Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well was astounding in both circumstance and content.

The Jews hated the Samaritans, and the feeling was mutual.  The conflict had its origin in the divided kingdom, and the animosity only grew through the centuries until the time of our Lord.  It is important to note that  the Samaritans were the remnants of the northern Jews who had been taken into Assyrian captivity, and had intermarried with other races upon their return to Samaria.  The mingling of races, combined with the Samaritans acceptance of pagan gods led to a mongrel race and religion.

The Samaritans had built  a temple upon Mount Gerizim, adjacent to Jacob’s well.  It is this mountain to which the woman referred, “Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship” (vs. 20); and is the setting and context for the conversation recorded in John 4.

Beginning in verse 16 of the text, Jesus made a seemingly peculiar request of the woman.  He had intrigued her with his statement concerning “living water”, and at her request that he give some to her, He said, “Go, call  your husband, and come here.” He did this fully knowing that she had a checkered past, having been divorced from five husbands, and currently living with a man to whom she was not married.  As He revealed this knowledge to her, His discernment convinced her that He was a prophet from God.  This led her to make the statement in verse 20, and allowed Jesus to fully turn her attention to spiritual matters.  Until this point, the woman had lacked sufficient discernment to realize that the Lord, in referring to “living water” was alluding to spiritual rather than physical matters.

As Jesus answered the woman, He alluded to a future that would see the removal of the animosity that existed between the Jews and Samaritans.  While Jesus denied that Samaritan worship was legitimate, and as such asserting it to be inferior to the God ordained worship of the Jews in Jerusalem, Jesus said, “But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him” (vs. 23).  That the Samaritans would be included among the true worshipers was evident as He included the woman, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming where you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father” (21).

With these words, Jesus affirmed the foundation of worship under His new covenant with mankind.  Three important points are here established.  First, man-made worship would not be accepted under the new covenant any more than it was under the old.  The Samaritan worship was not acceptable because it was not true worship — it did not emanate from God.  Under the new covenant God would demand the same.  Acceptable worship would be limited to that done in “truth.”

Second, the covenantal worship of the Jews likewise would not be accepted under the new covenant.  Though the Jews “know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews” (vs. 22), Jesus affirmed that an hour would come when such worship in Jerusalem would cease.  It is not surprising that with the establishment of a new covenant, Jesus would make changes in the worship to be offered.  However, it is a significant point, as so many religious people continue to make their appeal to the old covenant as their authority for worship offered to God.  Whether it be the use of mechanical instruments of music, an observance of the Sabbath, the practice of tithing, the burning of incense or the offering of animal sacrifices, there is no basis for an appeal to Jewish worship in that “hour.”

Third, for worship to be acceptable to God in that hour, it had to be offered with the proper “spirit.” Mere ritual, though comforting to the petitioner, would not appeal to God.  Zeal, ardor, and sincerity would be the hallmarks of true worship in the Kingdom of the Lord.  “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth” (vs. 24).

Perhaps such a radical prediction of change is what focused the woman on the prophesies of the Christ.  Her statement, “When He (the Messiah) comes, He will tell us all things,” gave the Lord an opportunity to reveal Himself fully to her.  “I who speak to you am He” (vs. 26).

Jesus is our Lord and Savior.  He has established His own covenant, and has revealed to man what true worship under that covenant will be.  It is left for us to search out His will, and submit to it fully.  Only then will our worship of Him be, “in spirit, and in truth.”

After Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus (John 3), He left Judea, and traveled through Samaria on His way back to Galilee. Many took a circuitous route between the two regions to avoid the Samaritans, who were despised by the Jews. However, Jesus determined to cross through Samaria, and immediately struck up a conversation with a Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well in the city of Sychar.

Jesus’ disciples had departed into the city to buy food, and upon their return (vs. 27) marveled that he had talked with the woman. Jesus’ actions, and the content of the conversation itself, made clear that His purpose in coming to earth was to save all men, not just the Jews.

The beginning of the conversation supplies for us a wonderful application regarding the work of evangelism. Jesus used a mundane request, “Give Me a drink,” (vs. 7), to introduce Himself to the woman as the Messiah. But first, he had to deal with the woman’s perception of Jews. She wondered why he was talking with her, because, as she said, “Jews have no dealings with Samaritans” (vs. 9). Instead of directly answering the question, which was most probably an expression of her animosity, He intimated that He was the Messiah. He said, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water” (vs. 10).

The phrase “gift of God” is a bit obscure, as it could refer to the giving of Jesus himself (cf. John 3:16), or perhaps the gift of salvation. The phrase “living water” was likewise obscure, at least to the woman, as she made the same mistake as Nicodemus, assuming that Jesus was talking about the physical rather than the spiritual. However, Jesus’ manner obviously disarmed and intrigued her, and allowed Jesus an opportunity to teach her important truths relative to her redemption.

Jesus’ words caused her to first ask, “Are you greater than our father Jacob?” (vs. 12), then to proclaim, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet.” (vs. 19). Finally, after their conversation was finished, she showed her growing faith by asking her countrymen, “Could this be the Christ?” (vs. 29). To the honest of heart, the words and works of Jesus clearly showed Him to be someone special, (cf. John 3:3), for He “taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes” (Mark 1:22).

The woman was first confused, as she thought Jesus was referring to the water in the well. The well was deep, and Jesus had no container to use to draw the water. Even after further clarification, she still thought Jesus was referring to actual water, perhaps from another location, that would forever slake her physical need (vs. 15).

Jesus, of course, was referring to the spiritual rather than physical. As Dan King puts it in his commentary on John,

It is easy for us to see in these words an allusion to the quenching of the spiritual thirst wrought by the gospel in the hearts of men. But this was a truth which the Samaritan woman could not yet hope to grasp. Her thoughts are upon physical needs and the relief which He might give her from the daily toil associated with visiting the well and drawing water from its depths. (pg. 76-77)

We should not be too harsh in our estimation of this woman, as she has many companions. Nicodemus was already mentioned, asking, “How can a man be born when he is old?” (John 3:4). The multitude in John 6 misunderstood Jesus’ reference to the bread of God, saying, “Lord, give us this bread always” (vs. 34). Even his own disciples often misunderstood His spiritual references to his death, resurrection and reign as the Christ.

Of greater importance is the promise itself, “whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life” (vs. 14).

What Christ offers us sustains us for an eternity. While we will always get thirsty again, no matter how much we may drink, this spiritual water supplied by Christ quenches our spiritual needs forever. We have a better understanding of Jesus’ words than did the woman at the well, but our request should be the same, “Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst…” (vs. 15).

The lingering images of Jesus Christ tend to be revived only twice a year and more by custom than faith, of course. In the early winter, people shower each other with gifts while being reminded that the babe in the manger is the reason for the season. Then in the spring, many of them take a few moments one Sunday morning to contemplate the crucified and risen savior.

We must be just as concerned with the Jesus in between the manger and the cross. Our savior is meek and mild, but is also bold and forceful, and his mission to defeat sin is never slowed by man’s desire that iniquity be tolerated.

No one on Earth knows exactly when Jesus Christ was born, but we do know where and the amazing story of how. Through Micah’s fulfilled prophecy (5:2), Jesus was born in the little town of Bethlehem, but not in a hospital or even a home (Luke 2:1-21). Jesus was born of a virgin, fulfilling probably the most astonishing prophecy in all the Bible (Isaiah 7:14).

Except for a single episode as a young man, we learn very little about Jesus until he is a grown man, being, as it was supposed, thirty years of age when he began his public ministry. For about three years, he worked miracles in Judea, taught the gospel of his kingdom, and generally opposed the hypocrisy of the religious establishment of the day. For his troubles, Jesus became an enemy of the chief priests and Sanhedrin and was turned over to the Roman authorities with the hope that they would silence him as a threat to the state as well.

Although he could have defended himself and called upon his faithful disciples to fight, he submitted to his enemies as a sheep goes to the slaughter, nailed to a Roman cross and killed (Luke 23:26-47). He was taken down from the tree and laid in a new tomb, but three days later, the stone that secured it was rolled away and Jesus was resurrected from the dead to walk again among men, before ascending into heaven to sit upon the throne of David (see Acts 2:29-33). Still, the most enduring image of Jesus Christ, the one that adorns jewelry and paintings, is the image of a bearded man in ragged clothing nailed to a cross–harmless and silent.

