When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)

The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.)

Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”

“Sir,” the woman said, “you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?”

Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

“Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

Jesus declared, “Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”

The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

Then Jesus declared, “I who speak to you am he.”

Then, leaving her water jar, the woman went back to the town and said to the people, “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Christ?” They came out of the town and made their way toward him.

Many of the Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me everything I ever did.” So when the Samaritans came to him, they urged him to stay with them, and he stayed two days. And because of his words many more became believers.

They said to the woman, “We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world.” (John 4:7-14, 19-26, 28-30, 39-42)

If every sinner would fall on his face and cry out for mercy at the mention of our Lord Jesus, surely no Christian would be afraid to speak about him. But we understand that this is not the case. Non-Christians are ignorant, confused, proud, dishonest, and wicked, so that the gospel is frequently met with resistance. This makes some believers nervous about even bringing up the subject.

However, by the Scripture and the Spirit, God has provided us all that is necessary to make us confident and skillful witnesses for the Lord. The right kind of confidence is more than raw attitude, but it is based on understanding, and understanding will lead to skillfulness. If you have a problem with speaking to people about Jesus Christ, then here is where you must begin. You must begin with understanding, that is, knowledge about Jesus Christ, your place in him, and what happens when a conversation turns to the topic of religion.

Jesus approached every situation with purpose, knowledge, and boldness. He knew who he was, that God had sent him, and what he had sent him to do. He was able to perceive everything in his life within the framework of performing the will of God. The Gospel of John portrays him as one who always knew what to do and what to say, and more than that, as one who knew the appropriate time for every word and action. Thus as the scriptural record shows, he handled every encounter with ease and assurance. This was the case whether he was speaking with eager inquirers, with hostile skeptics, or with someone like this woman at the well. He always had his mission in mind, or what he called the Father’s will, and no matter how a situation began, he could take control of it to advance this cause.

He never approached any situation to see what he could learn from it, and he never talked to anyone to see what he could learn from him. This was not because he lacked humility – far from it. The fact that he would talk to anyone at all was an act of infinite condescension. Rather, there was no point to submit. He never had to back down, to compromise, or to be corrected. He spoke from a position of absolute and unquestionable superiority. He knew that he was superior to anyone that he faced, and superior to anything or anyone that the world trusted in. The sense of superiority and confidence was based on knowledge, knowledge of who he was.

When the woman mentioned Jacob, it did not impress him. He was greater than Jacob. The woman had the means to draw water from the well, but he could provide a different kind of water, superior than that from Jacob’s well. When the woman finally deferred to the Messiah, the ultimate authority figure, who would come and explain everything, and settle all disputes, even then he did not retreat, for as he told the woman, “I who speak to you am he.”

We preach not ourselves but Jesus Christ, and his superiority is not lost when his disciples speak about him. He is the same Jesus. In fact, we would make him into a different person if we do not assume his utter superiority over everything and everyone. He is superior to each unbeliever that we speak to, and everything and everyone that this person trusts in. You strengthen your grasp of Christ’s superiority over all things by praying for illumination by the Spirit, by meditating on the greatness of Jesus based on all that the Scripture says about him, and by thinking about how even the most approved and enviable things in this world are but poor imitations of his wisdom, power, and glory. Then, you will know that, before Christ, the unbeliever is a worm to be pitied, and not a man to be feared.

This is the confidence we have in Christ: It does not matter what the non-Christian believes or whom he worships, but Jesus is always right, always relevant, always superior. Just as our Lord was never surprised, embarrassed, or overwhelmed by anything, we never need to be surprised, embarrassed, or overwhelmed.

It is true that Jesus preached himself, so that the messenger was also the message, and there was no distance between the two. The confidence, then, was thoroughly natural, even unavoidable. But we are not him, so how can we speak with confidence and authority as he did?

The difference that this makes has been exaggerated. Again, we do not preach ourselves, but we preach Jesus Christ, the same superior person that he himself preached. On that point, there is no difference, and our confidence in him will be in proportion to our understanding about him, and the measure of faith in our knowledge of him. His hearers observed that he spoke as one with authority, unlike the scribes and the Pharisees. The religious leaders of that day did not have firsthand knowledge of God. Even though they had the Scripture, they did not believe it, or they would have known God for themselves. Christ, on the other hand, spoke as one who came from heaven, and as the Son of God.

Whether you can speak about him with confidence and authority reveals whether you are his disciple, or whether you are as one of the scribes, who read the truth but did not grasp and embrace it. The Christian is one who sees Jesus Christ for who he is, who truly knows him, and who has received the Holy Spirit, that is, power from heaven to be a witness for the Lord. So the fact that we are not Christ does not make the difference that is supposed by many.

