Washed by the water and the blood

 

And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they have pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn...In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness (Zechariah 12:10, 13:1).

I am not a doctor.

However, after more than 35 years of working in insurance claims, I have become pretty familiar with medical terminology, having read thousands of medical reports describing injuries, pre-existing medical conditions, and post-injury complications.

I am not a theologian.

However, having received a Religious Education degree from a Baptist Seminary, and after studying Scripture and attending church services for most of my 65 years of life, I have become fairly familiar with the spiritual significance of events and of the power of fulfilled prophecy.

I have great respect for both doctors and theologians. As we study John's account of the events immediately following the death of Jesus, I hope to confirm His humanity and His physical death, as well as point to some of the prophesies fulfilled in the death of Jesus.

Then the Jews, because it was the day of Preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), 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 man and of the other who was crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things came to pass in order that the Scripture would be fulfilled, "NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN." And again another Scripture says, "THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED" (John 19:31-27, LSB).

 Of the gospel writers, Luke was a physician. However, Luke was not an eyewitness to the crucifixion, so his account does not go into the medical detail that John's does. John was there, an eyewitness to the events. His is a trustworthy account, because he wants the truth to be known. There may have been rumors or speculations spreading around that Jesus didn't truly die. Skeptics even today try to discount the accounts of Jesus' death, saying that He swooned or fainted, and that He revived only after being placed in a cool, dark environment like a rock-hewn tomb. By the time John wrote his account, perhaps people were repeating these very same objections.

John's account strikes down this argument in two ways.

First, he explains that since the Sabbath would begin at sundown, and that this particular Sabbath was a high holy day, the religious leaders demanded that the Romans take away the disgusting sight of three crucified men. The Romans would not remove the bodies until they were sure that they were dead, so measures were taken to hurry the process along.

Men on the cross would struggle to breathe. As their upper body strength left them, they would push themselves up, placing their weight on the iron spike nailed through the feet. One way to keep them from doing so would be for the Romans to break the legs of the crucified men. This meant that they could no longer push themselves up to take in gasping breaths, and as a result they would suffocate. The Jews asked that Pilate order the Roman soldiers to break their legs, so that they would die sooner, and therefore their bodies could be removed before sundown. 

Deuteronomy 21:22-23 specifically states, "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."

So the Roman soldiers took a mallet or a club and broke the legs of the two thieves hanging on either side of Jesus. However, when they looked at Jesus, they saw that He was already dead. Leaving aside the fact that these were executioners and professional killers, and that they would be able to discern if a man was dead or was merely faking death, one of them thrust his spear between the ribs of Jesus' lifeless body. What they saw confirmed that Jesus was no longer alive.

Medical textbooks today state that there is a lining around a human heart called the pericardium. When fluid fills the pericardium, the heart must work that much harder to pump blood through the body. This is a condition called pericardial effusion leading to cardiac tamponade. Without immediate medical attention, this condition is fatal.

Medical students may be familiar with a case study of a male in his mid-thirties who fell 30 feet from a platform or scaffold. Due to the chest wall trauma, this individual developed a pericardial rupture. "Pericardial rupture is a rare complication of blunt chest trauma," the case study reads, and "a subsequent cardiac herniation with dextrocardia through the pericardial tear is even a rarer and often fatal condition." 

I have heard too many preachers romanticize the symptoms, summing up by saying, "Jesus died of a broken heart." No, Jesus died of a pericardial effusion with possible pericardial rupture suffered either pre- or post-mortem. Could it be that when Jesus stumbled and fell under the weight of the cross He carried, that the Roman soldier kicked Him in the ribs to motivate Him to get up? We are not told of this, but it is not improbable. What we are told is that the Roman soldier who did not break His legs did thrust a spear into His ribs, possibly puncturing the pericardial lining and maybe even the chambers of the heart itself, which would be the source of both water and blood. If Jesus was not dead before the spear pierced His pericardium, He certainly was after.

Another possible medical explanation is this:

Those who were flogged would often go into hypovolemic shock, a term that refers to low blood volume. In other words, the person would have lost so much blood he would go into shock. The results of this would be:

1) The heart would race to pump blood that was not there.
2) The victim would collapse or faint due to low blood pressure.
3) The kidneys would shut down to preserve body fluids.
4) The person would experience extreme thirst as the body desired to replenish lost fluids.

There is evidence from Scripture that Jesus experienced hypovolemic shock as a result of being flogged. As Jesus carried His own cross to Golgotha (John 19:17), He collapsed, and a man named Simon was forced to either carry the cross or help Jesus carry the cross the rest of the way to the hill (Matthew 27:32–33; Mark 15:21–22; Luke 23:26). This collapse indicates Jesus had low blood pressure. Another indicator that Jesus suffered from hypovolemic shock was that He declared He was thirsty as He hung on the cross (John 19:28), indicating His body’s desire to replenish fluids. (www.gotquestions.org/blood-water-Jesus.html)

 If you have ever wondered why Jesus died so quickly relative to the others who were crucified that same day, the answer lies in the physical torture He sustained during the hours leading up to the crucifixion. There was severe physical trauma, and it resulted in the physical death of our Lord. There are enough details in John's gospel to verify this. NT Wright, in his commentary John for Everyone, writes:

But of course, at this moment of all moments, none of this is simply told for the sake of historical detail, vital though that is (the WORD really did become flesh, not a phantom!). John has left us in no doubt that all these details, too, though from one point of view "accidental" (nobody could have guessed what the soldiers might do next), were all to be seen as heaven-sent signs of what it all meant. We only have to think back through the gospel, to all the occasions where water or blood are mentioned, to realize that again and again they point to Jesus as the source of life, cleansing and purification. 

Charles Spurgeon said, "Take all the types of the Old Testament together, and you will gather this, that the purification of sin was typically set forth by blood and water. Blood was conspicuous always, you have no remission of sin without it: but water was exceedingly prominent also." Spurgeon also said, “One of these old divines says that Jesus Christ was typified by our first father, Adam. As Adam fell asleep, and out of his side Eve was taken, so Jesus slept upon the cross the sleep of death, and from his side, where the spear was thrust, his Church was taken.” 

Wright continues:

All these themes come together at this moment. And, in particular, they all point to Jesus as the true Passover lamb. At the moment when the lambs are being killed in the Temple, Jesus Himself is the true Passover Lamb, who takes away the sin of the world. The Passover regulations specified that no bone of the lamb should be broken (Exodus 12:46, Number 9:12). At the same time--here, as so often in John, two themes are combined--Jesus dies as the true Messiah, bearing the sorrow and shame of Israel and hence the world. "They shall look on the One whom they have pierced"; this is a quotation from Zechariah 12:10, a passage which speaks, darkly to our minds but powerfully in Jesus' day, about the time of great suffering and mourning which will come upon Jerusalem, through which God will bring about redemption, rescue, and deliverance. The immediate result of the piercing and mourning, according to the prophet, is that a fountain will be opened for the house of David and the people of Jerusalem, a fountain which will cleanse them from sin and impurity (Zechariah 13:1).

