11.02 More Miracles And Discipleship Training

11.02.20 JESUS DECLARES HIS ETERNAL EXISTENCE

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.20 JESUS DECLARES HIS ETERNAL EXISTENCE

11.02.20 Jn. 8:48-59

 

JESUS DECLARES HIS ETERNAL EXISTENCE

 

48 The Jews responded to Him, “Aren’t we right in saying that You’re a Samaritan and have a demon?”

49 “I do not have a demon,” Jesus answered. “On the contrary, I honor My Father and you dishonor Me. 50 I do not seek My glory; the One who seeks it also judges. 51 I assure you: If anyone keeps My word, he will never see death — ever!”

52 Then the Jews said, “Now we know You have a demon. Abraham died and so did the prophets. You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word, he will never taste death — ever!’  53 Are You greater than our father Abraham who died? Even the prophets died. Who do You pretend to be?”

54 “If I glorify Myself,” Jesus answered, “My glory is nothing. My Father — you say about Him, ‘He is our God’—He is the One who glorifies Me. 55 You’ve never known Him, but I know Him. If I were to say I don’t know Him, I would be a liar like you. But I do know Him, and I keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham was overjoyed that he would see My day; he saw it and rejoiced.”

57 The Jews replied, “You aren’t 50 years old yet, and You’ve seen Abraham?”

58 Jesus said to them, “I assure you: Before Abraham was, I am.”

59 At that, they picked up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple complex.   

 

“The Jews responded to Him … You’re a Samaritan.”  In this passage the phrase “the Jews,”[1] was not a reference to the leadership, but it was the common people who accepted the Pharisaic argument that Jesus was demon-possessed, or used demonic powers for His miracles. In this case, they accused Jesus of being demonized by saying He was a Samaritan. The cultural context is that in rabbinic demonology, a leading demon was named Shomroni, which was also used to refer to either any demon or to a Samaritan.[2] Since the Jews viewed the Samaritans as the lowest of low-life people, they sarcastically called Jesus a “Samaritan.” The statement was highly insulting and reflected their horrible ethnic attitudes toward the Samaritans.

 “Are You greater than our father Abraham?” The Jewish leadership often accused Jesus of directly claiming to be deity.[3] But rather than making a statement that He was the “Anointed One,” meaning the “Christ,” which obviously would have been challenged, He lived, taught, and acted in a lifestyle so that men could observe His divine nature and make an intelligent decision that He was the expected “Anointed One.” His accusers made the same observation and what they concluded threatened them.  They had become so arrogant that they believed they could kill the Messiah that God sent to deliver their land from the Romans.

“You’ve never known Him.”  The word “know” (Gk. ginosko) means “a knowledge of experience,”  more than mere facts, a relationship of trust and intimacy,[4] as opposed to “I know him” (Gk. oida), meaning an instinctive perception of facts.[5]

Your father Abraham was overjoyed that he would see My day.” This astonishing statement indicates that Abraham had some type of future knowledge of the life and ministry of Jesus and he rejoiced at the thought of it.  He knew that one day the whole world will be blessed through his descendants (Gen. 18:18).  Ironically, the Jews, through their faith gave us the Bible, but through their unbelief, gave us the Messiah.

11.02.20a

“Before Abraham was, I am.”   In this passage and in John 10:30, Jesus made His absolute claim to deity. It infuriated the leading Pharisees and Sadducees who said the statement was blasphemy.  The punishment for making a statement like this was death by stoning (Lev. 24:16).[6] The statement also brought memories of the second century B.C. King Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who claimed to be a god and instigated some of the worst persecutions that ever came upon the Jewish people.[7]

 

11.02.20.A. COINS OF ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES (2)

11.02.20.A. COINS OF ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES.  LEFT:  A coin of Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a military victor and King of Syria (170 B.C.). RIGHT: A different coin of him shown as “god manifest.”

 

 11.02.20.Q1 What are the three examples of where Jesus claimed divine authority that brought Him into conflict with the religious establishment?

Jesus did not openly declare His divine authority in His early ministry.  But in the course of time, it became evident.  First, by implication, then by straightforward statements as follows:

  1. In John 8:58 Jesus said that, “Before Abraham, I am.”

 

  1. In John 10:33 the Jews attempted to stone Jesus. When He asked them why, they responded and said it was because He was a mere man and made himself equal with God.

 

  1. In Luke 5:17-20 Jesus did not heal the paralytic, but said that “Your sins are forgiven you.” This was incredibly offensive to the Pharisees because, as they correctly said, only God could forgive sins.

 

Finally, it should be noted that the divine authority He claimed in the Great Commission, was told privately to His disciples, and not to the religious establishment.

 

[1]. The term “the Jews” is used in reference to no less than three Jewish groups in the gospels, and at times it is difficult to discern which group the gospel writer is referring to.

 

[2]. Fruchtenbaum, The Jewish Foundation of the Life of Messiah: Instructor’s Manual. Class 16, page 2. The name of the demon and its association with the Samaritans was deeply rooted in the centuries-old hatred between Jews and Samaritans.  See 02.01.18 for more details.

 

[3]. See Jn. 5:18; 10:33; 19:7.

 

[4]. Tenney, New Testament Times. 109.

 

[5]. Tenney, The Gospel of John. 98.

 

[6]. Judicial punishment by stoning had not been practiced for centuries, so this was a hypothetical issue.

 

[7]. See 03.04.17 for more information on King Antiochus Epiphanies.

 



11.02.21 HEALING THE MAN BORN BLIND

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.21 HEALING THE MAN BORN BLIND

11.02.21 Jn. 9:1-12  Jesus at the Pool of Siloam

 

HEALING THE MAN BORN BLIND[1]

1 As He was passing by, He saw a man blind from birth. 2 His disciples questioned Him: “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

3 “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” Jesus answered. “This came about so that God’s works might be displayed in him. 4 We must do the works of Him who sent Me while it is day. Night is coming when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

6 After He said these things He spit on the ground, made some mud from the saliva, and spread the mud on his eyes. 7 “Go,” He told him, wash in the pool of Siloam (which means “Sent”). So he left, washed, and came back seeing.

8 His neighbors and those who formerly had seen him as a beggar said, “Isn’t this the man who sat begging?” 9 Some said, “He’s the one.” “No,” others were saying, “but he looks like him.”

He kept saying, “I’m the one!”

10 Therefore they asked him, “Then how were your eyes opened?”

11 He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud, spread it on my eyes, and told me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So when I went and washed I received my sight.”

12 “Where is He?” they asked.

“I don’t know,” he said.

 

After Jesus declared His eternal existence (Jn. 8:48-59 above), He proceeded to perform a profound miracle – a messianic miracle that had a challenging effect on the Jewish leadership. This miracle forced them to decided whether Jesus was the expectated messiah. However, it was also an interesting historical reflection upon the Jewish people, which is why some Bible critics said the miracle never happened, but rather, it was simply a metaphor written as if it was an historical event.[2] However, with the discovery of the Pool of Siloam, the argument of the critics fell apart.

