Bible Groups - Gospel and Letters of John - navigation>
Gospel of John - Chapter 8
- Vv 1-11 often omitted and generally seen as not by John. It was not in early greek manuscripts and not
referred to before 3rd century, and many Greek Fathers did not comment on it. After 3rd century it floated
between the Gospels for a while. Yet has signs of truth, must date from Jesus’ time, and sounds as if by
Luke, especially reference to Mt of Olives. Some manuscripts have this story after Lk 21:38. Its
insertion here may be to illustrate Jn 8:15 & 8:46. It is canonical because it is in the Vulgate, accepted
by Jerome, and eventually in accepted Byzantine Church text and in the King James Bible. In form it is a
trap which requires a wise saying or action to escape (Cf Mk 12:13-17). May have been known but not
written down because its attitude to adultery was suspect. If even this most controversial text cannot be
proved either way, we can be confident of the rest, less controversial. Perhaps such difficulties serve to
test our humility.
- Rest of chapter: intense disputes, reflecting possible post-Resurrection questions, focussing on:
- (a) Is Jesus the unique Son of God the Father? What is Jesus’ relationship to the Father? Is it different
from the relationship every other human being has with the Father?” And if Jesus is the unique Son of
God, how does that affect those who refuse to believe in him? Actions indicate allegiance clearer than
words. And:
- (b) Is Jesus God? The clear claim to divinity: I AM, 3 times in this chapter, increasing in clarity.
Acknowledges the difficulty of this claim of a human being to be the God revealed to Abraham and
Moses.
- The disciples appear to be absent - or just onlookers? Seems to follow in time from chap 7, but may not.
- 1 In the synoptics Jesus often prayed at the Mount of Olives before important events.
- 3 To the scribes and Pharisees the woman is without a name - simply an object to be displayed very
publicly - vindictive and unnecessary - and used to trap Jesus - in contrast to Jesus’ courtesy to her as a
person in v.10. The grouping "Scribes & Pharisees" never found elsewhere in John, though common in
the synoptics. Punishment is death if she is betrothed or married, unless was in the open and could not
call for help. when only the man would be killed. (If not betrothed or married, they must marry). A sinner
confronts the sinless Jesus. Perfect tense: "taken with her shame upon her" implies continuing character
of an adulteress.
- 4 To be correct the witnesses should be questioned separately - Cf Dan 13:44-62, and the accused should
have been warned of the possible penalty. Where are the witnesses - what had they actually seen?
'Teacher' recognises his status, and so fit to be engaged in this debate.
- 5 Dt 22:23-24, Lev 20:10: but scriptures have been twisted into "such women" and saying stoning when
death is specified only for a betrothed virgin. Both parties were to be killed, but not an engaged woman
in open country because she could not call for help. Romans prohibited Jews from using death penalty
(Jn 18:31), so choice is between Moses and the romans - and is Jesus really as gentle and ready to forgive
sinners as he says he is?
- The Jews’ attitude to sinners is condemnatory, not to reclaim them. True authority is based on sympathy,
understanding the forces at work.
- 6 The test commonly seen as to whether he would support the Mosaic law, or the Romans recently
introduced ban on the Jews imposing the death penalty. But could also be whether he supported a
legalistic interpretation or favoured those who felt more lenient towards adultery - which appears to have
been very rarely punished by death, divorce and cash being a more usual penalty. Did he bend down to
avoid embarrassing her by looking at her? Perhaps he also wanted to avoid seeing the lust and cruelty of
the onlookers. What was he writing? Perhaps refers to Jer 17:13, implying guilt of those who are
condemning the woman. Aquinas: the law was written by the finger of God on stone because of the hard-hearted; Jesus now wrote on the ground because he was seeking fruit. Perhaps he was writing his
decision before saying it, as did the Roman magistrates.
- 7 Law required first stones to be thrown by witnesses (Dt 17:7) Jesus’ question forces them to consider
the personal aspects of sin - implied sexual sins. Cf Matt 7:3-5. Jesus’ approach to wrongdoing is to
seek to console and heal, not to condemn. The accusers' motives were not pure - they were not fit to
accuse or condemn her.
- Jesus is not saying a judge must be sinless, but that these zealots have wrong motives to be able to judge.
Nothing to suggest Jesus is making light of adultery, there is no conflict with Matt 5:28 or 19:5.
