John – Chapter 8:12-29
Introduction: As we discussed on the last handout, the actions of v. 12 and following are the continuation of ch. 7, specifically 7:37-38. We are once again in the temple and the main focus is the conflict over Jesus’ identity, confirmed by Jesus with new sayings that are misunderstood, doubted, and opposed by His hearers. 8:12 “Light of the World” – It is unclear if we remain in the context of the Feast of Tabernacles or immediately thereafter. The pronouncement of 7:37-38 closely parallels 8:12 in structure. According to Jewish tradition, “There was not a courtyard in Jerusalem that was not illumined by the light of the place of water-drawing” (Mishnah Sukkah 5:3). What was only symbolized at the feast, Jesus is and gives, “living water” and “the light of life.” The light the world needs and by which alone a person can escape the darkness is Jesus! This light is opposed to the forces of life-threatening darkness. v. 13-14 – The Pharisees are not offended that Jesus can bring, comfort, and happiness to people but rather that He is the light of the world. The credibility of Jesus’ claims is dependent of the forensic/legal testimony of two witnesses. Note again, they are not attacking what He says but His authority to say it. His testimony is true and valid because He knows Himself to be sent by the Father to save (13:1; 19:28). v.15-18 “You judge according to the flesh” – Jesus stresses that, unlike the Pharisees (8:1-11), judging others is not his business (3:17; 12:47) “of himself” but rather what He has heard from the Father (v.26). Jesus establishes that He self-testifies and the Father bears witness of Him. Thus, the “law” of two witnesses is fulfilled (Deut 19:15). Yet, Jesus also distances Himself from the law, “your law.” Law is not equivalent to Scripture but rather refers to what is in the Scripture that has been replaced, overshadowed (1:17), and fulfilled (15:25) with the coming of Jesus Christ. When Jesus appeals to the law and its principle of what constitutes a valid testimony, this is not sarcastic mockery of Jewish legalism, but rather an appeal to what the law intends: not external conformity to prescriptions but rather the confirmation of the truth over against a lie or presumption. v. 19-20 “Where is your Father?” – This is not naive incomprehension but rather a…