John 8

• The woman caught in adultery
• Dispute over Jesus’ claims of self
  • The Giver of life
  • A valid witness
  • True spiritual identity
    • One with the Father
    • One with the unknown Father
    • One in speech and action
    • An incomparable identity
    • The channel of God’s truth
  • The crucifixion clarifies
    • Clarifies relationship of Jesus and the Father
    • Two clarifying prophesies
    • Obedience, Truth and Freedom
    • Ancestry and Slavery
      • The ancestry of Jesus
      • The ancestry of the Pharisees
      • The devil as father
      • The father of the Pharisees
  • The ultimate claim of Jesus
    • The giver of eternal life
      • Glorified by the Father
      • Intimate with the Father
      • Seen by Abraham

The woman caught in adultery

¹ … but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. ³ The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group⁴ and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. ⁵ In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”⁶ They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. ⁷ When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”⁸ Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

⁹ At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. ¹⁰ Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

¹¹ “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

This is a very moving account of legalism with no heart abusing a defenceless and isolated woman in an attempt to trap Jesus into responding with grace when the Law required death.

The religious authorities had seen many occasions of Jesus extending grace to a wide variety of people in need and anticipated that he would do so with the victim they dragged into the Temple to stand before him and the many devout witnesses he was engaged in teaching. The authorities had already encountered him having no respect for their Sabbath laws by commanding the invalid at the Pool of Silom to pick up his camp bed and walk. His self-defence had resulted in their decision to kill him.

For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:18)

They were still on the hunt for an authoritative and unquestionably legal reason to kill him that would receive the full support of religious Jews. The Pharisees had caught this woman committing adultery. Who gave them the tip off? What reward did they receive from the Pharisees for turning her in? What about her male accomplice? Was she a victim of his rape attack or did she seduce him? Irrespective of the context of their catch, the authorities had caught her in the very act of adultery.^[1] There could be no clearer breaking of the Law. The religious hunters showed their eagerness to use her as a trap to catch Jesus by interrupting his teaching session and forcibly making her stand in the centre of the Temple attendees to be interrogated and charged. The practice of the day was to make the accused stand up in the centre of the interrogators. This could be both daunting and humiliating. The actions of the accusers against the woman had the hallmarks of an eager criminal investigation. Guilty as charged! What would Jesus do?

They made her stand before the group⁴ and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery.

Now they had a clear legal case to trap him. They did not need the Guards to drag her forcibly to the Temple. They were so confident in their catch to trap Jesus that they dragged the “seducer” themselves, no doubt eagerly, into the centre of the Temple teaching.

⁵ In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

John adds the editorial comment,

⁶ They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

Their motivation was not lost on John. It was clearly obvious what they were attempting to do. He notes that their focus and interest was not the woman. It was Jesus, whom the attendees at the Feast of Tabernacles had been fearful to support publicly, because of the search the authorities had launched for him from Day 1 of the Festival. Nevertheless, the Temple Guards had disobeyed the authorities and backed off arresting him. The only weapon left for them at that point was instant derision and self-righteous posturing, i.e., until they caught the woman in adultery.

⁵ In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger.

There has been much theorising about what Jesus wrote that was so pertinent to the situation. The point is, however, that Jesus responded how he always engaged in his interaction with people. He chose his terms of response and always maintained control of his interactions. He never let Satan work through a person or situation to control him no matter how dominating and persistent their behaviour. In this case,

⁷ When they kept on questioning him,

He remained silent … but then,

he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”

⁸ Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

The silence of Jesus before this command, and immediately after it, drew maximum effect. Hovering over him with a torrent of questions aiming to trap him was not getting a response, but then he stopped writing on the ground and stood to speak. The Pharisees probably thought that they had finally achieved a breakthrough and Jesus would either condemn the woman or incriminate himself extending forgiveness. No doubt everyone hung on his words. When he finally spoke, he switched the focus from his and the woman’s sin to their sin.

Each of the accusers would have been aware of their many sins hidden under their cloak of self-righteousness. The question was, as it is for any of us self-righteously engaged in judging another, whether or not we will be honest about the presence of our own sin.