There is one more point I want to make before taking leave of this passage. Warren Wiersbe points out in his The Bible Exposition Commentary that when Jesus was seen with Moses and Elijah in the transfiguration in Luke 9:28-31, the three of them were speaking to Him about His departure. The KJV and NKJV translate the word departure as decease, meaning that He would die. However, the actual Greek word they used is the word for exodus, "suggesting the Passover lamb and the deliverance from bondage."

God planned the exodus of the people of Israel, commissioning Moses to lead them out of bondage and slavery, and into the Promised Land. Elijah was sent by God to preach to the people a message of repentance, urging them to turn from idolatry and return to covenant faithfulness to the one true God. Jesus came do both--to lead God's people out of slavery to sin and toward a heavenly hope, and to preach a covenant relationship with God founded on faithfulness.

This word exodus is found only two other places in the New Testament. One is found in Hebrews 11, the chapter described as the "Hall of Fame of Faith", when Joseph, looking forward to his brethren returning to the Promised Land, urged them to take his remains with them after he died. The other is found in 2 Peter 1:15, where Peter says he knows that he will pass away soon, but that he wants his readers to remember his message of Jesus Christ, the hope of glory.

This exodus, this passing from one life to the next, is our destiny. We will either enter Heaven, the place prepared for us by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, by faith in Him alone; or we will enter Hell, a place of unspeakable and eternal torment, similar to the torment that Jesus experienced in our place and on our behalf. If our faith is in Jesus, then He took our torment and grants us His peace. If not, then His sacrifice is of no account for you, for you are dead in your sins and will receive a just punishment for those sins.

Ephesians 5:25-26 describes Christ as a husband to His bride the church, who "loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word." Hebrews 9:22 says that all things are cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. We are either washed, or we are not. Wiersbe concludes, "It will take an eternity to reveal all that happened when Jesus Christ died on the cross."

Done and Dusted

 

I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do.      --John 17:4

If you are a fan of British television, as my wife and I are, then you are familiar with the phrase, "Done and dusted." It is a phrase used to express that a task or situation has been fully completed.  It means that something is completely finished, finalized, or decided, with no further action needed. The phrase indicates total completion. It is commonly used in both formal and informal contexts to show that a project, deal, or task is fully wrapped up. Dictionaries define it as "finished or decided, with nothing more to be said or done." The expression likely originated in Britain, possibly linked to dusting powder used to finish documents (by drying the ink), symbolizing a final touch.

This is the meaning of the Greek word tetelestai, which Jesus shouted triumphantly from the cross as He drew His final breath. We will speak more of this in a moment, but in the beginning of today's Scripture passage, there appears to be some unfinished business that Jesus needs to be taking care of.

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home. After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst!" Now a vessel full of sour wine was sitting there; and they filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a hyssop, and put it to His mouth. Wo when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit (John 19:25-30).

Four women stood at the foot of the cross. One was Mary the mother of Jesus. The unnamed woman is identified in the other Gospels as Salome, wife of Zebedee, and mother of James and John (who were cousins of Jesus). Very little is known of the third woman, identified as Mary the wife of Clopas; this is the one and only time she is mentioned, unless she is the "other Mary" who brought spices to prepare the body of Jesus for burial. The fourth woman mentioned is Mary Magdalene, whom we know as a close follower of Jesus after He had delivered her from seven demons (Mark 16:9; Luke 8:2).

As Mary's firstborn, Jesus felt a responsibility for the welfare of His mother. "The first time we meet Mary in the gospel of John, she is attending a wedding (2:1-11); now she is preparing for a burial. The hour had come! She was experiencing 'the sword' that had been predicted years before (Luke 2:35)" (Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary).

William Barclay writes, "In this passage there is something which is surely one of the loveliest things in all the gospel story. When Jesus saw His mother, He could not but think of the days ahead. He could not commit her to the care of His brothers, for they did not believe in Him yet (John 7:5). And, after all, John had a double qualification for the service Jesus entrusted to him--he was Jesus' cousin, being Salome's son, and he was the disciple whom Jesus loved."

Having tied up the loose end of how His mother would be taken care of, Jesus then turned His attention to fulfilling prophecy. Psalm 22:15 says, "My tongue clings to My jaws; You have brought Me to the dust of death." The Jewish leaders would be thinking of this passage because Jesus had already quoted from this Psalm when He said, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me." Another Messianic Psalm is Psalm 49, and we see in verse 21, "They gave Me gall for My food, and for My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink."

So Jesus fulfilled this Scripture when He said, "I thirst." 

One commentary I read gave a completely different take on this passage, one that gives us pause. In the New Cambridge Bible Commentary, John Neyrey writes that when Jesus said "I thirst," He was not speaking to the crowds or to His disciples or even to the soldiers who tried to give Him drink. He was praying to God.

Just as the bystanders utterly misunderstood Jesus' statement "My God, my God..." and thought that He called Elijah to rescue Him, so, too, the soldiers here take Jesus' words literally and offer Him a drink. The meaning, however, lies elsewhere. One should link Jesus' "thirst" with His claim that others who drink of His water will never thirst again (4:13-14; 6:35; 7:37); just as "drink" has a literal and spiritual meaning, so, too, does "thirst." The "cup" He drinks, we are told, is that presented by the Father (18:11). If so, it expresses Jesus' full obedience to drink that cup, obey the divine will, and achieve the work for which He was sent.

In other words, when Salome, the mother of James and John, asked Jesus to allow the sons of Zebedee to sit at His right hand and His left in His kingdom, what did He ask them? "Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?" He went on to say that they would in fact drink that same cup, which symbolizes the suffering and trials that that God may bring upon them. Therefore, it could be interpreted that when Jesus said, "I thirst," He was acknowledging that He was ready, willing, and able to drink of the cup that the Father had ordained for Him to drink. Even though He Himself knew no sin, He was willing to suffer and die for the sins of others.

In John's gospel, you find a number of pictures of our Lord's death: the slaying of the lamb (1:29); the destroying of the temple (2:19); the lifting up of the serpent (3:14); the shepherd laying down his life for the sheep (10:11-18); and the planting of the seed in the ground (12:20-25). These pictures make it clear that Jesus' death was not an accident; it was divine appointment. He was not murdered in the strictest sense: He willingly gave His life for us. His death was an atonement, not just an example. He actually accomplished the work of redemption on the cross (Wiersbe).

