petra1000

Problem: Jesus declared to the Jews, “You have neither heard His [God’s] voice at any time, nor seen His form.” Yet the voice of God was heard many times in the OT (cf. 1 Sam. 3:4–14), and the Father spoke from heaven three times during Jesus’ earthly ministry (Matt. 3:17; 17:5; John 12:28).

Solution: There are a number of interpretations of this passage. First, some claim that Jesus is simply referring to the crowd to whom He is ministering here, thus, not excluding the fact that God’s voice had been heard by others. However, this seems unlikely in view of the sweeping phrase “at any time,” as well as the fact that Jesus seems to be addressing the Jewish nation in general which rejected Him (cf. John 1:10–11; 5:39; 12:37).

Second, still others believe Jesus is contrasting their state of knowledge with that of the OT prophets who heard God’s voice and saw His form (manifested in theophanies). If so, their inability to understand it was due to the fact that they were “not willing” to respond to God speaking in and through it (John 5:40).

Third, many scholars hold that this refers to their not heeding God’s unique or inner voice speaking to their hearts, since they were not receptive to His Word (cf. 1 Cor. 2:14). This fits with the fact that they could search the Scripture (John 5:39) and still miss its main message, Christ. In addition, the reference to the Father’s testimony of Him (v. 37) may be a reference to the voice from heaven at Jesus’ baptism, which, like the later voice from heaven (John 12:28), they dismissed as “thunder” (John 12:29).

See All Problems

Problem: In this verse Jesus rejected human testimony about Himself, insisting, “I do not receive testimony from man.” But elsewhere He accepted Peter’s testimony that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt. 16:16–18). In fact, even in this same book (John 15:27) Jesus said to His disciples, “And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning.”

Solution: The difference in these statements is due to the circumstances of the testimony. He did not accept mere human testimony to establish who He was, but He did accept it to propagate who He was. God, by miraculous acts, established who Jesus was (cf. Acts 2:22; Heb. 2:3–4), not human beings. On the other hand, once humans discovered what God had disclosed, their testimony was valid. Even after Peter’s great confession, Jesus reminded him that “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you” (Matt. 16:17). The matter can be summarized in this way:

Problem: In John 8:14 Jesus said, “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is true.” But here in John 5:31 He seems to say just the opposite, namely, “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true.”

Solution: There are two ways to understand this verse—hypothetically or actually. On the first interpretation, Jesus is saying in essence, “Even if you don’t accept my testimony about Myself, you should accept that of John the Baptist in whose ministry you rejoiced” (cf. 5:32).

Others take the verse as declarative, not hypothetical, claiming both texts are true, but in different senses. That is, everything Jesus said was actually true, but officially it was only considered true if it was verified by “two or three witnesses” (Deut. 19:15). Since Jesus was “truth” incarnate (John 14:6), everything He said was true. However, since He is trying to establish His claims to the Jews, He notes that they need not accept His words alone, but also the witness of the Scriptures and the Father.

Problem: In the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) Jesus seemed to go out of His way to avoid claiming He was the Jewish Messiah. He would ask His disciples in private (Matt 16:13) and would sometimes exhort people who discovered it “to tell no man” (see comments on Matt. 16:20). Yet here in John the woman of Samaria said, “I know that Messiah is coming who is called Christ” (John 4:25). Jesus forthrightly volunteered, “I who speak to you am He” (v. 26).

Solution: Here Jesus was in Samaria, not Judea. The Jews of Jesus’ day had a distorted concept of the Messiah, namely, as one who would deliver them from the political oppression of Rome. In this context, Jesus was more careful to make His claims more covert, so as to elicit from His disciples a more spiritual concept of the one who came to redeem His people (cf. Luke 19:10; John 10:10).

Indeed, this is why Jesus so often spoke in parables, so that those who were truly seeking would understand, but those who had a false concept would be confused (see Matt. 13:13). This is why when Jesus performed miracles He would sometimes exhort the person to tell no one, since He did not want to be thronged by the curious. Indeed, Jesus rebuked those who, having seen Him multiply the loaves, wanted to make Him king (John 6:15), declaring that they followed Him “because you ate of the loaves and were filled” (v. 26). However, in Samaria, where this false Jewish concept of a political deliverer from Rome who could feed the masses did not prevail, Jesus did not hesitate to claim that He indeed was the true Messiah. Furthermore, Jesus said this to only one Samaritan woman in private, not to the masses of Jews in Judea.

Nonetheless, Jesus did claim to be the Messiah in public, in Judea and to the Jews. Usually, however, His claim was more covert, trying to get them to discover for themselves who He was. However, when the chips were down and it became necessary to declare Himself before the high priest, Jesus explicitly answered the question “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed” by declaring, “I am [the Christ]” (Mark 14:61–62; cf. Matt. 26:64; cf. Luke 22:70).

Problem: According to this verse, God did not “send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” He added later, “I judge no one” (John 8:15; cf. 12:47). However, in other places Jesus claimed “authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man” (John 5:27). Indeed, He even claimed, “For judgment I have come into this world” (John 9:39) and the Father “has committed all judgment to the Son” (John 5:22).

Solution: These verses were spoken in different contexts and with different references. In general, the references to Jesus sitting in judgment on the human race are references to His second coming (see Rev. 19–20), while verses about His not coming to judge but to save have His first coming in mind. Sometimes Jesus is simply speaking about not acting as an earthly judge during His life on earth. A case in point is His answer to the man who wanted him to arbitrate the family inheritance: “Man, who made Me a judge or an arbitrator over you?” (Luke 12:14).

Continue reading →

Problem: Jesus declared in this text that “No one has ascended to heaven…” However, the OT records Elijah’s ascension into heaven in a chariot (2 Kings 2:11).

Solution: In this context, Jesus is setting forth His superior knowledge of heavenly things. In essence He is saying, “No other human being can speak from firsthand knowledge about these things, as I can, since I came down from heaven.” He is claiming that no one has ascended to heaven to bring down the message that He brought. In no way is He denying that anyone else is in heaven, such as Elijah and Enoch (Gen. 5:24). Rather, Jesus is simply claiming that no one on earth has gone to heaven and returned with a message such as He offered to them.

Problem: Jesus told Nicodemus that “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Does this mean a person has to be baptized to be saved?

Solution: Baptism is not necessary for salvation (see comments on Acts 2:38). Salvation is by grace through faith and not by works of righteousness (Eph. 2:8–9; Titus 3:5–6). But baptism is a work of righteousness (cf. Matt. 3:15). What then did Jesus mean when He referred to being “born of water”? There are three basic ways to understand this, none of which involve baptismal regeneration.

Continue reading →