CAF Bible Study - The Gospel of John

[MH84]

Can I go back to chapter 8 quickly because I was reading from it recently I have some questions. Please post if you know what I am asking based on the highlighted text.

**26 Many things I have to speak and to judge of you. But he that sent me, is true: and the things I have heard of him, these same I speak in the world. 27 And they understood not, that he called God his Father. 28 Jesus therefore said to them: When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak: 29 And he that sent me, is with me, and he hath not left me alone: for I do always the things that please him. 30 When he spoke these things, many believed in him.
31 Then Jesus said to those Jews, who believed him: If you continue in my word, you shall be my disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 33 They answered him: We are the seed of Abraham, and we have never been slaves to any man: how sayest thou: you shall be free? 34 Jesus answered them: Amen, amen I say unto you: that whosoever committeth sin, is the servant of sin. 35 Now the servant abideth not in the house for ever; but the son abideth for ever.
36 If therefore the son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. 37 I know that you are the children of Abraham: but you seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. 38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and you do the things that you have seen with your father. 39 They answered, and said to him: Abraham is our father. Jesus saith to them: If you be the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill me, a man who have spoken the truth to you, which I have heard of God. This Abraham did not.

46 Which of you shall convince me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? 47 He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God. 48 The Jews therefore answered, and said to him: Do not we say well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? 49 Jesus answered: I have not a devil: but I honour my Father, and you have dishonoured me. 50 But I seek not my own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.
51 Amen, amen I say to you: If any man keep my word, he shall not see death for ever. 52 The Jews therefore said: Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest: If any man keep my word, he shall not taste death for ever. 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? and the prophets are dead. Whom dost thou make thyself? 54 Jesus answered: If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father that glorifieth me, of whom you say that he is your God. 55 And you have not known him, but I know him. And if I shall say that I know him not, I shall be like to you, a liar. But I do know him, and do keep his word. **

www.drbo.org

Can someone tell me why John says in verse 31 that “Then Jesus said to those Jews, who believed him”, and later Jesus tells them that they sought to kill Him. Why would those who believed in Jesus want to kill Him. Was John referring to a different group that was standing there.

In verse 28 when Jesus says “When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father hath taught me…” I’m not sure Jesus was referring Himself to the Divine Name ie I Am Who Am, but maybe instead the Messiah; for several reasons:

• How come if many believed in Him, or even those there who did not, not threaten to throw stones at Him for blapheming as they eventually did in verse 58.
• Why would those standing there as Jesus was speaking want to kill him if they believed in Him especially of they understood I am He to be a divine title; was it a different group standing there?
• How come there is no record of the Jews saying something similar to “Are you saying that you are God Himself?” or “Are you using the title God revealed at mount Sinai?” or even “What eexaclty do you mean when you say that you are the Son of God?” at least until verse 58 ie before Abraham ever was I Am.

What does Jesus mean here:
54 Jesus answered: If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father that glorifieth me, of whom you say that he is your God.

 

[MH84]

Is anyone involved on this thread anymore?

Anyway, another question I have relating to the post above:

In John 8:40 it says: But now you seek to kill me, a man who have spoken the truth to you, which I have heard of God.

www.drbo.org

What troubles me is why Jesus decided to use the combination “a man… which I have heard from God”.

1. 
   *]The audience couldn’t have realised that Jesus could have been God.
   
   *]Why did Jesus say “which I have heard from God” because since Jesus is God why does he need to hear the Truth from God. Furthermore, if he is claiming equality with the Father why doesn’t Jesus instead say… “which I have heard from the Father.”?

 

[Church_Militant]

Can someone tell me why John says in verse 31 that “Then Jesus said to those Jews, who believed him”, and later Jesus tells them that they sought to kill Him. Why would those who believed in Jesus want to kill Him. Was John referring to a different group that was standing there.

Different Jews.

In verse 28 when Jesus says “When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father hath taught me…” I’m not sure Jesus was referring Himself to the Divine Name ie I Am Who Am, but maybe instead the Messiah; for several reasons:

Actually it’s both.

• How come if many believed in Him, or even those there who did not, not threaten to throw stones at Him for blaspheming as they eventually did in verse 58.

Those were the Pharisees and leaders (and not even all of them)

• Why would those standing there as Jesus was speaking want to kill him if they believed in Him especially of they understood I am He to be a divine title; was it a different group standing there?

Again… these are the Pharisees and council.

