was buried, and raised we have atonement for our sins through faith in Him. We can celebrate our first spiritual resurrection with Him that we enjoyed when we were saved. And we can look forward to our physical resurrection with Him on the last day. 

Can you look forward to this as well? If not, repent and believe in Christ.

The Kingdom

John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world."


36 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς· ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου· εἰ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου ἦν ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμή, οἱ ὑπηρέται οἱ ἐμοὶ ἠγωνίζοντο [ἂν] ἵνα μὴ παραδοθῶ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις· νῦν δὲ ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐντεῦθεν.

This was Jesus' answer to Pilate. Pilate didn't really understand what Jesus was all about and this answer didn't help things much. But it helps us when we consider what Jesus came to do.

The Jews were confused because they were sure that He came to establish an earthly kingdom. In fact, that's what they asked Him about in Acts 1. They were all set for Him to depose the Romans and set up His rule from Jerusalem. What nobody seemed to get is that He had to suffer and die on the cross first and then be raised on the third day.

Jesus had told them that the "Kingdom of heaven is at hand." Here we see that His kingdom is established. It's just not what everyone expected. Eventually He is going to return and reign in glory over the New Heavens and New Earth. Until then, His kingdom is a spiritual one.

Normally, I have a practical application from what I write, but here I don't. Instead, I just think that this gives me a hermeneutical principle as I read the Gospels. Enjoy!

The Whole Point

John 17:1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you,

1 Ταῦτα ἐλάλησεν Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἐπάρας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἶπεν· πάτερ, ἐλήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα· δόξασόν σου τὸν υἱόν, ἵνα ὁ υἱὸς δοξάσῃ σέ,

This is the beginning of Jesus' "high priestly prayer" where He makes an appeal to the Father for the disciples. There is a ton to talk about in this prayer, but I want to focus on this verse. First, we see that  ἐλήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα. Here Jesus uses a perfect to say that the time has arrived for the cross. Then He uses an imperative in praying for God to δόξασόν σου τὸν υἱόν. Why should God glorify His son? Jesus answers with a ινα clause: ἵνα ὁ υἱὸς δοξάσῃ σέ.


What's the big deal about this? I think that Jesus' prayer gives us a model for how we should be focused in our lives. When we talk about the gospel we tend to focus on what Christ did for us. It is true that He died to atone for the sins of the world. To minimize that would be ridiculous. However, we should not maximize it either.


Here we see Jesus pray that the Father would be glorified in the sacrifice He was about to make. The cross is central to everything we do. But ultimately it is not about our redeemed lives, but about the glory of the Father. The change in us should be focused on glorifying God the Father.

With Blinders On

John 14:17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.


17 τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν, ὅτι οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει· ὑμεῖς γινώσκετε αὐτό, ὅτι παρ᾽ ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται.

Here Jesus is teaching His disciples about the Holy Spirit. He has a lot to say about Him, but this is one of my memory verses for Pneumatology and something struck me about it as I read it yesterday and reviewed it today. Jesus says that the world οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει. The word θεωρεῖ is what is translated "sees" here i the ESV. When I learned it as a vocabulary word, I learned it as "look at, behold." The word "sees" captures that meaning, but I think that reading it in English it may not be strong enough.

I have met more than a few materialists who are materialists because they say that they only believe what they can sense. Of course, they believe in subatomic particles and all manner of theoretical things because scientists have proven them. They also tend to believe in the theory of evolution because they need something to tell them how we got where we are. My point is not to argue about subatomic particles or the theory of evolution. My point is just that folks who say that they cannot believe in an unseen God will happily believe in other things that they have not personally sensed because they trust the witnesses.

Jesus is telling His disciples that this would be the case and He was right (go figure). The world does not look at the Holy Spirit even though evidence of His work surrounds us every day. The world certainly does not know Him. How could it unless they are regenerated? This is the contrast that Jesus makes. You (the disciples) know Him, because (ὅτι) He dwells with you and will be with you. As Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 6:19, Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit. That is how He is in us. As Jesus was speaking this the Holy Spirit was only dwelling with them because this was before Pentecost.

The point is that the world does not see the Holy Spirit, but if you have become a Christian you must know Him. After all, He is the one who changed your heart. He is in us. What do you do with this knowledge?

