Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, March 31, 2014 Read John 18:1-11 We have already dealt somewhat with the story of Jesus in the garden at the foot of the Mount of Olives. As we noted before, John omits any mention of a prayer by Jesus in the garden – though as we noted John does mention Jesus asking his disciples, “Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me?” It appears perhaps John was aware of the prayer after all. The main reason why John would omit such a pray is that he has portrayed Jesus is fully in charge of his own destiny and fully aware of that destiny from the very beginning. Jesus is fully in control in John’s gospel. To have portrayed Jesus as agonizing over his destiny would have violated the picture John has been painting. It may be significant that John tells his readers that the soldiers who come to arrest Jesus needed to bring lanterns and torches – they are, after all, part of the darkness. John’s symbolism is a fascinating part of his story. The actual arrest of Jesus is peculiar to John. When the arresting soldiers arrive Jesus asks them who they are looking for. They tell him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Our English translation of Jesus’ response distorts the power of his response. Jesus responds by saying, “I am.” The “he” inserted in our English translation is not present in the Greek. The “he” is there to provide for convenience of reading. Jesus response is nothing less than a claim that God is present. “I am” as we have noted many times is the divine name in the OT and Jesus has appropriated it for himself. The response of those who were about to arrest Jesus is the only appropriate response to “I am!” John tells us that those who came to arrest Jesus fall to the ground on their faces in worship. That is how one responds to God. It is as if they know that Jesus is God in human flesh. Of course they really do not know that but John has not missed an opportunity to display to his readers who Jesus really is. The whole scene puts Jesus fully in charge – he is even in charge of his arrest. In John’s gospel Jesus has said, “no one takes my life from me, I lay it down on my own accord” (John 10:18). Those who arrest Jesus do not do so by their own power – Jesus controls his arrest. If it was not the will of God and the choice and desire of Jesus they would have been powerless. Once arrested Jesus pleads for the release of his followers and apparently his request was granted. John does not tell of the flight of the disciples. Jesus had promised that he would lose none of his followers and his word comes true. Peter’s attempt to defend Jesus is met with rejection by Jesus. Peter was attempting to keep his word too – he had said he would die for Jesus. But that is not what Jesus wants. Peter is thwarted. He will soon find himself denying that he even knows Jesus – something Jesus had said would happen even though Peter is trying very hard not to fail. With the garden scene ended, Jesus is now brought before the high priest.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, March 30, 2014 Read John 18:1-40 As we begin chapter 18 it is important that we notice that we have once again merged with the storyline we find in the synoptic gospels. The events recited and the order in which they are listed is strikingly similar. John and the synoptic gospels are following the exact same traditions. Only the inner details vary from one another but the storyline is nearly exact. Before we examine each piece of the story it is helpful for us to lay out the storyline and note the minor variances. We have noted already that the stories merge at the foot of the Mount of Olives. John knows the place only as a garden – a place where Jesus and his disciples have gathered often. The synoptic gospels do not mention that there was a garden but do call the place Gethsemane. It is clear that all four gospels have the same place in mind. We have also noted that Mark, Matthew, and Luke tell of Jesus praying in Gethsemane. His prayer is one of sheer agony as Jesus struggles to find and do God’s will in the face of the looming cross before him. The struggle is a genuine one for Jesus. The outcome of his whole mission hangs in the balance. John does not tell us about Jesus praying in the garden. We have already speculated about the possibility that John’s prayer of Jesus in the context of the meal scene may really be his acknowledgment of a prayer by Jesus in the context of the garden. As we have noted, the prayer that Jesus prays in John’s gospel is nothing like that of the synoptic gospels at Gethsemane. There is no struggle and no agonizing in John’s prayer. We have also noted that if there is a place where the events of Gethsemane may have a connection with John’s gospel it would be at John 12:27 where Jesus speaks of his troubled heart and asks the question of whether or not he should ask the Father to spare him from this hour. Jesus will not make that request because he knows it is precisely for this hour that he has been sent by God. The question that Jesus refuses to consider is exactly the question that he agonizes over in the synoptic accounts at Gethsemane. So even though John omits the prayer in the garden, he may well have been aware of it. Once the prayer has ended all four gospels tell the story of the betrayal of Jesus by Judas. In all four he comes with soldiers and gives them the sign that the one he kisses is Jesus. All four gospels tell of the subsequent arrest by the soldiers. And all four include a peculiar detail that unfolds in light of the arrest. The ear of a slave is cut off and then restored by Jesus. Only John provides the identity of the slave – he is Malchus, the slave of the high priest. Only John tells us that it was Peter who cut off the ear. It is striking that only John ends the arrest scene with the words, “Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me” (John 18:11). John has not spoken of a cup – the synoptic writers did in the prayer of Jesus at Gethsemane – perhaps this is a bit more evidence that John is aware of an agonizing prayer in the garden but he chooses to omit it. At this point the synoptic gospels tell us that the disciples all fled in fear. Only Mark identifies one of those who fled as a young man who leaves naked when his garment – in Mark’s story it is a shroud – is pulled off his body as he flees. John does not tell of the flight of the disciples but rather tells of Jesus concern for them and his request that they be allowed to leave. Apparently his request is honored. The next event to happen is that Jesus is brought before the high priest for a hearing. All four gospel writers tell of this event. In the process of telling of this hearing all four gospel writers tell of Peter’s following at a distance. All four gospel writers tell of Peter’s threefold denial though the order is somewhat different. John skillfully moves back and forth between the questioning of Jesus before the high priest and Peter’s denial. The synoptic gospels tell the story of Peter’s denial as one piece. At the conclusion of Peter’s denial, only Luke tells of the mocking and abusing of Jesus by the soldiers. At this point the synoptic gospels describe a much more detailed trial of Jesus before the council. It is during this trial that Jesus will respond to the high priest’s question about whether or not he is the Messiah, the Son of God with the response, “I am” which is the very same claim that John has repeatedly put on Jesus lips throughout his gospel. John describes what might be called a hearing and it is only before the high priests – the council is never mentioned by John. In actuality John has already described a trial scene before the council. At the time of the raising of Lazarus John tells of a gathering of the council in which they as much as pass judgment on Jesus in his absence (John 11:45-53). It is at this time that the high priest made his declaration that it is necessary for one man to die instead of having the whole nation destroyed. At this point during the hearing John refers to this comment by the high priest reminding his readers of the previous “trial” (John 18:14). In the synoptic gospels it is after the trial of Jesus that the threefold denial by Peter is reported. John has placed some of that denial in the midst of the hearing before the high priests. All four gospels tell the story of the cock crowing. All had told the story of Jesus’ prediction to Peter that this would happen. All four gospels now tell of a trial before Pilate. John’s trial before Pilate is far more detailed and is the main trial scene in his gospel. For the synoptic gospels the trial before the council is the main trial with the trial before Pilate more a matter of expedience to get Jesus sentenced to crucifixion. In the midst of the trial before Pilate, only Luke tells of a further hearing of Jesus before Herod. Once that hearing is completed in Luke’s gospel the scene moves back to the trial before Pilate. At the conclusion of the trial before Pilate, only Matthew tells the story of Judas’ attempted repentance and ultimate suicide. All four gospels tell the story of Pilate’s attempt to release Jesus and of the crowd’s desire that Barabbas be released instead of Jesus. Actually in John’s gospel it is the “Jews” who ask for the release of Barabbas. The crowd plays no role in John’s gospel. What this analysis shows is that all four gospels tell essentially the same story in the same order. This reality has led many readers of the gospels to suspect that there was an early “Passion Narrative” the preceded all of the gospels. It was the first thing written about Jesus. Such a speculation is likely correct. Having traced the main sequence of events we can return now to look at each event more closely.