John Chapter 5

A. Jesus heals a man at the pool of Bethesda

1. (John 5:1–4) The pool of Bethesda

Text:
“After this there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew, Bethesda, having five porches. In these lay a great multitude of sick people, blind, lame, paralyzed, waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had.” (John 5:1–4, NKJV)

a. A feast of the Jews:

John does not specify which feast Jesus attended. Scholars have long debated whether this was Passover, Pentecost, or Purim.

i. If it was Passover, then we can trace four Passovers in John’s Gospel (John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55; and here in John 5:1). This provides the framework for understanding that Jesus’ ministry lasted approximately three and a half years.

ii. Regardless of the specific feast, John’s point is that Jesus was faithful to the Law and to the worship of His people. As Deuteronomy commanded, “Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Lord your God in the place which He chooses: at the Feast of Unleavened Bread, at the Feast of Weeks, and at the Feast of Tabernacles” (Deuteronomy 16:16, NKJV).

b. A pool, which is called in Hebrew, Bethesda:

The pool of Bethesda (meaning “House of Mercy”) was located near the Sheep Gate, just north of the temple area. Modern excavations have uncovered its remains, confirming John’s description of five porches.

i. Alford comments: “The expression there is has been thought to import that St. John wrote his Gospel before the destruction of Jerusalem. But this must not be pressed. He might have spoken in the present without meaning to be literally accurate with regard to the moment when he was writing.”

ii. During the Crusader era, Christians honored this site by building a church nearby, and even depicted on the crypt walls the angel stirring the waters (Dods). This shows the long tradition of associating this pool with John 5.

c. For an angel went down… whoever stepped in first… was made well:

This statement explains the tradition that surrounded the pool. Multitudes of afflicted people—blind, lame, and paralyzed—gathered at Bethesda hoping for healing.

i. Some early manuscripts do not include the words from “waiting for the moving of the water” (v. 3) through the end of verse 4. Many scholars believe this was a later explanatory addition, inserted as early as the second century (Tertullian). Even so, John 5:7 shows that this belief was indeed held by those who gathered at the pool: “Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up” (NKJV).

ii. Trench observes: “From MSS. evidence, this verse and the last clause of verse 3 seem not to be by John, but to be a very early insertion.” Whether inspired text or early marginal explanation, the belief in supernatural stirring of the water was well known in the first century.

iii. Some believed the stirring occurred once a year, perhaps at Passover. Others thought it happened at major feast seasons, when the city was crowded with pilgrims (Trapp). Whatever the frequency, multitudes came in hope.

iv. If healings did occur, they were among the many unusual occasions of divine healing recorded in Scripture:

• Poisonous stew made harmless (2 Kings 4:38–41).

• Naaman cleansed by washing in the Jordan (2 Kings 5:10–14).

• A dead man revived by touching Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:20–21).

• The sick healed by Peter’s shadow (Acts 5:14–16).

• The afflicted healed by Paul’s handkerchiefs (Acts 19:11–12).

v. God often works in ways unexpected to human logic. Yet unusual does not always equal divine. Discernment is necessary. As John later warns, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1, NKJV).

Theological Application:

Bethesda was called the “House of Mercy,” yet for many it was a place of hopeless waiting. They put their trust in a legend of stirred water rather than in the living God. Into this scene of despair stepped Jesus, who alone could give true healing. The pool symbolizes the futility of human effort, while Christ’s word and presence reveal the sufficiency of divine grace.

2. (John 5:5–6) Jesus questions a lame man

Text:
“Now a certain man was there who had an infirmity thirty-eight years. When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he already had been in that condition a long time, He said to him, ‘Do you want to be made well?’” (John 5:5–6, NKJV)

a. A certain man was there who had an infirmity thirty-eight years:

The man’s condition was long-standing and debilitating. Thirty-eight years of paralysis is nearly a lifetime. For most of Israel’s history, that number symbolized a generation’s wandering in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 2:14). In a sense, this man’s life had been one long wilderness of disappointment, living so close to the pool of supposed healing yet never being healed.

i. His persistence at the pool demonstrates a faint glimmer of hope, but after nearly four decades of failure, his hope was more habit than expectation.

ii. John wants us to see the severity of the case. If healing came, it would be undeniable that God had done it.

b. When Jesus saw him lying there:

Jesus deliberately chose this man out of the multitude of afflicted people gathered at Bethesda. He did not heal everyone there; rather, He sovereignly set His attention on one.

i. Spurgeon points out the tragedy: “A blindness had come over these people at the pool; there they were, and there was Christ, who could heal them, but not a single one of them sought him. Their eyes were fixed on the water, expecting it to be troubled; they were so taken up with their own chosen way that the true way was neglected.”

ii. Spurgeon compared them to many today who wait for the wrong things instead of turning to Christ:

• Some wait for a more convenient season.

• Some wait for dreams and visions.

• Some wait for signs and wonders.

• Some wait to be compelled.

• Some wait for revival.

• Some wait for special feelings.

• Some wait for a human leader or celebrity.

In their waiting, they miss the One standing before them with power to heal.

iii. Jesus’ choice to focus on one man also illustrates His personal care. Though He could have healed them all, He often works individually, meeting people one by one, drawing them into a personal encounter with Him.

c. Do you want to be made well?

At first glance, the question may seem unnecessary. Who would not want to be healed? Yet Jesus’ words reveal that not every sick person desires wholeness.

i. Long illness often wears down the spirit as much as the body. Alford notes, “It certainly is possible that the man’s long and apparently hopeless infirmity may have given him a look of lethargy and despondency, and the question may have arisen from this.”

ii. Some who are afflicted lose all expectation of change. Hope deferred makes the heart sick (Proverbs 13:12). This man may have been resigned to a life of paralysis, content merely to survive at the edge of the pool.

iii. Barclay insightfully adds: “An eastern beggar often loses a good living by being cured of his disease.” The man may have felt safer with the familiar misery of his condition than with the unknown responsibility of being healed. Healing would mean the end of his begging life and the start of new duties.

iv. It is possible Jesus asked this question during one of the supposed stirrings of the water, as people lunged desperately toward the pool. The man knew he had no chance, no strength, and no helper. Jesus, by His question, turned his attention away from the hopeless pool and toward Himself as the true source of healing.