The Pool of Siloam had a most unique feature:  Its water originated at the Virgin’s Fountain, a/k/a the Gihon Spring.[3]  From there the water flowed through the 1,780 foot long Hezekiah’s Tunnel into the two sections of the Pool of Siloam, and then into a creek in the Kidron Valley. The ancient pool consists of a lower pool, known as the Pool of Shelah, and an upper pool known as the Pool of Siloah.[4] It is mentioned three times in the Hebrew Bible.[5]  The miracle of this healing was the fulfillment of a prophecy of Isaiah, who said,

 

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened,
and the ears of the deaf unstopped.  

Isaiah 35:5  

 

 

11.02.21.Q1 Why did Jesus use spit and mud to heal the blind man in John 9:1-12?[6]

Scholars have pondered this question for centuries.[7] In ancient times, eyes were sometimes healed with the application of a cream or salve; other times with spit and mud.  Could it be possible that Jesus purposefully mimicked existing methods?  Admittedly, nearly all evangelical scholars would demand a negative answer to this question. Furthermore, why would He have done so? He already demonstrated so many healing miracles where other so-called healers failed. To make the possible answers more challenging, the healing of a blind man in Mark 8:22-26 (10.01.28) is the only recorded miracle that was performed in two stages.  In that case, Jesus placed spittle on his eyes, but not mud.

After considerable research, a possible answer remains to be a little more than an educated guess.  The use of spit and mud was clearly out of the ordinary routine of miracles that Jesus performed, and there may have been more to it than to simply demonstrate His Messianic calling and divine authority. The religious leaders were nearly petrified at this miracle and, as if to add insult to injury upon Pharisaic legalism, this healing was not performed in a private home or environment, but in a public forum where it received maximum attention.  As stated previously, Jesus did not come to be a Healer of human bodies, but to be a Healer of souls. Miracles, with Jesus, were only a means to a higher end; credentials to enforce the reception of spiritual truth.

The Greeks, Romans, and other people groups used spit and mud because there was a widespread applied faith in its healing potency. Yet no records have been uncovered that verify a miraculous healing by this common ritual (except by those who claimed to be healers).  Some scholars believe that the ancients thought of it as a cure for eye diseases, but not blindness.[8]  However, the Roman writer Suetonius [below], in a discussion of Vespasian, said that the emperor used spittle to restore the sight to a blind man.

 

Vespasian as yet lacked prestige and a certain divinity, so to speak, since he was an unexpected and still new-made emperor; but these were also given to him.  A man of the people who was blind and another who was lame came to him together as he sat on the tribunal, begging for the help for their disorders, which Serapis had promised in a dream; for the god declared that Vespasian would restore the eyes, if he would spit upon them, and give strength to the leg, if he would condescend to touch it with his heel.  Though he had hardly any faith that this could possibly succeed and, therefore, shrank even before making the attempt, he was at last prevailed upon by his friends and tried both things in public before a large crowd; and with success.

Suetonius, The Deified Vespasian 7:69-121

 

It is noteworthy that Suetonius stated that the miracle was before a large crowd. Clearly Vespasian was seen as a god; especially since he claimed to be one and those who argued against it put their lives in danger. However, common sense argues against this miraculous claim.  If the emperor was so successful in healing others, why didn’t thousands come to him for a healing as they did to Jesus?

11.02.21a

Tacitus also has an account of Vespasian performing a healing, but it could be the same as reported by Suetonius.  It was not uncommon that one historian’s book was based, in part, on the work of another writer.[9] Tacitus said that a blind person in Alexandria asked Vespasian for a healing remedy, prayer, and to sprinkle his cheeks and the balls of his eyes with saliva.[10]  He wrote of an event when Vespasian visited Alexandria and two men approached him.  One was blind and the other had a diseased hand, but both claimed that their god sent them to the monarch. Vespasian initially refused.  But the blind man persisted to ask that his eyes be “moistened with spittle,” and the crippled man asked him to step on his diseased hand. Vespasian finally gave in and did as was requested of him, and

 

 “The hand immediately recovered its power; the blind man saw once more.  Both facts are attested to this day, when falsehood can bring no reward, by those who were present on the occasion.”

Tacitus, Histories 4:81

 

11.02.21b

Both were supposedly healed immediately. Yet how interesting it is that Tacitus made a comment about possible individuals who might think the report at being false. (Jesus never said anything like that.) His comment clearly suggests that it is really false. Nonetheless, it is it was about this time that Jesus apparently used a method and custom common of His day.[11]

 

Concerning another account from the first century, Aulus Persius Flaccus (34-62) was a Roman author of satires and poetry. He wrote of a woman and said,

 

She takes the babe from the cradle, and with her middle finger moistens its forehead and lips with spittle to keep away the evil eye.

Persius, Satire 2:32-33

 

Pliny the Elder (23-79) was a scholar, lawyer, soldier, and authored an encyclopedia of natural history that filled 37 books. His work remained unchallenged for nearly fourteen centuries but is now obviously rejected by modern science.  His work gives insight into first century Roman life.[12]  Among his countless comments, he said,

 

We are to believe that by continually anointing each morning with fasting saliva, inflammations of the eyes are prevented.

Pliny the Elder, Natural History 18:7

 

While these pagan accounts are obviously mythical, whether there was a healing is hardly the point, because many believed it had actually occurred. Nowhere in the Bible is the reality of pagan healings and exorcisms denied. When Jesus came to heal, He did so by His divine power that was in sharp contrast to pagan formulas and rituals. Furthermore, Jesus healed some who were blind from birth, indicating that their illness was not a temporary medical condition from which they could have naturally recovered.

 

  1. An opinion of this writer is that Jesus might have healed the man with spit and mud because others claimed to have done the same with a similar method, but Jesus actually healed where others failed.
  2. A thought worthy of consideration is this: just as the ten plagues by Moses were against the gods of Egypt, could it be possible that some of the miracles performed by Jesus were against the Greco-Roman gods? Jesus lived in a Jewish community with pagan Greek influences. He not only needed to prove to orthodox Jews who He was, but also to the Hellenized Jews who accepted many Greek ideologies.

11.02.21c

  1. Another opinion is that the use of mud reflects upon the creation of Adam in the Garden of Eden, and Jesus symbolically recreated the man’s vision so he could see his Creator. But that fails to sufficiently answer “why”?

11.02.21d

  1. However, a popular book, Tobit may give a clue to this method of healing. The apocryphal book may best be described as a novel within the culture of the second century B.C. It reflects folklore, sound moral teaching, and is a romantic story in which, at one point, the angel Raphael tells Tobias to apply the gall of the fish to the blind eyes of his father Tobit. The segment of the story is as follows:

 

Raphael said, “I know, Tobias, that your father will open his eyes. You therefore must anoint his eyes with gall; and when they smart he will rub them, and will cause the white films to fall away, and he will see you.”