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, March 29, 2014 Read John 17:20-26 The final section of Jesus’ prayer is the most precious for all of John’s readers. Suddenly, we become part of the story! Jesus prays not only for those who are with him as he goes to the cross. He also prays for all those who come to believe in him through the witness of those first followers. Of course John had his own community in mind. But he also had people like you and me. Jesus cares about you enough to pray for you! The focus of Jesus’ prayer is that we might be one. The witness of the gospel depends upon the unity of the body of Christ. Where there is disunity the mission is hindered. The world can only really know that God has sent Jesus when the world sees the unity of Christ’s body. That ought to strike each one of us with humility and with a deep concern for the church. When one looks back over the course of time it is a tragedy how fractured the body of Christ has been. When one looks at the world today we also know the tragedy of a divided church. We need to hear the prayer of Jesus clearly. No cause or personal belief is worthy of dividing the body of Christ. Of course Christians will never agree with one another about everything. Our experiences differ. In fact, it seems, God loves variety! But this prayer more than any other place in scripture demands of us that we strive for unity in the midst of diversity. It is only arrogance that tells us that we are right and others are wrong that causes us to put our own beliefs ahead of the plea of Jesus. At the heart of Jesus’ prayer is also love. Love has been an important part of John’s gospel. The only commandment Jesus gives in the gospel of John is that we love one another. To love one another is to put others ahead of ourselves. Love is to invest ourselves in others – to lose ourselves for the sake of others. Love is to seek to imitate Jesus.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, March 28, 2014 Read John 17:1-19 We come now to some of the most beautiful and powerful words in John’s gospel – the prayer of Jesus for his followers. Certainly this prayer belongs in the meal scene, doesn’t it? The final editor of John’s gospel wants his readers to associate this prayer with the meal. Yet, we are once again confronted with the reference to Jesus and his followers leaving the meal at the end of chapter 14. Is there another way for us to hear and think about this wonderful prayer? In the next chapter, chapter 18, we will find Jesus and his disciples in a garden across the Kidron valley to the east of the Jerusalem Temple at the foot of the Mount of Olives. That is the destiny for their leaving at the end of chapter 14. In fact, if we read the final verse of chapter 14, “Rise, let us be on our way,” and then jump over to chapter 18 and begin reading, “After Jesus had spoken these words, he went with his disciples across the Kidron valley to a place where there was a garden,” the sequence makes perfect sense. What we also discover is that we then match the storyline we find in the synoptic gospels (Mark 14:26-32, Matthew 26:30-36, Luke 22:39). We will look more fully at John 18 in the coming days, but there is something we should notice in the telling of this movement from the Passover meal to Gethsemane in the synoptic gospels. Once Jesus reaches his destiny at the foot of the Mount of Olives, all three synoptic gospel writers tell us that Jesus began to pray. Significantly, when John tells us that Jesus arrives at the garden at the foot of the Mount of Olives the prayer is missing. In John’s gospel Jesus does not pray in the garden. Jesus has already prayed. Could it be that John is very aware of the tradition of Jesus praying in the garden at Gethsemane but that he has taken that prayer and moved it ahead just a bit to place it within the context of the meal scene? We will notice that the prayer in John 17 and the prayer of Jesus at Gethsemane in the synoptic gospels are very different. In John’s gospel there is no agony for Jesus in the garden and there is no plea from Jesus that the Father “remove this cup from him.” We will talk about that later when we get to chapter 18 in John’s gospel. For now it is enough to say that the Jesus John has presented could never pray the agonizing prayer found in the synoptic gospels at Gethsemane. So if John found such a prayer in his traditions he would have omitted it. But, John does know that Jesus prayed! And Jesus does pray in John’s gospel – chapter 17. If, in fact, chapter 14 marks the “historical” ending of the meal scene, then perhaps the prayer in John 17 really belongs to the garden scene. The content of Jesus’ prayer in John 17 carries forward many of the same themes that have been a part of John’s gospel from the beginning and have been emphasized in the materials in the previous chapters (John 15-16). The prayer is very “theological” in nature – like much of John’s gospel, especially those parts that we have theorized might come from the eye-witness. The first few part of the prayer really is a prayer on Jesus’ own behalf – he prays that the Father might glorify him now that the hour has come. Readers of John’s gospel know by now that the “glorification” of Jesus is his death. His “hour” is also associated with his death. Jesus prays that the Father would complete his work through his death on the cross. Upon closer reading, the prayer also seems to do something we have noticed before – it morphs into commentary. It is a bit strange that Jesus should address the Father with the words, “that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Why would Jesus refer to himself in this way in an intimate prayer to his Father? It would have been more personal and flowed better if Jesus had said something like, “that they may know you, the only true God, and me, the one whom you sent.” The prayer lends itself to be interpreted as both the “words of Jesus” and theological commentary on the part of the author. Once again it is important for us to observe that John as not interested in providing “verbatim” words of a prayer but of making a theological proclamation through that prayer. Having prayed for himself, Jesus now prays for his disciples who accompany him on the way to his glorification – his death. John has often spoken of the reality that we, Jesus’ followers, did not choose him but that he has chosen us. Jesus now says that God has given these disciples to him and that he has kept them. No one can snatch the sheep out of the shepherd’s hand. Jesus declares the true faith of his disciples – they have come to know him and believe that he has come from the Father and that he is now returning to the Father. Jesus is also very aware that their genuine faith will be tested. And so he prays for them. Jesus is also aware that one of those who the Father has given him has become the betrayer and is lost. We have known from the very beginning that Judas Iscariot was the betrayer (John 6:71). We have also heard that Satan has entered into Judas. So here the betrayal by Judas is spoken of more as a necessity than the choice of Judas. John tells us that it fulfills the scripture. Exactly which scripture John has in mind is not easy to determine. There is no OT scripture that tells of this betrayal directly. However, in the meal scene, Jesus had said something quite similar and there the quotation regarding Judas is directed to Psalm 41:9 – “He who ate my bread has lifted his heal against me” (John 13:18). It is likely that John has this same passage in mind here. We have struggled before with this sense that it was Judas’ destiny to become the betrayer – he could not do otherwise! There is a profound mystery in the fate of Judas. Perhaps we should not be so quick to place judgment upon him. Jesus prays for his followers who will remain in the world now that he is returning to the Father. Jesus’ prayer is essentially for two things – that the followers of Jesus might be one and that they might be protected from the evil one. John is keenly aware of the plague of disunity within the body of Christ – the church. Earlier he had hinted at the reality that there were “sheep who do not belong to this fold” (John 10:16). In that context John longed for the day when they would be brought together and there would be one flock and one shepherd. Just who these “other sheep” might be is not easy to determine – but one possibility is that they were Christians who were associated with the writings in Mark’s gospel along with those of Matthew’s and Luke’s communities. Maybe they were also Christians who were associated with Paul and his friends. We cannot know for sure, but the point here is that Jesus prays for unity – that all might be one. In his letters, especially in 1 John, John reveals a painful break within the community of John’s gospel (1 John 2:18-28). Exactly who John is referring to in 1 John is also beyond our ability to say with certainty. Was it Jewish Christians who now turned against Jesus because to remain faithful to Jesus would mean being “put out of the synagogue” now that the “Jews” had split completely from Jewish Christians. Was it others who had misinterpreted Jesus and become Gnostics? Was it simply people who no longer agreed with the eye-witness behind John’s community and ventured off on their own? As we think about our own time, we tragically know that there is disunity within the body of Christ – and tragically there are some who seem to thrive upon it! Wherever there is disunity we need to approach that disunity with a profound sense of grief and sorrow. We need to take seriously the need to heal the brokenness we find. We need to be committed to unity within the body of Christ. It is Christ’s prayer for his church. The second concern that Jesus prays about is that his followers might be kept safe from the evil one. Living in this world is a dangerous proposition. So, Jesus invites his followers to think of themselves as he understands himself – just as Jesus does not belong to this world, his followers also do not belong to this world. The big catch, of course, is that the followers of Jesus must still live in this world. What are some of the dangers that this world poses? Jesus has mysteriously spoken of Satan entering into Judas. There is evil in this world. We can be thankful that Jesus has prayed for his followers and that he has given his followers the Paraclete to make Jesus present to his followers. Jesus has also given his followers his truth. So Jesus prays that his followers might be “sanctified in his truth” – that they might be set apart from the world by his truth, that they might be made holy in the word that Jesus gives. But it is not only the presence of evil in the world that is a danger. The world itself is a huge part of the problem. The world has become the enemy of its creator. The world is in rebellion against its creator. Just exactly what that means is a real challenge for any of us. We may even disagree about some of those things. But the point here is to be aware of the danger of this world. Believing that we do not belong to this world has sometimes resulted in Christians not being involved in the care of this world. I think that is a mistake and is not what Jesus meant. The care of creation is an important part of the mission God has given to human beings. To use a passage like this one to argue against good environmental practices and “doing good” within the world would be a mistake. So it is a balancing act. It is to know that “this world” is not our final destiny, but it is also knowing that “this world” is still God’s world.