Theological Application:

This encounter reminds us that Jesus does not force healing or salvation on anyone. He asks, “Do you want to be made well?” True healing begins with the will to be changed, even when change seems impossible.

Spiritually, the question reaches beyond physical paralysis. Many today linger near places of false hope, waiting for something external to fix them—religion, ritual, or circumstance—while ignoring Christ’s invitation. The gospel calls each person to confront Christ’s question personally: Do you really want to be changed? Or are you content to remain as you are?

3. (John 5:7–9) The man replies and Jesus heals him

Text:
“The sick man answered Him, ‘Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; but while I am coming, another steps down before me.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk.’ And immediately the man was made well, took up his bed, and walked. And that day was the Sabbath.” (John 5:7–9, NKJV)

a. Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool:

The man misunderstood Jesus’ question. Instead of directly answering whether he wanted to be healed, he explained why he could not be healed. He assumed Jesus was asking about his strategy for reaching the pool.

i. This shows how easily people confine God’s help to their own narrow categories. The man believed healing was possible only through the waters of Bethesda, not through the Son of God standing before him.

ii. Calvin remarked: “The sick man does what we nearly all do. He limits God’s help to his own ideas and does not dare promise himself more than he conceives in his mind.”

iii. His response also shows a mixture of hope and hopelessness. He had enough hope to remain at the pool year after year, but he also despaired of ever being the first to reach the waters.

iv. Alford observes: “The man’s answer implies the popular belief that whoever stepped in immediately after the bubbling up of the water was made whole.”

b. Rise, take up your bed and walk:

Jesus commanded the impossible. For a man paralyzed for thirty-eight years, the words must have seemed absurd—yet they were filled with divine authority.

i. The word “bed” does not refer to a full-framed bed but to a pallet or mat. Morris explains that the Greek term denotes a simple camp-bed or straw mattress used by the poor.

ii. The command was also symbolic. For thirty-eight years, the bed had carried the man. Now, in obedience to Christ, the man was to carry the bed, testifying that his healing was real and permanent. Barclay notes: “The man might well have said with a kind of injured resentment that for thirty-eight years his bed had been carrying him and there was not much sense in telling him to carry it.”

iii. Dods adds: “He was commanded to take up his bed that he might recognise that the cure was permanent. No doubt many of the cures at the pool were merely temporary.”

iv. Christ’s command demanded faith. The man could have responded with despair—“I cannot do that, why even try?” Instead, something about Jesus’ presence inspired him to obey. His response demonstrated that faith is often expressed in action: attempting what seems impossible at the command of Christ.

c. And immediately the man was made well:

The healing was instantaneous. As he responded to Jesus’ word, strength returned to his body, his paralysis vanished, and he was able to carry his mat.

i. Spurgeon beautifully comments: “Because Jesus told him, he asked no questions, but doubled up his couch, and walked. He did what he was told to do, because he believed in him who spake. Have you such faith in Jesus, poor sinner?”

ii. Trench observes: “He healed the man beside the pool, but without his touching the pool, to show that He could heal without the water.” By healing apart from the waters, Jesus demonstrated that true healing was in Him, not in rituals or traditions.

iii. The New Testament reveals that God uses various means of healing:

• Through the prayer of elders with anointing oil (James 5:14–16).

• Through laying on of hands (Mark 16:17–18).

• Through spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:9).

• Through personal faith (Matthew 9:22).

• Through the faith of others (Mark 2:4–5; Matthew 8:13).

• Through medical treatment (1 Timothy 5:23; James 5:14; Luke 10:34).

Jesus is sovereign and not limited to one method.

d. And that day was the Sabbath:

This detail sets the stage for controversy. The healing itself was a miracle of grace, but because it occurred on the Sabbath, it would provoke a clash with the Jewish authorities. Carrying his mat was considered a violation of Sabbath law by the Pharisees (Jeremiah 17:21–22).

John highlights this to show the growing opposition Jesus faced. The mercy of God stood in stark contrast to the rigid legalism of the religious leaders.

Theological Application:

This miracle demonstrates both the power of Christ and the nature of true faith. The man’s healing did not come through the waters of Bethesda but through obedience to the word of Christ. Spiritually, every sinner stands paralyzed until Christ commands, “Rise.” The same word that commands also empowers. True faith takes Jesus at His word and finds strength to do the impossible.

B. The Sabbath Controversy

1. (John 5:10–13) The Jews ignore the miracle and take offense

Text:
“The Jews therefore said to him who was cured, ‘It is the Sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your bed.’ He answered them, ‘He who made me well said to me, “Take up your bed and walk.”’ Then they asked him, ‘Who is the Man who said to you, “Take up your bed and walk”?’ But the one who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had withdrawn, a multitude being in that place.” (John 5:10–13, NKJV)

a. The Jews therefore said:

Throughout John’s Gospel, the phrase “the Jews” typically refers not to all Jewish people, but specifically to the religious leaders and authorities in Jerusalem.

i. Bruce notes: “Here, as regularly in the Gospel of John, it is important to mark who exactly ‘the Jews’ in question are: in this context they are members of the religious establishment in Jerusalem.”

ii. These were men consumed with maintaining their traditions and authority. Their focus on controlling others blinded them to the glory of God displayed in the healing.

b. It is the Sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your bed:

Instead of rejoicing over a man paralyzed for thirty-eight years being healed, the leaders condemned him for carrying his mat. Their devotion was not to God’s Word but to rabbinic tradition.

i. Carrying a bed-mat was not forbidden by God’s law but by rabbinical interpretation. The commandment was clear: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy… In it you shall do no work” (Exodus 20:8, 10, NKJV). Yet the rabbis had expanded this into hundreds of legalistic prohibitions, turning Sabbath rest into a burden.

ii. Barclay notes their extremes: “The Rabbis of Jesus’ day solemnly argued that a man was sinning if he carried a needle in his robe on the Sabbath. They even argued as to whether he could wear his artificial teeth or his wooden leg.”

iii. Morris summarizes: “Jesus persistently maintained that it is lawful on the sabbath to do good. He ignored the mass of scribal regulations, and thus inevitably came into conflict with the authorities.”

iv. Even in modern times, similar devotion to Sabbath regulations persists. Your note about the 1992 fire in an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood in Israel illustrates this point. Tenants let their homes burn while waiting for rabbinical permission to call the fire department. By the time approval came, three apartments were destroyed. This modern example mirrors the spirit of the leaders in John 5: they were more concerned with man-made rules than with mercy or preservation of life.

c. Who is the Man who said to you, “Take up your bed and walk”?