There are those who defer all authority to Christ or to the Scripture. We need to be careful here. It is true that any authority that we possess is derived from Christ and the Scripture; however, that is not the conclusion of the matter. Do you know Christ or not? Do you believe the Scripture or not? Do you have the Spirit of God in you or not? Preachers, have you been sent to speak for the King or not? If all this makes no difference, so that you could speak only as the scribes and the Pharisees, or like the unbelievers, then you still speak as an outsider. It is as if you have no place in the kingdom of heaven, as if you have no part of it, and have no role in it. An understanding of the superiority of Christ must be followed by an appreciation of our place in him.

When you engage an unbeliever in conversation, you are to position Christ, and thus also yourself, in the right place. It is not a dialogue of equals, nor a dialogue about equals. You come at him with a sense of superiority, because you understand that Christ is superior to him, and superior to everything about him. You may protest that you are not superior in yourself, but this is irrelevant, since you do not preach about yourself. However, this way of thinking, that you are not superior in yourself, is itself based on a deficient theology. The Bible tells you that you are a co-heir of Jesus Christ, even now seated with him at the right hand of God. It says that you are a new creation, born from heaven into the kingdom of God. It declares that you are in this world, but you are not of it. How is that not superior?

To acknowledge this has nothing to do with arrogance or self-righteousness, since you do not credit yourself with this reality. You attribute your superior condition to God’s sovereign kindness toward you. You have obtained your current station as a gift that you have received, not as something that you have earned or merited apart from God’s charity. The reality remains that this is what you are, and it is something that the unbelievers are not. And this enables you to speak with confidence and authority even when you face the best of them. Thus even when Paul addressed the elite Athenians, he did not say, “I am overawed by your culture and wisdom, and it would be my honor to present my humble Jesus to you for your consideration. Perhaps we can learn something from each other.” No, he said, “I have come to tell you something that you do not know, to address your ignorance about the matter.”

Any conversation can be guided toward a spiritual direction. Some contexts are more appropriate than others, and are given to more natural transitions, but it is always possible to take control and compel the unbeliever to consider deeper things. One way to do this is to make the mundane, the physical, and the natural things of life into analogies and metaphors for spiritual things, and by doing so elevate the conversation to a higher plane, compelling the unbeliever to follow you from the earthly to the heavenly. This approach is able to take the things that the unbeliever is usually concerned about, and redirect his attention to his true condition, and to his greatest needs and obligations.

I am not saying that we should use analogies and metaphors to facilitate comprehension. There are those who insist that God and other spiritual concepts cannot be understood except by analogies and metaphors, by comparisons with natural things, since it is alleged that we can understand the concrete better than the abstract. This is a popular notion that has arisen from false humility. It is simply not true that we can understand spiritual things only through analogies and metaphors, or that we can understand the abstract and the non-physical only by comparisons with the concrete and the physical.

Some people apply the tiresome “Hebrew vs. Greek” contrast, and even claim that the Hebrews had no abstract ideas, and that God cannot be considered in the abstract – only the Greeks try that. This is an anti-intellectual invention that goes along with the way that some scholars wish to see things, but it has no basis in the Bible. Instead, as mentioned in an earlier chapter, John begins his Gospel with an entirely abstract consideration about God and the Word. Ideas such as time, creation, life, light, and so on are used without any connection with the concrete. Frankly, the assumption behind the unwarranted contrast seems to be that these people are stupid, or at least they think that the Jews were stupid, and who were incapable of abstract thoughts, even though they were made in the image of God.

Thus I do not refer to the alleged advantages in using analogies and metaphors to explain spiritual things. Rather, I am saying that natural things are reflections of spiritual things, so that they can be used as starting points in a conversation to draw attention to the things of God. This allows you to make a smooth transition from the natural to the spiritual in any conversation.

There are those who disagree that we should make a sharp distinction between the natural and the spiritual, and to say that natural things are reflections of spiritual things, to them, again sounds Greek. But to repeat, there is no such distinction between Hebrew and Greek thought – that is, the differences are not found in concrete vs. abstract or dualistic vs. holistic. This is a myth in biblical scholarship that cannot withstand the test of simply reading the words of the Bible, and noting its plain statements and assumptions.

The Bible is filled with both concrete and abstract thoughts, and it is dualistic whenever the distinction between the natural and the spiritual is needed, or whenever it refers to the true nature of things, but it is holistic whenever the distinction is not needed, so that in those instances it would refer to a part as if it were the whole for the sake of convenience. For example, although the Bible makes a sharp distinction between the spirit and the flesh, or the mind and the body, when someone speaks to me, I do not think, “His body is speaking to me the words that his mind has arranged,” but rather, “He is speaking to me.” Both statements are true, but metaphysical precision is unnecessary in this context. However, if I make the distinction even once, this means that I believe in it. The Bible often makes such distinctions.

