Author: Jay Lehman

Jesus Heals a Lame Man on the Sabbath – John 5:1-13

Starting in John chapter 5, the apostle records a series of confrontations between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders centered around the shocking claims of Jesus.  His claim to be the Son of God, His claim to be an equal of God, and His claim to be the only Way to eternal life flies in the face of the Messianic expectations of both the religious leaders and the common folk of Jesus’ day.  It is during these confrontations that we learn many things about Jesus Christ, His nature and His work.

As we cover John chapters 5 through 7 over the next several weeks, we will follow a verse-by-verse format where the biblical text is included in red letters in the post (not to be confused with the typical red letters only for the words of Jesus).  My running commentary will be included in black text in and among the Scripture passage.

John 5:1 After these things there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porticoes. 3 In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, and withered, [waiting for the moving of the waters; 4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.] (Verse 3b and 4 are not included in some ancient texts, but the lame man’s answer to Jesus in verse 7 suggests this miraculous stirring of the waters actually happened from time to time.)

5 A man was there who had been ill for thirty-eight years. (We assume with some form of paralysis based on his answer to Jesus’ question.) 6 When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had already been a long time in that condition, He said to him, “Do you wish to get well ?” (This may seem like a rhetorical question on Jesus’ part, but He commonly asked it of the sick.  I think it is to allow the person to express their faith with a “Yes” answer.  After all, on many occasions, Jesus said to those he had just healed, “Your faith has made you well.”  In the same manner, our faith in Jesus is an important ingredient in our salvation as we will see throughout these chapters.)

7 The sick man answered Him, “Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, but while I am coming, another steps down before me.” (Somewhere in the man’s answer is a “Yes” based on what Jesus says next.) 8 Jesus said to him, “Get up, pick up your pallet and walk.” 9 Immediately the man became well, and picked up his pallet and began to walk. (Jesus healed the man on the spot and the man responded by obeying Jesus’ command and picked up his pallet – basically a sleeping mat – and walked away.) 

Now it was the Sabbath on that day. (The fact that it was the Sabbath sets the stage for the confrontation that is to come.) 10 So the Jews were saying to the man who was cured, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not permissible for you to carry your pallet.” (According to Jewish tradition, it was unlawful to carry furniture outside your house on the Sabbath, and a sleeping mat was considered furniture) 11 But he answered them, “He who made me well was the one who said to me, ‘Pick up your pallet and walk.’ “ (In this short answer it is unclear if the man was just reporting the facts, or trying to shift the blame to the one who commanded him to take up his sleeping mat, or if the fellow is actually making a statement that I have amazingly just been healed and the command of the one who healed me trumps your lifeless tradition.  At any rate, the man appears to be off the hook as the focus changes to, “Who is the one who gave this command?”) 12 They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick up your pallet and walk ‘?” 13 But the man who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped away while there was a crowd in that place.

There is a pause in the story here as we wait for the healer to be identified.  Will Jesus be found out and confronted?  And will He be on the hot seat for His healing work on the Sabbath?  We will find out next time.

Is Jesus the Only Way?

As you may recall, we started this series of posts with an empathetic ear to those calling for a more open, welcoming, and accepting church body.  I personally think a wider welcome in our churches is a good thing, but there is one point where the road narrows dramatically.  The road to salvation is very narrow, passing through the death and resurrection of one man, Jesus Christ.

The reason this is so important is because we have a generation coming up that has been raised on salad bar religion.  They have been taught to pick and choose their truth from a variety of religious traditions.  And in this setting, the idea that Jesus is the only way comes across as too narrow, too intolerant, and too divisive.  While criticism about our generational issues is something we need to honestly consider, we cannot bow to any criticism of this core truth:  Jesus is the only way to heaven.

Over the next several posts we are going to dive into the middle chapters of the gospel of John to discover the claims of Jesus regarding this issue.  Many today believe a misconception that Jesus never said He was the Son of God, or never said He was the only way to salvation.  As we will see going forward, that is just not true.  Jesus’ Christ claims, His Son of God claims, His Messiah claims all point to His death, burial, and resurrection as being the only way to heaven.  His divinity claims and His exclusive promise that all who believe in Him will have eternal life are critical to our gospel message.