(Here) is another of John's hidden things. He tells us that it was on a hyssop reed that they put the sponge containing the vinegar. Now a hyssop reed is an unlikely thing to use for such a purpose, for it was only a stalk, like strong grass, and at the most two feet long. So unlikely is it that some scholars have thought that it is a mistake for a very similar word that means lance or spear. But it was hyssop which John wrote and hyssop which John meant. When we go centuries back to the first Passover when the children of Israel left their slavery in Egypt, we remember how the angel of death was to walk abroad that night and to slay every first-born son of the Egyptians. We remember how the Israelites were to slay the Passover lamb and were to smear the doorposts of their houses with its blood so that the avenging angel of death would pass over their houses. And the ancient instruction was: "Take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood which is in the basin and touch the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood which is in the basin" (Exodus 12:22). It was the blood of the Passover lamb which saved the people of God; it was the blood of Jesus which was to save the world from sin. The very mention of hyssop would take the thoughts of any Jew back to the saving blood of the Passover lamb; and this was John's way of saying that Jesus was the great Passover Lamb of God whose death was to save the whole world from sin (Barclay).

After accomplishing all this, Jesus gave a triumphant shout. "IT IS FINISHED."  NT Wright, who is British and would have used the phrase "done and dusted" many times in his life, wrote in his commentary John for Everyone:

Jesus gives one last cry. "It's finished." "It's all done." "It's complete!" He has finished the work that the Father had given Him to do (17:4). He has loved "to the very end" His own who were in the world (13:1). He has accomplished the full and final task. The word translated "It's all done!" is actually a single word in the original language. It's the word that people would write on a bill after it had been paid. The bill is dealt with. It's finished. The price has been paid. Yes, says John: and Jesus' work is now complete, in that sense as in every other. It is upon this finished, complete work that His people from that day to this can stake their lives.

Bible scholar David Guzik writes, "A single word can change everything. 'Not guilty' in a court of law changes everything. 'Fair' on the playing field changes everything. When a woman says 'Yes' to a marriage proposal it changes everything. 'Goodbye' can change everything. Yet, there has never been a single word said that has impacted history than what Jesus said in John 19:30." Spurgeon said, “It was a Conqueror’s cry; it was uttered with a loud voice. There is nothing of anguish about it, there is no wailing in it. It is the cry of One who has completed a tremendous labor.”

It was all finished, paid in full, accomplished.

• >The types, promises, and prophecies were finished.
• >The sacrifices and ceremonies of the priesthood were finished.
• >His perfect obedience was finished.
• >The satisfaction of God’s justice was finished.
• >The power of Satan, sin, and death was finished.

When Jesus tasted death, as all men must do, He did so with the peaceful confidence of obedience to the Father, and the full knowledge that He had accomplished all that He was sent to do.

I told you so

 

And he said, "Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah would suffer and die and rise from the dead on the third day." (Luke 24:46 NLT)

 Last week there were headlines about a potential public execution in the United States. The man known as "The Fort Hood Shooter" has been sentenced to death for his crimes. Since he was a member of the military when the crimes were committed, the military has decided that his execution should be done in a very military fashion: he must stand before a firing squad.

Neither the death sentence nor the method of execution is news. What grabbed the headlines last week was the notion that the execution should take place in front of a camera, and that the images be live streamed so that the public could witness the event. Apparently, the government official who had proposed the first public execution in the US since 1936 thought that it would serve as a deterrent to those who might wish harm to the service men and women who serve this country with distinction.

Due to public outcry, and the idea that the live stream may backfire and may motivate our enemies to commit more acts of violence against US citizens, the execution will not be broadcast in this way. The perpetrator will perish for his purported crimes, but it will no longer be public.

Throughout history, however, public executions were common. They were thought to deter crime, but they were definitely a public spectacle. In the days before television and movies, people would gather in the public square to observe hangings, beheadings, and yes, even crucifixions. The charges filed against the accused would either be read aloud or written on a placard and prominently placed, so that all would know their crimes.

We see this play out in the 19th chapter of John's gospel, where the public crucifixion of Jesus was described.

And He, bearing His cross, went out to a place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha, where they crucified Him, and two others with Him, one on either side, and Jesus in the center. Now Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Therefore the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'He said, "I am the King of the Jews."'" Pilate answered, What I have written, I have written." Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts, to each soldier a part, and also the tunic. Now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top in one piece. They said therefore among themselves, "Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be," that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says: "They divided My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots." Therefore the soldiers did these things (John 19:17-24).

Commentator David Guzik writes, "According to Roman custom Jesus carried His cross from the place of sentencing to the place of crucifixion." This had been foreshadowed in the Old Testament, when Abraham was commanded by God to sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham told Isaac that there would be a sacrifice, and it was Isaac who carried the wood for the fire.

The thieves crucified alongside Jesus were likely associates of Barabbas, whose place Jesus had taken. In this way, Jesus was identified with sinners in His death. One commentator wrote, "The whole of humanity was represented there: the sinless Savior, the saved penitent, and the condemned impenitent." 

Historians say that Crucifixion was the appropriate punishment for slaves (Cicero), bandits (Josephus), prisoners of war (Josephus), and revolutionaries (Josephus). Jesus could not be accused of being a disobedient slave, although He came as a Servant (Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28). He was not accused of being a common thief, although He had stolen attention away from the high priests and Pharisees. He was definitely not a prisoner of war, although the Jews in Rome were treated as a conquered race of people. The only accusation that Pilate could level against Jesus that would justify a Roman crucifixion was public insurrection. This may be why Pilate wrote the charge against Him as, "King of the Jews." NT Wright puts it this way:

When Pilate places a notice above Jesus' head on the cross [it was meant to] rub in the point to the people who were watching: that's what will happen if you get up to this sort of thing. 'The sort of thing' in question was actions or teachings which the government interpreted as being revolutionary. Sometimes condemned Roman prisoners carried the notice around their neck on the way to the place of execution, so that all the more people could see, and take warning. The notice itself is full of irony. The chief priests are furious with Pilate. He doesn't believe Jesus is the King of the Jews any more than they do, and they don't want him making fun of them in this way. Pilate, of course, is getting back at them. It's a calculated snub. "You wanted Him crucified, didn't you?" we can feel him thinking. "Well, I've done it. And I reserve the right to say what I want on the public notice. As far as I'm concerned, He really is 'The King of the Jews'--the only sort of king you crazy people deserve! This is what I've done to Him, and this is what I'd be happy to do to the whole lot of you!"