What could possibly happen after the manger to transport this innocent babe to the cross of Golgotha? How could one so meek and mild make so many powerful enemies; how could it be that the Prince of Peace falls victim to the hatred of his own subjects? It was the Lord’s loathing of sin and his determination to save the penitent that brought him under the derision of people intent on having their lawlessness tolerated (John 3:19-21). Things have not changed since, either.

Among other descriptions, we learn that Jesus was to be born the Prince of Peace with authority and integrity. Indeed, he is announced as the bringer of peace, and even promotes blessing for peacemakers who will become sons of God (see Matthew 5:9, Isaiah 9:6-7). So long as he was only turning meager scraps of food into tremendous feasts, he had the approval of the people; when he demanded they convert from their sinful ways, however, he discovered just how deep their opposition would become (John 6:10-66).

In fact, Jesus did not come to inaugurate a period of international or social peace, but to make peace with God possible so that believers could likewise enjoy peace among themselves (Matthew 10:32-39, Second Corinthians 5:18). The gospel account of Mark does not even describe the birth of Jesus, but instead immediately portrays the savior as a teacher confronting his target – the sin of hypocrites, of the well-intentioned, and of the ignorant. This is the Jesus so much absent around the holidays, but so real throughout the New Testament. While still meek and mild, he is blunt, bold and forceful and never does he imply sin is tolerable.

Jesus, moreover, was not averse to confrontation, even at times inviting debates with those of false piety.

• He cleansed the temple of profiteers (John 2:13-17).
• He exposed the weakness of false religion (John 4:19-26).
• He confronted a friend with his shortcomings (Matthew 16:21-23).
• He rebuked hypocrites and an adulteress they accused (John 8:2-11).
• He told men their arguments were rooted in greed (Luke 12:13-21).
• He showed affection by pointing out vulnerabilities (Mark 10:17-22).
• He excoriated hypocritical religious leaders (Matthew 23:1-4).

This is hardly the popular image of Jesus Christ, but it is an important part of his character that should linger more powerfully in people’s minds than it does. In between the manger and the cross, Jesus confronted sin very forcefully in just the way that we ought to confront our own sin and that around us (see Ephesians 6:18-19).

We must be willing to confront transgression. An elder is to hold “fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). Preachers are to rebuke sharply those who are insubordinate to the will of God, who talk idly and deceive others as they subvert households teaching things they ought not (see Titus 1:10-14). Every spiritual person is to restore any of his brethren overtaken in any trespass (see Galatians 6:2).

The image of Christ that lingers should never be one that looks the other way at sin and error, but which confronts it, sometimes mildly and sometimes boldly, as the occasion requires (Jude 22, First Thessalonians 5:14). To follow his example, we must first examine ourselves (Matthew 7:1-5). Only then do we truly honor the babe in the manger who became the savior on the cross by upholding all the truth all of his life.

Remove the guilt right now! Here is the solution: Let us attempt to clear the cobwebs of misunderstanding brought on by the practices of the religious world and focus right now only on what the word of God actually says. Go with me step by step so that you can follow what God has told us is the truth about this subject. About 15 minutes of your time is really all you need. If you want to avoid any confusion DO NOT Google this subject! Your New Testament is the only source you will need to establish the truth of God’s word in your understanding.

A. It all starts with Jesus and His original purpose in coming in the way He did, born as a human being (declared by God – Matthew 17:5, Jesus is to be heard – remember, Jesus is the “Word” – John 1:1-5; 1 John 1:1-7, He came into this world to save mankind from being lost in sin. He is also the Creator who spoke all things into existence in Genesis 1, and amazingly, at the judgment He is to be our judge as well – John 5:22). Enduring the same temptations as any man, yet without sinning (Hebrews 4:15), He was to be the perfect sacrifice, ending the old law which required animal sacrifices every year to put away the sins of the Jews under the old law (the law of Moses which was for the Jews only but is “nailed to the cross” and a new law is now in effect – Colossians 2:11-14). This is also why the New Testament is THE ONLY LAW to which all of mankind is now responsible. The old law, i.e. the Old Testament is only for our learning and is not applicable for law or prophecy in our age.

B. By His death, burial and resurrection from the dead, Christ had accomplished His goal to save the souls of all of mankind by the means of hearing the word of God, having faith in Christ, to turn from sins, confessing the name of Christ and be baptized for the remission of sins. – Acts 2:36-41; 8:35-39; 1 Peter 3:21. In this way the mission of Christ has been achieved: the only way for the souls of man to be saved from eternal damnation – Acts 4:12; 14:27

C. The beginning of the Church of Christ – Acts 2:42-46.  Once we have met the conditions to receive salvation we are added by the Lord Himself – Acts 2:47; 1 Peter 2:5.

D. Membership in a local church is required, following the example of Saul of Tarsus – Acts 9:27-29. We are to worship every first day of the week with the local church – Acts 20:7, and we are to submit to the leadership of the local church we are members of and help in this way to maintain the discipline of the church – Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2-3

E. Many of us are constantly amazed at the way religion in the name of Christ is shown all around us. The religious world of our time evidently does not know what the mission of the New Testament Church is to be. What is now the established order and what we see everywhere we look are denominational groups enthusiastically being involved in and funding literally everything they can imagine and doing these things in the name of God without ever seeming to worry about whether their efforts are actually of God or not. Without the authorized will of God from His word, such religions (invented at the whims of men), still claim that “their God” would endorse them – Colossians 2:20-23.

F. But what IS the mission of the church of Christ? Flying in the face of contemporary denominational religions is that the Lord wants the work of the local church to be limited and focused on just three things. The apostle Paul set out to inform the congregations of God’s people what the mission or work of the Lord’s church was to be.
The Mission of the Church is:

1. Preach the Gospel – Ephesians 3:10-12
2. Perfecting the Saints – Ephesians 4:11-16; Hebrews 10
3. Caring for the Needy – 2 Corinthians 8:4

G. How Long Do We Continue This? This might be the simplest of all of these points: Jesus said, “..occupy till I come” (Luke 19:13)! Christians have been doing this since the church was established in Acts 2. Christ will return someday in the same manner as He departed – Acts 1:9-11, “Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”

Death by crucifixion was the most painful manner in which a person could be put to death. Suspended from the ground, the weight of the victim’s entire body pulled against metal spikes which were driven through the hands (wrists) and the feet. The victim would writhe in pain as he slowly died of asphyxiation.

There was a social stigma that was attached to crucifixion. Roman citizens were not candidates for crucifixion; only slaves and subject races. The Romans used crucifixion as an effective means of sending an intimidating message to those within their power: “This person was not worthy of dying like a man. Neither are the rest of you. You will obey us or this will happen to you!”

There was also the emotional suffering experienced by our Lord while He was upon the cross. He was betrayed by one friend, denied by another, and forsaken by the rest of His disciples during His hour of greatest need. He was mocked and rejected by the people He wanted desperately to save. He had to look down upon His own mother as she watched Him die.

Jesus was not executed in a “humane” manner. He came to this world knowing that he would hang on a cross and die like a criminal. Why did Jesus choose to give His life in the most painful manner possible? Why the cross?

1. To Manifest His Love For Us. Many things can happen which could cause one to wonder if God really loves them. They can lose their health, lose a loved one, lose their job or business, lose their home or possessions, etc. If we are ever tempted to doubt God’s love for us, we need look no further than the cross. “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). If God loved me so much that He was willing to give His Only Begotten Son for me, how can I ever doubt His love for me?

2. To Leave Us A Needed Example. “For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: Who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in His mouth; who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness – by whose stripes you were healed” (1 Peter 2:21-24). Jesus went to the cross to pay the price for our sins, but as He did so He left a perfect example of faithfulness, courage, love, commitment, and self-control in the face of injustice and pain. If Jesus could endure the pain and agony of the cross, then we can handle the struggles that arise in our lives.

3. To Thwart the Schemes of Satan and of the World. The world has always rejected God. This is proven in the fact that when they finally got their hands on Him (when Jesus came in the flesh), they killed Him! Jesus on the cross is this world’s opinion of God.