It does not matter what is Hebrew, or Greek, or Chinese, or Russian, or Martian – the Bible reflects a culture of its own. At what time did the Israelites in general think like the prophets? Since when did the Jewish population agree with the Lord and the apostles? If the prophets spoke in the abstract, then I can also – it does not matter what culture they spoke out of. If the apostles spoke in dualistic terms, making distinctions between the natural and the spiritual, the secular and the sacred, as they certainly did, then I will also – it does not matter what the Greek thought. If this sounds all Greek to you, then this means that the Greeks agreed with the Bible – well, then good for the Greeks!

The scholars protest that it is necessary to understand the cultures of biblical times in order to understand the Bible. Evidently, they do not understand the cultures, since what they say about the Hebrews in this area plainly contradicts how the Bible speaks, and what the Bible teaches. Again, regardless of what is assumed about Hebrew thought, the Bible speaks in the abstract, and the Bible is dualistic, in that it distinguishes between the natural and the spiritual, the secular and the sacred, the body and the soul.

Jesus initiated the conversation by asking the Samaritan woman for a drink from the well. The woman was surprised, since Jews did not associate with Samaritans. The conversation remained on the natural level, although there was a religious background behind this. Then, Jesus elevated the conversation to a spiritual level by mention “living water.” At this point, Jesus had already transitioned to the spiritual. The next mention of water was also a spiritual reference, since it was the water of “eternal life.” He used physical thirst as a metaphor for a deeper thirst, a spiritual thirst. Jesus brought attention to this, and stated that “the gift of God” can provide “living water” that would perpetually and permanently satisfy it. The woman could not follow at first. Her thinking remained on the natural level, and thought that this strange water could relieve her from coming to the well to draw water. Thus Jesus probed deeper into her background.

He did something similar with his disciples, who came and found him speaking with the woman. They were baffled but did not demand an explanation. When they offered him something to eat, Jesus said that he had food that they did not know about. At first they did not understand, and their thinking remained on the natural level, so that they thought he had food from somewhere else. So he explained that he meant his food was to do the will of God. Again, by making something mundane, natural, and physical into a metaphor for something spiritual, he elevated the conversation and the disciples’ thinking and priorities to a higher level.

Likewise, a Christian can elevate any conversation into a spiritual discussion. For example, a conversation on wealth can be transformed into one about true riches. A financial recession can become a metaphor for a famine of the word of God, that is, a shortage in knowledge about him. A conversation on various kinds of scandals can be transformed into one about spiritual deception, mental strongholds, or heretical theologians. They can also serve as illustrations for the destruction that results from sowing to the flesh rather than to the spirit. We indulge or invest in the things of the flesh, and we reap a whirlwind of troubles and punishments.

A conversation about friends and family can be transformed into one about the Christian’s true friends and family in Christ. When the unbeliever talks about education, the Christian can elevate the discussion to one about true wisdom. Or, if the topic is marriage, the Christian can make the transition to talk about true love, and the union between Christ and the Christians. At the mention of food, the Christian can make the transition by musing on the significance of eating together, especially in some cultures, and then elevate the conversation by discussing how a person gets to sit at the table of the Lord. Art can be a starting point for the Christian to talk about true beauty, moral beauty, spiritual and intellectual beauty, and the beauty of the Lord. Sports is usually connected with heroics, but what is so great about people who are very persistent about hitting a ball really hard, or running really, really fast? All such feats are insignificant, and in fact quite pathetic, compared to the heroics of the Lord, who suffered great pain and humiliation to redeem his people.

One effect of this approach is that it generates a contrast. On the one side, there are the lower and almost beast-like life and desires of the unbeliever. On the other side, there are the lofty thoughts of God, and his many powers and blessings that correspond with the unbeliever’s deeper needs. Jesus used the metaphor of water to press the point that the woman had a need greater than natural and physical drink. There was a spiritual thirst in her that had remained unquenched. And he also used the metaphor to describe what only he could provide, that is, a continuous supply of living water, spiritual water, that would satisfy and that would never dry up.

The Bible does for us what Jesus did for this woman. As we read it, it elevates our thoughts from the mundane to the spiritual. It informs us in our contemplation of God the doctrines that he has revealed and his saving acts throughout history. It redirects our attention from natural, physical, and earthly things, to supernatural, spiritual, and heavenly things. Non-Christians are from below, but as Christians, we have been born from above, and the Scripture provides us with the content for rich spiritual thoughts and conversations, while the Spirit of God enables us to remain on this level of thinking and speaking. Jesus told the woman that if she knew about the gift of God and who it was that spoke to her, she would have asked him for living water. By the Scripture and the Spirit, we do know the gift of God and who it is that speaks to us, and we ask, “Lord, give us this living water, so that we will never thirst!” As Christians, we do have this living water in us, so that even when the body suffers decay, the inner man is renewed day by day.