Wright continues:

Once again we must listen to what John is telling us, as Jesus goes to His death. Remember how Caiaphas had said more than he had known when he spoke, callously, about one man dying for the people (John 11:49-50). Remember how Jesus had been approaches by some Greeks, and how in His comment on their request He had said that when He was "lifted up from the earth" He would "draw all people to Himself" (John 12:32). Remember how Peter had declared that he would lay down his life for Jesus, and how Jesus had gently questioned whether he'd got that idea the right way round (John 13:37-38). Bring all that together, stand at the foot of the cross and look up at the notice that Pilate had written. What do you see?

Warren Wiersbe, in his The Bible Exposition Commentary, answers that question this way: "Pilate wrote a "gospel tract" when he prepared this title, for one of the thieves discovered that Jesus was King, and he asked entrance into His kingdom."

The second part of this narrative describes the soldiers gambling for Jesus' belongings. A Roman squad of four soldiers was responsible for overseeing the crucifixion. William Barclay writes, "Every Jew wore five articles of apparel--his shoes, his turban, his girdle (or belt), his tunic and his outer robe. There were four soldiers and there were five articles. They diced for them, each had his pick and the inner tunic was left. To have cut it into four pieces would have been to render it useless, and so they diced again to see who would possess it."

An astute student of Scripture will immediately see a fulfillment of the prophecy in Psalm 22. Centuries before the Jewish people had even heard of crucifixion, David wrote these words: "They pierced My hands and My feet; I can count all My bones. They look and stare at Me. They divide My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots" (Psalm 22: 16b-18).

Do you see the theme here? All throughout Scripture there are clues, snippets of things to come, predictions of suffering and death, all culminating in the death of God's own Son. I think William Barclay puts it best:

But there is something half-hidden here (in John's account). Jesus' tunic is described as being without seam, woven in one piece from top to bottom. That is the precise description of the linen tunic which the High Priest wore. Let us remember that the function of the priest was to be a liaison between God and man. The Latin for priest is pontifex, which means bridge-builder, and the priest was to build a bridge between God and man. No one ever did that as Jesus did. He is the High Priest through whom men come to God. Again and again we have seen that there are two meanings in so many of John's statements, a meaning which lies on the surface, and a deeper inner meaning. When John tells us of the seamless tunic of Jesus it is not just a description of the kind of clothes that Jesus wore; it is something which tells us that Jesus is the perfect priest, opening the perfect way for all men to the presence of God.

When the Jews protested to Pilate to change the wording on the charge, he refused. Pilate said, "I have written what I have written." From this side of history, we can hear the Word of God echoing through time, "I told you so."

NT Wright says this:

John doesn't need to do more than give the briefest description of the gambling at the foot of the cross, and to draw our attention to the psalm in question. He leaves us to think through the implication. Jesus is the fulfillment of prophecy and sacred song. He is the righteous sufferer. He is the true King. He is the one through whose shameful death the weight of Israel's sin, and behind that the sin of the whole world, is being dealt with. The King of the Jews is God's chosen sacrifice, not merely to rule the world but to redeem it.

This is what is meant by the words Lamb of God. John's gospel begins by describing Jesus as the Word. He quotes John the Baptist as saying of Jesus, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." A lamb is born for sacrifice. God sent His own Son to be that sacrifice for us. We need only to place our faith and trust in Him to save us from our sins.

Jesus was crucified between two sinners. One believed and was saved. The other ridiculed and was lost for all eternity. These two men represent all of humanity. Which one are you?

They made a mockery of Him in a spirit of fear

 

Will it be well when He searches you out? Or can you mock Him as one mocks a man? (Job 13:9)

Once, there was a boy who thrived on being the loudest in the room. Let's call him Pip. He enjoyed teasing classmates, making fun of their mistakes, and mocking their habits. Pip believed his humor was sharp and that no one would ever notice how he made them feel.

One day, during a school event, Pip targeted a quiet, kind student who had recently struggled with a personal loss. The student's name was Jesse. Pip made a cruel joke about Jesse’s situation, expecting laughter and a quick escape from the awkwardness. Instead, Jesse’s friends stepped in, and Pip’s own friends, who had been quietly watching, began to turn against him.

The mockery spread like wildfire — not because the joke was funny, but because it was unfair. Pip’s reputation took a hit, and he found himself isolated. Jesse, the student he mocked, later approached Pip, not with anger, but with a calm reminder. “Respect is earned, not taken,” Jesse said.

Today we will read a similar story in Scripture. Pilate resorts to mockery, and it backfires. Unlike our story, however, the people who mocked Pilate did not come to the defense of Jesus, but sentenced Him to be crucified.

The Jews answered him (Pilate), "We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." Therefore, when Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid, and went again into the Praetorium, and said to Jesus, "Where are You from?" But Jesus gave no answer. Then Pilate said to Him, "Are You not speaking to me? Do You not know that I have power to crucify You, and power to release You?" Jesus answered, "You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin." From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, "If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar." When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus out and sat down in the judgement seat in a place that is called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the Preparation Day of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" But 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!"  Then he delivered Him to them to be crucified. So they took Jesus and led Him away. (John 19:7-16)

 We have seen from the Scriptures prior to this passage that Pilate was quickly losing control of the situation. "That's the feeling we get at verse 12 in this passage," writes NT Wright. 

"Pilate is in charge. He's the governor. His word is law. He can kill people if he wants to; he can let them go if he wants to. He could order the troops to kill the chief priests themselves, if he thought he could get away with it. And when he decides that he really does want to let Jesus go, we assume he is going to be able to do it. But the one constraint on Pilate is what people think of him back in Rome. Roman governors down the years were regularly prosecuted for maladministration. Provinces and cities would take their case to Rome, insisting on justice against the man who had been ruling them in Rome's name. There were famous instances of ex-governors paying heavy penalties. Under the empire, if the emperor decided someone was a nuisance, or surplus to requirements, he was quite capable of sending a message advising the man to commit suicide, to save his soldiers the bother of killing him themselves."

With this constraint to his absolute power in the back of his mind, Pilate now hears from the Jews that this Jesus had claimed to be the Son of God. Theologian Leon Morris wrote, "He can scarcely be called a religious man, but the news that his prisoner had made divine claims scared the governor…every Roman of that day knew of stories of the gods or their offspring appearing in human guise.” 

Pilate had commanded that Jesus be flogged, and now he learns that Jesus had made a claim of divinity? Was this truly a son of the gods? Pilate was terrified upon hearing this. Quaking in his boots, he went back into the palace and demanded to know where Jesus had come from.

Jesus made no response. He didn't have to. Despite all of Pilate's bravado, putting up a brave front, he knew in his heart of hearts that Jesus was in control of the situation here. Pilate presses on. "Are You not speaking to me? Don't You know that I have the power in this situation?" Jesus probably smiled a wry smile at this. "You have no power here," He said. "You can only do what God has prescribed." 