When Jesus died on the cross, the Jews got rid of Jesus, the world got rid of God, and Satan won. However, his victory was short lived. “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know – Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it” (Acts 2:22-24).

Satan played his trump card (death) at the cross, but it was not enough. Jesus rose from the dead victorious over every power that Satan possessed. It was in dying that Jesus was able to gain the victory and secure eternal life for mankind.

4. To Draw All Men To Himself. Jesus said of His death on the cross, “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself” (John 12:32). Churches will use all kinds of programs and gimmicks to generate interest from the community and to increase their attendance, but what man needs most is to know that a Savior has died for his sins.

Christ on the cross gives man his greatest hope. The love that brought the Son of God from His Father’s side and nailed Him to a cross is the greatest love that anyone will ever know. The message of the cross is universal. It transcends time and culture. Everyone needs a Savior. Everyone needs assurance of love. Everyone needs forgiveness and peace with God. All of this is found in the cross.

5. To Demonstrate the Awfulness of Sin. Sin does not seem to be “sin” anymore. People are not called “sinners.” They are “victims” and “addicts” living the “high life,” enjoying “alternate lifestyles” and involved in “non-traditional marriages.” Our society seeks to ignore, then excuse and explain away, then finally embrace and celebrate sinful behavior. Sin is often the source of humor and entertainment. We laugh at the stumbling drunk, the strung-out addict, the womanizer, and the homosexual.

However, the death of God’s Son on the cross shows sin in its true light. It is neither funny nor excusable. It is darkness and death, pain and agony, separation from God and a plague upon all of mankind. “Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful” (Romans 7:13). Because of the cross, we must come to view all sin as “exceedingly sinful.”

God could have abandoned us to die in our sins without hope, but He did not. He sent His Son to die as an atonement for our sins. However, Jesus did more than just come and give His life. Paul said that He was willing to die “the death of the cross.” In purposefully enduring the most painful death possible, Jesus proved God’s love for us, gave us a perfect example, defeated Satan, left a means by which all men would be drawn to Him, and exposed the true nature of sin.

It is faith that saves our souls. Jesus said, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16).

Just about everyone accepts that faith saves, but an important question often remains unasked. What, or who is it I must believe in? Now the simple answer is, you must believe in Jesus. John stated in his gospel, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life" (3:16).

In contrast, when Jesus gave his instructions to his disciples to go preach His message to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, he said, "But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 10:33).

The Bible very clearly reveals who Jesus was, what He did while on earth, and the position He holds in heaven. This message is called the gospel, and believing it is the "power of God unto salvation!"

For example, to be saved we must believe that Jesus is the Son of God. John refers to Him as the "Word", and wrote at the beginning of His gospel, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

Not only must we believe that Jesus is God, we must also believe that Jesus came to earth, and became a man. In that same chapter, in verse 14, John wrote, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth"

There are other facts that together form what we refer to as the gospel. For example, Jesus, in fulfillment of prophecy, was born to a virgin. The prophecy is found in Isaiah 7:14, and its fulfillment is recorded in Matthew 1, when an angel of the Lord informed Mary’s betrothed, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins" (1:20-21).

Another fundamental truth is that while each of us is guilty of sin, and as such worthy of spiritual death, Jesus lived a sinless life. Peter wrote, "For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth" (1 Peter 2:21-22).

These facts – that Jesus was both a man and God; that he lived a sinless life while on earth; – these make Him unique. And, they make him uniquely qualified to be a sacrifice of atonement. When Jesus died on the cross, his death was a sacrifice for all mankind. Jesus, in predicting his death in Matthew 26:28, said, "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

After offering up Himself as a sin offering, Jesus was resurrected from the dead on the third day following His crucifixion. This is what we may refer to as the culmination of God’s scheme of redemption. Peter affirmed the same in his gospel sermon, recorded in Acts 2. In revealing that God had raised Jesus from the dead, he proclaimed, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." (vs. 37).

As Jesus was raised from the dead He remains alive today. He reigns as King in His kingdom, at the right hand of the Father in heaven above. He serves as our High Priest of the New Covenant of Grace, and, as the Hebrew writer said, "Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them" (Hebrews 7:25).

This is the gospel of Christ, and this is what you must believe in order to be saved from your sins, and go to heaven for eternity. So… do you believe?

In parallel, one of the strongest evidences pointing to Jesus’ resurrection from the dead is the eyewitness testimony. The apostle Paul wrote about the eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ in 1 Corinthians 15. He listed in order the apostle Peter, then the rest of the 12 apostles, then a group of over 500 Christians, then the apostle James, then the 12 again. Over 500 people who saw Jesus alive after he had died on the cross, and had been in a tomb for three days. This is powerful testimony.

But this testimony is denied by some because of the perceived prejudice of the witnesses. It is said that they are lying. They had the motivation to protect the claims of their leader, who had predicted that he would be raised from the dead on the third day. That claim was well known, and had led the Jewish leaders to request of Pilate a Roman guard and sealing of the tomb. As they put it, “lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So the last deception will be worse than the first” (Matthew 27:64).

After Jesus was raised from the dead it was commonly reported that the disciples had stolen the body while the Roman guard slept on duty. Perhaps on another occasion we will discuss the holes in that story. Some, no doubt, believe it to be so even today.

But, back to our illustration. Perhaps the most compelling eyewitness testimony is that of a hostile witness. If you can get one who is antagonistic to your cause to admit you are right, such testimony is unimpeachable. He has no motive to agree with you, and his willingness to tell the truth despite his antagonism indicates a person of great personal integrity.

Enter the Apostle Paul. In that list he compiled in 1 Corinthians 15, he added to the end, “Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.”

You may have heard about Paul. Before Jesus appeared to him alive on the road between Jerusalem and Damascus, he was virulently opposed the Christian faith. He consented to the death of the disciple Stephen, and it is recorded that he “made havoc of the church, entering every house, and dragging off men and women, committing them to prison” (Acts 8:3). Right before his conversion, the book of Acts recorded that he went to the high priest, “still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1). In fact, when Jesus appeared to him, that journey he was on was for the purpose of persecuting Christians.

The only thing Paul had going for him was his integrity. He thought what he was doing was right. When Jesus identified Himself as the risen Lord, Paul realized that he had got it wrong all along. The claims that Jesus was the Christ were true. Paul knew it for a certainty. When he heard the voice from heaven, he asked, “Who are you, Lord?”, and the voice responded, “I am Jesus.”

Was Jesus resurrected from the dead? The unimpeachable hostile witness says, “Yes, I saw Him!” That testimony is good enough for a court of law. Is it good enough for you?

The first promise was kept when God established the nation of Israel. The Israelites left Egypt, gained their sovereignty and dwelt in the land of Canaan, a land that had also been promised by God.

The second promise was what has been referred to as the Messianic promise. For generations the Jews looked for the one through which “all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” Over 2,000 years ago a man was born in the city of Bethlehem that many believe to be the One referred to in that promise to Abraham. His name is Jesus, and he was born in the small village of Bethlehem. He is famous the world over. Over the past 2,000 years billions have claimed Him as their Messiah. The question we want to ask, and answer in this video cast – is this Jesus, born in Bethlehem long ago, the Messiah of the world?

He certainly claimed he was. In John 14:6, we find one version of this claim.  Jesus said to one of his disciples, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

In other videocasts we will talk about what it means to be the Messiah, or the Savior of the world. We will discuss why a Savior is needed, why Jesus is the only one who can claim that status, and why each of us need to personally submit to Him as Our own Lord and Savior.

But now, we ask, “Should we believe His claim?” My answer is “Yes” and I want to quickly tell you why. The reason? Jesus Christ, after his death on the cross, was resurrected from the dead!

While there are other proofs we could supply, this is the main one. The apostle Peter, after telling the Jews at the Temple in Acts 2 that God has raised Jesus from the dead, finished his sermon in verse 36 by saying, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

Now, how do we know this claim that Jesus was resurrected is true? Simple… We have eyewitnesses to the fact. As Peter wrote in 2 Peter 1:16, “For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.” Peter’s reference here was to the resurrected Lord. He saw him, and because he saw Him, we can be assured that Jesus Christ is the one!