Then, Jesus exposed the fact that the woman had had five husbands, and that the man she was with, the sixth man, was not her husband. Commentators might argue whether this meant that she was an immoral woman, or that she was a victim of abusive and unfaithful men. This is unimportant to us at this point. What is important is that Jesus did not refrain from mentioning painful and embarrassing things in a person’s life in order to pursue a legitimate spiritual agenda. We may say that he did it with a note of gentleness, but this does not change the fact that he did it.

Regardless of the reason for her many marriages, Jesus showed that she was a broken woman, and she had a need deeper and greater than any natural solution can remove or alleviate. This is what happens when you use something in the unbeliever’s life as a metaphor for his spiritual need. You will show that he is a broken person. By broken, I do not mean that the non-Christian is a victim, but I mean that he is deficient and defective – every unbeliever is damaged goods. He is in a shameful condition that nothing natural or physical can repair or reverse. He needs Jesus Christ.

Behind all the strong talk, blasphemies, and sarcastic comments is a spiritual loser, a filthy and pathetic person, and an overused whore of the devil. He would be an object of scorn, something to be kicked around, laughed at, and spat on, if not for the fact that all the other non-Christians are just like him. And he is so ignorant and proud that he would not ask Christ for renewal, for restoration, for life and light. The unbeliever puts on a brave front, unwilling to show you his inadequacies. But if you will probe a little, it should not be difficult to find out what they are. He wants you to see him as a giant, but inside he is but a scared little worm. If you will talk to him and ask some questions, you will always find that this is so. Here you will find an opening to attack all the things that he trusts in, and to hold out Jesus Christ as his only hope.

Jesus crossed several well-defined boundaries. She was a woman, a Samaritan, and one who had married five times, and who now seemed to cohabit with a man who was not her husband. All of these were reasons for a Jewish Rabbi to have refrained from associating with her. But Jesus did it anyway, and in doing so, he stood against human traditions and authorities. As we can see from the woman’s initial response and then the disciples’ reaction, his behavior contradicted what was expected of him from all human perspectives.

This is a common observation, but incorrect implications are sometimes drawn from it. There are people who construe Jesus’ association with sinners as a license to attend dinners, parties, and all kinds of social gatherings with unbelievers. The Lord’s example has become for them an excuse to indulge their own fleshly desires for unholy fellowship and entertainment. Moreover, because the Gospel sometimes contrasts the sinners with the Pharisees, at times these Christians make the unbelievers into some sort of heroes, and they congratulate themselves for being so Christ-like that they would cross all boundaries, supposedly as Jesus did, in order to revel in worldly activities, if not debauchery, with the non-Christians. They are moved to tears by their own courage and open-mindedness.

However, this is an all-out perversion of what Jesus did. Although Jesus crossed boundaries, he never violated the word of God, but only broke with human traditions and expectations. Thus when a Christian claims to follow Jesus’ example in crossing boundaries, these boundaries should consist of human norms and rules only. A Christian is never allowed to transgress the word of God. This makes a large number of activities enjoyed by the unbelievers forbidden to Christians, and it also removes the sinful excitement and sensual indulgence from those that Christians are permitted to attend. This is just the way it is. The Christian should be honest about these activities and his motive for wanting to engage in them with the unbelievers. He must either refrain, or he must admit that he is an unbeliever himself.

Of course Jesus associated with sinners. He talked with them and ate with them. But he did this to save sinners, to teach them, to change them, and not to entertain them or to be entertained. It was not because he was bored or lonely, and had to socialize with unbelievers, because religious people were so dull. He crossed boundaries to carry out his mission, and not to indulge the flesh and sinful lusts, to appease his enemies, or to extend approval to unbelievers. As he would tell Pilate, his mission was to testify to the truth. This included the truth about God, about himself as the Christ, and about man and his sin. His crossed over to associate with people who were not like him, not to tell them that they were already acceptable in God’s sight, but to tell them that they were already condemned and that God’s wrath was already upon them, and that the only way they could be saved was to follow him and trust in him, for no one could come to the Father except through him.

Therefore, for a Christian to follow his example is to continue his mission to declare God’s condemnation against all sinners, and to hold forth Jesus Christ as the only way to salvation. We may associate with sinners as we do this; in fact, if we have no contact with them at all, then we cannot tell them any of this. So we may tell them that they are wretched sinners on the street, on the beach, at work, at school, at a party, over a casual lunch or a candlelight dinner, in their mosques and synagogues as we challenge their religions, in midair while plummeting toward the earth on a parachute jump together, or any setting where it is not inherently sinful for the Christian to be present.

