Born Again (41)
John 3:16 (G)
Both items can be quickly resolved. First, the language itself does not warrant the inferences made. I can say, "Whoever becomes a fish can breath under water." The statement is true, but it does not mean that a person can become a fish anytime he wishes. In fact, any inference about one's ability is strictly invalid, since the statement contains no information about ability except for the fish's ability to breath under water. Whether or not it is possible for a person to become a fish, one can infer nothing about it from the statement itself, but it only informs us as to what would happen to a person who turns into a fish.
Moreover, even if it is possible for a person to become a fish, the statement says nothing about how this is possible, or whether it is within the person's own power to do so. God is certainly able to turn a man into a fish, but a man "cannot make even one hair white or black" (Matthew 5:36). A statement like the one that I have made tells us nothing about a person's ability, but information about ability must be obtained elsewhere.
Whenever we are talking about something that is impossible with man – such as for a man to turn himself into a fish – it means that it will either never happen, or God must make it happen by his omnipotence. One episode in Jesus' ministry makes exactly this point:
Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, "Who then can be saved?"
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:23-26)
We only have time to note what is relevant to our discussion. Jesus says plainly that it is impossible for such a man to be saved, except if God makes it happen, since all things are possible with him. But what has happened to "whoever believes"? Jesus never said that everyone can believe, or that it is up to the person to believe, but only that whoever believes will not perish, but will have eternal life. Whether this person in Matthew 19 believes depends on God, not on him, since only God could make it happen.
In any case, the Gospel of John explains itself on this point, and does not leave us guessing. In John 10:26, Jesus says, "You do not believe because you are not my sheep." So a person is Jesus' sheep before he believes, and it is because he is his sheep that he believes. How does one become Jesus' sheep? Verse 29 says, "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." Jesus' sheep are what they are because they have been given to him by the Father, and remember, this is why they believe.
However, according to our opponents' theology, we freely decide to believe, and anyone can do it. Applying it to this passage, Jesus would have to say that we are the ones who give ourselves to him, and that we are the ones who make ourselves his sheep. Needless to say, this contradicts John 10, and therefore it is false doctrine.
(to be continued)
Born Again (40)
John 3:16 (F)
God's love is demonstrated in effective action. For the purpose of saving those whom he loves, God sends his Son. Verse 16 itself does not tell us the relevance of God sending his Son or what he sends the Son to accomplish. It only tells us that because he has been given, those who believe on him would not perish but have eternal life. This is because verse 15 has already informed us about his mission and how it relates to the salvation of men. It says that Christ would be lifted up so that those who believe would have eternal life. Verse 16, then, tells us what is at the back of this mission – God has sent his Son because he loves those whom he wishes to save.
We are so familiar with the verse that we might not realize it, but this verse tells us something that would be impossible for us to know other than by God's self-disclosure. As Paul writes, "For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us" (1 Corinthians 2:11-12). So we should regard it as a special gift to know, not only that God has sent his Son, but that he sent him because of love.
God has given something special, something unique, something precious, even his Son, in order to save those whom he loves. Not only does this tell us about the extent and intensity of God's love for those he saves, but it also teaches us that even his great love does not blind or nullify his justice. Rather, his love satisfies his justice. On the other hand, from this we also realize what it takes to satisfy this justice, and the divine wrath that our sins have incurred. And if this is what it takes to satisfy justice, we can be sure that this same justice will allow no one to escape everlasting hellfire who rejects the person and work of Jesus Christ.
We would prefer to revel longer in God's love and justice, and the perfect harmony between the two, but we must take time to deal with our opponents once again as they manipulate the next phrase to serve their own bias. John writes that God sent his Son out of love, so that "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." Our opponents differ in emphasis, but together, they have inferred from the text several unbiblical teachings, or rather, alleged support for unbiblical teachings that they already affirm.
First, coupled with their false interpretation of "the world," the term found earlier in the verse, they now infer from "whoever believes" that God loves every person the same way, and that Christ has died and made atonement for every person. Because I have already proved the biblical doctrine of a specific effective atonement elsewhere, I will not repeat the arguments here, as the topic is not the chief concern of this verse. Rather, I will just point out how the unbiblical doctrine of universal atonement cannot be inferred from it.
