Old Testament Reading: PSALM 16

Note: Psalm 16 should be compared with Peter’s preaching in Acts 2.

“A Miktam of David. Preserve me, O God, for in you I take refuge. I say to the Lord, ‘You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you.’ As for the saints in the land, they are the excellent ones, in whom is all my delight. The sorrows of those who run after another god shall multiply; their drink offerings of blood I will not pour out or take their names on my lips. The Lord is my chosen portion and my cup; you hold my lot. The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance. I bless the Lord who gives me counsel; in the night also my heart instructs me. I have set the Lord always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be shaken. Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure. For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption. You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.” (Psalm 16, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 20:1-10

“Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.’ So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes.” (John 20:1–10, ESV)

Introduction

The sermon last week concluded with the idea that if Christ did not really die, then our faith is empty, vain, and without substance. We should begin with the same thought today, but applied to the resurrection. If Jesus did not rise from the dead then our faith is empty. What we have, then, are twin truths – if Christ did not truly die and really rise from the dead, then, to quote Paul, “our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14, ESV) Indeed, the events of Christ’s death and resurrection are so central to the Christian faith – so foundational – that to remove them is to leave Christianity hollow and untrue.

Just stop and think about Paul’s words for a moment: “If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14, ESV)

That is a radical statement, wouldn’t you agree? But it is a true statement! And it is a helpful statement. It helps us to put our finger upon what is at the core of the Christian faith. At the core is Christ crucified, and Christ risen. At the core is the actual and historical death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

Notice that the earliest creeds of the church emphasize the centrality of the historical life, death and resurrection of Jesus. Take the Apostles Creed for example. It says,

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell [that is to say, he experienced death in full] .
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic [universal] church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

Brothers and sisters, the belief that Jesus lived, died, was buried, and that he rose again is at the heart of our faith. He did this in obedience to the Father. He did this to defeat death, and the one who has the power of death. He did this to save those given to him by the Father – all who believe upon him – from the curse of the law. Belief in the historical Jesus – the actual life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, is so central – so core – that to remove it is to leave us with only the shell of religion, but no substance.

Some might respond to this claim saying, if the death and resurrection of Jesus are so central, then prove them. Prove to me that Jesus really lived, really died, and really rose from the dead.  

Brothers and sisters, I do not claim that the death and resurrection of Christ can be proven, and neither should you.

Here is why. When we use the word “prove” do we not mean to demonstrate something beyond all doubt? I cannot prove to anyone that Jesus rose from the dead so as to remove all doubt; so as to guarantee that they believe it. I can present evidence, just as the Scriptures do. I can argue for belief in the resurrection. I can give reasons for the hope that is in me. But I cannot prove to anyone that Christ is risen. I can say what Mathew, Mark, Luke and John say. I can echo Paul’s words from 1 Corinthians 15:

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” (1 Corinthians 15:3–8, ESV)

I can faithfully set forth the testimony of scripture as evidence. But these are not proofs. You simply cannot argue someone into belief in Christ.

We should be aware of the fact that a good majority of those who hear these evidences for the death and resurrection of Christ will go on in unbelief. Such is the heart of man. The heart of man, by nature, is opposed to the word of God. Paul writes that, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 2:14, ESV) And so, where the Spirit is not active – where the Spirit is not gifting spiritual discernment – there will be no receiving of the things of God.

But I am also convinced that the Holy Spirit does use the word of God, and the evidences concerning the death and resurrection contained within, to convert sinners. More than that, the Holy Spirit uses these evidences to strengthen the faith of those who already believe. When the Spirit is at work in the mind and heart, these evidences have the force of proof. For the one called of God, these words stick; they have power; they convert.  It is the Spirit of God who makes the word of God powerful unto salvation. “Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says ‘Jesus is accursed!’ and no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:3, ESV)

What we have here in John’s Gospel cannot properly be called proof; but it is evidence concerning the resurrection. And it is strong evidence! John presents us with evidence concerning the historicity of Christ’s resurrection. He has presented us with evidence concerning the death of Christ, and now he presents us with evidence concerning the resurrection of Christ from the dead. I trust that the Spirit of God will use the word of God to build faith in the people of God, to the glory of God Father.

Mary

Notice that Mary Magdalene is the first witness that John sets forth. She was the first to see the empty tomb. And she would also be the first to see the Lord in his resurrection (we will consider that next week).

The other gospels reveal that there were other women with Mary at the empty tomb. Mark mentions Mary Magdalene, Mary the Mother of James, and a woman named Salome (Mark 16:1). Luke also mentions a woman named Joanna (Luke 24:10). But John is content to highlight only Mary Magdalene. But it is clear in John that she was not alone, for after she saw the empty tomb she ran to Peter and John and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” (John 20:2, ESV) The use of the first person plural pronoun “we” indicates that Mary was not alone.

We will return to focus on Mary next Sunday when we consider verses 11-18. But what can we say concerning her initial testimony to the resurrection?

For now simply notice that she was not expecting it. She did not go to the tomb expecting to find it empty. So far was the possibility of resurrection from her mind that, when she found the tomb empty and the stone rolled away, her only thought was that someone had “taken the Lord out of the tomb”.

One of the arguments used by skeptics to discredit the resurrection of Christ is to say that the disciples of Christ made it up. The idea is that they knew Christ claimed that he would rise, and the disciples, eager to continue the cause of Christ after his death, fabricated the resurrection story in order to validate his claims.

But the evidence points in the other direction. The empty tomb was not found by one of the twelve – it was discovered by one of the women who followed Jesus. And she did not go to the tomb hopeful. She went with spices to finish the job that Joseph of Aramethia and Nicodemus has begun on Friday evening. She went to the tomb fully expecting to find the body of her crucified friend there.

Peter and John

Mary, we are told, ran to find Peter and John (John again refers to himself as, “the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved”). And now the two of them take center stage in this passage and serve as witnesses.

In verse 3 we read, “So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first.” (John 20:3–4, ESV)

I do enjoy this little detail. I smile a little each time I read it. Students of the Bible have wondered about the significance of this. Why did John tell us that he outran Peter? Is he boasting, like a typical male, about his speed? Is he implying that he was more zealous for Jesus than Peter was? It is implied that the John was the better of the two disciples? I think not. It seems to me that this little detail is given to strengthen the idea that John was an eyewitness to these things. He was there. And he knew things that only an eyewitness could know.

Notice that John really does not present himself as superiors to Peter. He outran Peter (perhaps because he was younger and smaller). But notice that what he had on Peter in regard to speed, he lacked in courage.  Verse 5: “Stooping to look in, [John] saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in.” (John 20:5, ESV) Another possibility is that John did not lack courage, but waited for Peter to show him honor as the older disciple, and leader of the band.

Whatever the reason, John waited outside until Peter arrived. Verse 6: “Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed…” (John 20:6–8, ESV)

You can picture the two of them inside the tomb, can’t you? You can picture them, gasping for air because of the run (Peter more than John). I imagine them looking around intently, searching the dimly lit tomb for evidence – anything that would help them figure out what had happened to the body of their Master.  And they notice two things. One, the grave cloths were still there. And two, the face cloth was there, “not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself.”

Mary’s theory was that the body of Jesus had been taken by someone. But Peter and John, after seeing more than Mary was able to see (it was probably still dark when Mary was there), saw that the evidence pointed in another direction. For what grave robber would take the time to unwrap the body and to fold the face cloth nicely and to set it in another place? Undoubtably, if someone was interested in stealing away the body they would have simply taken it, grave cloths and all.

If this were the only evidence for the resurrection, I would be rather weak. But John will tell us much more. And the other Gospels, which were probably written before John, set even more evidence before us. When all is said and done, Jesus is seen, not by one or two, but hundreds. Not only is he seen, but he is touched, and heard. His disciples communion with him. And these appearances of Christ go on for forty days, until his ascension to the Father.

But here is where we begin. Mary found the stone rolled away and the tomb empty. Peter and John also find the tomb empty. And the scene looks, not like a crime scene, but as if Jesus had been freed from the grave cloths and walked out.

The Scriptures

Let us now turn our attention from the narrative of John 20 and consider for a moment the remark that John makes in verse 9 about his experience. It’s such a small remark. The significance of it is easy to miss. But I think it is an incredibly important part of this passage. For it is here that the Scriptures are set forth as a witness to the resurrection.

In verse 8 we’re told that John, when he saw the empty tomb and the grave cloths, “believed”. And then we have this remark: “for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.” (John 20:9, ESV)

First of all, what does John mean when he tells us that he, in that moment, “believed”? Didn’t John already believe in Jesus Christ. Hadn’t he been following him for years now? Indeed he had. It must mean that he, in that moment, came to believe that Jesus had risen.

But why? Were the empty tomb, the empty grave cloths, and folded face cloth, enough to convince him? Was the resurrection now proven to him by these things beyond all doubt?

No, John explains. He says, “for” – in the Greek the word is γάρ, which is used to mark the cause or reason for something – he believed “for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.” (John 20:9, ESV)

The thing that made John believe in the resurrection was not the experience of the empty tomb and the grave cloths alone, but those experiences understood in light of the Scriptures. It was not the experience, primarily, nor was it the experience in isolation, but the experience as confirmed by the Scriptures.

This is very significant. It indicates that, for the disciples of Christ, experience could only take them so far in their quest for truth. If they were to believe something as true they needed to be persuaded by the Scriptures. This was true of John. He believed in the resurrection when he came to “understand the Scripture, that [the Christ] must rise from the dead.” (John 20:9, ESV)

Notice the same emphasis in Paul’s resurrection passage. Hear it again:

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” (1 Corinthians 15:3–8, ESV)

Do you hear it? Paul presents us with evidence for the death and resurrection of Christ, but the evidence is only considered strong because it was in accordance with the Scriptures. These things happened in accordance with the Scriptures, and for this reason they are to be believed.  

If you were to ask me, Joe, why do you believe in the death and resurrection of Christ? I would first of all say, because God has given me the gift of faith. It is by his grace. 

If you were to press me further and ask, but what evidence do you present? I would simply say what the gospel writers say, and what Paul says. I would present the evidence that they present. He was seen, not by one person, but by many people over a forty day period of time. These things did not happen in secret. Christ presented himself in his resurrection in plain view. “He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom [were] still alive [when Paul wrote to the Corinthians], though some [had] fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to [Paul].” In fact more evidence than this could be presented, for Paul says noting of Jesus’ appearance to Mary, nor of his encounter with the men on the road to Emmaus. I would present this evidence, and I would emphasize how unlikely it would be for these people to imagine it together, or to make it up. What gain would there be in making this story up. Many of these men died for their testimony. What did it benefit them in this world to live as if Christ was risen, if he was not indeed risen?

This is strong evidence indeed. And it is necessary evidence. It would be wrong to claim that Christ is risen if he was not in fact seen as risen! The empirical evidence is essential. But the empirical evidence – the experiential evidence – becomes exceedingly strong, in my opinion, when we demonstrate that all of this happened in accordance with the Scriptures. 

What does we mean when we say that Christ lived and died and rose again in accordance with the Scriptures? We mean that the life, death, and resurrection of Christ were not random events – they were not spontaneous events – but they were foretold. They were the fulfillment of the “…definite plan and foreknowledge of God…” (Acts 2:23, ESV) The Old Testament Scriptures told of these things ahead of time.

Think about this.

We have eyewitness testimony concerning the resurrection of Christ preserved for us within the New Testament Scriptures. We know that the disciples of Christ were willing to die for the belief that Christ rose again. And these things were foretold. They were promised and pictured ahead of time. The life, death, and resurrection of Christ was not an isolated event, but the apex event in the history of redemption. He died and rose according to the scriptures.

The question is, what Scriptures? What Scriptures do John and Paul have in mind? 

Notice that John, throughout his Gospel, has made a point of alluding to, or directly quoting, specific passages from the Old Testament, saying “For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled” (John 19:36, ESV), or something like that, after which he quotes a specific text. Here he only mentions the Scripture generally. He does not point us to one specific text. The same can be said concerning Paul’s “in accordance with the Scriptures” phrase. Paul does not specify which Scripture he has in mind there in 1 Corinthians 15.

It would seem, then, that Paul and John have the whole of Scripture in mind in John 20 and 1 Corinthians 15. The whole of the Scriptures point to the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and the salvation provided therein. I am not saying that every verse in the Old Testament says something about the coming of Jesus Christ. But I am saying the Old Testament points to Jesus consistently and generally. It is the thrust the Old Testament. The Christ is the focal point of it. The Scriptures indeed point to Jesus beginning to end.

This is what Jesus taught as he walked with his disciples on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection.

“He said to them, ‘O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?’ And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” (Luke 24:25–27, ESV)

And when he later met with more of his disciples in Jerusalem we are told that he said to them,

“‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’ Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, ‘Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.’” (Luke 24:44–48, ESV)

What Scriptures did John and Paul have in mind? What Scriptures did Jesus point to as he taught his disciples after the resurrection? The passages do not explicitly say, but it is not hard to guess.

I would assume that Jesus reminded them of the promise of Genesis 3:15, that a Savior would come from the seed of the woman. I would assume that the promise made to Abraham and David was mentioned. I’m sure the typology of Abrahams mock offering of Isaac, and receiving him back from the dead  was mentioned, and also the typology of the Passover, and the temple sacrifices. I would imagine that Psalm 16:10 was mentioned, which says, “For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.” (Psalm 16:10, ESV) And Hosea 6:2, which says, “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him.” (Hosea 6:2, ESV)

The exact scriptures texts are not mentioned. And the effect of this is that we are sent, not to one or two verses in the Old Testament, but the Scriptures in general. And we go there looking for all the ways in which they point forward to the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. And once there we find, not one or two obscure texts, but thousands of them which come together to form a vivid mosaic which effectively shows forth the Christ crucified and raised for the sins of all who believe.

Conclusion

So how does this apply? How should this truth change us?

First of all, I must compel you to believe upon Jesus! “Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9, ESV)

Secondly, I exhort those who have faith to continue to believe upon Jesus! May these evidences strengthen your faith.

Thirdly, may those who believe upon Christ also proclaim Christ, crucified and risen. Brothers and sisters, we must give a reason for a hope that is in. Give evidence for Christ, crucified and risen. But do not think that you can prove it. The Spirit must move. Pray that the Spirit would move upon hearts and minds. The Spirit must do today what Christ did when he was on earth in his resurrection. The Spirit must “[open] their minds to understand the Scriptures… that the Christ… [suffered] and on the third day [rose] from the dead… that…forgiveness of sins [is available in] his name to all nations…” (Luke 24:44–48, ESV, with modification for purposes of application)

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 20:1-10
Comments Off on Sermon: The Empty Tomb: John 20:1-10 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Zechariah 12:7–10; 13:1

“And the Lord will give salvation to the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem may not surpass that of Judah. On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the Lord, going before them. ‘And on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn…’ On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness.” (Zechariah 12:7–10; 13:1, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 19:31-42

“Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe. For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: ‘Not one of his bones will be broken.’ And again another Scripture says, ‘They will look on him whom they have pierced.’ After these things Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus, and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took away his body. Nicodemus also, who earlier had come to Jesus by night, came bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds in weight. So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, since the tomb was close at hand, they laid Jesus there.” (John 19:31–42, ESV)

Introduction

The point of John 19:31-42 is very simple. It is that Jesus of Nazareth really died and was buried. That is the point. Jesus really experienced death. He tasted it. He was given over to it. He endured it, really and truly. So I guess we are done here, right?

No. Though the point of the passage is indeed this simple, I think it will be good for us to settle down in it for a bit, and to approach it in two stages. First of all, I would like to move through the passage to demonstrate that this is in fact John’s concern – he is concerned that you and I know and believe that Jesus of Nazareth really died, and was buried. After that, I would like for us to stand back from the text to ask the question, why is this so important to John? Why is he so concerned that we know for sure that Jesus truly died and was buried?