Let us not use Christ’s example to mask our hypocrisy, if the truth is that we crave the unbelievers’ worldly company, and in fact care very little about the mission that God has entrusted to us. If you are one of those people who are fond of befriending unbelievers so that you can be “salt and light” to the world, then see to it that you really are salt and light. Otherwise, you are just lying to yourself and to others, and hiding the fact that you enjoy the unholy fellowship of non-Christians more than the chaste conversation of God’s people.

The woman was incredulous at first. Although she had access to the well that Jacob made and drank from, Jesus claimed that if she knew who he was, she would have asked him for a drink of living water. She asked, “Are you greater than Jacob?” Jesus not only claimed that he was superior, but he explained to her how he was superior. Jacob, who was only a man, could provide only natural water that temporarily relieved physical thirst. Jesus, on the other hand, could provide living water that would perpetually and permanently satisfy a person’s spiritual needs and desires.

The same difference applies to all the characters in biblical history. Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Samuel, David, Elijah, Isaiah, and many others were indeed great men; in fact, the Spirit of God made them superior to their fellows in a number of ways. But still, they were but mere men, and nothing more than human. God regenerated them, and they were born from above, and transformed by the power of heaven, so that they became men of whom the world was not worthy. But Jesus Christ came from above. He needed no grace from heaven, for he came there as a bearer of grace in the first place. He was the mediator of the grace that transformed these chosen men.

Paul said that the Corinthians had a partisan spirit among them. They would align themselves to men that they favored, so that some would say, “I belong to Paul’s group!” and others would boast, “I belong to Peter’s group!” He rebuked them, and said that this type of thinking was carnal. It was not a reflection of superior knowledge or spirituality. This problem is still with us today. “Well, I am a Calvinist myself.” “But what did Spurgeon say about that?” Or, “Are you greater than Jonathan Edwards?” And, “How dare you contradict this Confession of Faith?”

You can throw your whole denomination at me, but if this is all you have, why should I care? What authority do you have over me? You are but a crowd of weak and confused men who, lacking genuine spiritual power, have constructed a feeling of comfort and an illusion of authority by offering formal approval to one another. Then, you speak from this platform, quoting from your confessions and citing from your theologians, supposing that by this you can compel others to heed your opinions. This is not wisdom, not knowledge, not spirituality. It is carnal thinking. It is children’s talk. It is idolatry. And its roots are far deeper and more widespread than many people realize, since many people share this way of thinking, and since it is often expressed in veiled forms.

For example, one of my critics dismissed my biblical commentaries because he could tell that they were substandard from “the footnotes.” His point was that the footnotes indicated an inadequate reference to advanced scholarship. However, this tells us more about him than about me or my commentaries. He had a personal bias against me and most likely did not make the same criticism against authors that he admired, since some of them would not cite any works at all in their commentaries. In any other context, he probably would have acknowledged that there are several kinds of commentaries, and how many works the author cites and what kinds of works he cites depend on the purpose of these commentaries. There is no universal rule for this. His comment reflects that he had only one kind of commentaries in mind, and his standard of judgment came from academic custom rather than truth and reason.

He also assumed that if I had consulted the advanced works that he approved, then I would have cited them. I indeed interact with advanced materials in my study and research; however, I cite the works of others not because of their academic level, as if to impress readers with my learning, or as if I depend on the agreement of others. Rather, I cite works that are relevant, sometimes to agree and sometimes to refute, especially when they state certain things in a manner that make them helpful or appropriate in the context of my writings. That is, I cite others not mainly for support or to compel agreement, as if I have no confidence or authority on my own, but often to clarify and illustrate due to the particular expressions used, or the way that something is stated. But now I am rather suspicious of the critic’s reasons for referring to the works of scholars in his own materials. Perhaps his eagerness to impress others made him assume that I would do the same.

This brings us to the most revealing point about his criticism. His thinking about scholarship, even when it came to the things of God, was bound to the level of human achievement, interaction, and approval. That is, good scholarship, even Christian scholarship, is constructed on human achievements, exhibited in interaction with other human works and approval by other human scholars.

His comment revealed that he had not learned to think like a true disciple of Jesus Christ. When people listened to Christ, they marveled that he spoke as one with authority, not like the scribes and the Pharisees. Later, the apostles made a similar impression on people, and they understood that they had been students of Jesus Christ. Spiritual confidence and authority is noticeably different from academic pretentiousness, so that the common people heard them with gladness. It is in the absence of spiritual power that a person must shroud himself under an air of academic sophistication – that is, academic sophistication as defined by non-Christian customs.