Now, I know that some of you may doubt we can trust these eyewitnesses. I contend we can. We are out of time for today, but I would like you to do something for me. Please read about the life of one particular witness. His name was Saul of Tarsus. He is perhaps the most important witness of Jesus’ Resurrection, because his testimony is absolutely unimpeachable. This is something we will talk about on our next video.

Is Jesus the Messiah? The eyewitnesses say, Yes, He Is! And God Himself testified that He is the One promised, by raising Him from the dead. Praise God, we have a Savior… His name is Jesus.

This article consists of an analysis of Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus, recorded in John 3.  As the conversation is lengthy, and I desired to include the entire context in this one article, it too is rather long.

Born Again (John 3:1-5)

Jesus, in John 3, had a conversation with a ruler of the Jews named Nicodemus. While it is obvious by Nicodemus’ words he was impressed with Jesus, it must be noted that he was ignorant of who Jesus truly was, and was a bit cautious in his approach.

Nicodemus referred to the Lord as a “rabbi” (teacher), and acknowledged that the miracles Jesus performed marked Him as a man from God. However, the fact that John revealed the ruler’s approach to be “by night” indicates that Nicodemus may have desired not to be seen talking with such a controversial man.

It is interesting that Jesus did not wait to learn from Nicodemus the reason for his visit. While we do not know for certain what Nicodemus wanted to ask, Jesus clearly revealed what Nicodemus needed to know!

Jesus’ words dealt with the kingdom of God. It was a subject of interest to the Jews, and certainly to a Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews. As one commentator put it:

It is likely that the (unstated) query of Nicodemus had to do with the coming kingdom, something like this: “What would a man of my station have to do to have a part in the kingdom which you are teaching people about.” Evidently Nicodemus thought that because he was a Jew, and more than a Jew, a Pharisee of high public office, there was little left for him to do to associate himself with the coming kingdom.

Dan King, Truth Commentary on John, pg. 56

But Jesus’ words indicated a different reality. One that reveals that there are no distinctions of rank in the kingdom of God; and that the kingdom of God was to be spiritual rather than physical.

Jesus said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (vs. 3). In order for one to have a part in the Messianic kingdom, no matter who he is, he would have to be “born again.” This new birth has reference to a new relationship with God through faith in Christ.

Nicodemus missed the point completely, which is understandable. While his mind turned to the obvious absurdity of a physical birth, Jesus’ reference was to a spiritual new birth. Jesus said further, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (vs. 5).

We, as Nicodemus, need to know what is meant by the statement, “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Fortunately the meaning is clear, when the entirety of scripture is consulted.

For example, an examination of the first two chapters of Acts reveals that the kingdom (if understood as the subjects of Christ’s rule), and the church are one and the same. We are told that those who received the words of the gospel “were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them” (Acts 2:41). Water baptism is “for the remission of sins” (vs. 38); to put one “into Christ” (Galatians 3:27); to “wash away sins” (Acts 22:16); and to “save us” (1 Peter 3:21). Such passages reveal clearly that the phrase “born of water” refers to water baptism. One who is baptized “into Christ” is added to the church, or gains entrance to the kingdom of God.

Paul draws the same basic picture in Romans 6, where he writes, “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (vs. 3-4).

The more difficult words of the passage are “and the Spirit”, indicating that one must be born of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of heaven. While John’s baptism was also a baptism in water, an added dimension is revealed here in the work of the Holy Spirit as it pertains to the new birth. As R.C.H. Lenski put it in his commentary, “the former being the divinely chosen earthly medium (necessary on that account), the latter being the regenerating agent who uses that medium.” (The Interpretation of St. John’s Gospel, 237).

It is amazing that while few would ever deny one must be born of the Spirit in order to see the kingdom, the majority of religious people today deny the necessity of being “born of water.” Denying the necessity of baptism is denying the teaching of the Lord himself. The doctrine of salvation by faith alone necessitates one ignore these plain words of Jesus Christ. “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

The Wind Blows Where It Wishes (John 3:6-8)

The text of John 3 contains a verse that is commonly misunderstood by religious people. It is the eighth verse, which reads, “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” As David Lipscomb wrote, “These verses have been ever of great difficulty because men try to get out of them what is not in them.” (G.A. Commentary, John, pg. 46).

A proper understanding of the passage is not difficult so long as the context is observed and respected. The important thing to remember is that Jesus has described the new birth (a spiritual birth), and that Nicodemus was confused by the description because he was thinking of the physical birth (cf. vs. 4).

After affirming the new birth to be something other than a physical birth, “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (vs. 3), Jesus continues his explanation of his assertion in verses 6-8. So, the context has Jesus correcting Nicodemus’ mistaken understanding of his teaching. When the verses are understood to be a contrast between physical birth and the new birth, most difficulties in the text are resolved.

In verse 6 the contrast is revealed in plain terms. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Though the text is plain, there are some who seek to read into it things that are not there. One example of this is Albert Barnes, who seeks to infer depraved character in the term flesh, and purity and goodness in the term spirit. His words are telling, “The word flesh here is used as meaning corrupt, defiled, sinful.” (Barnes on the N.T., pg. 203). This is typical of those who seek to defend the theology of Calvin. Anytime the word flesh is used, an attempt is made to define it as the corrupt nature of man. As Barnes states, “And as the parents are wholly corrupt by nature, so their children will be the same” (ibid.).

In fact, such an explanation of the text is neither necessary, nor natural. All our Lord is doing is indicating the difference between fleshly birth and spiritual birth. In doing so, he clearly reveals to Nicodemus that in saying a man must be born again, he is not referring to him entering “a second time into his mother’s womb” (vs. 4); but to the birth of a spiritual man, by or through the work of the Holy Spirit. It is not an inferred argument regarding corruption or purity; it is a plain argument regarding the physical body of man contrasted with his spirit.

This truth is born out by the next sentence uttered by our Lord. “Do not marvel that I said to you, You must be born again” (vs. 7). If you understand the new birth to be a spiritual one, the ridiculous image of a man entering again his mother’s womb is removed.

Verse eight continues the explanation by the use of an illustration. As the spirit of man is ephemeral, so is the wind. The two are contrasted to again emphasize the difference between the new birth, and physical birth.

Unfortunately, Charismatics have gotten hold of this passage, and confused many. They seek to read some teaching of significance regarding the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ words about the wind. They teach that the Holy Spirit is like the wind, that “blows where it wishes.” From this they infer things such as the miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and His subjective guidance of the Christian.

In fact, a careful reading of the passage shows that the wind is equated with the one who is born of the spirit, not of the Holy Spirit Himself. Again, when the context is considered, the meaning is clear and simple.

Jesus’ explanation to Nicodemus showed him that the spiritual birth was not visible like the physical birth of man. Just as the wind cannot be seen, though we see its effects, the new birth is not seen. It perhaps is not straining the comparison too much to note that we can see the effects of the new birth, as we can with the wind, but the verse is most certainly not talking about the Holy Spirit.

So, while we do not physically see the actual new birth, every child of God evidences the new birth in the life he lives. As Paul wrote, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age” (Titus 2:11-12). When men see our good works, they see evidence of the new birth, and by such “glorify [our] Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

Answering Nicodemus (John 3:9-15)

Jesus’ explanation of the new birth should have been sufficient for Nicodemus, but it was not. In verse 9, Nicodemus, reacting to Jesus’ declaration, “You must be born again”, answered by asking, “How can these things be?”

It may be helpful to consider Nicodemus’ reluctance to accept Jesus’ teaching in light of his standing as a ruler of the Jews. In chapter 7, John revealed Nicodemus to be one of the Sanhedrin, as he intervened on Jesus’ behalf before that august body. So, Nicodemus was a “ruler of the Jews” (verse 1), who accepted Jesus as a “rabbi” (verse 2), a teacher of the law of Moses. As he was a Pharisee and ruler, it made no sense to him for Jesus to say he had to be born again to enter the kingdom.

What Jesus taught had a surface similarity to the rituals required of Jewish proselytes. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia documents the requirements of a proselyte. He was first questioned, and if his answers indicated a sufficient faith and knowledge of Judaism, he was circumcised. After his circumcision he was immersed (baptized) as a cleansing, and after this immersion he was considered to be a “new man” and was given a new name. (Volume IV, page 2469).