2014 April Echoes

Click Here

Weekly Announcements March 30

Click Here

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, March 27, 2014 Read John 16:25-33 Our reading for today serves as a good summary of much of what has been said previously. Nothing new is added that has not been said before. Jesus says that he has spoken to the disciples in “figures of speech” but now he is speaking as clearly as he can. Jesus came from the Father and is returning to the Father again. His origin is with God and his destiny is with God. The disciples now appear to understand completely what Jesus is saying. They profess firm belief. Yet, Jesus seems still to dash some of that certainty by telling them again that they will soon be scattered. The power of death the looms in the cross will be too strong for them and they will abandon Jesus for the time being. All of this has been said earlier in chapter 13-14. It has been repeated in various ways in chapters 15-16. The importance of knowing the origin and destiny of Jesus, the meaning of his leaving which is through crucifixion, and that his leaving will cause great pain for his disciples and lead them to flee in abandonment is at the heart of Jesus’ message to them. And with it is the clear promise that Jesus’ leaving will ultimately result in his coming to them again in the Holy Spirit – the Paraclete who will take what is of Jesus and make it real for those who believe in him – and ultimately this world will be overcome through the death/resurrection/ascension of Jesus. As we think back over the chapters 13-16 we are faced with a challenging and complicated task of interpretation. On the one hand, it is clear that the final editor of John’s gospel wants his readers to hear all these words in the context of the final meal that Jesus shared with his followers. We have not yet spoken of chapter 17, but we can add that chapter as well. So, perhaps it is good for us to think of all of this as part of the meal scene – that’s the way the final editor has presented it. Yet, on the other hand we have been confronted with the puzzling comment at the end of chapter 14 where it seems clear that the meal has ended. I have interpreted that to mean that an original version of the meal scene in John’s gospel was only chapters 13-14. I think there is good reason to make that judgment as I have stated earlier. But, the issue of the meaning of Jesus’ “leaving and returning” was so important that more is needed. It is likely, as we have observed from listening to the synoptic gospels that Jesus spoke of the difficult life that would unfold for his followers following his death and resurrection and of the challenge that understanding the meaning of his death and resurrection would be for them. I have suggested that one way of looking at the material in chapters 15-16 is to see them as “extra” words that the final editor of John’s gospel had available to him regarding this struggle. The final editor has attached these words here, in the context of the meal, to augment and reinforce the primary message in chapters 13-14. What better place to insert these important words? In a way they are necessary to make the message in chapters 13-14 more clear and powerful. In that way they function well for us as well. The importance of the meaning of Jesus’ “leaving and returning” cannot be overemphasized. Together, all of these words add power and assurance to us as readers. We can be thankful for all of them!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, March 26, 2014 Read John 16:16-24 The same discussion regarding Jesus’ departure is at the center of our reading for today. In many ways the same message that we have been listening to is repeated in slightly different words. It seems that the message was an important one for followers of Jesus to hear – and it seems that they had a difficult time hearing and understanding it. Especially in this passage, John shares with the synoptic writers the deep misunderstanding and the challenge of catching on that must have dominated the first followers of Jesus. We have noticed how Mark characterizes the disciples as little more than bumbling idiots at time. Mark is very hard on them. All one needs to do is listen to Jesus berate his disciples in Mark 8:14-21. Matthew and Luke seem to mitigate Mark’s emphasis but it is still there. John has characterized the first disciples in a more favorable light most of the time. However, we need to be reminded of the outcome of the discussion after the feeding of the 5000 – most left him and Jesus asks the “Twelve” if they too want to leave. They stay with deep difficulty – where else are they to go? All of this points to the probability that the first followers of Jesus were far more clueless than we might imagine during the ministry of Jesus. They could not understand. It was only the resurrection and some heartfelt contemplation of everything that had happened that opened their eyes to the reality that had almost slipped past them. Stories like Luke’s story of the two travelers on the road to Emmaus and the disciples in the upper room on Easter evening join together with a story that John will tell us of Thomas later in the gospel to probe the reality of just how difficult it was to grasp what Jesus was all about. The reality that emerges is that it would have been impossible were it not for the fact that God made himself known to them – they recognized Jesus in the breaking of the bread. I suppose there was no way for those first followers to have known. It could only become knowable after the fact. That is what John is dealing with in passages like this one. It is no wonder that the same thing needed to be said in more than one way and more than once. If in fact, these too are “extra” words added to the scene, we can be thankful that they are available to us.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, March 25, 2014 Read John 16:4-15 As we listen to the words in our reading for today a new challenge arises. There is a real sense in which these words do seem to fit best in the context of the meal scene. However, as we listen closely we discover that they contradict some things about the meal scene as we hear it in John 13-14. In John 16:5 Jesus says that “none of you ask me, ‘Where are you going?’” Yet in the meal scene when Jesus speaks of where he is going, Peter asks specifically, “Where are you going?” (John 13:36) and Thomas complains that they do not know where he is going so how can they know the way (John 14:5). The meal scene unfolds as a dialogue in which the disciples do ask Jesus questions. Has Jesus forgotten that? Wasn’t he paying attention? Or, are the words in this passage from another occasion? In actuality this passage does not add much new to what we have already heard. Those who have analyzed this gospel can demonstrate that the same pattern and the same ideas are now repeated. Is it possible that, once again, the final editor of John’s gospel has more than one version of words about Jesus’ concern for his disciples in this time that he is going away and has added these “extra” words to a story he has already told – he has added these similar words because he finds them in the testimony of the eye-witness and does not want to lose them? Once again, the character of these words is highly theological and not narrative in nature. They are like the words we have discovered when the author wants to explain the meaning of an event. We have theorized that perhaps these “theological words” are really the witness of the eye-witness. Perhaps the eye-witness was not concerned about creating a cohesive narrative but of proclaiming the words of Jesus and their meaning. The value of these words to the followers of Jesus in the time after his departure is immense! They remind those followers that in the “absence” of Jesus the Paraclete will come and make Jesus present. Jesus has already told them that the Paraclete cannot come until Jesus has departed. So, Jesus can say that it is really for the benefit of the followers of Jesus that he goes. He goes so that the Paraclete can come. John tells us that the Paraclete will teach the followers of Jesus things they cannot bear or understand before the death/resurrection/ascension of Jesus. Once again we hear the truth that it is only after Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection that he can be really understood for whom he is. This idea agrees with that of the synoptic writers and likely reflects the exact experience of the first followers of Jesus – they cannot and did not recognize Jesus for who he really is until after the resurrection. At that point Jesus has returned to where he was before – to above – but the Paraclete will make him present nonetheless to those who believe. Once again, in John’s gospel the role of the Paraclete is welded to the ministry of Jesus. The Holy Spirit does not act on his own but only reflects what Jesus has already said and done. Just as Jesus and the Father are one, so the Holy Spirit and Jesus are one. In fact, later theology would develop the Trinity in which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in three persons. John may not have thought in quite this same way, but he is not far from the later development of the Trinity in the church – a theory that is helpful to attempt to explain God who is beyond our full comprehension.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, March 24, 2014 Read John 15:18-16:4 We have noticed earlier in John’s gospel that the idea of being “put out of the synagogue” has emerged. We heard it clearly in the story of the man born blind who was healed by Jesus. As we think through the early experience of the church we are challenged to understand this idea in light of a slightly different picture that emerges, especially in the book of Acts. There we meet Christians who live at least somewhat in the context of the Jewish community – they enter the Temple and participate regularly there. In fact, Luke will tell us in Act that many of the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem were zealous for the Law (Acts 21:17-26). One would have had a hard time, as an outsider, to distinguish between believing Jewish Christians and non-believing Jews. How are we to think about this discrepancy? Likely, a part of the message that a writer like John is proclaiming would be aimed at the people to whom he is writing and about their context. There is plenty of evidence within the gospel of John and the letters of John of a painful split that has happened between Jewish believers in Jesus and non-believing Jews. The believing Jewish Christians in that context likely had been “put out of the synagogue” and the pain involved in that parting would have been intense. We have witnessed the bitter pain in places like the discourse in chapter 8 of John gospel. So as we begin to listen to today’s reading we need to hear it in light of this kind of reality – it addresses itself as much to the context of the readers of John’s gospel, likely some 60 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, as it does to the time of Jesus’ crucifixion. Likely these words address themselves to that later context more than at the time of Jesus. To be sure there was a degree of hostility involved at the time of Jesus – after all Jesus was killed – but the bitter hostility likely belongs to a later time. So the words here are a warning for people who first read this gospel – life in this world will bring great friction. Being a follower of Jesus will be costly. Of course Jesus likely anticipated this great hostility and likely did speak words like these to his followers in anticipation of that time. The character of these words has that forward looking nature to it. And once again words like these are precious to people who are living under pressure from a world that has come to hate Jesus and to hate those who follow him. It is not only in John’s gospel that Jesus spoke words of warning to his followers of the coming persecution that likely would befall them. In Mark’s gospel, during the time when Jesus was talking with his disciples about the coming destruction of the Temple Jesus also warns them of the coming persecution (Mark 13:9-13). That warning came before the meal that Mark will soon tell his reader about. Also in Matthew’s gospel we read about Jesus sending his followers out on a mission during his ministry in Galilee where they are told that they can anticipate that they will be sent as sheep among wolves (Matthew 10:16-25). That warning also comes long before the meal scene. The point is that words of warning like we hear in John’s gospel at this point are not only relevant during the meal – Jesus likely spoke similar words in other contexts. The words we hear in John 15:18-16:4 may be from one of those contexts as easily as they are from the meal scene. We have noticed that Jesus was concerned for his followers and addressed that concern during the meal described in John 13-14. Again, whether or not these exact words were spoken in that context or some other is not important. But if these words really are “extra” words of the eye-witness that John wanted to include, then this provides a very good context to attach these words in John’s gospel. Even if they were not a part of the original meal scene they fit here to augment that scene. In our own time, we do not experience hostility to the degree spoken of in this passage. Yet, we know that following Jesus will be costly for us too and that the possibility of the hostility that undergirds this passage can become real for us. There are places in the world today where people are experiencing this hostility and persecution. These words would be even more precious to them. We can be thankful that our experience is not as hostile. And we can and ought to pray for those for whom experience matches that in this passage.