petra1000

Problem: Jesus’ unbelieving brothers challenged Him to go up to Jerusalem and show Himself openly if He was the Messiah (7:3–4). Jesus refused, saying, “I am not yet going up to this feast, for My time has not yet fully come” (v. 8). However, only a few verses later Jesus “went up to the feast” (v. 10).

Solution: Jesus did not go up to Jerusalem in the way in which His brothers suggested. They suggested He go and be “known openly” (7:4). But the Scripture explicitly declares that “He also went up to the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret” (7:10).

Problem: John informs us here that “Jesus walked in Galilee; for He did not want to walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill Him.” Yet Jesus said to His disciples, “My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body” (Luke 12:4).

Solution: Jesus did not fear death; He merely avoided dying prematurely. Before the appropriate time Jesus would say, “My hour has not yet come” (John 2:4; 8:20). But when “His hour came” (cf. John 12:23), Jesus faced death bravely and courageously. Though humanly speaking Jesus shrunk from the horror of the Cross (see comments on Heb. 5:7b); nevertheless, He prayed, “what shall I say? `Father, save Me from this hour’?” to which He answered with an emphatic no: “But for this purpose I came to this hour” (John 12:27). Jesus knew from the very beginning that He had come to die (cf. John 2:19–20; 10:10–11), and He never hesitated in His resolute purpose “to give His life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). However, to accomplish this as God had ordained and the prophets predicted, Jesus had to watch out for attempts on His life before the appointed time and way. For example, He was to be crucified (cf. Ps. 22:16; Zech. 12:10), not to be stoned, as the Jews sought to do on one occasion (see John 10:32–33).

Problem: Evangelical Christians believe in taking the Bible literally. But Jesus said, “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53). Should this be taken literally too?

Solution: The literal (i.e., actual) meaning of a text is the correct one, but the literal meaning does not mean that everything should be taken literally. For example, the literal meaning of Jesus’ statement, “I am the true vine” (John 15:1) is that He is the real source of our spiritual life. But it does not mean that Jesus is a literal vine with leaves growing out of His arms and ears! Literal meaning can be communicated by means of figures of speech. Christ is the actual foundation of the church (1 Cor. 3:11; Eph. 2:20), but He is not literally a granite cornerstone with engraving on it.

There are many indications in John 6 that Jesus literally meant that the command to “eat His flesh” should be taken in a figurative way. First, Jesus indicated that His statement should not be taken in a materialistic sense when He said, “The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:63). Second, it is absurd and cannibalistic to take it in a physical way. Third, He was not speaking of physical life, but “eternal life” (John 6:54). Fourth, He called Himself the “bread of life” (John 6:48) and contrasted this with the physical bread the Jews ate in the wilderness (John 6:58). Fifth, He used the figure of “eating” His flesh in parallel with the idea of “abiding” in Him (cf. John 15:4–5), which is another figure of speech. Neither figure is to be taken literally. Sixth, if eating His flesh and drinking His blood be taken in a literalistic way, this would contradict other commands of Scripture not to eat human flesh and blood (cf. Acts 15:20). Finally, in view of the figurative meaning here, this verse cannot be used to support the Roman Catholic concept of transubstantiation, that is, eating Jesus’ actual body in the communion (see comments on Luke 22:19).

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.