Notice carefully what the leaders asked. They did not ask, “Who healed you?” but rather, “Who told you to break our Sabbath rules?” Their concern was not the miracle of life restored but the perceived violation of their authority.

i. To the healed man, Jesus was “He who made me well.” To the religious leaders, Jesus was “the Man who breaks the Sabbath.” This contrast reveals the hardness of their hearts.

ii. From the healed man’s perspective, their question must have seemed absurd. As you noted:

“I was carried to the pool today and if I were not healed I would need to be carried home. That’s a lot more work than me carrying my little bed-mat. In healing me and sending me home, Jesus was saving work on the Sabbath, not making more work.”

d. For Jesus had withdrawn, a multitude being in that place:

Jesus did not linger in the commotion. He spoke the word of healing and then blended into the crowd.

i. Alford comments: “Jesus spoke the healing words, and then went on among the crowd, so that no particular attention was attracted to Himself, either by the sick man or others.”

ii. His withdrawal demonstrated both humility and intentionality. He did not come to stage public spectacles. Nor did He intend to heal every person by the pool that day. Instead, He revealed His authority through this one man, setting the stage for the greater confrontation about His identity and authority over the Sabbath.

Theological Application:

This scene is a sobering reminder of how legalism blinds the heart. The leaders, obsessed with protecting their rules, missed the presence of the Messiah in their midst. Their hardness warns us against elevating tradition or personal preference above the clear will of God. The healed man reminds us that Christ’s command brings life, while religious legalism only condemns.

2. (John 5:14–15) Jesus warns the healed man of a greater danger

Text:
“Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, ‘See, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you.’ The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.” (John 5:14–15, NKJV)

a. Afterward Jesus found him:

The Lord intentionally sought out the man again, this time not for physical healing but for spiritual correction. Jesus did not leave him with restored legs but a ruined soul.

i. Christ’s words show that sin is a greater bondage than paralysis. A body healed while the soul remains enslaved is still lost.

ii. Morris notes the verb tense: “See, you have been made well” employs the perfect tense, indicating a permanent cure. This contrasted with temporary “healings” that some may have claimed at Bethesda.

iii. Maclaren suggests that the man’s long condition may have been the result of a sinful lifestyle: “The man’s eight-and-thirty years of illness had apparently been brought on by dissipation. It was a sin of the flesh, avenged in the flesh, that had given him that miserable life.” Whether or not that is true, Jesus warns him that persisting in sin brings worse judgment than decades of paralysis.

iv. The warning echoes Jesus’ later teaching: “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28, NKJV).

b. The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus:

Instead of gratitude or loyalty, the man reported Jesus to the religious leaders.

i. Morris comments: “The man who had been healed seems to have been an unpleasant creature… as soon as he found out the identity of his Benefactor he betrayed Him to the hostile authorities.”

ii. His fear of the authorities outweighed his thankfulness to Christ. This shows how religious intimidation can enslave men, keeping them bound even after God’s mercy is displayed.

iii. Dods notes the severity of Sabbath penalties: citing Lightfoot, “Whosoever on the Sabbath bringeth anything in, or taketh anything out from a public place to a private one, if he hath done this inadvertently, he shall sacrifice for his sin; but if willfully, he shall be cut off and shall be stoned.” Under such threats, the man was quick to shift responsibility to Jesus.

3. (John 5:16–18) Jesus defends His Sabbath actions

Text:
“For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, because He had done these things on the Sabbath. But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.’ Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.” (John 5:16–18, NKJV)

a. For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him:

The religious leaders ignored the miracle and focused instead on their legalistic rules.

i. Bruce explains: “Inciting others to break the law (as they understood it) was worse than breaking it oneself. Therefore they launched a campaign against Jesus which was not relaxed until his death some eighteen months later.”

ii. Their fanatic devotion to rabbinic Sabbath traditions is illustrated in the extreme applications of the Law. For instance, Deuteronomy 23:12–14 required sanitation in Israel’s camps. The rabbis applied this to Jerusalem itself as “the camp of the Lord,” and when combined with Sabbath travel restrictions, they concluded that a person could not relieve themselves on the Sabbath day. Such absurdities show the lengths of man-made tradition.

b. And sought to kill Him:

The hostility of the leaders had a deeper spiritual root. Their hatred of Jesus revealed their hatred of the Father, though they claimed to be His representatives. As Jesus later told them: “You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do” (John 8:44, NKJV).

c. My Father has been working until now, and I have been working:

Jesus did not defend Himself by claiming He technically avoided work. Instead, He openly declared His authority to work as His Father works.

i. Philo, a Jewish philosopher of that era, wrote: “God never stops working, for as it is the property of fire to burn and of snow to be cold so of God to work.” (cited in Dods).

ii. Morrison contrasts the pagan and biblical views of work: “In the old world, it was hardly an honourable thing to work. It was a thing for slaves, and serfs, and strangers, not for freeborn men… It was a revolution when Jesus taught ‘God loves.’ But it was hardly less revolutionary when He taught ‘God works.’”

iii. Clarke reminds us that God’s rest in Genesis 2:2 did not mean inactivity: “Though he rested from creating, he never ceased from preserving and governing that which he had formed: in this respect he can keep no sabbaths.”