⁹ At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there.

The response of the accusers now facing the search light of judgment turned on them was reflective and individualistic. Each was confronted with having to be honest about their own sin. They each arrived at a decision separately as the timing of their responses indicates,

… those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first …

Why the older ones first? Only a person in their later years can answer that question with their lived understanding. Age leaves behind it a path of relationship failures, wounds from others, wounds we have given others and self-inflicted emotional wounds. We become increasingly aware of our imperfections seen in the trail of our sins. We know by hard experience that we are not without sin. This is a broader and deeper experienced reality than we had in younger years, when pride drove our external image building and our obsession with image comparisons. Then we gave little thought to our self-justified judgements about ourselves and others. In old age, however, the awareness of a trail of sins increasingly deadens joy and becomes an unshakeable mountain. The older ones carried this engrained consciousness that required little self-reflection. They left first, one at a time.

… only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there.

All the accusers had gone. Those Jesus was teaching, when interrupted by the religious authorities in for his kill, were likely still there to witness the conclusion of this staged trial.

¹⁰ Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

He had stood to question the accusers. Now he stood again and asked two questions still focused on the behaviour of the woman’s accusers. They were simple clarification questions that reinforced the obvious to the woman and the onlookers from the class being taught by Jesus when interrupted by the religious leaders in for his kill. The answer was obvious.

¹¹ “No one, sir,” she said.

The response by Jesus to her was instant unexpected grace coupled with a command to change.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

His response to sin is no different today. Any church or leader, who teaches differently and promotes instant grace coupled with empathy for the seeker’s struggle against their sin and no urgency for repentance, is a false teacher. Empathy at no cost destroys the good news of forgiveness leading to freedom.

Dispute over Jesus’ claims of self

John now switches his focus from the woman back to the Pharisees, who were continuing to challenge the legitimacy of Jesus. John covers their continuing interaction in lengthy detail, because of its significance with the man Jesus bringing to a head his emphatic claim of being the pre-existent, eternal deity, viz.,

⁵⁸ “Very truly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am!”

His claim was simple and forceful, a clear statement from Jewish history, using the father of Judaism as a reference point, and unmistakable in its claim of personal identity. Jesus claimed to be the eternal I AM, the Creator of all, which far exceeds being a miracle-worker restoring the sight of a blind man. Was he mad? Those listening had to decide.

The religious leaders and devout Jews present had no alternative than to execute him on the spot for this greatest of blasphemies of identifying himself as the I AM of their national formation through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses. Consequently, John took time to detail this critical milestone interaction, as follows:

The Giver of life

¹² When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

Jesus began this interaction chosen by him with one of his many “I am” statements, φῶς εἰμι^[2] Those listening would have immediately connected this claim of identity with God’s only name “I AM” meaning “he who always was, is and forever will be”. Jesus used a primary reflexive pronoun to emphasize his identity claim, “I myself am the light of the world.” He claimed to be the light of the world, i.e., of all humanity and not just a privileged few. He was not just any light increasing one’s sight in understanding a topic under theological examination. His claim was to be the light of life, i.e., the source of life, eternal life. An expanded translation highlights the thrust of Jesus’ claim^[3],

I AM myself am the light of the world. The one following me in particular shall not walk in darkness but shall have the light of life.

Only eternal life can enlighten and bring alive. This is what Jesus was claiming to be. None of the Pharisees could make such a claim. They were left speechless. Their only option was to discredit him before those present using a principle from their law.

¹³ The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”

A valid witness

This challenge by the Pharisees based on their law had instant unforeseen kick-back ramifications for them. It immediately trapped them into Jesus being able to highlight the contrast between himself, as divine and authentic, and them as religious technicians and oppressors.

¹⁴ Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you hav.  no idea where I come from or where I am going.

The test for every person claiming to be an authentic witness of God presented in any shape today is the same as the test Jesus applied to himself here.

… my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going.