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, March 23, 2014 Read John 15:1-17 Whether or not we take John’s apparent ending of the meal scene seriously will determine how we understand the material in John 15-17. I am working from the premise that John really was bringing to scene to an end at the conclusion of chapter 14 because the earlier version of the gospel of John ended it there. When we read the material in chapters 15-17 there is nothing in them that would necessitate that they took place during the meal that John has been describing in chapters 13 and 14. We will take each section at a time and attempt to think about how we might understand them in the scope of John’s whole gospel. I need to repeat again that thinking of these chapters in this way does not mean we can dismiss them or that they are any less important or less authoritative. They contain a message that is precious to us as the church and we want to take them very seriously. The point is that attempting to really listen to the story as John has told it, does lead us to think deeper about these words and to attempt to understand them even more fully. Thinking of these words as not really belonging to the meal scene also supports the idea that all of the gospel writers inherited a good deal of material that was not in any particular order – they are the ones who put the material in the order we find it. I have mentioned earlier that one possibility is that words like we find in chapters 15-17 are really part of the eye-witness testimony of the eye-witness who John claims stands behind this gospel. These chapters are, perhaps, a good example of the challenge John faced in fitting some of this eye-witness testimony into the narrative he was creating. You might say that these words were “extra” words that supplement and augment the rest of the narrative. John did not want to omit them so he attached them here. A good question then is why would John do that? We will also attempt to address that question as we proceed. As we begin to examine our reading for today, it is clear that these words need not have been part of the discourse in the meal scene. Actually, these are words that might fit in many contexts. They sound a lot like the words in chapter 10 where Jesus spoke of himself as the good shepherd. Though John does not speak of Jesus using parables, this passage is once again close to a parable. It is another of the “I am” passages we have been encountering – these passage are sprinkled throughout the gospel and all come together to proclaim a message about Jesus. All of these images fill out a picture of Jesus – he is the living water, he is the light of the world, he is the door, he is the gate, he is the good shepherd, he is the resurrection and the life, he is the way, the truth, and the life; and now we can add to the portrait that Jesus is the true vine. All of these images have to do with giving and sustaining life. Jesus is the source of life! The one element that is highlighted in this image that is not so evident in the others is the idea of remaining in Jesus. This picks up the image of the Word becoming flesh and “remaining” among us in the person of Jesus (John 1:14). The image of Jesus as the true vine emphasizes that necessity of remaining connected with Jesus. While the words themselves may not have been spoken during the meal, one can see why the image of remaining would be important in this context. During the meal Jesus had expressed his deep concern for this followers, especially in the time when Jesus would be “absent” from them in a physical way. This image reinforces that importance of remaining in Jesus – of remaining in contact with Jesus. This may be why John chose to place these words at this point – adding them to the story of Jesus at the meal to reinforce the meaning of that event. The message of this passage is critically important to the church of John’s time and to us as the church today. It is only as we remain connected with Jesus that we can have life. The message of this text is clear and easy to comprehend. John also addresses once again the necessity of love being at the center of God’s people. In his gospel and in the letters of John, Jesus lifts up only one commandment – that we love one another. Jesus is the source of that love – it comes to his followers because he lays down his life for them. There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life – and Jesus is about to do that. While Jesus does not command his followers to lay down their lives for one another – only Jesus can do that – he does call his followers to love as he has loved. John also reminds his readers that it is Jesus who has chosen those who are his followers. We did not choose him but he has chosen us. Remembering that is also critically important for the church. It is humbling to know that Jesus has chosen us. It is also empowering. We are reminded that we are not the source of the church’s mission or its power – Jesus is. That mission does not depend on us so much as it depends on him. We are blessed to participate in the mission of Christ, but we are not the initiator of that mission. We love because we have been loved by Jesus.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, March 22, 2014 Read John 14:25-31 Jesus’ concern for his followers, that they will know that he is still present with them even after he has returned to the Father, continues to dominate our reading for today. Jesus knows that he will only be physically present to his disciples for a short time – the cross linger in the future! So once again he promises them that in his “absence” they will know the “Paraclete, the Holy Spirit” who will continue to teach the followers of Jesus and, most importantly, help them remember everything that Jesus has told them. So, the Holy Spirit will continue the work of Jesus! Jesus fully understands the chaos and the confusion that likely will descend upon his followers in the aftermath of his crucifixion so he promises them that out of the chaos will emerge peace – a peace that the world cannot give. The picture that John has been painting is of a very compassionate and caring Jesus who is doing his best to prepare his church for life after his death/resurrection/ascension. Jesus now addresses the concern, in fact the deep fear that must have engulfed the disciples as they heard these words. He tells them that rather than being fearful, dreading his departure, they should rejoice because he is returning to the Father. Whether or not it calmed their fears at that moment is difficult to tell – I know hearing Jesus words probably would not have made me any less fearful. But eventually the followers of Jesus remembered Jesus words and their fear was turned into faithful joy. Jesus tells them that he is telling them these things now, before they happen, for the distinct purpose that they will remember after they have happened. What a gift that was! We have noted that only John tells us this story and provides us with these precious words of Jesus. John has placed them in the context of the meal just prior to Jesus’ arrest – something the synoptic writers did not do. We have noted that behind this gospel is the claim that an eye-witness testimony is present. We have also noticed that perhaps that eye-witness voice has emerged in those sections of John’s gospel that are mostly the interpretation or meaning of an event. If those sections are the words of this eye-witness – more in the form of sermons or theological explanations – then perhaps these are more of those words. That Jesus spoke words like these to his followers is likely, though perhaps they have been re-worked after some theological reflection on the part of one of his eye-witness followers. Regardless of that kind of speculation, these words of Jesus are valuable to us, as they were to the first followers of Jesus. We can let them speak to us giving us assurance and hope. The fourteenth chapter of John ends with a statement by Jesus that he will only be with them a short time more because the “ruler of this world is coming” and Jesus will soon depart. Jesus reminds his followers that this ruler has no power over him – Jesus lays down his life and he will take it up again – Jesus is in control of his destiny! He will go to the cross because he loves the Father – the one who so loves the world that he gives his only Son! And then John writes the words, “Rise, let us be on our way.” As readers we fully expect that the meal is now over and Jesus and his followers will proceed to the garden. We expect to merge into the storyline of the synoptic gospels once again. But that does not happen! With chapter fifteen we find ourselves back into the conversation we have been following in the previous chapter. John does not specifically say that we are back in the context of the meal, but that is the implication. And that is how John wants us to think of what is said in the following chapters. What are we to make of this strange scenario? As I mentioned at the beginning, the interpretation of these chapters is a challenge. There are these “rough places” that make it challenging to piece things together. Here is one possibility that makes a lot of sense to me. Likely this was the ending of an early version of John’s “meal scene” and if that is the case it roughly parallels the scene in the upper room as told in the synoptic gospels. We have noted the differences – in John, Jesus does not institute the Lord’s Supper since John does not understand the meal as the Passover; in the synoptic gospels, there is no mention of the foot washing and Jesus has no discourse about his return above and the promise of the sending of the Holy Spirit – but otherwise there is much in agreement between John and the others. If we understand this point in John’s gospel as the original ending, then we might go on to speculate that the “historical” experience of Jesus and the disciples include a combination of all the elements we have been reading in both John and the synoptic gospels – Jesus washes his disciples feet (only in John), Jesus identifies Judas as his betrayer which is also an event which shook all of his followers to the core since they knew they were all capable of betraying Jesus (in both John and the synoptic gospels), Jesus institutes the Lord’s Supper since this really was a Passover meal (only in the synoptic gospels), Jesus predicts Peter’s denial and the falling away of all of the disciples (in both John and the synoptic gospels), and Jesus spent some time trying to prepare his followers for his coming death and for how he would be present to them after his death/resurrection/ascension (only in John)! John’s apparent ending of the meal scene in chapter fourteen lends itself to this interpretation. By hearing John and the synoptic gospels together we get a fuller picture of the event. But that does leave us with the challenge of how we are to understand the rest of John’s gospel in chapters 15, 16, and 17. Were they really part of the original experience of the meal scene? If they weren’t, what are they? Where do they fit in the story? It is my interpretation that these chapters do not belong to the original meal scene. Likely they contain words that Jesus spoke on occasions prior to these events and also words that are simply the interpretation of the author – likely the witness of the eye-witness that stand behind this gospel is placed here to augment what happened in the meal scene as told in chapters 13 and 14 in John’s gospel. This does not reduce the importance of what we read in chapters 15-17. They are still critically valuable to us. And, while we might think of these chapters as not really belonging to the meal scene, it is important that we acknowledge that the author of John’s gospel wants us to hear them in that context. But it also does do justice to John’s gospel, especially his apparent ending at chapter 14. And, it does do justice to the storyline as we read it in the synoptic gospels.