 

Then Anna ran to meet them and embraced her son, and said to him, “I have seen you, my child; now I am ready to die.” And they both wept. Tobit started toward the door and stumbled.  But his son ran to him and took hold of his father and he sprinkled the gall upon his father’s eyes, saying, “Be of good cheer father.”  And when his eyes began to smart he rubbed them, and the white films scaled off from the corners of his eyes.  Then he saw his son and embraced him, and he wept and said, “Blessed art thou, O God, and blessed are all your holy angels …”

Tobit 11:7-14[13]

 

All ancient people groups believed in healing by divine intervention.[14]  It is well known that healers applied some type of ointment to the eyes of the blind.  While Jesus at times simply touched the eyes of the blind, quite possibly here He mimicked the narrative in Tobit, simply to demonstrate that He truly was the Healer as opposed to others who attempted similar feats.  But with this divine revelation the disciples, too, had their eyes of understanding opened. The healing power of Jesus was superior to the healing attempts of the best medicine man or magician of the day.

In another case, an inscription was found at the ruins of the temple of Asclepius on the island in the Tiber River in Rome. It is believed to have originated in A.D. 138 and has a reference to the healing of a blind soldier attributed, in part, to “eye salve.”

 

To the blind soldier Valerius (to whom)[15] Aprus the god commanded by an oracle to come and take the blood of a white rooster, to mix it with honey and eye salve, and to spread it on his eyes for three days.  And he recovered his sight and came and presented an offering of thanksgiving to the god.

MEB / from SIG no. 1173[16]

 

Did the ancient eye salve really heal the blind soldier? The fact that he was a soldier, obviously, indicates that at one point he had excellent vision, yet no reason for his temporary blindness is given. If, in fact, there really was a soldier by the name of Valerius, in all probability his sight was restored in spite of the medical brew.

Historians have long said that many emperors and other monarchs claimed to be gods in order to tighten their fearful control on the general population.  Stories were created in which they were said to have been born of a virgin or performed various miracles.  As previously stated, if Vespasian indeed had the power to perform miracles, it is questionable as to why he did not perform more of them and why thousands of people did not follow and worship him as they did Jesus.

11.02.21e

There are some distinct differences between ancient rulers, priests, and the ministry of Jesus. They are as follows:

  1. Ruling monarchs were proud, arrogant, and usually cared little for the common people. Jesus, on the other hand, loved everyone, was humble and demonstrated genuine care with compassion.

 

  1. While the pagans claimed to have healed only a few people, Jesus literally healed hundreds if not thousands. The pagans had no witnesses, whereas Jesus had multitudes of witnesses.

 

  1. As previously stated, claims of divinity and healings were used by rulers to solidify their power and control, while the demonstrations of healings by Jesus, along with His message, pointed people to the kingdom of God. Rulers demanded everyone recognize them as divine, whereas Jesus, by His actions, permitted observers to conclude whether He was divine.

 

  1. Possibly more important, the use of mud and spittle to make some eye salve was probably a silent attack against the pagans who used a similar method. Jesus quietly confronted the gods of the Greeks, Romans, and Hellenized Jews. He had untold numbers of witnesses who received healings or saw someone who received a healing. The pagans had only myths and a few testimonials of healings, that even they did not believe were true. In essence, He demonstrated His power over the demonic powers in a manner similar to that which God used when He sent the plagues upon Egypt fifteen centuries earlier. At that time, the plagues represented various Egyptian gods; this time Jesus demonstrated who He was.

 

  1. Pagan healers wanted as much public exposure as possible, while Jesus often told people not to tell others and avoided maximum public exposure.

 

The healing of eyes with saliva was a known remedy, even among the Jews. The Jerusalem Talmud Sorah 16,4) records the story of a Rabbi Meir and a wpman famous for her ability to heal sick eyes with her silva.[17] Ironically, those who carefully listened and observed Jesus recognized His attributes, while the leading Pharisees and Sadducees remained spiritually blind.[18]  In agreement with the Pharisees, a Jewish writer a few centuries later gave instructions in the Talmud on how not to heal a blind person with spit and mud.[19] Obviously his directives were a subtle attack against Jesus.

Many theologians have suggested that since God created man from dirt in the Garden of Eden, Jesus used spit and mud to recreate the blind man’s eyes.[20] When the first Adam opened his eyes, he saw his Creator Jesus; when the blind man opened his eyes he saw his Healer Jesus. Regardless of the reason or method of healing Jesus used, it was obvious to the observing audience that His power and authority could have only come from God. Finally, the reason for the two-step healing of a blind man is discussed in 10.01.28.Q1.

 

“Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents?”  The common thinking was that any disease or infirmity as this was the result of sin in the family.[21]  This was not based on any Scripture, but an opinion that became a Pharisaic doctrine. Certain sins of the parents were thought to have resulted in specific physical ailments of leprosy or blindness in their children.  This curse (Jn. 9:1-12) was considered typical evidence that sins were passed on to the proverbial “third and fourth generation.” In other cases, some Jews believed a child might sin in its mother’s womb. To support this argument, the rabbis referred to the struggle between Jacob and Esau prior to their births (Gen. 25:22).

In light of the fact that for four centuries there was not a single prophet in the land, there was extensive corruption in both the temple and government, and Hellenism was making great inroads into Jewish theology and lifestyles. It should not be surprising that superstition had increased significantly. One of those beliefs was that the moral state of a pregnant woman could be passed on to her unborn child. For this reason, it was believed that the apostasy of one of the great rabbis was caused by the sinful delight of his mother passing through an idol grove. So therefore, the community blamed her for the rabbi’s spiritual failure.[22] No wonder they asked, “Who sinned?”

“Born blind.”   The reasons children were born with blindness were obviously unknown to the ancients, but modern scientists have been able to make an educated guess of one possible cause. The venereal diseases of gonorrhea and chlamydia are known to cause a number of ailments, and many babies born to mothers with such diseases are born blind.[23] It has been estimated that around 1900, about 30 percent of all blindness were the result of sexually transmitted diseases.[24]

A point of consideration is that:  If the ancients believed that blindness could have been the result of a venereal disease that underscores their question of “Who sinned?” However, even more condemning is the increased probability that the blindness resulted from another cause, but the parents were suspected of this “sinfulness.” Regardless of the cause, to have a family member born blind was a horrible stigma. Even though the Jewish culture was socially conservative, their Hellenistic Jewish and Gentile neighbors did not hold the same values.

Most people who were blind became life-long beggars.  They were not permitted in the inner sanctuary of the temple, but were usually seated near the entrance of a “holy place” such as the temple gate or along the road leading to the temple or a synagogue.[25] In this case, Jesus met a blind beggar in the Court of the Gentiles where He healed him, and told him to go and “wash in the Pool of Siloam.”  He obeyed Jesus and immediately had strength for the long walk to the pool.