Jesus Of Nazareth, Dead And Buried

First of all, notice that it is John’s primary concern to demonstrate to you and I that Jesus of Nazareth really died and was buried.

We should begin by picking up with verse 30 where we read, “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished,’ and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (John 19:30, ESV)

If we were to define death only in medical terms we would describe it as the  “irreversible cessation of all vital functions especially as indicated by permanent stoppage of the heart, respiration, and brain activity (at least that is what Merriam-Webster says). But notice that the biblical conception of death is more complex. It includes what was just stated, but it demands more.

When Jesus died he indeed “bowed his head”. His body gave out. His heart stopped beating; his lungs stopped processing air; the synapses in his brain stopped firing. But we are also told that he “gave up his spirit.” There is a reminder here that we humans are not merely physical beings. We are not only made up of flesh and blood, but also of soul or spirit. There is a material aspect to our being, and an immaterial. To be human is to have a body and soul – a body and spirit. And notice that Jesus was truly human. He had a human body and a human soul. When he died he “bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”

Jesus of Nazareth experienced death in full, and John presents four witnesses to testify to it.

The Roman Executioners Are Presented As Witnesses  (vs. 31-34)

In verses 31-34 John presents the Romans executioners to us as witnesses to the death of Christ. Notice that they were certain that Jesus had died. And we should remember that these soldiers were quite familiar with death. This was nothing new to them. They were professionals in their field. And so it is not hard to see why John sets them before us as witnesses to the death of Christ.

In verse 31we read, “Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.” (John 19:31, ESV)

When we read that it was “the day of Preparation” we are to understand that it was Friday, the day before the Jewish Sabbath, which under the Old Covenant, and according to the Jewish way of measuring time, began at sundown on what we call Friday night. It was common for the Jews to refer to Friday as “the day of preparation”. It was on Fridays that final preparations were made for the proper observance of the Sabbath, which, under the Old Covenant, was on Saturday (by the way, we too should make preparations for the Lord’s Day, but that is another topic for another time). The Sabbath alluded to in John 19 was no ordinary Sabbath. We are told in verse 30 that it was a “high day”. This particular Sabbath fell during the Passover week, and for that reason, among others, it was extra special. It was a “high day”.

Again, the Jewish authorities come across hypocritical. They are willing to have an innocent man killed (ironically, he is their Messiah, though they don’t see it that way), while at the same time remaining deeply concerned to keep the nuances of their law.

Deuteronomy 21:22 says, “And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 21:22–23, ESV) It was this law that motivated the Jewish authorities to go to Pilate and to request that the three who were crucified have their legs broken and their bodies removed from the crosses and buried.

Last week I explained that a kind wedge would be placed on the cross and under the feet of the  one being crucified – their feet being nailed to it – so that the crucified one would have something to push up against, relieving the pressure from the arms and chest, enabling the person to breath. This was not an act of kindness. It was meant to prolong the life of the crucified one and to, therefore, increase suffering. It was not uncommon for condemned criminals to struggle for days on the cross. And the Roman custom was to leave criminals on the cross even after death as warning to all who passed by.

But the Jews wanted the process expedited so that their law would not be violated – especially given that it was the Sabbath, and an important one at that. The breaking of the legs of the criminals with a large mallet would make death come much more quickly.

Verse 32: “So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.” (John 19:32–34, ESV)

Why Jesus died so quickly, we do not know.

Was it due to the spiritual torment that he endured on the cross? He bore our sins. He saved us from the wrath of God. The Father forsook him as he served as the substitute for all who believe upon him. Perhaps it was the extreme spiritual suffering which contributed to Christ’s body giving out so quickly.

Or perhaps it was due to the double flogging that he endured. He was beaten once before he was condemned to die. Remember, it was after this first flogging that Pilate brought him before the Jewish authorities hoping they would be satisfied with that punishment so that he could release him, but the insisted upon his crucifixion.  It was after this that Jesus was condemned to dies and handed over to the executioners. It was then that he would have been flogged in a much more brutal way, as was the custom for criminals condemned to die by way of crucifixion. Maybe it was because he was beaten, not once, but twice.

The point is that the soldiers knew he was dead. And to make sure they thrust a spear into his side. Were he alive he would have certainly responded to this prod, but instead we are simply told that from his side flowed water and blood.

Students of the Bible have long wondered about the significance of this.

All agree that it certainly proved he was dead.  D.A. Carson notes that,

“Medical experts disagree on what was pierced. The two most common theories are these: (a) The spear pierced Jesus’ heart, and the blood from the heart mingled with the fluid from the [peri-cardial] sac to produce the ‘flow of blood and water’. (b) By contrast, it has been argued that fluid from the [peri-cardial] sac could not so readily escape from the body by such a wound; it would fill up the chest cavity, filling the space around the lung and then oozing into the lung itself through the wound the spear made. [But] it has been shown that where a chest has been severely injured but without penetration, (hem-or-rhag-ic) fluid, up to two liters of it, gathers between the pleura lining the rib cage and the lining of the lung. This separates, the clearer serum at the top, the deep red layer at the bottom. If the chest cavity were then pierced at the bottom, both layers would flow out. However the medical experts work this out, there can be little doubt that the Evangelist is emphasizing Jesus’ death, his death as a man, his death beyond any shadow of doubt.”

That the blood and water flowing from Jesus’ side proved his death is certain. What is often debated is if there is some symbolic significance to the blood and water.

Some believe that the water represents the waters of baptism, whereas the blood represent the wine of the Lord’s Supper. The thought here is that when the water and the blood flowed from Christ’s side it symbolically pointed to and sanctioned the two sacraments that Christ gave to his church – baptism and the Lord’s Supper. I find this to be a bit of stretch.

Other believe that the water and the blood symbolize the cleansing of sins and atonement respectively. The hymn, “Rock of Ages”, goes in that direction, doesn’t it?

“Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
let me hide myself in thee;
let the water and the blood,
from thy wounded side which flowed,
be of sin the double cure;
save from wrath and make me pure.”

It is the blood which saves from wrath. Christ has atoned for sins.  He has made propitiation through his shed blood. And the water symbolizes the cleansing, or purification that we have in Christ. The “water and the blood” then are, therefore, a “double cure”. They “save from wrath and make [us] pure.”

I would say that it is hard to know for sure what exactly John had in mind here as if we cold say the water symbolizes this particular thing, whereas the blood symbolizes that. It cannot be denied, however, that both water and blood are loaded with symbolism in John’s Gospel, and in the rest of scripture. It seems to me that there is something symbolical going on here, as the hymn “Rock of Ages” suggests. In my opinion, I would be most reasonable to point to the Zechariah 12 and 13 passage that we read together at the beginning. John explicitly tells us that Jesus’ side was pierced in fulfillment to the scriptures. He had Zechariah 12:10 in mind. And it is in 13:1that we read “On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness.” (Zechariah 13:1, ESV) If John had something symbolic in mind as he mentioned the blood and water flowing from Jesus’ side, this would seem be the most natural direction to go, given the context. Perhaps John saw here a fulfillment to the promised “fountain of cleansing” of Zechariah 13:1.

What is unmistakably clear is that Jesus really died.  The Romans soldiers – the professional executioners – were sure of it, and so John presents them to us as witnesses.

John Himself Is A Witnesses  (vs. 35)

Notice, secondly, that John himself is also a witness.

In verse 35 we read, “He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe.” (John 19:35, ESV)

Who is John referring to here? It is most natural, I think, and most in keeping with the way that John refers to himself throughout his Gospel, to understand John to be referring to himself. Remember that he mentions himself in his Gospel numerous times, but never by name.

And so it is right to think that John is the one who saw it. He is the one bearing witness. He is the one who testifies and promises to be telling the truth about the death of Christ. Why? So that you and I may believe.

The Scriptures Testify To The Death Of Christ (vs. 36 and 37)

Notice, thirdly, that the scriptures are set before us as testimony to Christ’s death.

Obviously I am not saying that scriptures some how witnessed Christ’s death in the way that the Romans and John did. No, I mean that John sets the Old Testament scriptures, which were written long before the birth of Christ, before us as evidence.

In verse 36 we read, “For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled: ‘Not one of his bones will be broken.’ And again another Scripture says, ‘They will look on him whom they have pierced.’” (John 19:36–37, ESV)

When we read in verse 36, “For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled”, we are to understand that the Old Testament scriptures, which were written hundreds, and in some instances, a thousand years or more before the birth of Christ, contain prophesies, predictions and promises concerning the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

Think about that for a moment. These things were foretold. They were declared long before they happened. And John has made it a point to set a number of these scripture passages before our eyes as a testimony concerning the death of Christ, so that we might believe.

Specifically, he notes how the fact that the soldiers did not need to break the legs of Jesus served to fulfill the scripture, “not one of his bones will be broken.”

When looking for the Old Testament reference we can go in two directions. One, we can see this as a reference to Psalm 34, which is a Psalm that speaks of the way that God preserves the righteous and protests his servants from the wicked. Ultimately it is a Psalm about the Righteous One, and the Servant of God, who is Christ. In verse 20 of Psalm 34 we are told that “[God] keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.” (Psalm 34:20, ESV) So, perhaps John had that passage in mind.

This phrase “not one of his bones will be broken” might also be meant to remind us of the laws in the Old Testament which give instruction concerning the proper observance of the Passover, and the proper handling of the Passover lamb. I am thinking here of Exodus 12:46 and Numbers 9:12. The later says, “They shall leave none of [the Passover lamb] until the morning, nor break any of its bones; according to all the statute for the Passover they shall keep it.” (Numbers 9:12, ESV)

I really do not see why would need to choose between Psalm 34:20 or the laws concerning the Passover lamb. John’s concern is that we would see Jesus as God’s righteous servant who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, who was to die for us. His death was foreordained, promised, and prefigured – that is the point. And the events that transpired at his crucifixion – even the small details – were in fulfillment to these prophesies of old.

Notice that John also mentions that the scriptures was fulfilled which says, “They will look on him whom they have pierced.” This is a reference certainly a reference to Zechariah 12:10 which we have already mentioned.

So much could be said about Zechariah 12 and 13 (and also Psalm 34 and the typological nature of the Passover lamb). For now I simply want to draw your attention to the main idea. Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross, not because he failed his mission, but because to accomplished it. He died, not as a victim, but as the victor. He was not put to death, he was submissive to the point of death. The death of Jesus Christ was not man’s idea, it was God’s. His death was in fulfillment to scriptures written long ago. And for this reason John sets the Old Testament scriptures before us so that they might testify to the necessity of the death of the Christ.

Joseph Of Aramathea And Nicodemus Testify His Death (vs. 38-42)

Notice, fourthly, that Joseph of Aramathea and Nicodemus also testify to the death of Christ.

I think these two serve as powerful witnesses, especially to the non-believing Jews who may have called into question the authenticity of the death and resurrection of Christ.

Both of these men were members of the Sanhedrin. They were powerful men, well respected amongst the Jews. Think of our Senators as a modern day comparison.

We don’t know much about Joseph of Aramathea. All four Gospels make mention of the fact that he went to Pilate to ask permission to take Jesus from the cross to give him a proper burial. When all the information is gathered about him he is portrayed as a good and righteous man who was looking for the kingdom of God. He had not consented to the decision to crucify Jesus. He is called by Matthew and John a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews. Mark says that he “took courage and went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.” (Mark 15:43, ESV) Indeed, it was a bold move.

Nicodemus we know. He appeared for the first time in John 3 where he is found coming to Jesus at night to ask questions of him. By the end of chapter 3 he disappears back into the night, and we are left wondering what will happen to this inquisitive one. Now we know. He emerges from the shadows and steps into the light, identifying with Jesus in his death.

Think of the power of their testimony, especially amongst the Jewish people. They possessed power and prestige. They were well respected individuals. And they, though they were formally numbered amongst the religious leaders of Israel, believed upon Jesus and were willing to identify with him in his death.

Their testimony concerning the reality of his death would have been most persuasive. After all, they took him off of the cross. They handled his body in a most direct way, wrapping him with cloths and 75 pounds of spices. They buried him in a new tomb located in a nearby garden.

Joseph of Aramathea and Nicodemus had nothing to gain and everything to loose. But after investigating Jesus’ claims, they believed upon him. They risked much to use the power of their position to go to Pilate, to request the body of Jesus, and to give him a proper burial, when no one else could or would.

So these are the four witness concerning the death of Jesus: The Roman soldiers, John himself, the scriptures, and Joseph and Nicodemus together.

Why Does It Matter That Jesus Truly Died?

But the question remains, why does it matter that Jesus died? Why is John so concerned to demonstrate it to us? 

Well, for one, it obviously sets up the resurrection narrative which follows. You cannot have a true resurrection without a true death. You must first establish the death, and then resurrection.

But I think there is more to it than this. If John were only interested in setting the stage for the resurrection he could have said, “he bowed his head and gave up his spirit”, and left it at that. But instead he belabors the point. He seeks to persuade us of the fact that Christ really died.

Perhaps one reason for this emphasis upon the real and true death of Christ was to combat early heresies concerning the nature of Christ. Docetism was not fully formed and mature by the time that John wrote this Gospel, but there were likely forms of it in infancy stages. The Docetists, while believing that Jesus was divine, refused to believe that he was truly human. The word Docetist comes from a greek word meaning “to seem”, and that’s a nice summery of their view. They believed that Jesus Christ only seemed to be human, but that he was not truly.

John clearly addresses the problem of Docetism in 1 John 4:2-3 when he writes, “By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.” (1 John 4:2–3, ESV)

But notice something about John’s account of the crucifixion in John 19. When Jesus was on the cross, who did he address? He addressed John and his mother – the woman who gave birth to him! Also, we are told that Jesus was thirsty. When he died he bowed his head and gave up his spirit, as a human would in death. And finally when the spear was thrust into his side, he bleed. Clearly Jesus was God and man, divine and human, united together in one person.  “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1,14, ESV)

But here is the most important reason for the emphasis upon the death of Christ. If he did not die, then our faith is useless. Here is how Paul puts it: “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14, ESV) You say, but Paul says “if Christ has not been raised, then our… faith is in vain.” Yes! But he must first truly die if he is to truly rise.

And why would our faith be vain or empty or useless if Jesus Christ did not die and then raise from the dead on the third day?

Brothers and sisters, the Christian faith is not, first of all, about ethical teaching.

It is not, first of all, about morality.

It is not, first of all, about showing you how to have a happier and more satisfying life.

If it were primarily about those things, or anything of the sort, then why would Christ need to die?  Why would Paul tell us that if he did not die and rise our faith is vain? Why would John labor to demonstrate his death to us? If the faith were fundamentally and foundationally about ethics or morality – showing you how to have a happier and more fulfilling life – then there is no reason for Jesus to die. He would only need to teach! If the main question answered by the Christian faith is what would Jesus do? then he need only to live and teach and serve as our example! His death would be unnecessary.

But his death and resurrection were necessary. He came to die. And he came to die so that through death he might put death to death. That is the central thing to understand. Death is a power. It is an enemy. It has dominion over us because of sin. And it is death that Christ came to conquer, by his death and resurrection.

Conclusion

Last week I was struck during the catechism teaching. Every Sunday we have our children come to the front and we introduce the catechism question and answer that will be covered in the home for that week. But last week I was struck by it in a unique way. Here is what we taught our children, (some of them being very small).