Should not a Christian who is filled with God’s Spirit speak with some measure of authority, a kind of spiritual power that is independent of human tradition and approval? This critic complained that I did not speak like the scribes and the Pharisees! He remained out of touch with biblical truth and spiritual authority. He remained as a person who was “from below,” and his understanding remained on this carnal level, so he thought like those who had no authority, or whose sense of intellectual cogency consists in the interaction and the approval of men. Thus he condemned himself by his criticism against me.

The biblical patriarchs and prophets were superior to their fellows only in the sense that God had chosen them, and at times moved them to speak by his Spirit. When they were carried along by the Spirit, their words were authoritative and infallible, for it was Christ who spoke through them. They were revered for the roles that they played in biblical history, but they were but mere men, and could produce no heavenly effects by themselves. And even as they spoke by the Spirit of God, they did not preach themselves, but pointed to the coming, the humiliation, and the exaltation of Christ. Thus although they were great men, Christ was infinitely superior to them. Although they were given birth from above, Christ was one who came from above.

This provides one way for us to understand the difference between the Christian faith and all non-Christian religions. Christ was greater than Jacob, but Jacob at least followed Christ and grasp some of the things of God by the Spirit. The founders of non-Christian religions had no such spiritual perception. If they had perceived and embraced any of the truth, they would have followed Christ. But they were men “from below,” and so they spoke as men from below. All their teachings consist of human speculations and suggestions. Even at their best, they could only provide their followers natural water, which can never begin to satisfy spiritual thirst.

Many Christians would preface their opinion of these founders of non-Christian religions, saying, “They were great moral teachers, and had great insights, but….” Even famed and respected Christian apologists would say this. But even this is false and unacceptable, and it is a compromise and a betrayal. Those who speak this way sin against Christ and all those who believe in him. If those who call themselves Christians would throw off this sense of obligation to be sickeningly courteous and effeminate in religious discussions, doubtless imposed upon them by non-Christians and not by Scripture, they would see that these non-Christian religions do not in fact have good moral and human insights. Rather, they are all very pathetic and absurd, and their leaders are as blind men leading other blind men into the ditch of everlasting hellfire.

Seeing that Jesus was a prophet, the woman made reference to the religious dispute between the Jews and the Samaritans, and in particular their disagreement regarding the proper location of worship. Jesus sided against the Samaritans, and at one point said that “salvation is from the Jews.” He went on to say something else, but we must pause here because there is so much misconception about the status of the Jewish people, that is, the natural descendants of Abraham through Isaac, that it would be worthwhile to consider the meaning and significance of this statement.

The Jews had been the focal point of salvation history up to the time of Christ. First, God’s had manifested his acts of grace and power mainly through the Jewish people. They were the recipients and the carriers of historical revelation. Second, they were also the recipients and the carriers of propositional revelation. God had revealed the facts of creation and history, of his divine nature, and of his holy laws and precepts in words spoken through his prophets. Historical revelation, at least epistemologically, reduces to propositional revelation, because the history itself is recorded in propositional form, and is passed on only in propositional form. In sum, God manifested himself in special and concentrated ways to the Jewish people, and superintended their history to construct a great portion of the Holy Scripture, that is, what we call the Old Testament, which already functioned as an established collection of sacred documents by the time of Christ.

The promise of the Messiah was not first given to the Jews, but much earlier than that, to Adam and Eve. Thus, in this broad sense, it had never been a promise to or for the Jews, but to humanity, and in particular to the elect of all times, all races, and all nations. But God focused this promise by decreeing that this Messiah would come as a seed of Abraham.

Because of the above considerations, it is said that “salvation is from the Jews.” These considerations are indeed significant, and made the Jews a privileged people. However, since they are often overestimated and misapplied, we must also make clear what the statement cannot mean, and the limitations of this privileged condition.

First, although “salvation is from the Jews,” it does not mean that all Jews are saved. In fact, most of them are not saved. During the ministry of Christ, so few of them accepted him that John wrote that “no one” believed his testimony. The fact that the Messiah came from the Jews in terms of his human nature did not benefit them, since they rejected him. They hated him, and tried many times to kill him. They finally murdered him by the hands of the Gentiles, although they would have done it by their own hands if they were able (John 18:31). They did not benefit from their natural affiliation with the Messiah.

Then, they did not benefit from the fact that God made them the recipients and carriers of historical revelation, since the history recorded about them is one of constant unbelief, idolatry, and rebellion. The record of their history benefits only Christians: “Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did….These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come” (1 Corinthians 10:6, 11).