• How come there is no record of the Jews saying something similar to “Are you saying that you are God Himself?” or “Are you using the title God revealed at mount Sinai?” or even “What exactly do you mean when you say that you are the Son of God?” at least until verse 58 ie before Abraham ever was I Am.

Probably because that is not what the original text says. If it did happen that way then the author would’ve recorded that way, right?

What does Jesus mean here:
54 Jesus answered: If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father that glorifieth me, of whom you say that he is your God.

He’s pointing out that all His glory in his public ministry is due to the miracles that the Father had done in order to establish the bona fides of His Son.

 

[Church_Militant]

Is anyone involved on this thread anymore?

Certainly, but we often get busy with other things.

Anyway, another question I have relating to the post above:

In John 8:40 it says: But now you seek to kill me, a man who have spoken the truth to you, which I have heard of God.

What troubles me is why Jesus decided to use the combination "a man

… which I have heard from God".

1. 
   *]The audience couldn’t have realized that Jesus could have been God.Because there hadn’t been a prophet in Israel in about 400 years and suddenly here’s Our Lord speaking for God in a way that the current generation hadn’t heard before. Jesus is telling them straight off that what He preaches He has brought from God.
   

   1. *]Why did Jesus say “which I have heard from God” because since Jesus is God why does he need to hear the Truth from God. Furthermore, if he is claiming equality with the Father why doesn’t Jesus instead say… "which I have heard from the Father

   1. 
      ."?
      Do you have children? I have sons. Each one is different, but each one is every bit as human as I am We all share the same nature. The same is true here. Jesus shared the divine nature with the Father and the Holy Spirit, but just as with my own human sons they can hear from me and I can tell them things that they can then pass on to others
      
      Jesus points out to the crowd elsewhere that even if they refuse to believe His words they should take a look at the works He has done and believe because those miracles display the power of God in Him. Our Lord didn’t seem too interested in giving anyone an “easy believism.”

 

[MH84]

Thanks for replying Church Militant, you are doing great with this Bible study.

Because there hadn’t been a prophet in Israel in about 400 years and suddenly here’s Our Lord speaking for God in a way that the current generation hadn’t heard before. Jesus is telling them straight off that what He preaches He has brought from God.

Fair enough… but still, Jesus is primarily a divine Person who *became *man.

Do you have children?

No, but that irreleveant with what you are about to say.

I have sons. Each one is different, but each one is every bit as human as I am We all share the same nature. The same is true here. Jesus shared the divine nature with the Father and the Holy Spirit, but just as with my own human sons they can hear from me and I can tell them things that they can then pass on to others

You can only compare yourself very limited here because you are not infinite and a mystery like God, and also you were born *before *your children which did not occur in the Blessed Trinity.

Why would Jesus need to “hear” from God? When God made the universe, I am quite sure it wasn’t by literally speaking or making a sound the universe just came to be. So, why would God the Father need to inform, so to speak, God the Son when all the Father has belongs to Jesus and all that the Son has belongs to the Father?

Jesus points out to the crowd elsewhere that even if they refuse to believe His words they should take a look at the works He has done and believe because those miracles display the power of God in Him. Our Lord didn’t seem too interested in giving anyone an "easy believism."

But Jesus said “come to me all you who are heavy laden and I will refresh you.” I don’t think that if Jesus would have wanted those who were following Him to be confused. Further, in itself Jesus having the power of God in Him is not enough to prove that He was saying “I am God”. St Peter had the power of God in him as well after Jesus ascended.

 

[katy]

Why would Jesus need to “hear” from God? When God made the universe, I am quite sure it wasn’t by literally speaking or making a sound the universe just came to be. So, why would God the Father need to inform, so to speak, God the Son when all the Father has belongs to Jesus and all that the Son has belongs to the Father?

This is true, but at the time, Jesus was here on Earth. He was experiencing what we do with limitations. He was showing how to act, and how life was to be lived here.

 

[Church_Militant]

Fair enough… but still, Jesus is primarily a divine Person who *became *

man.Yet was both fully human and fully divine.

You can only compare yourself very limited here because you are not infinite and a mystery like God, and also you were born *before *

your children which did not occur in the Blessed Trinity.That’s not true, and the point I was making is that all of us share the same 100% of human nature. The point is that Our Lord was “begotten not made, one in being with the Father”, and therefore shared the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)

Why would Jesus need to “hear” from God? When God made the universe, I am quite sure

it wasn’t by literally speaking or making a sound the universe just came to be.You err in saying that since you cannot possibly be sure, since you were not there at the creation.

