TEXT: John 2:23-25

SUBJECT: Exposition of John #6: Messiah Received and Withdrawn

Today brings us to the sixth sermon in our study of John's Gospel. Its author wrote with one purpose in mind: to make us "Believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God". His design must be respected and looked for in the reading of his Gospel. If we look for other things, we're likely to miss "the one thing needful". We must study John, therefore, not to find moral lessons (as valuable as they may be) but to gaze upon the Divine glory of Jesus Christ.

John begins his narrative by dating and placing its events, v.23a. They occurred "in Jerusalem, at the Passover, during the feast". The "Passover" was a religious holiday observed over seven days. It began with the sacred meal of roast lamb, bitter herbs, unleavened bread, and red wine. It was followed by another six days of feasting, after which the people would return to their homes reminded of the saving work of their God.

Just before the Passover, our Lord entered the Temple in Jerusalem and purified it in fulfillment of ancient prophecy. His next few days were spent performing other "signs". John doesn't tell us what they were. But we know this much: they were public acts, open to inspection, and designed to authenticate His Messianic claims.

Did they have the desired effect? The middle of v.23 implies they did: "Many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did".

Before the feast, our Lord had a handful of disciples; now people are flocking to Him. Are they but curious to see more "tricks"? No they're not. They're coming to Him in faith.

Some leading commentators are at pains to criticize this faith. F.F. Bruce calls it "superficial". D.A. Carson prefers "inadequate". Matthew Henry refers to it as "false". William Hendricksen thinks it lacked a "surrender of heart".

I see no reason to accept their verdict. Signs were given to produce faith. 14:11 is hard to miss: "Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves". For further proof, see 5:36 and 10:36-37.

Moreover, the context of their faith suggest it was a sincere and rugged commitment to Christ. What had He just done? He had just purified the Temple. Would anyone be offended by that? Yes: The rulers of Israel. Anyone else? The Romans who gave them their power. Hence, by "believing in His Name", the people were challenging the most powerful men in Israel and the power that stood behind them, Augustus Caesar. To commit oneself to Christ was not good for his health. As later events would make clear.

The people did not lack faith. What they lacked was a true understanding of our Lord. Upon seeing Him cleanse the Temple they took Him as the kind of Messiah they wanted--A Man of War. "At last! The Lion of the Tribe of Judah has come!" They wanted no "Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world". They longed for a Man to clean up the priesthood and to overturn the hated rule of Rome.

A bit later, their desire becomes clear. In 6:15 they try to "Make Him a king, by force". When He won't go along with their plans, they turn to another Messiah: "Not this Man, but Barabbas!"

The masses are ready to back the Lord Jesus. But He declines their offer, v.24a: "He did not commit Himself to them".

There is a play on words in the Greek that our translators have missed. The words "believed" in v.23 and "commit" in v.24 are the same. John is saying, in effect: "Although the people believed in Him, He didn't believe in the people".

Why not? Vv.24b-25: "Because He knew all men, and had no need that anyone should testify of man, because He knew what was in a man". In other words, He knew the Messiah they wanted and He wasn't it! He must not conform Himself to their desires; He was God's Man. A few days before, Mary tried to direct His life. Peter would try the same a bit later. Now, it is the people who hope to guide Him. But He submits to no one's will--no one but His Father.

These events provide a powerful witness to our Lord's Divinity. He is offered what everyone wants: power and prestige. He turned them down. This was no ploy; it came from the heart. Nor did He choose something easier than the pains of leadership; He preferred the cross to the crown.

What son of the Fall could be perfectly free of ego? Not I. Not you. Not one nobler than we. None. Consequently, "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God".

I know some believers who seem to be like the people of our passage: They want a Messiah who "takes no prisoners". He's aggressive, confrontational, and unyielding. The idea that He might wait for someone to learn the truth or grow in grace is intolerable to them. Messiah must be as hard and impatient as they are. Yet there He is--"Meek and lowly of heart". His friends are slow to learn His ways, but they remain His friends. With a minimum of reproof. "Now Jesus, having loved His own who were in the world, loved them to the end".

I know other believers who want just the opposite: They want a Messiah who is mellow to a fault. He's never mad, never disapproving--and especially--never "judgmental". But, in reading the Bible, they find a Man who overturns tables and uses a whip in anger.

Both versions of Messiah are partially right. But because each dismisses the other, both are ultimately wrong. We must, therefore, believe in the Whole Messiah. For not every "believing" saves. Only "Believing in [the] Jesus [who is] the Christ, the Son of God" results in "Life through His Name".

God has given us a "Whole Christ". It is now our duty to "Believe in His Name"--His whole name. And receive a whole life in return. May God "unite our hearts to fear His Name". For Christ's sake. Amen.