Warren Wiersbe writes, "Fear and anger often go together. When we are afraid we are weak, we go to the other extreme and try to appear strong. This is what Pilate did as he reminded Jesus of his Roman authority. But his statement did not demonstrate his power; it demonstrated his weakness. For if he had the authority to release Jesus, why did he not do it? He condemned himself with his own boastful words."

At this moment, Pilate was no longer acting as judge. He began acting as a prosecutor. However, he was not prosecuting Jesus; instead, Pilate began to pillory the priests who accused Jesus. Pilate showed his true feelings, not only for the high priests, but for all the Jews.

He began to mock them.

Pilate had already allowed his soldiers to place a royal robe on Jesus. They had also placed a makeshift crown on His head, albeit not one of honor, but of torture. Pilate then takes Jesus out to the seat of judgement. William Barclay writes:

The scene comes to an end by saying that Pilate brough Jesus out; as we have translated it, and as the Authorized Version and Revised Standard translate it, Pilate came out to the place that was called the Pavement of Gabbatha--which may mean the tessellated pavement of marble mosaic--and sat upon the judgement seat. This was called the bema, on which the magistrate sat to give his official decisions. Now the verb to sit is kathisein, and that maybe either intransitive or transitive; it may mean either to sit down oneself, or to seat another. Just possibly it means here that Pilate with one last mocking gesture brought Jesus out, clad with the terrible finery of the old purple robe and with his forehead girt with the crown of thorns and the drops of blood the thorns had wakened, and set Him in the judgement seat, and with a wave of his hand said: "Am I to crucify your king?" The apocryphal Gospel of Peter says that in the mockery, they set Jesus on the seat of judgement and said: "Judge justly, King of Israel." Justin Martyr too says that, "They set Jesus on the judgement seat, and said, 'Give judgement for us'." It may be that Pilate jestingly caricatured Jesus as judge. If that is so, what dramatic irony is there. That which was a mockery was the truth; and one day those who had mocked Jesus as judge would meet Him as judge--and would remember.

Instead of calling out Pilate for blasphemy or hypocrisy, the Jews answered politically. "We have no king but Caesar," they said, reminding Pilate that he was being watched carefully from Rome. In doing so, the Jews wounded the heart of God yet again. Wiersbe writes:

When Israel asked to have a king, and God gave them Saul, the nation rejected God the Father (1 Samuel 8:5-7). When they asked for Barabbas, they rejected God the Son. Today, they are rejecting the pleading of God the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51; Romans 10:21). Yet there will come a day when they shall see their King, believe, and be saved (Zechariah 12:10-11; Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7).

What will you do with the claims of Christ? Will you crown Him King of your life, or will you hold him in derision? Will you mock Him, or make Him Lord? Many will take the politically correct line, looking over their shoulder at their cohorts, their careers, or their cultures, fearing rejection by the world's standards. Others may hold to their religious background or heritage, rejecting Jesus as just another false god. I pray that you, dear reader, may embrace Christ as Lord and Savior, and follow Him whatever the cost may be. No matter the consequences in this life, we will receive our reward in heaven.

 

Behold the Man

Many a crown has been secured by blood, and so is this, but it is his own blood; many a throne has been established by suffering, and so is this, but he himself bears the pain. --Charles Spurgeon

On first reading, it appears in the biblical account that Pontius Pilate was weak. He appears unable to make a decision, finally washing his hands of the entire process of the prosecution and execution of Jesus. He seems to bow to the will of the people, even though he clearly believed Jesus to be innocent of all charges. As we shall see in our study today, Pilate appears to promote a policy of appeasement rather than take a stand and exercise his authority as a Roman ruler and representative of Caesar. 

History tells a different story. His contemporaries called him "inflexible, harsh, and obdurate." During his ten years as governor of Judea, there were three defining conflicts with the Jewish people that he governed.

The first was on his initial visit to Jerusalem. In Roman thought, the Emperor was considered a god, and the Jews despised all gods but Yahweh. All of Pilate's predecessors had made the soldiers that accompanied them remove the image of the Emporer from their standards. Pilate refused to do so. Commentator William Barclay says, "Pilate was adamant; he would not pander to the superstitions of the Jews. He went back to Caesarea. The Jews followed him. They dogged his footsteps for five days. They were humble, but determined in their requests." Pilate asked the Jews to meet him in the amphitheater. When they arrived, Pilate had them surrounded by armed soldiers, telling them that if they did not stop their requests, that he would have them killed right then and there. In response, the Jews bared their necks and invited the soldiers to strike. "Not even Pilate would massacre defensless men like that," says Barclay. He finally agreed to remove the images from the standards.

The second incident involved the water supply in Jerusalem. Pilate wanted to build a new aqueduct, but he raided the Temple treasury to do it. Though the Jews enjoyed the new water source, they resented Pilate for having stolen the funds from them. The Jews staged a riot. Pilate responded by having Roman soldiers wear plain clothes and disperse themselves among the crowds. When the command was given, the soldiers attacked the people. Many Jews were stabbed or clubbed to death that day. This caused him to be reported to his superiors in Rome.

The third incident was much like the first. Pilate had a number of decorative shields made. On these shields he had inscribed the name TIBERIUS. The decorative shields were devoted to the honor and memory of the Emperor. Again, the Roman ruler was considered to be a god in the culture of Rome; the Jews hated that the name of a false god was inscribed and reverentially displayed in the holy city of Jerusalem. "The people were enraged; the greatest men, even his closest supporters, besought Pilate to remove them. He refused. The Jews reported the matter to Tiberius the Emporer, and he ordered Pilate to remove them" (Barclay).

Given this background, let's take a look at the text in John's gospel. You remember that Pilate had interviewed Jesus, and came out to the people, saying to them, "I find no fault in Him at all."

"But you have a custom that I should release someone to you at the Passover. Do you therefore want me to release to you the King of the Jews?" Then they all cried again, saying, "Not this Man, but Barabbas!" Now Barabbas was a robber. So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him. And the soldiers twisted a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and they put on Him a purple robe. Then they said, "Hail, King of the Jews!" and they struck Him with their hands. Pilate then went out again, and said to them, "Behold, I am bringing Him out to you, that you may know that I find no fault in Him." Then Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them, "Behold the Man!" Therefore, when the chief priests and officers saw Him, they cried out, saying "Crucify Him, crucify Him!" Pilate said to them, "You take Him and crucify Him, for I find no fault in Him." The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." (John 18:39-19:7)

In this passage, Pilate tried three different times to appease the Jews. Why did he go to such lengths? Why didn't he make a decision and stick with it? The answer may be found in John 19:12. "From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, "If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend." Remember the background we learned earlier about Pilate, that he had been reported to Emperor Tiberius Caesar twice before for making bad governing decisions. Any new accusation that made its way to Rome would be Pilate's third strike; he could be removed from office, and another would be appointed to take his place.