- 9 Some less important manuscripts also have "convicted by their own conscience", but this is omitted in
many translations, but is in the Greek, and King James. However hardened, every person still has a
conscience, which can mislead but should not be ignored.
- 10 Jesus uses same courtesy as to the Marys and the Samaritan woman. Now the woman is no longer an
object, but a person, with whom Jesus enters into a relationship.
- 11 Jesus makes it clear he is not among her accusers, and will not punish her at this time, even though he
is without sin. She is free to go - but not to sin again ('again' is better translation than 'no more').
Sentence is deferred - she has time to amend her ways. Her sin is condemned but she is not. She has
gained both bodily and spiritual life. The law will be fulfilled, but not by transgressors of the law. A
challenge, not easy forgiveness. He expresses respect, confidence and trust in her - affirms her as a
valued person free to improve and be true to herself - as he does us. He requires true repentance - cease
and forsake sin of all types - intention to do so is not enough. Stop your sinful habit - a call to change her
way of life entirely. Could this be a sign that Jesus does not condemn the Jews? Jesus says nothing about
forgiveness - the woman has not indicated repentance: Jesus shows mercy and calls her to righteousness.
- 12. We are probably still in the Tabernacles setting (Cf 7:1, 7:37), (although John 8 could be taken as
during Hannukah, the festival of lights 2 months later) with its four immense torches lighting the Court
of the Women on the first night - said to light the whole of Jerusalem. Jesus, not the festal torch, is the
real light of the world, a Wisdom concept - and for ever, not just for one night. Not just a light in the
world (Cf 1:9, 3:19), but the light of the world. The only light the world has to see by comes from Jesus.
A unique and all-embracing claim - the only light, and for the whole world, not just some groups. And
"will have" - it is for all time, a permanent transformation. Others reflect this light kindled from Jesus, eg
Apostles (Matt 5:14, Phil 2:15). Light illuminates - all else needs light to be seen. Jews saw Temple as
the light of Jerusalem (Zech 14:7), and the Torah as the light of the world (Wis 7:26, 18:4, Ps 119:105,
Prov 6:23, Sir 24:27, Bar 4:2). Also Wisdom was created first ie = light (Prov 8:22). Jesus is the light that
the temple has failed to be. And the light is to enable walking from death to life (11: 9-10) - therefore we
must choose, make a decision either for or against Christ. Light both from God, the source of life, and
light which gives life. Without this light our lives cannot blossom. He is a light which we shall follow -
in all its senses: follow as a leader, as ready to give service, as accepting counsel, as obeying laws, as
understanding an argument. Light could also be a possible reference to the Pillar of Fire which led the
Jews in the wilderness, and was expected to return at the end of the world. This verse is the program for
the rest of this chapter.
- 13. The Pharisees object to Jesus’ claim: where is other testimony to back up your own testimony (Num
35:30, Deut 17:6)? His own witness to himself is not valid. The legal quibble misses the point. They are
judging by appearances - again (7:24). Light establishes its claims by shining - it must always be accepted
for itself, whatever others may say. Light is light to us when it illuminates us: if we say "I do not see it"
this says something about us, not about the light.
- 14. Jesus responds first that his own testimony is enough - he is sufficiently aware of his closeness to
God that he needs no other authority. “Even if I am bearing witness about myself (Cf 5:31), my witness
is true, because I know where I came from and where I am going”. Not strict Torah trial procedure, but
knowing one’s origin is superior to knowing one’s tradition. Jesus bases his testimony on his origin
“from the Father” (v 16) and on the testimony of his Father (v 18), which is not acknowledged by his
hearers (v 19). Jesus goes beyond the literal, legal process by pointing to himself as the revelation of
God to the world. The question of Jesus’ origin is fundamental to John: the pre-existent logos has
become flesh, as the one who is sent by the Father.
- 15. Criterion for judgement in this “trial” is not by material standards. “by appearances”: literally
“according to the flesh” which is weak and incomplete. But Jesus does not judge in the way the
Pharisees do: Cf 3:17-18. But also in 5:22, 27-30: “I judge as I hear”. Does Jesus judge or not? The
tension between judgement and salvation is unavoidable, except by a (later) acceptance of God’s mercy.