Q. 22. What is the misery of that estate whereunto man fell?

A. All mankind, by their fall lost [Adam fall and ours] communion with God, are under His wrath and curse, and so made liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell forever. (Gen. 3:8,24; Eph. 2:3; Gal. 3:10; Rom. 6:23; Matt. 25:41-46; Ps. 9:17)

As I was listening to this question being introduced I thought to myself, man, this would seem so strange to a non-Christian, or to Christians who have been brought up in a gospel-light, or Jesus-light, or doctrine-light tradition. Who teaches this sort of thing to their little ones? The answer: we do. Why? Because we know that the good news of Jesus Christ makes no sense whatsoever unless it is understood against the backdrop of the bad news of Genesis 3. The good news makes no sense at all unless it given after the bad. The covent of grace which Christ kept can be understood only against the backdrop of the covent of works, which Adam broke. To understand the gospel, we must first understand the law. To say to someone, Jesus died for sins, repent and believe upon him for your salvation! sounds very absurd unless we also explain who Jesus was, why he had to die, and what he in fact saves us from.

The misery of man’s state after the fall is that we have indeed lost communion with God, we are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell forever. This is our condition. And this is why Jesus died. He truly died to undo and reverse all of that for those who call out upon his name.

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 6:23, ESV)

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 19:31-42
Comments Off on Sermon: Jesus Of Nazareth, Dead And Buried: John 19:31-42 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Psalm 22:1–18

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry by day, but you do not answer, and by night, but I find no rest. Yet you are holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel. In you our fathers trusted; they trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and were rescued; in you they trusted and were not put to shame. But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by mankind and despised by the people. All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads; ‘He trusts in the Lord; let him deliver him; let him rescue him, for he delights in him!’ Yet you are he who took me from the womb; you made me trust you at my mother’s breasts. On you was I cast from my birth, and from my mother’s womb you have been my God. Be not far from me, for trouble is near, and there is none to help. Many bulls encompass me; strong bulls of Bashan surround me; they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted within my breast; my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to my jaws; you lay me in the dust of death. For dogs encompass me; a company of evildoers encircles me; they have pierced my hands and feet— I can count all my bones— they stare and gloat over me; they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.” (Psalm 22:1–18, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 19:16-30

“So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called The Place of a Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them. Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It read, ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.’ Many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek. So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, ‘Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but rather, ‘This man said, I am King of the Jews.’’ Pilate answered, ‘What I have written I have written.’ When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom, so they said to one another, ‘Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.’ This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, ‘They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.’ So the soldiers did these things, but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son!’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother!’ And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), ‘I thirst.’ A jar full of sour wine stood there, so they put a sponge full of the sour wine on a hyssop branch and held it to his mouth. When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished,’ and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (John 19:16–30, ESV)

Introduction

I would like to begin our time together today by envisioning the shape of a cross. In once sense, the image of the cross is complex. It is complex if we think of all that it symbolizes, or the variety ways in which that image has been used, for good or evil, throughout the ages. But it in another sense, the image of the cross is utterly simple. It consists of one horizontal line bisected by a vertical line. And it is this simple shape – the shape of a cross – that I wish for us to think upon this morning.

I’d like to use the shape of the cross as an illustration. And in this illustration the horizontal line represents the timeline of human history. Picture it in your minds eye. To the very left is the creation event. And to the very right is the consummation (how far that is in our future, only God knows). And so we have before us a horizontal line representing human history.

The vertical line, on the other hand, represents God’s intrusion into human history – his divine acts – his various comings, if you will. I have in mind here the creation event itself, and then God coming to Adam and Eve after the fall to bring that word of judgment, but also to clothe them, and to speak a word of promise. I think also of the flood. God came in judgment, and that judgment was but a foretaste of the final judgment to come. God’s grace was present there too, wasn’t it? Noah and his family were preserved in the ark, which is a type of Christ. I also think of God’s calling of Abraham, and his deliverance of the people of Israel from bondage to the Egyptians. These are all significant examples of intrusion – God acting powerfully and significantly in human history.

You say,  but isn’t God always involved in the affairs of man? Isn’t he always sovereign? Always immanent, always near? Why speak of intrusion, as if God were off somewhere and then near? 

You are right. It is indeed true that God is always near to us! He is, on the one had, transcendent, meaning that he is far above us – altogether of a different kind than us. He is God, and we the creature. But in the moment we say he transcendent, we must also confess that he is immanent, meaning that he near to us. Indeed, “God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble.” (Psalm 46:1, NIV84)

So, I am not, in this illustration, suggesting that God is, for the most part, distant from us – uninvolved, transcendent, and aloof – and that he, from time to time, breaks into the course of history to do his thing, only to retreat again to his monastery in the sky. That is not the point. God is indeed always with us. He is imminent. He is active within his creation, bringing his purposes to their desired end.

What the illustration of the cross is meant to communicate is that as we consider human history we must recognize that God, from time to time, has indeed interrupted the natural order of things in order to accomplish great acts in association with his redemptive purposes. Notice how I emphasized the words interrupted, accomplished, and act. The reason for the emphasis on these words is to communicate clearly that the Christian faith is not one that is based upon words or ideas only, but upon the acts of God in human history. It is these acts upon which the words and idea of scripture are based.

All of this is so fundamental and so important to understand. The Bible – the Christian faith itself – does not come to us because some religious guru walked to the top of a mountain somewhere and came up with some brilliant ideas. Instead, our faith is founded upon that which God has accomplished for us in human history – in reality. The scriptures are the divinely inspired record of those activities. And they are the divinely inspired interpretation and application of all that God has done for us in creation and in redemption. The pattern is this: God acts, and then the scriptures are written as a record, interpretation, and application of that act.

And brothers and sisters, what is the most significant of all of God’s acts in human history? After creation itself, is in not the cross of Christ? There is no event more significant that this one. The life, death, and resurrection of the Christ is of supreme importance. It is the granddaddy of all of God’s acts of redemption. For it was there on the cross that victory was won. It was there on the cross that sin, Satan, and death were overcome. It was there on the cross that God’s plan of redemption was accomplished, or fulfilled.

And so when I look upon the image of the cross I cannot help but see these truths illustrated there. Our God is a God who acts in human history. He has accomplished redemption for us. He has intruded in judgment (and will again), but thanks be to God, he has also intruded in mercy and grace. And who does it all center upon? Who is at the crux of it? It is Christ Jesus our Lord!

So why this introduction to John 19:16-30? Why the emphasis upon the horizontal and vertical, time and intrusion, history and redemptive event?

The simple reason is that this is John’s emphasis. He wants us to see Jesus as the man. He wants us to view the event of the crucifixion as the apex event – the crucial event – the decisive event, in the history of redemption.

John presents Jesus as the man in three ways. First of all, he again emphasizes Jesus’ kingship. He is lifted up from the earth (exalted and enthroned) as the King of the Jews. Secondly, John is concerned that we see Jesus as the one who has fulfilled Old Testament prophesy concerning the coming of the Messiah. Thirdly, Jesus is presented to us as the one who has accomplished the work of redemption, given to him by the Father.

So, why are we to view Jesus as the man, and his crucifixion as the apex event in human history?

Jesus Is The King Of The Jews

First of all, because he is the King of the Jews.

This is indeed the point that is emphasized in this passage, as it was in the previous passage. Jesus is the King of the Jews.

Now before I say a word about the significance of Jesus as the King of the Jews, let me explain what I mean when I say that this is the emphasis of the passage. When a writer writes, he has certain tools at his disposal to make certain aspects of that story background and to bring other aspect of the story to the foreground. The structure of the text might be used to make something pop. Rhythm or rhyme might be employed. It is common for repetition to be used – a word, or phrase, or idea will be used throughout the text in order to alert the reader to the point of the passage. Sometimes the author will simply spend more time on one thing than another, and that clues us in to the main idea of the text.

It is tempting, I think, whenever we speak of the crucifixion of Christ, to emphasize the physical suffering that Jesus endured. It is common, I think, to spend a great deal of time meditating upon the brutality of the event. I think sometimes this is done in order to stir up emotion. Pastors and authors will sometimes describe, in great detail, the brutality of the flogging that Jesus endured, and the physical effects that it had on his body. It is common for the crucifixion itself to be described in vivid detail – in full color and high definition. That all preaches very well, doesn’t it. It is not hard to move people to an emotional response – a sympathetic response – by describing in vivid detail the scourging, the long walk to Golgotha, and the horrors of crucifixion.

Please hear me. I am not saying that it is wrong to consider in detail all of the suffering that Christ endured for us. Though it can be abused, there is value in it indeed. What I am saying is that John is not interested in stirring us up emotionally by graphically describing to us the crucifixion itself. Look at his description of the crucifixion. What does he say? Simply, “There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them.” (John 19:18, ESV) The crucifixion is described in three words: “they crucified him”.

This is the point: the thing we so often emphasize about the crucifixion – namely, the brutality and extreme physical suffering – is backgrounded in John. The thing brought to the foreground is the significance of Jesus and the crucifixion event.

John isn’t trying to move you sentimentally. He’s seeking to persuade you intellectually. His desire is not that you would cry, but that you think. And if though thinking you also cry, then praise be to God! But to cry over the crucifixion without understanding it’s significance is useless.

Remember that John’s purpose in writing is not hidden, but is stated expressly at the end of the gospel. Listen to his own words: “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:30–31, ESV) That is his desire. To demonstrate to you that Jesus is the man, and that there is life in his name.

And this is why John takes something that you assume would be background and tangential information and brings to the forefront. He zooms in upon a little sign that the Romans placed over Jesus’ head as he hung on the cross. And he tells us that on that sign a phrase was written which simply read, “Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews.”

This was a common Roman practice. Criminals condemned to death by crucifixion would often carry their own cross to the place of execution. And around their neck would hang a sign which communicated the crime for which they were condemned, be it murder, or insurrection, or whatever. After the criminal was lifted up on the cross, the sign would be placed above their heads for everyone to see. The purpose is obvious. The Romans wanted to communicate to the public what it was the person was being punished for.

In Jesus’ case the sign read, “Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews”. The wording of it irritated the Jewish authorities. Pilate knew what he was doing when he crafted the statement in this way. He phrased it as if it were true that Jesus was indeed the King of the Jew. He did not believe it to be true. But he was interested in sticking it to the Jews who had been so effective in pushing him around. Notice that this phrase was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek, so that everyone who passed by could read it. And many would have passed by, given that it was near the city and during the Passover. “So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, ‘Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but rather, ‘This man said, I am King of the Jews.’” Evidently Pilate was tired of being pushed around and manipulated, so he responded, saying, “What I have written I have written.” (John 19:21–22, ESV)

Again, there is irony here. This scene is ironic in that when Pilate and the Jewish authorities read the sign, neither believed it to be true.

When Pilate and other Romans looked upon Jesus on the cross with that sign above his head saying, “Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews”, they laughed. To them it was a foolish thing; a silly thing; a reason to mock.

When the non-believing Jews looked upon Jesus crucified and read the sign, to them it was offensive.  It was not foolish or funny; to them it was repulsive to have this crucified one portrayed as their king.

But when John looked up at Jesus and read the sign – when Mary the mother of Jesus, along with the two other Marys, looked upon Jesus and read the sign – what did they think? Did they scoff with the Romans? Were they offended with the Jews? No! They observed that scene and thought to themselves, isn’t it ironic? Here he is, truly the King of the Jews, enthroned before us. 

By the way, notice how Paul picks up on all of this in his letter to the Corinthians when he writes, “we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:23–24, ESV) Paul picks this theme up and he observes that a crucified Christ, a crucified Messiah, is a stumbling block to the Jews. They get all tripped up over the thought of a Messiah who suffers and dies. And to the Gentiles (non-Jews/Romans) it is folly. But to those called by God – clearly, this being a reference to the effectual and inward calling or wooing of the Spirit – Christ is “the power of God and the wisdom of God”. What Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 1 is indeed portrayed here in the narrative of John 19.

Last Sunday I made much of the irony in John 19:1-16. And I tried to demonstrate that what we are being exposed to is a kind of ironic coronation ceremony for king Jesus. He was robed, but mockingly. Solders bowed the knee to him, but insincerely. They approached him one by one, not to kiss but to strike. He was crowned, not with gold, but with thorns. And when he was presented to the people they cried out, not long live the king, but “crucify him”! Now what is left to be done in this coronation ceremony except for the king to take his seat on the throne? And that is what Jesus does! His arms were  stretched out and were nailed to the cross, and then a bench of sorts was placed beneath his feet so that he would be able to press down upon it to relive the pressure from his arms and breath (this was not a merciful thing, but torturous – it was meant to delay death, and to increase the agony). Then they nailed his feet to the cross and lifted him up.

When the non-believing Jew looks upon this they are offended. When the non-believing Gentile looks, they scoff. But when the one called of God looks upon Christ lifted up they see “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” They see the King of the Jews, enthroned before them.

This is what Jesus was referring to when he said in John 12:31, “‘Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.’ He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.” (John 12:31–33, ESV)

I wish that I had more time to set before you all of the promises contained in the Old Testament concerning the arrival of the great king from amongst the Jews – a king who would come from David’s loins (2 Samuel 7) – a king who would rule in righteousness and establish an everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7). I am assuming that you have some knowledge about that and know that in the days of Jesus the Jews were (and some still are) waiting in anticipation for the arrival that great king. What is obvious is that John (along with the rest of the New Testament) wants to understand that Jesus of Nazareth was and is that great king. He is the fulfillment to those promises of old.

Jesus Has Fulfilled The Messianic Prophesies Of The Old Testament 

So the first thing to notice in answer to the question, why are we to see Jesus as the man, and his crucifixion the crucial event in human history? is that he was and is the King of the Jews. The next two points will come quickly because the stage has now been adequately set.

The second thing to notice is that Jesus has fulfilled the messianic prophesies contained within the Old Testament.

When I refer to messianic prophesies I am talking about those portions in the Old Testament which make mention of the future (future from their vantage point) coming of the Messiah, which means Anointed One. The Old Testament contains many such promises. What is clear is that that the Old Testament anticipated the arrival of an Anointed One who would one day provide salvation for his people. The description of this Anointed One is varied and complex. Sometimes he described as glorious and powerful; sometimes as lowly and humble. Sometimes he is described as a king; at other times he is portrayed as a prophet or priest. The clear teaching of the New Testament is that all of these prophesies land on Jesus. Paul puts it this way: “For all the promises of God find their Yes in [Jesus]. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory.” (2 Corinthians 1:20, ESV)

Notice that John mentions the fulfillment of two of these prophesies in the events surrounding the crucifixion of Christ (Mathew, Mark, and Luke provide you with many more). And again, notice that John brings details that we might consider background or tangential to the foreground.

He first of all tells us of the Roman soldiers dividing Jesus’ clothing and gambling over his tunic and says, ” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, ‘They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.’ So the soldiers did these things.” (John 19:24, ESV) This is a quotation from Psalm 22:18, which we read earlier. It is such a small detail – the diving up of Jesus’ belongings amongst the four Romans who carried out the crucifixion, and the gambling for the one piece tunic. But does this not demonstrate that God is sovereign over the smallest details of our lives? Also, John hones in upon this small and seemingly insignificant detail in order to “hyperlink” to the all that Psalm 22 has to say. I’m sure you agree that that passages if far from insignificant. It describes in great detail what the Christ would experience in his crucifixion. John wants us to see all of that.

He next zooms in upon the words “I thirst” which Jesus uttered near the end. Verse 28: “After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), ‘I thirst.’ A jar full of sour wine stood there, so they put a sponge full of the sour wine on a hyssop branch and held it to his mouth.” (John 19:28–29, ESV) This is a reference to Psalm 69:21, which says, “They gave me poison for food, and for my thirst they gave me sour wine to drink.” (Psalm 69:21, ESV) Again, Johns desire is that we would read, not just verse 21 of Psalm 69, but all of it, and see that Jesus fulfilled what is said there.