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, March 21, 2014 Read John 14:15-24 At this point in the story John introduces a new concept – one that only John speaks about. We need to remember that this section of his gospel is dealing with the huge question of how Jesus will remain present to his disciples after he has return to the place of his origin, “from above.” Jesus tells his disciples that when he returns above he will send “another Paraclete” to be with them forever. The word “Paraclete” is very difficult to translate because it has very little other usage in Greek writing. The word literally means “to walk beside” and that might be the best translation. Other words are often used – Advocate, Counselor, Helper. All of them are helpful and perhaps we should use them all at once. The idea of a Paraclete is a large concept. It is significant that John writes that Jesus is sending “another” Paraclete. The implication, of course, is that Jesus has been the first Paraclete. This one that Jesus is to send will thus be like him – doing the same things Jesus has done. John welds the Paraclete and Jesus together. Jesus goes on the say that this Paraclete is the “Spirit of truth.” In fact, the Paraclete will become known as the Holy Spirit – a concept much easier for us to understand. So, the way in which Jesus will remain present for his followers after he has returned above will be through the Holy Spirit who Jesus will send to them. Yet, this Paraclete, this Holy Spirit will not be visible to the world as Jesus has been. So, how will the followers of Jesus “see” him? At this point John returns to one of his dominant themes which is love. Jesus demonstrated his love by washing his disciples’ feet. He loved them to the end. They, in turn, are to love one another. It is only in the practice of love that the followers of Jesus will “see” Jesus. Or, to put it another way, “Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them” (John 14:23). It is in believing in Jesus and in loving one another that his followers will “see” the Paraclete among them. Just as Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in Jesus, so will Jesus be in his followers and his followers will be in him. And this is Jesus’ work not so much ours. He is hanging on to us – no one can snatch his sheep out of his hand. It is to live in the promise of Jesus. He will not leave his followers orphaned!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, March 20, 2014 Read John 14:1-14 John’s Passion Narrative contains four chapters that are not to be found in any of the synoptic gospels. That about one-fifth of John’s gospel. The narrative that unfolds in these chapters are obviously very important to John. To sum them up, they deal with the issues of how the followers of Jesus are to survive after Jesus has been glorified, lifted up on the cross, and returned to the Father from whom Jesus came. Jesus is “from above” and once he returns to his place “above” he will no longer be physically present for his disciples. How are they to survive? How are they not to feel abandoned? These chapters deal with the survival of the church! No wonder John has given them so much space. They address crucial questions about how God is present and active in the church following the death/resurrection/ascension of Jesus. They address the question of the presence or absence of Jesus. John sets these crucial questions in the context of the meal that Jesus shared with his disciples on the evening before the day of preparation for the Passover which would occur on the following evening. It is striking that none of the synoptic gospels mention a word of this. We will have to ponder this striking difference as we move along. Two questions dominate our reading today: (1) once Jesus has return above what will be the destiny of his followers? (2) what is the relationship between Jesus and the Father – who is Jesus? Jesus answers the first question by promising his disciples that their destiny will ultimately be with him, “above” where he is. Jesus had told them that he was soon going where they could not come, but that they would come to where he is going later. Now Jesus makes that even more explicit – he is going to prepare a place for them “above” where Jesus came from and where he is returning. Once again misunderstanding is a part of the story. The disciples to not understand where Jesus is going and so they do not know the way. They have not perceived that the death of Jesus is in fact a great victory through which Jesus will ascend to where he was and will bring his followers to be with him. They have heard Jesus say to them that he will be “lifted up” but they have only heard that in terms of its meaning that he will be crucified. They have not heard that his “lifting up” will be an exaltation – the glorification of Jesus. Jesus had told them that this was his glorification but, perhaps in their humanness, they have been deaf to those words. Maybe it just sounded too good to be true. Or maybe, more profoundly, human beings just can’t see the power of the cross until it happens. It is only after the fact that human beings have the possibility of understanding. That has also been a theme of the synoptic gospels – in fact it is the most pointed message of Mark’s gospel – no one can perceive that Jesus is the Son of God, the crucified Messiah, until after Jesus is dead! So maybe John is dealing with this same reality – even the disciples in John’s story cannot know that Jesus is the Messiah until after his crucifixion. John has just pushed the question backward into the ministry of Jesus to deal with it more fully there. So often in John’s story the disciples have misunderstood and so they ask questions. The question of Thomas in this story serves to move it along and provides Jesus with the opportunity to once again use the “I am” phrase. In response to the question of how they might know the way Jesus tells them that “I am” is the way – Jesus, the “I am” is the way. I think this is not so much an exclusive statement by Jesus as a statement through which Jesus is saying that he is responsible for his followers progressing on the way. Often this statement is used to exclude others – Jesus is the only way. On the other hand John has told us repeatedly that no one can come to the Father unless the Father draws them to himself. We don’t choose God – God chooses us. So here too Jesus is providing the way. He is the way and we cannot find the way without him, without his action of drawing us on the way. The disciples are not satisfied with Jesus’ response to Thomas. They still do not understand. The reason they fail to understand is that they still do not really comprehend the identity of Jesus. They do not perceive that Jesus and the Father are one. And so Jesus needs to state it to them again. If you want to see the Father then just look at Jesus – the Word became flesh and lived among us. The very essence of God is present in the human Jesus. Of course the disciples could see the human Jesus with their eyes. To see the Father in Jesus would take belief and that is the driving motive of John’s gospel – that people might believe in him (John 20:30). John is dealing with how the church is to think of Jesus. In the time following Jesus’ death/resurrection/ascension they are to know that Jesus is God the Son, in fact, he had been God the Son all along. Such a one can be depended upon for all of our needs. So Jesus promises his followers that whatever they ask in his Name will be done for them. They will do his works, in fact even greater works, in the time after his death/resurrection/ascension because he will still be with them. John will now move on to talk about just how Jesus will be present to his disciples after his death/resurrection/ascension.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, March 19, 2014 Read John 13:36-38 Today’s reading is connected with the reading from yesterday. In that reading, Jesus had told his disciples that he is going where they cannot come. Here Peter asks the question, “Where are you going?” Jesus’ answer is still ambiguous. We shouldn’t blame Peter for his lack of understanding. In veiled language Jesus is telling Peter that he is going to die – Jesus will lay down his life for Peter and for all people. Only Jesus can lay down his life for others. Peter protests. He boldly tells Jesus that he will lay down his life for him. Peter’s intentions are good and his determination is worthy – but to lay down his life for Jesus is something Peter cannot do. Only Jesus lays down his life for others. We still might speak of someone giving their life for someone else. That does happen, but not in the same way as Jesus laying down his life. Only Jesus can finally give life. That is John’s point. John shares with Mark and the other synoptic writers the story of Peter’s claim that he will not abandon Jesus. He also shares their story of Jesus telling Peter that before the cock crows he will deny Jesus three times. Of course we know how that prediction of Jesus will come true. We should not be so tough on Peter. He will emerge as a faithful follower of Jesus. It is at this point that Mark tells his readers that Jesus and his followers leave the supper and make their way to the garden. John continues his story of events at the time of the supper. In some senses in John’s gospel we have only begun. We will have to wait awhile to find the story of John merge again with that of Mark.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, March 18, 2014 Read John 13:31-35 The words in today’s reading are difficult to follow. They are part of the theological reflection John has been engaged in throughout his gospel. They pick up images that have been used before, particularly Jesus’ words to his opponents that he is going where they will not be able to go. In those cases the hearers misunderstand but then end up saying more than they realize. We look further at this language of Jesus in tomorrow’s reading. At the heart of the message in today’s reading is Jesus’ plea that his followers love one another. That was at the heart of the foot-washing experience earlier. Here Jesus makes things even more explicit. Just as Jesus loves his followers they are to love one another. There is great value in the loving – but there are also other consequences. When others see how much the followers of Jesus love one another they will recognize that they are truly Jesus’ disciples. Of course the opposite is also true. The lack of love among the followers of Jesus clouds the witness of Jesus. Jesus will pick this theme up again as the story continues.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, March 17, 2014 Read John 13:21-30 Already in the foot-washing John has developed the contrast between the love of Jesus and the tragedy of the betrayer. Now Jesus begins to speak to the disciples as if they had never heard about such a thing. They are shocked to hear Jesus statement. If they had heard Jesus words just a few minutes ago in the foot-washing why are they surprised now? It is these “discrepancies” that leads scholars to say that two stories have been brought together. I think there is value in that observation, though such a “discovery” can only help us if we do not get hung up on trying to decide what is “accurate” what is not. The words John uses at this point sound very much like the discussion that emerges in Mark’s account of the meal. Jesus makes a statement that one of those present will betray him and the group, in bewilderment, begins to wonder who it might be. The story reveals that all of them are very aware that it just might be them. The similarity between John and Mark likely means that an older tradition rests behind both – we have noticed that phenomenon before. John does provide us with some pieces of information that we need to discuss. First of all, John tells us of a “disciple who Jesus loved” who is reclining next to Jesus. We have heard of a “disciple who Jesus loved” once before – Lazarus. Is Lazarus at the table? John doesn’t say. Or, is this another disciple? Tradition has identified this disciple as John, the son of Zebedee, but it important to note that John doesn’t say that either. This “disciple who Jesus loved” will reappear later in the story. For now we will simply need to let his identity be wrapped in mystery. John also makes more specific the identity of Judas – he is the one who Jesus takes bread and dips it in the dish and gives to Judas (now identified by John as the son of Simon Iscariot). John tells us that after Judas took the bread Satan entered into him. Was Satan in the bread? Haven’t we already been told that Satan had put it into the heart of Judas to betray him? Again these small “discrepancies” point to the possibility that more than one story is being woven together. The story also reinforces the concept that powers greater that just Judas’ will are involved. They mystery deepens. Once Judas has received the bread Jesus tells him to go and do quickly what he has set out to do. The disciples misunderstand thinking perhaps Jesus has sent Judas to buy what would be needed to celebrate the Passover later – a certain statement that the disciples do not understand the present meal as the Passover. Such a thought would never have entered their minds within Mark’s storyline – in that storyline they were celebrating Passover at that very moment. Did Judas understand what Jesus was telling him? That is a mystery we cannot solve either. In a final word John tells us that when Judas left “it was night.” That is not so much an attempt to tell us what time of day it was as to point out that Judas was now entering the darkness. The words are symbolic – we should not miss John’s great storytelling ability and technique. Judas was now entering the darkness from which he will tragically never emerge.