Unless I confidently know these aspects about my origin and eternal destination, I will not be an authentic witness about life and truth. I will distract from the true nature of Jesus by my distorted self-perceptions.

Do I know for certain where I came from and where I am going, or am I still uncertain about who I am and the journey I am on? Have I simply become a legalistic religious zealot or a boring regular church, mosque or synagogue attendee to hide and suppress my uncertainty about my identity and journey, particularly my journey with Jesus and Satan? False teachers promoting successful living mask their uncertainty about their eternal identity with forceful control of their adherents, and the adherents submit to such religious-coated control with their uncertain and insecure selves.

True spiritual identity

Jesus continued …

¹⁵ You judge by human standards; I am passing judgment on no one. ¹⁶ But if I myself do judge, my decisions are true, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me.

One with the Father

Jesus now challenged the use of the Law by the attacking religious professionals. Through this familiar channel of control continuously used by them, Jesus introduced his relationship with the Father into the debate as his witness of what is true.

¹⁷ In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. ¹⁸ I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”

Jesus drew upon the highest second witness possible to authenticate his personal claims by drawing upon the Father, who sent him, to be his second witness, thus validating his claims to satisfy the Law. Of course, the Pharisees had to reject his nominated second witness, because not to do so would be to accept that he had been sent by God, who they claimed to be their Father. “The only Father we have is God himself.” (v. 41)

The response of the Pharisees demonstrated that they rejected the claim of Jesus having been sent by the Father and therefore having a divine identity. Their quick response to clarify his identity was framed as a question that restricted him to human progeny.

¹⁹ “Where is your father?”

One with the unknown Father

Jesus did not lower his identity under this attack by the Pharisees. Instead his reply reinforced the divine identity of his Father and their ignorance of his own identity.

“You do not know me or my Father … If you knew me, you would know my Father also.”

They would have received this claim by Jesus as a frontal attack on their whole religious identity, which was centred on, “The only Father we have is God himself.” (v.41) He threw a direct challenge at their boast. “You don’t have God as your only Father. You don’t even know Him, because you don’t know me!”

²⁰ Yet no one seized him, because his hour had not yet come.

John had learned by now from his journey with Jesus that his life was governed by his Father, who determined the time of events in Jesus’ life. Hence, he added an editorial comment that, “his hour had not yet come.” The time for his capture was not now, even though religious zealots listening to his blasphemous claims in the Temple precinct, would have felt fully justified in silencing him. It was still not the Father’s timing for Jesus to sacrifice his life for the sins of the world.

One in speech and action

Jesus continued his challenge to the Pharisees by differentiating his future from theirs.

²¹ Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.”

His immediate future journey was his alone and “off limits” to the Pharisees. They either ignored of avoided his claim that their destination was that they would die in their sin and kept their focus on his destination.

²² This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”

The Pharisees demonstrated in their response that Jesus was accurate when he previously said, “you have no idea where I come from or where I am going”. Where he was going was off limits to the Pharisees, because the starting point of his journey was totally different. Jesus was like them with a human body, but that is as far as the comparison could be taken. The resident spirit in their human bodies was not the pure, infinite Spirit of the Father, which Jesus claimed resided in him, and he in the Father. (10:38, 14:11; 17:21) In stark contrast, the sinful state of the Pharisees spirits would cause them to die in their sin.

An incomparable identity

Jesus now positioned himself in an incomparable place in the debate. He was not from this earth, and therefore incomparable with any other historical figure or liberator. Every person seeking to promote some other religious leader must authentically respond to the incomparable identity now claimed by Jesus. Can they authentically give a higher place of devotion in their mind, heart and actions to their current religious leader than to Jesus, given his following claim of incomparable identity?

²³ But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

Jesus could not have made clearer the stark contrasts of the origins of his identity with that of the Pharisees or any other subsequent religious leader: His identity was:

… from above… versus … from below

… not of this world… versus… of this world.