It may be that Jesus’ requirements were hard for Nicodemus to accept because they showed him that he, as a Jewish leader, would have to become as a proselyte. If so, his reasoning was hardly unique. Most Jews had such a misunderstanding of the nature of the Messiah’s kingdom.

Regardless, his words elicited a rebuke from Jesus. “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things?” (vs. 10). Jesus again and again had to deal with the ignorance of the Jews as He presented Himself as their Messiah. In fact, such prejudice remained well into the time of the kingdom. The writer of Hebrews had to deal with it as well, and admonished the Jewish Christians to whom he wrote. He found his explanation of Jesus as our High Priest “hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.” (Hebrews 5:11). Their dullness was the result of apathy, and their desire to return to the Law of Moses.

Jesus’ teaching was based in His experience as God’s Son. “We speak what We know and testify what We have seen” (vs. 11). This testimony was often misunderstood and rejected by the Jews, and especially the Jewish leaders. Why? Despite their knowledge of the law, they allowed their presuppositions and prejudices to cloud their thinking. “How will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” (vs. 12).

Future actions by Nicodemus indicate that Jesus’ words had at least some effect. As previously indicated, he intervened on the Lord’s behalf before the Sanhedrin (7:50-52). John later records that at the death of Jesus, Nicodemus supplied 100 pounds of myrrh and aloes which were used in the preparation of His body (19:39-42).

In verses 13-15 of the text, Jesus makes two assertions regarding Himself. Verse 13 reads, “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that it, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” The text is fairly difficult to fathom, due to our limited understanding of Jesus’ incarnation on earth. In fact, though the earliest manuscripts contain the final clause of the sentence, “the Son of Man who is in heaven”, some later manuscripts omit the clause. One theory that explains this omission is that scribes could not understand how the Son of Man could be on earth and in heaven at the same time, hence they concluded the final words did not belong in the narrative.

The problem is, as usual, that men seek to limit God. We may not fully understand how Jesus could be both descended from heaven and in heaven at the same time, but the passage affirms that it is so. Regardless, the words clearly identify Him as God.

Another explanation, advocated by David Lipscomb, is that the last clause is an interpolation of John, as the gospel was written after Jesus’ ascension. William Barclay believed the entire verse to be John’s commentary rather than Jesus’ words. Both views are doubtful, as the text is represented as being the actual words Jesus spoke to Nicodemus.

In verses 14 and 15 Jesus refers to the narrative of Numbers 21, where Moses “lifted up” a brazen serpent in the wilderness so that those Israelites who had been bitten by serpents could be saved from death. The account, no doubt, was very familiar to Nicodemus.

Jesus predicts his death with the next words, “Even so must the Son of Man be lifted up” (verse 14). The phrase “lifted up” refers to his crucifixion, not his resurrection. Compare the phrase with John 12:32, “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” John explained Jesus’ words in the next verse, “This He said, signifying by what death He would die” (verse 33).

So, in these three verses, Jesus affirms Himself to be both God and Redeemer. Because of these assurances we can know, “that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (verse 15).

(John 3:16-21)

The last portion of our Lord’s conversation with Nicodemus consists of a soliloquy where Jesus clearly distinguishes between those who will be saved, and those who will be condemned.

The text begins with the verse that is perhaps the best known in the Bible. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (3:16).  This verse has been referred to as the gospel in miniature.  It is a wonderful expression of both the extension of God’s grace, and the conditional nature of acceptance into Christ’s kingdom.  All of the verses that follow enlarge upon the basic premise of this one sentence.

For example, verse 17 affirms the purpose of Jesus’ coming.  The purpose of his first incarnation was not to condemn, but to save!  The world was already condemned.  The ubiquity of sin (cf. Romans 3:23) left mankind in a state which compelled Paul to quote the 14th Psalm, “As it is written:  ‘There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one’” (Romans 3:10-12).

Into this decrepit state God inserted His only begotten Son for the express purpose of saving man from his sins.  Other places in scripture explain why it was necessary for Jesus to come, explain the consequence of sin, the value of Christ’s blood, and the way in which grace reconciles God to man.  Here is the simple affirmation, “He who believes in Him is not condemned” (verse 18).  It is sufficient here to know that God loves us, and that His Son’s incarnation makes reconciliation available to all who will believe.

Belief, however, is a condition of that reconciliation.  Verse 18 reveals that clearly, stating:  1) “He who believes in Him in not condemned”; and, 2) “he who does not believe is condemned already.” John’s reasoning is clear.  A refusal to believe in Jesus Christ condemns a man because Jesus Christ came from God the Father.  The Jews had been looking for a Messiah, and now He was in their midst.  He is “the only begotten Son of God.” Again, as in verse 13, Jesus affirms His deity.  This is something the Jews would well understand.  In fact, on another occasion (John 5:18), John records that the Jews tried to kill Jesus, “because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.”

There are two phrases that are used in this context to describe Jesus.  The “Son of Man” (verses 13, 14) and the “Son of God” (verses 16,17,18).  In these self-affirmations, Jesus clearly revealed His duality as He lived upon the earth.  The Father sent His Son to be God on earth (Matthew 1:23), God incarnate (John 1:14).  Though Jesus remained God while on earth, he also was fully human (Philippians 2:5-8).  Only Jesus could accurately refer to Himself as both the “Son of Man” and the “Son of God.” This is what makes Him unique, and qualifies Him both as sacrifice, High Priest and Mediator (Hebrews 8:1-6).  As Christians, we must confess Jesus both as God and as Man. “Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God…” (2 John 9).  Please note that in the specific context of 2 John we have the condemnation of those who “do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh.”

One thing to consider here.  In both verse 16 and 18 Jesus refers to Himself as the “only begotten.” Though the word begotten commonly refers to one who is born, this term should not be construed to indicate Jesus having a beginning.  John clearly affirms that Jesus is self-existent, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (1:1).  The term differentiates between Jesus and all of us who can call God our Father through adoption (cf. Romans 8:12-17).  Divinity is suggested by the word “begotten” — it is not by the word “adopted.”

Finally, Jesus introduces the concept of light and darkness to describe the difference between those who respond to God’s grace and those who do not.  Jesus is the light that “has come into the world” (verse 19).  Evil men who seek to hide their evil deeds hate that light, and do not “come to the light, lest [their] deeds should be exposed” (verse 20).  However, the one who is righteous in his deeds has nothing to fear from the light.  When exposed, his deeds are revealed to be “done in God” (verse 21).

Whether it is described as coming to the light or faith, a man must respond to God’s gift of grace.  God sent His Son to die for all men, but not all are saved.  It is required that we love the light.  We must believe in Jesus Christ.  As He said, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6).

John 2:1-11

In John 2:1-11, the apostle records Jesus’ miracle at the wedding feast in Cana. There are many important things to note regarding this event, where our Lord first “manifested His glory” (cf. vs. 11), but we are here most interested in the words spoken on this occasion. Specifically, we wish to examine Jesus’ words to His mother, “Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me? My hour has not yet come” (vs. 4).

The remainder of Jesus’ spoken words in the text consist of His instructions to the servants, which led to the miracle itself (cf. vs. 7,8). The words are straightforward, and need no further explanation, so we will focus our comments on His words in verse four.

Jesus said what He did in response to His mother’s declaration, “They have no wine.” The wine at the feast had run out, and Mary clearly expected or desired Jesus to do something about it. It is equally clear by His response that her expectation was He would perform a miracle to remedy the situation. Even after Jesus’ response, she remained confident the miracle would be performed, as she instructed the servants, “Whatever He says to you, do it” (vs. 5).

This statement of Jesus is admittedly a difficult one. First, because of the apparent tone of His response to His mother, and second because of the ambiguity surrounding the phrase “My hour has not yet come.” We will address each in turn.

First, the tone. The English translations we use seem to indicate a harsh rebuke, but such is doubtful. First, the term translated woman (gune), was often used as a term of affection. It is the same term Jesus used in tenderly addressing His mother as He hung on the cross (cf. John 19:26). Such greetings have different connotations depending upon culture and time period. What we might think of as a jarring and disrespectful term was apparently a term of affection in His culture.