How did Pilate try to appease the crowd? First, he offered to free Jesus in accordance with Passover tradition. Once a year the governor would grant clemency to a man condemned to die. Pilate offered to grant clemency to Jesus, in honor of this custom.

The Jews would have nothing of it. They demanded the release of a man they called Barabbas. Commentators say that during this time period people did not have surnames like they do now. My last name is Stewart, as was my father's. In the first century, people were known by their fathers' name, as well. In Matthew 16:17, Jesus addresses Simon Peter as "Simon bar Jonah," or Simon, son of Jonah. In this passage, the thief whom the crowd wanted released was either known as "bar-Abbas" or "bar-Rabbas". That is, either he was known as "son of his father," meaning that his dad was also an insurrectionist, or he was called "son of the Rabbi." This second possibility may imply that Barabbas was a Zealot, a member of a militant sect who wanted to see the overthrow of Roman oppression. His acts of insurrection could have been on behalf of the Jewish people, meaning that he could have been a local hero to the Jews. In either instance, it would make sense that the cross upon which Jesus died was originally meant for him.

That, in essence, is the gospel message. Jesus did not deserve such torture, as He was without sin. We, on the other hand, deserve the beatings and scourging and death that He endured for us, because we are sinful creatures.

The second act of appeasement that Pilate tried was to have Jesus scourged. In this process, a man would be tied to a stake, forced into a stooping position with his back to the torturer. The scourge was a leather whip with sharp stones, shaped bones, and jagged bits of metal embedded into the ends. Each time the victim was whipped, he would endure deep lacerations. Barclay wrote, "It literally tore a man's back into strips. Few remained conscious throughout the ordeal; some died, and many went raving mad." It was said that forty lashes with a scourge would surely kill a man, so the punishment would stop at 39 lashes.

Old Testament prophet Isaiah wrote, "He was wounded for our transgression, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53:5). This does not mean, as some might suggest, that God's will is that His people would be healed of all diseases and infirmities. Instead, it describes the atonement; Jesus took on our punishment, so that we could be saved.

Now, when Pilate brought out Jesus, bleeding from the head and face from the crown of thorns they had pressed down upon His head, and with His back in tatters, he may have thought that the crowd would have compassion on Jesus. Maybe this level of punishment would be enough for them, that they might let Jesus live. Thus, when Pilate said, "Behold the Man," he wanted the Jews to take a good look at Jesus. Hadn't He suffered enough?

The Jews were not satisfied. They wanted Pilate to finish Him off. "Crucify Him," they cried. Their blood lust was not satisfied. Their appetite for revenge had barely been whetted.

Pilate made a third attempt. "I find no fault in Him," he said. "If you want Him crucified, you do it." Maybe putting the responsibility of this Man's death on the Jewish religious leaders would make them re-think their position. After all, was Judaism considered a peaceful religion? Weren't they all preparing for Passover, a religious feast commemorating an animal sacrifice that satisfied the Angel of Death from killing their firstborn sons? Perhaps placing that responsibility squarely on their heads would remind them that Jesus was the firstborn of His mother, that lambs were at that very minute being prepared for slaughter to commemorate the "passing over" of the angel of death, would make them choose life.

Last week we saw that the Jews were hiding their true motives for wanting to see Jesus dead. They brought civil charges against Him, charges that Pilate had already ruled were insufficient for the death penalty. Now, having seen Pilate's willingness to spill Jesus' blood, reveal their true motivation. "He deserves to die," they said, "because He claims to be the Son of God."

God had created man in His image, to remind us that we are His. Man corrupted that image, and God threw him out of the Garden. Did you know that there were no thorns in Eden? Thorns were only introduced as a result of man's sin. And now, God sent a perfect Man into the world, One without sin. Commentator NT Wright says this:

Now at last, with Roman emperors and creation stories in our heads, we find ourselves on a Friday morning, on the sixth day of the week, looking at the Roman governor and his peculiar new prisoner. He lets the soldier dress Him up as a king--of sorts: the crown of thorns, and the slapping about the face, tell you what they thought of such a claim. And Pilate says the words that still haunt us: "Look! Here's the Man!" Here is the true image of the true God. Here is the One who has brought God's wisdom into the world. Here is the living embodiment of God, the One who has made the invisible God visible. Here is the King. Here is the breathing statue of the Emperor-of-All, placed within the emperor's world so that people could see who was their true master. And all his rebel subjects can do is mock, and slap, and scream for His blood. He's made Himself God's Son, they say. Well, John's reader knows by now that Jesus has indeed behaved as the One who, as of right, reflects God into the world. His own intimate knowledge of the Father, and the sharing of that with His friends, is either a pack of lies, or it's true. But--and here's the new thing, the thing not mentioned in Genesis 1--this, too, this misrepresentation, these accusations, this crown of thorns (the sharp bits of creation, we note, drawing blood from creation's Lord), and the rest: all this is part of what it means to be God's image, planted in territory which belongs to God but which is in rebellion against Him. "He was in the world." Now we have learned what John means by "the world", that little sentence says it all.

John 1:10-12 says, "He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name." 

Are you a child of God? Do you believe in His name, in His work, in His saving power, in His forgiveness, and in His mission?

Hidden Motives

 

The Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.  (1 Samuel 16:7b)

Emphasis changes the meaning of a phrase. Changing which word you stress in the same sentence can completely alter its meaning, because the stressed word becomes the focal point of the message. An example is the phrase, "I didn't say she stole my money." Stressing different words changes the meaning completely. 

"I didn't say she stole my money" implies that the speaker made no accusation; perhaps someone else did, but not me. "I didn't say she stole my money" emphatically denies any such statement was made. "I didn't say she stole my money" means that I may have implied it, but did not state the accusation outright. "I didn't say she stole my money" means that the money is missing, but someone else may have taken it. "I didn't say she stole my money" means that she may have borrowed it or found it and had taken it innocently. "I didn't say she stole my money" means that it was someone else's money. "I didn't say she stole my money" implies that she may have taken something else of value.

When we explain scripture, we must be very careful what we emphasize, because we may miss the main meaning by putting emphasis where it doesn't belong. Let's apply this principle to our passage today.

Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover. Pilate then went out to them and said, "What accusation to you bring against this Man?" They answered and said to him, "If He were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him up to you." Then Pilate said to them, "You take Him and judge Him according to your law." Therefore the Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death," that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which He spoke, signifying by what death He would die. Then Pilate entered the Praetorium again, called Jesus, and said to Him, "Are You the King of the Jews?" Jesus answered him, "Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this concerning Me?" Pilate answered, "Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered You 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 fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here." Pilate therefore said to Him, "Are You a king then?" Jesus answered, "You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice." Pilate said to Him, "What is truth?" And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews, and said to them, "I find no fault in Him at all." (John 18:28-38).