Second, it is suggested that to say "whoever believes in him shall not perish" implies that, since Christ has already accomplished his work of atonement, the salvation of each individual now depends on the person's free choice. A related implication is that the person is able to make such a free choice. Again, as I have also refuted human freedom elsewhere, here I will only point out how it is impossible to infer human freedom and ability from this verse.
(to be continued)
Born Again (39)
John 3:16 (E)
We can reinforce our point with yet another example. John 12:32 says, "But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." The word "draw" refers to a powerful and effective action from God by which he inwardly drives a person to come to Christ. If "all" must mean all human persons in all of history, then this must mean that all human persons in all of history will become Christians, or at least all those who live after Christ had been "lifted up." But then this promise or prediction would have failed even before the Acts of the Apostles.
And even if we weaken the verb "draw" to something like a gentle nudge, it is doubtful that all human persons after the crucifixion have been thus nudged to come to Christ, as many have died never having heard of him, and many who have heard were repulsed by the message of the cross. Add to this the fact that God deliberately withholds understanding and repentance from many, and even harden their hearts (Romans 9:18, 11:7), it is impossible to interpret "all" here as referring to all human persons in all of history, or even just in all the years after the crucifixion.
The meaning of the verse is clear if we will demonstrate even a little respect toward God and Scripture, and not abuse the text as our opponents do. Just a few verses earlier (v. 20-22), John writes that some Greeks had expressed an interest in seeing Jesus. This provides the context for us to understand "all men," that Jesus is again referring to the fact that the gospel will transcend racial, cultural, and national boundaries to reach all kinds of people.
This is repeated especially to counteract the stubborn notion that the Jews are automatically entitled to salvation just because they are the natural descendents of Abraham. This is the consistent and emphatic message of John and the other New Testament writers. Matthew, for example, cites Jesus as saying, "I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 8:11).
When Jesus says that, "But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself," he is foreshadowing his later command to the disciples to no longer preach only to the people of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6), but to "make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:19). As he says in Luke 24:46-47, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." This is just another way of saying what we find in John 12:32. First, Christ will "suffer" ("when I am lifted up"), and then the gospel will be preached "to all nations" ("will draw all men").
This commission to perform worldwide ministry is repeated in Acts 1:8, and its fulfillment began just a number of days later in Acts 2, even before the disciples scattered away from Jerusalem. "God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven" (v. 5) gathered there on the day of Pentecost. Under Peter's preaching, thousands of them believed (v. 41), we assume that they brought the gospel back to where they lived.
We can make our point yet another way from Acts 2, since Peter cites Joel's prophecy, saying, "In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people" (v. 17). Again, this cannot refer to all human individuals without exception, but consistent with what is obviously one of the main thrusts of Acts 1 and 2, the term refers to people of "every nation" (v. 5). As Peter says in verse 39, "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off – for all whom the Lord our God will call."
Salvation is indeed for "all," but all of what? Peter says it is for all "whom the Lord our God will call." God is the one who chooses those who would be saved – indeed he will save all those whom he has chosen, and he has chosen not every individual in man's history, but people of all nations, even those who are far off, even as far as "the ends of the earth" (1:8). By extending the universal terms to include all human persons, our opponents have distorted all such verses, and obscured their important message.
Then, it is also likely that John is using the word "world" in John 3:16 to denote a humanity that is hostile to God, so that he loves even those who are now opposed to him, and he sends Christ to save them. This is consistent with what John teaches elsewhere, as when he writes in 1 John 4:10, "This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins" (also v. 19).
The same idea appears in Paul, who writes, "Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – it is by grace you have been saved" (Ephesians 2:3-5). Again, that this could be John's meaning neither proves nor disproves the doctrines of divine election and definite atonement. The verse does not directly address them.
(to be continued)
Born Again (38)
John 3:16 (D)
There are many other examples in the Bible, but we will look at just one more. Just a few verses after John 3:16, we find the following, "He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony" (3:32). No one, the verse says, accepts Christ's testimony. This time, if we were to interpret Scripture as our opponents do, then we would have to conclude that "no one" in all of human history has believed or will ever believe in Christ. There has never been and never will be a Christian in all of human history.