Amazingly, Jesus had never told him he would be healed, yet he was made whole. Since the miracle occurred during the Feast of Tabernacles, the pool was one of the most crowded places. As part of the religious rituals, an unusual number of priests were needed to perform the various services, one of which was to carry water from this pool to the altar. Hence, many priests who were not a part of the temple establishment were present and witnessed Jesus performing this messianic miracle.

A Small Escape from David Sandell on Vimeo.

The Talmud states that during the one week celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, a procession went to the pool to bring water in a golden vessel to the temple.[26] There it was poured out as a libation of thanksgiving to God.  John 7 indicates that Jesus attended the Feast and thaas t halfway through the festival, He went to the temple courts to teach the crowds that He was the living water (Jn. 7:34). Clearly, everyone’s attention was on the miracle and the message.

 

[1]. See comments by Rabbi John Fischer in 10.01.28.V where he discusses two unique methods of healing blind men including the event of John 9:1-12.

 

[2]. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct2005.010.35.26.html. Retrieved November 26, 2005; In addition, on March 9, 2013, Dr. James H. Charlesworth of Princeton Seminary gave a report in Jerusalem in which he outlined several archaeological discoveries that support the historical reliability of the gospel of John. Essentially, he said that John knew the details of Jerusalem as it was prior to the A.D. 70 destruction, details that were unknown to archaeologists only a decade ago. SOURCE: Charlesworth, James H. “Gospel of John Backed by Archaeology.” Artifax. 28:3 (Summer, 2013), 11-12.

 

[3]. Josephus, Wars 5.9.4 (410).

 

[4]. Zondervan’s New International Version Archaeological Study Bible. (2005 ed.) 1739. See also 2 Chron. 32:2-8, 30; Isa. 22:9-11; 2 Kgs. 20:20; Wiseman, “Siloam.” 3:1452.

 

[5]. It is the Pool of Shelah in Neh. 3:15, the Waters of Shiloah in Isa. 8:6 and the Pool of Siloam in Jn. 9:7; Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. 3:343.

[6]. See comments by Rabbi John Fischer in 10.01.28.V where he discusses two unique healing methods of blind men including the event of John 9:1-12.

 

[7]. This writer does not have a firm answer, but has found other ancient writings in which the mud and water were said to have healed blindness. For whatever reason is given, it was Jesus who performed the true healing.

 

[8]. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 599.

 

[9]. An example is Josephus who said that some of his information on Herod the Great came from the writings of John of Damascus, who was Herod’s historian.

 

[10]. Tacitus, History 4:81.

 

[11]. Barclay, “John.” 2:42.

 

[12]. http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/pliny_elder.html. Retrieved December 7, 2013.

 

[13]. The book of Tobit is part of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Bible, but is not in the Protestant Bible. Generally, it is classified as an apocryphal book by Protestant and Messianic Jewish scholars.

 

[14]. Atheists were all but unknown, and frequently mocked for their stupidity.

 

[15]. Clarification mine.

 

[16]. Cited by Boring, Berger, and Colpe, eds. Hellenistic Commentary to the New Testament. 284.

 

[17]. Cited by Tsvi Sadan, “He Spat on the Ground and made Clay with the Saliva” (Part 3) Israel Today. Oct. 2013. No. 171. 14.

 

[18]. Major, Manson, and Wright, The Mission and Message of Jesus. 813.

 

[19]. Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 108-120.

 

[20]. Zondervan’s New International Version Archaeological Study Bible. (2005 ed.). 1706.

 

[21]. There were four kinds of people that were considered as good as dead, and it was believed that in all four situations their situation was a divine judgment. They were the blind, the leper, the poor, and the childless.

 

[22]. Cited by Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament. 2:181.

 

[23]. Today newborn infants receive a few drops of silver nitrate solution or antibiotic as a preventative solution.

 

[24]. Hobrink, Modern Science in the Bible. 16-17.

 

[25].  A few examples are: 1) The impotent man of Acts 3:2-10 was near the Gate Beautiful, also known as the Nicanor Gate. 2) The blind and lame people in the temple who asked Jesus for a healing were probably in the Court of the Gentiles (i.e., Mt. 21:14). 3) The man who was blind from birth probably met Jesus at one of the two southern temple gates (Jn. 9:1-8). 4) The blind man of Jericho were along the major road that festival caravans took to Jerusalem, and that is where they met Jesus. 5) Jesus also met a blind man at the Pool of Siloam, another place considered to be “holy.”

 

[26]. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah. 4.9.z



11.02.22 PHARISEES QUESTION MAN

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.22 PHARISEES QUESTION MAN

11.02.22 Jn. 9:13-17 Pool of Siloam

 

PHARISEES QUESTION MAN   

 

13 They brought the man who used to be blind to the Pharisees. 14 The day that Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes was a Sabbath. 15 So again the Pharisees asked him how he received his sight.

“He put mud on my eyes,” he told them. “I washed and I can see.”

16 Therefore some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for He doesn’t keep the Sabbath!” But others were saying, “How can a sinful man perform such signs?” And there was a division among them.

17 Again they asked the blind man, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?”

He’s a prophet,” he said.

 

In this passage the two main points of controversy between the leading Pharisees and Jesus are revealed.

 

  1. The interpretation and application of the Mosaic Law to daily life and

 

  1. The claim of Jesus to be the unique and eternal knowledge of God.

 

Every conversation Jesus had with His hostile critics demonstrated that they did not share the same opinion as He did concerning the Mosaic Law and its relation to life and God.

 

“How can a sinful man perform such signs?” Finally, someone asked a question of intelligent observation.  They recognized that Jesus was born out of wedlock and yet they could find no fault (meaning sin in reference to the Written Law of Moses) in Him.  Since the religious leaders saw Him only as an ordinary man, they concluded that He must obviously be a sinner. Furthermore, He did not honor the Sabbath laws that they had created.

 

After telling His disciples and others that He was the light of the world, He healed a blind man.  While many were discussing the reason for this man’s blindness, they failed to connect this miracle with His teaching.  When the man received his sight, Jesus told him to wash His face in the Pool of Siloam, the same pool where the priests had drawn living water to pour on the altar of God.  Ironically, the blind man could not only see, but he could also perceive who Jesus was, while the critics chose to remain spiritually blind.

 

“And there was a division among them.”  The issue of division was that, on one hand, a man born blind was healed and the identity of the Person who healed him was clearly revealed because this was a messianic miracle.   On the other hand, Jesus performed the miracle on the Sabbath which violated Sabbath restrictions.[1]  The event was an interesting reflection upon John’s theme of light vs. darkness; belief vs. unbelief. When Jesus said He did not come to bring peace but a sword, He meant that there would be divisions among the people concerning His identity — it would be a matter of belief vs. unbelief.