Many scholars try to use this passage to argue that Jesus and the disciples did not eat a traditional Passover meal in the upper room; since the chief priests did not want to defile themselves before the Passover, that would mean that the Passover had not happened yet. Many even use this passage to say that Jesus was not crucified on Friday. I think they may be emphasizing the wrong thing. I personally think that the Passover celebration was for multiple days, and that the priests' not wanting to defile themselves by going into the Praetorium was only so that they could participate in the entire week of celebration.

The real emphasis should be given to the answer that they gave to Pilate. Their accusation hid their true motives. We see in Luke 23:2 that there were three accusations they brought against Jesus. First, they said that He led the nation astray. Second, that He had opposed paying tribute to Caesar (which was a lie). Third, they said that He had claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and King. This is why Pilate's first question to Jesus centered on His kingship.

However, we know from our comprehensive study of John's gospel that their animosity toward Jesus began when He healed a man on the Sabbath. Not only that, He instructed the man to pick up his bed and walk on the Sabbath, not only breaking the fourth commandment, but instructing someone else to break the commandment as well. This was their motive for seeing that Jesus was killed. 

Knowing that Pilate would not be interested in punishing someone for breaking the Jewish law, they brought the accusation that He had claimed to be a king. Pilate starts his interrogation of Jesus by asking, "So, are you a king, then?"

Jesus turned the question back to Pilate. "Are you asking for yourself, or did someone tell you this?" This question forced Pilate to answer whether he was open to realizing that Jesus is, in fact, king over all. This question ultimately will be asked of us all: what will you do with the claim that Jesus is king? If you agree, and crown Him king over your life, then you can share in His glory. If not, then you are lost forever.

Pilate makes his decision: if Jesus is a king, then He is limited to the Jewish nation. Pilate rejects Jesus as being his king, stating bluntly "Am I a Jew?" In other words, he stated emphatically, "You are not my king."

Pilate was an official in the Roman Empire. Rome ruled with an iron fist. What historians call Pax Romana, or "The Peace of Rome" describes a period of time without wars while Rome was in charge. This alleged "peace" was enforced with brutality; violence was brought against any who disagreed with the ruling class. Contrast this with the peace that Jesus preached. It was not some hippy-dippy "let's all get along" kind of peace that is in vogue today. The peace that Jesus preached was the peace of God--peace that encourages us even in the face of persecution.

Pilate re-directs the question back to Jesus. "What have You done?" In other words, what offense have You committed? Jesus answered logically: if He had set Himself up as an earthly king, then He would have supporters who would defend Him. By contrast, Jesus' disciples all scattered when He was arrested. Instead, Jesus described Himself as having a kingdom not of this world. This heavenly kingdom is committed to proclaiming the truth.

On hearing this, Pilate posed a philosophical question. "What is truth?"

Today we answer that question by saying that truth is relative. Your truth might be different than my truth. It's part of a larger worldview of diversity and inclusion. Nobody is wrong, because right and wrong are relative. This is a lie from Satan himself.

Jesus came to proclaim the truth of the gospel. He proclaimed this truth to the Pharisees and chief priests. "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" is part of the truth of the gospel. This message was rejected by the Sanhedrin. They believed that Jesus was going against the law of Moses, preaching a heretical message. The punishment for this offense, according to Moses, was stoning. But Jesus had already prophesied that He would "be lifted up," signifying the type of death He would die.

Bible commentator David Guzik writes, "The religious leaders may have, in part, pressed for crucifixion to bring the curse of Deuteronomy 21:22-23 upon Jesus. He did bear that curse, to redeem us from the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13)." The curse Moses described was this: "Cursed be a man who is hanged on a tree."

Pilate had already given the Jews tacit permission to "deal with Him according to your own law." In other words, Rome would look the other way if the Jews decided to put Jesus to death by stoning Him. They demurred, saying that it was "unlawful" for them to put anyone to death. They apparently forgot this a year or two later when they stoned Stephen to death.

The point I would like to emphasize from this passage is that Jesus gave Himself over to be killed. The Jews didn't put Him to death. Rome didn't put Him to death. All power and authority in heaven and on earth was given to the Son of God, who willingly laid down His life so that we could avoid the penalty of sin. Paul wrote to the Christians in Rome that "the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord."

It didn't matter what motives the Jews had for killing Jesus. It didn't matter what ideals the Roman government placed emphasis on. What matters is the gospel: that Jesus lived a sinless life; that He laid down His life, taking our sin and our shame upon Himself; and that He lives again to bring a heavenly peace to all who believe, who will trust fully in Him.

Faith alone, in Christ alone, by His grace alone, for His glory alone, as outlined by the Scriptures alone. This is our hope. This is our message. This is the gospel for all time.

What is the gospel?

 

Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:14-15)

This week I was scrolling through social media (as one does), and I came across a reel by the late Christian Apologist RC Sproul. He was explaining what the gospel is not. If you belong to an evangelical denomination like I do, you have probably heard sermons on sharing the gospel. You may have attended classes designed to teach you how to share the gospel with others.

You may have been told, "Just share your personal testimony of what Christ has done for you." This is not the gospel; it is the result of the gospel in your life. You may have been given gospel tracts, small booklets that are meant to help you share the gospel with others. A popular one begins this way: "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life." That's not the gospel, either.

When I was in seminary, there was a required course called Personal Evangelism, and we were taught to recite a program written and produced by an organization called Evangelism Explosion. It begins with the question, "If you were to die today and had to stand before God, and God were to ask you, 'Why should I let you into My heaven,' what would you say?" Friends, this is not the gospel.

Here's what Dr. Sproul had to say:

The gospel is a clearly defined message. If you want to see what it is, go to the servants and in the preaching of the book of Acts, and notice and underscore the content of those sermons. There you will discover what the gospel is. It's about Jesus. He was born according to the Scriptures, and He lived a sinless life, and He died an atoning death on the cross, and for our righteousness God raised Him from the dead and carried Him in glory to Heaven for His coronation as our king, and for His installation as our great High Priest who ministers for us every day, and who will come again at the end of the age to bring the fullness of His kingdom, which has begun already but will not be completely manifested and consummated until His return. That's the object of the gospel, but it's only part of the gospel. The rest is the question of the subjective appropriation of the benefits of Christ that accrue to us. So the objective data is the data concerning the person and work of Jesus that is to be received, savingly, by faith, and by faith alone.