Finally, they did not benefit from the fact that God made them the recipients and carriers of propositional revelation, since they did not believe in it. They claimed to believe the Scripture, but most of them never did. Rather, they constructed human traditions that allegedly enforced God’s laws, but in reality enabled them to bypass and subvert these laws. Jesus said that if they had believed Moses, then they would have believed him, because Moses talked about him, and he fulfilled what Moses said. And he also said that they were not ones who believed and repented at the words of the prophets, but they murdered the prophets that God sent to them.

Nowadays, anyone who speaks this way might be called a racist and an anti-Semite. But this is only a smokescreen and a red herring. Their own Scripture testifies to what Jesus said. The Old Testament itself condemns them, but the Gentiles did not write the Old Testament. The truth is that the Jews already had their own culture and religion set up, in ways that were very contrary to Moses and the prophets, and they did not want anyone, not even God or the Messiah, to disturb their lifestyle.

By rejecting Jesus Christ, the Jews had repudiated every advantage they had over other peoples of the world. God manifested to them in history, but they rebelled against him. God revealed to them his words, but they did not believe it. God appeared to them in the flesh, but they murdered him. Yes, salvation came from the Jews, but they rejected it, and so as Jesus said, the kingdom was ripped from their hands and given to another people who would believe and bear fruit, namely, the Christians.

All the advantages that the Jews ever had now belong to Christians. They have disowned their history – that history now belongs to us. They have rejected their own Scripture, or they would be Christians. But we believe both the Scripture that the Jews had, and the fulfillment and extension of it, which we call the New Testament. We now have the complete Scripture. They do not even have what they hold in their hands, since they do not believe it. As Jesus said, “As for one who has nothing, even that what he seems to have will be taken away.” The advantages that the Jews had over the Samaritans, the ones that they have lost since then, were the same advantages that Christians now have over the Jews.

This is so important but so little understood that I must repeat. The Jews indeed had spiritual advantages over others, but they have repudiated them by their unbelief, which persists to this day. All spiritual advantages now belong to Christians, and only Christians. The Jews are not even to be considered the children of Abraham, since Jesus said that if they were, they would have followed Abraham’s example of faith and righteousness. Instead, they hated Jesus and plotted to kill him, and eventually did murder him. This, Jesus said, Abraham would have never done. Rather, Abraham saw Jesus’ day and rejoiced. And now Christians, and only Christians, rejoice with him, sharing the faith of Abraham. Thus, as Paul wrote, Christians are the children of Abraham. True heritage is of the spirit, and not of the flesh. The flesh means nothing, but a follower of one’s spirit is that person’s true heir.

What does all of this mean? It means that any doctrine that even hints at Jewish superiority stands opposed to the spirit of the entire Scripture, and especially the New Testament. It is a most ridiculous notion that we should look to the Jews to learn how to become better Christians. Why, the Jews must look to the Christians to learn how to get saved at all! The appeal, popular in some circles, that we should “return to the Jewish roots” of the Christian faith is entirely without justification. The apostles never suggested this to the Gentiles, whether for the sake of spiritual attainment or for the sake of theological or hermeneutical advancement. There is not a hint that the Gentiles would benefit spiritually, that they would understand the Christian faith better, or that they would become more faithful interpreters of Scripture, by gaining knowledge and appreciation of Jewish culture, let alone by implementing some of it in their lives. In fact, the apostles vehemently fought against this. It was precisely what they wanted the Gentiles to refrain from doing.

The apostles were clear that the Gentiles could come as they were, as Gentiles, and become Christians, without having to become Jews, or to learn anything about the Jews, or to adopt anything from their thinking and culture. Of course they had to believe the Scripture, but as already indicated, this was not a Jewish thing to do, since the Jews rejected the Scripture. To believe God’s word has always been a Christian thing to do, from the time of Adam, when the promise of Christ was first announced. And again, the apostles never indicated that the Gentiles must learn about Jewish culture to believe or to understand the Scripture.

Moreover, it was not that the Gentiles were already familiar with Jewish culture. As indicated by various parts of the New Testament (e.g. Acts 17), and even the very passage we are considering (John 4:9), the original Gentile audience was often unfamiliar with Jewish culture. Yet the apostles made no effort to remedy this as if it would make possible a more accurate understanding of the Christian religion. The truth is that it is unnecessary. The assumption that it is necessary when it comes to theology and hermeneutics is false, and it is against the very thing that the apostles worked so hard to establish.

Once you mixed in the ideas of the superiority of the Jews and the necessity of understanding Jewish culture in order to become better Christians or better interpreters of Scripture, you have contaminated the gospel of Jesus Christ, and you have nullified the liberty that it extends to the chosen people of God. You do not have in mind the interests of God, but the interests of men. You have returned to thinking like men “from below.” You are heading in the wrong direction. You are regressing in your faith. And you are in danger of falling away from the grace of Christ.