And if "no one" must mean every human person without restriction and without exception, then it must mean that even as he writes this verse the apostle John himself has not accepted Christ's testimony. It is indeed strange, then, how he repeatedly encourages his readers to believe a testimony that he has rejected. Moreover, the way that our opponents would interpret this verse – that is, if we imitate their treatment of John 3:16 – would make John 3:32 contradict John 12:19. The former would make world evangelization futile, but the latter would say that the mission has already been accomplished.
If I were to ignore the context of everything that you say and take every universal term that you use as if it refers to every human person in all of history, I would make nonsense of your part of the conversation, and communication would break down. In addition, you could rightly accuse me of blatant disrespect for your speech and your person. You might even think that I am doing it on purpose to mock you or to annoy you.
Likewise, our opponents assume that "world" in John 3:16 must mean all human persons in all of history, and they accuse us of refusing to accept the verse just as it is written, but they are the ones who exhibit contempt for God and Scripture. In essence, they accept only one word from the text, and then assume the meaning that they desire for it without any regard for the context. On the other hand, we urge intelligence in interpretation, respect for the text, and reverence toward God by observing the context of the verse, including how all such universal terms are used throughout the writings of John, as well as the main theological concerns of the apostle.
The controversy that we are dealing with has to do with the biblical doctrines of divine election and definite atonement. Because I have addressed these doctrines elsewhere in great detail, I will not discuss them here. I am mentioning this just to point out that the verse neither proves nor disproves these doctrines. Even if the verse has some relevance to these doctrines, the focus is on something else.
John is counteracting the idea that salvation is exclusively or even mainly reserved for the Jews, or the natural descendents of Abraham. He has labored to build up this point from the very beginning, and throughout his Gospel there are comments, discourses, miracles, and other episodes to repeatedly reinforce the teaching. John 3:16 neither affirms nor denies that Christ has come to die for every individual. The question is settled in many places in Scripture, but not here. Whatever side we are on, if this has become our focus when studying the verse, then we have missed one of its main concerns.
John is stressing the transracial, transcultural, and transnational nature of salvation in Christ (1:13, 4:4-42, 8:31-47, 10:16). Along with the other New Testament writers, John is eager to announce that those who would receive eternal life will consist of "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language" (Revelation 7:9). I am deeply indignant that anyone must be diverted from reflecting on this aspect of the good news because of the incompetent, dishonest, and irreverent abuses that our opponents constantly inflict on this and other biblical passages.
(to be continued)
Born Again (37)
John 3:16 (C)
Let us take several examples from the Bible. The first one will just illustrate the need for context, and I have deliberately chosen something that has no immediate relevance to our verse. The example is Exodus 20:13, and there God declares, "You shall not kill." But what shall we not kill? Yes, humans. But what about vegetables? What about bacteria? These are not ridiculous questions, for once the context is ignored, these are indeed possibilities.
As with John 3:16, this verse has been subject to much abuse, and what usually happens is that a context, which defines and restricts the meaning, is imposed upon the text in the reader's mind without regard to the actual context in which the verse appears. This is why some people think that they can use this verse to oppose capital punishment, whereas other parts of the Bible explicitly command it. Others assert that this commandment would forbid us to eat meat, whereas the Bible explicitly permits it elsewhere. But if we cannot eat meat because we cannot "kill," and the killing here somehow includes animals, then how come vegetables and bacteria do not come under the same protection?
Of course, the commandment is more properly translated, "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13, NIV), but we still need the broader context of Scripture to define murder, since some advocates suggest that it is murder to execute a criminal, and it is murder to kill a chicken. But somehow it is permissible to murder vegetables and bacteria.
Now let us come to a more relevant example, at least in terms of the expression used. We read in John 12:18-19, "Many people, because they had heard that he had given this miraculous sign, went out to meet him. So the Pharisees said to one another, 'See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!'"
The Pharisees lament that "the whole world" has gone after Jesus. If we were to interpret Scripture as our opponents do, we must conclude that all human beings in all of history have become Christians. The work of evangelization is finished, and hell is completely empty except for the devil and his angels. And now that we think of it, why are the devil and his angels excluded from "the whole world," unless Scripture provides a context to justify this exclusion? Moreover, if we will forget about demons for now, if "the whole world" must mean every human person, then the Pharisees who uttered this statement must themselves have "gone after" Jesus. This would make their exclamation not a complaint, but a glad observation!