 

When the religious authorities then confronted the former blind man, he told them, “He’s a prophet.” That was the greatest compliment any Jew could give to another; that Jesus was no ordinary man.[2] And as such, he was among the first to proclaim the New Kingdom of God. This had a repelling effect on the leading Pharisees.[3]  However, at this point he was probably too fearful to call Jesus “the Messiah.”

[1]. See 02.04.06 “Sabbath Day Observances.”

[2]. Macartney, Great Interviews of Jesus. 23-25, 88.

 

[3]. See also 10.01.25 and 10.01.29.

 



11.02.23 PHARISEES QUESTION THE HEALED MAN’S PARENTS.

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.23 PHARISEES QUESTION THE HEALED MAN’S PARENTS.

11.02.23 Jn. 9:18-23

 

PHARISEES QUESTION THE HEALED MAN’S PARENTS

 

18 The Jews did not believe this about him—that he was blind and received sight — until they summoned the parents of the one who had received his sight.

19 They asked them, “Is this your son, the one you say was born blind? How then does he now see?”

20 “We know this is our son and that he was born blind,” his parents answered. 21 “But we don’t know how he now sees, and we don’t know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he’s of age. He will speak for himself.” 22 His parents said these things because they were afraid of the Jews, since the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him as Messiah, he would be banned from the synagogue. 23 This is why his parents said, “He’s of age; ask him.”

   

As stated previously, what both the leading Pharisees and Sadducees missed, what they did not learn from the destruction of Solomon’s Temple and the exile, is that God cares more about obedience, steadfast love, justice, righteousness, and humility than sacrifices, festivals, offerings, and assemblies.[1]

The indignant Pharisees said the healed man and any other followers of Jesus would be “banned from the synagogue.” Nothing was more important to a Jewish person than the synagogue. This was a powerful response because it was the local community center, the center of social and religious life outside of the temple. But what religious rule did these people break which would cause the religious leaders to ban them from the synagogue?

Just as the Jews had prioritized the 613 commandments of the Torah,[2]  they had also established 24 violations that would result in excommunication, and prioritized them as well. One of those regulations was decreed, for the necessity of the time.[3]  In essence, this was a “catch-all” reason that could be applied to anyone, at any time, for any reason. The parents and their healed son were probably threatened with violating this decree.[4]  To be excommunicated or “put out” was a horrible social stigma. Scholars agree that there were three levels of excommunication, but slightly different in the length of each one (see footnotes).  In first century Judaism there were three levels of excommunication as follows:

 

  1. The lightest level was the neziphah or n’zifah (rebuke) in which a person was removed from seven to thirty days.[5] An individual such as the synagogue president could impose this penalty.[6]  A New Testament example is found in 1 Timothy 5:1.

 

  1. A moderate level of punishment was the niddui or niddul (casting out; rejection) of the congregation.[7] This action required the decision of three persons and the excommunication lasted for an additional thirty days. A New Testament example is found in Titus 3:10.

 

  1. The most severe form of excommunication was the cherem, which resulted in the excommunicated person being treated as if dead.[8] A New Testament example is found in Matthew 18:15-20. Such treatment included the following: [9]     

 a This person was not permitted to be in a group of ten or more men. Obviously                         that meant he could not attend a synagogue service.

b.This person was not permitted to engage in any public prayers or services.

c.The public had to keep at least four cubits of distance from him.

d.No conversations were to be held with him.

e.Whenever he died, stones were to be thrown on his coffin and mourning for him                    was forbidden.[10]   

 

11.02.23a

 

The context of John 9:18-23 appears to be that the excommunication of the man healed by Jesus was a moderate one. Clearly, there were three or more individuals who challenged Jesus and the healed man, and also had the authority to excommunicate. Yet to experience the healing was the most exhilarating one, one that demonstrated that God still loved them.

This miracle polarized the differences between the followers of Jesus and those who opposed Him. Common belief was that when the messiah came, he would perform three kinds of messianic miracles that would unquestionably demonstrate His Messiahship: He would

 

  1. Heal a Jewish leper,

 

  1. Cast a demon or demons out of a mute or deaf person (In various Inter-Testamental Jewish writings, the advent of the Messiah meant that evil would be defeated.[11]), and
  2. Heal someone who was born blind. [12]

 

Jesus had now performed the last of the three and the leading Pharisees were scathing mad. But there is a mystery that remains as such – a mystery!  If the Pharisees threatened to excommunicate the man who was healed or his parents, why didn’t they threaten to excommunicate Jesus?  Or was Jesus excommunicated and the gospel writers believed there were other matters more important to record in their gospels than this?

 

11.02.23b

 

Finally, in today’s Western culture it is nearly impossible to comprehend the social stigma that was associated with first century excommunication.  Whenever it occurred, the chief authorities of the local synagogue read the name of the excommunicated person, the length of time the sentence was to be in effect, and the reason for the judgment. The healed man was threatened with excommunication, which was also a threat to his parents.  However, there is no record that this form of punishment was never threatened upon Jesus. Is it possible that Jesus was either threatened with excommunication, or was excommunicated from some local synagogues, and the gospel writers never wrote of it?

 

[1]. Jer. 7:21-23; Hos. 6:6; Amos 5:21-24; Mic. 6:6-8.

 

[2]. The 613 laws were observed only during the times of the tabernacle or temple. Today, only 271 of those Mosaic commands can be observed. See Parry, The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the Talmud. 221.

 

[3]. Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. 3:345.

 

[4]. Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. 3:344-46.

 

[5]. Fruchtenbaum says this level of discipline had a limit of 7 days. Fruchtenbaum, The Jewish Foundation of the Life of Messiah: Instructor’s Manual. Class 16, page 6; Lang, Know the Words of Jesus. 320.

 

[6]. A ban from one synagogue did not mean likewise from all synagogues. Some scholars believe that Jesus may have been banned from some synagogues, which is why He did not teach in them in the latter part of His ministry.  See Farrar, The Life of Christ. 310, 326.

 

[7]. Fruchtenbaum says this level of discipline was between 8 and 30 days. Fruchtenbaum, The Jewish Foundation of the Life of Messiah: Instructor’s Manual. Class 16, page 6;  Lang, Know the Words of Jesus. 320.

 

[8]. Farrar, The Life of Christ. 309; Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary. 184.

 

[9]. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament. 2:185.

 

[10]. Some historians believe that the more severe or restrictive demands (c,d,e) upon the excommunicated person do not reflect first century Jewish practices, but are of a later period.

 

[11]. 1 Enoch 55:4; Jubilees 23:29; Testament of Simeon 6:6; Testament of Judah 25:3; Testament of Moses 10:1, and the Testament of Solomon 20:16-17.