The point is this: Jesus fulfilled the scriptures. He fulfilled the prophesies which pointed forward to him. Just as he was the fulfillment of the promises concerning the coming king, so too he fulfilled all of the promises and predictions concerning the coming Messiah. We might ask the question, why was John so interested in “hyperlinking” to Psalm 22 and 69? Could he have not emphasized some other event which linked back to other Old Testament texts? He could of! But he emphasized these, I think, in order to demonstrate that the Old Testaments does indeed teach that the Christ would suffer – that the coming king would be a suffering king – abandoned, despised and betrayed – and that through suffering he would earn the victory.

Jesus Has Accomplished The Work Of Redemption 

Lastly, let us see that Jesus is the man, and his crucifixion the crucial event of human history, because it was by him, and through the cross, that the work of redemption was finally accomplished.

Notice Jesus’ final words: “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ’it is finished,’ and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (John 19:30, ESV)

What did Jesus mean when he said, “it is finished”? Was he simply indicating that the end had come? Was he saying, “it is over?” No. The greek word is τετέλεσται, meaning “to bring an activity to a successful finish—‘to complete, to finish, to end, to accomplish.’” The idea is not, it is over, but it is done, finished, accomplished, or completed. What is completed? I suppose it would be a mystery if we only had verse 30 to consider. But we have the rest of the Gospel of John. More than that, we have the rest of scripture. And when these things are considered it is clear what Jesus finished. He finished the work the Father gave him to do. He accomplished redemption. He atoned for the sins of those given to him by the Father. He earned salvation for them though his obedient life, sacrificial death, and glorious resurrection. It was through the cross that Christ won the victory over sin, Satan, and death.

Conclusion

The point of John 19:16-30 is this: Jesus is the man. His death on the cross was the most significant event in human history. It was there in the crucifixion event that God intruded in the most significant of ways, breaking the power of sin and death, and opening up through Christ’s shed blood the way to life eternal. Christ is the long awaited and victors King of the Jews. He is the fulminate of the Old Testament prophesies concerning the coming Messiah, who is prophet, priest, and king. And he has finished the work of redemption decreed by the Father from eternity past.

Prayer

Gracious Father, thank you for your indescribable love. Thank you for sending the Son to pay for our sins. Jesus, thank you for your obedience to the Father in life and in death. Holy Spirit, help us to now live according to the resurrection power available in Christ Jesus, to the glory of you, the Triune God. In the name of Jesus Christ we pray. Amen.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 19:16-30
Comments Off on Sermon: It Is Finished: John 19:16b-30 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Zechariah 6:9–15

“And the word of the Lord came to me: ‘Take from the exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon, and go the same day to the house of Josiah, the son of Zephaniah. Take from them silver and gold, and make a crown, and set it on the head of Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. And say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘Behold, the man whose name is the Branch: for he shall branch out from his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. It is he who shall build the temple of the Lord and shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. And there shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.’’ And the crown shall be in the temple of the Lord as a reminder to Helem, Tobijah, Jedaiah, and Hen the son of Zephaniah. ‘And those who are far off shall come and help to build the temple of the Lord. And you shall know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. And this shall come to pass, if you will diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God.’” (Zechariah 6:9–15, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 19:1-16

“Then Pilate took Jesus and flogged him. And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head and arrayed him in a purple robe. They came up to him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ and struck him with their hands. Pilate went out again and said to them, ‘See, I am bringing him out to you that you may know that I find no guilt in him.’ So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, ‘Behold the man!’ When the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, ‘Crucify him, crucify him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no guilt in him.’ The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God.’ When Pilate heard this statement, he was even more afraid. He entered his headquarters again and said to Jesus, ‘Where are you from?’ But Jesus gave him no answer. So Pilate said to him, ‘You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?’ Jesus answered him, ‘You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.’ From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, ‘If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.’ So when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Stone Pavement, and in Aramaic Gabbatha. Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover. It was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, ‘Behold your King!’ They cried out, ‘Away with him, away with him, crucify him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’ So he delivered him over to them to be crucified.” (John 19:1–16a, ESV)

Introduction

It would seem to me that the passage before us today demands that we answer one question: will you have Jesus as your King? Will he be your Lord and Master? Will you bow before him, trust in him, and give yourself to the service of him? That seems to be the question provoked by this narrative.

To confess Jesus as Lord is a difficult thing for fallen creatures to do. In fact, the scriptures reveal that it is an impossible thing for people to do apart from the grace of God. The reasons for this are many. And the scriptures use a diversity of images and terms to communicate the fact of our natural revolution to Christ’s kingship. The scriptures reveal that we, in our natural and fallen state, cannot follow after Christ apart from the call of God (John 6:44). This is due to our spiritual blindness, deafness, lameness, and deadness. We are by nature in bondage to another king. It takes an act of God to free us so that we might confess Jesus as Lord. God must, through the proclamation of the gospel and the working of the Spirit, graciously open our blind eyes, unstop our deaf ears, call us to take up our mat and walk, and summon us from the spiritual grave. The chains of bondage to sin, self, and Satan must be loosed by God if we are to walk freely after Christ. These are some of the images and terms found within the Holy Scriptures which communicate the fact of our natural revolution to Christ’s kingship

The truth of the matter is this: when people look upon the Jesus of John 19 in their natural and fallen state, apart from the grace of God, and apart from the regenerating work of the Spirit, they do not see a king there. Instead they see a pitiful man; a weak man; a foolish man; a failure. But when the Spirit of God effectually calls us – when he makes us alive to the things of God, unstops our ears, and causes the scales to fall from our eyes – it is then that we look upon Jesus, the suffering servant, and say, “There is my king! There is my Lord! There is my Savior!”

So will you have Jesus as your king? That is the question provoked by the narrative here in John 19. Our prayer is that God would move amongst us to bring more into his kingdom, and to make those who are already in his kingdom better servants of his.

Jesus Is Presented To Us As Our King

Notice that in this passage Jesus is indeed presented to us as our king.

Use your imagination for a moment and picture the coronation ceremony of a great king. I have never witnessed such an event. We do not live in a kingdom. But I would imagine that coronation ceremonies would be quite lavish. You can picture the new king standing there, can’t you? You can see the large crowd. You can hear their cheers. The whole event would be a great celebration. The king would undoubtably be clothed in the finest garments. He would be surrounded by his most trusted companions. I can picture him there standing in great gory and splendor having that precious crown placed upon his head. This is the scene we would expect to see at a the coronation of a king.

The irony in John’s gospel is indeed thick here in chapters 18 and 19. What is ironic is that Jesus is in fact the King of kings and Lord of lords, but he is presented as such in lowliest of ways. He is coronated as king, but to shouts of hatred. He is clothed in the garb of a king, but in mockery. He is presented to us as king, but in a sarcastic and belittling way. And the people do not receive him – they reject him instead. But it is never-the-less important see that Jesus is indeed set before us as a king.

Pilate was clearly growing frustrated. He knew that Jesus was innocent. He had some desire to uphold justice. But he was also concerned appease the Jews in order to keep the peace. His job was a difficult one. He was stuck between a rock and a hard place, as the expression goes. On the one hand, his concern was to uphold justice; on the other hand, he desired to keep the peace.  To be clear it was not the Jewish people that Pilate feared. He had more than enough power at his disposal to put down an uprising. Pilate feared the Roman authority which was over him. He feared Caesar. His job was to keep the peace, and too much trouble in his region could cost him dearly. Pilate was a conflicted individual, as his actions show.

Instead of doing the right thing, Pilate delivered Jesus, whom he had already said was innocent, to be flogged. 19:1 says, “Then Pilate took Jesus and flogged him.” It is not that Pilate flogged Jesus himself, but that he had him flogged.

It is important to understand that there were different kinds of floggings administered by the Romans which varied in degree. Common criminals would sometimes be whipped and then sternly warned. More severe crimes would be punished by a more brutal whipping and beating. And those condemned to death would be flogged in a most severe way. So brutal was this third form of flogging that some criminals would perish because of the flogging itself (I’ll spare you the details, though I am sure you have heard of the brutality associated with this most extreme form of flogging).

I say this because it helps to make sense of what at first seems to be a discrepancy between Matthew and Mark’s account when compared John’s. Matthew and Mark seem to suggest that that Jesus was flogged after Pilate delivered the death sentence. But John tells us that Jesus was flogged before the final verdict was delivered. It seems to me that both accounts are true. Jesus was flogged twice. Once in a that least severe way, and then again in the most severe way after the final verdict was given and Jesus was delivered to be crucified. It would not make sense for Pilate to hand Jesus over to this most severe form of flogging if he still hoped to release him. That form of flogging was reserved for criminals condemned to death. So severe was it that some died from it. Jesus was indeed brutally beaten before the final verdict was given, but he was scourged again in that more severe way afterwards, in the way that only criminals condemned to death were.

So what was the purpose of this first flogging? Pilate’s hope was that the Jews would be satisfied with it. His hope was that they would see that Jesus had been severely punished and posed no real threat to them or the Romans.

It was during this first scourging that the Roman soldiers mocked Jesus while they delivered the beating. It is in verse two that we read, “the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head and arrayed him in a purple robe.” (John 19:2, ESV)

These Roman soldiers were indeed brutal men. They were tasked with beating Jesus in order to teach him a lesson, but they decided to mock him too. It would have indeed been painful to have a crown of thorns (perhaps from the date palm) pressed down upon the forehead, but think of the mockery. Think of the fact of who Jesus was and is, and picture him enduring such scorn from sinful men such as these. It’s difficult to comprehend.

They also took a purple robe, which was probably a military cloak, and draped it over his back. And “they came up to him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ and [instead of kissing his cheek, they] struck him with their hands.” (John 19:3, ESV)

Do you see the irony, though? Do you see how, though these men meant only to mock Jesus, they speak better than they know. They do in fact present Jesus to us as the King of the Jews!

Pilate does the same thing.

Verse 4: “Pilate went out [to the Jews] again and said to them, ‘See, I am bringing him out to you that you may know that I find no guilt in him.’ So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, ‘Behold the man!’” (John 19:4–5, ESV)

What did Pilate mean by this? He brought Jesus before the Jews after having him mocked and beaten in order to say, look how pitiful this man is! “Behold the man”, in Pilate’s mind meant, is this the man you are so concerned about?

But ironically, he was indeed presenting the Jews with the man. He is the man in that he is the Messiah, the anointed one of God. He is the man in that he is the Son of Man, promised from long ago. And it is my option that he is the man of Zechariah 6, which was the Old Testament reading for today. That Old Testament passage is a Messianic prophesy which foretold the coming of  “the man whose name is the Branch: for he shall branch out from his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. It is he who shall build the temple of the Lord and shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. And there shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.” (Zechariah 6:12–14, ESV)

Who is “the man” of Zechariah 6? It is Christ Jesus our Lord! Pilate intended only to mock when he introduced Jesus as “the man”, but he spoke better than he knew. Ironically, his presentation of Jesus to the Jews was spot on, for he was indeed “the man whose name is the Branch” (see also Zech. 3:8; Is. 4:2).

The Jewish authorities did not see it that way. “When the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, ‘Crucify him, crucify him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no guilt in him.’” (John 19:6, ESV)

It is at this point that they reveal more to Pilate concerning their real trouble with Jesus. “The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God.’” (John 19:7, ESV)

Those who say that Jesus never claimed to be divine are mistaken. There are many passages in the Bible that we could point to which claim that Jesus was indeed God come in the flesh, and this one of them. Why did the Jews want Jesus put to death? It was because he claimed to be the Son of God. And what did they understand him to mean by this? Was he using the phrase “Son of God” to mean that God was his creator? No, for in that in that sense we are all son’s and daughters of God. There is no blasphemy in that. Or was he using the phrase “Son of God” in the way that the Old Testament sometimes does in reference to earthly kings who, in a way, serve as God representatives on earth? No, for this is the language of the Old Testament. When the Jews heard Jesus claim to be the Son of God they understood exactly what he meant by it – he was claiming to be from above, the eternal Word of God come in the flesh, the only or unique begotten Son of God. This was blasphemous to their ears and deserving of death.

“When Pilate heard this statement, he was even more afraid.” (John 19:8, ESV) By the way, notice the explicit statement that Pilate was acting out of fear the whole time. But upon hearing that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, “he was even more afraid.” This was not because he believed in Jesus as the Son of God in a true way, but because was superstitious. Pilate was a pagan. He believed in the gods. And according to his worldview he believed that the gods would sometimes visit earth. This is why he was afraid.

And so “he entered his headquarters again and said to Jesus, ‘Where are you from?’ But Jesus gave him no answer. So Pilate said to him, ‘You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?’ Jesus answered him, ‘You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.’” (John 19:9–11, ESV)

Jesus, where are you from? That seems to be the central question, doesn’t it? From beginning to end in John’s Gospel it is communicated that Jesus is from above. John speaks of Jesus this way: “He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony.” (John 3:31–32, ESV) In John 8:23 Jesus says, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.” (John 8:23, ESV) Here Jesus replies to Pilate saying, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.” (John 19:11, ESV)

Jesus reveals that Pilate is not the supreme authority. God is. And Jesus is from God – he came to accomplish the Fathers will. And it is the will of the Father that Jesus die at the hands of sinful men. Notice that Jesus does not say to Pilate, you have no sin. He only says, “he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin”, this most likely being a reference to Caiaphas the high priest and those he represented.

This is intriguing, isn’t it? In this verse, there is on the one hand the acknowledgement that it was the will of God that Jesus be condemned by Pilate. And on the other hand there is the truth that Pilate sinned in condemning Jesus unjustly. Here we see demonstrated that which is clearly communicated throughout the scriptures that God is both sovereign of all things, and yet man is accountable for his choices and actions.

This truth is stated most clearly by Peter when he preached to the Jews after Pentecost, saying that on the one hand Jesus was “delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God” and on the other it was the Jews who were guilty for “[they] crucified and killed [him] by the hands of lawless men.” (Acts 2:23, ESV)

 

What then does Pilate do in response to Jesus’ words? “From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, ‘If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.’ So when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Stone Pavement, and in Aramaic Gabbatha. Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover [the day before the Sabbath during the Passover (feast of unleavened bread)]. It was about the sixth hour [6am according to the Roman way of counting time?]. He said to the Jews, ‘Behold your King!’” (John 19:12–14, ESV)

Again, Pilate presents Jesus to us as our king. Again, he means it in a condescending way. He says it in the hopes that the Jews will relent. But he speaks better than he know, for Jesus is indeed their king and ours. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords.

And what did the Jewish authorities do with this? “They cried out, ‘Away with him, away with him, crucify him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’ So he delivered him over to them to be crucified…” (John 19:15–16, ESV)

Isn’t it ironic? “We have no king but Caesar”, the high priests said. Here Jesus the Christ is standing before them – “the man” , the savior, the Messiah, promised from long ago. He is indeed their king, the son of David, the Son of God. And yet how do they respond to him? They cry out, “crucify him, crucify him! We have no king but Caesar.”

Application and Conclusion

Brothers and sisters, how does this apply to you and me?

The most important question for me to ask is , will you have Jesus as your king? If so, we must receive him, first of all, as the humble, lowly, self-sacrificing king that he is. He will return in glory, it is true. “Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.” (Revelation 1:7, ESV) He will return in glory and power. But we must first of all revive him as the lowly, humble, servant-hearted king that he is. We must look beyond the humble appearance to see the power which lies beneath. There is great power in his death. It is through death that Jesus earned victory for himself and all who belong to him. The world looks at Jesus in his humility and scoffs. But those born of God – those born from above – look upon Jesus and see the true power and glory that is there.