If our opponents do not adopt this absurd interpretation, it is because they are assuming a context that is different from the one that they use when reading John 3:16. Just by reading the surrounding verses, it becomes clear that "the whole world" in verse 19 refers to the "many people" in verse 18, and perhaps also "the crowd" in verse 17. If "the whole world" does not automatically and necessarily mean every human person in history, then neither can we simply assume when it comes to the "world" in John 3:16.
(to be continued)
Born Again (36)
John 3:16 (B)
The verse says that God loves "the world," and this refers to the object and the scope of his love. As it is, this expression adds to the beautiful picture that John is painting for us about God's plan of redemption. However, at this point many people begin to twist the text to serve their own theological prejudice and humanistic bias. The distortion has been so emphasized and promoted that it has become the majority view. Therefore, we will devote part of this chapter to deal with it.
There are those who insist that "the world" here must refer to every human person in the entire history of mankind, that is, every individual in all of time. Those who, like me, disagree with this interpretation, but who point out that there is a context to John's usage of the term that narrows its scope, are sometimes accused of refusing to accept the plain teaching of the verse.
Now, if "the world" indeed refers to every human person in history, then the verse would be saying that God loves everyone, and that he loves everyone with a saving love that sends Jesus Christ to die for each human person. Therefore, from God's perspective, he has done all that he could do to secure potential salvation for every person. Salvation now depends on the person, on his own freedom of choice, and no longer on God. If this is what the text states and implies, then we ought to submit to it. But as I will explain, this interpretation is not only false, but it is also irreverent.
When we object to the above understanding of the word "world," we are told that if the text says "world," then we must accept that it means "world." I have no problem with this, but my question is what "world" means. Our opponents make a similar point in places where the Bible uses words such as, "anyone," "everyone," "all," and so on. They ignore the fact that these words appear in specific contexts that define their meaning and restrict their scope. I will first illustrate this point from general language usage, and then from several biblical passages.
First, it is true that we must accept what is written just as it is written. But what is written is always written within a context. When we accept "what is written," we must accept all that is written, that is, along with the context of the specific words and phrases that we are focusing on.
If I were to write, "I deny that I am a woman," then for you to take only "I am a woman" and say that we must accept just "what is written" is in fact to reject what is written. In this case, your representation of "what is written" would be the exact opposite of what is actually written.
This is so simple that it appears I am insulting my readers, but it is precisely this very simple principle that our opponents refuse to implement when they read the Bible. Of course we should accept the plain statements of Scripture, but what are these plain statements? Our opponents would say that I plainly wrote, "I am a woman," and of course I did. But it is something that "I deny."
As for these seemingly universal terms like "anyone," "everyone," "all," and so on, they are indeed universal in the contexts in which they are used, but they are not always absolutely universal. If you were to tell me, apart from any stated or assumed context, that anyone can learn to cha-cha, I would reply, "Yes, and I would like you to teach a panda how to do it." You would come back and tell me that you mean any human person can do it. But then I would ask, "What about someone who is in a coma? How about a crippled person? And can a newborn baby learn to cha-cha?"
The point is that the context defines and restricts a seemingly universal term. Surely our opponents realize that the words "God so loved the world" are surrounded by other words, and that the entire passage appears in the much larger text of the Gospel of John? What then is this context? And why does this context support their interpretation? What is the theology of John? And how does it imply their understanding of the word "world" as it is used in John 3:16?
(to be continued)
Born Again (35)
John 3:16 (A)
John 3:16 is one of the most famous verses in the Bible. It is so familiar that many people have no idea what it says, what it means, and what it implies. Thus it is also one of the most frequently distorted verses in Scripture. These interpretations are dangerous not only because they assert false ideas, but also because they obscure what the verse intends to convey, neutralizing its original force. Great crimes have been committed against John 3:16, and so it would be appropriate for us to take some time to dissect it. But first, let us read it again, even if we have read it many times before: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
The atonement is already alluded to in verse 15 when it is said that "the Son of Man must be lifted up." When verse 16 says, "For God so loved the world," it is a revelation of the very mind of God, telling us why he sends Jesus Christ to die for sinners. He sends Jesus to suffer the pain and humiliation of incarnation, persecution, and crucifixion because of love – because he loves those whom he wishes to save from everlasting destruction and punishment.