Leaving an Example

John 13:15 For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you.


15 ὑπόδειγμα γὰρ ἔδωκα ὑμῖν ἵνα καθὼς ἐγὼ ἐποίησα ὑμῖν καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιῆτε.

I apologize for my lack of posting lately. I am really working hard to finish this semester well since it is my last semester. Blogging has gone on the back-burner, but since Noah woke me up early today I got a good start and have time for it.

This verse comes right after Jesus washed His disciples' feet. There are some who take this passage as a prescription for how we should treat each other in a literal way. They practice foot-washing. I understand that this is prevalent among the Grace Brethren when they have communion services.

I don't think that it is a bad idea for the pastor to wash people's feet, though it would be a bit strange in our culture. I can't think of any men I want handling my feet. The question is whether Jesus is speaking literally or metaphorically here. If you don't like the word "metaphorical" you could substitute "paradigmatically" instead. In other words, was Jesus giving a specific instruction or was He simply giving them a principle by which to live?

I would have to go with the latter. Though this is not an ironclad argument, the fact is that we do not find foot-washing in any of the other synoptic gospels. We do not find it in Acts or the Pauline epistles. I don't know what the practices of the early church were, but I do think that these other arguments from silence are fairly compelling. If it is meant to be done regularly, why don't we see it elsewhere in Scripture?

I realize that this is not a particularly strong argument, nor do I think it is a sinful practice today. However, I do think that we will not go wrong if we take this to be an example of extreme humility on Jesus' part, particularly given the context of the next few verses where He describes the master-servant relationship. We need to humbly serve one another in the body of Christ. There are plenty of examples of that throughout Scripture, amen? Are there examples of that in your life?

Authorities

John 7:48 Have any of the authorities or the Pharisees believed in him?


48 μή τις ἐκ τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐπίστευσεν εἰς αὐτὸν ἢ ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων;

This is the question the Pharisees asked the "officers" who they sent as something of a goon squad to arrest Jesus. The officers refused to do this because they heard the power of Jesus' preaching. They understood something that the Pharisees could not grasp. Jesus was special and His preaching demanded a response.

The problem of course is that Jesus threatened the Pharisees' way of life. If He was right then they were clearly wrong. You don't just take a group of people who have made it their business to be the most right of all the people in society and then expect them to gracefully step aside. The Pharisees weren't going down without a fight. In a couple of chapters we will see how it all comes together.

This is clearly evident in the church today. It started with Rome and the Reformation. You expect to take a corrupt Pope like Leo and threaten him with the Bible? I sincerely doubt that he cared about anything beyond his own glory if the history about him is even partially true. But if Luther was right then that would destroy his whole way of life.

And lest we get on our Protestant high horses about this, take a look at the average megachurch. I just heard a story about a megachurch that could only offer $350/month to a church-planter because of budget issues. This was coming from a senior pastor's office that had a glass wall with a view of the Rockies. I suspect that most megachurches have the same problem. A severely obese person's heart works as hard when he is sitting as mine does when I go out for a run. Because I'm in decent physical shape I can push my body a little bit to run up a hill, climb stairs, etc. The obese person is always in a state of being pushed, so there is nowhere for his body to go.

I hope that the illustration is clear. To embrace the ideas in David Platt's Radical or even Francis Chan's Crazy Love is a threat to the way of life set up by today's churchianity. Why should we have small churches focused on discipleship? Does Mark Driscoll do it that way? How about C.J. Mahaney? John Piper? James MacDonald? No! They all have big churches with home/life/fellowship/small groups. Why should we do small churches.

Well, despite the success of these men's ministries (and I do think that they are all doing great works) I think that we need to let the New Testament guide us instead. Please hear me that I do not think that they are Pharisees either. My point is simply that the leaders and authorities of the day should always be trumped by Jesus. There is just no other way to look at it.

Who is your authority?

Emptied Teaching

John 7:16 So Jesus answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.


16 ἀπεκρίθη οὖν αὐτοῖς [ὁ] Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν· ἡ ἐμὴ διδαχὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὴ ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέμψαντός με·

Passages like this can put the Trinitarian into knots. I believe that this is a fairly good proof-text for the Jehovah's Witness view of who Christ is. Does this mean that Christ is of a different nature from the Father? If the teaching is not His then whose is it? How can it not be His if He is God?