We must come to terms with our need. Why do we need a king? Two reasons come to mind. First, we need a king to concur our own rebellious hearts. He must first subdue us! Secondly, we need a king to conquer all our enemies. We humans tend to think of ourselves as free by nature. But we are not free. We are in bondage to the world, the flesh, and the devil. Christ the king has won victory over these. Do you see your need for him? Or do you, like Pilate and the unbelieving Jews, assume that you are are free and are in need on no one?

Brothers and sisters, we must forsake Caesar. By this I mean that we must set aside all reliance upon the things of the world and look wholly upon Christ for our deliverance.

And it is important that we come to Jesus, not only as Savior, but also as Lord. It is true that he has earned salvation for those given to him by the Father. But we must believe upon him and confess him as Lord. He is to be submitted to. He is to be obeyed. And he is to be obeyed in the whole of life – in every arena. The longing of our heart should be to hear the word’s, “well done good and faithful servant.”

Brothers and sisters, men and women do not naturally bow the knee to Jesus. By nature we respond to him the way the Roman and Jewish authorities did here in John 19. We must pray that God would move by the Spirit and through the proclamation of the word in bringing many to repentance. The truth is this: “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 2:14, ESV) Paul poses this question:

“Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:20–24, ESV)

Father in heaven, move upon the hearts of men and women, and boys and girls, we pray. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Amen.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 19:1-16
Comments Off on Sermon: Will You Have Jesus As Your King?: John 19:1-16a Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: 2 Samuel 7:1–12

“Now when [king David] lived in his house and the Lord had given him rest from all his surrounding enemies, the king said to Nathan the prophet, ‘See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwells in a tent.’ And Nathan said to the king, ‘Go, do all that is in your heart, for the Lord is with you.’ But that same night the word of the Lord came to Nathan, ‘Go and tell my servant David, ‘Thus says the Lord: Would you build me a house to dwell in? I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent for my dwelling. In all places where I have moved with all the people of Israel, did I speak a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’ Now, therefore, thus you shall say to my servant David, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep, that you should be prince over my people Israel. And I have been with you wherever you went and have cut off all your enemies from before you. And I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth. And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more. And violent men shall afflict them no more, as formerly, from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel. And I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom.’” (2 Samuel 7:1–12, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 18:28-40

“Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor’s headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover. So Pilate went outside to them and said, ‘What accusation do you bring against this man?’ They answered him, ‘If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you.’ Pilate said to them, ‘Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.’ The Jews said to him, ‘It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.’ This was to fulfill the word that Jesus had spoken to show by what kind of death he was going to die. So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, ‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered, ‘Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.’ Then Pilate said to him, ‘So you are a king?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.’ Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’ After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them, ‘I find no guilt in him. But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover. So do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?’ They cried out again, ‘Not this man, but Barabbas!’ Now Barabbas was a robber.” (John 18:28–40, ESV)

Introduction

Today is resurrection Sunday. It is on this day that the church has traditionally given special attention to the resurrection of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. In truth, the church is to give attention to this every Lord’s Day as we gather and reflect upon the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ through the preached word and through the observance of the Supper.

Today my objective is simple. I desire to send you away thinking, not only of the resurrection of Christ, but of Jesus as a victorious king. That is how he is to be viewed in his resurrection – as a victorious king; a conquering king; a mighty king.

It may at first be difficult for us to think of Jesus in this way given the lowly and humble way in which he first came. The whole of Jesus’ life was characterized by lowliness. He was clothed in humility. From a worldly perspective Jesus was unimpressive. This was true of his birth, it was true of his death, and it was true of most everything in between. He was indeed “despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” (Isaiah 53:3, ESV) Certainly this is not the language that we would typically use to describe a great king.

Truth be told, Jesus, from a worldly perspective, seemed like a looser in the game of life in the end. He was poor. His band of disciples fell to pieces – one betrayed him; another denied him; most of the others were hiding in their homes, cowering in fear. Those with power and prestige amongst the Jews had, without a doubt, rejected him. They desired to put him to death. The Romans were indifferent. Jesus’ life meant little to them. They were willing to crucify him if it would serve their interests. Jesus was falsely accused, unjustly condemned, shamefully treated, brutally beaten, and hung upon a cross.

From an earthly perspective, then, it is indeed view Jesus as a king, much less the King of kings. But we should remember that things are not always as they appear. For Jesus was and is a king. He is the King of kings. The victories won by all of the kings in all the world combined look like nothing at all in comparison to the victory that he has earned through his life, death, and resurrection.

Brothers and sisters, Jesus was and is indeed a mighty and victorious king, but we will never see him as such if we fail to look upon him from the proper perspective. We must look upon him in the right light. We must gaze upon him with the proper lenses on. If we look upon him from a worldly perspective – from an earthly perspective – with the expectation that he do what earthly kings do, and establish the kind of kingdom that earthly kings establish, then we will not see him as a king. But if we look upon him with spiritual lenses on – biblical lenses – redemptive historical lenses – the lenses of faith, then we will indeed see and understand that he is the King of kings and Lord of lords, worthy of all glory, honor, and praise. He is that king who was promised to David long ago.

Notice that John 18 invites us to view Jesus in this way. Jesus is here presented to us as “the King of the Jews”. Notice that not only is he raised King of the Jews, but he first of all dies as such.  And three things need to be noticed about his kingship. First of all, Jesus is a righteous king. Secondly, he is a heavenly king. And thirdly, he is a self-sacrificing king.

Jesus, is a Righteous King

First of all, let us consider Jesus as a righteous king.

Here I simply wish to draw your attention to his innocence. He was innocent in regard to Roman law and Jewish law, and he was also innocent in regard to the law of God. He was indeed a righteous king.

The Jewish authorities brought Jesus to the Romans because they wanted him to be put to death. The Jews lived under the authority of the Romans. They did enjoy a certain degree of freedom. They, for the most part, governed themselves. But they did not have the authority to put a man to death. For this they had to come to the Romans. And so they brought Jesus to Pilate for this purpose.

That the Jews had nothing on Jesus is clear.

Notice how they are unwilling to answer Pilate with any specificity. Pilate asked the Jews “‘What accusation do you bring against this man?’ They answered him, ‘If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you.’” (John 18:29–30, ESV) In other words, just take our word for it. He is guilty. They were not interested in going through any kind of judicial process with Pilate. They just wanted the job done.

By the way, do you notice the irony and the hypocrisy of the Jewish authorities in this passage?They refuse to enter Pilate’s headquarters lest they defile themselves and make themselves unfit to observe the Passover. The passover meal had already been eaten, but entering the house of a gentile like Pilate would have made them unclean and thus unfit to observe the feast of unleavened bread, which was also referred to as the Passover. They were concerned to keep the letter of the law, but the ignored the spirit of it. They were careful not to enter a gentiles house lest they be defiled, but they hardly thought twice about delivering up an innocent man to be crucified. Pure hypocrisy.

So Pilate come out to them. And what charge did they bring against Jesus? They at first accuse him of being an insurrectionists. They attempt to convince Pilate that Jesus claimed to be the King of the Jews and as such posed a threat to Roman rule. The implication was that Jesus was gathering a following with the intention of revolting. This was a lie, of course. It was a lie meant to provoke Pilate to action. The Romans had little patients for insurrections, and so the hope was that Pilate would believe the lie and quickly put Jesus down.

That this was not really the concern of the Jews becomes clear. In 19:7 the Jewish authorities finally admit that their real concern. “The Jews answered [Pilate], ‘We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God.’” (John 19:7, ESV) That was their real concern. Jesus claimed to be the son of God. This was blasphemous to them and deserving of death. Indeed, it would have been blasphemous were it not true. The point is that this was their real concern – this was the real charge. The began with the charge of insurrection thinking that Pilate would be more concerned about this and willing to act.

Furthermore, if the Jews were so concerned about an insurrectionists running around in their midst, then why did they call for the release of Barrabas, who was in fact a condemned insurrectionist? The ESV says that he was a “robber” at the end of verse 40. A better translation of the greek is “insurrectionist”, or “revolutionary”.  The NIV is better here, I think, saying, “Now Barabbas had taken part in a rebellion.” (John 18:40, NIV84) The TNIV says, “Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising.” (John 18:40, TNIV) The NET says, “Now Barabbas was a revolutionary.” (John 18:40, NET) These translations are more to the point, I think. It is true that he was “a robber” in the sense that he was caught trying to take something that didn’t belong to him. But the thing that Barabbas was trying to take was power… from the Romans. It is interesting that Jesus was crucified between two other “robbers”. These were most likely Barabbas’ partners in crime. Brothers and sisters, these men did not steal fruit from a fruit stand. They were involved in a revolution, which is the very thing that Jesus was accused of starting, claiming to be the King of the Jews.  The point is this. If the Jews were really concerned about helping the Romans put down insurrectionists, then why did they cry out for the release of Barabbas?

Brothers and sisters, Jesus was a righteous king. The Jews had nothing on him, and Pilate knew it. He repeatedly came to the Jews saying, “I find no fault in him”. So why did he crucify Jesus then? The sad truth is that he did it to appease the crowd and to save his own skin.

Jesus was and is a righteous king.

Jesus, is a Heavenly King

Secondly, let us consider Jesus as a heavenly king.

Did Jesus ever claim to be the King of the Jews? Well, the answer depends upon what you mean by “king”, doesn’t it?

This was Pilate’s chief concern. “So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, ‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered, ‘Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?’” (John 18:33–35, ESV)

Then Jesus answered the question directly, saying, “‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.’ Then Pilate said to him, ‘So you are a king’” Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.’” (John 18:36–37, ESV)

Notice three things:

One, Jesus made it clear to Pilate that he was a king. Jesus’ mission was to establish a kingdom. He was born into the world for this purpose, he said. To establish a kingdom. To obtain a realm. And to bring subjects into that realm. He answered the question, “Are you the king of the Jews?” in the affirmative.

Two, Jesus also made it clear as to what kind of king he was. His kingdom is “not of this world”. Jesus, therefore, had no aspirations to be an earthly king. He is not interested in overthrowing Rome, or any other kingdom for that matter. His kingdom is “not of this world”. His throne is not an earthly. His kingdom is not geopolitical. It is not, nor will it every be, anything like the kingdoms of this earth.

So does Jesus’ kingship poses a threat to Pilate or Caesar or any other kingdom of this world? The answer is no, not in the least (this seems to be a point that Constantine, and many of his kind,  overlooked). If his kingdom were of this world then his followers would be compelled to fight, he says. But Jesus told Peter to put his sword back in it’s sheath. What kind of king is Jesus, then? He is a heavenly one. He is a heavenly king. His kingdom is a heavenly kingdom. Does his heavenly kingdom impact the kingdoms of this world? Certainly it does! But it is at it’s essence a kingdom, “not of this world.” (Christians today need to give more thought to this as they consider the relationship between the church and the state, and also their views on eschatology).

Three, notice how it is that Christ’s kingdom is established and how it grows. Jesus said, “For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” (John 18:37, ESV)

Worldly kingdoms are established and advance by use of the sword. Military conquest is involved, generally speaking. The sword is the weapon of the state. But what is the weapon of Christ’s kingdom? How does it advance? Christ’s kingdom advances by the proclamation of the word. Truth is the weapon of Christ’s kingdom. Truth is the thing that conquers. When we pray, for the advancement of Christ’s kingdom we pray that his truth may prevail. We are praying that the Holy Spirit would bring men and women to believe in Christ’s truth and to live by it. This is how Christ’s kingdom grows.

And so Christ is a king! In fact he is the king. He is the King of the Jews, the one promised to King David long before the time of Christ. His kingdom is not of this world. And people are brought into it as they come to believe in the truth which Christ has delivered to us.

Jesus, is a Self Sacrificing King

Thirdly, let us consider Jesus as a self sacrificing king.

Here is the real reason why it is so difficult for us to see Jesus as a king. He won victory for those who belong to him in a most unusual way. He defeated his enemies, not by exerting his power, but by laying himself down. It was through death that he would bring life. It was through suffering that he would save. Jesus is our king! But he is our self sacrificing king.

In John’s narrative Jesus has already demonstrated that he had the power to conquer his persecutors. When they came for him in the garden and asked for him by name, he said, “I am he”, and they fell to the ground. In Matthew’s gospel we learn that Jesus told Peter “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” (Matthew 26:52–54, ESV)

Jesus our great king earned victory by laying himself down. He submitted to the will of the Father. He gave himself up so that though death he might earn life. He laid himself down for us. He gave himself up. It was not for lack of power – it was not for lack of strength – he went willingly.

He died in our place. We deserve death, but he died for all who believe upon him. He served as our substitute.

The scriptures are clear that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23, ESV) The scriptures are also clear that “the wages of sin is death…” (Romans 6:23, ESV) But thanks be to God that “the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 6:23, ESV) Why is it that eternal life is found in Christ? It is because he payed the penalty that we deserve. He died in our place, and on the third day rose again, conquering sin, Satan, and even death itself.

Friends, Romans 10:9 says, “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, ‘Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.’” (Romans 10:9–11, ESV)

Jesus is our self sacrificing king. He laid himself down for al who believe. He is our substitute. The story of Barabbas illustrates this, doesn’t it?

Barabbas was a condemned criminal. He was indeed an insurrectionist. Matthew calls him “a notorious prisoner…” (Matthew 27:16, ESV) Luke tells us that he was “a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city and for murder.” (Luke 23:19, ESV) This man was a sinner. He deserved to die. All four gospels make the point this sinner was set free and Jesus the righteous one died in his place. When Christ was crucified, he was hung on the cross that Barabbas deserved.

This is picture of what Jesus has done for you and me and for all who believe upon him. Though we are guilty sinners deserving of condemnation, he took our place. He stood in for us. He endured the punishment so that we who trust in him won’t have to.

Peter reflecting upon of this wrote, “For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed…” (1 Peter 2:21–25, ESV)

Christ went to the cross as our king. He is a righteous king, a heavenly king, and a self sacrificing king. And when he rose from the dead on the third day he rose as our victorious king!

Application and Conclusion

Here is the question: Is Christ your king? Is he your Lord? Have you believed upon him? Have you received his word? Have you acknowledge your need, turned from your sin, and believed upon him for the forgiveness of sins? He is your Lord? Is he your Savior?

the truth of the matter is that you are not free. You have someone as Lord. Someone rules you. You are either in in bondage to sin, and servant of the evil one, or you are servant Christ. It is good to be Christ’s servant. It is good to have him as king.

For those already believing upon Christ, I ask this: Do you see him as king?

Paul prayed for Christians that they would. He said,  “I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.” (Ephesians 1:16–23, ESV)

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 18:28-40
Comments Off on Sermon: Behold, Your King!: John 18:28-40 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Isaiah 50:4-11

[This is the third of four Servant Songs, which anticipate the Messiah… This song focuses on the servant as a rejected prophet. (ESV Study Bible)]

“The Lord God has given me the tongue of those who are taught, that I may know how to sustain with a word him who is weary. Morning by morning he awakens; he awakens my ear to hear as those who are taught. The Lord God has opened my ear, and I was not rebellious; I turned not backward. I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting. But the Lord God helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be put to shame. He who vindicates me is near. Who will contend with me? Let us stand up together. Who is my adversary? Let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord God helps me; who will declare me guilty? Behold, all of them will wear out like a garment; the moth will eat them up. Who among you fears the Lord and obeys the voice of his servant? Let him who walks in darkness and has no light trust in the name of the Lord and rely on his God. Behold, all you who kindle a fire, who equip yourselves with burning torches! Walk by the light of your fire, and by the torches that you have kindled! This you have from my hand: you shall lie down in torment.” (Isaiah 50:4–11, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 18:12-27

“So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. First they led him to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people. Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest, but Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door, and brought Peter in. The servant girl at the door said to Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ He said, ‘I am not.’ Now the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and warming themselves. Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself. The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. Jesus answered him, ‘I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them; they know what I said.’ When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, ‘Is that how you answer the high priest?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?’ Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, ‘You also are not one of his disciples, are you?’ He denied it and said, ‘I am not.’ One of the servants of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, ‘Did I not see you in the garden with him?’ Peter again denied it, and at once a rooster crowed.” (John 18:12–27, ESV)

“The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8, ESV)

Introduction

Today is Palm Sunday, isn’t it? On it we mark the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. This Friday is Good Friday. It is on that day that we remember the death of our Lord. And next Sunday is resurrection Sunday. On it we remember the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Put it all together and we have, what some call, a holy week. I am not opposed to giving attention to these days. And I am not even opposed to calling this week a “holy week”. But we should take care to remember that, according to the scriptures, it is not a holy week that we are to observe, but a holy day, also known as the Lord’s Day, or the Christian Sabbath. And is not once per year that we are to remember the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord, but weekly as we gather together in fellowship and give ourselves to the word, to prayers, to singing, and to the breaking of the bread. These are the things that Lord has ordained.