 

[12]. Research on the “Messianic Miracles” is credited to Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, a Messianic scholar and director of Ariel Ministries in San Antonio, TX, formerly of Tustin, CA. For more information, see http://ariel.org/. Retrieved September 26, 2013. See also 06.03.08.V (Video), 06.01.03 and the comparison of Dead Sea Scroll fragments 4Q278 and 4Q521 with Luke 4:16-30 at 06.02.02; See also Fruchtenbaum, Messianic Miracles. 4; Fischer, The Gospels in Their Jewish Context. (Lecture on CD/MP3). Week 10, Session 2.



11.02.24 PHARISEES QUESTION MAN AGAIN

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.24 PHARISEES QUESTION MAN AGAIN

11.02.24 Jn. 9:24-34

 

PHARISEES QUESTION MAN AGAIN 

  

24 So a second time they summoned the man who had been blind and told him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner!”

25 He answered, “Whether or not He’s a sinner, I don’t know. One thing I do know: I was blind, and now I can see!”

26 Then they asked him, “What did He do to you? How did He open your eyes?”

27 “I already told you,” he said, “and you didn’t listen. Why do you want to hear it again? You don’t want to become His disciples too, do you?

28 They ridiculed him: “You’re that man’s disciple, but we’re Moses’ disciples. 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses. But this man — we don’t know where He’s from!”

30 “This is an amazing thing,” the man told them. “You don’t know where He is from, yet He opened my eyes! 31 We know that God doesn’t listen to sinners, but if anyone is God-fearing and does His will, He listens to him. 32 Throughout history no one has ever heard of someone opening the eyes of a person born blind. 33 If this man were not from God, He wouldn’t be able to do anything.”

34 “You were born entirely in sin,” they replied, “and are you trying to teach us?” Then they threw him out.  

 

It is interesting to observe how rapidly the man’s faith, insight, and courage grew during this brief examination. Previously he stated that he did not know who Jesus was, but then stated that Jesus must be a prophet. Like the Samaritan woman whom Jesus met at the well, her insight grew exponentially during the brief discussion.

 

“Give glory to God.”  The people who witnessed the miracle realized their purpose of life; to give glory to God.[1]  But the religious leaders who were anointed for a ministry to praise and glorify God, not only failed to do so, but also brutally condemned the Healer as well as the one who was healed.

 

“I was blind, and now I can see!”  This man had more vision than he could ever imagine.  He not only was able to see the world around him, but he also had his spiritual eyes opened and he “saw” that Jesus was the Son of God.  Amazingly, this is the condition of all humanity – people are blind to the desires of God until they respond to Him and the Holy Spirit opens their eyes.

 

“You don’t want to become His disciples too, do you?” This statement was not by one of the leading Pharisees, but by the blind man who was healed. It was an amazing confrontation to the religious leaders, who were insulted by his bold statement.  In essence, if the religious leaders were so close to God, how could Jesus heal him and they not know about it? The question “You don’t want to become His disciples too, do you?” was nothing other than a comment of sarcasm.  All this occurred even though he had not met Jesus, and did not even know of Him until verse 35.

 

Throughout history no one has ever heard of someone opening the eyes of a person born blind.”  This is a key statement to identify this miracle as a “messianic miracle.” The Greeks believed that their gods healed the blind and Roman emperors claimed they had divine healing powers as well. This phrase demonstrated that no one else, including the Greeks and Romans, had performed such an incredible miracle. Nonetheless, the Pharisees threw him out.

 

Finally, it is noteworthy to review the progression of revelation of how the healed blind man recognized Jesus. The Samaritan woman also had a progressive revelation written of her (see 06.01.03).

 

  1. He called Jesus a man in verse 11.

 

  1. In verse 17 he said Jesus was a prophet.

 

  1. He concluded by saying that Jesus was the Son of Man/God (verse 35). It was a good revelation for him but an undesirable conclusion for the leading Pharisees and other critics.

[1]. See  Josh. 7:19; 1 Sam. 6:5; Jer. 13:16; Lk. 17:18.



11.02.25 JESUS CONFRONTS THE HEALED MAN

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.25 JESUS CONFRONTS THE HEALED MAN

11.02.25 Jn. 9:35-41

 

JESUS CONFRONTS THE HEALED MAN

 

35 When Jesus heard that they had thrown the man out, He found him and asked, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”

36 “Who is He, Sir, that I may believe in Him?” he asked.

37 Jesus answered, “You have seen Him; in fact, He is the One speaking with you.”

38 “I believe, Lord!” he said, and he worshiped Him.

39 Jesus said, “I came into this world for judgment, in order that those who do not see will see and those who do see will become blind.”

40 Some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and asked Him, “We aren’t blind too, are we?”

41 “If you were blind,” Jesus told them, “you wouldn’t have sin. But now that you say, ‘We see’ — your sin remains.

 

This discussion took place in the temple where a giant menorah stood. It was so huge that a priest had to climb a ladder to light its seven lamps, which gave a soft glow throughout the temple area.  Jesus had just given sight to the blind man and He used the menorah as His object lesson when He said that He was the light of the world.  The blind man received both physical and spiritual sight in the temple.  Now Jesus would continue the conversation and discuss the true shepherd of the people of God.[1] Their blindness was that they did not recognize, nor did they want to, Jesus as being sent from heaven as their Messiah. They refused to acknowledge the powerful signs that pointed to this fact. According to the Jewish Bible, a sign is “an outward compelling proof of divine authority.”[2]

 

 

11.02.25.Q1 Does John 9:39 conflict with 5:22 and 8:15?

 

In John 9:39 Jesus said that He came into this world to judge it, but in 5:22 and 8:15 He said that judgment is left to Him because the Father judges no one. The difference lays in the fact that in John 9:39 Jesus said that His “judgment” was a clarification of where people stood in their relationship with God. As previously stated, he came to fulfill the Mosaic Law, not abolish it. He taught the Kingdom of God and helped people discern what God desires. He did not come to condemn the world (5:22; 8:15) but to save it.  However, in His future return He will judge all persons and nations. On an important side note, the Church has adopted a Roman view of law, that means restriction and is therefore considered to be bad, while the Hebrew Bible views law as instruction and freedom, and therefore, good.  Therefore, there is no conflict.

[1]. Pentecost, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ. (Video “D”).

 

[2]. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture. 224-25; Ex. 4:8-9; Deut. 13:1; Isa. 7:10-17, 38:7.

 



11.02.26 SHEEP AND THEIR SHEPHERD

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.26 SHEEP AND THEIR SHEPHERD

11.02.26 Jn. 10:1-6

 

SHEEP AND THEIR SHEPHERD

1I assure you: Anyone who doesn’t enter the sheep pen by the door but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2 The one who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The doorkeeper opens it for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought all his own outside, he goes ahead of them. The sheep follow him because they recognize his voice.  5 They will never follow a stranger; instead they will run away from him, because they don’t recognize the voice of strangers.”