Presumably (a) Jesus does not judge by material standards; and (b) Jesus does not judge now. But his
presence among mankind brings about judgement (Cf 3:7, 5:27). His coming brings about judgement - it
divides, so that we judge ourselves by choosing Jesus or not - and this judgement will be accepted by the
Father.
- 16. And - if Jesus judges, his judgement is true - based on all the facts, including those hidden from men.
All our sins are known. 'reliable' is better translation then 'valid'. It is true judgement, not according to the
flesh. Jesus judges noone, but a judging activity flows from Jesus' union with the one who sent him.
Jesus, sent by the Father, makes God known. The acceptance - or not - of this revelation by the people he
is among cannot be false: this judgement is reliable and genuine. Because the Father sent me and is with
me, my (Jesus') judgement is informed by intimate contact with the Father, and is therefore true. Any
judgement in harmony with the Father must be true. (Because truth is an essential aspect of God).
- 17 'your' distances Jesus from his accusers.
- 18. Jesus provides the required two witnesses (Deut 17:6, 19:15). Second witness is God: (a) Jesus
words contain so much wisdom that it must come from God; (b) Jesus’ deeds could only occur if God
was acting through Jesus (Cf 7:51); (c) The effect Jesus has on men - proof that Jesus’ power is not
simply a man’s power, but God’s. (d) The response of men to Jesus, coming from God in their hearts. No
one can possibly know the relationship of Jesus to his Father sufficiently to be able to testify about it.
Therefore Jesus has no choice of witnesses other than himself and his Father. If his relationship to the
Father is true no human witness can authenticate this divine relationship.
- 19. Wrong question - they ask 'where' rather than 'who', which is the real issue. Whoever knows Jesus
knows the Father - a Johannine theme of unity between Father and Son. His hearers ask for the Father
while the only real image of the Father is standing before them. Jesus’ testimony cannot be received by
those who do not “hear the Father” in Jesus’ words. They don't know or recognise Jesus, so they cannot
know the Father. His hearers ask for his Father with the bitter irony that Pilate asks about truth (18:38).
Cf 1 Cor 2:14-15. Haven’t they listened to Jesus claim that God is his Father (5:18)? Perhaps this is the
first encounter of the Pharisees with Jesus - the very hearing suggested by Nicodemus and chap 5 is a
different crowd. But since they do not know his Father, they do not know the God they claim to
represent. The tragedy is that the whole history of Israel was designed by God so that the Jews should
recognise the Son of God when he came, but they had become so involved in their own ideas that they
failed to recognise him when he came. 'know/knew' used 4 times to emphasise the importance of truly
recognising Jesus (Cf 5:17).
- 20. A reminder of the impossibility of acting against Jesus. But violence is a possible reaction to Jesus'
claim to intimacy with the Father, as in 5:17. Mark also refers to the Treasury - with its 13 treasure chests
for offerings, in the Court of the Women - as the site of Jesus’ teaching: Mk 12:41. Perhaps suggesting
the Pharisees are too focussed on earthly things. 'not yet' - but the hour will come.
- 21. 'Again' indicates a new section, as in v.12, and may be a different occasion. Vv 21-30 are profound.
Key thought: Jesus stands in a unique relationship to the Father, and is the revelation of the Father.
Which “them” is addressed is ambiguous: Cf 7:33-34. You will die in your sin - singular - for John the
sin is unbelief (Cf 16:9) - the same as blaspheming against the Holy Spirit in synoptics (Mk 3:29). It is
the condition of those to whom Jesus says “You belong to this world, I do not” (v 23). You cannot
follow me - unless you believe in me. After Jesus has gone, they will realise what they have missed:
certain opportunities come only once; life and time are limited; the greater the opportunity, the greater
the judgement. We only have a short time in this life to decide for or against Jesus - the opportunity will
not come again. They sought to kill him, but his going will bring their - spiritual -death, because they will
have rejected and failed to know him. To die in your sin is the supreme disaster, with your sins
unrepented and unatoned (Prov 24:9; Ezek 3:18, 18:18).
- 22. Now addressing the “Jews” - joined by the Pharisees? Again - ignoring any connection between
Jesus’ going and their sin - irony in crowd’s reaction - they have caught Jesus' reference to death: “Will
he kill himself?” - true in a sense: Jesus will voluntarily lay down his life for others, according to his
Father's plan. (Suicide would lead to Hell - the Jews would not wish or be able to follow him there). Cf
7:35 - irony that the Christian community will spread to the Diasporia. Note that unusually the Jews
quote Jesus exactly (Cf 7:34-36), and it is exactly repeated in 13:33, so the phrase "Where I am going you
cannot come" must be very important to John.