Just a thought…who’s to say that the alleged “big bang” that scientists speak of wasn’t actually that word being spoken that brought all things into existence?

So, why would God the Father need to inform, so to speak, God the Son when all the Father has belongs to Jesus and all that the Son has belongs to the Father?

You don’t suppose, do you that God has His own reasons for this for our benefit? Consider: All the signs and wonders that Our Lord did were by no means for His benefit, but for those around Him and ultimately for us all.

But Jesus said “come to me all you who are heavy laden and I will refresh you.” I don’t think that if Jesus would have wanted those who were following Him to be confused.

Again, here you err scripturally, since Matthew 13:13 says Therefore do I speak to them in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand So it appears that Our Lord did allow people to get confused. His promise of refreshing has nothing to do with people’s understanding of what He says. Frankly, i agree with St. Paul that “now we see in a mirror dimly” (1st Corinthians 13:12) and so when at last we are “face to face” we will understand the Word of God far more clearly.

Further, in itself Jesus having the power of God in Him is not enough to prove that He was saying “I am God”.

I disagree because it is clear to me, even as it was to the Jews who were so offended and wanted to kill Him, that that is precisely what He was saying.

St Peter had the power of God in him as well after Jesus ascended.

Can you cite scripture to support this?

My point being that the difference is that Peter never was “the fullness of deity bodily” as Our Lord was, therefore your comparison is inaccurate.

 

[Church_Militant]

This is true, but at the time, Jesus was here on Earth. He was experiencing what we do with limitations. He was showing how to act, and how life was to be lived here.

:yup:

 

[MH84]

That’s not true

So you think that you can compare yourself to God?

and the point I was making is that all of us share the same 100% of human nature.

No, you each have your own human nature. The Blessed Trinity each posess the same divine nature.

The point is that Our Lord was “begotten not made, one in being with the Father”, and therefore shared the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)

You err in saying that since you cannot possibly be sure, since you were not there at the creation.Just a thought…who’s to say that the alleged “big bang” that scientists speak of wasn’t actually that word being spoken that brought all things into existence?

You are missing the point. Btw, you were not there either. You accuse me of doing the same thing you are doing. I’m not perfect, address the issue, why pick on every little ‘mistake’ I make.

I asked that since Jesus is fully divine, why he says that he “heard” from God. In the scripture I quoted, Jesus said: " When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak: And he that sent me, is with me, and he hath not left me alone: for I do always the things that please him.

I want to understand why Jesus needs to be taught what the Father knows.

You don’t suppose, do you that God has His own reasons for this for our benefit? Consider: All the signs and wonders that Our Lord did were by no means for His benefit, but for those around Him and ultimately for us all.

I know, I’m Catholic too.

Again, here you err scripturally, since Matthew 13:13 says Therefore do I speak to them in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand So it appears that Our Lord did allow people to get confused. His promise of refreshing has nothing to do with people’s understanding of what He says. Frankly, i agree with St. Paul that “now we see in a mirror dimly” (1st Corinthians 13:12) and so when at last we are “face to face” we will understand the Word of God far more clearly.

But would Jesus intend to confuse Catholics; it was the Pharisees and scribes who Jesus allowed to be confused and some disciples who were not really following Him.

I disagree because it is clear to me, even as it was to the Jews who were so offended and wanted to kill Him, that that is precisely what He was saying.

You are not being honest with yourself. I stand by what I said here: "Further, **in itself **Jesus having the power of God in Him is not enough to prove that He was saying “I am God”. I am not saying that it isn’t some proof. Don’t get too defensive. Surely God can provide power to prophets and other men to do His will.

Can you cite scripture to support this?

How could Peter heal the cripple without the Holy Spirit?
Acts 2:
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a mighty wind coming, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared to them parted tongues as it were of fire, and it sat upon every one of them: 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak.

Then later…
Acts 3
3 He, when he had seen Peter and John about to go into the temple, asked to receive an alms. 4 But Peter with John fastening his eyes upon him, said: Look upon us. 5 But he looked earnestly upon them, hoping that he should receive something of them. 6 But Peter said: Silver and gold I have none; but what I have, I give thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise, and walk. 7 And taking him by the right hand, he lifted him up, and forthwith his feet and soles received strength. 8 And he leaping up, stood, and walked, and went in with them into the temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God.