In other words, the object of the gospel is the words and work of Jesus, who, though He was sinless, took our sins upon Himself so that we, the subject of the gospel, could be saved from God's wrath and eternal punishment for sin. When presented with that message, we can either accept it by faith, or we can deny it. It is only by God's grace that we may be able to hear that same gospel message and be given that same choice to make another day.

We get a glimpse of this in our passage today from John chapter 18. Last week we read the first part of the chapter, where Jesus was confronted by Judas and arrested by the Roman guard under the control of the high priests and Pharisees. Today's narrative begins after they have led Jesus away to the house of Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas the high priest.

And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Now that disciple was known to the high priest, and went with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest. But Peter stood at the door outside. Then the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to her who kept the door, and brought Peter in. Then the servant girl who kept the door said to Peter, "You are not also one of this Man's disciples, are you?" He said, "I am not." Now the servants and officers who had made a fire of coals stood there, for it was cold, and they warmed themselves. And Peter stood with them and warmed himself. The high priest then asked Jesus about His disciples and His doctrine. Jesus answered him, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said." And when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, "Do You answer the high priest like that?" Jesus answered him, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?" Then Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. Now Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. Therefore they said to him, "You are not also 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 him whose ear Peter cut off, said, "Did I not see you in the garden with Him?" Peter then denied again; and immediately a rooster crowed. (John 18:15-27)

Now there are many interpretations of this passage, such as "If we deny Jesus, it is like a slap in the face to Him." Friends, that is not the gospel.

I believe the gospel is found in this narrative. John is telling us about what happened to Peter. Some think that he is the "other disciple" who was known to the high priest and who granted access to Peter into the courtyard. Other commentaries say that the "other disciple" had to be either Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea, because how would a young fisherman be well known to the high priest? Regardless of the identity of the "other disciple", we see that Peter had disobeyed Jesus. When Jesus was arrested, He told the Roman guard to take Him only, and leave the others alone. 

Peter should have run to safety. Commentator NT Wright, in his book John for Everybody writes these words:

He (Peter) has come because he's loyal; but he had never understood more than half of what Jesus was saying, and it's the half he hasn't understood that is going to let him down now. He is cold and tired, drained of the sudden rush of energy in the garden. He must know that if the guards realize he'd not only been there, but had maimed one of the high priest's servants with that senseless swish of his sword, then Jesus might well have the company of His senior associate as he went to meet His fate--something Jesus was at pains to avoid. But all these thoughts come together and produce fear, panic, lies and disloyalty.

 Warren Wiersbe writes in The Bible Exposition Commentary, 

As you watch Peter, you see him gradually moving into the place and temptation and sin, and his actions parallel the description in Psalm 1:1. First, peter walked "in the counsel of the ungodly" when he followed Jesus and went into the high priest's courtyard. Peter should have followed the counsel of Jesus and gotten out of there in a hurry! Then, Peter stood with the enemy by the fire (v 16, 18), and before long, he sat with the enemy (Luke 22:55). It was now too late, and within a short time, he would deny his Lord three times.

In the middle of this story of Peter's unfaithfulness, John inserts a story emphasizing Jesus' faithfulness. Jesus is interrogated about His teaching and His known associates. He is treated much like a terrorist. if a suspected terrorist is arrested and interrogated today, the scene would be much the same. The arresting officers must have probable cause, so they already know about his teaching and his known associates, but the questions are asked nonetheless. In this case, Jesus gives the logical defense: I have not spoken anything in secret, but was very public in My speaking. You know what I said, because you were there. Jesus is not going to give up the whereabouts of His disciples, but He will challenge the interrogators about this line of questioning.

The point is, Jesus did not deserve to be struck.  Peter, who had already lied once and was about to lie again, not once but twice more, deserved the slap in the face, not Jesus. This, my friends and readers, is the gospel. Jesus took the punishment of our sin upon Himself, so that we could be spared. Just as this vignette is a foreshadowing of the crucifixion, where Jesus would take on the punishment for ths sin of the whole world upon Himself, it is also a vivid example of an atoning sacrifice.

You see, Peter was guilty. He had disobeyed Jesus. He had been disloyal to Jesus. He lied. All of these sins weighed heavy on Peter's heart, and in Luke 22:62 we see that Peter went out and wept bitterly. The guilt and shame overwhelmed him.

Yet Jesus forgave Peter. This is the gospel. Peter's story of redemption fulfilled comes later in John's narrative, after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. I love what NT Wright had to say about this.

There is a part of the human brain which seems to be closed off for much of the time, but which can be reached at once through the sense of smell. You can be walkig down the street, thinking of something completely different, when a single sniff of someone's pipe tobacco, or a single breath from a particular tree in a garden, can take you back twenty years or more to a memory you didn't even know you had. You can recall the place, the people, what was said, and particularly what it felt like.

There is one feature of this sad story, the story of Peter telling people he didn't belong to Jesus when his heart was crying out that he really did, which comes into this category. Charcoal fires have a particular smell to them; I can't possibly describe it, but you'd know it if you smelt it again. And you'd remember what you were doing, and what was said, last time you came upon one. Well, not very long after this, there is another charcoal fire that comes into the story (John 21:9). It calls up Peter, and for Jesus, the memory of this sad night. And it does so (this is the way the gospel of Jesus works, after all), in order to heal the open wound that this sorry tale has left in Peter, and perhaps in Jesus as well.

If you don't recall the story of John 21, let me remind you here. After the death of Jesus, the disciples were trying to go back to normal (though, after the realization of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, you can never go back to the old normal). Peter and Andrew and James and John went back to their fishing boat. They fished all night, and caught nothing. 

Suddenly, a barely visible outline of a human figure appears on the shore. "Did you catch anything?" A typical question posed to fishermen. "Nope, not a thing." A typical fisherman response. 

Then the man on the shore says, "Try the other side of the boat."

The fisherman shrug. They may have argued with the man, had he been closer. "Look," they might have said. "We've done this all our lives. Our families have done this for a living for generations. We know what we're doing."

Nevertheless, they throw the nets on the right side of the boat, and lo and behold, a catch so big that the nets start to break. Peter shades his eyes and squints toward the shoreline. "It is the Lord," he exclaims.

While the others are struggling to haul in the catch, Peter dives into the water and swims to Jesus. Jesus has a fire built, with a fish already cooking over it. The smell of the charcoal fire may have affected Peter, because he is quite humble in his response to the next few questions.

"Peter, do you love Me?" Jesus uses the word Jesus used is agape, meaning a deep and sacrificial love.

"Lord," Peter responds, "You know I love you." The word Peter uses is phileo, which means a brotherly love. 

"Here's what I want you to do: Feed My sheep." Jesus restores relationship with Peter, forgives him his past sins, and gives Peter a purpose. Peter takes this new mission, this calling, to heart. He becomes an evangelist, a faithful servant, even unto death.

This, my friends, is the gospel.