This is why I do not feel obligated to preach a traditional Palm Sunday, Good Friday, and Resurrection Sunday sermon every year. The culture expects it, I know. But it is not mandated by scripture. And notice that where we are in our study of the gospel of John makes it difficult to preach a Palm Sunday, Good Friday, and Resurrection Sunday message. The problem is that we are very near to each one of these events in John’s gospel, but we are not completely aligned. Jesus’ triumphal entry was communicated to us in John 12:12. From there we have encountered Jesus’ interaction, primarily with his disciples, in the week leading up to his crucifixion. He will be crucified in chapter 19, and we will hear of his resurrection in chapter 20. And so we are in the thick of it, aren’t we? And yet things are not perfectly aligned. If we were in, let’s say, chapter 5, I might consider breaking from John to preach three sermons on the events that transpired in the week of Jesus’ suffering. But because we are in the thick of it, I have decided to simply press on through John’s gospel.

In chapter 18 we encounter Jesus on the way to the cross. I suppose it could be said that Jesus was always on the way to the cross. The cross was always his goal. He came to die for those given to him by the Father from all the world. This we know well. But it is here in John 18 that things accelerate. He is not walking to the cross, but being dragged to it. At least that it how it looks from a human perspective. We know that he was not in fact dragged to the cross. He went willingly in full submission to the will of the Father. The point is that things progress quickly from here. Jesus will be in the grave less than 24 hours from the events narrated in John 18.

And what can we say about Jesus’ journey to the cross? Three observations seem import to me.

Jesus’ Journey to the Cross was Difficult

First of all, it should be acknowledge that Jesus’ journey the cross was difficult. This might seem so obvious that it is hardly worth saying, but I think it is good that we consider carefully the difficulty of Jesus’ journey.

I suppose it can be said that the whole of Jesus’ life was difficult. He was born in poverty. He was constantly opposed. Members of his own family did not at first believe in him. He was often a man on the run. The whole of Jesus’ life was characterized by difficulty. But here I wish to emphasize that Jesus’ final journey to the cross was exceptionally difficult.

We speak often of the fact that Jesus came to die for sinners. But notice that the death he died was not, what we would call, a natural death. He did not die of natural causes. He did not grow old for us. He did not succumb to illness for us. His life was not ended by way of, what we would call, an accident. No, he was put to death by sinful men.

There is a great deal of irony in John 18 and 19, and it is good that we recognize it.

Isn’t it ironic, for example, that it is was the Jews who pushed for the crucifixion of Christ? Later we will see that it was the Romans who carried it out. The Romans were certainly involved in the false trial, mistreatment, and the unjust killing of Jesus. In the end we must admit that all of humanity is represented here. Jew and gentile alike were involved in the killing of the Christ. But it was the Jewish people who pushed for it. And it is ironic, for Jesus was their Messiah. Of course he is the Savior of all people. Salvation is found in him, and in him alone. But he was the Messiah that the Jews had long been looking for. He came, and they put him to death.

John began his Gospel by making note of this irony. John 1:9 says, “The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God…” (John 1:9–12, ESV)

As we consider Jesus’ journey to the cross – the false trial, the brutality, the crucifixion itself – we should be struck by the irony. Here is Jesus, the eternal Word of God come in the flesh, the one through whom and for whom the universe was made, the giver and sustainer of life. He comes to man, not to judge, mind you, but to accomplish salvation. And what does man do with him? Their natural impulse is to kill him. Oh, how dark we are apart from the grace of God!

Isn’t it also ironic that it was the high priest who condemned Jesus to death? Jesus was first brought before Annas. Verse 13 says, “….for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year.” (John 18:13, ESV) Annas was actually the high priest before Caiaphas was. Some passages in the New Testament suggest that both Annas and Caiaphas were high priest at the same time (see Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6). The reason for this is that Annas was high priest first and then Caiaphas, but Annas was still called by that title, though he no longer officially held the position. Why Jesus was first sent to Annas we do not know for sure. But the point is that Jesus stood before the man who had been high priest and who was still honored as such. From there he was sent to stand before Caiaphas who was in fact the high priest.

We should pause for a moment to think about the significance of the high priestly office. Why did that office exist? What role did the hight priest play within Old Covenant Israel?

Much could be said about this. For now I would simply draw your attention to the fact that the high priest was to serve as a kind of mediator between God and man. The high priest was to pray to God on behalf of the people, and to offer up sacrifices to God for the people. It was the high priest who would go once a year into the Holy of Holies to make atonement for his sins and for the sins of the people. And the thing to remember and not forget is that the priesthood of the Old Covenant was temporary and typological. By temporary I mean that the priesthood would continue in it’s Old Covenant form only until the high priest would come. And who is that high priest? He is Christ Jesus our Lord! By typological I mean that the priesthood, along with the sacrifices that they administered, were intended to serve as types, shadows, pictures, or symbols, which pointed forward to the priest who would make the sacrifice which would actually, really, and fully atone for sins. Again, this is Christ Jesus our Lord.

Listen to the book of Hebrews in 3:1: “Therefore, holy brothers, you who share in a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession, who was faithful to him who appointed him, just as Moses also was faithful in all God’s house.” (Hebrews 3:1–2, ESV) Listen to 4:14: “Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:14–15, ESV) If I had the time I would read to you Hebrews chapter 5 on through to the end of chapter 13, for that is theme! Jesus is the true high priest who has made true atonement for sins! Listen to Hebrews 9:11-12, and then we will move on.“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.” (Hebrews 9:11–12, ESV)

So picture Caiaphas the high priest of Israel and Jesus standing before him. Don’t you find it ironic that, though the office he held was intended to serve as a kind of placeholder until the true high priest would come – and though the work he did was packed with typological and symbolic significance which pointed forward to the true lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world – when the true high priest, who is also the true lamb of God, stood before him, he did not recognize him. Caiaphas didn’t get it. Not even close. He was arrogant, unjust, and ignorant. He was ignorant as to the true significance of the position he held. He was ignorant as to the significance of the man who stood before him. And he was ignorant as to the significance of the moment.

And so how did Caiaphas handle Jesus? It’s interesting that John does not provide us with as much detail as Matthew does concerning Jesus’ trial before Caiaphas. John simply reminds us of something that had been mentioned earlier in his Gospel, namely that “it was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.” (John 18:14, ESV)

This is to remind us of what was said in John 11. Remember that at this point people were taking notice of Jesus because of the signs he was preforming. The religious authorities were troubled by this, so they gather together to discuss how to deal with Jesus. Their fear was that, “If [they] let him go on like this, everyone [would] believe in him, and the Romans [would] come and take away both [their] place and [their] nation.” (John 11:48, ESV) We were told that “one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, ‘You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.”” (John 11:49–50, ESV) In other words, it is better that we put this Jesus to death rather than risk the Romans growing upset with us and coming down hard on the nation. How did John interpret these words of Caiaphas? He tells us in 11:51 saying, “[Caiaphas] did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.” (John 11:51–53, ESV)

So here is the irony. Caiaphas was high priest. One of his responsibilities was to offer up sacrifices to God on behalf of the people for the forgiveness of sins. This he in fact did. He offered up Jesus, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins, not only of the Jews, but of all the peoples of the earth. He did so in ignorance and in sin. But he did it according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God.

Jesus’ journey was a difficult one, that is the point. He was falsely accused, falsely tried, and mistreated. By the way, can you imagine being the guy who slapped Jesus when he answered back to Caiaphas? Imagine being that guy! He slapped Jesus! And for what? Jesus simply replied to Caiaphas’ questions about his teaching saying, “‘I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them; they know what I said.’ When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, ‘Is that how you answer the high priest?’” (John 18:20–22, ESV) How blind these men were to the reality of things.

Jesus’ journey to the cross was indeed a difficult one. We tend to emphasize the physical suffering he endured (and it is true that he suffered in the flesh) but consider the emotional, the psychological, the spiritual aspect of all this. Think of the humility, the restraint, the submission to the Father that Jesus maintained in order to accomplish the Father’s will. He suffered for you and me and for all who believe. Thanks be to God.

Jesus’ Journey to the Cross was Lonely

Consider also the loneliness of Jesus’ journey. His journey to the cross was a lonely one.

Here I wish only to emphasize the fact that Jesus walked this difficult road alone.

Judas had already betrayed him. This we have seen.

And where are the majority of the eleven who remained? Most of them have all scattered, haven’t they? What Jesus predicted came true. He said to them in John 16:32, “Behold, the hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home, and will leave me alone.” (John 16:32, ESV) This is what happened.

Notice that Peter followed Jesus. I suppose he should be commended for this. He did have the courage to follow Jesus. But do you remember the conversation that Jesus had with Peter in the upper room after he washed the disciples feet? “Simon Peter said to him, ‘Lord, where are you going?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Where I am going you cannot follow me now, but you will follow afterward.’ Peter said to him, ‘Lord, why can I not follow you now? I will lay down my life for you.’” (John 13:36–37, ESV) Peter claimed to be willing to follow Jesus to the point of death. And his actions revealed that he was serious about that. What did he do when Judas let that band of soldiers into the garden? He drew his sword and started swinging! He displayed courage, did he not? But it was an ignorant courage – a misguided courage. He insisted on walking the road with Jesus when Jesus had already made it clear that he could not. When Jesus was dragged before Annas and Caiaphas, Peter was there. This was risky, wasn’t it? He was putting his life at risk. He was courageous. But again, it was an ignorant courage.

Evidently Peter was still struggling to understand Christ’s mission, wouldn’t you agree? He could not, at this time, understand the way of the cross. He could not comprehend that victory would come to Jesus by way of suffering and death.

He walk with Jesus for a while, didn’t he? But eventually he hit a will. Peter, being questioned three times, denied our Lord three times. This was to fulfill what Christ had predicted. In John 13 “Jesus answered [Peter], ‘Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you have denied me three times.’” (John 13:38, ESV) This is what happened.

I’d like to show you something interesting about the story of Peter’s denial in John 18, if you are willing to listen. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all tell the story of Peter’s denial. But, as is often the case, they provide more detail than does John. They tell us more about what was asked of Peter by his accusers. They also tell us more about what Peter said when he denied Jesus. Mark, in particular,  suggests that Peter grew more and more adamant in his denial with each question asked to the point of “[invoking] a curse on himself [saying], ‘I do not know this man of whom you speak.’” (Mark 14:71, ESV)

But what does John emphasize? How does he portray Jesus’ denial? He tells us that Peter denied  Christ three times with the simple words, “I am not”. Verse 17: “The servant girl at the door said to Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ He said, ‘I am not.’” (John 18:17, ESV) Verse 25, “Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself…” (By the way, notice the repetition of this theme. Twice it is mentioned that Peter was warming himself by the fire. This may suggest that Peter was concerned about his own comfort in contrast to Christ’s selfless suffering. But it might also be an allusion to the Isaiah 50 passage that I read at the beginning, especially verse 11. I’ll leave that to you to ponder) But as they stood around the fire “they said to [Peter], ‘You also are not one of his disciples, are you?’ He denied it and said, ‘I am not.’” (John 18:25, ESV) This happened a third time, and then the roster crowed.

So why is it significant that John’s simply uses the words “I am not” to describe Peter’s denial of Jesus, whereas the other Gospels tell us more? Think with me for a moment. How has Jesus identified himself throughout the Gospel of John? Has he not consistently referred to himself by the words “I am”? “I am the door”; “I am the bread of life”. “I am the light of the world”. “Before Abraham was, I am”, and so on. And even in the immediate context we see that when Judas and the soldiers came to find Jesus in the garden and said that it was Jesus of Nazareth that they were seeking, how did he respond except with the words “I am”? In the english it is “I am he”, but in the greek it is simply ἐγώ εἰμι – “I am”.

So that is the pattern in John. Jesus consistently reveals himself as the “I am”. Clearly this alludes to the divine name given to Moses at the burning bush, but it also communicates that Jesus is the one. He is the anointed one, the long awaited Messiah. He alone is the one who can atone for sins.

Tell me this, church. How has Peter been acting up to this point? He has been acting as if he is. He has been acting as if he could contribute to Christ’s work – as if he could walk with Christ, and even die with Christ. He at first would not let Jesus wash his feet. He claimed to be willing to die with Jesus. He drew his sword and began to fight. And he followed Jesus to Caiaphas’ headquarters. Courages? Indeed! But oh so misguided.

It is here that Peter finally comes to an end of himself. His flesh could take him so far, but he could go no further. He finally admits “I am not.”

Jesus’ Journey to the Cross was Necessary

Brothers and sisters, Jesus’ journey to the cross was indeed difficult and lonely (he was abandoned by men, but the Father was with him), but it was necessary. Only he could make the journey. Only he could walk that road and drink the cup that the Father had given him to drink. He was uniquely called, uniquely anointed, and uniquely qualified to suffer and die and rise again on the third day for your sins and mine, and for all who trust in him in every age, and in every place.

There is one other figure in this passage that we have not talked about yet and we should do so briefly before we conclude. Look at verse 15. It says, “Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest…” (John 18:15, ESV) Who do you think this other disciples is? Certainly this is John! He never names himself in his Gospel, but he appears in the narrative from time to time. Here he is called “another disciple”. In John 20 he is called “the other disciple”. He is the one who outruns Peter to the tomb. In John 21 he is “the disciple whom Jesus loved”. He is always appearing anonymously and as a kind of contrast to Peter.

Why? It seems to me that John, though he, like Peter, was willing to follow Jesus (he did not deny like Judas nor run away like the other nine) he followed in the right way. He followed, not in an attempt to rescue Jesus, and not in an attempt add anything to the work of Christ, as if that were possible. No, he simply followed and observed. He watched Jesus do the work that only Jesus could do. John, unlike Peter at this point in his life, was willing to be served by Jesus. He was willing to be loved by Jesus. That was his boast! Not that he loved Jesus, but that Jesus loved him, and gave himself up for him through his death on the cross.

 Conclusion

This seems to me to be the most crucial question of all. Will you have Jesus as your crucified Lord? Will you allow Jesus to serve you? Will you confess that you are needy – not able to add a thing to the work of Christ, but only able to receive that which he has graciously provided for you through his death, burial, and resurrection?