These are the logical questions that come to my mind. But when I think of things like this I tend to gravitate toward Philippians 2:6-11. That is the great kenosis passage, so named because of the verb that describes how Jesus emptied Himself. By taking on the form of a man He humbled Himself from being simply deity.

When Jesus makes this statement in John 7:16 He refers to the fact that as a man He has no authority. But as God He does. And this ultimately came from the Father who sent Him. In other places we see how folks marveled at His teaching because of His authority. Here he explains it a bit more, but perhaps makes it more puzzling.

The fact is that if the Bible is held to be God's Word we need to live with the tension that Jesus was fully God and fully man as He walked on the earth. Maybe He chose this language because He knew that they could not conceive of how He could be God. What I do know is that it is certainly confusing, but if we accept by faith what Scripture says then we have to live with a little bit of confusion.

No Alternative

John 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God."


68 ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος· κύριε, πρὸς τίνα ἀπελευσόμεθα; ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις, 69  καὶ ἡμεῖς πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν ὅτι σὺ εἶ ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ.

We went from people following Jesus as a mobile Jack In the Box and MASH unit to them walking away when He called them to commitment. Jesus then asked His disciples if they too wanted to leave and this was Peter's response.

I admit that I have times of doubt. I wonder if following Christ is really worth it. I wonder if it is all true. I have several personal apologetics that I go through that help me when I have those times of doubt. Ultimately it comes down to this statement. Jesus has words ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου. I have come to know that He is the Holy One of God. What else is there?

Sure we could follow Allah. We could follow the god of the Jehovah's Witnesses. We could follow the god of Joseph Smith. We could follow our hearts like Oprah tells us to. We could pay homage to nature like the Wiccans. We could worship a myriad of gods like the Hindus. There are other options out there.

But who else has the words of eternal life? Only Jesus. Therefore, let's draw near to God through faith to Him.

MASH Unit

John 6:2 And a large crowd was following him, because they saw the signs that he was doing on the sick.



2 ἠκολούθει δὲ αὐτῷ ὄχλος πολύς, ὅτι ἐθεώρουν τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει ἐπὶ τῶν ἀσθενούντων.

Jesus did a great job of attracting crowds through His ministry because He dealt with their needs. He helped them in practical ways such as healing them. Later in John 6 we will see how Jesus fed 5000 with a kid's sack lunch. This got to their base desires. After all, who doesn't want to be fed and made well?

The thing is that they were following Him for the wrong reasons. There is a school of thought in the evangelical world that we should attract people based on their physical needs. Or at the very least we should do it based no their felt needs. If they feel like they need help with their marriages then we should preach a series on marriage and challenge them to have sex for a certain number of consecutive days. If they are having financial problems then we should preach a message on stewardship, along with some Scripture-twisting to convince them that 10% is the minimum that a New Testament saint should give. And so on.

Jesus met people's needs, but that was not why His true disciples followed Him. They followed Him because He met their deepest needs. He filled their hearts as in John 4. This is what people need rather than a MASH Unit.

Why are you following Jesus, if you are? Certainly we should enjoy the fact that He does meet our needs, but hopefully we follow Him because He is God.

The New Temple

John 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?" 21 But he was speaking about the temple of his body.


19 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· λύσατε τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον καὶ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερῶ αὐτόν. 20  εἶπαν οὖν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι· τεσσεράκοντα καὶ ἓξ ἔτεσιν οἰκοδομήθη ὁ ναὸς οὗτος, καὶ σὺ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερεῖς αὐτόν; 21  ἐκεῖνος δὲ ἔλεγεν περὶ τοῦ ναοῦ τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ.

It's funny that when I went through Acts I really struggled to find things to write about each day, but now that I'm in John I have more than I know what to do with. There are great things to write about the wedding at Cana, but I think that this passage after Jesus cleared the temple is worth discussing too.

One of the big hermeneutical bones that Dispensationalists pick with Covenantal folks is that they claim that they are more literal when they read the text. In other words, they take passages literally unless there is a good reason not to. That's certainly commendable as it demonstrates a very high view of the text. However, it is problematic when our Lord does not do the same thing.