iv. Critics who mock God for “needing a nap” after six days of creation miss the point. The Sabbath was instituted for man, not God (Mark 2:27). Scripture is clear: “Behold, He who keeps Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep” (Psalm 121:4, NKJV).

v. Jesus’ statement, “My Father has been working… and I have been working,” asserted His unity with the Father. Tenney notes: “His explanation shows that he did not claim identity with the Father as one person, but he asserted his unity with the Father in a relationship that could be described as sonship.”

d. But also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God:

The leaders understood perfectly what Jesus claimed. By calling God “My Father” in this unique sense, He was declaring equality with God.

i. Morris notes: “He was claiming that God was His Father in a special sense. He was claiming that He partook of the same nature as His Father. This involved equality.” The Greek verbs “broke” and “said” are continuous, indicating that Jesus habitually broke their Sabbath traditions and habitually claimed equality with God.

ii. Alford emphasizes: “The individual use of ‘MY FATHER’ by Jesus had a totally distinct, and in their view a blasphemous meaning; this latter especially, because He thus made God a participator in His crime of breaking the sabbath.”

iii. Morgan notes: “It should be carefully observed that He did not deny the accuracy of their deduction, but continued to speak as One who claimed such equality of authority.”

iv. Augustine insightfully said: “Behold, the Jews understand what the Arians do not understand.” The Jewish leaders recognized the claim of deity. Modern heretical groups, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, repeat the ancient Arian error by denying that Jesus is truly God.

Theological Application:

This section demonstrates both the blindness of legalism and the boldness of Jesus. The leaders clung to man-made rules and missed the Messiah. Jesus, far from softening His claims, declared His unity with the Father, fully aware that they would consider this blasphemy. For the believer, this passage reaffirms the deity of Christ and calls us to worship Him not only as the Son of God, but as God the Son, who works even now to preserve, govern, and redeem His creation.

C. Jesus Explains His Relationship to the Father

1. (John 5:19–20) The Son does as the Father does

Text:
“Then Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.’” (John 5:19–20, NKJV)

a. Then Jesus answered and said to them:

Following the Sabbath controversy, Jesus entered into one of the most profound explanations of His relationship with the Father. The healing at Bethesda and His claim to be working as His Father works (John 5:17–18) opened the door for this discourse.

i. Leon Morris observes: “The language Jesus uses throughout is thoroughly Rabbinic.” His argument would have resonated with the style of discussion familiar to Jewish leaders, but His content went far beyond rabbinic categories, claiming unique unity with the Father.

ii. This passage is rich with Trinitarian theology. Here, John gives us one of the clearest windows into the inner relationship between the Father and the Son.

b. The Son can do nothing of Himself:

Jesus declared His complete dependence upon the Father. As God the Son, He never acts independently or contrary to the Father’s will. His submission is voluntary, not forced.

i. This directly addressed the Sabbath issue: Jesus was not arbitrarily telling a man to carry his bed. He acted in harmony with the Father. His authority flowed from perfect unity with the Father’s will.

ii. Morris notes: “It is not simply that He does not act in independence of the Father, He cannot act in independence of the Father.” The impossibility of acting alone is rooted not in weakness but in perfect unity of essence and will.

iii. This dependence underscores the Incarnation: though fully God, the Son lived in perfect obedience to the Father. As Paul said, “He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8, NKJV).

c. Whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner:

Jesus claimed that His actions perfectly reflect the Father’s. There is no difference in purpose, no division in mission.

i. Dods comments: “The Father is not passive in the matter, merely allowing Jesus to discover what He can of the Father’s will; but the Father shows Him.” Jesus did not guess or approximate the Father’s work; He fully revealed it.

ii. Bruce recalls C.H. Dodd’s insight: this may contain an “embedded parable.” Just as a boy in Joseph’s carpenter shop learned to imitate his father’s work, so the Son mirrors the Father’s activity perfectly.

iii. This rebukes the common but false distinction that pits the Father as the stern Judge and the Son as the loving Savior. The will of the Father and the work of the Son are one. As Jesus later declared: “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30, NKJV).

iv. Trench rightly concludes: “He is explaining also, by inference, the mystery of the Incarnation — that God the Son in becoming Man ceased not to be God, and that the Personality of Jesus is the Personality of God the Son.”

d. For the Father loves the Son:

The relationship between the Father and the Son is defined by eternal love, not hierarchy of worth. The Father’s love is continuous, unbroken, and absolute.

i. Morris notes: “The Father loves the Son (the tense denotes a continuing habitual love; the Father never ceases to love the Son).”

ii. John had already affirmed this truth earlier: “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand” (John 3:35, NKJV). Bruce points out that the use of phileō here versus agapaō in John 3:35 does not change the substance of the claim—it is still an eternal, perfect, divine love.

e. He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel:

The leaders were astonished that Jesus healed a paralyzed man and commanded him to carry his mat on the Sabbath. Yet Jesus promised they would see far greater works.

i. These “greater works” include raising the dead (John 5:21, 25) and executing divine judgment (John 5:22, 27–29). Both are prerogatives of God alone, yet Jesus claimed them as His own.

ii. Their marvel would not necessarily lead to faith. Many would respond not with belief but with intensified hostility, because His claims to divine authority directly challenged their self-made system.

Theological Application:

This passage establishes the unity and equality of the Father and the Son while affirming their distinct persons. Jesus is not a rival deity or a lesser being. He is the perfect revealer of the Father, fully sharing His nature and will. For the believer, this means that in seeing Jesus we see the Father (John 14:9). His works are the Father’s works; His will is the Father’s will. To reject the Son is to reject the Father; to honor the Son is to honor the Father.