- 23. The only double parallel metaphor in this Gospel. Jesus insists He is from above, as to Nicodemus.
Sharp contrast emphasises the gulf between heaven and earth - God’s creation - but a gulf which man
cannot bridge alone, and a blindness in the world to its creator. Hence man is not what God intended
him to be - because of sin. Jesus offers the cure - but we have to “take the medicine” and believe in him.
- 24. First I AM. Not 'I am he' as in some translations - there is no 'he' in the Greek. Cf Is 45:18, 41:4,
43:10-13, 48:12, Deut 32:39: the Hebrew for “I am he” and for “I am the Lord” is translated in the
Septuagint by “ego eimi”. Not so much “I am identical with the Father” as “Look at me because I am the
one by looking at whom you will see the Father, since I have made him known”. “If you do not believe
that I AM” - no predicate can be found in the ms. A claim to divine status, not to be the heavenly Father
(Cf v 28). Ex 3:14 might be the root of this idea, but it is best seen as affirming God's uniqueness - the
only God, as in Is etc. Only belief in Jesus’ divinity can save. Probably all 3 meanings are implied:- (i) I
am who I say I am - the light of the world; (ii) I am He - the promised Messiah; (iii) I AM - the divine
name. Division into 'above/below' is only made final by unbelief. From “sin” in v 21, to “sins” - the
manifestations of unbelief done in darkness. “Sin” originally was about missing the target - dying with
life unrealised. For John faith must have intellectual as well as emotional content: intellect must be
involved as well as personal trust and relationship. A saving faith requires that we believe Jesus is more
than just another man.
- 25. An honest question, seeking the missing predicate. They understood enough to see that Jesus was
making a large and outrageous claim. But too late - he has been answering it already - all the time. v 25b
very unclear - the Greek has " (at) the first what also I say to you" - many translations possible. “What I
told you from the beginning” - ie God’s Agent, not an earthly leader - one of several possible translations,
including “Why do I speak to you at all!” or “How is it that I am speaking to you?” or “(I AM) what I say
to you” or “Believe me to be the beginning; for, that you may believe, I not only Am, but also speak to
you” (Aquinas) or “I am from the beginning what I am telling you” or “I told you at the beginning what I
am also telling you (now)” or “What is it that I am saying to you at all?”, etc. "Let's start again from the
beginning", or "anything I say to you is only a beginning". Perhaps remaining “other” - impossible to
grasp. It appears they understood “that I AM” in v 24 as “what I am”. Cf Prov 8:12-36, esp 8:22, also Sir
24:9. No predicate can be added because Jesus has always been what he says he is: I AM.
- 26. Cf v 16. Or “I have much to say about (not "to") you and much to condemn” (NRSV). Since I AM, I
can say much and judge much. And “I tell the world” - the message is for everyone. Contrasts what Jesus
could say and God's plan. Does judge his attackers, but now is not the time or place - must await the
Father's time. Truth is an essential aspect of God - we only know truth as we know God. Cf Eph 4:21: "as
truth (=God) is in Jesus". Truth is from the essential nature of God, manifest in Jesus, expressed in the
Gospel, and in the actions of Christians whose lives are founded on truth. When Jesus says "I am the
truth" (14:6), God's very reality is revealing itself in Jesus, leading to action - ie the Cross.
- 27. Narrator’s interpolation reminds us how privileged we are in comparison to Jesus’ hearers. Since
they did not recognise Jesus' heavenly origin, it means nothing that Jesus' message is from the Father, nor
that the Father is true. Expresses frustration of Christians with hearers who are unwilling to share
Christians’ understanding of who Jesus is. The message continues to be repeated, in an effort to get
through the noise. But the dominance of one’s upbringing is such that one must be born again before the
message can be heard.
- 28. Second I AM, with overtones of judgement. Sent by - and therefore dependent on - but not separated
from the Father. Usually the Greek means exalted: only John uses this word to refer to the Crucifixion,
with both meanings. Predicts that after Calvary they will realise that He does come from the Father. A
message of hope, not condemnation. Alternative to seeing from the beginning. They will the see 2 truths:
(i) that Jesus makes God known; (ii) that ("that" is not in the Greek) Jesus does nothing on his own.