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, March 16, 2014 Read John 13:1-20 We now rejoin the Passion Narrative for a meal in which Jesus and his disciples are the participants. Before we proceed it is important that we make a few observations. We have already noted that the story follows the Passion Narrative we read in the synoptic gospels in a general sense but that there are also distinct differences. The first observation we need to make is that John tells us this meal took place before the Passover. Mark makes it clear that this meal is to be the Passover meal. That is a huge difference and we will need to attempt to understand it. Missing from John’s story is the story in Mark of Jesus sending out two disciples to prepare the “upper room” for them to eat the Passover together. Missing is also any mention of Jesus instituting Holy Communion. The meal is not a Passover meal in John’s gospel so there is no way for Jesus to transform the meal from Passover to Lord’s Supper. Other elements of the story are strikingly similar – the question of who will be the betrayer and Jesus’ identification of the one who will betray him, the protest of the disciples that they will not abandon Jesus, even the intense emotion involved in the supper. The second observation we need to make is that John’s story is much longer than Mark’s. Mark tells the story of the Passover in less than a chapter – 12 verses in all (Matthew also uses 12 verses and Luke is bit longer using 22 verses). John will take five chapters to tell the story using 155 verses! That’s about 13 times as long! A third observation is related only to John’s gospel. The story is not without challenges and likely reflects a composite of more than one version. For example the story seems to end at the close of chapter 14 only to begin again. There are also times when something is said that is contradictory to what has been said earlier. All of that makes for a challenging time for readers of John’s gospel. We will take up each of these issues in turn. A fourth observation is that John provides a great deal of material that is not in Mark, Matthew, or Luke. This provides us with an opportunity to expand our understanding of the whole event. Once again we can be thankful for what John has provided us. As we turn to our reading for today the first thing to notice is that the focus is not on the eating as it is in the synoptic gospels. Only John tells us about Jesus taking off his outer clothing and clothing himself with a servant’s towel and washing his disciples’ feet. This action of Jesus is grounded in his deep love for them – a love that John tells us Jesus maintained to the end. The action is also couched in the tragedy that a betrayer is in their midst. At the very beginning John tells us that Satan had put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus. Readers of John’s gospel are not surprised to hear this since we have been told from the beginning that Judas would be the betrayer. Readers of Mark’s gospel are also not surprised at that identity of Judas as the betrayer since they too were told when Jesus selected the Twelve that Judas would betray him. In John’s story this contrast between the love of Jesus and the betrayal by Judas is at the heart of the story. There may have been a tradition behind the foot-washing but modern readers and students of the gospels have not been able to identify it. So, like Peter, we are left wonder what the meaning that lies behind the foot-washing might be. The point seems to be both to demonstrate Jesus’ deep love and also to point out that not all are clean – even though Jesus washed all their feet. Jesus’ followers are to follow his example and love one another by being servants to one another. We will hear more of the importance of love on the part of those who follow Jesus as the meal proceeds. As we have mentioned, the other side of this story is the identification of the betrayer as an event that happens through the washing. It is a tragedy that Judas becomes the betrayer – somewhat of an inevitable outcome since John tells us Satan put it into Judas’ heart. John also tells us that the betrayal is also a matter of fulfilling the scripture and points to Psalm 41:9 – “Even my bosom friend in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has lifted the heel against me.” Could Judas have resisted? That is the mystery of belief and unbelief. John provides us no relief in our attempt to understand the wonder of humanity. The whole scene ends on a powerful note – a statement readers of John’s gospel must not miss. We have heard Jesus use the words, “I am,” several times to describe who he is. Often the words are coupled with a predicate such as I am the living water or I am the light of the world. But at other times the words have stood alone – “I am!” Unfortunately in most of those cases our English translators have added the pronoun “he” to facilitate our reading. The Greek language of the NT does not include the “he” and uses only the words “I am.” As we have observed before this is a direct connection with the OT use of “I am” to speak of God – most clearly in the story of the burning bush. In this passage Jesus says, “I tell you this now, before it occurs, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am.” What Jesus is speaking of is his betrayal and death. And when he tells his disciples that he is “I am” he in once again making a divine claim. This is an important claim in John’s gospel and differs from the way in which Jesus is portrayed in the synoptic gospels – though at the crucial moment of his trial Jesus will speak of himself as “I am” in Mark’s gospel too. John wants his readers to understand Jesus is God the Son throughout the story. That Jesus is God the Son is the crux of believing for John.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, March 15, 2014 Read John 12:37-50 The final verses of chapter 12 serve as a summary of John’s gospel to this point and serve as a transition into the final days of Jesus’ life. What has the result of Jesus ministry been? Should we call it a success? We have faced this dilemma before. When Jesus was speaking of the meaning of the feeding of the 5000 and its connection with Holy Communion we learned that almost all of those who were fed and supposedly “believed” in Jesus abandoned him. Only a few, the twelve remained – and one of them would become the betrayer. We could have hoped for a better outcome. These verses reveal a similar outcome – Jesus need to “hide” himself. At the conclusion of the feeding miracle Jesus own brothers almost accuse him of doing the same thing – hiding himself instead of doing more spectacular works in hopes that more people will “believe” in him. John tells us in summary fashion that Jesus performed many signs but they did not believe. Once again, the issue of signs comes to the fore. What do signs do? They are ambiguous. They are no guarantee that belief will come. But that has been God’s experience throughout history. At this point John points to two passages from Isaiah – both are harsh in their description of God’s people. The first is from Isaiah 53:1 and the second from Isaiah 6:9-10. Interestingly the synoptic writers also point to this passage. Mark tells us the reason why Jesus tells parables is summed up in this passage from Isaiah 6 – so that people will not understand (Mark 4:10-12). And Luke tells us that at the end of Paul’s debate with the Jews in Rome he concludes that Isaiah was right in his judgment that this is a people who will not see or hear (Acts 28:23-29). The dreadful thing about these verses is that it seems God is the force behind the blindness. Or, is it simply that human beings will refuse to receive life on God’s terms? Once again John tells us that there were some who wanted to “believe” and some of them were even among the authorities but they were afraid of being put out of the synagogue so they were unwilling to believe because they loved human glory more than the glory the comes from God. Once again John is speaking as much or more to people of his own community than to the people at that time. There is one more proclamation of Jesus to end this chapter. This proclamation like so many others is highly theological in nature. Several of John’s themes are summed up. Jesus and the Father are one – to see Jesus is to see the Father. Jesus is the light of the world but people love darkness. Jesus has come not to judge the world but to save it – the judgment is really the work of those who refuse to come to the light. God’s desire is for all to come to eternal life. The stage is now set for the unfolding of the end – an end which will be the beginning for believers in Jesus.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, March 14, 2014 Read John 12:20-36 Having connected with the “Passion Narrative” in Mark’s gospel, John now ventures out on his own again. What we read in the rest of chapter 12 is unique to John and serves in some senses as a summary of the first half of the gospel. Biblical scholars have sometimes spoken of the first twelve chapters of John as the “Book of Sign” and some have even speculated that these first twelve chapters once stood on their own. Such a view seem highly speculative to me, but we do need to acknowledge that there is a transition involved in moving from chapter 12 into chapter 13. It seems to me to be better to think of this as one continuous story flowing from beginning to end. Before we look specifically at what John tells us it is important that we think about the things that are missing at this point in John’s gospel when compared with Mark. The first glaring omission from the story as Mark tells it is Jesus’ cleansing of the Temple. Of course John has already told his readers that story way back at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. But, think of the climax that the story of the cleansing of the Temple provides for Mark’s story. It is the dramatic event that results in the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus. We have already talked some about the difference in the placement of this event in John and Mark. While it is possible it is highly unlikely that Jesus cleansed the Temple twice – in fact Mark’s storyline will not permit such a thing. So, we likely need to ponder why each writer told the story as they did. An important thing for us to consider is that by the time all of the gospel writers wrote their gospels the Temple in Jerusalem was lying in ruins. The Romans destroyed it at the end of the Jewish War in 70 AD. For all of the gospel writers, the cleansing of the Temple is a reference to this destruction. Why was the Temple destroyed? What is the meaning of its destruction? All want to say that the Temple was destroyed because it had become perverted. We already noted that John tells of the cleansing of the Temple as his way of speaking of Jesus replacing the Temple – Jesus becomes the Temple. For John the destroyed Temple is not a problem because Jesus is the Temple. What better place for John to tell his readers this than at the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry? For Mark the cleansing of the Temple became the final event which pushed things over an edge and resulted in the death of Jesus. From a strictly historical point of view it seems more likely that the event of the cleansing of the Temple happened in the last days of Jesus’ life. So, Mark is likely reflecting historical accuracy more clearly than John. The important thing to notice here is that John has moved the event forward. A second, more subtle thing that is missing from John’s gospel at this point is the brutal and hostile Temple Controversy that unfolds in Mark’s story. In John’s gospel, once Jesus enters Jerusalem in the triumphal entry the controversy goes underground and is not part of the story. The important thing that we have noticed is that John does tell of great controversy between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders but that he has told that story over about a five-month period of time from the Feast of Booths in the fall of the previous year up until this time. Now, it is highly likely that John is reflecting historical accuracy more fully. Mark could not tell the story of Temple Controversy earlier because Jesus wasn’t in Jerusalem. So all of the material is compressed in Mark into one day! Likely the debate was much longer and over a much longer period of time. In place of these events that John does not share with Mark in his “Passion Narrative” John has provided his readers with some very important information. We turn now to consider what John tells us. We have just heard the story of Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem – it is a highly symbolic story of the coming of the King. John has referenced both Psalm 118 and Zechariah 9:9 which looked forward to the coming one. Several times in the story Jesus has spoken of the coming of his “hour” – a time which was often delayed because this was not the right hour. John tells us of some Greeks who now come to see Jesus. Their coming triggers for Jesus the reality that his “hour” has now arrived. Why the coming of these Greeks should have triggered the coming of the “hour” is not revealed by John – so we are left only to speculate about that. Was it because they were Gentiles? We Gentiles like to think that, but John doesn’t really say that. Perhaps only Jesus knows why this is now the “hour” – in John’s gospel Jesus does control his destiny. At any rate the event leads Jesus to announce that his “hour” has now come. What sort of “hour” is it? Jesus says it is the “hour for the Son of Man to be glorified.” But, what does it mean to be glorified? Jesus begins immediately to speak of his death/resurrection/ascension – that is the meaning of his glory. We have noted that in John’s gospel Jesus does not tell parables. At this point, however, Jesus comes as close to telling a parable as at any other point. Jesus uses the symbol of a grain of wheat falling into the ground and dying in order to produce an abundant harvest to speak of the meaning of his impending death. In