It is common for people to impose their own human, and even sinful, ideas about love into places where Scripture refers to the love of God. The resulting heresies and licentiousness have proved devastating to true religion. Several central biblical doctrines are subverted and a confused message about the nature of God, his requirements, and his solution has been announced to the world.
God's love is not a feeling, but it is a policy of benevolence that results in actions performed for the benefit of those who are the objects of this love. This love is not promiscuous, but specific and effective. It consciously targets chosen individuals and it successfully accomplishes the acts of benevolence that it sets out to do. As God says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion" (Romans 9:15), and Paul affirms, "Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden" (v. 18). And it is also written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" (v. 13).
That God sends his Son out of love reminds us of the harmony within the Godhead. The Son does not come from heaven either against or apart from the Father's will, but it is the Father's love that sends him in the first place. Therefore, in the atonement, Christ does not offer himself as a sacrifice to appease the wrath of a reluctant God. Rather, the atonement is God's way to save those he loves, but at the same time to appease his own wrath and satisfy his own justice.
The foundation of our salvation is God's love for us. Another implication of this fact is that God is not moved by any faith or merit that he foresees in us. Neither is there anything deserving in us that makes him love us. His love is never separated from his will, so that he loves us not because he is overwhelmed by our goodness or potential, but he loves us because he chooses to love us.
(to be continued)
Born Again (34)
John 3:14-15 (C)
The Greek original does not contain devices like quotation marks to indicate when a person begins speaking and when he ceases to speak, and so they are added to the translations. In many of them, the quotation marks suggest that Jesus' speech extends all the way to verse 21, and red-letter Bibles would highlight all of verses 10-21 as the Lord's words. But it appears certain that Jesus has stopped speaking way before the end of verse 21, and that what we have instead is the commentary and reflection of the apostle John.
However, the precise point of transition is an issue of dispute. Some would suggest that Jesus finishes speaking at the end of verse 10. This would make verses 11-21 into a neat parallel to verses 31-36, as this latter passage is also considered the apostle John's words rather than that of John the Baptist. But this is unlikely because, everywhere else, "the Son of Man" seems to be an expression used exclusively by Jesus as a self-designation. Thus it seems safe to conclude that the words of Jesus extend at least to the end of verse 15.
Then, there are several indications that John's commentary begins from verse 16, and that from this point on Jesus is no longer the one speaking. First, at this point the text switches to the past tense, and this is what we would expect if we are reading John's reflection about something that had happened, rather than a quotation from Jesus. Second, verse 16 refers to Jesus as God's "one and only Son" or "only begotten Son" (also v. 18). John is accustomed to using this expression. For example, he uses it in John 1:14, 18 and 1 John 4:9, where we are certain that we are reading John's words instead of quotations of Jesus. Third, verse 19 uses similar expressions to echo something that John has already stated in 1:9-11. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Jesus finishes speaking at the end of verse 15, and that verses 16-21 consist of the commentary and reflection of John the apostle.
That said, nothing can be more important than to remember that we are noting this merely because we would like to know as much as possible about the text, and as accurately as we can – it is not because we are trying to distinguish between words that carry divine authority and words that do not.
The whole Bible is inspired and infallible, and both the words of Jesus and the words of John come from God, and are therefore equally authoritative. Of course, in themselves, Jesus (who is God) is infinitely more authoritative than John, but when we are comparing the words of Jesus and the inspired words of John, we are comparing inspiration with inspiration, or God with God, so that there is no difference. We are not comparing the divine Jesus with the merely human John, since the entire Bible is a product of the Holy Spirit.
So, even if we cannot discover the precise point of transition with complete certainty, it makes no difference where the authority of the text is concerned. And therefore, we must approach verses 16-21 with total reverence and confidence, just as we do the rest of the Bible.
(to be continued)
Born Again (33)
John 3:14-15 (B)
The verse also stresses the necessity of the crucifixion, saying, "the Son of Man must be lifted up." The aim is to make it possible for man to have eternal life (v. 15). Apart from the crucifixion of Christ, or the atonement of Christ, eternal life would be unavailable to mankind. And apart from looking upon the crucified Son of Man – apart from faith – there would be no way for a person to have eternal life.