Everything Jesus says and does are the words and actions of the Father. When the Jews pass judgement
on Jesus, he becomes their judge. True Christian faith, knowledge of who Jesus is, is not possible before
the Crucifixion. The Cross will reveal to all who Jesus is - including now: even now unbelievers lift up
Jesus on the Cross (by their unbelief) and so make him their judge. For John’s hearers after Calvary,
‘who Jesus is’ is not the problem it was for “the Jews” before Calvary. Portraits of believers in John’s
Gospel are therefore appropriate for use with seekers before conversion.
- 29. Not alone because always do what is pleasing to the Father: comforting in the face of abandonment
by the dominant culture - then as now. Jesus' sinlessness is positive - harmony with the Father. 4th
reference to being sent - emphasises mission. Because God sent Jesus, God continues to be with Jesus -
he will not abandon him.
- 30. After all these arguments, “many believed” (but not 'all'). And without signs. Why? But note that
many who believed in Him still objected to His claims - Cf vv 31-32 - perhaps reflecting continuing
arguments between Christians who believed in Jesus’ divinity and some who did not?
- 31 Addressing a different group - not the many who believed (v 30) who have departed - but those Jews
who had believed in him - how deep is their belief? The verb tenses indicate that these Jews have the
beginnings of belief (perfect tense) , but yet some way to go. Is it the seed that fell on stony ground,
germinating, but then withering? Apparently inclined to believe that what Jesus said was true, but not
prepared to give him the far-reaching allegiance that real trust implies. A very dangerous spiritual state:
to recognise that truth is in Jesus and to do nothing about it means in effect that one aligns with enemies
of the Lord. There is a very powerful spiritual force holding one back from a course of action that is
recognised to be right - slavery, not freedom. Difficult to understand what John means by "believe" in
this context: is the verb to be understood differently in vv 30 & 31, or the same? Perhaps best to see v 31
as referring to people who have made an outward profession of faith, but it does not go very deep. Jesus
is therefore addressing the meaning of true discipleship. This is what believing in him should really
mean. The test is "abiding" - continuing in Jesus’ word - perseverance, beyond an initial temporary
attraction - is essential for true discipleship - ie committing themselves to the journey by 'abiding' in the
word of Jesus - struggling to grasp this word indicates genuine discipleship. A disciple is always at the
school of Jesus - it is not assent but steadiness of faith that shows true discipleship. Note that we must
continue in his word - his word may continue in us without us paying attention to it.
- 32 Truth not as intellectual insight, but in the sense of knowing God through Jesus, full knowledge of
Jesus, who and what he is, and why he came. Jesus means not just freedom from error, but freedom from
sin and the Mosaic Law, Cf Gal 4:22-31. It is saving truth. There is no preparation in Hebrew literature
for the idea that ‘truth can make you free’. Judaism taught that study of the Law made people free. Truth
here can be seen either as the revelation of God in Jesus, or to the very reality of God, which alone gives
life.
- 33 ("The power of self-deception in unconverted man is infinite" - Ryle). The blindness of pride: claim to
be (spiritually?) free, because descended from Abraham and therefore related to God, while subject to
Rome - and previously in Egypt and Babylon - and without walking in the Father’s footsteps. Or perhaps
they wish to believe but without giving up their existing beliefs. We are the church - we must be right.
This issue is at the core of John’s Gospel: we have to give up old loyalties to receive discipleship as
members of a loving community. There is more to being saved than belonging to the true church - we
must be joined to Jesus by a living faith, and experience the Spirit in our hearts. The ‘Jews’ think Jesus
means political freedom. Many people now claim to be free without realising their bondage to today’s
sins.
- 34 Emphasising importance by "Amen, amen", Jesus explains that he is referring to spiritual freedom,
freedom from continuing sin, a bondage they are ignoring. Habitual sin is slavery (Rom 6), independent
of bodily parentage. How true that a sin can lead to enslavement to sin, powerless to free oneself,
needing an external power to break the bonds. They would not deny that habitual sinners are enslaved,
but would claim freedom from sin because of their descent from Abraham. This is not enough - only
'abiding' in Jesus' word brings spiritual freedom.