While it is accurate to consider this a reproof, it should be understood more as a mild correction rather than a strong rebuke. Mary, as the apostles, did not have a full understanding of the nature of Jesus’ work and ministry. The apostles themselves were sometimes guilty of trying to direct Jesus’ actions, not realizing the full impact of Jesus’ ministry, “Behold, I have come to do Your Will, O God!” (cf. Hebrews 10:9). Mary had to be reminded here, as in the temple (cf. Luke 2:49), that when it came to the Father’s business, she had no authority or influence.

Second, and more difficult, is a correct interpretation of the phrase, “My hour has not yet come.” The phrase is variously understood by commentators. David Lipscomb indicates it may have reference to the beginning of His miraculous demonstrations, saying “It is generally considered that he means that his hour for manifesting his power had not come. If so, it soon did come.” (Commentary on John, pg. 36). Albert Barnes takes it to mean that it was not yet time for Him to intervene in that circumstance. In effect, the wine was not yet all gone, and He was going to wait until it was before performing the miracle. (Personally, I find that explanation unsatisfying). William Barclay believes that Jesus was simply telling His mother not to worry, that He would handle things in His own way, and in His own time.

G. Campbell Morgan’s explanation of the text is interesting, though it contains some speculation that can’t be dogmatically asserted. He contends that Mary was anxious for Jesus to show the world who He truly was, and that Jesus’ answer indicated that a miracle on this occasion would not be sufficient. Later, He told his brothers who demanded in their unbelief that he show Himself “to the world,” “My time has not yet come” (7:6). When Jesus taught in the temple to an unfriendly crowd, we are told “…and no one laid hands on Him, for His hour had not yet come” (8:20).

In effect, Morgan claims that Jesus was telling Mary that only His death and resurrection would be a sufficient witness to prove Him as the Son of God.

Whatever the case, the words, and the events that followed, establish two things. First, Jesus was doing God’s will in Gods way; and no man, not even His own mother, would influence that work. Second, the changing of water into wine was His first demonstration of the miraculous power that constituted God’s witness that Jesus was His son (cf. Hebrews 2:4). As the text states, “The beginning of signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory; and His disciples believed in Him” (vs. 11). With this miracle, Jesus began his visible ministry among men.

The gospel of John records several short conversations Jesus had as He began to attract disciples at the beginning His ministry. These conversations are contained in verse 35-51 of John 1.

Andrew

One of John the Baptist’s disciples was Andrew. Two things led him to begin following Jesus. First, John proclaimed Jesus as “the Lamb of God.” Then, as Andrew heard Jesus speak, he became convinced that he had found “the Messiah.”

We do not have the words Jesus used that convinced Andrew that He was the anointed One. However, we do have words of Jesus available to us, that clearly show the truthfulness of Andrew’s conclusion.

Simon Peter

We know that Andrew believed that Jesus was the Christ because John records that statement in Andrew’s conversation with his brother Simon. “We have found the Messiah.” Andrew brought Simon to Jesus, who renamed him Peter (Cephas). The name Cephas is Aramic, and literally means “a stone.” The Greek equivalent to the name is Petros, or in the English, Peter.

The name is certainly appropriate for Peter, as the man showed himself to be a steadfast and preeminent apostle of Jesus. Though little is said of Andrew after this point, other than naming him as one of the twelve in the lists of the apostles, Peter has a large part to play in the preaching of the gospel and in the establishment of the Lord’s church as revealed in the New Testament.

Peter’s new name gave rise to a play on words by Jesus later in His ministry. In Matthew 16 the gospel records Peter’s confession that Jesus was “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (vs. 16). In response, Jesus said, “you are Peter (Petros, defined by W.E. Vine as a “detached stone or boulder, or a stone that might be thrown or easily moved), and on this rock (Petra, defined by Vine as a “mass of rock… a type of sure foundation”) I will build My church…” (vs. 18). Here a contrast is made, revealing that the church is established upon the firm foundation that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God.

Philip and Nathanael

The day after His conversation with Peter, Jesus came across Philip, and said to him, “Follow Me.” In the same manner as Andrew, Philip was convinced of Jesus’ standing as God’s Son, and likewise sought to enlarge Jesus’ influence by recruiting others to the cause. He found Nathanael, and proclaimed to him Jesus, as “Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote…” (vs. 45).

Nathanael was initially skeptical, as the region Jesus came from, Nazareth, was not well respected by the Jews. But, at Philip’s insistence, the two went to Jesus.

Jesus wasted little time in convincing Nathanael of His divinity. Without introduction, He indicated a personal knowledge of Nathanael by proclaiming him as “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!” (vs. 47). Of course, Nathanael was taken aback, as he knew that he had not met Jesus before. How could this man know his character, when the two had never met?

Nathanael asked Jesus, “How do you know me?” Jesus’ answer again established His divine nature. He said, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”

This may seem to be an innocuous statement, but Nathanael’s response indicated that it was an amazing thing. From his response, we can postulate that Jesus could not have naturally seen Nathanael. Further, physical sight does not sufficiently explain Jesus’ ability to discern the character of Nathanael. No, Jesus was showing in a divine and miraculous way that He was who Philip claimed that He was.

At Nathanael’s confession that “Rabbi, You are the Son of God!”, Jesus assured him that greater signs were coming, “You will see greater things than these” (vs. 50).

It is difficult to establish with certainty the meaning of Jesus’ final words, “Hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man” (vs. 51). It may be Jesus was referring to the care of God and the deliverance of Jesus in doing God’s will. It may be that Jesus was referencing His final ascension into Heaven after his resurrection (cf. Acts. 1: 9-11). Whatever the case, Jesus certainly had the testimony of God, through signs, wonders and various miracles, that He was God’s son. (cf. Hebrews 2:4).

The three synoptic gospels (Matthew 4:1-11; Mark 1:12-13; and Luke 4:1-13) record the temptation of Jesus following His baptism in the Jordan River. Mark records only that He was in the wilderness for forty days, and there tempted by Satan. Matthew and Luke record three specific temptations, and agree exactly in both the nature of the temptations and Jesus’ response to them. We will use Matthew’s account here.

The temptation of our Lord was a necessary part of his experience on earth. The Hebrews writer said that “in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God” (2:17). As such, in that He “has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted” (2:18).

Jesus was led by the Holy Spirit into the wilderness, and after fasting for forty days, “the tempter came to Him.” Both Matthew and Luke record the words of Jesus in response to those temptations of Satan.

“It Is Written”

There are two significant things to note about Jesus’ responses. The first thing is that Jesus consistently responded to Satan by quoting scripture. This tactic gives us a wonderful example to follow. A study of God’s word is not simply an intellectual exercise, devoid of benefit. When a child of God familiarizes himself with God’s word, he equips himself to fight against the devil. Remember that the word of God is a part of the Christian’s armor (the “sword of the Spirit”), and the apostle Paul encourages us to “Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil” (Ephesians 6:11). This is the strategy used by our Lord, and one we would do well to emulate. The second significant thing to note in Jesus’ response to Satan is that there was always a scripture available to answer the temptations with which He was beset. Jesus’ replies were not answers derived from the wisdom of man. They were supplied by God’s word, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Notice Jesus’ answers below:

“Man Shall Not Live by Bread Alone”

Satan first attempted to tempt Jesus through the weakness of the flesh. Jesus was extremely hungry after His extended fast, and the devil encouraged Him to use His divine power to turn stones to bread. Notice, however, the challenge of the devil, “If You are the Son of God…”

Herein lies the temptation. Our Lord knew well the faithfulness of God. He knew that God would give Him what was needful for His welfare and sustenance. To use His divine ability as a “shortcut” to alleviate His human suffering, or to prove His standing as God’s Son, was not in keeping with His purpose to come and suffer as a man. Jesus never utilized His miraculous power to alleviate His hunger, thirst, weariness, grief or suffering. He had His priorities straight. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.”

“You Shall Not Tempt the Lord Your God”

Next Satan took Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple in Jerusalem. He challenged Jesus to “throw Yourself down” to again prove He was God’s son. Some might think it would have been appropriate for Jesus to do just that, to shut the mouth of the devil.

However, such a test would not have been proper. It would have been wrong for Jesus to hazard His life to test God’s promise of protection to Him. Jesus knew of God’s power and love for His Son. To put God to the test would be have been presumptuous. “You shall not tempt the Lord your God.”