The faith of the New Testament, even the faith of Abraham, is spiritual. It is centered on Christ alone, and not on any race, gender, culture, or class. There is no such thing as a Jewish or a “Messianic” Christianity, just like there should be no such thing as a “Black Christianity.” If someone entices you to think in these terms, refuse to do it. Stand firm in your liberty, and fight back. We must rebel against these private versions of the Christian faith without fear of being called racists or bigots. The apostles fought for the purity of the gospel and the liberty of faith, so that it would be a message about simple devotion to Jesus Christ, and not a message that exalts a particular race or serves the agenda of a particular people.

Paul wrote that when it comes to sin, “there is no difference” – whether you are Jew or Gentile, male or female, free or bound, you are all under sin. And when it comes to salvation, again, “there is no difference” – whether you are Jew or Gentile, male or female, free or bound, there is salvation only through Jesus Christ, who makes a new creation out of his chosen people. You are a Jew? Give it up. You are either a Christian or you are not. If you are a Christian, God accepts you, and if you are not, you will burn in hell just like the rest. You are black? Get over it. You are either a believer in Jesus Christ or you are not. If you are a Christian, you are saved from God’s wrath, and if you are not, you can call God a racist when you burn in hell, but your race will have nothing to do with it because you will find people from all races there to burn with you.

Jesus made the same point that I make here. After he sided with the Jews in their dispute against the Samaritans, he said, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). The Jews were right, and the Samaritans were wrong. But both of them were going to be wrong if they would not follow God’s program. The dispute about the proper location for worship no longer mattered, for all those who would worship the Father must worship in spirit and truth through Jesus Christ, and independent of buildings and rituals. All the prayers, rituals, festivals, and holy places of all non-Christians, whether they are Jews, Mormons, Catholics, Muslims, or Buddhists, are meaningless.

Sometimes Christians forget that our faith is not about bringing people to our human traditions, our denominations, and our favorite theologians and preachers. We are to practice and to lead people to true worship, which is only possible in spirit and truth, through faith in Jesus Christ. The true worshiper must be a person who has been born from above, whom God has made his own holy temple. Thus he does not have to worship at a particular place, or to face a particular direction to be heard. And he does not worship someone or something that he does not understand, but he worships according to truth, that is, the doctrines of Jesus Christ. He worships God not with rituals and ceremonies, but with his intelligence, in his spirit, by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The woman had a greater appreciation of the Messiah than many Christians today. She said, “I know that Messiah is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.” Jesus did not oppose this understanding of the Messiah, but he embraced it and told the woman, “I who speak to you am he.” This strikes at the foundation of the way many professing believers understand the faith. First, contrary to them, the Christian religion does not consist of mysteries or incomprehensive teachings. Instead, the woman assumed that “everything” can be explained, and Jesus agreed with her. Second, following from this, the Christian religion holds the explanation to “everything” – we have all the answers.

This is not an arrogant claim about ourselves, but it is a fact about Jesus Christ, and what he has revealed by his own words, and by his Spirit through the words of his students, the apostles. The relevance of this fact continues through us, since we are the present students of Jesus Christ and the apostles. To the extent that we have learned their teachings, now we have all the answers. By logical necessity, all non-Christian beliefs that contradict what we say must be wrong. And since all non-Christian beliefs in fact disagree with us – even when they do not disagree explicitly, they disagree in their nuances, assumptions, and implications – all non-Christian beliefs are false. Since Jesus and the apostles explained “everything,” it also follows that there can be no new religion to supercede or even to build upon their teachings. The Christian religion is the final, complete, and perfect revelation from God.

Many converts seem to have their lives in order, at least more so than others, but they are still unwilling to testify about Jesus Christ before people. Or, some converts wait for things in their lives to be in order before they would do it. The thinking is that it is hypocritical to lecture others about truth, religion, righteousness, and judgment before we have attained perfection ourselves.

This woman did not wait, but she left her water jar at the well and returned to her people, and said, “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Christ?” She was still that broken woman who had married five times. There was no hypocrisy in this, because she was not preaching herself, but she was telling people about Jesus Christ. She did not wait until she could become more credible, because she did not claim that she was the one who could explain everything. But her message was, “Come, see.”

This is what the Gospel of John invites its readers to do, to “come, see” this Jesus through the words spoken by him and written about him, and to perceive that he was the Christ. And this is our task before the world today, not to preach ourselves, or to tell people about our merits, our achievements, or our opinions, but to preach Jesus Christ, the one who has all the answers, and who has given these answers to us. We call people to “come, see” by inviting them to read about him in the Scripture, or by telling them about his words and works as recorded in it.