The Pharisees, just like any leader of a global or local religion, before or since, could not make such a claim of their origin with any authenticity. Neither could any other religious leader ever add the following warning of no absolution being available for sins committed through a lifetime, because of choosing not to trust in them:

²⁴ I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

The loftiness of such claims made by Jesus concerning his origin and his eternal judgement on individuals, who fail to honour his identity, naturally raised the question, “Who is the ‘he’ Jesus claimed to be?” or simply,

²⁵  “Who are you?” they asked.

The channel of God’s truth

“Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. ²⁶ “I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.”

²⁷ They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father.

Jesus claimed to have been sent by the God they considered to be their Father, who he now claimed to be his trustworthy Father. That is how he experienced the character of his Father – trustworthy. He claimed that the Father chose to send him to be a reliable channel of God’s truth. Every word Jesus uttered we can trust, and yet the majority of the human race are resistant to trusting him. The only explanation for such madness is blocking pride and insecurity stoked with fear from Satan. Yet Jesus claimed here that his relationship with the Father was a ‘sent-listening-telling’ relationship, and they would not recognise this until his crucifixion.

The crucifixion clarifies

²⁸ So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. ²⁹ The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.”

³⁰ Even as he spoke, many believed in him.

And these believed before they saw him lifted up. Were they devout worshippers of God who knew well the prior revelations of him in the Law and the prophets? Either way, something in their prior exposure to their scriptures resonated sufficiently with the claims of Jesus that moved them from confusion into trust, from unknowing into knowing. The crucifixion continues to clarify for confused seekers of an authentic Saviour today.

So then, to whom was Jesus referring when he claimed, ‘I am he’? Was he claiming to be the Son of Man described in the vision of the prophet Daniel, who is given authority, glory and power by the Ancient of Days to establish an everlasting rule over all nations that would never end? After journeying with Jesus for three years, then witnessing his lifting up, followed by his resurrection and ascension, then witnessing the transforming power of his Spirit in thousands of people in the following years, John wrote with full confidence that Jesus was fully God (John 1:1) and fully human (John 1:14) deserving of both titles, ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of Man’. Jesus called himself ‘Son of Man’ often to emphasize his certain, representative humanity. He was the sinless pinnacle of humanity sent by the Father to demonstrate the nature of perfect righteousness and the forgiving infinite love of the Father.

Clarifies relationship of Jesus and the Father

Was the crucifixion this lifting up? Why did it become the moment when devout Jews would recognise and know for certain that Jesus had a ‘sent-listening-telling and obeying’ relationship with the Father? The reason is found in the limited boundary of the Law itself.

The sacrificial system prescribed by the Law given to Moses could never achieve the righteousness God required of an individual. Therefore devout worshippers continually reminded of their guilt felt the urgency and weight of needing to repeat sacrifices continually for their unceasing sins. These sacrifices were, therefore, only a shadow of good things to come.

The sacrificial system of the Old Testament given to the Jews for the forgiveness of their sins pointed forward to the apex of God’s plan to sacrifice his own sinless Son once for the sins of every person who ever lived, the one righteous sacrifice for all the unrighteous. God’s plan of salvation had reached its apex. As the writer of the book of Hebrews reminded every devout seeker of God in his day:

The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming — not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. ³ But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. ⁴ It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. (Hebrews 10:1-4)

Two clarifying prophesies

The following two passages written centuries before the birth of Jesus and the invention of the Cross by the Romans as a means of execution clarify his identity relative to being God’s ‘once-and-for-all lifted up’ sacrifice for sin.

“I am poured out like water , and all my bones are out of joint : my heart is like wax ; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd ; and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
and you have brought me into the dust of death.
For dogs surround me: a pack of villains encircles me;
they pierce my hands and my feet.
All my bones are on display : people stare and gloat over me.
They divide my clothes among them, and cast lots for my garment.

(Psalm 22:13-18)

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised,
and we held him in low esteem.
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

Yet who of his generation protested?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was punished.
He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makeshis life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
After he has suffered, he will see the light of lifeand be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

(Isaiah 53)

Obedience, Truth and Freedom

³⁰ Even as he spoke, many believed in him.