6 Jesus gave them this illustration, but they did not understand what He was telling them.

 

John 10 is known as the “Shepherd Chapter” of the Bible. It is here where Jesus was again criticized by the Pharisees (the shepherds of the people) for healing on the Sabbath.  The prophet Jeremiah had little good to say about the Jewish leaders in his day.  He warned that those who failed to care for the people of God would be severely punished (Jer. 23:1-2).  Ezekiel gave stronger words (Ezek. 34).   The response of Jesus was an obvious reflection upon Ezekiel 34 since the shepherds were more concerned with their own welfare than caring for the common people.  Careful reading of the text reveals that the issue begins in John 9:40 where the Pharisees are identified as blind thieves who are deceiving the flock.   The duplicated phrase of 10:1 emphasized the preceding passage after which Jesus gave His parable of the good shepherd. He often referred to Himself as the Good Shepherd.[1] The Pharisees still failed to understand Him (Jn. 10:6) and, therefore, He gave another illustration.

 

Jesus had the right credentials; He had the right genealogy, the right confirmation at the time of His baptism, fulfilled the prophecies of His birth and life, and performed the messianic miracles to enter the sheep pen by the gate.  The leading Pharisees and other religious leaders created their own way to enter the sheep pen and harm the sheep with false teachings. The Sadducees, including Caiaphas and his entire family, were committed to a Hellenistic lifestyle and gave only lip service to the Torah.

 

There is a problem in understanding this passage. But it is not so much with the passage, but rather, the simple fact that people today are so far removed from this ancient agricultural society and Jewish roots, that they have difficulty perceiving the full depth of its meaning.  In ancient times, shepherds did not raise sheep for meat, although on rare occasion one was slaughtered for a feast. The sheep were raised for wool and, therefore, they became very old.  The shepherd often had a name for each one.  Furthermore, they listened and obeyed him very carefully.

 

“I assure you,” This phrase has also been translated, I tell you the truth, truly, truly, or verily, verily, which underscored the importance of the preceding six verses.[2] The term amen (Gk. amen, 281)[3] is a confirmation of truthfulness.  In the Greek, there is a deliberate repetition of a word to underscore its significance. This was a common practice for the use of emphasis.  In this case, John placed an unusual emphasis on the fact that he is stating a truth that must be carefully observed.[4]  Statements such as this have recently given scholars serious consideration that this gospel may have originally been written in Hebrew.

 

Some scholars believe that the phrase truly, truly, or its translated equivalent, places the emphasis on the preceding statement, not the following statement as is often translated. As such, it should be translated, amen, amen.[5]  Since neither Greek nor Hebrew had punctuation marks, the translators throughout history have assumed this was to emphasize the phrase that followed, not what had preceded it.  The original writings did not have chapter or verse divisions. Historians have given various dates as to when these were incorporated into Scriptures.  Some say chapter divisions date to the seventh century, but most most scholars believe chapter and verse divisions were added between the years 1228 and 1551 respectively.[6]  Regardless, there appears to be a concensus that the phrase “amen, amen” should be at the beginning of the next verse rather than at the end as it is now.  However, its present position does not change the meaning, only the emphasis as it would have been understood in the first century.  When numerous Old Testament passages are examined, Amen is said by God to mean, it is and shall be so, and by men, so let it be.[7]

 

“The doorkeeper opens it for him.”  “The doorkeeper” is the hired hand who guarded the sheep at night while the shepherd slept. He opened the sheep-fold door in the morning at the arrival of the shepherd.

[1]. See Hebrews 13:20 that refers to our Lord Jesus as the Great Shepherd of the sheep and 1 Peter 2:25 that refers to stray sheep who returned to the Shepherd, the Overseer of their souls.

[2]. Blizzard III. “Jesus: I am the Good Shepherd.” Yavo Digest  1:1, 7. See also 05.04.02 and 15.01.05.

 

[3]. Vine, “Amen.” Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary. 2:25; and “Verily” 2:659.

 

[4]. .https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/135861d7fcdfed9d Retrieved February 22, 2012. See also Jn. 1:51; 5:19, 24, 25; 6:26, 32, 47, 53; 8:34, 51, 58; 10:1, 7; 12:24; 13:16, 20, 21, 38; 14:12; 16:20, 23.

 

[5]. Lang, Know the Words of Jesus. 279.

 

[6]. Most historical sources credit Stephen Langton for placing chapter divisions in the Vulgate Bible in the year 1228. Then, in 1240, Hugh De St. Cher introduced verse divisions in the Hebrew Bible. But it wasn’t for another three centuries, in 1551, when Robert Stephen introduced verse divisions in the Greek New Testament. See Heysham, The Birth of the Bible. 10.

 

[7]. Vine, “Amen.” Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary. 2:25.

 



11.02.27 THE GATE FOR THE SHEEP

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.27 THE GATE FOR THE SHEEP

11.02.27 Jn. 10:7-10

 

THE GATE FOR THE SHEEP  

 

7 So Jesus said again, “I assure you: I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep didn’t listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved and will come in and go out and find pasture.       10 A thief comes only to steal and to kill and to destroy. I have come so that they may have life and have it in abundance.

In biblical times there were two kinds of sheepfolds.  The discussion by Jesus includes both kinds.

  1. In villages there were communal sheepfolds where all the shepherds kept their sheep. This pen had a door and only one person held the key. In the morning when the shepherds came, all the sheep followed the shepherd whose voice they recognized. This is the kind of sheep-fold Jesus referred to in John 10:2-3.
  1. Sheepfolds in the countryside were large pens enclosed by a stone wall, but there was no door. Briars were often planted on the outside of the wall to deter attacks by wild animals and thieves. But to protect the sheep at night, the shepherd would sleep across the entrance. No sheep could go out or any other animal or person could enter without going over the shepherd and waking him up. In the most literal sense, he was the door to the sheepfold; Jesus is the sheep-fold door of John 10:7.

 

In this passage Jesus presented His seventh “I am” statement.  Not only did John present the divine characteristics of Jesus with those statements, but he verbally underlined their significance by mentioning seven statements, the number of wholeness and completeness.

During the day, shepherds and shepherdesses guarded the sheep.  In the later afternoon, however, the women returned to their homes and the shepherds guarded the sheep that were in the sheepfold. These village sheepfolds or pens were stone wall enclosures with thorny briars along top and outer edges.  In the event the sheepfold did not have a gate, or if it were broken, then the good shepherd would sleep across the open entrance and thereby protect his flock with his life.  An uncommitted shepherd might attempt to scare away a predator, but would not risk his life for the sheep. A good shepherd would risk his life for his sheep.


11.02.27.A. A RECONSTRUCTED SHEEPFOLD

11.02.27.A. A RECONSTRUCTED SHEEPFOLD.  Sheepfolds or pens were built of stone and were topped with briars to discourage predators and thieves.  This reconstructed sheepfold was photographed by the author at the former Pilgrim Center in Jerusalem.