2. (John 5:21–23) The works of the Father, the works of the Son

Text:
“For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” (John 5:21–23, NKJV)

a. As the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will:

Here Jesus places Himself side by side with the Father in the greatest of all divine works — the power to give life.

i. Resurrection is the ultimate act of power. The religious leaders focused on whether Jesus violated their Sabbath rules, but Jesus claimed an authority infinitely greater: the ability to raise the dead and impart eternal life.

ii. Clarke observes: “Here our Lord points out his sovereign power and independence; he gives life according to his own will — not being obliged to supplicate for the power by which it was done, as the prophets did; his own will being absolute and sufficient in every case.” Unlike Elijah or Elisha, who prayed for God to restore life, Jesus simply speaks life because He is life (John 11:25).

iii. This statement anticipates His later works: raising Jairus’ daughter (Mark 5:41–42), the widow’s son at Nain (Luke 7:14–15), Lazarus (John 11:43–44), and ultimately His own resurrection (John 10:18).

b. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son:

The second divine prerogative given to the Son is judgment. God the Father entrusted this role entirely to Christ, making Him the Judge of all humanity.

i. Even in His earthly ministry, Jesus served as a kind of judge. His very presence exposed hearts. Peter wept when Jesus looked at him after his denial (Luke 22:61–62). The rich young ruler walked away sorrowful (Mark 10:21–22). These were not condemnations but encounters with perfect holiness that revealed sin.

ii. Morrison insightfully writes: “Wherever Jesus was, there was the element of judgment… there was always self-reproach where Jesus was. Men were ashamed of themselves, they knew not why. His life was an unceasing act of love, and yet it was an unceasing act of judgment.”

iii. Scripture confirms this final authority: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:10, NKJV). On that day, it is not the Father but the Son who will sit as Judge of every man.

c. That all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father:

The purpose of giving the Son the role of Judge was not only for the administration of justice but to guarantee that all humanity would honor the Son equally with the Father.

i. This is an unmistakable claim to deity. If Jesus were a mere creature, then to honor Him as the Father is honored would be blasphemy and idolatry. Instead, the Son is worthy of the same glory, worship, and reverence as the Father.

ii. Alford explains: “All must honour Him with equal honour to that which they pay to the Father — and whosoever does not, however he may imagine that he honours or approaches God, does not honour Him at all; because He can only be known or honoured by us as ‘THE FATHER WHO SENT HIS SON.’”

iii. This verse demolishes the claim of any religion that seeks to honor God while rejecting Christ. Jesus is explicit: “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” There is no approach to the Father except through the Son (John 14:6).

iv. Trench rightly emphasizes: “The Incarnation is every whit as much The Father’s act as it is The Son’s: The Father ‘sent,’ The Son ‘came.’” Rejecting the Son dishonors the Father who sent Him.

Theological Application:

In these verses, Jesus claims for Himself the two highest divine prerogatives: the power to give life and the authority to judge. These are not delegated in weakness but exercised in perfect unity with the Father’s will. For believers, this is both a comfort and a warning. It comforts us because the One who gives life is also the One who will judge us — and He is our Savior. It warns us because to dishonor Christ is to dishonor God Himself. Neutrality toward Jesus is impossible; to fail to worship Him is to reject the Father.

3. (John 5:24–27) From death to life in the Son of God

Text:
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.” (John 5:24–27, NKJV)

a. He who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life:

Jesus assured His hearers that eternal life begins the moment one believes. Everlasting life is not merely a future hope but a present reality for those who hear His word and trust in the Father who sent Him.

i. This parallels John 3:16, where everlasting life comes through faith in the Son. Here, Jesus ties belief to both Himself and the Father, showing their perfect unity. True belief in the Father necessarily entails belief in the Son, and vice versa (John 14:1).

ii. Such a statement is staggering. Jesus claimed that eternal destiny hinges on hearing His word. As you noted, these are either the delusions of a madman or the declarations of God Himself. Neutrality is impossible.

iii. Spurgeon stresses the simplicity of salvation: “It does not appear from our text that everlasting life is communicated by drops of water, or in any other ceremonial manner; but the command is, ‘Hear, and your soul shall live.’” Rituals cannot save; hearing and believing Christ’s word does.

b. Shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life:

One mark of everlasting life is deliverance from judgment. Believers do not face condemnation for sin (Romans 8:1), because their guilt has been removed in Christ.

i. Clarke explains: “Has changed his country, or place of abode. Death is the country where every Christless soul lives. The man who knows not God lives a dying life, or a living death; but he who believes in the Son of God passes over from the empire of death, to the empire of life.”

ii. Salvation is not probation. Believers do not await judgment to see if they will be condemned; they have already crossed from death to life. The verb “has passed” is in the perfect tense, indicating a completed, irreversible action.

c. The dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live:

Jesus extended His claim beyond the spiritually dead to include the physically dead. His voice has power to summon life from the grave.

i. Already, the spiritually dead can hear His voice and live through faith. But Jesus also pointed to a coming hour when the physically dead will hear His voice and be raised — a theme He will expand later in this discourse (John 5:28–29).

ii. These words foreshadow His raising of Lazarus, when Jesus cried out, “Lazarus, come forth!” and the dead man obeyed (John 11:43–44). It also anticipates the final resurrection at the last day (1 Thessalonians 4:16).

d. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself:

This is one of the clearest affirmations of Christ’s deity. The Father and the Son share the divine attribute of aseity — self-existence, life that is not derived from any other source.

i. All created life is contingent and dependent. Our existence is fragile, dependent on parents, breath, and environment. But the Son possesses life inherently, just as the Father does.

ii. Maclaren reflects on the paradox: “What a paradox it is to say that it is ‘given’ to Him to have ‘life in Himself’! And when was that gift given? In the depths of eternity.” This points to the eternal generation of the Son — distinct from the Father, yet equal in divine essence.

iii. Here Jesus rejects two later theological errors:

• Sabellianism (Oneness/“Jesus Only”) — which confuses the Father and the Son, failing to see their distinction.

• Arianism (denying Jesus’ deity) — which makes Jesus a created being. His claim of self-existent life contradicts both errors.

iv. John 1:1 captures the balance: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Distinct from the Father, yet fully equal.

e. And has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man:

Jesus linked His role as Judge not only to His deity but also to His humanity.

i. As “Son of Man,” Jesus identifies with humanity. He knows our frailty, temptation, and suffering (Hebrews 4:15). His judgment will be perfectly just because He lived as one of us.

ii. Yet the title “Son of Man” also recalls Daniel 7:13–14, where the Son of Man receives authority, glory, and an everlasting kingdom from the Ancient of Days. Jesus claimed to be the fulfillment of that prophecy, the divine-human Judge of all nations.