If we did not have verse 21 we would think along with the Jews that Jesus referred to the physical temple. However, here the text tells us that Jesus was speaking in a figurative way. He was referring to His own body, which in context would have been completely unintelligible except for the clarification of verse 21. This does not mean that we should look for figurative allusions all over the place, but it does serve to point out that we need to be careful about how we define "literal interpretation."

If we take Jesus at His words then it seems to me that He became the new and better temple. There was no need for the old one because He would do away with the sacrificial system. This seems to imply that the temple described in Ezekiel cannot be a new temple set up in a millenial kingdom with real animal sacrifices on it. Otherwise, that would be going backwards to the types and shadows of the Old Covenant.

Matthew 2:15 shows us that Jesus is the true Israel. Here we see that He is the true temple as well. In short, Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament. He did it in a way that the Jews did not really understand and won't understand until God opens their eyes. Let's be careful about how literal we are and make sure that we are consistent. That's my goal. I'm sure that I'm inconsistent elsewhere. Hopefully this slow systematic approach to the New Testament will help me to see where.

The Word Became Flesh

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.



14 Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας.

Now that I've finished slogging through Luke's Greek in Luke-Acts it's time to go back through John. As a preview of what is to come, I plan to go through John, 1-3 John, and Revelation. Then I'll go back to Paul. I believe that John wrote those five books, so I want to get a sense of how it all ties together. Plus, I think it's good to mix things up once in a while.

If you've been around church for any length of time you're probably familiar with at least the clause Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν. This is a clause that maybe gets a little bit overpreached, but let's break it down a little bit. The verb ἐγένετο is an aorist. That means that at some point in time the Word became flesh. Aorist doesn't necessarily mean puncticular as some older preachers may have learned, but what we do know is that at some undefined past time the Word became flesh.

The word ἐσκήνωσεν is also an aorist. This has the idea of putting up a tent to settle down. You may have heard it preached as "And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us." I think that may be overtranslating it a bit, besides the fact that "tabernacle" is not a great expression to use in 21st century America. Basically, I think that we can understand this as saying that Jesus became flesh and for a time made His dwelling with us people.

What can we use to illustrate this? Let's say that you felt called to help the homeless. Since you're reading this on a computer I'm going to assume that you are not too badly off in your personal finances, even though you probably don't feel particularly rich. Would you be willing to grab a tent and live with the homeless in the woods near the highway? Let's take it a step further. I have a great box that we got from our new mattress. Would you be willing to take that and live with the homeless on the grates in the city?

To be honest, I wouldn't do either for various reasons. One big one is that it would be really inconvenient. I have a wife and children to love. I have work to do. I have schoolwork to complete. I have grass that needs mowing. I can't spare the time from what I consider to be really important.

Another is fear. Generally-speaking, the folks who are homeless are there for a reason. It's not always true, but there are often stories of addiction or other problematic behaviors. You're telling me to live with these people? I can't sleep with one eye open.

That leads to perhaps the greatest, but most shallow. It would be uncomfortable. These people stink. They aren't pleasant to be around. Camping in the woods would be great yesterday and today. The weather is beautiful. What about two weeks ago when it was raining sideways? I think you get the idea.

Now take all of those reasons and look at Christ and what He did by leaving heaven and coming to earth to be with us. I don't want to leave my comfortable house in Cary. He left heaven. I don't want to endanger my body. He came to die on a cross. I don't want to leave the comfortable sights, smells, and relationships I have at home. He left perfect fellowship with the Trinity to spend time with people who would all leave Him at His most difficult hour. We truly worship and awesome Savior.

Tending the Sheep

John 21:15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." 16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.

15 Ὅτε οὖν ἠρίστησαν λέγει τῷ Σίμωνι Πέτρῳ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Σίμων Ἰωάννου, ἀγαπᾷς με πλέον τούτων; λέγει αὐτῷ· ναὶ κύριε, σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ· βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία μου. 16  λέγει αὐτῷ πάλιν δεύτερον· Σίμων Ἰωάννου, ἀγαπᾷς με; λέγει αὐτῷ· ναὶ κύριε, σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ· ποίμαινε τὰ πρόβατά μου. 17  λέγει αὐτῷ τὸ τρίτον· Σίμων Ἰωάννου, φιλεῖς με; ἐλυπήθη ὁ Πέτρος ὅτι εἶπεν αὐτῷ τὸ τρίτον· φιλεῖς με; καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ· κύριε, πάντα σὺ οἶδας, σὺ γινώσκεις ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ [ὁ Ἰησοῦς]· βόσκε τὰ πρόβατά μου.