“You Shall Worship the Lord Your God”

Finally, Satan took him to a high mountain, and promised him the kingdoms of the world. All Jesus had to do to gain it all was to worship Satan.

In banishing the devil, Jesus stated His allegiance to His Father in Heaven. His kingdom was to be spiritual, not material. Where the Devil had only the temporal to offer, Jesus’ had received the promise of the eternal kingdom from His Father (cf. Acts 5:31). “You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.” So, Satan left Jesus for a season, having failed to shake His faithful devotion to His Father’s cause.

Immediately following Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan River, recorded in Matthew 3, Mark 1 and Luke 3, Luke states, “Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age…” (vs. 23).

The baptism of Jesus signified the end of His time in anonymity. He left Nazareth (the city of His youth) behind (cf. Mark 1:9), and traveled by foot 60-70 miles to be “baptized by John in the Jordan.” With this act of obedience, Jesus began His public ministry and His inevitable trek toward the cross at Calvary.

Of the three baptism accounts recorded in the gospels, only Matthew records the conversation between John and Jesus. When Jesus presented Himself to John to be baptized by him, the text says that “John tried to prevent Him, saying ‘I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?’” (vs. 14). Before noting Jesus’ response, it is important to note a few things about John’s reaction to Jesus’ presence at the Jordan.

First, John 1:29-34 reveals John’s testimony that he did not know Jesus to be the anointed of God until the Holy Spirit’s descent at the baptism. Since John’s words precede that event, it can’t be said that John was speaking from his knowledge that Jesus was the Son of God. However, as Jesus’ cousin, he would have been aware of the events surrounding Jesus’ birth, and been familiar with His good character. It may even be that he suspected Jesus to be the Messiah. Regardless, his awareness of his own sin, and his respect for the virtue of Jesus, led to his attempt to “prevent” Jesus from being baptized.

Such an attempt constituted one of many tests to Jesus’ determination to do God’s will. It is reminiscent of Peter’s rebuke of Jesus as He predicted His death, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!” (Matthew 16:22). Though Peter’s intent was pure (as was John’s), Jesus called him an adversary by opposing what was necessary. The Hebrew writer refers to Christ’s obedience to the Father’s will, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God,” and “By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:9,10).

John’s baptism was “for the remission of sins” (cf. Mark 1:4). As Jesus was not guilty of any sin (cf. 1 Peter 2:21-24), it follows that His baptism served a different purpose. (Note: It is ironic that the One who did not need baptism nevertheless submitted to it willingly, while those who are in need of the “remission of sins” are often unwilling to submit to the command to be baptized, cf. Acts 2:38). Jesus revealed the purpose of His baptism in the Jordan with His answer to John, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15).

While Jesus’ answer implies an acknowledgement of His virtue, His baptism was still necessary. To put it simply, God expected it, so Jesus did it. This theme in Jesus’ life, repeated again and again even to His death on the cross, is referred to again by the Hebrew writer in Hebrews 5:8, “Though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He suffered.” Paul said it this way, “And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8).

While the death on the cross is the ultimate expression of Jesus’ obedience, it is by no means the only one. This baptism in the Jordan was “to fulfill all righteousness.” His temptation in the Wilderness that immediately followed was a further test: “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve’” (Matthew 4:10).

As H. Leo Boles put it in his commentary on Matthew:

“Nothing must be left undone that would honor God and assist Jesus in beginning and carrying out his ministry. As John’s baptism was not ‘from men’ but ‘from heaven’ (Matt. 21:25; John 1:33), it became Jesus to receive the baptism of John, and John to administer it” (pg. 91).

Truly, Jesus came to do the will of God. This is evident in His words, and in His actions. From His baptism in the beginning of His ministry until His decision to carry through to the cross (“O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will,” Matthew 26:39), Jesus showed His willingness to “fulfill all righteousness.”

He serves as a wonderful example to us. Harold Fowler puts it well in his commentary on Matthew, “Nobody will ever form a better ethic than ‘doing all that God tells us to do’” (pg. 116). Wise words to live by!

The book of Leviticus contains many laws required of the Israelites that they might be undefiled before Jehovah.  It was necessary that they observe these laws, both moral and ceremonial, in order to be considered clean and worthy of worshipping Him.  Concerning these laws, Jehovah said, “Therefore you shall observe all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them:  I am the Lord” (Leviticus 19:37).

The holiness of God demanded obedience on the part of the Jews.  They were to be holy in their conduct, because God was holy. “For I am the Lord you God.  You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy; for I am holy” (Leviticus 11:44).  It is interesting that in this particular context, the Lord had commanded the Jews to refrain from eating unclean animals.  Later, this aspect of God’s law changed.

However, the call to holiness for us today is no different than it was for the Jews.  The only difference is a narrowing of the definition of what is holy before God.  The same call to holiness is present under the new covenant.  In fact, Peter quoted the admonition of Jehovah in 1 Peter 1:15-16, “But as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, “Be holy, for I am holy.” You may note that the call to holiness in this context had nothing to do with ceremonial uncleanness.  Rather, they were to separate themselves from the “former lusts” (vs. 14).

In both cases, holiness is enjoined upon those who desire to serve God.  The difference is in the definition or scope of what is holy.  With the change in covenant, there was a change in what God requires of man.  Jesus spoke clearly of this change in Matthew 15.  The scribes and Pharisees had expressed their objection to the practice of Jesus’ disciples.  They did not follow the Pharisaic tradition of ritual washing before eating (vs. 2).  Jesus indicated their traditions were empty, and said in verse 11, “Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” Later, in explaining himself to his disciples, he indicated that immorality (evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies) is what defiles a man, not to eat with unwashed hands.  In the new covenant, it is not what goes into the stomach, but what comes “out of the heart” that will stand between God and man.

An interesting illustration of this narrow definition of holiness is found in Luke’s record of the conversion of Cornelius.  God taught Peter that Gentiles were to be included among the redeemed by a vision.  In the vision, animals considered unclean under the Old Covenant were let down from heaven on a great sheet.  God gave the command, “Rise, Peter, kill and eat” (Acts 10:13).  At Peter’s objection, “Not so, Lord!  For I have never eaten anything common or unclean” (vs. 14), God answered, “What God has cleansed you must not call common” (vs. 15).  By indicating that the animals previously denied the Jews were now to be eaten, God taught the more important lesson that the Gentile was to be included among the redeemed together with the chosen Jew.

While the scope of what God considers holy is narrower under the new covenant, it is a mistake to equate the more narrow definition with a lower standard.  Some believe that because we are under grace, God is no longer as stringent in His judgment of man.  This is not so.  Paul indicated that the grace of God, as great and effective as it is, gives us no excuse to licentiousness.  “What shall we say then?  Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?  Certainly not!  How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?” (Romans 6:1-2).  The Hebrew writer indicated that the standard of God’s judgment is more stringent under the new covenant. “If the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?” (2:2-4).

Again and again Christians are called to be holy in their conduct.

“For this is the will of God, your sanctification:  that you should abstain from sexual immorality… For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness” (1 Thessalonians 4:3,7).

“Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul” (1 Peter 2:9).

“And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.  For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace” (Romans 6:13-14).

As Christians, we must recognize that God expects us to live holy before him.  If we recognize the exacting standards found in the old covenant, it will help us to understand what He requires of us today.

In this simple exchange a fundamental truth regarding the nature of authority is revealed. If a practice is authorized by man, it is in fact not authoritative at all. If however it is authorized by "heaven", men must heed it.

When Jesus came to earth, he claimed all authority for himself, "And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth’" (Matthew 28:18). Jesus is King, and has sole discretion in the making of law. We are to listen and obey him, and him alone.

Other New Testament passages teach this principle very clearly. Note the following:

"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds" (Hebrews 1:1-2).

"For ‘He (God) has put all things under His (Christ’s) feet.’ But when He says ‘all things are put under Him,’ it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted" (1 Corinthians 15:27).

"Which He (Christ) will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords" (1 Timothy 6:15).

All of these passages clearly reveal the exalted position of Jesus Christ. He is God’s messenger to man in our time. He has all authority, and all things are in subject to Him. He is the "King of kings and Lord of Lords."

Paul clearly stated in Colossians 3:17, "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him." The phrase, "in the name of the Lord Jesus" does not indicate a formula which must be said before engaging in a practice. Our religious practices must not only be done for the pleasure of Christ, but they must also be authorized by him.