Theological Application:

These verses reveal both the grace and authority of Christ. Grace, because the believer already possesses everlasting life and need not fear condemnation. Authority, because the Son gives life at His will and will one day summon the dead from their graves. The One who is both Son of God and Son of Man is our Savior and our Judge. For the believer, this means eternal security. For the unbeliever, it means there is no escaping the voice of the Son of God.

4. (John 5:28–30) The reality of the Son’s coming judgment

Text:
“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth — those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.” (John 5:28–30, NKJV)

a. The hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice:

Jesus expanded His earlier claim (John 5:25) that the spiritually dead can hear His voice and live. Now He speaks of the final resurrection, when all the physically dead will hear His voice and rise.

i. The authority of Christ is so great that even the dead respond when He speaks. At the tomb of Lazarus, He cried, “Lazarus, come forth!” and the dead man obeyed (John 11:43–44). In the same way, at the last day His voice will summon every soul from the grave.

ii. This includes all humanity — righteous and wicked alike. The resurrection will not be selective in existence but in destiny.

iii. Morris explains: “This does not mean that salvation is on the basis of good works, for this very Gospel makes it plain over and over again that men enter eternal life when they believe on Jesus Christ. But the lives they live form the test of the faith they profess.”

b. The resurrection of life… the resurrection of condemnation:

Two destinies await humanity: eternal life or eternal condemnation. Both involve bodily resurrection, but the character of the resurrection differs according to faith and works.

i. The resurrection of life belongs to those who, through faith in Christ, are declared righteous. Their works give evidence of their faith (James 2:18, Ephesians 2:10).

ii. The resurrection of condemnation awaits those who reject Christ and live in unbelief and sin. Their works testify against them (Revelation 20:12–15).

iii. Tenney notes: “The double resurrection assumes that both the righteous and the wicked will receive bodies in the future life and that presumably each body will express the character of the person who is resurrected.” This means resurrection bodies are not neutral; they are suited either for glory or for judgment.

iv. This teaching echoes Daniel 12:2: “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt.” The Old and New Testaments alike teach two eternal destinies.

c. My judgment is righteous:

Jesus assured His hearers that His judgment will be perfectly just, because He does nothing apart from the Father.

i. He repeats the themes of His unity with the Father: “I can of Myself do nothing … I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.” His judgment is free from self-interest, bias, or error.

ii. His judgment is righteous because it reflects both divine holiness and divine love. The same Son who gave His life for sinners will also judge those who reject His gift.

iii. The believer can rest in this promise: the Judge is the One who also bore our judgment on the cross (Isaiah 53:5–6; Romans 8:1). For the unbeliever, this is a fearful truth: the rejected Savior will be their Judge.

Theological Application:

This passage underscores the eternal seriousness of Christ’s claims. Every person will one day rise — not to oblivion, but to face the voice of the Son of God. Neutrality is impossible; eternity holds either resurrection to life or resurrection to condemnation. For the Christian, this is a source of hope, reminding us that death does not have the final word. For the unbeliever, it is a solemn warning that rejecting the Son means facing Him as Judge.

D. The Five-Fold Testimony to Who Jesus Is

1. (John 5:31–32) Jesus tells of testimony beyond His own regarding Himself

Text:
“If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true.” (John 5:31–32, NKJV)

a. If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true:

Jesus acknowledged the principle established in the Law: one person’s testimony, even His own, was not sufficient legal proof.

i. Deuteronomy 19:15 declared, “By the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.” Jesus placed Himself under this legal principle, not because His testimony lacked truth, but because it required validation according to God’s law.

ii. By adopting this principle, Jesus demonstrated His submission to the Father’s order. He never claimed special exemption from God’s standards but fulfilled them perfectly (Matthew 5:17).

iii. This also confronts the religious leaders with their own legal standards. They demanded proof, and Jesus would provide it — not merely by words, but by multiple authoritative witnesses.

b. There is another who bears witness of Me:

Jesus assured His hearers that independent testimony existed. In the verses that follow, He points to John the Baptist, His own miraculous works, the Father’s witness, and the Scriptures themselves.

i. These multiple witnesses confirmed His claims as the Son of God. Jesus did not merely appeal to inward conviction; He gave objective, external testimony.

ii. Bruce comments: “Jesus found it important to give them reason to believe beyond what He said about Himself.” This shows the patience and grace of Christ, meeting people even in their unbelief.

2. (John 5:33–35) The testimony of John the Baptist

Text:
“You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. Yet I do not receive testimony from man, but I say these things that you may be saved. He was the burning and shining lamp, and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light.” (John 5:33–35, NKJV)

a. You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth:

The religious leaders themselves had investigated John the Baptist (John 1:19–28). They knew his ministry, his character, and his message. John consistently testified that Jesus was the Lamb of God (John 1:29).

i. Jesus reminded them of John’s testimony, not because He needed human validation, but so that they might consider it and be saved.

ii. John’s ministry was prophetic in nature. Like Elijah, he stood outside the religious establishment, calling Israel to repentance and preparing the way for the Messiah.

b. He was the burning and shining lamp, and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light:

Jesus described John as a lamp — one who bore light but was not the Light itself (John 1:8).

i. Clarke observes: “The expression of lamp our Lord took from the ordinary custom of the Jews, who termed their eminent doctors the lamps of Israel.” John was a lamp, but Jesus is the eternal Light of the world (John 8:12).

ii. Barclay highlights several aspects of John’s lamp-like ministry:

• A lamp bears a borrowed light. John did not generate light but reflected God’s truth.

• A lamp gives warmth. John’s message came from a burning heart, not cold intellectualism.

• A lamp guides. John pointed men toward repentance and toward the Messiah.