This is a fairly heavily-preached passage at the very end of John's gospel.  Here Jesus restores Peter after Peter's denials on the night of Jesus' betrayal.  This is a powerful passage that displays God's grace.  I know that I am thankful for it because of my many failures.

Much is often made of the difference between Jesus' question ἀγαπᾷς με πλέον τούτων; contrasted with Peter's response of ναὶ κύριε, σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε.  It is usually preached something like Jesus asking Peter if he loves Him and Peter responds, "You know that I consider you a close friend."  This is because of the supposedly great difference between αγαπη and φιλεω.  Don't let anyone fool you.  It preaches well, but the differences aren't that great.  Not enough to warrant a sermon anyway.

This is a beautiful passage.  I love how it demonstrates God's persistent grace in our lives.  He loves us when we do not deserve it.  He restores us when we think we can do nothing for Him.  But don't make too big of a deal about these words.

Profession of Faith

 John 20:28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

28 ἀπεκρίθη Θωμᾶς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου. 29  λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· ὅτι ἑώρακάς με πεπίστευκας; μακάριοι οἱ μὴ ἰδόντες καὶ πιστεύσαντες.

If you want to get a moniker hung on you for eternity, just doubt who Jesus is.  "Doubting" Thomas refused to believe in the resurrection of Christ until he was able to touch the wounds himself.  This is his response to doing just that.  There is nothing fancy to point out in the Greek other than to say that ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου is written as explicitly as it can be.  Putting μου on each side of the καὶ removes all doubt about what Thomas was saying.  Jesus is both his Lord and his God.

There are those who say that Jesus was the son of God, lived a perfect life, was crucified, and on the third day rose again; however, they also say that He was not God.  Let's assume that they are correct for a minute.  Take a Rabbi who was perfectly devout.  If He was not truly God then Thomas just committed blasphemy here.  Jesus rebukes Thomas a bit, but not for blasphemy.  He simply makes a point about how weak Thomas' faith was and how much more blessed those who would know Him later (read: us) would be because they required a measure of faith.

It is inconceivable how Jesus' would let such blatant blasphemy slide if He was not God.  By His silence Jesus gives tacit approval to Thomas' statement.  In fact, He also gives implicit agreement by what He says.  In other words, Jesus says, "You believe rightly, but only because you have seen me.  Those who believe rightly without the physical benefits you just enjoyed will be even more blessed."

Jesus is God.  I don't see how else you can read this with integrity.

No Accusation

John 18:30 They answered him, "If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you."

30 ἀπεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ· εἰ μὴ ἦν οὗτος κακὸν ποιῶν, οὐκ ἄν σοι παρεδώκαμεν αὐτόν.

Pilate had just asked the crowd for their accusation against Jesus and this is what they came up with.  If you want to be a bit more wooden and literal you could translate εἰ μὴ as "except" or even "unless."  Either way, you get the idea.  They didn't have a true charge against Jesus, but they wanted Him to die.

On the other hand, God the Father does have a true charge against God the Son.  On the cross He took on the sins of mankind.  Therefore, there was a just reason to kill Him.  The problem is that He did not have any sin on His own, so it was only through God's (the whole Trinity) mercy that He went to the cross.

Sinner, do you marvel at this?  Do you realize that there would be no accusation for Jesus' death but for your sin?  I hope you do.  I know that it is something I need to dwell on more and more.  I take this for granted far too often.

Those That are His

John 17:9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. 10 All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them.

9 Ἐγὼ περὶ αὐτῶν ἐρωτῶ, οὐ περὶ τοῦ κόσμου ἐρωτῶ ἀλλὰ περὶ ὧν δέδωκάς μοι, ὅτι σοί εἰσιν, 10  καὶ τὰ ἐμὰ πάντα σά ἐστιν καὶ τὰ σὰ ἐμά, καὶ δεδόξασμαι ἐν αὐτοῖς.

This is part of what is known as Jesus' High Priestly Prayer.  I think that this is a section that merits some time camping.  But for now I want to focus on this part of the prayer.