³¹ To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you adhere to my teaching, you are really my disciples.

Jesus was quick to instruct these early believers in him that belief in his claim to be ‘the he’, who would be lifted up, only resulted in them being his disciples when they continued in his teaching. Such adherence to his teaching required continued trust and continued obedience, which become mutually reinforcing and produce the necessary spiritual insight into truth . The result is that such a disciple experiences inner freedom of soul and spirit.

³² Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

How did Jesus indicate any disciple would achieve and sustain freedom in their spirit? By the enlightenment of their spirit with his truth. Such enlightenment is critical because Satan as the father of lies holds humanity in bondage with a multitude of deceptions, present from the cradle to the grave, masquerading as truth. Social media, bookstores and well-meaning community groups are full of them. Jesus urged his new believers to hold fast to his teaching to break free from deceptions that can never give everlasting life. Only his truth sets free.

Ancestry and Slavery

The response of the Pharisees to this unmistakable claim by Jesus demonstrated that as religious professionals they had no perception of spiritual truth and freedom. Their response was entirely physical. They could only debate in those terms, which showed they were devoid of spiritual insight. They were proud and knowledgeable of their physical Abrahamic genealogy but did not recognise its spiritual role in God’s plan to redeem his human creation, because they had not properly integrated their prophets with the Law. They would have easily referenced the physical names of sons and daughters listed in any one of the long genealogies listed in their scriptures, such as Genesis 5, 10, 36 etc. These genealogies were the critical link to their claim on the land of Palestine as having been divinely given to Abraham and his descendants. Citing such ancestry, linked to physical locations, became a fundamental characteristic of their Jewish culture.

³³ They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

Part of their reactionary self-justification of their physical lineage, however, was a lie that ignored their slavery in Egypt for over 215 years.^[4] They had experienced oppressive slavery from which they escaped solely because of God’s intervention wiping out the Egyptian army sent to block their escape. Their Pharisaic pride was a well-nurtured habitual defender of their status and could not be seen to lose any debate on religious matters. The lie, therefore, was instant, easy and possibly not even noticed by them.

Jesus ignored their manufactured attempt of diversion from his claim to be critical to their understanding spiritual truth. He maintained his spiritual focus.

³⁴ Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.

His response dispelled their physical ancestry boast. He gave a spiritual response that had universal coverage regardless of racial and societal status. From the Jew to the Gentile, from the monarch on the throne to the beggar in the gutter, all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory originally intended to be manifested in his creation^[5]. Accordingly, Jesus did not resile from making clear to the Pharisees at this critical point in their debate that they were slaves to sin, because they still sinned, as seen by their knee-jerk attempt to deny their slavery. His subsequent teaching on their actual relationship to Abraham depended on this fact.

The ancestry of Jesus

Having established that the Pharisees were slaves as much as any Jew, Jesus moved to show them that equally they were dependent on him as the Son of God to be set free. Their appeal to their ancestry was flawed and corrupted as much as any Jew. It gave them no special spiritual status. Jesus, on the other hand, was the Son of God with an eternal place in God’s family.

Jesus sharply contrasted his security and certainty as a permanent, eternal, spiritual family member with the impermanence of the Pharisees as human slaves of sin.

³⁵ Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever.

His spiritual ancestry was not slavery like the Pharisees, but eternal with the authority and the position of a son to set slaves to sin irreversibly free.

³⁶ So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.

There could be no more glaring contrast of spiritual reality outlined by Jesus. This contrast is eternal and stands today as the reality every person must face. Has the Son set me free? Or do I continue living in denial of the sins that enslave me, while presenting a fake image of freedom and status? Nevertheless, it still remains true, there is no religious leader, psychologist, counsellor, personal motivator, coach or other person who can give freedom to a person weary with the entrapment of their sins,

… if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.

The ancestry of the Pharisees

Jesus now switched his debate with the Pharisees to exposing the true source that was motivating their attack on his claimed identity and spiritual teaching.