This is how we must come to Christ. We must repent and believe upon Jesus. We must come to terms with our need and cast ourselves complexly at the feet of Jesus, trusting in him alone for the forgiveness of sins. And brothers and sisters, this is what we must do throughout the Christian life in every circumstance. We must confess our need – confess our brokenness – and run to Jesus who is the author and perfecter of our faith.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 18:12-27
Comments Off on Sermon: Jesus’ Journey to the Cross: Difficult, Lonely, Necessary: John 18:12-27 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Genesis 2:4-9,15-17

“These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens. When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground, and a mist was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground— then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil… [Verse 15] The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’” (Genesis 2:4-9,15-17, ESV)

New Testament Reading: John 18:1-12

When Jesus had spoken these words, he went out with his disciples across the brook Kidron, where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered. Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place, for Jesus often met there with his disciples. So Judas, having procured a band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, went there with lanterns and torches and weapons. Then Jesus, knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, ‘Whom do you seek?’ They answered him, ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’ Jesus said to them, ‘I am he.’ Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. When Jesus said to them, ‘I am he,’ they drew back and fell to the ground. So he asked them again, ‘Whom do you seek?’ And they said, ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’ Jesus answered, ‘I told you that I am he. So, if you seek me, let these men go.’ This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken: ‘Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one.’ Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) So Jesus said to Peter, ‘Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?’ So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him.” (John 18:1–12, ESV)

“The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8, ESV)

Introduction

Whenever I read of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (I know it is not called Gethsemane here in John, but that is what it is) I cannot help but to think also of the first garden, and of the first man who was placed there. In my mind I begin to compare and contrast the two scenes, making note of the similarities and the differences, and I think it is right that we do so.

So what do the two gardens – Eden and Gethsemane – share in in common? On the most basic level it is important for us to recognize that both were a place of testing for men who served as federal heads, or covenantal representatives.

Adam was tested in Eden, was he not? And he was tested, not as an isolated individual, but as the representative of the Covenant of Works (or Life, or Creation – whatever term you prefer). His success meant success for others, and his failure meant failure for others. His God given mission was to work and to keep that garden paradise. That involved more than cultivating the ground and keeping the weeds out, mind you. His mission was to keep the garden from evil – to protect it from intruders who’s aim was to usurp the purposes of God. Adam was to abstain from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and to eat of the tree of life. These were the terms or conditions of the covent that God made with him. It was a works based covenant. Eternal life had to be earned. Had Adam kept the terms of the covenant he would have been confirmed in life. The Spirit would have ushered him into that state of glory – that state of eternal Sabbath rest which had been offered to him by his Maker. Failure meant the entrance of death for Adam and Eve and all who would descend from them. That test took place in Eden, the garden paradise of God.

Notice that Jesus was also tested in a garden. He too was tested, not as an isolated individual, but as the federal head, or representative, of a covenant – in this case the Covent of Grace. He is the mediator or servant of that covenant. And what were the terms or conditions of the Covent of Grace? Well, like the first Adam, Christ (whom Paul calls the second Adam) was to keep God’s law in perfection. This he did in his obedient life. He broke not a single commandment. He, unlike the first Adam, was obedient from beginning to end. More than that, he also accomplished the work that God gave him to do. The first Adam was to work and keep the garden paradise of God. Jesus Christ was also to work and keep all that God had given to him. His work was to reveal the Father and to accomplish redemption for those given to him by the Father. And it is these that he is to keep to the end so that they might enter into the glorified state – the eternal Sabbath rest – which was forfeited by the first Adam, but earned by the second, who is Jesus the Christ.

So we have two Adam’s being tested in two gardens, don’t we? There are indeed similarities between the two, wouldn’t you agree? And of course there are also many differences as well. In this brief sermon I would like to compare and contrast the two Adams and the two gardens as we work our way through John 18:1-12. The reason for the comparison is so that we might better understand the work that Christ has accomplished for us. It is good that we see his work – his obedient life and his sacrificial death – not as if it were an isolated, random, and spontaneous event – but an event which has meaning only as it is understood in the context of the full scope of human history, beginning with Adam in Eden and his breaking of the Covenant of Works. Indeed this story begins even before the fall with the eternal decree of God, but that is a story for another time.

Let us the consider Adam and Christ and their garden testings. Let us consider, first of all, the settings. Secondly, the temptations. And thirdly the results of all that transpired in Eden and in Gethsemane.

The Settings

First of all, let us consider the settings.

While it is true that both Adam and Christ experienced a time of testing in a garden, those gardens were substantially different from one another, weren’t they? The first Adam was placed within the garden paradise of God. Everything in it was good, indeed very good. Sin, suffering, and death were nowhere to be found in that garden, and Adam’s task was to keep it that way. Not only was the garden itself good, but Adam and Eve were also good. They were created in a state of innocency. They had the freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God, but they were unstable, so that they might fall from that state of innocency.  To put it another way, Adam had everything going for him. The conditions were perfect – the setting ideal. He was placed within that garden paradise of God free to obey and yet free to fall.

Now contrast that with Gethsemane. Gethsemane was indeed a garden. There was in that place a concentration of trees. And I do not doubt that it was a relatively tranquil place. But that is where the similarities stop. Eden was paradise, and it was surrounded by paradise. Gethsemane was surrounded by a world hostile to the things of God. It was but one small part of a fallen world. We should remember and not forget that Christ Jesus our Lord was obedient to God, not in paradise, but in this sin-sick world – a setting dominated by sin, and suffering, and death.

Remember that Jesus the Christ was born into this world in a lowly way. He was born to lowly and despised parents. His life was threatened from the beginning. He endured hostility and mistreatment from others from beginning to end.

And he suffered, did he not? He knew what is was to hunger and thirst. He knew the pain of betrayal. He wept over the loss of loved ones. He suffered in the flesh and was indeed a man of sorrows well acquainted with grief.

And remember that he endured constant temptation. Of course he was born of a virgin and was anointed with the Spirit beyond measure. And of course the divine nature supported and upheld the human nature so that he would not sin. But we should remember that the sufferings and temptations endured by Jesus Christ according to the human nature were real sufferings and real temptations. He endured them for you and for me.

So the first Adam lived in an ideal setting, living in the paradise of God, whereas the second Adam was born into a fallen and sin-sick world, hostile to the things of God, and yet he was God’s faithful servant to the end.

The Temptations 

Let us now turn our attention to the temptation of Adam and Christ so that we can compare the two.

They look different on the surface, don’t they? For Adam temptation came by way of the subtlety of the serpent. That ancient serpent, who is the devil, slithered into the garden of God in order to tempt the man to rebel.

In the scene presented here in John 18 we see Christ in Gethsemane. And the intruders take the form, not of a serpent, but as a band of soldiers with Judas in the lead. It was Judas who slithered into Gethsemane.

Though the scenes are vastly different, the temptation that came upon Adam in Eden and upon Christ in Gethsemane were essentially the same.

First of all, see that the same force was behind both temptations. The Evil One commandeered a serpent to temp Adam in Eden, but in Gethsemane it was Judas and the band of soldiers who were the servants of their father the devil.

Do you think this way of speaking is too harsh? Should we be more charitable towards Judas and those who opposed Jesus the Christ? Is it too much to say that they were servants of their father the devil?

We should remember the words of Jesus! Concerning his disciples he said,  “‘Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.’ He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.” (John 6:70–71, ESV) And concerning those who heard his word and yet remained in unbelief he said, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires…”” (John 8:44, ESV)

This is the way that Jesus spoke of them! He sees that men and women either have God as Father, or the devil. This corresponds to what has already been said about federal, or covenantal, headship. We either have Adam as our head, or Christ. We are born into Adam. We must be reborn into Christ. Correspondingly, we are born children of the Evil One. We must be reborn children of God.

And so see that the temptation endured by Christ came from the same source as the temptation which overran Adam. The Evil One inspired both. The first came by way of a serpent, the second by way of a band of soldiers lead by Judas.

Notice, secondly, that the substance of the temptation was essentially the same. The serpent tempted Eve, and through her, Adam, to abandon God’s plan for them. Adam was tempted to ignore God’s word, to distrust God’s word, and to go his own way. He was tempted to serve himself instead of the God who made him.

Was this not also the temptation that Christ endured according to his human nature? We know that he was tempted in this way in the wilderness at the beginning of his ministry, and we see that the same temptation persisted to the very end.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke tell us more about Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane. It is from their gospels that we learn that Jesus asked his disciples to pray for him, but they fell asleep. If is from their gospels that we learn of Jesus praying to the Father saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me…” (Matthew 26:39, ESV) Does this not reveal that our Lord was tempted, according to his human nature, to abandon the mission given to him by the Father and to go his own way?Was he not tempted according to the flesh to serve himself instead of the God who made him?

But what did the Christ do? He, unlike the first Adam, withstood the temptation. He submitted to God’s will. He kept God’s commands, living, not for himself, but for the Father. He served, not himself, but the God who made him, praying, “nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” (Matthew 26:39, ESV)

That same submission is communicated in John’s gospel embedded within Jesus’ words of rebuke towards Peter. Evidently Peter still thought that the Kingdom would be won with the sword, and so he drew his and cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant. And Jesus rebuked Peter, saying, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?” (John 18:11, ESV)

The point is this, Jesus Christ, the second Adam, was obedient to the Father to the end. He was ready and willing to “drink the cup that the Father [had] given [him]” to the dregs. He maintained a posture of submission before God to the point of death. This is why we call him Savior and Lord.

Notice the way that John portrays Jesus in the garden. Mathew, Mark, and Luke give us more information than John – that has already been said. John refrains from mentioning certain aspects of the story which are found in the other three gospels. Why? It was probably because the stories contained in the the synoptic gospels were well known by the time John wrote his. He, therefore, is able to be more direct and concise in his presentation of the event. And what does he hone in upon as he writes in this concise way? He highlights Jesus’ firmness and resoluteness in the face of temptation. He is presented as the vigilant one. Jesus is found standing guard. He greets the intruders with power and force.

Look at verse 5. “Judas, having procured a band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, went there with lanterns and torches and weapons.” And what did Jesus do as they came? Did he run from them? Did he hide behind his disciples? No! He, “knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, ‘Whom do you seek?’” (John 18:4, ESV) Do you notice his boldness? Do you see how proactive and vigilant he was? This is quite the opposite of what we saw from the first Adam, isn’t it? Where was he when the serpent slithered into the garden and began to tempt Eve? He was absent. He was disengaged. Negligent. But Christ, the second and faithful Adam, “came forward and said to them, ‘Whom do you seek?’ They answered him, ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’ Jesus said to them, ‘I am he.’” (John 18:5, ESV)

By the way, notice where Judas is now. He is with the enemies of Christ. He is no longer identified as one of the twelve, but he is with the world now. It was finally made plain and evident that he was indeed “a devil” and “of his father the devil”. He was on the wrong side in the end. May it not be so of us.

Notice that Jesus demonstrated power and control over the situation. “When Jesus said to them, ‘I am he,’ they drew back and fell to the ground. So he asked them again, ‘Whom do you seek?’ And they said, ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’ Jesus answered, ‘I told you that I am he. So, if you seek me, let these men go.’” (John 18:6–8, ESV) Jesus was not a helpless victim, but a conquering King. The way to victory involved the willing sacrifice of himself, and so he went in submission to the Fathers will. His life was not taken from him; he laid it down willingly.

Brothers and sisters, both Adam and Christ were tempted. Though the temptation took a different form, the same person was behind both temptations; and the substance was essentially the same.  Both Adam and Christ were tempted to turn from the love of God to the love of self. The first Adam succumbed to temptation, Christ, the second Adam, was victoriously. He obeyed God’s law to the end. He fulfilled God’s purpose for him. He willingly suffered to the death, drinking the cup that the Father had given him to drink.

The Results

Now that we have considered the settings and the temptations, let us now briefly consider the results of Adam’s rebellion and Christ’s obedience.

Put simply, the result of Adam’s failure was death. He entered into a state of death. His relationship with God was broken. He died spiritually, and physical death would eventually come. Notice that this was true, not only of Adam, but also for Eve and for all who were born to them, including you and me. We are born in sin, under the curse of the law, alienated from God, and by nature children of wrath. This was the result of Adam’s failure – death.

But notice the result of Christ’s victory. He laid ahold of life. The grave could not hold him. He defeated sin, and suffering, and death. He, because of his obedience to the Father, earned eternal life, not only for himself, but for all given to him by the Father.

Look at verse 8: “Jesus answered, ‘I told you that I am he. So, if you seek me, let these men go.’ This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken: ‘Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one.’” (John 18:8–9, ESV)

Notice that Adam lost all whom he represented; Christ lost not a single one of all he represented. He kept all that the Father had given to him, whereas Adam forfeited all. In the immediate context, this refers to the original disciples. In the context of John 17, and of the rest of scripture, this has reference to all whom the Father has given to the Son – all of the elect in every age. He earned life for all those given to him by the Father. He indeed “[laid] down [his] life for the sheep.” (John 10:15, ESV)

Application And Conclusion

Now that we have compared the two gardens and the two men who were tested as federal heads, or covenantal representatives, in those gardens, let us now consider how these things apply to us.

Should we not first of all ask, do I have Adam as my representative, do I have Christ? You are either in Adam, under that broken Covenant of Works, which brings only death, or you are in Christ, under that confirmed and fulfilled Covenant of Grace, which is the New Covenant in Christ’s blood, which brings life. The truth is that you are in, or under, or counted to, one or the other. We are into Adam, and we must be born again into Christ. To have Christ has our representative, as Lord, as Savior, we must believe in him. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16, ESV)

Furthermore, I cannot help not help but notice the three figures who come to the forward in this passage – Judas, Peter, and Jesus. The first two are a negative example to us, the third a good example.

Judas sold out for the world. He betrayed the Christ because he desired wealth and power, but he was on the wrong side in the end. When Christ spoke saying, “I am he”, Judas fell with the rest of the enemies of Christ. The eleven who remained – the eleven that Judas once walked with – were protected by Christ’s word. Is this not a picture of the final judgment when the wicked will be judged by Christ’s word, and the righteous pardoned? Let us be sure to be standing with Christ, and not against him; to be sheltered by Christ, and not the recipient of his condemning word. Let us not be like Judas.

Peter was one of the eleven but he still lacked understanding. He, at this point, failed to grasp that the Kingdom of God was not of this world. He was ready to fight, but with a sword. I can’t help but think that we make the same mistakes still today as we strive in this world according to the power of the flesh. But Christ compels us to trust in him and to go the way of a servant in this time between his first and second coming. Let us not be like Peter in this regard.

And as we consider Jesus are not moved to imitate him in his obedience to the Father? He was steadfast, faithful, resolute. He was not shaken by trial and tribulation. He was not moved by the temptation, but remained in submission to the will of God to the end. May our lives resemble his to the glory of God.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady John 18:1-12
Comments Off on Sermon: John 18:1-12: Showdown In The Garden Posted by Joe

Scripture Reading: 1 Corinthians 11:17–34

“But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not. For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another— if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.” (1 Corinthians 11:17–34, ESV)

Introduction

Most of you were here last Sunday when I announced that the elders of Emmaus desire to move us to the weekly observance of the Lord’s Supper, and to the use of wine (though grape juice will still be offered). If you were not here last week, that might come as a surprise. I would encourage you to listen to last week’s sermon. In it I attempted to answer the question, what is the Lord’s Supper? The reason I addressed that question first is because our view of what the Supper is will inevitably have an impact upon how we think it should be observed. In answer to the question, what is the Lord’s Supper? three simple observations were made. First of all, the Lord’s Supper is a covenantal meal. Secondly, it is a symbolic meal. And thirdly, it a spiritual meal.

Today I wish to build on that by addressing the question, how should the Supper be observed? I have seven points: One, it should be observed weekly. Two, with bread and wine. Three, after the proclamation of the word. Four, within the church. Five, with thanksgiving. Six, thoughtfully. And seven, in faith. Let us now move through these points one at a time.

Weekly

First of all, see that the Lord’s Supper ought to be observed weekly.