Jesus' language is curious, isn't it?  Well, it's curious in light of how most evangelicals tend to think of Jesus.  The idea is that Jesus loves the whole world so much and wants the world to come to Him, but they just won't do it.  Now of course there is an element of truth to that.  But on a deeper level it seems clear here that not everyone is His.  Experience in the world bears this out, doesn't it?  Not everyone knows Jesus.  Not even the so-called "good people" out there.

There is a subset of humanity that is sometimes called "the elect," to use a biblical term.  Here Jesus refers to them as ὧν δέδωκάς μοι.  The relative pronoun ὧν is where we get "those."  The word δέδωκάς is a perfect active indicative second person singular.  Generally speaking, the perfect has the idea of "past event with present effect."  In other words, some time in the past there was a group of people that God the Father gave to belong to God the Son.  Those people are called the elect.

I love the book of John for a lot of reasons.  I didn't when I was first coming to know the Lord as I was stuck in my sin.  I just wanted the facts about Jesus.  But John gives us more insight into the character of Jesus and more of a spiritual look at Him and His ministry.  Plus, the more I become convinced of the truth of election, the more I enjoy these passages in John.  You don't even need to go to Paul to find this doctrine.  It proceeds from Jesus' own lips.

If you are part of the elect I hope that this passage fills you with awe and wonder that God would choose someone like you.  I can't believe that He chose a sinner like me.  If you don't know Jesus, but wonder if you're part of the elect then I would submit that you probably are.  If you weren't then you just wouldn't care. But if you feel this nagging inside your soul like there is a void that nothing seems to fill then God is calling you to Himself.  Answer the call sooner rather than later.  You'll be glad that you did.

Right Pneumatology

John 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

14 ἐκεῖνος ἐμὲ δοξάσει, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήμψεται καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν.

I met a hospice chaplain a few weeks ago who taught me something really powerful about this verse.  Here Jesus is speaking of the Holy Spirit.  On a side exegetical note, you may notice that ἐκεῖνος is masculine rather than neuter.  The Holy Spirit is a He, not an it as some would say.  He is as much a part of the Godhead as Jesus and the Father.

So what of this verse?  This man was raised Catholic, and he came to know Christ after his parents were saved at a charismatic prayer meeting.  This man is a charismatic in the vein of C.J. Mahaney.  The point he made to me is that, unlike the "charismaniacs" who jump around and look for ecstatic experiences all the time, he understands the Holy Spirit's role as being there to glorify Jesus.  As I came across this verse today it really clicked for me.

I am not a cessationist, but I am very cautious about the charismatic gifts.  I have never personally experienced them, but have heard stories that seem legitimate.  I am very zealous about the fact that we have a closed canon with the Word of God.  We do not need to go beyond that for any instruction.  I do not think that it is reasonable to go through the New Testament and come to a cessationist position just based on what you read.  It takes a systematic theologian to get us there.  Yet we do need to be cautious.  By "charismaniac" I refer to the types of services where deacons are on hand to stretch people out before the service so they don't pull a hammy while jumping around.  I think that there is a reasonable middle ground here.  Just don't try to add to Scripture.

The point is that it all gets back to Jesus.  Are your charismatic experiences glorifying to Jesus?  In this man's case, they certainly were as the Spirit saved his family so that they may give glory to Jesus.  The Spirit regenerates the hearts of sinners so that they might believe in Jesus and be saved.  Salvation is a supernatural work to be sure.  Let's give the Spirit His due.  I'm afraid that in my circles He is often given short shrift.

Abide in Him

John 15:5 I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.

5 ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπελος, ὑμεῖς τὰ κλήματα. ὁ μένων ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ οὗτος φέρει καρπὸν πολύν, ὅτι χωρὶς ἐμοῦ οὐ δύνασθε ποιεῖν οὐδέν.

It's very difficult to isolate just one verse from this chapter.  It has been a very powerful influence on my life, but I'm afraid that I am just now starting to understand it.  Here Jesus uses some imagery that would have been very potent to folks in that time.  He compares us to branches on a vine.  Anyone who has done anything with plants can certainly relate to this.  We have a couple of bushes that grow like crazy in the summertime.  I prune them frequently as they tend to get overgrown.  No matter how lush the branches are they wither and die once they are cut off from the main bush.  So it is with Christians.