Paul:
Acts 14
7 And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, a cripple from his mother’s womb, who never had walked. 8 This same heard Paul speaking. Who looking upon him, and seeing that he had faith to be healed, 9 Said with a loud voice: Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped up, and walked.

www.drbo.org

Peter and Paul could not have worked these miracles without God.

My point being that the difference is that Peter never was “the fullness of deity bodily” as Our Lord was, therefore your comparison is inaccurate.

Of course Peter is not equal to the Lord. Remember, you were trying to compare God to yourself earlier on.

 

[NotWorthy]

So you think that you can compare yourself to God?

No, you each have your own human nature. The Blessed Trinity each posess the same divine nature.

Maybe this will help explain Jesus’ natures. I got this from Vinny Flynn’s “7 Secrets of the Eucharist”.

A deeper look at another mystery, the mystery of the Incarnation, provides the answer. Like most of you, I’m familiar with the term Incarnation, but all I knew about it was that it referred to the moment in time when the second person of the Trinity “became incarnate,” meaning, “took on human flesh” — the Son of God became man.
The Church teaches that at the words of Mary’s Fiat: “Let it be done to me according to your word,” a human nature, with a body and a soul, was created from her through the power of the Holy Spirit and was fused forever to the divine nature of the second person of the Trinity.

As the Catechism explains,
[This] does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. #464
Jesus Christ is one divine person with two distinct natures — one totally human, one totally divine. These two natures are so inseparable that the divine person of Christ “remained united to his soul and body, even when these were separated from each other by death” (CCC #650); and, when the Father raised Christ up. He “perfectly introduced His son’s humanity, including His body, into the Trinity” *(CCC *#648).

Jesus, as God was eternally there. Jesus’ human body came into being with His divinity. His human nature was not aware of everything all at once.

 

[Church_Militant]

So you think that you can compare yourself to God?

Did I say that?

The point, (which yo seem to have missed) is that there are no divisions in nature. Begotten children share the same fullness of their parent’s nature, and no more and no less.

No, you each have your own human nature. The Blessed Trinity each posses the same divine nature.

Point dealt with above.

You are missing the point. Btw, you were not there either. You accuse me of doing the same thing you are doing. I’m not perfect, address the issue, why pick on every little ‘mistake’ I make.

1. This is not a debate thread, if you wish to debate…take it to PMs.
2. I never asserted that I was either there. I merely made the point, (which I thought you’d pick up on) that no one can be sure.
3. I am addressing the issues that you brought up.

I asked that since Jesus is fully divine, why he says that he “heard” from God. In the scripture I quoted, Jesus said: " When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak:

And he that sent me, is with me, and he hath not left me alone: for I do always the things that please him.How is hearing from the Father somehow an indictment of the deity of Christ? There is a clear history of communication between the persons of the Trinity expressed as far back as Genesis 1:26, when God says, “…Let us make man to our image and likeness:…” so I don’t see a problem.

I want to understand why Jesus needs to be taught what the Father knows

.I have read the Bible through several times and have yet to see any passage that even implies such a thing. Can you PM me with scripture that supports that thinking?

But would Jesus intend to confuse Catholics; it was the Pharisees and scribes who Jesus allowed to be confused and some disciples who were not really following Him.

Isn’t that why we have the Holy Spirit guided magisterium of the Church? To insure that that does not happen? In fact the New Testament does in fact say, “And without parable he did not speak unto them; but apart, he explained all things to his disciples.” (Mark 4:34), which again (IMO) shows that Our Lord insures that the teachings of the Church remain faithful to Him.

I stand by what I said here: "Further, **in itself **

Jesus having the power of God in Him is not enough to prove that He was saying “I am God”. I am not saying that it isn’t some proof. Don’t get too defensive. Surely God can provide power to prophets and other men to do His will.You obviously don’t know me very well. I’m not defensive at all. My responses are logical and scriptural, but in this case you blend concepts that are dissimilar and it creates an errant conclusion.

You’ll never see me say that God cannot supply us with the power to do His will, but the reasoning that you have used so far is fallacious…again, if you really want to discuss this with me, take it to PMs because it is moving us away from the topic of the study of John’s Gospel.

How could Peter heal the cripple without the Holy Spirit? Acts 2:2-3. Then later…Acts 33:3 -8. Paul: Acts 14:7-9 Peter and Paul could not have worked these miracles without God.