In the moment I say these words I’m aware that they sound rather strong. When writing the sermon I actually debated between the word weekly and regularly. We, for nearly five years now, observed the Supper regularly, but not weekly. Many of our dear brothers and sisters worshiping in other churches throughout this valley, and throughout the world, observe regularly, but not weekly. By no means do I look down upon our past practice, nor do I wish to call into question the sincerity of our brothers and sisters in Christ who have a different opinion concerning the frequency of observance. I do not think of our past practice as sinful, nor would I dare accuse those who continue in regular but not weekly observance of sin. That language would be far too strong, in my opinion.

I made it clear in the sermon last week there are indeed situations where it would be appropriate for churches to decide to observe the Supper less frequently and using grape juice instead of wine, though my opinion is that the scriptures point to weekly observance and wine. You can go back and listen to the sermon if you missed it. At the heart of it is the idea that there may be pastoral concerns which lead us to deviate from the norm… for a time… until the concern can be addressed, and the church moved into line with the scriptural norm.

The truth of the matter is that the scriptures never explicitly command weekly observance of the Supper. By that I mean that the scriptures never say, thou shalt observe the Lord’s Supper every Sunday. Let me say two things about the lack of an explicate command: One, it may be that the lack of an explicate command is intended to give a degree of freedom to the people of God to discern what practice would be best given their situation according to the principle stated above. Two, the lack of an explicate command makes determining the proper approach to the Supper a little more difficult. The point is that we should be patience and humble towards those who see all of this another way.

With that said, though it is true that no explicit command can be found concerning weekly observance, it has grown more and more clear to me that the weekly observance of the Supper is strongly implied in the scriptures.

By the way, if we demand that the scriptures produce an explicit command or statement before we believe something or do something we may find ourselves waiting for a long time on some things. The scriptures communicate truth, not only through explicit commands or statements, but also by way of implication (or what theologians have called “necessary consequence”). Does the Bible ever say, for example, that God is triune in an explicit way? No. But the scriptures, by way of implication and necessary consequence clearly teach that God is triune as we take the whole of the scriptures into consideration.

The weekly observance of the Supper is, in my opinion, strongly implied in the New Testament.

For example, in Acts 2:42 we are told what those who had believed upon Christ and had been baptized in the earliest days of the church “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” (Acts 2:42, ESV) This phrase, “to the the breaking of bread” is almost certainly a reference to the Lord’s Supper. It is not just that the early church gathered together for fellowship, the teaching of the word, prayer, and a common meal.  No, when they gathered as the church they celebrated the meal. They broke the bread – the bread which Christ commanded them to break in the upper room before his death and resurrection. This comes through more strongly in the greek, for the greek contains the definite article. Literally rendered, it is not, “they devoted themselves to… the breaking of bread”, but “they devoted themselves to… the breaking of [the] bread.” That is significant, I think. I do wish that our english translations would bring that out.

Also, notice 1 Corinthians 11 which we read at the beginning. What was the church doing when they gathered together? They were celebrating the Lord’s Supper! It is true that Paul was addressing the disfunction in their observance of the Supper. So bad was their behavior that Paul even said, “When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat.” (1 Corinthians 11:20, ESV) In fact, it was the Lord’s Supper that they were eating (the rest of the passage makes that clear). Paul’s point was that the Corinthians were treating one another so badly that they had, in effect, made what was supposed to be the Lord’s Supper into something else. We tend to focus so much either on Paul’s rebuke, or upon Paul’s instructions for proper observance, that we miss the simple fact that the church made a practice of observing the Supper when they came together.

Listen to Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:17:  “But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you… When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat.” (1 Corinthians 11:17–20, ESV) From there Paul instructs them concerning proper observance so that when they come together they might partake of the Supper in the right way, so that the Supper they ate actually resembled the Supper that Christ instituted.

The point is this: both Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 11 imply regular and weekly observance of the Supper. When the church gathered together on the Lord’s day “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of [the] bread and the prayers.” We know from other passages that they also addressed God and one another in the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). Notice that these are the components of our worship. We give ourselves to the word, we seek authentic fellowship, we pray and sing, and I believe that we ought also to break the bread together whenever we gather.

There is so much more that could be said. For now I will be content to say, in response to the question, how should the Supper be observed, that the New Testament implies the weekly observance of the Supper.

With Bread and Wine 

Secondly, see that the Lord’s Supper ought to be observed with bread and wine.

When Christ instituted the Supper it was in the context of the celebration of Passover. He “took [the Passover] bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom. And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.’” (Matthew 26:26–30, ESV)

So the elements used in the Supper were bread (representing the body of Christ), and wine (representing the blood of Christ). More specifically, I think it is right for us to imagine unleavened bread and red wine. How do we know this? Well, from the Old Testament’s instructions concerning the proper observance of the Passover feast, and from history.

There are some who insist that the phrase “the fruit of the vine” is referring to unfermented grape juice. There are others who, though they admit that it was wine, claim that it was not nearly as alcoholic as our wine today. The truth of the matter is that there is no evidence for this whatsoever. If it is true that the wine of the Supper was non-alcoholic, or only mildly alcoholic, then how is it that the Corinthians were struggling with drunkenness in the observance of the Supper? It is beyond doubt that the Passover was celebrated with bread and wine, and that the Supper that Christ instituted involved the eating of bread and the drinking of wine.

You might say, Joe, why does it matter? What difference does it make whether we use wine in the Supper or grape juice? After all, doesn’t the symbolism still work? Grape juice is red, and it is “the fruit of the vine”?

Please hear me. On one level I would admit that it doesn’t matter. I agree, the symbolism still works. The Supper is valid and effective no matter if we use juice or wine. It That is not the issue, in my opinion.

The real issue emerges when we begin to ask the question, why is it that we would ever think of moving from the use of wine to grape juice in the first place? Have you ever thought of that? Have you ever asked yourself, why would Christians decided to make such a change? 

To put it another way, we might ask the question why is the burden of proof placed upon those who desire to move from juice back to wine – from that which is innovative and unoriginal back to the original? Should not the burden of proof forever rest upon those who have insisted upon the change?

The answer to the question, why would we ever think of moving from the use of wine to the use of juice? is found in the temperance movement in our nations history. It is tied to the prohibition era. There was a time in our nations history where, in some Christian circles, any use of alcohol was considered sinful. This, I think, was a problem. This smacks of legalism. The scriptures nowhere forbid the use of alcohol. The scriptures forbid drunkenness. And we should take care to draw the line where the scriptures draw the line. We get ourselves into all kinds of trouble as Christians when we begin to add commands to the commands of God. People do this kind of thing with good intentions (to discourage drunkenness in this case). But legalism is legalism even if it well intended.

In my opinion, this is the issue. I mentioned this last week, and I’ll mention it again. When I think of the monthly observance of the Supper and the use of juice instead of wine I can’t help but think of them as alterations of the original – alterations which are based upon the wisdom of man, in a vain attempt to address issues of the heart (drunkenness, monotony in worship), but through the external formality of manmade religion. It is better to just get to the heart of it, I think, instead of playing with the externals.

Please here me again. I am not saying that all who observe monthly, or who have abandoned the use of wine, do so in this spirit or according to this rational. Often times we find ourselves doing certain things or believing certain things because it is what we have always done or believed. I am not questioning the intentions or integrity of those who think differently on this issue. I am simply saying that if we are to burrow down deep enough seeking answers to the question, why the abandonment of wine? this is what you would find at the core.

So does the Lord’s Supper still “work” if we use juice? Yes! In fact we will be using juice today. Why? Because I told you that you would have a couple of weeks to think about these things and to speak with the Elders before anything different was instituted. We wanted to honor that. No one is saying that Supper doesn’t “work” with juice. That is not the issue. The issue is more fundamental (pun intended). Is has more to do with the question, why would we ever alter that which Christ has instituted? And what sort of thinking lays behind such alterations? When I consider the theology that motivated the abandonment of wine, I do not like what I see. It is concerning to me. It smacks of legalism – manmade religion based upon the wisdom of man instead of God’s revealed truth. More on that another time.   

After the Proclamation of the Word 

Thirdly, in response to the question, how should the Supper be observed? see that it ought accompany and follow the proclamation of the word.

This has to do with the way sacraments function. They are symbols, are they not? Baptism and the Supper are signs, or symbols. But how do we know what they are symbols of? We understand their symbolic significance only because we have, first of all, been given the word. Jesus did not say, here. Eat this. They are symbolic. Leaving the disciples to wonder as to what they were symbols of. No! He first gave them his word! He spoke, saying, “Take, eat; this is my body.” (Matthew 26:26, ESV) And “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Matthew 26:27–28, ESV)

It is God’s word which gives meaning to the sacrament. It is God’s word which defines the sacrament. To partake of the sacrament apart from the word will lead to idolatry, superstition, and ignorance. But to partake of the sacrament after the hearing of the word, and according to the word, is a great benefit to the people of God. It is then that the Supper nourishes the soul and strengthens the faith of those who are in Christ.

The Lord’s Supper has a way of sealing or confirming the word. Think of it. The word of God is preached. We hear it. We are urged to believe in it and to obey it. In particular, we are urged, by the preaching of the word, to believe upon Christ and to walk with him (either initially or in an ongoing way). And the Lord’s Supper is a sign of that very thing – our continual faith in Christ – our abiding in him. When we partake of the Supper are we not saying, I still believe! I am receiving this word that I have heard. I believe it. I remain in Christ, and depend upon him today? It is a powerful thing, really, to hear Christ proclaimed – to have him offered to you in the preaching of the gospel – and then, as a kind of sign and seal, to partake of him in the sacrament as an outward, visible, tangible manifestation of that inward and spiritual reality.

This is why it is important that the word be preached and then the sacrament administered. The sacraments loose their significance when the proclamation of the gospel of God is lacking. They, over time, turn into empty and superstitious rituals.

Within the Church 

Fourthly, see that the Lord’s Supper ought to be observed within the church.

I cannot say very much here, but it is important to see that the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper were given to the church. They are sacraments of the church and are to be administered in that context. It was to the Apostles that Christ said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you…’” (Matthew 28:19–20, ESV) And what did those Apostles do? They preached the gospel, planted churches, and appointed officers –  elders and deacons – to serve within the congregations. It is in that context that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are to be administered. I am not saying that it must happen in a church building – that is not the point! Notice the cover of the most recent Heart Cry Magazine! It is a picture of brothers and sisters gathered together somewhere in Asia, I think, baptizing in a river. The church is gathered, though – that is the point. And the same is true of the Supper. It is to be observed when we come together as a church (see 1 Corinthians 11:17ff.).

Remember that one of the things that the Supper symbolizes is our individual union with Christ and our union with one another! To detach from the body of Christ – to detach from his holy temple – to separate from his flock – and then to partake of the Supper, which, among other things, symbolizes the fact that you are a member of his body, a stone within his temple, and a sheep of his fold, is a profound contradiction. It is hypocritical. You are partaking of something which symbolizes unity when in fact you are settling for, or perpetuating, disunity. It is not right. The sacraments were not given to the individual Christian, nor to the family, nor the state. They were given to the church – and they are to be administered in that context.

Some might respond by saying, fine then! I will not gather with the church, and I will not partake of the Supper. If that is your attitude, I pray it changes. And I pray that your absence from the Lord’s Table would serve to symbolize the severed relationship that exists between you and Christ and his people. Just as the empty seat of the prodigal son at the fathers table served as a perpetual reminder of the severed relationship, so too ones absence from the Lord’s Table serves as an external manifestation or representation of a broken or damaged communion bond.

Brothers and sisters, if you have been neglecting to gather together with God’s people, repent of it (Hebrews 10:25). Come and sup with God and with his people. The Lord’s Supper is indeed a symbol, and a vital means, by which that communion bond is maintained.

With Thanksgiving 

So the Supper is to be observed weekly, with bread and wine, after the proclamation of the word, and within the church. Would you see, fifthly, that the Supper is to be received with thanksgiving?

It is with this fifth point that we turn our attention to the condition of our heart as we approach the table. We are to partake with hearts filled with thanksgiving.

The truth of the matter is that we should always give thanks. All of our prayers should be characterized by thankfulness. When we eat a common meal, it is good to give thanks for the food we are about to eat. When we eat and drink, is it not a reminder of God’s provision? Is it not a reminder that God cares for us? Truly, we should maintain a thankful disposition always as God’s people.

How much more as we partake, not a common meal, but of the meal that God has set before us. This meal reminds us of the provision that God has made, not only for the body, but for the soul – not only as it pertains to earthly and temporary things, but for heavenly and eternal things. If we give thanks for the food which feeds the body, how much more should we give thanks for the food which feeds the soul, namely Jesus the Christ – his body broken for us, his blood spilled. The Lord’s Supper is a celebration. It is a joyous occasion. It is a time for giving thanks.

When Jesus instituted the Supper “he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’” (Luke 22:19, ESV)

Thoughtfully  

Sixthly, see that the Lord’s Supper ought to be received thoughtfully.

Here I only wish to remind you of the symbolism embedded within the Supper. Never should we partake of the Supper in braindead way. No, as the elements are presented, distributed, and consumed, the mind is to be engaged. We are to ask the Holy Spirit to illumine, in this case, not the spoken or written word, but the visible word. For that is what the symbolism of the Lord’s Supper is intended to do – it preaches the gospel to us, not through words, but by way of symbol. Just as we will not benefit in the least from the spoken or written word if the mind is disengaged, neither will we benefit from the Supper if we approach in a mindless way.

Instead, we are to consider the symbolism. We are to think of the broken body and shed blood of Christ, in which there is the forgiveness of sins. We are to think of where he is now, ascended to the right hand of the Father, where he serves as our Mediator, and from where he will return. We are to think of the importance of believing upon him – chewing on him with the mouth of faith. We are to think of our union with Christ. We are to think of our communion with God through faith in Christ. We are to think of our union with one another. All of these things are communicated through the Supper by way of symbol. The point is that we are to think as we partake.

In faith

Seventhly, see that the Lord’s Supper ought to be received in faith.

Brothers and sisters, the Supper benefits you nothing if you do not have faith in Christ. In fact, if you do not have faith and you partake of the Supper it brings, not a blessing, but a curse. To partake of the Supper is to receive God’s mark; God’s name. And to receive it in an unworthy manner – to take his name in vain – brings, not a blessing, but a curse. “For the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.” (Exodus 20:7, ESV). It is a big deal to say that Jesus is Lord. And that is one thing that we do in the Supper. Are we not saying that we belong to Christ? We are receiving his mark, are we not? He puts his mark on us in baptism and in the Supper. Let us be sure, then, that we are partaking in a worthy manner with true faith in the heart.

“Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.” (1 Corinthians 11:28–32, ESV)

What does it mean, then, to partake in a worthy manner? It means that we are to partake only if we have faith in Christ. It means that we are to partake as long as we are living a life marked by repentance. It means that we are partake when we have done everything in our power to maintain unity within the body of Christ. To partake when we know there is no faith in Christ; to partake when we know that we are living in sin and are unwilling to turn from it; to partake when we know that we have sinned against our brother or sister in Christ and have not done our part to make it right, we  partake in an unworthy manner. It is a serious thing.

Here is what partaking in an unworthy manner does not mean. It does not mean that if you have sinned in the past week, or day, or hour, you cannot partake. If that were the case, then the trays would go out full and return full every Lord’s Day.

Brothers and sisters, repent of your sins and believe in Jesus. If you are doing that, then come to his Table. Come and commune with one another and with God the Father who has adopted you into his family through the broken body and shed blood of his uniquely begotten Son, Jesus, who is the Christ.

Conclusion

So how are we to partake of the Supper?

Weekly; with bread and wine; after the proclamation of the word; within the church; with thanksgiving; thoughtfully; and in faith.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady 1 Corinthians 11:17–34
Comments Off on Sermon: 1 Corinthians 11:17–34: The Lord’s Supper – How Is It To Be Observed? Posted by Joe