The reason that I feel like I am just now starting to get this is because I think I have used obedience as a substitute for abiding.  Certainly that is part of it as the surrounding verses show (look it up).  But merely reading the Bible, attending church, keeping my nose clean, etc is not enough.  I must truly abide in Him.

I have lost sight of this as of late.  It's easy for me to be distracted by the cares of life and the temptations of the world.  I find myself clicking on links that I know will lead me towards danger and then run away after I "stumble" upon something I shouldn't see.  I eat more than I need.  I dutifully read my Bible every day, but I do not necessarily abide in Him.

My exhortation to everyone starting with me is that we need to take this passage seriously.  We need to abide in Him.  Don't just know about Him, know Him!  Abide in Him.  Be someone who ὁ μένων.  That is a present active participle.  Be in a continual state of remaining or abiding in Him.  That is where we find life.

Whom He Has Chosen

John 13:18 I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled, 'He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.'

18 Οὐ περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν λέγω· ἐγὼ οἶδα τίνας ἐξελεξάμην· ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ· ὁ τρώγων μου τὸν ἄρτον ἐπῆρεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ τὴν πτέρναν αὐτοῦ.

This statement comes after Jesus washed the feet of His disciples, including Judas'.  Could you imagine knowing that you were performing such a menial task for one who would betray you to your death in a few hours?  I don't know if I could do it.  In fact, I'm sure that I couldn't apart from the Holy Spirit.

But what really impresses me with this is the statement that Jesus makes about how ἐγὼ οἶδα τίνας ἐξελεξάμην.  The word ἐξελεξάμην is an aorist middle first person indicative.  It is from εκλεγω, which means to choose.  The translation is just fine.  I take this to mean that Jesus specifically chose His disciples.  He still does this today.  We may think that we are in control of this, but it was done from before time began.

Nevertheless, I do not know who He chose.  Therefore, I keep issuing the call to salvation.  Repent and believe in Christ and you will be saved.  My prayer is that those who read this would either take heart in their salvation or else be saved for the first time as they read this.

Loving Life

John 12:25 Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.

25 ὁ φιλῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπολλύει αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ μισῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον φυλάξει αὐτήν.

In my opinion, this is one of Jesus' hardest sayings.  It stands in stark contrast with how we tend to look at the world.  We think in terms of our life and our stuff, etc.  We get very hung up on possessions, particularly in affluent America.  Not only that, but we also get very concerned about our rights.

The follower of Christ can't think that way.  Of course we should enjoy life.  I don't think that this verse is a call to asceticism.  However, I also don't think that it means that we are to seek the pleasures of this world.  We can enjoy them as we have opportunity, but we do not live for them anymore.  Instead we are to effectively die to ourselves so that we can live for Jesus.

I like to think that I do this well.  I think about how I exercise regularly or how I deny myself various things out of discipline.  Well whoopee.  I think I've really only scratched the surface on what it means to die to myself.  I love my life out of proportion with the call of this verse.  How about you?  Do you love your life?  Or are you ὁ μισῶν (one who hates)?

Care for the Poor

John 12:8 For the poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me."

8 τοὺς πτωχοὺς γὰρ πάντοτε ἔχετε μεθ᾽ ἑαυτῶν, ἐμὲ δὲ οὐ πάντοτε ἔχετε.

This was Jesus' rebuke at Judas Iscariot's false piety.  Judas wanted to rebuke Mary for "wasting" the perfume on Jesus' feet.  He suggested that they sell it for 300 denarii (roughly a year's wages) and use the money to help the poor.  Of course, Jesus knew Judas' heart and that Judas wanted to pocket his normal take of the till.  This is the reason Jesus gives him in defense of Mary's act.

I think this is an oft-abused verse among American Christians.  A lot of us tend to vote Republican for various reasons, many of them good.  The Republican party does a better job on the issue of abortion, for example.  And I don't think that it is the government's job to take care of the poor.  It is the church's job.  However, this verse is sometimes used to absolve us from our duty to care for the poor.  It is true that the poor will always be with us, but that does not mean we should sit idly by.

I have used this verse in defense of Capitalism against Communism.  In a sense, it is true.  Yet I can't help but think that one of the implications of this verse is that our care for the poor is a form of worship of Jesus.  This is very convicting to me.  How about you?