Their ancestries had different fathers in direct opposition to each other. Physical ancestry may look the same but spiritual ancestry is what governed the motivations of Jesus and the Pharisees. They had different spiritual fathers. Jesus spent the rest of his debate with them exposing this reality to the full.

³⁷ I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word.

Jesus pointedly exposed that their objective was to remove him from the crowds, just as they had John the Baptist and recently planned to silence the resurrected Lazarus. The murder of charismatic individuals with crowd appeal was already shown to be their method of preserving their religious control over their nation.

Jesus exposed what might otherwise have remained a hidden motivation of their plans to murder. They were closed to his word. The reason was that they were committed already to the word they heard from another source.

³⁸ I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.

At this point Jesus exposed the two different sources of ancestry between himself and the Pharisees. He came from the eternal Father motivated by what he had seen in his presence, whereas the Pharisees acted on the directions of the devil as a lower, temporal father with a created beginning in time, who had chosen to act in opposition to every plan and word of the Father, who had created him. The Pharisees deception under the control by their actual father the devil continued,

³⁹ “Abraham is our father,” they answered.

Jesus rejected their religious claim outright, because it did not match their actions. It was arrogant disillusionment that bore no relationship with their habitual behaviour. Any religious claim we make will receive the same response when not seen fulfilled in our life. Jesus ripped off their masquerade.

“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. ⁴⁰ As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.

Abraham did not do such things.

⁴¹ You are doing the works of your own father.”

The devil as father

Every attempt since to silence the truth of Jesus has the devil as its source. Behind every intellectual, religious or social resistance to a disciple seeking to proclaim the message of salvation through Jesus is the father of this world system. He is behind every temptation seeking to discredit every messenger of God’s Word and will continue to do so until cast into hell. The flawed argument used by the Pharisees against Jesus showed Jesus that they were discredited messengers of God’s Word in both the Law and their prophets.

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

Their claim was blatant, arrogant, disillusioned and manipulative. So also, in the final analysis, is every religious claim created by fallen humanity.

⁴² Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me.

Jesus would not let their claim stand. He made clear that their response to him exposed their lineage.

It is an unbreakable truth that our love of Jesus demonstrates our relationship to God. We are either his progeny or the devil’s. Our love for Jesus is the universal test that our ancestry is from the Father and not the rebellious father. This love test is easy to apply to ourself as soon as we are ready to make an honest self-assessment. Even though it is easy, according to Jesus the majority avoid it, because he claimed that only a small minority of the human race will find the narrow path to eternal life.

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it”. (Matthew 7:13)

The father of the Pharisees

Jesus had reached the point where it was necessary for him to make the father of the Pharisees even more exposed in contrast to him. Consequently, he detailed these facts, which still remain unseen by the person not prepared to reject what the devil is continually offering them.

⁴³ Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. ⁴⁴ You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. ⁴⁵ Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!

Accordingly, Jesus made clear:

1. What the devil creates:
   • Spiritual deafness and the deaf person does not know they are deaf. This is a terminal condition that only an intervention by the Holy Spirit can change.

     … you are unable to hear what I say.

   • Ownership of a person and infiltration of his desires into their relationships with self and others.

     … You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires.

2. What the devil is like:
   • A murderer,
   • Devoid of any truth,
   • A liar by nature, and the originator of all lies.
3. What the devil creates:
   • An inability to see spiritual truth and a blindness from living unaware in a framework of lies about life,
   • An inability to trust Jesus,
   • An inability to hear God.

Jesus concluded his outline of the actual fatherhood honoured by the Pharisees with an unmistakable accusation they could not rebut.

⁴⁶ Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me. ⁴⁷ Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

Jesus unabashedly pulled the rug out from under the feet of men, who posed as representatives of the God of Abraham, by emphatically stating that they cannot hear and do not belong to that God. The Pharisees reacted arrogantly with a predictable counter accusation by choosing the worst labels they could apply to the identity of Jesus.