- 35 Slaves to sin cannot live in the Father’s household for ever, as the Son does. They have no security,
no rights, no permanence. A son belongs, he has rights, he can choose to leave and to return (Cf 1 Chron
17:13-14). The Father wants us to be sons, like Isaac, not servants, cast out like Ishmael. Are the Jews to
be slaves, temporarily living in God's house, or to live there permanently as God's sons?
- 36 Because of Jesus’ place in the Father’s household as his Son, he can make us truly free. True freedom
comes only from God - freedom from domination by sin, and from its guilt.
- 37 Though from Abraham’s stock, are denying their family origin by refusing to do what Abraham did, ie
believe. They risk finding no place in the house of God because Jesus’ word ‘finds no place in you’.
They cannot 'make space' for - actively opening up themselves to - Jesus' (God's) word.
- 38 Various translations: ‘You are doing ...’; You should do ...’; ‘heard from your father’; ‘heard from the
Father’. Is Jesus contrasting their father with his? Jesus makes known what he knows of the Father from
his oneness with the Father. Their paternity should be made known by their actions, therefore they must
be children of another father. Jesus now accuses the group who had the beginnings of belief (v 31) of
belonging to another father, because of their deeds and their refusal to make space for (or some translate
as 'make progress' in ) his revealing word. Obviously this other father cannot be the Father of Jesus. Jesus
is raising the question: if they kill the Son of God and so are not children of his Father, whose children
are they? (Note: this awareness by Jesus of his oneness with the Father in this Gospel leads to denoting
John's christology as "high". Cf the synoptics where Jesus is much less certain of his divine identity, and
can ask the Father to grant his wishes.)
- 39 The question of parentage has been raised: whose children are they? Physical descent from Abraham
is of no avail unless they also act like their father, as true sons would, ie a man of faith open to the word
of God, setting out from Ur and risking the life of his only son.
- 40 Abraham believed when God spoke to him; they do not, so they are illegitimate. The Jews are
seeking to kill Jesus, and so are rejecting a message from God, losing their claim to be Abraham's
children. So their paternity must be elsewhere. True for us too: love and actions - and accepting the word
of God - are the true marks of faith. Refusing his word is to choose another father. Seeking to kill one
who speaks God’s truth is not a work of Abraham.
- 41 They react to the accusation of lack of paternity, with overtones of idolatry (Hos 2:13) by claiming
God as their - spiritual - Father - and perhaps implying Jesus cannot do so. They are accusing Jesus of
birth in fornication - ie in spiritual infidelity or apostasy from God (Cf Hos 1:2, 4:4-6, 15; Ezek 16:15,
33-34). (Vv 39-41 repeat arguments of 37-38). The Jews regard themselves as God's children (Exod 4:22,
Deut 14:1, 32:6, Jer 3:4, 3:19, 31:9, Isa 63:16, 64:7), as their priests confess each morning during feast of
Tabernacles..
- 42 Jesus denies this, because their actions are not based on love of the Son, who comes from the Father,
and therefore they should know him as their brother. Children of the same father know and love one
another. Again emphasis that Jesus is ‘sent’ by the Father, implying obedience to the Father, as well as
divine origin. Becomes important in Chapter 9.
- 43 Rhetorical question: why don't they understand what he says? You don’t understand me because you
have already hardened your hearts against me - you are not open to God's message - indeed they are not
capable of hearing the word of Jesus because of their origins - because their father is the devil. None so
deaf as those who do not wish to hear. ‘cannot’ in the sense of will not, unwilling. The essential content
of Jesus' message is so alien to them that they cannot comprehend/hear Jesus' message. This is spiritual
incomprehension, not failure of intellect. The Jews take no notice of what Jesus says because they have
no notion of what he stands for.
- 44 By turning away from the truth to be believed, they are believing in a lie, showing themselves by their
actions to be children of the devil, the father of lies. Jesus has denied both their claims to paternity -
from Abraham and from God, and now alleges that their behaviour in seeking to kill him shows that they
are from the devil. They speak and act on a continuing basis according to their origins - their habitual
will - attitude - is to do their father's desires. Jesus clearly knows that devil really exists 'from the
beginning' as a being who kills and lies (Gen 3:1-24, 4:1-15, Wis 2:24) - and so should we! There is no
truth in the devil. He is the father of lies and murdered the whole human race by procuring Adam's sin.