In other words, the only way to have eternal life is to become a Christian. We will return to this thought later, but even at this point, this "must" alone has doomed all non-Christians to an everlasting hell. The "must" might also have reference to the immutable decree of God on the matter, as foretold through the prophets, and thus "must" be fulfilled.
Verse 15 explains the significance or the purpose of Christ's crucifixion. It is so that "everyone who believes in him may have eternal life." A better translation is "everyone who believes may have eternal life in him." The NASB preserves the word order and translates, "that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life."
The words "in him" should modify "eternal life" because John uses a different expression when he wishes to say "believe in him." Here the verb "to believe" is used absolutely, without reference to an object. Another instance is John 6:47, which says, "I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life."
Although the verb does not refer to an object for believing, it is not difficult to ascertain from the context what one is to believe. Jesus complains in verse 11 that the people "do not accept our testimony," and in verse 12, that they "do not believe" him when he speaks about "earthly things," which include what he has just explained about the nature and necessity of a spiritual birth. Still less, he surmises, would they believe him were he to speak about "heavenly things."
Verse 13 refers to the fact that the Son of Man has come from heaven, something that cannot be said about any other man. Then, verse 14 says that he must be "lifted up" as typified by Moses and the bronze snake in the desert, so that those who look to him might have life. Thus, even though the verb for believing is used absolutely, even from this passage we can derive much information about the things that we are to believe. Briefly, we must believe the whole testimony of Jesus, about where he comes from, what he teaches, and what he has come to accomplish.
As for "eternal life," this is the first time the term appears in this Gospel, although John has already referred to "life" at the very beginning, saying, "In him was life, and that life was the light of men" (1:4). It is true that eternal life is life that will never end, but the term does not refer to duration, or the quantity of life, but its quality. It is the life that is found in Christ, the life that is found in God. It is resurrection life, the life that is proper to the age of come, but that is possessed and experienced in the present by those who believe in the Son of God.
Flesh is flesh, spirit is spirit – this is the kind of life that comes from God, and not by natural human birth. This is a different kind of life than flesh-life. As Morris writes, "Eternal life is life in Christ, that life which removes a person from the merely earthly. As we see from the earlier part of this chapter, it originates in a divine action, the action wherein one is born anew. It is the gift of God, and not a human achievement."
(to be continued)
Born Again (32)
John 3:14-15 (A)
Verse 13 says that the Son of Man, Jesus Christ, has come to us from heaven. Because of this, his testimony about spiritual things is authoritative and reliable, and this is true whether he is speaking about the earthly or the heavenly works of God. Then, verses 14 and 15 proceed to teach us about the heart of his mission, the central purpose for which he came to fulfill: "Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life."
The beginning of verse 14 refers to a time when "Moses lifted up the snake in the desert." This is a reference to Numbers 21:4-9. The passage reads as follows:
They traveled from Mount Hor along the route to the Red Sea, to go around Edom. But the people grew impatient on the way; they spoke against God and against Moses, and said, "Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the desert? There is no bread! There is no water! And we detest this miserable food!"
Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. The people came to Moses and said, "We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us." So Moses prayed for the people.
The LORD said to Moses, "Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live." So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, he lived.
The verse says that in like manner "the Son of Man must be lifted up." As is typical with John, the key term "lifted up" carries a double meaning in this Gospel. To illustrate, Jesus says in John 8:28, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [the one I claim to be] and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me." The NIV has added, "the one I claim to be," but he literally says, "then you will know that I am." This is a bold claim to deity that few Jews would miss. But he says that this would happen as he is "lifted up," that is, on the cross. Therefore, the term "lifted up" refers to both the physical lifting up of Jesus on the cross, and at the same time his exaltation on the cross.
But the point that one must not miss in John 3:14 is that Jesus must be crucified. He must be lifted up just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert. And just as those who looked upon the snake were healed, those who "look" upon the crucified Son of Man in faith will receive eternal life.
This aspect of Jesus' ministry is crucial in the preaching of the gospel. Paul writes to his converts, "Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified" (Galatians 3:1). This tells us about at least part of what this apostle aims to do as he preaches the gospel – he tries to portray the crucified Christ to his hearers. Otherwise, they would not be able to look upon the Son of Man as he was lifted up, so as to believe and have life in him.
(to be continued)