⁴⁸ The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”

Jews hated Samaritans.^[6] This was the most despised human label they could place on Jesus. They had no evidence for Jesus being a Samaritan. They were blatantly wrong and not right. They most likely had not looked into his lineage at all. If they had, they would have had to grapple with the only virgin birth in the history of the human race. None of the biographers of the life of Jesus at that time gave any hint that the Pharisees were aware of the miraculous circumstances of the birth of Jesus.

The Pharisees then coupled their most despised label of human lineage with the worst spiritual accusation possible by labelling Jesus as demon possessed. This was a factious accusation set against the background of them having witnessed Jesus driving demons out of many over a wide geographical area, e.g., Mark 6:13, Luke 4:36. They could not compete with such spiritual authority and could only irrationally twist his continually demonstrated authority over the demonic world by accusing him to be demon possessed himself.

⁴⁹ “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honour my Father and you dishonour me. ⁵⁰ I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge.

Jesus rejected their unfounded accusation of demon possession that had no credibility when measured against their plentiful observations of his public life full of the grace needed for extending forgiveness and casting demons out of sufferers. In contrast, Jesus made clear the focus of his attitude and actions was not him.

I honour my Father … I am not seeking glory for myself.

His mind-set was diametrically opposite to the Pharisees’ attempts to sustain their glory as religious leaders. The Pharisees would have been well aware of his demonstrated contrast in behaviour to their own. They loved glorifying self under the mask of honouring God, whereas Jesus claimed not to be seeking any glory for himself. He claimed that he did not need to seek any glory, because the judge was the one seeking it. He shortly after assets that his glory would come to him as a gift from the judge in the person of his Father.

The ultimate claim of Jesus

The giver of eternal life

Jesus switched the debate with the Pharisees from responding to their derogatory and ill-founded accusations to make an astounding claim.

⁵¹ Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”

It was a trap that they instantly jumped on, no doubt with glee.

⁵² At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. ⁵³ Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”

His response to their challenge to who he really considered himself to be was the time to make his greatest claims of identity. Jesus had their undivided attention.

Glorified by the Father

⁵⁴ Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.

Jesus drew a clear distinction between the object of their religion and his devotion by his choice of titles, “My Father … your God.”

Intimate with the Father

⁵⁵ Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.

Jesus now claimed what they could never, given their current practice of seeking to sustain and grow their religious esteem among the Jews. They were focused on self-aggrandizing religion and not on a humble relationship with God. Jesus asserted again that they did not know the Father, as he had only moments before.

Seen by Abraham

Jesus now reverted the confrontation back to their previous claim to be Abraham’s descendants. He boldly linked his existence and identity to their ancient history.

⁵⁶ Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

Their response was logical and most likely tinged with a tone of triumph and mockery.

⁵⁷ “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

Jesus by this point in his confrontation with the Pharisees had positioned them in an emotional and theological state where his greatest claim ever would have its maximum effect.

⁵⁸ “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

He took upon himself the eternal name of their God, which was to be revered as holy. There could be no greater sin and offence to God in the minds of the Pharisees than to claim eternal pre-existence as God. Jesus could only be a madman or the greatest blasphemer they had encountered.

“I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Isaiah 42:8)

The religious leaders could give only one response to such blasphemy. His sentence had to be death.

⁵⁹ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

---

1. The adjective used by the accusers is ἐπαυτοφώρῳ (epautophóró) meaning “caught in the very act”. ↩︎

2. εἰμι (eimi) is the basic Greek word for being (i.e. to be) without explicit limits. He therefore claimed during his ministry to be the timeless and complete being of light, life, resurrection, way, truth, good shepherding, bread, true vine. ↩︎

3. Ἐγώ εἰμι (Ego eimi) adds the emphasis of the reflexive pronoun, “I myself am … the one following me myself, solely, in particular …” ↩︎

4. See Biblical Hermeneutics for debate on the slavery in Egypt being 430 or 215 years depending on which ancient text is referenced, e.g., Masoretic or the older Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/86416/when-and-for-how-long-was-israel-enslaved-by-the-egyptians ↩︎

5. Romans 3:23 ↩︎

6. See footnote on the meeting of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well in 4:6 for historical background of the hatred of Jews for Samaritans. ↩︎