That is why the Jews cannot recognise the truth in Jesus. They reflect their origins in one who of his
nature lies. The revelation of the truth among the children of one who is the father of lies leads
inevitably to rejection and denial. In the New Testament, ‘liar’ is rarely used, but 5 times in 1 John,
seeming to mean saying “I have known him” and not keeping his commandments (1 Jn 2:4). John’s
community seem to use ‘liar’ for one who appears to be a follower of Jesus but turns out not to be. For
John, sin is not so much ‘falling’ as an aspect of character, revealed under pressure.
- For the Hebrews the devil was originally one who accuses sinners on God’s behalf, coming to be seen as
the instigator of evil. So Jesus accuses the Jews of being children of the accuser, while they are accusing
him.
- 45 It is 'because' Jesus tells them the truth that they cannot believe - because they follow the devil, the
father of lies, that they cannot accept the truth - it is in their nature. Not 'although he tells the truth'.
- 46 A staggering assertion of Jesus' sinlessness - bringing no response! Only one in complete communion
with the Father could assert his innocence so confidently. No other person in history could make such an
assertion. That they do not respond shows that he was speaking the truth, and that their failure to believe
has no valid basis. If you reject my (Jesus') word you do not belong to God. Jesus challenges the Jews to
convict him of sin - but they cannot do so, because liars cannot convict one who speaks the truth. They
are liars, it is against their very nature as the children of the devil to accept the word of truth. They
belong to untruth. The only answer they could give to Jesus' question "Why do you not believe me?" is
that they cannot. And they cannot understand him for the same reason (V 43b).
- 47 Parentage is revealed by behaviour and attitude. Abraham was known for his faith and openness to
God. If his hearers were truly sons of Abraham they would behave like Abraham and be ready to accept
one sent by God. (But how difficult it must have been for the Jews - how would we react today to
someone claiming to be sent by God? Reason alone is not enough - faith is indeed a gift!). In John's view
of God and the world 2 classes of people are involved in this discussion: those who are "of God" and
those who are "not of God". Jesus and his word are the revelation of God, and those who are of God will
hear his word. Such hearing is impossible for those who are children of the devil, such as the Jews, even
though they claimed Abraham as their father - their actions deny such a parentage.
- 48 Far from denying Jesus latest assertion that they are not from God, they resort to name-calling -
accusing him of being possessed by the devil and a Samaritan - a mixed and apostate race. Samaria was
famous for magicians, but the reference may be to Samaritans in John’s community. They set their word
against Jesus' word.
- 49 Jesus denies having a demon - but not being a Samaritan! - and accuses them of blasphemy. He
returns to the central issue: his words to the Jews flow from his union with the Father, whom he seeks to
honour, just as they seek to dishonour him.
- 50 Having mutually passed judgement on each other, they now move to passing sentence. But Jesus
defers to his Father, who, jealous of his Son’s honour, will be their judge. He does not seek to honour
himself. Such honour will come in the Father's time, because he is the Father's son. The Father will judge.
Present tense indicates that judgement takes place now. The Jews are seeking Jesus' death. But the Father
is searching out what they do and judges accordingly, seeking his own glory, and so bringing judgement
on those opposed to God's purposes. The irony is that the death of Jesus they seek actually brings Jesus
glory.
- 51 But Jesus as the source of life, offers hope - he can deliver us from death. Not from physical death,
but with eternal life in us we can look at creation and see life and see that God’s creative life-giving
power is stronger than the devil’s power to kill. Behind the judgement that flows from accepting or
refusing the honour of Jesus is God the Father who sent Jesus: everlasting life therefore flows from
keeping the word of Jesus, and living by it. Jesus' response to the Jews rejection of him is to reaffirm the
centrality of the revelation of God in him, which leads to either life or death.
- 52 Now clearly Jesus appears possessed - Abraham and the prophets died, the claim that some can ‘never
see death’ is clearly absurd. Yet they misquote Jesus, using ‘taste’ in place of ‘see’: ‘taste’ implies actual
experience, rather than seeing or beholding death. The Jews remain in their world below, where they
'know' and are not open to the word of Jesus that comes from above. Is Jesus greater than Abraham? (Cf
4:11-12).
- 53 Still a small crack in their hearts - whom does he make himself out to be? Will he condemn himself?