all of the gospels Jesus spoke about his impending death. In all of the gospels Jesus goes willingly to his death. John does not repeat the “passion predictions” that Mark used so skillfully, yet in John’s gospel, maybe more than in the others, Jesus speaks of his death. His death is the meaning of the “hour” of which Jesus spoke. We need to also note at this point that John does not tell the story of Jesus’ agony in the Garden of Gethsemane. John does tell of Jesus in the garden and we will look at that story later, but it is critical for us to notice that the agony over dying is absent from John – Jesus never prays asking the Father to remove the cup from him! As we return to chapter 12 we do hear words that are somewhat similar to those spoken by Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane in the synoptic gospels. John tells us that Jesus says his soul is troubled. Jesus asks, “What should I say? – ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, it is for this reason that I have come to this hour.” John speaks of the death of Jesus as his glorification – his death is not a defeat but a victory! And John now tells us that a voice speaks from heaven verifying all that Jesus has said. Mark and the synoptic writers also have told us of a voice from heaven speaking to Jesus. Twice in their story, at his baptism and on the Mount of Transfiguration a voice spoke to Jesus telling him that he was God’s own beloved Son. Both times the words came as verification to Jesus. The words are different but the verification is the same – only here Jesus says the words are spoken for those around to hear. Of course they had that effect in the synoptic gospels too, but there they were also for the benefit of Jesus. We have noticed before that John often provides theological commentary on events. To a point that is true here too. What is the meaning of Jesus’ death? Two things – judgment on this world, but more importantly is the grace of God through which God intends to draw all people to himself. Twice before Jesus has used the image of the serpent lifted up in the wilderness, once in the story of Nicodemus (John 3:14-15) and again in the controversy with the religious leaders (John 8:28). The purpose of the death of Jesus will be to draw all people to him. It is important that we remember John’s love of words with double meaning. The word “lifted up” can mean to be exalted or it can mean to be crucified. For Jesus, it means both – his crucifixion is his exaltation – his glorification.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, March 13, 2014 Read John 12:9-19 The next event in John’s story is one that he also shares with the synoptic writers – the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. John has attached a brief note to this story at the beginning about how the religious leaders are determined to kill Jesus. John tells us that the crowd who had witnessed the raising of Lazarus plays a significant part in the story – they want to see not only Jesus but Lazarus as well, perhaps to verify that he really was raised from the dead. The result is perilous for Lazarus. The religious authorities decide that they must kill Lazarus too – a reference to the reality that followers of Jesus may need to pay with their lives. The religious authorities are threatened because many people are now deserting them and believing in Jesus. We need to wonder how firm their “believing” will be – the cross is coming. The story of the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem told by John and that told by Mark, Matthew, and Luke are quite similar. John has told a few details the others leave out – the use of palm branches and his reference to the testimony of those who witnessed the sign of Lazarus’ raising from the tomb. John has also left out some of what the others included – the details about Jesus followers entering the city and finding the colt that never had been ridden and the placing of their garments on the colt. All four gospels reference Psalm 118 as the response of the people upon Jesus’ entry – it is a triumphant entry in all of them. John did also reference Zechariah 9:9, a reference absent in Mark and Luke but also present in Matthew (Matthew 21:5). The use of this story by all four gospel writers is also strikingly similar. They agree on the symbolic message of this story. While the placement of the story may be a bit more dramatic for Mark, Matthew, and Luke as the first and only entry of Jesus into Jerusalem the symbolism of the coming of the King is the same. John has spoken of an “hour” which is coming for Jesus. Events in John’s gospel could not happen because Jesus’ “time had not yet come.” This story signals the arrival of the “hour” that has been awaiting Jesus. And the next story will make that even clearer.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, March 12, 2014 Read John 12:1-8 As we begin reading chapter 12 it is important that we note that John’s storyline is now intersecting with the storyline in Mark’s gospel. We have noticed that John and Mark share very little from the Galilean ministry of Jesus – only two stories, the feeding of the 5000 and the Jesus walking on the water. From this point on, in a general way John and Mark will be telling the same story which is commonly called the “Passion Narrative.” We need to pay attention to the similarities and the differences. It is in noting the differences that we have the greatest potential at understanding why each writer told the story as they did. John tells us that it was now six days before Passover. While it is difficult to determine Mark’s time references it seems that Mark’s story also runs over the course of six days. According to Mark, on the first day Jesus enters Jerusalem (Mark 11:1-11). On the second day he cleanses the Temple (Mark 11:12-19). On the third day Jesus’ disciples notice the withered fig tree (Mark 11:20-25). On the fourth Jesus engages in the Temple Controversy with the religious leaders (Mark 11:26). Then two days later Passover is observed (Mark 14:1). Matthew follows Mark for the most part but seems to compress the entry into Jerusalem and the cleansing of the Temple into one day, thus Jesus would have entered Jerusalem five days before Passover according to Matthew and not six as Mark tells it. Incidentally, we will notice that John places the actual entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem five days prior to Passover too, which matches Matthew. Luke is far more ambiguous about his time references. In fact Luke may have been aware that Jesus spent much longer than six days in Jerusalem – something we have noted in John’s storyline. Luke simply leaves out any references to time passing. The order in which events are told also differs between John and Mark. Our reading for today is a story about the anointing of Jesus. This is a story that all four gospel writers tell in some form. John, Mark, and Matthew agree that this event happened in the last days of Jesus’ life. Luke adapts that story and places it in the middle of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Mark and Matthew tell this story just two days before Passover as one of the last things to happen to Jesus before he is arrested and crucified (Mark 14:3-9 and Matthew 26:6-13). John places this story at the beginning of his “Passion Narrative.” John, Mark, and Matthew are all in agreement that this event happened at Bethany. Only John identifies the woman – she is Mary the sister of Lazarus who Jesus just raised from the dead. The woman is anonymous in Mark’s and Matthew’s story – although Mark tells us they were at the house of a leper named Simon and portrays the woman as an outsider who comes uninvited into the house. By the way, Luke also tells us that the event happened in the house of a man named Simon, although this time Simon is a Pharisee, and Luke also pictures the unnamed woman as an intruder. Though told in slightly different ways, John, Mark, and Matthew all agree that the woman is accused of wasting the ointment which could have been sold for a large amount of money to be given to the poor. Only John identifies Judas Iscariot as the protester and in some ways this story serves as a motive for Judas to betray Jesus in John’s story. While Mark and Matthew don’t make the link specifically, they do tell us that Judas Iscariot leaves the scene to go to the religious leaders to plot the death of Jesus so perhaps they are also implying that the event served as motive for Judas. John, Mark, and Matthew all agree that the woman has bought the ointment for Jesus’ burial. What we discover is that John, Mark, and Matthew have told a very similar story –there is much more in agreement than not. It is only the time placement that differs. The story itself may seem somewhat unimportant yet it is remembered as a crucial event during the last days of Jesus’ life. It is logical that John would have placed the story within the scope of stories about Lazarus since he knows the woman as Lazarus’ sister. Thus placing it first makes sense for John. Mark and Matthew do not know of Lazarus and they do not know the identity of this woman. Therefore it makes much more sense for Mark to have placed this story just before the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus and after all of the controversy that led up to Jesus’ betrayal and death. Exactly when the event happened is beyond our ability to determine and actually has little importance. The actions of the woman are powerful. She demonstrates great devotion and faithfulness. Both John and Mark want their readers to identify with this woman and to follow her example with their own lives.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, March 11, 2014 Read John 11:55-57 These few verses move the story forward and set the stage for the final events in John’s gospel. They are summary in nature recapping the past few months. It is good for us at this point to think back over what we have been reading and the timeframe that John has in mind. From at least chapter 7 Jesus has been in Jerusalem and in the territory nearby. John has told us that Jesus arrived for the Feast of Booths. That would have been in late October or early November. John has mentioned another festival of Dedication which would have taken place in late December or early January. Now he tells us that Passover had almost arrived. Passover would have been in late March or early April. That means that in John’s timeframe Jesus has been in or near Jerusalem for about five month. Once again we need to notice that this is very different from the picture Mark and the other synoptic gospels portray. Rather than worry about this difference and wonder who is “right” and who is “wrong”, we need to wonder why each gospel writer portrayed the scene as they did. It is likely that John is reflecting the reality that Jesus was engaged in a dispute with the religious leaders for much longer than a week. So John has told the story as he has simply because that’s likely how it happened. Mark, on the other hand, has likely compressed the story to suit his proclamation of Jesus, the crucified Messiah. If we care about who is more “historical” it is likely that we should side with John. All of this adds so much to the picture of Jesus. We can be thankful for John’s insights and the information that John provides us. And we can be thankful for Mark’s proclamation. Together they fill out the story for us. These few verses provide us with no new information. They remind us of the division that comes about because of Jesus – some believe, others don’t. They remind us of the determination of the religious leaders to put Jesus to death. They add a little suspense to the story by wondering if Jesus will appear or not. However, readers of John’s gospel know by now that he will appear. This little pause in the action prepares us for what is to come.