These are actually irrelevant to this discussion. There is no question that each miracle that occurred was by the power of God, but this has no bearing upon the deity of Our Lord.

Of course Peter is not equal to the Lord. Remember, you were trying to compare God to yourself earlier on.

I don’t know where you get that from.

My point…as I’m pretty sure that everyone else here can see was that there are no divisions in natures, whether divine or human, and that persons of a nature, though separate individually are equally human or divine, (or even angelic I suppose) by birth.
Even in Christ’s case we are taught that He was fully human and fully divine all at the same time.

 

[MH84]

You are right when you say that my questions are derailing the thread. Sorry to all, but at least my questions are based on concepts in the Gospel of John. I am only going to bring up two more points/questions here at this stage:

I have read the Bible through several times and have yet to see any passage that even implies such a thing. Can you PM me with scripture that supports that thinking?

John 8
28 Jesus therefore said to them: When you shall have lifted up the Son of man, then shall you know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself, **but as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak: **29 And he that sent me, is with me, and he hath not left me alone: for I do always the things that please him. 30 When he spoke these things, many believed in him.

Here, I understand Jesus to be saying that what the Father has taught Him (or has told Him to say), that is what He is telling the people. So I understand that we believe Jesus came down of His choosing, and because He loves His creation and to redeem us. But what I don’t understand yet, is why as the omnipotent Co-Creator(is that a correct term?), Jesus has decided to say that he is speaking the message, or what He was taught, of the Father and the the GodHead? If, as Catholics, we are quick to say in Matthew, that in the ‘sermon on the mount’ Jesus is speaking the Law as God spoke the Law on Mount Sinai, why now Jesus is saying that He is not speaking His own message, but the Father’s (John 8:40 - But now you seek to kill me, a man who have spoken the truth to you, which I have heard of God. This Abraham did not.)

You obviously don’t know me very well. I’m not defensive at all. My responses are logical and scriptural, but in this case you blend concepts that are dissimilar and it creates an errant conclusion.

I am glad you have been responding to these questions because I from what I have seen (eg. here, your website), you love God and the Scriptures. But often you have simply stated I’m, or my conclusions, are “inerrant” because I am being honest with myself with what I am reading. Without doubt you have read more of the Bible than me, but with the points from the Scriptures I am addressing, Im reading the same passages as you.

Lastly, I have dared to try to look at the parts of the Bible I’ve read on its own terms and I think that if it wasn’t for the Church’s teachings, most Catholics would not be sure who Jesus **claimed **(regardless of who He is actually) to be. Now that more people have access to, or are reading, the Bible there are many other “Christian” denominations claiming that Jesus is not the same as the Person that the Church has taught for two thousand years (eg. prophet, holy man, demi-god, adopted Son, divine but not of the same substance as the Father etc), which is sad for those who are confused, but I understand their difficulties. Lord, may all who are having doubts, have faith in You.

 

[Church_Militant]

Excuse me…are you saying that you do not believe that Jesus is divine?

 

[maryj]

Now back to our regularily schedualed program…

 

[franny33]

To Church Militant and our other strong leaders, will you be starting chapter 11 soon? Franny

 

[Huiou_Theou]

[33] The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we stone you but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God.”
[34] Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, `I said, you are gods’?

No wonder they hated him, In the psalm Jesus is quoting:

Psalm 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
Psalm 82:2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
Psalm 82:3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
Psalm 82:4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
Psalm 82:5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Psalm 82:7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
Psalm 82:8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

The title Son of God applies to nations (rulers), devils, and angels:
And is found in a plurality of places in scripture:

Israel as a nation is the firsborn son of God: Exodus 4:22
( and as a slave of God as people, who serve him ).

The devil as the prince of demons / son of God: Mark 3:22, Job 1:6
Michael the archangel prince of Israel. Daniel 12:1

The sin of adam and eve:
Genes 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Genes 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

notice:
The psalm itself says that gods / rulers/ princes/ sons of the most high are condemned for being ignorant of the way of God. In the gospel of John, Jesus “the word of God”, is standing in the midst of an assembly.

He could have proved the son of God title from other sources, but he chose a very antagonistic one that implied his title was better than that of those in the psalm – the rulers of historical Israel.

[35] If he called them gods to whom the word of God came (and scripture cannot be broken),
[36] do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, You are blaspheming,' because I said, I am the Son of God’?