• A lamp consumes itself. In giving light, John’s ministry was spent and diminished, preparing the way for Christ (John 3:30).

iii. The leaders were “willing for a time to rejoice in his light.” They initially welcomed John’s preaching because they hoped he announced political deliverance from Rome. But when John preached repentance and pointed to Christ, they rejected both his message and his witness.

iv. Clarke notes: “They were exceedingly rejoiced to hear that the Messiah was come, because they expected him to deliver them out of the hands of the Romans; but when a spiritual deliverance, of infinitely greater moment was preached to them, they rejected both it and the light which made it manifest.”

Theological Application:

John’s testimony shows that God never leaves Himself without witness. The leaders had every reason to believe: John the Baptist’s testimony, the works of Christ, the Father’s voice, and the Scriptures all pointed to Jesus as the Messiah. Yet they hardened their hearts. This is a sober warning that hearing truth is not enough; it must be received in faith. For believers, John’s example reminds us to be lamps — burning with borrowed light, guiding others to Christ, even if it costs us everything.

3. (John 5:36) The testimony of the works of Jesus

Text:
“But I have a greater witness than John’s; for the works which the Father has given Me to finish — the very works that I do — bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me.” (John 5:36, NKJV)

a. A greater witness than John’s... the very works that I do:

Jesus pointed beyond John the Baptist’s testimony to His own miraculous works. These works were undeniable evidence of His divine identity.

i. This whole controversy began with a healing — the restoration of a man paralyzed for thirty-eight years (John 5:5–9). Such an act went far beyond human ability and demonstrated divine power.

ii. Unlike false claimants or prophets, Jesus’ miracles were consistent, public, and confirmed by the transformation of lives. They were not for show but for compassion.

b. The very works that I do; bear witness of Me:

Most of Jesus’ miracles were simple acts of mercy — giving sight to the blind, feeding the hungry, cleansing lepers, and raising the dead. These works revealed the heart of God more than any mere display of power could.

i. The Jews expected the Messiah to demonstrate miraculous power in political and military deliverance from Rome. When Jesus used divine power instead to relieve human suffering, they rejected the testimony of His works.

ii. Yet His miracles consistently fulfilled the Messianic prophecies: “Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then the lame shall leap like a deer, and the tongue of the dumb sing” (Isaiah 35:5–6, NKJV). His works bore witness that He was indeed sent from the Father.

4. (John 5:37–38) The testimony of the Father

Text:
“And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe.” (John 5:37–38, NKJV)

a. The Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me:

The Father’s testimony confirmed Jesus’ identity in several ways.

i. In Old Testament prophecy, the Father bore witness of the coming Messiah (Genesis 3:15; Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 53).

ii. At Jesus’ baptism, the Father declared openly, “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22, NKJV).

iii. Each miracle, teaching, and act of Christ carried the Father’s seal of approval. To reject Jesus was to reject the Father’s testimony.

b. But you do not have His word abiding in you:

The leaders could not receive the Father’s testimony because His word was not alive within them.

i. They could not claim ignorance, for God’s Word had been entrusted to them (Romans 3:2). Yet they read it without faith and without allowing it to take root in their hearts.

ii. They had knowledge of Scripture but not the abiding Word of God. As a result, they rejected the One whom the Father sent.

5. (John 5:39) The testimony of the Scriptures

Text:
“You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.” (John 5:39, NKJV)

a. You search the Scriptures:

The Jewish leaders prided themselves on their devotion to the Scriptures. They read, memorized, and debated them continually, convinced that eternal life was found in the sacred writings.

i. Morris notes: “They read them with a wooden and superstitious reverence for the letter, and never penetrated into the great truths to which they pointed.”

ii. Barclay adds: “They read it not to search for God but to find arguments to support their own positions. They did not really love God; they loved their own ideas about Him.”

iii. Bruce comments on the verb “search” (eraunao): it means to track diligently, like a hunter following a trail. Their scrutiny of Scripture was painstaking, yet they missed its true goal.

b. These are they which testify of Me:

The very Scriptures the leaders studied so carefully bore witness to Jesus. From Genesis to Malachi, the entire Old Testament pointed forward to Christ.

i. The sacrifices, the priesthood, the tabernacle, the feasts, and the prophets all spoke of Him.

ii. If they truly understood the Scriptures, they would have recognized Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promises. Their rejection of Him exposed their superficial reading of God’s Word.

Theological Application:

Jesus presented three witnesses beyond John the Baptist: His works, the Father, and the Scriptures. Together, they formed an unshakable case. The tragedy was that the very men entrusted with God’s Word ignored these witnesses and rejected the Messiah. This is a warning to us as well: Bible knowledge without faith and obedience leads only to pride and blindness. True study of Scripture must lead us to Christ.

6. (John 5:40–44) The reason for their unbelief

Text:
“But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. I do not receive honor from men. But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in you. I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God?” (John 5:40–44, NKJV)

a. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life:

Despite having every testimony — John the Baptist, the works of Christ, the Father’s witness, and the Scriptures — the leaders refused to come to Jesus. Their unbelief was not intellectual but volitional.

i. Spurgeon remarks: “Christ is a person, a living person, full of power to save. He has not placed His salvation in sacraments, or books, or priests, but He has kept it in Himself; and if you want to have it you must come to Him.” Eternal life is found only in union with Christ, not in rituals or external religion.

ii. Their refusal also exposed the limits of their Scripture study. As Jesus said earlier, “You search the Scriptures… and these are they which testify of Me” (John 5:39, NKJV). Spurgeon warns: “You may be Bible readers and yet perish, but this can never happen if you come to Jesus by faith.”

iii. Alford observes: “The words ‘Ye are not willing to come’ set forth strikingly the freedom of the will, on which the unbeliever’s condemnation rests.” Their guilt lay in their unwillingness, not lack of evidence.

iv. Spurgeon gave a sobering warning: “The day will come when you will wring your hands in anguish to think that you despised that life… amid the terrors of judgment, when there shall open wide before you the gates of hell.”

b. I do not receive honor from men:

Jesus did not seek human applause or validation. His mission was not driven by self-interest but by obedience to the Father and love for souls.

i. Clarke explains: “I do not stand in need of you or your testimony. I act neither through self-interest nor vanity. Your salvation can add nothing to Me, nor can your destruction injure Me.”

ii. This contrasts the religious leaders, who lived for human praise and recognition. Jesus stood free from the trap of man’s approval.

c. That you do not have the love of God in you:

The root problem was not a lack of knowledge but a lack of love for God. Their rejection of Christ revealed the absence of genuine devotion to God.

i. Intellectual knowledge of Scripture, without love for God, produces arrogance rather than faith (1 Corinthians 8:1–2).

ii. They clothed their rebellion with theological sophistication, but Jesus saw through to their hearts.

d. If another comes in his own name, him you will receive:

Jesus warned of their openness to deception. Because they rejected the true Christ, they would embrace false messiahs.

i. Alford notes this points to the final Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2:3–12), who will exalt himself above God and deceive many.

ii. Yet this prophecy also had partial fulfillments in history. Bruce points to Simeon bar Kokhba in AD 132, hailed by many rabbis as Messiah. His revolt ended in devastating ruin for Israel. Rejection of the true Christ always opens the door to destructive counterfeits.

e. How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God?

The fatal flaw was pride. They longed for honor from men and sacrificed honor from God.

i. Spurgeon, in his sermon Why Men Cannot Believe in Christ, gave piercing insights:

• “The mere fact of receiving honor, even if that honor be rightly rendered, may make faith in Christ a difficulty.”

• “When a man gets to feel that he ought to be honored, he is in extreme danger.”

• “Always receiving this undeserved honor, they deceived themselves into believing that they deserved it.”

• “The praise of men generally turns the receivers of it into great cowards.”

• “Many live on the breath of their fellow men; to be approved — to be applauded — that is their heaven; but to be despised… oh no, they would sooner go to hell than bear that.”

ii. Clarke comments: “The grand obstacle to the salvation of the scribes and Pharisees was their pride, vanity, and self-love. They chose rather to lose their souls than to forfeit their reputation among men.”

iii. Dods adds: “Seeking credit as religious men from one another, they necessarily habituated themselves to current ideas, and blotted out Divine glory from their mind.”

iv. Tasker concludes: “They had accused Jesus of acting independently of God; He now accuses them of displaying that independence. The motive of their actions is not love for God but the approval of their fellows.”

Theological Application:

The root of unbelief is not lack of evidence but lack of willingness. Pride and love of human honor blind men to divine truth. These religious leaders, who had the Scriptures and the promises, rejected the very One to whom they all pointed. Their condemnation shows that religion without humility and love for God leads only to ruin. True faith requires coming to Christ, seeking the honor of God rather than the fleeting praise of men.

7. (John 5:45–47) The testimony of Moses

Text:
“Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in whom you trust. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:45–47, NKJV)

a. If you believed Moses, you would believe Me:

Jesus concluded His case against the unbelief of the Jewish leaders with the strongest possible witness: Moses, the very one they claimed as their authority.

i. The leaders placed their trust in Moses, but ironically, it was Moses who accused them. They failed to see that to reject Christ was to reject Moses, for Moses wrote of Him.

ii. Their unbelief was not due to loyalty to Moses, but to rejection of the spiritual reality to which Moses pointed. Their hypocrisy was exposed.

b. For he wrote about Me:

Jesus explicitly declared that Moses’ writings pointed to Him. This was not a vague connection but a Christ-centered reading of the Torah.

i. Deuteronomy 18:15 — “The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear.” This was a direct Messianic prophecy, fulfilled in Christ.

ii. Numbers 21:8–9 — The bronze serpent lifted in the wilderness foreshadowed Christ lifted on the cross (John 3:14–15).

iii. Numbers 20:8–12; 1 Corinthians 10:4 — The rock that gave water in the wilderness was a type of Christ, the source of living water.

iv. Leviticus 1–7 — The seven Levitical offerings prefigured different aspects of Christ’s sacrificial death, whether as burnt offering, peace offering, or sin offering.

v. The Tabernacle itself foreshadowed Christ’s ministry. Romans 3:25 refers to Jesus as the propitiation — the mercy seat — where God’s justice and mercy meet.

vi. Exodus 21:5–6; Psalm 40:6–8 — The law of the bondservant pointed to Christ’s willing submission to the Father, fulfilled in His incarnation and obedience unto death.

vii. Psalm 40:7 — “Behold, I come; in the scroll of the book it is written of Me.” The entirety of Scripture testifies to Christ. This was fulfilled when Jesus taught on the road to Emmaus, “beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself” (Luke 24:27).

viii. Morgan comments: “Thus the writings of Moses were prophetic. In them nothing was completed. They pointed on to other things, which came to pass when He came. Thus in this word we find at once the authority and limitation of Moses.”

ix. Alford adds: “This is an important testimony by the Lord to the subject of the whole Pentateuch; it is concerning Him. It is also a testimony to the fact, of Moses having written those books, which were then, and are still, known by his name.”

c. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?

Jesus pressed the conclusion: unbelief in Moses’ testimony meant unbelief in Christ Himself.

i. Jesus did not present a new faith or a departure from Moses but the fulfillment of what Moses had always written.

ii. If they failed to believe Moses, whom they claimed to trust, there was little chance they would believe Christ, the One Moses foretold.

iii. This exposes the hardness of unbelief: it is not about evidence, for they had overwhelming testimony from John the Baptist, the works of Jesus, the Father, the Scriptures, and Moses. Their problem was the willful rejection of truth.

Theological Application:

This final testimony makes clear that the Old Testament and the New Testament form one unified witness to Jesus Christ. To reject Christ is to reject Moses, and to reject Moses is to reject Christ. The Pharisees, who prided themselves on fidelity to Moses, stood condemned by the very one in whom they claimed to trust. For us, this underscores the necessity of reading all Scripture with Christ at the center. The Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, and the Gospels speak in one voice: Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and God the Son.