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, March 10, 2014 Read John 11:45-54 The sign of the raising of Lazarus was the last and the most powerful of the signs that Jesus did in John’s gospel. But, like all the other signs, the outcome of this sign is ambiguous. We should not be surprised to hear that some believed and others did not. Signs do not guarantee belief they only help facilitate the possibility of belief. It seems the predominant result of this great sign is that it lead to a “trial” of Jesus in absentia through which he is sentenced to death. In words that are reminiscent of the man who was healed at the Pool of Siloam, some of those who witnessed the sign went to the Pharisees and “told on” Jesus. The Pharisees are now depicted as being somewhat desperate. If Jesus is not stopped it will mean the destruction of the nation and the Temple. There is great irony at work here. The very thing that the Pharisees feared would happen did happen. In 70 AD the Romans did in fact come and destroy the Temple. But the destruction of the Temple was not caused by Jesus – it was the result of the unbelief of the Jewish people. It is telling that the religious leaders recognize that Jesus has been performing many signs. One might think that their acknowledgement of Jesus performing signs might lead to belief in him. But, once again, we need to remember that signs, in and of themselves, are ambiguous. The same thing is true in our time. If we think that miracles will produce faith perhaps we need to think again. If we wonder why God doesn’t just do something spectacular and “seal the deal” then we need to listen to John’s gospel. Signs can produce either belief or unbelief. In fact, signs are at best only those events that facilitate the possibility of belief. Signs can move us alone further on the journey to belief. Or, signs can be missed and lead us deeper into unbelief. The outcome for the religious leaders is the latter – they persist in unbelief and essentially pass judgment at this time against Jesus – his later trials will only be the confirmation of what has already been decided. Another piece of deep irony is provided in the words of the high priest. He says that it is better for one man to die than for the world nation to perish. Of course, what he means is that Jesus is expendable for the sake of preserving the peace. He thinks that the removal of Jesus will help prevent the Romans from destroying the nation. The irony is that he says so much more than what he means. Jesus will indeed die, one man for the sake of all! And the tragedy is that the actions of the Jewish leaders actually lead to the Roman destruction they feared. We have noticed how John has ironically put true words about Jesus into the mouths of his opponents. They wonder if he is going to proclaim the gospel to those in dispersion among the Greek – and Jesus’ church will do exactly that. They wonder if Jesus is going to “kill himself” – and Jesus will lay down his life on the cross in order that he might take it up again. So here, one man will die for all! The result of the sign of the raising of Lazarus will mean that Jesus is no longer welcome in Jerusalem and will remain on the outskirts for the time being. We might have hoped for a better outcome. But, in the end, the gospel of John is not about “signs” – it is about the saving action of God in the person of Jesus. We are now nearing that part of John’s story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, March 9, 2014 Read John 11:1-44 The story of Lazarus and his sisters, Martha and Mary, is unique to John’s gospel. It is clear, however, that Luke is aware of this family since he knows of a story of a visit by Jesus to the home of Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38-42). Luke does not mention Lazarus. Luke does not provide a location for his story of Mary and Martha – to have done so would have necessitated moving Jesus to the area of Jerusalem far too early in the storyline that Luke inherited from Mark. Aside from this rather remote connection John’s use of this story is unique to his gospel. It is striking that Mark, Matthew, and Luke are completely unaware of this great occurrence. None of them mention it. Why do you suppose that is the case? Was it that they simply did not know the story? Or, was it that the story did not fit Mark’s storyline? Where was Mark to fit this story into the story he is telling about Jesus, the Messiah from Galilee who makes one journey to Jerusalem to suffer and die? Of course we cannot know for sure, but it seems to make sense to think of Mark omitting this story on purpose in order to preserve his proclamation. After all, the gospel writers were not simply reporters, telling everything that Jesus said and did. They were evangelists proclaiming a message meant to create believers. The story itself contains many of the techniques that John has been using. There is much misunderstanding going on – something John loves to exploit. Jesus is asked to do something which he refuses to do and then turns around and does on his own terms. There is growth in belief on the part of some in this story, as well as growth into unbelief on the part of others. All of this fits John’s style of writing. A sign is at the center of this story – but the sign does not guarantee belief. In fact, this is the last sign Jesus will do. It is the most powerful. And its outcome is as ambiguous as all the others. John introduces several new details into the story. For the first time John will speak of a disciple as “one whom Jesus loved.” Lazarus is the “disciple who Jesus loved.” We need to remember that the eye-witness authority behind John’s gospel is also spoken of as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” This connection has led some interpreters to speculate that Lazarus is in fact the eye-witness of John’s gospel. While that is possible and it may even be tempting to go down that trail, there are reasons why Lazarus likely was not the eye-witness. It is best for us to leave the eye-witness anonymous. In the scene right before this one, Jesus is removed to the area beyond the Jordan. The reason for his removal becomes clearer in this story – Jesus says that he was glad he was not near Lazarus’ home with the implication that had he been there Lazarus would likely not have died. Of course, we know in John’s gospel that Jesus can heal from afar – the story of the healing of the royal officials son (John 4) – but the point here seems to be that Jesus’ absence facilitated the demise of Lazarus. In classic style John tells us that Mary and Martha send a request to Jesus to come and heal their brother. Jesus refuses. Then, on his own terms, Jesus returns to Mary and Martha. Also in classic style John tells of the misunderstanding of the disciples. When Jesus tells them that he is going to wake Lazarus they think Jesus is speaking of sleep from which Lazarus will awake on his own. In a caring gesture they seek to keep Jesus away from Jerusalem where they know full well his life is in danger. When Jesus tells his disciples that Lazarus is dead they faithfully pledge to follow Jesus back to the Jerusalem death trap. At this point John introduces us to the character, Thomas. Thomas has received such a bad report over the years – here he represents dogged faith since he is willing to go and die with Jesus if he must. This is no doubter. Once back in the territory of Jerusalem John provides us with a bit more data. Lazarus and Martha and Mary live in the town of Bethany – a small community just up and over the Mount of Olives to the east of Jerusalem. It is over that very peak that Jesus will come in Mark’s storyline as he enters Jerusalem. It is clear from the context that Martha and Mary, and presumably their bother Lazarus, are believers in Jesus. Yet, there is still much misunderstanding in this encounter. Martha encounters Jesus first. Her words are cutting. “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died!” Who says that believers can’t question God? Yet, cutting as her words are, Martha is not without hope. Jesus promises Martha that Lazarus will rise from the dead. Martha appears to understand Jesus, but she really doesn’t. She proclaims her belief that Lazarus will rise on the last day. But Jesus is talking about a more powerful resurrection. So he says to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Those who believe in me, even though they die, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die.” This is language much like the promise to the woman at the well that she will never thirst again, or to those 5000 who Jesus fed who are promised that they will never be hungry again. On the level of this world, those promises make little sense, but on a spiritual level they make all the difference. People still die in the confines of this world, but Jesus’ promise is that those who believe in him will pass from death to life. This is language like that used by Jesus to speak of himself as being “from above” – language that Nicodemus misunderstands. Unless we can think beyond this world we will never understand Jesus. In this story, it appears that Martha has understood. She makes a bold and correct confession that Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God, the coming one!” But we will see that Martha really does not yet grasp what Jesus is saying. In the synoptic gospels it is Peter who makes the correct confession when Jesus asks his disciples who they think he is (Mark 8:29). But, Peter also does not fully understand – and is severely reprimanded by Jesus in Mark’s story. Now it is Mary’s turn to encounter Jesus. She approaches him with the same cutting words, “Lord, if you had been here my brother would not have died!” This time Jesus is reduced to tears of compassion for these friends – and also intense anger at the destructive nature of death. The words that are translated, “he was greatly disturbed in spirit and deeply moved” do not do justice to the emotion. Literally, “Jesus guts were ripped apart.” Jesus is moved to weeping. If we remember that, in John’s understanding, Jesus is the Word of God who was with God and was God – the Word who became flesh – the intensity of this moment is even more graphic and powerful. If somehow the very being of God is present in Jesus then it is God who weeps. It is God who is so deeply moved that his inner being is about to explode. There have been some over the years who have been intent on preserving God’s impassionate being. That is not the God we encounter in the Bible – the God of the Bible is “deeply moved” and “grieved” with the things of this world. This is a deeply passionate God! It is this God who now asks where Lazarus has been laid. And John cleverly reprises his words from the earlier encounter of people with Jesus – “come and see!” John interjects the dual response of the Jews to Jesus – some recognize the depth of Jesus’ love – others scorn Jesus and remark that someone who could open the eyes of the blind certainly could have prevented this man from dying. John has a way of tying his story together by referring back to the events in chapter 9. Once again Jesus is described as “greatly disturbed” – the same gut-wrenching emotional word as used before – when he arrives at the tomb. His command is to remove the stone, and now Martha’s misunderstand from earlier is revealed. She had made the right confession but it was a confession that needed to be deepened. Her response gives herself away – she remarks that there will be a stench because Lazarus has been in the tomb for four days. The mention of four days is important. Jewish belief was that a person might yet revive within three days – but not after that. So the comment that Lazarus had been in the tomb four days serves to guarantee that he was really dead. Jesus’ comments when the stone was removed serve as commentary on the whole episode. The purpose of the sign of Lazarus’ rising was so that people might believe. The purpose of Jesus’ absence which led to Lazarus’ death is now clearer too. The whole episode was meant to lead to belief. In one sense this is not so much about Lazarus getting a “second chance” to live as it is about Jesus’ sign which has the potential of leading to belief. Lazarus will die again. The sign will persist. What will be the outcome of this great sign?

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, March 8, 2014 Read John 10:31-42 Ever since the story of the healing of the man at the Pool of Bethzatha the Jews have attempted to kill Jesus. They are not able to do so because Jesus’ “hour” has not yet come. No one takes Jesus life from him – “the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” John tells us that once again they sought to stone Jesus. Their motive is because they are convinced that Jesus is speaking blasphemy because he makes himself equal with God. Of course if Jesus were not equal with God then he would indeed be speaking blasphemy and be subject to stoning. The OT sentence for blasphemy was to be stoned. They will not be successful in stoning Jesus. John does not tell his readers that Jesus’ hour had not yet come – they have heard it often enough to know already. Jesus’ defense is peculiar. John tells us that Jesus quotes from the Law that in fact God had said, “You are all gods.” From a technical point of view, this passage is not written in the Law but comes from Psalm 82. The psalm is a peculiar one with a meaning that eludes most interpreters. The psalm speaks of a “divine council” in heaven where God takes his place at the head. The heavenly beings addressed in the psalm are chastised because they fail in judging rightly and showing partiality to the wicked. It is these heavenly beings that God address with the words, “You are gods” and then tells them that, even so, they will die like mortals. As I said, the psalm eludes interpretation and sounds more like Greek and Roman mythology than OT understanding. All of this makes it difficult to deal with Jesus’ use of this psalm. It seems to run counter to the rest of John’s argument. Surely he is not attempting to say that Jesus is God’s son in the same way all human beings are children of God, is he? Jesus is the unique Son of God – the Word made flesh. This passage is a difficult one to understand. Perhaps the main point of it all is that Jesus escapes the attempt on his life. And so he move across the Jordan to the east of Jerusalem – yet still in the arena of Jerusalem’s control. John tells us that John the Baptist had once baptized there and that many in that area believe in Jesus because what John the Baptist said about him was true. Once again there is a subtle call for followers of John the Baptist to do as their founder had done – follow Jesus. The removal of Jesus to beyond the Jordan has one other purpose in the scope of John’s storyline. The next episode will provide the most powerful and dramatic of Jesus’ signs. But for the sign to happen Jesus must be absent for a time. So the storyline works to accomplish this.