But Jesus does not make exaggerated claims, continually emphasising his obedience and service to the
Father, while being fully aware of his dignity. They accuse him of being greater than Abraham and the
prophets, assuming he is not, refusing to realise that Jesus is fully aware what it is he is claiming but he
still makes the claim.
- 54 Jesus keeps suspense by delaying an answer. Jesus will not seek his own glory/honour (doxa), which
depends entirely on the Father. (It will be established by the Father at the Resurrection). No self-glorification, but nevertheless Jesus is still glorified - by the Father. Emphasise the difference in
relationship: to Jesus he is 'my Father'; to the Jews he is 'their God'.
- 55 But they do not know this God they claim to be children of - not in the past, nor now. But Jesus does
know him. And he would be a liar if he denied his relationship to God. Jesus knows God - they do not
because they refuse to accept Jesus' relationship with God.
- 56 They claim to be descended from Abraham, but he is separated from them because he accepted God's
word and design. Indeed he rejoiced that he was to see the day of Jesus, while they do not. Early Jewish
tradition held that Abraham was privy to secrets of the ages to come, especially the Messianic age, in
which salvation comes. Jesus is Saviour for all - including Abraham. It may be that Abraham rejoiced
because in the birth of Isaac, (Ex 3:13-14) he saw the promise of a messianic line (Gen 17:16-17). But
there is a huge gulf between Abraham who rejoiced to see the coming of Jesus and the Jews who seek to
kill him.
- 57 They have not listened: he did not say he had seen Abraham, but that Abraham rejoiced to see Jesus'
day.
- 58 With a solemn "Amen, amen", Jesus closes the discussion with words incomprehensible to "the Jews",
but fully understandable by those who are of God: "Before Abraham was, I Am". Jesus existed as the
logos from the beginning, while Abraham belongs to time: Abraham's story has finished, he has come
and gone, but Jesus transcends time: he existed before the time of Abraham. "Ego eimi" is present tense
reaching outside all time, recalling the imperfect (continuing) tense of the Prologue (1:1-4). Differs from
8:24,28, as here no predicate. A reminder that Jesus existed before Abraham. A third ‘I AM’ - Jesus
claim is an unambiguous claim to divinity. Abraham belongs to our world of ‘becoming’, but Jesus is.
John’s community is based on Jesus present in their midst. The initial "I am the light of the world" (v 12)
became "I am (he)" (Vv 24, 28), and now becomes the simple "I am", denoting timeless pre-existence.
Usually seen - but not by all - as a claim to deity, but certainly a divine style of speech. (The Jews
believed in the pre-existence of the Messiah.) "Either the greatest blasphemy ever or the words of God
incarnate".
- 59 The Jews stand outside the world of the Prologue, and therefore Jesus' words are seen as blasphemy -
correctly from their point of view. The claim to divinity is so clear that they try to kill him for blasphemy
(Lev 24:16). But for Jesus to die by stoning is not part of God's plan - he must be lifted up. So Jesus
leaves the temple secretly, as he arrived (7:10), bringing this section to a close. Symbolically abandoning
his people - the Temple - and going out to humanity - the man born blind.
- Summary of Chapters 7 & 8: The christological claims in these 2 chapters during the feast of
Tabernacles correspond with the major celebrations of the feast:-
- - Jesus is the revealer of the one and only God, against all idolatry;
- - Jesus is the Messiah, Israel's messianic hopes are not contradicted but transformed;
- - Jesus personalises and universalises the gift of living water, transcending the messianic hopes of
this gift;
- - Jesus personalises and universalises the celebration of the light of the Temple and city of
Jerusalem;
- - What is the celebration each morning of Israel's God about? Jesus speaks to the Jews about the
Father, those who seek to kill Jesus are not children of Abraham or of the one true God - but
children of the devil.
- The celebrations in the Temple during this feast are but a shadow of the perfection of the gift of God in
the person of Jesus, the Messiah who could not be contained within Jewish expectations, the perfection
of the gift of the Law as living water and the light of the world. The Johannine community had not lost
contact with their Jewish feast of Tabernacles, which celebrated God's liberating, nourishing and caring
presence to God's people. In Jesus Christ the Tabernacle traditions are enfleshed, not destroyed.
Christians belong to the Mosaic tradition now perfected in the gift of Jesus Christ. God's design was to
perfect the gift of the Law through Moses by the fullness of the gift of/through Jesus Christ. The Jews
have lost touch with this design by rejecting Jesus.