In the introduction to his gospel, the apostle John presents Jesus as the divine Son of God from the outset.  “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (Jn 1:1,14).  This is followed by the testimony of several eyewitnesses.  John the Baptist said of Jesus, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29), and “I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God” (Jn 1:34).  Andrew, later in chapter one, identified Jesus as “The Messiah” (Jn 1:41).  And Nathaniel addressed Jesus with, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.”  So many divinity titles and this just in chapter one!

The testimony of these eyewitnesses is powerful, but what did Jesus say about Himself?  We will begin to answer that question with a visit to John chapter 5 and the Pool of Bethesda.

The Canon of the New Testament

I am a natural born skeptic.  When they say I should drink two glasses of water before breakfast, I wonder who they are.  When they say I should change my oil every 3000 miles, I wonder if they are engine experts or shills for the oil companies.  When they say I need eight hours of sleep a night, I wonder how they know that about me specifically.  I subscribe to the theory that my body will wake up when it has had enough sleep.  Is that too simple-minded?  Maybe I should ask they.

So what happens to my skepticism when they tell me that the 27 books of the Bible that make up my New Testament are God-inspired?  In short, it disappears.

And my skepticism disappears for two reasons.  First, the manuscript evidence supporting the authenticity of the New Testament is outstanding.  No, we don’t have the actual originals penned by the apostles.  But we do have documents from so close to the time of the originals, that to a trained archeologist, the gap is basically zero.

I like to think of it this way.  As a geophysicist, I make predictions about the subsurface of the earth from measurements taken at the earth’s surface.  And there is always a varying uncertainty as to what I am “seeing”.  (In fact, a large part of my job is quantifying that uncertainty.)  Sometimes the “picture” is fuzzy and the uncertainty is high and my interpretation is nothing more than an educated guess.  Other times, the “picture” is quite clear and the certainty is high and I have a 90% confidence in my prediction.  And 90% is close enough to 100% to move any project forward.

We can’t say with a 100% certainty that the manuscripts we have are authentic.  But we are so close that, in my mind, the leap of faith is not very large to get there.  But we all vary in our natural skepticism, so let me encourage you that whether you think the leap of faith to get there is large or small, it is your faith that will take you the rest of the way.  And given the manuscript evidence at hand, it is a reasonable faith.

Now the second reason my skepticism disappears is because there is no they in the Canon of the New Testament.  No church council said, “OK, here is a list of 50 books, let’s pick 27 and get this finished.”  While two church councils – in 393 and 397 A.D. – did indeed confirm the canon of the New Testament, the key word is “confirm” not decide.  The councils codified something that already existed; the books of the New Testament.

For over two and a half centuries, prior to the councils, the developing church had adopted the 27 books of the New Testament.  The early church, in its teaching and practice, had come to accept the Fourfold gospel, the letters of Paul, the book of Acts as the connection between them, and the letters of the other apostles as the authentic Canon of the New Testament.  So if there is a they, it is the church at large, listening to the voice of God over a large geographic area and over a long time.  (For a longer explanation see F. F. Bruce The Canon of Scripture in book form or 4 page pdf summary)

So now we can proceed with confidence that we are indeed exploring the God-inspired text as we return to two of the New Testament’s over-arching messages:  Jesus is the only way to heaven and a sinful lifestyle is not compatible with being a believer.  We will take up the first point next time.

Everybody Has an Opinion

Ah yes, the beauty of diverse opinions in the body of Christ.  It seems everyone, these days, is an expert on what is wrong with the church, or more specifically in my milieu, the American church.  I have joined the chorus myself with several entries in this blog about my concerns.  Sometimes it is hard to separate legitimate concerns where we play the proper role of the prophet calling the church back to its purpose, and personal preferences where we are calling the church to be more to our liking.  Of course, I consider myself totally in the prophet category.  How about you?