The New Testament does not stop with the simple affirmation of the authority of Christ. It also condemns any who would usurp that authority through self-will. Those who believe they can practice what they wish religiously have no defense in scripture. Note the following passages:

"Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds" (2 John 9-11).

"And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men" (Matthew 15:9).

"Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’" (Matthew 7:21-23).

Simply put, direction for the Christian in his life must ultimately have as its source the Christ. Those who foist upon us their own opinions and directives practice lawlessness, and stand condemned. Do you want to enter the kingdom of heaven? Then follow Christ, not man.

The events themselves are simple enough to reconstruct with the inspired account of the beloved physician, Luke. In his gospel narrative, we learn that Christ led Peter, James and John up into the mountain to pray, where his appearance was transfigured into something glorious and majestic. Through drowsy eyes, the three apostles witnessed both this transformation and a subsequent conversation that Jesus had with Moses and Elijah, lawgiver and prophet respectively. Their discussion concerned our Lord’s impending death in the city of Jerusalem.

Aroused and impetuous, Peter offered to construct three tabernacles for the Christ and his two Old Testament friends, indicating his notion that they were equally deserving of this special treatment. Just then a voice came out of the cloud and corrected the apostle, "saying, ‘This is my beloved son. Hear him.’" The lawgiver and prophet had disappeared and Jesus alone remained before them.

The disciples who followed after Jesus during his earthly ministry lived in a time of transition. Still answerable to the law of Moses, they found it difficult to imagine a new order that would replace prophets and priests and lawgivers with a Messiah occupying all these seats himself. "When the voice had ceased, Jesus was found alone."

In each of the three gospel accounts of the transfiguration, the discussion which immediately precedes it is the same and about a week intervenes between the two. Luke, like Mark and Matthew, reports the words of Christ thus: "But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the kingdom of God" (9:27).

Mark’s rendering clarifies that the kingdom of God would be "present with power" before the death of the last witness to this prophecy (9:1). Matthew’s account adds that this would occur as Jesus is "coming in his kingdom" (16:28).

It is not absolutely necessary that there be a connection between these two events just because they occur successively and are reported thus in the gospel accounts. Today, I had lunch and then checked my electronic mail and now as I recount those events for the reader, they occur successively in my day but have no relation to one another. The kingdom prophecy and transfiguration, however, do have parallel points.

Again, the Lord predicted that his kingdom would come into existence before the total demise of his present generation. That means that it did not exist when he was born, nor even as he spoke these words to his disciples. The kingdom, however, would be established at some point between the period at the end of his sentence and the death of the last person alive as he spoke. For his prophecy to be fulfilled, the kingdom would have to be established sometime in the first century or no later than the early second century. We could not possibly be still waiting for it to be established today unless Jesus either lied or failed. Prophets cannot make predictions and then retreat to unforeseen circumstances as an excuse for failure. If the kingdom did not come during his generation, the Lord was a false prophet and deserves, not a second chance, but a second death (cf. Deuteronomy 18:22).

The connection between the kingdom prophecy and the transfiguration is that the latter illustrates the former. Many commentators and debaters, however, have exaggerated the connection and argued that the transfiguration actually fulfills the kingdom prophecy and is, in fact, the establishment of the kingdom of God. In a 1950 debate with brother Hoyt Houchen, Baptist pastor Ray Tatum argued that after Jesus issued the prediction, "He then led Peter, James and John on the mountain of transfiguration and there they saw the kingdom come with power …. The kingdom came with power then" (The Houchen-Tatum Debate, Dec. 26, 1950, page 54).

This exegesis, however, is riddled with difficulties that make it untenable.

• First, Luke introduces his gospel narrative as being an "orderly account" (1:3). If we agree that chronology is imperative, Luke’s order takes us from kingdom prophecy to transfiguration to prayer for the kingdom to come. In Luke 11:2, Jesus taught his followers to pray, "Thy kingdom come." If the kingdom came back on the mount of transfiguration, it makes no sense to continue praying for it. For a year, many of my neighbors wished for a certain barbecue restaurant to come to our fair city and now that it has, shall we continue wishing for it to come? Of course not; if Jesus taught those men and women to pray for the kingdom to come, it had not yet arrived.
• Second, the new covenant did not take effect until the death of Jesus of Nazareth and if the kingdom preceded his death, it was a realm without law. "For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives" (Hebrews 9:17). The prophecy predicted that the kingdom would come with power, but the testament itself held no power until Jesus first died. Instead, Jesus required his disciples to continue to heed the law of Moses (Matthew 23:1-3), which he came to fulfill (Matthew 5:17) and took away with his death upon the cross (Colossians 2:14). If the kingdom came on the mount of transfiguration, its law was of Moses, not of Christ.
• Third, there is the testimony of Joseph of Arimathea, a council member and a good and just man, but a secret disciple of Christ. Luke tells us that long after the transfiguration, he was still looking for the prophecy to be fulfilled, for he "was also himself waiting for the kingdom of God" (23:51). Many children spend months waiting for their birthdays to come and when the day arrives, they know enough to stop waiting and start celebrating. Joseph could not logically be described as waiting for a day that had come some time earlier.

The events upon the mount of transfiguration do indeed relate to the kingdom, but they do not fulfill the prophecy of its establishment. Instead, the episode with Moses and Elijah and the voice of God illustrates what would occur when the kingdom finally did arrive.

Moses represents the giving of law and Elijah represents the giving of prophecy, two facets of the Old Testament that were specifically listed by Jesus in his mission to fulfill (Matthew 5:17-18). When that moment came, the old law would be taken out of the way and a new covenant of Christ would replace it. The new covenant, however, could only take effect after the death of Christ, not before it. And so a chronology is developed of events that must precede or accompany the establishment of the kingdom. The transfiguration is just too soon since it does not allow for these events to pass first:

• Jesus is killed and then is resurrected (Matthew 16:21, 28)
• The kingdom comes with power (Luke 24:49)
• Jesus is crowned its monarch (Acts 2:30-31)
• The law of Moses is taken out of the way (Eph. 2:15)
• The new covenant takes effect (Heb. 9:16-17)

If the kingdom came on the mount of transfiguration, it came before the new covenant was in place and the law of Moses was its code. Under the law of Moses, however, Jesus could not be a priest, for he was a Jew, a tribe about which Moses had spoken nothing concerning the priesthood (Hebrews 7:12-13).

Truly, we can better correlate from scripture that the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ provide the proper time for the law of Moses to be removed, Jesus to be crowned, the kingdom to be established and the new covenant to take effect.

On the day of Pentecost, power came upon the apostles in Jerusalem as Jesus had predicted (Luke 24:49). The Holy Spirit descended upon them as tongues of fire and each man could speak in unstudied languages to proclaim the gospel to all nations. Peter began to preach that day a sermon which Luke saw fit to record. In it, Peter focused upon the death of Christ and his resurrection. See how much is accomplished by the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus: "Jesus of Nazareth … you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death, whom God raised up" (Acts 2:23-24). After quoting David’s resurrection prophecy from Psalm 16, Peter preaches, "Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ" (Acts 2:30-31).

If the kingdom was established on the mount of transfiguration, its throne was empty for it took death and resurrection to fill it. No, Jesus was raised from the grave and into heaven in order to sit on the throne of David and that happened well after the temporary transfiguration of Luke 9.

What occurred on that mountain simply illustrated the prophecy Jesus had uttered a week earlier by suggesting its consequences. The law and prophets would be fulfilled and the covenant of Christ would take force. That is the significance of the two worthies disappearing and leaving Christ alone before the apostles’ eyes. The appearance of the temporarily glorified Jesus foreshadowed the day of Pentecost when the permanently glorified master would be sitting upon David’s throne with all authority in heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18-20), the King of kings and Lord of lords (1 Timothy 6:15). His future resurrection body was on display that day, the figure he would take on forever when he shed his earthly tabernacle after death.

Finally, it is not wasted words that inform us that, on the mountain, Moses, Elijah and Jesus were discussing "his decease which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem" (Luke 9:31). His decease led him to the throne of the kingdom he was establishing. On the mount of transfiguration, the three were only discussing the kingdom yet to come.