Jesus said that, I have come so that they may have life and have it in abundance.”  This passage follows the ten verses in which Jesus is speaking of the relationship He desires to have with His followers.  It reflects that God’s desire is the highest and best for every person and He warned that the thief would be the one who desires to steal, kill, and destroy the followers of our Lord.



11.02.28 THE GOOD SHEPHERD

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 31, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.28 THE GOOD SHEPHERD

11.02.28 Jn. 10:11-18

 

THE GOOD SHEPHERD 

 

11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired man, since he is not the shepherd and doesn’t own the sheep, leaves them and runs away when he sees a wolf coming. The wolf then snatches and scatters them.         13 This happens because he is a hired man and doesn’t care about the sheep.

14 “I am the good shepherd. I know My own sheep, and they know Me, 15 as the Father knows Me, and I know the Father. I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 But I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice. Then there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves Me, because I am laying down My life so I may take it up again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down on My own. I have the right to lay it down, and I have the right to take it up again. I have received this command from My Father.”

 

The imagery of a shepherd in the Hebrew Bible is significant, far more than a lonely individual in the countryside tending a herd of sheep.  Parables are short stories that include a key figure, such as a king, farmer, or a shepherd, who is representative of God. However, shepherds are also described as the religious leaders of the Jewish people. Several examples of a shepherd image either as God or as a leader are,

 

  1. The Lord is my shepherd (Ps. 23:1)

 

  1. The leader of Israel is a shepherd (Ps. 80:1)

 

  1. Cyrus, king of Persia is called a shepherd (Isa. 44:28)

 

  1. “Bad shepherds” who failed to be righteous will be slaughtered (Jer. 25:34-36)

 

  1. God is the shepherd who judges between the sheep (Ezek. 34:17)

 

When Jesus said that He was the Good Shepherd, He was essentially stating that He was far superior to any other shepherd; associating Himself with God.  That was a profound statement to make to those who had experienced a number of evil monarchs since the Antiochus V Epiphanes and the Maccabean Revolt of the second century B.C. There are numerous writings in ancient Jewish books that pertain to a good shepherd.  Not the following:

 

When a sheep strays from the pasture, who seeks [for] whom? Does the sheep seek the shepherd, or [does] the shepherd seek the sheep? Obviously, the shepherd seeks the sheep. In the same way, the Holy One, blessed be He, looks for the lost.

           

Midrash Psalms 119:3[1]

 

Whether this comment in the Midrash was part of the oral tradition before or after the time of Jesus is not all that important, because there are many such narratives from both eras of history. Again, Jewish writings affirm the fact that orthodox rabbis and Jesus both firmly established their teachings upon the Hebrew Bible.

 

“I am the good shepherd.”  Jesus is the good shepherd, but not an ordinary good shepherd.  The Greek term for good is agathos, which simply describes a good moral quality.  However, Jesus did not use that term, He used kalos, which is good moral quality coupled to sympathy and kindness. [2] His passion for being a superior shepherd arises out of His love, knowing that His followers are challenged by two dangers.

 

  1. Dangers from the outside include persecutions and related dangers.

 

  1. Dangers from within the church include false shepherds who have their own agendas.

 

Again Jesus spoke of the false shepherd as “the hired man” who is more concerned about his own safety while attending sheep in the presence of wild animals, as compared to the good shepherd who would be willing to die for his sheep. Since the synagogue leaders were known as shepherds, His accusers immediately recognized that He was speaking of them in the most negative manner.  To add insult to injury, this discussion was held in a public forum where the common people could see Jesus express these ideas and sentiments.

 

Then Jesus startled everyone by saying, “I have other sheep.” He had always referred to the Jewish believers as His “sheep,” but, the phrase “other sheep” is a clear reference to the Gentiles who would become His disciples in the future as part of a single worldwide body of believers. This is a clear indication that some day He will unite Jews and Gentiles into one flock with one shepherd.

 

Previously, his critics were shocked when He healed the Roman officer’s servant (Mt. 8:5-13) and the daughter of the Canaanite woman (Mt. 15:22-28) along with other Gentiles. They were among His “other sheep.” He does not see denominations such as conservative Baptists or Pentecostals; or Messianic Jews or Palestinian Christians, or as Paul would later say, neither “Neither Greek nor Jew.” Jesus looked beyond our day and saw a single body of faithful, loyal, and holy people. The Jewish Bible often stated that salvation was to be offered to the Gentiles.[3] However, by this time many Jewish leaders assumed that God had no future plans for the Gentiles, but would destroy them instead.

[1]. Cited by Young, The Parables of Jesus,192.

 

[2]. Barclay, “John.” 2:62.

 

[3]. This is a partial listing: Gen. 12:3; 18:14; 22:18; 26:4; Isa. 11:10; 19:6; 54:1-3; 60:1-3; Hosea 1:10.

 



11.02.29 JEWS STILL DIVIDED

Bill Heinrich  -  Dec 30, 2015  -  Comments Off on 11.02.29 JEWS STILL DIVIDED

11.02.29 Jn. 10:19-21

 

JEWS STILL DIVIDED  

 

19 Again a division took place among the Jews because of these words. 20 Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and He’s crazy! Why do you listen to Him?”

 

21 Others were saying, “These aren’t the words of someone demon-possessed. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”

 

 

Again John recorded that many Jewish people accepted the argument of the scribes and leading Pharisees, that Jesus used demonic powers to perform miracles. How could they have drawn such a conclusion?

 

  1. One problem was that whatever concepts they had of the messiah, and various groups had a variety of ideas,[1] Jesus did not match any of them.

 

  1. The idea that Jesus could be God was simply an unacceptable idea. It not only violated their understanding of the Torah, but also reminded them of the horrors that Antiochus IV Epiphanies, who claimed to be god, inflicted upon them in the second century B.C.

 

  1. A number of persons had claimed to be the messiah,[2] all were proven to be false prophets, and Jesus, although quite different, was said to be one of them.

 

  1. At this point Jesus was at times teaching in parables, often leaving His critics in bewilderment and confusion

 

  1. The leading Pharisees said there was no explanation for the profound miracles that Jesus performed, other than His use of demonic powers. They refused to believe anything else.

[1]. See 12.03.01.Q1 “What ‘Messianic problems’ did the Jewish leaders have with Jesus?” and 12.03.01.A “Chart of Key Points of the Messianic Problems.” See also 02.03.09 “Messianic Expectations”; 05.04.02.Q1 “What were the Jewish expectations of the Messiah?” and Appendix 25: “False Prophets, Rebels, Significant Events, and Rebellions that Impacted the First Century Jewish World.”

 

[2]. For a partial listing of false prophets and false messiahs, see Appendix 25: “False Prophets, Rebels, Significant Events, And Rebellions That Impacted The First Century Jewish World.”

 



  • Chapters