But, if Jesus “said” on the authority of the consecration of the Father, he is a prophet just like those who spoke to the assembly of the mighty in the psalm and he is also implying that the condemnation of the psalm falls on those to whom he speaks.

“I AM” the “Son of God”

 

[Church_Militant]

John Chapter 11
[1] Now a certain man was ill, Laz’arus of Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha.
[2] It was Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Laz’arus was ill.
[3] So the sisters sent to him, saying, “Lord, he whom you love is ill.”
[4] But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness is not unto death; it is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified by means of it.”
[5] Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Laz’arus.
[6] So when he heard that he was ill, he stayed two days longer in the place where he was.
[7] Then after this he said to the disciples, “Let us go into Judea again.”
[8] The disciples said to him, “Rabbi, the Jews were but now seeking to stone you, and are you going there again?”
[9] Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any one walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world.
[10] But if any one walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him.”
[11] Thus he spoke, and then he said to them, “Our friend Laz’arus has fallen asleep, but I go to awake him out of sleep.”
[12] The disciples said to him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.”
[13] Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that he meant taking rest in sleep.
[14] Then Jesus told them plainly, “Laz’arus is dead;
[15] and for your sake I am glad that I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”
[16] Thomas, called the Twin, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go, that we may die with him.”
[17] Now when Jesus came, he found that Laz’arus had already been in the tomb four days.
[18] Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off,
[19] and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to console them concerning their brother.
[20] When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, while Mary sat in the house.
[21] Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.
[22] And even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.”
[23] Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
[24] Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
[25] Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
[26] and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
[27] She said to him, “Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, he who is coming into the world.”
[28] When she had said this, she went and called her sister Mary, saying quietly, “The Teacher is here and is calling for you.”
[29] And when she heard it, she rose quickly and went to him.
[30] Now Jesus had not yet come to the village, but was still in the place where Martha had met him.
[31] When the Jews who were with her in the house, consoling her, saw Mary rise quickly and go out, they followed her, supposing that she was going to the tomb to weep there.
[32] Then Mary, when she came where Jesus was and saw him, fell at his feet, saying to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.”
[33] When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who came with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in spirit and troubled;
[34] and he said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to him, “Lord, come and see.”
[35] Jesus wept.
[36] So the Jews said, “See how he loved him!”
[37] But some of them said, “Could not he who opened the eyes of the blind man have kept this man from dying?”
[38] Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb; it was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.
[39] Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, “Lord, by this time there will be an odor, for he has been dead four days.”
[40] Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?”
[41] So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.
[42] I knew that thou hearest me always, but I have said this on account of the people standing by, that they may believe that thou didst send me.”
[43] When he had said this, he cried with a loud voice, “Laz’arus, come out.”
[44] The dead man came out, his hands and feet bound with bandages, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”
[45] Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him;
[46] but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done.

 

[Church_Militant]

[47] So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council, and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs.
[48] If we let him go on thus, every one will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation.”
[49] But one of them, Ca’iaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all;
[50] you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish.”
[51] He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation,
[52] and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
[53] So from that day on they took counsel how to put him to death.
[54] Jesus therefore no longer went about openly among the Jews, but went from there to the country near the wilderness, to a town called E’phraim; and there he stayed with the disciples.
[55] Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and many went up from the country to Jerusalem before the Passover, to purify themselves.
[56] They were looking for Jesus and saying to one another as they stood in the temple, “What do you think? That he will not come to the feast?”
[57] Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given orders that if any one knew where he was, he should let them know, so that they might arrest him.

 

[Church_Militant]

(Sorry for the delay guys… I generally try to give everyone a chance to exhaust their thinking on a passage before we move on.)

Anyway, I always look at this event and can imagine the “shock and awe” that this must have caused. I mean, imagine if that happened today?!

How do you ignore that? So every time Lazarus went out in public, the whole world was confronted with the love (for Lazarus) and the power of Our Lord.

IMO, at that point you only have two choices:

1. Embrace Jesus as who He says He is and follow Him, or
2. bury your head in the sand and do your best to rationalize it all away.

I have to take option 1.

 

[katy]

Wasn’t there also an idea of killing Lazarus? I can’t remember where, but I think it is in one of the Gospel accounts about this event. I wonder why it did not occur to the authorities that raising someone from the dead showed a power greater than Rome and that maybe they should reconsider their attitude.