A recent rash of articles and responses in this regard highlights millenials leaving the church and what is behind their dissatisfaction.  And as usual, everyone has an opinion.  I understand young people’s hesitancy to embrace the church of my generation.  Looking back it is easy to see some confusion we have caused between the gospel message and our political activism, our pursuit of the American dream, and our rigid legalism.  But before we fling the pendulum, as we are all wont to do, too far the other direction into liberal politics, acceptance of all lifestyles, and living simply, let’s stop for a minute and let the Bible speak for itself.

When speaking for itself, I believe the New Testament is unequivocal on two points that affect what the church of the next generation embraces.  First, Jesus is the only way to heaven, no ifs, ands, or buts.  Second, a sinful lifestyle is not compatible with being a believer, a child of God.  Again, the Bible is unequivocal in its presentation of these points.

Now if we are going to accept what the Bible says for itself, we must trust that its words are true.  We must be committed to truth.  We must believe that the Bible, as we know it, is communicating God’s truth.  So this is where we are going to start.  Next post we will investigate the reliability of the New Testament.  Then we will move on to what the Bible has to say about our two propositions:  Jesus is the only way to heaven and a sinful lifestyle is not compatible with being a believer.  I hope you can join us and your faith is encouraged along the way.

A New Approach to Bible Publishing

Around 140 A.D. a church bishop named Marcion published a canon of Scripture that left out the Old Testament as well as any reference to it in the gospels and the letters of Paul.  It appears he was motivated by his inability to reconcile the character of the God of the Old Testament with God the Father as revealed by Jesus Christ.  His final product was a severely edited gospel of Luke (no Matthew, Mark, or John) and ten abridged letters of Paul.  He was excommunicated from the church as a heretic.

While Marcion was clearly over the line in his rejection of the Old Testament and much of what we have come to accept in the New, his angst is still with us today as evidenced by the recent series of cover stories in Christianity Today magazine under the banner Grappling with the God of Two Testaments.  The challenge brought on by how God describes Himself in the two testaments – a challenge Marcion basically gave up on – is still with us.

As a first step in addressing this challenge, I think we should flip things around in our Bible publishing.  What I mean is, let’s publish our Bible with the New Testament first and the Old Testament second.  Let’s publish our Christian Bible with the Christian message first.  Let’s print the New Covenant – our current arrangement with God – first, and include the Old Covenant second as a prequel or appendix as it were to the New.  Don’t you think that the Christian Bible, if it is to represent the Chirstian message, should start with the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ?

The church fathers in the second century, in direct response to Marcion, said that the New Testament does not supercede the Old Testament, but stands beside it to form a complete set.  But I wonder if the New Testament does indeed supercede the Old.  After all, the New Testament itself proclaims its superiority to the Old Covenant.

Theologically speaking, the New Covenant proclaims itself as better than the Old.  The book of Hebrews is a thirteen chapter dissertation on the main idea that Jesus is better.  Jesus is better than the angels, Jesus is better than the Old Testament prophets, Jesus is better than Moses, Jesus is better than the Law.  And the New Covenant introduced by Jesus is superior to the Old Covenant.

Practically speaking, the provisions for righteous living are far superior under the New Covenant than under the Old.  The whole book of Galatians is based on this idea.  The Law was nothing more than a schoolmaster condemning us and pointing out our sin.  But this ministry of condemnation, identified by Paul as the Old Covenant, has “come to an end” (II Cor 3:11).  It has been replaced, not added on to, by the New Covenant; described as the ministry of life, the ministry of the Spirit, the minstry of righteousness (II Cor 3:6-9).

So what do you think?  Do you like the idea of publishing the New Testament first in our Bibles?  It is an approach that is not that uncommon in the literary and film-making worlds.  Not to take our cues from Hollywood, but think about the Star Wars franchise.  As you recall, Episodes 4, 5, and 6 – the heart of the story – were produced first.  Episodes 1, 2, and 3 were produced many years later as a prequel.  If it had been shown the other way around, would the impact have been the same?  Would we have lost interest long before the pivitol quote, “Luke, I AM your father”?  Just a thought, but it causes me to wonder if it is an unfortunate part of our Bible publishing that one has to read through 931 chapters of the Bible before hearing God say, “Jesus, I AM your Father.”